Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 09/20/2022 - REGULAR MEETING
Fort Collins City Council Agenda Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, September 20, 2022 City Council Chambers at City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 Zoom Webinar link: https://zoom.us/j/98241416497 NOTICE: Regular meetings of the City Council are held on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of each month in the City Council Chambers. Meetings are conducted in a hybrid format, with a Zoom webinar in addition to the in person meeting in Council Chambers. City Council members may participate in this meeting via electronic means pursuant to their adopted policies and protocol. How to view this Meeting:: Meetings are open to the public and can be attended in person by anyone. Meetings are televised live on Channels 14 & 881 on cable television. Meetings are livestreamed on the City's website, fcgov.com/fctv Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. Meetings are available through the Zoom platform, electronically or by phone. Meeting agendas, minutes, and archived videos are available on the City's meeting portal at https://fortcollins-co.municodemeetings.com/ Written comments can be mailed or dropped off at the City Manager's Office at City Hall, at 300 Laporte Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 Email comments about any item on the agenda to cityleaders@fcgov.com The public can join the Zoom webinar and comment from the remote meeting, joining online or via phone. During the public comment portion of the meeting and discussion items: In person attendees can address the Council in the Chambers. Speakers are required to sign up to speak on sign up sheets on the tables just outside the Chambers. There are four options for members of the public who would like to participate in Council meetings: Comment in real time:: Full instructions for online participation are available at fcgov.com/councilcomments. Join the online meeting using the link in this agenda to log in on an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer with a speaker and microphone. Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve audio experience. To be recognized to speak during public participation portions of the meeting, click the 'Raise Hand' button. Participate via phone using the call in number and meeting ID below: Call in number: 346-248-7799 Meeting ID: 982 4141 6497 During public participation opportunities in the meeting, press *9 to indicate a desire to speak. Submit written comments:: Documents to Share: If residents wish to speak to a document or presentation, the City Clerk needs to be emailed those materials by 4 p.m. the day of the meeting. Persons wishing to display presentation materials using the City’s display equipment under the Public Participation portion of a meeting or during discussion of any Council item must provide any such materials to the City Clerk in a form or format readily usable on the City’s display technology no later than two (2) hours prior to the beginning of the meeting at which the materials are to be presented. NOTE: All presentation materials for appeals, addition of permitted use applications or protests related to election matters must be provided to the City Clerk no later than noon on the day of the meeting at which the item will be considered. See Council Rules of Conduct in Meetings for details. City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 7 City Council Summary Agenda City Council Regular Meeting Agenda September 20, 2022 at 6:00 PM Jeni Arndt, Mayor Emily Francis, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Gutowsky, District 1 Julie Pignataro, District 2 Tricia Canonico, District 3 Shirley Peel, District 4 Kelly Ohlson, District 5 City Council Chambers 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins & via Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98241416497 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Xfinity Carrie Daggett Kelly DiMartino Anissa Hollingshead City Attorney City Manager City Clerk PROCLAMATIONS & PRESENTATIONS 5:00 PM A) PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS PP 1. Proclamation Declaring September 15-October 15, 2022 as Hispanic/Latinx Heritage Month PP 2. Proclamation Declaring September 17-23, 2022 as Constitution Week. PP 3. Proclamation Declaring October 1 as Tour de Corgi Day. PP 4. Proclamation Declaring October 9-15 as Fire Prevention Week. PP 5. Proclamation Declaring October 15-16 as The Cupboard’s 50th Anniversary Days. REGULAR MEETING 6:00 PM Interpretation in Spanish is available for this meeting via this zoom link: Interpretación en español está disponible en esta reunión usando el siguiente enlace de Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/98241416497 B) CALL MEETING TO ORDER C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE D) ROLL CALL City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 7 E) CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA REVIEW • City Manager Review of Agenda • Consent Calendar Review, including removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion. F) COMMUNITY REPORTS 1. Platte River Power Authority Report G) PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY TOPICS OR ITEMS OR COMMUNITY EVENTS (Including requests for removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion.) Individuals may comment regarding any topics of concern, whether or not included on this agenda. Comments regarding land use projects for which a development application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to Council. • Those who wish to speak are required to sign up at the table in the lobby, or online if participating remotely. • Each speaker will be allowed to speak one time during public comment. If a speaker comments on a particular agenda item during general public comment, that speaker will not also be entitled to speak during discussion on the same agenda item. • All speakers are asked by the presiding officer to identify themselves by raising their hand (in person or using the Raise Hand option on Zoom), and if in person then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for those who are not able to stand while waiting). Those participating online will be called to speak following those attending the meeting in person. • The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. • Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and general address for the record, and, if their comments relate to a particular agenda item, to identify the agenda item number. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be provided to the City Clerk. • A timer will beep one time and turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time has ended. [**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development, consult the Development Review Center page on the city’s website at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/, or contact the Development Review Center at 970.221.6760.] H) PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP I) COUNCILMEMBER REMOVAL OF ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 7 CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar is intended to allow Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by either Council or the City Manager will be considered separately under their own Section, titled “Consideration of Items Removed from Consent Calendar for Individual Discussion.” Items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved by Council with one vote. The Consent Calendar consists of: • Ordinances on First Reading that are routine; • Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine; • Those of no perceived controversy; • Routine administrative actions. 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 6, 2022 Regular Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the September 6, 2022 Regular meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 090, 2022, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement to Poudre Fire Authority on City-owned Real Property Located at 430 N. College Avenue. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, authorizes the conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) to Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) on City- owned real property located at 430 N. College Avenue. The City leases this property, which is the location of the Powerhouse Energy Campus, to the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF). CSURF has submitted plans to the City to make improvements to the property to support a hydrogen fueling station and turbine generator. As a condition of approval, the City, as property owner, is required to convey an EAE to PFA to support fire truck and emergency equipment access, which is a common requirement for new development and improvements on certain properties. Conveyance of the EAE is the final action needed for the City’s Planning, Development, and Transportation Department to approve the project and issue construction permits as CSURF has met all other lease and development review requirements. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2022, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received by City Give for the 2022 Parks Independence Day Celebration and the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2022, appropriates philanthropic revenue designated for the 2022 Independence Day Celebration and the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2022, Conditionally Vacating a Portion of Coleman Street Right-of-Way. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2022, adopts the conditional vacation of a portion of Coleman Street right-of-way that is no longer desirable or necessary to retain for street purposes. The right-of-way area, once vacated, will be retained in its entirety as a public utility and public access easement to the City. The right-of-way vacation will be conditional upon the demolition of the existing street stub of Coleman Street and the reconstruction of the vacated area as a landscape and pedestrian area. These conditions are outlined in detail in the Ordinance. 5. First Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2022, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue From Philanthropic Donations Received in 2022 Through City Give for Various City Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 7 The purpose of this item is to request appropriation of $90,234 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City service areas support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. 6. First Reading of Ordinance No. 098, 2022, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Provide Financial Support to the United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos for Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park. The purpose of this item is to provide financial support to United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos (UN/VU), a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation that recently acquired ownership of the Parklane Mobile Home Park. On August 1, 2022, residents of the Parklane Mobile Home Park (Parklane MHP), with the help of a newly formed nonprofit (United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos, UN/VU), outbid a commercial owner’s offer and purchased their park. With this purchase, residents of Parklane have become one of only six mobile home parks in Colorado purchased by residents. UN/VU is seeking City funding toward several urgent and necessary infrastructure repairs to the park. This item was discussed at the September 1, 2022, Council Finance Committee. 7. Items Relating to the Peakview Annexation No. 1. A. Resolution 2022-099 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Peakview Annexation No. 1. B. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2022, Annexing the Property Known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this item is to annex a 5.78-acre portion of private property that will be used for the construction of Greenfields Drive, a future arterial street within the East Mulberry Corridor. The property to be annexed is a portion of the property subject to the Peakview Planned Land Division (“PLD”) development application which is currently being processed by Larimer County and is expected to be approved prior to completion of this annexation. The remaining property subject to the PLD is expected to petition for annexation as a condition of the County’s approval. The Initiating Resolution for this annexation was adopted on August 16, 2022. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on this agenda. This Annexation request is in conformance with State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements. City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 7 8. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2022, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Peakview Annexation No. 1 to the City of Fort Collins and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Peakview Annexation No. 1 Annexation into the General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) and Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (MMN) zone districts and placement into the LC1 and LC2 Lighting Context Areas. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 2(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures most recently adopted in Resolution 2022-068. 9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2022, Authorizing the Release of a Restrictive Covenant on Property at 331 North Howes Street Owned by Villages, Ltd. The purpose of this item is to obtain authorization from Council to release the Agreement of Restrictive Covenants Affecting Real Property for the property located at 331 North Howes Street. This property is owned by Villages, Ltd, a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation managed by Housing Catalyst. In exchange for repaying the original $3,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loan funds, the City will allow early release of a restrictive covenant which would otherwise expire in 2023. 10. Resolution 2022-100 Supporting a Grant Application for Gray and Black Market Marijuana Enforcement Funding for Fort Collins Police Services. The purpose of this item is to obtain Council support for the City to apply for grant money to support enforcement of gray- and black- market marijuana activity for Fort Collins Police Services. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR J) ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR K) CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP (This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.) L) STAFF REPORTS - None. M) COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS N) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 7 O) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PLANNED FOR DISCUSSION The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: • Mayor introduced the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff • Staff presentation (optional) • Mayor requests public comment on the item (three minute limit for each person) • Council questions of staff on the item • Council motion on the item • Council discussion • Final Council comments • Council vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure all have an opportunity to speak. If attending in person, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. 11. Public Hearing #1 on the 2023-24 Recommended Budget for the City of Fort Collins. This is the first public hearing on the City Manager’s 2023-24 Recommended Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on the 2023-24 budget. To receive further public input, a second public hearing is scheduled for Council’s Tuesday, October 4, 2022, regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers with the option for remote participation through the online Zoom meeting platform. Both hearings were set by Council adoption of Resolution 2022-097 at its September 6, 2022, meeting. The City Manager’s 2023- 24 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the City Clerk’s Office by appointment only and online at fcgov.com/budget. 12. Appeal of 1802 North College Avenue City Landmark Eligibility for Development Review. The purpose of this quasi-judicial item is to consider an appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s (HPC) Decision on July 20, 2022, determining that the property at 1802 North College Avenue, Pobre Pancho’s, is eligible as a Fort Collins Landmark and subject to the provisions of Land Use Code 3.4.7. Appeals of quasi-judicial commission decisions are processed under Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3. The Council is tasked, after considering the evidence, to uphold, overturn, or modify the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission (Sec. 2-56). The Council may also remand the matter to the HPC or an alternate decision-maker in certain circumstances under Sec. 2-56. A Notice of Appeal of the HPC’s decision was filed on August 3, 2022. The appellant, H and H Properties, LLC, (H&H) appealed the decision on two grounds. First, H&H argues that the HPC considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading. Second, H&H argues that the HPC failed to properly interpret and apply provisions of the City Code, specifically Municipal Code Sec. 14-22, Standards for Eligibility, and Sec. 14-23 Process for Determining Eligibility. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and will be considered in accordance with the Council appeal procedures described in Division 3 of Article II of Chapter 2 of the City Code. City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 7 P) OTHER BUSINESS OB 1. Possible consideration of the Initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) Q) ADJOURNMENT Every regular Council meeting will end no later than midnight, except that: (1) any item of business commenced before midnight may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the Council may, at any time prior to adjournment, by majority vote, extend a meeting beyond midnight for the purpose of considering additional items of business. Any matter that has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council meeting, and all matters for consideration at the meeting that have not yet been considered by the Council, will be deemed continued to the next regular Council meeting, unless Council determines otherwise. Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latinx/e Heritage Month celebrates the diversity of the Fort Collins community, has been a national observance and celebration since 1988 when it was approved by the 100th Congress , and September 15-October 15 has been designated for observance of Hispanic/Latinx/e Heritage Month Celebration; and WHEREAS, as the largest ethnic and cultural group in Fort Collins at nearly 20% of the population, the Hispanic/Latinx/e community—which reflects all genders, races, ethnicities, socioeconomic statuses, nationalities, ages, sexual orientations, religions and abilities—has historically faced cultural and systemic barriers to inclusion and equitable treatment in the City; and WHEREAS, despite such discrimination, Fort Collins is proud to be home to many people of Hispanic/Latinx/e descent who play an important role in our strength and prosperity by making the community vibrant, strong, and productive, and whose tenacity, energy and leadership are woven into the culture of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, it is the role of City leaders, City institutions, and community members to commit to the removal of cultural and systemic barriers, to combat discrimination, promote tolerance and social justice, and to advance the cause of equity and inclusion for all in our community, including community members of Hispanic/Latinx/e descent; and WHEREAS, the City celebrates Hispanic/Latinx/e community leaders, organizations, and businesses and their invaluable contributions to For Collins; thanks and expresses gratitude to Hispanic/Latinx/e leaders and contributors in education, the arts, sciences, medical fields, military, government, business, management, non -profits, social justice organizations, and more, and as a City we will continue to support such organizations, businesses, and individuals and recognize their important contributions to our community and city; and WHEREAS, the Fort Collins City Council and staff commit to making Fort Collins a welcoming community for all people living here; to expanding opportunities in business, education, the arts, sciences, government and leadership; to removing barriers to inequity, addressing hate and bias, and promoting equity and justice for Hispanic/Latinx/e community members. We recognize there is more work ahead of us and commit to the fundamental community values of equity and inclusion in Fort Collins, ensuring that all residents feel respected, valued, and affirmed. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim September 15 – October 15, 2022, as HISPANIC/LATINX HERITAGE MONTH in Fort Collins and encourage residents to participate and to celebrate the cultural riches that our Hispanic/Latinx /e community has to offer. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Page 8 Item PP 1. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, it is the privilege and duty of the American people to commemorate the anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America with appropriate ceremonies; and WHEREAS, September 17, 2022 marks the two hundred and thirty-fourth anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention; and WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper to officially recognize this magnificent document and the anniversary of its creation; and WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper to officially recognize the patriotic celebrations which will commemorate the occasion; and WHEREAS, Public Law No. 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America, designating September 17-23 as Constitution Week. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim September 17-23, 2022 as CONSTITUTION WEEK in Fort Collins, and ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals the framers of the Constitution had in 1787 by vigilantly protecting the freedoms guaranteed to us through this guardian of our liberties, remembering that lost rights may never be regained. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Page 9 Item PP 2. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, dogs are a vital part of Fort Collins families and are family members themselves; and WHEREAS, pets make life better by giving people love, companionship and comfort, getting us outside for exercise and helping us build social connections; and WHEREAS, responsible and entertaining dog ownership is essential to the wellbeing of dogs and people; and WHEREAS, dogs must be protected from harm and have the care, nutrition, exercise, and amusement they need; and WHEREAS, animal workers, dog lovers, and corgi advocates in our community work tirelessly to keep dogs healthy and safe; and WHEREAS, low-riding dogs such as Pembroke Welsh Corgis, Cardigan Corgis, and their mixes are more prone to health and joint issues and therefore need additional attention; and WHEREAS, dogs who look like loaves of bread with fluffy butts are more likely to be put in a costume and paraded through Old Town Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, we want our community to lead as a dog-friendly city that protects, supports, welcomes, and dresses-up dogs for no other reason than pure joy. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 1, 2022 as TOUR DE CORGI DAY IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Page 11 Item PP 4. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, fire prevention is vital to the safety of the community; and WHEREAS, this is the 100th anniversary of Fire Prevention Week which has been sponsored by the National Fire Protection Association since 1922, and made a national observance in 1925, making it the longest running public health observance in the United States; and WHEREAS, the celebration of this week commemorates the Great Chicago Fire which began on Oct. 8, 1871, which killed an estimated 300 people, left over 100,000 people homeless, and changed fire prevention and city planning forever; and WHEREAS, the amount of time to safely escape a fire has decreased drastically over the last several decades leaving as little as two minutes (or even less) to safely escape a fire from the time the smoke alarm sounds; and WHEREAS, working smoke alarms should be in every bedroom, outside all sleeping areas, on each level of the home and there should be two ways out of each room and a pre-planned, static meeting place (i.e., a tree not a car); and WHEREAS, the ability to escape during a fire depends on early warning from smoke alarms and planning so just a few minutes talking to your family, testing smoke alarms, and planning an escape can be the difference between safety and tragedy. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the week of October 9-15, 2022, as FIRE PREVENTION WEEK with the theme, Fire won’t wait. Plan your escape. I encourage the community to observe this week with appropriate programs, education, and activities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th of September, A.D. 2022. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Page 12 Item PP 5. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, The Cupboard was founded in 1972 by Carey Hewitt and a partner in Downtown Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, The Cupboard is now owned by Carey’s son, Jim, and his wife Andrea; and WHEREAS, The Cupboard is now one of the largest independent kitchen and home stores in the nation; and WHEREAS, The Cupboard supports hundreds of local businesses and non-profits each year; and WHEREAS, The Cupboard is thankful for the support of staff and customers during the past 50 years. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 8-16 as THE CUPBOARD’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION WEEK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September, 2022 __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Page 13 Item PP 6. City Council Agenda – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 1 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Anissa Hollingshead, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 6, 2022 Regular Meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the September 6, 2022 Regular meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Minutes, September 6, 2022 Page 14 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 7 September 6, 2022 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting – 6:00 PM A) PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS PP 1. Proclamation Declaring September 17, 2022 as Historic Homes Tour Day. PP 2. Proclamation Declaring October 21, 2022 as the Foodie Walk 10th Anniversary. Mayor Jeni Arndt presented the above proclamations at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. B) CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Jeni Arndt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, with hybrid participation available via the City’s Zoom platform. C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Jeni Arndt led the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. D) ROLL CALL PRESENT Mayor Jeni Arndt Mayor Pro Tem Emily Francis Councilmember Julie Pignataro Councilmember Tricia Canonico (arrived at 6:15 p.m.) Councilmember Shirley Peel Councilmember Kelly Ohlson ABSENT Councilmember Susan Gutowsky STAFF PRESENT City Manager Kelly DiMartino City Attorney Carrie Daggett City Clerk Anissa Hollingshead E) CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Kelly DiMartino provided an overview of the agenda, including: There were no changes to the published agenda. Item 2 is being pulled from the consent agenda with the recommendation it be postponed for two weeks to allow for additional staff work. The remaining items on the consent agenda all recommended for approval. Page 15 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 7 City Council Proceedings F) COMMUNITY REPORTS None. G) PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY TOPICS OR ITEMS OR COMMUNITY EVENTS (Including requests for removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion.) Sterling, a young resident of Fort Collins, read a short book he wrote about how government is structured. Tom Weatherly, a Fort Collins resident, shared concerns with Spin bicycles being left on city sidewalks, providing photos of some examples of the issues he is seeing on his normal routes when riding his bike to and from work and on other short car trips in his part of town. Jan Stallones, a Fort Collins resident, stated she is a new Fort Collins resident who is learning about codes and ordinances and expressed concern about an abandoned property near her home. She offered her willingness to be involved in proactive solutions for these sorts of issues. There were no online speakers. H) PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP Kelly Ohlson asked if City management has any comments regarding about the Spin program. City Manager Kelly DiMartino noted follow up will be provided in the form of a memo and possibly a staff report regarding follow up on these sorts of repeat issues. Mayor Jeni Arndt thanked Sterling for sharing his book, encouraged Ms. Stallone to be in contact with the City Clerk regarding openings on boards and commissions, and concurred regarding the need to ensure public sidewalks remain fully accessible. I) COUNCILMEMBER REMOVAL OF ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION None. J) CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the August 16, 2022 Regular Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the August 16, 2022 Regular meeting. Approved. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 090, 2022, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement to Poudre Fire Authority on City-owned Real Property Located at 430 N. College Avenue. This item was pulled from consent to allow for discussion. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 091, 2022, Authorizing the Execution of a First Amendment to Lease with New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC of City-Owned Property at City Park Ballfields. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, authorizes the City Manager to execute an amendment extending the existing New Cingular cell site lease at the ball Page 16 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 7 City Council Proceedings fields at City Park. The amendment would extend the end of the current lease terms from March 8, 2023, to October 20, 2023, and allow an additional 5-year term from October 21, 2023, to October 20, 2028. New Cingular has leased the site from the City since 2005. Annual rent received by the City will increase from $20,736 to $24,000 for the first year of the 5-year term with 3% increases every year afterwards. Adopted on Second Reading. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 092, 2022, Dissolving the Parking Advisory Board and Amending the Code of the City of Fort Collins by Repealing Section 2-110 Relating to the Parking Advisory Board. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, dissolves the Parking Advisory Board. Adopted on Second Reading. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 093, 2022, Making Supplemental Appropriations in the General Fund for the Environmental Services Air Quality Program from the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, appropriates unanticipated grant revenue in the General Fund for the Environmental Services Air Quality Program. This grant directly supports Council Priority #17, Improved Air Quality, and includes $108,200 of grant funding provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and associated with the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) to support local monitoring of National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) pollutants in and near communities with environmental justice concerns who face disproportionate exposure to these pollutants and health risks and are also associated with increased vulnerability to COVID-19. The Ordinance has been revised to include a reference to the City Manager’s authority to approve/sign an intergovernmental agreement with the EPA for the funding. Adopted on Second Reading. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 094, 2022, Adopting a Graywater Ordinance, to Allow Voluntary Graywater System Installations. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, adopts an ordinance to allow graywater systems to be installed in the City. The proposed graywater ordinance would enact a voluntary program for graywater use for toilet flushing in Fort Collins Utilities’ water and wastewater service areas, as well as the service areas of consenting water and wastewater districts in the Growth Management Area (GMA). The proposed graywater ordinance would be consistent with State regulatory requirements and local water right limitations. Adopted on Second Reading. Page 17 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 7 City Council Proceedings 7. First Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2022, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received by City Give for the 2022 Parks Independence Day Celebration and the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. The purpose of this item is to appropriate philanthropic revenue designated for the 2022 Independence Day Celebration and for the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. Adopted on First Reading. 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2022, Conditionally Vacating a Portion of Coleman Street Right-of-Way. The purpose of this item is to approve the conditional vacation of a portion of Coleman Street right-of-way that is no longer desirable or necessary to retain for street purposes. The right-of- way area, once vacated, will be retained in its entirety as a public utility and public access easement to the City. The right-of-way vacation will be conditional upon the demolition of the existing street stub of Coleman Street and the reconstruction of the vacated area as a landscape and pedestrian area. These conditions are outlined in detail in the Ordinance. Adopted on First Reading. 9. Resolution 2022-095 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision Approving the Sanctuary on the Green Project Development Plan #PDP210018. The purpose of this item is to make findings of fact regarding the appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision to approve the Sanctuary on the Green Project Development Plan. The appeal was heard by Council on August 16, 2022. Adopted. 10. Resolution 2022-096 Supporting an Application for a Great Outdoors Colorado Land Acquisition Grant for the Buckeye Conservation and Front Range Gateway Project. In partnership with Larimer County, the Buckeye Ranch Conservation Project would conserve over 1,000 acres north of Fort Collins. The County and City have been invited by Great Outdoors Colorado to submit a full grant application to support this project in their upcoming Land Acquisition program cycle. Adopted. 11. Resolution 2022-097 Setting the Dates of the Public Hearings on the 2023-24 Proposed City of Fort Collins Budget. The purpose of this item is to set two public hearing dates for the proposed 2023-24 budget that the City Manager has filed with the City Clerk pursuant to Section 2 of City Charter Article V. Section 3 of City Charter Article V requires Council to set a date for a public hearing on the proposed budget and to cause notice of the hearing to be published. This Resolution sets two public hearing dates for Council’s regular meeting on September 20, 2022, and its regular meeting on October 4, 2022. The Resolution also directs the City Clerk to publish the notice of these two hearings, which notice is attached as Exhibit “A” to the Resolution. Adopted. Page 18 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 7 City Council Proceedings 12. Resolution 2022-098 Making Appointments to the Transportation Board. The purpose of this item is to fill vacancies on the Transportation Board. Adopted. K) ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to approve the recommended actions on items 1 and 3-12 on the consent calendar. The motion carried 6-0. Absent: Councilmember Gutowsky. L) CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP (This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.) None. M) STAFF REPORTS None. N) COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS None. O) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 090, 2022, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement to Poudre Fire Authority on City-owned Real Property Located at 430 N. College Avenue. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, authorizes the conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) to Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) on City- owned real property located at 430 N. College Avenue. The City leases this property, which is the location of the Powerhouse Energy Campus, to the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF). CSURF has submitted plans to the City to make improvements to the property to support a hydrogen fueling station and turbine generator. As a condition of approval, the City, as property owner, is required to convey an EAE to PFA to support fire truck and emergency equipment access, which is a common requirement for new development and improvements on certain properties. Conveyance of the EAE is the final action needed for the City’s Planning, Development, and Transportation Department to approve the project and issue construction permits as CSURF has met all other lease and development review requirements. This item was pulled from the consent agenda to allow for discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to postpone second reading of this ordinance to September 20, 2022. The motion carried 6-0. Absent: Councilmember Gutowsky. Page 19 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 7 City Council Proceedings P) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PLANNED FOR DISCUSSION None. Q) OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) None. B. Consideration of a motion to go into Executive Session: Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Peel, that the City Council go into executive session pursuant to: City Charter Article Roman Numeral Two, Section 11(2), City Code Section 2-31(a)(2) and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(b), for the purpose of discussing with the City’s attorneys and appropriate management staff the following: 1. specific legal questions related to the Surat lawsuit; and 2. the manner in which the particular policies, practices or regulations of the City related to programs for advertising on City transit and other facilities may be affected by existing or proposed provisions of federal, state or local law.” The motion carried 6-0. Absent: Gutowsky. Entered into executive session at 6:33 p.m. for the purpose of discussing with the City’s attorneys and appropriate management staff specific legal questions pertaining to litigation with Michaella Surat, pursuant to: City Charter Article Roman Numeral Two, Section 11(2), City Code Section 2-31(a)(2) and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(b). The meeting returned to open session at 6:56 p.m. Entered into executive session at 6:58 p.m. for the purpose of discussing with the City’s attorneys and appropriate management staff the manner in which the particular policies, practices or regulations of the City related to programs for advertising on City transit and other facilities may be affected by existing or proposed provisions of federal, state or local law, pursuant to: City Charter Article Roman Numeral Two, Section 11(2), City Code Section 2-31(a)(2) and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(b). Page 20 Item 1. City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 7 City Council Proceedings Returned to open session at 7:29 p.m. R) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:31 p.m. to a special work session reconvening in the Colorado Community Room at 222 Laporte Ave. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk Page 21 Item 1. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Keith Hanson, Real Estate Manager Ingrid Decker, Senior Assistant City Attorney SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 090, 2022, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement to Poudre Fire Authority on City-owned Real Property Located at 430 N. College Avenue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 16, 2022, authorizes the conveyance of an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) to Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) on City-owned real property located at 430 N. College Avenue. The City leases this property, which is the location of the Powerhouse Energy Campus, to the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF). CSURF has submitted plans to the City to make improvements to the property to support a hydrogen fueling station and turbine generator. As a condition of approval, the City, as property owner, is required to convey an EAE to PFA to support fire truck and emergency equipment access, which is a common requirement for new development and improvements on certain properties. Conveyance of the EAE is the final action needed for the City’s Planning, Development, and Transportation Department to approve the project and issue construction permits as CSURF has met all other lease and development review requirements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION CSURF has leased the property from the City since 1994 for its Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory, and for instructional and research purposes focused on developing innovative and alternative energy solutions. The current lease, executed in 2012, is for a term of 40 years with a 20-year option. Since the 2012 lease was executed, CSURF has improved the property with the construction of a new facility, which will revert to City ownership upon the expiration of the lease. CSURF is responsible for all operations, maintenance, and repair at the property throughout the term of the lease in exchange for rent of $25 per year. CSURF has submitted construction plans to the City for improvements to support a hydrogen fueling station and turbine generator at the property. As part of the City’s development review process, PFA is one of the agencies that must review the plans for regulatory compliance. Fire truck access is required to be within 150 feet of all exterior portions of the structures. Since the location of the new structures is more than 150 feet from any current access point, an EAE for a fire lane will be necessary. Any fire lane greater than 150 feet requires a turn-around area (hammerhead). Page 22 Item 2. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 An existing driveway on the property was selected for the emergency access path. The driveway meets PFA’s requirements for a minimum of 20 feet of unobstructed width; a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons; and an approved fire truck hammerhead. CSURF provided a geotechnical report demonstrating the ability of the driveway to support 40 tons, as well as a fire truck turning analysis for a hammerhead at the end of the driveway. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS There is no cost to the City associated with the EAE or construction improvements. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments not included. 1. Ordinance for Consideration 2. Exhibit A Page 23 Item 2. ORDINANCE NO. 090, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF AN EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT TO POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT 430 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE WHEREAS, the City is the owner of real property located at 430 North College Avenue, which is the site of the Old Power Plant (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property is owned by the City’s electric utility but is no longer needed, except incidentally, for utility purposes; and WHEREAS, since February 2012 the City has leased the Property to the Colorado State University Research Foundation (“CSURF”) for use as the Colorado State University (“CSU”) Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory (the “Engines Lab”), also known as the Powerhouse Energy Campus, pursuant to Ordinance No. 183, 2011; and WHEREAS, prior to 2012, CSU had leased a portion of the Property for the Engines Lab since 1994; and WHEREAS, CSURF has submitted plans to the City to make improvements to the Property to support a hydrogen fueling station and turbine generator; and WHEREAS, as a condition of approval of CSURF’s plans, the City, as property owner, must convey an emergency access easement to Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) to provide access for fire trucks and other emergency equipment (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, the location of the proposed Easement, which is over an existing driveway, is shown and described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code authorizes the City Council to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property owned by the City, provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City and, with respect to property which is part of the City’s utility systems, that the disposition will not materially impair the viability of the particular utility system as a whole and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, as consideration for the City’s conveyance of the Easement CSURF has agreed to pay the City an administrative fee of $500 and assume responsibility for maintaining the surface of the Easement; and WHEREAS, City staff is recommending that the City not charge CSURF or PFA full fair market value for the Easement as the conveyance serves a bona fide public purpose under Section 23-114 of the City Code because: Page 24 Item 2. (1) The use of the Easement for emergency access by PFA, and CSURF’s continued use of the Property for research and development of alternate energy solutions, promotes health, safety or general welfare and benefits a significant segment of the citizens of Fort Collins; (2) The use to which the Property will be put supports one or more of the City Council's goals, adopted policies, projects or plans by continuing the support the City Council has previously shown for the Engines Lab through the minimal rent ($25 per year) the City charges CSURF under the 2012 lease; (3) The financial support provided by the City through the below-market conveyance of the Easement will be leveraged with other funding or assistance from CSURF; (4) Conveyance of the Easement will not result in any direct financial benefit to any private person or entity, except to the extent such benefit is only an incidental consequence and is not substantial relative to the public purpose being served; and (5) Conveying the Easement for less than fair market value will not interfere with current City projects or work programs, hinder workload schedules or divert resources needed for primary City functions or responsibilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the City’s conveyance of the Easement to PFA as described herein is in the best interests of the City, will not impair the viability of the electric utility system as a whole, and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. Section 3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easement to PFA on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal description of the Easement, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the interest to be conveyed. Page 25 Item 2. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 16th day of August, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 26 Item 2. EXHIBIT APage 27Item 2. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Nina Bodemhamer, City Give John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2022, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received by City Give for the 2022 Parks Independence Day Celebration and the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2022, appropriates philanthropic revenue designated for the 2022 Independence Day Celebration and the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The purpose of this item is to appropriate $27,500 in philanthropic revenue received from Elevations Credit Union. The award is designated by the donor as $20,000 for sponsorship of the 2022 Independence Day Celebration and $7,500 for sponsorship of the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. A sponsorship, also referred to as “underwriting,” is both a community partnership and charitable award. Local businesses sponsor events to invest in community engagement and expand the reach of both organization’s valuable audiences. Per IRS code, businesses can declare portions of a sponsorship as charitable giving. Therefore, the City’s fiduciary responsibility is to steward, track, and report sponsorships as philanthropic revenue. Each year, the City enters into various sponsorships across departments for events ranging from Kids in the Park to performances at The Lincoln Center, from Open Streets to Treatsylvania. Community partnerships and event sponsorships such as support from Elevations Credit Union significantly enhances the City of Fort Collins’ service to the community and our residents. Page 28 Item 3. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance will appropriate $20,000 in philanthropic revenue received by City Give in the General Fund for the Parks Department and $7,500 for Community Development and Neighborhood Services in the General Fund. The funds have been received and accepted per City Give Administrative and Financial Policy. The City Manager has also determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in the General Fund during fiscal year 2022. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments not included. 1. Ordinance for Consideration Page 29 Item 3. