The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDowntown Development Authority - Minutes - 05/06/2004DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORrrY REGULAR DIRECTORS' MEETING Kim JORDAN, CHAIR 22 1-0524 (W) BILL BERTSCHY, COUNCIL LIAISON 49 1 -4729 (W) LINDA GULA, STAFF LIAISON 484-2020 (W) MINUTES OF MAY 6, 2004 REGULAR MEETING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT 7:30 A.M. ON MAY 6, 2004 IN THE MEETING ROOM AT HOME STATE BANK LOCATED AT 303 EAST MOUNTAIN AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, CO 80524. PRESENT Kim JORDAN, CHAIR STEVE TAYLOR. VICE CHAIR BILL BERTSCHY MARY BRAYTON LARRY STROUD JACK WOLFE CAREY HEWITT ABSENT JASON MEADORS, SECRETARY/TREASURER BILL SEARS STAFF ROBERf STEINER. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNDA GVLA LUCIA LILEY, COUNSEL GUESTS DARIN ATTEBERRY, ALAN KRCMARIK, MYRNE WATROUS, DAVID SHORT, DICK BEARDMORE, HAROLD SOMMERS, DAVID BODE AND ALLEN CURTIS, CALL TO ORDER M5, JORDAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 7:30 A.M. AND ROLL CALL WAS TAKEN. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MR. TAYLOR MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL I. 2004. SECONDED BY MR, WOLFE AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 300 E. MOUNTAIN MR. STEINER REFERENCED THE PACKET INFORMATION IN WHICH HE OUTLINED A PROPOSAL FROM HAROLD SOMMERS TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY AT 300 EAST MOUNTAIN AVENUE INTO RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE. THE REQUEST TO THE DDA IS FOR $ 100,475 FOR A FACADE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OAWAY IMPROVEMENTS. HE NOTED THAT STAFF SUPPORTS THIS PROJECT BUT RECOMMENDS DDA PARTICIPATION AT ITS TRADITIONAL 10 PERCENT LEVEL WHICH WOULD BE $155.000. THE ESTIMATED HARD COST INVESTMENT IN THE PROJECT WILL BE $1550,000 - THE ESTIMATED ACTUAL VALUE ACCORDING TO THE LARIMER COUNTY ASSESSOR IS A LITTLE MORE THAN $ 1 MILLION DOLLARS. THE REQUEST TO THE DDA IS BASED ON THAT $ 1 MILLION DOLLAR VALUE WHICH WOULD GENERATE ALMOST $22,000 PER YEAR IN TAX INCREMENT, HE STATED THE OWNER NEEDS TO CLARIFY WHAT 15 MEANT BY THE TERM MASONRY." THE DDA NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT THE SKIN OF THE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE BEFORE IT COMMITS. DDA MINUTES PAGE 2 ALLEN CURTIS, PROJECT ARCHITECT, HANDED OUT COLORED ELEVATIONS OF THE CHESTNUT AND MOUNTAIN SIDES OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. HE EkPLAINED THAT THE "SKIN" 15 A COMBINATION OF BRICK, STONE AND PRECAST CONCRETE FOR STOREFRONT MATERIALS. IN TERMS OF WHY THE OWNER IS ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL DOLLARS, THIS BUILDINO HAS APPROK 21 0 LINEAL FEET OF FRONTAGE. IT 13 A VERY LARGE FACE TO DEAL WITH AND THE INTENT IS TO KEEP IT IN CHARACTER WITH OLD TOWN AND DRESS IT UP. THE AMOUNT OF HONEY THAT THE OWNER 13 ASKING FOR IS A LITTLE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS NORMALLY ASKED FOR, BUT THE EASE OF THE PROJECT 13 OURE A BR MORE THAN WHAT THE DDA 15 USED TO LOOKING AT DAVID BODE, PROJECT DEVELOPER, STATED THE BIG CHALLENGE IS THAT NOT MUCH OF THE EKISYINO FACADE 13 U$EASLE. THE PROCESS OF STRIPPING FACADE WOULD LEAVE PATCHY BRICK TO WORK WITH. THE MOST CO3T EFFECTIVE WAY TO DEAL WTH IT IS TO BRICK IT OVER. STUCCO CANNOT BE USED BECAUSE OF MOLD LAWSUITS. THERE WALL BE A COMPLETE MASONRY VENEER ON CHESTNUT AND MOUNTAIN HAROLD SOMMERS, OWNER/DEVELOPER, STATED HE LIKES OLD TOWN AND WANTS TO KEEP HIS COMPANY DOWNTOWN AND WOULD LIKE A NICE BUILDING TO HAVE HIS OFFICE. BOARD OUESlTON3 MR. HEWITT ASKED IF THE SPACE IS LEASED. MR. SOMMERS REPLIED THAT HIS OFFICE WILL OCCUPY ABOUT 24% OF THE BUILDING AND HE IE CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF LEASINO SPACE. MS, BRAYTON ASKED ABOUT PARKING AVAILABILITY FOR THE BUILDING. MR. SOMMERS STATED HE IS ON THE WAITING LIST FOR THE CHESTNUT STREET PERMIT PARKING. SHE ALSO ASKED WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE HISTORICAL PARAMOUNT LAUNDRY SIGN ON THE BRICK SECTION OF THE BUILDING. DAVID BODE REPLIED THAT A PORTION OF THAT SIGN WILL BE COVERED BY THE ADDITIONAL SECOND STORY. DICK BEARDMORE STATED THE SION 13 NOT HISTORICALLY IMPORTANT, HE STATED THEY HAVE TALKED TO THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION. MR. STEINER ASKED MYRNE WATROUS IF THERE WOULD BE A PROBLEM WITH COVERING UP THIS SIGN. SHE REPLIED THERE MAY BE A QUESTION ABOUT IT. MS, AJORDAN STATED THEY MAY WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION EARLY IN THE PROCESS RATHER THAN LATER. MR. STEINER SUGGESTED TO THE OWNER, IF POSSIBLE, TG 00 SOMETHING ON THE FIRST LEVEL OF THE CHESTNUT STREET ELEVATION TO MAKE IT LOOK LESS INDUSTRIAL AND MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY. MS. JORDAN ENCOURAGED THE OWNER/DEVELOPER TO BRING IN SOME MODERN ELEMENTS TO GIVE IT A FRESH INDUSTRIAL LOOK AND TO USE SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS, THERE WAS DISCUSSION AMONG BOARDMEMSERS CONCERNING THE 310EWALK AT THE CORNER OF THE TRIANGLE, IT 15 IN THE