Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTURNING POINT - MODIFICATION OF STANDARD - 12-99A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS,Rd'beived Dec-15-99 05:11pm from 970 482 8907 � TURNING POINT page 1 12/15/99 18:17 FAX 970 48,' 'O7 KINKOS CAMPUS WEST IM 001 December 15, 1999 Lars LeMieux Gamma Phi Beta 733 S Shields Ft. Collins. CO 416.5302 James Becker Executive Director Turning Point This letter is conperning the Center for Youth and Family Development that is being set up on the corner of Phan and Shields. We the ladies of gamma Phi Beta have met and spoken with James Becker, and we feel that this is a strong program that is needed in our community. We have also spoken to him about our concerns about the location. As a sorority we must always keep our safety in mind. As long as all ofthe children are kept under strong supervision 24 hours a day and an alarms is put throughout the structure, we will indeed feel that our needs are being meet. Although it would be nice to keep this building within the Greek community of Colorado State University, we do we the importance of a center like Turning point. Please keep us informed on the details of this project. Sincerely, Lars LeMieux President of Gamma Phi Beta Received Dec-16-99 07:13am from 4917975 - TURNING POINT page 1 DEC-16-99 FRI 7:34 AM HF CSU FAX NO. 4' '75 P. I Human Dovaicyment sand Family 8tudiw Fort Collin, Colorado 60323.1570 (970)491.5556 FAXi(970)491.7975 December 15, 1999 Jim Becker Director, Turning Point 1644 So. College Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Mr. Becker, I was glad to learn that Turning Point had acquired a location to open a girls' facility on the corner of Shields and Plum. As a practicing therapist and the interim director of the Colorado State Univcmity Marriage and Family Therapy Clinic, I have developed the utmost respect for the work of Turning Point. Your agency fills many important needs in our community, and does it well. Given my experiences with your agency, I am confident that this new facility will be managed with the same professionalism and quality that informs other Turning Point programs. Given the current and growing needs of adolescent girls in our community, I strongly support that 'Turning Point develops a 36-bed facility, as opposed to only a 20-bed facility. The location and size of the new building appear appropriate for serving thirty-six girls in need. Thank you for your on -going efforts to benefit the lives of our community's youth and their families. it is my hope that your efforts to serve more adolescent girls in need with this facility will be slichessful. Sincere , A Shelley Haddock, M.S. Interim Director, CSU Marriage and Family Therapy Clinic Tuesday, December 14, 1999 Dear City Council of Fort Collins; I am writing a letter of support on behalf of The Turning Point Youth Development Center. I am concerned that without the support of the city of Fort Collins, Turning Point's efforts cannot extend to the new girls' residence. During my time as a volunteer at Turning Point this semester, I have seen the program's effect on young adult's lives. I truly believe in the work that the center does for our community and for becoming a family for youth that need extra support. The program I have been working with is at the boys' residential school. I have seen several youth progress through their tests to attain a GED and have seen the levels of motivation that grow just by being in a healthy and stable environment. This is what I believe the residential programs offer for young women and men. The need to increase the capacity at the new facility for women is a positive growing movement as far as giving troubled youth an environment they can succeed in. I am definitely in support of the efforts Turning Point is seeking to make as they renovate their new facility and seek to provide residence for 36 young women. Sincerely, e�e Annie Rigo Volunteer from Mortarboard Senior Honor Society at CSU Human Development and Family Studies Fort Collins. Colorado 80523-1570 (970)491.5558 FAX: (970) 491-7975 www.colostate.edu/Depts/HDFS April 9, 1999 Jim Becker, Executive Director Turning Point Center for Youth and Family Development 1644 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 Mr. Becker: This letter is to express my support for Turning Point's plans to expand its facilities. As the Experiential Learning Coordinator for the Department of Human Development and Family Studies at Colorado State University, I have been involved with Turning Point and its programs for over 10 years. I believe your agency provides indispensable services to "at -risk" youth and their families, the students of Colorado State, and the Fort Collins community. Turning Point has been one of our most valued sites for interns. Students complete internships to gain professional skills, add to their repertoire of experiences, and to build networks for their career development In order to do this successfully, it is imperative that they have the opportunity to work in effective, multifaceted programs and to be supervised by. professional staff who are willing to be mentors. I have always found the Turning Point staff to be responsive to the needs of interns and to be willing to work with me to provide an optimal experience for all involved Interns are carefrilly trained, closely supervised and provided with opportunities for professional growth and tkill development. Over the years, I have observed the many changes through which Turning Point and its programs have gone. Revisions in star programs, clientele, program goals and facilities are not uncommon in human service agencies. Through each of these changes Turning Point has undergone, the agency's focus on meeting the needs of its clients and their families while providing residential facilities within the community has been constant I have never been hesitant to place an intern at Turning Point, and I have never been aware of any conflicts within neighborhoods or community members. I believe this is due to the diligence of your staff and to their responsiveness to the Fort Collins community_ I am pleased that Turning Point has the opportunity to continue to expand its facilities. This will enable your programs to meet the needs of a greater number of youth and their families. It will also provide an increase in collaborative efforts between your agency and Colorado State. If I can be of any assistance as you progress in this endeavor, please let me know. Sincerely, Linda L. Stoddard M.S. Experiential Learning Coordinator Human Development and Family Studies 491-7081 Received Dec-14-99 11:50am from CCITT G3 - TURNING POINT page 1 THE LUTHERAN CAMPUS MINISTRY AT COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY December 14, 19" Mr. Jim Becker Turning Point 1644 S. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Jim, Thank you for stopping by today to tell me of the modification of the building that you bought at the corner of Shields and Plum. I understand that you are in the process of changing your plans to not have administrative offices at that site. In addition, I understand that you will allow for 36 residents to be housed there. As the Pastor of Lutheran Campus Ministry which is a neighbor of that building I am in agrees of the change and am looking forward to having you as neighbors of this ministry. The changes that you will make to this property will be a welcome addition to this neighborhood. We took forward to the work being completed and you being able to move in. Thanks for your continued communication with us. Blessings, Pastor Connie Winter-Eulbexg ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY LUTHERAN CHAPEL 805 SOUTH SHIELDS STREET ... FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 ... PHONE (970) 482-2160 page 3 In addition to these specific questions, please allow me to clarify a couple of general points: ➢ Turning Point has been operating as a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization serving youth and their families for over 32 years. The organization was founded as LARICO, and in 1997 the name was changed to Turning Point. We have never operated as "New Beginnings' - that was a different organization. ➢ This is not a "new project' -- the project has been under review by various departments of City government since May of 1999. Turning Point has already had two public meetings on the project that required APO notification (the original request for a group home, the Administrative Hearing to approve the plat). There were no objections noted at either of the other two public meetings. ➢ The plat for this property was approved by Administrative Hearing in Sept. of 1999. The plat underwent rigorous review by multiple City departments, and meets all of the requirements. ➢ The approved site plan calls for improvements for pedestrian traffic, auto access to the site, and beautification of the site - at an estimated cost of over $80,000 to our organization. I hope that this answers your questions and the questions of the Planning and Zoning Board. I look forward to their approval on Thursday evening. Sincerely, rs.. Ja es Becker Executive Director page 2 ➢ The incoming President of Gamma Phi Beta sorority (Lara Lemiux), the residents of the building immediately north of 801 S. Shields, has reviewed the proposal for 36 residents. Upon hearing that the facility will be used for girls, and a review of the intended schedule and security plans, she expressed support for the plan. Sorority members may write a letter or attend the meeting to comment. 3) Why this site for this use, and why have 36 residents? ➢ The site was selected for its proximity to CSU, due to our close working relationship with various academic departments and community service elements of the University. ➢ This use, even at 36 residents, is a significant improvement over the prior use of the property (just ask the neighbors!) ➢ The prior occupancy was 45 residents. The site can easily accommodate 36 residents as well as the specialized programs planned (room for art therapy, computer lab for education and job training, kitchen & dining facilities for job training) recreational space, space for a wheelchair -bound client or visitor, and living and bathroom facilities that are 25% larger that the required state minimums for 36 clients). ➢ The use as a group home is allowed within this zoning district. After remodel, the 12,500 sq. ft. building can satisfy the criteria of "residential, not institutional in character", and "match the size and character of similar residential structures in the neighborhood." The site also provides convenient access to interns, volunteers, and visitors to the facility. 