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 095, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PHILANTHROPIC REVENUE RECEIVED BY CITY GIVE FOR THE 2022 PARKS INDEPENDENCE DAY CELEBRATION AND THE 2022 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES URBAN DESIGN AWARDS WHEREAS, the City has received in fiscal year 2022 through the City Give program a donation of $27,500 from Elevations Credit Union; and WHEREAS, Elevations Credit Union has designated that $20,000 of its donation be used for its sponsorship of the City’s 2022 Parks Independence Day Celebration and that the remaining $7,500 be used to fund the City’s 2022 Community Development and Neighbor Services Urban Design Awards; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make a supplemental appropriation by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriation, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in this Fund during this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, these appropriations serve the public purposes of funding the City’s 2022 Fourth of July celebration for its residents and funding in 2022 the City’s program awarding and incentivizing urban designs that improve the quality of life in Fort Collins, which purposes thereby benefit the public’s health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from new revenue or other funds in the General Fund the sum of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000) to be expended in the General Fund for the 2022 Parks Independence Day Celebration. Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated from new revenue or other funds in the General Fund the sum of SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($7,500) to be expended in the General Fund for the 2022 Community Development and Neighborhood Services Urban Design Awards. Page 30 Item 3. -2- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of, September A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Page 31 Item 3. City Council Agenda – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Sophie Buckingham – Civil Engineer I Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2022, Conditionally Vacating a Portion of Coleman Street Right-of-Way. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2022, adopts the conditional vacation of a portion of Coleman Street right-of-way that is no longer desirable or necessary to retain for street purposes. The right-of-way area, once vacated, will be retained in its entirety as a public utility and public access easement to the City. The right-of-way vacation will be conditional upon the demolition of the existing street stub of Coleman Street and the reconstruction of the vacated area as a landscape and pedestrian area. These conditions are outlined in detail in the Ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This portion of Coleman Street right-of-way is no longer desirable or necessary to retain for street purposes because Coleman Street will not be continued eastward by the proposed Bloom Filing One development, which is anticipated to be approved in Fall 2022. The right-of-way for the existing street stub of Coleman Street must be vacated for the Bloom Filing One development plans to be in compliance with Section 3.6.3(F) of the Land Use Code. Staff from Planning, Development, and Transportation have determined that vehicular connectivity and circulation will be adequate without the continuation of Coleman Street into the Bloom development, since the following streets will be continued east into the Bloom development: Barnstormer Street, Conquest Street, Sykes Drive, Comet Street, and Crusader Street. Figure 1 shows an area map of the existing street network. After Council’s conditional approval of this Ordinance and the City’s approval of Bloom Filing One, the Bloom developer will demolish the existing street stub and install a landscape area and pedestrian connection from the East Ridge neighborhood into the future Bloom neighborhood. Figure 2 shows the existing street stub. Once the street stub has been demolished and the pedestrian connection has been installed, the right-of-way vacation will take effect upon recording of the Ordinance with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. The entire area of vacated right -of-way will be retained as a public utility and public access easement to the City. The City Engineer and the Planning, Development, and Transportation Director recommend approval of this conditional right-of-way vacation. Page 32 Item 4. City Council Agenda – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3 For a vacation of right-of-way to be completed, the approved ordinance must first be recorded with Larimer County. To ensure that the vacated area is properly improved and maintained, staff recommends that the following conditions, as further detailed in the Ordinance, be satisfied prior to recording: East Ridge Second Filing – ROW Minor Amendment, MA220027, setting forth the proposed street stub demolition and landscape area construction must receive City approval. The Bloom Filing One developer will provide the City with a bond for 125% of the estimated cost to restore the existing street improvements, should the Ordinance become null and void after the existing street stub has been demolished. The Bloom Filing One developer will demolish the existing street stub. Mulberry Metropolitan District No. 3 for the Bloom development will enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City in which the Metropolitan District agrees to: o If vacated area does not vest in the Metropolitan District on vacation pursuant to Section 43-2-302, C.R.S, obtain ownership of the vacated area immediately upon vacation. o Provide a bond to the City for 125% of the estimated value of the landscape improvements to guarantee the completion of those improvements. o Maintain the vacated area in perpetuity pursuant to the City’s approved plans at the Metropolitan District’s sole expense. Figure 1. Area Map Page 33 Item 4. City Council Agenda – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3 Figure 2. Existing Street Stub CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The City will no longer need to maintain the 5,373 square feet of vacated right-of-way, which will decrease the City’s street maintenance costs. PUBLIC OUTREACH Potentially affected utility agencies, staff, and emergency service providers have been notified of the request for right-of-way vacation. Additionally, the adjacent property owners at 468 Fairchild Street and 502 Fairchild Street have been notified of the proposed right-of-way vacation. The notification letter to the adjacent property owners also informed them that the first reading of this Ordinance is scheduled for the City Council consent agenda on September 6, 2022. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments not included. 1. Ordinance for Consideration Page 34 Item 4. ORDINANCE NO. 096, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CONDITIONALLY VACATING A PORTION OF COLEMAN STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEREAS, the previously approved Eastridge Second Filing subdivision plat dedicated Coleman Street internal to the subdivision as a public street right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the developer of the Mulberry & Greenfields Planned Unit Development, Mulberry Development, LLC, (the “Developer”) located east of and adjacent to Eastridge Second Filing has requested that the portion of Coleman Street east of Fairchild Street be vacated as depicted on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein (such portion hereinafter referred to as the “Vacation Area”); and WHEREAS, the Vacation Area is a dead-end street stub originally intended to be extended upon development of the land to the east; and WHEREAS, the Developer has stated that extending Coleman Street east of Fairchild Street into the Mulberry & Greenfields Planned Unit Development is not necessary and proposes that the current street stub be removed and landscaping installed within the Vacation Area; and WHEREAS, the developer of East Ridge Second Filing has submitted a minor amendment, MA220027, to amend the site plan to allow removal of the street stub within the Vacation Area and to install landscaping in its place; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has routed the vacation request to potentially affected utility agencies, City staff, emergency service providers and affected property owners in the vicinity of the Vacation Area and no objection to the proposed vacation has been received; and WHEREAS, in accordance with City Code Section 23-115, the City Engineer recommended conditional approval of this vacation to the Planning, Development and Transportation Director, and the Director recommends to Council that the request for vacation be approved with the conditions set forth in the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the right of the residents of the City of Fort Collins will not be prejudiced or injured by the vacation of said street rights-of-way. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds and determines that: Page 35 Item 4. (1) The Vacation Area more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein is no longer needed for road right-of-way purposes and that it is in the public interest to vacate the Vacation Area provided certain conditions as stated in Section 3 below are met; and (2) Upon vacation of the Vacation Area, the City hereby reserves a non-exclusive blanket easement for access and utilities within the Vacation Area (the “Reserved City Easement”); and (3) Title to the Vacation Area shall vest, subject to the Reserved City Easement, in accordance with Section 43-2-302, C.R.S. Section 3. This vacation shall not take effect until this Ordinance is recorded with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and this Ordinance shall not be recorded until the following conditions have been met: (1) At the Developer’s sole expense, the Developer must demolish the existing street improvements in the Vacation Area to the City’s satisfaction after providing a bond with the City as obligee for 125% of the estimated cost to restore the demolished street improvements within the Vacation Area should this Ordinance become null and void as stated in Section 4 below, and such bond shall be released upon recording of this Ordinance; (2) The East Ridge Second Filing – ROW Minor Amendment, MA220027, must meet all applicable Land Use Code requirements and receive City approval; (3) The Mulberry Metropolitan District No. 3 (“Metropolitan District”) must enter into an intergovernmental agreement acceptable to the City in which the Metropolitan District agrees to: (a) If ownership of the Vacation Area does not vest in the Metropolitan District under Section 43-2-302, C.R.S., obtain ownership of the Vacation Area immediately after vacation, subject to the Reserved City Easement; (b) Provide a bond with the City as the obligee for 125% of the estimated value of the landscape improvements within the Vacation Area, as such improvements are described in the approved MA220027 minor amendment, to guarantee completion of such improvements; and (c) Maintain the Vacation Area in perpetuity pursuant to the City’s approved MA220027 minor amendment landscape plan, and any subsequent amendments, at the Metropolitan District’s sole expense. (4) The City Manager is authorized to sign the intergovernmental agreement referenced in (3) above and any subsequent amendment of such agreement. Page 36 Item 4. Section 4. If this Ordinance is not recorded within three years of the date of second reading of this Ordinance, then this Ordinance shall become null and void. Should this Ordinance become null and void but the existing road improvements within the Vacation Area have been demolished pursuant to Section 3, Subsection (1) above, the Developer must restore the road improvements within one-hundred and twenty days of this Ordinance becoming null and void, or such further time as the City Manager may grant in writing their reasonable discretion to restore the road improvements in consideration of the winter season or other construction limitations, after which the City may call upon the bond to restore such road improvements. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 37 Item 4. VACATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION COLEMAN STREET RIGHT OF WAY VACATION EAST OF FAIRCHILD STREET, EAST RIDGE SECOND FILING PLAT AS RECORDED AT RECEPTION NUMBER 20160047573 IN THE LARIMER COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE, LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH (6TH)PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IN THE CITY OF FT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. SAID VACATION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 15, BLOCK 21 OF SAID EAST RIDGE SECOND FILING PLAT AND THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLEMAN STREET; THENCE S00°17'22"W, A DISTANCE OF 53.00 FEET ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID EAST RIDGE SECOND FILING AND THE SAID EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 22 OF SAID EAST RIDGE SECOND FILING AND THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLEMAN STREET; THENCE N89 °40'53"W, A DISTANCE OF 84.54 FEET ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90 °02'10", A DISTANCE OF 23.57 FEET, A CHORD BEARING OF S45°18'02"W WITH A CHORD DISTANCE OF 21.22 FEET CONTINUING ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF FAIRCHILD STREET; THENCE N00°16'57"E, A DISTANCE OF 83.00 FEET ON SAID EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 15, BLOCK 21, A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT AND THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLEMAN STREET; THENCE ON SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND ON SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89 °57'50", A DISTANCE OF 23.55 FEET, A CHORD BEARING OF S44°41'58"E WITH A CHORD DISTANCE OF 21.21 FEET; THENCE S89 °40'53"E, A DISTANCE OF 84.57 FEET CONTINUING ON SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 5,373 SQUARE FEET OR 0.123 ACRES. BASIS OF BEARING: THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, IS ASSUMED TO BEAR S 00°17'22" WEST FOR 2647.93 FEET BETWEEN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 8, MONUMENTED WITH NO. 6 REBAR WITH 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP IN A MONUMENT BOX, STAMPED LS 28285 AND THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 8, MONUMENTED WITH NO. 6 REBAR WITH 3-1/4" ALUMINUM CAP, STAMPED LS 34995, 2016, WITH ALL OTHER BEARINGS REFERENCED THERETO EXHIBIT BIS ATTACHED HERETO AND IS ONLY INTENDED TO DEPICT EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IN THE EVENT THAT EXHIBIT A CONTAINS AN AMBIGUITY, EXHIBIT B MAY BE USED TO RESOLVE SAID AMBIGUITY. • I,. Lt•.,,_ .•·· .,. ..... \.,, _: .• -:. ·I.. A. It:• «..' . ' ·.;") PREPARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF GALLOWAY 3;�:;U1':::�� BY FRANK A. KOHL, PLS# 37067 7 11•: l. i_.i.\j_... March 3, 2022 ·r H:\Hartford Homes\CO Fort Collins HFH22 -Mulberry\0SVY\3-Docs\Legals\ColemanStreet-Vacalion-descriplion.doc EXHIBIT A Page 38 Item 4. EXHIBIT A Page 39 Item 4. September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Nina Bodenhamer, City Give Director John Duval, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2022, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue From Philanthropic Donations Received in 2022 Through City Give for Various City Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to request appropriation of $90,234 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City service areas support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non- partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City has long been the beneficiary of local generosity and has a valuable role in our community’s philanthropic landscape. Generosity is demonstrated in both large and modest gifts, each appreciated for its investment in the mission and the range of services the City strives to deliver. In 2022, the City received several individual philanthropic donations supporting various departments totaling $90,234 and these funds are currently unappropriated. As acknowledged by Section 2.5 of the City's Fiscal Management Policy 2-Revenue approved by Council, the City Manager has adopted the City Give Financial Governance Policy to provide for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City; and 52.2.C. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Give Director to accept donations of $5,000 or less for the City service area as designated by the donor. This Appropriation also includes a gift $50,000 received by The Gardens on Spring Creek made by The Friends of the Gardens designated for operations. Page 40 Item 5. These generous donations have been directed by the respective donors to be used by the City for designated uses within and for the benefit of City service areas and programs as each donation is described in Exhibit “A” attached to the Ordinance. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance will appropriate $90,234.00 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give for gifts to various City service areas to support a variety of programs and services. The funds have been received and accepted per the City Give Administrative and Financial Policy. The City Manager has also determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the designated funds and will not cause the total amount appropriated in these funds to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in these funds during fiscal year 2022. The proposed increase to appropriated expenditures is summarized below: 2022 Unanticipated Revenue General Fund $ 9,819.00 Cultural Services Fund $ 68,225.00 Transportation Fund $ 11,500.00 Golf Fund $ 690.00 These donations have been received and accepted per the City Give Administrative and Financial Policy. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance for Consideration Page 41 Item 5. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 097, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM PHILANTHROPIC DONATIONS RECEIVED IN 2022 THROUGH CITY GIVE FOR VARIOUS CITY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES AS DESIGNATED BY THE DONORS WHEREAS, since March 2022, the City has received twenty-seven individual philanthropic donations of $5,000 or less and two individual donations of $5,000 up to $100,000, which twenty-nine donations total $90,234, and these funds are currently unappropriated; and WHEREAS, these donations have been directed by the donors to be used by the City for certain designated uses within and for the benefit of certain City service areas as each donation is described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, as acknowledged by Section 2.5 for the City’s Fiscal Management Policy 2 – Revenue approved by City Council, the City Manager has adopted the City Give Financial Governance Policy to provide for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City (the “City Give Policy”); and WHEREAS, Section 52.2.C. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Give Director to accept donations of $5,000 or less for the City service area intended by the donor to be benefited and Section 52.2.D. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Manager to accept donations of more than $5,000 up to $100,000; and WHEREAS, as so authorized, the City Give Director and City Manager have accepted for the benefited City service areas, as applicable, the donations to be appropriated in this Ordinance to be used as directed by each donor as described in Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make a supplemental appropriation by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriation, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriations described in Section 2 of this Ordinance and determined that the amount of each of these appropriations is available and previously unappropriated from the funds named in Section 2 and will not cause the total amount appropriated in each such fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in those funds during this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, these appropriations will serve the public purpose of providing additional revenue to each of the benefited service areas to aid in accomplishing the public purposes for which each service area is established thereby benefiting the public’s health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Page 42 Item 5. -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from the following funds these amounts of philanthropic revenue received in 2022 to be expended as designated by the donors in support of the various City programs and services as described in Exhibit “A”: General Fund $ 9,819.00 Cultural Services Fund $ 68,225.00 Transportation Fund $ 11,500.00 Golf Fund $ 690.00 Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 43 Item 5. Exhibit “A” City Give 215 N Mason Street, 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6687 fcgov.com UNANTICIPATED REVENUE (2022 Donations) City Department/Donor Designation Donor Gift Date Gift Amount Digital Access & Equity German Marshall Fund 03/10/2022 2,000.00 Open Streets, Fc Moves Midtown Veterinary 08/10/2022 2,000.00 Open Streets, FC Moves HS&D 08/11/2022 2,000.00 Parks/Forestry Kevin Aldrich & Toni Patton 08/04/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Linda Sanchez 03/24/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Sally Bowly 04/21/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Mark Johnson 04/21/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Sean Burns 05/31/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Kim Kelley 05/31/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Ft Collins Pickleball 07/14/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Michael Smith 07/27/2022 500.00 Parks/Forestry Deklan & Susan Dieterly 07/27/2022 500.00 The Gardens on Spring Creek National Audubon Society 03/07/2022 4,000.00 The Gardens on Spring Creek Friends of the Gardens 03/14/2022 13,200.00 The Gardens on Spring Creek Friends of the Gardens 04/04/2022 50,000.00 The Gardens on Spring Creek Grant ($25); NoCo Daylilly Club ($1,000) 06/21/2022 1,025.00 Finance Admin/City Give Community Foundation of NoCo 07/01/2022 3,319.00 Youth Bike, FC Moves FoCo Fondo 08/12/2022 5,000.00 Youth Bike, FC Moves Bohemian Foundation/Music Event 08/13/2022 2,500.00 Youth Golf Scholarship William and Wendy Lopez 03/04/2022 100.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Jennifer & Randall Schwartz 07/01/2022 50.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Larry Pippitt 07/11/2022 100.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Patty & Jerry Johnstone 07/15/2022 50.00 Youth Golf Scholarship John & Kelly Bailey 08/03/2022 50.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Misc. Donors, 08/17/2022 165.46 Youth Golf Scholarship Ross & Kelly Liggett 08/18/2022 100.00 Youth Golf Scholarship James & Julie Spencer 08/19/2022 25.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Pam Harrold 08/20/2022 25.00 Youth Golf Scholarship Merle & Norma Gier 08/21/2022 25.00 Page 44 Item 5. September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy and Housing Programs Manager JC Ward, Senior Planner Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 098, 2022, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Provide Financial Support to the United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos for Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide financial support to United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos (UN/VU), a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation that recently acquired ownership of the Parklane Mobile Home Park. On August 1, 2022, residents of the Parklane Mobile Home Park (Parklane MHP), with the help of a newly formed nonprofit (United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos, UN/VU), outbid a commercial owner’s offer and purchased their park. With this purchase, residents of Parklane have become one of only six mobile home parks in Colorado purchased by residents. UN/VU is seeking City funding toward several urgent and necessary infrastructure repairs to the park. This item was discussed at the September 1, 2022, Council Finance Committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Parklane Mobile Home Park (Parklane MHP) is a mobile home community established in 1958 with 68 manufactured homes and a duplex located within the growth management area of the City. Approximately 200 adults and more than 100 children reside in the community. While Parklane MHP is outside City limits, the park is located in the East Mulberry enclave and will likely be annexed into the City at some point in the future. See location map. When the owner of Parklane MHP decided to sell the park in 2021, the residents had an opportunity to organize to preserve the park as an affordable mobile home community, ensuring that these homes remain affordable to low-income households and are operated with a commitment to creating community that provides safe and secure housing options. History of UN/VU and Purchase of the Mobile Home Park Over six years ago, a trusted relationship was established between the residents of Parklane MHP, the Page 45 Item 6. Genesis Project – a faith-based neighbor of the park – and the Matthews House, a local non-profit empowering youth and families to close the poverty cycle in Northern Colorado. In December of 2021, all three parties became aware that the park was for sale and an offer had been made by a private buyer. The park residents, the Genesis Project and the Mathews House knew they would need to organize quickly to take advantage of the opportunity to purchase afforded a group or association of homeowners or their assignees by Colorado Revised Statute 38-12-217. The residents organized and considered several possible structures before requesting the creation of UN/VU. Once formed, UN/VU was assigned the residents’ rights to purchase the park. While this is not the same as a resident owned community structure, this was done to give the residents time to make decisions on what governance and leadership is best for their community long term. Resident ownership may be an option in the future, but for purposes of the purchase, UN/VU will own the park and the residents will govern the community. Historically, Parklane, like most mobile home parks, was operated with divided ownership of assets. While homes could be rented or owned by the resident, the land beneath the home was rented from a private property owner. This opportunity to purchase provided by Colorado law allowed the residents to not only own their homes but to have control of their community. The residents have led the work of setting the goals, vision and voice of UN/VU and are preparing for the journey to discern what resident leadership, ownership, and governance will work best for the future. This may lead to residents owning the community in the future, and allowed UN/VU to attract funding and negotiate to purchase the park. Financing to purchase the park for about $6.8 million was obtained primarily from Impact Development Fund, Bohemian Foundation, and Larimer County. Larimer County provided $1 million which will be forgiven at the rate of $50,000 per year for 20 years provided the park remains affordable. Additional funding came from individuals and the United Way of Larimer County. On August 1, 2022, Parklane MHP residents, with the help of the newly formed nonprofit UN/VU, outbid a commercial owner’s offer and purchased their park. They became one of six mobile home parks in Colorado to accomplish buying their mobile home park. One of the first things they did was change the name of the park to Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park. Summary timeline of organizing efforts: ● December 9th, 2021 - Notice of Intent to Sell Parklane MHP received by Parklane Residents ● December 15th, 2021 - UN/VU filed for non-profit status (Residents selected name of nonprofit) ● December 19th, 2021 - 51% of votes needed to move forward for UN/VU to represent Parklane Residents in counteroffer obtained ● February 22, 2022 - Notice to accept a Final Unconditional Offer of Parklane MHP received by Parklane Residents (90-day statutory time limit restarted) ● April 22nd, 2022 - UN/VU goes under contract for Parklane MHP ● August 1st, 2022 - UN/VU closes on Parklane MHP ● August 19th, 2022 - UN/VU has block party in Parklane to celebrate the purchase and residents revealed new voted upon name “Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park” ● September 2022-September 2023 - Resident led process with support from FLTI and CU Sustainable Community Development Legal Clinic community meetings to explore long term governance and ownership options Request for Support While purchase financing has been secured, UN/VU has requested financial assistance from the City for immediate infrastructure needs identified during the due diligence process for acquisition. Delayed maintenance has created safety issues for the residents. A priority needs assessment identified at least $1M in immediate infrastructure upgrades required for the park including: Page 46 Item 6. Identified Need Estimate of Cost Tree Maintenance/Removal $75,000 Water & Sewer Pipes TBD Asphalt/concrete replacement $550K – 850K Curbs & concrete repairs $50,000 At the City Council meeting on April 5, 2022, under Other Business on the Agenda, several City Councilmembers asked staff to examine possible assistance options supporting the purchase of this park. See City Council Minutes attached. Based on the extensive needs identified which will need to be assessed to the residents if outside funding is not secured, this request is for $125,000 to be provided to UN/VU as a grant to be used to partially offset the cost of any of the infrastructure needs noted above. This amounts to less than $2,000 per household. While this amount will not cover the entire identified costs, it will show local support which often can be leveraged for additional funding. Grant Management The City will contract with UN/VU to establish specific terms for the grant and provide oversight for the use of these funds. Generally: The City’s Neighborhood Services Department will negotiate the contract and administer this grant. UN/VU has agreed to use approved City vendors for the infrastructure upgrades paid for with this grant, if possible, because they have been vetted and approved. UN/VU will work with City staff and the City Purchasing Department to select qualified vendors to ensure they are properly licensed and insured. The grant will be administered as reimbursement for work completed on a project-by-project basis until all funds have been expended. Funds must be used by December 31, 2023. City Policy Alignment In 2013, the City published the Affordable Housing Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategy. This document acknowledged that mobile home parks are important sources of housing for lower income working families, seniors and people with disabilities living in Fort Collins. The 2015-2019 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan’s objective to Preserve the Long-term Affordability and Physical Condition of Existing Stock of housing included action items to maintain the current available stock of affordable housing including mobile home parks. This policy was reinforced in the 2021 Housing Strategic Plan specifically in Strategy 24: Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, and housing programs. Page 47 Item 6. The outcome of this strategy is to increase stability and housing options for manufactures housing residents (both renters and owners) and improve housing equity. Lastly, supporting the conversion of a MHP from a private owner to resident governance aligns with the following 2022 Strategic Objectives: Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 1.1 – Increase housing supply and choice and address inequities in housing to ensure that everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 1.4 – Advance equity for all with an emphasis on racial justice to remove systemic barriers so that persons of all identities, including race, ethnicity, religion, gender and gender identity, age, class, sexual identity, mental and physical abilities, and ability can fully participate in City services and experience equitable community outcomes. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 1.5 – Enhance the quality of life and sense of belonging in neighborhoods by connecting neighbors to City services, building community, and fostering harmonious relationships. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 1.8 – Preserve and enhance mobile home parks as a source of affordable housing and create a safe and equitable environment for residents. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Affordable Housing Board discussed the opportunity to purchase Parklane MHP at its April 7, 2022, meeting and supported the efforts of UN/VU to acquire the park. See Minutes and Memorandum. This was also discussed at the September 1, 2022 Council Finance Committee meeting. See Minutes. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance will appropriate $125,000 of General Fund Reserves to be provided to UV/VU to be used to partially offset the cost of infrastructure upgrades. It can be used for tree maintenance or removal, repairing or replacing water and/or sewer pipes, replacement of asphalt or concrete, or repairing concrete or curbs. PUBLIC OUTREACH All meetings of the Affordable Housing Board, the Council Finance Committee, and the City Council where this was discussed were open to the public. No additional outreach was conducted on this request. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance for Consideration 2. Location Map 3. Council Minutes, April 5, 2022 (excerpt) 4. Affordable Housing Board Minutes, April 7, 2022 (excerpt) 5. Memorandum from the Affordable Housing Board to Council 6. Council Finance Committee Minutes, September 1, 2022 (excerpt) Page 48 Item 6. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 098, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO THE UNITED NEIGHBORS/VECINOS UNIDOS FOR THE NUEVA VIDA MOBILE HOME PARK WHEREAS, the residents of Parklane Mobile Home Park, located in the City’s growth management area (the “Park”), were recently able to organize and purchase the Park with financial assistance from Impact Development Fund, Bohemian Foundation, and Larimer County; and WHEREAS, the Park, now owned by United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos (“UN/VU”), a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, has been renamed Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park; and WHEREAS, UN/VU is seeking City funding of $125,000 to put towards approximately $1,000,000 in urgent and necessary infrastructure repairs to the Park including tree maintenance and removal, water and sewer pipes, and asphalt and concrete work; and WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on April 5, 2022, several City Councilmembers asked staff to examine possible options to support the residents’ purchase of the Park; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Board discussed the opportunity for the residents to purchase the Park at its April 7, 2022 meeting and supported the efforts of UN/VU to acquire the Park; and WHEREAS, this funding request was further discussed by the Council Finance Committee at its meeting on September 1, 2022; and WHEREAS, the funding would be provided and managed as a grant from the City to UN/VU pursuant to a grant agreement administered by the City’s Neighborhood Services Department (the “Agreement”); and WHEREAS, the Agreement would require UN/VU to use City-approved vendors, wherever possible, for work paid for with City funds, to ensure vendors are qualified, and properly licensed and insured; and WHEREAS, the City would reimburse UN/VU for work completed until all funds have been expended, with a deadline of December 31, 2023 for expenditure of the City funds; and WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of preserving the long-term affordability and condition of existing housing stock in the Fort Collins area, including mobile home parks; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon the recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves Page 49 Item 6. -2- accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in this Fund during this fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby appropriates from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($125,000) to be expended in the General Fund for providing financial support to the United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos for the Nueva Vida Mobile Home Park. Section 3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Agreement with UN/VU for expenditure of the funds appropriated herein on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such other terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City and carry out the intent of this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 50 Item 6. -3- Passed and adopted on final reading this 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 51 Item 6. City of Fort Collins, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, USDA Parklane Mobile Home Parklane Mobile Home City Limits Growth Management Area Page 52 Item 6. City of Fort Collins Page 169 April 5, 2022 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting – 6:00 PM ROLL CALL PRESENT: Pignataro, Francis, Arndt, Canonico, Peel, Ohlson, Gutowsky STAFF: DiMartino, Daggett, Hollingshead AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER Interim City Manager DiMartino and interpreters discussed the Spanish interpretation options. The video outlining public participation options was played. Interim City Manager DiMartino stated Item No. 5, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 034, 2022, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves from the Light and Power Fund for Use in the Connexion Account to Complete the Connexion System Construction and Customer Ramp Up and Providing for Future Cost Recovery, has been moved to the Discussion Agenda to allow an opportunity to read some technical changes into the record. Additionally, Item No. 14, Resolution 2022-040 Ratifying the Appointment of Anuja Riles and Randyn Heisserer-Miller to the Poudre River Library District Board of Trustees, has been withdrawn and Item Nos. 14A, Resolution 2022-042 Expressing Council’s Support for Ukraine, and 15, Resolution 2022-041 Making an Appointment to the Platte River Power Authority Board, have been added. Material Deleted until relevant excerpt: OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. Councilmember Canonico noted Council received a memo from the Affordable Housing Board related to providing assistance to Park Lane Mobile Home Park residents to purchase the mobile home park. Interim City Manager DiMartino replied she had planned to submit the item as a service area request for a written response. Councilmember Canonico stated there appears to be some urgency in this request. Mayor Pro Tem Francis stated she would support examining possible assistance options. Caryn Champine, Planning, Development, and Transportation Director, noted this park is in the County; however, it is in the growth management area. She also stated the County is also planning to provide some funding. Councilmembers provided support for bringing forth options. Mayor Arndt discussed establishing rules of decorum and civility in Chambers to ensure public comment can be protected. She cited an example of recording proceedings on handheld devices. Councilmembers provided support for bringing forth options. Page 53 Item 6. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 4/7 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 1 April 7, 2022, 4:00-6:00pm Remote/Online via Zoom due to COVID-19 CALL TO ORDER At 4:06 PM the meeting was called to order by John Singleton 1. ROLL CALL • Board Members Present: John Singleton, Jennifer Bray, Stefanie Berganini, and Seth Forwood joined in progress. Bob Pawlikowski and Kristin Fritz recused themselves from discussions. • Board Members Absent: Tatiana Zentner • Staff Members Present: ▪ Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Staff Liaison – City of Fort Collins ▪ Beth Rosen – City of Fort Collins ▪ Taylor Reynolds, Minutes – City of Fort Collins • Guests Present: ▪ Marilyn Heller ▪ Lisa Cunningham 2. AGENDA REVIEW – The draft of the Park Lane Mobile Home Park statement for City Council will be presented for board review. 3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION • Marilyn Heller – Member of the League of Women Voters Affordable Housing Team – announced a panel titled “Housing Insecurity: A Threat to Behavioral Health?” on Monday, April 11 at 7:00 p.m. via Zoom. • Lisa Cunningham – Member of the Temporary Rental Housing Task Force for the City of Fort Collins and rental property owner – shared passion for affordable housing in Fort Collins and looks forward to continuing to observe the work of this board. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Stefanie Berganini moved to approve March minutes. Bob Pawlikowski seconded. Approved 6-0. Page 54 Item 6. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 4/7 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 2 5. NEW BUSINESS • 2022 Spring Competitive Process – Ranking of Affordable Housing Applications • Sue reviewed the Guiding Principles of the Housing Strategic Plan • Board members engaged in discussion and agreed on the following: • All applications are for great projects. • The most valued projects were those that supported a wide range of Area Media Income (AMI) rents and those that targeted the lowest wage earners. • New construction ranked as the highest priority, followed by homeownership because of the ability to build equity. Renovation projects ranked as the lowest priority, but all the projects are important to increase or preserve affordable housing inventory. • Applications ranked in order of priority: • Housing Catalyst’s Impala Housing Project • CARE Housing Heartside Hill • Elevation Community Land Trust Kechter Townhomes • Habitat for Humanity Poudre Build 8 • Neighbor to Neighbor Phase 2 Rehab – 44 Apartments • Housing Catalyst’s Village on Bryan Renovation Jennifer Bray moved to recommend the current order as discussed and amended. John Singleton seconded. Approved 4-0. Bob Pawlikowski and Kristin Fritz abstained. • A Fall Competitive Funding Process is not likely. City ordinance requires excess funding and a project with an immediate need. • A total of $2.6 million in HOME ARP funding will be available for projects and programs that meet specific criteria: this includes serving populations earning less than 30% AMI, providing non-congregate shelter, preventing homelessness, or serving those at risk of homelessness. Beth Rosen will present more regarding HOME ARP at June meeting. Page 55 Item 6. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 4/7 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 3 • Board Member Ideas • Park Lane Community Mobile Home Park • Stefanie Berganini presented a draft statement of support for Park Lane Mobile Home Park, who wish to become a resident-owned mobile home park with help from United Neighbors. • Councilmember Canonico introduced this topic at the City Council meeting on April 5. Bob Pawlikowski moved to send City Council the memo as presented with additions from John Singleton in support of United Neighbors in their effort to support Park Lane Mobile Home Park. Seth Forwood seconded. Approved 6-0. • John Singleton would like to present a gaps analysis at an upcoming meeting. 6. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS – NONE 7. OTHER BUSINESS – NOT DISCUSSED • City Council 6-month planning calendar review • Council Comments – Who, what? • Review 2022 Work Plan • Update on Affordable Housing Projects • Future AHB Meetings Agenda 8. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 6:07 PM Page 56 Item 6. From: Affordable Housing Board Vice Chair John Singleton April 7, 2022 To: City Council and City Leaders Re: City support for Park Lane mobile home park purchase efforts Purpose: This memorandum serves as a formal request, on behalf of the Affordable Housing Board, that City Council and relevant City staff explore and pursue any and all forms of assistance - financial or otherwise – to support United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos in purchasing the Park Lane mobile home park located at 411 South Court Street in Fort Collins. The Affordable Housing Board (AHB) advises Council on matters concerning affordable housing in Fort Collins, including both the development of new affordable housing and the retention of existing affordable housing. The AHB’s internal working documents as well as City documents like the Housing Strategic Plan make clear that mobile homes are a critical piece of affordable housing in Fort Collins, and that the retention of extant mobile home communities must be prioritized as part of our collective mission to preserve housing affordability. The City’s 2021 Housing Strategic Plan, for example, specifically highlights this need in Prioritized Strategy #24: “Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, and housing programs.” This priority is listed as a “quick(er) win” that would increase stability for manufactured housing residents and improve overall housing equity in Fort Collins. More broadly, the sale and re-development of existing mobile home communities is directly related to the Housing Strategic Plan’s #1 priority: assessing displacement and gentrification risk. The sale and re-development of existing mobile home parks critically weakens housing affordability in our community and serves as a driver of displacement that works against the City’s stated goals of housing equity, stability, and preservation. In line with these priorities, the Affordable Housing Board formally requests that the City pursue any and all avenues available to support the Park Lane residents, and the efforts of United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos to purchase the Park Lane mobile home park at 411 South Court Street. Park Lane is located off of Mulberry near Link Lane, in the heart of the East Mulberry corridor. Though this area is not currently in city limits, it is within the Growth Management Area and likely to be in city limits soon pending the Mulberry corridor annexation. The residents of Park Lane have a very limited window to exercise their first right of refusal to purchase their housing community and have designated United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos to act as their agent in this matter. United Neighbors/Vecinos Unidos is currently trying to raise the funds to purchase the property and have a quickly shrinking window in which to do so before the current owner sells to other buyers. Though we know that the City may be limited in the ways it can support these efforts given the current location of the park outside city limits, we ask you to be proactive and flexible, and to quickly and seriously pursue any and all forms of assistance - financial or otherwise - for this purchase effort given the likelihood that this area will soon be within the City's jurisdiction. The Park Lane community represents a crucial piece of housing affordability in our city, and the Affordable Housing Board fully stands behind the residents in their attempt to purchase the property. Thank you for your consideration and prompt attention to this important issue. Page 57 Item 6. Finance Administration 215 N. Mason 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6788 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com Finance Committee Meeting Minutes September 1, 2022, 4-6 pm Zoom Council Attendees: Julie Pignataro, Kelly Ohlson, Emily Francis, Shirley Peel Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Travis Storin, Tyler Marr, Rupa Venkatesh, Carrie Daggett, Caryn Champine, Monica Martinez, Teresa Roche, Drew Brooks, Blaine Dunn, Ginny Sawyer, Megan Valliere, Jen Poznanovic, Nina Bodenhamer, Randy Bailey, Jo Cech, Molly Reeves, Lindsay Ex, Honore Depew, Gerry Paul, Josh Birks, Seve Ghose, Mike Calhoon, Victoria Shaw, Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Erik Martin, Lawrence Pollack, Lance Smith, John Phelan, Javier Echeverria, Dave Lenz, Sheena Freve, Zack Mozer, Carolyn Koontz Others: Kevin Jones, Chamber Molly Bohannon, Coloradoan Daniel Guimond Emily Gallichotte Jason Miller, Fehr & Peers Transportation ______________________________________________________________________________ Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm Approval of minutes from the August 1, 2022, Council Finance Committee Meeting. Kelly Ohlson moved for approval of the minutes as presented. Emily Francis seconded the motion. Minutes were approved unanimously via roll call by; Julie Pignataro, Kelly Ohlson and Emily Francis Other Business: Topic 1 of 2 Parklane Mobile Home Park / New Life Mobile Homes Requesting an Appropriation Ordinance authorizing a grant of $125K to bring forward at the September 20th City Council Meeting. Requesting $125K from the General Fund reserves to be used for forestry, landscaping (tree trimming, underground infrastructure, curb and gutter and pavement) at what was known as Parklane Mobile Home Park but has a new name of New Life Mobile Home Park. The residents purchased the property and changed the name. The city has previously made some verbal commitments around this when the mobile home park residents first indicated they were going to buy the park for themselves. Page 58 Item 6. Kelly Ohlson; is this in the city limits? Caryn Champine; it is in the county but is part of our Growth Management Area (GMA) and is part of the Mulberry enclave as well. Kelly Ohlson; that is a stretch for me because it is not in the city limits, but I will go along for the ride. If this were located inside the city limits this would be a no brainer. What did the county contribute? Caryn Champine; Larimer County contributed $1M toward the purchase. The City of Fort Collins didn’t contribute anything toward the purchase. Emily Francis; do we fund other things outside the city limits but within the GMA? This would be good information to have for our future discussion. I know they have a range of needs so also how we decide what we are going to fund. Travis Storin; we will take that back for discussion as I don’t think I can respond now regarding expenditures within the GMA but outside the city limits. Caryn Champine; We don’t necessarily have a formula to use in these types of circumstances. This is a unique dynamic and a new space for us. The approach we took was first to gain an understanding of what the Infrastructure assessment was and as Travis described it includes; tree trimming, underground infrastructure improvements that are needed as well as curb and gutter and pavement. All of that is upwards of $900K in total costs which would be absorbed by the residents over time. The approach we took was to look at the total cost of what they are getting as an assessment. There are approximately 60 units in this community, so we thought through a methodology of $1,500 - $2K per unit to give us some measure of how to help those residents offset their costs. The way we write this contract which will be a grant to them that will either be treated as a reimbursement approach or money coming forward. We are working with the City Attorney’s office to finalize the details on what that contract will look like if this is supported by Council. The contract would reference the infrastructure assessment. Emily Francis; I think that makes sense – thank you Page 59 Item 6. