Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 11/24/2020 - WORK SESSIONCity of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC) Kristin Stephens, District 4, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Susan Gutowsky, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Julie Pignataro, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Ken Summers, District 3 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Emily Gorgol, District 6 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. City Council Work Session November 24, 2020 4:30 PM (At 6:00 p.m. City Council will suspend the Work Session and move into an Adjourned Meeting; the Work Session will resume no earlier than 7:15 p.m.) •CALL TO ORDER. 1.UProcess for Council Vacancy Appointment and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem.U (staff: Delynn Coldiron; 10 minute presentation; 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to discuss the process Council would like to use to fill the District 4 vacancy created by Mayor Pro Tem Stephens’ election as a Larimer County Commissioner and for selecting a new Mayor Pro Tem. The proposed timeline and deadline impacts will also be discussed. (Council will likely take a recess here, hold the Adjourned Meeting which begins at 6:00 p.m., and then reconvene the Work Session after the Adjourned Meeting no earlier than 7:15.) 2.UOur Climate Future Planning Update U (staff: Jensen Morgan, Molly Saylor, Michelle Finchum, John Phelan; 15 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this work session is to provide an update to City Council on Our Climate Future planning process and seek feedback on next steps towards Council consideration in early 2021. Our Climate Future (OCF) is the project coordinating updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plan. Fort Collins has been a national leader for environmental action with the adoption of ambitious climate, energy, and waste goals for over 20 years. Significant gains have been made in each of these areas with primary climate and energy goals on track to achieve 2020 interim milestones. At the same time, efforts will need to quickly scale up to reach the 2030 goals. City of Fort Collins Page 2 Our Climate Future has proceeded with an intentionally different approach to updating planning documents. The integration of updating three plans in one process acknowledges the interconnections between waste, energy, and climate and identifies opportunities for connected solutions. Centering the planning process and strategies in community-defined priorities will result in increased buy-in to meet goals while simultaneously positively impacting other Fort Collins priorities. Staff have consolidated the major strategy ideas gathered from community, consultant and staff input into fifteen Big Moves that describe in plain and accessible language the outcomes which will lead to the achievement of Fort Collins climate, energy and waste goals while simultaneously positively impacting other community priorities. 3. UResidential Metro District Evaluation System.U (staff: Cameron Gloss, Paul Sizemore; 15 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to review and consider an evaluation system for Residential Metropolitan (Metro) District Service Plans. Staff proposes a system that provides both minimum requirements and a performance points system, including a menu of options, applied to Energy and Water Efficiency, Housing Attainability and Community Livability attributes. The proposed system is intended to provide metrics that further define ‘extraordinary public benefits’ as found in the adopted Metro District policy. • ANNOUNCEMENTS. • ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: November 24, 2020 Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk Carrie Daggett, Legal WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to discuss the process Council would like to use to fill the District 4 vacancy created by Mayor Pro Tem Stephens’ election as a Larimer County Commissioner and for selecting a new Mayor Pro Tem. The proposed timeline and deadline impacts will also be discussed. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the process for filling the District 4 vacancy? 2. Do Councilmembers have any concerns with the proposed timeline? 3. What feedback do Councilmembers have about the process for selecting a new Mayor Pro Tem and when? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council has filled five vacancies since 1992. The process used has differed over time as noted in the more detailed background information shown below. In contrast to most other Council appointment processes, there are some important Charter requirements that govern the process for filling this vacancy, particularly since it falls so close to an upcoming election. This has the potential to impact both timelines and process. The Charter requires that a Councilmember vacancy be filled within 45 days of the occurrence of the vacancy. In this case, the date will be calculated based on either (1) the effective date of a resignation the City Clerk’s office receives from Mayor Pro Tem Stephens or (2) the date she assumes her new office (January 12, 2021), whichever occurs first. There is an exception within the Charter that states that if the time for filling the vacancy by appointment falls within the 45 days prior to the regular election (on or after February 20, 2021), and the unexpired term of the Councilmember being replaced is more than 2 years, then the vacancy must be filled by the newly constituted Council following their election. If a resignation is received by Mayor Pro Tem Stephens that has an effective date on or before January 5, 2021, the existing Council will make the appointment. If a resignation is received with an effective date after January 5, 2021 or if no resignation is received and the vacancy is created by Mayor Pro Tem Stephens assuming her new role as a Larimer County Commissioner, then the newly constituted Council will appoint a replacement after the April election. Timeline: If a resignation letter is received that has an effective date on or prior to January 5, 2021, the following timeline could be used: • As soon as possible - begin advertising. • December 28, 2020 - deadline for candidate applications to be received by the City Clerk’s Office. 1 Packet Pg. 3 November 24, 2020 Page 2 • December 30, 2020 - applicant information provided to Council in mail packets and posted on the City webpage. • January 5, 2021 - candidate interviews done as part of a Work Session following the regular meeting; OR • January 12, 2021 - candidate interviews held as part of the Work Session. • January 19, 2021 - Council consideration of a Resolution recommending an appointee. • January 26, 2021 - formal swearing in of new Councilmember at an adjourned meeting. This would provide all persons interested in running for the District 4 seat in the April 6. 2021 election, including the person appointed, time to file a nomination petition by the February 16, 2021 deadline. There are multiple processes Council can follow to identify the desired applicant to fill a vacancy. The following options have been prepared for your consideration based on previous processes: Options for Interviewing: • Setting o Informal work session setting, o Formal Council Chambers setting, or o Remote Zoom meeting. • Questions o One question from each Councilmember; plus follow up questions based on the information provided, or o Another option defined by Council. • Sequestering o All applicants participate; no sequestering, or o Applicants are sequestered and Council interviews one at a time. • Timing o On a different day than the resolution making the appointment is considered, or o On the same day that the resolution making the appointment is considered. Options for Selection: • Public Comment o At the beginning of the item, or o After each specific motion identifying a potential appointee, or o Both at the beginning of the item and after each specific motion identifying a potential appointee, or o Another option defined by Council. • Finalists o 5 or fewer candidates based on a Councilmember vote, or o Another option defined by Council. • Voting to narrow the field of applicants o By raising hands, or o By written ballot (collected and read by the City Clerk). o Note: A roll call vote would be required in a remote meeting. • Tiebreakers to narrow the field of applicants o Councilmember discussion followed by agreed-upon method of voting, or o Another option defined by Council. 1 Packet Pg. 4 November 24, 2020 Page 3 Once the field of applicants has been narrowed, the process will move to Councilmember discussion and motions. The oath of office for the chosen candidate could be administered the same evening as the selection or could be administered at the following Tuesday’s meeting; either at a regular or adjourned meeting. Additional Background: The following is more detail from the earlier processes used since 1992 to fill various vacancies: 1. The most recent process was used to fill the District 1 vacancy that opened in 2019 due to the election of Councilmember Bob Overbeck to the Larimer County Assessor position. The process used at that time included: a. Advertising - open for 15 days (December 12 - December 26) i. 9 applications were received. b. Interviews - 9 applicants on January 2 at a work session following the regular meeting. i. 8 applicants attended; 1 applicant withdrew. c. Council consideration of Resolution (2019-014) at a regular meeting held on January 15, 2019. d. Oath of office administered at an adjourned meeting held on January 22, 2019. The process followed for interviews included: a. All applicants interviewed one at a time. b. 20 minutes per interview. i. Opening question (Mayor) - 1-2 minutes. ii. Council questions - 16-18 minutes. 1. One question per Councilmember (more if time allows). 2. Should be a follow-up or a clarification of information provided in the application. c. Closing statement (Applicant) - 1-2 minutes. Candidates were not sequestered and were interviewed based on a random selection done by staff in the City Clerk’s Office prior to the meeting. The process followed for selection included: a. Public comment. b. Motions nominating various candidates. c. Votes (roll calls). d. Motion to adopt Resolution adding nominated individual’s name. e. Vote (roll call). The appointment was valid from January 15, 2019 through the time successors took office after the April 2, 2019 election. Councilmember Gutowsky was elected to fill the remainder of the unexpired term. Minutes from the January 15 meeting are attached (Attachment 1). Resolution 2018-129 establishing the section and appointment process is also attached (Attachment 2). 2. A District 6 vacancy opened in 2002 due to the resignation of Councilmember Chuck Wanner. The process used at that time included: a. Advertising - open for 23 days (May 9 - May 31) i. 10 applications were received. b. Interviews - 10 applicants at an adjourned meeting held on June 11, 2002. c. Council consideration of a Resolution (2002-063) at the June 11 meeting to make the appointment. The process followed at the meeting included: 1 Packet Pg. 5 November 24, 2020 Page 4 a. Two-minute introductory statements by applicants. b. Public comment. c. Written ballot to select five candidates; results announced. d. Second written ballot done as a tie breaker for applicants who had received 3 votes; results announced. e. Third written ballot done as a tie breaker for applicants who had received 3 votes; results announced. f. Six applicants identified to move on to interviews. g. Interviews conducted i. Applicants were sequestered when not being interviewed. ii. Applicants were asked to provide responses to six questions (1 question submitted by each Councilmember); responses limited to 1 minute per question. h. Motions to appoint various candidates; all failed. i. Written ballot done to reduce the field to 2 candidates; results announced. j. Councilmember discussion on the strengths of the remaining applicants. k. 2-minute statements made by remaining applicants. l. Motion to reduce the candidates to two; David Edwards and David Roy. m. Motion to appoint David Roy; Resolution adopted. The appointment was valid from June 11, 2002 through the time successors took office after the April 3, 2003 election. Councilmember Roy was elected to fill a new four-year term. Minutes from the June 11, 2002 meeting are attached (Attachment 3). 3. A District 6 vacancy opened in 1994 due to the resignation of Councilmember Gerry Horak. The process used at that time included: a. Advertising - open for 30 days (October 18-November 16) i. 10 applications were received; one applicant withdrew. b. Interviews - 9 applicants on November 28 (Monday). c. Council consideration of a Resolution (94-194) at an adjourned meeting held on November 29 (5th Tuesday) to make the appointment. The process followed at the meeting included: a. Two-minute statements from applicants on why they wanted to serve on City Council. b. Public comment. c. Straw Poll (vote by show of hands). d. Discussion on the four remaining candidates who received votes. e. Motion to appoint Charles Wanner; Resolution adopted. The appointment was valid from November 29, 1994 through the time successors took office after the April 4, 1995 election. Councilmember Wanner was elected to fill a new four-year term. Minutes from the November 29 meeting are attached (Attachment 4). 4. A District 2 vacancy opened in 1994 due to the resignation of Councilmember Bob Winokur. The process used at that time included: a. Advertising - open for 20 days (January 12 - January 31). i. 5 applications received. b. Interviews - 5 applicants on February 8. c. Council consideration of a Resolution (1994-034) at an adjourned meeting held on February 17 to make the appointment. The process followed at the meeting included: a. Councilmember discussion on the strengths of the various candidates. b. Public comment. 1 Packet Pg. 6 November 24, 2020 Page 5 c. Straw Poll (vote by show of hands). d. Motions to adopt the Resolution inserting an individual’s name and then voting. Public comment was accepted. Multiple motions were made; Councilmember Will Smith was appointed. The appointment was valid from February 17, 1994 through the time successors took office after the April 4, 1995 election. Councilmember Smith was elected to fill a new four-year term. Minutes from the February 17 meeting are attached (Attachment 5). 5. A District 4 vacancy opened in 1992 due to the death of Councilmember Cathy Fromme. The process used at that time included: a. Advertising - open for 15 days (November 29 - December 14). i. 14 applications received. b. Interviews - 14 applicants on two separate days (December 16 and 18). i. 1 applicant withdrew from the process. c. Council consideration of Resolution (1992-193) at an adjourned meeting held on December 29 (5th Tuesday) to make the appointment. The process followed at the meeting included: a. Public comment. b. Motions nominating various candidates. c. Straw Poll (vote - process unknown). d. Motion to adopt Resolution inserting the nominated individual’s name and then voting. e. Councilmember Chris Kneeland was appointed. The appointment was valid from December 29, 1992 through the time successors took office after the April 6, 1993 election. Councilmember Kneeland was elected to fill the remainder of the unexpired term. Minutes from the December 29 meeting are attached (Attachment 6). Application Materials: Attached are application materials (Attachments 7 and 8) staff proposes using for this process. Council comments/suggestions are welcome. Mayor Pro Tem Selection: The City Charter requires the Council to elect a Mayor Pro Tem from among the members of the Council to act as Mayor during the absence or disability of the Mayor. Since Mayor Pro Tem Stephens will be leaving Council to assume her new role as a Larimer County Commissioner, the Council will need to elect a new Mayor Pro Tem. It is advisable that at the first regular or special meeting after the District 4 vacancy exists, Council elect its new Mayor Pro Tem. In the past, this has been done by Councilmembers indicating their interest in the position, followed by nominating motion(s) and vote(s). The individual selected as the next Mayor Pro Tem will act in this capacity until the new Mayor Pro Tem is elected after the April 6, 2021 election. 1 Packet Pg. 7 November 24, 2020 Page 6 ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (PDF) 2. Resoution 2018-129 (PDF) 3. Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (PDF) 4. Minutes November 29, 1994 Council Meeting (PDF) 5. Minutes February 17, 1994 Council Meeting (PDF) 6. Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (PDF) 7. Vacancy Application (PDF) 8. Council District 4 Map (PDF) 9. Power Point Presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 8 ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Minutes January 15, 2019 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Resoution 2018-129 (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Resoution 2018-129 (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Resoution 2018-129 (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Minutes June 11, 2002 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Minutes November 29, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Minutes November 29, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Minutes November 29, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 5 1.5 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Minutes February 17, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 5 1.5 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Minutes February 17, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 5 1.5 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Minutes February 17, 1994 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Minutes December 29, 1992 Council Meeting (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) APPLICATION FOR COUNCILMEMBER – DISTRICT 4 APPLICATION DEADLINE: 5:00 p.m. on December 28, 2020 (late applications will not be accepted/considered) PLEASE TYPE OR USE BLACK INK. ATTACHMENTS TO APPLICATION MUST BE LIMITED TO TWO PAGES. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR APPOINTMENT. Return completed application: In person: City Clerk’s Office 300 LaPorte Avenue Mail: City Clerk’s Office PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Email: cityclerk@fcgov.com Eligibility Requirements: United States citizen Registered voter in the city for one year immediately prior to appointment At least 21 years of age A resident of Council District 4 Never convicted of a felony If you have questions or need more information, contact the City Clerk’s Office at 970.221.6515 NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ RESIDENCE ADDRESS: __________________________________________________________ ZIP: _________________ HOME PHONE: _____________________ WORK PHONE: _____________________ MOBILE: ____________________ EMAIL: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ ARE YOU 21 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER? Yes No HAVE YOU BEEN A REGISTERED VOTER IN FORT COLLINS FOR AT LEAST A YEAR? Yes No DO YOU RESIDE IN DISTRICT 1? Yes No HAVE YOU EVER BEEN CONVICTED OF A FELONY? Yes No CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER: RECENT AND/OR RELEVANT WORK EXPERIENCE (PLEASE INCLUDE DATES): COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES/VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE (PLEASE INCLUDE DATES): ATTACHMENT 7 1.7 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Vacancy Application (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE VISION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS? BRIEFLY EXPLAIN WHAT YOU BELIEVE ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING THE FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY AT THIS TIME, AND HOW YOU BELIEVE THE CITY COUNCIL CAN PLAY A ROLE IN ADDRESSING EACH. 1. 2. 3. ATTACHMENT 7 1.7 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Vacancy Application (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS APPLICABLE TO CITY COUNCIL: WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON CITY COUNCIL? PLEASE SPECIFY ANY ACTIVITIES THAT MIGHT CREATE A SERIOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST IF YOU SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL: OTHER COMMENTS: By signing and submitting my application to the City of Fort Collins, I swear or affirm under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Colorado: • that I meet the eligibility requirements of the position sought and • that the information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature: Date ATTACHMENT 7 1.7 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Vacancy Application (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Hor s e t oot hRes er voi r S p r in g Cr eekParkPond H armonyReservoir R o b e rt Benson La ke Ro l la ndMoorePond C o t t o n w o odGlenPond P o rtn er ReservoirWa r ren L a keDi x o n ReservoirTro u tm anParkPond SCollegeAveS Taft Hill RdW Dra ke Rd W Horsetooth RdE Trilb y RdS Overland TrlE Drake Rd S Shields StWCountyRoad38ELandingsDrBoardwalk D r W Harmony Rd E Ho rse to oth Rd SMasonStW Trilby R d W Boa rdwa lk Dr W Troutman Pkwy E Ha rmonyR d E Tr o u t m a n P k w y JohnFKennedyPkwyS US Highway 287S County Road 19WXYZô I³ 21453353 25 21453353 27 21453353 10 2145 3353 20 2145 3353 40 21452352 46 2145 2352 48 21549354 07 21453353 29 2145 3353 13 21549354 41 2145 3353 14 2145 2352 14 21453353 17 2145 3353 16 2145 3353 19 2145 3353 23 21553357 03 21453353 18 21551355 01 2145 3353 22 2145 2352 33 21452352 15 2145 3353 30 21453353 15 21452352 21 2145 3353 31 2145 3353 28 21453353 21 21551355 02 2154 9354 37 21452352 22 21452352 32 2145 3353 26 2155 3357 02 2145 3353 11 2145 3353 24 2145 3353 32 75 18 60 65 63 78 74 68 7670 64 72 3766 85 82 73 57 49 88 80 22 86 81 54 27 61 62 69 87 43 20 28 36 847967 77 26 30 8339 Cityof Fort Co llin sDistrict 4 Printed: Octo ber 0 1, 2020 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1Miles1:32,000Scale ©Effective: April 23, 2 019 CITY OF FORT COLLINSGEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only,and were not designed or intended for general use by mem bers of the public. The City m akes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS M AKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSEDORIMPLIED, W ITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these m ap products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all dam age, loss, or liability arising from any use of this m ap product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all dam age, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or m ay arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.Co un cil Dis tri cts M ay or - Wa de Tr ox ell Distr ict 1 - S usan Gutowsky Distr ict 2 - Julie Pignataro Distr ict 3 - K en Summers Distr ict 4 - K ristin S tephens Distr ict 5 - R oss C unniff Distr ict 6 - EmilyGorgolCountyP recinct WaterFeatures Growth Management A rea Railroad Lines77City Pr ecinct Number s2145235205LarimerCountyPrecinctNumbersCountyPrecinctNum ATTACHMENT 8 1.8 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Council District 4 Map (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) November 24, 2020Council VacancyDelynn Coldiron, City Clerk; Rita Knoll, Chief Deputy City ClerkCarrie Daggett, City AttorneyATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 50Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) General Direction/Questions1. What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the process for filling the District 4 vacancy?2. Do Councilmembers have any concerns with the proposed timeline?3. What feedback do Councilmembers have about the process for selecting a new Mayor Pro Tem?2ATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 51Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Charter Requirements3• 45 days to fill vacancy • Starts on the effective date of resignation or • Date Mayor Pro Tem Stephens assumes her new office.• January 5, 2021 – last day to receive resignation for this Council to make an appointment.• After January 5, 2021 the appointment will be made by the newly seated Council after April elections.ATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 52Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Possible Timeline4As soon as possible – begin advertising.December 28– Application deadline.December 30– Information to Council. January 5 – Interviews and Selection.January 19 – Resolution. January 26 – Swearing In.Resignation Received January 5 or priorATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 53Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Interviewing and SelectionOptions for InterviewingOptions for Selection•Setting•Questions•Sequestering•Timing•Public comment•Finalists•Voting to narrow the field•Tiebreakers to narrow the field5ATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 54Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Selection of Mayor Pro Tem6• City Charter requires the Council to elect a Mayor Pro Tem• Acts as Mayor during absence or disability of Mayor• Choose from among members of Council• Advisable to do this at first regular or special meeting after the vacancy occurs.• Past process:• Indication of interest • Nominating motions and votes ATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 55Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) General Direction/Questions1. What process would Council like to use for filling the District 4 vacancy?2. Does Council agree with the proposed timeline?3. What process would Council like to use for selecting a new Mayor Pro Tem?7ATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 56Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) Alternative Timeline8As soon as possible – begin advertising.January 11 – Application deadlineJanuary 14 – Information to Council January 19 – Interviews January 28 – Interviews (alternate date). February 2 – Resolution.Resignation Received January 5 or priorATTACHMENT 91.9Packet Pg. 57Attachment: Power Point Presentation (9684 : Council Vacancy Process and Selection of Mayor Pro Tem) DATE: STAFF: November 24, 2020 John Phelan, Energy Services Manager Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer Molly Saylor, Senior Sustainability Specialist Jensen Morgan, Senior Sustainability Specialist WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Our Climate Future Planning Update. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this work session is to provide an update to City Council on Our Climate Future planning process and seek feedback on next steps towards Council consideration in early 2021. Our Climate Future (OCF) is the project coordinating updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plan. Fort Collins has been a national leader for environmental action with the adoption of ambitious climate, energy, and waste goals for over 20 years. Significant gains have been made in each of these areas with primary climate and energy goals on track to achieve 2020 interim milestones. At the same time, efforts will need to quickly scale up to reach the 2030 goals. Our Climate Future has proceeded with an intentionally different approach to updating planning documents. The integration of updating three plans in one process acknowledges the interconnections between waste, energy, and climate and identifies opportunities for connected solutions. Centering the planning process and strategies in community-defined priorities will result in increased buy-in to meet goals while simultaneously positively impacting other Fort Collins priorities. Staff have consolidated the major strategy ideas gathered from community, consultant and staff input into fifteen Big Moves that describe in plain and accessible language the outcomes which will lead to the achievement of Fort Collins climate, energy and waste goals while simultaneously positively impacting other community priorities. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Does Council have any feedback on Big Moves, the process ahead to Council Action, and the integration of the three plans? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Our Climate Future (OCF) is the project coordinating updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plan. Past Council Action • Funding o $120,000 from General and Enterprise Funds, appropriated for 2019 and 2020. Scaled to $60,000 due to COVID-19-related budget adjustments. • Work Session July 23, 2019 o Council provided direction and feedback for community engagement efforts and overall planning processes for the updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plans, as funded through the 2019-2020 budget (Attachment 1). 2 Packet Pg. 58 November 24, 2020 Page 2 Background Fort Collins has been a national leader for environmental action with the adoption of ambitious climate, energy, and waste goals for over 20 years. At the time they were adopted, the climate action goals were some of the most ambitious in the nation and more cities have since followed the path that Fort Collins blazed. These goals are grounded in Fort Collins’ decades-long commitment to community environmental priorities and local action for climate, waste and energy efforts. In 2013, Council adopted community waste goals through the Road to Zero Waste of: • 75% waste diversion by 2020; and • Zero waste by 2030. In 2015, Council unanimously adopted updated community greenhouse gas goals through the Climate Action Plan Framework of: • 20% below 2005 levels by 2020; • 80% below 2005 by 2030, and • Carbon neutrality by the year 2050. In 2015, Council adopted a range of energy goals through the Energy Policy, including: • Achieving increasing annual efficiency targets up to 2.5% of community use; • 20% renewable electricity by 2020, with 2% coming from local sources; • Related reliability, demand flexibility and carbon goals, and • In 2018, Council set a goal of reaching 100% renewable electricity by 2030. Significant gains have been made (Attachments 2 and 3) in each of these areas with primary climate and energy goals on track to achieve the 2020 interim milestones. However, our zero waste goals are not on track due to recycling market shifts and other challenges. Efforts will need to quickly scale up to reach the 2030 goals. Details on existing efforts are outlined in the Our Climate Future Existing Conditions document (Attachment 4) and link (https://ourcity.fcgov.com/3636/widgets/11586/documents/12238) Our Climate Future - A Different Approach to Planning Our Climate Future has proceeded with an intentionally different approach to updating planning documents. In addition, the scope was expanded to ensure the incorporation of resilience and equity to the long-standing focus on carbon mitigation. This change in approach and scope address two primary factors which will position the Fort Collins community to succeed over the next decade: 1. The integration of updating three plans in one process acknowledges the interconnections between waste, energy and climate and identifies opportunities for connected solutions. Historically, climate, energy, and waste plans have been created and updated separately, reinforcing a siloed approach. By updating these plans in concert, the City recognizes that these three areas of work are closely linked. 2. Centering the planning process and strategies in community-defined priorities will result in increased buy-in to meet goals while simultaneously positively impacting other Fort Collins priorities because the specific actions necessary are aligned with what is important to residents in their daily lives. Our Climate Future’s approach builds upon the successes and lessons learned from City Plan and a targeted effort to reimagine community engagement, including the structure of collaborating with Plan Ambassadors and Community Partners. In general, past environmental planning efforts have focused first on technical solutions, with additional positive impacts characterized as extra or co-benefits. While technical solutions remain important, Our Climate Future and other leading cities across the country are beginning to put the community at the center of planning efforts to identify strategies that meet community goals while advancing community priorities. By first taking the time to define broad community priorities for sustainability and then selecting strategies that resonate with these priorities and daily lived experience of community members, new opportunities are created for partnership, leaders, and 2 Packet Pg. 59 November 24, 2020 Page 3 perspectives. With these new leaders and partners co-owning community strategies, Fort Collins can rapidly increase the scale of what is possible in the next ten years and beyond climate, energy, and waste results. Centering Equity, Leading with Race Residents, City Council, and staff are increasingly recognizing that current and past inequities result in varying experiences for community members in Fort Collins. OCF is the first planning process to incorporate the City’s strategic objective 1.4 to advance equity for all, leading with race so that a person’s identity or identities is not a predictor of outcomes and also aligned with the Council’s adopted priority on Equity and Inclusion. With the intent to center equity in both the planning process and outcomes, everyone in Fort Collins can benefit from achieving these community goals. OCF leads with race because in the United States it is the most pervasive form of inequity and can help address inequities that may be associated with other identities. Centering in equity means: • Supporting Council’s adopted priority of Reimagining Engagement to bring more people into the process; • Elevating historically underrepresented voices and recognizing the leadership, knowledge, and skills they bring to planning and implementation, and • Developing and prioritizing strategies using an equity lens as part of a triple bottom line approach. This planning effort acknowledges climate change is not simply a technical problem to solve, but an issue deeply rooted in human systems which have historically produced significant disparities for people of color, low-income households, and other historically underrepresented groups. These inequities are exacerbated by climate change, where these same communities are more vulnerable to climate change impacts. Local governments can prioritize actions that simultaneously address equity, reduce emissions, and enhance community resilience - leading to better outcomes for all. Fort Collins is also participating with ten other U.S. cities through the Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN) to transform the way local governments approach climate planning, engage underrepresented groups and develop more equitable strategies that work for all community members. Reimagining Community Engagement and Partnership Understanding Our Community was Phase One of OCF, putting into action this new approach. Staff developed a multi-faceted engagement approach to understanding the community’s priorities and barriers around sustainability and climate change by meeting people where they were at in daily life and recognizing that each community might have different needs to be able to participate. Engagement included training individuals and organizations to go out and engage people in their own communities, running deep dive group discussions in geographically dispersed places, and a pop-up experience in venues such as the Old Town Library and the Downtown Transit Center. The results of Understanding Our Community include a set of Community Priorities and Big Barriers which summarize residents and business definitions of sustainability and primary obstacles (Attachment 5) and video link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_s_wn3pqPyU&feature=youtu.be). Phase Two of OCF is Strategic Planning for identification of the specific outcomes, strategies, and tactics which will reach goals, support community priorities, and address barriers. This phase was forced to adapt to the realities of COVID-19 to ensure the safety of participants while building upon the results of phase one. Staff developed new tools of remote engagement with nine weeks of virtual strategy brainstorming workshops and deploying an online survey, all directed towards the identified community priorities and barriers. Using these new methods and general approach to engagement, OCF has documented many successes and lessons learned, including: • Over 1,000 participants engaged in one or more of the various engagement approaches in the two phases from a wide diversity of racial, ethnic, age, socioeconomic and other demographic backgrounds; • Establishing and/or rebuilding trust with Fort Collins BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) and Historically Underrepresented Groups (HUGs) will be a long-term process that cannot be done with any single 2 Packet Pg. 60 November 24, 2020 Page 4 engagement process. It will require sustained and authentic trust and relationship building efforts from City leadership and staff for decades to come. • COVID-19 has severely impacted Fort Collins BIPOC and HUGs such that there was a dramatic reduction in the community’s capacity to participate in OCF engagement between phase one (pre-COVID) and two (post- COVID). • Authentic and ongoing community partnership will be necessary to achieve OCF goals because the 2030 targets envision dramatic and substantive change. The model of using Plan Ambassadors and Community Partners played a pivotal role in advising staff how to design and implement phase two engagement amid significant barriers posed by COVID-19. Developing and Prioritizing Big Moves and Next Moves Staff adopted the structure and nomenclature of Big Moves for the transformational outcomes and Next Moves for the specific strategies and tactics to reach these outcomes. With the support of the project’s consultant team led by