Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNITED WAY HOUSING SERVICES DAY CENTER - PDP - 30-06 - REPORTS - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARING (5)10) I own the property and business located adjacent to the north of the proposed United Way project. I do have many concerns other than the ones that I have listed already in this letter. I know that the concerns of an individual compared to the concerns of the community do seem minor, but they are real and shared by others in this neighborhood. My concerns involve: safety (for myself, my customers, my employees, and my business), lowered property values, loss of income for my business (and thus loss difficulty in being able to sell my property some day when the tim of income for my employees), die comes, to name a few. The Day Center will be bringing more homeless, disturbed, some potentially criminal, and addicted people into this area. Some of these people will be a problem and may even be a threat. My cost of doing business may rise due to increased insurance, loss from damage to my customer's cars and my building, and potential thievery. I may suffer a loss of customers from them not wanting to bring their cars to a shop located next to a facility that serves the people that a homeless center serves. My customers, my employees, and I may have to deal with panhandlers, vagrants, drunks, and drug addicts. The United Way promised me openly in the first public meeting that they would purchase a security system for my building as a sign of good faith. The promise was verbal. I quote on an alarm system and I gave them one at the beginning of the second public meenever did receive a written promise for their offer (which I accepted). The United Way asked me ting (at which for a the public and the coalition mentioned the promise of the security system for my building).. Since then I haven't heard a thing from the United Way about them buying me a security system as they had publicly promised. At this point, I don't have faith that the United Way will dt what they have said that they will do. If I can't trust them to keep their word on something as minor as an alarm system, can they be trusted to keep their promises to anyone else (including the City)? 11) In conclusion I am respectfully asking that the building proposal of the United Way for the Housing Services Day Center be denied at the present location. Thank You for your time spent reading this letter. Sincerely, William Cooper idea? If they left the project, what things about this project did they not agree with and should that be a point of a grave concern to the public? The second meeting was in July 2005 at Grace Fellowship Church. The second meeting met with heated objection to the project as well. The people of the area made it very clear that they didn't want the project to be built in this area at all. During the meeting, after heated remarks by the public, it was made clear by City staff that this meeting wasn't a debate; it wasn't a forum for people's opinions rather that it was to inform the public about what was going to be built. The public left this second meeting angry, disgusted, upset, and generally had all that they could stand of the coalition's plans to proceed with their project seemingly "no matter what". The third meeting was in August 2006 at Grace Fellowship Church. At the third meeting, only about 12 to 15 people from this area attended. It seems that the public became disgusted with the lack of results from the prior two meetings and had seemingly given up with the idea of giving their input on the subject of the project. It seems, conveniently, that there were, seated "randomly" about the room, just as many people (who didn't even live or work in the North College area) in favor of the project as there were people who objected to the project (people who do live and work in this area!). The meeting seemed to be carefully designed to immediately quell any and all opposition to the project by having people seated around the room to answer questions and concerns instead of the concerns being addressed by .City staff or `officials" of the entities wanting to build this project. It also seems that the parties that wish to build this project waited until the people who live and work in this area became overcome with disdain and despair about the project before they proceeded! Do the residents of this area of the City have no say in what is being planned or built in their neighborhood? Is it fair to saturate a neighborhood already heavily overburdened by social services with yet another major social service? Do the opinions of the people of this town that the government represents matter? I think that the opinions, cares, and wellbeing of the people of the North College area should be taken very seriously and should be carefully considered before any decision is made to allow or deny the Housing Services Day Center's plans to build in the North College area. 7) The plans that were presented at the 3 public meetings on the Housing Services Day Center plainly stated that only one building was going to be built. The people running the meetings stated that they had no plans for a second building on the properties at all. They assured the public of that! Now in the notice that was recently sent out about the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting, It states that a future 5000 square foot building may be proposed! Did the entities proposing this project simply blatantly lie to the public?! Is a second building and expansion of the facility planned? Is it fair to the public to just "slip" plans for a second building in at the last minute without first having a public meeting about it? Is that following legal protocol? I am very concerned about the legality of the "future second building". The coalition assured the public that a second building would not be built and yet here in a public mailing, a second building is now being foretold of. 8) The City of Fort Collins stands to lose substantial revenues from the property that the proposed United Way facility is to be built on since the United Way is a non-profit organization. 