HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks And Recreation Board - Minutes - 04/27/2005Minutes of Regular Meeting
April'27, 2005
215 North Mason
Community Room
5.30 p.m.
Call Meeting to Order: Jessica MacMillan called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m.
Agenda Review: None.
Items of Note: None.
Citizen Participation: None.
Approval of Minutes: On a motion by Greg Miller, seconded by Ann Hunt, the Board voted
unanimously to approve the minutes of the February 23, 2005 meeting.
Forestry Code Changes
Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, presented the proposed revisions of the Vegetation Ordinance
in the City Code. Tim handed out the most current draft of the code and referred to the memo in
the Board's packet that reviewed the most significant changes.
The two primary changes in the code are:
- the arborists license requirements
- the duties of property owners to maintain trees and shrubs, and how the City notifies
citizens regarding code violations or hazards
The current code states that anyone who does any pruning, planting or removing of any tree,
bush, shrub, has to have an arborist license. That includes not only commercial arborists and tree
services, but any landscaping company or nursery that removes low branches or suckers from a
tree. Tim stated that they wanted to make changes that focused only on the tree service
companies that trim or remove trees, or that apply pesticides. Currently, there are approximately
30 companies that are considered true arborists, and about 100 that are in the other services like
lawn services.
They set several distinctions that would cause a company to need an arborist license. The
primary distinction is if they trim or prune a tree above the height of ten feet. The rational for
the ten foot height requirement was based on the higher risk of accidents above the ten foot level,
and the need to use equipment. Both of these factors create a potential risk. Also, when work is
performed incorrectly above this height level, there is a chance of permanently damaging or
destroying the tree.
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 2
Jon asked if our codes were similar to other cities. Tim said it is very common for Cities to
license arborists for pruning and removal of trees, but Fort Collins is the only one that requires it
for planting. He added that other cities will set the limit of when to issue the permit in different
ways. In Colorado Springs it is working on a tree that is 15" in diameter; and in Denver it is
based on the height they are removing the branches. It is quite common to have these kinds of
codes. In Fort Collins it has been a requirement to have an arborist license since 1951. Cathy
asked about arborist training. Tim said that they are tested for knowledge through a written test
and a field test (climbing and pruning.) There is also a certification by a professional
organization, the International Society of Arboriculture, and there are also training manuals and
training seminars. If they are certified it is a big step toward license requirement. Most
companies have a combination of formal training, hiring CSU graduates, and learning the skill
by working on the job.
Other requirements related to licensing are:
- applying pesticides to trees of any size
- name of the company and phone number (a new requirement) on the sides of the trucks
- three letters of recommendation
- $25.00 dollars
- proof of insurance (general liability of $1 million per occurrence w/ the City named as insured)
Tim added that companies who are more of a pesticide application company also have to be
licensed by state of Colorado, and we would require them to provide their current applicators
license. The arborist license is good for one year. The code language also allows for a license to
be suspended for violations of standards. Tim investigates all violations to determine if there is a
violation, and has the authority to suspend or take the license away completely. The company
can appeal to the CLRS Director who can hold a hearing. The hearing would include a certified
arborist or another certified expert. Tim stated that it is very unusual that it would go that far as
they have not had a suspended license in 29 years.
Tim sent the above requirements out to most of the licensed companies asking for their input and
received three comments: 1) very supportive, especially in the case of the insurance, 2) concern
that we were not going to regulate the companies that plant trees or do pruning work (they felt
that without policing some situations would get worse, so it should be on the books even if we
don't have the staff to police it), and 3) concern about the ten foot height rule (it could promote
cheating if someone says they cut up to ten feet but actually they cutting up to 20 feet.) Tim
stated that before he takes it to council he is going to check with a few more experts.
The code also defines when we can send a notice to property owners when their trees are causing
problems with public safety. Currently, the code says that the City has to take care of pruning or
removals on private property if the trees are unsafe. Because it is a liability situation, it is
reasonable to expect the property owner to take care of their property, so the new code will
reflect that change. Also, site distance triangles, such as blind comers, must be maintained to
protect the visual clearance requirements; the City has liability to make street areas safe. Tree
branch growth must be maintained at 10 feet over a public sidewalk and 14 feet over traffic
lanes. Defective branches must be removed if they threaten public property. If there is a
hazardous tree on public property and Forestry determines it does not threaten public property
they would not take action on it. Authority is limited to making public space safe.
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 3
If a private tree is determined to have a destructive or communicable disease, such as Dutch Elm
disease or the IPS Beetle, we can notify the property owner to treat it or remove it. Another area
of the proposed code is that the property owner is responsible for keeping street name signs
clear, and can be notified to do so, but the City is responsible for traffic signs and signals.