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, City Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Items Relating to the Peakview Annexation No. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2022-099 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Peakview Annexation No. 1. B. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2022, Annexing the Property Known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this item is to annex a 5.78-acre portion of private property that will be used for the construction of Greenfields Drive, a future arterial street within the East Mulberry Corridor. The property to be annexed is a portion of the property subject to the Peakview Planned Land Division (“PLD”) development application which is currently being processed by Larimer County and is expected to be approved prior to completion of this annexation. The remaining property subject to the PLD is expected to petition for annexation as a condition of the County’s approval. The Initiating Resolution for this annexation was adopted on August 16, 2022. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on this agenda. This Annexation request is in conformance with State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading and the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Contiguity The subject property gains the required one-sixth contiguity to existing City limits from a common boundary on two sides with Springer Fisher Annexation which was annexed in 2001. As a result, there is 39.70% of the total perimeter contiguous to the existing municipal boundary which exceeds the required minimum (16.66%). Page 60 Item 7. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 Enclave Implications Annexing the 5.78-acre property does not create or contribute to creating an enclave and is a logical extension of municipal boundaries. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS There are no City financial impacts related to this annexation. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION At its August 18, 2022, regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend approval of the annexation. Further, the Commission recommended that the land be placed into the General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood zone districts. This unanimous action was taken as part of the Commission’s consent agenda; therefore, there are no minutes. PUBLIC OUTREACH Given that the future use of the land area will be solely used for the purposes of constructing a street, there was no neighborhood meeting for this annexation and zoning. All applicable mailings and postings per Section 2.9 (Amending the Zoning Map) and 2.12 (Annexation of Land) of the Land Use Code have been followed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution for Consideration 2. Ordinance for Consideration 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition Map 5. Plat Map Page 61 Item 7. RESOLUTION 2022-099 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE PEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2022-082, annexation proceedings were initiated by the City Council for property to be known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, following notice given as required by law, the City Council held a hearing on said annexation on September 20, 2022. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the petition for annexation of the Property complies with the Municipal Annexation Act (the “Act”), Colorado Revised Statutes Section 31-12-101, et seq. Section 3. That the City Council hereby finds that there is at least one-sixth (1/6) contiguity between the City and the Property proposed to be annexed; that a community of interest exists between the Property proposed to be annexed into the City; that said Property is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that the Property is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City. Section 4. That the City Council further determines that the applicable parts of the Act have been met, that an election is not required under the Act, and that there are no other terms and conditions to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 5. That the City Council further finds that notice was duly given, and a hearing was held regarding the annexation in accordance with the Act. Section 6. That the City Council concludes that the Property is eligible for annexation to the City and should be so annexed. Page 62 Item 7. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 63 Item 7. ORDINANCE NO. 099, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE PEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, on August 16, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 2022-082 finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings for the Peakview Annexation No. 1, as defined therein and described below; and WHEREAS, Resolution 2022-099 setting forth findings of fact and determinations regarding the Peakview Annexation No. 1 was adopted concurrently with the first reading of this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the property to be known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 as described below (the “Property”) to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby incorporates the findings of Resolution 2022- 082 and Resolution 2022-099 and further finds that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the Property to the City. Section 3. That the Property, more particularly described as: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH PM, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE SOUTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., BEING MONUMENTED BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS 23503" AT THE WEST END AND A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS 22573" AT THE EAST END, SAID LINE BEING ASSUMED TO BEAR S89°11'21"E. BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9, S88°55'11"E A DISTANCE OF 42.00 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTH LINE, THE FOLLOWING THIRTY-EIGHT (38) COURSES: Page 64 Item 7. 1. S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 827 07 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 2. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°15'25" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 16.50 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 3. S11°01'07"E A DISTANCE OF 41.76 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 4. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 116.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°15'25" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 22.79 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 5. S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 75.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 6. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 166.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°41'42" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 19.40 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 7. S06°56'01"W A DISTANCE OF 85.38 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 8. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°41'42" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 15.66 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 9. S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 182.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 10. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°54'53" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 14.54 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 11. S09°40'35"E A DISTANCE OF 52.35 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 12. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 116.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°54'53" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 2007 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 13. S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 102.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 14. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 166.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°23'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 18.51 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 15. S06°37'34"W A DISTANCE OF 78.77 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 16. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°33'20" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 22.35 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; 17. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,033.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°59'32" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 180.15 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE 18. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°47'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 17.28 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 19. S24°42'34"E A DISTANCE OF 43.84 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; 20. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S64°54'15"W, HAVING A RADIUS OF 108.19 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°37'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 20 06 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT; 21. S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 50.10 FEET; 22. S13°42'52"E A DISTANCE OF 50 01 FEET; 23. S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 36.74 FEET; Page 65 Item 7. 24. S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 47.62 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 25. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2000 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03°07'00" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 1.09 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; 26. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 129.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°04'32" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 18.18 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 27. S19°49'08"E A DISTANCE OF 108.53 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 28. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 179.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01 °22'20" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 4.29 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 29. S21°11'28"E A DISTANCE OF 91.99 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 30. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 49.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 62°31'40" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 53.47 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; 31. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 541.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°46'51" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 54.58 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 32. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 291.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°27'22" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 48 03 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 33. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°32'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 8.88 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 34. S50°56'41"E A DISTANCE OF 28.81 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 35. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2000 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°31'31" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 3.32 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; 36. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°29'51" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 125.94 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 37. S34°58'22"E A DISTANCE OF 155.19 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 38. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 21700 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°41'45" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 184.43 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST MULBERRY STREET AND A POINT OF NON-TANGENT; HENCE ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N89°11'21"W A DISTANCE OF 161.98 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES: 1. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS N41°03'41"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°57'58" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 68.98 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 2. N34°58'22"W A DISTANCE OF 155.19 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; Page 66 Item 7. 3. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 217.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°12'50" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 46.26 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 4. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2000 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°54'23" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.95 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 5. N67°05'34"W A DISTANCE OF 29.69 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 6. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07° 34'05" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 3.83 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; 7. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°18'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 50.49 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 8. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 409.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°14'40" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 123.10 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 9. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 54.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°02'58" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.57 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; 10. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 79.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50°07'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 69.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 11. S05°14'45"E A DISTANCE OF 94.32 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; 12. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 35°00'00" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT REVERSE CURVE; 13. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S56°47'06"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1012 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°04'04" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.73 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT REVERSE CURVE; 14. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S85°00'07''W, HAVING A RADIUS OF 517.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°14'12" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 47.25 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 15. S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 11.14 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; 16. ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CENTER BEARS N89°37'29"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.51 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°12'43" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 15.02 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID EAST MULBERRY STREET AND A POINT OF NON-TANGENT; THENCE ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N89°11'21"W A DISTANCE OF 154.79 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON SAID WEST LINE, N00°14'19"E A DISTANCE OF 2,604.37 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING A CALCULATED AREA OF 251,753 SQUARE FEET OR 5.7794 ACRES Page 67 Item 7. is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1, which annexation shall become effective upon completion of the conditions contained in Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) Section 31-12-113, including, without limitation, all required filings for recording with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4. That, in annexing the Property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the Property hereby annexed except as may be provided by ordinances of the City. Section 5. That the City hereby consents, pursuant to C.R.S. Section 37-45-136(3.6), to the inclusion of the Property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 68 Item 7. Page 69 Item 7. Page 70 Item 7. Page 71 Item 7. Page 72 Item 7. Page 73 Item 7. Page 74 Item 7. Page 75 Item 7. Page 76 Item 7. Page 77 Item 7. Page 78 Item 7. Page 79 Item 7. Page 80 Item 7. Page 81 Item 7. September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, City Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2022, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Peakview Annexation No. 1 to the City of Fort Collins and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Peakview Annexation No. 1 Annexation into the General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) and Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (MMN) zone districts and placement into the LC1 and LC2 Lighting Context Areas. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 2(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures most recently adopted in Resolution 2022-068. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend adoption of the ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The requested zoning for this annexation is General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N- C) and Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (MMN) which conforms to the adjacent zoning of the Springer Fisher property which was annexed into the City in 2021. Context The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: Direction Zone District Existing Land Use N Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN) Agriculture S Commercial Corridor (Larimer County) E Mulberry Street / Greenfields Court E Commercial Corridor (Larimer County) Agriculture Page 82 Item 8. Direction Zone District Existing Land Use W General Commercial (C-G) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. Agriculture City of Fort Collins Structure Plan The Structure Plan map shows the area within the Peakview property as a combination of Mixed Neighborhood, Suburban Mixed Use, and Neighborhood Mixed Use designations (see attached Structure Plan map). The Structure Plan future land use designations represent general citywide policy guidance. The Land Use Code does not include zoning to reflect these new designations in City Plan and specifically states that where there are conflicts with City Plan and an overlapping subarea plan, that the subarea plan shall prevail. In this case, the East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP), which is a subarea plan and is further discussed below, reflects more detailed and specific land use policy guidance than City Plan. East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP) The EMCP includes four future land use designations within the Peakview property, including General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (N-C), Employment (E), and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). These designations reflect the policy direction of the plan for a commercial mixed-use district and supporting higher-density mixed-use neighborhoods within walking distance to the commercial hub located northwest of the East Mulberry and Greenfields Court intersection (see attached EMCP map). The proposed Peakview Annexation No. 1 proposes zoning consistent with the EMCP and matches that of the adjacent property that was annexed and zoned as part of the Springer Fisher Annexation. Residential Sign District Staff recommends that the portion of the property with the MMN zone district designation be placed in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District and that the portion of the property with the C-G and N-C zone district designations be placed in the Non-Residential Sign District. The Sign Districts are established for the purpose of regulating signs for non-residential uses in areas of the community where the predominant character of the neighborhood is residential. Lighting Context Area On March 26, 2021, the City of Fort Collins adopted new exterior lighting standards and established Lighting Context Areas that correspond to the City’s zone districts. The corresponding districts identified by Table 3.2.4-1 of the City’s lighting code are LC1 and LC2. As part of this item, staff recommends placement of the portion of the property to be zoned M-M-N into the LC1 Lighting Context Area and the portion of the property to be zoned N-C and C-G into the LC2 Lighting Context Areas as indicated by the attached Lighting District map. The following are how each respective district is described: LC1 - Low ambient lighting. The vision of human residents and users is adapted to low light levels. Lighting may be used for safety and convenience, but it is not necessarily uniform or continuous. Typical locations include low and medium density residential areas, commercial or industrial areas with limited nighttime activity, and the developed areas in parks and other natural setting. Page 83 Item 8. LC2 - Moderate ambient lighting. Areas of human activity where the vision of human residents and users is adapted to moderate light levels. Lighting may typically be used for safety and convenience, but it is not necessarily uniform or continuous. Typical locations include high density residential areas, shopping and commercial districts, industrial parks and districts, City playfields and major institutional uses, and mixed-use districts. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION At its August 18, 2022 regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation. Further, the Commission recommended that the land be placed into the General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood zone districts. This unanimous action was taken as part of the Commission’s consent agenda; therefore, there are no minutes. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS There are no City financial impacts related to the zoning of the subject property. PUBLIC OUTREACH Given that the future use of the land area will be solely used for the purposes of constructing a street, there was no neighborhood meeting for this annexation and zoning. All applicable mailings and postings per Section 2.9 (Amending the Zoning Map) and 2.12 (Annexation of Land) of the Land Use Code have been followed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance for Consideration 2. Vicinity Map 3. Structure Plan Map 4. East Mulberry Corridor Plan Framework Map 5. Existing Zoning Map 6. Lighting Context Area Map 7. Petition 8. Plat Map Page 84 Item 8. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 100, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE PEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AND APPROVING CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN DISTRICT MAP AND LIGHTING CONTEXT AREA MAP WHEREAS, on October 4, 2022, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 099, 2022, annexing to the City of Fort Collins the property known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the zoning of land; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 2.9.2, the City Planning and Zoning Commission, at its meeting on August 18, 2022, unanimously recommended zoning the Property to be known as the Peakview Annexation No. 1 (the “Property”) as General Commercial (“C-G”) Zone District; Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“M-M-N”) Zone District; and Neighborhood Commercial (“N-C”) Zone District, as more particularly described below and determined that the proposed zonings are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed zonings of the Property are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, to the extent applicable, the City Council has also analyzed the proposed zonings against the applicable criteria set forth in Section 2.9.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code and finds the proposed zonings to be in compliance with all such criteria; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has considered the zonings of the Property as described below, finds it to be in the best interests of the City, and has determined that the Property should be zoned as hereafter provided. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by including Page 85 Item 8. -2- the following portion of the Property in the General Commercial (“C-G”) Zone District as more particularly described as: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/2, OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9, S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 1981.03 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°59'11"E A DISTANCE OF 135.68 FEET; THENCE S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 44.23 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03°07'00" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 1.09 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 129.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°04'32" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 18.18 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S19°49'08"E A DISTANCE OF 108.53 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 179.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01°22'20" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 4.29 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S21°11'28"E A DISTANCE OF 91.99 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 49.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 62°31'40" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 53.47 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 541.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°46'51" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 54.58 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 291.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°27'22" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 48.03 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°32'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 8.88 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S50°56'41"E A DISTANCE OF 28.81 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; Page 86 Item 8. -3- THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°31'31" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 3.32 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°29'51" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 125.94 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S34°58'22"E A DISTANCE OF 155.19 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 217.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°41'45" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 184.43 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MULBERRY STREET; THENCE ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N89°11'21"W A DISTANCE OF 161.98 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS N41°03'41"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°57'58" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 68.98 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE N34°58'22"W A DISTANCE OF 155.19 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 217.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°12'50" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 46.26 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°54'23" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.95 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE N67°05'34"W A DISTANCE OF 29.69 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07°34'05" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 3.83 FEET, TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°18'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 50.49 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 409.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°14'40" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 123.10 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; Page 87 Item 8. -4- THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 54.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°02'58" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.57 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 79.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50°07'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 69.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S05°14'45"E A DISTANCE OF 94.32 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 35°00'00" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S56°47'06"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.12 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°04'04" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 6.73 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S85°00'07"W, HAVING A RADIUS OF 517.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°14'12" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 47.25 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 11.14 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CENTER BEARS N89°37'29"E, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.51 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°12'43" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 15.02 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF SAID MULBERRY STREET; THENCE ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N89°11'21"W A DISTANCE OF 154.79 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON SAID WEST LINE, N00°14'19"E A DISTANCE OF 623.34 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING A CALCULATED AREA OF 148,324 SQUARE FEET OR 3.4050 ACRES. Section 3. That the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by including the following portion of the Property in the Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“M-M- N”) Zone District as more particularly described as: Page 88 Item 8. -5- BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/2, OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9, S88°55'11"E A DISTANCE OF 42.00 FEET; THENCE S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 827.07 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°15'25" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 16.50 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S11°01'07"E A DISTANCE OF 41.76 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 116.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°15'25" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 22.79 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 75.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 166.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°41'42" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 19.40 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S06°56'01"W A DISTANCE OF 85.38 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°41'42" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 15.66 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 182.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°54'53" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 14.54 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S09°40'35"E A DISTANCE OF 22.45 FEET; THENCE N89°03'37"W A DISTANCE OF 47.12 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON SAID WEST LINE, N00°14'19"E A DISTANCE OF 1320.69 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING A CALCULATED AREA OF 57,671 SQUARE FEET OR 1.3239 ACRES. Page 89 Item 8. -6- Section 4. That the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by including the following portion of the Property in the Neighborhood Commercial (“N-C”) Zone District as more particularly described as: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/2, OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9, S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 1320.69 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°03'37"E A DISTANCE OF 47.12 FEET; THENCE S09°40'35"E A DISTANCE OF 29.90 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 116.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°54'53" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 20.07 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S00°14'19"W A DISTANCE OF 102.11 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 166.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°23'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 18.51 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S06°37'34"W A DISTANCE OF 78.77 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°33'20" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 22.35 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1033.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°59'32" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 180.15 FEET, TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 84.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°47'15" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 17.28 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE S24°42'34"E A DISTANCE OF 43.84 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT CURVE; Page 90 Item 8. -7- THENCE ON THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CENTER BEARS S64°54'15"W, HAVING A RADIUS OF 108.19 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°37'19" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 20.06 FEET, TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENT; THENCE S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 50.10 FEET; THENCE S13°42'52"E A DISTANCE OF 50.01 FEET; THENCE S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 36.74 FEET; THENCE S14°51'36"E A DISTANCE OF 3.39 FEET; THENCE N89°59'11"W A DISTANCE OF 135.68 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE ON SAID WEST LINE, N00°14'19"E A DISTANCE OF 660.34 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING A CALCULATED AREA OF 45,758 SQUARE FEET OR 1.0505 ACRES. Section 5. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7.1(M) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that only the Property zoned as “M-M-N” is included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 6. That the Lighting Context Area Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.2.4(H) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the Property zoned as “M-M-N” is included in the LC1 Lighting Context Area and the Property zoned as “N-C” and “C-G” are included in the LC2 Lighting Context Area. Section 7. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 91 Item 8. -8- Passed and adopted on final reading this 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 92 Item 8. DAWN AVEVERDE AVESYKES DR CONQUEST ST SHERRY DRDASSAULTSTDELOZIER RDCANAL DRPLEASANT ACRES DR E LOCUST ST JOHN DEERE RDFRONTAGE RD KIMBERLY DRE MULBERRY ST E MULBERRY ST RIVERBENDDRWEICKER DR FRONTAGE RDDELOZIER DRREDMAN DR STOCKTON AVESUNRISE AVEGREENBRIARDRRELIANT ST COMET ST RENEDRPEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 VICINITY MAP SITE Page 93 Item 8. PEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 Structure Plan Map Printed: August 02, 2022 Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA Legend Structure Plan Adjacent Planning Area Campus District Community Separator Downtown District Industrial District Mixed Employment District Mixed Neighborhood Neighborhood Mixed Use District Parks and Natural/Protected Lands R&D/Flex District Rural Neighborhood Single Family Neighborhood Suburban Mixed Use District Urban Mixed Use District parcels SITE Page 94 Item 8. Peakview Annexation No. 1 East Mulberry Corridor Plan Map Street Right-Of-Way E Mulberry St Greenfields Ct Page 95 Item 8. PEAKVIEW ANNEXATION NO. 1 Zoning Map Printed: August 02, 2022 CG LMN CG MMN NCE Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA Legend Community Commercial (CC) General Commercial (CG) Employment (E) Industrial (I) Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Urban Estate (UE) parcels City Limits SITE Page 96 Item 8. §¨¦25 §¨¦25 §¨¦25 Æ¢287 Æ¢287 Æ¢287 Æ¢287 £%14 £%14 £%14 Æ%1 £%14 Æ%392Æ%392 Æ¢287 S SHIELDS STS COLLEGE AVES TAFT HILL RDE VINE DR S TIMBERLINE RDE P ROSPECT RD LAPORTE AVE S LEMAY AVEW DRAKE RD E D R AKE RDN TAFT HILL RDZIEGLER RDE HORSETOOTH RD E TRILBY RDN SHIELDS STW VINE DR W PROSPECT RD W MULBERRY ST S OVERLAND TRLS COUNTY ROAD 5COUNTY ROAD 54G W TRILBY RD E H ARMONY RD E MULBERRY ST CARPEN TER RD E LINCOLN AVE W HORSETOOTH RD RIVERSIDE AVE W COUNTY RO A D 38E TURNBERRY RDN COLLEGE AVEW ELIZABET H ST E COUNTY ROAD 32 COUNTRY CLUB R D N LEMAY AVEREMINGTON STRICHARDS LAKE RD MOUNTAIN VISTA DR S MASON ST N TIMBERLINE RDN COUNTY ROAD 5STRAUSS CABIN RDS COUNTY ROAD 19GREGORY R D W LAUREL ST KECHTER RD S S U M MIT VIE W D R9TH STS LEMAY AVEZIEGLER RDCity of Fort Collins Residential Sign District / Legend Residential Sign District 0 1 20.5 Miles Page 97 Item 8. SCOLLEGEAVEW HORSETOOTH RD W MULBERRY ST S SHIELDS STLAP ORTE AVE S TIMBERLINE RDSTATE HIGHWAY 392 NUS HIG H WA Y 2 8 7 SLEMAY AVESTRAUSSCABINRDZIEGLER RD RIV ERSID E AVE S OVERLAND TRLN HOWESST9TH STW LAUREL ST E MOUNTA IN A V E W DRAKE RD E PROSPECT RD W WILLOX LN S TAFT HILL RDW VINE DR COUNTRY CLUB RD E VINE DR RICHARDS LAKE RD REMINGTONSTW MOUNTA IN AV E TURNBERRYRDE W ILLOX LN E TRILB Y RDLANDINGSDRW PROSPECT RD E COUNTY ROA D 38 E MULBERRY ST JE F F E R S O N ST E DOUGLAS RD COUNTY ROAD 54G NCOLLEGEAVEW ELIZABETH S T NLEMAYAVEWCOUNTYROAD38EE COUNTY ROAD 50MOUNTAINVISTADR E HARMONY R DN TIMBERLINE RDBOA R D WALKD RTERRYLAKERDG R E G O R Y R D E HORSETOOTH RD KECHTER RDN SHIELDS STS COUNTY ROAD 5W HARMONY RD S HOWES STW DOUGLAS RD N OVERLANDTRLE COUNTY ROAD 36S MASON STMAIN STW TRILBY RD E DRAKE RD E SUNIGARD ELINCOLNAVE CARP E NTE R RD E TRO U T M A N P K W Y E COUNTY ROAD 30S US HIGHWAY 287S COUNTY ROAD 13E COUNTY ROAD 52 S COUNTY ROAD 11S S U MMIT V IE WD R S COUNTYROAD 7N COUNTY ROAD 17E COUNTY ROAD 48N COUNTYROAD 19N COUNTY ROAD 5NTAFTHILLRDE COUNTY ROAD 54 S COUNTY ROAD 19GIDDINGS RDN COUNTY ROAD 9S COUNTY ROAD 9Lighting Ordinance Planning - Draft Printed: February 04, 2021 Lighting Ordinance Context Areas - Draft City Limits - Outline Growth Management Area LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3 Page 98 Item 8. Page 99 Item 8. Page 100 Item 8. Page 101 Item 8. Page 102 Item 8. Page 103 Item 8. Page 104 Item 8. Page 105 Item 8. Page 106 Item 8. Page 107 Item 8. Page 108 Item 8. Page 109 Item 8. Page 110 Item 8. Page 111 Item 8. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy and Housing Programs Manager Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2022, Authorizing the Release of a Restrictive Covenant on Property at 331 North Howes Street Owned by Villages, Ltd. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to obtain authorization from Council to release the Agreement of Restrictive Covenants Affecting Real Property for the property located at 331 North Howes Street. This property is owned by Villages, Ltd, a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation managed by Housing Catalyst. In exchange for repaying the original $3,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loan funds, the City will allow early release of a restrictive covenant which would otherwise expire in 2023. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Over the last decade, Villages, Ltd., a 501(c)(3) affordable housing non-profit managed by Housing Catalyst, f/k/a/ the Fort Collins Housing Authority (FCHA), the City’s housing authority, has been liquidating aging, scattered site, single family homes and duplexes from its portfolio due to the high operating and maintenance costs associated with this type of housing. Upon sale, the proceeds leverage funding to preserve multifamily housing and to build additional new affordable housing in Fort Collins. On October 1, 2001, FCHA received a grant from the City of $174,931 in CDBG funding to rehabilitate 41 rental dwelling units in 11 buildings. At the completion of the rehabilitation projects, FCHA recorded a Restrictive Covenant on all 41 units, enforceable by the City, requiring FCHA to maintain the units as affordable rental housing for twenty years. The property at 331 North Howes Street is one of these buildings. This Covenant is scheduled to be released on October 1, 2023, which is 20 years from project completion. Seven of the properties encumbered by this Covenant have already repaid their portion of the grant and the City has released the Covenant with respect to those properties. They have been sold with the sales proceeds leveraged into multifamily housing that is more efficient and easier to maintain long-term. This happened over time, starting in 2009 and through 2013. The remaining three properties are multifamily units that will remain in the restricted inventory. Page 112 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 The property located at 331 North Howes Street received $3,000 of the initial grant for building rehabilitation. See attached map. This property currently has extensive long-term capital needs. (Attachment 2-3). It is currently vacant. It is in a desirable location and close to other public housing that has been sold. The affordable rent structure does not support the ongoing operations of this property. For that reason, Villages, Ltd., through Housing Catalyst, has offered to repay the $3,000 City investment in exchange for the early release of the Restrictive Covenant, which would otherwise expire in October of 2023. See attached Request to Release Restrictive Covenants. The funding returned to the City would be added to the funds distributed in Social Sustainability’s annual competitive grant process. Villages, Ltd. is currently strategically liquidating inventory, such as this single family scattered-site home, that are hard to operate as affordable rentals. Housing Catalyst has not specifically identified a buyer for this property. Housing Catalyst is selling some of its public housing units to Elevation Community Land Trust to provide permanently affordable for-sale affordable homes and continues to communicate with Elevation about properties that fit Elevation’s requirements when liquidating inventory. Regardless, Housing Catalyst will select the buyer based on furthering its mission while meeting the needs of the community. Sales proceeds will be used to leverage funding for Housing Catalyst’s extensive pipeline of both rehabilitation projects and new construction of affordable housing. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The removal of the Restrictive Covenant one year prior to original expiration will initially result in the loss of one single family unit of affordable housing; however, Villages, Ltd. is not currently leasing the unit because of its condition. The $3,000 repayment of Community Development Block Grant funding will be returned to the City’s Competitive Grant Process and will be available to fund future affordable housing projects. Approval of this request will lessen the financial burden experienced by Villages, Ltd., related to the operation of a scattered-site single family unit with extensive long-term capital needs. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Affordable Housing Board supports this request. PUBLIC OUTREACH The Affordable Housing Board meeting where this was discussed was open to the public. No additional public outreach was done for this request. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance for Consideration 2. Location Map 3. Photos of 331 N. Howes Street and Side Yard 4. Request to Release Restrictive Covenants 5. Affordable Housing Board Minutes, September 1, 2022 (excerpt) Page 113 Item 9. ORDINANCE NO. 101, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON PROPERTY AT 331 NORTH HOWES STREET OWNED BY VILLAGES, LTD. WHEREAS, on October 1, 2001, the City entered into a Recipient Contract with the Fort Collins Housing Authority, now known as Housing Catalyst (“FCHA”), through which FCHA received a grant from the City of $174,931 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to rehabilitate 41 affordable rental housing units in eleven buildings in Fort Collins (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, as required by the Recipient Contract, at the completion of the Project FCHA recorded a Restrictive Covenant enforceable by the City on all the units in the Project, requiring the units to remain affordable for twenty years (the “Covenant”); and WHEREAS, the Covenant is set to expire in October 2023; and WHEREAS, FCHA used $3,000 of the grant proceeds to make improvements to a single- family rental property located at 331 North Howes Street (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property is owned by Villages, Ltd., a 501(c)(3) corporation managed by FCHA; it is currently vacant and has extensive long-term capital needs; and WHEREAS, the Recipient Contract does not require repayment of the grant funds, but Villages, Ltd. has offered to repay the City’s $3,000 investment in the Property in exchange for the early release of the Covenant on the Property so that FCHA can sell the Property and use the proceeds for other multifamily housing; and WHEREAS, the City would add the repaid grant funding to the funds distributed through the Social Sustainability’s annual competitive grant process; and WHEREAS, the City’s right under the Covenant to restrict the use of the Property constitutes an interest in real property owned by the City that the City would be giving up by releasing the Covenant; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code states that the City Council is authorized to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property owned by the City, provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Board reviewed this request at its regular meeting on September 1, 2022, and voted to support the Council’s granting of this request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Page 114 Item 9. Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that releasing the Covenant on the Property on the terms and conditions described herein is in the best interests of the City. Section 3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute such documents as are necessary to release the Property from the Covenant upon repayment of the $3,000 in CDBG funds, on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, along with such other terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 4th day of October, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 115 Item 9. Cherry St N Howes St331 N HOWES ST Page 116 Item 9. Page 117 Item 9. Page 118 Item 9. August 11, 2022 Ms. Sue Beck-Ferkiss Social Policy & Housing Programs Manager City of Fort Collins Fort Collins, CO 80521 Dear Ms. Beck-Ferkiss, Please accept this letter as the formal request to release the restrictive covenants and allow repayment of the CDBG loan for the property owned by Villages Ltd. located at 331 N. Howes St. The covenant pertains to a single-family home with extensive long-term capital needs. Over the last decade, Villages Ltd., the 501(c)(3) affordable housing corporation managed by Housing Catalyst, has been liquidating aging, high operating cost single-family homes and duplexes from its portfolio and leveraging the sale proceeds to preserve and to build additional affordable housing in our community. We respectfully request the release of the restrictive covenants which were placed on this property in exchange for repayment of $3,000 in CDBG loan funds which were awarded for improvements made many years ago. These covenants would expire in 2023 in accordance with the 20-year loan term from project completion. Because the unit is now vacant, Housing Catalyst has elected to pursue the covenant release and sale of the property now instead of occupying the unit with a new lease. Additional information: 1. The history of the City of Fort Collins rehab loan a. Issued October 1, 2001, 20-year term from project completion, which occurred in 2003, 0% Interest, Due on Sale b. $174,931 total award for upgrades on 41 total units at 11 properties c. $3,000 of the total was used for capital improvements on this one unit located at 311 N Howes St. d. 34 units (3 properties) will remain encumbered by the restrictive covenant (7 single family homes from this loan have already been sold, released from the covenant and portions repaid in 2009, 2010, and 2013) 2. Housing Catalyst’s plans for the remaining units encumbered by the covenant a. The 34 remaining units at Elizabeth, Stanford, and Castlerock in this particular loan and restrictive covenant are multi- family units, and Housing Catalyst intends to keep them in the portfolio at this time. Page 119 Item 9. 3. History and context of the disposition plan a. Villages Ltd. made a strategic decision to liquidate aging, high operating cost single- family homes from its portfolio and utilize the sale proceeds to leverage additional affordable housing in our community. This particular property was near public housing that has since been sold. The affordable rent structure does not support the ongoing operations of this particular property. Proceeds from the sale of 331 N. Howes St. will be used to leverage additional units or substantially renovate of existing affordable multi-family units. 4. Detailed information on the buyer in relation to the neighborhood a. Housing Catalyst has not specifically identified a buyer for this property. Housing Catalyst has sold a number of its public housing units to Elevation Community Land Trust (ECLT) and continues to communicate with them about properties that may fit their requirements for affordable home ownership offerings. Housing Catalyst will select the buyer based on furthering the mission of Housing Catalyst while best meeting the needs of the community. I would be very happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michele Christensen Chief Executive Officer Page 120 Item 9. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 9/1 /202 2 – MINUTES - Excerpt Page 1 September 1, 2022 4:00-6:00pm Remote/Online via Zoom due to COVID-19 DRAFT CALL TO ORDER At 4:04 PM the meeting was called to order by John Singleton 1. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: John Singleton, Bob Pawlikowski, Stefanie Berganini, Seth Forwood, Jennifer Bray, and Kristin Fritz. Board Members Absent: Sheila Seaver-Davis Staff Members Present: Meaghan Overton, Social Sustainability– City of Fort Collins Noah Beals, City Planning – City of Fort Collins Taylor Reynolds, Minutes – City of Fort Collins Claire Havelda, City Attorney’s Office – City of Fort Collins Guests Present: Marilyn Heller *******Excerpt Related to this Resolution Begins Below******* 2. NEW BUSINESS b. Request from Housing Catalyst to Release Restrictive Covenant Kristin Fritz recused herself from discussions and presented the request for the release of the restrictive covenant on 331 N. Howes Street on behalf of Housing Catalyst. The current restrictive covenants are set to expire in 2023; however, the property is currently vacant, and Housing Catalyst would like to move forward with the release of the restrictive covenant now rather than have the property remain vacant for several months. Housing Catalyst is repositioning their property portfolio from single family homes to multi- family housing to better provide services for their residents. This property is a single-family unit in Old Town that remains expensive to own and operate. Proceeds from the sale will be leveraged to purchase a 28-unit property. Page 121 Item 9. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 9/1 /202 2 – MINUTES - Excerpt Page 2 DISCUSSION: • Are there any other restrictive covenants that remain on the property from organizations like CHFA? • This restrictive covenant with the City is the only one remaining on this property. Neighboring properties have already been released from their restrictive covenants. • Can you provide additional information about the 28-unit property that Housing Catalyst currently has under contract? • The current owner of the prospective property approached Housing Catalyst to sell it because it currently exists as naturally occurring affordable housing and the owner feels that Housing Catalyst could provide better management and assistance to the residents. Housing Catalyst agreed. If the 28-unit property was originally intended to be traditional student housing, will it become low-income student housing after it’s acquired by Housing Catalyst? • Housing Catalyst will operate it as unrestrictive until they can determine the best population/ voucher referrals served by this property. Most of the current residents would qualify under any of Housing Catalyst’s programs. • Why would someone argue against this release of restrictive covenants? • Housing Catalyst typically operates permanent affordable housing and releasing this restrictive covenant could be seen as a loss of an affordable housing unit, even if the proceeds will be used to create permanently affordable housing elsewhere. Will Housing Catalyst pursue funding that will require these units to be restricted housing? • The property could be purchased without the use of restricted funds to allow Housing Catalyst time to operate it as affordable without it being tied to a specific program. Is Housing Catalyst able to provide a cost-benefit analysis of the sales of select properties for the purchase of others? • There are not any exact calculations to compare the cost and benefit of the sale and purchase of another property; however, the cost per unit at the 28- unit site is significantly less than the cost of the single-family unit in Old Town. • Housing Catalyst’s strategy is to continue to move away from unsustainable, scattered sites and leverage sales of those properties to acquire more efficient and sustainable permanently restrictive units. Page 122 Item 9. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 9/1 /202 2 – MINUTES - Excerpt Page 3 Is there a manner in which the release of restrictive covenants and inventory of affordable housing units can be tracked? • Housing Catalyst is not the only operator of affordable housing units. Many other restricted units exist throughout the city. • Ideally, before any restrictive covenants expire City staff are coordinating with the property owner to extend the affordability. • Board members discussed inviting Beth Rosen, Grants Compliance & Policy Manager at the City of Fort Collins, to attend an upcoming board meeting and discuss the monitoring of restricted properties. Is there a Plan B following the release of the restrictive covenants if the sale of the 28-unit property does not close? • The 28-unit property is currently under contract; however, closing is approximately 60-90 days out. Housing Catalyst is always looking for the best ways to leverage funds to acquire or build new affordable units. Jennifer Bray moved to approve the release of restrictive covenants and receipt of the funds from Housing Catalyst’s property as requested. Bob Pawlikowski seconded. Approved 5-0. Kristin Fritz abstained. Page 123 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Jim Lenderts, Marijuana Enforcement Officer Ethan Doak, Legal SUBJECT Resolution 2022-100 Supporting a Grant Application for Gray and Black Market Marijuana Enforcement Funding for Fort Collins Police Services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to obtain Council support for the City to apply for grant money to support enforcement of gray- and black- market marijuana activity for Fort Collins Police Services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION “Gray Market” is a term that refers to marijuana grown legally then sold in a way that would be illegal. An example would be where someone has a medical card with an “extended plant count” which may allow them to grow up to 99 plants, but instead of using the product for their own medical needs, they sell it on the black market either locally or more likely to someone in another state. For the past four years, the State has made grant funding available to help address unlicensed and illegal marijuana activity in Colorado. In 2019, the Eighth Judicial District Attorney’s Office was awarde d approximately $120,000 in grant funds to which Police Services had access. In 2020, Police Services directly applied for and received $345,227 to continue local neighborhood marijuana investigations and in 2021, Police Services again applied for this grant and received $41,564 to continue the ongoing investigations noted above. In 2021, Police Services began receiving and investigating complaints of the sale of unregulated Delta -8 THC to minors at local smoke shops (not licensed marijuana businesses). Black market grant money was used to fund those investigations and begin regulatory inspections of commercial establishments relative to recent code changes involving the sale of smoking and vaping products to minors. Police Services received $44,805 in 2022 and was able to successfully investigate complaints in both smoke shops and residences. One case led to the seizure of over 100 lbs. of illegal marijuana resulting in felony charges. Page 124 Item 10. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 Use of this grant funding and investigations have not only addressed criminal activity but also improved neighborhood livability and provided insight into the level of unlicensed/illegal marijuana activity in the community. With additional insight and knowledge, Police Services can address community priorities and emerging trends in a proactive manner. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Grant dollars helped provide additional resources to existing staff without having a direct impact on the City budget. Funds are used primarily for overtime, equipment, and storage expenses to support th ese investigations. Support of this Resolution does not impact City finances and allows Police Services to apply to the State for these grant dollars. If the grant is awarded, the City will serve as the fiscal agent for the funds and will seek an appropriation at that time. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution for Consideration. Page 125 Item 10. -1- RESOLUTION 2022-100 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SUPPORTING A GRANT APPLICATION FOR GRAY AND BLACK MARKET MARIJUANA ENFORCEMENT FUNDING FOR FORT COLLINS POLICE SERVICES WHEREAS, Fort Collins Police Services (“FCPS”) is applying for a grant through the Gray and Black Market Marijuana Enforcement Grant Program (the “Program”) from the State of Colorado Department of Local Affairs (“DOLA”) to fund investigation and prosecution of unlicensed marijuana cultivation and distribution operations (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Program provides financial assistance to local law enforcement agencies and district attorneys through local governments; and WHEREAS, the total amount of grant money to be dispersed statewide by DOLA amongst applicant agencies and district attorneys is $900,000 for FY 2022-2023 Program funding; and WHEREAS, until submittal of an application, FCPS does not know the amount that may be awarded; and WHEREAS, in FY 2021-2022, FCPS received $44,805.16 from the Program; and WHEREAS, in 2022, Police Services continues receiving complaints about the sale of hemp intoxicants to minors at local smoke shops (not licensed marijuana businesses) and has several active investigations; and WHEREAS, previously awarded Program funds were used to investigate complaints in both smoke shops and residences and in one case led to the seizure of over 100 pounds of illegal marijuana, which led to felony charges; and WHEREAS, the current Program expires on June 30, 2023, and Police Services recommends the continuation of the above referenced grey- and black-market marijuana investigations; and WHEREAS, FCPS has utilized money from the Program to acquire long -term evidence storage units for illegal black-market marijuana, and for an increase in staffing to help with investigations of black-market grow operations in the City; and WHEREAS, as part of the Program grant application process, DOLA requires that the governing body of any entity applying for grant funds pass a resolution to show that it is aware of and supports the application, and recognizes the obligations the grant creates; and WHEREAS, the City would not be required to provide any matching funds toward the Project; and Page 126 Item 10. -2- WHEREAS, the grant money would allow FCPS to continue to improve neighborhood livability and provide insight into the extent of the problems associated with unlicensed, illegal marijuana activity in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby supports the City’s FY 2022-2023 application for a grant through the Program from DOLA to fund the Project; and Section 3. That if the grant is awarded, the City Council supports the completion of the Project. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of September, A.D. 2022. ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Page 127 Item 10. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 1 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing #1 on the 2023-24 Recommended Budget for the City of Fort Collins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the first public hearing on the City Manager’s 2023-24 Recommended Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on the 2023-24 budget. To receive further public input, a second public hearing is scheduled for Council’s Tuesday, October 4, 2022, regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers with the option for remote participation through the online Zoom meeting platform. Both hearings were set by Council adoption of Resolution 2022-097 at its September 6, 2022, meeting. The City Manager’s 2023-24 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the City Clerk’s Office by appointment only and online at fcgov.com/budget. Page 128 Item 11. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 6 September 20, 2022 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Paul Sizemore, Director, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Maren Bzdek, Manager, Historic Preservation Services Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Claire Havelda, Legal SUBJECT Appeal of 1802 North College Avenue City Landmark Eligibility for Development Review. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this quasi-judicial item is to consider an appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s (HPC) Decision on July 20, 2022, determining that the property at 1802 North College Avenue, Pobre Pancho’s, is eligible as a Fort Collins Landmark and subject to the provisions of Land Use Code 3.4.7. Appeals of quasi-judicial commission decisions are processed under Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3. The Council is tasked, after considering the evidence, to uphold, overturn, or modify the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission (Sec. 2-56). The Council may also remand the matter to the HPC or an alternate decision-maker in certain circumstances under Sec. 2-56. A Notice of Appeal of the HPC’s decision was filed on August 3, 2022. The appellant, H and H Properties, LLC, (H&H) appealed the decision on two grounds. First, H&H argues that the HPC considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading. Second, H&H argues that the HPC failed to properly interpret and apply provisions of the City Code, specifically Municipal Code Sec. 14- 22, Standards for Eligibility, and Sec. 14-23 Process for Determining Eligibility. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and will be considered in accordance with the Council appeal procedures described in Division 3 of Article II of Chapter 2 of the City Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION HEARING Subject: The subject of the hearing was the evaluation of the building at 1802 North College Avenue to determine the property’s eligibility for designation as a Fort Collins landmark according to the eligibility requirements contained in City Code Section 14-22. A staff decision on this matter was issued on April 22, 2022, in response to a development application put forward by Raising Cane’s that would demolish the existing properties at 1800 and 1802 North College Avenue for a new restaurant. Properties associated with potential development applications that contain buildings at least 50 years old are subject to Landmark Page 129 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 6 eligibility evaluation as an application pre-submittal requirement, as outlined in Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(C), Determination for Eligibility as a Fort Collins Landmark. Based on the evidence in the historic survey form provided by the third-party historian, Front Range Research Associates (FRRA), on April 22, 2022, staff provided an official determination that the property meets the eligibility requirements for significance and integrity. Staff’s findings were based on the following notes in the survey form: “The property is evaluated as potentially eligible for listing in the State Register of Historic Places and as a local landmark for its historical associations (Criterion A and 1) in the following areas of significance: Ethnic History/ Hispanic/Mexican for its association with the Perez family, Mexican immigrants who came to Fort Collins and established a restaurant business reflecting Mexican foodways….The Perezes were drawn to the US during World War II to work in agriculture, and the subsequent establishment and growth of Pobre Pancho’s reflects the upward mobility and entrepreneurial spirit of one Latino family.” “A 2003 historical context on Hispanics in Fort Collins by Adam Thomas is silent on Latinx participation in the local business community, suggesting such enterprises were rare. Current data from the City of Fort Collins reinforces this legacy, indicating that as of 2018 Hispanic residents made up nearly 12% of the city’s population but only 3% of its business owners. Research by the City to this point documents the discrimination against Hispanic residents, which made business ownership both more difficult due to institutional and overt racism in the Fort Collins business community, but also important as a means to provide commercial venues open to Hispanic residents.” “El Burrito restaurant (404 Linden Street), established by Jesse and Dorothy Godinez in 1960, is another example of a longtime Latinx restaurant. Both Pobre Pancho’s and El Burrito are included on the city website in a tour of Latinx resources. In regard to Pobre Pancho’s the tour observed: “The establishment of the second restaurant [at 1802 N. College Avenue] was a sign of the growing number of Latinx residents living along North College Avenue, typically in seasonal worker’s shacks or in the mobile home parks that began developing north of the Poudre River as a result of gentrification and displacement from neighborhoods like Holy Family and Tres Colonias.”” “Pobre Pancho’s is also significant in the area of Commerce, as an example of one of the city’s longer- lived restaurants of any cuisine, successfully operating for more than half a century in this location. By contrast, USA Today reported in 2018 (pre-pandemic) that “the average lifespan of a restaurant is five years and by some estimates, up to 90 percent of new ones fail within the first year.”” “The building retains historic integrity based on its appearance in a 1976 assessor appraisal card photograph, which shows the front and south walls, displaying the projecting entrance bay and fenestration present today. A subsequent rear addition was added in 1992, following the same materials and design approach as the original building, including stucco walls, board and batten gable face, and small, narrow windows. The building form reflects the functional and humble nature of a family owned restaurant but displays some decorative embellishments, including the façade’s two stained glass windows with sombreros and roses and the carved wood entrance door. The colorful wall signs were added in 2010. The expansions were made under Perez ownership and were necessitated by the growth of their business. The setting has been impacted by removal of the freestanding sign and relocation of parking access to the rear.” The City Code allows for an appeal to the HPC of a staff decision regarding eligibility. The property owner, H&H, appealed the initial determinations of eligibility to the HPC on May 2, 2022. It should be noted that the developer with the responsibility for ordering a historic survey as a requirement of the development review process and the current property owner are separate entities, and it was the owner who appealed this finding. As with staff’s determination of eligibility for the property, the HPC’s sole consideration was a de novo evaluation of the properties’ eligibility for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark. While the implications of the results of that evaluation include how the existing buildings would be treated as historic resources under the Land Use Code, the HPC did not consider or review a proposed development application for the Page 130 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 6 properties, and the members did not discuss how the Land Use Code or approved modifications of standards might be applied to the properties. City Code Requirements: The HPC’s evaluation of 1802 North College, the former site of Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant, was governed by City Code Section 14-22, Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects, and districts for designation as landmarks or landmark districts. Section 14-22 establishes that a property or district must possess significance under at least one of four criteria for significance (events, persons/groups, design/construction, or information potential) and must also possess integrity, i.e. the ability to convey any established significance through existing, related physical characteristics. Integrity is evaluated based on seven aspects as noted in the City Code: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. All seven are not required “as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident.” Decision and Findings: To arrive at findings for a de novo determination regarding the property’s landmark eligibility status, the HPC considered the property’s intensive-level historic survey document that was the basis for staff’s determination of eligibility, as well as additional information from staff regarding the property’s history, current condition, and discussion of professional methodology that is commonly used to evaluate historic properties in Fort Collins and for the National Register of Historic Places. On a vote of 7-0 (2 vacancies), the HPC found that the 1802 North College Avenue property, formerly Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant, meets the requirements for eligibility for Landmark designation under both Standards 1 for Events/Trends for its association with Hispanic/Latinx history in Fort Collins, and under Standard 2, Persons/Groups, for its association with the Perez family, key Hispanic business leaders in Fort Collins in the mid/late twentieth century (The HPC motion is in verbatim transcript on page 33, 23-43). The HPC passed the motion finding the 1802 North College Eligible for Landmark designation under the Standards in Sec. 14-22 based on the following three findings of fact: 1. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building is significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local Latino community under criterion one – events, for its association with a Mexican immigrant family that established a restaurant business reflecting the spread of Mexican foodways, and which also speaks to the changing taste of local non-Mexican residents who came to embrace the flavors of Mexico, and also the site’s association with, perhaps even leading the trend, towards Mexican-American and Hispanic businesses moving north along [U.S. Highway] 287 north of Fort Collins beginning during the ‘60’s and a pattern of development that is still evident today. 2. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building is also significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local Latinx community under criterion two – people, for its association with four generations of the Perez family including…Amelia Perez, Frank Perez, Mary Perez, daughter Amelia Perez, Monica Bird, and Carolyn Bird…who made their mark upon our local history through the Mexican restaurant business; 3. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building retains integrity and clearly conveys the functional and humble nature of the family-owned restaurant while still displaying some lovingly added decorative embellishments showing the importance of the building to the Perez family and the Fort Collins community that enjoyed dining in the Pobre Pancho’s establishment. Note: A verbatim transcript of the HPC’s hearing, along with a link to the FCTV recording on this item, is part of the record provided to Council for this appeal. APPEAL ALLEGATIONS Despite the order in which arguments are made in the Notice of Appeal by H&H, Council must consider argument #2 first as it alleges that the HPC hearing was not fair. If Council finds that an unfair hearing was held, it must remand the matter for further hearing and decision and need not analyze H&H’s argument regarding interpretation or application of Section 14-22 of the City Code. The Notice of Appeal also alleges that the HPC failed to properly interpret and apply City Code Section 14- 22 - Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and districts for designation as Page 131 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 6 landmarks or landmark districts and City Code Section 14-23 process for determining eligibility. Because the appellants arguments do not address City Code Section 14-23, the following focuses on the allegations regarding City Code Section 14-22. Page 3 of the Notice of Appeal states the Appellant’s primary objection to the HPC’s decision is based on the allegation that the building is not a significant example of Hispanic heritage in Fort Collins, nor is the Perez family significant enough to local history to warrant designation of their family restaurant under Standard 2 for Persons/Groups. The Notice of Appeal includes several points related to the allegation regarding interpretation and application of the designation standards. A list of those points with related information in the record is provided below. 1. “Construed generously, the Survey opines that the structure, as the site of a long -lived Mexican restaurant, has historic significance due [to] association with the following historic events or trends: systematic racism against Latinx people in Fort Collins that made successful Latinx businesses rare; (2) general migration of Latinx people to the city, state, and nation; and (3) settlement of Latinx people north of the Poudre River due to gentrification elsewhere in Fort Collins. Appellant contends that at the LPC hearing, the evidence did not show specific connections between these historic trends and the Pobre Pancho's business or Perez family that would merit preserving the building as a historic landmark. Thus, the evidence failed to show a sufficient "association" with historic events or trends.” Related information in the record is found in the verbatim transcript, page 5, line 37 through page 8, line 2. 2. “The Survey also suggests that the structure at 1802 S. College has historical significance by being "associated" with the lives of important persons or groups, namely, the Perez family and the long-lived Pobre Pancho's restaurant. Appellant agrees that immigrating to the United States and opening a restaurant that stayed in business for fifty years is an accomplishment for Frank Perez and his family. However, millions of other immigrants have similar stories. The Perez family's story is certainly significant to the Perez family and perhaps to some of Pobre Pancho's customers. But, the story is not "historically significant" to the economic or cultural history of the nation, the State of Colorado, or even the City of Fort Collins. The LPC was wrong to find otherwise.” Related information in the record is found in the verbatim transcript, page 8, lines 3-12. 3. “Appellants also contend that the structure at 1802 N. College lacks integrity, which is defined as "the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its significance." All of the alleged historic significance is connected to the experience of Latinx people, specifically Mexican people and the Perez family. However, the building itself was not built by the Perez family. It started out as a sporting goods store. There is no dispute that the building is completely generic, lacking any architectural distinction. Aside from two stained glass windows depicting sombreros and roses, the building itself reflects absolutely no Latinx or Mexican influence and so has no ability to convey its alleged significance. Thus, it lacks integrity and the LPC [sic] was wrong to find otherwise.” Relevant information in the record is found in the verbatim transcript, page 8, line 13 through page 9, line 40. The Notice of Appeal also includes a second allegation, related to the fairness of the HPC hearing, alleging that the HPC considered misleading evidence that was used as a basis for its decision. The Appellants’ primary justification with related information in the record is provided below. 1. “At the LPC [sic] hearing, members of the Perez family complained about the abrupt way in which the Hauns shut down the restaurant. Such evidence is misleading because the closing is in line with industry norms. The restaurant's closure is also irrelevant to whether the building is landmark eligible. Members of the Perez family also described in some detail the history of the restaurant and the friendly, hard-working personality of the restaurant's founder, Frank Perez. While this information may be true, the information is misleading because it does not establish any "historical significance" of interest Page 132 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 6 beyond the relatively few members of the Perez family and former customers.” Related information in the record is found in the verbatim transcript, page 5, lines 13-21 and 26-36; page 10, lines 25-42.” CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Determination that a property is Eligible as a City Landmark generally has no financia l impact on the City, as formal designation is typically required for accessing public incentives for historic properties. Designation as a Fort Collins Landmark qualifies property owners to apply for certain financial incentives funded by the City, as well as allows private property owners to leverage State tax incentives for repairs and modifications that meet national preservation standards. These include a 0% interest revolving loan program and Design Assistance mini-grant program through the City, and the Colorado State Historic Tax Credits. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION On a vote of 7-0 (2 vacancies), the HPC found that the 1802 North College Avenue property, formerly Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant, meets the requirements for eligibility for Landmark designation under both Standards 1 for Events/Trends for its association with Hispanic/Latinx history in Fort Collins, and under Standard 2, Persons/Groups, for its association with the Perez family, key Hispanic business leaders in Fort Collins in the mid/late twentieth century (The HPC motion is in verbatim transcript on page 33, 23-43). The HPC passed the motion finding the 1802 North College Eligible for Landmark designation under the Standards in Sec. 14-22 based on the following three findings of fact: 1. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building is significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local Latino community under criterion one – events, for its association with a Mexican immigrant family that established a restaurant business reflecting the spread of Mexican foodways, and which also speaks to the changing taste of local non-Mexican residents who came to embrace the flavors of Mexico, and also the site’s association with, perhaps even leading the trend, towards Mexican-American and Hispanic businesses moving north along [U.S. Highway] 287 north of Fort Collins beginning during the ‘60’s and a pattern of development that is still evident today. 2. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building is also significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local Latinx community under criterion two – people, for its association with four generations of the Perez family including…Amelia Perez, Frank Perez, Mary Perez, daughter Amelia Perez, Monica Bird, and Carolyn Bird…who made their mark upon our local history through the Mexican restaurant business; 3. “…the Pobre Pancho’s building retains integrity and clearly conveys the functional and humble nature of the family-owned restaurant while still displaying some lovingly added decorative embellishments showing the importance of the building to the Perez family and the Fort Collins community that enjoyed dining in the Pobre Pancho’s establishment. Note: A verbatim transcript of the HPC’s hearing, along with a link to the FCTV recording on this item, is part of the record provided to Council for this appeal. PUBLIC OUTREACH The Historic Preservation Commission recommendation was made at a properly noticed public hearing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Agenda Item Summary 2. Notices and Mailing List 3. Notice of Appeal 4. Staff Report to Historic Preservation Commission 5. Staff Presentation to Historic Preservation Commission 6. Applicant Presentation to Historic Preservation Commission 7. Link to Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Video Page 133 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 6 8. Verbatim Transcript 9. Presentation Page 134 Item 12. City Clerk’s Public Hearing Notice Site Visit Notice Mailing List Page 135 Item 12. Page 136Item 12. Page 137Item 12. Names Street Name City State Zip Code Email Address Kathleen Kilkelly 920 Inverness Road Fort Collins CO 80524 katzen2k@frii.com Amelia Perez 801 Grouse Circle Fort Collins CO 80524 Mary Perez 6880 Whispertrail Lane Fort Collins CO 80549 James Aron 3613 Kenyon Drive Fort Collins CO 80524 aronaronja@aol.com Betty Aragon-Mitotes 3375 Woodlands Way Wellington CO 80549 blaragon@msn.com Sent via email Ron Lautzenheiser returned undeliverable Rklasuz@msn.com Michael Bello, on behalf of North Fort Collins Business Association Board michael.bello@thecpigroup.net; Kacy Thompson kacytjobb@gmail.com Monica Bird krcbirds@yahoo.com Carol Tunner caroltunner@msn.com Page 138 Item 12. Notice of Appeal Filed by Jeffrey Cullers, Attorney for Applicant August 3, 2022 Page 139 Item 12. Page 140Item 12. Page 141Item 12. Page 142Item 12. Page 143Item 12. Staff Report (with attachments) Presented to the Historic Preservation Commission July 20, 2022 Page 144 Item 12. Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 20, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 1802 N. COLLEGE: APPEAL OF DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY STAFF Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the appeal of the determination of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation of the commercial property at 1802 North College Avenue. On April 22, 2022, in fulfillment of a pre-submittal requirement for a development review application, staff determined that the property was Landmark-eligible based on evidence and conclusions presented by an independent historic survey contractor in an intensive-level survey form. When undergoing development review, Landmark-eligible properties are subject to the historic resource requirements in Fort Collins Land Use Code Section 3.4.7. Staff decisions may be appealed to the Historic Preservation Commission. APPELLANT: Darren Haun, H & H Properties, LLC (Property Owner) HPC’S ROLE: Section 14-23 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code establishes that “any determination made by staff regarding eligibility may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant, any resident of the City, or owner of property in the City.” In this hearing, the Commission shall consider an appeal of the determination of eligibility for 1802 N. College Avenue, based on the provided evidence from the initial determination (Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory 1403 form) and any new evidence presented at the hearing. The Commission must use the standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects, and districts for designation as Fort Collins landmarks in Section 14-22 of the municipal code to make its own determination. Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Section 14-9). BACKGROUND The building at 1802 North College Avenue was built in 1961 by local businessman Maurice L. Deines. In its early years, the building housed two sporting goods stores, but by 1969, Frank & Mary Perez began operating Pobre Pancho’s at this location. Frank Perez was born in Mexico in 1937 and immigrated to northern Colorado with his parents in 1943. He went to high school in Fort Collins and joined the U.S. Navy after graduation, becoming a citizen in 1957 after his service. In 1967, Frank and his mother Amelia started Pancho’s, the restaurant that would become Pobre Pancho’s, at 214 Walnut Street. 1968, Frank married Mary Medeillin, who he met when she worked as a server at the El Burrito restaurant on Pine Street. Frank and Mary took over operation of Pancho’s, renamed it Pobre Pancho’s, and moved it to the 1802 N. College Avenue address in 1969. The building remained in operation Page 145 Item 12. Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 2 by the Perez family until early 2022 when the restaurant closed permanently. As part of the larger context of Hispanic/Latinx residents in Fort Collins, the history of discrimination by Anglo- American residents and lack of access to wealth-building opportunities is well-documented. Even today, while Hispanic residents make up about twelve percent (12%) of the city’s population, their share of business ownership is only three percent (3%) as of 2018. Pobre Pancho’s, like El Burrito on Pine Street and Joe’s Auto Upholstery (on Linden Street until several years ago when they moved to Willow Street), is a rare reflection of a long-standing Hispanic business that both served Hispanic residents that were often not welcome in other Anglo-owned businesses as late as the 1960s, but also a rare reflection of successful intergenerational wealth-building despite long-standing overt and institutional barriers to Hispanic residents to make that achievement in Fort Collins. March 3, 2022 – Conceptual Review: The property in question is part of a redevelopment of this and the 1800 N. College Ave property by Raising Cane’s. At their conceptual review hearing with City staff on March 3, Preservation staff identified the need for historic survey for both properties since they were both due for demolition. March 10, 2022 – Survey Ordered: On March 10, payment was received for the surveys of both properties from the developer. Preservation staff assigned the survey to Front Range Research Associates on March 17 (there was a delay as staff attempted to secure an available third party historian). April 28, 2022 – Survey Completed and Transmitted: On April 28, after FRRA was able to complete both surveys, staff transmitted the results of the survey both to the developers and the owners of record for both properties. Based on FRRA’s research, staff found the 1800 N. College property to be Not Eligible for Landmark designation, but found that 1802 N. College Avenue was Eligible, based on its significance to Hispanic and Commercial history in Fort Collins. May 2, 2022 – Appeal Received – On May 2, 2022, staff received an appeal of the finding of Eligible for 1802 N. College from the owner of that property, Darren Haun of H & H Properties, LLC. With the approval of the appellant, staff scheduled the hearing for the next available HPC agenda, July 20. RELEVANT CODES AND PROCESSES FOR HISTORIC REVIEW Sec. 14-22. - Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and districts for designation as landmarks or landmark districts. A determination of eligibility for landmark designation typically applies to the entire lot, lots, or area of property upon which the landmark is located and may include structures, objects, or landscape features not eligible for landmark designation located on such lot, lots, or area of property. In order for a district to be eligible for landmark district designation, at least fifty (50) percent of the properties contained within the proposed landmark district must qualify as contributing to the district. Resources eligible for landmark designation or eligible to contribute to a landmark district must possess both significance and integrity as follows: (a) Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object, or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. Significance is achieved through meeting one (1) or more of four (4) standards recognized by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. These standards define how resources are significant for their association with events or persons, in design or construction, or for their information potential. The criteria for determining significance are as follows: (1) Events. Resources may be determined to be significant if they are associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. A resource can be associated with either, or both, of two (2) types of events: a. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or b. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. Page 146 Item 12. Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 3 (2) Persons/Groups. Resources may be determined to be significant if they are associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. (3) Design/Construction. Resources may be determined to be significant if they embody the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represent the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possess high artistic values or design concepts; or are part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of resources. This standard applies to such disciplines as formal and vernacular architecture, landscape architecture, engineering and artwork, by either an individual or a group. A resource can be significant not only for the way it was originally constructed or crafted, but also for the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and/or uses over a period of time. Examples are residential buildings which represent the socioeconomic classes within a community, but which frequently are vernacular in nature and do not have high artistic values. (4) Information potential. Resources may be determined to be significant if they have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (b) Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities established by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven (7) qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object, or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. The criteria for determining integrity are as follows: (1) Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic or prehistoric event occurred. (2) Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a resource. (3) Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a resource was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the resource played its historic or prehistoric role. It involves how, not just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. (4) Materials are the physical elements that form a resource. (5) Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure or site. (6) Feeling is a resource's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the resource's historic or prehistoric character. (7) Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or prehistoric resource. A resource retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a resource's historic or prehistoric character. (Ord. No. 034, 2019 , § 2, 3-5-19) Sec. 14-23. - Process for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and districts for designation as Fort Collins landmarks or landmark districts. (a) Application. [Omitted – this code section applies to applications for formal Landmark designation, and not to determinations of eligibility for development review purposes under Land Use Code 3.4.7]. (b) Appeal of determination. Any determination made by staff regarding eligibility may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant, any resident of the City, or owner of property in the City. Such appeal shall be set forth in writing and filed with the Director within fourteen (14) days of the date of the staff's determination. The appeal shall include an intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form for each resource that is subject to appeal, prepared by an expert in historic preservation acceptable to the Director and the appellant, with the completion cost of such intensive-level survey to be paid by the appellant. Such survey need not be filed with the appeal but must be filed at least fourteen (14) days Page 147 Item 12. Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 4 prior to the hearing of the appeal. The Director shall schedule a date for hearing the appeal before the Commission as expeditiously as possible. Not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the hearing, the Director shall: (1) Provide the appellant and any owner of any resource at issue with written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing of the appeal by first class mail; (2) Publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; and (3) Cause a sign readable from a public point of access to be posted on or near the property containing the resource under review stating how additional information may be obtained. (Ord. No. 034, 2019 , § 2, 3-5-19) ELIGIBILITY SUMMARY From the Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form (1403) for 1802 N. College Avenue, Preservation staff found the property Eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark and subject to the provisions for historic resources in Land Use Code 3.4.7. Staff made that finding based on the research completed by Front Range Research Associates which includes the following statement regarding significance: The property is evaluated as potentially eligible for listing in the State Register of Historic Places and as a local landmark for its historical associations (Criterion A and 1) in the following areas of significance: Ethnic History/ Hispanic/Mexican for its association with the Perez family, Mexican immigrants who came to Fort Collins and established a restaurant business reflecting Mexican foodways. Using family recipes, the Perez family served a wide range of Mexican dishes, including now familiar Mexican favorites, a green chile sauce of varying degrees of heat, menudo, and its own Paco Macho. The operation of the restaurant included the extended Perez family, eventually embraced four generations. The Perezes were drawn to the US during World War II to work in agriculture, and the subsequent establishment and growth of Pobre Pancho’s reflects the upward mobility and entrepreneurial spirit of one Latino family. A 2003 historical context on Hispanics in Fort Collins by Adam Thomas is silent on Latinx participation in the local business community, suggesting such enterprises were rare. Current data from the City of Fort Collins reinforces this legacy, indicating that as of 2018 Hispanic residents made up nearly 12% of the city’s population but only 3% of its business owners. Research by the City to this point documents the discrimination against Hispanic residents, which made business ownership both more difficult due to institutional and overt racism in the Fort Collins business community, but also important as a means to provide commercial venues open to Hispanic residents. El Burrito restaurant (404 Linden Street), established by Jesse and Dorothy Godinez in 1960, is another example of a longtime Latinx restaurant. Both Pobre Pancho’s and El Burrito are included on the city website in a tour of Latinx resources. In regard to Pobre Pancho’s the tour observed: “The establishment of the second restaurant [at 1802 N. College Avenue] was a sign of the growing number of Latinx residents living along North College Avenue, typically in seasonal worker’s shacks or in the mobile home parks that began developing north of the Poudre River as a result of gentrification and displacement from neighborhoods like Holy Family and Tres Colonias.” Pobre Pancho’s is also significant in the area of Commerce, as an example of one of the city’s longer- lived restaurants of any cuisine, successfully operating for more than half a century in this location. By contrast, USA Today reported in 2018 (pre-pandemic) that “the average lifespan of a restaurant is five years and by some estimates, up to 90 percent of new ones fail within the first year.” The form provides the following information regarding historic integrity: The building retains historic integrity based on its appearance in a 1976 assessor appraisal card photograph, which shows the front and south walls, displaying the projecting entrance bay and fenestration present today. A subsequent rear addition was added in 1992, following the same materials and design approach as the original building, including stucco walls, board and batten gable face, and small, narrow windows. The building form reflects the functional and humble nature of a family owned restaurant but displays some decorative embellishments, including the façade’s two Page 148 Item 12. Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 5 stained glass windows with sombreros and roses and the carved wood entrance door. The colorful wall signs were added in 2010. The expansions were made under Perez ownership and were necessitated by the growth of their business. The setting has been impacted by removal of the freestanding sign and relocation of parking access to the rear. Based on that evidence, staff finds the property Eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark. PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY Staff is testing a new process for public engagement regarding the historic survey process with this appeal. Staff has developed a notice that will hopefully be a standard part of public engagement where the question of preservation or redevelopment arises. That letter is attached and has been sent to several interested groups in the community. Staff will provide a final list of contacted organizations to the HPC and appellant prior to the final hearing. As of July 19, four (4) public comments have been received regarding this determination of eligibility, two (2) in favor of an Eligible finding, and one (2) in favor of a Not Eligible finding. Staff will continue to report information about public comments received prior to the July 20 hearing to both the HPC and to the appellant and update this staff report as necessary. SAMPLE MOTIONS Eligible If the Commission determines that the property is eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation in compliance with Section 14-23 of the Municipal Code, it may propose a motion based on the following: “I move that the Historic Preservation Commission find the commercial property at 1802 North College Avenue eligible as a Fort Collins landmark, according to the standards outlined in Section 14-22 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, based on the following findings of fact: [insert findings of significance] and [insert findings of integrity]. Not Eligible If the Commission finds that a property is not individually eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation in compliance with Section 14-23 of the Municipal Code, it may propose a motion based on the following: “I move that the Historic Preservation Commission find 1802 North College Avenue not individually eligible as a Fort Collins landmark according to the standards outlined in Section 14-22 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, based on the following findings of fact [insert findings based on lack of significance and/or integrity].” Note: The Commission may propose other wording for the motion based on its evaluation. ATTACHMENTS 1. 1802 N. College, Historic Survey Form completed April 22, 2022 2. May 2, 2022 Appeal Letter from Property Owner 3. Public Engagement letter (English & Spanish) for this property 4. Public Comments 5. Staff Presentation Page 149 Item 12. Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.4250 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation Historic Preservation Services OFFICIAL DETERMINATION: FORT COLLINS LANDMARK ELIGIBILITY Resource Number: B2700; 5LR.15077 Historic Building Name: Pancho’s Café; Pobre Pancho’s Property Address: 1802 N. College Avenue Determination: ELIGIBLE Issued: April 22, 2022 Expiration: April 22, 2027 ATTN: James Waller, Kimley-Horn (consultant) H and H Properties, LLC PO Box 341 Laporte, CO 80535 Dear Property Owner: This letter provides you with confirmation that your property has been evaluated for Fort Collins landmark eligibility, following the requirements in Chapter 14, Article II of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, and has been found eligible for landmark designation. An intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form was completed by a third-party historic preservation consultant in order to provide the information that serves as the basis for an evaluation of a property’s historic and/or architectural significance and its integrity, both of which are required for landmark eligibility as per Article II, Section 14-22. Staff has made the following findings regarding the information and evaluation of significance, integrity, and landmark eligibility provided by the consultant in the attached form. Significance Consultant’s evaluation: The property is evaluated as potentially eligible for listing in the State Register of Historic Places and as a local landmark for its historical associations (Criterion A and 1) in the following areas of significance: Ethnic History/ Hispanic/Mexican for its association with the Perez family, Mexican immigrants who came to Fort Collins and established a restaurant business reflecting Mexican foodways. Using family recipes, the Perez family served a wide range of Mexican dishes, including now familiar Mexican favorites, a green chile sauce of varying degrees of heat, menudo, and its own Paco Macho. The operation of the restaurant included the extended Perez family, eventually embraced four generations. The Perezes were drawn to the US during World War II to work in agriculture, and the subsequent establishment and growth of Pobre Pancho’s Page 150 Item 12. - 2 - reflects the upward mobility and entrepreneurial spirit of one Latino family. A 2003 historical context on Hispanics in Fort Collins by Adam Thomas is silent on Latinx participation in the local business community, suggesting such enterprises were rare. Current data from the City of Fort Collins reinforces this legacy, indicating that as of 2018 Hispanic residents made up nearly 12% of the city’s population but only 3% of its business owners. Research by the City to this point documents the discrimination against Hispanic residents, which made business ownership both more difficult due to institutional and overt racism in the Fort Collins business community, but also important as a means to provide commercial venues open to Hispanic residents. El Burrito restaurant (404 Linden Street), established by Jesse and Dorothy Godinez in 1960, is another example of a longtime Latinx restaurant. Both Pobre Pancho’s and El Burrito are included on the city website in a tour of Latinx resources. In regard to Pobre Pancho’s the tour observed: “The establishment of the second restaurant [at 1802 N. College Avenue] was a sign of the growing number of Latinx residents living along North College Avenue, typically in seasonal worker’s shacks or in the mobile home parks that began developing north of the Poudre River as a result of gentrification and displacement from neighborhoods like Holy Family and Tres Colonias.” Pobre Pancho’s is also significant in the area of Commerce, as an example of one of the city’s longer-lived restaurants of any cuisine, successfully operating for more than half a century in this location. By contrast, USA Today reported in 2018 (pre-pandemic) that “the average lifespan of a restaurant is five years and by some estimates, up to 90 percent of new ones fail within the first year.” Staff agrees with the consultant’s conclusions regarding the property’s significance, based on the following findings. • The property’s statement of significance is supported by a discussion of historical context and a comparative analysis that is appropriate for the property. Relevant context reports have been referenced and cited. • Each significance criterion is addressed in the statement of significance, even if not applicable. • For eligible properties, a period of significance is provided and justified based on the available records. Integrity Consultant’s evaluation: The building retains historic integrity based on its appearance in a 1976 assessor appraisal card photograph, which shows the front and south walls, displaying the projecting entrance bay and fenestration present today. A subsequent rear addition was added in 1992, following the same materials and design approach as the original building, including stucco walls, board and batten gable face, and small, narrow windows. The building form reflects the functional and humble nature of a family owned restaurant but displays some decorative embellishments, including the façade’s two stained glass windows with sombreros and roses and the carved wood entrance door. The colorful wall signs were added in 2010. The expansions were made under Perez Page 151 Item 12. - 3 - ownership and were necessitated by the growth of their business. The setting has been impacted by removal of the freestanding sign and relocation of parking access to the rear. Staff agrees with the consultant’s conclusions regarding the property’s integrity based on the following findings. • Essential physical features are identified in the integrity analysis and related to period of significance. • Discussion of integrity relates to the property’s most relevant aspects of integrity per its significance. • Discussion of integrity focuses on the property’s essential physical features, and relates to period of significance. • Discussion and conclusion responds directly to previous conclusions and assessments of the property, whether in opposition or in agreement. Statement of Eligibility: This property is evaluated as eligible for listing in the State Register and as a Fort Collins local landmark for its association with Ethnic History/Hispanic/Mexican and Commerce. Per Article II, Section 14-23 of the code, any determination made by staff regarding eligibility may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant, any resident of the City, or owner of property in the City. Such appeal shall be set forth in writing and filed with the Director within fourteen (14) days of the date of the staff's determination. If you have any questions regarding this determination, or if I may be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. I may be reached at jbertolini@fcgov.com, or 970-416-4250. Sincerely, Jim Bertolini Senior Historic Preservation Planner Attachment: Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 1403, dated April 19, 2022. Page 152 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue OAHP1403 Rev. 9/98 COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Architectural Inventory Form Official eligibility determination (OAHP use only) Date Initials Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Determined Eligible- SR Determined Not Eligible- SR Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District Field Evaluation of Fort Collins Landmark Eligibility ☒ Individually Eligible ☐ Contributing to District ☐ Not Eligible ☐ Likely Eligible for State/National Register General Recommendations: This property is evaluated as eligible for listing in the State Register and as a Fort Collins local landmark for its association with Ethnic History/Hispanic/Mexican and Commerce. I. Identification 1. Resource number: 5LR.15075 2. Temporary resource number: N/A (parcel number 9836312001) 3. County: Larimer 4. City: Fort Collins Page 153 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue 5. Historic building name: Rod & Gun Shop, Rocky Mountain Sport Shop, Pancho’s Café, Pobre Pancho’s 6. Current building name: Pobre Pancho’s 7. Building address: 1802 North College Avenue 8. Owner name and address: H and H Properties LLC, PO Box 341, Laporte, Colorado 80535 II. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6th Township 8N Range 69W SW ¼ of SW ¼ of SW ¼ of SW ¼ of section 36 10. UTM reference Zone 13; 493575 mE 4495558 mN 11. USGS quad name: Fort Collins, Colorado Year: 2019 Map scale: 7.5' ☒ 15' ☐ Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): 1 Block: N/A Addition: Perez Minor Year of Addition: 1992 13. Boundary Description and Justification: The boundary includes the entire legal parcel historically associated with the property. The parcel measures 70’ north-south and 235’ east-west. Formerly described by a metes and bounds legal description, the owners platted the Perez Minor subdivision in 1992. III. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): L-Shaped 15. Dimensions in feet: Length 76 Width 40 16. Number of stories: 1 17. Primary external wall material(s): Stucco 18. Roof configuration: Gabled Roof/Cross Gabled Roof 19. Primary external roof material: Asphalt/Composition 20. Special features: Overhanging Eaves. Patio. Stained Glass. 21. General architectural description: The one-story, roughly L-shaped, cross gabled roof restaurant building faces west toward North College Avenue. The 2,322-square-foot building has a concrete foundation; stuccoed concrete block walls; and a few narrow, flat-headed window openings. The roof is clad with asphalt composition shingles and has overhanging eaves, several drum vents, and an evaporative cooler. Gable ends feature projecting purlins, and gable faces are clad with board and batten siding. Front (West Wall). The front contains a small, projecting, slightly off-center, front gabled roof Page 154 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue entrance bay. The south wall of the bay features a wood door with twenty-one square panels, each carved with a fleur-de-lys. The west wall has a small, narrow, vertical, single-light window. The gable face is clad with board and batten siding. North of the entrance are two small, narrow, horizontal windows filled with stained glass depicting sombreros and a rose. South of the entrance the front wall is unfenestrated. South Wall. The south wall of the north-south gabled wing holds two, small, single-light windows to the east: a square one near the center and a narrow horizontal one farther east. The gable face is clad with board and batten siding and holds an illuminated box sign for “Pobre Pancho’s Mexican Food, Cocktails.” The center ridgeline is extended to produce a prow or winged gable, and there are projecting purlins. The short east wall of the north-south gabled wing is unfenestrated. Extending to the east, the setback south wall is mostly unfenestrated except for a narrow, horizontal single-light window to the west. The wall then steps back, has no windows, and includes a center entrance holding a flush metal door. Rear (East) Wall. The rear is unfenestrated except for a flush metal door at its north end. The gable face is the same as on the south, but it does not have a prow/winged gable. North Wall. The long north wall is unfenestrated. The gable of the north-south gabled wing is the same as the south gable. 22. Architectural style/building type: Commercial 23. Landscaping or special setting features: The level parcel is on North College Avenue, with an auto dealership to the south and a Discount Tire store to the north. The rectangular parcel measures about 235’ east-west and 70’ north-south. A wide concrete public sidewalk extends along North College Avenue. The restaurant building is located near the western end of the parcel. A low wall encloses a concrete paved patio between the building and the sidewalk. The patio features a planting area with a raised border holding two Alberta spruce trees near the southwest corner of the building. At the northwest corner of the building is a Blue Spruce tree. South of the building is a gravel area holding two additional spruce trees, two taller deciduous trees, and small boulders. South of the building on the south property line is a very large deciduous tree in a triangular area with small boulders. A small triangular area with evergreen shrubs is located farther east on the south property line. The area southeast and east of the building is paved with asphalt and used for parking. A wood post and metal pipe rail fence stands along the west part of the south property line; the wood posts have beveled tops. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: None. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate: Actual: 1961, 1975, 1992 Page 155 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Source of information: City of Fort Collins building permits, number 4422, April 13, 1961; number 23608, June 26, 1975; and number 922647, October 1, 1992 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Maurice L. Deines Source of information: City of Fort Collins building permit number 4422, April 13, 1961 28. Original owner: Maurice L. Deines Source of information: City of Fort Collins building permit number 4422, April 13, 1961 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): There are no Sanborn fire insurance maps covering this location. A 1969 building permit for remodeling the interior noted the building then was a 40’ x 30’ rectangle. A 1975 building permit included construction of a new entrance (5’ x 6’) on the front and a center rear addition (16’ x 13’). A 1976 assessor appraisal card photo showed the front entrance and current fenestration, as well as a large free-standing sign standing next to North College Avenue and a driveway accessing the parking lot to the east. In 1992, the building received a subsequent rear addition on the east (producing an east-west extent of about 76’) that extended north to align with the north wall of the original building. The freestanding sign was removed in 2010 due to street and sidewalk improvements and the current wall-mounted signs were installed. At that time the driveway from College Avenue was removed and the front patio constructed. 30. Original location ☒ Moved ☐ Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Commerce/Trade/Specialty Store 32. Intermediate use(s): Commerce/Trade/Restaurant 33. Current use(s): Commerce/Trade/Restaurant 34. Site type(s): Restaurant 35. Historical background: Constructed in 1961, this commercial building housed two sporting goods stores before Pancho’s Café (later Pobre Pancho’s Mexican Food and Cocktails) began operating here in 1969. Frank J. and Mary M. Perez ran the business, which continues to function here. Construction and Early Uses. Maurice L. Deines acquired this parcel from Harry M. and Margaret C. Finley in 1961. In April 1961 Deines obtained a building permit for a $12,500 “masonry store building.” The permit indicated that he served as the contractor. The 1962 city directory showed Deines operating the Rod & Gun Shop here. Vic Tamlin was the manager. Deines was a contractor and developer, who operated Deines Homes, Inc., in the 1960s and 1970s, building homes and apartments in the Fort Collins, Loveland, and Greeley areas. Page 156 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Deines’ tenure here was short. By 1963 the building was vacant, and he sold it that year to David A. and Eleanor R. Thirolf. The deed included all improvements and store fixtures, including a “minnow tank.” In May 1963 the Mr. and Mrs. Thirolf opened the Rocky Mountain Sport Shop in this building. A large display advertisement in the Coloradoan announced the store specialized in “authentic Indian crafts,” including jewelry, blankets, and pots, as well as fishing reels, tackle, lures, and bait. The business was listed at this address in the 1964 city directory. In 1966 C.D. and Stella W. Burke bought the property. No information was provided for the property in the 1966 city directory, and the address could not be located in the 1968 publication. The Perez Family and Pobre Pancho’s. In 1969 Frank J. and Mary M. Perez began operating their Mexican restaurant here. Frank Javier Perez was born in Mexico in 1937. His father, Cipriano Ruiz Perez (1908-93), was a native of Hidalgo, Coahuila, and his mother, Amelia Ester (Cavazos) Perez (1915-79), was born in Monterey, Nuevo León. In 1943 Frank came with his parents to northern Colorado, where his father secured work as a farm laborer. Many Latinx were drawn to the area for work in sugar beets. Great Western Sugar was a major employer of Mexican workers during the World War II bracero program (1943-46) and the later Public Law 78 bracero agreement (1951-64), a binational farm labor agreement between the US and Mexico. It is not known if Mr. Perez worked under either of these programs. Latinx residents of Fort Collins principally settled in the Alta Vista and Holy Family neighborhoods. Latinx residents recall overtly discriminatory treatment in public accommodations, including at lunch counters and theaters, and in public education and infrastructure disparities within the city. After graduating high school, Frank served eleven years in the US Navy and became a naturalized citizen in 1957. He later worked for Hewlett-Packard. In 1967 Frank and his mother Amelia started Pancho’s Café at 214 Walnut Street in Old Town Fort Collins. In 1968 Frank married Mary Medellin, whom he had met when she worked as a server at El Burrito restaurant. Frank and Mary took over operation of Pancho’s and moved it to this location in 1969. The business was renamed Pobre Pancho’s (“Poor Frank’s” in Spanish) to distinguish it from a Pancho’s restaurant chain. The Perezes obtained a $3,200 building permit in February 1969 to “remodel interior of building for restaurant.” According to a 2017 Coloradoan article on the restaurant “Frank’s mother’s recipes have been used throughout the last 50 years with tacos, burritos, enchiladas, chile rellenos, tamales and tostadas among longtime menu staples.” The restaurant produced green chile in six different levels of spiciness and offered menudo (a specialty Mexican soup made of tripe) in the winter. Frank developed the Paco Macho dish, an enchilada stuffed burrito that became a popular seller. The restaurant prospered, and the Perezes purchased the parcel in 1972. They expanded the building in 1975-76 to meet increased business by adding a front entrance bay and a rear addition. In 1992 an 860-square-foot rear addition was constructed to increase the restaurant’s seating capacity. Frank was still working daily at the restaurant at age eighty in 2017. Page 157 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Sale and Closure. In 2003 Frank quitclaimed his interest in the property to Mary. She transferred the property later that year to 1802 North College Investments LLC (apparently a Perez-owned entity). In 2020 H and H Properties became the owner of the parcel, and Asher Haun, a heating and ventilation contractor and longtime restaurant patron, purchased the restaurant business. Karolyn Bird, the Perezes’ granddaughter, stayed on as general manager and received an ownership percentage. Frank Perez died in October 2020. Pobre Pancho’s abruptly closed on March 31, 2022, ending its more than half-century run. Citing Monica Bird, a daughter of the Perezes, Denver’s Channel 7 reported “the employees did not receive a notice and learned of its closure as they left for the day and noticed someone changing the locks on the doors.” Owner Asher Haun commented “It was inevitably going to happen,” pointing to such factors as “two years of no profits, challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, increased food prices and a slowing economy.” Haun has agreed to sell the property to Raising Cane’s, a fast-food chain selling “chicken tenders,” pending city approval of plans for a drive- through restaurant. 36. Sources of information: Larimer County Assessor, real estate information, Fort Collins, Colorado; Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, deeds and ownership transactions, Fort Collins, Colorado; City of Fort Collins, building permits, number 4422, April 13, 1961 (original construction), number 23608, June 26, 1975 (front entrance and rear addition), number 922647, October 1, 1992 (additional seating space added), and number B1004161, July 1, 2010 (removed freestanding sign and installed north- and south-facing wall signs); Fort Collins city directories, 1959-95; Larimer County Assessor, appraisal card, September 27, 1976, on file Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, Colorado; Fort Collins Coloradoan, May 29, 1963 (Rocky Mountain Sport Shop grand opening), August 6, 2020 (Pobre Pancho’s sold), and April 1, 2022 (Pobre Pancho’s closes); Pattrick [sic] Perez, “Beloved Fort Collins Restaurant Pobre Pancho's Permanently Closes,” www.thedenverchannel.com, April 3, 2022; Jacob Laxen, “A Family Tradition: Pobre Panchos [sic] Serves Up Time-Honored Mexican Dishes,” Fort Collins Coloradoan, October 11, 2017; Frank Javier Perez, obituary, Bohlander Funeral Chapel, www.bohlanderfuneralchapel.com (access March 23, 2022); Amelia Perez, Petition for Naturalization, number 25381, September 2, 1970, on Ancestry.com; US Census of Population, draft cards, and family trees, on Ancestry.com; USA Today, August 9, 2018; Adam Thomas, Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000: A Historical Context (Westminster, Colorado: SWCA Environmental Consultants, August 2003; City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation, Latinx History in Fort Collins, https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/latinx (accessed April 9, 2022), brochure, no date and Latinx History Tour Companion, https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/latinxtour (accessed April 9, 2022); City of Fort Collins, Equity Indicators Dashboard, https://ftcollinscap.clearpointstrategy.com/equity-diversity-and-inclusion/economic-opportunity- domain/, accessed April 22, 2022. Page 158 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes ☐ No ☒ Date of designation: N/A Designating authority: N/A 38. Applicable Eligibility Criteria: National Register Fort Collins Register ☐ A. ☒ 1. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; ☐ B. ☐ 2. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; ☐ C. ☐ 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or ☐ D. ☐ 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. ☐ Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) ☐ Does not meet any of the above criteria Needs additional research under standards: ☐ A/1 ☐ B/2 ☐ C/3 ☐ D/4 39. Area(s) of significance: Ethnic Heritage/Hispanic/Mexican, Commerce 40. Period of significance: 1969-2020 41. Level of significance: National ☐ State ☐ Local ☒ 42. Statement of significance: Constructed in 1961, this building housed two short-lived sporting goods stores in the early 1960s before becoming the home of Pobre Pancho’s Mexican restaurant in 1969. The property is evaluated as potentially eligible for listing in the State Register of Historic Places and as a local landmark for its historical associations (Criterion A and 1) in the following areas of significance: Ethnic History/ Hispanic/Mexican for its association with the Perez family, Mexican immigrants who came to Fort Collins and established a restaurant business reflecting Mexican foodways. Using family recipes, the Perez family served a wide range of Mexican dishes, including now familiar Mexican favorites, a green chile sauce of varying degrees of heat, menudo, and its own Paco Macho. The operation of the restaurant included the extended Perez family, eventually embraced four generations. The Perezes were drawn to the US during World War II to work in agriculture, and the subsequent establishment and growth of Pobre Pancho’s reflects the upward mobility and entrepreneurial spirit of one Latino family. A 2003 historical context on Hispanics in Fort Collins by Adam Thomas is silent on Latinx participation in the local business community, suggesting such enterprises were rare. Current data from the City of Fort Collins reinforces this legacy, indicating that as of 2018 Hispanic residents made up nearly 12% of the city’s population but only 3% of its business owners. Research by the City to this point documents the discrimination against Hispanic residents, which made business ownership both more difficult due to institutional and overt racism in the Fort Collins business community, but also important Page 159 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue as a means to provide commercial venues open to Hispanic residents. El Burrito restaurant (404 Linden Street), established by Jesse and Dorothy Godinez in 1960, is another example of a longtime Latinx restaurant. Both Pobre Pancho’s and El Burrito are included on the city website in a tour of Latinx resources. In regard to Pobre Pancho’s the tour observed: “The establishment of the second restaurant [at 1802 N. College Avenue] was a sign of the growing number of Latinx residents living along North College Avenue, typically in seasonal worker’s shacks or in the mobile home parks that began developing north of the Poudre River as a result of gentrification and displacement from neighborhoods like Holy Family and Tres Colonias.” Pobre Pancho’s is also significant in the area of Commerce, as an example of one of the city’s longer- lived restaurants of any cuisine, successfully operating for more than half a century in this location. By contrast, USA Today reported in 2018 (pre-pandemic) that “the average lifespan of a restaurant is five years and by some estimates, up to 90 percent of new ones fail within the first year.” 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: The building retains historic integrity based on its appearance in a 1976 assessor appraisal card photograph, which shows the front and south walls, displaying the projecting entrance bay and fenestration present today. A subsequent rear addition was added in 1992, following the same materials and design approach as the original building, including stucco walls, board and batten gable face, and small, narrow windows. The building form reflects the functional and humble nature of a family owned restaurant but displays some decorative embellishments, including the façade’s two stained glass windows with sombreros and roses and the carved wood entrance door. The colorful wall signs were added in 2010. The expansions were made under Perez ownership and were necessitated by the growth of their business. The setting has been impacted by removal of the freestanding sign and relocation of parking access to the rear. VII. National and Fort Collins Register Eligibility Assessment 44. Eligibility field assessment: National: Eligible ☐ Not Eligible ☒ Need Data ☐ Fort Collins: Eligible ☒ Not Eligible ☐ Need Data ☐ 45. Is there district potential? Yes ☐ No ☐ Discuss: This survey included only this property and the adjacent parcel to the south, so adequate information does not exist to formally assess district potential. There is substantial new construction in the vicinity, so district potential appears to be unlikely. If there is district potential, is this building: Contributing ☐ Non-contributing ☐ 46. If the building is in existing district, is it: Contributing ☐ Noncontributing ☐ VIII. Recording Information Page 160 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue 47. Photograph numbers: 01 through 15 Negatives filed at: City of Fort Collins 48. Report title: N/A 49. Date(s): Field surveyed March 18, 2022; form completed April 9, 2022 50. Recorder(s): Thomas H. Simmons and R. Laurie Simmons 51. Organization: Front Range Research Associates, Inc. 52. Address: 3635 W 46th Avenue, Denver, CO 80211 53. Phone number(s): 303-477-7597, frraden@msn.com, www.frhistory.com NOTE: Please include a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad map indicating resource location, and photographs. History Colorado - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 Page 161 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Historic Photos/Drawings Figure 1. This view northeast shows the restaurant in the fall of 1976. SOURCE: Larimer County Assessor, appraisal card photograph, September 27, 1976, in the files of the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, Colorado. Figure 2. This ca. 1976 assessor appraisal card drawing is oriented with north to the left and North College Avenue at the bottom. By this date the original 30’ x 40’ building had received the front entrance bay and a rear addition. SOURCE: Larimer County Assessor, appraisal card drawing, ca. 1976, in the files of the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, Colorado. Page 162 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Figure 3. This photograph (displayed in the restaurant) shows Frank and Mary Perez, likely in the kitchen. SOURCE: Fort Collins Coloradoan, August 7, 2020. Figure 4. Frank Perez, then eighty- years-old, works in the restaurant kitchen. SOURCE: Fort Collins Coloradoan, October 11, 2017. Page 163 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Site Photos and Maps Sketch Map: 1802 N. College Avenue Base: Google Earth, June 11, 2021 Page 164 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue USGS Location Map. Surveyed resource is denoted by crosshair symbol. North is to the top and 1”=2,000’. Page 165 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Current Photos (Date: March 18, 2022 by T.H. Simmons, photographer) Photograph 1. Overview of property from median of North College Avenue. View east. Photograph 2. Closer view of front from the North College Avenue median. View east. Page 166 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 3. The front (west) and south walls of the building and the patio area. View northeast. Photograph 4. Front and south wall. View northeast. Page 167 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 5. Front entrance detail. View north. Photograph 6. Stained glass window north of the entrance. View east-northeast. Page 168 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 7. South wall. View north-northeast. Photograph 8. The west part of the south wall. View northwest. Page 169 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 9. The east part of the south wall. View north-northwest. Photograph 10. The south and east (rear) walls. View northwest. Page 170 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 11. The north wall from the east end. View west-southwest. Photograph 12. The north wall from the west end. View southeast. Page 171 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 13. North wall and. Front (west) wall. View southeast. Photograph 14. View along the south property line from the public sidewalk. View east. Page 172 Item 12. Resource Number: 5LR.15077 Temporary Resource Number: N/A Address: 1802 North College Avenue Photograph 15. View toward the building from the east end of the parcel. View west. Page 173 Item 12. Page 174Item 12. Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.4250 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation Historic Preservation Services COMMUNITY INPUT INVITATION Ver página siguiente para español July 6, 2022 Dear Community Member, We are contacting you to invite you to provide your opinion about a City of Fort Collins process that affects the former Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant building at 1802 N. College Avenue. The property is for sale and new uses are being considered right now. In situations like this, the City’s Historic Preservation division is required to research the history of commercial buildings that are at least 50 years old if major changes are proposed for the property. If that research produces information that suggests a property is important to the history of the community, our development regulations require that the historic buildings are reused rather than demolished so that their history can be preserved. In this case, the former Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant property was determined to be important because of its long-standing association with the Hispanic business community in Fort Collins. The owner of the property has appealed this decision, which means there will be a public hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) on July 20 starting at 5:30pm) so they can make a decision about whether saving and reusing the building will be required, or if it would be cleared for potential demolition. The Historic Preservation Commission is a group of volunteer residents who live in Fort Collins and have expertise or special interest in local history and historic buildings. The community’s opinions about the importance of the building and whether it should be saved because of its history are an important part of the process and will be considered by the Historic Preservation Commission. If you would like to share your opinion about what this property means to you, your organization, your family, or the local Hispanic community in general, we invite you to do so. Your input will be shared with the property owner, City staff, the Historic Preservation Commission, and anyone else from the community who has an interest in this property. There are several ways to share your thoughts. 1) All members of the public and interested parties are invited to attend the HPC meeting, in-person or online, on July 20 and speak directly to the Commission. You can do this either at the beginning of the meeting in the general public comment period, or just before the Commission discusses it, which will be later in the meeting. More information about how to attend that meeting and the schedule of items will be posted at https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/historic-preservation on Friday, July 8. 2) Reply directly to this email and your message will be included with the other information presented at the HPC meeting. 3) Mail written comments to us at: Historic Preservation Services, 281 N College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Comments must be received by noon on July 20. 4) Drop off your written comments at 281 N College Avenue by noon on July 20, either to a staff member at the front counter, or by using the 24-hour secure dropbox next to the rear entrance of the building. A copy of the historic survey form for this property is attached for your information. Please feel free to forward this invitation to anyone else who may be interested in sharing comments about the property. Sincerely, Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager 970-221-6206 mbzdek@fcgov.com Page 175 Item 12. Estimado miembro de la comunidad: Nos ponemos en contacto con usted para invitarle a dar su opinión sobre un proceso de la Ciudad de Fort Collins que afecta al antiguo edificio del Restaurante Pobre Pancho ubicado en 1802 N. College Avenue. La propiedad está en venta y actualmente se están estudiando nuevos usos. En situaciones como esta, la división de Preservación Histórica de la Ciudad está obligada a investigar la historia de los edificios comerciales que tienen por lo menos 50 años de antigüedad si se propone hacer cambios importantes a la propiedad. Si esa investigación arroja información que sugiera que una propiedad es importante para la historia de la comunidad, nuestro reglamento de desarrollo exige que los edificios históricos se reutilicen en lugar de demolerlos para poder conservar su historia. En este caso, se determinó que la propiedad del antiguo Restaurante Pobre Pancho es importante por su larga asociación con la comunidad empresarial hispana de Fort Collins. El dueño de la propiedad apeló esta decisión, lo que significa que habrá una audiencia pública ante la Comisión de Preservación Histórica (HPC, por sus siglas en inglés) el 20 de julio a partir de las 5:30 p. m. para que puedan tomar una decisión sobre si se requiere salvar y reutilizar el edificio, o si se autoriza su demolición potencial. La Comisión de Preservación Histórica es un grupo de residentes voluntarios que viven en Fort Collins y tienen experiencia o un interés especial en la historia local y en los edificios históricos. Las opiniones de la comunidad respecto a la importancia del edificio y si debería salvarse debido a su historia son una parte importante del proceso, y la Comisión de Preservación Histórica las tomará en cuenta. Si desea compartir su opinión sobre lo que esta propiedad significa para usted, su empresa, su familia o la comunidad hispánica local en general, lo invitamos a que lo haga. Su aportación se compartirá con el dueño de la propiedad, con los empleados de la Ciudad, con la Comisión de Preservación Histórica y cualquier otra persona de la comunidad que tenga interés en esta propiedad. Hay varias formas de compartir sus ideas. 1) Todos los integrantes del público y las partes interesadas están invitados a asistir el 20 de julio a la reunión de la HPC, en persona o en línea, para hablar directamente con la Comisión. Puede hacerlo al principio de la reunión, en el periodo de comentarios del público en general, o justo antes de que la Comisión lo analice, que será más tarde durante la reunión. Se publicará más información sobre cómo asistir a esa reunión y el programa de temas en https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/historic-preservation el viernes, 8 de julio. 2) Puede responder directamente a este correo electrónico y su mensaje se incluirá con el resto de la información que se presentará en la reunión de la HPC. 3) Puede enviarnos sus comentarios por escrito a: Historic Preservation Services, 281 N College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Los comentarios se deben recibir el 20 de julio al mediodía. 4) Puede entregar sus comentarios por escrito en 281 N College Avenue antes del mediodía del 20 de julio, ya sea a un miembro del personal en el mostrador, o utilizando el buzón seguro de 24 horas junto a la entrada trasera del edificio. Una copia del formulario de encuesta histórica de esta propiedad se incluye para su información. No dude en reenviar esta invitación a alguien más que pueda estar interesado en compartir sus comentarios sobre la propiedad. Sinceramente, Maren Bzdek, Gerente La división de Preservación Histórica 970-221-6206 mbzdek@fcgov.com Page 176 Item 12. From:RON LAUTZENHEISER To:Maren Bzdek Subject:[EXTERNAL] FEEDBACK REQUESTED. NORTH COLLEGE AVE. Pobre Pauncho’s Building Date:Wednesday, July 13, 2022 3:15:23 PM I’ve been involved for 27 years on north college. I own the Big O Store and Grease Monkey Lube Center. I’ve been a leader for the last 25 years in returning N College to the condition it is now at. I am a Citizens Advisory Group member and have been for 20 years. I’m on the board of NFCBA I knew Frank Perez and his wife well. In my opinion there is no redeeming historical value to their building. Any more than my Grease Monkey or Big O Store. Sent from my iPhone Ron Lautzenheiser 970-214-1275 Rklautz@msn.com Page 177 Item 12. From:Jimmy Aron 970-388-6654 To:Historic Preservation Subject:[EXTERNAL] Pobre Ponchos Date:Friday, July 15, 2022 12:01:08 PM Dear Historic Preservation Commision, My name is James Aron. I live at 3613 Kenyon Drive, Fort Collins Colorado, phone number: 970-732-3106, email: aronaronja@aol.com. I would like to share my thoughts and memories of Pobre Panchos located at 1802 North College. I grew up in Loveland and moved to Fort Collins in 1975. Looking for good Mexican food I found Pobre Panchos on North College and was thrilled with my discovery. I was a regular client along with my family. It was my Son, Travis, favorite place to go for his birthday or food in general from about 1998 on. Every birthday Frank would give him a Pobre Panchos T Shirt. We have had many many family dinners there along with many many fond memories. It wasn't hard to find Frank Perez as he was always on site checking with the customers to make sure their meals were as they wanted. I got to know Frank and had abundant conversations with him over the years. It was a sad day when he passed on. We were there often enough to where the Ladies who worked there would automatically serve up an Arnold Palmer for me and a Doctor Pepper for my Son. In fact we ate there the final night before it closed. Pobre Panchos was our "home" restaurant. The food was good, the place was always clean and the service was quick and friendly. At the time of Franks death I was very happy the restaurant would not be closing as Asher Haun had bought it to keep the legacy alive. Myself, my family, the staff I knew and all of my friends were thrilled Pobre Panchos would be continuing on. There were two Mexican Food restaurants, to the best of my knowledge, actually owned and run by Hispanic families. Pobre Panchos and El Burrito. There may be others but these are the only ones I have direct knowledge of. Dorothy at El Burrito is retired now but her legacy lives on with her family working there. Frank at Pobre's also had his family employed there. It wasn't just a business it was a Family business. When King Soopers moved in next door Frank was offered a substantial amount to relocate. Happily Frank stood by his guns and stayed put. Pobre Panchos building is a landmark as much it is as a testament to Frank and his restaurant. I'm not sure how many Hispanic business owners there are in town but I'll wager there's not many. I believe Mr Haun bought Pobre's not to keep the legacy going but to sell it when the money was right. The way he shut it down with no notice, not even to the staff or regular clients, seals that for me. From the initial purchase I believe he saw it as a deal. I'm sure the price was reduced to keep the restaurant open as Mr Haun first promised. He states it was due to the economy and lack of customers yet every time we were there it was three quarters full to totally full. I believe that his true reason to sell was the high offer made by Raising Cane's for the property. He bought in low, Page 178 Item 12. with the understanding the restaurant would stay open, and sold high for the money. I would give anything to have one more beef and cheese Paco Macho smothered in their hot green chili, lettuce, tomatoes, onions, avocado and cheese! So in closing I'll say that Pobre's is a Historical Landmark due to the years it was in operation, the fact it is one of the few businesses in Fort Collins legitimately owned and run by a Hispanic family and the joy it brought to many Fort Collins residents who happily indulged their need for Mexican Food. It should remain Pobre Panchos with some of the finest Mexican food forever! Sincerely, James Aron Page 179 Item 12. From:Michael Bello To:Maren Bzdek Cc:Michael Bello-Contact; Historic Preservation Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: Request for input - Pobre Panchos building historic status Date:Friday, July 15, 2022 3:09:59 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Maren I reached out to the North Fort Collins Business Association Board and got the following responses. I would agree with the prevailing thoughts here that though the family history has some significance the building doesn’t and as suggested in the first paragraph below, naming a building after them would be a better recognition of that history. Interesting read, I do believe that building does hold historical significance more so within the Perez family but not necessarily for Fort Collins. The fact that the owners, whom have occupied the building since 1969, are appealing the decision of its historical designation does hold weight with me, I happen to agree with them, that the building does not have historical significance. I believe someone had suggested that the new Community Center be named after the Perez family, which I think would be great recognition/ tribute to the family’s contribution to the business community. I am sure it has some history, but I don’t think you should put a historical tag on it. Doesn’t seem like it’s any special architecture, etc. I don't see anything historically significant for the building, the previous owners, nor anything that had happened there, so therefore I don't see any reason why the building should be historically preserved The building, if someone sees Historic value, should consider purchasing the building and moving the structure to another site. The current location provides for opportunity for a new building and a more functional use that would be compatible with surrounding properties. I know Pobre's was one of the first restaurants on N college and has been there for a long time, but honestly I don't personally feel that the historical significance of the building is doing much in the way of value for the community. From my perspective, this building has zero historical or architectural significance. It's fine with me to tear it down-- the sooner the better.-- has zero historical significance. Let me know if you need anything else from me. Thanks. Michael Bello C: 970.566.4541 From: Maren Bzdek <mbzdek@fcgov.com> Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 6:44 PM To: Historic Preservation <preservation@fcgov.com> Subject: Request for input - Pobre Panchos building historic status Greetings, Page 180 Item 12. You are receiving this message because we are inviting your input for an upcoming hearing on July 20 related to the former Pobre Pancho’s Restaurant building at 1802 N College. Please see the attached bilingual message that provides more information about the nature of the hearing and instructions on how to participate or provide input in advance, as well as the second attachment that provides the historic survey evaluation of the property. We are interested in your input as an individual, or as the representative of a formal organization, or both. Please forward this message to any organizations or individuals who may also be interested in providing public comment for consideration at the hearing. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to me. Regards, Maren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MAREN BZDEK She/Her/Hers Historic Preservation Manager Historic Preservation Services 281 North College Avenue 970-221-6206 office mbzdek@fcgov.com Page 181 Item 12. Betty Aragon-Mitotes 3375 Woodlands Way Wellington, Colorado 80549 July 18th, 2022 Historic Preservation Services 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 To whom it may concern: I am writing this letter regarding Pobre Pancho’s Café historic designation. I am in full support of this being designated historical. The Perez family opened this café back around the same time as El burrito, in a time when there was still much discrimination. There were able to have a clientele that appreciated good Mexican food. They have been open for generations until the passing of Mr. Perez. This café brings fond memories for me; my father would always ask me to take him to eat there. It was a special time for me and my father. This family worked hard to keep that café open and they accomplished that as business owners. We need to honor Hispanics that were able to create a business and keep it going despite the struggles and discrimination. The Perez family has earned the right to be honored for their contributions to Fort Collins. Sincerely, Betty Aragon-Mitotes Page 182 Item 12. Page 183 Item 12. Page 184 Item 12. Page 185 Item 12. Full - 4 pages Page 186 Item 12. Page 187 Item 12. Page 188 Item 12. Page 189 Item 12. Short - 3 pages Page 190 Item 12. Page 191 Item 12. Page 192 Item 12. Staff Presentation to the Historic Preservation Commission July 20, 2022 Page 193 Item 12. 1 Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Historic Preservation Commission, July 20, 2022 Appeal: 1802 North College Avenue Landmark Designation Eligibility Page 194 Item 12. 1802 N. College –Pobre Panchos 2 Page 195 Item 12. Role of the HPC •De Novo hearing –HPC provides a new decision •Consider evidence regarding significance and integrity of the building addressed as 1802 N College Avenue •Standards under Municipal Code 14, Article II •Provide a determination of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation •Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Sec. 14-9) 3 Page 196 Item 12. Current Review Timeline 4 •March 3, 2022: Conceptual plans reviewed by staff (Raising Cane’s) •Informed of Historic Survey requirement in LUC 3.4.7 (B) & (C) •March 10, 2022: Raising Cane’s orders historic survey for 1800 & 1802 N College Ave in preparation for PDP •April 28, 2022: Historian (FRRA) completes surveys and staff certifies findings •1800 N. College –Not Eligible •1802 N. College –Eligible •May 2, 2022: Property owner of 1802 N College (Hahn) files appeal Page 197 Item 12. Code Process Land Use Code (Development) -3.4.7 -(B) Requires identification of historic resources on/near development site -(C) Determination of Eligibility -(D) Treatment of Historic Resources Municipal Code - Eligibility -Chapter 14, Article II -14-22 –Standards for eligibility -14-23(b) –Process for appealing a staff decision 5 If found Eligible Page 198 Item 12. Outcomes •If determined Eligible •Does not require formal designation •Does require preservation and adaptive reuse of historic resources for development applications subject to land use code compliance [3.4.7(D)(3)] •Modifications of Standards are allowed under the usual process in LUC 2.8 •If determined Not Eligible –no further Preservation concerns 6 Page 199 Item 12. 2 Requirements: Landmark Eligibility* Significance 1. Events/Trends 2. Persons/Groups 3. Design/Construction 4. Information Potential Integrity (7 Aspects) 1.Design 2.Materials 3.Workmanship 4.Location 5.Setting 6.Feeling 7.Association* 7 *Section 14-22, ““Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and districts for designation as Fort Collins landmarks or landmark districts.” Page 200 Item 12. 1802 N. College –Pobre Panchos 8 Page 201 Item 12. 1802 North College Avenue: History •Constructed 1961 •Two sporting goods stores •1969-2022 –Pobre Pancho’s •Frank & Mary (Medellin) Perez & family •Frank was a U.S. Navy vet & naturalized citizen •1967 -started Pancho’s with his mother Amelia at 214 Walnut •Moved to 1802 N College w/ Mary and renamed Pobre Pancho’s Top: 1802 N. College, 1976 Bottom: Frank & Mary Perez, no date, Coloradoan. Page 202 Item 12. 1802 North College Avenue: Significance 1 –Events/Trends (Ethnic History/Hispanic & Commerce) •Long-standing business on North College Ave (1969-2022) •Hispanic-owned restaurant established during period of overt & institutional discrimination •Significant institution in Hispanic community on N. College Ave Page 203 Item 12. 