1) Loss of property tax revenues year after year. 2) Loss of street oversizing funds. (I had to pay substantial street oversizing fees when I moved into my building and all I was doing was changing the use from office/warehouse to an automotive service facility)(the proposed project is turning an open lot into a facility that will have vehicles coming and going all day long every day, every year) 3) Loss of any sales and use taxes 4) Loss of any income taxes and 5) Loss of any and all urban renewal funds. The City government needs all of the funding that it can obtain to properly manage and maintain the City. City funding has been severely low over the last several years and because of that jobs have been lost, projects have been cancelled, and maintenance has suffered. If any one other than a non-profit entity were building on this property, the City would reap the benefits of increased revenues. This non-profit proposal will serve to do nothing but cost the City more time and money. 9) I do realize that facilities such as the one that the United Way wishes to build are needed. (Sometimes badly). Social Services are needed and are an integral part of all governments and communities. The question is should this project be built on this property, in this part of the City, at this time, and is it in the best interest of the people and businesses that are in this area? Is this project really in the City's best interest? Could or Should this project be built outside of City limits to relieve the burden that this facility will take on the City, on the residents of this area, and on the efforts of urban renewal? 4) During the Urban Renewal process an expensive and extensive study was and still is being done by PMG Associates paid for by the City of Fort Collins concerning what kind of businesses should be built and or attracted to build in the North Fort Collins area. One recommendation of this study was presented in a North Fort Collins Business Association meeting via a power point presentation in large letters projected on the wall (and I quote) "NO MORE SOCIAL SERVICES" should be built within the Urban Renewal area. PMG Associates found that there were already too many social services in the Urban Renewal area. The statement concerning social services in the Fall 2005 printed version of the North College Area Market Analysis prepared by PMG Associates from page 29 section 6.3 under Restrictions and Controls on Detrimental Uses — Tax Exempt Uses , is: "The URA also needs to ensure that only a fair share of non-profit and government users are located in the area. Often these types of users will locate in an area because of inexpensive land (something that exists in the North College Avenue Area). However, if a concentration of these users present themselves, they will negatively impact the tax increment collected and thus the funding for the URA. Every community needs the services provided by the government and non-profit organizations, and in fact, the provision of such services adds value to a community and thus dollar value to property., however, much like any business type dominating a local economy, the location of too many of these users in one area can have negative affects." The City paid for this study to improve the Urban Renewal area and yet one of the first 3 or 4 major projects in the Urban Renewal area is a SOCIAL SERVICE! Building another social service in the North Fort Collins area is completely contrary to the recommendations of the study of the area that the City of Fort Collins paid very good money for. The Market Analysis by PMG Associates is still being performed and is being used by The City of Fort Collins' Advance Planning Department. There was an informational meeting presented by PMG Associates just held on Jan. 11t' 2007. Is the marketing analysis study of this area of the City being done in vain? Is the study being done just for the recommendations to be ignored? Current Planning, PLEASE take this information in full consideration! Please don't make a decision that hinders urban renewal before urban renewal has had a chance to even begin to work and have a positive affect on the City of Fort Collins. Please allow the urban renewal process to work as it was intended. 5) The North College area is already saturated with social services. Within a 6 block area there already is: 1) The Food Bank for Larimer County 2) Larimer County Social Services (2 buildings) 3) The Health District (3 buildings)(low income only health care) 4) Salud (moved recently into an existing building)(low income health care) 5) C.A.R.E. Housing (low income housing project) 6) Fort Collins Low Income Housing (low income housing project) 7) Wing Shadow (troubled youth high school) And now, yet another social service is being proposed! The parties involved with this project have had the audacity to call this area of North College Avenue a "campus" for the homeless and want to facilitate their new project and the homeless "campus" ideal. Looking at a map of Fort Collins and the "distribution" of the various social services in our community, I find that there is not a fair distribution of the social services in this City, and it is plain for all to see. Most of the social services are indeed located within a six block area of the city. How much domination of so many social services can such a small area of our community withstand? I don't believe that allowing another social service to be built in the North College area would be a proper and prudent use of the authority entrusted to the City government by the people that the government represents and protects. I know that I am not alone in my opinion of this subject as has been reflected in the three public meetings held on the subject of the Housing Services Day Center. 