ROW AND IS ELIGIBLE MR DDA FUNDING. M5. BRAYTON STATED IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO COORDINATE THAT SIDEWALK WORK WITH UPGRADE WORK ON THE CORNER. MR. STEINER SUDGESTED THAT THE BOARD COULD COMMIT TO A CERTAIN LEVEL OF FUNDING AS THE PROJECT 15 PRESENTED AND THEN ASK THE OWNER/DEVELOPER TO BRING BACK A SITE PLAN WITH THE CORNER IMPROVEMENTS AND THE DDA COULD CONSIDER ADDTONAL FUNDING. MR. ATTEBERRY STATED THERE 13 AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE AND HE COMMITTED THE CITY TO WORK COOPERATIVELY ON THE PROJECT. MR. TAYLOR HAD OUESTION3 ABOUT THE EXTENT OF WORK THAT WOULD BE DONE ON THE SIDEWALK AND THE FUNDING, HE STATED HE WOULD SUPPORT MORE MONEY TO THE PROJECT IF HE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE SIDEWALK. HE WOULD BE WILLING TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT AGAIN IF A SIT! PLAN WAS AVAILABLE OUTLINING THE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, MS, BRAYTON ASKED ABOUT THE TIMELINE FOR THE PROJECT. MR SOMMERS STATED THE LENDER REOUIRE3 50% LEASING TO FUND THE PROJECT. HE INTENDS TO OCCUPY BY DECEMBER BO CONSTRUCTION IS SLATED TO BEGIN BY JULY. MR. STEINER STATED THAT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT TODAY IS A COMMITMENT 30 THAT MR. SOMMERS WOULD HAVE SOMETHING TO TAKE TO THE BANK, HE SUGGESTED THAT THE OWHER/DEVELOPER COME UP WITH A SITE PLAN AND THEN THE DOA COULD CONSIDER ADDITIONAL FUNDING. DDA MINUTES PAGE 3 MR. HEWITT MOVED TO COMMIT $75,000 TO THIS PROJECT WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THEY NEED TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD WITH A SITE PLAN DESIGN AND THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THAT BUT NOT THE BUILDING. SECONDED BY MR. BERTSCHY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, PARKING SYSTEM MR, STEINER INTRODUCED MR. RANDY HENSLEY FROM THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO GIVE AN UPDATE UPDATE ON THE CHANGES IN THE PARKING POLICIES DOWNTOWN. HE NOTED THAT THERE HAS BE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN PERMITS PURCHASED IN THE FIRST THREE MONTHS AND THERE HAS BEEN AN INCREASE IN NUMBERS OF VEHICLES THAT HAVE BEEN BOOTED. HE HANDED OUT COPIES OF THE LETTER OUTLINING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING COOPERATIVE THAT HAD BEEN SENT TO BUSINESSES AND ALSO A HANDOUT ON THE TRAFFIC CODE REGARDING "PARKING ON THE SAME BLOCK" (THE 500' RULE). HE STATED THE OLD LANGUAGE IS UNENFORCEABLE, MR, HENSLEY STATED THAT IT IS NOT THE CUSTOMERS WHO ARE THE PROBLEM, BUT IT 15 BUSINESS OWNERS WHOSE EMPLOYEES PARK AND MOVE. THE GPS SYSTEM CAN TELL EXACTLY WHERE CARS ARE MOVING (THE 2 HOUR SHUFFLE). A FIRST OFFENSE WARNING WILL BE ISSUED. BOARD QUESTIONS. MR. TAYLOR STATED HE WOULD LIKE *ONE NUMBERS (DATA) ON HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE MOVING THEIR CARS EVERY TWO HOURS, HE STATED THAT WE CANNOT BE TOO RIGHTEOUS, THERE ARE A MULTITUDE OF EXCEPTIONS, WE HAVE USERS WHO ARE OWNERS AND EMPLOYERS, MR. HENSLEY STATED HE COULD PROVIDE DATA IF NEEDED. MR. WOLF! STATED HE LIKES THE IDEA OF THE COOPERATIVE AND THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE ENFORCEMENT TO MEASURE RESULTS MR. BEPTSCHY ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY REASON WHY THE COOPERATIVE HAS NOT TAKEN OFF. MR. HENSLEY STATED IT MAY BE THAT PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. HE SAID HE WOULD BE MAKING FOLLOW-UP CALLS TO BUSINESSES IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS TO TALK ABOUT THE COOPERATIVE AGAIN AND CITED EXAMPLES OF WHERE THE APPROACH COULD WORK Ma. JORDAN STATED IF THE NUMBER OF REQUESTS FOR PERMITS ARE INCREASING, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH PERMITS (AND PARKING) FOR EMPLOYEES. WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT BEING TOO MILITANT, MR. HEWITT STATED HE SUPPORTS THE NEW CODE IMMEDIATELY. YOU HAVE TO HAVE ACCOUNTABILITY AND CONSEQUENCES. MS. BRAYTON STATED EMPLOYEES HAYS TO BE LEADERS FOR GETIINO THE PROGRAM TO WORK. IT IS SHOPPERS WHO WE NEED TO ACCOMMODATE. SHE SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS MR, HEWITT OR ANOTHER BOARDMEMSER COULD WRITE A SOAPBOX TO THE COLORADDAN FROM THE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE. MR. STROUD STATED THAT WE NEED A CONVENIENT SUPPLY OF PARKING MR. STEINER STATED WE NEED SOME COUNTER BALANCING AND NOTED MR. MEADORS COMMENTS FROM A PAST MEETING THAT EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES ARE "CUSTOMERS" DOWNTOWN TOO, MR. HEWITT MOVED TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED NEW CODE WORDING AS PRESENTED. SECONDED BY MR. STROUD. PUBLIC INPUT — MR. DAVID SHORT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, STATED THAT THE PARKING CHANGES ARE WORKING AND HE BELIEVES WE JUST NEED TO GIVE THEM MORE TIME BEFORE WE TAKE AN EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVE APPROACH, MR. TAYLOR STATED HE DOES NOT FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS AND WILL NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION. MR. BERT50HY STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COOPERATIVE WORK, MR. STROUD SAID HE WOULD SUPPORT THE MOTION BUT WE NEED TO DEVELOP A SUPPLY OF PARKING AREAS AND CONCENTRATE ON ABUSERS. DDA MINUTES PAGE 4 MR. WOLFE STATED HE WOULD SUPPORT THE MOTION BUT WE NEED MORE DATA. PASSED ON A 5-2 VOTE - MS. JORDAN AND MR, TAYLOR VOTING NO. CORTINA MR. STEINER NOTED THAT BOARD APPROVAL OF DDA PARTICIPATION IN THE CORTINA PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN TO STIPULATE THAT THE AUTHORITY'S INVESTMENT WOULD BE $ 1 .e57 MILLION OR 1 5 PERCENT OF THE PROJECT. HE ASKED THE BOARD TO CAP THE AUTHORITY'S PARTICIPATION AT $ 1 .867 MILLION RATHER THAN LET THE LEVEL FLOAT WITH THE COST OF THE PROJECT. MR. WOLFE MOVED TO APPROVE STAFFS RECOMMENDATION OF CAPPING THE AUTHORITY'S PARTICIPATION AT $ 1 ,1587 MILLION. SECONDED BY MR. BERTSCHY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, ALLEY DESIGN MR. STEINER STATED HE HAD RECEIVED TWO DESIGN PROPOSALS FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS. ONLY THE PROPOSAL FROM EDAW WAS RESPONSIVE TO THE RFP. HE ASKED FOR BOARD APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE $ 13.500 PLUS EXPENSES. MS, JORDAN NOTED THE KEY ISSUES LISTED IN THE PROPOSAL: OPERATIONAL ISSUES, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUES, CREATING AN ATTRACTION, CREATING AN AESTHETICALLY RICH AND PLEASING PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT', AND RETAIL AND WAYFWDINO SIONAOE. MR, BERTSCHY MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE $ 13,500 PLUS EXPENSES. SECONDED BY MR WOLFE AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. OFFICE EXPANSION MR. STERNER STATED THE DBA AND DDA STAFFS ARE ASKING THEIR RESPECTIVE BOARDS TO AUTHORIZE THE EXPANSION OF THEIR OFFICE SPACE TO INCLUDE TWO NEW OFFICES AND A SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM. THE DBA ANTICIPATES ADDING AN INTERN UT A MINIMUM) TO ITS STAFF TO HELP WITH EVER INCREASING LOAD OF MARKETING AND PROMOTIONAL EVENTS AND TO FREE UP TIME FOR THE DIRECTOR TO WORK ON MORE SPONSORSHIPS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AMPHITHEATER. THE DDA'S EXPANDINO PROJECT AGENDA 19 CREATING A NEED FOR A PROJECT MANAGER TO TRACK AND EXECUTE THE DEALS BETWEEN THE AUTHORITY AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS AS WELL AS MANAGE SOME OF THE PUBLIC PROJECTS. THE 2005 BUDGET WILL REFLECT THE ADDITION OF THIS POSITION. COST FOR THE ADDITIONAL SPACE I9 ESTIMATED AT $ 1 2/SQUARE FOOT GROSS OR $7,200 ANNUALLY. PROGRESSIVE OLD THE TOWN SQUARE HAS AGREED TO PAY FOR THE TENANT FINISH ($3000+/+ MS. BRAYTON ASKED IF THE $7,200 WOULD BE SPLIT 50/50 BETWEEN DDA/DBA. MR. STEINER SAID IT WOULD BE. MS. BRAYTON MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE EXPANSION OF OFFICE SPACE FOR THE DDA AND DBA AS OUTLINED. SECONDED BY MR. HEWTT AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF CULTURAL MR. STEINER ASKED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER FORMALIZINO THE OLD TOWN CULTURAL DISTRICT DISTRICT VISION VISION STATEMENT AS A GUIDING DOCUMENT FOR THE AUTHORITY, THE ADOPTION OF THE VISION STATEMENT STATEMENT WOULD PROVIDE A ROAD TAP TO GUIDE THE DDA-B EFFORTS AT ECONOMIC REVITALJZATION. IT WOULD ALSO GIVE THE DOWNTOWN AND DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY A SPECIFIC RES 2004-07 TARGET FOR THE NEW PROJECTS, BUSINESS AND SERVICES, HE ASKED FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2004-07 IF THE BOARD AGREES WITH STAFFS REQUEST MS, BRAYTON MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2004-07. SECONDED BY MR, STROUD AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: MR, STEINER NOTED THAT THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HAS BEEN CHOSEN AS A RECIPIENT OF THE CITY'S "FRIEND OF PRESERVATION AWARD" FOR 2004. MR. STEINER HAD ACCEPTED THE AWARD AT THE MAY 4' CITY COUNCIL MEETING. MR. STEINER STATED THAT CORTINA WILL BE ON THE MAY 18, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. IT WAS NOTED THAT IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE FOR IT TO BE ON THE DISCUSSION AGENDA AND MS. JORDAN WOULD BE PREPARED TO 00 A BRIEF PRESENTATION DDA MINUTES PAGE 5 MS. JORDAN REQUESTED A PREPARATION MEETING WITH DOA STAFF AND LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE THE MAY 18 COUNCIL MEETING. 'PROJECT UPDATES PROJECT UPDATES - MS. JORDAN REQUESTED BOARDMEMBERS TO REVIEW THE PROJECT UPDATE LIST AND LET MR STEINER KNOW IF THERE WERE QUESTIONS. ADJOURN THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT Q' 15 A.M. JASON MEADORS, SECRETARY DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ddiiAUTHORITY TO: DDA Board of Directo FROM: Chip Steiner DATE: June 1, 2004 RE: 325 Cherry Street Greg Glebe, the developer of Cherry Street Lofts, has acquired an adjacent property and intends to add parking garages to the project. As the attached letter explains, Mr. Glebe wishes to utilize DDA funds for right-of-way improvements on the additional property as well as on the existing development. He is not requesting more funds from the Authority. Staff recommends approval. XYLEM DESIGN. 