4) What are the differences and similarities between this facility and Turning Point's facility on Mathews Street? ➢ The Mathews Street facility and Shields Street facility (as proposed) compare as follows: Shields Street Mathews Street Ca acity 36 Capacity 20 Girls residential Boys residential 12,500 s . foot building 8,700 s . foot building Less yard for outdoor recreation, proximity to CSU and City Park More yard for outdoor recreation, proximity to Library Park Will include day treatment and schooling for 14 clients Day treatment program will move from Mathews to Shields 19 off-street parking spaces available 4 off-street parking spaces available turning Pc-.", Center fo,Youth & Family Development Troy Jones Current Planning Department City of Ft. Collins 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 Dear Troy, December 15, 1999 Please allow me to respond the questions you posed regarding Turning Point's requested Modification of Standards at 801 S. Shields Street: 1) What are the lighting & security plans for the building? ➢ The minor amendment approved earlier this year did not require any specific changes to lighting. However, Turning Point has made plans for improved exterior lighting as part of the remodel. The plans call for building -mounted exterior (or under-eave canister) lighting that illuminates the first floor exterior of the building without spill -over. ➢ The first floor window & doors will be alarmed, set to ring after-hours and alert staff if a door or window is opened. ➢ Turning Point will have awake staff on duty at all times when clients are in the building. The general daytime staff ratio is 1 staff to 6 girls; overnight ratio is 1 staff to 12 girls (the state required staff: client ratios are 1:10 and 1:20). 2) What do the neighbors (especially CSU) think of this modification? ➢ An officer from ASCSU and several other members of the CSU community intend to attend the meeting. No one that I have talked to from CSU has indicated an objection to the modification; several have indicated support. ➢ The pastor from the Lutheran Ministries building directly to the south is aware of the proposed modification and has indicated her support (letter attached). ➢ The owner of Cambridge Apartments (Jim Smith) has reviewed our proposal and site plan in detail. He indicated no objection to the proposed modification for 36 residents. He feels that the new use will be a "great improvement' over prior use and other options. ➢ The owner of the four-plex immediately to the west of 801 S. Shields could not be reached for comment. 1644 South College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80525 �n�Mea COUNTY Phone (0) 221- 727 Fax(970)221-2727 Comma -y Planning and Environmental rvices Current Planning City of Fort Collins MEMO To: The Planning and Zoning Board From: Troy Jones, City Planner December 15, 1999 Re: Additional Information Regarding the Turning Point Modification Request Because I, will not be at the 12/16 P&Z Hearing, and because I will be delivering the Board additional packet materials anyway, I have found it appropriate to include some additional information that I have received regarding the Jacob Center modification request. Please note the following attached items: 1) A letter from the applicant providing responses to the questions Board members had at the 12/10 worksession. 2) A letter of support from a representative of the property adjacent to the south of the site. 3) A letter of support from the Human Development and Family Studies Department at CSU. 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 P & Z Minutes J 6/26/80 Page 25 Severe: Stated he favors educating people in the community and would be happy to provide the Board with a copy of their regulations within the week. Haase: Stated that since it was late and three of the Board members were absent, that perhaps they were not ready to offer a recommendation to City Council. Noted that all the information they had received has been most helpful, and that there is a real need for additional discussion and more expertise from the social and humanitarian community. Said the issue is very important and suggested continuing it until the July meeting. Smith: Suggested setting up a special work session to get more input and to get more consensus from the Board as to changing the amendment or not. Haase: Agreed that would be a good solution. Moved to refer the subject ordinance amendment to a special work session to be held, in July before the next regular meeting. Eckman: Second. Wells: Stated she is opposed to postponing the issue as it had been discussed four years ago and postponed; there are too many meetings already; and the decision must be made at a public meeting, so this will all have to be gone through again. Spahr: Stated he would vote no because he is prepared to support the original resolution. Wells: Stated she also would support the original resolution. Vote: Haase: yes; Wells: no; Spahr: no; Eckman: yes. Wells: Asked for another motion. Haase: Moved recommendation of approval to City Council of the proposed amendment with the addition that 24-hour authorized supervision on the premises be added to the definition of group homes. Spahr: Second. Vote: Eckman: no; Spahr: yes, explaining his reversal by saying that it is improper to go for a special permit use as the Board will not be any better qualified to rule on social impacts in the future than tonight; Wells: yes; Haase: yes, commending Deibel for a fine, comprehensive report, and supporting the normalization treatment concept, and stating that the community has a responsibility to offer a fair zoning ordinance with open locations for group homes. Motion carried, 3 - 1. Wells: Stated that Gary Spahr would no longer be on the Board after tonight, and thanked him for his service, saying that he had been a great asset to the Board. Spahr: Expressed his appreciation to the staff for their help and cooperation P & Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 24 more people than others. Eckman: Said that is probably a semantic problem with his terminology, and that he feels that zones where there are more young children need protection from the addicted and criminal types. Mitchell: Stated nobody ever felt the need to protect her child when she lived in the R-H zone, but brought in anything they wanted to. Suggested it might be better for each group home application to come in for review than to severely amend the proposed amendment. Said originally she did not want that because the Board would be subject to many long hearings and abuse by neighborhoods, but that that would be preferable to too many amendments. Eckman: Said the reason he included convenience stores and transporation services was because the statute says that municipalities could use those for valid considerations in locating group homes,.but that he could delete that portion of the motion. Ruggiero: Noted that in the particular case to which Eckman referred, involving Adams City, it was a situation where they had special permit review so the city council considered those services at their hearings and the court ruled which things could be taken into consideration. Stated that in the case of use by right such things would not be taken into consideration. Bob Severe: House Manager at Community Corrections Halfway House. With reference to the roles of the P & Z Board and the licensing agencies, stated it would help to have more information on what such agencies require. Said their licensing agency is the state Department of Corrections and they work under a contract. Stated that 24-hour awake supervision is already required by them. With respect to so-called anti -social houses, said it should be understood that people come to such homes three months before being released from prison, so if they do not come into a half -way house, they will go into every neighborhood in the city --back where they came from. Said no area in the city is free from crime, but that they try to channel people back into the community in more appropriate ways than those in which they left. Contended they are probably far more strict than what the Board's ideals might be. P�.Wells: Stated, then, that homes for people with anti -social behavior are more usually transitional from institutions into the community rather than alternatives to incarceration. Severe: Stated that is partially true, but that they serve in both capacities, and some judges do sentence people directly from the court. Noted that there are hundreds of people in Fort Collins who are on probation for the same crime that others go to Canyon City for, and their only requirement is to send a written report to a probation officer once a month or to see him once a month. People are often sent to halfway houses by judges in order to provide more supervision for them, and because they may have potential for rehabilitation in a halfway house without having to be incarcerated. Spahr: Said this has been very helpful, and asked that Severe's and other agencies respond to the question of the protection or lack of it that the public has because of staff supervision and client supervision and placement. P & Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 23 disabled, pointing out that the present proposal has a lower limit for the number of individuals in a home than the state statute. Stated the City has a responsibility to protect neighborhood families and provide them some domestic tranquility and some freedom from the stresses of external inputs which they might be forced to withstand if homes for persons with addiction and criminal problems were allowed in their neighbhoods. Stated provisions should be made for homes for the developmentally disabled in conformance with the statute, and for shelter homes as they had had a burden imposed upon them from birth. Stated he distinguishes that kind of an affliction from one which is acquired from drug addiction or criminal behavior. Said that despite Larico's good record he had concern about these kinds of homes in more vulnerable communities. Said that any group home should be placed in some location with ready access to public transportation, convenience stores and drug stores. Stated that to protect the R-H zone and any others, consideration should be given to spacing requirements between homes, whatever the type. Said he could not recommend approval of the proposal as presented. Moved recommendation