It is also unlawful to sell, import or plant box elders, cotton bearing cottonwoods, seed bearing
box elders, russian olives and salt cedars. We can make an exception in a natural area because
they are considered native species in natural areas. Another requirement is that a free permit is
required to plant, prune or remove a tree in a public right of way. It also states that we can go on
private property for inspection purposes of trees during the course of our work. Etiquette rules
are followed, such as leaving cards and notifying the citizen that we need to go on their property.
The notification process consists of giving the citizen a notice, and giving them a period of time
to complete the work. If it is not completed, the city can cause work to be done and bill the
citizen for it. If the citizen wants to appeal the notice, it goes to the Director of CLRS. If the
citizen cannot afford to have the required work done, they can enter into a payback agreement
over 3 years with 6% interest. If the citizen does not pay we hand it over to county collection
and it is handled as a collection on taxes.
Tim finished by stating that they feel they are making some good changes in the code that are
long overdue, and wanted to introduce the information to the Board and get their approval before
going to Council.
Jessica mentioned that she was concerned about the older areas of town where trees are mature
and the citizens don't have the finances to take care of the trees. Tim reassured her that they will
take bids on the work and get the citizen a very favorable choice of bids, or they could use the
payback program. Tim stated that last year the Forestry Division worked on 150 spruce
removals community wide and they did not have any of those citizens request assistance. He
added that most nurseries have cooperative programs that if you lose a tree to the IPS they will
give you a discount on a replacement tree. Dean motioned that the Board recommend to Council
that they accept the code changes. Jessica seconded the motion and all board members agreed.
2006/2007 Budget Recommendations
Marty explained that the City is in the process of preparing the next two-year budget. The
timeline for the budget recommendations is for Council to adopt the charter in November,
causing the City Manager to refer his recommended budget to Council by September 1, 2005.
Marty referred to a memo in the Board packets from Doug Smith requesting the Board's
thoughts and recommendations on budget issues that relate to Parks and Recreation. Marty
obtained an extension of the deadline mentioned in the memo because the Parks and Recreation
Board did not meet in March. Marty also explained that the departments have been directed to
engage in a new budgeting process called Outcome Based Budgeting. He had just recently been
to a seminar to learn about the process. He stated that the City still has budget problems, even
though the No -on -I campaign was successful, with a positive vote of 72%. He reminded the
Board that the employees are still not receiving compensation raises after 3 years, and since the
City is no longer competitive we are starting to lose employees. He added that Council still
wants to open fire station 14, they want to put money into transportation, and Parks needs more
money for maintaining new parks and trails that are being built, as well as the streetscapes that
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 4
they are asked to maintain. There are always funding needs, and the projections are that we
simply do not have enough growth in our sales and use tax to keep up with the need of our
anticipated expenses. He further explained that the economy has been slow over the last few
years. Part of the reason for that is that our neighboring cities are developing retail centers so
fewer people are coming to Fort Collins to shop, plus we are losing a lot of revenue to intemet
sales because those sales are exempted from local taxation. These factors have come together to
lower our revenue base. The current projection is 5% growth per year.
Council is very focused on looking at what services the City offers that they can cut or stop in
order to get on a more solid fiscal footing. The typical way to do this is for the City Manager to
come to Council and explain what we need, and show our budget gaps. Darin has spoken to the
new Council about Outcome Based Budgeting and they have all decided that this is the new way
they want to handle the budget process. Because we are getting a late start on this process it has
to be completed in two months time. The model is to find out what tax payers want to buy for
their tax dollars. Council is going to a retreat this weekend to come up with target goals, such as
a safe community, an active and healthy community, and an economically vibrant community.
These goals will be based on what they feel their constituents would want, and the citizen
surveys the City has performed over the past few years. Then teams will be formed for each
goal, they will analyze how to best achieve those results, then that information will be given to
the departments, and the departments will then have to sell their services to the results teams.
The result teams will then be given a certain amount of money to put towards those departments.
Marty stated that this Board's input is important because of the feedback they can provide on
what they feel are important goals for funding in our department. Marty apologized for the time
frame, but stated that we do have to come up with a recommendation today.
Marty listed his recommendations for the Board's review:
1) Ask for our frozen positions to be filled, three in Parks, one in Cemetery, two in Forestry, and
one in Recreation. Marty explained that we have already cut back on conference training, trash,
cleaning restrooms, and deferred equipment expenses. He stated that we would like to look at
restoring our previous funding level.