1802 North College Avenue: Integrity •Simple Contemporary/Ranch-style commercial building •Strong integrity to c.1976 image; compatible 1992 rear addition •Setting: Somewhat diminished due to loss of landscape features & redevelopment Page 204 Item 12. Setting and Context 12 1800 North Block, East Side Significantly Redeveloped since mid-20th century 1937 1969 Page 205 Item 12. Evaluating Integrity Most Important for Criterion A /Standard 1 (Events/Trends):* •Property must retain the essential physical features that made up its character or appearance during the period of its association with the important trend/event •Design –are the basic features expressive of the properties design and/or function present, such as configuration, proportions, window pattern, etc. •Location –it is still on its original site •Materials –historic materials connected to event/trend are present •Setting –its general and specific setting is intact* •*Difficult to retain general setting in context of urban local historic preservation codes 13 Page 206 Item 12. Comments •Staff Public Engagement •Letter sent to local organizations •Public Comments (as of am, 7/19) •2 in favor of Not Eligible determination •2 in favor of Eligible determination 14 Page 207 Item 12. Role of the HPC •De Novo hearing –HPC provides a new decision •Consider evidence regarding significance and integrity of the building addressed as 1802 N College Avenue •Provide a determination of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation •Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Sec. 14-9) 15 Page 208 Item 12. Applicant Presentation to Historic Preservation Commission July 20, 2022 Page 209 Item 12. Appeal to Landmark Eligibility PRESENTED BY JEFFREY CULLERS, ATTORNEY FOR H AND H PROPERTIES LLC JULY 20, 2022 Page 210 Item 12. Presentation Outline I.Basic history of H and H Properties ownership. II.Basic legal framework. III.Appellant position on “significance” criteria. IV.Appellant position on “integrity” criteria. V.Comparison to another historic Mexican restaurant. VI.Comparison to other landmarked restaurants in Colorado. VII.Conclusion. 2 Page 211 Item 12. H and H Properties, LLC Ownership Purchased in Summer 2020 (beginning of pandemic). Asher Haun –longtime customer, purchased through this entity to keep the restaurant going in the face of challenges. 3 Page 212 Item 12. 4 Page 213 Item 12. Legal Framework A historic survey has been done as part of Raising Cane’s development application. Staff determined 1802 N. College is “eligible” for designation as a Fort Collins landmark under the applicable criteria. Property owner (H and H Properties LLC) has appealed to the LPC. Standard of review –de novo? Two questions to answer under the Code: Is there “significance,” under at least one of the four standards? Is there “integrity”, based on a set of 7 factors. 5 Page 214 Item 12. Significance –the Standard (1)Events. Resources may be determined to be significant if they are associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. A resource can be associated with either, or both, of two (2) types of events: a. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or b.A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. 6 Page 215 Item 12. Significance –Staff Finding Staff summary –staff determined eligible under the “pattern of events” option or “historic trend” for these reasons: 1.Focuses on the history of the restaurant itself, the recipes, and the history of the Perez family. 2.Suggests that the family overcame institutional racism as an obstacle to business ownership. 3.Notes that Pobre Pancho’s was a long-lived restaurant, but there is another Mexican restaurant that has been there even longer (El Burrito). 4.Suggests that the “second” Mexican restaurant in the area (in addition to El Burrito) was a sign of migration of Latinx residents to north of the Poudre River. 1.Note: El Burrito is not actually north of the Poudre. 7 Page 216 Item 12. Appellant Response Recall: the resource has to be “associated” with a “pattern of events” or “historic trend” that made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. 1.Staff did not directly identify any specific “pattern of events” or “historic trend.” 2.The only “historic trends” that could be gleaned from the report are: General migration of Latinx people to the City, State, and Nation. Institutionalized racism against Latinx people in Fort Collins, and Settlement of Latinx people north of the Poudre River because of gentrification. 8 Page 217 Item 12. Appellant Response Is Pobre Pancho’s “associated” with the trend of general migration of Latinx people to the City, State, and Nation? 9 Page 218 Item 12. Appellant Response Is Pobre Pancho’s “associated” with institutionalized racism against Latinx people in Fort Collins? 10 Page 219 Item 12. Appellant Response Is Pobre Pancho’s “associated” with settlement of Latinx people north of the Poudre River because of gentrification? 11 Page 220 Item 12. Integrity –the Standard Integrity is “the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its significance.” Based on seven factors. 12 Page 221 Item 12. Integrity –Staff Finding There is integrity because of the following: 1.Front of the building is generally the same as 1976 photograph, except that monument sign is now gone. 2.1992 rear addition is compatible with the original. 3.Two stained glass windows (sombrero and roses). 4.Carved wood entrance door. 5.2010 colorful wall signs. 13 Page 222 Item 12. 1976 Photograph 14 Page 223 Item 12. Appellant Response Recall: the “historic trends” that support a significance finding all relate to Mexican or Latinx-specific matters, such as migration and racism. Recall: Integrity is “the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its significance.” Is there any integrity? 15 Page 224 Item 12. Current Pictures 16 Page 225 Item 12. Current Pictures 17 Page 226 Item 12. Current Pictures 18 Page 227 Item 12. Current Pictures 19 Page 228 Item 12. Current Pictures 20 Page 229 Item 12. La Posta de la Mesilla –New Mexico 21 Page 230 Item 12. La Posta de Mesilla –New Mexico 22 Page 231 Item 12. Current Pictures 23 Page 232 Item 12. Other Historic Restaurants in Colorado –Bastien’s Restaurant 24 Page 233 Item 12. Other Historic Restaurants in Colorado –Bastien’s Restaurant 25 Page 234 Item 12. Other Historic Restaurants in Colorado –White Spot Restaurant 26 Page 235 Item 12. The Eagle and Child Pub 27 Located in Oxford, England. Site of the “Inklings” writer group. Most famous members include C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. Page 236 Item 12. Conclusion Pobre Pancho’s significance and legacy is not about the building, and the building does not reflect it. 28 Page 237 Item 12. Link to Video Historic Preservation Commission July 20, 2022 https://youtu.be/EG6bIdG_0Lk Page 238 Item 12. Verbatim Transcript Historic Preservation Commission Meeting July 20, 2022 Page 239 Item 12. 1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CITY OF FORT COLLINS Held JULY 20, 2022 Hybrid Meeting – 300 Laporte Avenue and via Zoom Fort Collins, Colorado In the Matter of: 1802 North College – Appeal of Determination of Eligibility Meeting Time: 5:30 PM, July 20, 2022 Commissioners Present: Staff Members Present: Kurt Knierim, Chair Brad Yatabe Jim Rose, Vice Chair Jim Bertolini Margo Carlock Melissa Matsunaka Meg Dunn Maren Bzdek Walter Dunn Eric Guenther Anne Nelsen Page 240 Item 12. 2 CHAIR KURT KNIERIM: We are on discussion agenda item number six, 1802 North College, 1 the appeal of determination of eligibility. Are there any recusals from the Commission for this? 2 COMMISSIONER MEG DUNN: Could I make a disclosure Mr. Chair? 3 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: I had a friend in the history community send me an email saying 5 that she had concerns about the project and wanted to send in a letter, and I immediately prompted her to 6 write to Jim Bertolini, and I also included Claire in that email so that they knew right away that I had been 7 contacted. I don’t believe it biases me in any way in making this decision today. 8 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Any other disclosures or recusals? Hearing none, let’s begin 9 with our staff presentation. 10 MR. JIM BERTOLINI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One moment and I’ll get that set up for you. 11 Alright, are folks seeing that slideshow okay? 12 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes. 13 MR. BERTOLINI: Perfect. Thanks again. This is an appeal of the staff finding of the 14 determination of eligibility for the property at 1802 North College Avenue. Little bit about this 15 property…this is at the northeast corner of Willox and College in north Fort Collins, formerly known as 16 the Pobre Pancho’s restaurant. The role of the Historic Preservation Commission in this sense…this is a 17 de novo hearing…the Preservation Commission is tasked under the Code of providing a new decision 18 regarding eligibility of this resource for landmark designation. Your role is to consider the evidence 19 regarding significance and integrity of the building addressed as 1802 North College. It is intended to be 20 a linear process: does the property have significance and then does it have enough of its physical features 21 or historic integrity to convey that importance. The standards for that are referenced in Municipal Code 22 14, Article 2. Again, your task is to provide a determination of eligibility for whether the property 23 qualifies as a Fort Collins landmark. Final decisions…since you are a quasi-judicial Commission, your 24 final decision is subject to the right of appeal under City Code. 25 A little bit of background about this particular project. This timeline starts in March of this year. 26 At that time, Raising Cane’s submitted conceptual plans to be reviewed by City staff from several 27 departments. At that time, staff informed the applicant, Raising Cane’s, of the Code requirement under 28 Land Use Code 3.4.7 that requires any redevelopment proposal to survey the properties on that proposal if 29 they are over fifty years of age, and determine if they are eligible as City landmarks or not. The idea is, if 30 they are determined eligible, then the property is supposed to be preserved an incorporated into the new 31 development. March 10th, Raising Cane’s ordered that historic survey for both 1800 and 1802 North 32 College in preparation for their formal project development plan submittal. That survey was completed 33 for both properties on April 28th of this year; it was completed by Front Range Research Associates, 34 which is a history consulting firm based out of Denver. The findings that staff certified, was that the 35 property at 1800 North College was not eligible to be a Fort Collins landmark, but the property at 1802 36 was eligible. At that point, the findings were transmitted both to the developer, Raising Cane’s, and then 37 the property owners, Darren and Asher Haun, and on May 2nd, we received an appeal of that finding for 38 1802 North College, and that has brought us to this hearing this evening. 39 In part to respond to some questions about how determinations of eligibility for landmark status 40 play into the development review process, I just wanted to highlight this here. So, when we’re dealing 41 with development, the Code that covers that is 3.4.7, and the sections B and C deal with the requirement 42 Page 241 Item 12. 3 to identify any historic resources on or near the development site. And during that process, we need to 1 determine if that property is eligible as a Fort Collins landmark. So, it’s the same standards we use when 2 we’re formally nominating a property, but this is a separate process that is specifically for project…or 3 development project review. So, at that point, if we do have…when we’re determining whether a 4 property qualifies as a landmark, that’s why, since we’re using the same standards, we come over to 5 Chapter 14 where most of our City landmark applicable standards exist. And so, we have our standards 6 for eligibility, that’s what our consultant, in this case, and staff, as we certified those original findings, 7 that’s what we used to come to the finding of the property as eligible. And that section also includes the 8 process for appealing a staff decision, which we are conducting tonight. In the event that a property is 9 found eligible, that’s what kicks in the 3.4.7, treatment of historic resources, generally requiring that 10 landmark-eligible properties need to be preserved and incorporated on the development site. There are 11 some cases that can qualify for modifications of standards, but generally the expectation is that this 12 historic resource is preserved and incorporated. 13 Again, if the property is determined eligible, it does not require formal designation. In other 14 words, the Commission does not need to recommend that the property actually be designated as a City 15 landmark; the determination of eligibility is sufficient for project review. It does require, again, that 16 preservation and adaptive reuse on the development site. And this is just the reference for any 17 modification of standards to any requirement in the Land Use Code as covered under 2.8. If the property 18 is determined not eligible, there are no further preservation concerns at that stage since there would not be 19 any historic resources on the development site. 20 Again, there’s two requirements for landmark eligibility. The first is significance, is the property 21 even important? I have the events and trends highlighted because in this case, for 1802 North College, 22 staff’s finding was that the property was significant under standard one. If a property is determined 23 significant, then we measure its integrity, how well it still reflects it’s story, whatever that may be. For 24 properties that are significant under standard one, typically the…not all seven aspects need to be retained. 25 Typically that changes depending on which standard for significance we’re applying. And so, typically, 26 with a historically significant property under standard one, we’re going to emphasize overall design, 27 historic materials that were there during whatever the historic period was, location, so wherever the 28 historic building was either created or used, typically has a role to play in the story that makes it 29 important, the overall setting, that can be difficult, especially in areas that have been redeveloped 30 significantly, and association, can it still be connected to the significant story that was found to be 31 important. 32 So, again, just a reminder on the location along North College Avenue, and reminding you what 33 the building looks like that we’re talking about here. And a little bit about the history of this property. It 34 was constructed…this is all in your packet and covered in more detail in the survey form that was 35 produced in April. It was constructed in 1961, had two sporting goods stores in it prior to 1969. At that 36 point, that’s when this became Pobre Pancho’s. This is where Frank and Mary Perez and their family ran 37 this business from 1969 until the restaurant closed earlier this year. Frank Perez was an immigrant from 38 Mexico as a child, and he served as a U.S. Navy sailor, became a naturalized citizen after his service, and 39 in 1967, started Pancho’s with his mother Amelia on Walnut Street, and then moved to the 1802 North 40 College location in 1969 with his then wife Mary, and renamed it Pobre Pancho’s. 41 For significance, that is again outlined in the survey form and staff memo that covers our findings 42 and certification of that recommendation from a historian, this was significant for its association with 43 Hispanic history in Fort Collins and commercial history. Part of that is due to it being a long-standing 44 business on North College Avenue. There are a handful of surviving commercial properties along North 45 Page 242 Item 12. 4 College that reflect that post-World War II development along that corridor. In this case, the association 1 with our Hispanic community, especially considering the establishment of the restaurant in 1969…was 2 during a period of overt and institutional discrimination against our Hispanic community that at this point 3 is well documented, and the restaurant was intended to be a place that served Hispanic community 4 members. And so, this has become a significant institution in the Hispanic community…the restaurant in 5 particular was considered important and compared with the El Burrito restaurant on Linden Street that 6 was operated by the Godinez family. These were two, based on prior research, that rose to a level of 7 importance to be highlighted by research. 8 Measuring integrity, this was a post-war commercial building on North College. It was built as a 9 simple contemporary ranch-style building…a little bit of a mixture between the styles…it was not 10 intended to be an architectural landmark, and it’s not considered significant for it’s architecture, it’s 11 considered significant for it’s history. Based on a 1976 image, which I believe I have later and you saw 12 previously, it has good integrity to the historic period, which would cover the Perez family’s operation of 13 the restaurant. And there is a compatible…what you see here is a compatible 1992 addition. 14 The setting is somewhat diminished due to loss of some landscape features, including the 15 monument sign that used to be in front of the building, and of course there has been fairly significant 16 redevelopment in this area over the last decade or so. So, the setting is somewhat diminished, but staff’s 17 finding is that it was not sufficient to render the property ineligible. 18 Just a little bit about the setting and context, this is a 1937-era image, and so the blue and red just 19 marks the 1800 property in red and the Pobre Pancho’s 1802 property in blue, just showing their 20 approximate location compared to, in 1937, still predominantly agricultural, versus 1969 after both of 21 those properties had been constructed, we see a lot more development along North College sending it 22 toward the context that we see today that’s being redeveloped again. 23 Again, just a reminder in evaluating integrity for standard one…these are taken from a National 24 Parks Service Bulletin since our standards are based on the National Register of Historic Places , the 25 guidance for this comes from the National Register Bulletin that interprets those standards. And so, that’s 26 where, for historically significant properties, we must define what the historic period is. In this case, the 27 period of operation by the Perez family. Then we measure the design, the location, materials, and setting, 28 and then of course association for these. That’s the measurement of integrity…how well the property 29 tells that significant historical story. Just a summary, and I’ll have to update this lower part here…so staff 30 did make an effort as part of new policy related to processes like this. We did send a letter to several 31 local organization, including the business association that covers North College as well as other 32 organizations that may have an interest in this particular property. So, an update to this…we did transmit 33 some public comments that were received earlier today, so in total, we’ve received seven written 34 comments, two of those were in support of a finding of not eligible, and then five were in favor of a 35 finding of eligible. Those will…should be added to the packet and you should have received those late 36 additions earlier today. 37 Again, just a reminder for the Historic Preservation Commission, this is a de novo hearing, so 38 you’re providing a new decision regarding the eligibility of this property. And your role is to consider 39 evidence under Chapter 14 regarding the significance and the integrity of the building addressed at 1802 40 North College, and then provide a new determination of eligibility for designation. And again, as a quasi-41 judicial Commission, your final decision can be…is subject to appeal to City Council. That concludes the 42 staff presentation. Before handing things off to the appellant, I do want to note that, as questions come 43 up, staff will be available. We do also have, I believe, Tom Simmons, who is the historian who wrote the 44 Page 243 Item 12. 5 survey form. So, if you have specific questions about the content in the survey form, Tom should be 1 available to answer those. But, with that, I believe we have the property owner’s attorney is representing 2 him, Jeff Cullers, and then the owner himself, Mr. Haun, are here and have a presentation for you. 3 CHAIR KNIERIM: Okay, thank you Jim. And, yeah, let’s invite the appellants up. 4 MR. JEFF CULLERS: Good evening Commissioners, and for the record, my name is Jeff 5 Cullers…there’s an ‘s’ at the end. And I do want to…I’m going to disagree with the staff 6 recommendation, but I do want to compliment Jim Bertolini on some conversations I had with him over 7 the phone. He really did help me understand, kind of procedurally, where we’re at with this matter. And 8 I also want to be clear about one other thing, and that is my presentation is not meant to diminish the 9 accomplishments of the Perez family, let’s just be clear about that. Another thing I’d like to be clear 10 about is that the actual property owner and the appellant is H & H Properties, LLC, it’s not Darren and 11 Asher Haun. They own the LLC, and Darren is here with me, and I believe Asher is calling in virtually. 12 I’m going to go through a little bit of the history of the Hahn’s…or the company’s involvement 13 with the restaurant. H & H Properties purchased it…purchased the building in the summer of 2020, and 14 the purpose of that purchase was to keep the restaurant going. Asher Haun is a long-time customer of the 15 restaurant and he wanted to…the restaurant was facing challenges, including the illness of Frank Perez. 16 And there’s another LLC called Pobre Pancho’s Mexican Restaurant, LLC; that’s the entity that actually 17 owned the restaurant and ran the restaurant. And so, there’s actually two LLC’s, and that’s very common 18 in this business, and the Perez family did the same thing. One of the Perez family members also had a 19 five percent ownership in the Pobre Pancho’s Mexican Restaurant, LLC. I’d like to go ahead and go to 20 the next slide. 21 So, this is going to be my basic outline; I’ve already started the first one, history of H & H 22 Properties ownership. And I’m going to offer a few points on the legal framework, then we’re going to 23 go through the significance criteria and the integrity criteria, I’m going to make some comparisons to 24 other restaurant landmark designations, and then wrap up. Let’s go to the next slide. 25 This is a picture of the inside, and I would note that the H & H Properties made some 26 improvements after buying the building, including some paint, some new flooring, and some new light 27 fixtures. Pobre Pancho’s Mexican Restaurant, LLC decided to close down effective March 31st, 2022, 28 because it was losing money. There was a loss of about $123,000 since the restaurant was…you know, 29 changed hands. And the Haun’s did come out of pocket to make payroll and to pay vendors. So, there 30 was no…the Haun’s did not purchase the property for the purpose of just flipping it to Raising Cane’s . 31 And Raising Cane’s actually did approach them within a few weeks of them buying the property, and the 32 answer was no, we’re not interested in selling. The closure of the restaurant was abrupt and without 33 warning, but I would note that that’s pretty common, and that’s really kind of the s tandard way that 34 people do it in the restaurant industry. You don’t tell your employees, you know, hey, in two or three 35 weeks, this ship is going down. It’s usually a very abrupt event. Next slide. 36 So, this is another picture of the inside of the restaurant. Next slide. So, I think that Mr. Bertolini 37 already went through some of this. I do want to point out that under the Code provisions, memories about 38 Pobre Pancho’s are not really relevant to the eligibility determination. I’m sure we’re going to h ear some 39 of those from public comment tonight, but the landmark has to have meaning for people who never had a 40 meal at Pobre Pancho’s, and this…the landmarking is for future generations. And, you as the 41 Commissioners need to consider that potentially indefinite timeline of historic landmarking, and note that 42 within several decades, Pobre Pancho’s will…the restaurant will pass out of living memory. And this 43 Page 244 Item 12. 6 discussion is also about landmarking the building…we’re not talking about landmarking the restaurant , 1 that’s intangible, and that…the restaurant itself doesn’t exist right now. We’ll go onto the next slide. 2 And this is the significance standard. And before I go on with that, I do want to note that this was 3 triggered because the building was over fifty years old, specifically, the building was fifty-one years old. 4 The restaurant did not get started until 1967; it didn’t move to Pobre Pancho’s…it didn’t move to the 5 current location until 1969. So, the restaurant’s history is definitely less than fifty years old, and I wonder 6 if we’d be having this discussion if the building was built in 1963 instead of 1961. So, I’ll go to the 7 next…oh, I’m sorry. This is, again, the standard, and it has to be associated with a broad pattern of events 8 of history of the community, state, or nation. So, the point I want to make is it has to be associated with 9 something that’s not just…not just the building itself. So, go to the next slide. 10 So, the staff finding identified this, you know, pattern of events or historic trend, and I’m just 11 going to call it historic trend. So, the staff finding is that this is significant…there’s an association with 12 historic trends. The finding focuses on the history of the restaurant itself, recipes, and the history of the 13 Perez family as successful immigrants, suggests that the family overcame institutional racism as an 14 obstacle to business ownership, and notes that Pobre Pancho’s is a long-lived restaurant, but there’s 15 actually a restaurant in town that’s been here even longer, and that’s the El Burrito. The staff findings 16 also suggest that the second Mexican restaurant in the area was a sign of migration of Hispanic residents 17 or Latino residents to north of the Poudre because of gentrification, but I’d note that the El Burrito 18 restaurant is…I don’t know that the El Burrito restaurant is evidence of that because it’s actually not north 19 of the Poudre. Next slide. 20 So, recall, the history…the resource, which is the building, has to be associated with a pattern of 21 events or a historic trend that made a recognized contribution to the patterns of history of the community. 22 This criteria doesn’t support making the building a landmark to it’s own history; it has to commemorate 23 an association with some other history. I mean, otherwise, every old building would qualify. Now, I’d 24 note that this standard, this association with something that’s historic, is one of the easier standards to 25 meet because it kind of assumes the existence of the historic trends, and the question is, is the 26 building’s…you know, associated with those historic trends. So, you don’t necessarily have to prove out 27 the historic trends. I would note that the restaurant is not identified as making any influence or 28 contributions of a culinary nature that went beyond the restaurant itself. The only historic trends that I 29 could glean from the report are these three that I put on the slide here: the migration of Latinx or Hispanic 30 people to the city, state, and nation, institutionalized racism against Hispanic people in Fort Collins, 31 which I think that means racism by people in the City of Fort Collins…and when I say the City, I mean 32 like the City entity itself, that’s the institution. The last historic trend that I could glean is settlement of 33 Hispanic people north of the Poudre River because of gentrification. Now, the survey also suggests 34 association with the Perez family, who emigrated to the United States and built their dream. Now, that’s 35 an accomplishment, but I don’t think that means that the family itself is a historic trend. We’re 36 getting…now they’re associated with historic…the family is associated with the historic trend of 37 immigration, and the building is associated with that family, but we’re getting kind of attenuated if that’s 38 the path that we go down. I mean, the Perez story is not unique, I mean there’s probably thousands of 39 Mexican restaurants in this country that were started by immigrants. 40 The survey also suggests that the restaurant itself was significant, but I didn’t see any specific 41 information on how it influenced Fort Collins, like how it influenced the way the city of Fort Collins 42 developed. It basically notes that the restaurant survived a long time in a difficult industry; however, 43 difficulty of surviving in the restaurant business is not a historic trend, and success at that is not a historic 44 event. 45 Page 245 Item 12. 7 So, I’m going to focus on the three…what I think are the actual historic trends, and that’s 1 the…the first one is the association with the general migration of Hispanic people to the city, state, or 2 nation. I think that’s the next slide. So, is the building associated with this historic trend? And I think 3 the answer is no, I mean the intangible restaurant was associated with that, but it’s not the actual building. 4 If we’re going to go down that road, I think what we’d have to…the staff report would have to make the 5 case that the building was more than just along for the ride with this historical trend. For example, maybe 6 the building, or the Perez family, helped new arrivals adjust to life in the United States, something like 7 that. But, there’s absolutely no information that the Perez family or the restaurant was associated with 8 people actually arriving to Fort Collins from Latin America. So, the answer in my view is no, there is no 9 evidence of association of the building with this actual historic trend. And I want to point out that the 10 burden is on the City staff to give you guys evidence to prove out the case. If the evidence isn’t there, 11 then the finding has to be that it’s not significant. The burden of proof is on the applicants , and if the 12 Commission is going to exercise the authority to restrict what we can do with this property, that’s an 13 exercise of the City of Fort Collins’ authority to legislate and make decisions for the welfare of the 14 residents. So, that invokes the police power; if you’re going to invoke that police power, the evidence has 15 to be pretty clear. 16 So, the next one I’m going to hit on is the association with this other historic trend which is 17 institutionalized racism by the City of Fort Collins. Mr. Bertolini said that that is well documented, but I 18 didn’t see any documentation about that in the report. That might be the case, I wasn’t around in 1969, 19 but if we’re going to make this bold claim, that’s a bold claim, and with great claims come great 20 responsibility to prove them up, and I don’t think the report tried to do that at all. This is one of those 21 instances where it’s just assumed that this historic trend existed in Fort Collins, and really didn’t try to 22 actually prove that. But, even if we’re going to accept that, again, I would go to the next step, okay, so 23 besides just being a Mexican restaurant in Fort Collins during, you know, the last fifty years or so, is there 24 any specific challenges that the restaurant or the Perez family faced in overcoming institutionalized 25 racism, and the report doesn’t have anything like that. The report just doesn’t, in my view, it just doesn’t 26 connect the dots between institutionalized racism by the City of Fort Collins to this specific restaurant in 27 some specific way. And practically speaking, I would point out, what would the plaque…if that’s the 28 historic trend that we want to latch on to, what would the plaque on the restaurant say commemorating it? 29 I mean it basically would say something like, this restaurant made it through institutionalized racism on 30 the part of Fort Collins. Now, that’s again…that’s a bold claim. With great claims come great 31 responsibility to prove them up. And I also point out that that’s going to be a controversial claim; it’s a 32 polarizing topic, obviously, racism. So, we just have to be…I would encourage the Commissioners to be 33 real careful about stepping into that unless the case is quite clear. Next slide. 34 Is the building…and now my slides say, is Pobre Pancho’s associated…and it should say is the 35 building associated, so I’ll just make that little change. But, is the building associated with settlement of 36 Hispanic people north of the Poudre because of gentrification in other parts of town? That’s the 37 suggestion of the historic report. Now, again, this makes a lot of assumptions. First of all, it assumes that 38 gentrification was a thing in 1969, and I don’t know the answer to that. But, if it is, we need to see, you 39 know, the evidence for that. The report…the evidence needs to show that that was the case. And the 40 second, there’s another connect the dots issue with this historic trend. The staff report says that the 41 restaurant moved to its current location in 1969. Did it move because of gentrification? I mean, or did 42 they just need more space? Was their lease running out? So, I don’t think we can just assume that the 43 reason the restaurant moved to its current location is because of gentrification. The staff report just 44 doesn’t make that case. So, I would say no on this historical trend association; the report just doesn’t 45 Page 246 Item 12. 8 connect the dots. And when I say report, I’m also talking about the historic survey and staff’s excerpts of 1 that. 2 The other potential historic event that the survey suggests is, again, the association with the Perez 3 family. Now, that would have to…in order for that to satisfy the standards, that would have to mean that 4 the Perez family is a historic event, or a historic family. And not to diminish their accomplishments, but I 5 mean, the Perez family moved here, the founders moved here to chase their dream, and they succeeded, 6 and that’s a great thing, but their story is not unique at all. 7 So, just to close on this topic, the association topic, I believe at most the evidence shows that the 8 restaurant and the Perez family were along for the ride through some historic trends, and those historic 9 trends were: institutionalized racism by the City of Fort Collins, general immigration from south of the 10 border, and moving…being displaced by gentrification to their current location. I’ll move on to the next 11 one. 12 So, the other portion of the findings that have to be made is, well, let’s say that there is an 13 association with a historic event or trend…sorry, I shouldn’t say historic event, it’s a historic pattern of 14 events or historic trend. The next one is integrity, and that one I think is a little easier to understand, it’s 15 the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its significance, and there’s those 16 seven factors that Mr. Bertolini went through. Basically the question is, can we look at this building and 17 does it have something to say about the historic trends? Let’s go to the next slide. 18 So, the staff finding is…well, there’s integrity to the historic trends because the front of the 19 building is generally the same as in the 1976 photograph that was put up on the screen, except that the 20 large monument sign is now gone. There was a rear addition in 1992 that’s compatible with the original 21 construction. There’s a couple stained-glass windows that depict sombreros and roses, there’s a carved 22 wood entrance door, and there’s these wall signs that were added in 2010. Next slide please. 23 So, this is that 1976 report…or, I’m sorry, picture. I looked at the historical survey to see what 24 the architectural style is, because a lot of these alleged reasons that there’s integrity focus on the 25 architectural style. But, I would note that Mr. Bertolini said that there’s really nothing special about the 26 architectural style. The historic survey definitely bears that out. The answer…I wanted to see what was 27 the architectural style…the survey says, well, it’s commercial. It doesn’t really identify any sp ecific 28 architectural style at all. I’d also note that the Perez family did not build this building, so this is not even 29 where it all began concerning Pobre Pancho’s. Next slide please. 30 So, what were the historic trends? And is there any integrity…the historic trends were the 31 institutionalized racism, the migration of…general migration of people from south of the border, and the 32 displacement due to gentrification. So, does the restaurant have…or not the restaurant, the building have 33 anything to say about those issues? And let’s go through the slides…I think some of them you’ve already 34 seen. That’s the interior of the restaurant. There’s no bar; there’s a service bar, but there’s not like a bar 35 for customers to sit at. Next? That’s the outside. The signs have been taken down; you can see the 36 outline in the paint, but taking down the signs is a standard practice when the business closes. Next? This 37 is just the back side. Next? So, I think the building does retain strong integrity to its original style and 38 purpose, which is a very humble, generic, 1950’s retail building. Next slide. The only thing about this 39 building that seems to recall any type of Mexican or Hispanic culture is the stained-glass windows, and 40 they definitely convey that, but I challenge whether they are really authentic. Is stained-glass an artform 41 that’s associated with Mexican culture? I don’t know the answer to that, but the historic survey doesn’t 42 address that issue. The other part of that is, well, is the design itself, like in the style of Mexican artwork? 43 Again, I don’t know the answer to that, and the survey doesn’t address that question either. It might be 44 Page 247 Item 12. 9 that the colorful paint job on the outside evokes like a Mexican cultural stereotype, but the paint colors 1 were not addressed in the historic survey or the staff report. And I would also note that if the building is 2 determined eligible, the owners will want to get permission to paint it a generic color, and I would think 3 probably get permission to do that. 4 The survey mentions the carved door, but it doesn’t explain how the door is carved in a Mexican-5 influenced art style, it just says it’s a carved door. So, there’s no evidence of that connection. Next slide. 6 So, I would posit that the restaurant really has no integrity…it really has almost no integrity to its 7 significance, which is rooted in Mexican or Latino culture. I’m going to compare it to this restaurant, 8 which is called La Posta de la Mesilla, and this is in southern New Mexico. It is on the National Register 9 of Historic Places. This has classic southwest pueblo architecture; the walls are made out of real adobe, 10 it’s got this whitewashed finish, there’s wrought iron details. Next slide please. This is what the inside 11 looks like. The ceiling is this viga pattern, which is spelled V-I-G-A, and that’s the log ceiling detail. It 12 has the cultural…it has the classic, like, Mexican pattern tile in it. So it, I mean, it clearly says, this place 13 has Mexican and southwest influence. This is, I mean this is the whole package. It has all that…this 14 restaurant has been there since 1937, the original parts of the building date to the 1840’s. It’s located next 15 to a plaza that’s listed as a National Historic Landmark. It clearly has integrity. Next slide please. 16 This is our building. So, in our view, the integrity criteria is just clearly not met. It’s generic. 17 There’s no suggestion to a connection with Hispanic culture or food. I looked to see if there’s other 18 restaurants in the state of Colorado that have been designated for any kind of historic preservation, so next 19 slide please. So this is Bastien’s Restaurant, which is in Denver on Colfax. It is on the National Register 20 of Historic Places. This was preserved because the building is an example of Googie architecture…I’m 21 not sure if I’m saying that right…it’s spelled G-O-O-G-I-E. Next slide please. So, this is the inside, and 22 it’s…I mean the architectural features here are quite obvious. I mean, it’s got this dramatic folded roof, 23 the circular…the whole building is a circle. It’s got this hemispherical skylight in the middle, this stained 24 tongue and groove ceiling panels, complex curves throughout the building. 25 The other restaurant I found…next slide please…is the White Spot Restaurant, and this is 26 basically the same thing, it’s just not as cool as Bastien’s. It’s also a Googie architecture example. So, I 27 thought about what would be a restaurant that…and the reason I put these up is that this is really…these 28 two are…the historical designation is about the architectural value of the building. They’re not about 29 the…you know, what the building housed. In other words, they have their own…the building has its own 30 historical significance, it’s not connected with some other historical significance. Next slide please. 31 So, I thought about what would be a building or a restaurant that’s really not very interested…not 32 very interesting in its own right, but it’s associated with something that’s historically significant. And 33 this is an example: this is the Eagle and Child Pub, it is located in Oxford, England, and it’s the site of the 34 Inklings writer group back in the first half of the 20th century, and the members of the writer’s group 35 included C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. This place is on the British equivalent of the National Register 36 of Historic Places. Now, this has some integrity because it’s associated with something that’s historically 37 important, clearly, I mean you can…if you were so inclined, you could go in there and read your copy of 38 Lord of the Rings in the same place that J.R.R. Tolkien was thinking it up; that’s some integrity. So, next 39 slide please. 40 So, this is bringing me to the end of my presentation. I think the…a few thoughts on what I’ll 41 leave you with. The historic significance is Pobre Pancho’s as a successful restaurant for a long time. 42 But, the building itself really doesn’t reflect that. If Pobre Pancho’s moved to a new bigger building a 43 few years ago, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation. It’s a…the restaurant itself is the Perez 44 Page 248 Item 12. 10 family legacy, and that’s intangible, and I think it’s more important than the building itself. I’d like to 1 leave you with some thoughts about the practical implications of eligibility. I mean, if the building is 2 eligible, it’s going to turn into something; hopefully the H & H Properties can find a tenant, or they might 3 sell it, but it’s unlikely to become a new restaurant because you just can’t get enough tables in there, and 4 you can’t expand the building anymore because of the site footprint. It’s probably going to be a small 5 retail or office space. It’s going to get painted a different color, so the festive colors are going to go away. 6 And, if someone walks by and sees this building painted a beige, they’re not…it’s not going to be clear 7 what that…what the building is commemorating, what it’s associated with. And if we can’t…if the 8 building can’t do that, then what’s the purpose of finding it eligible as a landmark? The restaurant’s 9 legacy is more than this generic shell, and is preserving this generic shell the best way to honor the Perez 10 family and their restaurant? I don’t think so…we need to think outside the box, like quite literally. This 11 is a generic box, that’s all the building is, and we can do better…perhaps we can name a park or a street 12 or something in honor of the Perez family, but landmarking the restaurant is not the way to do that. So, 13 for these reasons, I ask the Commission find the building is not eligible as a historic landmark. And, I 14 know there’s going to be some public comment; I would like to ask that the…that Mark O’Donnell, 15 who’s the H & H Properties real estate broker be maybe allowed to speak first so he can answer 16 some…so he can give a little bit more information about it, or if the Commission allows it, he could 17 follow me right away and just add his two cents. 18 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, thank you. We’ll have all of the appellants that want to speak, speak, 19 and then we’ll have ample time for public comment. 20 MR. MARK O’DONNELL: Thank you; my name is Mark O’Donnell, I’m a real estate broker 21 with Colorado Commercial here in Fort Collins. I’m assisting H & H Properties in the sale of 1802 North 22 College Avenue as the seller’s agent. I’ve been in Fort Collins as a commercial real estate professional 23 for over thirty years, and that includes ten years of commercial property management experience. 24 With regard to the 1802 North College Avenue, the property has numerous marketability 25 limitations which would be further limited should the property be designated as a local historic landmark. 26 That designation would most certainly create undue hardship for H & H Properties by reducing the 27 current value of the real estate as there would be virtually no buyers or tenants who would consider 28 buying or leasing it in its current condition for the following reasons. First, the building is not large 29 enough to generate sufficient income to feasibly support a restaurant and the lot size is inadequate to 30 allow for expansion of the restaurant footprint, the current buyer, Raising Cane’s Chicken, intends to 31 combine both the 1800 and 1802 North College lots in order to make the project viable as a restaurant. 32 Secondly, the building is not well suited for other uses like retail or office as either of those uses would be 33 adversely impacted by the size limitations of the property. Even if H & H were able to get current market 34 rents for a retail or office user, the cost to remodel the building to accommodate such users would not 35 make that type of a use change practical. 36 H & H Properties purchased the property in August of 2020 with the intent of expanding the 37 restaurant. In September of 2020, H & H submitted a purchase contract to buy the adjacent property at 38 1800 North College Avenue, North College Motors. That contract was declined by the current owner. At 39 that point, H & H directed me to find them a property large enough to potentially relocate the restaurant. 40 We were unable to find a suitable replacement property and in March of this year, after significant 41 business loses, H & H was forced to close the restaurant. 42 As a certified property manager, I have managed over a million square feet of mixed-use real 43 estate products up and down the front range, including a number of restaurants. In my experience, the 44 Page 249 Item 12. 11 way in which the restaurant was closed by H & H is consistent with restaurant industry standards. Should 1 the Historic Preservation Commission elect to designate the property as a historic landmark, H & H 2 Properties will be left with a property of little value with very few options for re-tenanting the building or 3 selling the real estate to a buyer unless that buyer is able to assemble multiple properties. If the property 4 is designated as a historic landmark, it is likely that the property may remain vacant for years to come. 5 Thank you. 6 CHAIR KNIERIM: They just said that they don’t need to say anything else, thank you. Alright, 7 at this point, we will…well, staff, any rebuttal? I want to make sure t hat we have time for rebuttal on that 8 before we get to public comment. 9 MR. BERTOLINI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t have any specific rebuttal at this point, but 10 if there’s questions or need for clarification from Commission members, I’d be happy to do so at that 11 time. 12 CHAIR KNIERIM: Alright, thank you. Let’s get on with public comment and then we’ll have 13 questions from the Commission. Let’s begin with the folks in the room and then we will go to our online 14 folks. So, yeah, just approach the stand and state your name, and write your name down on the sheet 15 there if you would please. 16 MR. BRAD YATABE: Mr. Chair, I did want to clarify for the appellant and the public, generally, 17 there was a statement that what’s being considered tonight is the designation of this property, and that is 18 not correct. Actually, what’s being considered…and I know you guys understand this, but what’s being 19 considered is the eligibility of this property for designation, which is…makes a significant difference in 20 how that property is treated. So, I just want to clarify that for people. 21 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Yeah, so we are talking about eligibility. 22 MS. MONICA BIRD: Hello, my name is Monica Bird; I am Frank Perez’s daughter and I’m here 23 to talk on his behalf, and my family will also speak, but I’m also speaking for some of my other family. I 24 wanted to clarify a couple things. Pictures that were shown was not the way we had it…the blue outside 25 was not done by us, that was done by H & H. The pictures that we had inside, the Hispanic culture 26 pictures, were taken down. So, yes, right now it’s a shell, but it wasn’t before. So, I wanted to make 27 those clarifications. And yes, if it is, we want the color changed because it’s not what we wanted. 28 So, I would like to go through and talk about the history. Now, there was lots of mention of, 29 well, is that historic, is that this…? Well, in the Latin community, it is historic. Some of the things that 30 my father endured and overcame, that’s historic. Just coming over…they came over because of World 31 War II. I’m a history major, so here we go. World War II…many migrant workers were asked to come 32 up because the boys were out fighting the war, so they appealed to the Hispanic culture in Mexico to 33 come up, and that’s when my family came up. So, they have that tie to World War II. When they came 34 up, they didn’t have anything. They came up to the United States and they were met with racism; whites 35 only signs were in the buildings. And there was even a segregation of where they could live…Spanish 36 colony is still there today. And there were other parts also designated where they could live. And, it is 37 correct, it is a building…it is a building. There’s more to this building than those walls , and that ceiling, 38 and that roof. What is so important about this building is that is my…a physical representation of my 39 father’s fight, and it was an uphill fight. Racism, segregation, and the pursuit of American dream. That’s 40 tying to something; that is not an everyday thing. People don’t come up from nothing, everybody, 41 because then we’d all be living differently. They come from nothing, and they build to something. 42 Page 250 Item 12. 