Revamped Fort Collins land-use code gets initial nod

FORT COLLINS — Reflecting the community’s sharp division over whether to add density to its housing stock in a quest for more housing affordability, the Fort Collins City Council voted 5-2 on Tuesday night to give first-reading approval to the city’s latest stab at a revamped land-use code — but with one concession for people living in single-family neighborhoods..

As proposed by Councilmember Shirley Peel, the last-minute amendment, which was approved 5-1, deleted the staff’s provision that would have allowed duplexes to be added in the “RL” low-density residential zone, which makes up nearly a quarter of all the land in Fort Collins.

Peel originally also wanted to delete three other provisions that add density to the two zones in Old Town, but ended up settling for the ban on duplexes in low-density residential.

In talking to community members in various forums, Peel said, “I am finding that the community is actually split right down the middle. I’m always about meeting halfway, trying to find consensus. If we pass this tonight, it gets repealed again and goes to the ballot in six months to a year. This is the only thing I could come up with.”

Councilmember Julie Pignataro said she was ‘very disappointed’ to remove that provision” because “retirees or widowers may want to have a basement apartment and age in place.” She said she wished the new code had gone further and that the change “is a real detriment, but this is [a] compromise, and this is what it looks like.”

The newly written code will be up for second reading and final approval at the council’s Oct. 17 meeting.

The council last November adopted a sweeping Land Development Code, which virtually eliminated single-family zoning to encourage additional dwelling units on properties. However,  a group of voters gathered enough signatures through the city’s referendum process to require that the council reconsider the ordinance, and on Jan. 17 it voted unanimously to repeal its new code and send its staff back to the drawing board with additional community engagement.

Under the new code, ADUs would be allowed in all residential zones other than those for manufactured housing. In lower-density parts of Old Town, up to three units could be allowed if they use an existing structure, include a deed-restricted affordable housing unit, or if it’s an ADU plus a duplex. In Old Town’s medium-density zone, five units would be allowed on a lot, up from the current rule of up to four.

There would be no density cap in low-density mixed-use zones of the city if units include affordable housing.

Homeowners’ associations can still enforce their covenants “including, but not limited to, site placement/setbacks, color, window placement, height, and materials with the intent of furthering compatibility with the existing neighborhood,” the new code said, but HOAs can’t prohibit ADUs.

It also reduces parking requirements for studio, one-, and two-bedroom units in multi-unit developments and for affordable-housing developments with seven or more units, but also requires parking to be provided for ADUs. It also allows ADUs in all residential and mixed-use zones, with some requirements.

Left intact in the new code were the overall development-review process, including requirements for public meetings, the U+2 occupancy rules, and requirements for historic preservation and landscaping.

Councilmember Kelly Ohlson voted against the previous land-use code rewrite, and he didn’t like this one, either. He and Councilmember Susan Gutowski were the two dissenting votes, as they were last November.

“We’ve got ADUs popping up like mushrooms,” Ohlson said, asking what it would do to a homeowner’s privacy if a neighbor wanted to build an additional dwelling unit that looks over into that homeowner’s back yard. 

“It’s not a good code,” he said, questioning the city’s “emphasis on alienating such a large percentage of people in this town when this will affect just 3% of our land mass” in Old Town and along transit corridors.

“This is not fair to people who bought in established neighborhoods,” he said, echoing the ideas of some residents who opened the meeting’s nearly two hours of public comment by proposing that the high-density housing should be built instead in “greenfields or brownfields” — undeveloped land or vacant infill where structures have been demolished.

“You can’t grow your way to affordable housing. It doesn’t work that way,” Ohlson said. “Show me where that’s working, and we’ll copy that. All you get is a bigger town with more density. So I’m a hard no.”

Mayor Pro Tem Emily Francis answered that “we can’t grow our way out but we can intentionally plan for our community“ because providing housing is vital to its success.

Some opponents, as they did before the council’s previous attempt, speculated that more density wouldn’t bring affordability because developers from out of town could swoop in and build high-density housing at market rates or higher. Gutowski echoed that concern.

Even though the new code expands affordable-housing incentives for renter- and owner-occupied projects and lengthens the term from 20 to 60 years that an affordable-housing development must remain price-restricted, Gutowski wasn’t satisfied.

“There’s no mandate for affordable housing here,” she said. “We encourage, we recommend, but there’s no teeth. To ask developers ‘we sure would like it’ is not going to cut it.

“I’m always conflicted about the definition of affordability,” she said, arguing that the city instead should work to meet the needs of “the vulnerable who have nowhere else to go” — at 30% or less of area median income — “and can’t afford the market rate of developers who will come in.”

Noting that more than 30% of the homes purchased in Colorado are converted into rentals and that “investors and speculators are outbidding families and other people who would like to have single-family homes,” Gutowski said that “they have plenty of money to pay cash. Until we deal with that, we’re hitting our heads against the wall — and then they’ll be rental housing and we won’t have the affordable housing we want.”

Zillow reports that 340 rental properties in Fort Collins have been on the market for more than 90 days, Gutowski said, adding, “Why are we building more when we can’t rent the ones out there?”

Under the new code, Ohlson added, “more units could be put up in Old Town that have nothing to do with affordable housing. The code could have negative affordability consequences.”

However, Mayor Jeni Arndt answered that in Fort Collins, “we’re creators. We have choice. We tolerate failure because we value giving something new a try.

“Fort Collins can’t stand still in time,” she said. “We look forward and plan for the future while preserving the idea of Fort Collins.”

on Facebook on LinkedIn