2) Ask for O&M dollars needed to operate the new Northside Recreation Center. The project is
moving along, but the schedule to open the center is at the end of 2007. In order to open we will
need $560,000 of additional funding from the general fund to open and run it. We have about
$300,000 currently from the general fund to operator the existing center, and that pays for three
full-time staff, but the new center will be 50,000 square feet and a full community center so we
are going to need $560,000 more to operate it. Marty further explained that fees from the
Northside Center do not bring in much because most of our subsidized programs come out of the
Northside Center. He added we may have to take a harder look at that. The Northside Center is
a Building Community Choices project and future growth is supposed to help operate it. They
currently have three designibuild firms submitting designs and will be choosing one next month,
with the announcement of which firm coming out in July. A conceptual plan from the design
team will be completed by April 2006 and the Board will be involved in reviewing that plan.
The next step from that will be the public outreach process, and then Council approval. The
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 5
issue of notice will proceed in May of 2006, with construction starting in October of 2006 and
completion in 2007.
3) Ask for O&M for new parks, trails and forestry. Marty referred to a memo in the Board's
packets that he wrote to the Mayor and City Council in March regarding Managing Maintenance
Expenses for New Parks. He stated that they worked hard on this because some Council
members were worried about how we were going to pay to maintain parks and trails, whether we
should we be building new parks, and should we slow down on what we are building. We
currently have a system in place to build a great park and trail system, but we don't have a
system to maintain them. It is a legitimate problem, so the memo was designed to put it in
perspective. Three things are mentioned in the memo; delaying future build -out of the park
system (I0-yearmaximum,) build in a more durable fashion so they last longer, and design them
in ways to minimize the maintenance.
4) Request a parks maintenance fee. In the memo, Marty reminded council that the park system
will build out in 15-20 years and the cost to maintain new parks is about $100,000 more per year
until built out. Jon asked if they would shut down if parks O&M money was reduced. Marty
stated that they would have to reduce the level of service. Jessica stated that we have already cut
out so many things, that two dollars a month in taxes per family is not too much to ask to
maintain the parks system. Cathy asked what the fee would need to be to cover the upcoming
years. Marty responded that with an inflator of 3% in 10-15 years it would be $6.00, which
would include all of the upcoming community parks. Ann asked if there a way to opt out of the
fee for poor people, and Marty responded that we could develop a rebate program. When asked
if we could charge $6.00 right away, Marty responded that you can not charge a fee that is more
then the cost of service.
Marty added that our biggest problem is that we are heavily dependent on our sales tax and have
been living on growth, but those days are over. When we compare our costs per acre for
parkland maintenance, we are competitive. We contract out all of the medians and parkways
because contractors can do it cheaper than we can, and we have cut parks so much that things
just are not getting done. Marty feels that the Parks Division is very lean and that they are the
most efficient and cost effective they have ever been, and that these problems will not be solved
through cost saving efforts. He feels convinced that if they don't have the money, service levels
will go down.
5) O&M of Picnic Rock. This site is 3-4 miles up Poudre Canyon. The DOW owns it, and the
state could not handle it any more. We have an agreement with them to help maintain it so we
could open it. We pick up trash and put port -a -lets out there between Memorial Day and Labor
Day. Marty thinks we could take it over, hire staff to maintain it and police it, and keep it open
year round if we could get $25,000 per year. The staff from Gateway Park would maintain it. It
is a pivotal place in the lower canyon. If it is not open, people park up and down along the road
causing safety issues. It currently has a self-service fee, but only about $3.00 a month is being
collected. Cathy asked why Larimer County can't handle it since it is not within the City limits,
and Marty stated that he will be reviewing the county's open land funding source and discussing
it with them. There was discussion regarding having the river rafting companies pitch in to help
care for it, and talking more to the state, even though they are in bad shape. Marty also stated
that if we do not get funding we will open it for free, fix things as they break, and put in a few
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 6
port -a -lets for about $2,500 a year. Jon stated that Friends of the Poudre and their annual
marathon should be able help out.
Marty stated that if the Board was interested in any of these items, they could vote on it, put a
memo together, and send it to the budget office.
The Board had further discussion about the items and decided to leave all items on the list with
the addition of adding an item to maintain existing funding levels for all parks and recreation
facilities. Jessica recommended endorsing all items to the City Council, Cathy seconded, all
Board members were in favor, none opposed.
Building on Basics (BOB) Capital Project Recommendations
Marty stated that the Board made a recommendation for the Building Community Choices
Capital program, an extension of the '/o cent tax that Council will put on the ballot in November.
Council had been asked to consider putting two '/< cent taxes on the last ballot in April, but they
decided to only add the one for streets so it would not conflict with the grocery tax. Marty feels
the new Council will take the remaining '/< cent that sunsets at the end of this year and ask the
voters in November to extend it for 8 to10 years, generating about $5.5 million dollars a year for
a variety of capital improvements that have not been funded.