12 He came here in 1943; they were migrant workers, my family was, and they worked on many of 1 these farms that we talked about earlier with being preserved…they worked on some of those farms and 2 probably lived in some of those buildings on site. One of the buildings that they lived in was on Vine by 3 the old school, that one room white building that was there, they lived there. He attended school there, 4 and the school at the time…because there was quite a few, they had to change their name. He was no 5 longer Francisco Perez, he had to change it to Frank. He wasn’t allowed to speak Spanish in school, you 6 had to speak English, and that was pretty common at the time. Even though he faced that racism, those 7 signs, changing his name, not being able to speak his native language in school, he still joined the Navy. 8 There was a draft; he went and signed up. He signed up because he felt what America stood for; the land 9 of opportunity and equality was worth defending. He served there for eleven years. When he came back, 10 the racism was still here. HP was predominantly employing white employees. My father didn’t let that 11 stop him; he went and applied for an electrical engineer, and he got the job, which was kind of unheard of 12 at the time. 13 My grandmother wanted to start a Mexican food restaurant, and she started in Old Town, because 14 that was what was available to her. My father and my uncles helped, and my father thought, you know 15 what, we don’t want a lease, we want to own. So, against the odds of banks not wanting to lend to 16 Latinos at the time, to become business owners, he didn’t let that stop him. Family members helped him, 17 he had to go to a bank in Greeley to get the money, and that’s what that building is. That’s that fight to 18 even get going to begin with. He transformed that old building into a Mexican café. It was different then, 19 stucco everywhere. He was one of two Latino business owners in 1969. You know, today, this came out 20 in the newspaper this year…of the 7,000 businesses here in Fort Collins, six percent are Latino owned. 21 What is that saying about today? That is 420 out of 7,000 businesses. He started that trend, gave people 22 courage. What does that building mean? Courage. He did it; maybe I can too. 23 Not long after he started that, he married my mother, and my sister and I came along. And with 24 Pobre Pancho’s, he redefined the meaning of family when he started that restaurant. Family was now a 25 customer as well, no matter their ethnicity. Yes, he opened it because Mexicans wanted Mexican food, 26 but whites, Asians, African Americans, they all came in. It didn’t matter; they were all part of that 27 family, and that’s what he wanted. He broke down those barriers because that’s what he wanted, and 28 that’s worth noting, and that’s worth recognizing. Customers could always count on him to offer them a 29 home-cooked meal, our family recipes. He sat and he talked with them…in reading some of what people 30 turned in, that was the great thing. Frank went around and talked to everybody; it didn’t matter who y ou 31 were, it didn’t matter what you believed in, it didn’t matter, democrat, republican, he talked to everybody. 32 My father inadvertently created a melting pot which this nation is all about , a melting pot…he created that 33 there in that building. He provided that atmosphere for half a century. He provided work to many in 34 need, and that was brought up. Did he help the Hispanic migrants? Yes, he did. They came here needing 35 a job, they came here needing help getting citizenship. He helped them. He rented them some of his 36 properties so they could have someplace to live. They bought it from him. He did all of these things to 37 help the Latino community coming into Fort Collins. He didn’t turn anybody away. If you made 38 mistakes in the past, he still helped you. 39 Our family members all worked there, my mother, my sister, myself, my daughter who still owns 40 five percent, my other children, my grandkids worked there. This is generations. My son-in-law, my ex-41 husband worked there, he welcomed him with open arms, they did it together. And a lot of our 42 customers, they came to work there as well. They were kids who ate there, and they started work there, 43 and he taught them hard work gets you somewhere. Outside of that restaurant, he donated time and 44 money to churches, charities, law enforcement, fire authority. As one of the first Latino businesses, and 45 Page 251 Item 12. 13 ultimately the cornerstone on the north end of town, my father believed it was his duty to bring to North 1 College…belong to the North College Business Association. He advocated for positive growth, he broke 2 down walls of racism and segregation, finding ways to bring North College community together inspiring 3 minority-owned businesses. He did all of this until June of 2020. He greeted everyone with a smile. He 4 accepted everyone. If you didn’t like him, he still accepted you. He passed away in October of 2020 to 5 cancer. If he didn’t get cancer, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, we’d all still be working there. 6 He passed on with the knowledge that his granddaughter, my daughter, was continuing his legacy. 7 I mentioned that my daughter had owned part of that business, five percent. Yeah, it’s small, but 8 it’s five percent. On October 14th, without her knowledge, without coming to her, without talking to her, 9 she was informed it was sold, they were in a deal with Raising Cane’s. On March 31st, they locked the 10 doors, they changed the locks actually. And no matter what non-restaurant…they didn’t own restaurants 11 before, they didn’t know what to do, so they thought, we’ll just lock the doors. You talk to other 12 restaurant owners in the community, and they were appalled. One even confronted them when they went 13 to breakfast there; that’s not what you do. On April 1st, everyone became aware that it was closed. We 14 had no warning. My daughter had no warning, the employees had no warning. The community had no 15 warning. What significance does this building bring to us? The building reminds us of what my dad 16 often said: it is not where you come from that defines who you are, it is what you do with the time God 17 has given you on this earth and how you improve the lives of others around you. This building is the 18 physical reminder that with a strong faith in God, perseverance, hard work, dedication…that no barrier of 19 racism or segregation can stand in your way. My dad embodied and redefined what it is to be an 20 immigrant. He is no longer defined by the food he prepared, but by the love he had for those around him. 21 He’s a direct symbol for the Latino community of their family values, resilience, strength, grit, and 22 determination for the American dream. If that’s not historic…it is not a common thing, it is not 23 something that everybody just does. Back then it was rare. Judging by the amount of Latino businesses, 24 businesses owned by Latinos, it seems to be pretty rare still. 25 My life and the surrounding community have been touched by my father’s life as symbolled in 26 that building. If you believe what they say, it’s no significance, it’s nothing. Yeah, it was great what they 27 did, but other people have done it too. Fine. But, if you believe that our Latino business heritage, 28 overcoming racism and segregation is symbolic in this building, brought to you by a Mexican immigrant 29 for over a half a century, then you have to save this building. That building can be a beacon for 30 generations to come, to show them nothing can keep you down, keep going and you can do it. That’s 31 what that stands for, that’s what that means. And that’s what he showed us. Thank you. 32 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Other folks here live that want to speak? Come on down. Be 33 sure to sign in and then state your name. 34 MS. MARY PEREZ: Yes, thank you for letting me talk here tonight. My name is Mary Perez, 35 and yes, I am Frank’s wife. We started that business in 1968, right after we were married. Yes, it’s true, 36 my husband and his mother had the business in Old Town before that. When my husband came home 37 from the service, he decided he wanted a bigger place with parking, because downtown, in Old Town, it 38 was hard to find parking at the time. So, he found 1802 North College, and it had been vacant for quite a 39 while. And so, he found the owner that lived in Iowa, we bought the building from him, we cleaned it up, 40 and we started Pobre Pancho’s. Well, actually it was Pancho’s at the time. And we did not go there 41 because of segregation or anything like that, we just wanted a bigger building and a parking lot. So, we 42 got it going. At first, our parking lot was nothing but dirt, but gradually, as we kept going, we added 43 stuff, we added to the building, we had it painted. In fact, Frank and I, and some of the workers painted 44 it. It was tan with brown, and that’s the way it stood. The colors that it has tod ay, H & H did it, not us. 45 Page 252 Item 12. 14 And, we made a business for fifty-one years. We had our daughters working, Amelia and Monica, and 1 then as the grandchildren grew up, they worked there also. My husband took our granddaughter, Karolyn, 2 under his wing, taught her well. Towards the end, she was managing with him. When he got really sick, 3 then he turned manager over to her. He was home in…he was in Hospice at home, and I was his 4 caretaker. We…I’m sorry, I get emotional. 5 But, you know, he came from Mexico, and he graduated from high school, decided he wanted to 6 go to the service. He was actually going to go to the Marines, but when he went to sign up, they were 7 closed, they were out to lunch, so a gentleman next door came over to see him. He was a Navy recruit er. 8 So, he tells Frank, what are you doing here? Well, I want to join the Marines, but they’re out to lunch. 9 And he told Frank, well, come here son. When it was said and done, he joined the Navy. So he was in 10 the Navy for eleven years and then he came home and we started the business. 11 So, all I want to say is the building, 1802 North College, does have a history. It has our heritage 12 in there, and it’s a building that was made and ran for fifty-one years with a Hispanic person. We had 13 Hispanics, we had Anglos, we had Chinese, we had them coming over from Laramie, Cheyenne, 14 Loveland, Greeley, from all over. Today they showed us some pictures of the building; they say it’s not 15 Hispanic. Well, they showed us an empty building. It wasn’t empty when we had it. There was a bar 16 there; it wasn’t a sit-down bar because it was a restaurant. We were selling drinks at the tables while they 17 ate, but there was a bar there. Those stained-glass windows? My husband designed them, and he had 18 someone put them in. That was part of his heritage because he was from Mexico. The sombreros in 19 there, the roses…my mother-in-law loved roses so that’s why he planted roses in the yard, and he had 20 roses put in the stained glass. So, I just want you to know that our heritage is there, that building is there, 21 it's been there for the longest time. We moved here in ’68, my family and I. There was nothing there but 22 a building, weeds and all. So, when my husband and I bought it, it came to life. And that was a history. 23 Thank you. 24 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Are there others here live that would like to speak? Be sure to 25 state your name and write your name on the pad please. 26 MR. JAMES ARON: Yeah, my name is James Aron and I apologize for my casual appearance. 27 I’ve had a medical condition that doesn’t get me out of the house much; when I do go out, this is how I 28 have to dress to keep cool enough to be outside. You probably might have gotten a copy of the letter that 29 I submitted already referencing 1802 North College. I believe I sent it on the 15th, I got a response on the 30 15th…but anyway, I’d like to just read a little bit of it if I can, if that’s okay with the Commission? 31 Okay, like I say, my name is James Aron, I live north of town, and I’d like to share my thou ghts 32 on Pobre Pancho’s. I grew up in Loveland, moved to Fort Collins in 1975 and moved up to the north end 33 of town. So, I was, you know, here about six years after it started. I was looking for good Mexican food, 34 found Pobre’s…I was thrilled. Me and my family, we have eaten there up until the day it closed. In fact, 35 we were there eating the night before it closed so suddenly. My son…Frank would always make sure that 36 when we’d go in for birthdays, because my son, Travis, loved the place for birthdays…Frank would make 37 sure he had his own T-shirt, every year like clockwork. It wasn’t hard to find Frank, he was always there 38 checking on customers, make sure that meals were good, how they wanted them. And I got to know 39 Frank, had a lot of conversations with him over the years, and there was a lot of years there. Sad day 40 when he passed on, I’ll be honest with you. But, you know, it was good, because we heard that a fellow 41 had bought the place and it would not be closing, and the legacy and tradition of Pobre’s would be 42 continuing on. 43 Page 253 Item 12. 15 You know, there’s a couple Mexican food restaurants that have been around for a while. The 1 other one is El Burrito owned by Dorothy…I’ve known Dorothy for years too. And, to the best of my 2 knowledge, they are the only two Hispanic restaurants that have been in business in Fort Collins for a 3 period over fifty years. Silver Grill downtown has been around for more than fifty, how many years has it 4 been owned continuously by the same people? How many restaurants in town have been owned by the 5 same people? Much less Hispanic that had to work through a lot of stuff to keep it open. 6 You know, knowing Frank, when King Sooper’s moved in next door, we had a lot of discussions 7 about that. Frank was offered a sizable sum, I never found out what it was, but he was paid pretty 8 intensely if he’d have taken it to move it so that they could have that little corner piece too. Well, he 9 stuck by his guns, he said no, this is my legacy, this is where we’re going to stand, this is where we’re 10 going to do it. He could have taken the money and run; he didn’t because that was Frank. This was a 11 historic place for him; it was steeped in tradition for him and his family, and for we as customers down 12 there, as clients. I think now he maybe should have taken the money, but there was no way to talk Frank 13 into it then. 14 I believe that Mr. Haun bought Pobre’s not with the idea of keeping the legacy going, you know, 15 but with the idea that some day that corner was going to be really worth a lot. I think that he got a good 16 deal with it, you know, from the family, in order to keep it going. And, not keeping your word, you 17 know, that’s one thing, but I believe the whole thing was from start to finish knowing that that corner was 18 going to be worth a sizeable amount of money. And, it was sold for the money, bought for the money, 19 not necessarily because there’s any history of it, which there is, or any legacy, which, I mean who else in 20 Fort Collins had a restaurant that’s open fifty years? Can anybody name any? Other than Frank and 21 Dorothy? I can’t. 22 Anyway, I think it should be a landmark because of what it stood for, how Frank saw it. And you 23 tell people, okay, I live north of town, so I’d say, okay, what you is you go up to Pobre’s, you know 24 where that’s at? Yeah. It’s that big of a landmark; everybody I knew, knew where it was at. So, I think it 25 was a landmark, I think it’s location was good. Granted, that was a time when he opened up in ’69, the 26 early ‘70’s…I’m sure everybody here remembers that restaurants weren’t always that big. A small place 27 like that, small, comfortable place, that was a good place to go to. I will still remember fondly the 28 memories of that, and I think that the Commission really ought to look at the legacy of that place. And, I 29 was honored to eat there, I was honored to know Frank. 30 Anyway, I hope that it can be…talking about use of the building. I saw the pictures. They gutted 31 it. It didn’t look like what the pictures looked like any of the times since ’75 that I started eating there. 32 But, that’s the way it is right now. They’re saying it can’t have another use…it did fifty-one years as a 33 restaurant, why couldn’t it be returned to that? Why couldn’t it be returned…you know, make some 34 money off the deal, that was the original idea behind it, and I’m not against capitalism , I’m not against 35 investment properties, I’m against when you say something…my word means something to me, and I’m 36 sure it means something to you people. Stick by your word. Not, get a good offer and sell it. That’s all 37 I’ve got to say. Thank you very much. 38 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Are there others here that would like to speak? Please state your 39 name and write your name on the sheet there please. 40 MS. AMELIA PEREZ: Hi, yes, I’m Amelia Perez; I am Frank and Mary’s daughter, and thank 41 you for letting me speak tonight. Just stating that I have worked for Pobre Pancho’s since I was in junior 42 high. And I’m actually speaking for some of the regular customers we’ve had…I see them every day at 43 my job. They’re always asking what’s going on, what’s happening, and don’t know. The story is, is that 44 Page 254 Item 12. 16 my niece, Karolyn Bird, owns five percent of it. He locked the doors on her, and don’t think that’s 1 possible if you don’t own the whole thing, you shouldn’t be able to do that, but that’s a different story. 2 But anyway, like they were saying, the building…we had a painted mural. My dad had this 3 tennis player that was…I’m sorry, I’m nervous…he had this mural painted on the wall, and that wasn’t on 4 there. The outside…it was a white stucco before, and now it’s blue. They did not do that. But, we’ve 5 had…our family has watched generations and generations of families come in. We were not only a 6 restaurant, we were a family, and that meant something to people, and that’s what these customers are 7 telling me to tell you. It’s not just a restaurant, it’s a place for families to go to. They bring their 8 children, their children bring their children…and my dad had, like my sister said, he talked to everybody. 9 He let everybody come in, no matter what race…sorry, I’m really nervous. But, it’s heartbreaking when 10 you have a friend who says that he’s going to help you and he turns around and pulls the rug underneath 11 you after you’re gone, out from underneath your family, out from underneath your friends…we call them 12 Pancho’s family. That’s what we are, we’re Pancho’s family. These customers here that are here tonight, 13 I’ve known them since I was a little kid. My dad taught me how to work hard, strive for my dreams, and 14 you can’t really call a friend a friend when they do you wrong. And that’s all I can say right now because 15 I’m really nervous. Thank you. 16 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Other folks here that would like to speak? Please be sure to state 17 your name and write it on the ledger please. 18 MS. CAROL TUNNER: My name is Carol Tunner. I come to you with a great deal of education 19 and experience in historic preservation as I was the City’s Historic Preservation Planner for twenty years. 20 I staffed your Commission for twenty years. I went to conferences and educational classes, and in my 21 estimation, Pobre Pancho’s is an institution that needs to be designated. Not only that, but I live in the 22 neighborhood. I live to the east. My husband and I would eat there. It was known as good food, good 23 Hispanic, good Mexican food, all over town everybody knew that. And it was locally owned, I think 24 that’s an important, very important fact that I haven’t heard mentioned very much, that it was such a small 25 number of Hispanic people that owned businesses, and Mr. Perez represented that. He was a pioneering 26 businessman. 27 I would say that, first of all, it’s important for the…famous person, Frank Perez…and that’s one 28 of our categories in designation. Second, historic trend…yes, it’s true that Hispanic peoples have moved 29 north of the Poudre River. Last year I served on the North College Urban Design Committee and I was 30 absolutely amazed at the influence the Hispanic people have in the North College area, with their 31 businesses, and living around there, and La Familia, and all their organizations, the butcher shop, 32 everything. This is something that needs to be designated. It was locally owned; the money didn’t go off 33 to corporate somewhere in another big city. We need to support the Hispanic community, we really do, 34 and this is one way to do it, is to designate their business, their pioneering effort at business. 35 Finally, and this is aside from the designation. The way the restaurant was acquired may have 36 been legal, but it was unconscionable. It has nothing to do with the designation, of course, but it makes 37 me very sad, to the point that if Raising Cane’s tears Pobre Pancho’s down, I’ll not eat there, and I’ll not 38 eat at the one south of town. But, if Pobre Pancho’s stays there, boy I’ll support them. 39 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Other folks here that would like to speak on this issue? Alright, 40 let’s then move to the online contingent. Melissa, if you would bring in the first person, please? 41 MS. MELISSA MATSUNAKA: Yes, Mr. Chair, it is Bloss. 42 Page 255 Item 12. 17 MS. BLOSSOM SANCHEZ: Are you able to hear me? 1 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, and please state your name. 2 MS. SANCHEZ: My name is Blossom Sanchez – B-L-O-S-S-O-M, S-A-N-C-H-E-Z. 3 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, go ahead please. 4 MS. SANCHEZ: I first want to say that I don’t know the Perez family and I’ve never ate inside 5 Pobre Pancho’s before, and I also don’t know the H & H, LLC person either. So, I’m kind of nervous 6 too. But, I have lived in…I’m thirty-two years old; I have lived in Fort Collins my whole life. And I saw 7 this through a Facebook, someone shared it through Facebook, first when it closed back in April, and I 8 was, like, really sad about it because I actually lived on North College for like thirteen years, and I used to 9 walk by Pobre Pancho’s to go to Albertson’s all the time, get my hot pickle, come back home. So, like, it 10 has always been there. I have family that still live on North College, so I actually drive by there…and 11 always see it there as well. 12 So, for it to be a historic landmark, I definitely do think it fits the criteria that you guys were 13 talking about. Actually, I took some notes down here, so let me bring my laptop here. Because, it is a 14 part of the Latino community, I see that as well. But, before the Latinos were there, there was also Native 15 Americans there as well, so technically it is on Native land. We’re all on Native land. And, in 18…I 16 want to say like, 1860-something, there was something called Camp Collins, where it was full of military 17 men who would help, I guess, travelers, with like the Native Americans and outlaws in the area, and kind 18 of like shooed them away. So, and this Camp Collins was located about in Laporte, up from Fort Collins. 19 And, so, then they got…flooded out, and they got pushed down four miles down towards Fort Collins 20 area more. So, my point is like, the land itself is historical; that’s what I’m trying to say here. Like, 21 we’ve had…you know, a lot of stuff happen to our people that I thank that just needs to be recognized. 22 And when, I think his daughter took the stand and said something about her dad having to change his 23 name and not be able to speak his language made me cry because I am eastern…Apache, so my ancestors 24 were also put in residential schools, stripped of their name, and stripped of their language. So, I literally 25 was crying because just the history of like that, and the generational trauma that comes with that. And I 26 think like them doing this and abruptly closing the restaurant like this, is also more trauma that was, you 27 know, that their dad endured as well, like even though he’s not here anymore. And what I’m 28 hearing…well, all the stories I’ve heard, he sounds like a great man. And you also…what I hear is he was 29 illegal immigrant, and he came to this country and served in the war…like, he wasn’t even a citizen yet, 30 and he’s like, yes, I’m going to serve for this country so that I could become a citizen and, you know, 31 fulfill my dream. So, like, that’s a big accomplishment for the Latino…their part of their history and their 32 family. 33 I also was looking up like the style of the way the building was made. And, if you drive down 34 North College, you can see that like the buildings in the area were also built in that timeframe, like the 35 Jax, like the recycling place…they’re all built the same, like farm style, kind of like ranch style-ish type 36 of building, which is kind of like what Pobre Pancho’s looks like, kind of like a ranch-style building. So, 37 I would like it to stay there as Pobre Pancho’s as well because I drove by there for like thirty-two years 38 because I still have family that live up there and I’ve always seen it; it was always just something there. 39 Like, Pobre Pancho’s, like you knew that was a Mexican restaurant, you knew that was on the north side, 40 and it was just a staple, it was…everybody knew. If you wanted directions because you don’t…like me, I 41 don’t know, like don’t tell me to turn on Willox or something…tell me like, hay, turn left on…where 42 Pobre Pancho’s is, or turn left where that King Soopers is before you see it, you know before Pobre 43 Pancho’s, you know, like…that’s how I know directions. So, Pobre Pancho’s has always been like a 44 Page 256 Item 12. 18 focus point on that 287. And before, like, buildings were built there, it was a touring spot to come down 1 from Wyoming, and that’s where the tourists came in straight, like 287 right there, the first thing they 2 saw. Like, I remember when I was growing up, there used to be like a farm stand there that now a car lot 3 takes, so like, people saw the farm stand, and then, like there was Pobre Pancho’s, there was the motels, 4 there…and they’re like right next to each other. So, if you’re staying at the motel, you’re probably going 5 to eat at Pobre Pancho’s, and you’re going to remember that coming in from Fort Collins . 6 I was also…let me see what else…I’ll look it up here. I did also…while the lawyer was talking, 7 he mentioned a restaurant in, La Posta de Mesilla in New Mexico, and I actually was like, huh, I’m going 8 to look this up. Well, the lawyer had said, like, stained glass is probably not part of their culture. 9 Actually, if you look at this restaurant and look at their pictures, they have a stained glass window in their 10 bar area. It looks like it’s some horses, you know caballeros or something, but it is part of their culture. 11 If you know the Catholic empire…like the Spaniards came to Mexico, they, you know, gentrified it, and 12 they passed on their religion which is Catholic. If you go to Catholic churches today, what’s in the 13 window, stained glass windows. So, like these are stuff that was brought, like, forced onto the Mexican 14 community that was brought over from overseas. So, it is something in their culture, because of the 15 horrific genocide that happened. 16 But, my…like I really just want to say, like I want you guys to consider, like, this restaurant as a 17 historic place, because it’s been there for over fifty years, it was locally owned, and that’s a big part of 18 like anything nowadays, like you want to support locally-owned businesses. You don’t want to go to 19 corporate…and they never did that, and I think that’s a big plus for them. 20 Let’s see here…this says, like, it’s been family-owned since 1960’s, that’s also in my notes there. 21 And I wasn’t even born back then, but I have family members that say like, yeah, I remember that place, 22 it’s been there forever. And when I saw the pictures the lawyer put up, like, I was like, what…like the 23 blue, I was like, that was never there, like the Pobre Pancho’s sign is missing. I hope if it does become 24 like a historical place, I hope it gets put back the original way it was, because that just breaks my heart 25 right there. Other than that, I think that’s all I have to say. Thank you. 26 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Next online public comment? 27 MS. MATSUNAKA: Mr. Haun. 28 CHAIR KNIERIM: Hello, are you there? 29 MS. MATSUNAKA: Asher Haun? 30 CHAIR KNIERIM: Hello? 31 MR. ASHER HAUN: Okay, can you hear me now? 32 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, thank you. Please state your name and then your comment. 33 MR. HAUN: My name is Asher Haun and I am the principal of H & H Properties, and I would 34 like to…yes, and I own Pobre Pancho’s along with five percent that was given to Karolyn for what she 35 brought to the restaurant; Karolyn being Frank and Mary’s granddaughter. And I would like to reiterate 36 to the Board that I regret not being there; I had previous obligations that I needed to meet. 37 I bought the restaurant with sincere desire to keep it open; otherwise, I would have not remodeled 38 it and invested in new appliances and keep pumping cash into it. The colors of the building was stucco 39 falling off of the south walls; I had it re-stuccoed and painted the brilliant colors that you see today to 40 Page 257 Item 12. 19 bring back the Hispanic preservation that it may have had. But, it was a plain white building as I’m sure 1 everyone on the Board noticed that. The interior was in dire need of remodel. For the thirty-five years 2 that I ate there, the interior never changed as far as upgrades. The appliances in the kitchen were failing, 3 and I upgraded several appliances, all with the hope of keeping the family restaurant going for the family. 4 I paid Frank what he wanted for the building, no negotiations. 5 As I said, Karolyn was given five percent for her knowledge of what she brought to the building, 6 and no cash. And at no point in my $123,577 as of the 31st of March did Karolyn contribute in any of 7 them funds. So, with that being said, we lost more money in the first three months of this year than we 8 did all of last year. The declining business…yes, at one time, the building was very noticeable, and that 9 was another reason for painting it the way I did, was to make it more visible to the public. It got 10 swallowed up in the North College improvements to that area. We had full intent of keeping the business 11 going, but it just wasn’t possible; raising costs in food and et cetera, COVID…I paid the girls what I 12 considered well, more than I actually had to legally. I wanted them to try and make a decent living, they 13 made a decent living as best as we could provide for them. To me, they wouldn’t have had a job for 14 eighteen months, and if the family is so dead set on me buying the business and the building, why didn’t 15 they step up to buy the business and the building. And the reason for that was, the family didn’t have the 16 money and the family needed the money, and I’m not going to get into their financial situations, that 17 would be the last thing that I would do. But, the two years previous to my buying it, it was very, very, 18 very marginal, and that is all I will say about the financial side of it. 19 But, the building was never bought, or I wouldn’t have closed it a week after I bought it and 20 invested the money that I did. The interior, like I said, we put a lot of money inside and out. The painting 21 of the outside was a very, very small portion of the percentage of money that I spent. Most of it was on 22 appliances and the interior. The interior doesn’t look the same, I’ll give them that a hundred percent, 23 because I think that we made drastic improvements, and the clientele gave me nothing but thanks and 24 gratitude for what we did to the building and the fact that I bought it trying to keep it going. Just…it 25 wasn’t in the cards. And, I love Mexican food. I have nothing against the Perez family or the Hispanic 26 preservation, the…any of that…I have nothing against that. I own a heating and air conditioning business 27 and I have a lot of people that work for me of different cultures and et cetera. So, I am not a prejudiced 28 person in any way, shape, or form, and I loved Frank as much as any of the other customers. 29 So, I don’t know…look at my notes here…the restaurant’s not going to reopen, that I can say 30 because I did liquidate everything, and at some point here in the near future, I will be dis bursing with 31 Karolyn Bird, the cash that was received and the items that was donated. But…just was no way we were 32 going to be able to keep this thing going. So, with that being said, I would ask the Board to reverse its 33 decision. And, with that, I’ll hang up. 34 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Any more public comment, Melissa? 35 MS. MATSUNAKA: There are no other hands raised online Mr. Chair. 36 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Any more public comment here? Seeing none, that will close 37 the public comment for this, and let’s move on to Commission questions for our appellants or for Jim. 38 Hearing none, let’s move on to discussion. And what we are talking about today is… 39 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Kurt, I’m sorry. I do have some questions, I’m sorry. I was 40 trying not to jump in first again like I’ve been doing, but… 41 CHAIR KNIERIM: That’s fine. 42 Page 258 Item 12. 20 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: I guess I’m the only one. So, I have some questions for Jeff. Jeff, 1 I just want to clarify a few things, or at least one thing. So, at one point, and I might have just not heard 2 everything you were saying, but I heard mention of police power, and so I just wanted to clarify, are you 3 saying that our making a decision based on our local Municipal Code that’s been developed through 4 significant public input is exercising police power, or were you referring to something else? 5 MR. CULLERS: I probably shouldn’t have used that term; that’s kind of a legal term regarding 6 the ability of the municipality to make laws in the public interest or public welfare. So, it doesn’t mean 7 police power in the criminal justice sense at all. 8 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Alright, so… 9 MR. CULLERS: But I think that the council is going to be exercising that power…that ability to 10 make decisions that’s, you know, for the good of the…or for the benefit of the citizens of Fort Collins in 11 making…in addressing this. 12 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: That’s helpful, thank you. And then, I don’t know if you can 13 answer this, or if it would be better to be asking the gentleman that wrote the report, the survey report, but 14 Jeff, in your…when you were talking, you mentioned that there was racism by the City of Fort Collins, 15 which I assume you meant by the government entity, against the P erez family, and I didn’t see that in the 16 survey report, so I just was hoping to figure out what page that’s on so I can make sure I’ve read that. 17 MR. CULLERS: Well, I can’t tell you the page number off hand, but what I was referring to was 18 the idea that there was institutional…what the historic survey said was institutional racism in Fort Collins, 19 which I think that would mean racism by the institutions of Fort Collins, so that would be the City and 20 then maybe some of the business institutions. 21 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Okay, so… 22 MR. CULLERS: Does that make sense? 23 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: What the Perez’s mentioned about the white trade only would 24 count in what you were talking about? 25 MR. CULLERS: Say that again? 26 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: So when one of the Perez’s…I can’t remember, maybe it was 27 Monica, got up and spoke, she mentioned the white trade only signs that we used to have here in Fort 28 Collins in our business windows. Is that the kind of institutionalized racism you’re referring to? 29 MR. CULLERS: You know, I don’t think I know enough about those buildings…those signs to 30 say one way or the other. 31 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Okay, so you mentioned it but you’re not entirely sure what we 32 were talking about. 33 MR. CULLERS: Well, I don’t think that’s fair. I mean, I guess to challenge you on that I would 34 say, if there’s individual businesses putting up discriminatory signs, that’s clearly racism…but I mean, 35 that would be racism by that business. Does that mean that there’s an institutional racism? I don’t k now 36 the answer to that. 37 Page 259 Item 12. 21 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Okay, so I’m just clarifying…we don’t have evidence that the 1 City of Fort Collins specifically did racist whatevers to the Perez family; that’s not what you were 2 referring to? 3 MR. CULLERS: Well, what I meant was that there was no evidence that the City itself, like the 4 City of Fort Collins, made the Perez family cause difficulties, like permitting the restaurant, or 5 inspections, and that kind of thing. There was no evidence in the historic survey that that actually 6 happened to the Perez family, and that’s the point I was making. 7 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Okay, good, that’s helpful. Thank you. I think that’s all the 8 questions I had for you. And I just want to make a comment there that when we’re talking about the 9 institutionalized racism, Jeff mentioned it was probably the City of Fort Collins; we don’t know that. As 10 he said, we don’t have evidence that it was the City of Fort Collins, so it could have been other forms of 11 racism that was taking place in Fort Collins that the survey report is referring to. 12 My next question I think is for Brad, although, maybe someone else could answer this also. But, 13 just based on what Jeff said multiple times in his presentation, you know, by his own admission, he really 14 doesn’t know much about Fort Collins history, and it just dawned on me, this survey really was written 15 kind of presupposing that people have a basic understanding of our city history. And we do have multiple 16 contexts that have been written about Hispanic history in the city of Fort Collins and the surrounding 17 area. I’m just wondering, should we…would it make more sense, I mean, I just feel like there’s this huge 18 block of information that’s missing in what we’re looking at, and we’ve got this survey that’s resting on 19 top of it, but not everybody has that block of information underneath. I’ve read the contexts so I have that 20 block, but not everybody does. I’m wondering if it’s possible to table this meeting with the specific 21 request that we would ask for that information to be added to our packet and that it would be given to the 22 appellant so that they kind of have a better sense of our local history, because otherwise I feel like we’re 23 talking apples to oranges here. 24 MR. YATABE: Well, I will first say that Mr. Cullers, as an attorney and advocate, he is not a fact 25 witness here. He’s making arguments based on the information. So, whether he has a background or 26 familiarity with the history of Fort Collins or not, I’m not particularly sure how relevant that i s. I do think 27 that the Commission does have the ability…this is a de novo hearing, albeit it is an appeal of the staff 28 decision, this is a matter that is before the Commission for your…ultimately you to make a decision on 29 the information that you receive. So, to the extent you want more information, I think it’s within your 30 power to continue this, but I will also say, and I’ll say this for the Commission as a whole, so…all of the 31 Commissioners, you need to be operating off of a common record of knowledge. So, if you are making a 32 decision based on information, that needs to be in the record. So, to the extent you want…you think 33 there’s information out there that will provide some more information for everyone to make…have a 34 common basis…also it’s a common basis so the appellants can understand that information and 35 potentially rebut that information, it’s also a common basis of information for the members of the public 36 to understand that decision and potentially make comment to rebut it if they think something is incorrect. 37 So, that…what you’re saying is a vital aspect of this, so, to the extent somebody on the Commission has 38 some information, and of course you as Commissioners have a lot of historical information about this 39 city, it has to be information that everybody can see in the record and understand, because if that your 40 basis for your decision, everybody needs to be able to not only understand that, but to potentially test that 41 information if need be by bringing in opposing information, or however that might be tested. 42 MS. MAREN BZDEK: I’d also like to speak to the question of evidence in terms of the historic 43 record and our general procedure on…in that regard in terms of our reliance upon historic survey reports 44 Page 260 Item 12. 22 for these determinations. One of the requirements that we have for our contractors who provide these 1 professional assessments for us…and this is something that we check for the methodological standpoint 2 when we receive the surveys as staff, is that they provide the sources of information for the basis 3 of…essentially the evidence for the claims that they provide in those survey forms. And so they’re 4 relying on both primary and secondary sources of information, their original research as well as other 5 histories that have been written by other historians. And so, in this case, we have several, as you 6 mentioned council member Dunn, related to the Hispanic history of Fort Collins that are cited in the 7 survey report, and you can find that in particular on packet page 259 in section thirty-six, sources of 8 information. And so, that presumption there is that…that is the…essentially the background context in 9 which some of those claims can be made. And if you have any particular questions about how the 10 contractor used that information in order to formulate their argument for significance, you can certainly 11 direct that directly to Mr. Simmons. 12 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: I don’t know that I have any questions on that, but I would…I 13 haven’t met Mr. Simmons, but I would just say, I would recommend that when you write this, you write 14 with the assumption that people don’t know that base information. So, as much as needed, maybe, you 15 know, quote it or something. But, I do think that this is something that we’ll need to talk about as a 16 Commission and see if we…if we have the same background information. I think that’s all my questions, 17 Mr. Chair. 18 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Other questions? 19 COMMISSIONER ERIC GUENTHER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have a question. I’m not sure if I 20 should direct this to Brad or to Jim, Jim touched on it at the top of the conversation. But, can you clarify 21 process? There have been several references this evening to the Historic Commission designating this 22 property historic. My understanding is, our role tonight is to decide whether its eligible or not eligible. 23 What happens after that? For example, if we decide that the property is eligible, I understand the 24 appellants can then proceed to appeal to City Council. If we decide that its not eligible, what are the 25 implications? 26 MR. YATABE: Well, I think…and Jim, you can help me out as you see fit, but the…I think the 27 important thing to remember is that this is related to a potential review process under the Land Use Code. 28 So, if this were strictly speaking under the City Code, the Municipal Code under chapter 14 as an 29 eligibility issue, the effect on this property is…well, I won’t say that it’s negligible, there is something to 30 that eligibility determination. It really has a role in the development review process, because there are 31 Land Use Code standards stating that if something is eligible, then you have to make efforts to essentially 32 preserve that property, or show some kind of reuse of it. So, that’s the tie in to the Land Use Code and 33 the importance…and essentially the tie in to Cane’s interest in the property, or it could be anyone else 34 who wants to develop the property. 35 With regards to the eligibility determination, and just to clarify, that is different that a landmark 36 designation…if something is eligible, the landmark designation is an involved process beyond that to 37 make that a landmark. A finding of eligibility does not establish this as a landmark, it merely says it is 38 eligible to go into that process if someone were to initiate it. So, in terms of your decision, if the 39 Commission is to find that this is not an eligible property, or if the Commission finds that it i s an eligible 40 property, there is the possibility to appeal that decision to City Council…in whatever decision you make. 41 Does that answer your questions? 42 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Yes, it does, I believe so. I do have one follow-up question for 43 Jim, and I think you also referenced something earlier relative to the condition of the property having an 44 Page 261 Item 12. 23 effect on whether or not its eligible. So, if for example, we find as a Commission, find the property 1 eligible for historic designation, and nothing moves forward, and it sits vacant for two, three, five years, 2 and it floods, and it goes into a condition of deterioration, what are the implications there? 3 MR. BERTOLINI: If I understand your question correctly, you’re referring to the discussion of 4 historic integrity? 5 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Well, I believe historic integrity, but also just the physical 6 condition of the property. If, for example, whether its eligible for designation or its ultimately designated, 7 but nothing happens, no new business goes in there, clearly there’s not likely to be a restaurant going in 8 there, and so it just sits, unmaintained, and deteriorates over the course of time, and whether its, you 9 know, weather conditions, or a fire, or anything that happens that substantially impacts the integrity of 10 that building, what happens then? Are the current owners then in a position where they could go ahead 11 and sell it without any involvement from the Commission or the Council, or what would be the 12 implications of a situation like that? 13 MR. BERTOLINI: In particular with the finding of eligibility, so assuming it’s found eligible, 14 the…that finding is really neutral in terms of ownership; it’s really focused on the property. And the 15 hope, of course, is that designation would follow that finding because there are financial incentives that 16 can support and offset any historic preservation costs…there’s things like the Colorado Historic Tax 17 Credit, our own micro loans, the zero interest landmark rehab loans. So the intention there is to leverage 18 those resources in order to maintain that property and ideally support rehabilitation for continuation of 19 Pobre Pancho’s, a new tenant…that’s the other thing about the rehabilitation standards that would apply 20 is that they are kind of occupancy neutral to a point, and really just intended to allow for the change and 21 turnover with certain features not changing that are considered critical to the historic character of the 22 property. So, the intention is not that a property would sort of sit vacant and deteriorate in condition, in 23 part because of…we’d be encouraging any owner to leverage those resources with a formal designation. 24 And furthermore, we do have, you know, demolition by neglect ordinance that can sometimes apply to 25 certain properties. So, does that answer your question? I’m not sure if I… 26 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: I believe so. I’ve got a practical mindset and lots of experience 27 with this type of thing, and so I’m just curious…and again, we can go through the process, there will be 28 more questions, but relative to realistically, what’s the future of this property? And clearly, we don’t 29 know, it all contingent on some of the decisions that we make, or that other groups within the City 30 government make as we move forward. 31 MR. BERTOLINI: I guess I would note, just as an additional point within that realm, is that’s 32 the…some of that may be covered by the Land Use Code’s modification of standards…that is intended to 33 address certain things, certain aspects of hardship that may make a particular property hard to redevelop 34 in certain ways. There’s specific criteria outlined in Land Use Code 2.8 about what can qualify for a 35 modification of standards, but that’s intended to be a release valve for certain kinds of situations that 36 might be considered an unfair hardship on the property. 37 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Got it, thank you. 38 MS. BZDEK: If I could just add one more addition to that, which is the question of how any of 39 these scenarios that you described, Mr. Guenther, might potentially impact the eligibility in the future. 40 So, let’s just say that you uphold the determination…or you make a determination that the property is 41 eligible, that determination stands for five years, but our Code does allow for reevaluation if there are 42 Page 262 Item 12. 24 significantly changed circumstances that would warrant that reevaluation, so that’s just another 1 consideration. 2 COMMISSIONER MARGO CARLOCK: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. 3 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, go ahead. 4 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: And this would be for Jim and possibly Brad. On the staff 5 presentation, there’s a slide that says ‘outcomes,’ and I guess I’m following up on Eric’s question, just to 6 clarify. I know that we are not designating, or are not being asked to designate as a historic landmark, we 7 are only considering whether it is considered eligible for historic landmark. But, on that slide that talked 8 about outcomes, it says, if determined eligible, does not require formal designation; however, it does 9 require preservation and adaptive reuse of historic resources for development applications subject to Land 10 Use Code. So, in effect, they would be subject to the same restrictions on being able to change the 11 outside of the building or the surrounding grounds, is that correct? 12 MR. BERTOLINI: That is correct…it helps to use your item number four from your agenda this 13 evening, the Balfour Senior Living Center…that’s exactly the same Code section that they’re subject to, 14 because they started out with a historic survey, determined that farm complex eligible, and so the Code 15 citation that you should be seeing on your screen here, that 3.4.7(D) regarding treatment of historic 16 resources on a development site, that same process would apply. So, yes, the standards for rehabilitation 17 would apply to the building. We do…as has been done in the past, you do have some flexibility about the 18 site itself, and infill and densification…we do try to allow for that where the zoning would call for that. 19 But the expectation is that the historic resource be retained and treated like a landmark. 