Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 05/04/2021 - REGULAR MEETING
City of Fort Collins Page 1 Jeni Arndt, Mayor Emily Gorgol, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Gutowsky, District 1 Julie Pignataro, District 2 Tricia Canonico, District 3 Shirley Peel, District 4 Kelly Ohlson, District 5 City Council Chambers City Hall West 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk Regular Meeting May 4, 2021 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OPTIONS There will be four options for people who would like to participate in the meeting: Live via the Zoom online meeting, Live via the telephone, Live in Council Chambers, By submitting emails to Council at CityLeaders@fcgov.com. All options will be available for those wishing to provide general public comment, as well as public comment during individual discussion items. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (ONLINE VIA ZOOM): Individuals who wish to address Council via remote public participation can do so through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98241416497. (The link and instructions are also posted at www.fcgov.com/councilcomments.) Individuals participating in the Zoom session should watch the meeting through that site, and not via FCTV, due to the streaming delay and possible audio interference. The Zoom meeting will be available beginning at 5:15 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Participants wanting to ensure their equipment setup is working should join prior to 6:00 p.m. For public comments, the Mayor will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address Council. In order to participate, you must: Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer. Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience. Join the Zoom meeting using the link on the front page of the agenda or on the City’s home webpage at www.fcgov.com. If you use the City’s home page, simply click on the “Participate remotely in Council Meeting” link shown near the top of the page. City of Fort Collins Page 2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA PHONE) Dial the public participation phone number, 1-346-248-7799, and then enter the Meeting ID 982 4141 6497 followed by the pound sign (#). The meeting will be available beginning at 5:15 p.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 6:00 p.m., if possible. For public comments, the Mayor will ask participants to indicate if you would like to speak at that time – phone participants will need to press *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address Council. When participating online or by phone, DO NOT Watch/stream FCTV at the same time due to streaming delay and possible audio interference. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (IN PERSON) To participate in person, individuals should come to City Hall and be prepared to follow strict social distancing, sanitizer and facial covering guidelines. A limited number of individuals will be allowed in Council Chambers. Therefore, staging for individuals who wish to speak will occur in the City Hall lobby and outside (weather permitting). Individuals will be required to wear masks while inside City Hall and any other City buildings being utilized. Individuals who wish to speak will line up at one of the two podiums available in Council Chambers, maintaining physical distancing by standing on the lines marked on the floor. Facial coverings need to stay in place while speaking. Once a speaker has provided comments, he or she will be asked to leave Council Chambers to make room for the next speaker. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA EMAIL) Individuals not comfortable or able to access the Zoom platform or participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments to CityLeaders@fcgov.com. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send prior to the meeting Tuesday evening. WATCH THE MEETING Anyone can view the Council meeting live on Channels 14 and 881 or online at www.fcgov.com/fctv. Note: Only individuals who wish to address Council should use the Zoom link or call in by phone. Anyone who wants to watch the meeting, but not address Council, should view the FCTV livestream. Documents to Share: If residents wish to speak to a document or presentation, the City Clerk needs to be emailed those materials by 4 p.m. the day of the meeting. Persons wishing to display presentation materials using the City’s display equipment under the Citizen Participation portion of a meeting or during discussion of any Council item must provide any such materials to the City Clerk in a form or format readily usable on the City’s display technology no later than two (2) hours prior to the beginning of the meeting at which the materials are to be presented. NOTE: All presentation materials for appeals, addition of permitted use applications or protests related to election matters must be provided to the City Clerk no later than noon on the day of the meeting at which the item will be considered. See Council Rules of Conduct in Meetings for details. Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 221-6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. City of Fort Collins Page 3 Proclamations and Presentations 5:15 p.m. A. Proclamation Declaring May 2021 as Asian-American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. B. Proclamation Declaring May 2021 as Building Safety Month. C. Proclamation Declaring May 2-8 as Drinking Water Week. D. Proclamation Declaring May 2021 as Fort Collins Historic Preservation Month. E. Proclamation Declaring May 2021 as Mental Health Awareness Month. F. Proclamation Declaring May 2-8, 2021 as Small Business Week. Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City Manager Review of Agenda. Consent Calendar Review This Review provides an opportunity for Council and citizens to pull items from the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. o Council-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered before Discussion Items. o Citizen-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered after Discussion Items. PUBLIC COMMENT Individuals may comment regarding items scheduled on the Consent Calendar and items not specifically scheduled on the agenda. Comments regarding land use projects for which a development application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to the Council. Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the table in the lobby (for recordkeeping purposes). All speakers will be asked by the presiding officer to identify themselves by raising their hand, and then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for those who are not able to stand while waiting). The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and general address for the record, and to keep comments brief. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be provided to the City Clerk. A timer will beep once and the timer light will turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain, and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time to speak has ended. [**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development, citizens should consult the Development Review Center page on the City’s website at fcgov.com/developmentreview, or contact the Development Review Center at 221-6750.] PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP City of Fort Collins Page 4 Consent Calendar The Consent Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Pulled Consent Items. Items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved by City Council with one vote. The Consent Calendar consists of: ● Ordinances on First Reading that are routine; ● Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine; ● Those of no perceived controversy; ● Routine administrative actions. If the presiding officer determines that the number of items pulled from the Consent Calendar by citizens is substantial and may impair the Council’s ability to complete the planned agenda, the presiding officer may declare that the following process will be used to simplify consideration of the Citizen-Pulled Consent Items: (1) All citizen-pulled items (to be listed by number) will be considered as a group under the heading “Consideration of Citizen-Pulled Consent Items.” (2) At that time, each citizen wishing to speak will be given a single chance to speak about any and all of the items that have been moved to that part of the agenda. (3) After the citizen comments, any Councilmember may specify items from the list of Citizen-Pulled Consent Items for Council to discuss and vote on individually. Excluding those specified items, Council will then adopt all “Citizen-Pulled Consent Items” as a block, by a single motion, second and vote. (4) Any Citizen-Pulled Consent Items that a Councilmember has asked to be considered individually will then be considered using the regular process for considering discussion items. 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the March 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the March 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the March 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the March 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 051, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Comply with the Terms of the Grant, and Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund from the Colorado Arts Relief Fund. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates unanticipated grant revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund for the Lincoln Center operations. This appropriation includes $100,000 of grant revenues awarded on February 7, 2021, provided by the State of Colorado through the Creative Industries Division of the Office of Economic Development to support personnel or business expenses. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 052, 2021 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural Areas Fund for the Purpose of Land Conservation, Visitor Amenities, Restoration and Other Related Natural Areas Stewardship Activities not Included in the 2021 Adopted City Budget. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $5,000,000 in prior year reserves and unanticipated revenues in the Natural Areas Fund. These appropriations are for land conservation, visitor amenities and restoration of wildlife habitat, as well as other Natural Area Department stewardship activities to benefit the residents of Fort Collins. City of Fort Collins Page 5 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 053, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Cultural Development and Programming Activities and Tourism Programming. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $252,818, of which $199,364 is proposed for 2021 Cultural Development and Programming Activities (Fort Fund) and $53,454 is proposed for 2021 Tourism Programming (Fort Fund) from a combination of Lodging Tax and Prior Year Reserves (unspent appropriations) in the General Fund Lodging Tax Reserves. Lodging taxes are annually collected by the City for cultural development and tourism programming activities. Anticipated revenue is projected through each Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) cycle and then adjusted annually as needed based on final actual collections. Due to the 2020 pandemic, lodging tax revenues collected came in $595,613 below projected 2020 collections. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 055, 2021, Authorizing Transfer of Funds from the Nature in the City Program and the Parks Department Operating Budget to the Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, transfers $75,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Nature in the City Program in the Capital Projects Fund and $20,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Parks Department operating budget in the General Fund into the Capital Projects Fund for the Spring Canyon Park Urban Ponds Project. The proposed transfers of funds will pay for the design and construction of a bioswale and natural habitat system within the existing Spring Canyon Park that will improve wildlife habitat, reduce bacterial contamination of Spring Creek, provide an enhanced natural habitat within Spring Canyon Park and serve as an educational opportunity for the public to learn about natural treatment systems and the importance of minimizing waste input into natural streams. The total project cost is $95,000. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 056, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Agree to the Terms of the Grant and Making Supplemental Appropriations for the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates funds to be later reimbursed by awarded grant funds and to authorize FC Moves to accept an awarded grant from the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program and comply with the terms of that grant. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 057, 2021, Making Supplemental Appropriations of Anticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves for the Epic Homes Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $69,000 in grant funds from Bloomberg Philanthropies as part of the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge award, and $8,024 in interest earned on previous Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge grant funds, from the Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power Fund to be expended for the ongoing project management and operations of Epic Homes Program by Utility Services and to pay a sub-grant to Colorado State University for indoor environmental quality research. The Bloomberg Philanthropies funds come from (1) the 2021 grant installment of $69,000 and (2) $8,024 in interest earned on advanced Bloomberg Philanthropies funds from the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge, as of December 31, 2020. Based on terms of the Bloomberg grant agreement, all advanced grant funds are subject to accruing interest, with such interest earned being reported on a semi-annual basis, and with such earnings used to further project goals as demonstrated in the agreement between Bloomberg and the City. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 058, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue from Philanthropic Donations Received by City Give for Various City Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $42,264 in philanthropic revenue received through the City Give program. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. City of Fort Collins Page 6 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 059, 2021, Further Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Exterior Lighting. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, adopts the Lighting Context Area Map that is part of the Exterior Lighting Code unanimously adopted by Council by Ordinance No. 040, 2021, on March 16, 2021, and to insert effective dates in two places in the Exterior Lighting Code. The map is an integral component of the Exterior Lighting Code but was inadvertently excluded in Council materials during its adoption. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 060, 2021, Amending Ordinance No. 116, 2020, to Extend the Suspension of Certain Provisions of the City's Land Use Code to Permit Temporary Use of Certain Non-Residential Buildings for Child Care Centers in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, extends the end date described in Ordinance No. 116, 2020, which temporarily suspended certain provisions of the Land Use Code (LUC) to permit the temporary use of certain non-residential buildings for child care operations. The temporary suspension is set to end on May 28, 2021. This item would change the end date to August 31, 2021, to allow flexibility for remote summer school and other summer child care needs. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 062, 2021, Approving the Addition of Permitted Uses Associated with the East Park District Maintenance Facility Major Amendment MJA200003. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, considers the Addition of Permitted Uses (APU) for a development plan located in the Urban Estate Zone District. The development plan is for a City of Fort Collins Parks Department maintenance facility comprising a building with office and shop space, an outdoor storage yard, parking, fencing, landscaping, and improvements to adjacent recreation trails. The applicant is the City of Fort Collins Parks Department. The Urban Estate Zone does not list the proposed office/shop and outdoor storage uses as Permitted Uses, and so the development plan is required to include a request for Addition of Permitted Uses pursuant to Land Use Code (LUC) Section 1.3.4. This APU involves a proposed use permitted in one or more of the City’s other zone districts and is proposed based solely on unique circumstances and attributes of the site and site development plan, which may be permitted under LUC Section 1.3.4(B). Pursuant to Ordinance No. 079, 2020, Council authorized the remote hearing of this item in Resolution 2020-093 and the applicant has consented to having this item heard remotely. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 063, 2021, Authorizing the Sale of an 11.4-acre Parcel of Vacant Land Located at Meadow Springs Ranch. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, sells 11.4 acres of vacant City-owned land to Daniel R. Thiel, who has offered to purchase it. The fair market value and negotiated purchase price is $13,680, and the deed contains a restriction prohibiting any advertising signs from being placed on the property. The sale is contingent on approval by Council. The close of escrow is expected to be May 18, 2021. Meadow Springs Ranch is operated by the City’s Utilities department, and it has no current or identified future use for this parcel. They concur that it is in the best interest of the City to eliminate potential maintenance and liability issues that may arise with respect to the property by selling it to Mr. Thiel. City of Fort Collins Page 7 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 065, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Comply with the Terms of the Grant, and Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund to Support Childcare Needs Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The purpose of this item is to accept and appropriate a $32,800 Child Care Relief Grant awarded by the State of Colorado into the Recreation Department’s 2021 budget. The grant funds will help offset the Recreation Department’s financial impacts resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. 14. Items Relating to the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Intersection Improvement Project. A. Resolution 2021–051 Authorizing Execution of the First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Signal Project. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 066, 2021, Making a Supplemental Appropriation for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Intersection Improvements Project. The purpose of this item is to enable the City to receive and expend reimbursement funds from Larimer County for constructing intersection improvements associated with the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Intersection Improvements Project. This item will authorize the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Signal Project dated May 7, 2019 (IGA) with Larimer County. This item will also appropriate $437,376 (to be reimbursed by the County under the IGA) in the Capital Projects Fund for the project. These funds will be used for the construction of a traffic signal and related intersection improvements at the State Highway 1 and Douglas Road intersection. 15. Items Relating to the Gil Boyer Annexation. A. Resolution 2021-052 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Gil Boyer Annexation. B. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 067, 2021, Annexing the Property Known as the Gil Boyer Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this item is to annex a 9,800 square foot residential parcel located in northwest Fort Collins. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on consent, March 16, 2021. The property abuts North Taft Hill Road to the east and is situated 450 feet northwest of the intersection of Laporte Avenue and North Taft Hill Road. The annexation area consists of a single-family home and several accessory buildings. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. 16. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 068, 2021, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Gil Boyer Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Gil Boyer Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zone district, Neighborhood Sign District, and LC1 Lighting Context Area. City of Fort Collins Page 8 17. Resolution 2021-054 Appointing Directors to Fill Vacancies on the Foothills Metropolitan District Board of Directors. The purpose of this item is to appoint three directors to the Foothills Metropolitan District Board of Directors (Board). In December 2020, the Foothills Mall, owned by Walton Foothills Holding VI LLC (Walton), went into foreclosure and a receiver was appointed by the courts to control the property during the pendency of the foreclosure (Receiver). As a result, two representatives of the Receiver became directors on the Board. In late 2020, Walton mistakenly transferred a parcel of real property to the Foothills Metropolitan District (District), in which property these two directors, as well as the Board’s other director, had a contractual interest. It was these directors’ contractual interests in the property that qualified them to serve on the District’s Board. The effect of this conveyance was to disqualify these three directors from serving on the Board resulting in a vacant Board. To remedy this, the property has been reconveyed to Walton, and the District is asking Council to adopt this Resolution to appoint these three past directors to serve again on the Board. State law authorizes Council to make these appointments when a metropolitan district’s board of directors becomes vacant in a situation like this, but it also requires the newly appointed Board to call within six months of its appointment for the nomination of new directors and to hold a special election for these offices. Without these temporary appointments, the District will be hindered from providing its services to the residents and businesses in the District. These appointments are also needed because Walton currently has a contract with McWhinney Enterprises (McWhinney) to sell the Foothills Mall to McWhinney and this sale cannot be completed until the District’s Board is fully operational. END CONSENT CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. STAFF REPORTS COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS Discussion Items The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ● Mayor introduces the item number, and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ● Staff presentation (optional) ● Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (three minute limit for each citizen) ● Council questions of staff on the item ● Council motion on the item ● Council discussion ● Final Council comments ● Council vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure all citizens have an opportunity to speak. If attending in person, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. City of Fort Collins Page 9 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 069, 2021, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins By Changing the Zoning Classification of the Hughes Stadium Annexation Property from the Transition District to Public Open Lands as Required by the Citizen-Initiated Ordinance Passed at the April 6, 2021, Regular Municipal Election. On April 6, 2021, Fort Collins’ voters passed the citizen-initiated ordinance requiring, among other things, that the City rezone the approximately 164.56-acre property that was subject to the Hughes Stadium Annexation from its current Transition District zoning to the Public Open Lands District. The rezoning ordinance is presented for Council adoption on First Reading. 19. Resolution 2021-055 Directing the City Manager to Investigate and Evaluate the Regulation of Areas and Activities of State Interest Pursuant to Powers Established in State Law Commonly Referred to as 1041 Powers. The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution that directs staff to develop a feasibility evaluation and proposal to implement 1041 regulations for areas and activities of state interest. This item is being brought to City Council because a councilmember requested more details on 1041 authority during the April 20, 2021 Council meeting. If Council adopts the Resolution, staff will investigate and evaluate ways in which 1041 powers and 1041 regulations may better allow the City to achieve its policy and regulatory goals and return to Council to report and discuss its findings. CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) B. Consider a motion to adjourn into an executive session to discuss legal issues related to Hughes Stadium annexation property and real property acquisition: “I move that the City Council go into executive session for the purpose of discussing with the City’s attorneys and appropriate management staff: ● specific legal questions related to potential litigation regarding the citizen initiative requiring acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property and the manner in which the particular policies, practices or regulations of the City related to that initiative and acquisition may be affected by existing or proposed provisions of federal, state or local law, pursuant to: o City Charter Article Roman Numeral Two, Section 11(2), o City Code Section 2-31(a)(2) and o Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(b); AND ● real property acquisition and disposition related to the Hughes Stadium property, pursuant to: o City Charter Article Roman Numeral Two, Section 11(3), o City Code Section 2-31(a)(3) and o Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(a).” ADJOURNMENT Every Council meeting will end no later than 10:30 p.m., except that: (1) any item of business commenced before 10:30 p.m. may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the City Council may, by majority vote, extend a meeting until no later than 12:00 a.m. for the purpose of considering additional items of business. Any matter which has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council meeting, and all matters scheduled for consideration at the meeting which have not yet been considered by the Council, will be continued to the next regular Council meeting and will be placed first on the discussion agenda for such meeting. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month became nationally observed from the introduction of Asian/Pacific American Heritage Week to Congress on May 4, 1979, later expanded in 1992 to designate the entire month of May, and finally updated to its current official nomenclature in 2009; and WHEREAS, the AAPI community invites Fort Collins to celebrate its diversity and the triumphs of its AAPI community members through their historically unique journeys and struggles; and WHEREAS, the AAPI community invites Fort Collins to honor their history, an inherently immigrant story-in this generation and previous-of overcoming cultural barriers, language deficiencies, and systemic challenges; and to understand the reality and difficulty of the need to assimilate for survival, which may lead to painful cultural distancing and erasure, and yet still be denied their American identity; and WHEREAS, the City acknowledges the nation’s historical injustices against the AAPI community, such as the People v. Hall in 1854 where Asian witnesses were barred from testifying against a white man convicted of murder; the Page Act of 1875; the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882; the scapegoat of San Francisco’s Bubonic Plague on its Chinatown in 1900; Japanese internment during WWII where nearly 62% were American citizens; the murder of Vincent Chin in 1982 where his murderers were sentenced to just probation and a fine of $3,780; the post-9/11 profiling toward South Asian, Sikh, Muslim, and Arab Americans; and the recent rise in violence, harassment, and hate incidents against those who identify as AAPI, both here in Fort Collins and across the nation; and WHEREAS, despite past and present challenges, the AAPI community thrives in the City of Fort Collins, wielding their work ethic, resiliency, and vibrant cultures; and WHEREAS, the Fort Collins City Council and staff have committed to make Fort Collins a welcoming place for all community members, and to celebrate such members who lead, educate, and invite into the AAPI community, such as CSU’s Asian Pacific American Cultural Center, its director JoAnn Cornell, and its staff. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2021 as ASIAN AMERICAN & PACIFIC ISLANDER HERITAGE MONTH in the City of Fort Collins and encourage all community members to participate in and celebrate the rich cultural tapestry of the AAPI community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 11 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is committed to recognizing that our growth and strength depends on the safety and economic value of the homes, buildings and infrastructure that serve our citizens, both in everyday life and in times of natural disaster, and WHEREAS, our confidence in the structural integrity of buildings that make up our community is achieved through the devotion of vigilant guardians--building safety and fire prevention officials, architects, engineers, builders, tradespeople, design professionals, laborers, plumbers and others in the construction industry--who work year-round to ensure the safe construction of buildings, and WHEREAS, these guardians are dedicated members of the International Code Council, a nonprofit that brings together local, state and federal officials that are experts in the built environment to create and implement the highest -quality codes to protect us in the buildings where we live, learn, work, play, and WHEREAS, our community benefits economically and technologically from using the International Codes that are developed by a national, voluntary consensus codes and standards developing organization, our government is able to avoid the high cost and complexity of develop ing and maintaining these codes, which are the most widely adopted building safety and fire prevention codes in the world; and WHEREAS, “Prevent, Prepare, Protect. Building Codes Save,” the theme for Building Safety Month 2021, encourages all Americans to raise awareness about the importance of safe and resilient construction; fire prevention; disaster mitigation, energy conservation; water safety; training the next generation; and new technologies in the construction industry and WHEREAS, Building Safety Month is sponsored by the International Code Council to remind the public about the critical role of our communities’ largely unknown protectors of public safety--our local code officials--who assure us of safe, efficient, and livable buildings that are essential to the City of Fort Collins prosperity. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2021 as BUILDING SAFETY MONTH in the city of Fort Collins in honor of the men and women whose diligence and professionalism keep the buildings where we live, learn, work and play safe and sustainable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. ______________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 12 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, water is our most valuable natural resource; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins tap water is critical to maintaining public health protection, economic vitality, fire protection, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, for more than 35 years, the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and its members have celebrated Drinking Water Week - a unique opportunity for both water professionals and the communities they serve to join together to recognize the vital role water plays in our daily lives, and WHEREAS, the City works diligently to guarantee that the drinking water leaving the Water Treatment Facility is safe to drink and meets all federal and state standards, and contributes to a successful community through low mortality rates, economic growth and diversity, productivity and public safety; and WHEREAS, we are all stewards of the water infrastructure upon which future generations depend; and WHEREAS, each citizen of Fort Collins is called upon to help protect our source waters from pollution, to practice water conservation, and to get involved in local water issues. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim, May 2-8, 2021, as DRINKING WATER WEEK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 13 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, ongoing research reminds us that our historic buildings and resources are the keystone of the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of our community both present and future; and WHEREAS, places such as our historic Downtown and historic residences representing the full diversity of our community such as the John and Inez Romero House, the William and Mattie Lyle residence, and the Elizabeth Stone cabin, often serve as sources of local economic vitality, inspiration, and courage in the face of community challenges in the past, present, and future; and WHEREAS, it is important to recognize and celebrate Fort Collins’ unique and singular stories of our past, and to preserve the many tangible aspects of our history that have shaped us as a community; and WHEREAS, historic places can remind us of the important role underrepresented and historically marginalized groups have played in Fort Collins history, including women, African Americans, Latinx residents, and LGBTQ individuals; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services is recognized as a leader both regionally and nationally for its innovative and interdisciplinary approach to preservation and support for property owners, occupants, and business owners in our historic buildings. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2021 as FORT COLLINS HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH and call upon the citizens of Fort Collins to join in recognizing and participating in the preservation of our heritage. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 14 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Mental Health Awareness Month has been observed since 1949 to raise awareness of mental health conditions and the importance of mental health; and WHEREAS, 20% of Coloradans live with mental illness - the third-highest in the nation; and WHEREAS, Colorado ranks 43rd out of 50 states with a higher prevalence of mental health issues and lower rates of access to care for adults; and WHEREAS, in 2020 37.6% of Coloradans reported symptoms of anxiety and/or depression; and WHEREAS, Larimer County experiences a suicide every 5 days and it is the second leading cause of youth deaths; and WHEREAS, cost-effective and beneficial mental health systems of care must be expanded to meet the varying levels of care needed by the people being served; and WHEREAS, access to necessary medication, appropriate treatment, and responsive peer support helps prevent individuals from ending up in emergency rooms and jails; and WHEREAS, it costs seven times more to incarcerate someone with mental illness than to treat them in the community; and NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim May 2021 as MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 15 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, a collaboration and partnership was established to highlight and recognize the contributions of the Northern Colorado small business community; and WHEREAS, the following partners share a unified message to continue to invest in and support small businesses: Berthoud Chamber of Commerce, City of Fort Collins - Economic Health, City of Loveland - Economic Development, Estes Chamber of Commerce, Estes Park Economic Development Corporation, Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce, Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority, Fort Collins Startup Week, Larimer County Economic and Workforce Development, Larimer Small Business Development Center, Loveland Business Development Center, Loveland Chamber of Commerce, Loveland Downtown District, Midtown Business Improvement District, Midtown Fort Collins Business Association, North Fort Collins Business Association, Poudre River Public Library District, Town of Berthoud, Visit Fort Collins, Wellington Colorado Main Street Program; and WHEREAS, small businesses add to the unique vibrancy of the Northern Colorado community and these partners acknowledge the efforts made by small businesses each day; and WHEREAS, business owners and staff are ingrained in and support the local community. They continue to welcome, serve, and showcase a variety of shopping, dining, personal and professional services; and WHEREAS, Small Business Week is part of the Downtown Development Authority’s efforts to recognize the importance of the small business community and the economic impact they make to Northern Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Downtown Development Authority would like to extend an invitation to celebrate the small businesses and NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the week of May 2-8, 2021 as SMALL BUSINESS WEEK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 16 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the March 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the March 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the March 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the March 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. March 16, 2021 (PDF) 2. March 23, 2021 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 17 City of Fort Collins Page 386 March 16, 2021 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting – 6:00 PM (Secretary's Note: Due to the COVID-19 crisis and state and local orders to remain safer at home and not gather, all Councilmembers, staff, and citizens attended the meeting remotely, via teleconference.) ROLL CALL PRESENT: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff STAFF: Atteberry, Daggett, Coldiron AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City Manager Atteberry stated Item No. 15, Resolution 2021-031 Approving and Adopting the Our Climate Future Plan, has been moved from the Consent to the Discussion Agenda. Item No. 16, Resolution 2021-032 Authorizing the City Manager to Sign a Master License Agreement with Crown Castle USA, Inc. for Small Wireless Communication Equipment Attachments on City Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way, has been withdrawn from consideration due to ongoing negotiations. Additionally, a staff report from Larry Schneider, Streets Superintendent, has been added. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Troxell outlined the public participation options. Jerry Gavaldon commended City Manager Atteberry on his work and sincere service for the City. Eric Sutherland stated the citizens of Fort Collins were provided a business plan for Connexion that showed it could cash flow its debt and stated the current available data could not be construed to conclude there is any way for the entity to pay operations and interest on the debt right now. He commented on the secrecy surrounding the project to date. PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP Mayor Troxell summarized the citizen comments and noted Connexion is still in its build-out phase and the monthly update includes accurate information on the progress of the project. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated he does believe Connexion is going to get to a fiscally sustainable point and stated it is time to start creating the final path to providing full transparency on take rates and revenues. CONSENT CALENDAR Rich Stave withdrew Item Nos. 10, Items Relating to Amending City Code Provisions Concerning the City’s Self-Insurance Program and Fund, and Amending Related Code Provisions Concerning the City’s Obligations to Defend and Indemnify its Employees, and 11, First Reading of Ordinance 1.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 387 No. 045, 2021, Amending Section 23-354 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Disposition of Land Bank Property, from the Consent Agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gutowsky, to adopt and approve Item Nos. 1-9, 12-14, and 18-19 on the Consent Agenda. RESULT: CONSENT CALENDAR ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff (Secretary's Note: Item No. 17 was inadvertently left off the motion to adopt the Consent Agenda, thereby necessitating the following motion.) Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, to adopt Resolution 2021-033. The motion was adopted unanimously. RESULT: RESOLUTION 2021-033 ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the February 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the February 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the February 16, 2021 Regular meeting and the February 23, 2021 Adjourned meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 035, 2021, Reappropriating Funds Previously Appropriated in 2020 But Not expended and Not Encumbered in 2020. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, adopts to reappropriate monies in 2021 that were previously authorized by Council for expenditures in 2020 for various purposes. The authorized expenditures were not spent or could not be encumbered in 2020 because: There was not sufficient time to complete bidding in 2020 and therefore, there was no known vendor or binding contract as required to expend or encumber the monies; or The project for which the dollars were originally appropriated by Council could not be completed during 2020 and reappropriation of those dollars is necessary for completion of the project in 2021. Additionally, there may have been sufficient unspent dollars previously appropriated in 2020 to carry on programs, services, and facility improvements in 2021 for those specific purposes. In the above circumstances, the unexpended and/or unencumbered monies lapsed into individual fund balances at the end of 2020 and reflect no change in Council policies. 1.1 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 388 Monies reappropriated for each City fund by this Ordinance are as follows: 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 036, 2021, Making a Supplemental Appropriation for Grants to Fort Collins Utilities Commercial Water Customers for Water Conservation Landscape Transformation Projects. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, appropriates unanticipated grant revenue in the amount of $70,000 awarded by the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation ("Reclamation") to the Fort Collins Utilities Water Conservation Division ("Water Conservation"). The funds will support commercial-scale waterwise landscape transformations through the Xeriscape Incentive Program (also known as "XIP"). Eligible participants of the program include but are not limited to homeowners' associations ("HOAs"), businesses, religious organizations, government entities, schools, and other Fort Collins Utilities commercial water customers. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 037, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Making Supplemental Appropriations for the Utilities Locating Department. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, is to provide supplemental resources in the 2021 budget for the Utilities Locating Department. Utilities has a regulatory obligation to fulfill underground facility locating requests within 48 hours of notification and the current volume of locating requests exceeds the normal capacity of Department resources. This appropriation will provide additional resources to contract for third party services to meet locating request obligations in 2021. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 038, 2021, Establishing Rental Rates and Delivery Charges for Use of Water Available Under Fort Collins Utilities' Raw Water Interests for 2021 Through March 2024. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, to obtain Council approval for the proposed formulas for calculating rental rates and delivery charges for Fort Collins Utilities’ (Utilities) raw water supplies for approximately three years, which includes proposed rental rates and delivery charges for fully consumable water. The rates and charges would be effective through March 2024, to address the gap between the end of 2023 and Council approval of new rates and charges in early 2024. Setting the rates and charges via formula ensures Utilities will recoup its costs for rented water while increasing the planning certainty for the water rental community. Staff is recommending an increase in the rental rate for fully consumable water. This increase will only impact customers of our year-to-year leasing program. The increase reflects the cost of administering these rentals and is in line with market conditions for this type of water. This is the only significant change to the rental rates and delivery charges. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 039, 2021, Making Supplemental Appropriations and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves for the South Timberline Road Improvements Project - Stetson Creek Road to Trilby Road and Related Art in Public Places. (Adopted) General Fund $912,543 Keep Fort Collins Great Fund 226,690 Cultural Services Fund 55,000 Wastewater Fund 35,000 Total $1,229,233 1.1 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 389 This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, enables the City to receive and use federal Surface Transportation Block Grant funds for the South Timberline Improvement Project - Stetson Creek to Trilby (the “Project”), to appropriate those funds and Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (“TCEF”) Fund reserves to fully fund the Project, and to appropriate Transportation Services Fund reserves to satisfy the City’s Art in Public Places program contribution requirements. This will authorize the Mayor to sign an intergovernmental agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) to receive and use the federal grant funds and will appropriate $4,556,542 into the Capital Projects Fund for the Project. These funds will be used for the construction of roadway improvements along Timberline Road from Stetson Creek Drive to Trilby Road. Finally, a transfer of $18,435 from the Project to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund will be made for the required Art in Public Places program contribution. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 040, 2021, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Exterior Lighting. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021, approves changes to the exterior lighting standards in the City Land Use Code for new commercial and multi-family development projects. The goals of the update are to ensure adequate light levels for safety and commerce; update technical criteria to align with current industry metrics; better control the various aspects of light pollution (overlighting, glare, light trespass); and require contextually appropriate lighting plans that result in lower lighting in areas with lower nighttime activity (Natural Areas and residential areas), and higher lighting levels in areas with higher nighttime activity (Downtown and commercial corridors). 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 041, 2021, Appropriating Unanticipated Philanthropic Revenue Received by City Give for Transfer to Natural Areas for Restoration of Bobcat Ridge. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to appropriate $75,000 in philanthropic revenue in the General Fund through City Give for transfer to Natural Areas to support fire recovery and ecological restoration efforts at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area as designated by the donor, the D.R. & V. Pulliam Charitable Trust. 9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 042, 2021, Authorizing the Issuance of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado Tax-Exempt Economic Development Revenue Bond (The Residence At Oakridge Project), Series 2021A and Taxable Economic Development Revenue Bond (The Residence At Oakridge Project), Series 2021B to Refund the City of Fort Collins, Colorado Variable Rate Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series 2001A (The Residence At Oakridge Project); and Authorizing the Execution and Delivery by the City of a Financing Agreement, Bonds, and Other Documents in Connection Therewith. (Adopted) In 2001, the City issued its City of Fort Collins, Colorado Variable Rate Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series 2001A (The Residence at Oakridge Project), in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,555,000 (the “2001A Bonds”). The 2001A Bonds financed a portion of the costs of a 68- bed assisted living facility in the Oakridge Business Park (the “Project”). The proceeds of the 2001A Bonds were loaned by the City to The Residence @ Oakridge, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the “Borrower”) which owns the Project. The Borrower has requested that the City issue its Tax- Exempt Economic Development Revenue Bond (The Residence At Oakridge Project), Series 2021A and Taxable Economic Development Revenue Bond (The Residence At Oakridge Project), Series 2021B (collectively, the “2021 Bonds”) to refund the 2001A Bonds to take advantage of current low interest rates. The Borrower has solicited proposals from various financial institutions and has determined that First American State Bank (the “Lender”) will provide the lowest interest rate and most 1.1 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 390 favorable terms to the Borrower. This Ordinance will authorize the issuance of an amount not to exceed $2,415,000 of economic development revenue bonds for the Project. Economic development revenue bonds may be issued by the City pursuant to the County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond Act (the “Act”), constituting §§ 29-3-101 through 29-3-123 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S), for private activity purposes, such as the Project. These 2021 Bonds are not a financial obligation of the City and will be repaid solely by payments from the Borrower. The issuance of the 2021 Bonds does not require the use of any of the City’s private activity bond allocation from the State. And, there is no fiscal impact on the City in connection with the issuance of the 2021 Bonds and the Borrower will pay all of the City’s costs and attorney fees for the refunding either from proceeds of the 2021 Bonds or its own resources. 10. Items Related to Post-Fire Watershed Restoration Treatments and Operational Costs Associated with Treating Fire-Impacted Water Supplies. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to consider the second reading of an appropriation of funds for the unanticipated needs of post-fire watershed restoration treatments and operational costs associated with treating water supplies impacted by the 2020 Cameron Peak wildfire. Additionally, Staff will also provide a resolution for an Intergovernmental Agreement for cost-sharing with partnering public water providers to address the needed post-fire watershed restoration treatments This AIS summarizes the current and anticipated impacts from the 2020 Cameron Peak wildfire on water quality, water treatment and water supply planning, and expected funding needs for post-fire watershed restoration and to support water treatment operations in 2021. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 048, 2021, Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to make amendments to the Land Use Code (“LUC”) to: (1) clarify the appeal process to the Planning and Zoning Board for minor amendments, changes of use, and basic development review; and (2) allow one additional kitchen within a dwelling unit. These changes were separated out from the annual update in December of 2020 to provide greater public input and refinement of the proposed Code. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 047, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Light and Power Fund for Electric Utilities Customer Payment Assistance. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to consider appropriation of a “one-time cash distribution” of $468,941 from Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) to be used for utility delinquencies through the Utilities Payment Assistance Program for electric and telecommunication utility customers economically affected by COVID-19 and to address the impact on rates that significant past-due and uncollectible balances may have on all electric and other utility ratepayers. The funds were deposited into the Light & Power Enterprise Fund in December 2020, and may only be used for that utility’s operations, maintenance, repair, replacement, or betterment or for another “specific utility purpose determined by Council to [benefit the utility’s ratepayers]”. 1.1 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 391 13. Resolution 2021-033 Approving Fort Fund Grant Disbursements. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to approve Fort Fund grants from the Cultural Development and Programming Account and the Tourism Programming Account for the selected community events in the Project Support II category, based upon the recommendations of the Cultural Resources Board. 14. Resolution 2021-034 Renaming a Portion of Brightwater Drive to Windward Way. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to rename a portion of Brightwater Drive that was originally named on the Water’s Edge plat to Windward Way. The new street name will aid in wayfinding for emergency services by allowing a proper sequence of assigned addresses. 15. Resolution 2021-035 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Gil Boyer Annexation. (Adopted) This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. The purpose of this item is to initiate annexation proceedings for the Gil Boyer Annexation. This is a voluntary annexation initiated by the property owner. The property contained within the annexation area is approximately 9,800 square feet and is located at 241 North Taft Hill Road, approximately 475 feet northwest of the intersection of Laporte Ave and North Taft Hill Road. The proposed zoning for this annexation is Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (L-M-N). The proposed Resolution makes a finding that the annexation petition substantially complies with the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, determines that a hearing should be established regarding the annexation, and directs notice be given of the hearing. The hearing will be held at the time of First Reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances, and notice will be published and distributed as required by State law. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated Item No. 13, First Reading of Ordinance No. 047, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Light and Power Fund for Electric Utilities Customer Payment Assistance, currently allows for using the PRPA money for payment of delinquent Connexion bills and he stated his preference would be for that to be solely focused on electric utility bills. He requested staff provide some options to ensure that intent is clear. STAFF REPORTS A. Staff Report: Utility Bill Delinquencies (staff: Lisa Rosintoski, Lance Smith, Gretchen Stanford, Lori Clements) Lisa Rosintoski, Customer Connections Deputy Director, stated staff is recommending resuming utility disconnects on May 3rd. She noted all utility disconnects have been on hold due to the pandemic and she outlined the communication efforts provided to delinquent customers. She outlined the various funding assistance and payment arrangement options for customers. She 1.1 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 392 discussed the magnitude of the trajectory and impact of uncollected revenues noting many area municipalities have resumed disconnects. Mayor Troxell commented on the benefits of the funding provided by Platte River Power Authority. Councilmember Pignataro noted there are about 2,700 households eligible for disconnects and asked how many of the delinquent accounts may be related to renters moving out or other communication issues. Rosintoski replied about 5% of accounts typically fall into that category. She noted customers are given a seven-day notice prior to disconnection and provided details about the process staff uses to reinstate service. Councilmember Gorgol asked about the response rate from the last round of disconnect letters. Rosintoski replied about 60% of those customers got in touch to arrange for assistance or payments and service was subsequently not disconnected. She noted those with current eligible disconnects have received the second notice but have not yet received the seven-day notice, after which approximately 60% typically respond. Councilmember Gorgol asked what percentage of the uncollected revenue is on a payment plan and how staff reaches out to the 40% of people who do not respond to the seven-day notice. Rosintoski replied staff has done a call tree to those residents in the past and could do so again. Councilmember Gutowsky asked if reconnect fees are waived. Rosintoski replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Gutowsky asked what occurs if individuals default on payment plans. Rosintoski replied staff will continue to work with individuals on delinquency. Councilmember Gutowsky asked if there is ever a tipping point at which the number of delinquent accounts exceed the revenue needed to function. Rosintoski stated staff is trying to be very judicious in working with customers who are eligible for disconnect given the average of uncollected revenue is $300,000-$600,000 per year and the current amount is $1.8 million. B. Staff Report: Winter Storm Update (staff: Larry Schneider) Larry Schneider, Streets Superintendent, discussed the recent storm during which the city received 20-25 inches of snow, ranking it as one of the top four storms in the city’s history. He discussed the challenges of removing that much moist snow and detailed the snow removal process throughout the city. He discussed the challenges with downed tree branches as well. Kendra Boot, City Forester, stated a preliminary assessment of downed branches around arterial and collector streets has occurred. She noted it remains difficult to access residential areas to 1.1 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 393 assess them. She noted the urban forest storm response plan will help to categorize clean-up efforts moving forward. City Manager Atteberry commended the work of city staff during the storm and noted the clean- up effort will likely cost over $1 million. Mayor Troxell commended the work of staff and requested citizens remain patient as snow and branch removal occurs. He also commended the decision made long ago to underground Fort Collins' electric system. Councilmember Potyondy commended the snow clearing work and stated she had a constituent specifically commend the work to clear in front of driveways. Councilmember Gutowsky commended the snow removal work and commented on snow clearing work and asked why certain streets in neighborhoods were not cleared while others were. Schneider replied entire neighborhoods should be cleared at once but may be interrupted due to equipment issues. Councilmember Pignataro commended the snow removal work. She mentioned the website that tracks the snowplows. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff commended the heroic effort around snow clearing and noted some of the windrows that are blocking driveways may have been created by a well-intended citizen who plowed the roadway. He suggested the City may try to address those areas as well. City Manager Atteberry thanked Council for providing higher-level policy support. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Mayor Troxell reported on the recent design charette for the new terminal building at the Northern Colorado Regional Airport. He noted a large part of the funding for that building is from the CARES Act. Councilmember Gutowsky reported on the ribbon cutting for the Northern Colorado Police Training Center. Councilmember Potyondy reported on a joint listening session she hosted with Councilmember Gorgol on affordable and attainable housing. 1.1 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 394 DISCUSSION ITEMS 16. 738 Campfire Drive Extra Occupancy Appeal. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to consider an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision, on December 18, 2020, approving the 738 Campfire Drive Extra Occupancy Rental House #FDP 200018 to permit not more than 4 occupants. A Notice of Appeal was filed on January 4, 2021 alleging the Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.2.2(C)(4)(b) regarding the number and type of required bicycle parking spaces. The Appellant alleges the Hearing Officer’s Decision approving the project did not meet the number of bicycle parking spaces required by the LUC and that the type of bicycle parking spaces approved do not meet the LUC definition of fixed bicycle parking spaces. Mayor Troxell outlined the quasi-judicial nature of this item and his determination that remote participation by Councilmembers remains to be allowed. City Attorney Daggett outlined the appeal process. Paul Sizemore, Interim Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, provided the staff overview related to the appeal of an administrative hearing officer decision to approve an extra occupancy rental house, allowing up to four unrelated adult occupants, at 738 Campfire Drive, which is located in the Trailhead neighborhood. He stated the appeal specifically deals with the number and types of bicycle parking spaces proposed as part of the project; the site plan proposes three fixed bicycle parking spaces and a dedicated space inside the garage. Sizemore stated the single allegation in the appeal is that the hearing officer failed to properly interpret and apply Land Use Code Section 3.2.2(C)(4)(b) and that the proposed extra occupancy rental house does not provide an adequate number of fixed bicycle parking spaces, and that the proposed bicycle parking does not meet the definition for fixed bicycle parking. Sizemore outlined the Land Use Code bicycle parking requirements and noted the Code was changed in January to make the per-bed bicycle parking requirement a per-occupant requirement; however, that was done after this application and therefore does not technically apply. The hearing officer did ask about this issue at the hearing; however, it was determined the bicycle parking requirement was met since the number provided matches the number of beds, which was the Code requirement in place at the time. Sizemore noted staff has been in touch with the applicant since the Code change and the applicant has agreed to provide four spaces consistent with the updated Code language based on the number of occupants. Sizemore stated the other aspect of the allegation relates to the nature of the parking spaces provided, and that is not affected by the January Code change. He discussed the proposed bicycle parking in the garage and stated the appellant contends the wording of the Code establishes a clear expectation for what fixed bike rack parking should include and that the proposed interior wall- mounted bike parking does not meet that expectation. He outlined the role of the Council in this appeal. 1.1 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 395 Mayor Troxell noted a site visit had been scheduled for March 15th; however, it was cancelled due to the inclement weather. He asked if any Councilmember had an objection to proceeding without having a site visit and no objections were made. Joseph Brown, appellant, identified himself. Rosemary Beauvais identified herself as a party-of-interest and stated allowing this extra occupancy would be disruptive. Mayor Troxell noted the bike parking is the subject of the appeal. Noel Rodriguez (no last name given) identified himself as the tenant at 738 Campfire Drive and an opponent to the appeal. Stephanie Golden identified herself as a party-of-interest opposing the appeal. Jonathon Huynh identified himself as the owner of 738 Campfire Drive and an opponent to the appeal. Mayor Troxell outlined the time allotments for the presentations and rebuttals. Mr. Brown stated the essential argument of his appeal is that the hearing officer misinterpreted the Land Use Code related to the required number of bicycle parking spaces and location of the bike rack. He also expressed concern the granting of an extra occupancy permit is permanent. He stated the garage bicycle parking does not allow room for vehicle parking and commented on the impermanence of the proposed bicycle parking hooks. He stated neighbors have overwhelmingly opposed the extra occupancy permit. Mr. Huynh stated he thought he had met all requirements after the hearing officer approval and noted he has since added a fourth bike hook. Mr. Rodriguez discussed the history of the process to get the extra occupancy permit and noted the house remains three bedrooms with four occupants as he and his partner share a bedroom. He discussed the bike hook parking solution and outlined his efforts to meet all requirements. Mr. Brown stated this neighborhood is not opposed to renters nor these tenants; however, he expressed concern that this is a permanent change and stated it seems this property is being shoehorned into a successful request. He requested a reconsideration of this application to meet Code requirements. He stated Mr. Huynh is an investor owner and must follow the law and applicable requirements. Mr. Huynh stated he has attempted to make everything right and follow all applicable regulations. 1.1 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 396 Mr. Rodriguez stated the appeal is not about the permanence of the permit, but about the bike parking and stated the hooks were installed because that is what was necessary to meet requirements. Mayor Troxell reviewed the appeal allegations and stated Council needs to consider whether the plain language of the Land Use Code provision 3.2.2(C)(4) is clear and unambiguous in the requirement of the number of required bicycle parking spaces and whether the provided bicycle parking in the garage meets the minimum land use requirements when reading the definitions of fixed and enclosed bicycle parking. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated his reading of the Code is that the length of the spaces should be 5.5 feet and questioned whether staff is advising that something that is significantly less than that is compliant with the Code. Will Lindsay, Associate City Planner, replied staff considered the 5.5 feet x 2.5 feet to be the footprint of the bicycle parking apparatus, which is essentially wall- mounted in this instance, in considering the dimensional standard requirement for a fixed bicycle parking facility. He stated staff found the proposal met the maneuverability requirement for a fixed bicycle facility as well. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff expressed concern length is not being interpreted as a horizontal dimension in this case and questioned why this is deemed acceptable given a significant fraction of the population would not be physically able to lift a bicycle up on to a wall. Lindsay replied staff did not take that into consideration for this request but was considering the perspective of providing enclosed bike parking, which is considered superior to fixed bike parking and makes no mention of how the bikes must be stored. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff asked if the current version of the Code which allows extra occupancy units to provide a minimum of 0% enclosed but 100% fixed bicycle parking applied to this project. Lindsay replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Pignataro asked if the extra occupancy bicycle parking regulations were written when the occupancy ordinance went into effect. Lindsay replied he would need to research that. Councilmember Pignataro asked to whom an extra occupancy permit is granted. Lindsay replied extra occupancy is currently a use applied to the property itself and is not attached to an owner or occupant. Councilmember Pignataro asked if there are bike trails in this part of town. Mr. Brown replied there are bike lanes down Vine and Timberline and the trails exist after the Mulberry crossing. Councilmember Gutowsky asked if this property owner was granted a waiver to not provide an outdoor metal bike rack. Lindsay replied in the negative and stated staff’s interpretation related to the fixed bicycle parking requirement being a minimum requirement with the provided enclosed bicycle parking in the garage being an enhancement. 1.1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 397 Councilmember Gutowsky asked if adult sized bikes fit on the hooks. Mr. Rodriguez replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Gutowsky asked if there is a limit on the number of homes that can apply for extra occupancy permits in the neighborhood. Lindsay replied, in the LMN zone district, it is a permitted use subject to a type I administrative review, and there is a limit of 25% of dwellings on a block face that can be approved for that use in this zone district. Councilmember Gutowsky asked how this residence would be treated if the fourth resident needed a fourth bedroom. Lindsay replied it would be subject to a minor amendment and the site plan would need to be adjusted to ensure the fourth bedroom was meeting all requirements. Councilmember Gutowsky asked if this permit requires this home to always be a rental. Lindsay replied in the negative. Councilmember Summers asked if the Code requires homeowners to also meet bicycle parking requirements. Lindsay replied in the negative stating there is no bicycle parking requirement for a single-family homeowner. He noted this requirement only applies to a property seeking an extra occupancy approval for which there is a minimum bicycle parking requirement. City Attorney Daggett noted there is a general provision in the Land Use Code related to bicycle parking that applies to a variety of different approvals. Councilmember Summers asked if the bicycle parking is required regardless of whether tenants have bicycles. Lindsay replied in the affirmative. He reiterated there is no requirement for, nor prohibition of, providing parking in a garage in the case of extra occupancy permits. Councilmember Potyondy asked if tenants in these situations are expected to flex with Code changes or if they are grandfathered into requirements in place at the time an extra occupancy permit was issued. Lindsay replied the latter is the case. Councilmember Potyondy stated indoor bicycle parking provides both security for the bicycles and improved aesthetics for neighbors. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff asked if the Code states enclosed bicycle parking is superior to fixed. Lindsay replied that has been the practice of staff; however, that specific wording is not codified. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff asked if this project would have been compliant with the Code if three outdoor bicycle parking spaces were provided. Lindsay replied in the affirmative. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff asked if there are requirements related to the visibility of fixed bicycle parking from the right-of-way. Lindsay replied in the negative and stated the main consideration outside of the required dimensional standards has been to keep bicycle parking outside of easements. 1.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 398 Mayor Troxell commented on the advent of bicycle parking requirements and on the merits of this particular situation. He noted the garage is unfinished and questioned whether that aspect is related to the durability and permanence of the solution. Lindsay replied staff did consider that and determined mounting the hooks into studs provided enough permanency without being detrimental to the structure itself. Mayor Troxell asked if there was any input received from the new FC Moves Manager on this topic. Sizemore replied he spoke with the Interim FC Moves Manager who concurred with staff’s implementation of the distinction between fixed and enclosed bike parking. Mayor Troxell stated there may need to be more consideration of durability in the future. Councilmember Potyondy agreed the bike hooks can be removed; however, she noted those hooks are specifically designed for hanging bikes long term. Lindsay replied that is his understanding of what was installed. Mr. Rodriguez confirmed that is what is in place. Councilmember Gutowsky stated Mr. Brown is asking that the Code be applied as written rather than interpreted by staff on a case-by-case basis and she could understand that frustration. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff noted fixed bicycle parking allows the frame and both wheels to be locked to the structure and these hooks do not have that feature. Mayor Troxell noted the parking is secured through another means by being indoors. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated he would be more comfortable with a permanent floor-mounted rack that would allow three bicycles to be stored parallel to the vehicles and locked, or three outdoor spaces that meet the fixed bicycle parking definition. Councilmember Summers asked about the relationship of the occupants of the house. Mr. Rodriguez replied the tenants all know each other and applied together to rent the property. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff noted this permit applies to the property, not to this owner or these specific tenants. Mayor Troxell asked if the hearing officer properly interpreted and applied the Land Use Code Section 3.2.2(C)(4) regarding the number of bicycle parking spaces required in connection with the extra occupancy of this rental house by four individuals. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff replied in the affirmative noting there are three clearly defined bedrooms in the home. Councilmember Gorgol agreed and noted the per-bedroom requirement was in place at the time of this application. 1.1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 399 Councilmember Pignataro commended the January Code change to a per-occupant requirement and stated this appeal has highlighted some additional issues that may need to be addressed. She agreed the hearing officer properly interpreted the Code. Mayor Troxell noted the question now becomes whether the hearing officer properly interpreted and applied Land Use Code Section 3.2.2(C)(4) regarding the type of bicycle parking spaces required in connection with the extra occupancy of this rental house by four individuals. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff replied in the negative stating the bicycle hooks are not a permanent structure and do not provide the ability to lock bicycles. Additionally, he stated their dimensions do not meet Land Use Code definitions. Councilmember Summers stated applying the requirements intended for outdoor bicycle parking to an indoor situation does not make sense and he agreed with the decision of the hearing officer. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff clarified he is not suggesting a requirement for an exterior bike rack inside the garage; however, other alternatives do exist. Councilmember Pignataro agreed with the staff interpretation of the Code. Councilmember Gorgol agreed with the staff interpretation of the Code and noted that, while the Code is prescriptive, there must be some room for flexibility. She stated this solution provides secure, adequate bicycle parking. Councilmember Gutowksy stated this may be a situation in which the Code needs to be revisited; however, she would support the staff interpretation. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Potyondy, that Council uphold the hearing officer’s decision granting the extra occupancy request for 738 Campfire Drive and find that the hearing officer properly interpreted and applied the Land Use Code, and further moved, that based on the evidence in the record and presented at this hearing that the appeal is without merit and is hereby denied in its entirety. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gutowsky, to amend the motion to modify the hearing officer’s decision to require the indoor bicycle parking to be modified to include three floor-mounted permanent fixtures that provide a space compatible with the Land Use Code dimensions and access for bicycle parking. Councilmember Gorgol noted indoor bicycle parking requirements do not reference permanent fixtures and asked why Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff would like that stipulation. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff replied the Land Use Code requires a minimum of 100% fixed parking for extra occupancy rentals. 1.1 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 400 Councilmember Pignataro stated she would not support the amendment as it is an exercise in attempting to meet a part of the Code she sees as being interpretable. Councilmember Gutowsky noted there may be a time wherein future tenants may want to secure a bicycle by locking it. Councilmember Gorgol stated she would not support the amendment as the applicants have already met their requirements. The vote on the motion to amend was as follows: Yeas: Cunniff and Gutowsky. Nays: Troxell, Pignataro, Summers, Gorgol, and Potyondy. THE MOTION FAILED. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated he would not support the main motion as it does not meet the Land Use Code requirement of 100% fixed bicycle parking. Mayor Troxell stated he would support the motion but noted there has been value in this conversation. City Attorney clarified the language of the motion. The vote on the main motion was as follows: Yeas: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy and Troxell. Nays: Gutowsky and Cunniff. (Secretary’s Note: Councilmember Summers was absent for this vote.) (Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) RESULT: ADOPTED [4 TO 2] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Melanie Potyondy, District 4 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Troxell NAYS: Gutowsky, Cunniff AWAY: Summers 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 027, 2021, Approving and Appropriating an Off-Cycle Funding Request Contingent on the Outcome of the April 6, 2021, Election, to Support Initial Implementation of Ordinance No. 026, 2021, Establishing Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags. (Adopted on Second Reading) This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on March 2, 2021 by a vote of 6-1 (Nay: Summers), provides $87,500 in funding to support the initial 2021 roll-out of the Disposable Bag Ordinance and the Waste Reduction Program, including outreach and engagement and making free bags available to the community. 1.1 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 401 Rich Stave stated this is well-intentioned but questioned whether the approach is the best and is in the best interest of citizens. Councilmember Pignataro requested staff input regarding Mr. Stave’s comments. Molly Saylor, Environmental Sustainability Senior Specialist, replied the $0.12 fee was based on a fee study conducted to look at the cost of this program. The neutral split between the City and the grocers allows for additional exploration of actual costs to grocers and grocers are required to create a plan for how to use the fee revenue with the City. Victoria Shaw, Sustainability Services Senior Financial Analyst, replied the City will retain $0.06 of each bag fee and revenues will be less than $800,000 per year at their peak with expected related costs to the City ranging from $800,000 to $1.4 million per year. Councilmember Summers noted there is no pro forma showing those revenues or costs. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gutowsky, to adopt Ordinance No. 027, 2021, on Second Reading. Councilmember Summers stated he would not support the motion given the timing and the amount of the request. Mayor Troxell asked how this issue would be reconciled with state regulations should they pass the legislature. Tyler Marr, IES Deputy Director, replied he is not prepared to speak wholly to that legislation; however, the bill currently contains language allowing municipalities to exceed the state regulations. He stated he would follow-up with additional details. Councilmember Pignataro noted adjustments could be made as this ordinance would place the City ahead of the game. Councilmember Summers stated the City’s regulations would not be compatible with the state law if it goes forward as proposed as the state law would be more restrictive; therefore, some type of reconciliation will be required should it pass. Judy Schmidt, City Attorney’s Office, stated the current language allows municipalities to charge more than $0.10 and enact an ordinance that is as stringent or more stringent than the state law. She noted several aspects of the bill remain unclear and it may or may not pass in its current form. She also noted the bill would remove the statewide preemption in 2023. Councilmember Summers asked why the preemption would need to be removed if it does not apply to home-rule cities. Schmidt replied it preempts some local government action; however, it is not clear that it preempts home-rule municipalities. Mayor Troxell stated he would support the motion but hopes the ballot measure does not pass. 1.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 402 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 027, 2021 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING [6 TO 1] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Troxell, Cunniff NAYS: Summers 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 049, 2021, Repealing and Reenacting Chapter 2, Article III of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Boards and Commissions. (Adopted on First Reading) The purpose of this item is to update Chapter 2, Article III of the City Code based on the Council priority to Reimagine Boards and Commissions. These Code changes are intended to reduce barriers to participation, increase consistency and clarity, and avoid redundancy. Elizabeth Blythe, Senior Public Engagement Specialist, stated these changes are a result of Council’s 2019 adopted priority to enhance advisory committees to ensure value for both Boardmembers and Councilmembers so that Council receives timely and useful advice from diverse perspectives. She outlined the process that has led to these changes and discussed the goals of reducing barriers to participation on Boards and Commissions and improving efficiency and consistency in the Code and Boards and Commissions program. Blythe detailed the proposed changes included in the Ordinance. Rich Stave agreed some restructuring around Boards and Commissions is needed. He questioned the definition of joint meetings and asked if remote participation is an option. He also stated 24- hour meeting notice is too short and questioned why recordings of Boards and Commissions meetings are not available. Eric Sutherland stated it does not appear the current Boards and Commissions have any impact on the policies of the City of Fort Collins. Mayor Troxell stated the Boards and Commissions play an important role in advising Council and there are frequently more qualified individuals who have applied for Boards than Council is able to appoint. He thanked Blythe for her work on keeping this item before the current Council. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff noted joint meetings have a specific definition and notice requirements and are all open to the public. City Attorney Daggett concurred and noted the 24-hour notice requirement is currently in the Code and is consistent with state law. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, to adopt Ordinance No. 049, 2021. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff commended the changes and stated the flexibility should help encourage a more diverse set of applicants. Councilmember Potyondy commended the changes. 1.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 403 Councilmember Gutowsky thanked Blythe for her work and interview coordination. Councilmember Gorgol stated she would support the motion but stated she remains curious to see if the changes will result in a better structure and more participation. She requested a follow-up in a year to see if the desired outcomes are occurring. Councilmember Summers stated there are some items he would still like to see addressed but commended the changes to this point. RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 049, 2021 ADOPTED ON FIRST READING [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Emily Gorgol, District 6 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff 19. Resolution 2021-031 Approving and Adopting the Our Climate Future Plan. (Adopted as Amended) The Our Climate Future Plan has been revised to consistently and accurately represent community quotes associated with each Big Move and associated with Plan Ambassador and Community Partner features. Several small typos and grammatical errors were also addressed with this revision. The purpose of this item is consideration of a resolution adopting the Our Climate Future Plan, which describes thirteen Big Moves and a flexible portfolio of related Next Moves, a two-year community review and calibration cycle and updated energy and waste goals. The Our Climate Future Plan presents implementation strategies to simultaneously address climate, waste and energy goals and improve our community equity and resilience outcomes. The Plan articulates an unwavering commitment to mitigating climate change with a systems-approach, centering solutions in people and community priorities, and implementing the Big Moves in an evergreen review cycle. Molly Saylor, Environmental Sustainability Senior Specialist, stated the Our Climate Future plan will rely on the entire community. She discussed the primary outcomes affected by the plan and noted the work touches every strategic outcome area. She noted the Our Climate Future plan has been the joint update to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste plan. She stated Council’s adoption of Our Climate Future means adopting the implementation structure and process as well as revised waste and energy goals. John Phelan, Senior Energy Services Manager, stated Our Climate Future demonstrates a systematic approach to intensify the community efforts aimed at achieving three primary environmental goals. Rich Stave commented on the cost of the plan to this point and mentioned increasing electric rates. He stated there are things the average citizen is going to have to give up for the plan to work. Emily Gallishote supported the two recommended changes to Our Climate Future: specifically, 1.1 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 404 reviewing the climate goals and milestones in 2022 rather than waiting until 2024, and naming Broadcom specifically as the sole IPPU contributor in town. Eric Sutherland commented on the previously made commitments of taxpayer dollars and stated Fort Collins should be further along in these efforts given those investments. He touted the benefits of simpler projects over planning. Councilmember Potyondy commended the work on the plan and asked about any future plans for composting. Saylor replied getting organic waste out of the waste stream is a critical path item and will be worked toward through the regional waste shed. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff thanked staff for the changes made based on the work session feedback and outlined suggested changes provided by the Fort Collins Sustainability Group. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, to adopt Resolution 2021-031, as amended to include suggested wording changes. Councilmember Gorgol stated she would support the motion and thanked Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff for the proposed edits. Mayor Troxell commended combining the three areas and stated opportunities to leverage community assets should continue to be explored. He commented on waste energy. RESULT: RESOLUTION 2021-031ADOPTED AS AMENDED [6 TO 1] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Emily Gorgol, District 6 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Troxell, Cunniff NAYS: Summers Motion to Suspend the Rules to Continue Past 10:30 PM to Complete the Remaining Agenda Items. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to suspend the rules to continue past 10:30 PM to complete the remaining agenda items. RESULT: MOTION ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Julie Pignataro, District 2 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS 20. Items Relating to Amending City Code Provisions Concerning the City’s Self-Insurance Program and Fund, and Amending Related Code Provisions Concerning the City’s Obligations to Defend and Indemnify its Employees. (Adopted on First Reading) A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 043, 2021, Amending Division 3 in Article III of Chapter 8 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Concerning the City’s Self-Insurance Program and Fund. 1.1 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 405 B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 044, 2021, Amending Division 6 in Article VII of Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Concerning the City’s Defense and Indemnity of its Employees in Certain Civil, Criminal and Administrative Matters The purpose of these two ordinances is to update the City Code provisions concerning the City’s use of its Self-Insurance Program and Fund to pay judgments, settlements, attorney fees and other litigation costs related to the various civil claims that can be brought against the City and its employees and, related to this update, amending the City Code provisions addressing the City’s obligations to defend and indemnify its employees regarding such civil claims and, in some circumstances, to reimburse City employees for the attorney fees and costs they may incur in certain criminal matters related to their City employment. The amendments to the City’s defense and indemnity obligations include adding provisions to recognize the defense and indemnity obligations the City has to its police officers under two Colorado statutes, including the recent statute enacted under Senate Bill 20-217 creating a new civil claim against police officers for violating a person’s rights under the Bill of Rights in the Colorado Constitution. Also added is a provision to reimburse City employees in some circumstances for the attorney fees and costs they may incur in certain administrative matters related to their City employment. Rich Stave asked if contractors are included in the indemnification process and questioned some of the wording associated with the ordinance. Mayor Troxell requested staff input regarding Mr. Stave’s questions. John Duval, Deputy City Attorney, replied this does not cover the City’s contractors. He outlined the situations in which the City would be responsible for indemnifying employees for the costs of their attorney’s fees and other related costs. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, to adopt Ordinance No. 043, 2021, on First Reading. Yeas: Potyondy, Troxell, Cunniff, Gutowsky, Pignataro, Summers and Troxell. Nays: none. RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 043, 2021 ADOPTED ON FIRST READING [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Emily Gorgol, District 6 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, to adopt Ordinance No. 044, 2021, on First Reading. Yeas: Potyondy, Troxell, Cunniff, Gutowsky, Pignataro, Summers and Troxell. Nays: none. 1.1 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 406 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 044, 2021 ADOPTED ON FIRST READING [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Emily Gorgol, District 6 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 045, 2021, Amending Section 23-354 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Disposition of Land Bank Property. (Adopted on First Reading) The purpose of this item is to replace the right of reverter clause in the Land Bank program with a more flexible requirement that can be tailored to each project. Currently, the right of reverter would allow the City to seize property if the Land Banking Code requirements are not met, but this possibility makes it difficult, if not impossible, for developers of affordable housing to obtain financing for their projects on Land Bank parcels. The proposed amendments to City Code in the Ordinance retain the requirement that the City secure permanent affordability to the greatest extent possible, through a deed restriction, covenant or such others instrument or instruments as the City Manager and City Attorney deem appropriate but do not lock the City into one remedy for non-compliance. Rich Stave commented on deed restrictions and restrictive covenants. He asked if there would be some process more palatable than a deed restriction that could be used and asked who signs off on deed restrictions. Mayor Troxell requested staff input regarding Mr. Stave’s comments. Ingrid Decker, Senior Assistant City Attorney, stated this item would change the nature of the restriction on the property, but would not change the public nature of it. She noted any document would be recorded and the affordability of the project would still be protected. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gutowsky, to adopt Ordinance No. 045, 2021, on First Reading. RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 045, 2021 ADOPTED ON FIRST READING [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. Councilmember Gorgol stated she saw a request on the Leadership Planning Team notes for staff to provide some clarity and direction for policy work related to manufactured housing. She stated two items have yet to be addressed: zoning for the manufactured housing parks that are partly zoned commercial and reviewing Code changes to provide local enforcement of the House Bill changes that were passed. She requested and received Council support to move forward with those items. 1.1 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 16, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 407 B. Consideration of a motion to cancel the Tuesday, April 6, 2021 Regular Council meeting: Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Potyondy, that Council cancel its regular meeting of April 6, 2021, pursuant to City Code Section 2-28(a), in light of the City Election to be held this day. RESULT: MOTION ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Melanie Potyondy, District 4 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff C. Consideration of a motion to adjourn this meeting to 6:00 pm on Tuesday, March 23, 2021: Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gorgol, that Council adjourn this meeting to 6:00 pm on Tuesday, March 23, to consider any other such business that may come before Council. RESULT: MOTION ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Emily Gorgol, District 6 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:53 PM. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk 1.1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: March 16, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) City of Fort Collins Page 406 March 23, 2021 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting – 6:00 PM (Secretary's Note: Due to the COVID-19 crisis and state and local orders to remain safer at home and not gather, all Councilmembers, staff, and citizens attended the meeting remotely, via teleconference.) Mayor Troxell requested a moment of silence for the victims of yesterday’s Boulder King Soopers mass shooting. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff STAFF: Atteberry, Daggett, Coldiron AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Atteberry stated Item No. 2, Resolution 2020-030 Approving an Agreement to Secure Public Benefits for Mulberry Development as Provided in Service Plan for Mulberry Metropolitan District Nos. 1 through 6, has been amended to more clearly define the obligations of the developer and to give the City discretion in the timing for requiring particular public benefits. City Manager Atteberry stated the City is arranging for two free branch drop-off sites at Hageman Earth Cycle and the former Hughes Stadium site for the next six weeks. Additionally, branches will be picked up in a specific highly impacted area of town. He noted free mulch giveaways will occur in the spring. He stated the estimated cost of the storm is approximately $3 million. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff asked if there will be assistance provided for those who cannot get branches to the drop off sites. Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager, replied the Neighborhood Services Department is working on that along with volunteer resources. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Resolution 2021-036 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the Hearing Officer Decision Approving the 738 Campfire Drive Extra Occupancy Rental House #FDP 200018. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions regarding the Appeal of the Hearing Officer decision to approve the 738 Campfire Drive Extra Occupancy Rental House combined Project/Final Development Plan. The appeal was heard by Council on March 16, 2021. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to adopt Resolution 2021-036. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff expressed concern that Council seems to be more and more willing to interpret the Land Use Code and other codes as they wish it was written, and not how it is actually written, though he stated he would support the motion. 1.2 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: March 23, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 23, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 407 RESULT: RESOLUTION 2021-036 ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Julie Pignataro, District 2 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff 2. Resolution 2020-030 Approving an Agreement to Secure Public Benefits for Mulberry Development as Provided in Service Plan for Mulberry Metropolitan District Nos. 1 through 6. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to consider a Resolution adopting the Agreement to Secure Public Benefits for the Mulberry Development (Public Benefits Agreement). The Public Benefits Agreement is contemplated in the Consolidated Service Plan for Mulberry Metropolitan Districts Nos. 1-6, approved by City Council on April 16, 2019 (Service Plan). Staff has completed its review of the Public Benefits Agreement to ensure it conforms to the Service Plan. The public benefits structure of this public benefits agreement tracks very closely with the changes made to the last public benefits agreement the Council approved. However, some customization was needed to address the particular circumstances of the Mulberry project and where it is in the land use process. To address these issues, new language was added to make clearer what the developer’s obligations are and the City discretion in the timing for requiring the particular public benefits that are tied to the development review process. These changes are an improvement to the public benefits agreement that ensures the City gets the public benefits promised as the project proceeds in phases. Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Manager, outlined the proposed project noting the applicants anticipate submitting a planned unit development application with the City in the coming months. He noted Council adopted the metro district service plan for the development on April 16, 2019 and this public benefits agreement secures the commitments made by the service plan. He detailed the public benefits to which the developer has committed noting they fall into four categories: affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, smart growth initiatives, and initiatives related to environmental sustainability. Frickey noted there are performance measures in place to assure public benefits are delivered throughout the development and not just at the end. Jessie DeLaCruz expressed concern about zoning and land use as well as the possible implications of the East Mulberry annexation which would include Pleasant Acres. Landon Hoover, Hartford Homes owner, provided updates on the development and discussed agreements that are in place to provide the committed affordable housing units. Mayor Troxell asked about the proposed zoning for this development. Frickey replied most of the project will be low-density, mixed-use neighborhood with some commercial zoning along Mulberry. He also noted this development is separate from any possible East Mulberry annexation process. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to approve Resolution 2021-030. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated he opposed the service plan in 2019; however, he stated he would support this motion. He noted the beginning of these processes is the time during which Council has the most input. Councilmember Pignataro stated she would support the motion and concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff that the beginning of this process is the time during which Council has the most input. 1.2 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: March 23, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 23, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 408 Councilmember Gorgol noted this is the public benefits agreement for a metro district that was approved prior to her tenure on Council; therefore, she would support the motion. Mayor Troxell stated he would support the motion and commended the public benefits being provided to the northeast portion of the community. RESULT: RESOLUTION 2020-030 ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Julie Pignataro, District 2 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff 3. First Reading of Ordinance No. 050, 2021, Amending Chapter 22 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Add a New Article V. Concerning the Establishment of Tourism Improvement Districts. (Adopted on First Reading) The purpose of this item is to consider adoption of an ordinance outlining the requirements for establishing a Tourism Improvement District (TID). Visit Fort Collins (VFC) began exploring a TID based on engagement for the Tourism and Destination Master Plan. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, hoteliers are looking for additional revenue streams. Lodging tax collections are down 47.6% through December 2020. A TID would allow hotels to levy an assessment or fee on all hotels that would allow the TID to undertake activities that would help increase demand for overnight visitation. VFC contemplates a TID that would levy an assessment or fee on hotel businesses rather than the underlying property owner. This necessitates a local ordinance outlining the process for forming a TID, the powers of a TID, and TID governance, amongst others. If adopted by Council, VFC contemplates starting the formation process of a TID beginning in April with Council considering the TID in July. Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Manager, stated this item was initiated by Visit Fort Collins and discussed the negative impact of the pandemic on local tourism. He noted this item would permit the City to create a business-based improvement district for tourism. He stated the ordinance would allow a Tourism Improvement District (TID) to undertake promotion and marketing, organizing, promoting, marketing and management of public events, and provision and maintenance of tourism improvements. He also outlined the requirements of a TID and next steps. Councilmember Gutowsky asked who collects the TID surcharge and how it is redistributed. Frickey replied the 3% assessment will be passed onto guests and the City will collect it as part of the lodging tax. The funds will then be returned to the TID for management and distribution. He noted there is a requirement for a TID to outline expenditures which will go before Council for approval annually. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gutowsky, to adopt Ordinance No. 050, 2021, on First Reading. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff noted this process will continue with the required petition process. Councilmember Gutowsky commended the idea of a TID and noted revenue generation for hotels is important for Fort Collins. Mayor Troxell thanked Visit Fort Collins for bringing this forward and stated he would support the motion. 1.2 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: March 23, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) March 23, 2021 City of Fort Collins Page 409 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 050 ADOPTED ON FIRST READING [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 AYES: Pignataro, Gorgol, Potyondy, Gutowsky, Summers, Troxell, Cunniff OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. Councilmember Pignataro requested Council receive a memo it had previously received regarding the options and limits available to Council regarding gun violence. She requested and received Council support to request a legal analysis regarding Boulder’s assault rifle ban. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff expressed support and noted the legislative policy agenda includes a line related to Council support of laws designed to reduce gun violence. Councilmember Gutowsky expressed support for Councilmember Pignataro’s suggestion. Councilmember Summers commented on the current administration blocking media from reporting on the current situation at the border. He supported contacting the congressional delegation and urging them to encourage greater transparency around the impact of the current regulations and policies on conditions at the border. Mayor Pro Tem Cunniff stated his concerns about the treatment of unaccompanied minors at the border remains and supported Councilmember Summers’ suggestion to contact the congressional delegation. Other Councilmembers agreed. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:47 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk 1.2 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: March 23, 2021 (10235 : Minutes - 3/16, 3/23) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Jaime Jones, Analyst II Jim McDonald, Cultural Services Director Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 051, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Comply with the Terms of the Grant, and Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund from the Colorado Arts Relief Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on Apr il 20, 2021, appropriates unanticipated grant revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund for the Lincoln Center operations. This appropriation includes $100,000 of grant revenues awarded on February 7, 2021, provided by the State of Colorado throug h the Creative Industries Division of the Office of Economic Development to support personnel or business expenses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 051, 2021 (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 44 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Jaime Jones, Analyst II Jim McDonald, Cultural Services Director Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 051, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Comply with the Terms of the Grant, and Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund from the Colorado Arts Relief Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate unanticipated grant revenue in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund for the Lincoln Center operations. This appropriation includes $100,000 of grant revenues awarded on February 7, 2021, provided by the State of Colorado through the Creative Industries Division of the Office of Economic Development to support personnel or business expenses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Colorado Arts Relief Fund provides support to private and public cultural and entertainment venues that have had their revenues affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This funding initiative was passed by the State of Colorado legislature during the First Extraordinary Session of the 72nd General Assembly from the Small Business Relief Program. The grant specifies that the funds can be utilized to cover personnel, operations, and activities from February 1 to May 31, 2021. The Lincoln Center will direct these funds to support hourly and classified personnel and other operation expenses related to the impact of COVID-19. The grant does not require the City to sign a post-award agreement. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Lincoln Center resources in the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund would increase by $100,000. There are no matching fund requirements. ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10236 : SR 051 Lincoln Center Grant) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 051, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A GRANT AWARD AND COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GRANT, AND APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE CULTURAL SERVICES FUND FROM THE COLORADO ARTS RELIEF FUND WHEREAS, on December 7, 2020, Governor Polis signed Senate Bill 20B-001 creating the Small Business Relief Program; and WHEREAS, SB20B-001 includes $7.5 million for the Colorado Arts Relief Fund to support arts, cultural and entertainment artists, crew members and organizations affected by the COVID-19 pandemic (the “Fund”); and WHEREAS, the City’s Cultural Services department applied for and received a grant from the fund of $100,000 to help fund Lincoln Center personnel, activities and operations, which have been negatively affected by the loss of revenue from events that had to be cancelled over the last year due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements, such as grant agreements, to provide any function, service or facility, under Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter and Section 29-1-203 of the Colorado Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 1-22 requires intergovernmental agreements or cooperative activities between the City and other governmental entities to be submitted to the City Council for review and approval by ordinance or resolution; and WHEREAS, the Grant does not require execution of a post-award agreement, but City staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or the City Manager’s, designee to accept the Grant award and comply with any State requirements associated with receipt of the Grant; and WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits public health, safety and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of helping the City maintain the viability of its arts facility; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the Cultural Services Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Cultural Services Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. 2.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Ordinance No. 051, 2021 (10236 : SR 051 Lincoln Center Grant) -2- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, to accept the Grant award and comply with the requirements of the Colorado Arts Relief Fund grant program. Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated grant revenue in the Cultural Services Fund the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000) for expenditure in the Cultural Services Fund to support hourly and classified personnel and other operation expenses related to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 2.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Ordinance No. 051, 2021 (10236 : SR 051 Lincoln Center Grant) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Zoe Shark, Interim Natural Areas Director Barb Brock, Natural Areas Financial Coordinator Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 052, 2021 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural Areas Fund for the Purpose of Land Conservation, Visitor Amenities, Restoration and Other Related Natural Areas Stewardship Activities not Included in the 2021 Adopted City Budget. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $5,000,000 in prior year reserves and unanticipated revenues in the Natural Areas Fund. These appropriations are for land conservation, visitor amenities and restoration of wildlife habitat, as well as other Natural Area Department stewardship activities to benefit the residents of Fort Collins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 052, 2021 (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 48 Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Zoe Shark, Interim Natural Areas Director Barb Brock, Natural Areas Financial Coordinator Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 052, 2021 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural Areas Fund for the Purpose of Land Conservation, Visitor Amenities, Restoration and Other Related Natural Areas Stewardship Activities not Included in the 2021 Adopted City Budget. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate $5,000,000 in prior year reserves and unanticipated revenues in the Natural Areas Fund. These appropriations are for land conservation, visitor amenities and restoration of wildlife habitat, as well as other Natural Area Department stewardship activities to benefit the residents of Fort Collins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Funding for the Natural Areas Department (NAD) for purposes, other than capital projects lapses each year if not spent. Unspent prior year funds and unanticipated revenues need to be appropriated into the following year’s budget before they can be used. The purpose of this item is to appropriate $5,000,000 in unspent funds and unanticipated revenues in the Natural Areas Fund to fund land conservation, restoration of wildlife habitat, trails and visitor amenities, facility operations, special projects and other NAD needs to benefit the residents of Fort Collins. Of the total appropriation, $4,313,875 will be used for land conservation. With over $10,000,000 in land acquisitions under negotiation there is a reasonable likelihood that most of these funds will be spent in 2021. In 2020, NAD received $914,000 in unanticipated revenues; $515,875 of these revenues are being appropriated to provide funds for NAD expenditures not included in the 2021 adopted City Budget. The remaining $398,125 will be left in the fund balance for use in future years. The funds for NAD come from the following designated sources of revenue: the City - Open Space Yes! ¼ Cent sales tax; the Larimer County - Help Preserve Open Space ¼ cent sales tax; and miscellaneous anticipated and unanticipated revenues. All these funds are restricted to the purposes of the NAD, including unanticipated revenues, which consist generally of income from sales tax revenues, sale of easements and leases, and grants. The prior year reserve funds being appropriated in this Ordinance are more specifically described as: ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10237 : SR 052 Natural Areas Appropriation) Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 2 $4,484,000 Unspent 2020 Budgeted Funds - appropriated for same purpose. $ 516,000 Unanticipated Revenues & Unspent Funds - appropriated for new purposes. ======== $5,000,000 Total Appropriation from 2020 Prior Year Reserves ANTICIPATED USE OF FUNDS Land Conservation - $4,314,000: $4,100,000 in unspent land conservation funds plus $214,000 in new funds for land conservation efforts per the Natural Areas Master Plan. Resource Management - $146,000: $76,000 to carryover the unspent donation from the West Vine Neighborhood for the restoration of Kestrel Fields and $70,000 for fire recovery restoration at Bobcat Ridge. Planning and Special Projects - $120,000 to provide $100,000 to remediate the undocumented dump at Bobcat Ridge that was disturbed by the 2020 wildfire, $20,000 for miscellaneous small projects. Trails and Visitor Amenities (TVA) - $420,000: $298,000 in unspent TVA funds plus $122,000 in new funds for trail and visitor amenities projects, including: upgrading the Foothills Trail across Maxwell Natural Area per the Foothills Management Plan; a new parking lot in Arapaho Bend Natural Area; and a Signalized pedestrian signal for the Foothills Trail crossing on Dixon Canyon Road. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance increases 2021 appropriations in the City’s Natural Areas Fund by $5,000,000. The requested total appropriation of $5,000,000 in the Natural Areas Fund represents 2020 appropriations that were unspent and unencumbered at year-end in addition to 2020 unanticipated revenues. These funds are restricted to the purposes of the NAD. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously at its regular meeting on March 10, 2021, to recommend that Council approve the appropriation. (Attachment 1) PUBLIC OUTREACH Natural Areas funds will be spent in alignment with the Natural Areas Master Plan, which was extensively reviewed by the public prior to its adoption in October 2014. ATTACHMENTS 1. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Minutes (PDF) 3.1 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10237 : SR 052 Natural Areas Appropriation) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 052, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE NATURAL AREAS FUND FOR THE PURPOSE OF LAND CONSERVATION, VISITOR AMENITIES, RESTORATION AND OTHER RELATED NATURAL AREAS STEWARDSHIP ACTIVITIES NOT INCLUDED IN THE 2021 ADOPTED CITY BUDGET WHEREAS, the City is committed to preserving natural areas and providing educational, interpretive and appropriate recreational opportunities to the public; and WHEREAS, Natural Areas Department (“NAD”) programming implements open land conservation priorities identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan by purchasing conservation easement interests in key natural areas, community separators, or other open lands; providing stewardship for lands purchased; and developing trails and interpretive features for public use; and WHEREAS, the NAD is funded primarily through the collection of City Open Space - Yes sales and use tax revenue, as well as revenues from the Larimer County Help Preserve Open Space sales and use tax, investment earnings, and other miscellaneous revenues deposited in the Natural Areas Fund; and WHEREAS, funding for purposes other than capital projects lapses each year if it is not spent; and WHEREAS, NAD staff has asked that the City Council appropriate $4,484,000 in unspent 2020 budgeted funds and $516,000 in unanticipated revenue to increase 2021 appropriations in the City’s Natural Areas Fund by $5,000,000; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter requires all appropriations unexpended or unencumbered at the end of the fiscal year lapse to the applicable general or special revenue fund, except appropriations for capital projects and federal or state grants do not lapse until completion of the capital project or expiration of the respective grant; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the appropriations as described herein are available and previously unappropriated in the Natural Areas Fund; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation from prior year reserves in the Natural Areas Fund of a total of $5,000,000, comprised of unspent and unencumbered appropriations from 2020, to be used for land conservation and restoration, acquisition, construction, enhancement and maintenance of trail systems, wildlife habitat and other natural areas, and other NAD stewardship activities to benefit the residents of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: 3.2 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Ordinance No. 052, 2021 (10237 : SR 052 Natural Areas Appropriation) -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Natural Areas Fund the sum of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS ($5,000,000) to be used for land conservation and restoration, acquisition, construction, enhancement and maintenance of trail systems, wildlife habitat and other natural areas, and other NAD stewardship activities to benefit the residents of the City. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 3.2 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Ordinance No. 052, 2021 (10237 : SR 052 Natural Areas Appropriation) Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Chris Martinez, Financial & Policy Analyst Amanda King, Communications/Public Involvement Director Jim McDonald, Cultural Services Director Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 053, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Cultural Development and Programming Activities and Tourism Programming. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $252,818, of which $199,364 is proposed for 2021 Cultural Development and Programming Activities (Fort Fund) and $53,454 is proposed for 2021 Tourism Programming (Fort Fund) from a combination of Lodging Tax and Prior Year Reserves (unspent appropriations) in the General Fund Lodging Tax Reserves. Lodging taxes are annually collected by the City for cultural development and tourism programming activities. Anticipated revenue is projected through each Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) cycle and th en adjusted annually as needed based on final actual collections. Due to the 2020 pandemic, lodging tax revenues collected came in $595,613 below projected 2020 collections. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 053, 2021 (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 53 Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Chris Martinez, Financial & Policy Analyst Amanda King, Communications/Public Involvement Director Jim McDonald, Cultural Services Director Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 053, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Cultural Development and Programming Activities and Tourism Programming. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate $252,818, of which $199,364 is proposed for 2021 Cultural Development and Programming Activities (Fort Fund) and $53,454 is proposed for 2021 Tourism Programming (Fort Fund) from a combination of Lodging Tax and Prior Year Reserves (unspent appropriations) in the General Fund Lodging Tax Reserves. Lodging taxes are annually collected by the City for cultural development and tourism programming activities. Anticipated revenue is projected through each Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) cycle and then adjusted annually as needed based on final actual collections. Due to the 2020 pandemic, lodging tax revenues collected came in $595,613 below projected 2020 collections. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Section 25-44 of the City Code requires that 75% of the total lodging tax receipts be used for the promotion of convention and visitor activities in the City and 25% of receipts be used for cultural development and programming activities in the City. Actual revenue collected is appropriated based on this allocation formula and any excess revenue and budget savings are reserved for these activities in the General Fund. Pursuant to a contract with the Fort Collins Convention and Visitors Bureau (FCCVB), the City has paid a portion of lodging tax receipts to the FCCVB since 2011 for delivery of convention and visitors programming services in furtherance of the City Code requirement. The amount due for convention and visitors programming is appropriated based on prior year receipts and paid annually to FCCVB after the close of the prior tax year. In the past, when actual lodging tax receipts exceed the anticipated amount appropriated for cultural development and programming activities, the City would appropriate additional funds and adjust the amount allocated for those activities in the year following the year in which the tax is collected. For 2021, given the shortfall of 2020 lodging tax receipts due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City must reduce funding for these 2021 activities by the same percentage per City Code. Also, any appropriated lodging tax revenues remaining unspent at the end of the tax year lapse into the General Fund and may be appropriated the following year for the same purposes as they were originally appropriated. ATTACHMENT 1 4.1 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10238 : SR 053 Lodging Tax) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 2 The actual tax revenue collected during the 2020 tax year, as determined March 2021, was $595,613 less than the Lodging tax revenue anticipated and appropriated for expenditure in 2020. Accordingly, downward adjustments to the 2021 appropriations under Section 25-44 of the City Code are required. In addition, Budget staff has recommended unspent appropriations for convention and visitor activities and cultural development and programming activities that lapsed into the General Fund in 2020 be re-appropriated in 2021 for the same purposes as originally appropriated. These appropriation adjustments are described below. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Section 25-44 of the City Code: 25% Promote Cultural Development & Programming 503200 503202 503201 Lodging Tax Convention & Visitors Bureau 70% Fort Fund (Tourism Programming) 5% Fort Fund (Cultural Development & Programming) 25% Total Unanticipated Lodging Tax Collection Shortfall (416,929)$ (29,781)$ (148,903)$ (595,613)$ Unspent Appropriations -$ 83,235$ 348,267$ 431,502$ Total of Unanticipated Lodging Tax and Unspent Appropriations Available for 2021 (416,929)$ 53,454$ 199,364$ (164,111)$ 2021 LODGING TAX CLARIFICATION 75% Promote Convention & Visitor Activities 4.1 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10238 : SR 053 Lodging Tax) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 053, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRAMMING ACTIVITIES AND TOURISM PROGRAMMING WHEREAS, Section 25-244 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins requires that Lodging Tax revenue is to be allocated as follows: 75% for the promotion of convention and visitor activities and 25% for cultural development and programming activities; and WHEREAS, Lodging Tax revenue was estimated at $1,620,000 for 2020 and appropriated; however, actual Lodging Tax receipts were less than projected due to the impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic on travel and tourism; and WHEREAS, at the end of 2020, a total of $1,024,387 in Lodging Tax revenues had been collected; and WHEREAS, unexpended 2020 appropriations of Lodging Tax revenue in the amount of $252,818 have lapsed and were returned to the General Fund, and are to be appropriated for Lodging Tax programs and activities based on the use specified when they were first appropriated, as follows: Cultural Development and Programming (Fort Fund) $199,364 Tourism Programming (Fort Fund) $53,454; and WHEREAS, these additional funds will help support a future Fort Fund grant process; and WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of promoting visitor activity and cultural development ang programming activities; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and 4.2 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Ordinance No. 053, 2021 (10238 : SR 053 Lodging Tax) -2- WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to appropriate funds allocated for Cultural Development and Programming and Tourism Programming. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the General Fund the total sum of ONE HUNDRED NINETY-NINE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-FOUR DOLLARS ($199,364) for Cultural Development and Programming activities. Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the General Fund the total sum of FIFTY-THREE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY- FOUR DOLLARS ($53,454) for the Tourism Programming. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 4.2 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Ordinance No. 053, 2021 (10238 : SR 053 Lodging Tax) -3- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 4.2 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Ordinance No. 053, 2021 (10238 : SR 053 Lodging Tax) Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Basil Hamdan, Civil Engineer II Mike Calhoon, Director of Parks Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 055, 2021, Authorizing Transfer of Funds from the Nat ure in the City Program and the Parks Department Operating Budget to the Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, transfers $75,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Nature in the City Program in the Capital Projects Fund and $20,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Parks Department operating budget in the General Fund into the Capital Projects Fund for the Spring Canyon Park Urban Ponds Project. The proposed transfers of funds will pay for the design and construction of a bioswale and natural habitat system within the existing Spring Canyon Park that will improve wildlife habitat, reduce bacterial c ontamination of Spring Creek, provide an enhanced natural habitat within Spring Canyon Park and serve as an educational opportunity for the public to learn about natural treatment systems and the importance of minimizing waste input into natural streams. The total project cost is $95,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 055, 2021 (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 59 Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Basil Hamdan, Civil Engineer II Mike Calhoon, Director of Parks Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 055, 2021, Authorizing Transfer of Funds from the Nature in the City Program and the Parks Department Operating Budget to the Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to transfer $75,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Nature in the City Program in the Capital Projects Fund and $20,000 in funds that were previously appropriated in the 2021 Budget from the Parks Department operating budget in the General Fund into the Capital Projects Fund for the Spring Canyon Park Urban Ponds Project. The proposed transfers of funds will pay for the design and construction of a bioswale and natural habitat system within the existing Spring Canyon Park that will improve wildlife habitat, reduce bacterial contamination of Spring Creek, provide an enhanced natural habitat within Spring Canyon Park and serve as an educational opportunity for the public to learn about natural treatment systems and the importance of minimizing waste input into natural streams. The total project cost is $95,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Nature in the City program aims to increase wildlife habitat and access to diverse forms of nature for the entire community. Nature in the City achieves this goal through investment in small urban projects. The program supports cross-departmental work to leverage funds, increase knowledge of Nature in the City principles, and showcase City lands as leading examples of nature integration. Nature in the City appropriated 2021 funds in support of other City projects that further Nature in the City principles and opened the funds up to other City departments. Through a competitive process, supporting funds were awarded by the Nature in the City program to the Parks program to build a bioswale and associated landscape improvements in Spring Canyon Community Park. The resulting project has been named the Spring Canyon Urban Pond (SCUP) project. Pursuant to the award of supporting funds from the Nature in the City Capital Projects Fund to the Parks Capital Projects Fund and to complete the design and construction of the proposed improvements in Spring Canyon Park, the supporting funds provided by the Nature in the City program must be transferred into the Parks program. The proposed SCUP project aims to improve the water quality of the water discharged from the existing Dog Park located in Spring Canyon Community Park. That discharge water is currently undergoing minimal treatment ATTACHMENT 1 5.1 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10239 : SR 055 Spring Canyon ponds) Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 2 before it enters the headwaters of Spring Creek, which is on the State's list of impaired waters for E. coli. The objective of the project is to implement an innovative green infrastructure approach that addresses water quality issues while improving habitat and creating an aesthetically interesting landscape. To achieve this objective, work will be done on two existing ponds - an existing water quality pond north of the skatepark and a pond within the dog park area. At the water quality pond north of the skatepark, a bioswale will be installed to biologically treat the runoff in the pond to help improve Spring Creek water quality, minimize/eliminate E.Coli discharge from the pond, and create a hospitable environment and habitat for a variety of plants and wildlife. The bioswale is near a heavily trafficked path that will serve as an educational outreach to community members. At the wet pond in the dog park, new vegetation will be planted to stabilize the banks of the existing dog park pond and increase plant diversity and structure. Additionally, the water intake/outlet from the pond will be modified to enhance water quality. The pond has high visitation from park goers and the proposed educational signage will provide another opportunity to engage the community in the benefits of Green Infrastructure and Nature in the City. Staff will provide the educational messaging as well as ensure the new signage matches the design character of the existing community park. Building an effective treatment system is essential for the continuous operation of the Dog Park pond, which has been heavily used as a recreational outlet for the community. Without addressing water quality, the Dog Park pond is at risk of permanent closure. This project allows the City to address water quality, keep a well utilized recreational area operational, and enhance the user experience and habitat values. Locations and conceptual plans of the two ponds that will be enhanced are attached for reference. (Attachment 1 and 2) Nature in the City, in conjunction with Parks and Utilities, have collaborated on the Spring Canyon Urban Pond project. This cross-departmental project is aimed at building improvements at the Spring Canyon Community Park that will improve wildlife habitat while treating the runoff and the water released from the existing dog park pond and eliminate or reduce any bacterial contamination of Spring Creek. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The Parks Department has received supporting funds from Nature in the City in the amount of $75,000 for the Spring Canyon pond project. The $75,000 will be transferred from the Nature in the City budget that has been previously appropriated within the Capital Projects Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Pond Project within the Capital Projects Fund. In addition, $20,000 will be transferred from Parks Department operating budget that has been previously appropriated within the General Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Pond Project within the Capital Projects Fund. The total cost for the project of $95,000 is less than $250,000 and is therefore not subject to a contribution to the Art in Public Places Program. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The funding for this project from the Nature in the City Program was approved by the City’s Land Conservation Stewardship Board. PUBLIC OUTREACH The Nature in the City Program budget and the Parks Department operating budget were appropriated through the City’s 2021 budget process which underwent extensive public outreach. This project is consistent with the purpose of the originally appropriated funds. ATTACHMENTS 1. Bioswale Site (PDF) 2. Dog Park Site (PDF) 5.1 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10239 : SR 055 Spring Canyon ponds) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 055, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE NATURE IN THE CITY PROGRAM AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT OPERATING BUDGET TO THE SPRING CANYON PARK PONDS PROJECT WHEREAS, the City’s Natural Areas Department runs the Nature in the City program, which provides funds to increase wildlife habitat and access to diverse forms of nature for the entire community through investment in small urban projects, including projects by other City departments; and WHEREAS, Nature in the City has awarded $75,000 in funds to the Parks Department for the Spring Canyon Urban Pond Project (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, an additional $20,000 in the Parks Department operating budget is available for transfer to the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project is intended to help protect the water quality in Spring Creek by improving the quality of the water discharged from the existing pond in the dog park and Spring Canyon Community Park (the “Park”), and from an existing water quality pond in the Park; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council, upon recommendation by the City Manager, to transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one fund or capital project to another fund or capital project, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged, the purpose for which the funds were initially appropriated no longer exists, or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital project in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the transfer of $75,000 from the Nature in the City Program within the Capital Projects Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project within the Capital Project Fund and determined that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the transfer of $20,000 from the Parks Department operating budget within the General Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project within the Capital Project Fund and determined that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the unexpended appropriated amount of SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($75,000) is authorized for transfer from the Nature in the City Program in the Capital 5.2 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Ordinance No. 055, 2021 (10239 : SR 055 Spring Canyon ponds) -2- Projects Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project within the Capital Projects Fund and appropriated therein. Section 3. That the unexpended appropriated amount of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000) is authorized for transfer from the Parks Department operating budget in the General Fund to the Parks Department Spring Canyon Park Ponds Project within the Capital Projects Fund and appropriated therein. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 5.2 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Ordinance No. 055, 2021 (10239 : SR 055 Spring Canyon ponds) Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Amanda Mansfield, Transportation Planner Adam Stephens, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 056, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Agree to the Terms of the Grant and Making Supplemental Appropriations for the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates funds to be later reimbursed by awarded grant funds and to authorize FC Moves to accept an awarded grant from the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program and comply with the terms of that grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 64 Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Amanda Mansfield, Transportation Planner Adam Stephens, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 056, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Agree to the Terms of the Grant and Making Supplemental Appropriations for the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to request Council approval to appropriate funds to be later reimbursed by awarded grant funds and to authorize FC Moves to accept an awarded grant from the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program and comply with the terms of that grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On March 18, 2021, the City received a grant award of $135,000 from the Colorado Energy Office (CEO) to implement the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program. With this funding, the City will deploy a program that provides Class 1 electric bikes, accessories, and a maintenance package to lawfully present low-income essential workers at no cost. Project objectives include supporting program participants in learning to ride and maintain their e-bikes and encouraging participants to use their e-bikes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the two-year program period. The City will partner with community-based organizations (CBOs) to identify participants who meet the lawfully present, low-income and essential worker criteria. The CBOs will apply to the program on behalf of their clients, and the program partners will select eligible participants whose use of an e-bike is expected to most significantly reduce GHG emissions. E-bikes and accessories such as helmets, locks, and lights will be purchased, assembled, stored, and distributed to program participants by the bike vendor partner. The selected bike vendor will also provide a maintenance package. Program partners Northern Colorado Clean Cities (NCCC), Bike Fort Collins (BFC), and a to-be-selected bike vendor will develop instructional videos about e-bike maintenance, where to ride, how to ride and bicycling safety. Selected participants will be invited to collect their e-bike and accessory kit at a deployment event at their CBO headquarters. At these events, program partners will ensure the new e-bike owners know how to operate, maintain, and safely ride their bike. The e-bikes and accessories are intended to be purchased at the end of April/beginning of May and distributed before July 31, 2021. Additional program partner National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL) CanBikeCO app will be customized for the City program and will be used to collect data about e-bike usage and to continuously communicate with program participants. The data collected through the CanBikeCO app will be used to evaluate program effectiveness in reducing GHG emissions. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected from program ATTACHMENT 1 6.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 2 participants to respond in real-time to their reported barriers to riding during the two-year data collection period and to provide insight for future scale-up of the program if additional funding is obtained. This program will directly benefit mobility and access for the lawfully present, low-income essential workers who receive e-bikes. The program model also strengthens relationships between the City and local CBOs facilitating future programs to advance equity and sustainable transportation within the City. A full description of the program is include in the CEO Purchase Order (PO) attached as Exhibit A to the Ordinance. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance will appropriate $135,000 of unanticipated grant revenue from the Transportation Services Fund to be pledged to support the implementation of the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program. The appropriation of funds does not require matching funds to be provided by the City. The budget for the program is included in Exhibit A to the Ordinance. PUBLIC OUTREACH On January 5, 2021, staff sent an announcement to over 40 local CBOs to announce that the City was applying for a grant award from the CEO to implement the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program and to invite the CBOs to provide input on how the program should be structured. No input was received. On February 22, 2021, City staff sent out a request to CBOs identified as most likely to benefit from the program, to ask that they submit letters of support for the program to be included in the grant application. Letters of support were provided by Matthews House and Homeward Alliance on February 23, 2021. Staff released a program announcement notification and a request for applications to over 40 local CBOs on April 7, 2021. 6.1 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 056, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A GRANT AWARD AND AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE GRANT AND MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE CAN DO COLORADO E-BIKE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Colorado Energy Office (CEO) is a non-regulatory department within the Governor's Office with a stated mission to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and consumer energy costs by advancing clean energy, energy efficiency and zero emission vehicles to benefit all Coloradans; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2021, the City received a grant award of $135,000 from the CEO (the “Grant”) to implement the Can Do Colorado E-Bike Program (the “Program”); and WHEREAS, the Program will use the Grant funding to provide Class 1 electric bikes, accessories, and a maintenance package to lawfully present, low-income essential workers at no cost; and WHEREAS, the Program objectives include supporting program participants to use their e-bikes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the two-year program period; and WHEREAS, the City will partner with community-based organizations (CBOs) to identify participants who meet the lawfully present, low-income and essential worker criteria and will apply to the Program on behalf of their clients, and the Program partners will select eligible participants whose use of an e-bike is expected to most significantly reduce GHG emissions; and WHEREAS, Program partners Northern Colorado Clean Cities (NCCC), Bike Fort Collins (BFC), and a to-be-selected bike vendor will develop instructional videos about e-bike maintenance, where to ride, how to ride and bicycling safety; and WHEREAS, the e-bikes and accessories are intended to be purchased at the end of April/beginning of May and distributed before July 31, 2021; and WHEREAS, additional Program partner National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)’s CanBikeCO app will be customized for the Program and will be used to collect data about e-bike usage and to continuously communicate with Program participants amd the data collected through the CanBikeCO app will be used to evaluate Program effectiveness in reducing GHG emissions; and WHEREAS, quantitative and qualitative data will be collected from Program participants to respond in real-time to their reported barriers to riding during the two-year data collection period and to provide insight for future scale-up of the Program if additional funding is obtained; and WHEREAS, this Program will directly benefit mobility and access for the lawfully present, low-income essential workers who receive e-bikes and the program model also strengthens 6.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) -2- relationships between the City and local CBOs facilitating future programs to advance equity and sustainable transportation within the City; and WHEREAS, the Colorado Energy Office’s Purchase Order, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” (the “PO”), requires only City affirmation to receive the Grant; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements, such as grant agreements, to provide any function, service or facility, under Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter and Section 29-1-203 of the Colorado Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 1-22 requires intergovernmental agreements or cooperative activities between the City and other governmental entities to be submitted to the City Council for review and approval by ordinance or resolution; and WHEREAS, City staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager or their designee to accept the grant award and comply with the terms of the grant as evidenced in the attached PO marked as Exhibit “A”; and, WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Fort Collins and serves a public purpose of promoting alternative forms of non-carbon emitting transportation by lower income commuters and to study the feasibility of widespread use of e- bikes for commuter purposes; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the Transportation Services Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Transportation Services Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to accept the terms and conditions outlined in Exhibit A for purposes of receiving the grant award and facilitating the Program in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. 6.2 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) -3- Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated grant revenue in the Transportation Services Fund the sum of ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($135,000) for expenditure in the Transportation Services Fund for the Can Do Colorado E-Bike program. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 6.2 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) STATE OF COLORADO Office of the Governor Colorado Energy Office Page 1 of 2 ORDER *****IMPORTANT***** Number:POGG1,EFAA,202100002968 The order number and line number must appear on all invoices, packing slips, cartons, and correspondence.Date:4/6/21 Description: Can Do Colorado Community Challenge Grant BILL TO Colorado Energy Office - Broadway 1600 Broadway Suite 1960 Denver, CO 80202 Effective Date:04/07/21 Expiration Date:10/31/23 BUYER SHIP TO Buyer: Colorado Energy Office - Broadway 1600 Broadway Suite 1960 Denver, CO 80202 Email: VENDOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS 215 N MASON ST FORT COLLINS, CO 80522 SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS Delivery/Install Date:- FOB: Contact:Amanda Mansfield Phone:000-000-0000 VENDOR INSTRUCTIONS EXTENDED DESCRIPTION Grantee shall complete the work as outlined in Exhibit A, the Statement of Work, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. CEO Representative: For questions pertaining to this project contact Christian Williss at christian.williss@state.co.us. Line Item Commodity/Item Code UOM QTY Unit Cost Total Cost MSDS Req. 1 G1000 0 0.00 $115,000.00 ¨ Description:Grant Commodity Service From:04/07/21 Service To:10/31/23 Line Item Commodity/Item Code UOM QTY Unit Cost Total Cost MSDS Req. 2 G1000 0 0.00 $20,000.00 ¨ Description:Grant Commodity Service From:04/07/21 Service To:10/31/23 EXHIBIT A 6.2 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) STATE OF COLORADO Office of the Governor Colorado Energy Office Page 2 of 2 TERMS AND CONDITIONS https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/osc/small-dollar-grant-award-terms-conditions DOCUMENT TOTAL =$135,000.00 6.2 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 1 of 11 Exhibit A - Statement of Work I. Project Background and Description The Grantee was awarded funding as part of the competitive Can Do Colorado eBike Pilot Program Request for Applications (RFA). The Colorado Energy Office (hereinafter called “CEO” or the “State”) agrees to provide funding to the City of Fort Collins (hereinafter called the “City or “Grantee”) for its E- Bike Access Program. The Grantee will deploy a program that provides eBikes and accessories to low income essential workers: • The Grantee will work with a variety of local partners to provide Class 1 e-bikes, bicycling accessories and a maintenance package to low-income essential workers at no cost. Project objectives include supporting program participants in learning to ride and maintain their e-bikes and encouraging participants to use their e-bikes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the two-year program period. • The Grantee will partner with community-based organizations (CBOs) to communicate with low- income essential workers and identify participants who meet the income and employment criteria. The CBOs will apply to the program on behalf of their clients, and the program partners will select participants whose use of an e-bike is expected to most significantly reduce GHG emissions. • E-bikes and accessories such as helmets, locks, and lights will be selected through a competitive solicitation. The selected bike vendor will also provide a maintenance package. Northern Colorado Clean Cities (NCCC), Bike Fort Collins (BFC), and the bike vendor will develop instructional videos about e-bike maintenance, where to ride, how to ride and bicycling safety. • Selected participants will be invited to collect their e-bike and accessory kit at a deployment event at their CBO. At these events, program partners will ensure the new e -bike owners know how to operate, maintain, and safely ride their bike. • The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) CanBikeCO app will be customized for the City of Fort Collins program and will be used to collect data about e-bike usage and to continuously communicate with program participants. The data collected through the CanBikeCO app will be used to evaluate program effectiveness in reducing GHG emissions. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected from program participants to respond in real- time to their reported barriers to riding during the two-year data collection period and to provide insight for future scale-up of the program if additional funding is obtained. • This program will directly benefit the low-income essential workers who receive e-bikes. The program model also strengthens relationships between the City and local CBOs facilita ting future programs to advance equity and sustainable transportation within the city. II. Work Tasks, Deliverables and Timeline 6.2 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 2 of 11 Grantee shall perform the following work tasks and provide the following deliverables to CEO, each subject to the CEO’s final approval and discretion. It is anticipated that the Grantee will begin work immediately upon issuance of a Small Dollar Grant Award Purchase Order (PO) with CEO. Task 1 – Project Communication and Administration ● Immediately following issuance of the PO, Grantee will hold a project kick-off meeting with CEO and agency partners to discuss project scope, activities and milestones, and project schedule. ● Grantee shall submit monthly progress reports to CEO summarizing work accomplished to date including project status, description of the deliverables and tasks completed during the reporting period, findings or results, unanticipated outcomes or roadblocks, and next steps in the project. If work is behind schedule, a summary of reasons for delay and a plan of action to bring back on schedule will be included. ● Grantee will hold monthly coordination calls with CEO and other check in calls as needed. Deliverables: ● Kick off meeting agenda and meeting minutes, due within one week of PO issuance ● Monthly progress reports ● Monthly call summaries Task 2 – eBikes, Equipment, and Accessories City of Fort Collins shall purchase the following eBikes and equipment or similar bikes and equipment through a competitive solicitation process. Due to uncertainties in the e-bike manufacturing and distribution environment caused by the pandemic, City of Fort Collins has identified four potential Class 1 e-bikes as the primary options for the program: Batch Step Thru e-bike, Batch Commuter e-bike, and the Izip Vibe 2.0 in step over and step thru models. All the e-bikes have frame mounted removable batteries rated at 400Wh and 250W mid-drive motors, as recommended in the RFA, and come with required charging equipment. The Batch e-bikes have a range of 30-80 miles. The iZip Vibe models have a range of 16-35 miles. All models have integrated racks, and the Batch models include fenders. Program participants will be provided with a set of biking accessories to promote safety and convenience for participants. The accessories will include: • Tires: City of Fort Collins anticipates that participants will be offered a Flat Free Guarantee. This system includes a thorn resistant tube, a hard plastic liner, and Slime to ensure protection against the elements and other road debris. If a flat occurs, the tires can be brought to the bike vendor’s location to be repaired while the rider waits. Two years of this service will be provided to participants. • Lock: The OnGuard Bulldog comes with a hardened U-Lock and a 3’ cable to lock all parts of the bike, including the wheels. It comes in either a combination or keyed lock and a mounting bracket that is suitable for the selected frames. • Light: The Serfas E-Lume 350/15 light set provides multiple settings and brightness settings including flash and steady modes, feature easy to mount brackets, and are USB chargeable. 6.2 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 3 of 11 • Pumps: Floor model Serfas Tier 2 – has a large gauge for the user to see the correct sett ing. The pump works with both Presta and Schrader valves and has heavy duty construction to stand-up over time. • Hand pump, Serfas Full Stick: Small and compact and fits Presta and Schrader valves. • Hydration: A standard handlebar mount cage will fit on all recommended e-bikes and provides an easy location for the rider to use while on the move or taking a break. • Tool: The bike vendor’s standard multi tool will include the 3 most common sizes of Allen keys – 4, 5, 6 mm. Also, a flat and Philips head will be included to make minor adjustments. • Bag: Sunlite Top Mount bag fits nicely on built-in racks, gives the rider a place to store lock, pump, tool, and lights, with room for other items that the rider wants to carry along. • Bell: Standard bell will allow rider to let other riders know they are approaching. • Helmet: Serfas Kilowatt helmet is specifically designed for the e-bike rider. It has a hard shell encasing, Hi Vis colors available as well as a Matte Black. The helmet also comes with a built -in rear light with easy to change batteries. Once the bikes are distributed, participants will be provided a 30–45-day riding tune up. This includes minor adjustments to shifting and brakes and checking for any issues the rider has noticed since ownership of the bike. Each participant may bring the bike in after one year of use for a full tune up. Deliverables: ● Grantee shall provide a final list of equipment and accessories ordered including make and model for each. Task 3 – Project Workplan and Schedule Task 3.1 – Project Development The Program Development stage consists of six tasks and will commence as soon as the official notice of award is received: 1. Develop Program Application Website and Secure Bike Vendor Through RFP Process The City will put out a Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit applications from potential bike vendors to partner with the City on this program. Responsibilities of the selected bike vendor will include procuring e-bikes and e-bike accessories, assembly and storage, partnering on the development of educational videos, and sharing in the responsibility of hosting distribution events where the videos will be shown. The City will develop an online application page where representatives from CBOs can apply to participate in the program on behalf of their clients. The application web page will allow applicants to sign up to attend virtual meetings with City staff where staff will walk applicants through the application process. For those who cannot attend the meetings, there will be a link to connect with bilingual City staff for assistance in filling out the application. The website application will collect the initial information needed to verify eligibility for the e-bike program, select program participants whose use of an e-bike would most effectively contribute to 6.2 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 4 of 11 reductions in GHG emissions, and initialize the data collection process. NREL will be a partner in developing the application questions, and storing and analyzing the data received to assist in selecting participants and in evaluating their participation throughout the program. 2. Task 2: Promote program and solicit applications from community -based organizations and their clients The City will reach out to the CBOs to announce this opportunity and will invite them to apply. The City will put out a press release after program recipients have been selected. The City will ask CBOs to help bring clients who will receive e-bikes for a mandatory deployment event which will include information on how and where to ride, basic maintenance, and how to use the CanBikeCO app. The City will also invite them to participate in two e-bike promotional and educational events to be hosted by the City, NCCC and BFC during the two-year program period after the e-bikes are deployed. The City will allow each CBO to apply for up to 10 e-bikes for their clients. As part of the application process, the City will set up an option for community organization applicants to obtain assistance filling out and submitting the application. 3. Work with NREL to adapt CanBikeCO app to the City program and prepare for data collection The City will work with NREL to develop a plan for the CanBikeCO app. This will be an ongoing task in which the City will review user engagement quarterly and identify new improvements for prioritization and implementation in the next quarter. 4. Task 4: Develop training videos for program participants The bike vendor, NCCC and BFC will work together to develop a series of five educational videos in English and Spanish that participants will be required to watch prior to receiving the e -bikes. The videos will focus on operation, charging and maintenance of e -bikes, bike safety and rules and regulations for bikers in Fort Collins. 5. Collect and review applications, select program participants The deadline for application submittal will be set as 3-4 weeks after announcement. Applicants will be selected to participate based on whether they meet eligibility criteria and on number of miles they are expected to ride on the e-bike and/or GHG emissions they are expected to avoid by using the e-bike. 6. E-bike and equipment procurement, assembly and storage After the City confirms that selected participants are committed to the education and data requirements of the program, the City will work with the bike vendor to place orders for the e- bikes and bike accessory kits. When the e-bikes arrive, the bike vendor will assemble the bikes and provide storage of bikes and accessories until the e-bike deployment stage. Task 3.2 – eBike Deployment 1. Notify participants of selection 6.2 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 5 of 11 The City will notify the CBOs on who has been selected to participate in the program. The CBO will be responsible for notifying their clients on whose behalf they submitted the application. 2. Prepare participants to receive e-bikes Participants will be required to download the NREL CanBikeCO app . Participants will also be required to attend an in-person or virtual deployment event hosted by their CBO. 3. E-bike distribution After participants have completed the requirements, they will receive e -bikes in person at the headquarters of their CBO as part of the deployment event. For participants who are unable to pick up the e-bike in person, the City will provide delivery of the e-bike and go over the educational videos and the app, and demo the e-bike. 4. Communicating with new e-bikers and initiating data collection When participants pick up their e-bike, they will receive a welcome message through the CanBikeCO app along with a token for login and a short demographic survey. After this welcome, the participants will begin seeing prompts in the app to “label” their trip and NREL will begin sending out quarterly surveys to assess participant experience with the app and the e -bike. For participants without a Smart Phone, the initial and ongoing communication strategy will be adapted to accommodate their needs. Task 3.3 – Ongoing Support and Maintenance 1. Continued communication with and support of participants Using the CanBikeCO app, NREL will send out quarterly surveys regarding participant app and e - bike experience for the duration of the two-year data collection period. Additional information will be included with initial messages focusing on rider education and building new habits to support data collection. Later messages will advertise things to do or places to go on e-bikes to encourage further use of the e-bikes. Communication will include reminders and tips to conduct routine maintenance on the e-bikes and to go to the bike vendor for their no-cost maintenance services. The bike vendor, NCCC and BFC will plan and implement two promotional and educational events within the two-year program period after the e-bikes are distributed. 2. Maintenance activities The bike vendor will offer a riding tune up at no cost to participants within 30-45 days of receiving their e-bike at the bike vendor’s location in Fort Collins. Additionally, included in the cost of the e-bike they are receiving, participants will be allowed to bring their e-bikes in to the bike vendor’s location for a full maintenance treatment after one year of use. The bike vendor will allow participants to bring in their e-bikes to receive flat tire repair services at no cost as needed for two years after deployment. 6.2 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 6 of 11 3. Data Collection and Reporting NREL will make the required quantitative metrics specified by CEO available through the public dashboard. This will include frequency of e-bike use (days per month), total number of trips (per month), average trip length (per month), total e-bike miles (per month) and estimated energy and emissions impacts. Qualitative data collection will include surveys administered though the CanBikeCO app that reveal participant experience with app and with e-bike, project anecdotes and observations collected from partner organizations and participants, and testimonials/quotes about the importance of the program. 4. Pursuit of additional sources of program funding The City will compile a list of and pursue funding through Federal and State grant or sponsorship opportunities. Task 4 – Final Report/Quarterly Reporting City of Fort Collins will submit to CEO a project completion report that provides a summary account of the total work performed including all tasks contained in the project work plan. The report shall include: ● Project Summary Narrative: This should summarize the project and its achievements including, project objectives and benefits, if and how they were met, project participants, and anything else about project development and implementation. ● Project Lessons Learned: summarize project challenges and how they were overcome, findings, and recommendations for future projects. ● Financial Status: summary of project expenditures including eBikes and equipment, administrative costs, and any other project costs. ● Project Communication: Include a description of promotional activities including newsletter, email, or social email content, and photos documenting the project. ● Other Information: Other information as requested by CEO. Grantee shall submit quarterly reports for two years following eBike deployment with the first report falling at the beginning of the subsequent quarter and then each following quarter for a total of eight reports, with the first anticipated for July 31, 2021. Reports shall be submitted by the end of the first month of the quarter. Reporting criteria will include, but may not be limited to, the following: ● Quantitative data as identified in section 3 ● Qualitative data including data collected through surveys, project anecdotes, and project observations ● Testimonials/Quotes including statements about the project’s importance from participants that could be used for communications. 6.2 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 7 of 11 ● Summary of Communications including press releases, advertising, or newsletters. ● At any time, the CEO may determine that additional reporting information is needed and reserves the right to request this information at any time during the reporting period. Deliverables: ● Final report - due within 30 after full eBike deployment is completed ● Eight quarterly reports – first report is due by end of the first month following end of the quarter in which eBikes were fully deployed, anticipated to be July 31, 2021 ● Final quarterly report shall include a final summary of any key project insights from deployment and two years of data collection. Project Schedule The workplan for this project considers three essential stages: Program Development, e -Bike Deployment, and Ongoing Support and Maintenance. Milestone dates are estimates. City of Fort Collins shall provide an update as part of the monthly report on how closely activities align with anticipated milestone dates. Program Development Date of Milestone Task 1 Develop Program Application Website Secure Bike Vendor Through RFP Process March 15, 2021 (or upon issuance of the purchase order) April 5, 2021 Task 2 Promote program and solicit applications from community-based organizations and their clients April 15, 2021 Task 3 Work with NREL to adapt CanBikeCO app to the City program and prepare for data collection May 15, 2021 Task 4 Develop training videos for program participants May 15,2021 Task 5 Collect and review applications, select program participants April 25, 2021 Task 6 E-bike/equipment procurement, assembly/storage April 30, 2021 E-bike Deployment Task 7 Notify participants of selection April 25, 2021 6.2 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 8 of 11 Task 8 Prepare participants to receive e-bikes June 1, 2021 Task 9 E-bike distribution July 31, 2021 Task 10 Communicating with new e-bike recipients and initiating data collection July 2021 Ongoing Support and Maintenance Task 11 Continued communication with and support of participants Monthly starting August 31, 2021 Task 12 Maintenance activities TBD – July 2021 – July 31, 2023 Task 13 Data Collection and Reporting Quarterly with first report submitted July 31, 2021 Task 14 Pursuit of additional sources of program funding August 2021 - ongoing Task 15 Development of how-to-guide TBD – estimated end of 2022 Reporting Monthly reporting Reports prepared and submitted to CEO Monthly with first report submitted April 30, 2021 through month following e-bike distribution Quarterly reporting Reports prepared and submitted to CEO Quarterly with first report submitted October 31, 2021 for two-year period (October 31, 2023) Final Report Report prepared and submitted to CEO TBD – estimated August 31, 2023 III. Key Personnel Grantee shall immediately notify the State if any of the below Personnel cease to serve. Provide d there is a good-faith reason for the change, if Grantee wishes to replace its Key Personnel, it shall notify the State and seek its approval. Such approval is at the State’s sole discretion, as the State issued this Purchase Order in part reliance on Grantee’s representations regarding Personnel. Such notice shall specify why the change is necessary, who the proposed replacement is, what their qualifications are, how Grantee plans to ensure quality assurance and quality control of the program, and when th e change would take effect. Anytime Personnel cease to serve, the State, in its sole discretion, may direct Grantee to suspend Work until such time as their replacements are approved. 6.2 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 9 of 11 • Amanda Mansfield – Transportation Planner, City of Fort Collins Project Team: Executive Director, Northern Colorado Clean Cities, Program Manager, Northern Colorado Clean Cities IV. Testing & Acceptance Criteria CEO shall determine whether deliverables meet the task requirements in the scope of work. The Grantee shall provide professional, high-quality deliverables that have gone through an internal quality assurance process. If the deliverables, invoices, and reports are inadequate, the CEO Program Manager will notify the Grantee with a request to correct, modify, or replace as needed. V. Budget The total budget shall not exceed $135,000 as described in the chart below. Budget line items may be moved between tasks with pre-approval from CEO program manager. eBike accessories may be substituted with like equipment in the event accessories are not available or cannot be acquired in time for eBike deployment. Note that eBike and accessory budgets are estimated. Grantee shall provide CEO with a final list of equipment and accessories based on the outcome of the competitive solicitation. The list shall include unit and total cost for each equipment type. Total eBike, accessories, and maintenance shall not exceed $127,406 and include at least the minimum number of eBikes, accessories, and maintenance services listed in the estimated budget. A. E-Bike, Accessories, Maintenance Package Available E-Bike, Accessories and Maintenance Package Budget: $127,406 E-bike/accessories (adaptive bikes will be researched and assessed on an individual basis once applications are received.) Batch E-Bike Commuter Batch E-Bike Step Through IZIP Vibe 2.0 Standard and Step Thru models 1 maintenance visit to bike vendor $296.50 $296.50 $296.50 E-bike/accessory package (see accessory package breakdown below) $2,833.9 $3,371.7 $3,112.9 Smart Phone (for participants without) $ 40 $40 $40 Total cost (e-bike, accessories, (incl. smart phone), and maintenance package) $3,170.4 $3,708.2 $3,449.4 Number of bike-accessory-maintenance packages to be purchased at this price 40 34 36 6.2 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 10 of 11 B. 5 videos developed (editing, planning, filming; video topics: charging costs, how to charge and ride and take on a bus/where to ride/maintenance/safe riding) hours cost/hour total cost NCCC Staff Member 60 $50 $3000 1st Bike Fort Collins staff 10 $50 $500 2nd Bike Fort Collins staff 10 $50 $500 1 bike vendor staff 10 $62.5 $625 Total 90 $262.5 $4625 C. 5 video presentations (to take place at CBO Headquarters; 3 hours per presentation including planning, 1.5-hour presentation/demo, follow-up. The number of presentations will depend on number of applicants) hours cost/hour total cost NCCC Staff Member 30 $50 $1500 1 Bike Fort Collins staff 15 $50 $750 1 bike vendor staff 7.5 $62.5 $468.75 Total 52.5 $212.5 $2718.75 D. Promotion (creating social media toolkit) NCCC Staff Member 5 $50 $250 e-bikes/maintenance/accessories/smart phones (A) - $127,406 Total Education/Training and Promotion Costs (B-D) - $7,584 Total Grant Award - $135,000 Accessory Item Name (incl. with each e-bike) Accessory Item Cost FLAT FREE GUARANTEE PACK FRONT 4.99 (x2) 9.98 TIRE SEAL INSTALLED FRONT 2.46 (x2) 4.92 TIRE LINER WIDE 7.99 (x2) 15.98 INSTALL TIRE/TUBE TRONT 6.00 (X2) 12.00 TUBE SV TR 26 X 1.15 _ 2.0 12.99 (x2) 25.98 SHOP FEE - MILAN 0.60 (x2) 1.20 FLAT FREE GUARANTEE PACK REAR 4.99 (x2) 9.98 TIRE SEAL INSTALLED REAR 2.46 (x2) 4.92 TIRE LINER WIDE 7.00 (x2) 15.98 INSTALL TIRE/TUBE REAR 6.00 (x2) 12.00 TUBE SV TR 26 X 1.75 - 2.0 12.00 (X2) 25.98 SHOP FEE - MILAN 0.60 (x2) 1.20 LOCK ONGUARD BULLDOG ULOCK/CBL 44.99 LIGHT SERFAS E-LUME 350/15 COM 54.99 PUMP SERFAS TIER 2 34.99 6.2 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Page 11 of 11 BAG RACK TOP SUNLITE 59.99 WATER BOTTLE CAGE HANDLEBAR 12.99 FENDERS 26 FULL BLK 34.99 INSTALL FENDERS 25.00 SHOP SUPPLIES FEE 1.25 TOOL MULTI TOOL 14.99 PUMP SERFAS FULL STICK 29.99 HELMET KILOWATT ORANGE S/M BELL 69.99 INCREDIBELL DUET BRASS 12.99 TOTAL COST $537.27 VI. Payment The maximum amount payable under this purchase order to Grantee by CEO shall be $135,000 as determined by the State from available funds. Payments shall be made in accordance with the budgets described for each task herein. Grantee shall submit monthly invoices on a time and materials basis according to the budget above. Grantee shall provide a schedule of values substantiating work complete to date by task, which shall be provided to CEO with each invoice. The invoice documentation shall be submitted with each monthly report and shall indicate all work performed in the invoicing period in a manner sufficient to CEO to justify any payment requested for the Work. eBikes, equipment, and accessories will be reimbursed upon delivery. The State shall pay Grantee the reasonable, allocable, and allowable costs for work performed based on satisfactory progress of the work defined in this scope and the associated tasks. Grantee shall be compensated only for work and services performed by Grantee and accepted by CEO pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Payment shall also be contingent upon CEO’s timely receipt and acceptance of required invoices and associated reports and deliverables described herein. Grantee shall be reimbursed no more than once per month based on the submission of Grantee’s invoice providing a detailed account of the work completed and the amount of costs incurred relating to line items per the project set forth in the above section. VI. Purchase Order Term The Grantee shall begin work upon the later of the P.O. Service From Date as shown on the cover page of this P.O. or upon Grantee’s acceptance of this Purchase Order. This Purchase Order shall terminate on October 31, 2023, unless sooner terminated or further extended as specified elsewhere herein. 6.2 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Ordinance No. 056, 2021 (10240 : SR 056 Can Do E-bikes) Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF John Phelan, Energy Services Manager John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 057, 2021, Making Supplemental Appropriations of Anticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves for the Epic Homes Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $69,000 in grant funds from Bloomberg Philanthropies as part of the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge award, and $8,024 in interest earned on previous Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge grant funds, from the Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power Fund to be expended for the ongoing project management and operations of Epic Homes Program by Utility Services and to pay a sub-grant to Colorado State University for indoor environmental quality research. The Bloomberg Philanthropies funds come from (1) the 2021 grant installment of $69,000 and (2) $8,024 in interest earned on advanced Bloomberg Philanthropies funds from the Bloomberg M ayor’s Challenge, as of December 31, 2020. Based on terms of the Bloomberg grant agreement, all advanced grant funds are subject to accruing interest, with such interest earned being reported on a semi-annual basis, and with such earnings used to further project goals as demonstrated in the agreement between Bloomberg and the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 057, 2021 (PDF) 7 Packet Pg. 83 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF John Phelan, Energy Services Manager John Duval, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 057, 2021, Making Supplemental Appropriations of Anticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves for the Epic Homes Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate $69,000 in grant funds from Bloomberg Philanthropies as part of the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge award, and $8,024 in interest earned on previous Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge grant funds, from the Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power Fund to be expended for the ongoing project management and operations of Epic Homes Program by Utility Services and to pay a sub-grant to Colorado State University for indoor environmental quality research. The Bloomberg Philanthropies funds come from (1) the 2021 grant installment of $69,000 and (2) $8,024 in interest earned on advanced Bloomberg Philanthropies funds from the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge, as of December 31, 2020. Based on terms of the Bloomberg grant agreement, all advanced grant funds are subject to accruing interest, with such interest earned being reported on a semi-annual basis, and with such earnings used to further project goals as demonstrated in the agreement between Bloomberg and the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Epic Homes In October 2018, Fort Collins was a winner of the 2018 Bloomberg Mayors Challenge and the associated $1 million prize. The 2018 Bloomberg Mayors Challenge involved over 300 cities proposing ideas to address important issues in their community. The City’s proposal, Epic Homes, was selected as a winner for its innovative approach to providing health and equity benefits to residents, specifically for low-to-moderate income renters, by improving the energy efficiency of rental homes. Residential property owners can take advantage of Epic Homes’ easy streamlined steps to make their homes more comfortable, healthy, and efficient. Partnering with Colorado State University, Fort Collins has also established a research study which links the health and well- being indicators of improved indoor environmental quality. Epic Homes is a comprehensive portfolio for single-family home performance, for both owner-occupied and renter-occupied properties. Epic Homes includes energy assessments and rebates, on-bill financing (Epic Loans), an indoor environmental quality and health/well-being study (IEQ Study), and documentation of home improvements (Epic Certificate). Detailed information regarding the Epic Homes program can be found at www.fcgov.com/utilities/epichomes/. ATTACHMENT 1 7.1 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10241 : SR 057 Epic HOmes) Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 2 Bloomberg Mayors Challenge Funding The Bloomberg Mayors Challenge grant supports a three-year performance period from 2019 through 2021. The project includes a semi-annual review of the budget categories with an opportunity to revise the amounts, subject to the approval of Bloomberg Philanthropies. The 2021 tranche of the Bloomberg award for $69,000 was received in March 2021. Additionally, the 2020 Bloomberg award funds earned $8,024 in interest over the course of 2020 from funds advanced by Bloomberg Philanthropies - funds received in advance to spending in accordance with grant terms. The funds listed above will support a subgrant to Colorado State University to implement an indoor environmental quality and health/well-being study and project costs for Fort Collins Utilities (e.g., staff, supplies, workshops/trainings, travel, software, loan-related fees, marketing, etc.). Table 1 summarizes the appropriation. Description Amount Appropriated To Funds Source Colorado State University Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Study $13,000 Operating business unit of L&P Bloomberg Award - 2021 Installment Grant project management and operating expenses $56,000 Operating business unit of L&P Bloomberg Award - 2021 Installment Grant project management and operating expenses $8,024 Operating business unit of L&P Bloomberg Award - 2020 Interest Earned on Award Funds Before Expensed Total $77,024 The City Manager recommends these appropriations and has determined that the funds for them are available and previously unappropriated from the Light and Power Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Light and Power Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that Fund during this year. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The 2021 funds for appropriation have been received and are being held on the Light & Power balance sheet awaiting this appropriation Ordinance. The 2020 interest earned is being held in Light & Power reserves. The appropriation of these funds will enable Utilities to move forward with the next phases of the project. There is no financial exposure to the City. 7.1 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10241 : SR 057 Epic HOmes) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 057, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS OF ANTICIPATED REVENUE AND PRIOR YEAR RESERVES FOR THE EPIC HOMES PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City has previously established and funded a program to assist certain Electric Utility customers of Fort Collins Utility Services ("Utility Services") in financing energy-efficiency and renewable-energy improvements for single-family residential properties they own by making loans to these customers, whether their properties are owner or renter occupied ("Epic Homes Program"); and WHEREAS, in 2018, the City was awarded a $1 million grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies ("Bloomberg") to be used for the Epic Homes Program, which grant is being paid to the City under an agreement with Bloomberg that provides for certain annual payments to the City; and WHEREAS, the City has recently received from Bloomberg the 2021 grant payment in the amount of $69,000, which payment has been deposited into the City's Light and Power Fund established in City Code Section 8-77 (the "Light & Power Fund"); and WHEREAS, previous years' grant funds received from Bloomberg that have been deposited in the Light & Power Fund earned $8,024 of interest in 2020, which amount is unexpended from the Light & Power Fund; and WHEREAS, it is proposed the $69,000 received from Bloomberg in 2021 be appropriated from the Light & Power Fund and the $8,024 in interest be appropriated from the reserves in the Light & Power Fund from prior years with this total amount of $77,024 to be expended as follows: (i) $13,000 for payment to Colorado State University for the Indoor Environmental Quality Study the City has commissioned in connection with the Epic Homes Program (the "CSU Study"), and (ii) $64,024 for Utility Services' costs to manage and operate the Epic Homes Program; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter also permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years in the Light & Power Fund, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the Light & 7.2 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Ordinance No. 057, 2021 (10241 : SR 057 Epic HOmes) -2- Power Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Light & Power Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that Fund during this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, these appropriations benefit the public's health, safety and welfare and serve the utility and public purposes of supporting the Epic Homes Program that improves the energy efficiency of older homes in Fort Collins and helps achieve the Our Climate Future greenhouse gas reduction and energy efficiency goals, thereby benefiting Electric Utility ratepayers and the health, safety and comfort of the inhabitants of the improved homes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from anticipated revenue in the Light & Power Fund the sum of FIFTY-SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS ($56,000) for expenditure from the Light & Power Fund for Utility Services’ costs to manage and operate the Epic Homes program. Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated from anticipated revenue in the Light & Power Fund the sum of THIRTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($13,000) for expenditure from the Light & Power Fund for the CSU Study. Section 4. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Light & Power Fund the sum of EIGHT THOUSAND TWENTY-FOUR DOLLARS ($8,024) for expenditure from the Light & Power Fund for Utility Services’ costs to manage and operate the Epic Homes program. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 7.2 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Ordinance No. 057, 2021 (10241 : SR 057 Epic HOmes) -3- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 7.2 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Ordinance No. 057, 2021 (10241 : SR 057 Epic HOmes) Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Nina Bodenhamer, City Give Director John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 058, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue from Philanthropic Donations Received by City Give for Various City Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, appropriates $42,264 in philanthropic revenue received through the City Give program. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (PDF) 8 Packet Pg. 89 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Nina Bodenhamer, City Give Director John Duval, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 058, 2021, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue from Philanthropic Donations Received by City Give for Various City Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to request appropriation of $42,264 in philanthropic revenue received through the City Give program. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Strong oversight of philanthropic gifts is a priority, and Financial Services has created multiple layers of accountability and transparency for donated funds and the projects receiving donated funds. The City’s finance team provides financial oversight of all philanthropic gifts to ensure IRS compliance, accountability and transparency, timely and accurate reporting, and the responsible use of dollars for public purpose. In fiscal year 2020, the City received several individual philanthropic donations of $5,000 or less and one $6,519 donation totaling $34,291 and these funds are currently unappropriated from prior years reserves. So far in fiscal year 2021, the City has received several more individual philanthropic donations of $5,000 or less totaling $7,9723 and these funds are currently unappropriated. These donations are listed in Exhibit “A” to the Ordinance and describe for each of them the donor’s intended use of the donation by the City. As acknowledged in Section 2.5 of the City’s Fiscal Management Policy 2 – Revenue approved by City Council, the City Manager has adopted the City Give Financial Governance Policy to provide for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City (the “City Give Policy”). Section 52.2.C. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Give Director to accept donations of $5,000 or less for the City service area intended by the donor to be benefited. Section 52.2.D. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Manager to accept donations of more than $5,000 up to $100,000. As so authorized, the City Give Director and the City Manager have accepted for the benefited City service areas, as applicable, each of the donations to be appropriated in this Ordinance to be used as directed by each donor as described in Exhibit “A” to the Ordinance. Charitable gifts expand and enrich City programs and services, from youth recreation to projects in the arts, from climate action to social sustainability, and many more. All charitable gifts made to the City are designated, in their entirety, for services as defined by respective donors. ATTACHMENT 1 8.1 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 2 This appropriation request includes non-controversial charitable gifts and/or gifts of $5,000 and less. Going forward, these types of donations will be bundled for appropriation and brought forth to Council two times each year: first as part of a City Give-specific appropriation request in the springtime (this item is the first of these), and later in the year as part of the Citywide Annual Adjustment appropriation (sometimes called the ‘Clean Up’ appropriation). CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This item seeks to appropriate $42,264 of philanthropic revenue received through City Give for a variety of City programs & services. Since the requested appropriation amount is funded in its entirety from philanthropic revenues, the financial impact to the involved City Funds is net neutral. This philanthropic revenue is comprised of $34,291 of prior year reserves (from donations made to the City in 2020), and $7,973 of unanticipated revenue (from donations made to the City in 2021). The proposed increase to appropriated expenditures is summarized below: General Fund $9,349 Natural Areas Fund $1,350 Cultural Services & Facilities Fund $4,900 Recreation Fund $11,187 Transportation Services Fund $4,343 Capital Projects Fund $4,125 Light & Power Fund $5,000 Benefits Fund $2,010 These donations have been received and accepted per the City Give Administrative and Financial Policy. 8.1 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 058, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES AND UNANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM PHILANTHROPIC DONATIONS RECEIVED BY CITY GIVE FOR VARIOUS CITY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES AS DESIGNATED BY THE DONORS WHEREAS, in fiscal year 2020 the City received several individual philanthropic donations of $5,000 of less, except for one $6,519 donation, totaling $34,291 and these funds are currently unappropriated from prior years reserves; and WHEREAS, so far in fiscal year 2021 the City has received several more individual philanthropic donations of $5,000 or less totaling $7,973 and these funds are currently unappropriated; and WHEREAS, these donations have been directed by the donors to be used by the City for certain designated uses within and for the benefit of certain City service areas as each donation is described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by refernece; and WHEREAS, as acknowledged by Section 2.5 of the City’s Fiscal Management Policy 2 – Revenue approved by City Council, the City Manager has adopted the City Give Financial Governance Policy to provide for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City (the “City Give Policy”); and WHEREAS, Section 52.2.C. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Give Director to accept donations of $5,000 or less for the City service area intended by the donor to be benefited and Section 52.2.D. of the City Give Policy authorizes the City Manager to accept donations of more than $5,000 up to $100,000; and WHEREAS, as so authorized, the City Give Director and City Manager have accepted for the benefited City service areas, as applicable, the donations to be appropriated in this Ordinance to be used as directed by each donor as described in Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter also permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriations described in Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance and determined that the amount of each of these appropriations is available and previously unappropriated from the funds named in Sections 2 and 3 and will not 8.2 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) -2- cause the amount appropriated in each such fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in those funds during this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, these appropriations will serve the public purpose of providing additional revenue to each of the benefited service areas to aid them in accomplishing the public purposes for which each service area is established thereby benefiting the public’s health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from the following funds these amounts of philanthropic revenue held in prior year reserves to be expended as designated by the donors in support of the various City’s programs and services as described in Exhibit “A”: General Fund $7,376 Natural Areas Fund $1,350 Cultural Services & Facilities Fund $4,900 Recreation Fund $11,187 Transportation Services Fund $4,343 Capital Projects Fund $3,125 Benefits Fund $2,010 Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated from the following Funds the amounts of unanticipated philanthropic revenue received in 2021 to be expended as designated by the donors in support of the various City’s programs and services as described in Exhibit “A”: General Fund $1,973 Capital Projects Fund $1,000 Light & Power Fund $5,000 8.2 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 8.2 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) 215 N Mason Street 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6795 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com April 12, 2021 RE: First Reading of Ordinance No. 058, 2021, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received through City Give for Various Programs and Services According to Donor Designations PRIOR YEAR RESERVES (2020 Donations) City Department Donor Designation Donor Gift Date Gift Amount Communications and Public Involvement Campaign: Thank You Frontline Workers Elevations Credit Union 07/29/2020 $2,000.00 Community Development Neighborhood Services General Support, Restorative Justice Restorative Justice Community Council 06/08/2020 $1,755.97 Community Development Neighborhood Services Sponsorship, FoCo Pop Up Connexion 10/03/2020 $2,500.00 Parks Share Some Shade Online Campaign 07/03/2020 $ 450.00 Recreation Youth Sports K- 12 Dick’s Sporting 01/22/2020 $1,000.00 Recreation Adaptive Recreation Programs Moniker Foundation 01/27/2020 $1,000.00 Recreation NACC Youth Tom Van Horn Fund, CFNC 10/11/2020 $6,518.96 Recreation Youth Sports The Zimdahl Fund, CFNC 10/27/2020 $ 667.30 Recreation Youth Sports Snow Charities 11/20/2020 $2,000.00 EXHIBIT A 8.2 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) Page 2 of 3 City Department Donor Designation Donor Gift Date Gift Amount Volunteer Services General Support Online Campaign: Various Gifts 01/2020 – 07/2020 $ 645.00 HR Benefits CoFC staff Health Screening Albertson-Clark Family 06/08/2020 $2,010.00 Volunteer Services General Support Online Gift 09/29/2020 $ 25.00 FC Moves Sponsorship, FoCo Pop Up Bohemian Event Fund 10/03/2020 $2,500.00 FC Moves Safe Routes to School FoCo Fondo 8/6/20 $1,843.00 Natural Areas General Support Ottercares Foundation 10/30/2020 $ 250.00 Natural Areas General Support L. Khourey 12/20/2020 $1,000.00 Natural Areas 2540 West Vine Restoration Online 10/28/2020 $ 100.00 Park Planning Design: Capital 9-11 Memorial at Spring Park Lisa Northern 12/26/2020 $ 100.00 Park Planning Design: Capital 9-11 Memorial at Spring Park Michael Jones 12/26/2020 $ 25.00 Park Planning Design: Capital 9-11 Memorial at Spring Park Rosemary and Paul Eide 12/09/2020 $3,000.00 Lincoln Center Sponsorship, 4th of July Music Pop Bohemian Event Fund 12/17/2020 $4,900.00 UNANTICIPATED REVENUE (2021 Donations) Parks Share Some Shade, Forestry Online Campaign 01/17/2021 $ 500.00 Parks Forestry Eva and Erin Lieser 01/17/2021 $ 50.00 Parks Urban Forestry Troxell Family 03/04/2021 $1,034.55 Park Planning Design: Capital 9-11 Memorial at Spring Park David Pousey 01/17/2021 $1,000.00 8.2 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) Page 3 of 3 City Department Donor Designation Donor Gift Date Gift Amount Volunteer Services General Support Benevity/Endries 2/18/2021 $ 388.40 Utilities Payment Assistance Fund Jeff Lebesch and Zia Zybko 2/3/2021 $5,000.00 8.2 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Ordinance No. 058, 2021 (10242 : SR 058 Philanthropic donations) Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 059, 2021, Further Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Exterior Lighting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, adopts the Lighting Context Area Map that is part of the Exterior Lighting Code unanimously adopted by Council by Ordinance No. 0 40, 2021, on March 16, 2021, and to insert effective dates in two places in the Exterior Lighting Code. The map is an integral component of the Exterior Lighting Code but was inadvertently excluded in Council materials during its adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 059, 2021 (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 98 Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 059, 2021, Further Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Exterior Lighting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item has been amended to correct errors on the map designated as Exhibit A to the Ordinance. The purpose of this item is to adopt the Lighting Context Area Map that is part of the Exterior Lighting Code unanimously adopted by Council by Ordinance No. 040, 2021, on March 16, 2021, and to insert effective dates in two places in the Exterior Lighting Code. The map is an integral component of the Exterior Lighting Code but was inadvertently excluded in Council materials during its adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council adopted the revised Exterior Lighting Code on second reading on March 16, 2021, by Ordinance No. 040, 2021. The Exterior Lighting Code incorporates by reference the Lighting Context Area Map but such map was inadvertently not attached to Ordinance No. 040, 2021. It is being presented to Council for adoption and is necessary to allow application of the revised Exterior Lighting Code. The effective date of the map is specified in the Ordinance as March 26, 2021, to match the effective date of the previously adopted Exterior Lighting Code. The adopted Exterior Lighting Code contains two placeholders for insertion of the effective date of Ordinance No. 040, 2021, Sections 3.2.4(B) and (D), and this Ordinance will replace the placeholders with the March 26, 2021, effective date. The effective date will determine which development applications are subject to the revised Exterior Lighting Code. ATTACHMENT 1 9.1 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10243 : SR 059 Exterior lighting map) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 059, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FURTHER AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING EXTERIOR LIGHTING WHEREAS, on March 16, 2021, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 040, 2021, on second reading to amend the Land Use Code lighting standards; and WHEREAS, Land Use Code Section 3.2.4(B) and (D) of the adopted lighting regulations contain placeholders for the insertion of the effective date of Ordinance No. 040, 2021, and this Ordinance inserts such date; and WHEREAS, the lighting regulations adopted in Ordinance No. 040, 2021, reference the “Lighting Context Area Map” and this Ordinance adopts such map; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that the insertion of the effective date and adoption of the “Lighting Context Area Map” are necessary for the effective administration of the lighting regulations and is in the best interests of the City and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That Section 3.2.4(B) and (D) of the Land Use Code are hereby amended to read as follows: 3.2.4 Exterior Site Lighting . . . (B) General Standard. All development that includes proposed artificial outdoor lighting, except for development on single-family detached residential lots, single- family attached residential lots, and two-family dwelling residential lots for which an application is submitted after March 26, 2021, subject to below Subsection 3.2.4(D), shall submit for review and approval a proposed lighting plan that complies with the standards in this Section 3.2.4 and meets the functional needs of the proposed land use without adversely affecting adjacent properties or the community. . . . (D) Existing Lighting. Existing lighting shall mean lighting installed or approved prior to March 26, 2021. . . . 9.2 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Ordinance No. 059, 2021 (10243 : SR 059 Exterior lighting map) -2- Section 3. That the Lighting Context Area Map attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and referenced in the lighting regulations adopted in Ordinance No. 040, 2021, is hereby adopted, and shall be deemed effective, nunc pro tunc, as of March 26, 2021. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 9.2 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Ordinance No. 059, 2021 (10243 : SR 059 Exterior lighting map) SCOLLEGEAVEW HORSETOOTH RD W MULBERRY ST S SHIELDS STL AP ORTE AV E S TIMBERLINE RDSTATE HIGHWAY 392 NUSHIGH W AY 287 SLEMAY AVESTRAUSSCABINRDZIEGLER RD RIVERSID EAVE S OVERLAND TRLN HOWESST9TH STW LAUREL ST EMOUNTA IN A V E W DRAKE RD E PROSPECT RD W WILLOX LN S TAFT HILL RDW VINE DR COUNTRY CLUB RD E VINE DR RICHARDS LAKE RD REMINGTONSTW MO UNTA INAVE TURNBERRYRDE WILLOX L N E TRILB Y RDLANDINGSDRW PROSPECT RD E COUNTY ROA D 38 E MULBERRY ST JEF F E R S O N ST E DOUGLAS RD COUNTY ROAD 54G NCOLLEGEAVEW ELIZABE TH S T NLEMAYAVEWCOUNTYROAD38EE COUNTY ROAD 50MOUNTAINVISTADR E HA RMONY R DN TIMBERLINE RDBOAR D WALKD RTERRYLAKERD GR E G O R Y RD E HORSETOOTH RD KECHTER RDN SHIELDS STS COUNTY ROAD 5W HARMONY RD S HOWES STW DOUGLAS RD N OVERLANDTRLE COUNTYROAD 36S MASON STMAIN STW TRILBY RD E DRAKE RD E SUNIGARD ELINCOLNAVE CA RP E NTE R RD E TR O U T M A N P K W Y E CO UNTY ROAD 30S US HIGHWAY 287S COUNTY ROAD 13E COUNTY ROAD 52 S COUNTY ROAD 11S S U M M IT VIE W D R S COUNTYROAD 7N COUNTY ROAD 17E COUNTY ROAD 48N COUNTYROAD 19N COUNTY ROAD 5NTAFTHILLRDE COUNTY ROAD 54 S COUNTY ROAD 19GIDDINGS RDN COUNTY ROAD 9S COUNTY ROAD 9LIGHTING CONTEXT AREAS MAP Printed: April 19, 2021 LEGEND City Limits - Outline Growth Management Area LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3 EXHIBIT A 9.2 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Ordinance No. 059, 2021 (10243 : SR 059 Exterior lighting map) Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 060, 2021, Amending Ordinance No. 116, 2020, to Extend the Suspension of Certain Provisions of the City's Land Use Code to Permit Temporary Use of Certain Non-Residential Buildings for Child Care Centers in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 20 21, extends the end date described in Ordinance No. 116, 2020, which temporarily suspended certain provisions of the Land Use Code (LUC) to permit the temporary use of certain non-residential buildings for child care operations. The temporary suspension is set to end on May 28, 2021. This item would change the end date to August 31, 2021, to allow flexibility for remote summer school and other summer child care needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (PDF) 10 Packet Pg. 103 Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 060, 2021, Amending Ordinance No. 116, 2020, to Extend the Suspension of Certain Provisions of the City's Land Use Code to Permit Temporary Use of Certain Non-Residential Buildings for Child Care Centers in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to extend the end date described in Ordinance No. 116, 2020, which temporarily suspended certain provisions of the Land Use Code (LUC) to permit the temporary use of certain non-residential buildings for child care operations. The temporary suspension is set to end on May 28, 2021. This item would change the end date to August 31, 2021, to allow flexibility for remote summer school and other summer child care needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On October 6, 2020, Council adopted Ordinance No. 116, 2020, which temporarily suspended certain provisions of the Land Use Code (LUC) to permit the use of certain non-residential buildings for child care. This time-bound exemption from zoning and development requirements allowed for child care operators to rapidly utilize existing buildings to offer remote learning centers and expanded child care options in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Operators are still required to meet applicable building code, fire protection, and other health and safety requirements, as well as state licensing requirements. The timeframe for the temporary suspension was tied to the 2020-2021 academic school year that ends on May 28, 2021. Staff has received inquiries from child care operators about extending this timeframe through the end of the summer. Some facilities that are normally used for summer school instruction and other summer programming are not currently available, so there is an ongoing need for additional child care locations in the community. Staff previously anticipated that the local public health emergency would be resolved by the end of the current academic school year, but it has become apparent that there is continued demand for temporary child care facilities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic through the summer months. This ordinance would establish a new end date of August 31, 2021 for the temporary LUC suspension for child care uses. Prior to the extension of any existing temporary certificate of occupancy issued pursuant to Ordinance No 116, 2020, the City’s Building Services will reinspect the premises to verify continued compliance with applicable regulations. Previously adopted Ordinance No. 116, 2020: <https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=3&docid=3496257&dt=ORDINANCE&doc_download_date=OC T-06-2020&ORDINANCE_NO=116> ATTACHMENT 1 10.1 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 2 PARAMETERS FOR EXEMPTION Under Ordinance No. 116, 2020, the following parameters and limits apply for any LUC exemptions: Applicable to buildings within City limits with existing approvals for the land uses listed below. A temporary certificate of occupancy (TCO) must be issued by the City Building Services Division to ensure health and life safety requirements have been addressed. The end date for any TCO that has been issued pursuant to this exemption would be extended to August 31, 2021. o A building permit may be needed to address building code requirements prior to occupancy. o All applicable state licensing, building code, fire code, Americans with Disabilities Act, and health and safety requirements must still be satisfied o Capacity for individual classrooms and/or the building overall will be limited based on building code, fire code, County health, and state licensing requirements. This ordinance would exempt temporary childcare uses from the requirement to bring the site into compliance with the LUC during the time period specified by the TCO; however, these improvements may be required through subsequent development review if the use extends beyond the approved timeframe. If a child care center desires to extend operations beyond the 2020-21 school year, the property owner or operator must initiate the applicable development review process no later than the end date of the temporary LUC suspension, which would be extended to August 31, 2021. o The development review process must be diligently pursued according to the timeframes prescribed in LUC Section 2.2.11 - Step 11: Lapse. o At the completion of the development review process, if approved, the property owner or operator must complete all required site and building improvements to satisfy the requirements of the development review process to receive a full Certificate of Occupancy (CO). o An operator may be allowed to continue operating while they are diligently pursuing the development review process and installation of site/building improvements, at the discretion of the Community Development & Neighborhood Services Director. Child care operations would be permitted in buildings with the following designated land uses, subject to the parameters described above: Adult Day/Respite Care Center Clubs and Lodges Community Facilities Conference/Convention Center Entertainment Facilities & Theatres Exhibit Halls Health & Membership Clubs Limited Indoor Recreation Mixed use dwellings (non-residential portion only) Neighborhood support and recreational facilities, including clubhouses Offices, Financial Services, and Clinics Personal & Business Service Shops Place of Worship/Assembly Public/Private school Retail Establishment Homeless Shelters Day Shelters Small Scale Reception Center Unlimited indoor recreational uses and facilities 10.1 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 3 Residential uses are not included in this exemption for the following reasons: “Child care center” is defined by the LUC to only include operations serving “seven or more children under the age of sixteen years who are not related to the owner, operator or manager.” This does not include “family child care homes,” as defined by the State of Colorado. In-home daycares and homeschooling “pods” generally would not fall under the definition of “child care center” and would not require development review, even without the exemption proposed by this ordinance. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance could result in a loss of revenue for the City in the form of development review fees and payments associated with development review improvements. However, staff time would not be spent on the tasks that such fees would cover, so the fiscal impact would be negligible. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff has been in communication with child care providers to understand barriers and discuss alternative locations for virtual learning and child care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This outreach has assisted in identifying the need for Land Use Code exemptions to support the rapid deployment of child care during the current public emergency, as well as the ongoing need for remote learning centers and expanded child care operations through the end of August 2021. 10.1 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 060, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 116, 2020, TO EXTEND THE SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE CITY’S LAND USE CODE TO PERMIT TEMPORARY USE OF CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS FOR CHILD CARE CENTERS IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is threatened with serious injury and damage, consisting of widespread human and economic impact caused by the Novel Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19); and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, in order to undertake emergency measures to protect the life, health, safety and property of the citizens of the City and persons conducting business therein, and to attempt to minimize the loss of human life and the preservation of property, the City Manager, as the Director of the City’s Office of Emergency Management, proclaimed a “local emergency” in accordance with Section 2-671(a)(1) of the City Code and activated the Emergency Operations Plan established pursuant to Section 2-673 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has, with the adoption of Resolution 2020-030, extended the City Manager’s proclamation of local emergency; and WHEREAS, the State of Colorado declared its first Emergency Disaster Declaration related to COVID-19 on March 11, 2020, and the declared emergency remains in effect; and WHEREAS, to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 public health emergency on the ability of local school districts to offer in-person classes and the inability of many parents to care for or supervise remote learning or to afford in-home child care, Ordinance No. 116, 2020, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” suspended certain Land Use Code (“LUC”) requirements to allow buildings that had been previously approved for certain uses to be used as child care centers without the normal development review process; and WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance No. 116, 2020, specifies that the suspension of LUC requirements and any temporary certificate of occupancy issued to allow the temporary operation of a child care center automatically terminates on May 28, 2021, unless the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services has granted an extension because a development application to approve a particular child care center has been submitted and such application is diligently pursued; and WHEREAS, because of the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency, some facilities normally used for summer school instruction and other summer programming for children are not currently available and there is an ongoing need for additional child care; and WHEREAS, in consideration of the continuing urgent need for child care centers and supervision alternatives for families after the school year and during the summer, the City Council wishes to extend the temporary suspension of certain LUC requirements set forth in Ordinance No. 116, 2020, until August 31, 2021; and 10.2 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) -2- WHEREAS, in order to help address the continuing urgent need for child care centers necessitated by the COVID-19 public health emergency, the City Council finds it is necessary for public health, safety and welfare, and in the best interests of the City and its residents, to extend the temporary suspension of the application of certain LUC requirements to facilitate the operation of child care centers using buildings that have already been approved for certain uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby amends all references to “May 28, 2021,” in Ordinance No. 116, 2020, to “August 31, 2021,” and renews the authority of Ordinance No. 116, 2020, to continue to suspend certain LUC requirements as stated therein. Section 3. That prior to the extension of any certificate of occupancy issued pursuant to Ordinance No 116, 2020, the premises will be subject to reinspection by the City’s Building Services. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 10.2 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) EXHIBIT A10.2Packet Pg. 109Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) 10.2Packet Pg. 110Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) 10.2Packet Pg. 111Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) 10.2Packet Pg. 112Attachment: Ordinance No. 060, 2021 (10244 : SR 060 LUC Childcare) Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Clark Mapes, City Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 062, 2021, Approving the Addition of Permitted Uses Associated with the East Park District Maintenance Facility Major Amendment MJA200003. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, considers the Addition of Permitted Uses (APU) for a development plan located in the Urban Estate Zone District. • The development plan is for a City of Fort Collins Parks Department maintenance facility comprising a building with office and shop space, an outdoor storage yard, parking, fencing, landscaping, and improvements to adjacent recreation trails. The applicant is the City of Fort Collins Parks Department. • The Urban Estate Zone does not list the proposed office/shop and outdoor storage uses as Permitted Uses, and so the development plan is required to include a request for Addition of Permitted Uses pursuant to Land Use Code (LUC) Section 1.3.4. • This APU involves a proposed use permitted in one or more of the City’s other zone districts and is proposed based solely on unique circumstances and attributes of the site and site development plan, which may be permitted under LUC Section 1.3.4(B). Pursuant to Ordinance No. 079, 2020, Council authorized the remote hearing of this item in Resolution 2020 - 093 and the applicant has consented to having this item heard remotely. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 062, 2021 (PDF) 11 Packet Pg. 113 Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Clark Mapes, City Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 062, 2021, Approving the Addition of Permitted Uses Associated with the East Park District Maintenance Facility Major Amendment MJA200003. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter. If this item is considered on the consent agenda, a public hearing will be deemed to have been open and closed, with the only evidence considered being that set forth in this AIS and the attachments hereto, including the staff report. If this item is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2019-064. The purpose of this item is to consider the Addition of Permitted Uses (APU) for a development plan located in the Urban Estate Zone District. The development plan is for a City of Fort Collins Parks Department maintenance facility comprising a building with office and shop space, an outdoor storage yard, parking, fencing, landscaping, and improvements to adjacent recreation trails. The applicant is the City of Fort Collins Parks Department. The Urban Estate Zone does not list the proposed office/shop and outdoor storage uses as Permitted Uses, and so the development plan is required to include a request for Addition of Permitted Uses pursuant to Land Use Code (LUC) Section 1.3.4. This APU involves a proposed use permitted in one or more of the City’s other zone districts and is proposed based solely on unique circumstances and attributes of the site and site development plan, which may be permitted under LUC Section 1.3.4(B). Pursuant to Ordinance No. 079, 2020, Council authorized the remote hearing of this item in Resolution 2020- 093 and the applicant has consented to having this item heard remotely. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION For this item, the APU process requires a development plan, a major amendment to the Bucking Horse Overall Development Plan, MJA200003, to be reviewed and decided by the Planning and Zoning Board, in conjunction with a Board recommendation to Council on the APU aspect of the plan. Council is then required to decide whether the APU meets the criteria set forth in the LUC to authorize the additional uses. On March 11, 2021, the Planning and Zoning Board approved on its consent agenda the development plan and recommended that Council approve the APU with a vote of 7-0. ATTACHMENT 1 11.1 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10245 : SR 062 East Park) Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 2 Consideration of an APU is a quasi-judicial decision requiring a public hearing according to procedures set forth in the LUC and specific findings by Council as to whether the APU meets the criteria set forth in LUC Section 1.3.4 (addressed in more detail below). If this item is considered on the consent agenda, a public hearing will be deemed to have been open and closed, with the only evidence considered being that set forth in this AIS and the attachments hereto. If this item is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2019-064. The development plan is classified as a Major Amendment to the Bucking Horse Overall Development Plan, which currently shows the site as Community Supported Agriculture or CSA. A CSA initiative was pursued by Bucking Horse ownership but was not found to be viable due to lack of an interested operator. The proposed maintenance facility would meet the Parks Department’s needs for maintenance of various parks in the southeast part of the city, including the nearby Bucking Horse Neighborhood Park which is currently in the design process and planned for construction later in 2021. The site is 3.6 acres located at the eastern point of the triangular-shaped 154-acre Bucking Horse development, which is bounded by Timberline Road on the west, Drake Road on the south, and a railroad along the angled northeast side. The development plan, a major amendment to the Bucking Horse Overall Development Plan, MJA200003, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board on March 11, 2021, and includes: Vehicular access from an existing access driveway on Environmental Drive. A 6,000 square foot building with office space for Parks crews and a shop for light maintenance of vehicles and equipment, a screened storage yard for equipment and materials, a few visitor parking spaces near a public entrance, and a complete landscape plan. Trail linkages to the trail system in the area, and related acceptance of an existing private recreational trail through the larger Bucking Horse development, into the City’s public trail system. A complete landscape plan. APU Criteria. The criteria for APUs are found in Land Use Code Section 1.3.4. The purpose of the APU process is to allow for approval of a particular land use to be located on a specific parcel in a zone district that otherwise would not permit such a use. An applicant may submit a plan with the understanding that it will be subject to a heightened level of review, with close attention being paid to compatibility and impact mitigation. This process is intended to allow for consideration of unique circumstances on specific parcels with evaluation based on the context of the surrounding area. The process encourages dialogue and collaboration among applicants, affected property owners, neighbors and staff. The proposed Parks maintenance facility comprises office and outdoor storage uses, which are not listed as Permitted Uses in the Urban Estate Zone District, and thus require findings under this Section for approval. Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation. The Planning and Zoning Board may recommend that Council add the proposed uses if the Board specifically finds that such uses: (1) conform to all of the eight criteria listed below; (2) would not be detrimental to the public good; (3) would be in compliance with the requirements and criteria contained in Land Use Code Section 3.5.1; and (4) are not specifically listed as prohibited uses in the Urban Estate zone district. The Board found that these requirements were met and recommended approval of the APU. The eight criteria are: a) Such use is appropriate in the zone district to which it is added. 11.1 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10245 : SR 062 East Park) Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 3 b) Such use conforms to the basic characteristics of the zone district and the other permitted uses in the zone district to which it is added. c) The location, size and design of such use is compatible with and has minimal negative impact on the use of nearby properties. d) Such use does not create any more offensive noise, vibration, dust, heat, smoke, odor, glare or other objectionable influences or any more traffic hazards, traffic generation or attraction, adverse environmental impacts, adverse impacts on public or quasi-public facilities, utilities or services, adverse effect on public health, safety, morals or aesthetics, or other adverse impacts of development, than the amount normally resulting from the other permitted uses listed in the zone district to which it is added. e) Such use will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. f) Such use is compatible with the other listed permitted uses in the zone district to which it is added. g) Such use, if located within or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood, shall be subject to two neighborhood meetings. The second neighborhood meeting must take place after the submittal of an application and after the application has completed the first round of staff review. City Council Approval. In conjunction with development plans for projects located in certain residential-based zone districts including Urban Estate, any application for the addition of permitted uses shall be determined by Council after a Planning and Zoning Board recommendation on the APU. The Planning and Zoning Board shall remain the decision maker on the primary application. Council may approve the requested additional uses after considering the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation if the Council specifically finds that such uses: 1) conform to all of the eight criteria listed above; 2) would not be detrimental to the public good; 3) would be in compliance with the requirements and criteria contained in Land Use Code Section 3.5.1; and 4) are not specifically listed as prohibited uses in the Urban Estate zone district. If this item is moved from the consent agenda to the discussion agenda, the following hearing procedure applies subject to such limitations in time and scope as may be imposed at the discretion of the presiding officer: 1) Announcement of item; 2) Consideration of any procedural issues; 3) Explanation of the application by City staff; 4) Presentation by the applicant and/or by the affected property owner (if not the applicant); 5) Public testimony regarding the application; 6) Rebuttal testimony by the applicant/property owner; 7) Councilmember questions of staff, the applicant/property owner and other commenters; and 8) Motion, discussion and vote by Council. Staff Findings. Staff finds that the plan meets all of the APU criteria because: The use has basic characteristics similar to other permitted uses in the UE zone, such as plant nurseries and greenhouses, resource extraction, processes and sales, and composting facilities; and is less intensive than these other uses typically are. The use creates no offensive impacts. All storage and maintenance functions are contained within the building and screened storage yard. The use will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area, which includes a concrete plant and wastewater treatment plant. The project will provide a transition, buffering and screening between those two uses and the Bucking Horse neighborhood development. The use is compatible with the other uses in the Bucking Horse development, particularly a large stormwater detention area that separates it from the rest of Bucking Horse. The project is designed with an urban agricultural theme that complements the overall Bucking Horse development theme. The 234-acre Bucking Horse is anchored and inspired by remaining farm buildings at Jessup Farm and Johnson Farm. Also, a Cargill agricultural research complex is embedded within Bucking Horse. 11.1 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10245 : SR 062 East Park) Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 4 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The development will pay typical development impact fees required of all development, with no financial impacts associated with the addition of the permitted uses. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board unanimously recommended that Council approve the Addition of Permitted Uses. There was no discussion of the item and therefore no minutes from the meeting are attached. PUBLIC OUTREACH Two neighborhood meetings were held as is required when a project in the Urban Estate Zone District involves APU. The first meeting was held on November 20, 2019 as a combined meeting to discuss this maintenance facility along with a Bucking Horse Neighborhood Park, which will be built in the near future approximately 500 feet to the north. The park would be served by the facility, as would a number of other parks in the southeastern portion of the city. Approximately 20 people attended. There were no comments about the facility. The second meeting was held virtually on November 12, 2020, following the first round of staff review of a development plan submittal, as required by code. Approximately six people attended. Two questions were asked, each with a simple yes or no answer regarding the plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Staff Report (PDF) 2. Staff Presentation to Board - March 11,2021 (PDF) 11.1 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10245 : SR 062 East Park) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 062, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING THE ADDITION OF PERMITTED USES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EAST PARK DISTRICT MAINTENANCE FACILITY MAJOR AMENDMENT MJA200003 WHEREAS, MJA200003, a major amendment of the Bucking Horse Overall Development Plan, proposes the construction of a City of Fort Collins Parks maintenance facility including a building with office and shop space, an outdoor storage yard, parking, fencing, landscaping, and improvements to adjacent recreation trails in the Urban-Estate zone district (“U-E zone”) on the parcel located at 2982 Environmental Drive, parcel number 8720467909 (the “Parcel”); and WHEREAS, the proposed maintenance facility office/shop and outdoor storage uses are not listed as permitted uses in the U-E zone in the Land Use Code (“LUC”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to LUC Section 1.3.4(B)(2), the proposed uses are listed aspermitted uses in one or more of the City’s other zone districts and are proposed based solely on unique circumstances and attributes of the site and development plan and are therefore eligible for consideration as an Addition of Permitted Uses (“APU”) under LUC Section 1.3.4; and WHEREAS, a request pursuant to LUC Section 1.3.4(C)(3), Addition of Permitted Uses, has been made for an APU in conjunction with MJA200003 to add office/shop and outdoor storage uses as allowed uses on the Parcel so that the proposed Parks maintenance facility can be constructed and operated; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LUC Section 1.3.4(C)(3), the Planning and Zoning Board (“P&Z”) must make a recommendation to Council regarding the APU, Council shall be the decision maker on the APU by ordinance, and P&Z shall be the decision maker on the primary application, MJA200003; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LUC Section 1.3.4(C)(1)(g), two neighborhood meetings were held regarding the APU with the first meeting held prior to the submittal of the development application on November 20, 2019, and the second meeting held after submittal of the development application and completion of the first round of staff review on November 12, 2020; and WHEREAS, at its March 11, 2021, regular meeting, P&Z on a 7-0 vote approved as part of its consent agenda MJA200003 and recommended that City Council approve the APU, finding that the APU satisfied the applicable requirements set forth in LUC Section 1.3.4(C); and WHEREAS, LUC Section 1.3.4(C) sets forth the criteria, as further described below, that must be satisfied in order for Council to approve the APU; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2021, Council held a public hearing and considered the APU in accordance with the LUC, either as part of the consent or discussion agenda and if considered on the consent agenda, a public hearing is deemed to have been open and closed, with the only evidence considered being that set forth in the agenda item summary and the attachments thereto, including the staff report. 11.2 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Ordinance No. 062, 2021 (10245 : SR 062 East Park) -2- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Council, after considering the P&Z recommendation on the APU and the agenda materials provided for the APU, hereby approves the requested APU to add office/shop and outdoor storage facilities as uses specifically limited to the Parcel located in the U-E zone. Section 3. That the Council, in support of its decision to approve the APU, makes the following findings of fact: (1) The APU satisfies the criteria set forth in LUC Section 1.3.4(C)(1) as follows: (a) Such uses are appropriate in the U-E zone. (b) Such uses conform to the basic characteristics of the U-E zone and the other permitted uses in the U-E zone. (c) The location, size and design of such uses are compatible with and has minimal negative impact on the use of nearby properties. (d) Such uses do not create any more offensive noise, vibration, dust, heat, smoke, odor, glare or other objectionable influences or any more traffic hazards, traffic generation or attraction, adverse environmental impacts, adverse impacts on public or quasi-public facilities, utilities or services, adverse effects on public health, safety, morals or aesthetics, or other adverse impacts of development, than the amount normally resulting from the other permitted uses listed in the U-E zone. (e) Such uses will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. (f) Such uses are compatible with the other listed permitted uses in the U-E zone district. (g) The APU fulfilled the LUC requirement for two neighborhood meetings with the first meeting held prior to the submittal of the development application on November 20, 2019, and the second meeting held after submittal of the development application and completion of the first round of staff review on November 12, 2020. 11.2 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Ordinance No. 062, 2021 (10245 : SR 062 East Park) -3- (h) Such use is not a medical marijuana business as defined in Section 15-452 of the City Code or a retail marijuana establishment as defined in Section 15-603 of the City Code. (2) The APU is not detrimental to the public good; (3) The APU complies with the requirements and criteria contained in Section 3.5.1; and (4) The APU is not specifically listed as a "prohibited use" in the U-E zone. Section 5. That the Council approval of the APU is based upon the development proposal described in MJA200003 and the associated APU request. Any changes to the uses or to its location, size and design, in a manner that changes the predominant character of or increases the negative impact upon the surrounding area, will require the approval of a new addition of permitted use. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 11.2 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Ordinance No. 062, 2021 (10245 : SR 062 East Park) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Keith Hanson, Real Estate Manager Jason Graham, Water Reclamation/Biosolids Manager Ryan Malarky, Legal SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 063, 2021, Authorizing the Sale of an 11.4-acre Parcel of Vacant Land Located at Meadow Springs Ranch. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, 2021, sells 11.4 acres of vacant City - owned land to Daniel R. Thiel, who has offered to purchase it. The fair market value and negotiated purchase price is $13,680, and the deed contains a restriction prohibiting any advertising signs from being placed on the property. The sale is contingent on approval by Council. The close of escrow is expected to be May 18, 2021. Meadow Springs Ranch is operated by the City’s Utilities department, and it has no current or identified future use for this parcel. They concur that it is in the best interest of the City to eliminate potential maintenance and liability issues that may arise with respect to the property by selling it to Mr. Thiel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 063, 2021 (PDF) 12 Packet Pg. 121 Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 20, 2021 City Council STAFF Keith Hanson, Real Estate Manager Jason Graham, Water Reclamation/Biosolids Manager Ryan Malarky, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 063, 2021, Authorizing the Sale of an 11.4-acre Parcel of Vacant Land Located at Meadow Springs Ranch. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to sell 11.4 acres of vacant City-owned land to Daniel R. Thiel, who has offered to purchase it. The fair market value and negotiated purchase price is $13,680, and the deed contains a restriction prohibiting any advertising signs from being placed on the property. The sale is contingent on approval by Council. The close of escrow is expected to be May 18, 2021. Meadow Springs Ranch is operated by the City’s Utilities department, and it has no current or identified future use for this parcel. They concur that it is in the best interest of the City to eliminate potential maintenance and liability issues that may arise with respect to the property by selling it to Mr. Thiel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City owns this 11.4-acre parcel of vacant land as part of the approximately 26,000 acres that make up the Meadow Springs Ranch. The Utilities department uses the Ranch for the regulatory compliant application of biosolids generated from the City’s wastewater facilities, as well as leasing it as a working cattle ranch. The 11.4-acre parcel is located in Weld County adjacent to the east side of Interstate 25. The rest of Meadow Springs Ranch in that area lies on the west side of Interstate 25 (Attachments 1 and 2). The 11.4-acre parcel is a standalone parcel that is severed from the rest of Meadow Springs Ranch. It is not used by the City for biosolids application or for cattle operations like on the remainder of the Ranch. City staff from Real Estate Services, Utilities and Natural Areas have consulted with each other on the sale of this parcel, and they have determined there is no current or future identified use of it. Daniel R. Thiel (along with his company, the Terry Grazing Association) is the owner of the property surrounding this parcel and is uniquely situated to make use of the property because of his existing access. The City and Mr. Thiel have entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement with a purchase price of $13,680.00. Real Estate Services determined this is a fair market value based on comparable sales and the lack of existing independent access to the parcel. As part of Agreement, the parties agreed to include a deed restriction, which was recommended by the Natural Areas department, that will prohibit any advertising signs being placed on the property. Mr. Thiel has agreed to remove all due diligence contingencies on the transaction. Therefore, the completion of this transaction is only contingent on Council’s approval of the sale by its final adoption of this Ordinance in accordance with Article IV, Section 23-111 of the City Code. ATTACHMENT 1 12.1 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10246 : SR 063 Meadow Springs) Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 2 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The sale proceeds of $13,680, less costs associated with the sale, will be deposited in Utilities’ budget. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Water Board has been apprised of the intent to sell the property. ATTACHMENTS 1. Meadows Springs Ranch Map (PDF) 2. Detail Map (PDF) 12.1 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, April 20, 2021 (w/o attachments) (10246 : SR 063 Meadow Springs) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 063, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF AN 11.4-ACRE PARCEL OF VACANT LAND LOCATED AT MEADOW SPRINGS RANCH WHEREAS, the City is the owner of Meadow Springs Ranch, 26,000 acres of land located approximately 20 miles to the north of the City of Fort Collins near to the Wyoming border (the “Ranch”); and WHEREAS, the City’s wastewater utility uses the Ranch for the regulatory compliant land application of biosolids generated from the City’s wastewater facilities, and it is also leased as a working cattle ranch; and WHEREAS, an 11.4-acre parcel (the “Property”) within the Ranch is located adjacent to the east side of Interstate 25, is severed from the remainder of the Ranch, and is not used either for biosolids application or for cattle ranching operations; and WHEREAS, Real Estate Services staff has consulted with Utilities and Natural Areas department staff, and staff has concluded the City has no current or future identified use for the Property; and WHEREAS, because there is no foreseeable City use of the Property, staff is recommending the Property be sold for fair market value to Daniel R. Thiel who, along with his company Terry Grazing Association, is the owner of the real property surrounding the Property; and WHEREAS, Mr. Thiel has agreed to pay $13,680.00, which Real Estate Services staff has determined is fair market value based on a review of comparable sales and considering the lack of existing independent access to the Property; and WHEREAS, in addition to agreeing to pay fair market value, Mr. Thiel has agreed to a deed restriction that will prohibit the placement of advertising signs on the Property, which is a restriction recommended by the Natural Areas department; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code authorizes the City Council to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property owned by the City, provided the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City and, for real property that is part of the City’s utility systems, that the disposition will not materially impair the viability of that utility system as a whole and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. 