HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDTAIL PONDS - PDP - PDP130030 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - MODIFICATION REQUEST (3)September 10, 2013
MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS
1. Compliance with Block Requirements
The Redtail Ponds Supportive Housing Project (“Project”), proposed by the Fort Collins Housing
Authority (“FCHA”), is a permanent supportive housing community designed to meet the
special housing needs of homeless individuals with disabilities, homeless veterans and other low-
income individuals, and is categorized by the City as a multi-family development. The Project
is located on a narrow, rectangular (approx. 225’ by 550’) 2.97-acre parcel in the Cameron
Park/Redtail Ponds office park development surrounded by Woodley’s Fine Furniture on the
north, College Avenue on the east, Cameron Park 2
nd
Filing on the south, and Fossil
Blvd./Conejos Road and the Redtail drainage area and pond on the west.
All multi-family projects are required to comply with the Block Requirements in Sec. 3.8.30(D)
of the Land Use Code unless “compliance with a specific element of the standard is infeasible
due to unusual topographic features, existing development, safety factors or a natural area or
feature.” The Project satisfies the elements of the Block Requirements as follows:
A. Section 3.8.30(D)(1) Block Structure. This section sets forth the requirements for the
“block structure” and states that all projects are to be “developed as a series of
complete blocks bounded by streets (public or private)”, although “natural areas,
irrigation ditches, high-voltage power lines, operating railroad tracks and other
substantial physical features may form up to two (2) sides of a block.”
Series of Blocks: It is infeasible to create a series of blocks or even one additional
block by installing a street that would divide the property into more than one block.
The sole point of access to/from the Project is on its west end at the intersection of
Conejos Road and Fossil Blvd. Using this only possible point of access, the
extension of a street into the Project far enough to divide the property and create an
additional complete block could only result in a dead end, as there are no
opportunities for connections due to the existing development on the north
(Woodley’s Fine Furniture) and south (Cameron Park 2
nd
Filing), and the College
Avenue frontage on the east where the number and kind of accesses are limited
because of safety factors.
Bounded by Streets: The east and west sides of the property comply with the standard
as they are bounded by either streets or a combination of streets and a natural feature
or substantial physical feature (College Avenue and the steep slope to College
Avenue on the east; Fossil Blvd. and the Redtail Ponds wetland and natural area on
the west). The north and south sides of the property are not bounded by streets, but
rather by existing development (Woodley’s Fine Furniture on the north and Cameron
Park 2
nd
Filing on the south). This block standard is thus met pursuant to the
infeasibility language of Sec. 3.8.30(D).
B Section 3.8.30(D)(2) Block Size. The Project satisfies this standard as the gross
acreage of this one-block Project is 2.97 acres, which is less than maximum seven
(7)-acre size imposed by Sec. 3.8.30(D)(2).
C. Section 3.8.30(D)(3) Minimum Building Frontage. The Project satisfies this standard
requiring that 40% of each block side or 50% of the block face of the total block shall
consist of either building frontage, plazas or other functional open space.
The approximate total length of all block faces combined is approx. 1,640 lineal feet.
The combined length of the building frontage, plaza, and functional open space
(multi-use paths, walkways, lawns, terraces and urban agriculture) is approximately
1,110 lineal feet, or 68% of the total of all block faces, which is in excess of the
minimum of 50%.
2. Alternative Request for Modification of Standards
FCHA believes that the Project meets the Block Structure standards in Section 3.8.30(D)(1)
under the infeasibility language and requests the Board to include such infeasibility language in
any approval of the Project. However, to be very conservative, FCHA requests the Planning and
Zoning Board to grant a modification of such standards.
The Land Use Code requires that all modifications not be detrimental to the public good, and
provides four (4) alternative specific grounds for granting the modification, of which, we are
citing two (2) as justification for approval of this request.
In support of its request, the applicant asserts:
A. Not Detrimental to Public Good
Land Use Code Sec. 2.8.2(H): “the granting of the modification would not be
detrimental to the public good.”
The stated purposes of the multi-family development standards in Land Use Code Sec.
3.8.30 (several of which are not applicable to development in the TOD Overlay District)
are “to promote variety in building form and product, visual interest, access to parks,
pedestrian-oriented streets and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.” Granting
a modification from the Block Structure standards requiring “a series of complete blocks
bounded by streets” would not be a detriment to the public good in that none of the
overall purposes of the standard are diluted. With the modification of standards, FCHA
will be able to construct a building with excellent design and high quality materials to
create variety, vibrancy and eclectic ambience in the neighborhood, the South College
Corridor and the TOD Overlay District. Access to parks is not affected by a modification
of these standards, and the Project is able to incorporate a street-like private drive with
pedestrian-oriented features like tree-lined borders, connecting walkways, plazas, outdoor
spaces, pedestrian lighting and direct pedestrian access to the building entrance.