20 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: But that would also then, obviously, precluded demolition and 21 something else going up on that site? 22 MR. BERTOLINI: Correct, correct…and the only exception to that, again, is if the applicant can 23 make a case for a modification of standards. 24 MS. BZDEK: Another important distinction there is that a landmarked property…the Historic 25 Preservation Commission is the decision-maker. So, the design review process is administered by you or 26 staff through your designation and you ultimately are applying the standards, whereas in the scenario in 27 which a property is held to those standards under the Land Use Code, you’re making a recommendation 28 to the decision-maker, and those decisions are usually made in combination with a more complex set of 29 factors that are involved in redevelopment. So, it’s just…it’s a procedural difference, essentially, and it’s 30 also a difference in terms of the Commission’s role in the process. 31 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: Okay, thank you. 32 CHAIR KNIERIM: Other questions before we move to discussion? 33 COMMISSIONER ANNE NELSEN: I can jump in. This may be for Maren or Jim…I think that 34 it might be worthwhile, especially at 10:13 PM, to have a bit of a refresher on the events and trends 35 significance. We, generally speaking, I think the bulk of what we see tends to be significant for design or 36 construction, and I think there’s sort of this preconceived notion that a building is important if it is 37 significant under design and construction, but events and trends is a bit more nuanced, and I don’t know if 38 concrete examples would help, or…maybe just elaborating on what it means to be significant in that 39 aspect. 40 Page 263 Item 12. 25 MR. BERTOLINI: Certainly. Yeah, and so the standard, standard one for events and trends, 1 again, this is based on the National Register of Historic Places, and that’s why you’ll hear staff frequently 2 reference National Parks Service guidance, since we’re trying to adapt their playbook for our use here in 3 Fort Collins for a city landmark program. So, the events and trends is really intended to be fairly broadly 4 applied to any significant historical trend, it might be a specific event…trends are more broad but still 5 need to be demonstrated as significant. And so, that could mean, in this case, you know, the development 6 of a Hispanic-owned business, if there’s documentation to support that that was significant, that was rare, 7 especially in the context of what we already have documented in the survey form, and then as well in the 8 Hang Your Wagon to a Star historic context related to Hispanic history here in Fort Collins, which is 9 cited in that same survey form. So, the intent is to recognize significant events or significant places 10 within a broader trend; that might include the establishment of Hispanic businesses in the mid-20th 11 century in Fort Collins. 12 In terms of how we determine something eligible in that case, if you’ve made that case for 13 significance, and you’ve got that established and documented, this is where that relationship to historic 14 preservation comes in that is place-based…that’s really the fundamental aspect of historic preservation is 15 that we are grounding history of some kind in a place, and we are trying to preserve a physical 16 manifestation of that, and that’s where the measurement of historic integrity comes in. 17 So, the nuance in particular that comes in with a standard one, events and trends, significance, is 18 that we’re really…we’re not expecting to see a building look as it did…or site for that matter since we 19 don’t just preserve buildings…it’s not as important for it to look like it did originally, when it was first 20 built, because we may not care about its original construction. What we care about is the story that we’ve 21 determined is significant. And so, what we want to measure in that case is, does this property still reflect 22 that story, that trend, that specific event. You know, common way we typically explain this to folks is, if 23 you took a person from that important historic period, maybe someone who worked there, or in this case, 24 the owner of the restaurant, could you bring them forward in time, look at the building today, wou ld they 25 still recognize it. That’s kind of the non-jargon-y way of explaining that. So, that’s kind of the basic way 26 we apply standard one. So, the main difference is that we’re usually measuring a period of time, we’re 27 expecting to see some evolution, and that effects how we measure things like integrity. But, we still are 28 looking for physical connections, physical features that connect to the story that makes that place 29 important. Does that answer your question? 30 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: Yes, I think so, thank you. 31 CHAIR KNIERIM: Jim, would you put up slide seven so we can kind of see what we’re talking 32 about for significance and integrity? 33 MR. BERTOLINI: Sure, absolutely. 34 CHAIR KNIERIM: Because we’re looking at this as a package, right? That we have significance 35 of events and trends, and also persons and groups, right? As that story, right? And this is certainly a 36 story that has been under-told in Fort Collins, and you know, I’ll put myself out there. I think that this 37 should retain its eligibility because it tells a story that has historically been under-told in Fort Collins. 38 And that, you know, I’d like to see that change. 39 MR. YATABE: Mr. Chair, before we…this is sort of becoming a mix of discussion and 40 questions. I did want…I think it would be a good idea to provide the appellant an opportunity to rebut 41 any of the public testimony or to, if they want to provide a brief closing, before you move into discussion. 42 But I just want to see if…if Commissioners have questions that are not leading into discussion, but 43 Page 264 Item 12. 26 they’re just trying to clarify fact, information, and other things…you may want to see if there’s more of 1 that and we can get that done, or if there’s procedural aspects, before launching into more discussion, but 2 also giving the appellant an opportunity to respond if they so choose. 3 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Yeah, so other questions from Commissioners? We’ve had good 4 questions, and would the appellant like to respond to any? 5 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: I have one question while they’re deciding that. And hopefully 6 this will be my last question, but if the property ultimately is designated as a historic property, are there 7 any restrictions to the type of business that could go in there? Again, based on some of the conversation, 8 highly unlikely that a restaurant is going in there or that the previous restaurant would reopen, so what are 9 the implications if a liquor store, or a dispensary, or a variety of other businesses are the only types of 10 entrepreneurs that would go ahead and lease the property from the current owners or buy it? 11 MR. YATABE: I’ll let Jim also chime in, but I guess my take on this is…well, one, I think we 12 have to…are you asking about, if it’s actually designated as opposed to being just an eligibility 13 determination? 14 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: I guess either way; I’m not certain I would understand the 15 difference…whether it’s eligible or ultimately designated, are there any restrictions on the type of 16 business that would be allowed to go in there? 17 MR. YATABE: I don’t think we view the use so much as the preservation of the structure and the 18 historical context. And, Jim, feel free to correct me if you think differently, but what is conducted on the 19 interior as the business and the use of that is not necessarily affecting the historical aspects of those, and I 20 mean, really, we look at the exterior of that building and changes, and identify the character-defining 21 aspects of that. So, generally speaking, it is not the particular use that may go in, but it’s the proposed 22 alterations to that exterior of the building and potentially other features of that that are character-defining. 23 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: I guess my concern though is, ultimately, what we’re 24 trying…or ultimately will get around to, is preserving the historic legacy, the influence, the trends…that’s 25 the idea behind this conversation. To me, it’s less about the building and more about the influence, and if 26 the building is replaced by something that is much different than a restaurant, and there are a hundred 27 different businesses that could be out there, I mentioned, you know, dispensary or liquor store, but will 28 that preserve this…you know, this legacy and recognize the influence that that structure had? Because, 29 frankly, to me, its not the structure that has the influence, it’s what happened within that structure over the 30 course of fifty years, and as business people, the applicants will, if they’re not allowed to sell to Cane’s, 31 they will have to either try to sell the business to someone who recognizes the implications of the historic 32 context, or they will have to lease to someone who can put a business in there. And so, it’s a broad 33 question, I recognize that, but if our objective is to preserve that historic legacy and the trends that were 34 influenced over fifty years, I think whoever goes in there ultimately has a big impact on that. So, I’m not 35 sure if there’s a question in there, or if that was just a statement, but that’s kind of where my thoughts are 36 at the moment, trying to, again, be practical and recognize what the future of this structure would look 37 like. 38 MR. YATABE: And, I’d invite Jim or Maren to chime in, but my understating is there are not 39 only eligible…eligible properties, but also landmark designated properties that have different uses than 40 they were originally used for. But again, it’s the alterations to the property…not the particular use of that, 41 but it’s the alterations to that property that a business moving in there may suggest that, in particular for a 42 Page 265 Item 12. 27 designated property that’s under your purview, to review as to whether that is altering…fundamentally 1 making alterations to the historic nature…the character and the context of that property. 2 MR. BERTOLINI: And just to add one piece to that, about the only time that the rehabilitation 3 standards…so, you’ll note if you go back to the rehabilitation standards, standard one refers to use…that a 4 historic property will be used as it was historically, or for a compatible new use, which is usually what 5 happens. But the only time where there’s a conflict there is under existing building code…if there’s a 6 code compliance issue with a certain type of occupancy that would require damaging or removing a 7 character-defining feature. That’s about the only time that we might not recommend a certain type of 8 occupancy for that building, if it is going to require destruction of some character-defining feature. But, 9 those kinds of conflicts, I’d say, are relatively rare, especially in the context of a local preservation 10 program where we don’t regulate interiors for historic character, we strictly regulate the interior. So, it 11 does happen, but it’s fairly rare that that would occur. 12 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: So, I think…sorry to jump in again…but, actually, no I’m not 14 sorry, that’s why we’re here…I rescind my apology. I think…so, I’d like to hear from staff, and then I 15 think the appellant certainly has the right to respond to it, but I guess this goes back to what I was asking 16 before about the link between the significance and integrity, and when we’re talking about…we’ve heard 17 a lot tonight, and thank you all, really, truly, thank you all for coming and participating in this discourse, 18 wherever you stand, it’s important civic discussion. In any case, so…we’re talking about something that 19 is representative…a building that is representative of some pretty significant meaning, right? But, it…I 20 think it’s very important for everyone to be super clear about the connection, or the disconnection, 21 between place and events, because we’re not looking at it for its fenestration pattern, we’re looking at it 22 because it is a place where things happened. So, maybe I’m not being super clear, but…Maren is nodding 23 her head, so…I would love to hear a little bit more focus on that, because I think that that is the crux of 24 the issue, right? There are people who see the importance of the stories, maybe, but maybe not the 25 building, and then there are the people who recognize that the building itself is important. So, as staff 26 who put together the staff report, I’d like to hear what you have to say, and I’d also like to hear what the 27 appellants have to say as well. 28 MS. BZDEK: If I could just make a general comment about that, and then if Jim wants to speak 29 to that specifically…I think what I hear you asking about is what we think of as a continuum of 30 opportunities for storytelling and maintaining history through specific places. And so, you know, at one 31 end of that continuum is a place where the use hasn’t changed and essentially, whether it’s architectural 32 significance or historical significance, those are still associated with the contemporary use, right? So, it’s 33 unbroken in that respect. But then, at the other end of that is the ability to continue to tell stories 34 about…through a place…through the preservation of a place, even when those stories have terminated, 35 essentially. And so, you know, in the case where a building is being preserved, but the use has changed, 36 there are ways to sort of, you know, not just through storytelling at that place, through signage, or 37 preservation of certain important elements that evoke that past, there are also kind of more subtle 38 opportunities for people to remember what occurred there just because the building continues. And so, all 39 of that can be true, and there’s lots of different opportunities to share those stories. In the absence of 40 buildings, we…that’s also part of that continuum. We can mark places where important things…and 41 that’s at the very opposite end of that continuum. We can still tell those stories even when the buildings 42 are gone, but the ability to do that, of course, is lost the more that we lose, you know, of that physical 43 representation of what was there. It is more challenging in the context of sites that are deemed significant 44 because of their history and not so much because of their architecture, and I think we’ve acknowledged 45 Page 266 Item 12. 28 some of the reasons why that’s the case, but there’s very good reasons why we recognize those criteria, 1 and it’s because, quite frankly, architecture is only one component of what makes, you know…what leads 2 to importance in historic preservation, or in our histories in general. 3 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: Mr. Chairman, I have another question. 4 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes, please. 5 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: And, I’d like to direct this to the Perez family. I’m curious as 6 to…and thank you all, again, for being here, and not just the Perez family by relationship, but by the 7 customers, the Pancho’s family. I’ve been very struck by the heartfelt reminiscences of your father, and 8 of your husband, and of the struggles, and how important this restaurant was. It wasn’t just a restaurant; 9 it was indeed a community place. So, I’m very struck by that, and thank you all for opening my eyes to 10 that. How best do you feel your…that Frank Perez’s memory and, more importantly the story that he was 11 a part of, could be preserved and even perhaps better clarified through this building, or…how would you 12 like to see this memorialized? I mean, if it’s…I’m struck by what Eric said, if some other business comes 13 up, and it has nothing to do with a restaurant, it has nothing to do with the Mexican…or I’m sorry, the 14 Hispanic heritage. How would you see that? Just the fact that that building exists to be able to resonate 15 those stories with the community, or would perhaps another form of memorial, including perhaps the 16 salvaging of the windows and some of the previous things that were in it, in some sort of a museum 17 exhibit…a permanent exhibit that explained the story of the Hispanic struggles in the business 18 community? I’m just…I’m trying…I understand what…the importance of the story, and I want to see 19 that story continue. I’m just looking at perhaps what might be the best way, and I was hoping you might 20 have some ideas. 21 MS. BIRD: Actually, I do. I think moving, like, you know…sorry, I forgot your name, but 22 saying that, you know, it could be a street sign or something like that…I think that takes away the 23 significance of being the cornerstone business, a Latino-owned business, on the north end of town. I 24 think it takes away that impact that had and that resonating part of that story. My dad always believed in 25 helping other people, not only the people around him, but the community. They made mention of some 26 preserve…or something…some funds being able to be used…why not use this to help families? Why not 27 use this as an education center? Why not use this as something positive in our community, to carry on 28 that you can make it, you can do it, it doesn’t matter. It’s kind of been rolling around in my head, what 29 would he want? He would want that building to be used for something that could impact the community. 30 I don’t know if that’s possible. I don’t know, you know, how that would work, but I thought…and I think 31 he would want something like that, and I think that would preserve his story, that could be able to be 32 shared, you know, something in there to talk about, you know, this is here because of this individual. 33 There’s help here because of this, or something to that extent. Like I said, I don’t know how it would 34 work; it’s a great idea…love to help do it. I am not an individual who just talks; I’m an individual who 35 does. If it’s able to be turned into something like that, I will do like my dad and work until its done. 36 Those are just my ideas; I don’t know…I guess we’re all in consensus. Does that answer your question? 37 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: Yes, it does, thank you very much. 38 CHAIR KNIERIM: Any other questions? Opportunity for rebuttal. 39 MR. CULLERS: Thank you, Commissioners. I do have some points to make on rebuttal. I 40 would note that if the Commissioners decide it is eligible for…as a landmark, that really puts H & H 41 Properties in an awful situation because there’s no…as I explained earlier, since it’s not actually 42 designated as a landmark, we can’t unlock any funds to help preserve the property; it’s going to be at H & 43 Page 267 Item 12. 29 H Properties expense to preserve it and H & H Properties is not going really have an incentive to go an 1 unlock those funds and say, hey, please designate this as a historic landmark, because then the five year 2 time period goes away and it becomes forever. So, it’s a really untenable position to put…or, I wouldn’t 3 say untenable, but it’s very burdensome position to put the property owner in to live with this historical 4 eligibility determination. 5 We’ve heard a lot about the way the restaurant shut down…obviously the Perez family is 6 unhappy about that. That’s not relevant to deciding whether it’s eligible. And I did provide an example 7 of a building that’s eligible with something historic, and that was the pub in England. I don’t think I 8 agree with Mr. Bertolini’s thoughts on what integrity means, and he basically said, well, if you took 9 somebody, you know, that has personal experience with the restaurant, and you put them in the building 10 the way it is today, would they…you know, would they recognize it. And, I mean the answer to that is…I 11 mean…I think that wrongly focuses on the experiences of individual people, their memories with the 12 restaurant. The focus would be…if you brought somebody that had nothing…I think the right question is, 13 if you brought somebody that had nothing to do with the restaurant into the building, and they saw the 14 association, that’s the right question, because that’s who’s going to be going through this restaurant in 15 fifty years, or through the building in fifty years. It’s not going to be people that have experience with the 16 restaurant; it’s going to be people that have no experience with the restaurant. So, the question is, is that 17 person going to pick up on the association with the historic trends, and I think the answer to that is 18 probably no. 19 The idea that the story is under-told, I don’t know that that is relevant to deciding whether it’s 20 eligible. And, is it really that rare that a Mexican restaurant survived for fifty years? I mean, there’s 21 another restaurant in town that survived for even longer. I’d also note that the…the thought of preserving 22 a building as a monument to its prior use is maybe not a good policy, because it’s going to discourage 23 people from…like the Haun’s, from doing exactly what they did. And I believe them, that they bought 24 this restaurant, they put over a hundred thousand dollars into the restaurant to make it survive, and it just 25 didn’t work. So, now, they can’t get out from under it. And I think that’s a significant policy concern 26 that the Commissioners should be aware of. I mean, if the next person wants to go in and buy a building, 27 and keep the long-standing business in that going, and they fail…I mean now we’re saddling them with 28 that building as…because it’s eligible for historic landmark designation. 29 I’d also note that nobody from the Perez family has actually approached the Haun’s and asked 30 them about doing what they want, which is, they want their restaurant back. And the Perez family…why 31 haven’t they approached the Haun’s and say, hey, let’s find a better way…a different location to make the 32 restaurant work. And I don’t think…I didn’t hear any effort by the Perez’s to do that, and there’s nothing 33 stopping them from doing that. If that’s what they want, there’s nothing stopping them. Let’s let them 34 have that conversation with the Haun’s…they haven’t tried to do that. 35 The next point I want to make is…the building is…let’s face it, the building is not going to be an 36 impressive monument to anything, okay? The building is an empty, generic shell. If we want to make a 37 monument to the historical trends, maybe…can’t we do something better than preserving this empty shell 38 forever? That’s…in my mind, that’s almost a little insulting, that’s we’re going to preserve the Perez 39 family restaurant, and they were in this historic shell, but surely there’s a better way we can do that. If the 40 Commission decides that it is eligible, then we’re going down the road to preserving some aspect of that 41 shell forever, and it’s not a very impressive shell. And this brings me to my other point, I mean, I was 42 really disappointed that Ms. Bird had no other ideas on how to honor the legacy that don’t include 43 preserving the shell. She wants to maybe turn it into a museum, or a…I don’t know, a non-profit or 44 something, but that’s not…the Commission cannot force the owners to do that; the Commission has no 45 Page 268 Item 12. 30 control over what it’s going to become. I mean, maybe it will become that, but probably not. I mean the 1 building…this kind of goes back to my other point, that the building is a generic shell of really no 2 economic, or minimal economic value. It’s just not in the Commissioners’ power to turn that building 3 into something that’s actually a homage to the historic values. So, thank you very much; that concludes 4 my rebuttal. 5 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. At this point, we will have some discussion and then see where 6 we go from there. 7 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Kurt…I want to respond to one of Eric’s questions earlier. 8 There’s a building downtown that was originally built to be a bank. Later, while the bank was still there, 9 it became a hotel, now it’s Nature’s Own. So, talk about change of uses; there’s been some significant 10 ones for that building. And yet, if someone were to go and walk up to that building, they can…I mean 11 other than the word ‘bank’ at the top…it doesn’t say hotel anywhere, but bank is up there, but there’s also 12 features on the building that kind of speak to its history, and the key is, they make people ask questions, 13 and then people do what Ashley did which is go to Google and figure it out…and dig up that history. 14 And so…so that’s just an example of change of use doesn’t mean we’ve lost the history. The history can 15 retain…can remain in the building even if there’s something else entirely going on in there. So, that was 16 just to that piece. 17 I also wanted to address…and now I’ve forgotten his name…Jeff, I think it was, the lawyer? He 18 brought up some issues on architecture, and I just want to help us get past this because I think Anne 19 helped us do this, but I just want to say it again, his point was, it doesn’t look Mexican enough, 20 essentially, to be a landmark for what we want to landmark it for. And, I just feel like that’s like saying 21 Stonewall Inn doesn’t look gay enough to be landmarked for an event that took place inside of it. The 22 event inside doesn’t necessarily match the architecture outside, and if we’re looking at events, then 23 architecture is kind of a moot point except when it comes to, is there enough integrity to undergird that 24 significance. So, I really think the architecture is not something that we’re looking at in this. 25 He also made a really, really fantastic point that he brought up again in his rebuttal, but 26 landmarking is not just for us, it’s for our kids and it’s for our grandkids. And I tell you what, I cannot 27 even…there’s so many people that are new to Fort Collins, and I’ll mention something, and they’re like, 28 what? That was here? And they don’t have any clue about it because the building related to it was 29 demolished. And so, having a building, a structure remaining, even if its just the shell and something else 30 entirely different is going inside, gets people saying, why is this shell here? What’s it doing here? 31 What’s going on? What’s the point? They do what Ashley did, they pull out Google, they’ve just learned 32 some really important local history. So, having that physical artifact still with us is a critical part of what 33 historic preservation is, because if it’s…if there’s nothing physical, you might find it in a book, but how 34 many people pick up books these days? You might find it in a movie, but how many movies do we have 35 about local Fort Collins history? Really, these local buildings, these local places, these local sites are 36 what get people thinking about this stuff. Why is that there? What’s going on with that? 37 Why…like…having a different use could be the very reason why somebody asks that question. So I 38 think that’s an important understanding of why we landmark properties, not that we’re even talking about 39 landmarking this one, but that’s what we’re looking at when we’re looking for eligibility. 40 And then, I just want to say, I think this building is significant for a couple of reasons, maybe 41 more than a couple. One is, there’s this Mexican American family that is making…at the time, they 42 would be calling it ethnic food, and I know my grandpa, he wouldn’t even go to Taco Bell, because that 43 food was so different, and yet here, we’ve got a restaurant that became beloved by the entire community. 44 Page 269 Item 12. 31 And I think that shows a change in our community that’s something we would want to capture and 1 acknowledge, and that’s important. And so, I think that’s an event or a pattern that took place right here 2 in Fort Collins that we would want to remember. I’m also really intrigued by what Mary said about they 3 were some of the first folks going north. It really seems to me, and perhaps we need to do more research 4 on this, they could be the very reason why north of the Poudre became such a strong Hispanic cultural 5 community. They could have been the ones leading that, in which case, as Monica said, this really, then, 6 is a cornerstone building for that change. And that’s something…one of the letters of…it was actually 7 against supporting this eligibility, said why don’t you just move the building? And yet the location of this 8 building is a key part of the story that it’s telling. And so, I would say that that pattern of development is 9 embodied in the location of where that building is, and it can be kind of verified by the number of 10 Hispanic shops, not just restaurants, but all kinds of things, that are now north of College, and that was 11 such an important part of our local history. 12 And I also really feel like this building is significant for the people that it’s associated with, and 13 that’s the entire…four generations of the Perez family. I think we want to acknowledge buildings that are 14 associated with important people in our community, and I think…Aaron…what was his name…alright, 15 there was a fellow that got up and spoke…Aaron was in his name somewhere, and he just talked about the 16 community that was there, and the importance that that had on his family, and that’s all because of the 17 Perez’s; it’s not because of the building, but that’s the place that embodied their sense of what Fort 18 Collins is, and their family’s involvement in it, and it’s all due to the Perez family and how they treated 19 people, and that’s the kind of thing we really want to acknowledge with buildings that we find eligible. 20 So, that’s all I had to say Mr. Chair. 21 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you, Meg. And I agree with that, except I think that the building 22 itself, you know…we’ve talked about how plain it is, and I think that is significant because it was difficult 23 in late 1960’s for the Hispanic population to get loans, to get…you know, if it was a fancy building, that 24 would tell a different story. But, this tells a significant story of working hard and getting the loan, and 25 yeah, it’s not an impressive building, but look what happened with it. And that tells a story, you know, 26 when someone sees that building and says, oh, that’s a plain little building, that tells a story, right. So, I 27 agree with what you said, but I also think that the building…the plainness of the building is significant in 28 itself. 29 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: I appreciate that, Kurt, and Meg, I appreciate your comments 30 as well. Again, I mentioned earlier, I’m very practical when it comes to a decision like this. And while 31 the intent of what we’re discussing is noble, honorable, and a lot of the comments that we heard this 32 evening are heart wrenching, if nothing else, but I think we, as a Commission, have to look for practical, 33 reasonable, and balanced, and frankly cost-efficient opportunities, not just for this particular situation, but 34 in the future, so that having a historic designation on your business or on your home is an aspirational, 35 inspirational thing, that you want that. I suspect, and don’t mean to speak on behalf of the Haun’s here by 36 any means, but had they known that they wouldn’t be able to sell this building if their original intent to 37 keep the restaurant open, if they didn’t know that they would be able to sell it or lease it, make 38 modifications to it, I suspect they never would have invested in trying to make this business go. And so, 39 whether it’s this particular situation, or looking at the precedent, looking at the example that it sets for, 40 again, either commercial or residential, business or homeowners, it’s far-reaching, it goes beyond just this 41 specific decision that we’re making right now. 42 CHAIR KNIERIM: But at the same time, we’re limited by the structures that…the parameters by 43 which we need to make a decision. We can’t go beyond that…we can’t…we’re not in the business of 44 writing code, we’re not the legislative branch…we have police power. 45 Page 270 Item 12. 32 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: We have what power? I have a lot of thoughts. I think, Meg, I so 1 appreciate what you said. And I will say, Eric, I’m not sure that…it’s hard to just look at the case, the 2 issue at hand, within the framework, sometimes the very narrow framework, that we’re allowed to by 3 code. 4 Some of us were at a presentation earlier this year about documenting slave houses…I think, 5 yeah, a few of us were...which is an extreme example, but it’s something that certainly at the time was not 6 seen as architecturally significant. It is not high style, but it absolutely tells a story, and it is essential to 7 our nation’s history at this point that those are preserved. There’s very little economic value in those…I 8 think the land is probably valuable, but, especially…say, like, at their fifty-year mark, they were probably 9 not seen as something that was really worth preserving. So I think it’s easy to discount the near past, and 10 I don’t want to boil all of this down to issues of just racism, right, because what I heard tonight was so 11 much more than institutional and overt racism. But, at the same time, there were significant challen ges, 12 and I would love to think that those challenges could be seen as something that we’re so far past in a few 13 generations, but it’s certainly very fresh right now. And I think that building represents it, in addition to 14 the work that your family has done to build a community. Meg, I thought you did an excellent job of 15 lauding the other aspects of the significance to this particular community. So, I think this is absolutely 16 eligible, this is what this is about, the events and trends, and the link to the building and its location. It’s a 17 landmark, and not in the technical sense, a codified way, but people are giving directions based on the 18 building; we heard that from many people. So, outside of the kind of more significant urban 19 development…that’s a fascinating link, and I would like to know more…it currently serves as a 20 wayfinding. So, we could extrapolate that into a beautiful story, but it’s…I was very touched by what I 21 heard tonight, and I think it’s fairly clear to me that…obviously the events and trends are well-22 documented, and if we’re asked to evaluate the integrity of the building and its significance, then 23 absolutely it should be eligible as a city landmark for everything that we’ve heard tonight. 24 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. Other thoughts, Commissioners? 25 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: Mr. Chair? 26 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes? 27 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: I’m really torn. I agree that it has significant significance, if I 28 can say that. But, I also am mindful of the realities, as Eric pointed out, that the decision we make is 29 going to affect a piece of an asset that someone holds that will now not be worth as much as it would have 30 been, and the difficulties in trying to then find a use for it. And, I wonder how the…how this story will 31 live in that building in the future. I don’t have a clear picture, unless there’s a fundraising effort t o buy it 32 back from the Haun’s and turn it into a non-profit museum, or something to that effect, or a community 33 center for aiding immigrants; I think that would be an excellent use. But, we are in effect taking away an 34 asset in a substantial part from the private owner, and that bothers me…the ramifications of what we say, 35 because it’s…we’re not just deciding that it’s eligible, we’re basically saying it is because the effect is 36 pretty much the same. I mean, there can be no changes, no demolition, no…and that concerns me. So, 37 I’m in real conflict here; I just wanted to throw that out there. 38 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: Do we know…really is it well documented to this Commission 39 that it’s absolutely a depreciation of assets? I mean, first of all, Brad, we’re delving into some territory 40 that feels outside of our purview, but also, I’m not sure that that was established outside of a passing 41 comment by the applicant. 42 Page 271 Item 12. 33 MR. YATABE: I really want to focus the Commission on the decision you’re making, and I 1 understand, you know…I like to entertain some conversation about different topics, but I do…at some 2 point, I do need to focus you. And I do think you need to look at section 14-22, and it’s really a question 3 of eligibility that is a question of significance and integrity. I think the other pieces that you’re talking 4 about…just some of the things that have been referenced tonight in terms of the economic impact, or 5 whether there might be a better way of memorializing this, some type of alternative…those are outside of 6 this determination. Your role is fairly simple, and I understand the consternation, but this is also a 7 small…well, I won’t say a small piece…this is also a piece in a larger process, and you’re just being 8 asked to take on the one piece. And I agree with the Chair’s statement that you are not, essentially 9 making code here, you are applying the code that Council has seen fit to adopt, and to the extent that’s 10 ever changed, then your role may change, but at this point, it’s pretty clear that significance and integrity 11 are what you’re looking at, and that’s sort of the…those are really the sandbox that you’re in now. And, 12 yes, it will have ramification one way or another, but that is…that is outside of this particular examination 13 right now. And some of those are, yes, for example, if you find it to be eligible, that will affect the 14 development review process, and also if you find it not to be eligible, it will have that same effect. And 15 also, of course, your decision could be appealed, whatever that decision may be, as well, so…again, this 16 is a piece of it, and I misspoke when saying it’s a small piece; it is an important piece of this, but it is a 17 very focused piece. 18 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you, Brad. 19 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Mr. Chair, I’d like to make a motion that might help us kind of 20 zero in on our conversation. Would that be okay? 21 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes. 22 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Okay, I move that the Historic Preservation Commission find the 23 commercial property at 1802 N. College Avenue eligible…and when I typed it up here while I was 24 tapping here…eligible is underlined and bold. I just want to emphasize, we’re talking about eligibility. 25 Alright… 1802 North College Avenue eligible, as a Fort Collins landmark, according to the standards 26 outlined in section 14-22 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, based on the following three findings of 27 fact: number one, the Pobre Pancho’s building is significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local 28 Latino community under criterion one – events, for its association with a Mexican immigrant family that 29 established a restaurant business reflecting the spread of Mexican foodways, and which also speaks to the 30 changing taste of local non-Mexican residents who came to embrace the flavors of Mexico, and also the 31 site’s association with, perhaps even leading the trend, towards Mexican-American and Hispanic 32 businesses moving north along 287 north of Fort Collins beginning during the ‘60’s and a pattern of 33 development that is still evident today. Reason number two: the Pobre Pancho’s building is also 34 significant to the history of Fort Collins and the local Latinx community under criterion two – people, for 35 its association with four generations of the Perez family including, and I hopefully will get all these 36 names right, Amelia Perez, Frank Perez, Mary Perez, daughter Amelia Perez, Monica Bird, and Karolyn 37 Bird…and if I messed any of that up, feel free to…we can correct that later…who made their mark upon 38 our local history through the Mexican restaurant business; and number three, the Pobre Pancho’s building 39 retains integrity and clearly conveys the functional and humble nature of the family-owned restaurant 40 while still displaying some lovingly added decorative embellishments showing the importance of the 41 building to the Perez family and the Fort Collins community that enjoyed dining in the Pobre Pancho’s 42 establishment. 43 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you, Meg. Is there a second? 44 Page 272 Item 12. 34 COMMISSIONER WALTER DUNN: Second. 1 CHAIR KNIERIM: Walter Dunn seconds. Discussion? Well, I certainly agree with that, and 2 it’s…in terms of eligibility, in terms of our role in this whole larger process, it certainly is eligible. I 3 agree with the motion. Seconded by Walter. 4 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: I think I sort of blurted out all of my thoughts earlier…again, I 5 apologize, but it’s so late. Thank you, Meg, for your motion…I support it as well. 6 CHAIR KNIERIM: Other discussion? 7 COMMISSIONER JIM ROSE: Mr. Chairman, I guess the thought I have, and I agree with the 8 content of Meg’s mega motion. The…what this says to me is, we have to tell a story. If we’re going to 9 be truthful about our history, we have to have artifacts. You don’t go to a museum and look at a bunch of 10 written text that just says, this is why this is important. We have to have tangible evidence. So, when you 11 do a walking tour, when you go by 306 Cherry Street now, it’s not the house where the Thomas’ lived, 12 it’s an attorney’s office, but it’s a city landmark because something happened there that we can say, that’s 13 where that happened. Well, this is the same thing. That building, and I agree with you Kurt, I think that 14 relative prosaic nature of the construction tells us even more about why its important. So, we have to 15 have that, we have to have…that’s the place. So, when you do a walking tour of Hispanic Fort Collins 16 and it’s history, that’s where you go and you point to that, and you say, the Perez family was part of Fort 17 Collins at its inception when things weren’t so easy, and you can tell that story, but you can’t tell 18 it…there’s a place in Philadelphia called Franklin Square, done by Robert Venturi, the American 19 architect, that’s supposedly where Ben Franklin’s house was, but it’s not there. It’s just a steel fram e the 20 shape of the house. And the only reason the steel frame is there is because people couldn’t go into there 21 and say, oh, I see, this is where Ben Franklin lived. They have to have something that frames it. Well, 22 this is even better than that. So, I think we have to do this because that’s the story we want to tell. 23 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: I’ve just got to say, I’ve been in that steel frame thing, and i t 25 really lacks any sense of connection to history. You feel like you’re walking through a book; you don’t 26 feel like you’re walking through a building. I think that’s a fantastic example, Jim. 27 CHAIR KNIERIM: Other discussion? Otherwise, we’ll call the question. 28 MR. YATABE: I will remind Commission members…and this goes not only for this motion, but 29 for all motions. If you are voting against a motion, I ask that you state a reason why you are voting 30 against the motion. 31 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. 32 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Can you clarify that request, Brad? Is that a part of the regular 33 rules of order? 34 MR. YATABE: That is. I believe it’s stated in the Boards and Commissions manual. 35 CHAIR KNIERIM: Hearing no more discussion, let’s call for a vote. Roll call please? 36 Page 273 Item 12. 35 MS. MATSUNAKA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jim Rose? 1 COMMISSIONER ROSE: Yes. 2 MS. MATSUNAKA: Eric Guenther? 3 COMMISSIONER GUENTHER: Yes. 4 MS. MATSUNAKA: Meg Dunn? 5 COMMISSIONER M. DUNN: Yes. 6 MS. MATSUNAKA: Margo Carlock? 7 COMMISSIONER CARLOCK: Yes. 8 MS. MATSUNAKA: Walter Dunn? 9 COMMISSIONER W. DUNN: Yes. 10 MS. MATSUNAKA: Anne Nelsen? 11 COMMISSIONER NELSEN: Yes. 12 MS. MATSUNAKA: Kurt Knierim? 13 CHAIR KNIERIM: Yes. 14 MS. MATSUNAKA: Mr. Chair, that’s seven yes, zero no. 15 CHAIR KNIERIM: Thank you. With that, that concludes number six on our discussion agenda. 16 Page 274 Item 12. Appeal: 1802 North College Avenue City Landmark Eligibility for Development Review September 20, 2022 Paul Sizemore, Director, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Services Manager Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Page 275 Item 12. 2Vicinity Map Page 276 Item 12. 3Aerial Photo Page 277 Item 12. 4Timeline •Conceptual Review for Raising Cane's,March 3, 2022 -Historic survey initiated to comply with City Land Use Code •Staff Determination: Eligible under Standard 1, Events/Trends on April 22, 2022 •Owner Appeal to HPC received on May 2, 2022 •HPC Determination, July 20, 2022: Eligible under Standards 1, Events/Trends & 2, Persons/Groups; passed 7-0 (2 vacancies) •Owner Appeal to Council: August 3, 2022 Page 278 Item 12. 5Role of Council 1.Determine if allegations made by the appellant have merit 2.Based on determination: •Uphold HPC determination of eligibility; •Overturn HPC determination of eligibility; or •Modify HPC determination of eligibility Page 279 Item 12. 6Code Process -3.4.7 -(B) Requires identification of historic resources on/near development site -(C) Determination of Eligibility -(D) Treatment of Historic Resources Land Use Code (Development)Municipal Code -Eligibility Chapter 14, Article II -14-22 –Standards for eligibility -14-23(b) –Process for appealing a staff decision If found Eligible Page 280 Item 12. 7Background: Historic Survey Process •Why is survey of older properties ongoing? •Changes to buildings can alter eligibility •New community-driven knowledge •New professionally produced information/evaluation frameworks •5-year expiration •How is historic survey data generated? •Proactive: 1) City-sponsored projects + 2) voluntary landmark nominations + 3) due diligence requests from owners, buyers, community •Reactive: 1) Pre-submittal requirement for development review (applicant pays fee if no current data on file) + 2) involuntary landmark nominations Page 281 Item 12. Background: Existing Historic Survey Data GIS Map Link: https://gisweb.fcgov.com/Html5Viewer/I ndex.html?viewer=historic Total 789 of Properties Surveyed since August 2017 •Eligible for FC Landmark: 133 •33 intensive •100 non-intensive •Not Eligible: 550 •51 Intensive •499 non-intensive •51 were records improvements for already designated resources OR have since been designated •55 are undetermined (more data needed) •0 Intensive 8 Page 282 Item 12. 1802 North College Avenue: Significance 1 –Events/Trends 2-Persons/Groups •Long-standing business on North College Ave (1969-2022) •Hispanic-owned restaurant established during period of overt & institutional discrimination •Significant institution in Hispanic community on N. College Ave Page 283 Item 12. 1802 North College Avenue: History •Constructed 1961 •Two sporting goods stores •1969-2022 –Pobre Pancho’s •Frank & Mary (Medellin) Perez & family •Frank was a U.S. Navy vet & naturalized citizen •1967 -started Pancho’s with his mother Amelia at 214 Walnut •Moved to 1802 N College w/ Mary and renamed Pobre Pancho’s Top: 1802 N. College, 1976 Bottom: Frank & Mary Perez, no date, Coloradoan. Page 284 Item 12. 11HPC Decision Summary •HPC Determination: Eligible under Standards 1, Events/Trends & 2, Persons/Groups •passed 7-0 (2 vacancies) •Public comments at hearing: •1 in favor of Not Eligible determination •6 in favor of Eligible determination •Key findings: 1.Significant under Standard 1 (Events/Trends) for association with a Mexican immigrant family that established a restaurant business reflecting the spread of Mexican foodways and expansion of Hispanic commercial businesses along the North College Avenue corridor. 2.Significant under Standard 2 (Persons/Groups) for association with four generations of the Perez family with importance to local history through the Mexican restaurant business; 3.Retains integrity, clearly conveying the functional and humble nature of the family-owned restaurant. Page 285 Item 12. 12Potential Outcomes Redevelopment •Decision-maker: Planning & Zoning Commission •Adaptive Reuse (same or other permitted use; required if landmark-eligible or for FC Landmarks) •Demolition •If not landmark eligible; •If eligible, based on acceptable modification of standards proposal Recognition of Historic Resources •Building preservation •May include landmark designation initiated by 3+ city residents, HPC by resolution, or a member of City Council in writing •Signage or other interpretative storytelling tools •Additional documentation of building and its history Page 286 Item 12. 13Allegations •Failure to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Municipal Code, Land Use Code, and Charter because: •The evidence does not show a specific connection between the property and historical trends and events related to systemic racism and its impact on Hispanic businesses, the migrations of Hispanic people, and settlement north of the Poudre River due to gentrification elsewhere. •The Perez family's story is not historically significant to the economic or cultural history of the nation, state or city. •The structure lacks integrity because it was not built by the Perez family and does not reflect Mexican influence. •Considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading because: •Testimony about the closing of the restaurant was irrelevant to Landmark eligibility •Testimony about the founder's work ethic does not establish historic significance Page 287 Item 12. 14Role of Council 1.Determine if allegations made by the appellant have merit 2.Based on determination: •Uphold HPC determination of eligibility; •Overturn HPC determination of eligibility; or •Modify HPC determination of eligibility Page 288 Item 12. Appeal: 1802 North College Avenue City Landmark Eligibility for Development Review September 20, 2022 Paul Sizemore, Director, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Services Manager Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Page 289 Item 12.