05-13-04 ?he Relentless Pursuit Dear Chip, Of Excellence Here is the updated description on the 325 Cherry Street Terrace/Loft project as we discussed the other day. We were allotted up to $200,000 in DDA reimbursements on the original package that was to be completely new construction on top of the existing 325 Cherry Street woodshop. Since that time we were able to purchase the adjoining property to the east. The house that stands there was occupied for a time by Hattie McDaniels, the first Black American woman to win an Oscar Award. She played a part in Gone With The Wind. Our intent is to merge the two properties, rehabilitate the "Hattie House" and add a parking structure to the rear section of that building. I am asking that you consider allowing us to utilize the credit for the entire project as it has evolved. My hope is that another presentation will not be required. Please share the enclosed information with the group and let me know the response. 325 CHERRY STREET • FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 970-493-7458 • 1-800-333-9953 • FAX 970-493-7468 • www.xylemdesign.com V3 O =I Lr ] U4 cc I v C z m e No Text DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO: DDA Board of Dire FROM: Chip Steiner L DATE: June 1, 2004 RE: Conflict of Interest Issue Legal counsel will discuss, law, policies, and procedures governing conflict of interest issues for Board and staff members. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO: DDA Board of Directors FROM: Chip Steiner GI DATE: June 1, 2004 RE: Community Capital Program The City is beginning the process of identifying projects that could be funded through the extension of the Building Community Choices taxes. Council discussed this issue last week. Attached is a summary overview. Staff does not believe any action is necessary by the Board at this time. DATE: May 25, 2004 STAFF: Diane Jones SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION STUDY SESSION ITEM FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Building on Basics 2005 Capital Sales Tax Renewal Program. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Is the proposed project list appropriate for use in the citizen outreach process? Does Council wish to see any additions or deletions? 2. Staff has developed a more detailed Outreach plan for gathering input and encouraging citizen involvement in the process of selecting projects. Does City Council have any suggestions, comments or concerns about the proposed process? 1 As staff collects citizen feedback on the project list, is it appropriate to ask voters if they are willing to consider an additional sales tax, beyond the renewals? The purpose of the Study Session is to update the Council on the process of renewing the Building Community Choices sales taxes and to solicit direction from Council regarding key steps in the process. 1. Is the proposed project list appropriate for use in the citizen outreach process? Does Council wish to see any additions or deletions? Purpose of Initial Project List: Staff is presenting a project list for Council's consideration at this Study Session. It is the initial "narrowing" of the entire inventory list from the 10-Year Capital Plan and Inventory. This preliminary list will be used to gather citizen input on projects which could be included on the ballot for the renewal of the Building Community Choices sales taxes. By providing a short list of what seem to be the highest priority needs, citizens can provide feedback both on projects which are on the list and others which they may like to see funded. Attachment A. The process of this initial narrowing has involved Boards and Commissions and staff. Now staff is seeking input from City Council on whether the list encompasses all of the projects that City Council would like to present for community discussion and feedback. This Study Session provides Council an opportunity to add to or eliminate projects from the list prior to beginning citizen outreach. At future stages of the process, Council will be responsible for further refining the list to reflect the input received from citizens and the wishes of Council. May 25, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND In 2003, Staff developed a 10-Year Capital Improvements Plan and Inventory that includes over 150 needed capital projects. The inventory includes some fully funded projects, some partially funded projects and some without any identified funding source. The projects span all areas of the City's operations, including Utilities, Transportation, Cultural, Library and Recreation Services, Police Services, General Government and Natural Areas. The 10-Year Capital Plan and Inventory serves as the basis for the list of projects to consider for funding in the Building on Basics 2005 capital renewal program. Staff and several Boards and Commissions have contributed to the process of paring down the list of projects to a reasonable number to consider. Rather than present citizens and Council with all 150 projects