of approval to City Council of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would provide for all state licensed group homes for the developmentally disabled, serving not more than .eight develop- mentally disabled persons,in any residential zone in the City of Fort Collins; which would also provide for homes for abandoned children and other homeless persons, excluding homes for persons with addiction and criminal problems which will remain as they presently do, with the requirement that any group homes be spaced adequately apart from one another as set forth in the report, and with homes for the developmentally disabled and for abandoned children that they be placed not further than 500' from public transportation and convenience and drug stores. Included in the motion is the stipulation that only homes for the developmentally disabled and shelter care homes would be permitted outside the districts in which they are currently allowed, and that all other types of group homes would remain under present zoning. Jean Adams: Employee for the Department of Social Services. Expressed concern with the term "abandoned", noting there are not really many abandoned children. Spahr: Suggested using the term, shelter care. Bavoso: Stated that the children who come into shelter care are the same ones who eventually end up in Larico, so if shelter care is included, that could also become a problem. Said that not all of their youth are --those involved in criminal offenses or with drugs, but those who need super- vision. Weddell: Stated he sees the Board as trying to determine therapeutic considerations which perhaps � specialists or therapists are better equipped to handle. Contended th�� �Foup home for minor developmentally disabled children should be near public transporation is immaterial. Said that a home's location near a convenience is an issue for the licensing agency to determine, and not an appropriate issue for inclusion in a zoning ordinance. P. Wells: Agreed with Weddell's statement. Expressed concern with the designation of vulnerability of zones, noting that higher density zones may have even P 6*Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 22 is an emotional social issue involved which is difficult to deal with. Pointed out the value of group homes with a family -type environment for rehabilitation as seen by professionals in the field. Stated that those individuals admitted to group homes are carefully evaluated. Said there were studies for all kinds of disabilities showing the effects of group homes on communities and that such factual studies should be used to counter emotional opposition. Listed several studies showing very, very little negative effects from group homes, and considerable positive contributions by group homes. Glen Thill: Resident on Wood Street. Expressed opposition to the Community Development project on Wood Street. Wells: Stated there would be hearings on that particular project, probably at the Council level, and suggested he attend hearings on that project and present his views. Hazel Belcher: Supervisor at the Department of Social Services for the last seven months. Stated that before that time she had been in California for nine years in the field of developmental disabilities. Complimented Deibel for his support which summarizes modern thinking about the best way to care for people who are less fortunate than most. Limiting her comments to the developmentally disabled, stated that group homes are designed to help those who are capable of living in such a situation do so rather than being.shoved into an institution or nursing home. Said this is a nation-wide trend and commended the Board for dealing with the issue now as it would certainly become one later. Haase: Moved recommendation that the Zoning Ordinance be amended as recommended in Deibel's report, with the addition requiring that a group home be required to have 24-hour authorized supervision on its premises be added to the definition of group homes. Spahr: Said he generally supports the proposal, has no problems with homes for the developmentally disabled or with shelter care, but expressed uncertainty with respect to homes for drug and alcohol rehabilitation due to the side - effects of the disease. Stated he was very concerned about the emotionally disabled and correctional rehabilitation, despite the very good reputation of Larico. Said he had doubts ab relying on the state licensing agency because they are often inadequate lack of funds and staff. Also expressed concern about the adequacy of properly trained supervision for the protection of the community. Noted this also may be due to the notoriously low budgets of such agencies and their inability to pay for proper supervision. Stated the evaluation of individuals for placement in homes for the emotionally disabled and for criminal rehabilitation is a very imperfect system and a very conservative approach needs to be taken, which is not always done. For these reasons, expressed doubts about the safety for the surrounding community with these types of homes, homes for the "anti -social" for lack of a better word. Eckman: Agreed with some of these concerns. Stated he felt comfortable with having the Planning and Zoning Board consider the question of social compatibility with neighborhoods inasmuch as the state statutes give the municipalities the power to zone for the purpose of promoting health, safety, moral and general welfare. Said the City should come into compliance with the state statute concerning homes for the developmentally P &'Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 21 Cienfuegos: Stated he had previously been to the Planning and Zoning Board objecting to the building of an apartment as their neighborhood has its share of high density housing. Asked about a proposed medical center on Cherry and Wood Streets. owned by the City. Deibel: Replied that a facility providing full-time medical care would not be classified as a group home, and would have to be located in a zone in which full-time health care facilities are allowed, i.e. R-H. Stated he was not familiar with the particular case. Cienfuegos: Stated he opposed that center as they had their share, but did not oppose the ordinance amendment. Presented a petition. Wells: Stated that the Planning Board and staff are also concerned about the issue of concentration. Smith: Stated he would take the petition and present it to Pat Allen who is doing something in that area, noting he is not familiar with exactly what it is. Haase: Stated it would be a Respite Care, lifeline for families with members who are developmentally disabled, supported by the Association for Retarded Citizens of Larimer County. Said information about it had been presented to City Council May 20, and that funding comes from Community Development Block Grant funds. Carol Flynn: Director of Association for Retarded Citizens. Stated the particular lot had not yet been purchased. Said it is neither a medical center nor a group home, but a Respite Care program, providing a house which would fit in with the neighborhood for a kind of drop -in child care. Said they were planning neighborhood informational meetings about the program. Margaret Mitchell: Owner of two properties in the Laurel School neighborhood. Said she is glad the City is pursuing the problem of group homes, but noted that it is difficult for the neighborhood resident to distinguish between group homes, respite care facilities, medical centers and social service agencies or a unit of the Housing Authority. A concentration of such social services, when it becomes high, is threatening to the neighborhood. Said it is appropriate to move group homes out of the R-H zone as others would be more difficult to locate outside the R-H zone. Stated that while she supports the amendment, she is concerned that many group homes will still locate in the older neighborhoods. Said that if this were handled on a permit -only basis, some neighborhoods would present very resistant, emotional statements and would defeat the application, while neighborhoods like Laurel Street with little resistance would end up with the homes. For that reason, stated she supports a right by use. Stated she supports this kind of group home and would like to see them spread throughout the community. Art Bavoso: Director of Larico Youth Homes which has two of the homes in the City. Complimented Deibel on his report which he characterized as being "enlightened". Stated they also support the amendment and spreading out the group homes. Jim Weddell: Board Member for the Association for Retarded Citizens. Stated there P & Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 20 Deibel: Replied they do not as the staff would have a hard time coming up with objective criteria, but that that is the issue people are concerned about. Stated they had concluded that would have to be the responsiblity of the licensing agencies and that it is their job to do so. Noted that some of the debate is whether or not they do an adequate job, but that it would be very difficult for the City to do so. Ruggiero: Stated this originally stemmed from a question about group homes for the developmentally disabled. Said that the proposed ordinance is in substan- tial, but not complete, compliance with state statutes which require that a city provide as a residential use for a home for developmentally disabled individuals of a capacity of not more than eight. Noted the proposed zone actually starts at five to seven occupants and allows for more than eight which is not required. Noted the statute refers only to homes for the developmentally disabled. Stated the statute does provide that the city can provide for certain regulations in terms of spacing, accessibility to convenience facilities, transportation, education, etc., as long as such regulations are not tantamount to prohibiting the use in a residential zone. Deibel: Said that since the state allows for size and scale limitations, there could be room for interpretation, but that it is a relatively minor issue. Said the City should decide of its own accord how it wanted to handle group homes and not simply respond to state legislation. Spahr: Asked counsel why the state singled out developmentally disabled homes. Deibel: Replied it may be because the developmentally disabled were more effective lobbyists. Ruggiero: Stated he was speculating, but that a home environment is important to the developmentally disabled who may not pose the same kind of problems that other groups might. Suggested Deibel give