Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-02/13/2018-AdjournedFebruary 13, 2018 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting — 6:00 PM • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Martinez, Stephens, Summers, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff, Horak Staff present: Atteberry, Daggett, Coldiron Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning and Zoning Board Decision Regarding the Union on Elizabeth Project Development Plan/Final Plan PDP/FDP170024. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to consider an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Board decision to approve the Union on Elizabeth Project Development Plan/Final Plan. On December 28, 2017, an appeal was filed challenging the Planning and Zoning Board Decision made at the December 14, 2017, hearing. City Attorney Daggett outlined the hearing process and Code requirements related thereto and briefly discussed the allegations of the appeal. Rory Heath, Appellant, Stephanie Hansen, Ripley Design and Applicant representative, and Dino DiTullio, Applicant, identified themselves. Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager, stated the proposed project, a 5-story mixed -use building, is located on Elizabeth Street just west of Shields Street. The building has 3,800 square feet of retail and 107 units with 402 bedrooms. It is in the Community Commercial zone district and Transit Overlay District. Gloss outlined the specific appeal allegations: the authority or jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Board, failure to conduct a fair hearing, the Board exceeded its authority or jurisdiction, and that the integrity of public participation was severely damaged by the Chair. The appellant alleges the Board decision was favorable to the personal business interests of one or more Boardmembers and that the Board moved through the approval process too quickly. Staff's perspective is that the Board followed proper procedures. Regarding the assertion that the Board substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure, staff finds the conduct of the public hearing and order of proceedings was followed based on Land Use Code Section 2.2.7. Regarding the allegation the Board considered evidence that was substantially false or grossly misleading, the Land Use Code states any person may appear at a public hearing and submit evidence. Regarding the allegations related to the traffic study, Gloss stated the traffic study complies with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards and did factor in future anticipated growth. The allegation regarding failure to properly address concerns introduced by the appellant concerning .CSU's view corridors, staff finds it has consistently applied the Code to consider views from designated natural features and not views from private property. Regarding the allegation on public outreach to CSU, staff noted there was mailed and posted notice in accordance with the City's standards. CSU was also involved with the West Central Area Plan 2015 update which included an analysis of building heights west of campus. City of Fort Collins Page 165 February 13, 2018 Regarding the allegation the Boardmembers and Chair have special interests in mind, Gloss noted one Boardmember recused himself and the others stated they had nothing to disclose; therefore, no evidence of a conflict of interest exists. Gloss discussed the location of the proposed project and outlined its aspects that meet the Land Use Code and West Central Area Plan. He noted no Land Use modifications were required. Mayor Troxell asked Councilmembers to discuss their site visits. Councilmember Cunniff stated he observed the site and context of the area. Councilmember Overbeck stated he walked from the east to west side of the property, looked at the alley and surrounding structures, and inquired about the street access point. Mayor Troxell stated he and Mayor Prq Tern Horak also attended the site visit. He stated he inquired about the paseo's alignment with the adjacent complex. Mayor Troxell asked that procedural issues be addressed. Mr. Heath asked if he could present a PowerPoint presentation. Mayor Troxell asked if it is limited to materials previously presented. Mr. Heath replied in the affirmative but stated there is additional clarifying information in the presentation. Ms. Hansen requested the ability to object should she see information not previously presented. Mayor Pro Tern Horak suggested the applicant be given the opportunity to review the presentation to determine if any objections exist. (Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Ms. Hansen stated significant new information exists in the PowerPoint presentation; however, the applicant does not have any objection to its inclusion in the hearing. APPELLANT PRESENTATION Mr. Heath discussed the citizen participation aspects of. this project and the appeal process. He stated the staff presentation by Mr. Gloss favored the applicant. He showed slides of various aspects of the Planning and Zoning Board hearing and other information. Mr. Heath discussed other recently approved projects in the area and stated the traffic study does not provide a metric with the new lane conditions and projects present. He questioned how a "neighborhood" is defined and how much input CSU provided. Regarding bias, Mr. Heath stated Chair Schneider was able -to steer the direction of the hearing and denied the continuance of the item as requested. He stated Chair Schneider's employment in the construction industry is a bias. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Stephanie Hansen, Land Planner, stated her presentation addresses the notice of appeal rather than the new additional information provided in Mr. Heath's presentation. She discussed the changes City of Fort Collins Page 166 February 13, 2018 made to improve the plan and noted it was approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board. I . Ms. Hansen discussed the area and noted the West Central Area Plan, provides information as to the definition of the neighborhood. The proposed project focuses on the pedestrian experience by stepping back the third and fourth floors, articulating all sides of the building, and providing large setbacks on the east and west sides. Ms. Hansen stated there are three review criteria for potential impacts of a building over 40 feet tall: light and shadow, privacy, and neighborhood scale. The Code does not have any review criteria for protecting views or view corridors and the evidence on the record shows this project complies with all three applicable review criteria. Ms. Hansen noted the project is not requesting any modifications and discussed the conditions imposed on the project by the Board. She stated the Board has consistently set public input time for three minutes, as it did when Mr. Heath spoke, and stated the Board may not have exhaustively discussed every topic; however, that does not mean they were not considered. Ms. Hansen stated the exact dates of the traffic study were included and all applicable developments were included in the traffic forecast. She discussed the allegations of bias and noted Chair Schneider has no financial interest in the project. She requested Council uphold the Planning and Zoning Board's approval. APPELLANT REBUTTAL Mr. Heath stated there is a bias in that Chair Schneider works in the construction industry and has a network within that industry. He stated the traffic report did not contain proper diagramming and there was a lack of legislative will when the item was not considered for continuation. Mr. Heath stated there has not been a specific name of anyone notified at CSU. He stated the entire West Central Area Plan was not considered for this project and discussed parking issues. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Ms. Hansen stated several potential retail tenants have been identified, all notices were mailed per Code requirements, and she has met with the appellant several times and would meet with any interested party to gain input. Mr. DiTullio stated he has never had any interactions with Chair Schneider outside of the Planning and Zoning Board and his company has nothing to do with the project. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilmember Martinez asked about the process of notifying CSU. Gloss replied CSU, as a nearby property owner, does receive written notice. CSU is also closely coordinated with the City's planning efforts and participated heavily in the West Central Area Neighborhood Plan update. City of Fort Collins Page 167 February 13, 2018 Councilmember Martinez asked who specifically is notified at CSU. Gloss replied Fred Haberecht, CSU Facilities, is the main point of contact; however, he cannot speak to the exact individual who received the mail notice in this case. Councilmember Martinez asked about the public outreach process for the project. Gloss replied the required neighborhood meeting was conducted. Councilmember Martinez asked about the bias allegations. Gloss replied Boardmembers were given the opportunity to recuse themselves if a conflict existed. Councilmember Martinez asked Mr. Heath if he has any specific proof of a bias. Mr. Heath replied he has no specific proof; however, it is a logical conclusion that someone within the industry would have the same network of people who may benefit from the project and his decision. Councilmember Martinez asked Mr. Heath to clarify his comments about the traffic study being reckless. Mr. Heath replied the traffic study did not correct a change in the traffic flow, especially considering the new underpass. He stated losing the second lane causes an awkward and unsafe flow of traffic. Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations, stated a scoping meeting with the applicant occurred prior to the completion of the underpass; therefore, the traffic study started from a baseline of the existing conditions when the project was submitted. After the underpass was complete,. the applicant was required to do a memo addition to the traffic study which included the differences in lane utilization and number. That memo did not change the conclusions of the study. Councilmember Martinez asked Mr. Heath why he wanted the Board to continue the item. Mr. Heath replied an exhaustive look at all the issues had not occurred and the Board was not at a point to reach a conclusion at the hearing. He stated another meeting would have allowed for more significant public input. Councilmember Martinez asked how much public input occurred for the West Central Area Plan. Gloss replied there was an 18-month public process which included multiple meetings for neighborhood's within the area. Councilmember Stephens asked how the incongruity in building height will be addressed until additional redevelopment occurs. Gloss replied that is a challenge and it is difficult to measure compatibility; however, based on conversations with area property owners, there is an anticipation of redevelopment. Regarding the proposed building, there are large setbacks and upper floors are stepped back. Councilmember Stephens asked if the Planning and Zoning Boardmembers frequently have development and design backgrounds and professions. Gloss replied in the affirmative and stated it has been shown to be advantageous to have some familiarity. He stated Boardmembers are conservative when considering conflicts of interest. Councilinember Stephens asked if the crosswalk and stadium were considered when traffic was analyzed. Wilkinson replied in the affirmative and stated the applicant moved their access a couple hundred feet to the west to help avoid conflicts with the crossing. City of Fort Collins Page 168 February 13, 2018 Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Martinez, to find that the Planning and Zoning Board conducted a fair hearing in its consideration of The Union on Elizabeth and that the Board did not substantially exceed its authority or jurisdiction, did not substantially ignore its previously established rules of procedure, did not consider evidence relevant to its decision that was substantially false or grossly misleading, did not improperly fail to receive all relevant evidence offered by the appellant, and was not biased against the appellant by reason of a conflict of interest or close business, personal, or social relationships that interfered with the Board's independence of judgement. Based on the evidence in the record and presented at this hearing, the appeal is hereby found to be without merit and it denied. Mayor Pro Tem Horak opposed the allegation of bias. Councilmember Cunniff noted the Code and Charter specifically outline the definition of "conflict of interest" and none of that definition was cited as being violated by the appellant. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted Boardmembers can always recuse themselves if they do not feel they can be fair in making a judgement. Councilmember Stephens stated extending the time beyond three minutes for each speaker would have gone against procedures. She noted there -.will be some growing.pains with new development in the area. Councilmember Martinez stated there was no direct evidence for any of the appeal allegations. Councilmember Overbeck stated the appellant did.not meet the burden of proof. Mayor Troxell stated the Board conducted a fair hearing and the appellant was unable to prove his case. RESULT: MOTION ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS) MOVER: Gerry Horak, District 6 SECONDER: Ray Martinez, District 2 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Summers, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff, Horak Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunniff, to uphold the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board approving The Union on Elizabeth PDP/FDP because the Board properly interpreted and applied the relevant provisions of the City Code and Land Use Code cited in the appeal notice. Based on the evidence in the record and presented at this hearing, the appeal is hereby found to be without merit and is denied. Councilmember Cunniff stated it is obvious this project complies with the Land Use Code and City Code. Mayor Pro Tem Horak commended Mr. Heath for bringing forth his concerns and stated there will be opportunities to address those types of concerns as part of the City Plan update. Councilmember Summers commended the process of improving the application and noted this project will become a prototype for the area. City of Fort Collins Page 169 February 13, 2018 I Mayor Troxell stated he believes the Board properly interpreted and applied the relevant Land Use Code sections approving the project. RESULT: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD DECISION UPHELD [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Gerry Horak, District 6. . SECONDER: Ross Cunniff, District 6 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Summers, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff, Horak 0 • ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:07 PM. ATTEST: OF FORT SE City rk ��' 9 City of Fort Collins Page 170 E