for consideration, we developed a shorter list of 60 projects for initial consideration by the boards and staff. A total of $456 million in high priority needs were evaluated, with the goal of creating an even shorter list of 25-35 projects for further consideration by the broader community. The entire list of 60 projects is included as Attachment B. Board and Commission Input: From the list of 60 priority projects, Boards and Commissions reviewed the projects to further refine the list and identify key projects related to various services for funding consideration. Several Boards and Commissions were asked to review capital needs related to their area of interest, including: • Transportation Board • Cultural Resources Board • Library Board • Senior Advisory Board • Parks and Recreation Board • Youth Advisory Board • Golf Board These boards were asked to review the projects related to their areas of interest and provide narrative feedback on four aspects of those projects —Feasibility, Urgency, Need and Desirability. They also had the opportunity to make some general recommendations about priorities within their area of expertise. Their detailed feedback is included as Attachment C. In addition to these Boards, the Planning and Zoning Board and the Air Quality Advisory Board provided more general feedback about projects that would be significant in implementation of City Plan and the Air Quality Action Plan respectively. Their feedback is also included in Attachment C. Staff Input. - The staff Capital Planning Team also reviewed the projects using the FUND prioritization process outlined in the City's Capital Plan. This process was developed to assist in setting relative priorities across the various service areas. The FUND criteria are generally grouped into four themes: Feasibility: Practical considerations related to the ability of the City to achieve the project's goals, including financial considerations and other limitations. May 25, 2004 Page 3 Urgency: Time related criteria, projects calling for immediate attention. Need: Data driven criteria that relate to Master Plans and Level of Service or standards. Desirability: Qualitative criteria thathelprank projectsby policy relatedcriteria, including impacts on various interests and benefits to different individuals or groups. The staff team of nine members reviewed each of the 60 projects using the FUND criteria and scored the projects on a scale of 0-120. The staff team took into account information from the Capital Plan and Inventory project sheets as well as the feedback from Boards and Commissions in scoring each project. A summary of the criteria and the overall scoring results report are included for Council's information as Attachment D. Preliminary List: By combining the input from the Boards and Commissions and the FUND rating process, staff has developed a preliminary list of projects for the community to consider and for Council and staff to garner input during the next several months. These projects reflect 34 of the highest priority capital needs related to four significant community services. See Attachment A. The list contains approximately $229 million of projects for the upcoming community outreach process (Web, meetings, surveys, etc.) The list combines the following information: The 12 highest priority projects from Cultural Library and Recreation Services according to both FUND raters and Board input. These projects total $122 million in unfunded capital projects. The Transportation list includes the top 15 projects as rated by the Transportation Board, plus the additional projects needed to reach the top 15 projects from the staff FUND raters. This results in 19 Transportation related projects on the list with a total unfunded cost projection of approximately $90 million. The Transportation Board's recommendations concentrated primarily on multi - modal, bike -pedestrian and transit projects. The Board did not rank or rate some road projects that were high on the list of projects as rated by the staff FUND raters and in the newly updated Transportation Master Plan. The emphasis on multi -modal projects resulted in significant differences in the rankings of projects between the two groups. By including the top 15 from the each of the two lists, a total of 19 projects are reflected on the Preliminary Project list. The top two Police projects are includedbased on FUND rater scores. (No Board was involved in the process) The Poudre River Habitat project is included. (This project represents the only "Unfunded" project from Natural Resources) No projects from Operations Services are included based on FUND rater scores. (No Board was involved in the process) May 25, 2004 Page 4 A summary of how projects were prioritized by both the staff FUND raters and the Boards and Commissions is included in Attachment B. This attachment includes the FUND scorer's rankings, plus information regarding the rank of each project by the relevant board(s). For example, the Timberline, Drake to Prospect project was the highest ranked project from the staff team, and tanked as the 27th highest priority of 58 projects ranked by the Transportation Board. Similarly, the staff rated Library Technology as its Th highest rated project of the 60 rated, while the LibraryBoard rated it 1" among the four projects it reviewed. Operations and Maintenance Costs: A key component in developing a package for voter consideration will be the cost of Operations and Maintenance for all of the projects included in the funding package. Staff has completed some preliminary analysis of the O&M costs for the projects on the Preliminary Projects list. These costs are included for Council's information in Attachment A. The cost estimates represent one year of O&M. This is the amount that would need to be added to on -going budgets to operate and maintain the new facility or capital asset. Funds to cover these costs have not yet been identified. 2. Staff has developed a more detailed Outreach plan for gathering input and encouraging citizen involvement in the process of selecting projects. Does City Council have any suggestions, comments or concerns about the proposed process? During the next several months, staff will work to gather input from citizens regarding the renewal of the sales taxes designated for community capital projects. The process began in April with efforts to develop awareness of both the need to renew the taxes and the successes of past capital sales tax programs. This effort will continue throughout the summer months through a variety of techniques. Citizen input will be gathered to assist City Council in the process of narrowing the list of projects for funding consideration and to present to voters. A variety of outreach activities are planned, including: • Web site to provide both information and a feedback system • Brochure for distribution at speaking engagements, etc. • City News articles —April - January • Forum newspaper articles • Community Leaders Letters • Open Houses/Community Meetings —June and August • Information Video for Channel 27 • Speaker's Bureau • Events —New West Fest booth; Farmer's Markets • Informal surveys, listening log • Statistically valid citizen survey See the attached schedule for outreach, Attachment E. The goal of the outreach process will be to gather input and ideas from a wide range of citizens and to provide that feedback to City Council for use in setting the ballot measure. Staff is seeking Council's input on whether the planned outreach efforts will provide Council with the data and opinions that will be helpful in developing the proposed ballot measure. May 25, 2004 Page 5 3. As staff collects citizen feedback on the project list, is it appropriate to ask voters if they are wilting to consider an additional sales tax, beyond the renewals? At two previous Study Sessions, Council discussed the renewal of two existing Building Community Choices sales taxes. Council has developed a general agreement that one of the % cent renewals should be dedicated to Street Maintenance (Pavement Management Program.), while the other existing '''A cent tax would be used for other high priority capital needs. Each r/ cent sales and use tax is expected to generate $5.4 million per year for a total of $43 - $54 million over the 8-10 years term of the tax in constant 2004 dollars, or $58-77 million with growth and inflation. Year Annual Revenue 2004 Constant Dollars Revenue Projections 0.25 Cent Sales & Use Tax Cumulative Annual Constant Projection Percentage Dollars w/ Inflation Growth Cumulative Total with Inflation and Growth 1 2006 $ 5,400,000 $ 5,400,000 $5,792,456 5.9% $5,792,456 2 2007 $ 5,400,000 $10,800,000 $6,192,164 6.9% $11,984,620 3 2008 $ 5,400,000 $16,200,000 $6,598,404 6.6% $18,583,024 4 2009 $ 5,400,000 $21,600,000 $6,993,870 6.0% $25,576,894 5 2010 $ 5,400,000 $27,000,000 $7,402,887 5.8% $32,979,781 6 2011 $ 5,400,000 $32,400,000 $7,827,914 5.7% $40,807,695 7 2012 $ 5,400,000 $37,800,000 $8,280,568 5.8% $49,088,263. 8 2013 $ 5,400,000 $43,200,000 $8,719,438 5.3% $57,807,701 9 2014 $ 5,400,000 $48,600,000 $9,181,568 5.3% $66,989,269 10 2015 $ 5,400,000 $54,000,000 $9,668,191 5.3% $76,657,461 NOTE: The above are projections and as such, will most certainly be revised as new data is received throughout the projection period. Council also discussed the possibility of seeking an additional capital sales and use tax to provide funding for other high priority capital needs. Council did not provide specific direction on whether or not to seek an additional tax, but rather deferred that discussion until later in the process. Through the citizen outreach process, staff believes that it is important to test the interest and willingness of citizens to consider an additional sales tax to construct more capital projects. Staff is seeking Council's approval to include discussion of a possible additional tax measure in its outreach efforts. A decision about whether to place an additional tax on the ballot could then be made during the ballot measure development process. May 25, 2004 Page 6 ATTACHMENTS A. Recommended Capital Project List with O & M estimates B. Project List --All High Priority Projects C. Board and Commission Feedback memos D. FUND Summary Report and FUND Criteria E. Information and Outreach Campaign Summary F. Project Sheets, All High Priority Projects Attachment A Preliminary Projects for Citizen Input --Building on Basics 1005 (thousands of 2004 dollars) '.�``� ti .'�f,-0 .t�. y syd',L �'i� +, J i ^�''+:, .. .• .''ir�4�^`•. ,b,':'�„`.i .... Cultural, Library and Recreation Services Projects 1 Southeast Branch Library $ 4,450 S 3,000 S 1,450 S 705 2 Library Technology S 4,472 $ - $ 4,472 S - 3 New Downtown Civic Center Library S 40,000 S 1,000 S 39,000 S 2,360 4 Performing Ans Center 10 S 48,760 S 6,000 S 42,760 S 1,268 5 Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 2,500 S - S 2,500 S 40 6 Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 700 S - $ 700 S 55 7 Library Materials S 2,548 S - S 2,548 S - 8 Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park S 20,988 $ - S 20,988 $ 1,665 9 Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion 8,480 S - S 8,480 S 255 10 Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility _S S 2,400 S - S 2,400 S 20 - i Fort Collins Museum and Cultural Center S 6,500 S - S 6,500 S 300 Restroom, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery $ 275 S - $ 275 S 15 Total CLRS Projects Unfunded Cost; S1'32,073 Community Planning and Environmental Services Projects 13 Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration $ 5,000 $ - $ 5.000 Police Services Projects 14 Police Services CAD Replacement Project $ 4,000 $ 3,400 S 600 $ 219 15 Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVLs) S 487 S - $ 487 S 66 Total Police Services Projects Unfunded Cost: S 1,087 Transportation Services Projects 16 Timberline - Drake to Prospect to S 11,799 $ 8,694 S 3,105 S 18 17 Harmony - Seneca to College S 8,901 $ 5,201 S 3,700 S 22 18 Intersection Improvements at College Ave. and Harmony Road S 4,140 S - S 4,140 $ 3 19 Prospect - Poudre River to 1-25, 4 Lane Arterial S 8,280 $ 2,898 $ 5,382 $ 19 20 Replacement Buses Transit Fleet S 4,613 $ 3,690 S 923 S - 21 Lemay Avenue, Lincoln to Conifer S 23,805 S 13,973 S 9,832 S 28 22 Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, Continuation S 8,560 S 3.280 $ 5,280 $ 100 23 North College Avenue --Vine Drive to Conifer Street S 8,280 S - $ 8,280 S 7 24 Traffic Signal Replacement Project (ATMS) Enhancement S 2,000 S - S 2,000 S 48 ?5 Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signal Pool S 16,000 S - $ 16,000 S 6 3 Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation S 10,350 $ - S 10,350 S 3 27 Timberline --Mulberry to Mountain Vista $ 22,770 S 18,216 S 4,554 S 28 28 New Vehicles for Transit Fleet S 3,091 S 2,473 S 618 S 1.234 29 Streets Facility Expansion S 2,000 S 700 $ 1,300 S 60 30 Mason Transp.Cor: -Bike & Ped. Trail, Spring Cr. Trail to Laurel St. S 3.450 $ - S 3,450 $ 12 31 East Drake Road --Harvard to Stover $ 2,073 $ - S 2,073 S 3 32 MTC Plan Imp., Troutman Bike/Ped Underpass @BNSFRR Tracks S 1.500 S - $ 1,500 S I5 33 Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan Implementation $ 7,100 S - $ 7,100 $ - 34 Mulberry St./ SH 14 Park and Ride --Mulberry/ 125 Interchange $ 1,000 S - S 1,000 S 100 Total Transportation Services Projects Unfunded Cost: S 90,587 Total Unfunded Cost: $ 228,747 ' See project sheet re: additional costs for relocating Operations Services facility 2 See project sheet re: assumptions for developer share to be financed through SID 'Other Operation and Maintenance Costs for some tmnsporation projects will be covered by other sources, including Pavement Management Program and Transportation Fund 5/19/200411:24 AM Attachment B Prolect List -All High Priority Proiects 1 Timberline - Drake to Prospect $ 11,799 S 3,105 1 Transportation Board 27 2 Hamiorty • Seneca to College $ 9,901 $ 3,700 2 Transportation Board 2 3 Intersection Improvements at College Ave. and Harmony Road S 4,140 S 4,140 3 Transportation Board 14 4 Prospect - Poudre River to 1-25: 4 Lane Arterial S 8,280 $ 5,382 4 Transportation Board Not ranked by Board 5 Replacement Buses Transit Flat S 4,613 S 923 5 Transportation Board 6 e Lemay Avenue, Lincoln to Conifer S 23,805 S 9,832 6 Transportation Board 26 7 Southeast Branch Library S 4,450 S 1,450 7 Library Board 3 8 Library Technology $ 4,472 S 4,472 8 Library Board 1 9 New Downtown Civic Center Library S 40,000 $ 39,000 9 Library Board 4, wen add new 1/4 cera, then Ist 10 Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, Continuation $ 8,560 S 5,280 10 Tranp. 