some insight into the capacity requirements of licensing agencies. Deibel: Replied that the requirements vary according to the agency and the type of facility. Gave some examples of the types of capacity requirements. Wells: Asked for public comment. Bob Wells: Chairman of the Handicap Advisory Committee for the City of Fort Collins, and extensively involved with the disabled community in the area. Stated that their last meeting they had discussed this ordinance amendment and that they had commended the staff for their research and recommenda- tions. Said they support the adoption of the amendment. Joe Cienfuegos: Resident on Wood Street. Stated that group homes are meant for criminals, alcoholics, and nothing to do with disabled persons. Asked if any property had been bought for these homes. P. Wells: Stated that there are several categories of group homes: for shelter for the homeless, for drug and alcohol rehabilitation, for developmentally - disabled, for the emotionally disabled, and for correctional rehabilitation. Said that Mr. Wells had referred to homes for the developmentally disabled. Pointed out on a map the current location of group homes, five of which are currently in existence. P VZ Minutes 6/26/80 Page 19 become concentrated in the R-H neighborhoods. An over -concentration in one neighborhood could create negative impacts in that the neighborhood becomes identified as a social services district. This is also detrimental to group homes as their goal is to provide as normal a setting as possible. Recommendations were made at the February meeting to define group homes and staff was directed to look further into use, the result of which is the report under discussion tonight. Stated the report includes information on the different categories of group homes, indica- ting their diversity and also their similarity in that each is to provide a family -like environment under supervision. This distinguishes a group home from a multiple -family dwelling or a boarding house. Pointed out that as the City grows, more group homes of all types are likely to come in. Stated that the report contains information on how other cities handle group homes, generally on a special case -by -case review or by standardized regulations that apply to all cases across the_ board. Said it is staff's opinion that the latter approach is superior. While the _other approach does provide for neighbQrhkod-input,.._i _may_..be_more emotional than objective. Regulatory guidelines would be needed anyway, and.it makes .sense to develop regulations to .be included in.the_ordi.nance and applied equally in all cases. Stated that there are no provisions at the present time for special permit uses, per se, but that that kind of a mechanism could be provided if the Board so desired. Summarized the City's concerns: that the group homes be properly run and not pose any hazard•to the health or welfare to City or neighborhood residents; that the size and scale of group homes be consistent with the neighborhoods in which they are located; and that group homes not be over -concentrated in any zone. Stated these concerns can be met by requiring all group homes to be licensed by appropriate governmental agency, be operated as a single dwelling, and have constant supervision on the premises; size and scale requirements with respect to each zone; minimum distance separation requirements between any existing group home and any proposed group home. Read the revised definition of group homes: "Group home: a residence operated as a single dwelling under the supervision of a court, state or local governmental agency, housing persons for purposes of special care or rehabilitative treatment due to homelessness, physical condition or illness, mental condition or illness, social, behavioral, or disciplinary problems, and with a person authorized by the operating agency to supervise the facility present on its premises at all times." Noted that provisions for additional parking for group homes are also included. Spahr: Asked if the group home categorization is standardized or if it was made up locally; expressed concern about being able to categorize a home. Deibel: Replied it was difficult to get an over-all picture of all the categories and that the diagram in the report came out of the Planning office. Spahr: Noted the difficulties of distinguishing between various kinds of disabi- lities. Deibel: Agreed that can be difficult, and noted there is considerable variation within each category, but that there are consistent characteristics which identify all as group homes. Spahr: Asked if Deibel had any guidelines for wrestling with the issue of social compatibility with a neighborhood, noting he had no problem with the issue of physical compatibility. P & 'Z Minutes 6/26/80 Page 18 Wells: Stated that this particular annexation is supported by many of the Land Use Policies: it is basically in -fill development, surrounded mainly be urban -style development; such in -fill may mean that larger tracts of agricultural land will not be lost; the basic infrastructure for urban services is available; and this is one of the areas which needs to be considered for economical and logical growth patterns. Stated it is also supported by the Urban Growth Area Plan and is in accordance with the Goals and Objectives adopted by the City Council. Vote: Haase: no, with support for the long-term commitment the area residents had made for their quality and style of life, but stated she would support annexation of the undeveloped area; Wells: yes, for the reasons previously mentioned and in support of the motion, noting that if it were limited to the undeveloped areas, the excluded areas would be forcibly annexed very soon, so it makes more sense to include those areas and avoid problems with utilities, road maintenance, establishment of logical transportation patterns; Spahr: yes; Eckman: yes. Motion carried, 3 - 1. 10. #50-80 Vine/LaPorte/Taft Hill Zoning A request to zone approximately 86.7 acres located between LaPorte Avenue and Vine Drive, west of Taft Hill Road, requested zoning R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential. Applicant: Jerry Nix, Rocky Mountain Bank Building, Fort Collins, CO 80521. Smith: Stated that the annexation will be heard by City Council on July 15. Chianese: Described the proposed zoning. Wells: Asked if the applicant had any problem with the recommendations. Nix: Replied in the negative. Wells: Asked if anyone wished to speak on the item. Eckman: Moved recommendation of approval of the zoning as. submitted. Spahr: Second. Vote: Eckman: yes; Spahr: yes; Wells: yes; Haase. 11. W56-80 Amendment of Zoning Ordinance relating to group home residential care facilities. Deibel: Commented on the impetus for the proposed changes in the ordinance and went over some of the specifics of staff's findings concerning the issue and their recommendation. Stated the initial impetus came from requests to locate group homes outside the R-H zone, but that the present ordinance ( makes no provision for group homes in any zone. Previous homes had been located in the R-H zone by administrative interpretation, but that zone encompasses a relatively small portion of the City and is not expanding at the same rate as -the remainder of the City, so such facilities could Planning and Zoning Matter #56-80 Page arise, especially in the case of homes licensed by a state rather than a local agency. However, for reasons similar to those discussed above, it is our opinion that monitoring, investiga- tions, and judgments concerning whether a particular group home is being "properly run" or not must be the responsibility of the licensing agency. It is also important to note that if any significant nuisance problems were to arise, the City can inter- vene through the police power (not the zoning ordinance). Recommendation: Our recommendation is that the zoning ordinance be amended as indi- cated in the "group homes report", (with the addition that a phrase requiring a group home to have 24 hour authorized supervision on its premises be added to the definition of group homes.) Planning and Zoning Matter Page 2 Discussion:** #56-80 (June 26, 1980) Since preparation of the report on group homes, which the Board received last month, we have had some additional input and comments, leading to the following general observations: 1. It should be recognized that there can be social "problems" with some group homes in the eyes of its neighborhood, and that there have been such problems with some of them in Fort Collins, particularly where a home may be dealing with residents having some anti -social. behavioral -tendencies. Moreover, not all group homes are equally well operated, and the same home may go through cycles of good and poor operation in the eyes of its neighborhood. This observation, however, does not alter our conclusions or recommendations. If a potential for intermittent problems exists, the overconcentration issue becomes all the more important. We still see no justification for potentially allowing them in some neighborhoods or zones without potentially allowing them in all neighborhoods or zones along with size and scale limitations appropriate to the zone and with minimum distance separation requirements. 2. It has been suggested that a special permit or other case -by -case review of group home proposals would minimize the potential for such social problems to arise. The Planning staff, however, does not feel that a special permit review would be either appropriate or effective in somehow determining the "social compatibility" of potential group home residents with a given neighborhood. It would not be appropriate because the province of the zoning ordinance is physical compatibility, not social compatibility among individuals. It would thus not be effective because zoning special review criteria and recommendations would only dea physical criteria not social criteria. For these reasons, it is our opinion that decisions based on social criteria must be left to the appropriate licensing agency. The foregoing is not to say that a case -by -case review procedure for group homes is necessarily inappropriate to determine physical compatibility. As is discussed in the report, however, it is the staff's opinion that since any special use procedure must be guided by objective criteria anyway, it makes sense for those criteria to be specified in the ordinance itself and applied uniformily in all cases rather than on a case -by -case special review basis. This is, moreover, the general approach of the Fort Collins' zoning ordinance which does not provide for "special permit" uses as such for any single use in any zone. 3. Concern has also been expressed about a possible lack of account- ability of a group home to its neighborhood if such problems do These additiona staff comments were prepared for the Planning and Zoning Board for its meeting of June 26, 1980. Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Fourteen REFERENCE SOURCES Community Based Residential Facilities in the Twin Cities Metropoli- tan Area - Location and Community Res onse, University of Minnesota, Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, December, 1975. Group Homes in Metropolitan Washington. Metro Washington, D.C., Council of Governments, September, 1976. A Report on Zoni Clara County. and Non Medical Communit4 Care Facilities in Santa nta C ara County Planning Dept., March, 1976. The Social Impact of Service Proarams in Pr Commission, 1973. Group Homes: A Study of Small Residential ime Residential Areas, by Eric Know es an versity of Wisconsin -for the Green Bay Planning Zoning for a New Kind of Famil Westchestor County (N.Y.) Depart - men o Panning, Fall, 9 Zoning for Family and Group Care Facilities, by Daniel Lauber and T—rank Bangs, Jr., American Society of -Planning Officials P.A.S. Report 300, Mrrch, 1974. Memo to the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board from Barbara Oglesby, Fort Collins Planning Department, September, 1976. Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Thirteen tion or illness, mental condition or illness, social, be- havioral or disciplinary problems. 2. List "group homes" as a permitted use in all residential zoning districts, and establish "sliding scale" limitations on group home size for different zones such as the following (to be added probably to Section 118-82. Supplementary regulations.) Maximim No. Maximum of Residents Additional Permissible Minimum (in add. to Lot Area No. of Resi- Separation Minimum operators of For Each dents (in Requirement Lot Size home) for Mini- Additional add. to Between Zone and FAR mum Lot Size Resident Operators) Homes R-E 9000 s.f. 6 1500 s.f. 10 (on min. 2000 ft. (1:4) lot of 159000 s.f. R-L1 6000 s.f. 5 1200 s.f. 10 (on min. 2000 ft. (1:3) lot of 129000 s.f.) R-M 6000 s.f. 6 750 s.f. 15 (on min. 1000 ft. (1:2) lot of 129750 s.f.) R-H 6000 s.f. 7 500 s.f. 20 (on min. 700 ft. (2:1) lot of 139000 s.f.) 3. Add to Section 118-81 D. Off Street Parking. (3) (F) For each group home, two parking spaces for each (3) employees, plus one (1) parking space for each four (4) adult residents, unless residents are prohibited from owning or operat- ing a personal automobile. 1 Adding the use to R-L also permits it by reference in R-L-P, R-L-M, R-P, R-M-P, subject to the same limitations as in R-L (unless part of a P.U.D.). Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Twelve neighbor's sidewalks. It is perhaps because of this, that we can find no evidence that the location of a group home in a neighborhood has negatively affected property values. The third concern can be addressed by establishing minimum separation requirements between group homes. This is the approach taken by many communities as indicated in the survey of ordinances above, with the separation requirement ranging from 300 feet to one mile, sometimes varying by zone. VI. Recommendations. In light of the foregoing discussion, the general recommendations of the staff are as follows. 1. The zoning ordinance definition of group homes should require them to be licensed or operated by an appropriate governmental agency. 2. The zoning ordinance definition of group homes should require them to -be operated as a single household unit. By the same token, they should be allowed in all residential zones, but subject to limitations which will make the size,and scale of the group home similar to the size and scale of the other residential uses permitted in that zone. 3. The zoning ordinance should establish minimum distance separation requirements between group homes to prevent their overconcentra- tion in one area. By the same token, they should again be allowed in all residential zones. Specific ordinance revisions to implement these recommendations would be such as the following. These proposed specifics are tentative at this point. We are still studying the wordings and numbers prior to making a final recommendation. 1. Add to Section 118-11, Definitions: - GROUP HOME: A residence operated as a single dwelling under the supervision of a court, state or local governmental agency, housing persons for purposes of special care or rehabilitative treatment due to homelessness, physical condi- Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Eleven 2. That the size, scale, and overall appearance of group homes be consistent with the general character of the neighborhood in which it is located. 3. That group homes not be overly concentrated in any one neighbor- hood due to the potentially detrimental effects on both the neighborhood and on the "normalization" programs of any existing group homes in that neighborhood. The first concern of the City relating to qualities of the eventual residents of the homes is one frequently given voice by neighbors fearful for their own well being. It is best answered by requiring: (1). the licensing of homes and/or operators (by state agencies) and (2) screening (by the operating or licensing agency) of residents so that those who might be disruptive or dangerous are excluded. The several studies which have been conducted have indicated that commun- ity fears are not justified by the actual operation of such homes, and, in fact, fears have generally decreased in direct proportion to familiarity with, or proximity to, existing homes. While every effort should be made by the City and the agencies involved to allay the fears of neighbors, this is best accomplished by an effort to educate 'and inform the community about the objectives and inten- tions of the homes. The outstanding record of group homes across the country should be emphasized, as should the point that neighborhood fears elsewhere have been proven to be unfounded in this regard. Evidence of responsible licensing and screening procedures can do much to put fears of violence or disorder to rest.* The second concern, relating to the physical compatibility of a group home with its neighborhood, can be addressed by establishing reason- able limitations on the size and scale of group homes which are geared to the general size and scale limitations of dwelling units allowed in each zone. Neighborhoods facing the prospect of a group home often express concern about the maintenance and upkeep of the facility. While it is difficult for the City to "require" exemplary maintenance of property by any private owner, the assurance that group homes must be licensed should meet this concern. It should be the role of the licensing agency to require proper upkeep by any licensee. Moreover, the operators of group homes would seem to have a vested interest in maintaining good rapport with the neighborhood and developing understanding and support from the neighbors. The residents of one home in town, for example, shovel the snow from Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 ' Page Ten nance lends itself more to this approach since there are no provi- sions in the ordinance for "special permit" uses in any zone in the City. V. Conclusions. The objective of allowing and encouraging full participation of group home residents in society as "normal" persons requires enhancement of those qualities which characterize ordinary home situations and minimization of those qualities which are disruptive or adversely affect achievement of such situations. Zoning and other City regula- tions should be used only to insure that the homes are not located or operated in such a manner that they become nuisance problems them- selves, not to frustrate the legitimate social welfare objectives of other state and local agencies and the community. In fact, however, the zoning ordinance has operated in such a manner as to exclude group homes of the type proposed from the areas most desir- able (in terms of fulfillment of the objectives of rehabilitation and normalization), and to force them instead into commercial and high - density housing areas where those objectives become increasingly difficult to achieve.* The responsibility of the City in this case is, we think, to evaluate realistically the potential problems of specialized group homes in residential neighborhoods and to enact controls which will minimize those problems while aiding the homes in the accomplishment of their own objectives. In addition, both the agencies operating the homes and the City may share some interests in the setting of stan- dards for the operation and maintenance of group homes, including requiring their dispersion throughout the residential areas of the City, rather than concentration in one neighborhood or zone.* The legitimate concerns of the City are: 1. That group homes be run properly and that .persons living .in the homes pose no threat to the safety or welfare of the community in general or of nearby residents in particular. * Starred paragraphs are taken from a 1976 planning staff report to this Board concerning group homes prepared by Barbara (Oglesby) Rodman. City Denver Colorado Springs Boulder TABLE: Summary of regulations concerning group home uses in selected zoning ordinances. Definition Regulation "homes for d.d.": allowed by special permit in all residential districts, (8 max. cap., 2000' separation req.) "group homes": allowed by special permit in R-3 (med.) and R-4 (high) zones (with 800' min. separa- tion requirement) "specialized group home": allowed by special permit in all residential districts (max. cap. 6 youths) "group home for d.d.": "human service est.": "group residence": "residential institution": Lakewood "family": Lincoln, "group home": Nebraska Portland, "residential care Oregon facility": San Jose, "residential care California facility": allowed as accessory use in all residential districts (max. cap. 8, k mile separation) allowed by special permit in all residential districts six occupants allowed as "dwelling unit" in any zone allowed by special permit in all residential districts "any number of individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit," (allowed in all zones) allowed in all residential districts (separa- tion dist. from 2 mi. to 1200 ft., depending on zone) allowed by special permit in all districts, with a city Residential Care