Metabolic (an international consulting firm based in Amsterdam, with support from local partners WestUrb and Brendle Group), staff have consolidated the major strategy ideas into fifteen Big Moves (Attachment 6). The Big Moves describe in plain and accessible language the outcomes which will lead to the achievement of Fort Collins climate, energy, and waste goals while simultaneously positively impacting other community priorities. Associated with each Big Move are a set of Next Moves that describe the specific strategies for implementation. The Next Moves were established through the summer 2020 virtual workshop process by community participants, and by staff and the consultant team. The team is using a structured evaluation framework that considers mitigation, resilience, equity, and feasibility in the context of environmental, social, and economic factors for each of the Next Moves. This framework builds upon the City’s experience with using triple-bottom-line analysis and is supporting the selection of Next Moves for more detailed analysis and evaluation. Staff will bring forward a set of Next Moves to achieve 2030 climate, energy, and waste goals including those which should be considered for immediate implementation in 2021 and 2022. These Next Moves will detail the strategies’ mitigation, resilience, and equity potential, as well as information on investment, savings, feasibility, and roles for implementation. As the City partners with the community to plan for and achieve 2030 goals, the process will need to be flexible to respond to changes in the community, technology, and national and state policies. With an evergreen approach and framework, staff will be able to leverage OCF to calibrate strategies every two years and establish a regular cadence for community input and accountability. Our Climate Future Big Moves and Example Next Moves Big Move Example Next Moves Better Together Community partnership and governance: Centering equity and leading with race, all parts of our community implement, govern, and benefit from Our Climate Future · Reimagine the Community Advisory Committee for the Plan to be centered in community needs, implementation, and governance · Partnerships with institutions, e.g., working with students in schools for curriculum aligned local governance studies AND opportunities. · Language justice for materials and events Resilient community, urban and natural systems: Fort Collins is prepared for the threats of climate change · Embed resilience strategies into planning policies · Prepare the most vulnerable for climate change impacts · Increase capacity and redundancies in water system Cooperative communities: Connected neighborhoods where people don't need to buy things they won’t regularly use · Education campaign on sharing, repair, and reuse · Libraries facilitate sharing economy · Make a collaborative consumption app 2 Packet Pg. 61 November 24, 2020 Page 5 Live Better Healthy affordable housing: Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford · Assess U+2 to determine if it’s the right tool for achieving stability, health, and affordability citywide · Determine whether tiny homes should be permitted in the City and under what conditions · Find ways to incentivize affordable housing and green building through regulatory or financial solutions Accessible live/work/play centers: Everyone lives near centers which provide walkable access to daily needs · Encourage neighborhood commercial uses · Increased density near existing centers · Simplified/expanded accessory dwelling units Local, affordable and healthy food: Everyone has access to healthy and affordable food, sourced or rescued from local and regional producers · Support farmers to have affordable access to unused lands · Greater awareness of food redistribution services, incentives to donate · Incentivize new marketplaces for locally grown foods Reduce driving, especially people driving alone: Everyone can safely get to where they need to go within 20 minutes without a car · Establish on-demand transit service option · Expanding public transit coverage and frequency · Improve transit infrastructure in low-income neighborhoods Efficiency for existing buildings: Everyone lives and works in healthy, energy and water efficient buildings · Energy scoring for homes · Minimum energy standards for commercial buildings · Expand home and apartment efficiency programs Breathe Better Natural spaces and ecosystems: The community supports ecosystems, watersheds and natural spaces that are healthy and accessible · Use vegetation for water management · Protect habitat corridors · Require xeriscaping over lawn Emission-free cars, freight and fleet: Fort Collins uses clean personal, shared, and commercial vehicles to complement non-car transportation · Electrify entire bus fleet · EV car shares in low-income / high pollution areas · EV promotion campaign Emissions free buildings: All new and existing buildings transition to become emissions free · Advanced energy codes for new buildings · Incentives for gas to electric heating conversions · Zoning incentives for zero emissions buildings 100% renewable electricity: Everyone in the community receives affordable and reliable 100% renewable electricity, including from local sources · Support local shared and community solar options · Additional large regional wind and solar resources · Support for home and business battery systems Resource Better Healthy local economy and jobs: The community supports a healthy, innovative local economy with new opportunities for all people and businesses to thrive · Supporting and expanding local businesses and entrepreneurs that serve the community · Public/private partnerships that increase job opportunities · Incentives for manufacturers to reduce carbon Circular economy: All parts of the community work together to keep natural resources in circulation instead of becoming waste · Circular materials purchasing strategy for government and institutions · Digital marketplace for construction and industrial waste · More recycling end markets and corresponding job opportunities Universal recycling and composting: Everyone is able to compost and recycle · Carbon reduction or salvaging requirement for demolitions · Financial incentives to support composting, recycling, and waste reduction · Home composting rebate program 2 Packet Pg. 62 November 24, 2020 Page 6 Next steps • Community review - Staff are now checking alignment of the draft Big Moves with the community through targeted virtual one-on-one discussions with historically underrepresented stakeholders and an online survey to the broader community. • Staff is working with the consultant team on detailed evaluations of a set of Next Moves selected to reach the plan targets, improve resilience and equity and address the community priorities. • There is a Superboard meeting on OCF scheduled for January 11. In addition to reviewing the next level of detailed analysis and priority Next Moves, staff will be seeking input towards community partnership models for co-implementation roles. • A work session is scheduled for February 9 to review a draft Our Climate Future plan with details of recommended Next Moves. ATTACHMENTS 1. Work Session, July 2019 (PDF) 2. 2019 Energy Policy Annual Update (PDF) 3. 2018 Climate Action Plan Update (PDF) 4. OCF Existing Conditions Summary (PDF) 5. OCF Engagement Summary (PDF) 6. Big Moves Summary (PDF) 7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 63 DATE: STAFF: July 23, 2019 Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Jackie Kozak Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer John Phelan, Energy Services Senior Manager Lindsay Ex, Environmental Sustainability Senior Manager WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Climate Action Plan Annual Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this Work Session is two-fold: x Provide an update on the implementation of the City’s Climate Action goals, including the preliminary 2018 community carbon inventory and highlights from 2018 actions and achievements in related policies and the various sectors (electricity, natural gas, transportation, and waste materials) on the journey to carbon neutrality; x Seek Council’s feedback on the proposed community engagement efforts and overall planning processes for the updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plans, as funded through the 2019-2020 budget. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have feedback on the proposed community engagement? 2. Does Council have feedback on the proposed planning process? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Overall Summary and Progress since the Goals were Adopted in 2015 Background: In 2015, Council unanimously adopted updated community greenhouse gas goals: x 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, x 80% below 2005 by 2030, and x Carbon neutrality by the year 2050. These goals are grounded in Fort Collins’ 20-year history of climate action. From the community’s first commitment in 1999, leadership has recognized that Fort Collins is uniquely positioned to lead and demonstrate how to implement pragmatic and cost-effective climate action strategies given our municipal electric utility, extensive partnerships, e.g., CSU, Platte River, etc., and innovation economy – from breweries to bikes to small business action. Since that initial commitment, Fort Collins’ has aligned these efforts with the latest global science and continued to act in a manner that aligns with the City’s seven outcome areas, commitment to leadership, and to ensure our community’s long-term resilience. 2018 Community Carbon Inventory: As noted in the July 10 memo to Council, the 2018 greenhouse gas inventory update is delayed as staff make updates to transportation data. While the changes will significantly improve the overall quality of the inventory, data is required from the State and has been slower to bring in-house than anticipated. Staff anticipates a Read Before Memo the week of the Work Session to provide these preliminary results to Council in advance of the Work Session. More than Just Carbon – 2018 Results and Highlights. Addressing climate action brings significant benefit to the community, including the following results: x Energy Policy 2018 results ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) July 23, 2019 Page 2 o See Attachment 1 for the 2018 Energy Policy Annual Update infographic. o Top highlights: ƒ Time of Day rates for all residential electric customers and Income Qualified Assistance Program for all utility services. ƒ 100% Renewable electricity by 2030 Resolution ƒ Ordinance establishing the Building Energy and Water Scoring program. ƒ Winning the Bloomberg Philanthropies Mayors Challenge and $1M award for establishing the Epic Homes initiative. o Results from the 2018 efficiency programs show energy reductions equivalent to over 4,200 homes in our community by saving 32,800 megawatt-hours (2.1% of the community’s electricity use). o Solar installations continued at a rapid pace with over 350 new solar systems completed, adding 2,400 kilowatts of capacity. o Efficiency and solar programs generated in excess of $40 million in local economic benefits through reduced utility bills, direct rebates and leveraged investment, while supporting over 200 jobs. o New wind and solar resources provided via Platte River Power Authority will provide more than 50% of electricity from non-fossil resources by 2021. x Waste Materials: o Collaborated successfully with regional partners to develop and begin implementing Larimer County master plan for new infrastructure that will help Fort Collins meet diversion goals. o Community diversion rates holding steady at 59% (overall), 28% (residential/commercial) o 58% increase in concrete recycling in 2018 (over 2017) o Recognized for most thorough tracking & reporting of industrial waste in the state x Transportation and Mobility: o Went from funding one electric bus to pilot on the Transfort System back in 2018 to securing almost $6.3M in funding for seven electric buses that will be online by 2023. o Completed updates to City Plan, Transportation Master Plan, and the Transit Plan , which included a focus on climate action and will guide the community’s land use patterns over the next 20-30 years. o Completed the EV Readiness Roadmap, outlining short-term, medium-term and long-term strategies to become EV ready as a community. x Water: Decreased per capita per day water use by 8% since 2005 and increased 1% over 2017. x Overall efforts and highlights: o Continued to engage and diversify the CAP Community Advisory Committee , now representing over 20 community members across the triple bottom line and the triple helix. o Continued statewide and federal policy advocacy via Colorado Communities for Climate Action (CC4CA), a coalition of 27 Colorado counties and municipalities to protect Colorado’s climate for current and future generations, including the passage of over a dozen bills in the 2019 legislative session in alignment with Fort Collins’ climate action goals. Legislative advocacy also included the Colorado Association of Municipal Utilities (CAMU) where specific utility issues were relevant. o Completed the second round of the Innovate Fort Collins Challenge, which supported five external and seven internal projects that will pilot solutions to reduce emission though energy, waste reduction, and behavior change. 2018 projects reduced approximately 4,500 Metric Tons CO2e. o Launched the SHIFT campaign to engage residents with easy, simple and positive actions to save them time, money, and improve their health, all while positively impacting our climate action goals. Already hundreds of Fort Collin’s residents have pledged to take action. o Launched Sustainable Neighborhoods Fort Collins, which includes four pilot neighborhoods across the community engaging in projects they design and select to increase their neighborhood’s sustainability. o Initiated a partnership with Vila Nova de Famalicão via the European Union’s International Urban Cooperation Programme, with shared goals and focus around sustainable mobility, behavior change, and inclusive economic development. o Staff continues to meet with interested businesses, community members and stakeholders and interacted with over 6,000 interactions with community members and approximately 350 interactions with business community members in 2018. ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) July 23, 2019 Page 3 o Launched a grant-funded effort by the Urban Sustainability Directors Network in partnership with eight other U.S. cities to advance climate action planning work that centers planning and implementation in equity and includes both mitigation and resilience actions. Local Action Makes a Difference Staff and leadership are often asked about the difference local action makes in achieving the community’s climate action goals. A new analysis of drivers of electricity emissions (Attachment 2). The analysis demonstrates how various factors have driven electricity emissions up, while City and partner efforts have brought them back down. Key takeaways from the analysis include the following: x Population growth and weather-related increases (34% increase since 2005) are offset by utility-scale investments (34% decrease since 2005). x Local investments, including both energy efficiency and distributed energy resources, drive the 16% reduction in electricity emissions seen from 2005 - 2018. In other words, without local investments, energy emissions would have stayed flat and not decreased 16%. Transitioning to 2030 – Updating the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plan Summary: In the 2019-2020 City Budget, two offers were funded: x Offer 43.10 – Road to Zero Waste Plan Update (funded via KFCG for $30K over two years) x Offer 43.12 – 2030 Climate Action and Energy Policy Update – Optimizing Policy, Targets, and Strategies ($120K of funding over two years split between the General Fund and the Light and Power Fund) Alignment: Updating these three plans aligns with the City’s Strategic Plan, Council Priorities, and City Plan (see Attachment 3 for full linkage): Document Linkage Strategic Plan • 4.1 Achieve Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2020 goals and continue progress toward 2030 goals • 4.3 Achieve 2020 Energy Policy goals and work towards Climate Action goals for carbon neutrality • 4.4 Achieve the 2020 Road to Zero Waste goals and work toward the 2030 zero waste goals • 4.5 Develop strategies to improve the community’s climate resiliency Council Priorities • Equity and Inclusion • Community Engagement • Air Quality • Infrastructure City Plan • Principle ENV 2: Become a carbon neutral community by 2050 and improve the community’s resilience to prepare for and adapt to the impacts of climate change. • Principle ENV 3: Transition from fossil to renewable energy systems. • Principle ENV 5: Create a Zero Waste system • Principle T 9: Utilize the transportation system to support a healthy and equitable community. • Principle HI 3: Provide opportunities for meaningful and inclusive community involvement in governance and decision-making. Proposed Process: These three planning efforts will officially kickoff in the fall of 2019 and will run through 2020; all engagement efforts will be aligned (similar to the City Plan, Transportation Master Plan, and Transit Master Plan process) to allow residents and businesses streamlined and optimized engagement experiences. Adoption hearings are tentatively planned for Q4 of 2020. Naming the Process: To ensure the planning process is accessible to the public, staff will be calling the combined effort of updating the three plans “Our Climate Future: Seeking equitable solutions to achieve energy, zero waste, and climate goals.” Planning Phases: Three phases are proposed for the plan updates and are roughly outlined below: ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) July 23, 2019 Page 4 1. Understanding Community Priorities: Summer – Fall 2019 o Purpose: Understand what residents and businesses care about most to ensure alignment of the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plans with community priorities. o Key Activities: ƒ Initial Community Engagement (completed) x Visited with six stakeholder groups to begin co-creating the planning scope with the community, a key best practice from an equity perspective. x Results from this activity are described further below. ƒ Initial Staff Analysis (currently underway) x Compile best practices from peer communities, as shared with the CAP CAC at their last meeting; x Conduct stakeholder mapping to understand the level of impact and influence of various stakeholders to prioritize initial engagement, e.g., how might we include indigenous communities, people of color, low- and moderate-income community members, youth, and more within the planning processes; and x Compile existing data to understand frontline communities most at-risk to climate change impacts and those impacted by existing inequities, e.g., housing affordability. ƒ Targeted Community Engagement (next steps) x Community listening sessions with prioritized stakeholder groups x Pop-up events, similar to those employed in Vila Nova de Famalicão, e.g., “yellow couch,” to meet people where they are x Development of community partners and plan ambassadors’ program to help facilitate these conversations (similar to City Plan) ƒ Engagement Plan for the Formal Planning Process, which will be posted online for the community to provide feedback o Outcomes: Engagement Plan, Summary of Community Priorities, Plan Ambassadors and Community Partners selected, trained and leading discussions 2. Formal Planning: Fall 2019 – Summer 2020 o Purpose: Leveraging the community priorities from Phase One, this phase will include the more traditional components of a planning process and will result in a draft plan. o Key Activities: ƒ Data collection and analysis, e.g., apply an equity lens to existing CAP strategies and new strategies identified through Phase One (both via community engagement and best practices research) ƒ Coordination with preliminary results and studies from the Platte River Power Authority Integrated Resources Plan (IRP), scheduled for completion in summer 2020. ƒ Visioning and scenarios, e.g., community kickoff and engagement efforts to develop the vision and scenarios for the various plans; formation of working groups to dive more deeply into strategy development and scenario analysis. ƒ Plan Development, including the drafting of the plan document(s) o Key Outcomes: Draft Plan(s), summary from various community engagement efforts 3. Plan(s) Release and Adoption: Fall – Winter 2020 o Purpose: Ensure the community and leadership has enough time to review and provide input on the draft plan prior to adoption. o Key Activities: ƒ Community dialogues, including a Work Session, to review the draft plan(s) as well as online public comment on the various strategies and metrics proposed for the processes. ƒ Revisions as a result of this feedback, with documentation of what was done with ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) July 23, 2019 Page 5 the feedback. ƒ Develop the final plan(s). o Key Outcomes: Final Plan(s), summary of community feedback Results from Initial Community Engagement: Staff visited with numerous groups to gain a starting point for how these plans should engage the community: x CAP Community Advisory Committee (February 7, 2019) x Energy Board (March 14, 2019) x Chamber Local Legislative Affairs Committee (April 19, 2019) x Youth Advisory Board (May 1, 2019) x Natural Resources Advisory Board (May 15, 2019) x Air Quality Advisory Board (June 17, 2019). x Note, in addition to these groups, staff also reviewed these themes with the North Fort Collins Business Association (May 22, 2019). In each of these meetings, staff asked the group’s the following questions: x If the planning processes were successful, how would residents be engaged? x If the planning processes were successful, how would businesses be engaged? x If the planning processes were successful, how would initiatives be selected? The feedback from these groups is summarized in Attachment 4, with the following highlights: Overall Themes More Specific Perspectives Planning Processes • Understand the audience and go to them • Who leads the engagement is just as important as the process • Ensure a variety of community members are engaged in the process • Peer to peer engagement • Bring in experts to lead • Communicate the “why” Planning Outcomes • Match storytelling to the audience – ensure relevancy of the final plan • Show the benefits, both from a TBL perspective and from an individual lens • Be transparent about the plan process • See businesses & residents in the final plan • Beyond GHG reductions • Illustrate residents & businesses are being heard Final Plan Strategies • Diversity / Variety of pathways • ROI and tradeoffs • Strategies build in the dynamic nature of climate work • Honor community’s diversity • Preference for voluntary strategies • Be clear on who benefits and who does not Next Steps. x Our Climate Future (planning processes) o Initiate the remaining activities associated with Phase One – Understanding Community Priorities. o Launch an OurCity webpage for residents to interact with the effort. o Develop structure for topic areas and associated working groups to begin formal planning and scenario analysis. o Define potential needs for consultants and community partners for technical analysis and/or engagement with stakeholders. x Overall o Council will consider a Draft Resolution Declaring a Climate Emergency at their August 20 Regular Meeting. o At the May CAP Community Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting (see Attachment 5), members noted it is important for the CAP CAC to be as representative of Fort Collins as possible and that ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) July 23, 2019 Page 6 additional recruitment is important to ensure this representation. Before soliciting additional CAP CAC members, staff is first assessing the existing demographics of the CAC so that recruitment can be targeted to maximize representation. o Publish 2018 community carbon inventory report and send out press release. o Launch a fall SHIFT campaign with additional actions residents can take to make a difference and save time, money and improve their health. ATTACHMENTS 1. Energy Policy 2018 Annual Update infographic 2. Local Action Makes a Difference: New Analysis Highlights Impact of Local Investments 3. Our Climate Future: Linkage with City’s Strategic Plan, Council Priorities, and City Plan 4. Overall Engagement Themes 5. May CAP Community Advisory Committee Notes 6. Presentation (PPTX) ATTACHMENT 1 COPY2.1 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Work Session, July 2019 (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Learn more ways to conserve at fcgov.com/conserve 13%PETROLEUMHow do you fit in? COMMUNITY ENERGY USE Per capita reductions from 2005 Building square footage increased by 21%, but buildings are 4% MORE EFFICIENT.NATURAL GAS3% SINCE 2005 28%POPULATION INCREASED15%ENERGY USE INCREASED ONLY Thanks to residents and businesses improving efficiency and practicing conservation.ELECTRICITY16%Electricity use per capita is the lowest it’s been since 1986. Energy Policy Report We can lead in ENERGY EFFICIENCY and RENEWABLES with HIGH RELIABILITY, AFFORDABLE BILLS and AWARD-WINNING PROGRAMS. The Energy Policy reflects Fort Collins’ values of reliability, affordability, safety, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, pollution prevention, environmental stewardship and energy independence. It is aligned with the Climate Action Plan (CAP) goals of 20% carbon reduction below 2005 levels by 2020, 80% by 2030 and carbon neutral by 2050. Read the full annual report at fcgov.com/what-we-do. 2019 Annual Update OUR IMPACT DOWN Despite a growing population, efficiency programs have helped limit the increase in electricity use. It would be 14% higher without Utilities’ programs. Saved Electricity from Efficiency Utilities Actual Community Electricity Use Residential Efficiency Savings: 72M kWh Business Efficiency Savings: 144M kWh 2015 2010 2019 2005 Fort Collins received designation as a Smart Energy Program Provider from the American Public Power Association. ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 2019 Energy Policy Annual Update (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Peak Usage With Peak Partners, customers reduced demand by 1,600 kW during peak times. The average residential customer uses about 620 kWh per month (or 7,400 kWh per year). Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD 711 Esta informaciόn puede ser traducida, sin costo para usted. 970-212-2900 20-22209 X 100 Energy Efficiency Customer electricity savings from efficiency programs totaled ȊȊȇM kWh (2.8% of the community's annual use), equivalent to taking 5,600 homes' electric use off the grid. Reliability With 99.9966% reliability, most residents did not experience an outage. Community Economics Customer projects generated more than $45M in local economic benefits through reduced utility bills, direct rebates and leveraged investments, and also supported 230+ JOBS. Did you Know? It is cheaper to save electricity with efficiency (3.4 cents) than it is to buy more electricity (6.2 cents). DOWN 17%from 2005 Electricity Carbon Emissions Electricity Supply 76% Fossil Fuels 2% Wind 0% Solar 22% Hydro 67% Fossil Fuels 11% Wind 3% Solar 19% Hydro 2005 2019 2030 GOAL 100% renewable Local Renewables Installed 337 new renewable energy systems, adding 3,600+ kW, a 26% increase in total capacity from 2018. 1.4% of electricity came from local renewables. LOOKING FORWARD We are community-owned and together we can reach our goals. Join the thousands of other residents and businesses taking action. You are part of the solution. Get engaged at fcgov.com/climatefuture. Time-of-Day Rates 65% of residential customers showed a decrease in annual electric bills with TOD pricing. The average monthly bill was $1.38 lower. SUMMER NON-SUMMER ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 2019 Energy Policy Annual Update (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Fort Collins has some of the most aspirational climate goals in the country: 20% reduction below 2005 levels by 2020, 80% reduction by 2030, and carbon neutral by 2050. As of 2018, Fort Collins' carbon emissions were 14% lower with a growing population and economy. With two years to go, we are nearly to our first milestone of a 20% reduction! 20% REDUCTION 80% REDUCTION Climate Action Plan Average annual community savings per household from climate action investment in 2015-2020. fcgov.com/climateaction Every one dollar invested by the City is leveraged by almost two dollars by the community and private investment. $220 17 MTCO2e 2005 13 MTCO2e 2014 12 MTCO2e 2018 NEUTRAL BY 2050 CARBON 2005 2020 2030 2050 How do you fit in? PROGRESS PER CAPITA Our actions add up. Changes by residents, businesses, and local action have reduced per capita emissions by 33% from 2005 levels. How do you fit in? PROGRESS PER CAPITA 2018 Community Carbon Inventory Where are we going? CLIMATE GOALS DOWN 33% 2018 INVENTORY 14% BELOW 2005 14% DOWN $1 $2 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 2018 Climate Action Plan Update (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) LET'S DIVE INTO THE DETAILS BEHIND THE 14% REDUCTION Visit the CAP Dashboard for more information fcgov.com/climateaction Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. Esta informaciόn puede ser traducida, sin costo para usted. 19-21734 CAP goals adopted Timberline Recycling Center opens Installed local solar hits 10 MW from over 1,000 systems across the community Our Climate Future planning process kicks off, determining the path to 2030 and beyond! CAP campaign launches to help people to what matters most 175 MW of new renewables by the end of 2020 will boost our non-fossil electricity to nearly 50%TO 2050 Our climate journey...2015 2016 2017 2020 Overall Electricity Ground Travel Natural Gas Waste Water How have emission changed since since 2005? What's driving the drop in emissions by 14% from 2005? It's a huge deal! In 2018, Fort Collins: To see large facility emissions, some of which are not included in Fort Collins' greenhouse gas inventory, visit the EPA's GHG from Large Facilities map. • Saved electricity equivalent to taking 4200 Fort Collins homes off the grid. • Left cars at home. Fort Collins residents are 3 times more likely to bike or walk to work than the national average. 4200 • Saved enough water to fill bathtubs.3.3 million 3%9%National Average Fort Collins • Saved over 33,000 tons of organic waste fom the landfill, enough to fill a fleet of 3,000 garbage trucks. x1,000 2019 ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 2018 Climate Action Plan Update (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) WHERE WE ARE AND A LOOK AHEAD EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 1 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 2 EQUITY AND INCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 9 POWERING OUR COMMUNITY...........................................................................................12 WHERE WE LIVE AND WORK.............................................................................................15 THE MATERIALS WE USE...................................................................................................19 THE AIR WE BREATHE........................................................................................................22 OUR WATER.........................................................................................................................25 HOW OUR COMMUNITY IS DESIGNED..............................................................................30 HOW WE GET AROUND ......................................................................................................34 HOW THE CITY LEADS BY EXAMPLE................................................................................40 GLOSSARY ...........................................................................................................................42 APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT AND PARTNERSHIPS........................................................43 APPENDIX B: REFERENCED PLANS..................................................................................44 ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 2 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF OUR CLIMATE FUTURE In 2019 and running through 2020, the City is updating three plans: Climate Action Plan,Energy Policy, and the Road to Zero Waste Plan. These combined planning processes are being conducted together with the goal of providing a seamless and streamlined engagement process for the community, where if a community member or business engages with one plan, they can impact all three. Collectively, these planning updates are being called “Our Climate Future.” Our Climate Future builds on Fort Collins’ goals and leads with equity in both the update process and intended outcomes of the plans. Achieving the community’s goals and strengthening them through this planning process will impact every community member – it will mean better individual health, better air and water quality, increased and reliable transportation options, new facets to our economy and labor market and a safer community. With community partners embedded in this process, we can move toward these outcomes, as well as other areas important to our community members. WHAT GOALS HAS FORT COLLINS SET? Climate Action Plan Energy Road to Zero Waste Reduce carbon emissions by: 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 Carbon neutral by 2050 Energy Efficiency: Increase savings incrementally to 2.5% savings per year by 2020 Renewable Electricity: Increase renewable energy to a minimum of 20% by 2020 Achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030 Overall Waste Diversion: 75% diversion by 2020 90% by 2025 Zero waste by 2030 Per Capita Diversion: 2.8 pounds/day by 2025 WHY OUR CLIMATE FUTURE NOW? Most of the community’s efforts have focused on achieving the short-term 2020 goals, e.g., a 20% reduction in carbon emissions below 2005 levels (Climate Action Plan); improved efficiency resulting in a 2.5% electricity savings (Energy Policy); and a 75% diversion of our community’s waste (Road to Zero Waste Plan). Achieving the Climate Action and Energy Policy goals is largely within reach, and it is time to focus on the transformational strategies and policy solutions that will be needed to achieve the 2030 goals. Additionally, though the community has made great strides in waste diversion, 2020 Road to Zero Waste goals are not expected to be met; it will be important to refresh waste reduction goals and strategies through this update. BUILDING ON THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE: CENTERING OUR CLIMATE FUTURE WITH EQUITY The City of Fort Collins aspires to provide world-class services to the community and ensure that actions equitably address the triple bottom line of sustainability: economic, social and environmental resources. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 3 Triple bottom line thinking is embedded into the Our Climate Future planning processes, as Fort Collins is seeking equitable solutions to achieve our community’s energy, zero waste, and climate action goals (see the Equity and Inclusion Section beginning on page 9 for more context). This means we’ll be identifying opportunities to advance goals and strategies that not only reduce carbon emissions, reduce waste, increase energy efficiency, and increase renewable electricity, but also reduce risk and vulnerability and enhance equity. Thus, trade-offs and tensions can be revealed, considered, and limited when possible. This information will be used when prioritizing actions for the coming decade. HOW ARE WE DOING SO FAR? WILL WE MEET OUR GOALS? CLIMATE ACTION GOALS FIGURE 1. FORT COLLINS PROGRESS TOWARD COMMUNITY CLIMATE GOALS OF 20%REDUCTION BELOW 2005 LEVELS BY 2020. As of 2018, Fort Collins had decreased its community carbon emissions by 14% below 2005 levels (Figure 1) and is currently projected to be between 19% and 25% below 2005 levels in 2020. Additional progress is anticipated in the early 2020s, drawing reductions down further to the 29-32% range, leaving an approximate 50% gap to the 2030 goals. While the city’s 100% renewable electricity policy is likely to close a significant portion of that gap, additional strategies will be needed to get to the 80% reduction goal in 2030. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 4 FIGURE 2. FORECASTED COMMUNITY INVENTORY EMISSIONS.RANGES DEPICT GOAL YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT DROP IN 2021. The community’s progress to date of 14% reduction tells only a part of the larger story of this community effort. New analyses have helped shine light on the fact that drivers like population growth have increased emissions. For example, without municipal and community efforts, Fort Collins’ emissions would be over 700,000 MTCO2e higher than they were in 2017 (Figure 3). The effects of growth are expected to continue driving emissions up, making continued climate efforts even more important. While our community’s climate goals are based on absolute progress from 2005 levels, continuing to monitor per capita progress (33% below 2005 levels in 2018) can shed light on areas where activities are increasingly low carbon. FIGURE 3. WATERFALL GRAPH OF FACTORS THAT INCREASED AND DECREASED EMISSIONS BETWEEN 2005 AND 2017 ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 5 ENERGY POLICY GOALS The Energy Policy goals are to achieve 20% renewable electricity by 2020 (2% locally) and 100% renewable electricity by 2030. F IGURE 4. ELECTRICITY SUPPLY IN 2018 ROAD TO ZERO WASTE GOALS With the current community diversion rate at 57% (see Figure 5), the Road to Zero Waste goal of 75% diversion by 2020 is unlikely to be met. This is due to changes in recycling markets (see waste chapter), population and construction activity growth in our community. Fort Collins can gather community input, identify emerging technologies, and renew strategies through the Our Climate Future process. FIGURE 5. FORT C OLLINS COMMUNITY DIVERSION RATES SINCE 2010. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 6 WHAT ARE THE OVERALL TRENDS AND DRIVING FORCES FOR CHANGE IN FORT COLLINS? As mentioned in the section How Are We Doing? Will We Meet Our Goals?,Fort Collins is a rapidly growing community, and the city is experiencing many related changes. As the Our Climate Future planning effort develops, these local driving forces and trends will help inform our planning scenarios, strategies and engagement approaches. Fort Collins population is projected to reach nearly 240,000 residents by 2040. Currently, more than 2,000 people are moving to Fort Collins annually. The city has added more than 5,000 new jobs since 2011. Employment is growing faster than housing availability, resulting in higher housing costs. Many of the newer members of this community include students and Millennials (those between the ages of 20-34 years). The median age of our population is increasingly older with the 60- to 64-year-old cohort growing at more than three times the rate of the entire population. The poverty rate of residents increased from 14% in 2000 to 17.8% in 2016. Fort Collins is a desirable place to live. The city offers high quality educational institutions as well as access to natural assets and amenities that promote a healthy lifestyle. The two largest industries are Education and Health Care, which corresponds to a highly educated workforce and a high quality of life for many. With current and anticipated growth, changes in demographics and economic conditions bring many challenges and opportunities. Multiple community plans and programs are seeking to support growth with an approach grounded in community values that promotes a more diverse, inclusive, healthy and sustainable city. METHODS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO INFLUENCE OUTCOMES It’s essential to understand the methods by which Fort Collins can influence outcomes related to the community carbon targets. While the City government may have substantial mechanisms available, it is ultimately the community’s residents, businesses and institutions which will determine results over time. The role of local government in leveraging these mechanisms is an ever-evolving topic. In recent years the Fort Collins community has asked City sustainability efforts to push into new territory, which may lead to an evolution of this list. In general, the following methods will influence the community’s ability to reach climate goals: Market transformation – markets can transform for a wide range of reasons, such as technology shift or consumer expectations. Efforts which target changes in markets can have much greater impact than alternative approaches; however, the impact can be much more difficult to attribute to specific actions. Incentives – incentives for individual and specific actions can be very effective in impacting decision-making and the local availability of goods and services. Education – education provides a foundational element which can encourage stakeholder decisions and behavior, which align with intended outcomes. Social norms – the community sense of what is “normal” can have tremendous influence on the adoption of behaviors, services, products and technology. Pricing – the price level and transparency of services (e.g. energy, water, waste) can have substantial impact on the value proposition for how much of the commodity people will use. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 7 Regulations or requirements – local, state and federal standards have substantial influence on many aspects of our carbon footprint. Policies – setting of policy targets (e.g. 100% renewable electricity) drive local and regional decision-making. Climate economy – similar to market transformation but at a higher level, the shift to a climate economy is likely to influence the investment, regulatory and policy environment for years to come. LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT Fort Collins recognizes that achieving the ambitious goals set by our community requires leadership at all governmental levels, in our business community, and from our residents. In August of 2019, City Council adopted Resolution 2019-091, which acknowledged the global climate emergency and reaffirmed Fort Collins’ commitment to local action. The Resolution also reaffirmed Fort Collins’ “commitment to engage with regional, state, and national governments in order to achieve climate action goals.” The City currently partners with organizations throughout the Front Range and across the U.S. and the world to share best practices and will continue to build partnerships to meet our ambitious goals. Examples of these types of engagements are included in Appendix A. KEY THEMES Ambitious goals and the need to dramatically reduce emissions and waste while increasing renewable electricity and efficiency by 2030. Centering our work in equity to make sure everyone benefits from our work, keeping who benefits and who is burdened in mind (see Equity and Inclusion section on page 9). Our growing community presents challenges to each area of our work. Improving quality of life and communicating the additional benefits of action on climate, waste, and energy to our community. Trade-offs and overlap between activities and areas of our work – reliability/affordability/sustainability; mitigation and resilience; water/energy/waste; impacts at different geographic and time scales. HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT The content section of this document begins with an introduction to Equity and Inclusion, including why this work is being centered in equity and the historical and local context that influences this work. Then, the remaining sections outline the various areas of impact for the three plans – whether it is how we power our community, the air we breathe, the water we all need to survive, and more. Each section contains the following information: Overview and Existing Conditions – includes a description of the issue and why it is important Nexus – addresses the nexus between a given area and the other elements of the document, e.g., how does how we get around in our community (transportation) interact with the air we breathe? These sections recognize there are both synergies and tensions to each area of impact. Key Policies, Plans, and Goals – illustrates the linkages between existing city plans and this area of impact. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 8 Data – highlights the metrics and key results to date. New and Emerging Strategies – highlights examples of areas where other communities are leading in this space or Fort Collins is beginning to explore; note this is not meant to be a comprehensive list but just examples as a starting point. Related Challenges, Needs and Benefits – an opportunity to address other issues that have been noted by staff in exploration. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 9 EQUITY AND INCLUSION Our Climate Future is being centered in equity for all, leading with race, from both a process and outcome perspective: Equity in process: Ensuring everyone has meaningful opportunities to engage and provide input into the Our Climate Future process. Equity in outcomes: Everyone benefits from a carbon neutral Fort Collins. This section provides an initial framing around the historical and local context that influences this work and begins to illustrate how equity and climate planning are related. Moreover, the City recognizes these efforts require humility, listening, and learning, as staff’s knowledge in this space, both locally and nationally, is incomplete. Accordingly, staff anticipates these sections will be updated with the community throughout the process and beyond as understandings and information evolve. EXISTING CONDITIONS: HISTORICAL AND LOCAL CONTEXT Looking Back to Look Forward:Understanding how we can plan together for Our Climate Future requires awareness of both our past and present. The examples below are not meant to be comprehensive of the entire historical and present-day context, but are meant to provide an initial background to the reader to begin understanding how persistent inequities (see sidebar) impact our ability to dramatically reduce the amount of carbon we emit, waste we generate, and energy we use, as well as how we implement strategies moving forward. Historical Context. Chances are every person has likely experienced some degree of inequity. However, despite progress in addressing explicit discrimination, racial inequities continue to be deep, pervasive and persistent across the country. Racial inequities exist across all indicators for success, including in education, criminal justice, jobs, housing, public infrastructure and health, regardless of region.1 Rooted in our country’s violent history of genocide, colonization, slavery, and segregation, racist practices have been embedded in almost every aspect of American life,2 resulting in structural racism.3 Local Context.Our country’s broader history of oppression has also played out locally, at times with local government as a key actor. This local context is key and yet, to staff’s knowledge, a comprehensive racial history for Fort Collins has not been developed. Many more examples have occurred on both individual, institutional, and structural levels than can be listed here. For illustrative purposes, some documented examples include: Individual racism:Recently Fort Collins has seen cases of racial profiling on the Colorado State University campus and crime spree vandalism, such as experienced by our Muslim 1 Government Alliance on Race and Equity –see their information here. 2 See for example, section II of the Racial Equity Toolkit published by the Government Alliance for Race and Equity (GARE). 3 Reference the Equity and Inclusion Work Session Agenda Item Summary for more information. Centering work in equity includes an understanding that racism takes place at multiple levels: Individual racism: pre-judgment, bias, or discrimination based on race by an individual. Institutional racism:Policies, practices, and programs that, most often unintentionally and unconsciously, work to the benefit of white people and the detriment of people of color. Structural Racism:A history and current reality of institutional racism across all institutions, combining to create a system that negatively impacts communities of color. (Source: fcgov.com/equity) What it means for Our Climate Future to be centered in “equity for all, leading with race” is that all dimensions of equity are considered and that racial equity is prioritized. A best practice in equity work is to lead with race, because focusing on racial equity provides the opportunity to introduce a framework, tools and resources that can also be applied to other areas of marginalization. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: Existing Conditions Assessment – Draft for Review – Updated January 22, 2020 10 community when the Fort Collins Islamic Center was vandalized. In addition, there is a rise of anti-Semitism in Colorado overall. Institutional racism:From a land use and environmental justice perspective, starting in the 1930s neighborhoods were segregated so that residents of Alta Vista, Andersonville, Buckingham and the Holy Family neighborhood lived near the city’s industrial wastelands; were exposed to toxins such as coal smoke and soot from the sugarbeet factory; dealt with constant pollution from trains carrying concentrated lime and the Fort Collins City dump.4 From a financial perspective, there is a documented 22% lending disparity between community members who identify LatinX and white.5 Structural racism:Before Fort Collins was even established, there were indigenous people in Larimer County for 13,000+ years, with the last local Native Americans in Larimer County (Arapahos) to move to reservations in 1868. 6 The legacy of institutional racism has led to recent displacement and gentrification of neighborhoods,7 lower overall health and equity index scores,8 and high school graduation rates at Poudre School District that are lower for students of color than for white students.9 These few examples of the community’s history, while not intended to be comprehensive, demonstrate the continued nature of discrimination at all levels and that impacts are disproportionately experienced by people of color and other communities with identities that have been historically marginalized. OUR CLIMATE FUTURE: EQUITY FOR ALL, LEADING WITH RACE This planning effort acknowledges climate change is not simply a technical problem to solve, but an issue deeply rooted in human systems which have historically produced significant disparities for people of color (as demonstrated in the previous section), low-income households, and other historically underrepresented groups. These inequities are exacerbated by climate change, where people of color and other marginalized populations are more vulnerable to climate change impacts.10 Local governments have the opportunity to prioritize actions that simultaneously address equity, reduce emissions, and enhance community resilience - leading to better outcomes for all. By putting racial equity at the center of our planning process, this work recognizes racial inequity is the most pervasive type of inequity in our country. This aligns with organization-wide efforts to ensure equity for all, leading with race.11 Fort Collins is working at multiple scales to influence this challenge. At the national level, Fort Collins is participating with ten other U.S. cities to transform the way local governments approach climate planning, engage underrepresented groups, and develop more equitable strategies that work for all community members. The result of this work will be a framework that any community can employ for climate work centered in equity. 4 Hang your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins 1900 – 2000. Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental Consultants, see in particular pages 7-9 for examples. 5 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, update in 2017 by City staff to original work completed by BBC Consulting in 2012. The lending disparity cited here was identified in the 2017 update. 6 There have been indigenous people in Larimer County for 13,000+ years and the 1868 event is only one example from indigenous group. More information can be found in An Ethnohistory of the Cache la Poudre River National Heritage Area by Lucy Burris. 7 See, for example, this article in the Colorado Sun. 8 See the Trends and Forces Report associated with City Plan for this reference. 9 See Poudre School District’s graduation information here, and slide 6 for graduation rates for English Language Learners compared to all students. 10 See for example,this article and this article about vulnerabilities to wildfire, the Fourth National Climate Assessment, which illustrates how climate change exacerbates existing vulnerabilities - especially in low-income communities, communities of color and other vulnerable populations. 11 See the Equity and Inclusion Work Session Agenda Item Summary for more information. ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: OCF Existing Conditions Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) OCF Engagement Summary Timeframe of Phases of Engagement Phase One: “Understanding Our Community” (September 2019 – January 2020) Phase Two: “Strategic Planning” (July 2020 – December 2020) “Understanding Our Community” Phase One Report - Executive Summary (Read the full Phase One Report at ourcity.fcgov.com/ourclimatefuture) Our Climate Future (OCF) is a joint planning process to update the Road to Zero Waste plan, Energy Policy, and Climate Action Plan. OCF strives to center both its engagement process and the final plan outcomes in equity for all, leading with race. Additionally, the impacts of climate change are already happening in Fort Collins and will continue to increase in the decades to come, therefore it is key that OCF integrates climate resilience into the process. This document illustrates how staff developed and deployed the first phase of OCF called “Understanding Our Community” while embedding both equity and climate resilience. The first phase of OCF has been crucial to center staff and the process in our community’s needs. Past versions of the waste, energy, and climate plans focused primarily on implementing solutions to technical problems, but behavior change is not a technical problem; It is a people-centered one. By understanding community member’s fundamental needs and their barriers to action first, OCF can ground all strategic plan development with a people-centered approach at its core. This is why centering OCF in equity, leading with race is critical. The entire community of Fort Collins must be active changemakers if the community is going to achieve its long-term goals integrating equity, economic health, and environmental wellbeing. By addressing historically underrepresented group’s needs, they can become active participants in creating Our Climate Future. Understanding Our Community followed a deliberate process to engage and reflect a diversity of community voices. 1.Staff designed five outreach approaches and engaged Community Partners and Plan Ambassadors to reach individuals and businesses across our community. 2.Five questions were asked of our community to learn the collective vision for a sustainable future as it relates to waste, energy, and climate and the barriers to getting there. Staff analyzed each response to craft themes called Community Priorities and Big Barriers, beginning with people of color and members of historically underrepresented groups’ responses. ATTACHMENT 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: OCF Engagement Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) When looking at all responses together, the following three priorities and four barriers were mentioned the most. However, there were a total of eleven Community Priorities and eight Big Barriers which are summarized in later sections of this document. Community Priorities Big Barriers x More Reuse, Recycling, and Composting x More Renewable Energy x Local and Regional Transit x Not Enough Action by Individuals, Organizations, and Government x Not Enough Information or Awareness of Sustainability x Not Enough Funding and Infrastructure x Racism, Inequity, and Exclusion Staff analyzed the data by demographics to better understand how historically underrepresented parts of Fort Collins might identify different priorities and barriers to success compared to other members of the community. In total, responses suggest that the highest priorities in our community are waste management, energy, and transit. The most mentioned barriers were also aligned across demographic groups with people expressing concern about the top three in the table above; however, one barrier that was disproportionately identified by people of color, particularly Hispanic/Latinx community members, was “Racism, Inequity, and Exclusion”. Overall, staff’s interpretation of responses is that our community is aligned around what our biggest priorities and barriers are to achieving our climate future, but our communities of color are disproportionately experiencing additional barriers around racism, inequities, and exclusion that must be addressed in order for us all to achieve a sustainable future together. “Strategic Planning” Phase Two Engagement Summary The second phase of OCF built upon the first phase “Understanding Our Community”. Staff ran 9-weeks of virtual strategy brainstorming which included: x Over 25 workshops conducted via Zoom x An online survey Through community and staff input and consultant research, over 700 ideas were identified that were evaluated across a complex set of criteria including, but not limited to: feasibility, equity, resilience, greenhouse gas reduction potential, and more. The strategies were then aggregated to capture the high-level underlying concepts resulting in 15 major strategies of action to achieve Our Climate Future, the “Big Moves” (See Attachment A for a summary of the “Big Moves”). Staff are now taking the draft “Big Moves” back out to the community to check if they align with community priorities. This current step of community engagement is being done through: x Targeted one-on-one discussions focused solely on historically underrepresented communities in a method called “Cup of CAP”. o Background: the idea originally came from one of OCF’s Plan Ambassadors to share a hot coffee or tea, even if just virtually, with historically underrepresented community members in a one-on-one informal chat to do a deep dive conversation to get to know them better, build trust and hear their feedback on the “Big Moves”. ATTACHMENT 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: OCF Engagement Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) x An online survey to the broader community via OurCity to enable everyone to provide input on the draft “Big Moves”. ATTACHMENT 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: OCF Engagement Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD: 711 20-22744 COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE Centering equity and leading with race, all parts of our community implement, govern, and benefit from 1.ˏ(%)0!ˏ101.! HEALTHY AFFORDABLE HOUSING Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford HEALTH Y RESILIENT COMMUNITY,  AND NATURAL SYSTEMS Fort Collins is prepared for the threats of climate change ACESSIBLE LIVE/WORK/ PLAY CENTERS Everyone lives near centers which provide walkable access to daily needs REDUCE DRIVING, ESPECIALLY PEOPLE DRIVING ALONE Everyone can safely get to where they need to go within 20 minutes without a car LOCAL, AFFORDABLE, AND HEALTHY FOOD Everyone has access to healthy and affordable food, sourced or rescued from local and regional producers DRIVING ALONE LOCAL, AFFORDABLEEveryone has access to healthy and affordable EMISSION FREE CARS, FREIGHT AND FLEET Fort Collins uses clean personal, shared, and commercial vehicles to complement non-car transportation NATURAL SPACES AND ECOSYSTEMS The community supports ecosystems, watersheds and natural spaces that are healthy and accessible HEALTHY LOCAL ECONOMY AND JOBS The community supports a healthy, innovative local economy with new opportunities for all people and businesses to thrive All new and existing buildings transition to become emissions free EMISSIONS FREE BUILDINGS EMISSIONS 100% RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY Everyone in the community receives affordable and reliable 100% renewable electricity, including from local sources CIRCULAR ECONOMY All parts of the community work together to keep natural resources in circulation instead of becoming waste UNIVERSAL RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING Everyone is able to compost and recycle COOPERATIVE COMMUNITIES Connected neighborhoods where people don't need to buy things they won’t regularly use Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD: 711 EFFICIENCY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS Everyone lives and works in healthy, energy and water efficient buildings BIG MOVES Big Moves are the primary strategies to meet our community climate, energy and waste goals while advancing our community priorities for a sustainable future. FCGOV.COM/CLIMATEFUTURE ATTACHMENT 6 2.6 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Big Moves Summary (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Our Climate Future1ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 89Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Question slide•Does Council have any feedback on Big Moves, the process ahead to Council action, and the integration of the three plans?2ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 90Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) STRATEGIC ALIGNMENTPrimary outcomes• 4.1 Climate Action• 4.3 Zero WasteBUDGET$60k split between General and Enterprise FundsOur Climate Future3ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 91Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Transition to 2030: Our Climate Future4INCLUDES UPDATES TO:Climate Action PlanEnergy Policy Road to Zero Waste PlanATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 92Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Our Climate Future Timeline5Summer 2019 -Spring 2020Summer 2020 - Fall 2020Winter 2020 -Spring 2021ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 93Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Three Plans | Three Goals6Bottom Line: Significant planning and implementation work ahead to achieve goals100% renewable by 2030Carbon neutral by 2050Zero Waste by 203014%20% needed in 202033% 20% needed in 202055% 75% in needed in 202080% needed in 2030 ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 94Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Gap to 203072020 goal40%+ gap to 2030 goalATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 95Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) GoalsNarrow strategiesTechnical solutionsGoals and PrioritiesMulti-purpose strategiesCommunity prioritiesBIPOC and HUG prioritiesOCF centers equity and leads with race so all can benefit from a carbon neutral Fort CollinsBIPOC and HUGTRADITIONAL APPROACHOUR CLIMATE FUTUREBIPOC - black, indigenous, and people of colorHUG – historically underrepresented groupsOCF ApproachATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 96Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) 9COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND PLAN AMBASSADORSCOMMUNITY CONVERSATIONSPOP UP EVENTSONLINE ENGAGEMENT140 2142459“UNDERSTANDING OUR COMMUNITY” ENGAGEMENTATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 97Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Community Priorities10“Regionally better access throughout (not just on main lines) still need some for people w/ disabilities to get closer”“More bus stops, longer bus hours, and more frequent bus times”• More reuse, recycling and composting• Healthy air quality• More renewable energy• Reliable supply of high quality water• Local and regional transit• Affordable housing• Job opportunities and healthy economy• Local and dependable food• Healthy natural environment• More equity, diversity, and inclusion• Be prepared for changes in our climate“Anything that we use must be able to be renewed or reused”“Recycling infrastructure”“We need to decolorize and reprioritize indigenous knowledge”“equality among all its residents. There is too many differences between rich and not-so-rich.”ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 98Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND PLAN AMBASSADORSZOOM BRAINSTORMING WORKSHOPSPOP UP EVENTSONLINE SURVEY ENGAGEMENTADVISORYROLE302CANCELLED FOR COVID332“STRATEGIC PLANNING” ENGAGEMENT“INCENTIVIZE LOCAL SOLAR COMPANIES TO PROVIDE LOW-COST SYSTEMS TO LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS” –QUOTE FROM COMMUNITY WORKSHOPATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 99Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Goals and Priorities-Big Moves-Multi-purpose strategies-Next Moves-Community prioritiesBIPOC and HUG prioritiesPlans & Goals: Climate, Energy & WasteFocus: Mitigation, Resilience & EquityOUR CLIMATE FUTURECommunity Priority: Local and Regional TransitNext Move: Expanding public transit coverage and frequency"Think there needs to be Max lines on Mulberry, Prospect, and Harmony--regular, often-run transportation."Big Move: Everyone can safely get where they need to go in 20 minutes without a car.“Regionally better access throughout (not just on main lines) still need some for people w/ disabilities to get closer”OCF ApproachATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 100Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Better TogetherATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 101Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Live BetterATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 102Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Breathe BetterATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 103Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Resource BetterATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 104Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) 17Our Climate Future – Moves Summary• Big Moves >> transformational outcomes• Next Moves >> strategies to get there• Evaluation framework• Priorities, engagement and implementation• Mitigation• Resilience• Equity• Feasibility• + TBL analysisATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 105Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Key Takeaways• Racial, social and climate justice are intrinsically linked• Mitigation, resilience and equity must be addressed together• The City cannot resource or achieve these goals alone• We need leaders from across our community to succeed• Centering strategies to address community priorities will lead to greater impact on results and daily lived experiences18ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 106Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Next Steps• Evaluation of Next Moves• Implementation planning• Drafting plan with linkages• Superboard meeting January 11• Council work session February 9 • Council adoption March 219ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 107Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) Question slide•Does Council have any feedback on Big Moves, the process ahead to Council action, and the integration of the three plans?20ATTACHMENT 72.7Packet Pg. 108Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9672 : Our Climate Future Planning Update) DATE: STAFF: November 24, 2020 Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Paul Sizemore, Interim Director, Comm. Devt. & Neighborhood Serv. WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Residential Metro District Evaluation System. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review and consider an evaluation system for Residential Metropolitan (Metro) District Service Plans. Staff proposes a system that provides both minimum requirements and a performance points system, including a menu of options, applied to Energy and Water Efficiency, Housing Attainability and Community Livability attributes. The proposed system is intended to provide metrics that further define ‘extraordinary public benefits’ as found in the adopted Metro District policy. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Do the councilmembers support an evaluation system for residential Metro District Service Plans that provides both minimum requirements and a performance points system? 2. Are there other evaluation systems that should be considered? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On June 16th, the City Council approved a six-month moratorium on new metro district applications and directed staff to develop possible changes to the Metro District policy that addresses issues raised by Council and citizens, and that fulfill established City goals. The moratorium remains in place until January 31, 2020, and applies to the consideration of new Service Plans, but not to the amendment of Metropolitan District Service Plans previously approved by Council or to the consideration of agreements with the City as contemplated in the Service Plans. Policy Direction The current Policy generally supports the formation of a Metro District where it will deliver ‘extraordinary public benefits’ that align with the goals and objectives of the City. These aspirational goals are embodied in several adopted long-range plans, including City Plan (Comprehensive Plan), Climate Action Plan, Transit and Transportation Master Plans, Housing Plan, Arts and Culture Master Plan, and others covering multiple City and community programs. Since ‘extraordinary public benefits’ are difficult to define, one of the primary objectives in creating a residential Metro District evaluation system is to develop metrics that capture those community benefits in a clear, measurable and predictable way. Residential Mill Levy Service Plan Development Agreement Peer Cities Review With Colorado Front Range communities making up the bulk of the state’s 1,800 metro districts, City staff interviewed developers and fellow staff within 10 other jurisdictions (Boulder, Colorado Springs, Denver, Greeley, Jefferson County, Lakewood, Larimer County, Loveland, Timnath, and Windsor) to get a better understanding of regulatory options employed elsewhere and their potential applicability to Fort Collins’ approach. A summary table comparing Front Range Metro District standards have been provided on slide 8 of the attached presentation (Attachment 1). 3 Packet Pg. 109 November 24, 2020 Page 2 General Trends • All surveyed jurisdictions provide similar requirements intended to increase transparency with consumers through property purchase disclosure statements. • Residential Mill Levy caps range from a low of 30 mills in Colorado Springs to no specified limits in Jefferson and Larimer Counties. An additional Operations and Maintenance mill levy is provided in several jurisdictions. Fort Collins, with a cap of 50 mills matches limits found in Denver, Lakewood and Timnath. • Three communities prohibit a District’s use of eminent domain, including Fort Collins, while the balance of jurisdictions either allow those powers to be exercised as a basic right or allowed under certain conditions and considered on a case-by-case basis. • No other community surveyed includes a performance-based system to evaluate residential Metro District Service Plans as is being suggested by staff. Only Windsor has an adopted policy giving preference to certain types of development, e.g. up-market residential or mixed-use projects. Denver includes one criterion that all metro districts integrate a public art program. Evaluation System Based Upon Reduced Cost of Ownership and Increased Community Benefits At its Work Session on January 7th, the City Council provided general direction on several evaluation system methodologies presented by staff. Council cited the “need to maintain integrity in the intersection between resident benefit (who pays higher taxes) and community benefits delivered by a specific metro district/project”, and that any system needs to have quantifiable elements when they can be integrated into the evaluation while still providing flexibility as new priorities arise. A more detailed summary of Council’s Work Session discussion is provided in Attachment 1. The proposed evaluation system considers the impact of Metro Districts on the residential consumer, who pays District property taxes in addition to other taxes, fees, and monthly utility bills. The resulting system is designed to help reduce costs to Metro District residents primarily through savings from reduced energy and water consumption. Another underlying principle is the increase in community benefits addressing high priority needs for increased affordable and attainable housing options and providing elements that increase livability and address community goals and aspirations expressed through: • City Plan • Transportation and Transit Master Plans • Climate Action Plan • Arts and Culture Master Plan • Nature in the City Under the proposed evaluation system concept, all Residential Metro Districts would need to satisfy a series of minimum requirements addressing Energy and Water Efficiency, Housing Attainability and Community Livability, as well as meet an additional number of optional ‘points’, in order to receive Service Plan approval. All elements satisfying the approval requirements are intended to exceed standards described in the City’s adopted Land Use Code, Energy Code, and other related provisions of the City Code. Essentially, the performance requirements are intended to bridge the gap between existing codes and the more aspirational aspects of City policy plans. Performance requirements within each category include: 3 Packet Pg. 110 November 24, 2020 Page 3 Energy Water Affordable/Attainab le Housing Livability Minimum Requirements Enhanced energy efficiency measures Use WaterSense fixtures & irrigation controllers 5% Affordable (60% AMI) Rental Housing - Either Developer Built or Land Donation At least X number of points from the menu of options below: • High quality transit stop • Shared transportation options • Bike & walk friendly streets • Essential neighborhood services • Exceptional gathering spaces • Community workspaces • Common areas food production • Universal 10 min walk to nature • Public trails connectivity • Enhanced pollinator habitat • Meet Indoor airPLUS standard • Universal design standards • 1% for arts & culture • Sustained educational programming • Excellence in public engagement Solar & Electric Vehicle ready Water efficient common areas *20% Attainable Housing -half at 80% AMI, half at 80- 120% AMI *Attainable units could be 1. Deed Restricted, 2. Provided through Smaller Units or 3. Community Land Trust Additional Points from a Menu of Options Zero energy homes Deed restrictions for water friendly and plant positive landscapes Additional affordable and/or attainable housing units Build to Passive House standard Additional water efficiency in common areas Options for Accessory Dwelling Units Zero energy homes Non-potable irrigation supply Build all electric homes Stormwater innovation Install solar [50/75/100]% of annual use Smart storage and grid interactivity 3 Packet Pg. 111 November 24, 2020 Page 4 Financial Impact A new evaluation structure for Residential Metro District review will require additional staff time to evaluate each application for compliance. Outreach to Boards and Commissions The proposed evaluation strategies will be presented to the Natural Resources Advisory Board, the Energy Board, the Economic Advisory Committee and the Affordable Housing Board, as well as the Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee and other community organizations, for their comments prior to returning to City Council for its official consideration of a potential Metro District policy change. Next Steps Following direction from Council, staff will conduct additional stakeholder workshop(s), facilitated by members of the Institute for the Built Environment, to refine metrics used in the residential Metro District Service Plans evaluations system. Future workshop participants will include those from the most recent session in October and will be expanded to include additional stakeholders and subject matter experts in the fields of energy and water conservation, and housing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Work Session Summary, January 7, 2020 (PDF) 2. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 112 ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Work Session Summary, January 7, 2020 (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Work Session Summary, January 7, 2020 (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) November 24, 2020 Residential Metro Districts Evaluation System Cameron Gloss ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Direction Sought: §Do the councilmembers support an evaluation system for residential Metro District Service Plans that provides minimum requirements and a performance points system? §Are there other evaluation systems that should be considered? 2 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Metro District Basics •Quasi-governmental entity with tax-exempt bonding and taxing authority; used to finance Public infrastructure and services •Authorized under Colorado's Special District Act, Colorado Revised Statutes Ti tle 32 •Examples of infrastructure needs: o Street infrastructure o Non-potable water systems o Extend utility infrastructure o Parks/Recreation facilities o Parking structures o Operations and maintenance 3 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) City of Fort Collins Metro District Policy Ø The Policy establishes the criteria, guidelines and processes followed by City Council and City staff in considering service plans for the organization of metropolitan districts Ø The Policy encourages the formation of a District that delivers extraordinary public benefits that align wi th the goals and objectives of the City Ø The approval of a District Service Plan is at the sole discretion of City Council 4 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Why Metro Districts? •Public infrastructure can be financed over time •Public infrastructure can be financed at tax-exempt interest rates •Property owners can deduct taxes paid to the district on their federal income tax returns •New infrastructure is funded by those who will benefit (Constituents within the District) and not all City residents •Permanent operation and maintenance of certain public improvements that are not dedicated to the City 5 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Our Region 6 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 7 Mill L evy Cap 50 Mills Maximum O&M Levy Cap 10 Mills Re gional Improvements Levy Cap 5 Mills (in ad ditio nl ro the 50 Mills limit) Basic Infrastructure To enab le public benefit Eminent Domain Prohibite d Debt Limita tio n 100%of Capacity Minimum Debt Au th orizatio n $7 millio n Debt Term Limit 40 years unless Metro Distric t B oard decides othe rwis e Citiz en Control As early as possible Multip le Districts Projected over an e xte nd ed perio d Dissolutio n Distric ts shall have no more than thre e years from ap proval o f the Servic e Plan to secure City Counc il ap proval b y re solutio n Commercial/ Residential Ratio N/A City of Fort Collins Metro District Policy ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Front Range Metro District Comparison 8 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Appropriate Parameters How do we define parameters for residential Metro Districts in a way that addresses know n issues? •Tr ansparency for buyers •Cost burden to residents •Fairness & community benefit •Process and governance -minimum thresholds (i.e. size of project, public infrastructure needs) -timing and approval process -developer accountability -policy updates and changes 9 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 10 To tal Cost of Ownership Mortgage Ta xes and Fees: §County Property Ta x §Metro District Property Tax §Homeowner ’s Association Fees Insurance Utilities: §Wa ter, Wastewater, Stormwater, Electricity, Natural Gas §Internet & Cable TV §Solid Waste/Recycling ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Data: Larimer County Treasurer Graphic: Denver Post A P roperty Tax Comparison Johnstown: Thompson River Ranch (metro district) Vs. Thompson Crossing (no metro district) ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Fort Collins Avg Residential Utility Bills 12 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Require Extraordinary Community Benefit Recognizing that current code does not necessarily result in developments that meet our community aspirations, how might Metro Districts help realize the kind of residential development that we desire as a community as defined by adopted City policies? Relevant Plans Include: •City Plan •Climate Action Plan •Housing Plan (update in progress) •Wa ter Efficiency Plan •Energy Policy •Others 13 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Proposed Evaluation System All projects meet minimum requirements by category PLUS a minimum number of additional points are required and achieved from a menu of options Exceptional circumstances and innovation allowed as alternative compliance Revisit every two years Energy Water Housing Livability Public Infrastructure Needs Metro District Minimum Requirements Menu Options (points)Code Code Code Code Plan Plan Plan Plan ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Energy 15 Additional Points •Zero energy homes •Build to Passive House standard •Build all electric homes •Install solar [50/75/100]% of annual use •Smart storage and grid interactivity •Other energy saving technologies Required •Enhanced efficiency measures •Solar & Electric Vehicle ready ENERGY Minimum Requirements Additional PointsATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Wa ter 16 Additional Points •Deed restrictions for water friendly and plant positive landscapes •Additional water efficiency in common areas • Non-potable irrigation supply •Stormwater innovation Required •Use WaterSense fixtures & irrigation controllers •Wa ter efficient common areas WATERMinimum Requirements Additional PointsATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 17 Housing Affordability Along the Income Spectrum AMI 0% Below 80% AMI is City’s Definition of Affordable Housing 80% $69.7K/yr 200%100% $87.2K/yr 120% $105K/yr $415K Market Housing $320KPurchase Price Goal is defined by AHSP (188-228 units/year) Fewer attainable options are available to Middle Income Earners Goal is harder to define & City influence may be outweighed by market forces ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Affordable & Attainable Housing 18 Additional Points •Additional affordable and/or attainable housing •Options for Accessory Dwelling Units Required -Example •5% Affordable Housing (60% AMI) •Developer Built or Land Donation •20% Attainable Housing •half at 80% AMI, half at 80-120% AMI •Deed Restricted or Smaller Unit Sizes or Community Land Trust HOUSINGMinimum Requirements Additional PointsATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) City Plan Report Card 19 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Livability 20 Point Options 1.High quality transit stop 2.Shared transportation options 3.Bike & walk friendly streets 4.Essential neighborhood services 5.Exceptional gathering spaces 6.Community workspaces 7.Common areas food production 8.Universal 10m walk to nature 9.Public trails connectivity 10.Enhanced pollinator habitat 11.Meet Indoor airPLUS standard 12.Universal design standards 13.1% for arts & culture 14.Sustained educational programming 15.Excellence in public engagement Required •Achieve at least X points from above LIVABILITYPoint OptionsATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Public Infrastructure 21 Points •Considerations made for disproportionate costs Base Assumption •Assumes significant public infrastructure needs and cost Public Infrastructure Exceptional Costs Base Assumption ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Next Steps •Confirm direction on Residential Metro District methodology •Focus Group evaluation and production of refined metrics •Review evaluation system with Boards and Commissions 22 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) Direction Sought: §Do the councilmembers support an evaluation system for residential Metro District Service Plans that provides minimum requirements and a performance points system? §Are there other evaluation systems that should be considered? 23 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 24 Backup Slides ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 25 Fort Collins HOA Tr ends Observations: §HOA fees for SFHs are typical in subdivisions constructed after 1985 §Due to age of development fees are most likely in S/SE and NE Fort Collins §Av erage annual HOA fee: $602 §To wn home and condo fees typical regardless of age of development §HOA fees 3-5x higher than single family homes but may also include certain utilities/insurance §Av erage annual HOA fee (attached): $2,710 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 26 Units w/o HOA Fees (Typically SFH built before 1985) Units with HOA fees (Typically SFH built after 1985)To wnhomes & condos (Highest observed HOA fees)Listing PriceAnnual HOA Fee ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 27 Housing Data / Comparisons Local Data: §Colorado average housing unit size –2,162 sf (2nd highest in US) §Colorado average lot size –8,076 sf (6th smallest in US) §Fort Collins median unit size –2,269 sf §Median of 3 bed / 2.5 baths §Persons per household –2.56 (Colorado) , 2.46 (Fort Collins), 2.52 (National) ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) 28 Housing Trends §New single-family and multifamily unit sizes are decreasing slightly after years of increase. §Fort Collins singe-family and multifamily unit sizes are stable §Fewer households contain children under 18 (15% in Fort Collins, 2016) Size of New Single-Family Homes (US) Source: National Association Home Builders ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9685 : Residential Metro District Evaluation System) City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Remote Meeting Kristin Stephens, District 4, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Susan Gutowsky, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Julie Pignataro, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Ken Summers, District 3 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Emily Gorgol, District 6 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk Adjourned Meeting November 24, 2020 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OPTIONS There will be three options for people who would like to participate in the meeting:  Live via the Zoom online meeting,  Live via the telephone,  By submitting emails to Council at CityLeaders@fcgov.com. All options will be available for those wishing to provide general public comment, as well as public comment during individual discussion items. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (ONLINE VIA ZOOM): Individuals who wish to address Council via remote public participation can do so through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98241416497. (The link and instructions are also posted at www.fcgov.com/councilcomments.) Individuals participating in the Zoom session should watch the meeting through that site, and not via FCTV, due to the streaming delay and possible audio interference. The Zoom meeting will be available beginning at 5:15 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Participants wanting to ensure their equipment setup is working should join prior to 6:00 p.m. For public comments, the Mayor will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address Council. In order to participate, you must:  Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer. Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience.  Join the Zoom meeting using the link on the front page of the agenda or on the City’s home webpage at www.fcgov.com.  If you use the City’s home page, simply click on the “Participate remotely in Council Meeting” link shown near the top of the page. City of Fort Collins Page 2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA PHONE)  Dial the public participation phone number, 1-346-248-7799, and then enter the Meeting ID 982 4141 6497 followed by the pound sign (#).  The meeting will be available beginning at 5:15 p.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 6:00 p.m., if possible. For public comments, the Mayor will ask participants to indicate if you would like to speak at that time – phone participants will need to press *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address Council. When participating online or by phone, DO NOT Watch/stream FCTV at the same time due to streaming delay and possible audio interference. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA EMAIL) Individuals not comfortable or able to access the Zoom platform or participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments to CityLeaders@fcgov.com. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send prior to the meeting Tuesday evening. WATCH THE MEETING Anyone can view the Council meeting live on Channels 14 and 881 or online at www.fcgov.com/fctv. Note: Only individuals who wish to address Council should use the Zoom link or call in by phone. Anyone who wants to watch the meeting, but not address Council, should view the FCTV livestream. 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 Citizen 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. 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 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 221-6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible.    City of Fort Collins Page 3  PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE  CALL MEETING TO ORDER  ROLL CALL 1. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2020 Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Timberline Church Rezoning. (staff: Jason Holland, Judy Schmidt; 12 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion) This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with Section 1(f) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2019-064. At the November 17 Regular Meeting, Council voted to continue this item to the Adjourned Meeting on November 24, 2020. The purpose of this item is to amend the City’s Zoning Map to change the zoning designation for the Timberline Church Campus from Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) to Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN). The area proposed to be rezoned is approximately 32.79 acres. The applicant proposes the rezoning to support future infill housing on the site and enable higher density housing than would be allowed with the current LMN zoning. Additional commercial and institutional uses may also be proposed. The church has been in discussions with CSU regarding a potential land swap to construct an attainable housing project. CSU would donate their 4.76 acres on Timberline Road, and the church will swap 8-10 acres for the CSU property. The rezoning request is subject to the criteria in Section 2.9.4 of the Land Use Code. The rezoning may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by Council after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board, which voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the request with condition that the residential density be limited to 20 units per gross acre and that an Overall Development Plan (ODP) precede or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). The purpose of the condition of approval is to provide a density limit to help achieve a compatible transition with the surrounding neighborhood because the MMN zone district does not have a maximum density requirement. Additionally, the ODP would help identify the general design parameters for the property – including the general location and nature of proposed uses, transportation circulation, open space, buffers, and drainage features. A traffic study is also required. The ODP is required to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board and would require at least one neighborhood meeting.  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.)  ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY November 24, 2020 City Council STAFF Jason Holland, City Planner Judy Schmidt, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2020 Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Timberline Church Rezoning. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with Section 1(f) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2019-064. At the November 17 Regular Meeting, Council voted to continue this item to the Adjourned Meeting on November 24, 2020. The purpose of this item is to amend the City’s Zoning Map to change the zoning designation for the Timberline Church Campus from Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) to Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN). The area proposed to be rezoned is approximately 32.79 acres. The applicant proposes the rezoning to support future infill housing on the site and enable higher density housing than would be allowed with the current LMN zoning. Additional commercial and institutional uses may also be proposed. The church has been in discussions with CSU regarding a potential land swap to construct an attainable housing project. CSU would donate their 4.76 acres on Timberline Road, and the church will swap 8-10 acres for the CSU property. The rezoning request is subject to the criteria in Section 2.9.4 of the Land Use Code. The rezoning may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by Council after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board, which voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the request with condition that the residential density be limited to 20 units per gross acre and that an Overall Development Plan (ODP) precede or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). The purpose of the condition of approval is to provide a density limit to help achieve a compatible transition with the surrounding neighborhood because the MMN zone district does not have a maximum density requirement. Additionally, the ODP would help identify the general design parameters for the property – including the general location and nature of proposed uses, transportation circulation, open space, buffers, and drainage features. A traffic study is also required. The ODP is required to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board and would require at least one neighborhood meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION A. Overview of Main Considerations Five criteria govern the review and findings for proposed amendments to the zoning map. These criteria can 1 Packet Pg. 4 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 2 be paraphrased as ‘consistent with the comprehensive plan’; ‘warranted by changed conditions’; ‘compatible with surrounding uses’; ‘impacts to the natural environment’; and ‘a logical and orderly development pattern’. These criteria are explained and evaluated in the staff analysis section of this report. The Timberline Church Campus could be a suitable location for densities that are higher than LMN, while still maintaining compliance with the Structure Plan and meeting City Plan Principles and Policies. The property’s close proximity to the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center meets the purpose of the MMN zone district, which is intended to locate higher density housing in close proximity and with good multi-modal access to a Neighborhood Center. The Neighborhood Center also provides access to a transit hub. The MMN zone is considered a bridging zone district, concentrating density near services and transit by locating MMN near/adjacent to the Neighborhood Center (NC) zone district, with the MMN zone district providing a transition and link between these areas and surrounding lower density LMN zone district areas. Compatibility with surrounding land uses may also be a consideration. There are different land use code standards for the LMN and MMN zones which could affect the overall size and scale of multifamily buildings, should these be proposed. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended a condition of approval that the MMN residential density be limited to 20 dwellings per acre. The main differences between LMN and MMN zoning is that MMN allows higher density and larger multifamily buildings than LMN zoning, as shown in the following table. Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Maximum Density (based on gross acres of the residential development) LMN: 9 units/acre overall, and 12 units maximum per phase; 12 units/acre maximum if affordable housing MMN: No maximum per code; P&Z condition of approval recommended to limit residential density to 20 dwellings per acre. Minimum average density: 7 units/acre minimum for developments 20 acres or less; 12 units/acre minimum if over 20 acres Limit on number of units per building LMN: Yes - maximum of 12 dwelling units per building MMN: No maximum Maximum Floor Area (of each building) LMN: The maximum gross floor area (excluding garages) shall be fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet MMN: No maximum Maximum building height of one, two and three-family dwellings LMN: 2.5 stories MMN: 3 stories Maximum Building Height for Multi-family LMN: 3 stories MMN: 3 stories Maximum height for each residential story, and maximum building height to roof peak • 12’ 8” maximum for each story, (which equals 38 feet from the finish floor to ceiling of the 3rd floor) • No maximum, but “Special Review” required if roof peak is over 40 feet. B. Site Context and Development History The 32-acre Timberline Church Campus PUD was first approved in 1999. The approval included two building phases. The first phase was completed and includes the main church building and related parking on the site. A second building phase and parking expansion was envisioned, but never constructed, along the east and southeast portions of the site. The Foothills Channel is located along the south property boundary. 1 Packet Pg. 5 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 3 Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses North South East West Zoning Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center (NC) Pinecone Apartments PUD (MMN) The Willow at Rigden Farm (LMN) Meadows East (RL) Land Use Commercial Multi-family Single family attached and detached houses Single family detached houses C. Summary of the Review Criteria for Rezoning of Parcels Less Than 640 Acres Only the Council may, after recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board, adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map in accordance with the provisions of Division 2.9. An amendment to the Zoning Map may be proposed by Council, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Director or the owners of the property to be rezoned. To approve a proposed rezoning of 640 acres of land or less (quasi-judicial) the decision maker must find that it satisfies the following criteria: The proposed amendment is: • Criterion 1: consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan (City Plan); and/or • Criterion 2: warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. The Planning and Zoning Board and Council may consider the following additional factors: • Criterion 3: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; • Criterion 4: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; • Criterion 5: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. D. Criterion 1: Consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan 1. Compliance with the City Structure Plan Map Background: The Structure Plan map serves as a blueprint for the desired future development pattern of the community, illustrating how the community will grow and change over time with a focus on the physical form and development pattern of the community. The Structure Plan Map includes place types-or land use categories-which provide a framework for the ultimate buildout of Fort Collins. These place types provide a policy structure that can apply to several specific zone districts within each place type by outlining a range of desired characteristics. (Attachment 4) Timberline Church Campus: The Structure Plan Map includes 13 land use place types, with 5 of the place types considered priority areas where the full infill or redevelopment of these areas has not been realized. The proposed Timberline Campus rezoning is within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type, which is one of the five priority land use areas included in the Structure Plan. The Mixed-Neighborhood place type is the overarching land use designation for both the LMN and MMN zone districts. Because of this, the proposed rezoning from LMN to 1 Packet Pg. 6 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 4 MMN is consistent with the Structure Plan Map. Should the rezoning be approved, there is no need to amend either the Structure Plan Map or Residential Neighborhood Sign District. 2. Compliance with Structure Plan Mixed-Neighborhood Place Type Characteristics City Plan (p. 98) describes the characteristics and considerations of the Mixed-Neighborhood place type which applies to both the LMN and MMN zone districts. The intent of the characteristics is to guide infill and redevelopment, outline the intended types of land uses, and describe development intensities to encourage within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type. City Plan characteristics described for the Mixed-Neighborhood place type include: a) Place-Type Land Uses: Principal Land Uses in the Mixed-Neighborhood place type: Single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes and townhomes. Supporting Land Uses in the Mixed-Neighborhood place type: ADUs, small scale multifamily buildings, small-scale retail, restaurants/cafes, community and public facilities, parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship. Both LMN and MMN zones allow similar residential and commercial land uses. Supporting land uses include “small scale multifamily buildings.” There are different land use code standards for the LMN and MMN zones which could affect the overall size and scale of multifamily buildings, if proposed. Based on these standards, staff recommended four conditions of approval to the Planning and Zoning Board to mitigate potential impacts and ensure that all aspects of future development comply with the principles and policies in City Plan. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the rezoning without the four staff conditions of approval and recommended a different condition of approval to limit the residential density to 20 dwelling per acre. The four staff conditions outlined in the staff report focus on the scale of multifamily buildings and achieving compatibility and appropriate transition within the neighborhood context surrounding the property. (Attachment 9)The discussion from the Planning and Zoning Board was that these factors could be considered upon submittal of a Project Development Plan (PDP), rather than with the rezoning. (Attachment 10) b) Place-Type Density: Between five and 20 principal dwelling units per acre, typically equates to an average of 7 to 12 dwelling units per acre. Overall density within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type around the property is as follows: Projects in the Mixed- Neighborhood Placetype: Total acres: Density: Pinecone Apartments 15 acres 12.89 units/acre Rigden Farm LMN 215 acres 8.9 units/acre Rigden Farm MMN 24 acres 21.4 units/acre Mixed-Neighborhood Totals: 254 14.4 units/acre Existing development in the area complies with the Land Use Code standards for the LMN and MMN developments, however some existing development in the area is above the density range and typical average noted in City Plan for the Mixed Neighborhood place type. 1 Packet Pg. 7 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 5 c) Place-Type Location: New development in Mixed-Neighborhood in place type should be located within walking/biking distance of services and amenities, as well as high-frequency transit, with the Neighborhood Center providing these services as the focal point within Mixed-Neighborhoods. • The property is in close proximity to the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center to the north. • Timberline Church Campus could be a suitable location for densities that are higher than LMN, while still maintaining compliance with the Structure Plan and meeting City Plan Principles and Policies. One of the most important considerations for higher density housing is to be located in close proximity and with good multi-modal access to a Neighborhood Center. The proposed Timberline Church housing infill location meets these characteristics, which are described in both City Plan as well as in the purpose statements for the MMN zone district. • The neighborhood center provides higher frequency bus service routes along Drake and Timberline consistent with the Transportation Master Plan. Location of larger townhome or multifamily developments into existing single-family neighborhoods should generally be limited to edge or corner parcels that abut and/or are oriented toward arterial streets or an adjacent Neighborhood Mixed-Use District where transit and other services and amenities are available. • The intent of this guideline is to avoid situations where larger scale multifamily developments are located in the middle of existing single-family neighborhoods and to reinforce the policy to have higher density housing in close proximity to shopping and services. While MMN is proposed for the Timberline Church Campus, the location is somewhat unique. The MMN housing area proposed does not have frontage directly on an arterial street, and it does not directly abut the commercial Neighborhood Center to the north. However, the proposed MMN housing could be integrated with and oriented to the Neighborhood Center with a private street and pedestrian connections. d) Place-Type Transition: Utilizing “small scale multifamily buildings” as a supporting land use. Where townhomes or multifamily buildings are proposed in an existing neighborhood context, a transition in building height, massing and form should be required along the shared property line or street frontage. • Because higher LMN densities have been constructed abutting the property to the east, and MMN exists to the south and north, a rezoning to MMN could be warranted. A comparison of the Land Use Code requirements for LMN and MMN is provided in Section 5 of the Planning and Zoning Board staff report. The discussion from the Planning and Zoning Board is that building height, massing and form could be considered at the time of development review rather than as part of the rezoning. 3. Compliance with City Plan Principles and Policies City Plan provides guidance that the Structure Plan is not intended to be used as a stand-alone tool but should be considered in conjunction with City Plan principles, goals and policies as a tool to guide future growth and development. OUTCOME AREA “LIV” -- NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY AND SOCIAL HEALTH - Managing Growth: These principles help the City to manage growth by encouraging infill and redevelopment, ensuring this development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood or area. 1 Packet Pg. 8 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 6 PRINCIPLE LIV 2: Promote Infill and Redevelopment: POLICY LIV 2.1 - REVITALIZATION OF UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES Support the use of creative strategies to revitalize vacant, blighted or otherwise underutilized structures and buildings, including, but not limited to: Infill of existing surface parking lots-particularly in areas that are currently, or will be, served by bus rapid transit (BRT) and/or high-frequency transit in the future. PRINCIPLE LIV 3: Maintain and enhance our unique character and sense of place as the community grows POLICY LIV 3.1 - Public Amenities Design streets and other public spaces with the comfort and enjoyment of pedestrians in mind …such as plazas, pocket parks, patios, children’s play areas, sidewalks, pathways… POLICY LIV 3.5 - Distinctive Design …Development should not consist solely of repetitive design that may be found in other communities. POLICY LIV 3.6 - Context-Sensitive Development Ensure that all development contributes to the positive character of the surrounding area. Building materials, architectural details, color range, building massing, and relationships to streets and sidewalks should be tailored to the surrounding area. PRINCIPLE LIV 4 - Enhance neighborhood livability POLICY LIV 4.2 - Compatibility of Adjacent Development Ensure that development that occurs in adjacent districts complements and enhances the positive qualities of existing neighborhoods. Developments that share a property line and/or street frontage with an existing neighborhood should promote compatibility by: Continuing established block patterns and streets to improve access to services and amenities from the adjacent neighborhood; Incorporating context-sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials); and Locating parking and service areas where impacts on existing neighborhoods-such as noise and traffic-will be minimized. Principle LIV 5 - Create more opportunities for housing choices. POLICY LIV 5.3 - Land for Residential Development Use density requirements to maximize the use of land for residential development to positively influence housing supply and expand housing choice. Staff Comments Related to City Plan Principles and Policies: • Taken together, these descriptions and policies establish an expectation that development of this parcel will factor in neighborhood input and achieve compatibility through project design. As recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board -- policies that encourage compatibility by considering the context and surrounding characteristics of the site could be considered at the time of development review. • City Plan policies could be met with either MMN or LMN zoning. Because higher LMN densities have been constructed abutting the property to the east, and MMN exists to the south and north, a rezoning to MMN could be warranted. The proposed MMN rezoning could meet these policies better by allowing an increase in density at a location near transit and commercial services. • The MMN zone has long been considered a bridging zone district, concentrating higher density ranges near services and transit by locating MMN near/adjacent to the NC zone, with the MMN zone providing a transition and link between these areas and surrounding lower density LMN areas. Higher frequency 1 Packet Pg. 9 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 7 bus routes are currently provided at the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center. The proposed rezoning could support higher density and better leverage the adjacent Neighborhood Mixed Use/Activity Center Area. E. Criterion 2: and/or Warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. The proposed rezoning is supported by several changed conditions in the area since the Timberline Church Campus was originally constructed, all of which support a change in zoning to MMN: • The Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center has been constructed, which provides a mix of commercial uses that are within walking distance of the Timberline Church Campus. • Higher density housing has been constructed to the north and east within Rigden Farm -- with higher densities concentrated on the perimeter of the Neighborhood Center. o Constructed in 1993, Pinecone Apartments to the south are 12.89 units per acre and are located in the MMN zone district. o Approved in 2002, the Willow housing development is located adjacent to the east of the proposed Timberline Church Campus, within the Rigden Farm LMN zone district. o Overall density for the Willow is 10.47 dwellings per gross acre. o Average housing density in the Rigden Farm MMN area to the north of the property is approximately 21.4 dwellings per gross acre. • Bus transit routes are provided in the area, with the Neighborhood Center serving as a transit hub. • The original plan for the Timberline Church Campus, which envisioned a second building phase for a maximum 3,500-person seating capacity, is no longer proposed. This would have required 875 parking spaces on the site. Actual peak seating capacity for the church is currently 1,844 seats, with a peak parking requirement of 461 parking spaces. Currently, the Campus includes vacant land to the east and surplus parking, with a total of 1,293 parking spaces on the property. The Timberline Church development plan was first approved in 2000 and opened in 2002. Since that time, the majority of the 303-acre Rigden Farm development to the north and east of the Timberline Campus has been developed, with construction beginning in 2000. This includes the 23-acre Neighborhood Center (N-C) zone district to the north, 24-acres in the Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) zone district and 215 acres in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zone district. Additionally, Rigden Farm is a phased development plan. LMN areas within phased developments allow to concentrated densities within portions of the overall plan, provided that the overall density does not exceed 9 units per gross acre, and provided that no phase is greater than 12 units per gross acre. The Rigden Farm LMN zoning area utilizes this density range by providing lower density phases to the east and higher density phases to the west. Densities in the east portion of Rigden Farm, near Zeigler Road, are in the 4 unit per gross acre range. F. Criterion 3: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land and is the appropriate zone district for the land. The proposed MMN zoning could be compatible with existing surrounding land uses. There are different land use code standards for the LMN and MMN zones which could affect the overall size and scale of multifamily buildings, should these be proposed. The discussion from the Planning and Zoning Board was that achieving compatibility and appropriate transition within the neighborhood context surrounding the property could be further considered at the time of development review. 