HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/04/2000 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 37, 2000, AMENDING AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 28
DATE: April 4, 2000
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
Bob Blanchard
SUBJECT:
First Reading of Ordinance No. 37,2000,Amending Article 2.8.2(h)(2)of the Land Use Code With
Regard to Modifications of Standards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance as drafted on First Reading, except for the changes
which would require the Planning and Zoning Board to make specific findings in support of its
decision not to grant a modification.With regard to that proposed change staff supports the Planning
and Zoning Board's recommendation that findings be made only when a modification is granted,and
not when it is denied.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This Ordinance would make two changes. The first change would clarify that,when a modification
of standards is requested under the Land Use Code,and the justification is based upon a substantial
benefit that the development will provide to the City, the mere fact that the project will constitute
an affordable housing project within the meaning of the Code should not necessarily justify the
granting of the modification of standard. The second change would state that,when a modification
of standards is requested under the Land Use Code,findings should always be made in support of
the decision on the application. At present, findings are required only when the modification of
standards is approved.
BACKGROUND:
During recent appeals to the City Council, certain issues have arisen with regard to the Land Use
Code provisions relating to the modification of standards. In one appeal,the applicant for approval
of an affordable housing project sought a modification of a certain standard under the Land Use
Code on the basis that the affordable housing project would provide a substantial benefit to the City.
One of the justifications that can be offered in support of a request for a modification of standards
under Article 2.8.2(H)(2) of the Land Use Code is that the proposed project will result in a
substantial benefit to the City,that is, the proposed project will substantially address an important
community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the City's comprehensive plan,
or in an adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of the City Council. When the benefit to be
provided to the City is the provision of affordable housing, the Code is somewhat unclear as to
whether that "substantial benefit" requirement will be satisfied merely by reason of the fact that the
proposed project will meet the definition of an affordable housing project under the Code. (In order
to be recognized as an affordable housing project for certain other benefits under the Code, at least
ten percent (10%) of the dwelling units in a project must qualify.)
DATE: April 4,2000 2 ITEM NUMBER: 28
Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code defines an affordable housing project as follows:
Affordable housing project shall mean a development project in
which: (1) at least seventy-five (75)percent of the gross acreage to
be developed under the plan is to be developed as residential dwelling
units or mobile home park spaces;(2)at least ten(10)percent of said
dwelling units or spaces (the "affordable housing units") are to be
available for rent or purchase on the terms described in the definitions
of affordable housing unitfor rent or affordable housing unit for sale
(as applicable);(3)the construction of the dwelling units or spaces is
to occur as part of the initial phase of the project and (I) prior to the
construction of the market rate units or (ii) on a proportional basis,
according to the same ratio as the number of affordable units bears to
the number of the market rate units;and(4)the units will be required
by binding legal instrument acceptable to the city and duly recorded
with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder,to be occupied by and
affordable to low-income households for at least twenty (20)years.
For the purposes of considering a request for modification of standards, staff believes that the mere
fact that a proposed project will constitute an affordable housing project does not necessarily justify
the granting of a modification of standards. Instead, a greater percentage of affordable housing
might be necessary in order to provide a substantial benefit to the City that would justify such
modification. The proposed ordinance would clarify the distinction between an affordable housing
project for other purposes under the Code and one which would provide a substantial benefit
sufficient to justify the granting of a modification of standards.
In another appeal,the Planning and Zoning Board denied a requested modification of standards for
a storage facility and was not required to make any findings in support of that decision because such
findings are required only when a modification of standards request is approved by the Board. The
proposed amendment would require such findings whether an application for modification of
standards is approved or denied.
Finally, the Council Growth Management Committee has requested the deletion of the present
language of the Code which gives "examples" of urban blight and traffic congestion as city-wide
concerns and of historic preservation and affordable housing as important community needs.
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the proposed Land Use Code amendments relating to
modifications of standards on Thursday, March 2, 2000. The Board discussed and voted on each
proposed amendment individually.
Regarding the proposed changes contained in Section 2.8.2(H)(2),the Board,by a unanimous vote
of 7-0,recommended that Council delete the last underlined sentence relating to affordable housing.
Boardmembers felt that the first part of the paragraph refers to items which address a community
need specifically described in City Plan or in adopted Council policy and ordinances,of which there
may be many,yet the last sentence singles out affordable housing without mentioning others. It was
DATE: April 4, 2000 3 ITEM NUMBER: 28
the Board's belief that this may cast a shadow over affordable housing that may result in developers
• being less inclined to provide for this need.
Regarding the proposed changes contained in Section 2.8.2 (H),the last paragraph requires that the
Board make specific findings regarding a modification whether they approve or deny a modification
request. Again, by a unanimous vote of 7-0,the Board recommended that Council not approve the
proposed amendment. It was a consensus opinion that a burden of proof exists if they elect to grant
a modification to an adopted standard. However,the Board does not believe it should be required
to justify why an applicant should comply with adopted law.
I
i
ORDINANCE NO. 37, 2000
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING SECTION 2.8.2(H)(2) OF THE LAND USE CODE
WITH REGARD TO MODIFICATIONS OF STANDARDS
WHEREAS, Section 2.8.2 of the Land Use Code permits the standards in the Code to be
modified under certain circumstances; and
WHEREAS,one of those circumstances is when a proposed alternative plan would result in
a substantial benefit to the City; and
WHEREAS, when such substantial benefit is to consist of the provision of affordable
housing, the present language of the Land Use Code is somewhat unclear as to whether any
"affordable housing project"as that term is defined in Article 5 of the Land Use Code should suffice
to establish that substantial benefit; and
WHEREAS,the City Council believes that a project should not necessarily be permitted to
obtain a modification of standards merely because it is an affordable housing project within the
meaning of Article 5 of the Land Use Code, and that the language of the Land Use Code should be
clarified in this regard; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use Code also presently requires the Planning and Zoning Board,
when approving a proposed modification,to make certain supplemental findings showing how the
plan, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria to justify a modification; and
WHEREAS,the Council has determined that the Planning and Zoning Board should also be
required to make supplemental findings showing how the plan, as submitted, fails to meet the
requirements and criteria to justify a modification in the event that the Board determines that the
modification should not be granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that Section 2.8.2(H)(2) of the Land Use Code shall be amended to read as follows:
2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures
(H) Step 8(Standards): Applicable,and the Planning and Zoning Board
shallmay grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the
granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to the
public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use
Code; and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a
plan which complies with the standard for which a
modification is requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of
any standard when suchapplirahon would reritler fhe�4 61e
�iracticall�smfeasible and t}leadocatt`a,�` atld"sbati
alleviate'8n existinng3Aa'-d�n soi�ib 1
wide coneem nrvould result in a substantial benefit to the
city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would
substantially address an important community need
specifically and expressly defined and described in the city's
Comprehensive Plan, orju'aRadopted policy, ordinance or
resolutionbfthe At—y
Prnetietd}y i easrb}e e fact ttrut a ro# evelb i 4t
plan would constitutean:'affordable hdusmg prijec titti
the meaning of Arrticle '�bf this Codew'hall ndf--69§ L
coristitutdtubstantialtiedefittothecttytbwatrant
theinodification of.a standard; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extra-
ordinary and exceptional situations,unique to such property,
including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as
exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or
physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install
a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard
sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional
practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon
the owner of such property,provided that such difficulties or
hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the
applicant.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2) or(3) above shall be
supported by stxpplexent4specrfic findings showing how the plan,as
submitted,either":meets ocW,,, dmeet the requirements and criteria
of said subparagraph(1), (2) or(3).
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 4th day of
April, A.D. 2000, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of April, A.D. 2000.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 18th day of April, A.D. 2000.
Mayor
ATTEST:
i
City Clerk
•