Facility Licen- sing Board. allowed in all residential districts (up to 6 residents by right, 7 or more by permit) Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Eight Operated by the Larimer County Mental Health Department, Adult Services Division, licensed by the State Department of Institu- tions, Division of Mental Health. F. Community Corrections Halfway House, 502 W. Laurel. Correctional group home for adult offenders. Maximum capacity: 20 adults. Operated by Larimer County Department of Community Corrections, licensed by State Department of Institutions, Division of Corrections. The map on the preceding page shows the locations of these group homes. As the map clearly illustrates, existing group homes are concentrated in the R-H zone. The concentration is due to the current zoning ordinance treatment of the use as discussed above. While it is beyond the scope of this report to project the need for additional group homes in Fort Collins, it is clear that as the city grows, the number of group homes will also grow. The capacity of the areas currently zoned R-H to absorb additonal group homes will soon be exhausted, particularly considering the competing demand for office and multiple family uses in the R-H zone. IV. Zoning Ordinance Survey. A brief survey of several zoning ordinances that provide specifically for group homes in all residential zoning districts is summarized in the table on the following page. As the table indicates, some of these ordinances rely on special use permits to regulate group homes on a case -by -case basis, while others allow the use subject to regulations specified in the ordinance. The advantage of the "special permit" approach is that it provides for neighborhood input. The disadvantage is that neighborhood fear and misunderstanding may overshadow the hearing process. According to a survey conducted by ASPO, the experience in many cities is that the outcome of the hearing process is determined more by the politics of the case than on consistently applied objective standards. This is unfortunate since negative public attitudes toward group homes are often uninformed, as is discussed above and below. For these reasons, the generally superior approach seems to be to allow the use subject to specific conditions and limitations as stated in the ordinance appropriate to each residential zone rather than subject to a special permit. Moreover, the Fort Collins ordi- No Text Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for .Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Six additional group homes located in close proximity may diminish the "normalness° of the neighborhood which is part of the exist- ing group home's program. III. Existing group homes in Fort Collins. The following is, to the best of our knowledge, a complete list of the existing group homes in Fort Collins, with a brief description of each. A. Shelter Care Home, 4432 Poco Drive. Youth crisis intervention and temporary youth shelter. Maximum capacity: 10 youths. Operated by the County Department of Social Services. B. Larico Home ("Larimer County Residential Treatment Center"), 614 Mathews Street. Youth correctional group home. Maximum capacity: 12-14 youths. Operated by private non-profit foundation, licensed by State Department of Institutions, Division of Corrections. C. Larico Placement Center, 640 W. Prospect Street. Youth correctional needs assessment and placement facility. Maximum capacity: 6-8 youths. Operated and licensed by same as Larico Home above. D. Remington Street House, 418 Remington Street. Group home for developmentally disabled adults. Maximum capacity: 8 adults. Operated privately, licensed by State Department of Institutions, Division of Developmental Disabilities. E. Mental Health Halfway House, 214 S. Whitcomb. Group home for emotionally disturbed adults undergoing treatmeant at the County Mental Health Center next door. Maximum capacity: 6 adults. Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Five 1. Program standards for the quality of care and treatment provided residents. 2. Physical and health standards for the adequacy of the struc- ture and premises. (Detailed licensing requirements for several types of group homes are available in the Planning Office.) The licensing agencies generally monitor licensees with periodic "spot checks", and most licenses are renewed annually. The licensing agencies also establish screening requirements with respect to residents. Among the personality types which are not considered by licensing agencies to be appropriate for group homes are psychotics, sexual deviants, the severely mentally retarded, or those who have demonstrated a known pattern of violence. E. Neighborhood impacts. Although recognition of the need for group homes is becoming more widespread, the immediate response of many people in -a neighbor- hood faced with the possibility of a group home is one of fear and apprehension. This fear is generally expressed by neighbors who may be unfamiliar with the nature and intent of group homes and who are genuinely apprehensive about loss of personal safety and property values. This is unfortunate since, according to an analysis of much of the research in this area by the American Society of Planning Officials (ASPO), "the facts and information available indicate that this apprehension is unwarranted." A heavily documented article to this effect is attached to this report. The proponents of group homes maintain that a properly run facility will not create any neighborhood impacts, and that were any such problems to ar-ise,- a -group home's license could be revoked. However, an over concentration of group homes in one neighborhood can be detr mi enTal for two reasons. First from the standpoint of a neighborhood, while one group home may have no significant visual or social impact, several in close proximity may tax the capacity of the neighborhood to absorb them without any such effect. Secondly, from the standpoint of an existing group home, J Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Four "Two important concepts are related to dein- stitutionalization: 'normalization' and 'con- tinuum of care'. As defined by Bengt... 'the normalization principle means making avail- able... patterns and conditions of everyday, life which are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the mainstream of society'. Normalization implies that standards for resi- dences serving as community -based residential facilities should be the same as those regular- ly applied to similar dwellings for ordinary citizens. In other words, community -based residential facilities are not institutions, rather they function as 'home' for their occu- pants ... The concept of 'continuum of care' has as its objective enabling persons to move from states of physical, emotional, and/or financial dependency to states of self-suffi- ciency and or se -support." In other words, the "ideal" pursued by a group home is to be as "normal" a household in the community and neighborhood in which it is located as is possible. In light of this, group homes can be functionally distinguished from other residential uses such as boarding and rooming houses in which occupants maintain separate individual residences or "housekeeping units", and from temporary unsupervised group living arrangements such as a group of students occupying a house. For the sake of clarity, group homes should also be distinguished from "foster homes" in which one to four persons are placed by an agency with a family in their own residence.) D. Licensing requirements and procedures. Licensing requirements for group homes vary by type, but seem to be quite extensive for all. The requirements generally fall into two categories: 1 Our ordinance adequately provides for "family foster homes" as an accessory use (not to exceed four children in any home.) However, this provision should be revised to recognize adult (elderly) foster placements. Licensed Group Homes (cap. 540) Youth Adult Diagram: Categories of Group Homes Health Care Drug and Alcohol Developmentally Emotionally Correctional Shelter Rehabilitation Disabled Disabled Rehabilitation Fort Collins None yet None yet Shelter Care Home None yet in None yet Remington St. Fort Collins Home None yet Mental Health Halfway House Note: each of the existing Fort Collins group homes identified above is described in greater detail on pp. 6 to 8 of this report. Larico Homes (2) Community Corrections Halfway House J Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment June 5, 1980 Page Two II. What are "group homes" and how do they work? A. Description. The term "group home" refers to a community -based residence housing generally from five to twenty persons who live there for purposes of rehabilitative treatment or special care. Group homes are operated either by state or local governmental agencies themselves, or, as is more often the case, by private indi- viduals, foundations, religious groups, etc. which are licensed by appropriate governmental agencies. As the diagram on the following page indicates, group homes may be designed to serve any of several very diverse groups of persons including the homeless or abused child or elderly person, those recovering from drug or alcohol abuse, the developmentally disabled, the emotionally disturbed, and the criminal offender. B. Role of Group Homes. Group homes have arisen in response to a critical gap in the health care and correctional systems. Institutionalization is often inappropriate or detrimental to persons in need of partial or temporary care or supervision. Group homes can provide a much less expensive and more effective alternative to institutions for persons who can benefit from a small, supportive family -like setting within their own community. More often than not, how- ever, the potential residents of group homes would be placed or allowed to remain in the community anyway, but without the benefit and support of the group home environment which might prevent future institutionalization. C. Therapeutic characteristics of the neighborhood group home setting. ' The essential characteristics for a therapeutically effective group home are (1) that it provide a home or family -like environ- ment, and (2) that it be reflective of the social environment and characteristics of the general community. A study of residen- tial care facilities in the Twin Cities (Minnesota) explains as follows how these characteristics work: .t CITY OF FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX 580, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 PH (303) 484-4220 PLANNING DIVISION M E M O R A N D U M EXT. 655 DATE: June 5, 19801 TO: Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Paul Deibel, Senior Planner RE: Group Homes: Background Information and Suggestions for Zoning Treatment I. Introduction. A. Purpose and Contents of Report. The purpose of this report is to provide information on the nature and function of "group home" residential care facilities so that decisions can be made as to how they will be dealt with in the zoning ordinance and in the community. The major headings of this report are: I. Introduction II. What are "group homes" how do they work? III. Existing group homes in IV. Zoning ordinance survey V. Conclusions VI. Recommendations B. Need for Decision. P. 1 and p. 2 Fort Collins p. 6 P. 8 P. 10 p. 12 The growing utilization of group homes is a relatively recent trend. For this reason group homes are not specifically address- ed in the zoning ordinances of many cities, including Fort Collins. The group homes which currently exist in the city have been allowed only in the R-H zone under the rubric of "boarding house." As will be discussed below, however, the intrinsic nature and external effects of group homes are quite different from those of boarding houses. Moreover, as the public benefits of group home treatment become more evident, their utilization may be expected to increase. For this reason in particular,.it behooves the City to establish specific regulations which will direct the location and development of future group homes. 