1 Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 8 1. Existing Uses North of the Property: The proposed MMN zoning is compatible with the commercial uses and higher density housing located adjacent to the north. The property is located in close proximity to the existing Neighborhood Center, which is consistent with the intent of MMN zoning. 2. Existing Uses South of the Property: The existing Meadows East single-family development to the southeast is buffered by the perimeter storm drainage and the Foothills Channel. Existing mature trees are located along the edge of the channel near the rear property lines of the Meadows East homes. Stewart Case Park and Rendezvous Trail are located in this area, which provide an appropriate buffer and transition to the Meadows East neighborhood. The existing buffer, drainage areas and existing trees in this area provide a compatible transition from the proposed MMN zone to these existing uses. 3. Existing Uses East of the Property: The Willow at Rigden Farm is located adjacent to the property to the east. The Willow development’s overall LMN density is near the highest maximum allowable LMN density at 10.47 units per gross acre. The Willow includes single-family attached buildings, with 12 units per building that are two stories in height. These buildings face west towards the Timberline Church Campus and are in close proximity to the property. Conditions of approval were recommended by staff to provide a transition in this area, discussed in Section 5 of the Planning and Zoning Board staff report. 4. Existing Uses West of the Property: South Timberline Road is located along the west boundary of the property, which provides an appropriate buffer and transition to the Meadows East single-family neighborhood to the west. G. Criterion 4: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposed rezone to MMN is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the natural environment. The Foothills Channel represents a significant habitat feature adjacent to the proposed infill housing. This habitat feature requires protection regardless of whether the development is rezoned. Additionally, code requirements for stormwater detention and water quality treatment are not affected by the rezoning. H. Criterion 5: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. The proposed MMN infill housing area would represent a logical and orderly development pattern which reflects the unique context of the site. • The Rigden Farm neighborhood to the east (zoned LMN), provides a range of LMN densities, with higher density LMN development provided adjacent to the Timberline Church Campus, serving as a logical transition to MMN zoning on the subject property. The proposed rezone to MMN provides a more logical development pattern than the current LMN zoning, provided that conditions of approval are put in place to provide a compatible transition per City Plan. • The Foothills Channel, existing drainage and stormwater detention areas to the east and south provide a buffer transition. • Because the proposed infill housing area is located within close proximity to the existing Neighborhood Center, and it can be integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods’ street and pedestrian networks, 1 Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 9 the proposed infill housing area could achieve a higher density while meeting the purpose of the MMN zone, as described in Division 4.6(A) of the Land Use Code. The MMN district is intended to: “…be a setting for concentrated housing within easy walking distance of transit and a commercial district.” “…form a transition and a link between surrounding neighborhoods and the commercial core with a unifying pattern of streets and blocks.” The MMN zone “is intended to function together with surrounding low density neighborhoods [typically the L-M- N zone district] and a central commercial core [typically an N-C or C-C zone district]. The intent is for the component zone districts to form an integral, town-like pattern of development, and not merely a series of individual development projects in separate zone districts.” BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 17, 2020, Planning and Zoning Board meeting, the Board recommended that Council approve the Timberline Church Rezone with a 6-0 vote, with the condition that the residential density be limited to 20 units per gross acre and that an Overall Development Plan (ODP) precede or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). (Attachment 10) PUBLIC OUTREACH A virtual neighborhood meeting was held on October 22, 2020. Approximately seven residents attended the virtual meeting. Staff has also received several comment letters from residents. Discussion of the proposed rezoning centers on concerns that higher density housing which could be proposed after the rezoning would have negative impacts on the area. Concerns have been expressed related to increases in traffic, demand on the shopping center, stormwater impacts, and potential compatibility issues with larger buildings on the church site. (Attachments 11 & 12) ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Aerial Map (PDF) 3. Perspective Map (PDF) 4. Structure Plan Map (PDF) 5. Existing Zoning Map (PDF) 6. Proposed Zoning Map (PDF) 7. Area Land Use Density Map (PDF) 8. Permitted Use Comparison LMN and MMN (PDF) 9. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (PDF) 10. Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (PDF) 11. Neighborhood Meeting Notes (PDF) 12. Resident Comment Letters (PDF) 13. Timberline Church Rezoning Petition (PDF) 14. Petitioner's Justification Narrative (PDF) 15. Timberline Church Rezone Boundary Map (PDF) 16. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 12 Site ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Location Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Illinois Dr.Stewart CaseParkC.S.U.Custer Dr.Colony at RFRigden Farm O.D.P.Dakota Ridge P.U.D.TimberlineChurch CampusPinecone Apts. P.U.D.Rigden Farm Neighborhood CenterIowa Dr. S. Timberline Rd.The WillowRendezvous TrailFoothills ChannelBrooklynTownhomesChild CareMed. OfficeBankFoothills ChannelMeadowsEastATTACHMENT 21.2Packet Pg. 14Attachment: Aerial Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) E. Drake Rd.Illinois Dr.Stewart CaseParkC.S.U.Custer Dr.Colony at RFRigden Farm O.D.P.Dakota Ridge P.U.D.TimberlineChurch CampusPinecone Apts. P.U.D.Rigden Farm Neighborhood CenterIowa Dr.S. Timberline Rd.The WillowRendezvous TrailFoothills ChannelBrooklynTownhomesChild CareMed. OfficeBankFoothills ChannelATTACHMENT 31.3Packet Pg. 15Attachment: Perspective Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) !"`$ I³S College AveS Timberline RdE Mulberry StN County Road 19ECounty Road 56 S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd W Laurel St NHighway1W Willox Ln SLemay AveS County Ro ad1 3N College AveW County Ro a d 5 6 S Taft Hill RdN Highwa y 2 87E Horsetooth RdSCountyRoad23WElizabethStS Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd W Harmony Rd W Mulberry St E County Road 30 E Harmony Rd E Trilby RdRemington StE Prospect RdN Overland TrlZieglerRdLaporte Ave W Drake Rd S County Road 5NCounty Road11E County Road 50 E Linc o l n A v e N Timberline RdRiversid e A ve S Highway 287Highway 392 W Vine Dr E Douglas RdW Douglas Rd A nn apo lis DrNTaftHillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd Country Club Rd SCent enni al Dr W Mountain Ave TurnberryRdE Will oxLn Main StE Vine Dr W Prospect Rd WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr E Drake Rd Bo a r dwal k DrE County Road 52Richards Lake Rd TerryLakeRdW Trilby Rd Gre g ory RdW County Road 54G SMasonStC ountyRo a d 4 2 C E County Road 36N County Road 9N County Road 5S County Road 9Giddings RdStructure Plan Map FORT COLLINSCITY PLAN PLANNING OUR FUTURE. TOGETHER. Source: City of Fort Collins; Larimer County Adopted: April 16, 2019 N 01234 Miles PLACE TYPES Districts Downtown District Urban Mixed Use District Suburban Mixed Use District Neighborhood Mixed Use District Mixed Employment District Research and Development/Flex District Industrial District Campus District Neighborhoods Rural Neighborhood Suburban Neighborhood Mixed Neighborhood Other Parks and Natural/Protected Lands Community Separator Boundaries City Limits Growth Management Area (GMA) Adjacent Planning Areas Document Path: K:\ArcMapProjects\Advanced_Planning\Structure Plan 2019\Maps\Structure_Plan_11x17.mxd SITE ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Structure Plan Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) LMNLMNLMNMMNNCTCSUMMNNCEMMNUELMNRLRLLMNPOLLMNLMNRLERCRCE DRAKE RDS TIMBERLINE RDE HORSETOOTH RDIRCSiteZEIGLER RD.ATTACHMENT 51.5Packet Pg. 17Attachment: Existing Zoning Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) LMNLMNLMNMMNNCTCSUMMNNCEMMNUELMNRLRLLMNPOLLMNLMNRLERCRCE DRAKE RDS TIMBERLINE RDE HORSETOOTH RDIRCSite--proposed MMNZEIGLER RD.ATTACHMENT 61.6Packet Pg. 18Attachment: Proposed Zoning Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 9,028 1,504.7 This map is a user generated static output from the City of Fort Collins FCMaps Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 6,859 City of Fort Collins - GIS 1,143.0 Legend 1: WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet01,143.0571.50 Notes Street Names Multiuse Trail Shared-use Trail (paved) Minor Paved Multiuse Trail Shared-use Trail (unpaved) Parcels Growth Management Area Parks Schools Natural Areas City Limits The Willow 15.09 ac/10.47 du/ac gross Rigden 6th du/ac 4.25 gross/5.1 net Parkside West 3.49 ac 13.75 du/ac gross; 48 units Parkside East 3.24 ac 11.75 du/ac gross Parkside East 4.5 ac 8.6 + du/ac gross Rigden 1st 39.26 ac 3.34 du/ac gross Colony at Rigden 2.6 ac 18.45 du/ac gross Rigden 9th 6.75 ac 10.5 du/ga Rigden 2nd/LaGrange 8.66 ac 11.3 du/ac gross; 98 units total +/- 4 du/ gross acre Brooklyn TH's 1.73 ac 24.3 du/ac gross Rigden 10th senior living 4.22 ac 29.6 units/ga Rigden 13th 2.5 ac 19 du/ac 12th Brooklyn TH's 2.6 ac 24.2 du/ac gross Rigden Flats N-C zone 4.08 ac 23 du/ac Pinecone Apts. PUD 15.13 ac/12.89 du/ac gross; 15.34 net (12.71 ac net) Bright HorizonsMedical / Office Bank ATTACHMENT 7 1.7 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Area Land Use Density Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE ZONING DISTRICT KEY LMN Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood MMN Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood REVIEW PROCESS KEY B Basic Development Review A Administrative Review P Planning and Zoning Board Review Ax Administrative Review but use must be combined with at least 1 other use allowed in the Zone to form a Neighborhood Center Px Planning and Zoning Board Review but use must be combined with at least 1 other use to form a Neighborhood Center LM MM RESIDENTIAL USES N N Extra occupancy rental houses 5 or fewer boarders B Extra occupancy rental houses more than 5 boarders A Extra occupancy rental houses 4 or fewer boarders A Fraternity and sorority houses P Group homes as per Sec. 3.8.6 P P Group homes (8 or less develop. disabled & elderly)A A Mobile home parks P Single-family detached dwellings A SF detached (on lot in an approved Site Specific Plan)B B Single-family detached dwellings (<6,000 sq. ft. lot)A Single-family attached dwellings A A Shelter for victims of domestic violence B B Two-family dwellings A A Multi-family dwellings (12 units or less/building, 50 du or less and 75 bdr or less)A Multi-family dwellings (more than 8 units/building, or more than 50 du, or more than 75 bdr)P Multi-family dwellings (50 du or less and 75 bdr or less)A Multi-family dwelling (more than 50 du or more than 75 bdr)P Mixed-use dwellings A A LM MM INSTITUTIONAL/CIVIC/PUBLIC USES N N Cemeteries A Community facilities A A Golf courses P Long-term care facility P P Neighborhood support/recreation facilities Ax Public/Private schools (elem., interm. & H.S.)P P Public/Private schools (voc. & tech.)P Public/Private schools (coll., univ., voc., & tech.)A P/P schools (coll., univ., voc., & tech.) <500' E. Vine A Parks, recreation, & open lands (not neighbrhood park)A A Neighborhood parks B B Places of worship or assembly A A Minor public facilities A A Wildlife rescue and education centers P LM MM COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USES N N Adult day/respite care center A A Artisan and photography studios and galleries Px A Artisan and photography studios/galleries not in neighborhood center P Bed & breakfast establishments <6 beds A A Child care centers A A Convenience retail stores without fuel sales Ax A Convenience retail stores with fuel (>3/4 mile spacing)Px Enclosed mini-storage facilities (<500' of E. Vine)P Limited indoor recreation estab. (<500' of E. Vine)P LM MM COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USES (continued)N N Neighborhood center A/P Offices, financial services & clinics P Offices, financial services & clinics <5000 sq. ft.Ax Offices, financial services & clinics not in nghbr.center P Personal and business service shops Ax P Restaurant (limited mixed-use)A Restaurants (standard)Px Restaurants (fast food)Px Retail stores (<5000 sq. ft.)Ax Veterinary facilities/small animal clinics or hospitals Ax P LM MM INDUSTRIAL USES N N Light industrial uses (< 500' of E. Vine)P Solar energy systems, small- and medium-scale P P Workshops/custom small industry (< 500' of E. Vine)P LM MM ACCESSORY/MISCELLANEOUS USES N N Accessory buildings B B Accessory uses B B Any legally permissible use which existed on date B B Any use authorized pursuant to a site specific plan B B Urban Agriculture B B Wireless telecommunication equipment P P Page 1 ATTACHMENT 8 1.8 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Permitted Use Comparison LMN and MMN (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 4 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com Planning and Zoning Board Hearing: September 17, 2020 Timberline Church Rezone, #REZ200002 Summary of Request This is a request for a rezone of Lots 1-5 and Tract A of the Timberline Church Campus from Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) to Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N).The area proposed to be rezoned is approximately 32.79 acres. The applicant proposes the rezoning in order to support future infill housing on the site and enable higher density housing than would be allowed with the current L-M-N zoning. Existing Zoning Map Next Steps At the Planning and Zoning Board hearing, the Board will make a recommendation to City Council. City Council would then consider a rezoning Ordinance. Site Location The Timberline Church Campus is located approximately 1,275 feet south of the intersection of Timberline and Drake Roads. Petitioner Bradley J. Florin 2908 S. Timberline Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Owner Timberline Church 2908 S. Timberline Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Staff Jason Holland, City Planner Contents 1. Project Introduction .................................... 2 2. Land Use Code Article 2 Procedural Standards .......................................................... 3 3. Article 2 – Rezoning Standards ................. 6 4. Staff Analysis of Compatibility and Conditions of Approval .................................... 15 5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion .................... 23 6. Recommendation ..................................... 23 7. Attachments ............................................. 24 Recommendation Approval with Conditions ATTACHMENT 9 1.9 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 2 of 24 Back to Top 1. Project Introduction A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION As noted in the applicant’s submittal narrative, the rezoning to MMN is proposed in order to support future infill housing on the site and allow the potential for higher density housing than would be allowed with the current LMN zoning. B. BACKGROUND & CONTEXT The 32-acre Timberline Church Campus PUD was first approved in 1999. The approval included two building phases. The first phase was completed and includes the main church building and related parking on the site. A second building phase and parking was envisioned, but never constructed, along the east and southeast portions of the site. The Foothills Channel is located along the south property boundary. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses North South East West Zoning Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center (NC) Pinecone Apartments PUD (MMN) The Willow at Rigden Farm (LMN) Meadows East (RL) Land Use Commercial Multi-family Single family attached and detached houses Single family detached houses C. OVERVIEW OF MAIN CONSIDERATIONS Five criteria govern the review and findings for proposed amendments to the zoning map. These criteria can be paraphrased as ‘consistent with the comprehensive plan’; ‘warranted by changed conditions’; ‘compatible with surrounding uses’; ‘impacts to the natural environment’; and ‘a logical and orderly development pattern’. These criteria are explained and evaluated in the staff analysis section of this report. The Timberline Church Campus could be a suitable location for densities that are higher than LMN, while still maintaining compliance with the Structure Plan and meeting City Plan Principles and Policies. The property’s close proximity to the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center meets the purpose of the MMN zone district, which is intended to locate higher density housing in close proximity and with good multi-modal access to a Neighborhood Center. The neighborhood center also provides access to a high-frequency transit hub. The MMN zone is considered a bridging zone district, concentrating density near services and transit by locating MMN near/adjacent to the NC zone, with the MMN zone providing a transition and link between these areas and surrounding lower density LMN areas. Compatibility with surrounding land uses is also a main consideration. The proposed MMN zoning could be compatible with existing surrounding land uses, however there are different land use code standards for the LMN and MMN zones which would affect the overall size and scale of multifamily buildings. Staff analysis of potential compatibility concerns and the conditions proposed are discussed in detail in Section 5 of this report. The proposed MMN rezoning could allow an increase in housing density at a location near transit and services, while the recommended conditions of approval address policies that encourage compatibility by considering the context and surrounding characteristics of the site. The conditions focus on the scale of multifamily buildings and achieving compatibility and appropriate transition within the neighborhood context surrounding the property. 1.9 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 3 of 24 Back to Top D. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Neighborhood meetings are not required for amendments to the zoning map but can be held for rezoning proposals of known controversy and/or significant neighborhood impacts. A neighborhood meeting was not held for the proposed rezoning because there is no known controversy or significant neighborhood impacts related to the proposed rezoning. E. PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comments have been received. Any comments received prior to the Planning and Zoning Board hearing will be forwarded to the board for consideration. 2. Land Use Code Article 2 Procedural Standards 1. Conceptual Review – CDR180026 A conceptual review meeting is not required for the rezoning, but is required for a future Project Development Plan (PDP). A conceptual review meeting was held on May 7, 2018. 2. Petition – REZ200002 The petition was submitted on May 22, 2020. 3. Neighborhood Meeting Neighborhood meetings are not applicable for amendments to the zoning map, except that, with respect to a quasi-judicial map amendments only (rezonings under 640 acres), the Director may convene a neighborhood meeting to present and discuss a proposal of known controversy and/or significant neighborhood impacts. No neighborhood meeting was held for this rezone. 4. Notice (Posted, Written and Published) Posted Notice: June 10, 2020, Sign # 547 Note: According to Section 2.2.6(B) of the Land Use Code, a posted development review sign shall be posted within fourteen (14) days following the submittal of a development application. The deadline for this proposal to meet the fourteen (14) day requirement was June 5, 2020. The posted notice was not posted within the fourteen (14) day timeframe due to staff oversight. Once staff identified the development review sign had not been posted, the issue was corrected, and the sign was posted as soon as possible. Given that the written and published notice were provided in accordance with the standards outlined in Article 2, and the sign has been posted since June 10, 2020, staff finds that the affected property owners have received adequate notice. Written Hearing Notice: September 3, 2020, 529 addresses mailed. Published Hearing Notice: September 6, 2020, Coloradoan Confirmation #0004363413 1.9 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 4 of 24 Back to Top Existing Zoning Map: Proposed Zoning Map: 1.9 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 5 of 24 Back to Top Site Context – Proposed 10-acre Housing Infill Area The original plan for the 32.79-acre Timberline Church Campus, which envisioned a second building phase for a maximum 3,500-person seating capacity, is no longer proposed. Currently, the campus includes vacant land to the east and surplus parking, with a total of 1,293 parking spaces on the property. The image above indicates the infill area, hatched in red, which is approximately 10.2 acres. This is the area of the site which would likely be redeveloped for infill housing. 1.9 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 6 of 24 Back to Top 3. Article 2 – Rezoning Standards A. DIVISION 2.9 – AMENDMENT TO ZONING MAP Applicable Code Standard Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff Findings 2.9.2 – Applicability Only the Council may, after recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board, adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map in accordance with the provisions of Division 2.9. Complies 2.9.3 – Initiation An amendment to the Zoning Map may be proposed by the Council, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Director or the owners of the property to be rezoned. Complies 2.9.4 – Text and Map Amendment Review Procedures In order to approve a proposed rezoning of 640 acres of land or less (quasi-judicial) the decision maker must find that it satisfies the following criteria: The proposed amendment is: Criterion 1: consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan (City Plan); and/or Criterion 2: warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. The Planning and Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors: Criterion 3: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; Criterion 4: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; Criterion 5: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Complies, with Conditions of Approval Recommended 1.9 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 7 of 24 Back to Top B. Criterion 1: Consistency of the proposed rezoning to MMN with the City’s Comprehensive Plan (City Plan) City Plan provides guidance that principles and policies contained in City Plan—together with the Structure Plan— are used to guide future growth and development. The Structure Plan map is used to help implement the principles and policies in City Plan, guiding where and how growth occurs. 1. Compliance with the City Structure Plan Map: Background: The Structure Plan map serves as a blueprint for the desired future development pattern of the community, illustrating how the community will grow and change over time with a focus on the physical form and development pattern of the community. The Structure Plan Map includes place types—or land use categories—which provide a framework for the ultimate buildout of Fort Collins. These place types provide a policy structure that can apply to several specific zone districts within each place type by outlining a range of desired characteristics. Thus, staff analysis of this rezoning considers the compliance of the proposal with the characteristics of the Structure Plan place type in addition to an analysis of the specific zone district proposed (MMN). Timberline Church Campus: The Structure Plan Map includes 13 land use place types, with 5 of the place types considered priority areas where the full infill or redevelopment of these areas has not been realized. The proposed Timberline Campus rezoning is within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type, which is one of the five priority land use areas included in the Structure Plan. The Mixed-Neighborhood place type is the overlying land use designation for both the LMN and MMN zone districts. Because of this, the proposed rezoning from LMN to MMN is consistent with the Structure Plan Map. 1.9 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 4 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com 2. Compliance with Structure Plan Mixed-Neighborhood Place Type Characteristics: Page 98 of City Plan describes the characteristics and considerations of the Mixed-Neighborhood place type which applies to both the LMN and MMN zone districts. The intent of the characteristics is to guide growth of infill and redevelopment, describe the intended types of land uses, and describe development intensities to encourage within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type. The list of characteristics and guidelines noted in City Plan for the Mixed-Neighborhood place type are provided below along with staff comments: a) Mixed-Neighborhood Land Uses: Principal Land Uses in the Mixed-Neighborhood place type: Single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes and townhomes. Supporting Land Uses in the Mixed-Neighborhood place type: ADUs, small scale multifamily buildings, small-scale retail, restaurants/cafes, community and public facilities, parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship. • Supporting land uses include “small scale multifamily buildings.” There are different land use code standards for the LMN and MMN zones which would affect the overall size and scale of multifamily buildings. Because of this, the conditions of approval included with this staff report focus on the scale of multifamily buildings and achieving compatibility and appropriate transition within the neighborhood context surrounding the property. b) Mixed-Neighborhood Density: Between five and 20 principal dwelling units per acre, typically equates to an average of seven to 12 dwelling units per acre. Overall density within the Mixed-Neighborhood place type around the property is as follows: Projects in the Mixed- Neighborhood Placetype: Total acres: Maximum Density: Pinecone Apartments 15 acres 12.89 units/acre Rigden Farm LMN 215 acres 8.9 units/acre Rigden Farm MMN 24 acres 21.4 units/acre Mixed-Neighborhood Totals: 254 14.4 units/acre • Existing development in the area complies with the Land Use Code standards for the LMN and MMN developments, however some existing development in the area is above the density range and typical average noted in City Plan for the Mixed Neighborhood place type. 1.9 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 9 of 24 Back to Top c) Mixed-Neighborhood Place type – Location, Integration and Transition for Multifamily in Existing Neighborhoods: Location of larger townhome or multifamily developments into existing single-family neighborhoods should generally be limited to edge or corner parcels that abut and/or are oriented toward arterial streets or an adjacent Neighborhood Mixed-Use District where transit and other services and amenities are available. • The intent of this guideline is to avoid situations where larger scale multifamily developments are located in the middle of existing single-family neighborhoods and to reinforce the policy to have higher density housing in close proximity to shopping and services. While MMN is proposed for the Timberline Church Campus, the location is somewhat unique. The MMN housing area proposed doesn’t have frontage directly on an arterial street, and it does not directly abut the commercial Neighborhood Center to the north. However, the proposed MMN housing could be integrated with and oriented to the Neighborhood Center with a private street and pedestrian connections. d) Mixed-Neighborhood Place type -- Access and Proximity to a Neighborhood Center: New development in Mixed-Neighborhood in place type should be located within walking/biking distance of services and amenities, as well as high-frequency transit, with the Neighborhood Center providing these services as the focal point within Mixed-Neighborhoods. • The property is located in close proximity to the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center to the north. • Timberline Church Campus could be a suitable location for densities that are higher than LMN, while still maintaining compliance with the Structure Plan and meeting City Plan Principles and Policies. One of the most important considerations for higher density housing is to be located in close proximity and with good multi-modal access to a Neighborhood Center. The proposed Timberline Church housing infill location meets these characteristics, which are described in both City Plan as well as in the purpose statements for the MMN zone district. • The neighborhood center provides higher frequency bus service routes along Drake and Timberline consistent with the Transportation Master Plan. e) Mixed-Neighborhood Place type considerations: Utilizing “small scale multifamily buildings” as a supporting land use. Where townhomes or multifamily buildings are proposed in an existing neighborhood context, a transition in building height, massing and form should be required along the shared property line or street frontage. • Because higher LMN densities have been constructed abutting the property to the east, and MMN exists to the south, a rezoning to MMN could be warranted, with conditions of approval recommended to address this guideline. An analysis of the Land Use Code requirements for LMN and MMN is provided Section 5 of the staff report, along with recommended conditions of approval, with a focus on the two considerations described above for the Mixed Neighborhood place type. 1.9 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 10 of 24 Back to Top 3. Compliance with City Plan Principles and Policies: City Plan provides guidance that the Structure Plan is not intended to be used as a stand-alone tool; rather, it should be considered in conjunction with the accompanying principles, goals and policies contained in City Plan as a tool to guide future growth and development. OUTCOME AREA “LIV” -- NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY AND SOCIAL HEALTH – Managing Growth: These principles help the City to manage growth by encouraging infill and redevelopment, ensuring this development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood or area. PRINCIPLE LIV 2: Promote Infill and Redevelopment: POLICY LIV 2.1 - REVITALIZATION OF UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES Support the use of creative strategies to revitalize vacant, blighted or otherwise underutilized structures and buildings, including, but not limited to: Infill of existing surface parking lots—particularly in areas that are currently, or will be, served by bus rapid transit (BRT) and/or high-frequency transit in the future. PRINCIPLE LIV 3: Maintain and enhance our unique character and sense of place as the community grows: POLICY LIV 3.1 - PUBLIC AMENITIES Design streets and other public spaces with the comfort and enjoyment of pedestrians in mind …such as plazas, pocket parks, patios, children’s play areas, sidewalks, pathways… POLICY LIV 3.5 - DISTINCTIVE DESIGN …Development should not consist solely of repetitive design that may be found in other communities. POLICY LIV 3.6 - CONTEXT-SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT Ensure that all development contributes to the positive character of the surrounding area. Building materials, architectural details, color range, building massing, and relationships to streets and sidewalks should be tailored to the surrounding area. PRINCIPLE LIV 4 – Enhance neighborhood livability POLICY LIV 4.2 - COMPATIBILITY OF ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT Ensure that development that occurs in adjacent districts complements and enhances the positive qualities of existing neighborhoods. Developments that share a property line and/or street frontage with an existing neighborhood should promote compatibility by: Continuing established block patterns and streets to improve access to services and amenities from the adjacent neighborhood; Incorporating context-sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials); and Locating parking and service areas where impacts on existing neighborhoods—such as noise and traffic—will be minimized. Principle LIV 5 – Create more opportunities for housing choices. POLICY LIV 5.3 - LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Use density requirements to maximize the use of land for residential development to positively influence housing supply and expand housing choice. 1.9 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 11 of 24 Back to Top Staff Comments Related to City Plan Principles and Policies: • The proposed rezoning of the Timberline Campus to the MMN zone district is requested in order to provide higher density infill housing than what is permitted with the property’s current LMN zoning. • The MMN zone has long been considered a bridging zone district, concentrating density near services and transit by locating MMN near/adjacent to the NC zone, with the MMN zone providing a transition and link between these areas and surrounding lower density LMN areas. High frequency bus routes are currently provided at the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center. The proposed rezoning could support higher density and better leverage the adjacent Neighborhood Mixed Use/Activity Center Area, with conditions recommended to address City Plan principles and policies. • City Plan policies could be met with either MMN or LMN zoning. The proposed MMN rezoning, with the recommended conditions of approval would meet these policies better by allowing an increase in density at a location near transit and services, while the recommended conditions of approval address policies that encourage compatibility by considering the context and surrounding characteristics of the site. • Because higher LMN densities have been constructed abutting the property to the east, and MMN exists to the south, a rezoning to MMN could be warranted, with conditions of approval recommended to address City Plan policies. C. Criterion 2: and/or Warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. • The proposed rezoning is supported by changed conditions, within the subject property as well as the surrounding neighborhood. • The Timberline Church development plan was first approved in 2000 and opened in 2002. Since that time, the majority of the 303-acre Rigden Farm development to the north and east of the Timberline Campus has been developed, with construction beginning in 2000. This includes all of the 23-acre Neighborhood Center (N-C) zone district to the north, 24-acres in the Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) zone district and 215 acres in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zone district. o Constructed in 1993, Pinecone Apartments to the south are 12.89 units per acre and are located in the MMN zone district. o Average housing density in the Rigden Farm MMN area is approximately 21.4 dwellings per gross acre. There is no maximum permitted density in the land use code for the MMN zone district. o Average housing density in the Rigden Farm LMN area is approximately 9 dwellings per gross acre. The maximum permitted density in the LMN zone district is 9 dwellings per gross acre and 12 dwellings per gross acre for affordable housing developments. • Additionally, Rigden Farm is a phased development plan. LMN areas within phased developments are allowed to concentrate densities within portions of the overall plan, provided that the overall density does not exceed 9 units per gross acre, and provided that no phase is greater than 12 units per gross acre. The Rigden Farm LMN zoning area utilizes this density range by providing lower density phases to the east and higher density phases to the west. Densities in the east portion of Rigden Farm, near Zeigler Road are in the 4 unit per gross acre range. 