6) There have been 3 public meetings concerning this project. I attended all three of these meetings. The fast meeting was in January 2004 at Tavelli Elementary School. At the fast meeting there was heated and staunch objection to the Housing Services Day Center project to say the least. At that time the Salvation Army was part of the project and was planning to move their headquarters into the proposed new facility. The public made it clear that they didn't want the project built in the North College area! By the time the second meeting was held, the Salvation Army had left the project and frankly, it left me wondering why they had abandoned the "coalition" that was trying to build the Housing Services project. Why had the Salvation Army decided to leave the project? What did they find wrong with the William Cooper Fort Collins Foreign Car Service 1219 Blue Spruce Drive Fort Collins, Co. 80524 (970) 482-4331 1/16/2007 To: The City of Fort Collins: Current Planning: Re: Building Proposal: Comer of Conifer Street and Blue Spruce Drive "Housing Services Day Center" Concerns and Objections: 1) One half of the eastern of the two properties under current review is within the City of Fort Collins' 100-year flood plain. The main structure is to be built on this flood plain area according to the plans that have been presented to the public in meetings at Tavelli School and at Grace Fellowship Church. Building within a flood plain is dangerous and would put any people visiting, using or working at a structure within a flood plain at risk. As I understand it, flood plains are created to ensure public safety. This is a public safety issue! Will the City just simply remove the flood plain restriction in this instance to facilitate the building of this project or will they enforce the flood plain status to maintain public safety? The City is currently reviewing the flood plains in the City for revision, though revisions have not been made yet. Is it proper to approve a building plan in a flood plain before the flood plain is revised or should current planning wait until the revision of the flood plain is completed before deciding on approval of any plans within the flood plain? The entities that are proposing the Housing Services Day Center have already waited for more than three years to submit their plans to the City of Fort Collins Current Planning. Why should the plans be decided on before the revision of the flood plain in the very near future? I believe that waiting on the decision to approve or deny plans to build the day center until the flood plain is revised is the only efficient, prudent, correct, sure and proper way to proceed with this matter. 2) The current zoning for the properties that this project is to be built on is Industrial. This facility is not industrial. It is human services. Why is valuable, somewhat rare industrial zoning designed for industry, which increases city revenues (which the City seems to need badly), being used for a social service which generates no income for the city in any way? 3) The property where this project is planned to be built is within the City's Urban Renewal Area. Within the Urban Renewal Area, the increases of the property tax on all property improvements in this area are designated for use in the Urban Renewal area to improve the image and prosperity of the area. The proposed project is a social service and therefore a non-profit entity, which does not pay taxes of any kind. A non-profit, non -tax -paying project in an Urban Renewal area is not in accordance with the intent of Urban Renewal. Urban Renewal will not benefit monetarily in any way from the building of this social service project and may in fact hinder any other businesses or building projects in the area by continuing to saturate the area with another social service for the homeless, further causing a lack of generation of Urban Renewal funds. Businesses may, and some will, think that building and trying to grow a business in a social service "low income" area would be counterproductive and unwise exacerbating the problem with Urban Renewal fund generation. What is the property tax increment on a million dollar project? How much Urban renewal income will be lost because of the building of another non-profit social service within the Urban Renewal area? I believe that it is unwise and wrong to approve plans for another non-profit, non -tax generating entity within the City's Urban Renewal area. The City for many reasons created Urban Renewal: to improve the physical condition, the image, the prosperity, the income, and the tax revenues (and thus the City's working capital) in the North College area. Please consider these facts before making a decision on possibly allowing another non- profit entity to build within the new Urban Renewal area in Urban Renewal's infancy! Steve Olt - Fwd: housing services day c—iei From: Steve Olt To: Brigitte Schmidt; dlingle@alter-lingle.com; jim@wetzler.us; poudretrout@hotmail.com; ruthie.rollins@gmail.com; stockover@aol.com Date: 01/18/2007 1:12:19 PM Subject: Fwd: housing services day center Attached is a letter of concerns about and objections to the United Way Housing Services Day Center that You will be discussing tonight at public hearing. This is the property/business owner directly to the north of the proposed development site at the northwest corner of Coniofer Street and Blue Spruce Drive. I received his letter just this morning. Steve