1 Additional staff comments prepared for June 26, 1980 Planning and Zoning Board meeting are also attached to this report. Commi ty Planning and Environmental rvices Current Planning City. of Fort Collins MEMO To: The Planning and Zoning Board From: Troy Jones, City Planner Re: Requested Background Information on Group Homes December 15, 1999 At the December 10, 1999 worksession meeting, several members of the Board expressed a desire to have some background information that would help explain some of the reasoning behind the group home regulations as specified in the Land Use Code, and in particular more information about: Question 1) How the maximum number of 20 group home residents in a single facility was established, and Question 2) What was the reason for the separation requirements between group homes? The concept of group homes was first introduced into the Zoning Ordinance by Ordinance 13, 1981 on February 17, 1981. Before the ordinance was presented to city council, it was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board on June 26, 1980 for the purpose of establishing a recommendation to forward on to council. The staff report for this June 26, 1980 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing provides quite a bit of background about group homes, and perhaps provides the answers to the questions asked by the Board in last Friday's worksession. The staff report addresses the issues in the following manner: Answer 1) No specific discussion was provided as to why 20 is specifically the maximum number, however background information was provided that supported the notion that group homes be "operated as a single household unit," and, "subject to limitations which will make the size and scale of the group home similar to the size and scale of the other residential uses permitted in that zone." Answer 2) The staff report specifically addresses the reasons for the separation requirements between group homes when it states, "an over concentration of group homes in one neighborhood can be detrimental for two reasons. First from the standpoint of a neighborhood, while one group home may have no significant visual or social impact, several in close proximity may tax the capacity of the neighborhood to absorb them without any such effect. Secondly, from the standpoint of an existing group home, additional group homes located in close proximity may diminish the "normalness" of the neighborhood which is part of the existing group home's program. There is so much background information provided in the staff report for the June 26, 1980 P&Z hearing, and the minutes of that hearing that it will most likely be useful in helping you to make an informed decision about group homes. I've decided to it was important enough to warrant a special delivery of addition packet materials. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 H 0 f— Vine Mz, Lincoln Junior High City Park Campus West c 'I �I � U Stuart ma Suma tSenior so Drake Center Crossing Drake_ 7° N 0 0 rrd/ffte: Map The "Y" Wi to City Hall ool ❑ ao University Mall CSU let. Hos ital Swallow Horsetooth Target Fashion Mall L Poudre valley EPIC ROUTE r=' ROUTE ROUTE ® ROUTE ROUTE ROUTE ROUTE e ROUTE ROUTE ROUTE ROUTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Look for our new Transit Center north of LaPorte at Mason in the Fall Collins School C re O L; Hewlett Packard Front Range Community � College Single ride fare Is 90c exact change only. Discount fare passes may be purchased at the Cfty of Fort Collins Ut111ty Office at 330 South College Avenue and customer service counters in Alfalfa's, Albertson on Mason, Beaver's Market, King Soopers, Nonhside Aztlan Community Center, Safeway, Steele's Markets, and Toddy's. Transfort also has three night service routes. Ride Sunday through Thursday until 12:40 a.m. Ride Fridays and Saturdays until 2:45 a.m. CSU students ride free with valid activity card on all Transfort bus trips, any time, anywhere, For schedule Information please call 221.6620. August 1998 „4� ow*+ El No Text n _| | / ____________________________� _���� — ss - ,A1 ewsnr+s BVILDIHE �rrrrvni �•• ,E:�I� FAA . I I � il\ I 1 I I I 1 I � — J O ; b .��(�1. law. YYY�I • • M Y•I N N YY� MYf V6b�YMY • • M N iA 1 gprvtkLs EBBtAL NOBS O =Zoe W 5 J O f Wo Za VV)u W Q Z 2 Q � J O Z y O C 0 LL 1..[.rowern rc 7•�[YT Yvn.w..reu[ wnmu•. come [ulw�w�1n [.ML Mw•a�mn RB+B p.. JO. MYYYCM: GY{b pIU[[Ib .FS aYxYm, a awe wrz, saw etYl 610BB B2 w 615pB e.inw bHW 6ttYB WC[T M.el� W1D8fi[VE NAN we" YYYBW 1.3 � v I G E>wma BuLD 49 ♦W=aw� --------------- ♦V- 4 11 ♦ rii io w�a '" S +�+ ♦row �srN- �a uuue DUAeJ NV ®BE4TK OB {i{ i --ate a♦e�b ca���cnna+ ✓•P oil! DATA m.. rwwa �� m� � iaimv• Ewa �.s� —_ Vi64wIY KW a 9 �„e 11 im millml= - - - ----- ----- ------ VICINITYMAP #12-99A Turning Point Modification Request Type II LUC 07108199 1 600' Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 7 5. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION: A. The request for a modification to Land Use Code Section 3.8.6 Group Home Regulations subsection (A) of the LUC is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. B. Granting the requested modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code. C. Granting the requested modification would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address the important community need of "residential and treatment facilities for individuals threatened with homelessness" specifically and expressly defined and described in the Consolidated Plan. Granting this modification will allow the applicant to increase the overall supply of residential and treatment facilities for individuals threatened with homelessness in Fort Collins. 6. RECOMMENDATION: A. Staff recommends approval of the modification request to Section 3.8.6(A) of the LUC for the Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A. Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 6 • The section titled "Needs of Homeless and Persons Threatened with Homelessness" (pg 14 of the Consolidated Plan) states, "There are many agencies and service providers assisting homeless individuals and families in Fort Collins. While the community has several agencies working to prevent homelessness and provide shelter for the homeless, there is a need for additional assistance. " The Turning Point facility provides a residential service to troubled youth who might otherwise be run-aways or homeless. • The Consolidated Plan's section titled "Needs of Homeless and Persons Threatened with Homelessness" has a subsection on page 15 titled "Facilities and Services Needed," which states "Based on discussions with agencies directly involved with providing services to the homeless and an assessment of homeless data provided by these groups, there is a need in Fort Collins for coordination of treatment, counseling, training and education programs and services to address the prevention of homelessness. The Turning Point facility provides treatment, counseling, training and education programs for troubled youth who are threatened with homelessness. • The Consolidated Plan's section titled "Needs of Homeless and Persons Threatened with Homelessness" has a subsection on page 16 titled "Substance Abuse," which states "There is a glaring need in Fort Collins for a long term treatment facility for these persons [people afflicted with substance abuse]." This subsection goes on to point out that Turning Point (formerly known as Larico) is one facility in town that offers two residential programs for substance abuse and a one day treatment program with a focus on assisting troubled youth. The description goes on to say, "The residential program can accommodates 12 clients per session, while the one day treatment program can accommodate 14 clients. According to Larico, demand is growing for their services. The increased demand necessitates expansion of their current facilities and increases in staff to facilitate the increased caseload." Granting this modification will allow Turning Point to expand their current facilities, thereby substantially addressing the important community need of a treatment facility for youth afflicted with substance abuse. • The Consolidated Plan's section titled "Facilities & Services for Homeless and Persons Threatened with Homeless" (page 17) lists Youth S.A.F.E. as another agency providing similar services as Turning Point does, and lists the facility as constantly operating at capacity. The city has a greater demand for this service than supply. Granting this modification request will address the important community need of increasing the supply of this type of service. Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 5 less of an impact to the neighboring properties than the former use of a fraternity for 45 males had been, therefore it is not detrimental to the public good. Staff also feels that the public good of the entire City of Fort Collins is being enhanced by increasing the possible number of local placements of adolescent girls needing transitional residential and treatment services within our city. The granting of the modification request would not impair the intent or purposes of the LUC. Section 3.8.6 of the LUC does not specify a purpose, however the general purpose of the LUC is stated in Article 1.2.2. A few of these purposes are addressed by this section of the code where it states, "the purpose of this Land Use Code is to improve and protect the public health, safety and welfare by: (B) encouraging innovations in land development and renewal, (C) fostering safe, efficient and economic use of the land, the city's transportation infrastructure, and other public facilities and services, (F) encouraging patterns of land use which decrease trip length of automobile travel and encourage trip consolidation, (G) increasing public access to mass transit, sidewalks, trails, bicycle routes and other alternative modes of transportation, and (L) encouraging the development of vacant properties within established areas. Staff feels that because Turning Point is adaptively reusing an existing underutilized structure with a user group that will utilize alternative modes of transportation, and because Turning Point chose to locate the facility in an existing established neighborhood which is near many retail destinations, the proposed modification request satisfies the intent and purposes of the Land Use Code. The granting of the modification would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important community need that is specifically and expressly defined and expressly described in the city's Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance or resolution. The Comprehensive Plan (City Plan) states in Policy HSG-1.5 Special -Needs Housing, "The housing needs of all special populations within the community should be met. Residentiakcare facilities, shelters, group homes, elderly housing, and low-income housing should be dispersed throughout the Fort Collins urban area and the region." The granting of the modification request would help to meet the housing needs of the special population of youth that are undergoing special care and/or rehabilitation due to social, behavioral, or disciplinary problems. The City of Fort Collins Consolidated Plan specifically states that the types of services being proposed by Turning Point would address an important community need: Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 4 Originally, when Turning Point changed the use of this existing building to a group home, their intention was to utilize the building as a 20 bed residential facility, a 24 student day treatment program, and office space for 10 administrative staff. In this scenario, Turning Point was going to use the 3`d floor of the existing building as the office space for the 10 administrative staff. The Building Inspection Department has since informed them however that in order to put offices on the 3`d floor, it would have to be handicap accessible. Construction estimates to make the 3rd floor handicap accessible have proven to be more expensive than would be practical, so the applicant has decided to not locate the administrative offices in this building. Without the administrative offices being located at 801 S. Shields, the applicant would like to utilize the building a bit differently than was originally envisioned. If this modification request is granted, Turning Point would increase the approved number of beds in the facility from 20 to 36, decrease the number of students participating in day treatment from 24 to 14, and reduce the number office spaces for administrative staff from 10 office spaces to 2 office spaces. The applicant suggests that the modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of the LUC listed in Article 1.2.2, specifically subsections B&K because it is an innovative renewal project which improves the relationship of the property with the neighboring CSU, for the mutual benefit of all. The applicant further argues that because it is consistent with the intent and purpose of the LUC that the granting of the modification would enhance the public good. The applicant also suggests that granting the modification would result in a substantial benefit to the city by substantially addressing an important community need specifically and expressly described in the adopted policy of the City of Fort Collins Consolidated Plan. (The Consolidated Plan is a document prepared in 1995 by the Advance Planning Department which outlines the development needs of low & moderate income households, as well as the special needs populations of the city). The applicant explains that in the Consolidated Plan, under the heading titled "Needs of Homeless and Persons Threatened with Homelessness," on page 16, the document specifically describes Turning Point (then known as Larico) as an organization that addresses this important community need. The Consolidated Plan document specifically states the following about the Turning Point (then known as Larico), "the increased demand necessitates expansion of their current facilities and increases in staff to facilitate the increased caseload." The applicant also points out that on page 19 of the Consolidated Plan that an organization called Youth S.A.F.E., which is another facility in town that offers similar services as Turning Point, is "...constantly operating at capacity." 4. EVALUATION OF MODIFICATION REQUEST The granting of the modification request would not be detrimental to the public good. Staff feels that a group home for the residential treatment of up to 36 girls will be Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 3 Zone Maximum Additional lot Maximum Minimum number of area for each permissible separation residents additional residents, requirements excluding resident excluding between any supervisors, for (square feet) supervisors other group minimum lot home (feet) size UE 3 2,000 8 1,500 RL, NCL, HC, 3 1,500 8 1,500 E, RF LMN, NCM, 6 750 15 1,000 RDR NCB, D, CN, 6 500 20 700 CCN, MMN, NC, CC, CL, CCR As specified in the LUC Section 2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures (H) (Standards), the Planning and Zoning Board shall review, consider, and approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for a modification based upon: "... granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code; and that. - the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the city's Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance or resolution (such as, by way of example only, affordable housing or historic preservation) or would substantially alleviate an and existing, defined and described problem of city-wide concem, and the strict application of such a standard would render the project practically infeasible. " 3. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant specifically requests the Planning and Zoning Board to allow the maximum number of group home residents at the property at 801 S. Shields (zoned CC) to be 36, rather than the maximum of 20 that is specified in the LUC. (See the attached letter from the applicant requesting the modification and justifying the request) Turning Point Modification of Standards, File # 12-99A December 16, 1999 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. BACKGROUND The zoning and land uses that surround the site are as follows: N: CC; West Plum Street, existing Sorority, existing multifamily residential, S: CC; existing church, existing parking lot, existing Campus West retail, W: CC; existing multifamily residential, E: CSU; South Shields Street, existing University property including a grass buffer and a parking lot, This property was annexed into the City as part of the "First South Shields Street Consolidated Annexation" on December 11, 1958. The site was developed in June 1959 as Delta Zeta Sorority House. The property has been most recently used as the Phi Gamma Delta Fraternity House, which operated as such until 1998. The building has been vacant during 1999. Turning Point purchased the property in June 1999, and officially changed the use from a fraternity to a group home in October 1999. Since October, Turning Point has been working with the Building Inspection Department to work out the details of renovating the interior of the building. The property is currently unoccupied. The group home residents at this facility will not be allowed to drive, therefore an increase in the number of residents will have any traffic impacts. By increasing the number of residents, the applicant is proposing to decrease amount of administrative office space in the facility, which will actually reduces the number of employees, thereby causing a reduction of traffic coming to and from the site. 2. MODIFICATION REQUEST (1) Division 2.8 MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS This request is for a modification to Land Use Code Section 3.8.6(A) of the LUC which specifies lot areas, separation requirements, and allowable number of residents as follows: Group homes shall conform to the lot area and separation requirements specified in the following table: ITEM NO. 6 MEETING DATE 12/16/99 STAFF Troy Jones City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: TURNING POINT MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS- File #12-99 A [Type 2, Planning and Zoning Board Review] OWNER/ Jim Becker APPLICANT: Turning Point 1644 South College Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for the Planning and Zoning Board to allow a modification to the Land Use Code to increase the number of permitted group home residents from 20 to 36 at the property at 801 South Shields Street. The site was recently granted a change of use from "fraternity" to "group home." As a fraternity, the existing 12,508 square foot, 3 story building housed 45 residents. The building is on a 25,200 square foot lot. Section 3.8.6(A) of the LUC limits group homes in the CC zoning district to a maximum of 20 residents. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a modification of Land Use Code Section 3.8.6 Group Home Regulations, specifically the table in section 3.8.6(A) where it specifies that group homes in the CC zone are limited to a maximum number of permissible residents of 20, excluding .supervisors. Granting the requested modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code. Granting the requested modification would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in adopted policy, namely residential and treatment facilities for individuals threatened with homelessness. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT