Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY PUD EXPANSION - FINAL - 28-89D - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES CONTINUATION OF THE JANUARY 23, 1995 HEARING FEBRUARY 6, 1995 STAFF LIAISON: BOB BLANCHARD COUNCIL LIAISON: GINA JANETT The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairman Rene Clements. Roll Call: Carnes, Bell, Fontane, Clements, Cottier, Strom, Walker. Staff Present: Blanchard, Olt, Shepard, Eckman, Ashbeck, Wamhoff, Mapes, and Deines. Agenda Review: Chief Planner Blanchard reviewed the discussion agenda for the items continued from the January 23, 1995 meeting: 11. #2-95 Recommendation to City Council Regarding the North College Avenue Corridor Plan. 12. #11-81M Huntington Hills PUD, Filing 5 - Preliminary. 13. #28-89D Fort Collins Housing Authority Expansion PUD - Final. 14. #34-90A Saturn PUD - Referral of an Administrative Change. 15. #43-94A Horsetooth East Business Park PUD, Filing Two - Preliminary. 16. #18-94B Woodland Station PUD - Preliminary. Discussion Agenda: North College Avenue Corridor Plan: Staff Presentation: Clark Mapes gave Staff's presentation. Slides were shown of the area being studied. The plan has been in the making for approximately 2 1/2 years. There would be no decision on this item tonight, this hearing is for public comment only. The plan was done primarily in three phases: Phase 1, a thorough analysis of existing conditions; identification of issues and problems such as transportation; drainage; and the means of area development from past to present. Phase 2, further analysis of existing conditions; development of a vision for the area; workshop held for citizens and the committee; and a draft report issued in February of 1994. Phase 3, recommendations. The Dry Creek Drainage Way has posed the most significant problem for the corridor plan. This deals with the flood plain of Dry Creek and how to reroute the creek for storm flooding. The preferred alternative is to divert Dry Creek to the Poudre River thereby eliminating the flooding possibility. Storm water utility has been studying the issue. The plan recommends that Storm water i 0 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 6, 1995 Is Page 9 Member Strom stated that he will support the motion and is comfortable that the applicant has met the necessary points. However, he is uncomfortable with the idea of negotiating away points under the Land Development Guidance System and would, at some point in the future, like to have an inventory of how many projects are outstanding that have had points negotiated away prior to any Planning and Zoning hearing or citizen process. Member Carnes stated that he feels the City has a special responsibility in such a complex situation as this to help integrate all the concerns involved. He expressed his sympathy to the applicant in its valiant effort to try to meet all concerns. He also would like to see the City departments involved in these type of complex projects fully represented at the Planning and Zoning Board hearings and fully expressing all the considerations, alternatives, and recommendations to the projects. Mr. Carnes stated that he will also be supporting this motion. Mr. walker relayed that he felt comfortable with the Fossil Creek Parkway condition. However, he felt uncomfortable with the unresolved issue of the mitigation plan and would like to see more clarity in the future. He also wanted to express his disapproval of the negotiation of points in the Land Development Guidance System and feels this sort of action is completely inappropriate. The Motion approved unanimously 7-0. Fort Collins Housing Authority Expansion PUD Final: Staff Presentation: Bob Blanchard, Chief Planner summarized the project stating that this issue has come back to the Board after an appeal to the City Council on preliminary approval on the grounds that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the code and charter. The appeal was denied by City Council. The final plan has minor changes including: provision of a bicycle rack and changes in some vegetation on the south side of the building. The expansion details were laid out in Staff's report. The Board also received four letters from people in opposition to the expansion as well as an addendum to the lease agreement outlining no additional expansions upon approval. In addition, if the expansion is approved tonight, any nonconformity existing between the Housing Authority and the zoning district will be removed. staff is still recommending approval of the project. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 6, 1995 Page 10 62gl,}gant's Presentation: Shelly Stevens, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority, believes the requirements of the Land Development Guidance System have been met. She pointed out that the Housing Authority has voluntarily entered into a lease provision that would prohibit future expansion beyond the current proposal. Ms. Stevens explained that the Housing Authority office was built as an administrative facility to attend to the HUD funded public housing units through the funds of CIAP, and CIAP moneys can only be used for improvements at the existing building. Relocation alternatives have been investigated and are cost prohibitive within the constraints of the administrative budget. Citizen Participation: Valerie Pedis, representative of the City Park Neighborhood Association, reiterated the concerns put forth in her letter which was given to the Board. She stated that if the expansion is approved, two additional changes to the lease are requested: 1) Existing space may only be expanded by converting the garage area into office space and relocating the maintenance facility; 2) Relocate all outside storage. Betty Maloney, Co-chair of the Affordable Housing Task Force of Larimez County, expressed her frustration with the roadblocks encountered when attempts are made to place affordable housing projects. She believes the opposition to this expansion is due to not wanting the Housing Authority in the area, not because the expansion doesn't fit within the guidelines. She also believes that the humanitarian use of the location is as important to the community as the recreational use of the nearby ball park. John Mansinio pointed out the addition is twice what the original lease was for, and the original lease was set out for office space, not storage and shop facilities. A survey was given to the Board showing residents' strong disapproval of the project. Mr. Mansinio showed slides of mature trees that would be removed if the expansion was approved, and he showed slides of the unsightly mess in the City Park storage facility. Nancy Grey explained that when the original lease was drawn up, the building was used to house one part-time employee of the Housing Authority and the rest of the building would be used as a community building or recreation facility. She stated that in 1992,an expansion was unanimously turned down based on improper land use. She also stated the Land Use Development Guidance System's underlying question is: What is good land use? She also believes the fencing at the facility blocks the visibility of the park. • 9 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 6, 1995 Page 11 Nell VanDriel stated that no one who is opposing the expansion is doing so because they are against the Housing Authority. The opposition comes from the belief that the use of the facility does not belong in the neighborhood. Board Discussion and Vote: In response to questioning, the following points were made: Mitigation moneys will be set aside for the planting of two three- inch caliper trees to replace four trees ranging from 10 to 20 inches in diameter. This is a plan approved by the City Forester. Accumulation of debris varies in the outside storage facility. After a few turnarounds on units, accumulation builds, and approximately once a month the maintenance crews remove the buildup. All accumulation is within the confines of the fence and not in public view. - Fencing will not be removed if expansion is not approved. The Housing Authority is no longer being served by Transfort. Member Cottier believes the Housing Authority has outgrown this facility and the facility is not in compliance with the West Side Neighborhood Plan. With regard to the LDGS, she believes that in evaluating this area for a PUD, it does not meet the All - Development Criteria. Also, Member Cottier pointed out the Housing Authority is supposed to be in a location accessible to the people it serves, and therefore, this location does not apply since it is no longer served by public transportation. Member walker explained that the general procedure on nonconforming uses is to try to eliminate them over time. He believes this project is a misapplication of the PUD; believes more care should be taken in looking at how the trees are being removed; believes the terms of the lease have not been followed; and believes the Housing Authority, irrespective of their mission, should be held to the same standards as anyone else. Moved by Member Walker, seconded by Member Cottier: To deny the Fort Collins Housing Authority PUD, Final. Member Bell stated that she believes a stronger stance needs to be taken in listening to the collective memories and trying to honor the time and effort that citizens are putting forth in the discussions of various projects. She also hopes that if this decision is appealed again, the City Council members will take a very careful look at the lease agreement because it does not appear that certain areas are being withheld at the current time. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February b, 1995 Page 12 Chairman Clements expressed her opinion that trust should be placed in Staff and believes the final PUD is in compliance with the preliminary PUD which was approved by the Board and upheld by City Council. Motion denied four to three, with Members Carnes, Fontana, Clements, and Strom voting in the negative. Moved by Member Fontana, seconded by Member Strom: To approve the Fort Collins Housing Authority Expansion PUD, Final, with the condition for the standard development agreement. Motion approved four to three, with Members Bell, Cottier, and Walker voting in the negative. Saturn PUD, Referral of an Administrative change_: Chairman Clements had a conflict of interest on this item and excused herself. Staff Presentation: Steve Olt presented a brief overview of the request for an addition to the existing Saturn building as well as a change in character to the site. Staff approved of the request for an addition but denied the change in exterior appearance. The applicant has therefore asked that the administrative change for the exterior appearance be referred to the Board for decision. Applicant's Presentation: Frank Vaught, from Vaught Frye Architects, explained that the curzent addition being requested will be on the east side of the existing building. He explained that the brick used on the original building is no longer manufactured. Therefore, it was felt that the new expansion would be a good time to perhaps give the building a fresh new look which can most reasonably be accomplished by building the new addition out of a different material. A synthetic stucco has been chosen for this purpose. In addition, the stucco material would be wrapped around the top of the existing building and the brick portion of the building would be painted. Mr. Vaught presented slides on the proposed new look. He stated that he feels the new image being requested is tasteful and well designed and, therefore, should not be compared with the existing building but should be judged on its own merits as if it were a new structure. Mr. Doug Markley and Mr. Gene Markley, owners of the Saturn dealership, also spoke to the Board and made their pleadings for approval. Mr. Doug Markley named several buildings within the area who have used stucco including: Foley's, Blockbuster Video, Boston Chicken, Lee's Cyclery, and Palmer House Florist. He relayed his