1.9 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 12 of 24 Back to Top • Approved in 2002, the Willow housing development is located adjacent to the east of the proposed Timberline Church Campus, within the Rigden Farm LMN zone district. Overall density for the Willow is 10.47 dwellings per gross acre. • Five notable conditions have changed in the area since the Timberline Church Campus was originally constructed, all of which support a change in zoning to MMN: 1) The Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center has been constructed which provides a mix of commercial uses that are within walking distance of the Timberline Church Campus. 2) Higher density housing has been constructed to the north and east within Rigden Farm -- with higher densities concentrated on the perimeter of the Neighborhood Center. 3) High Frequency bus transit is provided in the area, with the Neighborhood Center serving as a transit hub. 4) Improvements to the Drake/Timberline intersection have been constructed. 5) The original plan for the Timberline Church Campus, which envisioned a second building phase for a maximum 3,500-person seating capacity, is no longer proposed. This would have required 875 parking spaces on the site. Actual peak seating capacity for the church is currently 1,844 seats, with a peak parking requirement of 461 parking spaces. Currently, the Campus includes vacant land to the east and surplus parking, with a total of 1,293 parking spaces on the property. D. Criterion 3: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land and is the appropriate zone district for the land. The proposed MMN zoning could be compatible with existing surrounding land uses. Staff is proposing conditions of approval to further ensure compatibility. Staff analysis of potential compatibility concerns and the conditions proposed are discussed in detail in Section 5 of this report. 1. Existing Uses North of the Property: The proposed MMN zoning is compatible with the commercial uses and higher density housing located adjacent to the north. The property is located in close proximity to the existing Neighborhood Center, which is consistent with the intent of MMN zoning. 2. Existing Uses South of the Property: The existing Meadows East single-family development to the southeast is buffered by the perimeter storm drainage and the Foothills Channel. Existing mature trees are located along the edge of the channel near the rear property lines of the Meadows East homes. Stewart Case Park and Rendezvous Trail are located in this area, which provide an appropriate buffer and transition to the Meadows East neighborhood. The existing buffer, drainage areas and existing trees in this are provide a compatible transition from the proposed MMN zone to these existing uses. 3. Existing Uses East of the Property: The Willow at Rigden Farm is located adjacent to the property to the east. The Willow development’s overall LMN density is near the highest maximum allowable LMN density at 10.47 units per gross acre. The Willow includes single-family attached buildings, with 12 units per building that are two stories in height. These 1.9 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 13 of 24 Back to Top buildings face west towards the Timberline Church Campus and are in close proximity to the property. Conditions of approval are recommended to provide a transition in this area, discussed in Section 5 of the staff report. 4. Existing Uses West of the Property: South Timberline Road is located along the west boundary of the property, which provides an appropriate buffer and transition to the Meadows East single-family neighborhood to the west. E. Criterion 4: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. • The proposed rezone to MMN is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the natural environment. • The Foothills Channel represents a significant habitat feature adjacent to the proposed infill housing. This habitat feature requires protection regardless of whether the development is rezoned. Additionally, code requirements for stormwater detention and water quality treatment are not affected by the rezoning. F. Criterion 5: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. The proposed MMN infill housing area would represent a logical and orderly development pattern which reflects the unique context of the site: • The Rigden Farm neighborhood to the east (zoned LMN), provides a range of LMN densities, with higher density LMN development provided adjacent to the Timberline Church Campus, serving as a logical transition to MMN zoning on the subject property. The proposed MMN zoning provide a more logical development pattern than the LMN zoning, provided that the conditions of approval are put in place to provide a compatible transition per City Plan. • The Foothills Channel, existing drainage and stormwater detention areas to the east and south provide a buffer transition. • Because the proposed infill housing area is located within close proximity to the existing Neighborhood Center, and it can be integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods’ street and pedestrian networks, the proposed infill housing area could achieve a higher density while meeting the purpose of the MMN zone, as described in Division 4.6(A) of the Land Use Code. The MMN district is intended to: “…be a setting for concentrated housing within easy walking distance of transit and a commercial district.” “…form a transition and a link between surrounding neighborhoods and the commercial core with a unifying pattern of streets and blocks.” The MMN zone “is intended to function together with surrounding low density neighborhoods [typically the L-M-N zone district] and a central commercial core [typically an N-C or C-C zone district]. The intent is for the component zone districts to form an integral, town-like pattern of development, and not merely a series of individual development projects in separate zone districts.” 1.9 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 14 of 24 Back to Top Aerial Context Map The image below indicates the housing infill area, hatched in red, which is approximately 10.2 acres. Although the entire 32.79-acre property is proposed to be rezoned, the 10.2-acre area is the portion of the site which would likely be redeveloped for infill housing. Conditions of approval are proposed for this area. The original plan for the Timberline Church Campus envisioned a second building phase north of the existing church building. This church phase is no longer proposed. Peak seating capacity for the church is currently 1,844 seats, with a peak parking minimum requirement of 461 parking spaces. Currently, the Campus includes vacant land to the east and surplus parking, with a total of 1,293 parking spaces on the property. The parking lot’s outer perimeter drive aisle is shown below with a dashed blue line. This drive aisle could be converted to a private street with sidewalks and street trees. 1.9 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 15 of 24 Back to Top 4. Staff Analysis of Compatibility and Conditions of Approval A. Overview The redevelopment area for the Timberline Church Campus is likely to be higher density housing located along the east and southeast portion of the property, which is approximately 10.2 areas. This area is shown on Exhibit A. The shape and orientation of this redevelopment area could allow large 3-story building footprints to be placed end-to-end along the outer edge of the existing church parking lot. This could lead to an inappropriate size and scale of the redevelopment in comparison to the surrounding developments. 1. Characteristics of the subject property which could lead to compatibility issues with MMN buildings: • Long, linear shape of the redevelopment area; • Lack of public streets surrounding the redevelopment area; • Open, unrestricted views towards the property from the Willow development to the east and; • Existing size and scale of nearby buildings in comparison to the MMN zone, which has few restrictions to limit the overall size of multifamily buildings. 2. Characteristics of the subject property and surrounding area which support MMN zoning: • The property abuts existing MMN developments to the north and south of the church property, including the Pinecone Apartments to the south and Brooklyn Townhomes to the north. • LMN housing to the east in Rigden Farm is near the highest permitted density in the LMN zone (12 units per acre is permitted within a phased development). The Willow development adjacent to the east is 10.47 dwellings per acre. • The Foothills Channel and stormwater detention areas to the south and southeast help provide a buffer transition. • Recognizing these characteristics should allow a greater opportunity to meet City Plan housing objectives with a density greater than what would be allowed with LMN, while providing limitations to achieve an appropriate transition to surrounding properties. B. Summary of Compatibility Topics Discussed in City Plan and the Land Use Code 1. The following strategies promote compatibility by addressing City Plan Mixed Neighborhood Placetype Characteristics: a. Utilizing “small scale multifamily buildings” per the per the Mixed Neighborhood place type b. Where townhomes or multifamily buildings are proposed in an existing neighborhood context, a transition in building height, massing and form should be required along the shared property line or street frontage. 2. The following strategies promote compatibility by addressing City Plan Principles and Policies: a. Utilize building materials, architectural details, color range, building massing, and relationships to streets and sidewalks that are tailored to the surrounding area. 1.9 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 16 of 24 Back to Top b. Incorporate context-sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials); c. Continue established block patterns and streets to improve access to services and amenities from the adjacent neighborhood; d. Locate parking and service areas where impacts on existing neighborhoods—such as noise and traffic—will be minimized. e. Design streets as public amenities with the comfort and enjoyment of pedestrians in mind. f. Design the development to distinctive, not consisting solely of repetitive design. 3. Elements of Compatibility Discussed in the Land Use Code The Land Use Code includes a definition of compatibility: Compatibility shall mean the characteristics of different uses or activities or design which allow them to be located near or adjacent to each other in harmony. Some elements affecting compatibility include height, scale, mass and bulk of structures. Other characteristics include pedestrian or vehicular traffic, circulation, access and parking impacts. Other important characteristics that affect compatibility are landscaping, lighting, noise, odor and architecture. Compatibility does not mean "the same as." Rather, compatibility refers to the sensitivity of development proposals in maintaining the character of existing development. C. Analysis of Development Characteristics Related to Compatibility When considering compatibility topics, the following tables focus on elements of size and scale for multifamily buildings, both near the property as well as examples of larger multifamily developments. 1. Multi-family and Attached Housing Located Around the Property: Name and distance from property Building length Stories Height to roof peak Height to eave Dwellings per building Housing type Max. Density DU/gross acre Zone Brooklyn Rowhouses 20 ft. 234 ft 2 35 ft 25 ft 11 max multifamily 24.3 M-M-N The Willow at Rigden, 30 ft. 150 ft 2 30’ – 3” 20 ft 12 max Single family attached 10.47 L-M-N Pinecone Apartments 100 ft. 150 ft, 106 ft, 80 ft 3 33 ft 26 ft 24, 15, 12 multifamily 12.89 M-M-N The Colony at Rigden 90 ft. 174 ft 3 40 ft 29 ft 24 multifamily 18.5 M-M-N 1.9 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 17 of 24 Back to Top 2. Examples of Larger-scale MMN Multi-family Developments with Blocks of Streets: A typical MMN multifamily development with larger scale buildings includes a network of public streets surrounding the multifamily buildings, creating blocks surrounded by streets which provide separation and a land use transition. Example characteristics of MMN developments with larger building footprints generally contained within a network of streets are provided in the table below. Name and distance from property Building length Stories Height to roof peak Height to eave Dwellings per building Housing type Max. Density DU/gross acre Zone Sidehill, 1,600 ft. 182 ft 3/ with step- down at ends 50 ft, 38 ft at ends 28 ft, 19 ft at ends 20 multifamily 9.56 (includes some SF) M-M-N Trails at Timberline, 1,900 ft. 222 ft, 209 ft, 150 ft, 89 ft 3 46 ft 29 ft 24, 18, 12 multifamily 17.5 M-M-N Caribou Apartments, 5,500 ft. 315 ft, 250 ft, 187 ft 3/ with 2 story at ends 40 ft, 29 ft at ends 30 ft, 19 ft at ends 44, 32, 20 multifamily 17.9 M-M-N Harmony 23 12,500 ft. 268 ft, 222 ft, 187 ft 3 39’ – 5” 30 ft 36, 36, 24 multifamily 14.7 H-C D. Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, the maximum allowable building height shall be 40 feet to the roof peak, and the maximum allowable eave height shall be 30 feet as measured to the face of the soffit. 2) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, the maximum allowable building length shall not be more than 200 feet. For any building longer than 150 feet, all end units shall step down to two stories and shall have a maximum eave height of 22 feet and a maximum height to the roof peak of 29 feet, as measured to face of the soffit. 3) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, at least two east/west pedestrian connections shall be provided, and one of these connections shall be to the Rendezvous Trail. 4) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, a building and parking setback, not less than 30-feet in width, shall be provided along the east property line bordering the Willow development. 1.9 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 18 of 24 Back to Top E. Comparison of LMN and MMN Code Requirements, and related Conditions of Approval • The proposed MMN zoning could be compatible with the nearby LMN and RL uses subject to the conditions of approval recommended to tailor the MMN zoning of the property to the context. These conditions focus on the size and scale of multifamily buildings because the MMN zone has no specific limitations that regulate the size and overall coverage of a multifamily building footprint. • When considering the Land Use Code differences between what is allowable in the LMN zone compared to the MMN zone, a comparison of standards related to compatibility are summarized with the following table. Conditions of approval are summarized in the table which relate to compatibility characteristics noted in City Plan. • These standards relate to: 1) Building coverage; building size, height, bulk, mass and scale 2) Pattern of streets, outdoor spaces, and pedestrian circulation 3) Parking and buffer transitions along shared property lines Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed Maximum Density (based on gross acres of the residential development) LMN: 9 units/acre overall, and 12 units maximum per phase; 12 units/acre if affordable housing MMN: No maximum Minimum average density: 7 units/acre for developments 20 aces or less; 12 units/acre if over 20 acres None. Addressed with conditions 1 and 2 that limit the overall length and height of the buildings. Limit on number of units per building LMN: Yes – maximum of 12 dwelling units per building MMN: No maximum None. Maximum building height of one, two and three-family dwellings LMN: 2.5 stories MMN: 3 stories None. Maximum Building Height for Multi- family LMN: 3 stories MMN: 3 stories None. 1.9 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 19 of 24 Back to Top Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed Maximum height for each residential story, and maximum building height to roof peak • 12’ – 8” for each story, which equals 38 feet from the finish floor to ceiling of the 3rd floor • No maximum, but “Special Review” required if roof peak is over 40 feet. Condition 1: 40 feet maximum building height to roof peak. Maximum eave height of 30 feet. Provides a height transition from the 2-story Willow homes to the east, which are 30’-3” max height to the roof peak and 20’ eave height. Per City Plan Mixed Neighborhood place type, provides transition in building height, massing and form. Special Building Height Restrictions LMN: Multifamily buildings with a setback of less than 50 feet facing a street or single- or two-family dwellings shall minimize the impact on the adjacent single- or two-family dwelling property by reducing the number of stories and terracing the roof lines over the occupied space. None. Special Height Review Both LMN and MMN: Yes – required for buildings that exceed 40 feet in height to roof peak. Criteria addresses light/shadow, privacy, and neighborhood scale Maximum Floor Area LMN: The maximum gross floor area (excluding garages) shall be fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet MMN: No maximum None. Provides smaller scale buildings, however limiting the length and height of the building is recommended, rather than limiting the overall building floor area 1.9 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 20 of 24 Back to Top Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed Building Length LMN: No limit, however, block lengths are limited to 700 feet. MMN: No limit maximum Condition 2: Maximum building length not more than 200 feet. For any building longer than 150 feet, all end units shall step down to two story and shall have a maximum eave height of 22 feet and a maximum height to the roof to the peak of 29 feet. The adjacent Willow townhome buildings are 150’ wide total. Per City Plan Mixed Neighborhood place type, provides transition in building height, massing and form and helps ensure smaller scale multi-family buildings. Per City Plan Policy LIV 4.2 -- Incorporates context-sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials). Block size and length; LMN: An interconnected network of streets with blocks of developed land bounded by connecting streets no greater than 12 acres in size; block face is over 700 feet long, then walkways connecting to other streets shall be provided at approximately mid- block or at intervals of at least every 650 feet MMN: All blocks shall be limited to a maximum size of seven (7) acres, rest is same; streets shall be spaced at intervals not to exceed six hundred sixty (660) feet between Condition 3: At least two east/west pedestrian connections shall be provided. One of these connections shall be to the Rendezvous Trail. This condition reinforces a town-like urban pattern, per City connectivity standards -- where buildings are oriented towards public streets, street trees and public sidewalks, with a spacing that provides a relatively fined-grained network of pedestrian connections. Street Requirements Both LMN and MMN: Requires that buildings face and connect to a public or private street. None. This requirement recommended to be reviewed with the specific development plan, and not with the rezoning 1.9 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 21 of 24 Back to Top Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed Parking setbacks Both LMN and MMN: Minimum 5’ along a lot line. *Setbacks along lot lines for vehicular use areas may be increased by the decision maker in order to enhance compatibility with the abutting use or to match the contextual relationship of adjacent or abutting vehicular use areas. Condition 4: 30’ minimum building and parking setback along the east property line bordering the Willow. This reflects the Willow setback, which is 30’ and also helps preserve the storm drainage feature along the east boundary of the Church Campus. Provides transition space for change in building height. Building setbacks Both LMN and MMN: • 9’ along a nonarterial street, 5’ side, 8’ rear • Setbacks from the property line of abutting property containing single- and two-family dwellings shall be twenty-five (25) feet. Neighborhood Park / Open Space LMN: Must be at least one acre, either public or private. Can be located off property in a neighborhood park or a privately owned park, located within a 1/3 mile of at least ninety (90) percent of the proposed dwellings; applies to projects 10-acres or larger. MMN: Must be at least 10,000 square feet if a private park or can be a public park if located within a 1/3 mile of at least ninety (90) percent of the proposed dwellings; applies to projects 10-acres or larger. None. Recommended to be addressed at the time of development review 1.9 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 22 of 24 Back to Top Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed Mix of Housing Types Examples: Two-family dwellings, Single- family attached dwellings, Single- family detached, Multi-family buildings with 5 to 7 units, Multi- family buildings with 7 to 12 units, 12 or more LMN: 0-15 acres – 1 housing type 15-20 acres – 2 housing types 20-30 acres – 3 housing types 30 or more – 4 housing types MMN: 0-16 acres – 1 housing type 16-30 acres – 2 housing types 30 or more – 3 housing types None. Multifamily housing is the most likely housing type that will be proposed for the site. A variety of housing types already exist in the area, and the residential development area is under the 16-acre threshold. Additionally, because building variation is required (see below) no conditions are proposed to provide multiple housing types. Building Articulation Both LMN and MMN: Building facades shall be articulated with horizontal and/or vertical elements that break up blank walls of 40 feet or longer. Facade articulation may be accomplished by offsetting the floor plan, recessing or projection of design elements, change in materials and/or change in contrasting colors. Projections shall fall within setback requirements. None. Building standards are the same for LMN and MMN, and are recommended to be considered at the time of development review and not with the rezoning. Building Variation LMN: 5-7 buildings: at least 2 distinctly different building designs required. More than 7 buildings: at least 3 distinctly different building designs required. MMN: 3-5 buildings at least 2 distinctly different building designs required. More than 5 buildings: at least 3 distinctly different building designs required. None. The development area will likely include more than 5 buildings, and at least 3 distinctly different building designs are appropriate. Setbacks from single- and two- family dwellings Both LMN and MMN: Multi-family buildings shall provide buffer a 25’ minimum buffer yard along the property line of abutting existing single- and two- family dwellings N/A A 30’ buffer is recommended to provide a walkway within a green courtyard space between the proposed Church Infill area and the Willow housing entrances to the east. This would also preserve existing drainage features. This continues the “town-like” pattern by 1.9 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 23 of 24 Back to Top Code Standard LMN Requirement MMN Requirement Recommended Condition of Approval Compatibility Topic Addressed providing a green court and walkways in lieu of a street network. Natural Habitat Buffer for Foothills Channel Both LMN and MMN: 50’ buffer from top of bank. None. Because this standard applies to both LMN and MMN, no conditions are recommended. 5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion In evaluating the petition for the proposed Timberline Church Rezoning, #REZ200002, staff makes the following findings of fact: A. The Rezoning complies with the process located in Division 2.2 – Common Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 – Administration and Division 2.9.4 – Quasi-Judicial Rezonings B. The Rezoning complies with the applicable review criteria for quasi-judicial requests in that: 1) The amendment is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan (City Plan); 2) The amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and provides an appropriate zone district for the land; 3) The amendment would not result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater, management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; and 4) The amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. 6. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board approve a motion to recommend that City Council approve the Timberline Church Rezoning, #REZ200002, based on the Findings of Fact in the Staff Report, subject to the following conditions: 1) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, the maximum allowable building height shall be 40 feet to the roof peak, and the maximum allowable eave height shall be 30 feet as measured to the face of the soffit. 2) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, the maximum allowable building length shall not be more than 200 feet. For any building longer than 150 feet, all end units shall step down to two stories and shall have a maximum eave height of 22 feet and a maximum height to the roof peak of 29 feet, as measured to face of the soffit. 3) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, at least two east/west pedestrian connections shall be provided, and one of these connections shall be to the Rendezvous Trail. 4) Within the Infill Area shown on Exhibit A, a building and parking setback, not less than 30-feet in width, shall be provided along the east property line bordering the Willow development. 1.9 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Agenda Item 4 REZ200002 | Timberline Church Rezone Thursday, September 17, 2020 | Page 24 of 24 Back to Top 7. Attachments 1. Zoning Petition 2. Petitioner’s Justification Narrative 3. Existing Zoning Map 4. Proposed Zoning Map 5. Perspective Map 6. Context Map 7. Structure Plan Map 8. Land Use Density Map 9. Exhibit A – Infill Area 10. Petitioner’s Rezoning Map 11. The Willow – Approved Plans 12. The Willow – Approved Elevations 1.9 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Jeff Hansen, Chair Hybrid Hearing Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair City Council Chambers Per Hogestad 300 Laporte Avenue David Katz Fort Collins, Colorado Jeff Schneider Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & William Whitley Channel 881 on Comcast The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Hearing September 17, 2020 Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Haefele, Hansen, Hogestad, Katz, Schneider, Shepard, Whitley Absent: None Staff Present: Stephens, Everette, Sizemore, Beals, Hahn, Bzdek, Kleer, Mapes, Yatabe, Spencer, Virata, Holland, Stroud, Smith, Smith and Manno Chair Hansen provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. He described the following procedures: • While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen input is valued and appreciated. • The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item. • Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land Use Code. • Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will be allowed for that as well. • This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard. Agenda Review CDNS Interim Director Sizemore reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, stating that all items will be heard as originally advertised. Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda: Planning and Zoning Board Minutes ATTACHMENT 10 1.10 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 2 of 10 None noted Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes from August 20, 2020, P&Z Hearing 2. Mountain View Community Church Chair Hansen did a final review of the items that are on consent agenda and reiterated that those items will not have a separate presentation unless pulled from the consent agenda. Member Whitley made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Consent agenda which consist of the draft minutes of the August 2020 Planning and Zoning hearing and the Mountain View Community Church PDP 200008. This approval is based on the agenda materials and information presented during the work session, this hearing and discussion. It also includes information, analysis and finding of fact and conclusion contained in the staff report including the agenda materials and the hear that are adopted by this Board. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0. Discussion Agenda: 3. Brothers BBQ PDP 200005 Project Description: This is a proposed Project Development Plan to redevelop an existing abandoned gas station for a barbeque restaurant. The property is within the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN). Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that there were no citizen emails or letters received for this item. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Mapes gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Applicants Nick O’Sullivan, Chris O’Sullivan, and Nathan Hall (Architect), Jess Deal (Accountant and other) also provided a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Jeff, via Zoom, is in favor of the project and asked what was going to happen with contamination and underground tanks. Staff Response Planner Mapes reviewed what the four modifications entailed. Parking dimensions: Standard parking stall dimensions are 19’ long, for this project they would be 18’. Standard parking lot isle is 24’ wide, for this project it would be 20’. Landscaping: This was gone over in the presentation. Walkways: Standards require that there be a walkway to the building that does not require a person walking to walk across any vehicle use area. This project will use marked or separated pedestrian access to the building. There is not a clear route to mark in this small lot, everyone will have to watch out for each other. Neighborhood Centers: This was included in the project review and staff report. To meet the standards the neighborhood center must have access to the neighborhood with local streets such that arterial street access is not required. They are required to be part of a neighborhood and have an outdoor gathering space. This modification was questioned, but staff felt the the type of use should be reported on. Applicant Chris O’Sullivan responded that the tanks have been removed and testing was completed as well as four (4) monitoring wells. The site is fully clean with a letter of compliance received. Board Questions / Deliberation 1.10 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 3 of 10 Chair Hansen asked for clarification of the four modifications. Member Hogestad asked about 3.4.7 and if preservation staff had been involved and if not, why not? Planner Mapes responded that because of previous changes/alterations, the project no longer requires preservation oversite. Planner Bzdek responded that 3.4.7(c) details the process for determining eligibility. In this case this building is more than 50 years old, but without documentation. A third party was hired to complete and intensive level survey. The survey was completed, it was found that due to extensive alterations, the building no longer required input by preservation staff. Member Hogestad quested the 20’ drive isle and asked if Poudre Fire Authority was ok with it. Planner Mapes responded yes. Member Hogestad questioned 3.2.2(b)(c)(d), he is concerned with the lack of safety with pedestrians walking through the lot. He is also concerned that it does not support the bicycle or pedestrian plans. Chair Hansen asked if Member Hogestad saw any alternate means for getting pedestrians off the site where they do not cross the drive isle. Member Hogestad was not sure, but felt it is contrary to pedestrian safety to not offer any sort of demarcation or separation of the walkway. Member Hafele wanted understanding of the modification. Is it possible to remove one or two parking space to create a walkway? Member Hogestad commented that those that come on bike or foot need better safety. Member Hogestad commented that the issue also is people coming in other modes of transportation, bike, and foot. Chair Hansen asked where the bicycle parking will be located. Mr. O’Sullivan responded that on the the North East of the building, a bicycle rack will be installed. Due to the site being such a small location, when you do park, it is such a small walk. Mr. O’Sullivan responded that there has not been a problem at other locations within the past 20 years. Member Haefele commented that the site is small and normally would not have so many parking spaces. Would it be better to remove two parking spaces to make a walkway on one or the other sides? This would facilitate walking there even if people come out to one of the arterials and around. Member Shepard wondered if pavement stripping would work to satisfy this issue. Multiple board members agreed. Chair Hansen asked if there was enough space for someone to safely access the site without having to cross the drive isle? Chair Hansen also asked about vehicle access. Are both the curb cuts full access and are they right in, right out only? Planner Mapes responded they are right in, right out. He felt that it could be stripped if the Board felt it should be. Chris felt that these are great ideas, and they can work with Planner Mapes. Chair Hansen wants to make sure that it is well thought out in terms of thinking where people will walk, and not just striping for the sake of striping. Member Haefele commented that people will walk where they are going to walk and those that are concerned will see that there is a designated area for them. She hopes that motorists will see that there might be pedestrians. Member Hogestad is concerned about the lack of landscape. He feels there need to be attention paid, whether that is losing parking space or what have you. He feels that “not detrimental to the public good” is completely wrong. It is a loss of canopy cover, stormwater control, lack of water conservation, an increase in air pollution, increase in glare and increase in heat island. Chair Hansen asked if all the trees in green were currently on the site. Planner Mapes responded that the trees on the West and South side are existing. All the street trees are new. Located in the Northeast corner is a planter. Member Shepard recalled that this is where the monitoring well is located and that they built the planter to disguise the monitoring well. Planner Mapes did not know. Chris responded that the monitoring well is located on the Northwest corner not where the planters are. All will be irrigated. Planner Mapes added that losing a couple parking spots would allow for extra landscaping and pedestrian stripping. Chris questioned if the patio landscaping counts as interior landscaping. Planner Mapes responded it does not meet the requirement. Chair Hansen commented that per the LUC it is clear the alternate ideas would not work on the site. Member Haefele asked if more trees on the South side would be workable. Is it possible to make the parking lot porous pavers? Member Shepard asked if their plan was not already a greater amount of landscaping than what is there presently. Planner Mapes explained that the big change is the street trees. Other than that, it is pretty much all paved currently. Member Whitley is sorry that we are going to lose the perimeter of green, and he is also concerned about the heat affect. Member Katz asked if there was any way to fit some planters between the curbs and sidewalk. Nathan responded that to get to a 10’ wide sidewalk they condensed the parking to 56’ which is comfortable. It is not possible to shrink the parking more than 56’. Tree health is better if it is closer to the interior of the lot, but for pedestrian safety the trees need to be closer to the street to create a buffer. As far as adding more trees, there are specific City rules for engineering for how close to the street trees can be placed. After working with everyone, the number originally proposed is what will work. Member Shepard asked Member 1.10 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 4 of 10 Hogestad, what if the trees were upsized increase the caliper size? Planning Manager Everette responded that Forestry staff are experiencing issues with upsized trees. Sourcing is more difficult, and the survival rate is lower. Member Hansen asked about the parking spaces and the requirements. Planner Mapes responded the minimum required is 12. Member Schneider commented that stormwater is involved in the process and there must have been conversation in that area. Planner Mapes did not recall what the discussion has been, but there are no remaining outstanding issues with stormwater. The site is already 100% paved. Member Hogestad commented that it is about the purpose. Member Schneider responded that there are no changes or increases in the existing condition of impervious surface on the site, and this is the reason stormwater has no concerns. Chair Hansen asked if the Board were to include a condition on the modification that they add some landscaping, positioning it in such a location that water flowing off the site happened through it would be a good recommendation. Member Shepard made a motion to approve modification 3.2.2(L) Parking Stall Dimensions, to allow reduced drive by width from 24’ to 20’ and 19’ to 18’, the justification of 2.8.2 is due to the exceptional physical conditions and peculiar uniqueness of the site. This is based on the findings of fact in the staff report, materials that have been presented in the staff packet, at the work session, throughout this hearing and Board discussion. Member Schneider seconded. Vote: 7:0. Member Schneider made a motion to approve modification of standard 4.5(D)(3) Neighborhood Centers that the subject property does not comply to the standards. The neighborhood centers in the LMN, the modification of the standard is not detrimental to the public good and complies with Section 2.8(2)(H). This is based on the findings of fact in the staff report, materials that have been presented in the staff packet, at the work session, throughout this hearing and Board discussion. Member Katz seconded. Vote 7:0 Member Schneider made a motion to approve modification of standard 3.2.2 Access and Circulation around parking. This modification will not be detrimental to public good and satisfies 2.8.2(H) along with the condition of approval that there be two pedestrian stripped access point, one off the northern property line and one off of the eastern property line for access to the building. This is based on the findings of fact in the staff report, materials that have been presented in the staff packet, at the work session, throughout this hearing and Board discussion. Member Hogestad is somewhat concerned that the Board is tinkering with the design rather than allowing the architect to work out what this all should be. He would have liked to table this and let them design it and come back. He will support this, so the project moves on. Chair Hansen commented that Member Hogestad could make an amendment to the motion. Member Shepard agreed with Member Hogestad. Member Haefele asked if the condition of approval for the modification says, “to pedestrian access points within the parking lot separated from each other so they provide multiple entrances”. Member Schneider prefers to leave the motion as is. Chair Hansen feels the motion is good as it stands. Member Katz seconded. Vote: 7:0 Member Shepard made a motion to approve modification of standard to the maximum extent feasible increasing the amount of landscaping on the side subject to the requirements of the departments such as Poudre Fire Authority, Utilities, Engineering, and Stormwater. This is based on the findings of fact in the staff report, 3.2.1(E)(4), 3.2.1(E)(5), recorded by 2.8.2 due to the exceptional physical nature and conditions of the site, materials that have been presented in the staff packet, at the work session, throughout this hearing and Board discussion. Member Schneider finds it interesting that a requirement is never placed on the “not feasible” other than what is proposed. He would like the applicant team and staff do everything possible to try and increase the landscaping to the best of their ability without doing major changes to the overall plan. Member Whitley wished there were more green space and barriers. He will be supporting the project. Member Katz would like to see more landscaping but acknowledge that this is a big improvement in this space. He will be supporting the modification. Chair Hansen would like the applicant to find other ways to increase the landscaping. Member Haefele feels this will be an improvement on the corner and will be supporting the project. Member Haefele seconded. Vote 7:0 Member Schneider made a motion that the Fort Colins Planning and Zoning Board approve the Brother’s BBQ PDP 200005. This is based on the findings of fact in supporting explanation of the primary staff report, along with the two conditions that should be addressed in the final plans. For the final plans, the 1.10 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 5 of 10 details and mulch around raised planter at the street corner and along with the 6’ fence on the South property line. This is all based on the information provided to us in the staff report, the discussion in the work session and the tonight’s hearing. Member Schneider is happy to see that the corner is being redeveloped and cleaned up. Member Shepard is supporting the recommendations and conditions of approval as well. Member Hogestad believes in good design; he hopes this is an opportunity to step up and so something extraordinary. Member Whitley acknowledges that the plan is an improvement. Member Haefele appreciates the effort to bring the building back to its original design. Chair Schneider is excited to see this site redeveloped. Member Katz seconded. Vote: 7:0 4. Timberline Church Rezone Project Description: This is a request for a rezone of Lots 1-5 and Tract A of the Timberline Church Campus from Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) to Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N). Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that the following was received: • Email was received from Brad Florin commenting that the recommended Conditions of Approval are the spirit of the intended development, but they would prefer a rezone. • Email received from Julius Medgyesy stating opposition to the project. • Email received from Olivia Moench stating opposition to the project. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Holland and Planning Manager Everette gave a brief verbal/visual overview of the project. Brad Florin, applicant, also provided a brief verbal/visual presentation. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Amber Kelly, she is thankful there was thought into buffers. She wanted to know if this could only be a multi-family project and that there should be a neighborhood meeting. Kim Schwindt, 2400 Pinecone, she wants to know how the City will address the drainage and is unhappy with traffic on the bike trail and on the street. Brian Kelly, he is concerned with adequate facilities to allow this medium density. He is also concerned with the traffic and safety of the traffic. He feels the drainage should be kept the way that it is. Randy Schwindt, 2400 Pinecone, he feels there should be a maximum per acre. He wanted to know if some of the parking lot for Timberline Church was going to go away. He is opposed to this project. Randy Munzt, via Zoom, Kansas Dr., he has seen flooding and the ponds fill. He feels the area is overwhelmed with people and new building. He wanted to know if the open space requirement is being met. Diane Benta, via Zoom, Iowa Dr., she is concerned with drainage and traffic. She is wondering if a traffic study could even be done during this pandemic, pre-pandemic people were driving over driveways. It is very unsafe. Udea, via Zoom, she wonders why CSU is looking for housing away from campus and she feels Fort Collins is losing its character. She is tired of the same issues being raised on every project, such as traffic, drainage, etc. Elda Hopkins, via Zoom, is concerned with the traffic on Timberline. There is no consideration for the people trying to turn off Timberline when leaving the church. She is not in favor of any houses being built. Staff Response 1.10 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 6 of 10 Planner Holland responded to citizen comment. He spoke to buffering to the South and the East and what is possible in that area. The channel will be looked at when a site-specific plan is received. Overall drainage will be looked at when submitting the overall development plan. Regarding traffic, both foot and vehicular, all comments and questions will be forwarded to Parks staff so that they are aware of the concern. Vehicular traffic will be addressed when they submit a specific site-plan. Regarding drainage, Planner Holland cannot confirm whether or not it fits within the 30” buffer separation at this time. Additional park space could be looked into when the time comes. Other uses allowed in the MMN zone is residential uses like multi-family, townhomes, two-family dwellings, mixed-use, institutional use, parks, and a handful of commercial uses. Maintenance of right-of-way frontages within Rigden Farm and who is responsible. Development and impact fees would be collected to help contribute to the maintenance. The property owner is the one who must maintain the right-of-way frontage. Mr. Florin responded that with the new zoning, an affordable housing standard could be achieved. This is not a CSU development, but would offer CSU employees an affordable option for housing. Board Questions / Deliberation Member Hafele wanted clarification on the trail and buffer, that they are not developable? Planner Holland responded yes, that is correct. Member Hafele; is the 30’ setback a mirrored section? Planner Holland commented that it is normal and reasonable and allows some separation of buildings. Member Schneider requested clarification from the applicants. What acreage are you trying to rezone? Mr. Florin responded that the whole property is what is being requested with the rezone, 33 acres. Density will follow what is allowed, looking at 17-20 units, this is what will make the project viable. It is based on the area of use and gross acreage. Chair Hansen asked about the first condition that is regarding max height. The first is to reduce max height, in the MMN zone what is the max height without the condition? Planner Holland; 3-stories with max height of each story at 12’8”. Required pedestrian connections are being reinforced. The setback is a matter of building code. Member Katz requested clarification on condition four and if they wanted the Board to drop this condition or all four of the conditions. Mr. Florin responded that they feel all four conditions are overly prescriptive and would like all four dropped. Currently this is conceptual and would like to wait until they come forward with a submittal. Member Hogestad feels that since there are conditions, that there is a level of detail required. Have they considered, as one of the conditions, a maximum floor area or a number of units? Planner Holland has thought about this, they are focused on a rectangular building but there are options and ways to approach this. Member Schneider questioned if the applicant had a conversation with staff regarding increasing the density between the two zone districts making this all obtainable housing or looking at doing an 80% AMI or some sort of justification for the increased density? Mr. Florin responded that there were conversations with staff and developers, and it became obvious that LMN density would not work without extra density. This is the reason for this request. A MMN master plan for the whole 33 acres is the direction as opposed to just the 10 acres. Member Haefele is frustrated that there is a plan for obtainable housing, but it is attached to the the land. Find a builder, willing to build on the land. Mr. Florin responded that Timberline Church will be giving (donating) 6 of the 10 acres to CSU. The church does not have the finances to subsidize construction of a project. CSU is donating the land to the developer, this is for the obtainable housing, even with the MMN. This is how we can get to an 80% AMI goal. Chair Hansen asked about the access point to Custer Dr. and if there is capacity to improve this intersection? Mrs. Hahn Hahn responded that, if and when, a submittal comes in, they would look at intersection improvements and making the traffic pieces function. There is capacity to facilitate the volumes with this development. Member Hogestad asked if Timberline is constrained? Mr. Virata explained that there is capacity with the right-of- way to add a third lane on Timberline, making a total of 6 lanes. 1.10 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 7 of 10 Member Katz is not a fan of rezones as they may cause issues down the road. He would like to see a PDP come in and the land be built organically. Member Haefele feels that the property owners do not have a right to rezone, they have a right to request a rezone and only if it can be done in a way that does not negatively impact all the other property owners adjacent who have rights as well. She will not support this rezone unless the conditions are retained. Member Shepard wanted to know if flexibility could be added to the prescriptiveness. Chair Hansen feels there are already provisions in the Land Use Code that would address bulk and mass. This may hurt as opposed to help. Member Schneider is in the middle and can understand both sides. He is most concerned with overall density on the property. May be a cap of 20. Member Shepard feels the conditions are of the middle ground. He would like a little flexibility of prescriptiveness of the standards. Member Haefele feels it makes sense to limit the density to something more than LMN but less than unlimited and matching the 21, 12, 13 of the existing current MMN neighborhoods. Member Schneider questioned changing the density over part of the parcel as opposed to all of the parcel or would the Board leave it all MMN but with a cap for the whole parcel? Member Katz asked what the highest density was in MMN in the City? Member Shepard responded within the 14-20 range. Member Katz made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council the following recommendation for the Timberline Church Campus Rezone REZ-200002 with the following condition: • Maximum gross unit per acre density of 20 units and that an overall development plan precedes or accompany the PDP This recommendation is based upon the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session, this hearing, and the Board discussion on this item. Member Schneider feels this is a happy compromise. Member Hogestad agrees with Member Schneider, 20 is a bit high, but he supports the motion. Member Whitley feels this is a good compromise, 20 is a bit on the high side, but will support the motion. Member Hafele feels this is a good compromise. Chair Hansen agrees that dropping the previous conditions and creating their own is a good idea. Member Schneider seconded. Vote: 7:0. 5. Ridgewood Hills Fifth Filing Project Description: This is a proposed Project Development Plan (PDP) for residential development comprising 362 units in a combination of multi-family buildings, townhomes, and duplexes distributed across the 34-acre site. The project is located on the west side of S. College Avenue/US Hwy 287 between Triangle Drive and Long View Farm Open Space where Avondale Road/Carpenter Road define the southern edge of the City. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that the following was received: • Email received from Scott Hollingsworth stating their concerns for the project. • Email received from Dave and Hilary Snyder stating some preferences they would like to have noted for the project. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Kleer gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Member Shepard disclosed that he walked the sight this morning, but no ex parte contact with any person. Bri Kneep, Mrs. Hahn Renner, Donald Cecil, Chris Walla, and John Beggs also provided a brief verbal/visual presentation. 1.10 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 8 of 10 Public Input (3 minutes per person) Jeff, via Zoom, feels there will be traffic issues, pedestrian issues and wants the Board to deny this project as is. He feels their requests have been ignored. Varah, via Zoom, disagrees with the project, does not want people just shoved in every open space, and no mention of sustainability. Scott, via Zoom, he is concerned with neighborhood safety with traffic that will cripple current roads. He is against the project. Bill Cobb, via Zoom, would like to know more about the traffic impact within the neighborhood, what commitment is there for the safety of the children? Speeds limits are not obeyed, there has been a death. Hilary Frazer, via Zoom, she does not agree with this project. The traffic is a tremendous issue. She would like to see specific entries and exits, a couple of sound barriers, access to the entrance closet to College Ave., trail access, every tree they take out needs to be replaced with 10 trees, separate park, clashing cross walk sign in front of house, round-about installed, security guards etc. House values will drop because of the rentals. Bill, via Zoom, he is concerned with the traffic. Will there be another school? Ben, via Zoom, would like to know how this filing meshes with the fourth filing. He is concerned with traffic and density. Debbie, via Zoom, does not approve of this project. She is concerned with traffic issues that will arise. Staff Response Planner Kleer and Mr. Delich responded to questions brought forth from public input relating to the traffic impact survey. Chair Hansen asked about schools in relation safety and capacity. Planner Kleer responded that discussions were had with Thompson School District. They have capacity for 385 students and indicated that there is capacity if this moves forward. Chair Hansen asked about design fit. Mr. Beggs responded that they have looked at documents from the Carpenter Gateway plan which is considered or part of the Southern Gateway. Chair Hansen spoke of concerns that this project may not be meeting the City’s more innovate, sustainability goals. Planner Kleer responded that the building code has a higher standard of building in relation to energy code and providing conduit for EV’s. The solar orientation is sufficient and lend to efficiency. The Land Use Code does not require a higher level of energy efficiency beyond what the building code does. Mr. Beggs gave response to the trail system. Chair Hansen requested clarification regarding the tree mitigation of 10:1. Mr. Beggs responded that they have completed extensive walk-abouts with Forestry. Documentation has been completed and recommendations followed. Member Schneider asked if staff could reach out to existing residents regarding traffic calming and what can be done to help. Mr. Delich responded that the neighborhood has extensive traffic calming in place currently. Speed studies have been conducted and found that there has been a reduction in speed. Planner Kleer responded to visual and sound buffering commenting that this is not applicable. There is not much other than landscaping that could offer a visual buffer. Board Questions / Deliberation 1.10 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 9 of 10 Member Shepard asked how far the backs of the garages that face College Ave. and the terrace wall. Mr. Beggs responded that some of them abut the wall and others are offset. Is the area for parking a street like private drive or a private parking lot drive isle? Mr. Beggs responded that the street like private drive is in the northwest corner of the project. Are the two-family dwellings manufactured housing? Mr. Beggs responded no. Are the single- family attached on individual lots? Mr. Beggs, yes. Member Haefele asked if the intention was to rent the cottages and duplexes. Mr. Beggs, rental. Is any of the development expected to be owner occupied. Mr. Beggs, the single-family attached is intended to be owned, along with the townhomes in the southwest. Member Shepard, along Longmont Street there are five buildings that face the wetlands area, but no walkways between the buildings, how the emergency personnel get to the front door? Mr. Beggs, there is a front door on both sides of the building. Member Shepard asked about access, connect and right-of-way. Mrs. Hahn responded that they could meet the level of service without making additional connection. It would be a meaningful connection for the neighborhood and Kroger. Mr. Beggs responded that attempts have been made to contact Kroger but have been unsuccessful. Member Katz questioned if Goodwin, Knight ever pursued acquisition of the Kroger site. Mr. Beggs responded that not at this time, they are not interested. Member Shepard feels there is a site distance issue. Mrs. Hahn responded that it is a consideration when installing traffic signals. In this case, there have not been a lot of crashes of vehicles exiting either direction. Installing a signal could cause crashes. Chair Hansen asked about pedestrian crossing for the trail. Mr. Beggs responded that they could bring it down to cross at Avondale only once. Chair Hansen asked if there were 8 conditions. Planner Kleer responded yes, describing the difference between a couple of them. Chair Hansen asked if the color was in the Land Use Code or more of a preference. Planner Kleer responded that in the code is states to not have those colors be vibrant and selected from the surrounding neighborhood, and in character or aligned with surrounding natural environment. Member Shepard commented that maybe a metro district could be sought in the future. Chair Hansen commented he was getting at a similar thing. Member Schneider commented that metro districts are currently on hold. Member Shepard asked if the street trees could be at 35’ center as opposed to 40’, also could the parkway strip could be widened by 1’. He approves the first modification if this could be added. Modification #1 – On-street Parking Member Shepard made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification number one to 3.2.2(K)(1)(B) to consider Strasburg an internal street for multi-family parking and to allow the on-street parking as proposed. This complies with 2.8.2(H) and is not detrimental to public good and is equal to or better than. This is subject to the condition that the street trees along the multi-family section of the project are 35’ center. This approval is based upon the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session, the findings of fact, the staff report, this hearing, and the Board discussion on this item. Member Schneider seconded. Vote: 6:1. Modification #2 – Dwelling Fronting Streets or Walkway Spines Member Schneider made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification number two to 3.5.2(D) regarding the relationship with dwellings to street parking to allow three duplex buildings not to front either street, a connection walkway or major walkway. This modification will not be 1.10 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2020 Page 10 of 10 detrimental to public good and qualifies with section 2.8.2(H). This is based on the finding of fact, staff report, the work session, and this hearing tonight. Member Katz seconded. Vote 7:0 Modification #3 – Building Variations Member Shepard made a motion to deny this modification to 3.8.30 regarding footprint size and shape. Attorney Yatabe requested specificity as to why this is being denied. Member Shepard responded that the footprints are strikingly similar. The standard contains the word significant. Attorney Yatabe commented that the applicant’s justification is that this is equal-to or better-than. Based on the standards, what part of the modification of standard is not being satisfied? Member Shepard stated that it does not meet 2.8.2 in terms of being equal to or better than, it appears to be self-imposed, there is no hardship, and it is not equal to or better than. Member Schneider commented that it is hard for him to tell the difference in architecture from what is normally seen. He agrees that it looks repetitious and looks like mirror imaging. Member Haefele agrees that the buildings are substantially similar. In this case there is not a benefit, it is not equal or better. Chair Hansen disagrees in that they are asking for the modification for the subtle changes and the building end caps help to make them look different. Member Haefele seconded. Vote 5:2 Condition #9 – To Clean up Modification Denied Member Shepard made a motion for approval that Condition #9 read as follows: Applicant will work with staff and the design team meeting 3.8.30(F)(2) to comply with the standard to the maximum extent feasible. Member Schneider seconded. Vote 7:0 Member Schneider made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve Ridgewood Hills Fifth Filing – PDP-190018 subject to the eight (8) conditions that were included in the staff report with the additional condition tonight. This approval is based upon the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session, the findings of fact, the staff report, this hearing, and the Board discussion on this item. Member Schneider feels this is a good project. Chair Hansen likes the natural areas and the layering. Member Katz seconded. Vote 7:0 For more complete details on this hearing, please view our video recording located here: https://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php?search=PLANNING%20ZONING Other Business None noted Adjournment Chair Hansen moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 2:13 am September 18, 2020. Minutes respectfully submitted by Shar Manno. Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on: ____________. Paul Sizemore, Interim Director, CDNS Jeff Hansen, Chair 1.10 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Planning & Zoning Board Hearing Minutes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Timberline Church Rezoning Neighborhood Meeting Summary Neighborhood Meeting Date: October 22, 2020 A video of the neighborhood meeting is available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iZ6zPv0sqk&feature=youtu.be City Staff – Attendees: Alyssa Stephens – Neighborhood Development Liaison Jason Holland – City Planner Nicole Hahn – Interim City Traffic Engineer Marc Virata – Civil Engineer Applicant Contact: Brad Florin - bflorin@55resort.com Information Presented: • Alyssa Stephens provided an overview of the meeting process and ground rules. • City Planner Jason Holland provided an overview of the area context, rezoning criteria, and the steps in the rezoning review process. • The applicant presented information about the church property, which was purchased in 1993, opened in 2002, and an addition added in 2008. Mr. Florin explained that, since that time, a huge amount of development has occurred in the area surrounding the property. • Mr. Florin explained that the church campus has become an inadvertent land bank, and they have been exploring infill development for attainable housing. They have been meeting with partners/developers. City fees and construction costs are substantial, the only way to achieve attainable housing is with higher density; economic reality has prompted the request for the rezoning. • The church campus is considered a resource for entire community; over 200 events per week; does not charge for these events; church has a track record of partnering with the community. Community Development and Neighborhood Services Planning Services 281 North College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview ATTACHMENT 11 1.11 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Neighborhood Meeting Notes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Neighborhood Meeting Notes – Timberline Church Rezoning Page 2 • Mr. Florin explained that the church has been in discussions with CSU regarding a potential land swap to construct an attainable housing project. CSU would donate their 4.76 acres on Timberline Road, and the church will swap 8-10 acres for the CSU property. The goal is to target housing rents for 80% average median income, with 30% of units available to CSU staff and faculty and 70% of units available to the public. Mr. Florin explained that additional density is required beyond LMN zoning in order to get to a feasible project. • Timberline Church is considering an Overall Development Plan (ODP) for the entire 37 acres, which would be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board -- looking at the property as a significant infill asset and how it can be better leveraged for the benefit of the community. Questions/Comments and Answers: • Comment: It seems like CSU is trying to make money on both sides of the deal by having their employees live together and pay rent. It seems like CSU should just pay their employees better, so that they can chose where to live. Also, the land by Timberline Road is more valuable because there’s more visibility there, so it’s not clear why the church is swapping for that land? Applicant response: We’re not looking for retail frontage so for us it’s a wash as far as the frontage value of the CSU property, and in order to make it work for CSU and the church, it would need to be a land swap. We certainly need to look and the land values for both areas, and because there is limited infill land available in the city, the church looks at this as a significant contribution to infill housing. • Comment: I think traffic in and out of the property should be looked at closely and that there should be another traffic signal along Timberline, so that that less traffic goes north through the King Soopers center. City staff response: At this point a traffic study hasn’t been modeled because there are not specific uses proposed. Until a specific use is nailed down, we can’t analyze the traffic operations piece, but we will take a close look at the operations and functions with a future development plan. Timberline Road is slated to be a major arterial, and south of Timberline we have the right-of-way, but the lanes have not yet been built out as they have along Timberline north of Drake. Current volumes north of Drake are at about 38,000 vehicles per day, and in this section of Timberline south of Drake we’re right at about 30,000 trips per day with current traffic volumes. • Comment: I worry about the drainage impacts the most and I worry about the noise from new development affecting my quality of life – if they can’t get enough employees to live there then maybe it will just become student housing. I border the property, and the drainage goes through the property along the east, and when it rains really hard the swale fills with water. This swale is very much needed, and I’m a little worried about water coming onto my property (to the east). • Applicant response: The drainage along the east side was designed for the entire campus property, so our view is to retain that and reuse it rather than try to rebuild it. The Planning and Zoning Board asked us to come with an Overall Development Plan (ODP) with the first Project Development Plan (PDP) so we’re committed to that process to look at this holistically as an overall plan for the property. 1.11 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Neighborhood Meeting Notes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Neighborhood Meeting Notes – Timberline Church Rezoning Page 3 • Question: I was at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing, there were ideas presented by Jason Holland about how tall buildings were and places for trees and the church explained that they didn’t want those restrictions because they didn’t have a plan yet, but it seems like they do have a plan, so I’m wanting to understand why there’s not a benefit to having a plan and those restrictions? Applicant response: Part of what’s happened over the past several years is that we initially were looking at ideas to provide infill housing on a portion of the property. Now we are taking a broader view and looking at the entire property. We may even re-evaluate and look at bringing through a public street which may help with traffic flows. It’s still very early and conceptual right now. We asked that the Board remove the restrictions because they were too prescriptive, and we agreed that the density limit of 20 units per acre was appropriate. • Question: They want to whole property rezoned, does that mean that they can do 20 units per acre across the entire property? City staff response: No, they would be required to net out the portions of the property that are not used for proposed residential uses – including commercial and institutional uses (such as the area for the existing church). • Question: The King Soopers is somewhat really packed there. It seems like another grocery store in the area would really help. I appreciate that you all are considering commercial uses and not just residential. My concern is Custer Road. We currently pay through the HOA for median maintenance. Also, it would be nice if there are trees buffering the two properties along the east. Also, is some of the existing parking lot being removed to accommodate drainage, I’m still worried about drainage once we get additional roofs and parking lots? Applicant Response: We appreciate your input and hear your concerns. We going to adhere to the city’s requirements, and we think the church has proven itself to be a good citizen in the community for a very long time and it will continue to do so. City staff response: We will look at Custer and the area intersections with the traffic analysis, and pedestrian connectivity across those. The function of Custer and Timberline is one that we’ll look at closely. It is correct that the Custer median is not maintained by the city. The city only maintains medians that are part of arterials such as Timberline, but not collector streets such as Custer. The original developer did elect to put in those medians, but with the understanding that they would be maintained by a future HOA. If there are future developments that want to contribute to the maintenance that is an option, but it wouldn’t be a part of the city’s requirements. • Question: If you do a development with CSU, do you actually get to make the decisions to respect your neighbors? What say would you have in how they build out the property? Applicant Response: We have worked very closely with CSU, and the church essentially has a veto voice in the matter here, so we absolutely want to build something that works in the neighborhood here. The church has veto power over anything that CSU wants to do on the church land, and it is really important because this is a part of the church, and it’s going to look and feel like part of the church. With no additional questions or comments, the meeting was adjourned. 1.11 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Neighborhood Meeting Notes (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) From:Julius Medgyesy To:Development Review Comments Subject:[EXTERNAL] Timberline Church Rezone REZ200002 opposition Date:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 4:21:12 PM Hello Alyssa Stephens, Unfortunately I can not attend the September 17th hearing, Our family is against the rezoning for this site to MMN use, the area is already overcrowded enough, it reminds me my childhood when I lived in the communist era apartment complex. Thanks for your consideration. Julius Medgyesy ATTACHMENT 12 1.12 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) From:O.C. Moench To:Development Review Comments Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zoning Behind Timberline Church - Comments Date:Wednesday, September 16, 2020 4:00:44 PM Good afternoon, My name is Olivia Moench, I am a senior at Fort Collins High School, and a Fort Collins Native. I'm living at 2851 Kansas Drive Unit D, which is directly behind the lot that is being considered for multi-family housing owned by Timberline Church (and CSU). I may not be able to attend the virtual meeting on Thursday, so I wanted to offer my perspective now and ahead of time. Thank you much for giving us the chance to speak our minds about something that will affect my home, and allowing me to fulfill my duty as a citizen with a voice. I have also sent this email to the city council, and my representative for District 2, Julie Pignataro, who will be making the decision on the zoning of this property. Therefore, I'm against the development of this field for the following reasons and ask the council to deny the proposal. 1) Climate Change and Sustainability: The City of Fort Collins has specifically created a plan to battle Climate Change here in our community, and one of the struggles we face is the ongoing construction of new homes and population increase. In the "Our Climate Future Program", which I have participated in, more homes for more people to move into our town would not only increase emissions but require more resources to provide for this new development which may see a decline as our climate worsens. This new complex requires more waste management that is already at an unmanageable level not just in Fort Collins, but around the world. We do not need to fill every acre of space in this town, we have to allow open spaces in as many available areas as possible. The population of this town is already growing to an unsustainable level, which ruins the quality of life. The city has to consider my generation and this town's future, with an increase of people it will make this situation so much more unmanageable, and if this development proposal was declined, it would make a massive impact. 2) Religious Aspects and The Sense of Community That Is Created by This Empty Field: While this is just a field behind the Timberline Church, it serves as many of our backyards. We (this neighborhood of townhomes) are not fortunate enough to have our own backyards, so we rely on this open space to do so. People walk their dogs, allow their children to play, and in the winter, it serves as a sledding hill and space for young families in this neighborhood. Without this, all they would have are small patches of grass that would make us feel confined in our space, and make the yard/lawn distribution in this neighborhood unequal. Since Timberline Church owns this property, they should know how vital it is to have a sense of belonging and community in a church, this is what we could lose if this field was developed for monetary gain. If this message will be shown to the pastor or whoever will be present at the council hearing 1.12 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) advocating for the church, I would like for them to hear what I have to say. In Leviticus 25:23, the bible quotes, "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me." The selling of this land for monetary gain, greed, and housing purposes goes against this quote in the bible. If it is God's land than it is not the Church's to sell for purposes that would not benefit his people. The church needs to address the concerns of the neighborhood living in this area, this would not benefit us, and would make our experience at our home so much worse. We are all living in one community, and need to think of each other. 