Loveland planners approve letter planning Nov. 9 housing-code hearing

The Loveland Planning Commission approved a letter to City Council saying it intends to hold a Nov. 9 public hearing on concerns about proposed housing-code amendments. It removed a request to return the amendments to the commission for another review.

City Council had approved the proposed Unified Development Code amendments on first reading. The amendments’ Nov. 4 second reading was removed from the council agenda and rolling calendar, a staff member said. No date was set for second reading, and the staff member knew of no Nov. 4 deadline for the letter. The commission also reinstated its Nov. 9 meeting.

The commission’s Oct. 12 draft letter said the council questioned higher-density uses in low-density zones and sought details on allowable density in R1 zones and public-meeting requirements. It said staff was preparing responses and possible alternatives that commissioners had not had a chance to consider. Some commissioners were unsure whether they had the full picture when they voted, the letter said.

The draft letter also raised a concern that updating the Unified Development Code before the Comprehensive Plan could put regulations ahead of the policy they are meant to carry out. A commissioner objected that waiting for the plan could take at least two years and would sideline the commission’s work reviewing code updates. Another commissioner suggested revisiting concerns with more public comment, possibly increasing speaking time from three to five minutes: “I don't think we need a remand.” The commission dropped four requests covering further review, the plan update, the assessment and public participation, replacing them with its intent to hold a Nov. 9 public hearing on some concerns.

Of 1,146 Housing Needs Assessment participants, 481 were from Loveland — 42% — a commissioner said. The draft letter questioned whether that local participation was sufficient for major regulatory decisions and asked the council to weigh the limitation. Planning Commission Chair Sarah Warnock said, “The housing needs assessment is flawed, and huge decisions should not be made off of the housing needs assessment in its current state.” Staff said a city consultant team would scrutinize the assessment and consider additional data if it found flaws.

The draft letter said members of the public, including Ms. Van Slambrook, had raised concerns about limited participation and called for staff to respond before the council took final action. A commissioner asked what people at a community meeting were shown, including whether they saw a parcel map or examples of affected properties. Another commissioner said there had been one Loveland outreach meeting about the assessment, but commissioners did not know what happened there. The member did not know whether additional outreach the city had discussed had taken place.