The Board originally recommended:
- Community park improvements
- Neighborhood park improvements
- Recreation center at Fossil Creek Community Park
- Second phase at Gateway
For the second '/< tax the Board recommended:
- Recreation center at Fossil Creek Community Park
- Community park improvements
- Neighborhood park improvements
- Second Phase at Gateway
Projects not recommended by the Board but popular with Council:
- Senior center expansion
- Restroom and irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery
Further projects not recommended:
- Streetscape beautification
- Park shop expansion
- Eastside park expansion
- Southwest recreation center
- Sports park
Highlights of the Board's discussion were:
Senior Center — Concern that Council will make this a top priority when the interest may not be
there from citizens; possible name change of the center; and Council's desire to annex the
existing center, expand the parking and combine it with the Pottery Studio.
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 7
Lobbying for the projects — showing more support of Parks and Recreation projects by speaking
up for the needed funding at Council meetings, and calling and e-mailing Council members.
Marty asked the Board if they wanted to keep the recommendations previously made or if they
wanted to change it. Jessica recommended going with the list and start organizing their efforts to
lobby for the projects. All members agreed.
Water Update
Staff checked with the ditch riders to get an outlook of the water situation and it looks much like
it did last year. They are not sure if we are out of the drought, but they see no need for water
restrictions this year. The general message is people are feeling comfortable with the water we
have.
Project Updates
Spring Canyon Community Park. Currently, and through the summer, Park Planning will be
working through the design piece and the code items. The Colorado Eagles adopted the
playground as their project and are donating up to $250,000. Planning is also working with
Stormwater for more detention on the north end. The traffic study is done and Craig is looking
at the review process. There has been good interaction with Forestry.
NACC. See above Budget section.
Rabbit Brush Park. Stephanie Van Dyken, a landscape architecture interning with Park Planning
presented information on this park. The park is 1.5 acres and located in Waterglenn subdivision
on East Vine and I-25. The neighborhood meeting received positive feedback, and the design
concept is coming together and should be mailed to neighbors in May with construction starting
in June or September.
Trails. The concrete work on the Poudre Trail from Taft to Shields and by Lincoln
Green to Mulberry is wrapping up and should open this week. Seeding will be completed this
week. The fence is in on the Power Trail from Horsetooth to Harmony. They are still waiting on
the sidewalks along Harmony. The sidewalks from Golden Meadows are going in right now.
Underpass of Fossil Creek Trail. They are coming along with the CDOT process. Still working
on the underpass and adjusting the work around a nesting red tail hawk.
Mason Street Corridor. They are getting the easements worked out. Hoping to get the bid in
June and working on construction the remainder of 2005 and into 2006.
City Park. Park Planning held a neighborhood meeting on February 16a'. They liked the
basketball court location, the core pedestrian area, more sidewalks, the east restroom as long as it
is along Sheldon Drive instead of Jackson Street, an east shelter as long as it was not by the
restrooms, and changing the roadways so there was less traffic and less speed. They don't like
the parking lot south of the ballfields because they don't want to give up that green space. They
did like keeping the historical theme with the moss rock.
Parks and Recreation Board Minutes
April 27, 2005
Page 8
Council Periodic Review Process
City Council reviews a few boards each year to see if the process is still meaningful and if the
Board members feel their time is well spent. Jessica, Marty and one other board member will go
in front of Council on July 26a' to answer questions. In the mean time, the Board will need to
answer the self -assessment questionnaire included in their packets. Marty asked that the Board
put some thought into the questions so they could have a discussion on agenda for the next
meeting. Jessica asked that each member fill it out and send it to her, and she would bring them
to the next meeting.
Other Business
Farewell to Dean Hoag. Dean is leaving because he has moved out of the City limits. The
Board thanked Dean for his years of service.
Trail Committee. A new Board member will need to take Dean's place on the Trail Committee.
Marty told the Board to let him know if they are interested and he will bring the names to next
month's meeting so they can vote.
Board Member and Staff Comments
None
Correspondence
None
Adjournment: The Board unanimously agreed to adjourn at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
�euVmo0Yt-�
Kelly Moore
Administrative Support Supervisor
Board Attendance
Board Members: Dean Hoag, Ann Hunt, Cathy Kipp, Mark Lueker, Jessica MacMillan, Gregg
Miller, Jon Sinclair, Walt Peeples
Staff: Tim Buchanan, Craig Foreman, Marty Heffernan, Kelly Moore, Stephanie Van Dyken
Guests: None