B. Alleviate City Problem/Address Community Need
Land Use Code Sec. 2.8.2(H)(2): “the granting of a modification from the strict
application of the standard would, without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land
Use Code, substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-wide
concern or 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 or in an adopted
policy, ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of such a
standard would render the project practically infeasible.”
The Project meet both alternative requirements of Land Use Code Sec. 2.8.2(H)(2). The
Project is a permanent supportive housing community designed to meet the special
housing needs of homeless individuals with disabilities, homeless veterans and other low-
income individuals. The need for housing units tailored to the specific needs of these
types of individuals is defined in City Plan and the Affordable housing Strategic Plan,
and the opportunity to provide such housing for 60 individuals is a significant steps
towards addressing this important community need and provides a substantial benefit to
these individuals and the community as a whole. Please see the following excerpts:
City Plan:
Principle LIV 7: A variety of housing types and densities for all income levels shall
be available throughout the Growth Management Area.
LIV 7.5 – Plan for and meet the housing needs of special populations within the
community. Disperse residential-care facilities, shelters, group homes, and senior
housing throughout the Growth Management Area.
Principle LIV 8: The City will encourage the creation and expansion of affordable
housing opportunities and preservation of the existing affordable housing supply.
LIV 8.5 – Encourage the integration and distribution of affordable housing as part of
individual neighborhoods and the larger community rather than creating larger
concentration of affordable units in isolated areas.
Affordable Housing Strategic Plan:
Executive Summary: Increase housing and facilities for people with special
needs.
Introduction: Affordable housing is a critical asset contributing to the social,
economic, and environmental sustainability of a community . . . The overall
wellbeing of an individual can be significantly improved with stable housing
conditions, which leads to more stable families and stable neighborhoods.
4.1 Goal: Increase the Inventory of Affordable Rental Housing Units. The first
priority should be to increase the inventory f affordable rental units . . .
4.3 Goal: Increase Housing and Facilities for People with Special Needs. This
broad category includes those who are homeless, seniors, persons with disabilities,
and victims of domestic violence. These groups generally require housing units
tailored to specific needs not typically addressed by market-driven development.
Many times a network of support services is needed to keep these populations stable
and independent.
4.3.1 Justification.
Homeless: . . . Research has shown the sooner people can enter a stabilized shelter
situation, the sooner they can start dealing with the other problems that accompany
homelessness, which also decreases costs to providing community services for this
populations. . . . suggests single room occupancy housing as a more effective
alternative to traditional homeless shelters.
Persons with Disabilities: . . . organizations which provide supportive services or
housing for disable customers do not have enough low-rent options for the number of
people who need them. . . . it is important to expand the supply of housing that is
both accessible and affordable.
Partners in Affordable Housing. While the City of Fort Collins is an important
player in addressing the affordable housing needs of its citizens, there are other
partners that also contribute important resources. . . . the City cannot solve all of the
community’s affordable housing needs alone.
Policies:
AHSP-11 The City will support community initiatives identifying homeless needs
and developing action plans to reduce the homeless population in Fort Collins, The
City will also participate in partnerships exploring solutions for homelessness.
AHSP-12 The City will support projects producing affordable units to serve persons
with disabilities, and “cost-burdened” senior citizens.
Conclusion: . . . A lack of affordable housing affects everyone. . . . Affordable
housing is greater than a social issue; it is also about economic development and
environmental protection. . . . The Fort Collins City Council made a commitment to
affordable housing through the adoption of many programs and the allocation of
General Fund revenue into the Affordable Housing Fund. . . . affordable housing must
be elevated so it is discussed on par with such topics as economic development,
environmental protection, and public safety . . . Every discussion regarding a
sustainable community must include the consideration of affordable housing.
C. Exceptional Conditions
Land Use Code Sec. 2.8.2(H)(3): “By reason of exceptional physical conditions or other
extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not
limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or
topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar
energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in
unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the
owner of such property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the
act or omission of the applicant.”
The Project is an infill development located in the existing Cameron Park/Redtail Ponds
office park on an exceptionally narrow, rectangular (approx. 225’ by 550’) 2.97-acre
parcel which slopes steeply down to College Avenue. The combination of these
conditions, all of which are unique to the property, present unusual and exceptional
practical difficulties in designing a multi-block development. In addition, with a single
possible point of access (Fossil Blvd./Conejos Road on the west), the installation of a
street through the Project to divide the property and create and additional block would
result in a dead end, as there are no opportunities to connect the street on any of the three
other sides of the property. An on-site street of sufficient length to divide the Project into
more than one block would consume approx. .76 acres of the 2.97-acre property (25%),
leaving only approx. 1.1 acres on either side, making it extremely difficult to construct
any financially feasible commercial or multi-family project and leaving insufficient space
for construction of the size and type of facility (single building with controlled access and
consolidated on-site supportive tenant services) necessary to adequately serve the special
needs of the tenant population. Finally, designing the Project around the additional street
right-of-way that would be required to divide the property into more than one block
would not allow for many of the site amenities, recreation, natural areas and urban
agriculture currently planned for the Project.