3) The Logistics of This Development and Re-Zoning: Our town prides itself on the stunning views of our mountains, Horsetooth Rock, and natural areas which are vital to our local environment and economy. I love looking out my window and porch and seeing these stunning sights and would be appalled to look out into someone else's room, who could be staring right back. Not only would this ruin our neighborhood's privacy, but take away the charm of this neighborhood that we are lucky and grateful to have. As well as when the church is in session, without the pressures of a global pandemic, there are already unmanageable amounts of traffic that this causes and potentially sparks safety issues. With the addition of neighborhoods directly in this traffic flow, it could make this situation much worse and would also be unfair of the potential homeowners to have to deal with all the traffic. With housing or any other developments, construction is extremely loud and makes life difficult for many. No one is guaranteed to want to hear loud machines and other construction going on when we could be enjoying the peace of our home, which we will lose if this development is allowed. I understand this housing is for low-density purposes. It is such a small area that it would not be fair to put communities in here, where they would be living in cramped quarters, regardless of the designated density. Families deserve a better lot than behind Timberline Church, where it would just lead to congestion. I would be heartbroken to see this field that is full of life ruined. Thank you so much for allowing me to express my concerns about the zoning of this land. Please consider my words and let those who will decide on the zoning to hear this. If you have any questions about my thoughts, please feel free to email me back. Sincerely, Olivia C Moench (970) 231-3752 2851 Kansas Drive Unit D Fort Collins, CO 80525 1.12 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) From:Megan Lusk To:mr_peters795@hotmail.com; Darin Atteberry; Julie Pignataro Cc:SAR Admin Team; Jason Holland; Gretchen Schiager; Kelly DiMartino; Dean Klingner; Paul S. Sizemore; Caryn M. Champine Subject:RE: Response to: Housing Development between Timberline Church and CSU (Council SAR #58038) Date:Tuesday, October 13, 2020 2:44:09 PM Attachments:image001.png Dear Matt Peters, Thank you for the recent email regarding the housing development between Timberline Church and CSU. Please see the following response provided by City Planner, Jason Holland, on behalf of Councilmember Julie Pignataro and City Manager Darin Atteberry. Kind Regards, Megan Lusk Business Support II City Manager’s Office City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 300 Laporte Avenue, Building A 970-221-6266 office mlusk@fcgov.com COVID19 Resources For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus For businesses: https://www.fcgov.com/business/ Want to help: https://www.fcgov.com/volunteer/ Dear Mr. Peters, Thank you for taking the time to write and share your comments. We will ensure that your email is included in the packet of materials when City Council considers this rezoning proposal, which is currently scheduled for the November 17 Council meeting. For the Timberline Church rezoning proposal, the church is petitioning for the rezoning, and not CSU. Staff’s role is to review development based on City standards and guidelines. A land transaction between CSU and the church could occur and would be independent of a City development review process. You also have questions about the type and nature of housing that may be proposed. The applicant 1.12 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) has not provided a concept site plan with their rezoning request. They are not required to submit a site plan at this time, so we don’t yet know exactly what they will propose, or how the site will be configured to meet the City's development standards. The applicant’s petition for rezoning says that “Timberline has been exploring the potential of adding residential components to the Timberline Campus. These housing additions could include multifamily dwellings, an active adult community, and/or senior living facilities”. You also have a question for how "affordable/attainable" housing is being defined in the case being proposed. The Church’s petition for rezoning says that “Timberline would like to support the City’s goal of bringing attainable housing (30% or less of monthly income) to residents”. While this is stated as a goal, their application is not specifying that any affordable housing dwellings will be available for sale or rent with a future development project. Should this be proposed with future development on the property, the affordable housing would, at a minimum, need to meet the City’s requirements: Affordable housing unit for rent shall mean a dwelling unit which is available for rent on terms that would be affordable to households earning eighty (80) percent or less of the median income of city residents, as adjusted for family size, and paying less than thirty (30) percent of their gross income for housing, including rent and utilities. The unit must be occupied by and affordable to such low-income household(s) for a period of not less than twenty (20) years. Affordable housing unit for sale shall mean a dwelling unit which is available for purchase on terms that would be affordable to households earning eighty (80) percent or less of the median income of city residents, as adjusted for family size, and paying less than thirty-eight (38) percent of their gross income for housing, including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, utilities and homeowners' association fees. The unit must be occupied by and affordable to such low-income household(s) for a period of not less than twenty (20) years. Again, thank you for sharing your comments and questions. We will ensure that your email is included in the packet of materials when City Council considers this rezoning proposal. Best, Jason Holland, PLA City Planner jholland@fcgov.com 970.224.6126 Original Request From: Matthew Peters <mr_peters795@hotmail.com> Date: Saturday, October 10, 2020 at 11:16 PM To: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>, Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com>, Rebecca Everitt <reverette@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Housing development proposed between Timberline Church and CSU property 1.12 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Great, thank you! Regards, Matt Peters ________________________________________ From: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 2:32 PM To: Matthew Peters <mr_peters795@hotmail.com>; Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com>; Rebecca Everette <reverette@fcgov.com> Subject: Re: Housing development proposed between Timberline Church and CSU property Mr. Peters, Thank you so much for reaching out with your feelings and questions about this area. I have included two people on this response -- Rebecca can get your comments included in the official record for the Planning & Zoning Board and Darin can help get your questions answered. Darin: can you please create a Service Area Report to answer Mr. Peters questions below? Julie Pignataro City of Fort Collins Councilmember, District 2 The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more. With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. ________________________________________ From: Matthew Peters <mr_peters795@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 10:07 PM To: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com> Subject: Housing development proposed between Timberline Church and CSU property Hi Julie, I know you're busy so I'll try to keep this brief. I understand that the land swap being pursued 1.12 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) between Timberline Church and CSU will likely go before city council. With my townhome in your district, I thought I'd write and share my quick perspective + some questions that might be worth looking into: My perspective: * I (along with many others) purchased my property with the knowledge of the current zoning. Naturally, we're not too thrilled about the potential of this changing to the very high density proposed and the loss of open space as it will change the quality, value, mountain views, noise, and traffic of the area. Questions: * Should CSU continue to be in the business (referring somewhat to the Hughes debate as well) of selling land to developers? If they aren't going to use land, shouldn't it be returned to the tax payers since they're a public institution? Maybe the residents can vote to bail them out of their financial woes instead of them selling the land away? * Rigden Farm already has tons of multi-family housing in the area. If this is potentially affordable/attainable housing, are more high density apartments/condos really going to be what we need and what these folks desire? Maybe some habitat homes would be a more desirable solution to those seeking affordable housing and a place to raise their families? Low income seniors with accessibility seems like it is also something needed. * How is "affordable/attainable" housing being defined in the case being proposed? If the numbers are requiring very high density, then maybe we should be looking for a different solution? Thank you for reading and for your consideration. I think you'll find that many in the area are not in favor of this project and would like to see the city continue to promote a good balance of natural areas, open space, and promoting the high quality that has made Fort Collins a desirable place to live. My hope is that we'll keep those values that can make us stand out and find solutions that align rather than over-devleoping like so many other communities. Regards, Matt Peters 1.12 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Resident Comment Letters (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) ATTACHMENT 13 16.13 Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Timberline Church Rezoning Petition (9632 : Timberline Church Rezoning)1.13 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Timberline Church Rezoning Petition (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Updated June 21, 2020 Page 1 of 12 Timberline Church Rezoning to MMN Project Overview Original Submittal May 19, 2020 Updated July 21, 2020 Timberline Church – 2908 South Timberline Road, Fort Collins, Colorado ATTACHMENT 14 1.14 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 2 of 12 SUPPLEMENT – JULY 21, 2020 The original Timberline Church PUD planned for a second main sanctuary to the north of the main sanctuary, anticipating total seating of 3,500 which would require 875 spaces. A Major Amendment to the Timberline Church PUD was filed in 2007 for a further building addition called the “South Auditorium” at which time it was anticipated that a total of 1,724 parking spaces when all planned structures were built. The north sanctuary and other outbuildings envisioned by the Timberline Church PUD filed in 2002 and Major Amendment filed in 2007 were never constructed, nor was all of the parking envisioned in the Major Amendment constructed. In addition, actual seating used by Timberline Church is significantly less than the originally planned seating capacity for each auditorium. The current weekly configuration is 1,210 seats in the main auditorium and 342 seats in the south auditorium for a total of 1,552 seats, which would dictate a parking requirement of 388 parking spaces at the required 4 to 1 ratio. Maximum seating at Christmas & Easter is about 10% higher in the main auditorium (1,331 seats) and 50% higher in the south auditorium (513 seats) for a total of 1,844 seats, which would anticipate a peak parking requirement of 461 spaces. Maximum occupancy load for fire is a total of 2,870 people including 1,820 in the main auditorium and 1,050 in the south auditorium. Getting that many people in each auditorium would require removing all of the chairs, which is not a typical use of the facility. At the fire occupancy load the required parking would be 718 spaces. Today there are approximately 1,293 parking spaces on the Timberline property, far in excess of the parking that would be required by any measure. Providing the rezone to MMN is approved, as Timberline Church proceeds with development plans, we will re-plan and re-plat the parking spaces in conjunction with a future amendment to the Timberline Church PUD in order to ensure ongoing compliance with the City of Fort Collins parking standards. 1.14 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 3 of 12 PROJECT: Timberline Church Rezoning to MMN BACKGROUND Timberline Church (“Timberline”) acquired the property at 2908 S Timberline Road in 1993, a plat was filed in 2000, the main church building was opened in 2002 and an addition was made to the building in 2008. The original Planned Unit Development envisioned that additional buildings would be constructed on the site and Timberline has funded significant infrastructure to support future development of the property. Collectively this property represents the “Timberline Campus”. With 115,640 square feet and numerous rooms that support gatherings of 10 to 1,200 people, the Timberline Campus is a hub of community activity with over 220 meetings and events in a typical week. Timberline provides space at no cost to dozens of municipal and non-profit partners including the Fort Collins Police Department, Larimer County Department of Human Services, Larimer County Sheriff’s Department, Girl Scouts, Fort Collins Symphony, and Poudre School District. See Exhibit B for a list of example events. Over the last 20 years large scale retail and residential development has occurred near the Timberline Campus. The City of Fort Collins has also experienced a housing shortage resulting in a significant increase in housing costs for residents. Since 2018 Timberline has been exploring the potential of adding residential components to the Timberline Campus. These housing additions could include multifamily dwellings, an active adult community, and/or senior living facilities. Residential uses of the Timberline Campus would leverage the City’s designated Community Activity Center at Timberline & Drake of which Timberline is a part of. Further, Timberline would like to support the City’s goal of bringing attainable housing (30% or less of monthly income) to residents. Working with prospective development partners it has become clear that with today’s high costs of construction, achieving that goal requires higher density than allowed by the current LMN zoning. In order to support these future uses Timberline Church is requesting a rezone of its property on South Timberline Road to MMN which would assure potential developer partners they can confidently invest in architecture, engineering & design of prospective projects that are aligned with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and help fulfill Timberline’s vision of leveraging its infill property for the benefit of City of Fort Collins residents. The total land area is 32.79 acres and the legal description of the “Timberline Property” is: Lots 1-5 and Tract A of the Timberline Church PUD, FTC (2000052648). Parcels included in this request include 8729225901, 8729225902, 8729225903, 8729225904, 8729225905, and 8729226901. 1.14 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 4 of 12 CITY OF FORT COLLINS REZONING REQUIREMENTS The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code relating to the rezoning of property under 640 acres reads as follows (bold added for emphasis): 2.9.4(H) (2) Mandatory Requirements for Quasi-judicial Zonings or Rezonings. Any amendment to the Zoning Map involving the zoning or rezoning of six hundred forty (640) acres of land or less (a quasi-judicial rezoning) shall be recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board or approved by the City Council only if the proposed amendment is: (a) consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and/or (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. This project overview documents how this request meets both of these requirements. Further, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code relating to the rezoning of property defines additional considerations for rezoning: 2.9.4(H) (3) Additional Considerations for Quasi-Judicial Zonings or Rezonings. In determining whether to recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land and is the appropriate zone district for the land; (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and the natural functioning of the environment; (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. This project overview documents how this request is compatible with all of these additional factors. 1.14 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 5 of 12 CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This request is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with Section 2.9.4(H)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code, in many aspects. See below for a list of CCP goals and an explanation of how Timberline’s use is consistent with that goal. Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan Goal Timberline Use Consistent with the Goal INTRODUCTION “…reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 80% below 2005 levels by 2030…” As an infill project the rezone to MMN will facilitate more residents living closer to their work and thereby reducing their GHG emissions. CORE VALUES / LIVABILITY “Attainable housing options” Higher density allowed with MMN zoning will facilitate development of attainable housing that cannot be achieved under LMN zoning. VISION AND VALUES “Making the most of the land we have left” Adding residential use to the Timberline Campus is an excellent example of infill making the most of the land we have left. POLICY LIV 1.6 - ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES “Direct development to locations where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and services such as water, sewer, police, transportation, schools, fire, stormwater management and parks, in accordance with adopted levels of service for public facilities and services.” The Timberline Campus is already well served by public facilities and services. 1.14 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 6 of 12 POLICY LIV 1.6 - ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES “Give preferential consideration to the extension and augmentation of public services and facilities to accommodate infill and redevelopment before new growth areas are prepared for development.” Rezoning the Timberline Property to MMN accommodates infill and redevelopment. POLICY LIV 2.1 - REVITALIZATION OF UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES “Support the use of creative strategies to revitalize vacant, blighted or otherwise underutilized structures and buildings…” The addition of residential uses on the Timberline Campus is a creative strategy to revitalize an otherwise underutilized property. POLICY LIV 2.3 - TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT “Require higher-density housing and mixed- use development in locations that are currently, or will be, served by BRT and/or high-frequency transit in the future as infill and redevelopment occurs.” The Timberline Campus is well served by Transfort Route 7 with a bus stop at Custer & Illinois (Stop 1328). POLICY LIV 3.6 - CONTEXT- SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT “Ensure that all development contributes to the positive character of the surrounding area.” Development of the Timberline Campus with MMN density is in context with the surrounding Timberline/Drake Community Activity Center. 1.14 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 7 of 12 POLICY LIV 4.2 - COMPATIBILITY OF ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT “Ensure that development that occurs in adjacent districts complements and enhances the positive qualities of existing neighborhoods. Developments that share a property line and/or street frontage with an existing neighborhood should promote compatibility by: o » Continuing established block patterns and streets to improve access to services and amenities from the adjacent neighborhood; o » Incorporating context- sensitive buildings and site features (e.g., similar size, scale and materials); and » Locating parking and service areas where impacts on existing neighborhoods—such as noise and traffic—will be minimized.” Timberline will steward the development of its property to ensure compatibility with adjacent developments which include two story multifamily condominiums, two story townhomes / row homes, and three story multifamily communities. POLICY LIV 5.2 - SUPPLY OF ATTAINABLE HOUSING “Encourage public and private sectors to maintain and develop a diverse range of housing options, including housing that is attainable (30% or less of monthly income) to residents earning the median income. Options could include ADUs, duplexes, townhomes, mobile homes, manufactured housing and other ‘missing middle’ housing types.” The primary goal of the rezone to MMN is to support the development of attainable housing, including residents with 80% of the Fort Collins Area Median Income (AMI). 1.14 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 8 of 12 WARRANTED BY CHANGED CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD This request is warranted by changed conditions in the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property, in accordance with Section 2.9.4(H)(2)(b) of the Land Use Code. After the Timberline Property was platted in August 2000, the following nearby projects were approved with MMN zoning: Sidehill Condominiums June 2005 Rigden Farms Townhomes December 2005 Colony at Rigden Farm February 2006 East Village at Rigden Farm Condos March 2006 Trails at Timberline Apartments November 2012 Another significant change to the neighborhood has occurred with the development of neighborhood commercial (NC) at The Shops at Rigden Farms which was platted in November 2004. The primary anchor is King Soopers with grocery, pharmacy and fuel service. Many retail and commercial uses have been added over the years including: FirstBank Subway Krazy Karl’s Pizza Timberline Animal Hospital Cost Cutters Mail & Copy Fort Collins Genoa Coffee & Wine Eileen’s Colossal Cookies Meraki Yoga Studio Grease Monkey QDOBA Bright Horizons (daycare) Chase Bank Fabby’s Wine and Spirits William Oliver’s Publick House Kung Fu Tea Blue Federal Credit Union OrangeTheory Fitness Harbor Dental Farmer’s Insurance Mountain View Eye Specialists Caring Smiles The extensive nearby and immediately adjacent development that has occurred since the subject was platted in 2000 meets the requirement for changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING USES SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT LAND Section 2.9.4(H)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code encourages rezoning that is “compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land.” There are adjoining and nearby properties that were zoned MMN prior to the Timberline plat being filed in 2000: 1.14 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 9 of 12 Pinecone Apartments June 1993 Rigden Farms October 1999 These uses which were in existence prior to the Timberline PUD, combined with the MMN and NC uses that were approved and developed subsequently, have resulted in the creation of the Fort Collins Timberline/Drake Community Activity Center. Being sited between that Community Activity Center and MMN property to the south that is even further from Timberline/Drake, this request for the subject property is compatible with existing uses surrounding the subject land. WOULD NOT HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE NATURAL ENVIROMENT Section 2.9.4(H)(3)(b) of the Land Use Code discourages a rezone that “would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and the natural functioning of the environment.” Adding residential use to the Timberline Campus would not have significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. In fact, we would expect this infill development to reduce impacts to the natural environment by allowing residents that work in the City of Fort Collins to live closer to their workplace. For many it could mean being able to walk to work or commute using a bike, Transfort or a combination of both. Future residents of the Timberline Campus would also be able to access retail and commercial amenities that are within walking distance, eliminating the need to drive for many errands including grocery shopping, a haircut or stopping into their bank. With a Walk Score of 49 and a Bike Score of 87, the subject property will facilitate a lower carbon footprint lifestyle than most suburban neighborhoods in Fort Collins. These changes in habits would mean a reduction in vehicle miles travelled within the city and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions with a positive impact on the natural environment. MMN IS THE APPROPRIATE ZONE DISTRICT FOR THE TIMBERLINE CAMPUS AND WOULD RESULT IN A LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERN Section 2.9.4(H)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code encourages rezoning that is “the appropriate zone district for the land.” Further, Section 2.9.4(H)(3)(c) of the Land Use Code encourages rezoning that “would result in a logical and orderly development pattern.” The development pattern surrounding the Timberline/Drake Community Activity Center is primarily MMN and NC: 1.14 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 10 of 12 1. The NE corner of Timberline/Drake is zoned MMN 2. The NW corner of Timberline/Drake is zoned MMN 3. The SE corner of Timberline/Drake is zoned NC 4. Properties immediately north of the subject are zoned NC and MMN 5. The property immediate south of the subject is zoned MMN Nearby properties with density compatible with this rezone request include: a) The Colony at Rigden Farm, 2.6 acres gross and 18.45 du/acre b) Rigden 10th filing (Senior Living), 4.22 acres gross and 29.6 du/acre c) Rigden 13th filing, 2.5 acres gross and 19 du/acre d) Rigden Flats, 4.08 acres gross and 23 du/acre e) Brooklyn Townhomes, 1.73 acres gross and 24.3 du/acre f) Rigden 12th filing (Brooklyn Townhomes), 2.6 acres gross and 24.2 du/acre g) Pinecone Apartments, 15.13 acres gross (12.71 acres net), 12.89 du/acre, 15.34 du/acre (net) Current LMN zoning envisions places of worship of up to 25,000 square feet as typical. At 115,640 square feet the Timberline Church facility is more compatible with MMN, making MMN the appropriate zone district for the land. Based on the immediately adjacent and surrounding properties in the Timberline/Drake Community Activity Center that are zoned MMN and NC, as well as the primary use of MMN zoning along the Timberline Road corridor in the nearby area, MMN is the appropriate zone district for the land and approval of this request would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. SUMMARY Timberline’s MMN Rezone Request fully meets the rezoning requirements of the Land Use Code and has the potential to bring new residential uses to an almost 33-acre campus whose previous Planned Unit Development contemplated a large-scale church facility. The City will have a limited number of infill opportunities that are so well suited to support the City Comprehensive Plan and therefore this request should be approved. 1.14 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 11 of 12 EXHIBIT A TIMBERLINE CHURCH PROPERTY MAP [ See Separately Submitted Parcel Map ] 1.14 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONE REQUEST Updated June 21, 2020 Page 12 of 12 EXHIBIT B TIMBERLINE CAMPUS – EXAMPLE USERS Organization Event Attendees 9 News Health Fair 1,000 Centennial Children's Choir Holiday Concert 1,200 Colorado State University Science Fair 1,200 Girl Scouts Cookie Sales Training 150-200 Fort Collins Symphony YES Concert PSD Students (multiple events) 4,300 Fort Collins Symphony Community Concerts 1,000 Front Range Nursing Pinning Ceremony 400-450 Larimer County Dept of Human Services Awards Ceremony 150 Larimer County Sheriff's Office Awards Ceremony 200-300 Night To Shine Special Needs Prom Night 1,000+ Poudre School District Various 35-350 1.14 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Petitioner's Justification Narrative (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) ATTACHMENT 151.15Packet Pg. 78Attachment: Timberline Church Rezone Boundary Map (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 1Timberline Church Rezoning November 17, 2020 ATTACHMENT 16 1.16 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 2 •Rezoning request for the Ti mberline Church Campus •1,275 feet south of the intersection of Ti mberline and Drake Roads 1.16 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 3 Existing Zoning Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) 1.16 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 4 Proposed Zoning Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (M-M-N) 1.16 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 5 •32.79-acre Campus •First approved in 1999 •Surrounding uses and features 1.16 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 6 Existing Campus Plan •Tw o building phases. First phase completed, includes main church parking on the site. •Second building phase and parking was envisioned, but never constructedS. TIMBERLINE RD.1.16 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Rezoning Review Process 7 Rezoning Petition P&Z Board Review City Council Hearing City Council 2nd Reading May 22, 2020 Sept. 17, 2020 Nov. 17, 2020Oct. 22, 2020 Neighbor- hood Meeting 1.16 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Neighborhood Meeting Resident Comments 8 Resident Comments: •Increase in residential density in area •Tr affic/congestion increase •King Soopers Neighborhood Center already too busy •Potential for larger multi-family buildings •Flooding and drainage 1.16 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 9 Planning and Zoning Board -- Approval recommended with one condition: The residential density shall be limited 20 units per gross acre and an Overall Development Plan (ODP) precedes or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). P&Z Recommendation 1.16 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Rezoning Review Criteria Division 2.9 –Amendment to Zoning Map 10 Review governed by 5 criteria: Is the proposed Amendment: 1.Consistent with the comprehensive plan (City Plan); 2.and/or warranted by changed conditions. Additional factors: 3.Compatible with surrounding uses; 4.Impacts to the natural environment; and 5.A logical and orderly development pattern 1.16 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 11 Structure Plan Map 1.16 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 12 Criterion 1 --Consistency with the Structure Plan City Structure Plan Proposed Zoning 1.16 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 1 --Consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan (City Plan) 13 •Consistent with City Plan Principles and Policies •Consistent with Mixed- Neighborhood place type 1.16 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 1 Primary City Plan Policies 14 PRINCIPLE LIV 2: Promote Infill and Redevelopment: Policy LIV 2.1 –Revitalization of Underutilized Properties Policy LIV 5.1 –Housing Options Policy LIV 5.2 –Supply of Attainable Housing Policy LIV 5.3 –Land for Residential Development 1.16 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 15 Place Types–Mixed Neighborhoods 1.16 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 16 Existing and Planned Transit Routes Current Routes Tr ansit Vision Network SITE SITE 1.16 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 1 Consistency with the Mixed-Neighborhood Place Type 17 Location meets the purpose of the Mixed-Neighborhood place type and MMN zone: •Access to a Neighborhood Center --within walking/biking distance of services, amenities, and high-frequency transit; •Becomes important with higher densities 1.16 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 2 and/or Warranted by Changed Conditions 18 Notable conditions have changed in the area since the Timberline Church was originally constructed: 1.The Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center has been constructed. 2.Higher density housing to the north and east within Rigden Farm; higher densities concentrated near the Neighborhood Center. 3.Bus transit provided with the neighborhood center 1.16 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 3 Compatible with Existing and Proposed Uses 19 Characteristics of the subject property and surrounding area which support MMN zoning: •Property abuts existing MMN developments to the north and south of the church property --Pinecone Apartments and Brooklyn Townhomes •LMN housing to east --near the highest permitted density in the LMN zone •The Foothills Channel and stormwater detention areas to the south and southeast help provide a buffer transition. 1.16 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) Criterion 4 Adverse impacts on the natural environment 20 Criterion 4: Whether and the extent to w hich the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. •The proposed rezone to MMN is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the natural environment. •The Foothills Channel represents a significant habitat feature adjacent to the proposed infill housing. This habitat feature requires protection regardless of whether the development is rezoned. Additionally, code requirements for stormwater detention and water quality treatment are not affected by the rezoning.Foothills Channel 1.16 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 21 Criterion 5: Logical and Orderly Development Pattern Criterion 5: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Logical and orderly development pattern which reflects the unique context of the site: •Continues the range of densities from east to west, serving as a logical transition to MMN zoning on the subject property, with conditions to provide a design transition. 1.16 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 22 1.16 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 23 Reflects the unique context of the site: •East and south buffer provided --Existing drainage and stormwater detention areas and Foothills Channel. •Close to the existing Neighborhood Center, integration into the surrounding neighborhoods’ street and pedestrian networks, meets purpose of the MMN zone. Criterion 5: Logical and Orderly Development Pattern 1.16 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) 24 The rezoning complies with the applicable review criteria for quasi-judicial requests in that: 1)The amendment is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan (City Plan); 2)The amendment is warranted by changed conditions in the area; 3)The amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and provides an appropriate zone district for the land; 4)The amendment would not result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater, management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; and 5)The amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. With One Condition: The residential density shall be limited 20 units per gross acre and an Overall Development Plan (ODP) shall precede or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). P&Z Recommendation 1.16 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9702 : Timberline Church Rezoning) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 145, 2020 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE TIMBERLINE CHURCH REZONING WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the “Land Use Code”) establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has conducted a public hearing, considered the Staff Report, the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation and findings, and the evidence from the public hearing and has determined that the property that is the subject of this Ordinance should be rezoned as hereinafter provided; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further determined that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property as established in Section 2.9.4(H)(2) of the Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the condition included below is to provide a density limit that will help achieve a compatible transition within the context of the existing surrounding neighborhood since the proposed Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“M-M-N”) Zone District does not include a maximum density and to require an Overall Development Plan to help identify the general design parameters for the subject property as it proceeds toward development; and WHEREAS, to the extent applicable, the City Council has also analyzed the proposed rezoning against the considerations as established in Section 2.9.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code and determined that the proposed MMN zoning: (a) is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject property and is an appropriate zone district for the property; (b) is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the natural environment; and (c) represents a logical and orderly development pattern that reflects the unique context of the site. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS: 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 adopted by Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by changing the zoning classification from Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“L-M-N”) Zone District, to Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“M-M- Packet Pg. 103 -2- N”) Zone District, for the following described property in the City known as the Timberline Church Rezoning: Lots 1-5 and Tract A of the Timberline Church PUD, containing 32.79 acres, more or less. Section 3. That the following condition is hereby imposed upon the Timberline Church Rezoning as permitted by Section 2.9.4(I) of the Land Use Code: that the residential density will be limited 20 units per gross acre and that an Overall Development Plan (ODP) will precede or accompany the Project Development Plan (PDP). Section 4. That the property subject to the Timberline Church rezoning shall continue to be included in the Residential Sign District adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7.1(M) of the Land Use Code. Section 5. 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 24th day of November, A.D. 2020, and to be presented for final passage on the 1st day of December, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 1st day of December, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 104 -3- Packet Pg. 105