6ddSanor Adv. T-Bin vabaa mai,p 5-57, srrw 4 11 12 North College Avenue --Vine Drive to Conifer Street S 8,280 $ 9,280 11 Transportation Board 12 13 Traffic Signal Replacement Project (ATMS) Enhancement S 2,000 S 2,000 12 Transportation Board Not ranked by Board 14 Performing Arts Center S 48,760 S 42,760 13 Cultural Resources Bd. 3, milas add new 114, then I a 15 Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signal Pool S 16,000 S 16,(100 14 Transportation Board 3,4,25,28,29,30,31,33 t6 Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements S 2,500 S 2,500 15 P&R Board 1 17 Police Services CAD Replacement Project $ 4,O00 S 600 16 n/a No Board 18 Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation S 10,350 S 10,350 17 Transportation Board 1 19 Titriberline--Mulberry to Mountain Vista S 22,770 $ 4.554 18 Transportation Board Not ranked by Board 20 Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements S 700 S 700 19 P&R Board 2 21 New Vehicles for Transit Flat S 3,091 S 618 20 Transportation Board I treets Facility Expansion $ 2,000 $ 1,300 21 Transportation Board 22 24 Downtown Railroad Crossings --Laurel to Oak S 932 S 932 22 Transportation Board 54,58 25 Bus Stop Accessibility Modifications $ 315 S 315 23 Transportation Board Not ranked by Board 26 Library Materials S 2,548 $ 2,548 24 Library Board 2 27 Mason Transportation Corridor --Bike & Ped. Trail, Spring 0. Tail to Morel St. S 3,450 S 3,450 25 Transportation Board 7 28 Mason Transportation Corridor Trail S 6,000 S 6.000 26 Transportation Board Not ranked by Board 29 East Drake Road --Harvard to Stover S 2,073 S 2,073 27 Transportation Board 13 30 Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park S 20,988 $ 20,988 28 P&R Board/Youth Bd. 3 e a&s i/4 n, a tit. vomam i 31 South College Avenuo--Fosatl Creck to Harmony S 9.005 $ 4,503 29 Transportation Board 44 32 33 Mason Transportation Corridor -Downtown Bike and Ped. Imp. S 1,000 S 1,000 30 Transportation Board 16 34 Transit Technology Improvements S 1,142 $ 1,142 31 Transportation Board 39,49 35 MTC Plan Imp. BNSFRR Bike and Rd Underpass @ NRRMnivemty Mail S 1,200 $ 1,200 32 Transportation Board 37 36 Eastside Neighborhood Park $ 1,620 S 1,550 33 P&R Board Not ranked by Board 37 Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion $ 89480 S 8.480 34 Senior Adv.BdJ Youth Senior: 1; Youth: 2 38 Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility S 2,400 S 2,400 35 Cultural Resources Bd. 2 39 Fort Collins Museum and Cultural Center S 6,500 S 6,500 36 Cultural Rea/ Senior CRB:I ; Senior. 3 10 Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVLs) S 487 S 487 37 n/a No Board 41 MTC Plan Imp., Troutman BikdPed Underpass @BNSFRR Tracks $ 1,500 S 1,500 38 Transportation Board 15 43 Restroorn, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery S 275 $ 275 39 44 Cache La Poudm River Habitat Restoration S 5,W) S 5.000 40 45 Downtown Maintenance Facility S 330 S 330 41 48 Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan Implementation S 7,100 S 7,100 42 47 Southwest Recreation Center S 20,988 S 20,988 43 48 Police Services Community Policing Centers S 2,500 S 2,500 44 MTC Plan Imp., Rapid Transirway Imps. to South Terminus S 55,916 S 23,415 45 Edora Maintenance Facility $ 664 S 664 46 51 Park Maintenance Center Expansion S 200 S 200 47 Senior Advivaory Bd. 3 P&R Board Transportation Board P&R Board n/a Transportation Board P&R Board P&R Board Not ranked by Board Various rankings 9-53 Not ranked by Board No Board Not ranked by Board Not ranked by Board Not ranked by Board 53 Renovation of Police Services Building S 3,738 S 3,738 48 n/a No Board 54 Transit Facilities -- Maimenance/Repair S 1,024 S 1,024 49 Transportation Board 43,48 55 Golf Capital Improvements $ 450 S 450 50 Golf Board 1 56 Gateway Mountain Park --Phase II S 1,400 S 1,100 51 P&R Board 4 57 Sports Park S 5,300 S 5,300 52 Youth Advivsory Ed. 3 581 Mulberry St./ SH 14 Park and Ride --Mulberry/ 125 Interchange S 1,000 S 1,000 54 Transportation Board 9 ddh DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY To: DDA Board of D' rs FROM: Chip Steiner /y DATE: June 1, 2004 C� RE: Updates 1. Old Town Square Bathrooms. DDA has a tentative agreement to contract with Paul Found to clean the new bathrooms in Old Town Square. Cost is $25/day and we are experimenting with how many days a week cleaning is necessary —five, six, or seven. 2. Rental housing project. Yet another housing project has approached the DDA. This one is for 80 —140 rental units with commercial on the first floor. Developer is the same one who is doing the downtown project in Loveland. Developer holds its properties. Probably will ask DDA to participate in parking. No site has been selected. 3. Alley design. We have let a contract with EDAW to do our alley design work. Scheduled completion is July 1. 4. Discovery Center and Colorado College of Contemporary Music. Working with Commercial Federal Bank about using New Markets "near equity" and low - interest loans to see if we can package a development project. 5. CCRA Conference. Scheduled for the evening of Thursday, September 16, Friday, September 17, and through noon, Saturday, September 18. Headquarters will be at Everyday Joe's and conference sessions will be held in the County administrative building. Need sponsors. See attached materials. 6. Cortina and Pine Street Lofts. Should have the agreements with these two projects finished in the next week or two. These agreements differ from the usual documents because of the complex ownership. 7. Amphitheater. Will take the agency proposal to the DBA next week. 4