12.2 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Ordinance No. 063, 2021 (10246 : SR 063 Meadow Springs) -2- Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the sale of the Property to Daniel R. Thiel as provided herein is in the best interests of the City, will not impair the viability of the City’s utility systems, and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. Section 3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a deed and such other documents as are necessary to convey the Property to Mr. Thiel on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such other additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including but not limited to any necessary changes to the legal description of the Property, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size of the parcel to be conveyed. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of April, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 12.2 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Ordinance No. 063, 2021 (10246 : SR 063 Meadow Springs) Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Aaron Harris, Interim Recreation Director Ingrid Decker, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 065, 2021, Authorizing the City Manager to Accept a Grant Award and Comply with the Terms of the Grant, and Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund to Support Childcare Needs Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to accept and appropriate a $32,800 Child Care Relief Grant awarded by the State of Colorado into the Recreation Department’s 2021 budget. The grant funds will help offset the Recreation Department’s financial impacts resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Due to the ongoing pandemic, the need for childcare has increased in our community. Staff has sought out grants and other sources of funding to meet community need. These grants and funding sources a re needed to offset additional unbudgeted expenses associated with the COVID -19 pandemic, including but not limited to: • Increased operating costs associated with: o Additional cleaning and sanitation; o Health monitoring; o Supplying personal protective equipment for childcare workers; and o Salaries and other compensations for staff who provide childcare, especially as necessary to support COVID-19 restrictions and recommendations. • Reduced revenue resulting from lower staff-to-child ratios, reduced enrollment, or temporary closures due to local public health guidance; • Covering salaries and other compensations for staff who provide childcare, including costs necessary to retain the workforce; • Providing scholarships to reduced fee participants; and • Marketing programs to community. The Child Care Relief Grant Program does not require the City to sign a post -award agreement, but the grant requirements described in the grant application include submitting quarterly responses to data requests and maintaining documentation to demonstrate how the funds were used for three years after receiving funds. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS City resources would increase by $32,800 in the Recreation Fund. No matching funds are required for this grant. 13 Packet Pg. 126 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 065, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A GRANT AWARD AND COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GRANT, AND APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE RECREATION FUND TO SUPPORT CHILDCARE NEEDS DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC WHEREAS, the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for childcare in the Fort Collins community and the costs to childcare facilities of providing such care; and WHEREAS, the City’s Recreation Department operates licensed childcare programs and has sought out grants and other sources of funding to help meet community needs; and WHEREAS, in January 2021, the Colorado Department of Human Services Office of Early Childhood announced the creation of two grant programs to support childcare providers across the state; and WHEREAS the Recreation Department applied for funds from the Child Care Relief Grant Program and was awarded $32,800 to offset additional unbudgeted expenses associated with childcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, including cleaning, health monitoring and equipment costs; reduced revenue; salaries and compensation; scholarships for reduced -fee participants; and marketing of programs to the community (the “Grant”); and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements, such as grant agreements, to provide any function, service or facility, under Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter and Section 29-1-203 of the Colorado Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 1-22 requires intergovernmental agreements or cooperative activities between the City and other governmental entities to be submitted to the City Council for review and approval by ordinance or resolution; and WHEREAS, the Grant does not require execution of a post-award agreement, but the Grant application did require the City to acknowledge that grantees must submit quarterly responses to Child Care Relief Grant data requests and maintain documentation to demonstrate how the funds were used for three years after receiving funds; and WHEREAS, City staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or the City Manager’s, designee to accept the Grant award and comply with the terms of the Grant as describe herein; and WHEREAS, appropriation of the Grant benefits public health, safety and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of supporting affordable childcare programs; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the Packet Pg. 127 -2- total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and ant icipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the Recreation Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Recreation Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated grant revenue in the Recreation Fund the sum of THIRTY-TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($32,800) for expenditure in the Recreation Fund to support childcare needs due to the COVID- 19 pandemic. Section 3. That the City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute any grant agreement or other forms reasonably required by the State to receive the Grant funds. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 128 Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Mark Laken, Civil Engineer II Dan Woodward, Civil Engineer I Brad Buckman, Manager, Civil Engineering Judy Schmidt, Legal SUBJECT Items Relating to the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Intersection Improvement Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2021–051 Authorizing Execution of the First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Signal Project. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 066, 2021, Making a Supplemental Appropriation for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Intersection Improvements Project. The purpose of this item is to enable the City to receive and expend reimbursement funds fro m Larimer County for constructing intersection improvements associated with the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Intersection Improvements Project. This item will authorize the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the State Highway 1/Douglas Road Signal Project dated May 7, 2019 (IGA) with Larimer County. This item will also appropriate $437,376 (to be reimbursed by the County under the IGA) in the Capital Projects Fund for the project. These funds will be used for the co nstruction of a traffic signal and related intersection improvements at the State Highway 1 and Douglas Road intersection. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Larimer County considers the State Highway (SH) 1 and Douglas Road intersection the top ranked intersection in need of signalization improvements. As this intersection falls within the City’s Growth Management Area (GMA), the City has a vested interest in improving this intersection as well. The intersection has high vehicular volumes and speeds on SH 1 as compared to cross traffic on Douglas Road. Analysis performed by CDOT indicates a high potential to enhance safety at the intersection by adding the signal. In 2019, Larimer County applied for and received a Federal Highway Safety Improvement (HSIP) Grant in the amount of $550,000 to design and install traffic signals at the intersection. Shortly thereafter, the City entered into the IGA to define project roles, responsibilities, and funding/reimbursements. Larimer County agreed to design the improvements and perform grant management while the City agreed to oversee the construction and provide long term maintenance of the signal (as it does with other signals under an agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation – “CDOT”). As HSIP funds are grant funds, all funds expended on the project will be subject to applicable CDOT and Federal guidelines. Larimer County has spent $112,624 of the HSIP funds to design the SH1/Douglas Road intersection improvements and to purchase the signal poles required for construction. This agreement will reallocate the 14 Packet Pg. 129 Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 2 remaining $437,376 to the project’s construction phase as well as make these funds to be reimbursed by t he County available for expenditure by the City for all work associated with the construction phase of the project. Independent of this project, the City previously received federal grant funds to design and construct intersection improvements at the Drake Road and Hampshire Road intersection. Due to the similar nature of work required for both projects, CDOT, Larimer County, and the City have agreed that both projects can be delivered more efficiently as a single construction project compared with two independent, smaller construction projects. Staff also anticipates more competitive pricing delivering both intersection improvements under a single contract. This method of contracting is intended to permit completion of the project for the remaining available funds or $437,376. As HSIP funds are ineligible for use toward public art, the project does not include a contribution to the Art in Public Places Program. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The following is a summary of the project funding: Funds to be Appropriated with this Action Larimer County Reimbursement Funds $437,376 Total Current Project Budget $437,376 PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff did not participate in public outreach during the design phase of the project as this was managed by County staff. Staff and County staff will collaboratively develop a comprehensive communication plan for the construction phase to reach residents, property owners, business owners, and other stakeholders. County staff will serve as the lead for public outreach during construction. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map (PDF) 14 Packet Pg. 130 9,&,1,7<0$3 +:<$1''28*/$652$' ATTACHMENT 1 14.1 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Vicinity Map (10227 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road) -1- RESOLUTION 2021-051 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND LARIMER COUNTY FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY 1 / DOUGLAS ROAD SIGNAL PROJECT WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) awarded the County a Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (“HISP”) grant in the amount of a total project cost up to $550,000 for the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Signalization Project (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the City and County entered into the original Intergovernmental Agreement on May 7, 2019 (the “IGA”) in which the County would design and coordinate the Project and the City would construct the Project, and be reimbursed by the County from Federal and State grant funds (collectively the “Grant Funds”); and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County wish to enter into a First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Signal Project substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference (“First Amendment to the IGA”) to allocate the remaining Grant Funds currently budgeted and appropriated in the amount of $437,376 (“Remaining Grant Funds”) to fund the City’s construction of the signal and related improvements as set forth therein; and WHEREAS, Article II, Section 16 of the City of Fort Collins Charter empowers the City Council, by ordinance and resolution, to enter into contracts with governmental bodies to furnish governmental services and make charges for such services, or enter into cooperative or joint activities with other governmental bodies; and WHEREAS, Section 29-1-203 of the Colorado Revised Statutes and Article XIV, Section 18 of the Colorado Constitution provides that governments may cooperate or contract with one another to provide certain services or facilities when such cooperation or contracts are authorized by each party thereto with the approval of its legislative body or other authority having the power to so approve; and WHEREAS, under Section 1-22 of the City Code, intergovernmental agreements and other cooperative arrangements between the City and other governmental entities are to be submitted to the City Council for review, unless they fit within one of the exceptions that permit execution by the City Manager. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the First Amendment to the IGA is in the best interests of the City and its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Packet Pg. 132 -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That, subject to adoption of Ordinance 066-2021 appropriating the Remaining Grant Funds for the Project, the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the First Amendment to the IGA substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” with such modifications and additions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes set forth herein and not otherwise inconsistent with this Resolution. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 133 Contract # 11696331 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR STATE HIGHWAY 1 / DOUGLAS ROAD SIGNAL PROJECT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ("First Agreement") is made and entered into by and between LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, a body politic organized under and existing by virtue of the laws of the State of Colorado ("County") and THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule municipal corporation ("City"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") awarded the County a Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant in the amount of a total project cost up to $550,000 for the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Signalization Project (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City and County entered into the original Intergovernmental Agreement on May 7, 2019 in which the County would design and coordinate the Project and the City would construct the Project, and be reimbursed by the County from Federal and State grant funds (collectively the “Grant Funds”); and WHEREAS, the original grant agreement between the County and the Federal Government funding the Project reflected a Federal contribution of 80% and a local match of 20% for which the County was responsible; and WHEREAS, subsequently, it was determined that the appropriate Federal grant contribution was 90%, and the local match of 10% would be covered by the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”); those grant agreements have been amended accordingly; and WHEREAS, the Grant Funds are broken down as follows: 1) Federal Funds will provide up to $495,000.00 for the Project; and 2) CDOT will provide local matching funds equaling ten percent (10%) of the total Project cost up to an amount of $55,000.00; and WHEREAS, to date, the design of the Project has been completed by the County, and the County received reimbursement of $71,953.49 for its costs of design of the Project from the Grant Funds; and WHEREAS, the City has expended an additional $53.750.50 in purchasing parts for the Project, $40,670.40 of which it has invoiced the County and the County agrees to pay; and WHEREAS, the City and County agree that there will be a shared public benefit by both parties for the Project and agree to collaborate on the Project. This can be accomplished by cash or in-kind services that will reduce overall Project cost; and EXHIBIT A A Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) WHEREAS, the City and the County agree that because the Project is located in the City's Growth Management Area and because the City will operate and maintain the signal for CDOT once complete pursuant to an existing intergovernmental agreement between the City and CDOT, and because the City would like to ensure the signal meets City operation and maintenance needs and because estimated Project costs can be lowered thereby reducing the local match requirement, that it is in both the City and County's best interest for the City to design and construct the signal; and WHEREAS, the City and County agree that the County will remain the grant recipient and manage the Project and reimburse the City for costs related to the design and construction of the signal; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that should the Project costs exceed the current grant funding amounts, the County and City will be equally responsible for these costs subject to appropriations ; and WHEREAS, the Parties intend that the specific provisions set forth in Sections 1 and 2 of this Amended Agreement set forth below shall expressly supersede Sections 1 and 2 of the original Intergovernmental Agreement on May 7, 2019. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: A. Sections 1 and 2 of the original Intergovernmental Agreement on May 7, 2019 are hereby amended in their entirety to read as follows: 1. City Obligations a. The City will construct the signal consistent with the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A (the " Work"). The Work is estimated to occur in 2021. b. On a recurring basis, City will invoice the County for the Work to an amount up to the remaining Grant Funds currently budgeted and appropriated in the amount of $437,376.11 at the time of this Agreement (“Remaining Grant Funds”), unless increased costs are previously approved by the Parties through written and signed change orders and/or contract amendments to exceed such amount. c. The City will give the County reasonable notice and documentation to support any increased costs to aid the County in timely allocating funds for any costs over the Remaining Grant Funds currently budgeted and allocated for this Project. d. The City and County will equally split any Project cost that exceeds the Remaining Grant Funds. e. Once the Work is complete, the City will operate and maintain the signal consistent with the current maintenance contract with CDOT adopted by City resolution 2019-001 (as it may be amended) and any applicable City policies and practices. 2. County Obligations a. The County will provide grant management with CDOT, project design management, public outreach, complete site design and all construction not A Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) specifically related to the signalized intersection project including but not limited to survey, utilities, and right-of-way acquisition. b. The County will pay any invoices described in l(b) above within thirty (30) days of receipt. c. The County acknowledges that the cost of the Project may exceed the Remaining Grant Funds currently budgeted. To that end, the County agrees to act in good faith in seeking future appropriations for the Project should they become necessary. The County further acknowledges that this approval of funds, subject to appropriations, is a pre-requisite to the City authorizing additional work beyond the Remaining Grant Funds. The County further agrees that the City will be equally responsible for any costs of the Project over what is reimbursed by the County. B. The original Agreement remains in full force an effect, except where expressly superseded by this Amended Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement to be effective as of ________________________________ day and year first written above. [Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally] A Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO By: _________________________ Wade Troxell, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Approved to form: ________________________ Judy Schmidt, Sr. Assistant City Attorney A Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO By: ______________________________ Chair, Board of County Commissioners _______________________________ Clerk Approved as to form: ________________________________ Deputy – County Attorney A Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) Exhibit A - City of Fort Collins Scope of Work The City portion of this project is for the installation of a four-phase signalized intersection including pedestrian facilities at the intersection of State Highway 1 & CR 54 (Douglas Road) in Larimer County, CO. The project involves the following work tasks: • Development of traffic signal design plans. • Traffic signal construction cost estimate • Pedestrian facilities improvements (ramps) • Traffic signal Scope of Work Task 1 - Project Coordination. The City Traffic Operations Department will coordinate with other project team members including Larimer County and CDOT as necessary during the project to discuss traffic design issues and project scheduling, coordinate work done by others including concrete work, coordinate work area traffic control during construction and to determine any other project specific requirements. Task 2 - Construct Signalized intersection. Upon completion of the design, City Engineering Dept. will advertise the project for construction and oversee the signalized intersection construction including order material, schedule the work, obtain all necessary permits and install the new traffic signal. Once completed the signal will be turned on in accordance with the City's policy for the turn on of new traffic signal. A Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) A Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Exhibit A (10228 : State Highway 1 - Douglas Road RESO) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 066, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY 1 / DOUGLAS ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") awarded Larimer County a Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant in the amount of a total project cost up to $550,000 for the State Highway 1 / Douglas Road Signalization Project (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City and County entered into an original Intergovernmental Agreement on May 7, 2019 (the “IGA”) in which the County would design and coordinate the Project and the City would construct the Project, and be reimbursed by the County from Federal and State grant funds (collectively the “Grant Funds”); and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County are entering into a First Amendment to the IGA (“First Amendment to the IGA”) to allocate the remaining Grant Funds awarded to the County in the amount of $437,376 to fund the City’s construction of the signal and related improvements as set forth therein; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Ordinance is to appropriate the remaining Grant Funds the City will receive from the County to reimburse the City for construction of the signal and related improvements as set forth in the First Amendment to the IGA; and WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits the public health, safety and welfare of the City’s residents and serves the public purpose of funding the City’s construction of the signalization and related improvements that are included in the Project; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that this appropriation is available and previously unappropriated from the Capital Projects Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Capital Projects Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in that Fund during any fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the project funds being appropriated here are ineligible for public art purposes, as Section 23 -304 of the City Code otherwise requires, due to grant restriction on the use of the funds. Packet Pg. 141 -2- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from anticipated grant revenue in the Capital Projects Fund the sum of FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY-SEVEN THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-SIX DOLLARS ($437,376) for expenditure from the Capital Projects Fund for the State Highway One and Douglas Road Intersection Improvements Project. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021 __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 142 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Associate Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Items Relating to the Gil Boyer Annexation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2021-052 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Gil Boyer Annexation. B. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 067, 2021, Annexing the Property Known as the Gil Boyer Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this item is to annex a 9,800 square foot residential parcel located in northwest Fort Collins. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on consent, March 16, 2021. The property abuts North Taft Hill Road to the east and is situated 450 feet northwest of the intersection of Laporte Avenue and North Taft Hill Road. The annexation area consists of a single-family home and several accessory buildings. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading and the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This is an annexation of a single parcel located at 241 North Taft Hill Road in northwest Fort Collins. According to policies and agreements contained in the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) regarding Growth Management dated June 24, 2008, as amended (IGA), the City of Fort Collins agrees to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property becomes eligible for annexation under the Colorado Revised Statutes. The Gil Boyer Annexation gains the required contigu ity to existing City limits from three common boundaries with the Sanctuary on the Green Annexation (2018) and satisfies the requirement that no less than one -sixth of the perimeter boundary be contiguous to the existing City of Fort Collins municipal boun dary. The proposed annexation is not part of an enclave nor does it create an enclave. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 1, 2021, regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7 -0 to recommend approval of the annexation. This unanimous action was taken as part of the Board’s Consent Calendar. 15 Packet Pg. 143 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 2 PUBLIC OUTREACH The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code and the Colorado Revised Statutes do not stipulate that a neighborhood meeting be held in conjunction with a voluntary annexation. Therefor e, a neighborhood meeting was not held. No public comment has been received to date. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity and Zoning Map (PDF) 2. Annexation Petition (PDF) 3. Annexation Map (PDF) 4. Ownership Report (PDF) 15 Packet Pg. 144 GRANDVIEWCEMETERY POL LMN GIL BOYER ANNEXATIONVICNITY & ZONING MAP ± LAPORTE AVE N TAFT HILL RDPENNSYLVANIA STSITE ATTACHMENT 1 15.1 Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Vicinity and Zoning Map (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) ATTACHMENT 2 15.2 Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Annexation Petition (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) 15.2 Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Annexation Petition (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) 15.2 Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Annexation Petition (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) 15.2 Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Annexation Petition (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) i • f ! • i l· ;i! i • .. j~.f ~ • I • f I ! I • . i i a:H f ! l ~ ~ i 0 ~ !~! ! ._, • ~ ; i lii j~~ t• : ~ .. • ~ ~.~ !q• : .. ! , l i n i • E ! • 's 1•·! • ! • i ' I f'u Ji?:!§ ii l II f ti ·i~i .. ' f ~ J ! i !~I i jf I i " i I• :1 ! •.. i j z ' i. ~m ~f O_t ' ~~} ' ~~ ! ., ! i I ~ • i! •• i i H • ~ 5~!it: !~~~ e i I n :~ H ' !~ !' !: ~I fa HI' , . f u i i ri B ! !j J m1 fid m i f . ~ 61 !f • • • a.fl iii • oo i! . i i I' ~ I Hi i ~ 1 II i • .. • •! f I"' .j!, t~i ' 1! i i h !' ~· i i: ! r" !H { I ' it" i i 'l ~ •l Hj. t~H ~ll ' ~~~ ... • ;~ E 5• E ~ .Jn ii~ i i ,j ~ ii !i i ·' ~ • d s .! s., i iW Hi i f I~ ~ •• f m1 !"'; I iH l H 8 8 ,• l ~H ;~; ~ .. .. .I ~ ~ !i 8 i' i ' JH ~ ~ <l •• i·i i i n ii Hi all ll ·~· ji: l ~! I ~Ii Hi {p l !~ j ~ ~ HJ .. .-!;! ii . .. l Ii .§~8 flo ,, .tiz: iii •• iii ' I• H H: tH l t' ii ''! lf ii' 1•! l .. 1H 1h I d h ., ~,. .. ~· ! !1 : ! =· .. ! h j! I ~i ~ u ll! l! n ! i ~it Sf} . ~' ~~ H h· •" H ~ej ti•I u !~~ i1H li :lf u rn iE u~ ;HI " ATTACHMENT 3 15.3 Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Annexation Map (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) H~ Heritage . I '-Title company TITLE DEPARTMENT-DELIVERY TRANS MITT AL 8055 E Tufts Ave, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80237 M.lring T121W1Crio .. Pe'*'AAI A Commonwealtti ,. warm•~Anr'I' (303) 476-5800 Fax: OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRANCE REPORT Date: August 31, 2020 Effective Date: August 26, 2020 0 & E Order Number: H0615591 Schedule No.: Vesting: Vesting Deed Info.: Property Address: Legal Description: R0147524 Gilbert G. Boyer Warranty Deed 11/2/1970 Book 1445 Page 455 and Death Certificate for Loretta J. Boyer 12/6/2017 (copy not available online) 241 North Taft Hill Road, Fort Collins, CO 80521 See Warranty Deed recorded November 2, 1970 in Book 1445 at Page 455, Excepting that portion contained in Deed of Dedication recorded May 31, 2006 at Reception No. 20060040423. Encumbrances: None NOTE: This information is for your sole use and benefit and is furnished as an accommodation. The information has been taken from our tract indices, without reference to, or examination of, instruments which purport to affect the real property. The information is neither guaranteed nor certified, and is not an Abstract of Title, Opinion of Title, nor a Guarantee of Title, and our liability is limited to the amount of the fees. oande ATTACHMENT 4 15.4 Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Ownership Report (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) STATE HUIEllJMY Fill ''·.' 'oN••:;:·_ ~. Gimirot Larimer ~., .......... and State of . GILBgRT G. BOYER and LORETTA J. BOYER of,tliii ·., ·. . •· 0...111 Larimer lllldStateofColondo,ofth .. eeo.-ulpan: · .WlfMiiiliaiiiO .......... tutie s of IM ftnt part, for and ill eonaideratlon of the ai:m Of ... T~n . Dollars and other valuable consideration. W1tr "°-~-~es ·:·_, ...... ,.re 1n hlllld pUI w· .... •kt,."'"' o1 u.. .~ .... d ""rt. .... -i,e ..... ~ •• ll•lllii;•...._..lllill ¢ '1 II ', uve lll'Utlld. liusalned. 1old and eollve)'ed, and b)' \hue p-tl do 1riaut. ............. , .... .., ..... •unn"" untu th• .. s.1 ....... a.. of U111. •G<"""d rnrl .• th,..ir ltfllrA •nd ""ll'M fnrner. not la...._. .. _ bat la Jetn& t.IDlncp, all lb• tullowlas cl.ae•i~•d Jut or 1•...-<cl yf l•ud, oll.,.'9, lyl"ll ••Ml billsla•. .ea.trot Larimer and Stlteot Colo.ado, to wit: ',,· · .... Ci?nsldering the East line of the NE~· of Section ?, . Toimship 7 :~orth, Ra~.g~~69J4.est ~f the 6th P.M., as bearir!b ~:. oo::i10;t 1 :!:. and with all bear.bigs. herein relative thereto: Begi!-ini~p; at a point on the West · ine of. ~he CoUrity ' Road right of way, which point bears :~. 00010~1 s. 520. 78 feet and again ~:. 89°38 • W. JO feet from the E~ corner of sai Sectt·on 9, thence N. a903a 1 w. 150 f'eet t<:ence t:. 0001.:i~· E. 70 feet thence S. a9°J8' E. 150 feet ·to said ri;-;ht of way line, thence.s. OQ910i' .w •.. 70 feet to the point of be,~im1i~g; · ...... · . '-'\ .. ~ ':: .. · ... :· 1*1ii;ia: ...... ea ~ 8lmplar tb lllndltammta ud appu..--thenunt.o ......-. or la llQWflle .:Vf:l:L:t:~t;4>-=:...-=:.: :-::: =~=-°'-:.D:!tl.:::;_ U: :.::: ··-S;·~QJ;'ti:e~·iiimmc -p.reilllleii, wliJa tlle bereditamenta aad appurte-. .. : •.-·" ' ·· · --.... :·:~llle.W ....._abqft llU' .. illed and claeribed, with tile~ 11Atod1uald : -,. _ ....... "*' U4 .-... '-· And the l&ld part i es of die tint .-rt. tor t:h".lm ./t,, l.iW.~-~ ~ .... llllmhWllator... -t, put, barsaln u4 ..-to ... wltla tlla · · ·.-· 'tliiii ·-.... llift. tWr Hu. ... .-.... tllat at the time of the -1lDS ucl dell"" of~ ,_ ~:;;,:-...: ·r-.. ., ... ,_._ ..... _,.., u of IOOd. ...... perfeet, iibeot• ..... ~ . · ... .,,,,, .. ,,bi:i!n,~·1a1eee1mp1e._.11ave sood rtPat. f1IIl .,_and lawflll ......... to put,._ -~:lii(!M!t·:...,.W ·.-:-.. Ill-.,...,. .. ...,. ,_ .r-•l.t, a11d U>Rt tlui ........ ..., free and ei.r "'°"' aU '""".,. :.tiiiail'~liiiiiillii;........_..a-.u... .._ __ ta allll e.11Cunib-pf wba'4rfc "1nd •• .,..,.~ l!Yft••· EXQep-i;:--;.~ase11119nt:s-, -resel'va-&1on1>, ana. res i:rim;ions:; 01 recoI'u u ar:y; exoep,t ';ane:re.l"taxe$ for 1970 and subseouent ;zee.rs and a first loan ~A~~i"~:~~~ede:a1 Savin&s and Loan Associa ... ion which buyers agreq <:. .., ,. ... :x: ]J ... 'f'Y_, .......... __. .. .,....... oi .... -.. pudaa °' ........ put, dialr · · ·' · · •iiiilil$:1B:•..., ,._ • ,._ lnfllllF elalmbasor to elalm tile whole or_, put thnof, rtli ·~ea:, ~:· .. tut IW 11114 wtll WA&MNT AND FOllEVU DEFEND. . • :'?ili~W~i ..... • ... IUI tut ies cii 6.tlnt puUave hlnaatult t~. ud !,~~x~~'.~~~~._.......... . /2 e/ ~ .¢~ . ~ . .............. ili\l~la ... .,._., ...:.L. ... _ ........................... 1•-!»-""'--.:-~-(RALJ }a ,_ ............ .., __ WI ~ 9 c( ;..., o~J.-/. S~ill and Brenda G. Still July 6 15.4 Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Ownership Report (10216 : Gil Boyer Annexation) -1- RESOLUTION 2021-052 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE GIL BOYER ANNEXATION WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2021-035, annexation proceedings were initiated by the City Council for property to be known as the Gil Boyer Annexation (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, following notice given as required by law, the City Council held a hearing on said annexation on May 4, 2021. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the petition for annexation of the Property complies with the Municipal Annexation Act (the “Act”), Colorado Revised Statutes Section 31-12-101, et seq. Section 3. That the City Council hereby finds that there is at least one-sixth (1/6) contiguity between the City and the Property proposed to be annexed; that a community of interest exists between the Property proposed to be annexed into the City; that said Property is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that the Property is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City. Section 4. That the City Council further determines that the applicable parts of the Act have been met, that an election is not required under the Act, and that there are no other terms and conditions to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 5. That the City Council further finds that notice was duly given, and a hearing was held regarding the annexation in accordance with the Act. Section 6. That the City Council concludes that the Property is eligible for annexation to the City and should be so annexed. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins held this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 153 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 067, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE GIL BOYER ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, on March 16, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution 2021-035, finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings for the Gil Boyer Annexation, as defined therein and described below; and WHEREAS, Resolution 2021-052 setting forth findings of fact and determinations regarding the Gil Boyer Annexation was adopted concurrently with the first reading of this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the property to be known as the Gil Boyer Annexation as described below (the “Property”) to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby incorporates the findings of Resolution 2021-035 and Resolution 2021-52 and further finds that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the Property to the City. Section 3. That the Property, more particularly described as: A portion of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Claimer, State of Colorado, being described as follows: Basis of bearings: The east line of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, assumed to bear N00°37'22"E. Commencing at the east quarter corner of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., Thence along the east line of the northeast quarter of said Section 9, N00°37'22"E a distance of 520.78 feet; Thence departing said section line, N89°11'08"W a distance of 40.00 feet, to a point on the easterly right of way of North Taft Hill Road, said point being the Point of Beginning; Thence N89°11'08"W a distance of 140.00 feet to the east line of Sanctuary on the Green Annexation; Thence N00°37'22"E, along the east line of said Sanctuary on the Green Annexation, a distance of 70.00 feet; Packet Pg. 154 -2- Thence S89°11'08"E, along the south line of said Sanctuary on the Green Annexation, a distance of 140.00 feet to the aforesaid easterly right of way line; Thence S00°37'22"E a distance of 70.00 feet along said easterly right of way line to the Point of Beginning; Containing a calculated area of 0.225 acres, more or less is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Gil Boyer Annexation, which annexation shall become effective upon completion of the conditions contained in Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) Section 31-12-113, including, without limitation, all required filings for recording with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4. That, in annexing the Property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the Property hereby annexed except as may be provided by ordinances of the City. Section 5. That the City hereby consents, pursuant to C.R.S. Section 37-45-136(3.6), to the inclusion of the Property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 155 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Associate Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 068, 2021, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Gil Boyer Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Gil Boyer Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zone district, Neighborhood Sign District, and LC1 Lighting Context Area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The applicant, Gary Van Doren, on behalf of the owner, Gil Boyer, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of the 9,800 square foot parcel located approximately 450 feet northwest of the Gr andview Cemetery. The requested zoning is Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N). The property is currently zoned RR-2 Rural Residential, in the County which allows for rural residential, agricultural, and civic uses. The parcel is developed and contains a single-family detached home, car-port, and two outbuildings. The requested zoning complies with the City's Structure Plan Map, Northwest Subarea Plan Framework Map, both elements of the City' Comprehensive Plan (City Plan). The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: DIRECTION ZONE DISTRICT LAND USE NORTH Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) Undeveloped (development proposal, Sanctuary on the Green) SOUTH RR2 - Rural Residential Single- Family Residential EAST Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) Undeveloped WEST Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) Undeveloped (development proposal, Sanctuary on the Green) The requested zoning for this annexation is the Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zone district. The Land Use Code describes this zone district as follows: 16 Packet Pg. 156 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 2 “Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhoo d and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this District shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. Typically, Low Density Neighborhoods will be clustered around and integral with a Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood with a Neighborhood Commercial Center at its core. For the purposes of this Division, a neighborhood shall be considered to consist of approximately eighty (80) to one hundred sixty (160) acres, with its edges typically consisting of major streets, drainageways, irrigation ditches, railroad tracks and other major physical features.” Northwest Subarea Plan (2006) The subject parcel is contained within the Northwest Subarea Plan which is an element of City Plan. This Pl an was adopted in 2006 and covers 2,680-acres of land in northwest Fort Collins. The creation of the sub -area plan was a joint effort between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County and is an element of the Larimer County Land Use Plan and City of Fort Collins City Plan. The plan provides the following relevant guidance: • The Recommended Locations for RL and LMN Zone Districts in the Low Density Mixed Use Residential Area map on p.17 designates this lot as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. • The Plan recommends that most of the annexed area within the Subarea Plan will be appropriate for LMN zoning. • Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) district, which allows housing up to eight (8) units per acre, including single family homes and townhomes with no minimum lot size and also some commercial development. • Framework Plan map identifies this parcel as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. (p. 12) City Plan (2019) The annexation area is designated as Suburban Neighborhood by the Structure Plan Map. Suburban Neighborhood is described as: • A place type with the principal land-use of single-family detached homes with supporting land uses such as parks, recreation facilities, schools, places of worship, and ADUs where permitted by underlying zoning. • Densities between two and five units per acre. • Amenities and infrastructure encourage walking and biking, but transit service is typically more limited. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 1, 2021, regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Boar d voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposed Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) zoning and placement into the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. This unanimous action was taken as part of the Board’s consent agenda; therefore, no minutes of the meeting are provided. Regarding placement of this parcel into the LC1 Lighting Context Area, City Council adopted the Lighting Context Area map at their April 20, 2021 , regular meeting, therefore the Planning and Zoning Board could not provide a recommendation regarding this. PUBLIC OUTREACH The City of Fort Collins Land Use Code and the Colorado Revised Statutes do not stipulate that a neighborhood meeting be held in conjunction with a voluntary annexation. Therefore, a neighborhood meeting was not held. No public comment has been received to date. 16 Packet Pg. 157 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity and Current Zoning Map (PDF) 2. NW Subarea Framework Plan (PDF) 3. Structure Plan Map (PDF) 16 Packet Pg. 158 GRANDVIEWCEMETERY POL LMN GIL BOYER ANNEXATIONVICNITY & ZONING MAP ± LAPORTE AVE N TAFT HILL RDPENNSYLVANIA STSITE ATTACHMENT 1 16.1 Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Vicinity and Current Zoning Map (10218 : Gil Boyer Zoning) ATTACHMENT 2 16.2 Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: NW Subarea Framework Plan (10218 : Gil Boyer Zoning) 9,028 1,504.7 FCMaps This map is a user generated static output from the City of Fort Collins FCMaps Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.City of Fort Collins - GIS 1,143.0 1: WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet1,143.00571.50 Notes Gil Boyer Annexation Legend 6,859 Street Names Growth Management Area City Limits Community Separator Adjacent Planning Area Structure Plan Adjacent Planning Area Campus District Community Separator Downtown District Industrial District Mixed Employment District Mixed Neighborhood Neighborhood Mixed Use District Parks and Natural/Protected Lands R&D/Flex District Rural Neighborhood Single Family Neighborhood Suburban Mixed Use District Urban Mixed Use District Site ATTACHMENT 3 16.3 Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Structure Plan Map (10218 : Gil Boyer Zoning) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 068, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE GIL BOYER ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AND APPROVING CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN DISTRICT MAP AND THE LIGHTING CONTEXT AREA MAP WHEREAS, on May 18, 2021, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 067, 2021, annexing to the City of Fort Collins the property known as the Gil Boyer Annexation (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the zoning of land; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 2.9.2, the City Planning and Zoning Board, at its meeting on April 1, 2021 unanimously recommended zoning the Property as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L-M-N), as more particularly described below and determined that the proposed zoning is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed zoning of the Property is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, to the extent applicable, the City Council has also analyzed the proposed zoning against the applicable criteria set forth in Section 2.9.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code and finds the proposed zoning to be in compliance with all such criteria; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has considered the zoning of the Property as described below, finds it to be in the best interests of the City, and has determined that the Property should be zoned as hereafter provided. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by including in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“L-M-N”) Zone District the Property more particularly described as: Packet Pg. 162 -2- A portion of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Claimer, State of Colorado, being described as follows: Basis of bearings: The east line of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, assumed to bear N00°37'22"E. Commencing at the east quarter corner of Section 9, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., Thence along the east line of the northeast quarter of said Section 9, N00°37'22"E a distance of 520.78 feet; Thence departing said section line, N89°11'08"W a distance of 40.00 feet, to a point on the easterly right of way of North Taft Hill Road, said point being the Point of Beginning; Thence N89°11'08"W a distance of 140.00 feet to the east line of Sanctuary on the Green Annexation; Thence N00°37'22"E, along the east line of said Sanctuary on the Green Annexation, a distance of 70.00 feet; Thence S89°11'08"E, along the south line of said Sanctuary on the Green Annexation, a distance of 140.00 feet to the aforesaid easterly right of way line; Thence S00°37'22"E a distance of 70.00 feet along said easterly right of way line to the Point of Beginning; Containing a calculated area of 0.225 acres, more or less. Section 3. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7.1(E) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the Property described herein is included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 4. That the Lighting Context Area Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.2.4(H) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the Property described herein is included in the LC1 Lighting Context Area. Section 5. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 163 -3- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 164 Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Program Manager John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Resolution 2021-054 Appointing Directors to Fill Vacancies on the Foothills Metropolitan District Board of Directors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appoint three directors to the Foothills Metropolitan District Board of Directors (Board). In December 2020, the Foothills Mall, owned by Walton Foothills Holding VI LLC (Walton), went into foreclosure and a receiver was appointed by the courts to control the property during the pendency of the foreclosure (Receiver). As a result, two representatives of the Receiver became directors on the Board. In late 2020, Walton mistakenly transferred a parce l of real property to the Foothills Metropolitan District (District), in which property these two directors, as well as the Board’s other director, had a contractual interest. It was these directors’ contractual interests in the property that qualified th em to serve on the District’s Board. The effect of this conveyance was to disqualify these three directors from serving on the Board resulting in a vacant Board. To remedy this, the property has been reconveyed to Walton, and the District is asking Counc il to adopt this Resolution to appoint these three past directors to serve again on the Board. State law authorizes Council to make these appointments when a metropolitan district’s board of directors becomes vacant in a situation like this, but it also requires the newly appointed Board to call within six months of its appointment for the nomination of new directors and to hold a special election for these offices. Without these temporary appointments, the District will be hindered from providing its s ervices to the residents and businesses in the District. These appointments are also needed because Walton currently has a contract with McWhinney Enterprises (McWhinney) to sell the Foothills Mall to McWhinney and this sale cannot be completed until the District’s Board is fully operational. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The District is a metropolitan district established pursuant to Colorado’s Special District Act (the “Special District Act”) under the Amended and Restated Service Plan for the Foothills Metropolitan District approved by City Council on May 7, 2013, in Resolution 2013-044 (Service Plan). The District is located entirely within the City’s boundaries and was organized to provide public improvements and services for the redeveloped Foothills Mall. The District is governed by a board of directors (Board), the directors of which are elected by the District’s “eligible electors.” For a person to qualify under the Special District A ct to be a director on the Board, the person must an “eligible elector” of the District. The Special District Act defines an “eligible elector” of a metropolitan district to be a registered voter in Colorado who is a resident in the District or is the fee title 17 Packet Pg. 165 Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 2 owner of taxable real or personal property in the district or is a person who is under contract to purchase taxable property in the district and obligated under that contract to pay property taxes for the property. Until recently, the qualified directors on the District’s Board were Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli (Past Directors). These Past Directors were qualified to serve as directors on the Board based on them having a contract to purchase a certain parcel of real property (Pro perty) within the District and being obligated under that contract to pay the property taxes for the Property (Purchase Contract). The Past Directors recently lost their qualifications to serve as directors on the Board when the Property was inadvertently conveyed by Walton to the District and, as result, the Past Directors lost their qualifying interest in the Property under the Purchase Contract. Section 32-1-905(1)((d) of the Special District Act provides that a director’s office on the board of a metropolitan district “shall be deemed to be vacant . . . if the person who was duly elected . . . ceases to be qualified for the [director’s] office.” However, Section 32-1-905(2.5) of the Special District Act provides that when there are no duly elected directors on the board of a metropolitan district and the failure to appoint a new board will result in the interruption of the district’s services, the governing body of the municipality within which the district is located “may appoint all directors from the pool of duly qualified, willing candidates.” Also, within six months of such appointments, the newly appointed board must call for nominations for a special election to be held in accordance the Act and applicable Colorado election laws to elect directors . The City recently received a letter (Attachment 1) from the District’s lawyer asking Council to exercise its authority under the Special District Act to appoint directors to the District’s now vacant Board so that the District’s ability to continue to provide its public services will not be hindered. The District’s lawyer advises that the District and Walton have recently recorded a correction deed to reverse the conveyance of the Property from Walton to the District so the Past Directors are again quali fied to serve as directors on the Board and may do so if appointed by Council as authorized in Section 32-1-905(2.5). She also advises that the Past Directors are willing to serve again as the directors. The District is therefore asking that the Past Directors (Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli) be appointed to the Board by Council. And, as already mentioned, if Council adopts the Resolution making these appointments, the Special District Act requires the new Board to call an election within the next six months for the election of directors. It is also the case, as indicated by the District’s lawyer, that Walton has defaulted on its financing for the Foothills Mall, so the Mall is now in foreclosure and being operated by a court -appointed receiver. In an apparent attempt to avoid this foreclosure, Walton has a contract with McWhinney to sell the Foothills Mall to it and the currently closing date for the sale is mid -May. However, this closing will apparently not occur until new directors are appointed to the Board. It should also be noted that Past Directors Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli are also representatives and agents of the court-appointed receiver now operating the Foothills Mall. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter of Request (PDF) 17 Packet Pg. 166 WILLIAM P. ANKELE, JR. JENNIFER GRUBER TANAKA CLINT C. WALDRON KRISTIN BOWERS TOMPKINS ROBERT G. ROGERS BLAIR M. DICKHONER GEORGE M. ROWLEY OF COUNSEL: KRISTEN D. BEAR K. SEAN ALLEN ZACHARY P. WHITE TRISHA K. HARRIS HEATHER L. HARTUNG MEGAN J. MURPHY EVE M. G. VELASCO LAURA S. HEINRICH AUDREY G. JOHNSON LISA CANCANON CAREY S. SMITH V ERIN K. STUTZ April 26, 2021 Via Email: jduval@fcgov.com City of Fort Collins c/o Mr. John Duval, Deputy City Attorney RE: Foothills Metropolitan District/Board of Director Reappointment Request Dear Mr. Duval: White Bear Ankele Tanaka & Waldron currently serves as general counsel to Foothills Metropolitan District (the “District”). The District was organized in accordance with the provisions of Article 1, Title 32, Colorado Revised Statutes (the “Special District Act”) and operates pursuant to the Amended and Restated Service Plan for the District approved by the City Council (the “City Council”) of Fort Collins (the “City”) on or about May 7, 2013. Pursuant to the Special District Act, to qualify as a director of a special district, a person must be an “eligible elector” which is defined as a registered voter of Colorado and either (1) a resident of the special district, or (2) the owner (or spouse or civil union partner of the owner) of taxable real or personal property situated in the special district. For purposes of (2) above, a person who is under contract to purchase taxable property in the special district and is obligated to pay taxes prior to closing is consider an “owner.” It is our understanding that the property within the Foothills development is currently in receivership, though there is a potential sale pending of the property that is anticipated to close in mid-May. As a consequence of the receivership, two representatives of the receiver were recently placed upon the Board of the Directors of the District -- Suni Devitt and Michael L. Staheli. Each of those representatives were qualified as eligible electors pursuant to certain purchase and sale agreements (the “PSA”) for property located within the District between each representative and Walton Foothills Holdings, VI, LLC, the current owner of the property within the District (“Walton”). In addition to the two representatives of the receiver, one additional representative of Walton serves as board member -- Patrick Bunyard. However, it has recently come to our attention that Walton conveyed certain public property to the District for the purposes of ownership, operation and maintenance (the “Transfer”). The legal description included in the Transfer mistakenly included the parcel of property identified in the PSA described above. As a consequence, the three board members were immediately disqualified as “eligible electors,” and the Board of Directors of the District was inadvertently vacated. Walton is in the process 2154 E. Commons Ave., Ste. 2000 | Centennial, CO 80122| P 303.858.1800 F 303.858.1801 | WhiteBearAnkele.com ATTACHMENT 1 17.1 Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Letter of Request (10223 : Foothills Mall Metro District Appointments) 1266:0011:11177989 City of Fort Collins Page 2 April 26, 2021 of executing a correction deed that corrects the underlying legal description of the property conveyed to the District by deleting the parcel of property described in the PSA. Upon delivery of the correction deed, the following persons will be qualified as eligible electors of the District: Patrick Bunyard Suni Devitt Michael L. Staheli In a situation such as this where a board is vacated, the Special District Act (at § 32-1-905(2.5), C.R.S.) authorizes the governing jurisdiction, in this case the City Council, to appoint qualified electors to serve on the Board of Directors of the District, subject to a directors’ election held within six months of the appointment. Pursuant to this statutory authorization, we are requesting the above individuals be appointed to the Board of Directors of the Foothills Metropolitan District by the City Council. Because of the timing associated with the potential closing of the property to a new entity, it is critical that the appointment of the qualified individuals named above occur as soon as possible. This will enable the Board to continue its normal functioning, meet its statutory and contractual obligations, and otherwise handle any District related matters that are necessary for the successful transition of the property to the new owner. On behalf of the District, we respectfully request that the City Council approve the Resolution Appointing Directors to Fill Vacancies on the Foothills Metropolitan Board of Directors at the City Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021. We have enclosed a proposed draft Resolution for your consideration. Sincerely, WHITE BEAR ANKELE TANAKA & WALDRON Kristen D. Bear Of Counsel Cc: Clay Frickey | Redevelopment Program Manager, cfrickey@fcgov.com Enclosure 17.1 Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Letter of Request (10223 : Foothills Mall Metro District Appointments) 3 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING DIRECTORS TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE FOOTHILLS METROPOLITAN DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, Foothills Metropolitan District (the "District") is duly created pursuant to statute and exists as a quasi-governmental entity pursuant to Title 32 of the Colorado Revised Statutes and the Amended and Restated Service Plan for the District (the "Service Plan") as approved by the City Council (the "City Council") on May 7, 2013; and WHEREAS, the District is located entirely within the boundaries of the City; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the directors of the District held interests sufficient to constitute their positions as eligible electors of the District was inadvertently included within a legal description conveying property from Walton to the District (the “Transfer”), resulting in the District's Board of Directors (the "Board") being vacated; and WHEREAS, a correction deed was subsequently recorded correcting the Transfer legal description and the following persons are qualified and willing to serve on the District’s Board of Directors: Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli (the “Proposed Directors”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 32-1-905(2.5), C.R.S., if there are no duly elected Directors of the District and the ongoing services provided by the District will be interrupted as a result thereof, the governing body of the municipality which approved the organization petition may appoint all directors from the pool of duly qualified, willing candidates; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Directors are willing to serve on the Board of the District and provide continuity in its governance as to ongoing matters; and WHEREAS, appointment of the Proposed Directors is necessary in order for the Board to carry out its various powers and responsibilities under Article 1 of Title 32, C.R.S. (the "Special District Act"), and Article 13.5 of Title 1, C.R.S. (the "Election Code"); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fort Collins, having been advised of the need to make such appointments and having been advised that the candidates are duly qualified and willing to serve as members of the Board of Directors, has agreed to appoint such elector candidates to the Board of Directors. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fort Collins , Colorado as follows: 17.1 Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Letter of Request (10223 : Foothills Mall Metro District Appointments) 1266:0011:11177989 Section 1. Appointment of Directors. The City Council of the City of Fort Collins, in accordance with Section 32-1-905(2.5), C.R.S., hereby appoints the following qualified and willing eligible electors of the District to the Board of Directors to be effective immediately, to serve until their successors are duly elected or appointed as provided by statute: Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli. Section 2. Special Election. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 32-1-905(2.5), C.R.S., the Board of Directors of the Foothills Metropolitan District shall call for an election within six (6) months hereof for the purpose of electing members to the Board of Directors in accordance with all statutory requirements. Section 3. Board Action Required. A copy of this Resolution shall be delivered to each Director appointed hereunder. The Board of Directors and each member thereof shall take all other actions in connection with this matter as may be required under the Special District Act and the Election Code. 17.1 Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Letter of Request (10223 : Foothills Mall Metro District Appointments) 5 ADOPTED this _____ day of May, 2021. CITY OF FORT COLLINS By: ____________________________________ Name: __________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ ATTEST: ________________________________ 17.1 Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Letter of Request (10223 : Foothills Mall Metro District Appointments) -1- RESOLUTION NO. 2021-054 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPOINTING DIRECTORS TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE FOOTHILLS METROPOLITAN DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, the Foothills Metropolitan District (the “District”) is a metropolitan district duly established under Colorado’s Special District Act (the “Act”) in Title 32 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) under the Amended and Restated Service Plan for the Foothills Metropolitan District approved by City Council on May 7, 2013, in Resolution 2013-044 (the “Service Plan”); and WHEREAS, the District is located entirely within the City’s boundaries and was organized to provide public improvements and services for the development known as the Foothills Mall; and WHEREAS, in order for a person to qualify under the Act to be a director on the board of directors of a metropolitan district, the person must an “eligible elector,” which the Act defines as a registered voter in Colorado who is a resident in the district or is the fee title owner o f taxable real or personal property in the district or is a person who is under contract to purchase taxable property in the district and obligated under that contract to pay property taxes for the property; and WHEREAS, until recently, the qualified directors on the District’s board of directors (the “Board”) were Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli (collectively, the “Past Directors”); and WHEREAS, the Past Directors were qualified to serve as directors on the Board based on them having a contract to purchase a certain parcel of real property (the “Property”) within the District and being obligated under that contract to pay the property taxes for the Property (the “Purchase Contract”); and WHEREAS, the Past Directors recently lost their qualifications to serve as directors on the Board when the Property was inadvertently conveyed in fee title to the District by the previous fee title owner of the Property, Walton Foothills Holdings, VI, LLC (“Walton”) and, as result of this conveyance, the Past Directors lost their qualifying interest in the Property under the Purchase Contract; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(1)(d) provides that a director’s office on the board of a metropolitan district “shall be deemed to be vacant . . . if the person w ho was duly elected. . . ceases to be qualified for the [director’s] office”; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(2.5) provides that when there are no duly elected directors on the board of a metropolitan district and the failure to appoint a new board wi ll result in the interruption of the district’s services, the governing body of the municipality within which the district is located “may appoint all directors from the pool of duly qualified, willing candidates” and within six months of such appointments the newly appointed board must call for Packet Pg. 172 -2- nominations for a special election to be held in accordance the Act and applicable Colorado election laws; and WHEREAS, the District and Walton have recently recorded a correction deed to reverse the conveyance of the Property from Walton to the District so the Past Directors are again qualified to serve as directors on the Board and may do so if appointed by the City Council as authorized in C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(2.5); and WHEREAS, the Property is part of the Foothills Mall development, which development is owned by Walton, however the development is currently being foreclosed upon by Walton’s lender, MUFG Union Bank (the “Lender”) and in control of a court-appointed receiver, Cordes & Company LLP (the “Receiver”); and WHEREAS, two of the Past Directors, Suni Devitt and Michael L. Staheli, are representatives and agents of the Receiver; and WHEREAS, the current lack of directors on the Board will cause an interruption of the District’s services and will interfere with a current contract between Walton, the Lender and a third party for the third party to purchase the Foothills Mall in lieu of the foreclosure; and WHEREAS, the Past Directors are currently eligible electors of the District and therefore qualified to serve on the Board and are willing to do so to provide continuity in the District’s governance as to its ongoing matters, including the pending potential sale of the Foothills Mall; and WHEREAS, the City Council, having been advised of the need to make the a ppointment of new directors to the District’s Board and having been advised that the Past Directors are duly qualified and willing to serve as directors on the Board, finds that it is in the best interests of the City and the District that the Past Directors be appointed to serve as directors on the Board as authorized in C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(2.5). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby appoints, in accordance with C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(2.5), Patrick Bunyard, Suni Devitt and Michael Staheli to serve as directors on the Board until their successors are duly elected as provided in C.R.S. Section 32-1- 905(2.5). Section 3. That pursuant to the requirements of C.R.S. Section 32-1-905(2.5), the Board shall call for an election within six (6) months hereof for the purpose of electing directors to the Board in accordance with the Act and all other applicable statutory requirements. Packet Pg. 173 -3- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 174 Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Brad Yatabe, Legal Carrie Daggett, City Attorney SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 069, 2021, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins By Changing the Zoning Classification of the Hughes Stadium Annexation Property from the Transition District to Public Open Lands as Required by the Citizen-Initiated Ordinance Passed at the April 6, 2021, Regular Municipal Election. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On April 6, 2021, Fort Collins’ voters passed the citizen-initiated ordinance requiring, among other things, that the City rezone the approximately 164.56-acre property that was subject to the Hughes Stadium Annexation from its current Transition District zoning to the Public Open Lan ds District. The rezoning ordinance is presented for Council adoption on First Reading. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In October 2018, Council annexed into the City the approximately 164.56-acre property upon which Hughes Stadium stood (the “Hughes Stadium Property”) by adopting Ordinance No. 123, 2018, and the Hughes Stadium Property was concurrently zoned as Transition District by Ordinance No. 124, 2018. On November 17, 2020, by means of Resolution 2020-105, Council submitted a citizen-initiated ordinance, subject to modification based upon judicial review, to a vote of the registered electors of the City at the April 6, 2021, regular municipal election. Based upon a Larimer C ounty District Court decision, the citizen-initiated ordinance as set forth in Resolution 2020-105 was later amended by Council adoption of Resolution 2021-024. The amended ballot measure put to a vote of the registered electors of the City read as follows : Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de -annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance? On April 6, 2021, the registered electors of the City passed the ballot measure and as called for in that ballot measure the Ordinance will rezone the Hughes Stadium Property from its current Transition District zoning to Public Open Lands District zoning. 18 Packet Pg. 175 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 069, 2021 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HUGHES STADIUM ANNEXATION PROPERTY FROM THE TRANSITION DISTRICT TO PUBLIC OPEN LANDS AS REQUIRED BY THE CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE PASSED AT THE APRIL 6, 2021, REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION WHEREAS, by adoption of Ordinance No. 123, 2018, on October 16, 2018, City Council approved the Hughes Stadium Annexation, which annexed into the City the approximately 164.56-acre property (the “Hughes Stadium Property”) upon which Hughes Stadium formerly stood; and WHEREAS, by adoption of Ordinance No. 124, 2018, on October 16, 2018, the Hughes Stadium Property was zoned as Transition District; and WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution 2020-105 on November 17, 2020, City Council submitted a citizen-initiated ordinance related to the Hughes Stadium Property, subject to modification based upon judicial review, to a vote of the registered electors of the City at the April 6, 2021, regular municipal election; and WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution 2021-024 on February 16, 2021, City Council revised the citizen-initiated ordinance as set forth in Resolution 2020-105 based upon a related Larimer County District Court decision; and WHEREAS, the revised ballot measure (the “Ballot Measure”) put to a vote of the registered electors of the City at the April 6, 2021, regular municipal election read as follows: Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance? ; and WHEREAS, on April 6, 2021, the Ballot Measure was passed; and WHEREAS, the Ballot Measure requires City Council to rezone the Hughes Stadium Property from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District; and Packet Pg. 176 -2- WHEREAS, in order to carry out the will of the voters, City Council is adopting this Ordinance to rezone the Hughes Stadium Property from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council, in order to carry out the will of voters and as required by the approved Ballot Measure, hereby changes and amends the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins to rezone from the Transition Zone District to the Public Open Lands Zone District, the Hughes Stadium Property more particularly described as: A parcel of land situate in the East Half of Section 20, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 20 as bearing South 00°16'25" West and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto: BEGINNING at the Southeast corner of Foothills Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, recorded at Book 1439 Page 17 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, said corner also being the Northwest corner of Becksted Addition to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Reception No. 910170 Larimer county Clerk and Recorder; thence along the West line of said Becksted Addition, said line also being the East line of said Section 20, South 00°16'25" West, 1,390.85 feet to the East Quarter corner of said Section 20, said point also being the Northwest corner of Mountain Shadows Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Book 1500 Page 6 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the West line of said Mountain Shadows Annexation, said line also being the East line of said Section 20, South 00°17'42" West, 690.54 feet to a point on the Northerly line of Pine Ridge 5th Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Reception No. 2001113963 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along said Pine Ridge 5th Annexation the following three (3) courses and distances, North 89°42'16" West, 30.00 feet; thence, South 00°17'42" West, 456.97 feet; thence, South 78°29'11" West, 1,114.50 feet to a point on the Northeast corner of Pine Ridge 3rd Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, recorded at Reception No. 99006010 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the Northerly line of said Pine Ridge 3rd Annexation, said line also being the Northerly right of way line of Dixon Canyon Road, South 78°29'11" West, 948.91 feet; thence along the Westerly line of said Pine Ridge 3rd Annexation, South 11°30'33" East, 60.00 feet to the Southerly right of way line of Dixon Canyon Road; thence along said line South 78°28'57" West, 635.98 feet; thence departing said line, and along the Easterly line of State Board of Agriculture Lands as recorded at Reception No. 10510582 the following two (2) courses and distances, North 00°04'23" East, 61.42 feet; thence, Packet Pg. 177 -3- North 00°30'58" East, 878.03 feet to the Southeast corner of Maxwell Open Space Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Reception No. 90017479 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the East line of said Maxwell Open Space Annexation, North 00°31'43" East, 1,573.16 feet; thence departing said line, and along the line of said State Board of Agriculture Lands the following six (6) courses and distances, North 57°47'42" East, 65.46 feet; thence along a curve concave to the Northwest having a central angle of 25°26'23", an arc length of 149.40 feet with a radius of 336.48 feet, and the chord of which bears North 45°04'30" East, 148.18 feet; thence along a curve concave to the Northwest having a central angle of 31°42'57", an arc length of 133.40 feet with a radius of 240.99 feet, and the chord of which bears North 16°32'04" East, 131.70 feet; thence, North 00°30'42" East, 111.20 feet; thence along a curve concave to the East having a central angle of 23°27'51", an arc length of 96.85 feet with a radius of 236.49 feet, and the chord of which bears North 11°47'37" East, 96.17 feet; thence, North 86°25'25" East, 1,487.45 feet to the Southwest corner of Foothills 3rd Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Book 1497 Page 190 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the South line of said Foothills 3rd Annexation, North 86°25'25" East, 25.79 feet to the Southwest Corner of Foothills 2nd Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Book 1456 Page 668 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the South line of said Foothills 2nd Annexation, North 86°25'25" East, 446.63 feet to the Southwest Corner of Foothills Annexation to the City of Fort Collins recorded at Book 1439 Page 17 Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; thence along the South line of said Foothills Annexation, North 86°25'25" East, 479.58 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 7,167,953 square feet or 164.554 acres, more or less, and is subject to all easements and rights-of-way now on record or existing. Section 3. The Hughes Stadium Property is not included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 4. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 178 -4- Passed and adopted on final reading on this 18th day of May, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 179 Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 4, 2021 City Council STAFF Paul Sizemore, Interim Director, Comm. Devt. & Neighborhood Serv. Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Resolution 2021-055 Directing the City Manager to Investigate and Evaluate the Regulation of Areas and Activities of State Interest Pursuant to Powers Established in State Law Commonly Referred to as 1041 Powers. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution that directs staff to develop a feasibility evaluation and proposal to implement 1041 regulations for areas and activities of state interest. This item is being brought to Council because a councilmember requested more details on 1041 authority during the April 20, 2021 Council meeting. If Council adopts the Resolution, staff will investigate and evaluate ways in which 1041 powers and 1041 regulations may better allow the City to achieve its policy and regulatory goals and return to Council to report and discuss its findings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION 1041 powers allow local governments to identify, designate, and regulate areas and activities of state interest through a local permitting process. The term “1041” refers to the number of the bill, House Bill 74-1041, that created the 1041 powers in 1974 and the statutes regarding 1041 powers are also referred to as the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (“AASIA”). The purpose of 1041 powers is to give local governments control over particular development projects occurring within their jurisdiction even when the project has statewide impacts. In order to exercise 1041 powers, a local government must identify the areas or activities of state interest and adopt guidelines for the administration of the designated areas or activities, all pursuant to statutory procedures and limitations. Regulations interpreting and applying the adopted guidelines may in turn be adopted in relation to specific development in ar eas of state interest and to specific activities of state interest. Currently, public projects are reviewed through the Site Plan Advisory Review (“SPAR”) process and are not also reviewed under 1041 powers because the City has not adopted 1041 regulations . At the April 20, 2021, regular Council meeting, a majority of Councilmembers expressed interest in exploring the adoption of 1041 regulations. Pursuant to that request, staff is bringing forward this resolution for Council to consider formalizing that direction to staff. If Council adopts the resolution, staff will investigate and evaluate ways in which 1041 powers and 1041 regulations may better allow the City to achieve its policy and regulatory goals and will return to Council to report and discuss its findings. Areas and Activities Subject to 1041 Regulations 19 Packet Pg. 180 Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 2 The AASIA defines the parameters of local regulatory control and establishes minimum standards that must be met or surpassed in local regulations. Development projects that can be regulated under 1041 powers include areas or activities of state concern. AASIA defines areas of state concern as those that contain: 1. Mineral resources 2. Natural hazards 3. Historical/natural/archaeological resources of statewide importance 4. “Key facilities”(airports, highways, major public utility, etc). AASIA defines activities of state concern as the selection, construction and/or development of: 1. Water supply and treatment systems 2. Waste disposal sites 3. Airports 4. Highways 5. Transit infrastructure 6. Utilities 7. New communities 8. Geothermal resource use 9. Nuclear detonations. Several counties and municipalities have adopted 1041 regulations throughout the state. Based on community survey 2015 data collected by the Department of Local Affairs, 37 (or 57%) of Colorado counties and 61 (or 22%) of Colorado municipalities have adopted 1041 regulations. Below is a breakdown of how municipalities currently regulate development projects under 1041 powers. TABLE 1. 1041 MUNICIPAL BREAKDOWN: Percentage of Municipalities Regulating by Area and Activity AREA ACTIVITY MINERAL NATURAL HAZARD HISTORIC/ NATURAL/ARCH KEY FACILITIES WATER SUPPLY WASTE AIRPORT HIGHWAY TRANSIT UTILITIES COMMUNITIES GEOTHERMAL 14% 19% 22% 14% 10% 10% 3% 9% 5% 8% 6% 1% Procedure for Designating Areas and Activities of State Interest and Adopting Guidelines AASIA Section 24-65.1-404 describes the process that must be followed for the City to designate an area or activity of state interest and to adopt guidelines for the administration of designated matters of stat e interest. • The City must hold a public hearing prior to designating an area or activity of state interest and adopting guidelines. o Notice of the date, time, and place of the public hearing and where materials relating to the matter proposed to be designated and the proposed guidelines must be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least 30 days and not more than 60 days prior to the hearing. 19 Packet Pg. 181 Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 3 • Within 30 days after completion of the public hearing, the City may adopt, adopt with modification, or reject the particular designation and guidelines, but the City is obligated to designate any matter that has been finally determined to be a matter of state interest and adopt guidelines for the administration thereof. • After a matter of state interest has been designated, no person may engage in development in a designated area and no designated activity may be conducted until the designation and guidelines for such area or activity been finally determined by the City pursuant to the AASIA. Once the City has designated particular areas and activities of state interest and adopted guidelines and regulations, any person wishing to develop in a designated area or engage in a designated activity apply for a permit to do so. The City must conduct a public hearing on the application may approve an application if it complies with the guidelines and regulations and must deny it if it does not. ATTACHMENTS 1. Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (PDF) 2. Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (PDF) 19 Packet Pg. 182 Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations Audrey Dakan A Project for the Colorado Department of Local Affairs | Community Development Office May 11, 2017 ATTACHMENT 1 19.1 Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations Acknowledgements John Cumming, Ph.D., Jefferson County Public Schools and University of Colorado Denver Barbara J.B. Green, Esq., Sullivan Green Seavy Andy Hill, Colorado Department of Local Affairs, Community Development Office Anne Miller, AICP, Colorado Department of Local Affairs, Community Development Office Jennifer Steffel Johnson, Ph.D., University of Colorado Denver Special Thanks to the Local Government Participants Arapahoe County Boulder County Clear Creek County City of Golden Otero County Park County Routt County Town of Silt Town of Silverthorne Summit County City of Superior 19.1 Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ i INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND | CONTEXT | PROBLEM STATEMENT ..................................................................... 1 OBJECTIVE .................................................................................................................................. 1 OUTLINE OF REMAINDER OF REPORT .......................................................................................... 2 BACKGROUND RESEARCH ...................................................................................................... 2 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 2 AASIA AND 1041 REGULATIONS................................................................................................... 4 LEGAL CHALLENGES TO AASIA AND 1041 REGULATIONS ............................................................... 5 THE LAND USE COMMISSION ....................................................................................................... 9 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 10 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 12 THE DATA .................................................................................................................................. 12 THE SAMPLE .............................................................................................................................. 12 COLLECTING THE DATA ............................................................................................................... 12 ANALYZING THE DATA ................................................................................................................ 12 THE RESPONSE RATE .................................................................................................................. 14 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 14 QUESTIONNAIRES ...................................................................................................................... 14 INTERVIEWS .............................................................................................................................. 20 LESSONS LEARNED ............................................................................................................... 23 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 24 CASE STUDIES ...................................................................................................................... 26 ARAPAHOE COUNTY .................................................................................................................. 26 19.1 Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations CLEAR CREEK COUNTY ................................................................................................................ 28 OTERO COUNTY ......................................................................................................................... 30 ROUTT COUNTY ......................................................................................................................... 32 TOWN OF SILT ............................................................................................................................ 34 TOWN OF SILVERTHORNE........................................................................................................... 36 SUMMIT COUNTY ...................................................................................................................... 38 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 40 APPENDIX A, ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................ 43 APPENDIX B, COUNTIES WITH 1041 REGULATIONS ............................................................... 47 APPENDIX C, MUNICIPALITIES WITH 1041 REGULATIONS ..................................................... 48 APPENDIX D, PARTICIPANTS SELECTED FOR INCLUSION IN THE SAMPLE ............................... 50 APPENDIX E, ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES, QUESTION 1 ......................................... 51 APPENDIX F, ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES, QUESTION 3 ......................................... 52 APPENDIX G, ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES, QUESTION 8 ......................................... 53 APPENDIX H, ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES, QUESTION 9 ......................................... 54 19.1 Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION In 1974, House Bill 74-1041 was introduced to address issues surrounding land use planning in Colorado (Warner, 1977, p. 1731). Later that year, the bill was enacted as the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (AASIA) (Panos, 1994, p. 1309). AASIA defines a set of activities and areas of state interest and delegates power to local governments to regulate the development of such areas or such activities (C.R.S. §§ 24-65.1-101, et seq., 2016). The delegated powers are commonly referred to and known as “1041 Powers,” and the regulations as “1041 Regulations,” and primarily consist of area-and/or activity-designation, adoption of development guidelines, and permit issuance (C.R.S. §§ 24-65.1- 101, et seq., 2016). Though 1041 Powers have existed since 1974, information about how they are being used by Colorado local governments has never been assembled. In 2016, during an examination of web traffic to their site, the Community Development Office (CDO) of the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), Division of Local Government, discovered numerous people looking to their office for information on 1041 Regulations. The CDO currently shares some basic information about 1041 Regulations and recognized an opportunity for its office to fill the gaps in the current understanding and provide more comprehensive information. OBJECTIVE The objective of this project was to research how local governments are using 1041 Regulations by assembling case studies and lessons learned that can be accessed by Colorado local governments interested in learning more about 1041 Powers. To uncover how local governments are using 1041 Regulations, questions about the experience of using 1041s, the effectiveness and usefulness of 1041s, and when 1041s should be used needed to be answered. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF 1041 REGULATIONS The desire for state-level oversight in local planning decisions in the early 1970s led to the creation of the Land Use Act (LUA), the Land Use Commission (LUC), and 1041 Regulations. As support for state control waned, the LUC’s role was changed, from oversight and approval to guidance and support. Throughout the evolution of the LUC, the authority delegated to local governments remained intact. Challenges to AASIA and the authority delegated to local governments confirmed the validity and constitutionality of 1041 Powers and 1041 Regulations. The abolishment of the LUC ultimately removed all state oversight from the 1041 Regulation process, and solidified local governments’ authority to enact 1041 Regulations. See also Figure 1. METHODOLOGY THE DATA. The data that needed to be collected for this study was, broadly, about how local governments are using 1041 Regulations. To obtain more in- depth information from local governments, the researcher and the CDO crafted 19.1 Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations ii a series of closed-ended and open-ended questions. The questions were sorted into two different collection instruments: closed-ended questions (plus two open-ended questions) were used in an online questionnaire and open-ended questions were asked during telephone interviews. THE SAMPLE. Communities known to have 1041 Regulations were identified for participation in the study. The goal was to have a representative sample of communities from across Colorado, such that any community interested in learning about 1041 Regulations could find information with which they could identify and from which they could gain insight: the communities identified for inclusion represented different areas of the state, different population sizes, and were a mix of counties and municipalities. Forty communities were identified for inclusion in the sample. Eleven local governments responded to the online questionnaire and seven governments participated in telephone interviews. RESULTS KEY FINDINGS • All respondents adopted 1041 Regulations pro-actively because they desired local control and the ability to regulate projects and developments in a manner that protected their communities. • Most respondents have found their 1041 Regulations to be effective because of the ability to control large-scale projects at the local level. Many of the development types designated in AASIA are not subject to local control through other regulatory tools. • Most respondents would recommend 1041s to other local governments because of the additional authority granted to local governments, the ability to regulate and mitigate adverse impacts, and ensure project coordination. LESSONS LEARNED 1041s expand local government authority. It is the expanded authority to oversee and review projects and entities that are not subject to other local controls that helps explain why a community would elect to use 1041s. The authority to coordinate with landowners, project developers, and other agencies is key. Additionally, 1041 designations enable counties with large areas of federal land to regulate development therein, an authority they do not have with other land use regulations. 1041s are customizable to suit specific needs and unique circumstances . The ability for local governments to adopt more stringent criteria than is described in AASIA makes these regulations incredibly useful and powerful. With the same regulation, the respondent communities have each made designations and incorporated criteria that enable them to address needs specific to their community. 1041s enable coordination between the public and private realms. 1041s also enable a local government to regulate development on private land to protect the public welfare. 1041s cover all affected land or activities within the 19.1 Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations iii local government’s boundaries and apply regardless of the existing uses or who owns the land. This is especially helpful with activities such as pipelines or transmission lines that cross miles of land, private and public, because it enables the local government to regulate the entire project in a coordinated and consistent manner. 1041s connected to legitimate community concerns are unlikely to be opposed. While one might expect that property owners would be reluctant to support regulations that could interfere with their own use of their land, the respondent communities’ experiences demonstrate that community members will support the adoption of 1041 Regulations when the benefits of adoption are reasonable and protect resources or assets of special value to the community. 1041s are working as intended to protect natural assets and resources. The intent of AASIA is to protect “the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-101, 2016) and, as opined by Panos (1994) and Warner (1977), and echoed by one respondent, 1041s are an environmental regulation. Though AASIA does not require it, all the interviewed communities require submission of an environmental impact analysis from any applicant (not just CDOT or other agencies), and many require it regardless of the development type or impacts. Despite the state no longer overseeing this process, 1041 Regulations provide a means for enacting broad environmental regulations through voluntary and context-specific adoption at the local level. CONCLUSION In the years since 1041 Powers and 1041 Regulations were authorized through AASIA, many local governments adopted and used the regulations. AASIA and some governments’ 1041 Regulations were challenged in the courts but emerged intact, with important confirmations made about the constitutionality and validity of the powers and authority conferred to local governments. Despite their use and court rulings over the years, the information about how 1041s are being used has never been collected from the various sources and made easily available. The CDO recognized an opportunity for their office to assemble and share in-depth information about 1041 Regulations. Thus, the objective of this project was to research the use of 1041 Regulations by local governments and assemble and package that information for easy access by other local governments interested in learning more. The background research assembled in this project provides important contextual information about the history of 1041 Regulations and provides a short breakdown of the most important elements of AASIA. Summaries of the legal opinions published about AASIA and 1041 Regulations highlight the most important and relevant—for planners and land managers—decisions and findings from the courts. The case studies developed from the questionnaire data, interviews, and review of each local governments’ 1041 Regulations provide useful information about the experience of using 1041s, the effectiveness and usefulness of 1041s, and when 1041s are appropriate for use. 19.1 Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND | CONTEXT | PROBLEM STATEMENT In 1974, House Bill 74-1041 was introduced to address issues surrounding land use planning in Colorado (Warner, 1977, p. 1731). Later that year, the bill was enacted as the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (AASIA) (Panos, 1994, p. 1309). AASIA defines a set of activities and areas of state interest and delegates power to local governments to regulate the development of such areas or such activities (C.R.S. §§ 24-65.1-101, et seq., 2016). The delegated powers are commonly referred to and known as “1041 Powers,” and the regulations as “1041 Regulations,” and primarily consist of area-and/or activity-designation, adoption of development guidelines, and permit issuance (C.R.S. §§ 24-65.1- 101, et seq., 2016). Though 1041 Powers have existed since 1974, information about how they are being used by Colorado local governments has never been assembled. The Community Development Office (CDO), located within the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), Division of Local Government, collected data from local governments in 2015 that showed many across the state have adopted 1041 Regulations (DOLA, 2015(a), p. 31-33; DOLA, 2015(b), p. 11). That data showed the areas and/or activities designated by some local governments, but did not include any other information about the communities’ 1041s. Over the years, lawyers have written about the regulations, and various provisions of AASIA and local governments’ 1041 Regulations have been challenged and upheld in the courts. So while there is a wide range of information and knowledge available about local governments’ use of 1041s, it has never been pulled together and made available for reference in one place. In 2016, during an examination of web traffic to their site, the CDO discovered numerous people looking to their office for information on 1041 Regulations. The CDO currently shares some basic information about 1041 Regulations, and recognized an opportunity for its office to fill the gaps in the current understanding and provide more comprehensive information. In particular, local governments need case studies and lessons learned about how to effectively and successfully use 1041 Regulations. OBJECTIVE The objective of this project was to research how local governments are using 1041 Regulations by assembling case studies and lessons learned that can be accessed by Colorado local governments interested in learning more about 1041 Powers. To uncover how local governments are using 1041 Regulations, questions about the experience of using 1041s, the effectiveness and usefulness of 1041s, and when 1041s should be used needed to be answered. The case studies and other findings will provide guidance on developing and adopting 1041 Regulations, and might inspire local governments to consider modifying or adopting regulations in ways not previously considered or thought feasible. 19.1 Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 2 OUTLINE OF REMAINDER OF REPORT What follows next is a summarization of background research on AASIA and 1041 Regulations. This will include the historical context in which House Bill 74- 1041 was born and ultimately enacted, a narrative summary of AASIA, and legal decisions about 1041 Powers and local 1041 Regulations. The background research will conclude with a brief discussion of the Land Use Commission, a body that was charged with oversight of the 1041 process when AASIA was first enacted, but which is no longer in existence (and, thus, no longer plays a role in the implementation of AASIA). Following the background research, the methodology for collecting data will be briefly discussed, including the data collection instruments, sampling method to identify communities for participation, methodology for data analysis, and the response rate. The results section will describe, both generally and specifically, the findings from the questionnaires and interviews. The findings will be analyzed and discussed in the section on lessons learned and case studies detailing the communities’ experiences with 1041s will complete the paper. BACKGROUND RESEARCH The purpose of reviewing the existing literature was to understand the history of AASIA and 1041 Powers and how they have been understood and viewed over the years. The existing literature was written primarily by lawyers and the courts and is approached from a legal perspective. The literature provides historical information about AASIA and 1041 Powers, as well as confirmation of the validity of the regulation, but does not include any research on the use of 1041 Regulations by local governments. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND After World War II, states across the U.S. began looking for ways to assert some control over local land use planning decisions, motivated in part by President Nixon’s National Land Use Policy Act (Bosselman and Callies, 1971). Nixon’s act was never adopted but it would have required states to oversee development in sensitive environmental areas, to ensure that regional planning efforts were not thwarted by local governments, and to manage the development of large-scale projects and land use around “key facilities,” all in order to receive certain federal funds (Bosselman and Callies, 1971, p. i). Colorado’s population boomed in the post-WWII era. The state’s population grew by 32 percent during the 1950s and by another 26 percent in the 1960s, growing from 1.3 million to 2.2 million people in just 20 years (State Demographer’s Office, n.d.; Warner, 1977; Wickersham, 1977). The influx of people had politicians and Coloradans, both long-time residents and new transplants, worried about how the state was changing (Wickersham, 1977). In Denver, the rapid population growth and development of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s had transformed the capital city from a “Cow Town” to an urban city, but not without negative effects (Wickersham, 1977). Traffic congestion and 19.1 Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 3 pollution worsened, development sprawled outward, and taxes were raised to fund the construction of utilities (Wickersham, 1977). Older residents saw their way of life disappearing and new residents worried that their “Colorado lifestyle” was being destroyed (Wickerhsam, 1977, p. 1780). To address the concerns of Coloradans about the rapid development taking place, and in order to introduce state oversight into the planning process,1 the Colorado Land Use Act (LUA) was enacted in 1970 (Green and Seibert, 1990). The LUA’s legislative declaration read, “’the rapid growth and development of the state and the resulting demands on its land resources make new and innovative measures necessary to encourage planned and orderly land use development’” (Warner, 1977, p. 1731, quoting C.R.S. § 24-65-102(1), 1973 (repealed)). The LUA created a “statewide system of land use” (Warner, 1977, p. 1731), with the intent to develop a “state land use map” (Dischinger, 2005, p. 80), a project that was to be coordinated and overseen by the Land Use Commission (Dischinger, 2005). In 1974, House Bill 74-1041 was introduced in the Colorado legislature to address issues surrounding land use planning in Colorado (Warner, 1977). The intent of HB 74-1041 was to protect the environment and lifestyle of the state. Panos (1994) writes, “The clear objective of H.B. 1041 is to assure that environmental impacts of new development are considered and mitigated” (p. 1311). Warner (1977) writes, “The intent of … H.B. 1041 is distinctly environmental” (p. 1732). Beginning in January and continuing through April of 1974, House Bill 74-1041 moved through House and Senate Committees (Colorado State Archives, n.d). As enacted, it became the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act, as part of the LUA (Dischinger, 2005). AASIA granted “broadened authority and a permit- type procedure to local governments, yet reserve[d] to state level decision- makers the ability to ensure responsible action at the local level” (Kurtz-Phelan, 1977, p. 1719). Essentially, AASIA introduced a layer of state oversight to certain local planning and development decisions—those of “state interest”—that had not previously existed (Kurtz-Phelan, 1977; Panos, 1994; Warner, 1977). At the same time, AASIA granted to local governments express control of the impacts of development (Panos, 1994) and was “a distinct shift from the traditional zoning methods by which local governments exercise[d] their police power over land development (White and Petros, 1977, p. 1697). Control at the state level was exercised through the Land Use Commission and a few other state agencies, and at the local level through the delegated authority to local governments to designate matters of state interest, adopt development guidelines, and issue permits. However, as explained further below, state-level control would disappear over the years as the Land Use Commission’s role and responsibilities were amended and minimized, ultimately leading to its 1 Dischinger (2005), quoting the Commentary on Article 7 of the Model Land Development Code, writes “‘Most of the states are now giving serious study to a variety of proposals to reform land use regulation, and almost all these proposals involve some new powers for state or regional agencies’” (p. 80). 19.1 Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 4 Local governments are authorized to adopt regulations stricter than the minimum standards set out in AASIA. abolishment. Despite the evolving nature of state-level control under AASIA, local control remained in full effect; 1041 Regulations have been adopted by many local governments as an effective land-use planning tool. AASIA AND 1041 REGULATIONS The legislative declaration of AASIA reads, “The protection of the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state, including the public domain as well as privately owned land, is a matter of public interest. . .Local governments shall be encouraged to designate areas and activities of state interest” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1- 101, 2016). AASIA defines “areas” of state interest as those that contain “mineral resources … natural hazards … significant impact upon historical, natural, or archaeological resources … [and are] around key facilities” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-201, 2016). “Activities” include the selection, construction, and/or development of water supply and treatment systems, waste disposal sites, airports, highways and transit infrastructure, utilities, new communities, and geothermal resource use (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203, 2016). It establishes a set of criteria for each of the four areas and ten activities, describing the minimum standards for development that must be met to be in compliance with AASIA. For example, “[a]irports shall be located or expanded in a manner which will minimize disruption to the environment of existing communities, minimize the impact on existing community services, and complement the economic and transportation needs of the state and the area” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-201(3), 2016). If a local government wishes to invoke its 1041 Powers and adopt 1041 Regulations, it must first hold a public meeting (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-401(1), 2016), providing notice of such meeting between 30 and 60 days beforehand (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-404(2), 2016). If the designation includes designation of an area, the designation must describe the physical boundaries of the area. AASIA also sets forth the necessary findings that a local government must make prior to designation of an area or activity of state interest (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-401(2), 2016). Once a designation is made, development in an area of state interest or the conduct of an activity of state interest is prohibited (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-404(4), 2016) until the local government “develop[s] guidelines” that are consistent with the minimum standards set forth in AASIA (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-402(1), 2016). The designation and guidelines also may be made and adopted in a single hearing. No less than 30 days following the public meeting, the local government “may adopt, adopt with modification, or reject the particular designation and guidelines” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-404(3), 2016). Importantly, local governments are authorized to adopt regulations stricter than the minimum standards set out in AASIA (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-402(3), 2016). Once an area or activity of state interest has been designated, and regulations have been adopted, the local government can issue permits for development in a designated area of state interest or for an activity of state interest. The government must hold a public meeting (with notice) where a “decision, and its findings and conclusions” are made (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-501(1)(a), (2)(a), (5), 2016). The local government “shall” deny a permit for any development or activity that 19.1 Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 5 A local government can make 1041 designations upon receiving an application for development. does not meet the statutory guidelines or the local regulations adopted by the government (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-501(3), (4), 2016). If a permit is sought for an activity or development in an area that has not yet been designated, the local government still has time to act; it can hold a public meeting “for determination of designation and guidelines and granting or denying the permit” (C.R.S. § 24- 65.1-501(2)(b), 2016). LEGAL CHALLENGES TO AASIA AND 1041 REGULATIONS A number of court cases have been decided that challenged different aspects of AASIA and 1041 Regulations adopted by local governments. The following cases represent published opinions of the Colorado Court of Appeals or Supreme Court of Colorado. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Ass’n, Inc. v. Board of County Com’rs of Lincoln County, 600 P.2d 103 (Colo.App. 1979): site selection and construction of public utilities (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(f), 2016) designated as an activity of state interest. In a 1979 case brought by Tri-State Generation against Lincoln County, the Court of Appeals held that Lincoln County could designate an activity of state interest and enforce its 1041 Powers even when there was a “vested property right” (Tri-State Generation and Transmission Ass’n, Inc. v. Board of County Com’rs of Lincoln County, 600 P.2d 103, p. 104). Importantly, the court found that the county’s application of its newly adopted 1041 Regulations to the activity in question (construction of power lines) was not an unconstitutional taking because, while money had been expended for right-of-way acquisition, plan making, and site studies, construction had not yet begun when the 1041 Regulations were adopted in accordance with AASIA. Further, the court ruled that the county’s denial of Tri-State’s permit was not an abuse of discretion because it was based on the plan submitted by Tri-State; the county was under no obligation to consider an alternative that was not presented to it. City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656 (Colo.App. 1988): site selection and construction of major new domestic water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(a), 2016), and the efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(h), 2016) designated as activities of state interest. In 1988, Denver’s Board of Water Commissioners (Denver Water) filed a facial challenge2 to AASIA and the 1041 Regulations adopted by Eagle County and Grand County. Denver first argued that AASIA’s delegation of authority to local governments to designate matters of state interest was unconstitutional because the delegation granted too much discretion to local governments. The Court of Appeals did not rule on the constitutionality of AASIA itself, but found that, as adopted, the counties’ regulations were well within their authority and, thus, valid (City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 2 A facial challenge alleges that a statute is unconstitutional and, thus, void. 19.1 Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 6 The provision of AASIA that authorizes local governments to adopt stricter requirements for approving permits is a constitutional delegation of authority. Regulation of matters of state interest supersedes Denver Water’s local interest in water projects outside its boundaries. 656, p. 660-61). Second, Denver Water claimed that it was exempt from the 1041 Regulations adopted by the counties because of its home rule status under the state Constitution, arguing that it had a right to construct water projects wherever it holds water rights. Specifically, Denver Water believed “it [was] empowered to construct or add to its water works facilities outside its territorial limits free from regulatory interference by the Counties” (City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656, p. 660-62). The court disagreed and ruled that regulation of matters of state interest supersedes Denver Water’s local interest in water projects outside its boundaries, and thus, Denver must comply with the counties’ 1041 Regulations. Third, Denver Water argued that the 1041 Regulations interfered with its constitutional right to water access and use. The Court disagreed, finding that the county regulations did not deny Denver Water its right to use its water, the regulations only required that Denver Water seek a permit and comply with the adopted regulations (City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656, p. 662). Denver Water’s last claim, that it was exempt from complying with the counties’ 1041 Regulations based on “the express provision of the Act” (City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656, p. 662) was denied because: 1) Denver Water met the definition of a “person” as defined in AASIA; and 2) because the counties’ regulations simply addressed the manner in which Denver Water could appropriate water (City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656, pp. 662, 663). City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 782 .2d 753 (Colo. 1989). Unhappy with the Court of Appeals’ decision, Denver brought the case before the Colorado Supreme Court. In 1989, the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals’ rulings. The Supreme Court also held that the provision of AASIA that authorizes local governments to adopt stricter requirements for approving permits was “an understandable provision” and a constitutional delegation of authority (City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 782 .2d 753, p. 760). It also ruled that the overall authority delegated to local governments through the Land Use Act was constitutional (City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 782 .2d 753, p. 766). City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105 (Colo.App. 1994): site selection and construction of major new domestic water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(a), 2016), and the efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(h), 2016) designated as activities of state interest. In this case, Eagle County denied a permit for a water project proposed by the Cities of Colorado Springs and Aurora on federal land within the Holy Cross Wilderness Area because the cities’ project did not satisfy the Eagle County regulations. In particular, Eagle County decided that the cities failed to prove that the impacts of the project to wetlands would be adequately mitigated. The cities then sued Eagle County on a number of claims. In 1994, the Colorado Court of Appeals 19.1 Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 7 “…if a proposed project fails to satisfy even one criterion, the Board must deny the requested permits.” Once a designation of state interest has been made, AASIA is the controlling statute, regardless of which statute is newest. 1041 Powers and 1041 Regulations apply to projects on federal land. ruled on the case, and upheld the decision of the Eagle County Commissioners to deny the permit. First, the court referred to the provision of AASIA that requires the local government to deny a permit if all criteria of regulation are not met, concluding that “if a proposed project fails to satisfy even one criterion, the Board must deny the requested permits” (City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105, p. 1110 (emphasis added)). The court, relying on City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County ruled and agreed that AASIA, and any 1041 Regulations adopted by a local government, authorize a local government to regulate home rule city water projects located outside of the cities’ jurisdictional boundaries (“…the regulations enacted by the Board are applicable to development of water diversion projects which are located within Eagle County even if the end users of the water are not” (City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105, p. 1113)). The court also ruled that when a conflict between AASIA and another statute exists, AASIA controls once a designation of state interest has been made, regardless of which statute is newest (City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105, p. 1118). The court made additional rulings on claims similar to those made in City & County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, relying upon the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals determinations about constitutionality and the delegation of authority. The Eagle County case is uniquely important because it is the only challenge to a denial of a 1041 permit and the only case that confirms that 1041 authority applies to projects on federal land. Dill v. Board of County Commissioners of Lincoln County, 928 P.2d 809 (Colo.App. 1996): site selection and development of solid waste disposal sites (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(b), 2016) designated as an activity of state interest. In 1982, Lincoln County adopted 1041 Regulations addressing solid waste disposal sites. In 1994, Dill notified Lincoln County that it intended to build and operate a landfill. Before receiving any application from Dill, the county received complaints from citizens about the proposed development and adopted two resolutions, effectively preventing Dill from proceeding with its development plan. Dill sued the county, in part, on the basis that it had exceeded its authority by adopting a moratorium. The Court of Appeals ruled that, based on the language of AASIA, a local government has the authority to revise its 1041 Regulations as it sees fit and to cease approving permits “for a reasonable time such that regulations can be updated” (Dill v. Board of County Commissioners of Lincoln County, 928 P.2d 809, p. 814). Board of County Com’rs of the County of Douglas v. Gartrell Inv. Co., LLC, 33 P.3d 1244 (2001): site selection and development of new communities (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(1)(g), 2016) designated as an activity of state interest. AASIA defines new communities as “the major revitalization of existing municipalities or the establishment of urbanized growth centers in unincorporated areas” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-104(13), 2016). Douglas County adopted 1041 Regulations under this provision that defined urbanized growth centers as “‘[a]ny incorporation or annexation of an existing or proposed urbanized growth center 19.1 Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 8 1041 Regulations are not preempted by state highway regulations because they “advance compatible goals.” in Douglas County when located outside the MPAs [municipal planning areas] as identified on the Douglas County Master Plan Land Use Map, as amended’” (Board of County Com’rs of the County of Douglas v. Gartrell Inv. Co., LLC, 33 P.3d 1244, p. 1247, quoting Regulations, Areas & Activities of Douglas County Designated as Matter of State Interest). The County argued that a developer in an urbanized growth center needed a 1041 permit before the land could be annexed into Aurora. The court disagreed with the county’s contention, noting that AASIA “did not expressly list annexation as an activity of state interest” (Board of County Com’rs of the County of Douglas v. Gartrell Inv. Co., LLC, 33 P.3d 1244, p. 1248) and thus, the county could not define an urbanized growth as an annexation. The court further noted that the developer did not need a 1041 permit from Douglas County because the land would not be developed unless or until it was annexed into Aurora, thereby removing the land from unincorporated territory. Under AASIA, county 1041 Regulations only apply in unincorporated areas of a county. Department of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490 (Colo.App. 2008): site selection of arterial highways and interchanges and collector highways (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-203(1)(e), 2016) designated as an activity of state interest. The City of Idaho Springs adopted 1041 Regulations governing highways in anticipation of the widening of I-70. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) sued Idaho Springs claiming that it was not subject to Idaho Springs’ 1041 Regulations because CDOT was not a “person” under AASIA. The court disagreed, finding that “[b]ecause the site selection of arterial highways is an activity often conducted by CDOT (under the provisions of Title 43), the context suggests that the legislature intended to subject CDOT to some degree of local regulatory control under the AASIA” (Department of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490, p. 493). CDOT also argued that AASIA and Title 43 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, which “places CDOT in charge of developing the state transportation plan” (Department of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490, p.492), conflict with one another, thus relieving CDOT from being controlled by AASIA or 1041 Regulations because Title 43 is newer and more detailed. The court disagreed with CDOT, noting that there was no conflict between AASIA and Title 43 “because the schemes advance compatible goals” (Department of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490, p.494). The court held that the Idaho Springs 1041 Regulations could be applied harmoniously with state highway regulations and thus, were not preempted by state regulations. With these seven rulings, the courts confirmed that the authority delegated to local governments to adopt 1041 Regulations, and the provision authorizing local governments to adopt more stringent development guidelines than those outlined in AASIA, are constitutional. The courts also confirmed that a local government reserves the right to deny a permit if all criteria under the statute has not been satisfied, to update its 1041 Regulations as it deems necessary, and to hold off on approving permits during the updating process. The courts’ rulings in City and County of Denver and City of Colorado Springs confirmed that 1041 Regulations can be successfully implemented with regards to water 19.1 Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 9 The Land Use Commission’s most significant and meaningful contributions came in the form of providing advisement, support, and guidance to local governments. projects that have multi-jurisdictional impacts and that originate from home- rule municipalities. The City of Colorado Springs case also importantly provides confirmation that 1041 Regulations can be used to control development on federal lands and that AASIA is the controlling statute when conflicts between statutes might exist. THE LAND USE COMMISSION The Land Use Commission (LUC) was established in 1970 through the Land Use Act (Dischinger, 2005), and, initially, “was charged with developing a statewide land use plan” (Wickersham, 1977, p. 1780). At its inception, the LUC was housed in the governor’s office and consisted of nine appointed members serving four-year terms (Evans and Stafford, 2011). The LUC’s responsibilities changed during its first few years (Dischinger, 2005); by the time AASIA went into effect, instead of engaging in land use planning, the LUC had become an organizing body, “coordinating and unifying policies in planning for growth and development” (Dischinger, 2005, p. 80). Through AASIA, the LUC was initially given a broad range of powers. It had the authority to pro-actively trigger the designation process simply by requesting a local government make a designation, even if the local government had no intent to do so (Panos, 1995; Warner, 1977). It could temporarily block development, by making the request for designation (Dischinger, 2005), or halt development already underway by issuing “a cease and desist order” if it feared that a development might cause harm (Warner, 1977, p. 1735). For designations being made by a local government, the LUC had “authority to approve or suggest modifications to local rules” (Dischinger, 2005, p. 80). The LUC also issued model regulations and enforced minimum development standards (Kurtz-Phelan, 1977). And, it had the authority to bring lawsuits or initiate de novo3 review (Kurtz-Phelan, 1977; Warner, 1977). It did not have the power, however, to overrule a local government’s decision not to make a designation if the government followed the established guidelines in making its determination (Kurtz-Phelan, 1977; Panos, 1994; Warner, 1977). According to Dischinger (2005) and Warner (1977), the LUC’s most significant and meaningful contributions came in the form of providing advisement, support, and guidance to local governments. The Land Use Commission was not without controversy. In 1977, the LUC made itself unpopular by flip-flopping on its request to Morgan County about power plant construction. Initially, it voted against requesting the county to designate the Pawnee power plant as an activity of state interest. It reversed itself shortly thereafter and requested Morgan County to make such designation, then modified its request to exclude the Pawnee power plant from designation 3 Dischinger (2005) explains, “The trial de novo is to evaluate the legality of the county’s proceedings and to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion, not to judge the merits of the county’s decision” (p. 82). 19.1 Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 10 (Dischinger, 2005; Warner, 1977). The LUC’s authority was modified by the state legislature shortly thereafter; it was no longer allowed to stop ongoing construction activity simply by requesting that a designation be made (Warner, 1977). That same year, staffing for the LUC was moved from the Governor’s Office to DOLA (Warner, 1977). After being moved to DOLA in 1977, the state legislature cut the LUC’s budget by almost 75 percent in 1978, and by 1983 it was no longer being funded (Dischinger, 2005; Panos, 1995). Despite having no dedicated staff or funding (Panos, 1995), the LUC continued to minimally function through much of the 1990s in an emergency capacity, invoking its authority to halt ongoing construction and hold public hearings upon request only (Panos, 1995). By 1998, the LUC “had ceased meeting altogether” (Dischinger, 2005, p. 82). Despite the requirement under AASIA that the LUC review all designations of state interest, such review no longer took place. It was not until 2004 that the LUC’s vanished existence became a problem. That year, the Boulder County District Court ruled that Boulder County’s designation of both an area and activity of state interest was invalid “because there was no review and comment by the LUC” (Dischinger, 2005, p. 83). The state legislature responded to the ruling by reconvening the LUC, “approv[ing] Boulder County’s 1041 regulations,” and then eliminating the LUC (Dischinger, 2005, p. 84). House Bill 05-1063 amended AASIA; it removed all references to the LUC—its authority and responsibilities—and officially delegated all authority under AASIA to local governments (Dischinger, 2005; Pommer and Entz, 2005). SUMMARY The desire for state-level oversight in local planning decisions in the early 1970s led to the creation of the LUA, LUC, and 1041 Regulations. As support for state control waned, the LUC’s role was changed, from oversight and approval to guidance and support. Throughout the evolution of the LUC, the authority delegated to local governments remained intact. Challenges to AASIA and the authority delegated to local governments confirmed the validity and constitutionality of 1041 Powers and 1041 Regulations. The abolishment of the LUC ultimately removed all state oversight from the 1041 Regulation process, and solidified local governments’ authority to enact 1041 Regulations. See also Figure 1. 19.1 Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 11 Figure 1. Timeline of 1041 Events. 19.1 Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 12 METHODOLOGY With the objective of researching how local governments are using 1041 Regulations, the data collected from the research participants was intended to fill a gap in the understanding of 1041s and provide guidance to interested local governments about 1041s. THE DATA The data that needed to be collected for this study was, broadly, about how local governments are using 1041 Regulations. To obtain that information, the researcher and the CDO crafted a series of closed-ended and open-ended questions. The questions were sorted into two different collection instruments: a mix of closed- and open-ended questions were asked in the online questionnaire and additional open-ended questions asked during the telephone interviews. See Text Box 1; Appendix A, Online Questionnaire. THE SAMPLE Communities known to have 1041 Regulations were identified for participation in the study. The goal was to have a representative sample of communities from across Colorado, such that any community interested in learning about 1041 Regulations could find information with which they could identify and from which they could gain insight: the communities identified for inclusion represented different areas of the state, different population sizes, and were a mix of counties and municipalities. Forty communities—18 counties and 22 municipalities—were identified for inclusion in the sample. See Map 1, Local Governments Selected for Inclusion in the Sample; Appendix D, Participants Selected for Inclusion in the Sample. COLLECTING THE DATA The data was collected in two stages. The first stage of data collection was conducted by online questionnaire. The second stage of data collection was conducted by telephone interview. The sample for the second stage was assembled from the respondents to the questionnaire. A combination of structured and unstructured telephone interviews were conducted: the interview questions were asked in order (as they had been provided to each participant) and additional questions not on the questionnaire were asked at the end. ANALYZING THE DATA Analysis was focused on answering the overarching research questions—How are the 1041 Regulations being used? What are the lessons learned?—and developing case studies. The questionnaire and interview data were analyzed and compared to ensure consistency of the emergent concepts, and was combined to develop short case studies. 19.1 Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 13 Text Box 1. Research questions. Online Questionnaire Questions 1. Which areas and/or activities do you have designated in your 1041 Regulations? 2. What year were your 1041 Regulations first adopted? 3. What prompted the development of the 1041 Regulations (e.g., pro-active, in response to an anticipated development, etc.)? 4. Have you updated or changed your 1041 Regulations over time? a. If yes, when? 5. Did you adopt development guidelines that were more stringent than the minimum criteria set in the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act? a. If yes, on which areas or activities did you adopt more stringent guidelines? 6. How many permit applications for designated areas or activities have you approved since adopting your 1041 Regulations? 7. What is your current permit fee(s)? (If you have more than one, list by type.) 8. Have your 1041 Regulations been an effective tool for regulating development in your community? a. Why or why not? 9. Based on your experience, would you recommend other communities use 1041 Regulations? a. Why or why not? Telephone Interview Questions 1. Why did you elect to use 1041 Regulations instead of another regulatory tool (e.g., special review permits, etc.)? 2. Who were the parties involved in developing and adopting your 1041 Regulations? 3. Where are your 1041 Regulations codified (e.g. land use code, county code, or other regulation)? 4. Were there parties opposed to your 1041 Regulations? Who were they? Why were they opposed? 5. What types of challenges (for instance, from developers, community members, or elected body) did you have to respond to get the 1041 Regulations adopted? 6. Did you seek any outside guidance, advice, or expertise in the process of developing your 1041 Regulations? a. If so, from who or where? In what form? b. If so, did you include any specific procedure or technical language that was recommended to you? Please describe. 7. Have there been any legal challenges made related to the adoption or application of your 1041 Regulations? 8. If applicable, why did your community decide to update or change your 1041 Regulations after they were first adopted? 9. In what ways have your 1041 Regulations been effective for regulating development in your community? a. Is there anything about the way your 1041 Regulations are written that you believe help them to be effective? 10. What advice and strategies/tips do you have for other communities interested in adopting 1041 Regulations? 19.1 Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 14 Map 1. THE RESPONSE RATE Questionnaire. Forty communities were identified for inclusion in the sample and 37 were contacted successfully (defined as e-mails sent that did not get returned as undeliverable). In all, 11 questionnaire responses (out of a total of 37 potential responses) were received. Interviews. All 11 questionnaire respondents were asked to participate in the second stage of data collection. Seven agreed to participate in the interviews (63.6% response rate). Two declined (Golden and Superior) and two (Boulder County and Park County) did not respond. RESULTS QUESTIONNAIRES Eleven local governments responded to the questionnaire: Arapahoe County, Boulder County, Clear Creek County, City of Golden, Otero County, Park County, Routt County, Town of Silt, Town of Silverthorne, Summit County, and City of Superior. See Map 2, Questionnaire Respondents. Overall, their responses indicate that 1041s are an effective land use regulation because they grant greater oversight and control over development than other regulatory tools. 19.1 Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 15 Map 2. Text Box 2. Areas and Activities for Designation. Areas of State Interest (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-201) (a) Mineral resource areas; (b) Natural hazard areas; (c) Areas containing, or having a significant impact upon, historical, natural, or archaeological resources of statewide importance; and (d) Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or the surrounding community. Activities of State Interest (C.R.S. §24-65.1-203) (a) Site selection and construction of major new domestic water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems; (b) Site selection and development of solid waste disposal sites; (c) Site selection of airports; (d) Site selection of rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, and fixed guideways; (e) Site selection of arterial highways and interchanges and collector highways; (f) Site selection and construction of major facilities of a public utility; (g) Site selection and development of new communities; (h) Efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects; (i) Conduct of nuclear detonations; and (j) The use of geothermal resources for the commercial production of electricity. 19.1 Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 16 Question 1: Which areas and/or activities do you have designated in your 1041 Regulations? Site selection and construction of water and sewage treatment systems is the most designated matter of state interest, with nine communities having such 1041 designation. Site selection and construction of public utilities and efficient utilization of water projects are each designated by seven communities. Areas of significant impact on historical, natural, or archaeological resources and the site selection of highways are each designated by six communities. Five communities have 1041 designation of airport site selection. Natural hazard areas and site selection and development of new communities are each designated by four communities. Areas around key facilities, site selection of rapid transit, and site selection and development of solid waste disposal sites are all designated by three communities. Two communities have mineral resource areas under 1041 designation, and only one community regulates the conduct of nuclear detonations. None of the respondent communities have designated the use of geothermal resources. See Table 1. To see each of the respondents’ designated areas and activities, refer to Appendix E, Online Questionnaire Responses, Question 1. For a complete listing of available areas and activities, see Text Box 2. Table 1. Ranked Designations by Local Government Respondents. Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water/Sewer Treatment Systems 9 Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects 7 Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility 7 Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource 6 Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways 6 Site Selection of Airports 5 Natural Hazard 4 Site Selection/Development of New Communities 4 Areas around key facilities… 3 Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities 3 Site Selection/Development of Solid Waste Disposal Sites 3 Mineral Resource 2 Conduct of Nuclear Detonations 1 Use of Geothermal Resources for Commercial Production of Electricity 0 Question 2: What year were your 1041 Regulations first adopted? 1041s were adopted by the respondent communities at different times based on their individual needs. Summit County was the first of the respondents to adopt 1041s, putting theirs on the books on July 1, 1974. Clear Creek County adopted their 1041s two years later, in 1976. None of the respondent communities 19.1 Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 17 The communities adopted their 1041s pro-actively, in response to identified development pressures and with a desire for more local control. adopted 1041s during the 1980s, but during the 1990s Boulder County (1994), Park County (1997), and Golden (1999) all adopted 1041s. Six of the respondent communities adopted their 1041s in the 2000s: Arapahoe and Otero Counties in 2004, Silverthorne in 2005, Routt County and Silt in 2007, and Superior in 2010. Question 3. What prompted the development of the 1041 Regulations (e.g., pro-active, in response to an anticipated development, etc.)? None of the respondent communities adopted their 1041 Regulations in response to an application for development in an area or activity that was not previously designated, as permitted under AASIA (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-501(2)(b)). All communities4 adopted their regulations pro-actively, either shortly after being authorized to do so, as in the case of Summit County and Clear Creek County, or in response to identified development pressures and a desire for more local control. Silverthorne adopted theirs with the specific objective of regulating water pipelines, and Silt adopted theirs to control the development of gravel mines. Park County was responding to an increase in subdivision development and Golden to pressure it was facing from adjacent communities to allow for completion of a beltway. Both Arapahoe County and Routt County saw the benefits, and necessity, of being able to interact with and oversee major developments and projects. Otero County wanted to protect its natural resources and Clear Creek County wanted to control development in environmentally sensitive areas. Overall, these communities desired local control and the ability to regulate projects and developments in order to protect their communities. See Appendix F, Online Questionnaire Responses, Question 3. Question 4: Have you updated or changed your 1041 Regulations over time? If yes, when? Five of the respondent communities have updated their 1041 Regulations since they were first adopted. Summit County updated theirs in 1988, 1995, 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2013. Clear Creek County has also updated theirs a number of times, adopting revisions in 1989, 1998, 2006, 2007, 2009, and 2012. Boulder County has made three updates to their 1041s, in 1998, 2001, and 2011. Arapahoe County and Otero County both updated their 1041s in 2006, and Otero County just recently (in April of 2017) revised theirs again. Golden, Park County, Routt County, Silt, Silverthorne, and Superior have not made any changes to their 1041s since adoption. Question 5: Did you adopt development guidelines that were more stringent than the minimum criteria set in the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act? If yes, for which areas or activities did you adopt more stringent guidelines? Most of the respondent communities were unsure if their regulations went beyond the minimums described in the statute, but many have adopted submittal and approval criteria that go beyond the statutory minimums. Arapahoe, Clear Creek, Routt, and Summit Counties, and the Town of 4 Boulder County did not respond to this question; thus, the reference to all communities here is applicable to the respondents to this question. 19.1 Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 18 Arapahoe, Clear Creek, Routt, and Summit Counties, and the Town of Silverthorne all follow a similar template for their 1041 Regulations. Silverthorne all follow a similar template for their 1041 Regulations, and require environmental impact statements, socioeconomic impact statements, traffic studies, or mitigation plans (and many other documents) for all applicants regardless of which area or activity will be impacted by development, and have additional submittal and approval criteria specific to each area or activity (Arapahoe County, 2006; Clear Creek County, 2012; Routt County, 2007; Summit County, 2013, Town of Silverthorne, 2005). Otero County requires much of the same documentation, but applicants must also submit a revegetation plan for development in natural resource areas (Otero County, 2006). Question 6: How many permit applications for designated areas or activities have you approved since adopting your 1041 Regulations? Neither Silt nor Silverthorne has received any applications since adopting their 1041 Regulations, and, so far, Golden’s only applicant was itself. Routt County has had two or three applicants, but all were approved through a less restrictive, Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) administrative approval. Arapahoe County has approved between six and 12 1041 permit applications and Clear Creek County between 15 and 20. Park County has approved 10, Summit County has approved 47, and Boulder County approved 53 1041 permit applications. Question 7: What is your current permit fee(s)? (If you have more than one, list by type.) Permit fees varied greatly between the respondent communities. See Table 2. Question 8. Have your 1041 Regulations been an effective tool for regulating development in your community? Why or why not? Most respondent communities have found their 1041s to be effective. Park County’s are effective because of local development control. Arapahoe County points to the ability to ask for multiple documents and an expansive list of information for projects that they would not otherwise be able to require. Clear Creek County appreciates the ability to review and regulate projects and large-scale activities that would not otherwise be applicable to zoning authority. Otero County has used theirs to ensure that historically irrigated lands continue to be vegetated, something they could not do with any other regulatory tool. Summit County notes that their 1041s have enabled them to control growth and development to ensure consistency with their goals and priorities, to protect the public welfare, and to regulate developments that are normally outside of their authority. While Silverthorne has not processed any 1041 applications, they believe they will be effective for regulating development because they have a lengthy list of requirements and criteria. Similarly, Silt has not received any applications but believes theirs will be effective for regulating any proposed mineral extraction. Overall, these communities have found their 1041s very effective for expanding their authority to control development. Many of the development types designated in AASIA are not subject to local control through any other regulatory tool. See Appendix G, Online Questionnaire Responses, Question 8. 19.1 Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 19 Table 2. 1041 Permit Fees Arapahoe County $10,000 initially with a draw down based upon planners and hours Boulder County Application fee $750, then $103.83 per hour Clear Creek County Permit fees are based on staff's hourly rate Golden (City of) Application Fee per state regulations Otero County The applicant pays all costs associated with permit. Legal fees, publication costs, employees hourly wage plus fringe costs and hours (Paralegal, Land Use Administrator) Park County $5,000 Routt County Since there is a corresponding County approval required (SUP, PUD, etc.), the project is billed out at $120 per hour for planner time spent. At this time, no additional base fee for 1041. Silt (Town of) $1,000 Silverthorne (Town of) As determined by the Community Development Department and in accordance with rates set in Appendix A in Charter and Municipal Code Summit County $1,870 for the pre-application fee, which is the first step in the process to cover costs associated with determining the level of permit review. If the project is determined to be a "Minor" permit review, the fee is $9,415; if it is going to be processed as a "Major" permit, the fee is $28,300. Both the Minor and Major permit fees are "initial deposits" that are required to be paid at the time of permit submittal. Staff then tracks the actual time it takes to review the application, as well as other costs, such as adjacent property owner notification, mailing costs, etc., and will determine the final fee at the end of the approval process. The difference between the actual costs and the initial deposit will then be determined and a refund will be given or supplemental fees will be assessed. Superior (City of) Would depend on scope of project, but range from $5,000 to $10,000 19.1 Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 20 1041s are highly recommended as an effective regulatory tool that allows for additional authority and control. Question 9. Based on your experience, would you recommend other communities use 1041 Regulations? Why or why not? All but two5 of the respondent communities would recommend 1041s to others. Arapahoe County highly recommends 1041s and believes that all local governments should adopt them. Clear Creek County recommends them based on the additional authority 1041s give to local governments. Park County points to the ability to regulate developments to prevent adverse impacts on the economy and local area. Routt County recommends them because 1041s provide an extra layer of protection for unincorporated areas in rural counties. Summit County has found their 1041s powerful, allowing them to review significant projects for potential impacts. Superior notes that their 1041s have been effective not only for regulating and controlling against adverse impacts, but also for ensuring that projects are being appropriately coordinated. Otero County, Silt, and Silverthorne recommend them because 1041s are a valuable and effective tool for regulating development. Overall, 1041s come highly recommended by almost all of the respondent communities as an effective regulatory tool that allows for additional authority and control. See Appendix H, Online Questionnaire Responses, Question 9. INTERVIEWS Interviews were conducted with seven communities: Arapahoe County, Clear Creek County, Otero County, Routt County, Town of Silt, Town of Silverthorne, and Summit County. Ten questions were asked of each community and their responses are briefly summarized below. Additional questions were also asked of each community to help clarify responses. For more detailed information, case studies detailing each community’s experience with 1041 Regulations can be found starting on page 26. Question1. Why did you elect to use 1041 Regulations instead of another regulatory tool (e.g., special review permits, etc.)? Overwhelmingly, each community adopted 1041s because of the authority they confer to the local level to control development. This has been particularly important to these communities because of the types of development they are able to control and the fact that no other regulatory tools grant them this type of oversight. Question 2. Who were the parties involved in developing and adopting your 1041 Regulations? Unsurprisingly, 1041s were developed by planning staff, county and city attorneys, retained attorneys with 1041 expertise, boards of county commissioners, and town councils. Question 3. Where are your 1041 Regulations codified (e.g., land use code, county code, or other regulation)? See Table 3. 5 Boulder County did not respond to this question and Golden did not believe their experience provided a basis to recommend or not. 19.1 Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 21 Table 3. Codified 1041 Regulations Arapahoe County A separate set of regulations under the Land Development Code Clear Creek County A distinct set of guidelines and regulations Otero County A separate set of regulations under the Land Use Code Routt County A separate set regulations under the Zoning & Subdivision Regulations Silt (Town of) A set of regulations under the Zoning Code Silverthorne (Town of) A set of guidelines and regulations under the Municipal Code Summit County A set of regulations under the Land Use and Development Code Question 4. Were there parties opposed to your 1041 Regulations? Who were they? Why were they opposed? Overall, most communities did not face any opposition to their 1041s. When there was opposition, it was in the form of concern from community members that the 1041 Regulations were not doing enough to regulate development or that the types of development that would be allowed would be detrimental to their community. Question 5. What types of challenges (for instance, from developers, community members, or elected body) did you have to respond to to get the 1041 Regulations adopted? Most communities did not have to respond to any challenges to get public approval or get their elected body to adopt the regulations. Clear Creek County had to respond to concerns from residents about noise pollution from wind turbines and one of Summit County’s updates responded to concerns over the complexity of the process. Question 6. Did you seek any guidance, advice, or expertise in the process of developing your 1041 Regulations? If so, from who or where? In what form? If so, did you include any specific procedure or technical language that was recommended to you. Clear Creek County retained a sound consultant to address community concerns over noise pollution, reviewed other communities 1041s for guidance (Golden, Idaho Springs, and Douglas County for highways; Eagle County for water; and Weld County for wind and solar), and borrowed language from others’ 1041 Regulations that they knew had survived legal challenge. Otero County retained an attorney with expertise in 1041s and land use who gave them legal advice and a template for their regulations. Routt County had a staff member with 1041 experience, and they looked to and borrowed language from other communities’ 1041s. Silt sought guidance from geologists, biologists, and water and air quality professionals for expertise, commissioned a traffic study, and referred to Frederick’s 1041s because that town had recently revised their 1041s after losing a case that challenged their 19.1 Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 22 procedural language. Summit County hired a land use attorney and an attorney with expertise in water quality to rewrite their 1041s in 2002. Question 7. Have there been any legal challenges made related to the adoption or application of your 1041 Regulations? None of the communities interviewed were aware of any legal challenges to their 1041s. Question 8. If applicable, why did your community decide to update or change your 1041 Regulations after they were first adopted? Only four communities interviewed have updated their 1041s since they were first adopted. Arapahoe County updated theirs in 2006 simply to make some technical updates to new water and sewage developments to better serve growth. Clear Creek County updated their 1041s six times since first adopted, to add new designations to go along with zoning changes and to strengthen their language around highway development. Otero County made an important update to their regulations in 2006, adding an Historically Irrigated Acreage Map to support their objective of keeping land vegetated, and is in the process of making another update to clarify verbiage. Summit County has updated their 1041s six times, most significantly in 2002 when they substantially rewrote their regulations and added a designation. Question 9. In what ways have your 1041 Regulations been effective for regulating development in your community? Is there anything about the way your 1041 Regulations are written that you believe help them to be effective? Many pointed to the level of control and authority they can assert over projects and entities they would not otherwise be allowed to oversee. Others to the ability to tailor the regulations to meet their community’s unique and specific needs. As to how the regulations are written, many pointed to the broad, clear language of their 1041s, as well as their incorporation of other communities tested 1041 language. A couple of communities pointed to their tiered permit review processes which they believe effective for streamlining the process. And, one community pointed to its incorporation of construction impacts, in addition to project impacts, as effective for protecting their community members from adverse effects during the construction phase of a project. Question 10. What advice and strategies/tips do you have for other communities interested in adopting 1041 Regulations? More than one community has emphasized the importance of identifying the unique needs and circumstances of a community and designating only those areas or activities that are best suited to address them. One suggested getting professional advice and devising a fee schedule that adequately covers the time and expense of approving a permit application. Another warns that if all local elected officials, planning staff, and county or town attorneys are not on the same page, enforcement of the 1041s can become a challenge. 19.1 Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 23 LESSONS LEARNED 1041s expand local government authority. It is a given that 1041 Regulations confer control to local governments to regulate development and nearly every community identified this as key to their interest in using them and critical to their effectiveness. But, it is the expanded authority to oversee and review projects and entities that are not subject to other local controls that helps explain why a community would elect to use 1041s. Local governments do not have authority over CDOT or Denver Water, and without 1041s are not guaranteed an opportunity to review or negotiate how those entities expand or develop in their communities. Thus, the authority to coordinate with landowners, project developers, and other agencies is key. Additionally, 1041 designations enable counties with large areas of federal land to regulate development therein, an authority they do not have with other land use regulations. 1041s are customizable to suit specific needs and unique circumstances. The ability for local governments to adopt more stringent criteria than is described in AASIA, a power upheld by the Supreme Court in City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 782 .2d 753 (Colo. 1989), makes these regulations incredibly useful and powerful. The list of designations in AASIA, while not exhaustive of all development types, is expansive and broad, and the ability to add application and approval criteria, to require assessments, management plans, or impact studies, gives a local government the ability to control development in a context sensitive manner. Otero County uses the natural resource area and water system activity designations to prevent the loss of top soil while Silverthorne uses their water system activity designation for the sole purpose of negotiating with Denver Water about the potential placement of water pipelines. With the same regulation, the respondent communities have tailored their designations to address needs specific to their community. 1041s enable coordination between the public and private realms. 1041s also enable a local government to regulate development on private land to protect the public welfare. 1041s cover all affected land or activities within the local government’s boundaries and apply regardless of the existing uses or who owns the land. This is especially helpful with activities such as pipelines or transmission lines that cross miles of land, private and public, because it enables the local government to regulate the entire project in a coordinated and consistent manner. 1041s connected to legitimate community concerns are unlikely to be opposed. While one might expect that property owners would be reluctant to support regulations that could interfere with their own use of their land, the respondent communities’ experiences demonstrate that community members will support the adoption of 1041 Regulations when the benefits of adoption are reasonable and protect resources or assets of special value to the community. 19.1 Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 24 1041s are working as intended to protect natural assets and resources. The intent of AASIA is to protect “the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state” (C.R.S. § 24-65.1-101, 2016) and, as opined by Panos (1994) and Warner (1977), and echoed by one respondent, 1041s are an environmental regulation. Though the minimum criteria in AASIA does not require it, all the interviewed respondent communities require submission of an environmental impact analysis from any applicant (not just CDOT or other agencies), and many require it regardless of the development type or impacts. Despite the state no longer overseeing this process or land use planning at the local level, 1041 Regulations provide a means for enacting broad environmental regulations through voluntary and context-specific adoption at the local level. Otero County’s use of 1041s to enforce revegetation to minimize the loss of top soil (a local environmental and economic concern as well as a concern for the state as a whole) demonstrates the effectiveness of 1041s for addressing unique environmental concerns. CONCLUSION In the years since 1041 Powers and 1041 Regulations were authorized through AASIA, many local governments adopted and used the regulations. AASIA and some governments’ 1041 Regulations were challenged in the courts but emerged intact, with important confirmations made about the constitutionality and validity of the powers and authority conferred to local governments. Despite their use and court rulings over the years, the information about how 1041s are being used has never been collected from the various sources and made easily available. The CDO recognized an opportunity for their office to assemble and share such in-depth information about 1041 Regulations. Thus, the objective of this project was to research the use of 1041 Regulations by local governments and assemble and package that information for easy access by other local governments interested in learning more. The need for this project was confirmed in feedback from local governments who participated in this study, most of which relied on dispersed sources—outside experts and other local governments’ 1041 Regulations—when developing their own. The background research assembled in this project provides important contextual information about the history of 1041 Regulations and provides a short breakdown of the most important elements of AASIA. Summaries of the legal opinions published about AASIA and 1041 Regulations highlight the most important and relevant—for planners and land managers—decisions and findings from the courts. The case studies developed from the questionnaire data, interviews, and review of each local governments’ 1041 Regulations provide useful information about the experience of using 1041s, the effectiveness and usefulness of 1041s, and when 1041s are appropriate for use. Of course, the information gathered in this study about the experience of using 1041 Regulations is specific to the respondent communities and may not be shared by every other local government with 1041s. To continue to build and develop the information about 1041s, further study is needed. Additional case 19.1 Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 25 studies should be developed to more fully understand the experience of using 1041s. To gain an understanding about why a local government would not want to use 1041s, those that have considered them but ultimately opted not to adopt them should also be interviewed. And, to get an outsider’s perspective, agencies such as CDOT and Denver Water should be interviewed for their experience with the 1041 process. Finally, the expertise and practical knowledge of the attorneys with 1041 experience should also be gathered. 19.1 Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 26 CASE STUDIES ARAPAHOE COUNTY Population: 608,310 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: Eastern metro-Denver and into the Eastern Plains 1041 Designations: ▪ Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways ▪ Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment Systems ▪ Major Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Sewer Treatment Systems ▪ Site Selection/Development of Solid Waste Disposal Sites ▪ Site Selection/Development of New Communities ▪ Site Selection of Airports Year of 1041 Adoption: 2004; Amended 2006 Number of Permits Approved Since 2004: 6-12 1041 Story Arapahoe County is the third most populated county in Colorado with a mix of urban, suburban, and rural elements. As a part of the metro-Denver region, Arapahoe County faces a wide array of development pressures and leading up to 2004, bigger developments started appearing in the County. The County needed more tools to address these new developments and regulate growth, and adopted 1041 Regulations because of their depth and flexibility. In 2006 they amended and readopted their 1041 Regulations, refining the language of the requirements for new water and sewage projects to more effectively address growth. Developing and Implementing their 1041s Development of Arapahoe County’s 1041s was done in-house. The county attorney’s office drafted and reviewed the regulations for compliance with the enabling legislation. The planning commission and county commissioners reviewed the regulations and, after the public hearing process, the Board of County Commissioners adopted them as a separate set of regulations under their Land Use Code. Some Key Features of Arapahoe County’s 1041s The County has a three-tiered permit review process: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), minor permit review, and major permit review. If a FONSI determination is made, a permit is not required for the project to move forward (Arapahoe County, 2006). Major permit review is triggered when “a significant adverse impact” of two or more approval criteria, or a “severe adverse impact” of one approval criteria is likely (Arapahoe County, 2006, p. 12). Source: http://www.villagerpublishing.com/67715/free- articles/centennial-airport-faces-future-putting-lid-airport-noise/ 19.1 Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 27 The County drafted their 1041s to require multiple different documents from applicants. All applications, regardless of the type of development, require documentation addressing compliance with all applicable regional water quality management plans, an environmental impact analysis, a traffic impact analysis, a socio-economic impact study, and engineering studies (Arapahoe County, 2006), amongst other broad requirements. Additional application requirements are also outlined for each designated activity of interest (Arapahoe County, 2006). Similarly, for a permit to be issued, the project must comport with both “General Approval Criteria” (Arapahoe County, 2006, p. 28-30), and additional criteria established for each designated activity of interest (Arapahoe County, 2006). Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Arapahoe County needed more tools to effectively address its growth. The County’s regulations are effective because they are straight-forward and clearly written, and because the county can ask more questions and get more answers from developers at the outset of a project. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Arapahoe County All local governments should adopt 1041s. 1041s give a planning agency the authority to get information from developers that other regulatory tools do not. The regulations are flexible and adaptable, allowing for as much or as little regulation as is needed. Takeaways When a community is facing wide ranging development pressures, 1041s provide a layer of control and protection over development that are not offered in other regulations. Arapahoe County exercises its control, in part, by requiring the submission of documents and studies that they are not otherwise necessarily authorized to require. 19.1 Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 28 CLEAR CREEK COUNTY Population: 9,136 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: Eastern Slope of mountains along I-70 1041 Designations: ▪ Natural Hazard Areas ▪ Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource Areas ▪ Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or surrounding community ▪ Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways ▪ Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment Systems ▪ Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects ▪ Site Selection/Development of New Communities ▪ Site Selection of Airports Year of 1041 Adoption: 1976; Amended 1989, 1998, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2012 Number of Permits Approved since 1976: 15-20 1041 Story Clear Creek County has a rich mining history, with gold and silver mining booming in the mid-1880s before busting in the 1930s (Clear Creek County, n.d.). Today, Clear Creek County attracts tourists and skiers, interstate travelers and outdoors enthusiasts, and is home to the Henderson molybdenum mine (Clear Creek County, n.d.). Through its history, mining has been a significant factor in the growth and development of the County. In 1976, the County was facing development pressure and grew concerned that residential development could interfere with mineral extraction in adverse ways. The County first adopted 1041s to help resolve the conflict between future mining and future development, to preserve their hard rock mineral resources and ensure that mineral interest holders could continue to access those resources, and to regulate development in natural hazard areas as well as environmentally sensitive areas. Clear Creek County has updated their regulations several times since 1976, to add designations, to clarify and strengthen the criteria for approval, and to respond to increased and changing development pressures. Developing and Implementing their 1041s The Board of County Commissioners adopted the 1041 Regulations and the updates over the years as a distinct set of guidelines and regulations. The County looked to other communities’ 1041 Regulations for guidance and borrowed the language from others’ 1041s that they knew had survived legal challenge. In the mid-2000s, the County completed a zoning update to allow for the development of wind and solar energy facilities. Around the same time, they updated their 1041s to incorporate large wind and solar facilities as public utilities. Some residents were opposed to allowing such facilities because of potential Source: http://www.denverpost.com/2015/12/10/looming-henderson- mine-closure-stokes-big-fears-in-clear-creek-county/ 19.1 Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 29 adverse impacts to the natural environment. Residents were also concerned about noise pollution from wind facilities, so the County retained a noise control expert to help them respond to the community’s concerns with specific noise standards. Some Key Features of Clear Creek County’s 1041s The County’s 1041s are written to address not only the impacts of a proposed project, but the impacts of the construction of the project. Applicants must provide plans for vehicular circulation and detours, the impacts of circulation and detours on community members, and detail what time of day construction will occur. Clear Creek County allows applicants to request a FONSI evaluation during the pre-application process in order to get an early determination of the applicability of 1041 Regulations to a particular project (Clear Creek County, 2012) Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Clear Creek County’s 1041s have given them a larger seat at the table when dealing with large-scale activities that are not otherwise applicable to local zoning authority. This has enabled the County to effectively review projects for potential impacts on its communities and neighborhoods and allows them to require additional information and considerations. Their 1041s are also effective because their permit approval process is similar to the NEPA process, requiring much of the same documentation and information for review. For applicants such as CDOT, this has made Clear Creek’s permit process predictable and has helped reduce incomplete application submittals. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Clear Creek County Before adopting 1041s, make sure you have identified clear goals and objectives for their use. Do not adopt 1041 Regulations for the sake of adopting them for their authority; ensure that the designations support your priorities and address development issues specific to your community. Be careful not to adopt designations in a way that might deter or prevent the types of development that you want to encourage or allow. Finally, make sure 1041s are the most appropriate regulatory tool for addressing your community’s needs; there could be more effective tools depending on the need. Takeaways Clear Creek County’s 1041s started out as a means to negotiate between mineral interest holders and their rights to access those minerals and the pressure to grow and develop. Over the years, their 1041s have evolved to incorporate more protections for the public’s benefit. Their 1041s have given them a voice and a seat at the table that has enabled them to negotiate with developers and agencies to ensure that their communities are not adversely impacted by large-scale projects. This is of particular importance to the County as CDOT continues to look for ways to address congestion issues along I-70 through the County. Without the highway activity designation, the County would have less negotiating power or authority to work with CDOT and ensure CDOT’s plans will not adversely impact Clear Creek County’s residents and economy. 19.1 Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 30 Source: Lex Nichols, Otero County OTERO COUNTY Population: 18,572 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: East of Pueblo County on Colorado’s Eastern Plains. 1041 Designations: ▪ Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource Areas ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Facility ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water/Sewer Treatment Systems ▪ Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects Year of 1041 Adoption: 2004; Amended 2006, 2017 Number of Permits Approved since 2004: 4 1041 Story Otero County is a right-to-farm county and agriculture is their primary economic activity. Water is a necessary and sustaining resource in Otero County, and having seen the devastating effects from the loss of irrigation water in Crowley County (also, Sanchez, n.d.), knew it was important to take steps to protect their land and keep it vegetated. There are also miles of oil and gas pipelines running through the county and construction of pipelines disturbs the rangeland. The County was looking for more local control and chose to adopt 1041 Regulations because of the ability to tailor the regulations to their specific needs. Developing and Implementing their 1041s Otero County’s 1041 process was started by the Board of County Commissioners. An attorney was retained to provide legal advice and provided the county with a template to follow for drafting their regulations. The county attorney and paralegal reviewed the regulations for compliance with the enabling legislation. The county commissioners also reviewed the regulations and, after the public hearing process, adopted them as a separate set of regulations under their Land Use Code. The County updated their 1041s in 2006 to add a map of historically irrigated acreage in support of their requirement for revegetation plans. Otero County updated their 1041s again in 2017 to refine and clarify some language. There were no direct challenges to Otero County’s 1041 Regulations. The County made the case for why these regulations were necessary and community members were on board. Some Key Features of Otero County’s 1041s The County drafted their 1041s to include provisions that specifically address one of their most pressing concerns: preventing the loss of top soil. The language in their designations on natural resource areas and water systems ensure that landowners cannot sell or transfer water rights from, or simply stop irrigating, historically irrigated land without plans to revegetate. The map added in 2006 is reviewed 19.1 Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 31 upon receipt of a 1041 permit application to determine if the proposed project will impact acreage irrigated as of 2004, providing an important baseline of irrigated land in the County and justification for requiring revegetation plans. The County’s 1041 Regulations also give them the ability to impose fines and force compliance with the 1041 process even after water rights have been transferred or sold (Otero County, 2004). Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Otero County was looking for a way to protect and preserve its agriculture-based economy. Specifically, it was looking for a way to prevent the loss of top soil and ensure that future generations could continue to farm the land. Their 1041 Regulations have given them the ability to regulate the way property owners manage their land and are a tool the County uses to ensure that revegetation of the rangeland is done, and done correctly. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Otero County It is important that everyone—commissioners, administrators of the regulations, and the county attorney—is on board and in agreement about the 1041 Regulations. If everyone does not have the same goals for the use of the 1041s, then enforcement can become difficult. Public input is also an important and critical component for developing the regulations. Takeaways The County was looking for a tool that would enable it to protect its most valuable resources—top soil and water. Though they cannot prevent a landowner from selling or transferring their water rights away from irrigated land, they were able to craft development guidelines that enable them to regulate the treatment of irrigated land in such an event. Because the enabling legislation allows a local government to enact guidelines that are more stringent than the statutory criteria, Otero County was able to incorporate language regarding irrigation and revegetation in its 1041s, making the 1041s extremely effective for addressing their specific needs. 1041 Regulations gave the County a degree of local control that other regulatory tools could not. 19.1 Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 32 ROUTT COUNTY Population: 23,606 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: Northwest Colorado 1041 Designations: ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment Systems ▪ Major Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Sewer Treatment Systems ▪ Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects ▪ Site Selection of Airports Year of 1041 Adoption: 2007 Number of Permits Approved since 2007: 2-3 1041 Story Routt County is a rural, mountainous county in Northwest Colorado. It is a tourist destination, attracting visitors from around Colorado and across the globe, contributing to the state’s tourism economy (Routt County, 2007). Around 50 percent of land in the County is U.S. Forest Service land and the County is home to “one of the last river basins in Colorado in which water is not fully appropriated or over- appropriated” (Routt County, 2007, p. 2). Because of the desire to maintain their rural character, to protect or have a say in trans mountain diversion of water, to protect their natural amenities, and continue to be a tourist destination, the County was looking for a way to regulate development that would match those development pressures and priorities, especially water. The County wanted to ensure they could control the development of new water infrastructure because of anticipated demand for water from the Front Range and the Board of County Commissioners elected to adopt 1041s because of their ability to control developments from governmental entities, which other regulations do not allow them to do. Developing and Implementing their 1041s Planning staff, county attorneys, and the planning commission helped to draft the regulations. The Board of County Commissioners adopted the 1041s as a set of separate regulations under their Zoning & Subdivision Regulations. Some Key Features of Routt County’s 1041s Like other respondent counties, Routt County’s 1041s require documentation on compliance with regional water quality management plans, an environmental impact analysis, transportation impact analysis, and engineering studies, amongst other items (Routt County, 2007). Routt County also includes additional submittal requirements and approval criteria for all five designated activities. The County’s 1041s also explicitly invoke the right to deny a 1041 application if it is determined the application has or could fail to “comply with any one of the approval criteria” (Routt County, 2007, p. 24). Source: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/colorado- hunting-retreat-in-routt-county-back-on-market-as-smaller-parcels 19.1 Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 33 The County also has a three-tiered permit review process: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), Level 1 permit review, and Level 2 permit review. If a FONSI determination is made by the Planning Director, a permit is not required for the project to move forward (Routt County, 2007). Level 2 permit review is triggered when “a significant adverse impact” of two or more approval criteria, or a “severe adverse impact” of one approval criteria is likely (Routt County, 2007, p. 14). Naturally, Level 1 permit review is triggered when the impacts are less substantial than Level 2, but more substantial than FONSI (Routt County, 2007). Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Routt County wanted to protect its rural character and adopted 1041 designations that would help them meet that goal. Routt County’s 1041 Regulations explicitly connect the activities designated with real development pressures or potentials, connecting them clearly to the goals and objectives outlined in their master plan. The County has a special use permit process in place for most land use applications but they chose to add 1041s to strengthen their special use process and because of the expanded authority that could be exercised using 1041s that they do not get with other permitting processes. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Routt County When developing 1041s, keep in mind that not all proposed projects will be large-scale or have major impacts. Create a FONSI review process to make sure smaller projects can be reviewed quickly and less expensively than the process for reviewing the bigger projects that require more regulation. Takeaways Routt County has made maintaining its rural character a priority. This included controlling the development of water pipelines and reservoirs that could negatively impact their landscape. The County also made a connection in their 1041s between the local contribution to the tourism economy of the state and the need to protect that economy. In so doing, the County makes the case that the public benefit of regulating these types of developments outweigh the private rights to develop without oversight. 19.1 Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 34 TOWN OF SILT Population: 2,976 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: 68 miles east of Grand Junction along I-70 in Garfield County 1041 Designations: ▪ Mineral Resource Areas ▪ Natural Hazard Areas ▪ Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource Areas Year of 1041 Adoption: 2007 Number of Permits Approved since 2007: 0 1041 Story Silt is a bedroom community of Aspen and other ski towns and provides a lot of the more affordable housing in the area. It sits along the Colorado River and is home to a 132-acre river preserve and other natural resources that need to be protected. It is also in an area where there are a number of gravel deposits. In 1999 Garfield County approved an application for a gravel pit mine along Silt’s borders without giving any notice to Silt. In 2004, Silt received an application for a gravel pit mine near the Colorado River and was working with the applicant to include provisions to protect a blue heron rookery and other wildlife habitats near the river. The applicant abruptly pulled its application, applied to the County, and the gravel mine was approved without the protections Silt was attempting to put into place. In 2005, Silt became a home rule municipality. The Town wanted to control its destiny and chose to adopt 1041 Regulations because of the control that those regulations give to the local government. Developing and Implementing their 1041s Silt’s 1041 process began in the Town’s Community Development Office with a review of other communities’ 1041 Regulations (specifically, Frederick’s). Air and water quality professionals were consulted and a biologist, geologist, and traffic engineer were retained to provide expertise and guidance. Town attorneys reviewed the regulations for compliance with the enabling legislation. Town council adopted the regulations within their zoning code. There was no opposition or direct challenge made to Silt’s 1041 Regulations, though some in the community were concerned that the regulations were not strict enough, particularly with protecting the environment and regarding oil and gas extraction. Silt responded to these concerns and assured the community that they would be good stewards of the land and would work to protect their resources. Some Key Features of Silt’s 1041 Regulations The application requirements under its mineral resource areas designation include a fire protection plan, identification of water sources and use rights, and a traffic plan that includes “the numbers and types of vehicles entering and exiting the site” (Silt, 2017, § 17.77.070(J)). Applicants must also submit a wildlife study demonstrating their compliance with all “regulations and standards concerning wildlife and endangered species” (Silt, 2017, § 17.77.210). Silt’s 1041s also establish setback requirements from all buildings and public roads for extraction sites or processing plants (Silt, 2017). Source: http://www.townofsilt.org/silt_river_preserve. Photo by M. Lundeen. 19.1 Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 35 Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Silt was looking for a way to control the development of mineral extraction activities and 1041s are an effective tool for that objective. There are very critical commercial areas directly across the Colorado River from the 2004 gravel pit and nearby property owners appreciate that there is a level of control that can be exercised that helps protect their properties against any adverse impacts from mineral extraction activities. While Silt has not had any applications for development under its 1041 Regulations, the regulations are in place if and when an application is received. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Silt Be pro-active and utilize 1041 Regulations to address areas of high community priority and concern. Take an inventory of the properties, land uses, assets, and resources in your community to identify which types of areas or activities are most pressing. Make 1041 designations that address those pressing issues first. Takeaways The two gravel pit applications approved by Garfield County made Silt realize that they had no regulations in place should they receive an application for such development within their borders. Though their regulations will not impact development outside their boundaries, there is now a mechanism in place that protects their natural areas and minimizes adverse impacts for their community members when such applications are received. By taking an inventory of their existing conditions, the Town was able to identify specific areas of potential development, prioritize those that they were most likely to see, and develop regulations that specifically addressed those needs without adding other, unneeded regulations. 19.1 Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 36 Source: http://www.denveraerialphoto.com/denver-aerial-photography- gallery/residential-real-estate-denver-aerial-photography/ TOWN OF SILVERTHORNE Population: 4,117 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: 67 miles west of Denver along I-70 in Summit County 1041 Designations: ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water Treatment Systems ▪ Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects Year of 1041 Adoption: 2005 Number of Permits Approved since 2005: 0 1041 Story Silverthorne sits north of I-70 near the towns of Frisco and Dillon. The town attracts tourists rear-round to its outlet mall and because of its proximity to several ski resorts and natural areas. It is surrounded by U.S. Forest Service land and sits below Dillon Reservoir, Denver Water’s “largest water storage facility” (Town of Frisco, n.d.). In the early 2000s, Silverthorne heard of a potential transmountain water diversion project aiming to bring more water into Dillon Reservoir. Silverthorne was concerned that new water pipelines would need to come through their town and go through private property. Silverthorne wanted to control the construction and placement of any new water pipelines and adopted 1041s for that purpose. Developing and Implementing their 1041s Silverthorne’s 1041s were drafted and developed by the town attorney and adopted by the town council under their municipal code. Some Key Features of Silverthorne’s 1041s Silverthorne’s 1041s go far beyond the minimum statutory criteria, requiring from all applicants an environmental impact analysis, socioeconomic impact analysis, and mitigation plan, amongst other documents. Additional submittal requirements are described for both 1041 designations. The criteria for approval is also expansive, and aimed at preventing adverse impacts to their land use patterns, economy, the use and enjoyment of outdoor recreational areas, and air and water quality, amongst others. Permit approval hinges on whether the benefits of the project outweigh any losses the town might experience. Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Silverthorne needed a means to control the construction of any new water pipelines feeding into Dillon Reservoir and 1041s were the best tool for that objective. While Silverthorne has not yet had any applications since they adopted their 1041s, the regulations are in effect when or if they are needed. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Silverthorne Select the areas and activities for designation based on the needs of your community and the development pressures being faced. Adopt the areas and activities that are best suited to addressing your needs. Do not designate an area or activity that is not needed. 19.1 Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 37 Takeaways The construction of new pipelines through Silverthorne could have a significant impact on the town, its residents, and its continuing prosperity. Without 1041s, Silverthorne would be unable to control where new pipelines or other attendant structures would be placed or how they might adversely impact their residents. This concerned Silverthorne because of the potential significant impact to private property, over which they would have less control without 1041s. With their 1041s, Silverthorne will be included in any negotiations between private property owners and water providers should the latter decide to expand their water systems. 19.1 Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 38 SUMMIT COUNTY Population: 28,940 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015) Location: Central mountains along I-70, east side of Vail Pass 1041 Designations: ▪ Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways ▪ Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility ▪ Site Selection/Construction of Major New Domestic Water and Sewage Treatment Systems ▪ Major Extensions of Existing Domestic Water and Sewer Treatment Systems ▪ Efficient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects ▪ Site Selection/Development of Solid Waste Disposal Sites ▪ Site Selection of Airports Year of 1041 Adoption: 1974; Amended 1988, 1995, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2013 Number of Permits Approved since 1974: 47 1041 Story Summit County first adopted their 1041s on July 1, 1974, not long after the enabling legislation was passed. The County adopted their regulations pro-actively because they wanted to control their destiny and saw the advantages of exercising this new level of delegated authority. The White River National Forest occupies over 80% of the total land area in Summit Co unty. Without 1041s, the County government did not previously have authority to regulate development within these federal lands. 1041 Regulations gave the County the authority to review development that would otherwise be outside their control, greatly expanding the County’s ability to regulate growth and development within the designated areas and activities. Summit County’s 1041s have been updated over the years, to clarify language or add additional designations, and were substantially rewritten in 2002. Developing and Implementing their 1041s When Summit County updated their 1041s in 2002, the County hired an attorney with expertise in land use and 1041 Regulations and another attorney with expertise in water quality issues. The Board of County Commissioners reviewed and adopted the amended regulations in July of 2002 under the County’s Land Use and Development Code. There have been no legal challenges to Summit County’s 1041 Regulations, though over the years some applicants expressed concern over the complexity of the process. The County responded to this concern by amending the regulations in 2002 to clarify and simplify the provisions. The key changes included allowing for a coordinated approach with other regulatory agencies, improvements to the permit application, review, and hearing procedures; clarifying, expanding, and improving the definitions, applicability, exemptions, financial guarantee, and permit administration and enforcement sections of the Code. Source: https://summitcountyvoice.com/tag/summit-county- wildflowers/ 19.1 Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 39 Some Key Features of Summit County’s 1041s Like other respondent communities, Summit County’s 1041s require substantial submittal documentation for all applicants, additional documentation specified for each designated activity, and compliance with approval criteria that go beyond the minimum criteria set in AASIA. The County’s streamlined permit review process provides for an early determination of the impacts of a proposed development or project. Like other communities, the County has a three-tiered permit review process: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), minor permit review, and major permit review (Summit County, 2013, pp. 12-13). FONSI determinations are most often made for proposed revisions or changes to previously approved permits or completed projects. A minor permit review designation allows the project to skip review by the planning commission and go straight to the Board of County Commissioners. Effectiveness of the 1041s for Regulating Development Summit County adopted their 1041s to ensure that growth and development in the County occurs in a safe, efficient, and coordinated manner that is consistent with legitimate environmental concerns, and to ensure that adequate community services and facilities are provided to serve the community’s needs (Summit County, 2013, p.4.) 1041s gave Summit County authority to review and regulate developments that were not otherwise previously within their jurisdictional authority. In particular, Summit County successfully uses their 1041s to review projects on U.S. Forest Service land, exercising a level of oversight of development that did not otherwise exist. The County’s 1041s have been effective for controlling development to protect and preserve environmental resources, public lands and welfare, and the rights of property owners. Summit County’s 1041s have given the County the ability to ensure that development of designated areas or activities of state interest is not in conflict with the community’s goals or the County’s duties to manage and coordinate growth and development. Advice | Tips | Strategies for Adopting 1041s from Summit County Seek the advice of knowledgeable professionals so you can be confident your 1041s are consistent and fully comply with the enabling legislation. Also, make sure you have permitting fees that adequately cover the staff time and costs incurred by your office to process a 1041 permit approval. Takeaways Summit County was an early adopter of 1041 Regulations and has used them successfully for over 40 years to regulate development that would not otherwise fall under their jurisdictional purview. The fact that 1041s are applicable to projects on U.S. Forest Service land is critically important because over 80% of the land in Summit County is in the White River National Forest. Without 1041s, the County would be unable to regulate development or projects over large swaths of its land area, areas that are critical tourist destinations (ski resorts) and natural resource areas. 19.1 Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 40 REFERENCES Arapahoe County, Colorado. (2006). Regulations Governing Areas and Activities of State Interest in Arapahoe County (1041 Regulations) [data file]. Retrieved from http://arapahoegov.com/index.aspx?NID=619. Areas and Activities of State Interest Act, C.R.S. §§ 24-65.1-101, et seq. (2016). Blair, E. (2015). A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 6 (1), 14-29. Retrieved from http://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jmmss/article/view/18772. Bosselman, F. and D. Callies. (1971). The Quiet Revolution in Land Use Control, Council on Environmental Quality [data file]. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED067272.pdf City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 760 P.2d 656 (Colo.App. 1988). City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners of Grand County, 782 .2d 753 (Colo. 1989). City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105 (Colo.App. 1994). City of Superior, Colorado (2010). Municipal Code. Chapter 16 – Land Use. Article XXXIV – Areas or Activities of Statewide Significance. Retrieved from https://www.municode.com/library/co/superior/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=CH16LAUS_AR TXXXIVARACSTSI. Clear Creek County, Colorado. (n.d.). History. Experience Clear Creek County. Retrieved from http://www.co.clear-creek.co.us/Index.aspx?NID=175. Clear Creek County, Colorado. (2012). Guidelines and Regulations for Matters of State Interest (1041 Regulations) [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.co.clear-creek.co.us/index.aspx?NID=431. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (n.d.(a)). 1041 Regulations. Local Government | Community Development & Planning. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dola/1041- regulations. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (n.d.(b)). Community Development & Planning. Local Government. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dola/community-development-planning. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (2015(a)). 2015 Colorado Municipal Land Use Survey Results (Tabular results) [data file]. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dola/colorado- land-use-survey. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (2015(b)). 2015 Colorado County Land Use Survey Results (Tabular results) [data file]. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dola/colorado-land-use- survey. 19.1 Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 41 Colorado State Archives. (n.d.). House Bill 1041 (1974) Concerning Land Use [data file]. Retrieved from http://cdm16924.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/myfirst/id/407. Dill v. Board of County Commissioners of Lincoln County, 928 P.2d 809 (Colo.App. 1996). Dischinger, J. (2005). Local Government Regulation Using 1041 Powers. Colorado Lawyer. 34 (12), 79-88. Evans, J. and D. Stafford. (2001). Senate Bill 01S-003 [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.leg.state.co.us/2001s/inetcbill.nsf/billcontainers/3DF38C2C182F227387256A48007 059CA/$FILE/003_01.pdf. Green, B.J. and B. Seibert. (1990). Local Governments and House Bill 1041: A Voice in the Wilderness. Colorado Lawyer. 19 (11), 2245-2249. Kurtz-Phelan, J. (1977). H.B. 1041: A Step Toward Responsible and Accountable Land Use Act Decisions. Colorado Lawyer, 6 (10), 1718-1729. Otero County. (2006). Guidelines and Regulations for Areas and Activities of State Interest, County of Otero, State of Colorado [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.oterogov.com/departments/land-use/state-interest-1041-regulations. Panos, N.P. (1994). H.B. 1041 as a Tool for Municipal Attorneys. Colorado Lawyer, 23 (6), 1309-1313. Pommer, J. and L. Entz. (2005). House Bill 05-1063 [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.statebillinfo.com/bills/bills/05/1063_rev.pdf. Routt County, Colorado. (2007). Resolution No. 2007 -P-059 [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.co.routt.co.us/index.aspx?nid=439. Sanchez, R. (n.d.). High + Dry. 5280 The Denver Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.5280.com/crowley/. Summit County, Colorado. (2013). Summit County Land Use and Development Code. Chapter 10: Areas and Activities of State Interest [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.co.summit.co.us/255/Land-Use-Development-Code. State Demography Office | Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (n.d.). Historical Census Data – Counties and Municipalities [data files]. Retrieved from https://demography.dola.colorado.gov/population/data/historical_census/. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Ass’n, Inc. v. Board of County Com’rs of Lincoln County, 600 P.2d 103 (Colo.App. 1979). Town of Frisco, Colorado. (n.d.). Dillon Reservoir. Play. Retrieved from https://www.townoffrisco.com/play/dillon-reservoir/. Town of Silt, Colorado. (2017). Code of Ordinances, Title 17 – Zoning. Retrieved from https://www.municode.com/library/co/silt/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT17ZO. 19.1 Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Colorado Local Governments’ Use of 1041 Regulations 42 Town of Silverthorne, Colorado. (2005). Charter and Municipal Code. Chapter 4 – Community Development. Article XII – Guidelines and Regulations for Matters of State Interest. Retrieved from https://www.municode.com/library/co/silverthorne/codes/charter_and_municipal_code?nodeI d=CD_CH4CODE_ARTXIIGUREMASTIN. United States Census Bureau. (2015). Community Facts | 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. American Fact Finder. Retrieved from https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF Warner, C.J. (1977). Of Growth Controls, Wilderness and the Urban Strip. Colorado Lawyer, 6 (10), 1730- 1755. White, M.D. and R.L. Petros. (1977). Land Use Legislation: H.B. 1034 and H.B. 1041. Colorado Lawyer, 6(10), 1686-1717. 19.1 Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Questionnaire: Local Government Use of 1041 Regulations Form description 1. Which areas and/or activities do you have designated in your 1041 Regulations? Check all that apply. Mineral Resource Areas Natural Hazard Areas Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource Areas Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or surrounding community Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water/Sewer Treatment Systems E£cient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects Site Selection/Development of Solid Waste Disposal Sites Site Selection/Development of New Communities Site Selection of Airports Use of Geothermal Resources for Commercial Production of Electricity Conduct of Nuclear Detonations Questionnaire: Local Government Use of 1041 Regulations QUESTIONS RESPONSES 11 WW E/y͕KE>/E Yh ^d/KEE/Z ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϯ 19.1 Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) 2. What year were your 1041 Regulations ¡rst adopted? Long answer text 3. What prompted the development of the 1041 Regulations (e.g., pro-active, in response to an anticipated development, etc.)? Long answer text 4. Have you updated or changed your 1041 Regulations over time? Yes No Don't know or unsure 4a. If yes, when? Long answer text 5. Did you adopt development guidelines that were more stringent than the minimum criteria set in the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act? Yes No Don't know or unsure 5a. If yes, for which areas or activities did you adopt more stringent guidelines? Check all that apply. Mineral Resource Areas Natural Hazard Areas Historical, Natural or Archaeological Resource Areas ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϰ 19.1 Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or surrounding community Site Selection of Arterial Highways/Interchanges/Collector Highways Site Selection of Rapid/Mass Transit Facilities Site Selection/Construction of Major Facilities of a Public Utility Site Selection/Construction of Major New or Expanded Domestic Water/Sewer Treatment Systems E£cient Utilization of Municipal/Industrial Water Projects Site Selection/Development of Solid Waste Disposal Sites Site Selection/Development of New Communities Site Selection of Airports Use of Geothermal Resources for Commercial Production of Electricity Conduct of Nuclear Detonations 6. How many permit applications for designated areas or activities have you approved since adopting your 1041 Regulations? Long answer text 7. What is your current permit fee(s)? (If you have more than one, list by type.) Long answer text 8. Have your 1041 Regulations been an effective tool for regulating development in your community? Yes No Other 8a. Why or why not? ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϱ 19.1 Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Long answer text 9. Based on your experience, would you recommend other communities use 1041 Regulations? Yes No Other 9a. Why or why not? Long answer text *10. Your Name Long answer text *10a. Organization Long answer text *10b. Job Title Long answer text *10c. Email Long answer text 10d. Phone Number Long answer text ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϲ 19.1 Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) County Population Location # of AAs ůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬ ϵ͕ϭϱϯ DŽ ϵ 'ŝůƉŝŶ ϱ͕ϴϯϬ DŽ ϭϯ ,ƵĞƌĨĂŶŽ ϲ͕ϰϮϴ ^ ϱ :ĂĐŬƐŽŶ ϭ͕ϯϴϴ DŽE Ϯ <ŝŽǁĂ ϭ͕ϯϴϱ W ϭ WŚŝůůŝƉƐ ϰ͕ϯϴϬ WE ϭ ^ĂŐƵĂĐŚĞ ϲ͕ϮϬϲ DŽ^ ϵ ^ĂŶDŝŐƵĞů ϳ͕ϴϮϯ t^^ ϳ ^ĞĚŐǁŝĐŬ Ϯ͕ϯϯϭ WE Ϯ ůĂŵŽƐĂ ϭϱ͕ϴϳϬ ^ ϭ >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŽĚĞƐ ƌĐŚƵůĞƚĂ ϭϮ͕Ϯϰϵ DŽ^ ϭ DĞсDĞƚƌŽ ŚĂĨĨĞĞ ϭϴ͕ϰϱϰ DŽ ϰ DŽсDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ ϭϱ͕ϲϲϬ DŽ ϭϯ ^с^ŽƵƚŚĞŶƚƌĂů >ĂƐŶŝŵĂƐ ϭϰ͕ϬϲϬ ^ ϴ Wс ĂƐƚĞƌŶWůĂŝŶƐ KƚĞƌŽ ϭϴ͕ϯϴϬ W^t ϴ t^сtĞƐƚĞƌŶ^ůŽƉĞ WĂƌŬ ϭϲ͕ϯϴϯ DŽ ϯ EсEŽƌƚŚ WƌŽǁĞƌƐ ϭϭ͕ϵϴϱ W^ ϰ с ĂƐƚ zƵŵĂ ϭϬ͕ϭϯϮ WE Ϯ ^с^ŽƵƚŚ tсtĞƐƚ ůďĞƌƚ Ϯϰ͕ϭϰϰ ϯ сĞŶƚƌĂů &ƌĞŵŽŶƚ ϰϲ͕Ϯϵϰ DŽ ϯ DŽƌŐĂŶ Ϯϴ͕Ϯϱϰ WEt ϳ ZŽƵƚƚ Ϯϯ͕ϴϵϲ t^E ϰ ^Ƶŵŵŝƚ Ϯϵ͕ϯϵϵ DŽ ϵ dĞůůĞƌ Ϯϯ͕ϯϵϰ DŽ Ϯ ĚĂŵƐ ϰϴϬ͕ϯϭϳ DĞ ϭϬ ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞ ϲϭϴ͕ϯϰϭ DĞͮ Wt ϭϰ ŽƵůĚĞƌ ϯϭϯ͕ϳϬϴ DĞ ϴ ƌŽŽŵĨŝĞůĚ ϲϭ͕ϴϮϲ DĞ ϯ ĞŶǀĞƌ ϲϲϰ͕ϮϮϬ DĞ Ϯ ŽƵŐůĂƐ ϯϭϰ͕ϱϵϮ DĞ ϱ ĂŐůĞ ϱϮ͕ϴϯϭ DŽ Ϯ ůWĂƐŽ ϲϲϱ͕ϬϳϬ ^ ϱ 'ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ ϱϳ͕ϱϰϴ t^ ϱ :ĞĨĨĞƌƐŽŶ ϱϱϴ͕ϱϯϮ DĞͮDŽ ϭϬ >ĂƌŝŵĞƌ ϯϮϯ͕ϴϲϯ DŽ ͮE ϳ WƵĞďůŽ ϭϲϭ͕ϳϴϮ ^ ϵ tĞůĚ Ϯϳϲ͕Ϭϳϵ WtͮE Ϯ Counties with 1041 Regulations WW E/y͕KhEd/ ^t/d,ϭϬϰϭZ 'h>d/KE^ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϳ 19.1 Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Municipality Population Location County # of AAs ůĂĐŬ,ĂǁŬ ϭϮϱ DŽ 'ŝůƉŝŶ ϭ ƌŽŽŬƐŝĚĞ Ϯϰϰ DŽ &ƌĞŵŽŶƚ Ϯ ĞŶƚƌĂůŝƚLJ ϳϮϮ DŽ 'ŝůƉŝŶ ϲ ŚĞƌĂǁ Ϯϰϱ W^t KƚĞƌŽ ϭ ŽŬĞĚĂůĞ ϭϭϳ ^ >ĂƐŶŝŵĂƐ ϭ ƌĞƐƚĞĚƵƚƚĞ ϭ͕ϱϰϭ DŽ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ ϱ ůŝnjĂďĞƚŚ ϭ͕ϯϵϱ ůďĞƌƚ Ϯ 'ĞŽƌŐĞƚŽǁŶ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ DŽ ůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬ ϭ ,ƵĚƐŽŶ ϭ͕ϱϳϬ E tĞůĚ ϭ /ŐŶĂĐŝŽ ϳϭϵ DŽ^ >ĂWůĂƚĂ Ϯ <ĞƌƐĞLJ ϭ͕ϱϰϭ E tĞůĚ Ϯ >Ă:ĂƌĂ ϴϬϳ DŽ^ ŽŶĞũŽƐ Ϯ >ĂŬĞŝƚLJ ϯϳϬ DŽ^ ,ŝŶƐĚĂůĞ ϭ >ŝŵŽŶ ϭ͕ϵϬϵ W >ŝŶĐŽůŶ ϲ Dƚ͘ƌĞƐƚĞĚƵƚƚĞ ϴϬϲ DŽ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ ϭ EƵŶŶ ϰϰϭ E tĞůĚ ϰ KĂŬƌĞĞŬ ϴϴϲ DŽE ZŽƵƚƚ ϭ KůŶĞLJ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ ϯϯϮ W^t ƌŽǁůĞLJ ϭ KƵƌĂLJ ϭ͕ϬϬϳ DŽ^ KƵƌĂLJ ϯ WĂŐŽƐĂ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ ϭ͕ϳϲϲ DŽ^ ƌĐŚƵůĞƚĂ ϱ ZŽĐŬǀĂůĞ ϰϵϳ DŽ^ KƵƌĂLJ ϱ sŝĐƚŽƌ ϯϳϱ DŽ dĞůůĞƌ Ϯ tŝŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬ ϵϰϰ DŽ 'ƌĂŶĚ Ϯ ĞŶŶĞƚƚ Ϯ͕ϰϱϰ Wt ĚĂŵƐͮƌĂƉĂŚŽĞ ϯ ĂĐŽŶŽ ϰ͕ϰϲϵ E tĞůĚ ϭ ĂƚŽŶ ϰ͕ϴϭϬ E tĞůĚ ϭ >ĞĂĚǀŝůůĞ Ϯ͕ϲϬϬ DŽ >ĂŬĞ Ϯ DĞĂĚ ϯ͕ϵϬϴ E tĞůĚ ϭ DĞĞŬĞƌ Ϯ͕ϰϭϭ DŽt ZŝŽůĂŶĐŽ ϰ DŽŶƚĞsŝƐƚĂ ϰ͕Ϯϵϱ DŽ^ ZŝŽ'ƌĂŶĚĞ ϰ EĞǁĂƐƚůĞ ϰ͕ϱϳϳ DŽt 'ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ ϰ ^ŝůƚ ϯ͕Ϭϭϯ DŽt 'ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ ϱ ^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ ϰ͕ϭϭϲ DŽ ^Ƶŵŵŝƚ ϭϬ ^ŶŽǁŵĂƐƐsŝůůĂŐĞ Ϯ͕ϴϴϵ DŽ WŝƚŬŝŶ ϭ dĞůůƵƌŝĚĞ Ϯ͕ϰϱϳ DŽ^t ^ĂŶDŝŐƵĞů Ϯ ƐƉĞŶ ϲ͕ϴϰϬ DŽ WŝƚŬŝŶ Ϯ ǀŽŶ Ϯ͕ϰϳϴ DŽ ĂŐůĞ Ϯ ƐƚĞƐWĂƌŬ ϲ͕ϭϵϳ DŽ ͮE >ĂƌŝŵĞƌ ϯ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ ϱ͕ϵϯϱ DŽ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ ϱ 'LJƉƐƵŵ ϲ͕ϳϵϳ DŽ ĂŐůĞ ϭ Municipalities with 1041 Regulations WW E/y͕DhE//W>/d/ ^t/d,ϭϬϰϭZ 'h>d/KE^ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϴ 19.1 Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Municipality Population Location County # of AAs Municipalities with 1041 Regulations >Ă:ƵŶƚĂ ϲ͕ϵϬϯ W^t KƚĞƌŽ ϭ DĂŶŝƚŽƵ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ ϱ͕ϯϱϳ DŽ^ ůWĂƐŽ Ϯ DŝůůŝŬĞŶ ϲ͕ϬϳϮ E tĞůĚ ϵ ZŝĨůĞ ϵ͕Ϯϴϵ t^ 'ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ ϭ ĂŶŽŶŝƚLJ ϭϲ͕Ϯϯϱ DŽ^ &ƌĞŵŽŶƚ ϴ ƵƌĂŶŐŽ ϭϳ͕ϴϭϴ DŽ^t >ĂWůĂƚĂ Ϯ &ƌĞĚĞƌŝĐŬ ϭϬ͕ϵϬϴ E tĞůĚ Ϯ &ƌƵŝƚĂ ϭϮ͕ϲϵϭ t^ DĞƐĂ ϭϬ 'ŽůĚĞŶ ϮϬ͕Ϭϵϲ DĞͮDŽ :ĞĨĨĞƌƐŽŶ ϯ >ĂĨĂLJĞƚƚĞ Ϯϲ͕ϳϴϲ DĞ ŽƵůĚĞƌ Ϯ >ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ ϮϬ͕Ϭϰϳ DĞ ŽƵůĚĞƌ ϭ ^ƚĞĂŵďŽĂƚ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ ϭϮ͕Ϯϵϭ t^E ZŽƵƚƚ ϯ ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ ϭϮ͕ϴϱϳ DĞ ŽƵůĚĞƌ ϭϬ tŝŶĚƐŽƌ Ϯϭ͕ϳϯϮ E tĞůĚ ϰ ƵƌŽƌĂ ϯϱϬ͕ϳϳϯ DĞ ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞ ϭϭ ƌŽŽŵĨŝĞůĚ ϲϭ͕ϴϮϲ DĞ ƌŽŽŵĨŝĞůĚ ϯ ĞŶƚĞŶŶŝĂů ϭϬϳ͕ϱϬϭ DĞ ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞ ϭ ĞŶǀĞƌ ϲϲϰ͕ϮϮϬ DĞ ĞŶǀĞƌ Ϯ 'ƌĂŶĚ:ƵŶĐƚŝŽŶ ϲϭ͕ϴϰϳ t^ DĞƐĂ ϭ 'ƌĞĞůĞLJ ϵϴ͕ϲϲϲ E tĞůĚ ϱ WƵĞďůŽ ϭϬϴ͕ϭϳϳ ^ WƵĞďůŽ ϰ dŚŽƌŶƚŽŶ ϭϮϵ͕ϰϬϯ DĞ ĚĂŵƐ Ϯ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϰϵ 19.1 Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) Name of County Location Population Category # of AAs 'ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ t^ >ĂƌŐĞWŽƉ ϱ ^ĂŶDŝŐƵĞů t^ ^ŵĂůůWŽƉ ϳ ZŽƵƚƚ t^E DĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϰ DŽƌŐĂŶ WE DĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϳ ^ĞĚŐǁŝĐŬ WE ^ŵĂůůWŽƉ Ϯ ^Ƶŵŵŝƚ DŽ DĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϵ KƚĞƌŽ W^ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϴ WƌŽǁĞƌƐ W^ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϰ ůWĂƐŽ ^ >ĂƌŐĞWŽƉ ϳ >ĂƐŶŝŵĂƐ ^ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϴ ŽƵůĚĞƌ DĞ >ĂƌŐĞWŽƉ ϯ ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞ DĞͮ Wt >ĂƌŐĞWŽƉ ϭϰ :ĞĨĨĞƌƐŽŶ DĞͮDŽ >ĂƌŐĞWŽƉ ϭϬ &ƌĞŵŽŶƚ DŽ DĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϯ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ DŽ DĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϭϯ WĂƌŬ DŽ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵWŽƉ ϯ ůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬ DŽ ^ŵĂůůWŽƉ ϵ 'ŝůƉŝŶ DŽ ^ŵĂůůWŽƉ ϭϯ Name of Municipality Location Population Category # of AAs >ŝŵŽŶ W ^ŵĂůů ϲ ĞŶŶĞƚƚ Wt ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵ ϯ EƵŶŶ E ^ŵĂůů ϰ DŝůůŝŬĞŶ E DĞĚŝƵŵ ϵ WƵĞďůŽ ^ >ĂƌŐĞ ϰ ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ DĞ DĞĚŝƵŵͲ>ĂƌŐĞ ϭϬ ƵƌŽƌĂ DĞ >ĂƌŐĞ ϭϭ 'ŽůĚĞŶ DĞͮDŽ DĞĚŝƵŵͲ>ĂƌŐĞ ϯ ƐƚĞƐWĂƌŬ DŽ ͮE DĞĚŝƵŵ ϯ ĞŶƚƌĂůŝƚLJ DŽ ^ŵĂůů ϲ ƐƉĞŶ DŽ DĞĚŝƵŵ Ϯ ƌĞƐƚĞĚƵƚƚĞ DŽ ^ŵĂůů ϱ ^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ DŽ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵ ϭϬ 'ƵŶŶŝƐŽŶ DŽ DĞĚŝƵŵ ϱ WĂŐŽƐĂ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ DŽ^ ^ŵĂůů ϱ ZŽĐŬǀĂůĞ DŽ^ ^ŵĂůů ϱ DŽŶƚĞsŝƐƚĂ DŽ^ ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵ ϰ ĂŶŽŶŝƚLJ DŽ^ DĞĚŝƵŵͲ>ĂƌŐĞ ϴ DĞĞŬĞƌ DŽt ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵ ϰ ^ŝůƚ DŽt ^ŵĂůůͲDĞĚŝƵŵ ϱ &ƌƵŝƚĂ t^ DĞĚŝƵŵͲ>ĂƌŐĞ ϭϬ ^ƚĞĂŵďŽĂƚ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ t^E DĞĚŝƵŵͲ>ĂƌŐĞ ϯ Participants Selected for Inclusion in the Sample WW E/y͕WZd//WEd^^ > d &KZ/E>h^/KE/Ed, ^DW> ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϱϬ 19.1 Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) DŝŶĞƌĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞ EĂƚƵƌĂů,ĂnjĂƌĚ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů͕EĂƚƵƌĂůŽƌ ƌĐŚĂĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞ ƌĞĂƐĂƌŽƵŶĚŬĞLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͙ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶŽĨƌƚĞƌŝĂů ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJƐͬ/ŶƚĞƌĐŚĂŶŐĞƐͬŽůůĞĐƚ Žƌ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJƐ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶŽĨZĂƉŝĚͬDĂƐƐ dƌĂŶƐŝƚ&ĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶͬŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨ DĂũŽƌ&ĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐŽĨĂWƵďůŝĐ hƚŝůŝƚLJ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶͬŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨ DĂũŽƌEĞǁŽƌ džƉĂŶĚĞĚ ŽŵĞƐƚŝĐtĂƚĞƌͬ^ĞǁĞƌ dƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚ^LJƐƚĞŵƐ ĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚhƚŝůŝnjĂƚŝŽŶŽĨ DƵŶŝĐŝƉĂůͬ/ŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůtĂƚĞƌ WƌŽũĞĐƚƐ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶͬĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨ ^ŽůŝĚtĂƐƚĞŝƐƉŽƐĂů^ŝƚĞƐ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶͬĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨ EĞǁŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐ ^ŝƚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶŽĨŝƌƉŽƌƚƐ hƐĞŽĨ'ĞŽƚŚĞƌŵĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ ĨŽƌŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůWƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨ ůĞĐƚƌŝĐŝƚLJ ŽŶĚƵĐƚŽĨEƵĐůĞĂƌ ĞƚŽŶĂƚŝŽŶƐƌĂƉĂŚŽĞŽƵŶƚLJdždždž dž dždždžŽƵůĚĞƌŽƵŶƚLJdždždždž dž dž dž džůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬŽƵŶƚLJdždždždždždž dž dž dždž'ŽůĚĞŶ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿdžKƚĞƌŽŽƵŶƚLJdždždždžWĂƌŬŽƵŶƚLJdždžZŽƵƚƚŽƵŶƚLJdždždž dž^ŝůƚ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿdždždž^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿdždž^ƵŵŵŝƚŽƵŶƚLJdždždž dž dždž dž^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿdždždždždždždž dž dždždždž džTotal2463637 9 734501Online Questionnaire Responses1. Which areas and/or activities do you have designated in your 1041 Regulations? Check all that apply.WW E/y ͕KE>/E Yh ^d/KEE/Z Z ^WKE^ ^͕Yh ^d/KEϭ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϱϭ 19.1 Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) 3. What prompted the development of the 1041 Regulations (e.g., pro-active, in response to an anticipated development, etc.)?ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞŽƵŶƚLJdŚĞŶĞĞĚĨŽƌŽƵŶƚŝĞƐƚŽŝŶƚĞƌĂĐƚǁŝƚŚŵĂũŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚLJƉĞƐƚŚĂƚŝŵƉĂĐƚƌĂƉĂŚŽĞŽƵŶƚLJŽƵůĚĞƌŽƵŶƚLJůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬŽƵŶƚLJdŽďĞƉƌŽͲĂĐƚŝǀĞŝŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƚŽƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝŶĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůůLJƐĞŶƐŝƚŝǀĞĂƌĞĂƐ͘'ŽůĚĞŶ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿŽŶĐĞƌŶĨŽƌƐƚĂƚĞŽƌƌĞŐŝŽŶĂůƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽũĞĐƚĚĞƐŝŐŶKƚĞƌŽŽƵŶƚLJdŽďĞƉƌŽͲĂĐƚŝǀĞĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŽƵƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͘WĂƌŬŽƵŶƚLJŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚƐƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚZŽƵƚƚŽƵŶƚLJdŚĞĂƌĞĂƐĂŶĚĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐƐĞůĞĐƚĞĚĐŽƵůĚŝŶǀŽůǀĞŵĂũŽƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂŶĚƚŚĞŽƵŶƚLJƐĂǁƚŚĞďĞŶĞĨŝƚŽĨŚĂǀŝŶŐϭϬϰϭƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƐƵĐŚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐ͘^ŝůƚ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿ/ŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƚŽĂĐŽƵƉůĞŽĨŐƌĂǀĞůƉŝƚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJ͘^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿdŽƌĞŐƵůĂƚĞǁĂƚĞƌƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞƐǁŝƚŚŝŶũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶ͘^ƵŵŵŝƚŽƵŶƚLJWƌŽͲĂĐƚŝǀĞ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿWƌŽͲĂĐƚŝǀĞOnline Questionnaire ResponsesWW E/y&͕KE>/E Yh ^d/KEE/Z Z ^WKE^ ^͕Yh ^d/KEϯ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϱϮ 19.1 Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) 8. Have your 1041 Regulations been an effective tool for regulating development in your community? 8a. Why or why not? ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ŽƵůĚĞƌŽƵŶƚLJ ůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ ĂďŽǀĞĂĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJΖƐnjŽŶŝŶŐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJĨŽƌĂ ůŽĐĂůĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƚŽĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞůLJƌĞǀŝĞǁŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ ĐĂƵƐĞĚďLJǀĞƌLJůĂƌŐĞͲƐĐĂůĞĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚ ǁŽƵůĚŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞŶŽƚďĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽůŽĐĂů njŽŶŝŶŐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ͘ 'ŽůĚĞŶ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿ KƚŚĞƌ KŶůLJĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐĨŽƌĂĐŝƚLJƐƉŽŶƐŽƌĞĚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ KƚĞƌŽŽƵŶƚLJzĞƐ ŵĂũŽƌƉĂƌƚŽĨŽƵƌƐŝƐŵĂŬŝŶŐƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚŝĨ ǁĂƚĞƌŝƐƌĞŵŽǀĞĚĨƌŽŵůĂŶĚ͕ƉƌŽƉĞƌƐƚĞƉƐĂƌĞ ƚĂŬĞŶƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐƌĞͲǀĞŐĞƚĂƚĞĚ͘ /ĨĂƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞŐŽĞƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƌŽƵŶƚLJǁĞ ŵĂŬĞƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚĂůůĚŝƐƚƵƌďĞĚƌĂŶŐĞůĂŶĚŝƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌůLJƌĞͲǀĞŐĞƚĂƚĞĚ͘ WĂƌŬŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ůŽĐĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽů ZŽƵƚƚŽƵŶƚLJ KƚŚĞƌ tĞƌĞĂůůLJŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŚĂĚŵĂũŽƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐƚŚĂƚ ƚƌŝŐŐĞƌĂĨƵůůϭϬϰϭƌĞǀŝĞǁ͘ ^ŝůƚ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿ zĞƐ dŚĞdŽǁŶĚŝĚŶŽƚǁĂŶƚƚŽƐĞĞĂƉůĞƚŚŽƌĂŽĨ ŵŝŶĞƌĂůĞdžƚƌĂĐƚŝŽŶďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚŝƚŚĂƐŶΖƚ͘ ^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿ EŽ EŽĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ ^ƵŵŵŝƚŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ KƵƌϭϬϰϭƌĞŐƐĂůůŽǁƵƐƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚŐƌŽǁƚŚ ĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝŶ^ƵŵŵŝƚŽƵŶƚLJŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚůĞŐŝƚŝŵĂƚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĂŶĚŽĐĐƵƌƐŝŶĂƐĂĨĞ͕ĞĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚĂŶĚ ĐŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞĚŵĂŶŶĞƌĂŶĚ͕ĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ͕ĞŶƐƵƌĞƐ ƚŚĂƚĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĂŶĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ĂƌĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŝŶĂŵĂŶŶĞƌĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ĐŽŶƐƚŝƚƵƚŝŽŶĂůƌŝŐŚƚƐŽĨƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐ͕ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ƉƵďůŝĐǁĞůĨĂƌĞ͘ ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿ zĞƐ /ŚĂǀĞŶŽƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞĚĂϭϬϰϭƉĞƌŵŝƚĚƵƌŝŶŐŵLJ ƚŝŵĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞdŽǁŶŽĨ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ͘ Online Questionnaire Responses WW E/y'͕KE>/E Yh ^d/KEE/Z Z ^WKE^ ^͕Yh ^d/KEϴ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϱϯ 19.1 Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) 9. Based on your experience, would you recommend other communities use 1041 Regulations? 9a. Why or why not? ƌĂƉĂŚŽĞŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ŽƵůĚĞƌŽƵŶƚLJ ůĞĂƌƌĞĞŬŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ^ĞĞĂŶƐǁĞƌŝŶϴĂĂďŽǀĞ͘ ϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ ĂďŽǀĞĂĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJΖƐnjŽŶŝŶŐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJĨŽƌĂ ůŽĐĂůĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƚŽĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞůLJƌĞǀŝĞǁŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ ĐĂƵƐĞĚďLJǀĞƌLJůĂƌŐĞͲƐĐĂůĞĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚ ǁŽƵůĚŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞŶŽƚďĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽůŽĐĂů njŽŶŝŶŐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ͘ 'ŽůĚĞŶ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿ KƚŚĞƌ KƵƌĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞďĂƐŝƐƚŽ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚŽƌŶŽƚ KƚĞƌŽŽƵŶƚLJzĞƐ zŽƵŶĞĞĚĂŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƌĞŐƵůĂƚĞŵĂƚƚĞƌƐŽĨƐƚĂƚĞ ŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͘/ĨĂůůƐƚĂĨĨĂŶĚŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌƐĂƌĞŽŶ ďŽĂƌĚŝƚŝƐĂǀĂůƵĂďůĞƚŽŽů͘ WĂƌŬŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ ĐĂŶƌĞŐƵůĂƚĞƚŚŽƐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐƚŚĂƚŚĂǀĞ ŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽůŽĐĂůĂƌĞĂΘĞĐŽŶŽŵLJ ZŽƵƚƚŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ džƚƌĂůĂLJĞƌŽĨƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƌƵƌĂůĐŽƵŶƚŝĞƐ͘ ^ŝůƚ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿ zĞƐ ĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞƚŽŽů͘ ^ŝůǀĞƌƚŚŽƌŶĞ;dŽǁŶŽĨͿ zĞƐ ϭϬϰϭƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐĐĂŶďĞĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞŝŶƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŶŐ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ ^ƵŵŵŝƚŽƵŶƚLJ zĞƐ dŚĞLJĂƌĞĂǀĞƌLJƉŽǁĞƌĨƵůƐĞƚŽĨƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ƚŚĂƚĂůůŽǁŽƵƌĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƚŽĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞůLJ ƌĞǀŝĞǁƚŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚƚLJƉĞƐŽĨƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐƚŚĂƚĂƌĞ ƌĞŐƵůĂƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞϭϬϰϭWĞƌŵŝƚƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ ^ƵƉĞƌŝŽƌ;ŝƚLJŽĨͿ zĞƐ /ƚŝƐĂŶĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞƚŽŽůĨŽƌĐŽŶƚƌŽůůŝŶŐͬŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŶŐ ƚŚĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƐŽĨĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĞŶƐƵƌŝŶŐ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĂǁĂƌĞŶĞƐƐĂŶĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ĐŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ͘ Online Questionnaire Responses WW E/y,͕KE>/E Yh ^d/KEE/Z Z ^WKE^ ^͕Yh ^d/KEϵ ŽůŽƌĂĚŽ>ŽĐĂů'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐΖhƐĞŽĨϭϬϰϭZĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϱϰ 19.1 Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Local Governments' Use of 1041 Regulations (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-101. Legislative declaration, CO ST § 24-65.1-101 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-101 § 24-65.1-101. Legislative declaration (1) The general assembly finds and declares that: (a) The protection of the utility, value, and future of all lands within the state, including the public domain as well as privately owned land, is a matter of public interest; (b) Adequate information on land use and systematic methods of definition, classification, and utilization thereof are either lacking or not readily available to land use decision makers; and (c) It is the intent of the general assembly that land use, land use planning, and quality of development are matters in which the state has responsibility for the health, welfare, and safety of the people of the state and for the protection of the environment of the state. (2) It is the purpose of this article that: (a) The general assembly shall describe areas which may be of state interest and activities which may be of state interest and establish criteria for the administration of such areas and activities; (b) Local governments shall be encouraged to designate areas and activities of state interest and, after such designation, shall administer such areas and activities of state interest and promulgate guidelines for the administration thereof; and (c) Appropriate state agencies shall assist local governments to identify, designate, and adopt guidelines for administration of matters of state interest. ATTACHMENT 2 19.2 Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-102. General definitions, CO ST § 24-65.1-102 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-102 § 24-65.1-102. General definitions As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Development” means any construction or activity which changes the basic character or the use of the land on which the construction or activity occurs. (2) “Local government” means a municipality or county. (3) “Local permit authority” means the governing body of a local government with which an application for development in an area of state interest or for conduct of an activity of state interest must be filed, or the designee thereof. (4) “Matter of state interest” means an area of state interest or an activity of state interest or both. (5) “Municipality” means a home rule or statutory city, town, or city and county or a territorial charter city. (6) “Person” means any individual, limited liability company, partnership, corporation, association, company, or other public or corporate body, including the federal government, and includes any political subdivision, agency, instrumentality, or corporation of the state. 19.2 Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-103. Definitions pertaining to natural hazards, CO ST § 24-65.1-103 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-103 § 24-65.1-103. Definitions pertaining to natural hazards As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Aspect” means the cardinal direction the land surface faces, characterized by north-facing slopes generally having heavier vegetation cover. (2) “Avalanche” means a mass of snow or ice and other material which may become incorporated therein as such mass moves rapidly down a mountain slope. (3) “Corrosive soil” means soil which contains soluble salts which may produce serious detrimental effects in concrete, metal, or other substances that are in contact with such soil. (4) “Debris-fan floodplain” means a floodplain which is located at the mouth of a mountain valley tributary stream as such stream enters the valley floor. (5) “Dry wash channel and dry wash floodplain” means a small watershed with a very high percentage of runoff after torrential rainfall. (6) “Expansive soil and rock” means soil and rock which contains clay and which expands to a significant degree upon wetting and shrinks upon drying. (7) “Floodplain” means an area adjacent to a stream, which area is subject to flooding as the result of the occurrence of an intermediate regional flood and which area thus is so adverse to past, current, or foreseeable construction or land use as to constitute a significant hazard to public health and safety or to property. The term includes but is not limited to: 19.2 Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-103. Definitions pertaining to natural hazards, CO ST § 24-65.1-103 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4 (a) Mainstream floodplains; (b) Debris-fan floodplains; and (c) Dry wash channels and dry wash floodplains. (8) “Geologic hazard” means a geologic phenomenon which is so adverse to past, current, or foreseeable construction or land use as to constitute a significant hazard to public health and safety or to property. The term includes but is not limited to: (a) Avalanches, landslides, rock falls, mudflows, and unstable or potentially unstable slopes; (b) Seismic effects; (c) Radioactivity; and (d) Ground subsidence. (9) “Geologic hazard area” means an area which contains or is directly affected by a geologic hazard. (10) “Ground subsidence” means a process characterized by the downward displacement of surface material caused by natural phenomena such as removal of underground fluids, natural consolidation, or dissolution of underground minerals or by man-made phenomena such as underground mining. (11) “Mainstream floodplain” means an area adjacent to a perennial stream, which area is subject to periodic flooding. (12) “Mudflow” means the downward movement of mud in a mountain watershed because of peculiar characteristics of extremely high sediment yield and occasional high runoff. (13) “Natural hazard” means a geologic hazard, a wildfire hazard, or a flood. 19.2 Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-103. Definitions pertaining to natural hazards, CO ST § 24-65.1-103 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5 (14) “Natural hazard area” means an area containing or directly affected by a natural hazard. (15) “Radioactivity” means a condition related to various types of radiation emitted by natural radioactive minerals that occur in natural deposits of rock, soil, and water. (16) “Seismic effects” means direct and indirect effects caused by an earthquake or an underground nuclear detonation. (17) “Siltation” means a process which results in an excessive rate of removal of soil and rock materials from one location and rapid deposit thereof in adjacent areas. (18) “Slope” means the gradient of the ground surface which is definable by degree or percent. (19) “Unstable or potentially unstable slope” means an area susceptible to a landslide, a mudflow, a rock fall, or accelerated creep of slope-forming materials. (20) “Wildfire behavior” means the predictable action of a wildfire under given conditions of slope, aspect, and weather. (21) “Wildfire hazard” means a wildfire phenomenon which is so adverse to past, current, or foreseeable construction or land use as to constitute a significant hazard to public health and safety or to property. The term includes but is not limited to: (a) Slope and aspect; (b) Wildfire behavior characteristics; and (c) Existing vegetation types. (22) “Wildfire hazard area” means an area containing or directly affected by a wildfire hazard. 19.2 Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-104. Definitions pertaining to other areas and..., CO ST § 24-65.1-104 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 6 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-104 § 24-65.1-104. Definitions pertaining to other areas and activities of state interest Effective: August 11, 2010 As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Airport” means any municipal or county airport or airport under the jurisdiction of an airport authority. (2) “Area around a key facility” means an area immediately and directly affected by a key facility. (3) “Arterial highway” means any limited-access highway which is part of the federal-aid interstate system or any limited-access highway constructed under the supervision of the department of transportation. (4) “Collector highway” means a major thoroughfare serving as a corridor or link between municipalities, unincorporated population centers or recreation areas, or industrial centers and constructed under guidelines and standards established by, or under the supervision of, the department of transportation. “Collector highway” does not include a city street or local service road or a county road designed for local service and constructed under the supervision of local government. (5) “Domestic water and sewage treatment system” means a wastewater treatment facility, water distribution system, or water treatment facility, as defined in section 25-9-102(5), (6), and (7), C.R.S., and any system of pipes, structures, and facilities through which wastewater is collected for treatment. (6) “Historical or archaeological resources of statewide importance” means resources which have been officially included in the national register of historic places, designated by statute, or included in an established list of places compiled by the state historical society. (7) “Key facilities” means: 19.2 Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-104. Definitions pertaining to other areas and..., CO ST § 24-65.1-104 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 7 (a) Airports; (b) Major facilities of a public utility; (c) Interchanges involving arterial highways; (d) Rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, and fixed guideways. (8) “Major facilities of a public utility” means: (a) Central office buildings of telephone utilities; (b) Transmission lines, power plants, and substations of electrical utilities; and (c) Pipelines and storage areas of utilities providing natural gas or other petroleum derivatives. (9) “Mass transit” means a coordinated system of transit modes providing transportation for use by the general public. (10) “Mineral” means an inanimate constituent of the earth, in solid, liquid, or gaseous state, which, when extracted from the earth, is usable in its natural form or is capable of conversion into usable form as a metal, a metallic compound, a chemical, an energy source, a raw material for manufacturing, or a construction material. “Mineral” does not include surface or groundwater subject to appropriation for domestic, agricultural, or industrial purposes, nor does it include geothermal resources. (11) “Mineral resource area” means an area in which minerals are located in sufficient concentration in veins, deposits, bodies, beds, seams, fields, pools, or otherwise as to be capable of economic recovery. “Mineral resource area” includes but is not limited to any area in which there has been significant mining activity in the past, there is significant mining activity in the present, mining development is planned or in progress, or mineral rights are held by mineral patent or valid mining claim with the intention of mining. (12) “Natural resources of statewide importance” is limited to shorelands of major, publicly owned reservoirs and significant wildlife habitats in which the wildlife species, as identified by the division of parks and wildlife of the department of natural resources, in a proposed area could be endangered. 19.2 Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-104. Definitions pertaining to other areas and..., CO ST § 24-65.1-104 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 8 (13) “New communities” means the major revitalization of existing municipalities or the establishment of urbanized growth centers in unincorporated areas. (14) “Rapid transit” means the element of a mass transit system involving a mechanical conveyance on an exclusive lane or guideway constructed solely for that purpose. 19.2 Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-105. Effect of article--public utilities, CO ST § 24-65.1-105 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 9 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-105 § 24-65.1-105. Effect of article--public utilities (1) With regard to public utilities, nothing in this article shall be construed as enhancing or diminishing the power and authority of municipalities, counties, or the public utilities commission. Any order, rule, or directive issued by any governmental agency pursuant to this article shall not be inconsistent with or in contravention of any decision, order, or finding of the public utilities commission with respect to public convenience and necessity. The public utilities commission and public utilities shall take into consideration and, when feasible, foster compliance with adopted land use master plans of local governments, regions, and the state. (2) Nothing in this article shall be construed as enhancing or diminishing the rights and procedures with respect to the power of a public utility to acquire property and rights-of-way by eminent domain to serve public need in the most economical and expedient manner. 19.2 Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-106. Effect of article--rights of property..., CO ST § 24-65.1-106 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 10 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-106 § 24-65.1-106. Effect of article--rights of property owners--water rights (1) Nothing in this article shall be construed as: (a) Enhancing or diminishing the rights of owners of property as provided by the state constitution or the constitution of the United States; (b) Modifying or amending existing laws or court decrees with respect to the determination and administration of water rights. 19.2 Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-107. Effect of article--developments in areas of..., CO ST § 24-65.1-107 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 11 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-107 § 24-65.1-107. Effect of article--developments in areas of state interest and activities of state interest meeting certain conditions (1) This article shall not apply to any development in an area of state interest or any activity of state interest which meets any one of the following conditions as of May 17, 1974: (a) The development or activity is covered by a current building permit issued by the appropriate local government; or (b) The development or activity has been approved by the electorate; or (c) The development or activity is to be on land: (I) Which has been conditionally or finally approved by the appropriate local government for planned unit development or for a use substantially the same as planned unit development; or (II) Which has been zoned by the appropriate local government for the use contemplated by such development or activity; or (III) With respect to which a development plan has been conditionally or finally approved by the appropriate governmental authority. 19.2 Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-108. Effect of article--state agency or commission..., CO ST § 24-65.1-108 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 12 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 1. General Provisions (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-108 § 24-65.1-108. Effect of article--state agency or commission responses (1) Whenever any person desiring to carry out development as defined in section 24-65.1-102(1) is required to obtain a permit, to be issued by any state agency or commission for the purpose of authorizing or allowing such development, pursuant to this or any other statute or regulation promulgated thereunder, such agency or commission shall establish a reasonable time period, which shall not exceed sixty days following receipt of such permit application, within which such agency or commission must respond in writing to the applicant, granting or denying said permit or specifying all reasonable additional information necessary for the agency or commission to respond. If additional information is required, said agency or commission shall set a reasonable time period for response following the receipt of such information. (2) Whenever a state agency or commission denies a permit, the denial must specify: (a) The regulations, guidelines, and criteria or standards used in evaluating the application; (b) The reasons for denial and the regulations, guidelines, and criteria or standards the application fails to satisfy; and (c) The action that the applicant would have to take to satisfy the state agency’s or commission’s permit requirements. (3) Whenever an application for a permit, as provided under this section, contains a statement describing the proposed nature, uses, and activities in conceptual terms for the development intended to be accomplished and is not accompanied with all additional information, including, without limitation, engineering studies, detailed plans and specifications, and zoning approval, or, whenever a hearing is required by the statutes, regulations, rules, ordinances, or resolutions thereof prior to the issuance of the requested permit, the agency or commission shall, within the time provided in this section for response, indicate its acceptance or denial of the permit on the basis of the concept expressed in the statement of the proposed uses and activities contained in the application. Such conceptual approval shall be made subject to the applicant filing and completing all prerequisite detailed additional information in accordance with the usual filing requirements of the agency or commission within a reasonable period of time. (4) All agencies and commissions authorized or required to issue permits for development shall adopt rules and regulations, 19.2 Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-108. Effect of article--state agency or commission..., CO ST § 24-65.1-108 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 13 or amend existing rules and regulations, so as to require that such agencies and commissions respond in the time and manner required in this section. (5) Nothing in this section shall shorten the time allowed for responses provided by federal statute dealing with, or having a bearing on, the subject of any such application for permit. (6) The provisions of this section shall not apply to applications approved, denied, or processed by a unit of local government. 19.2 Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-201. Areas of state interest as determined by local..., CO ST § 24-65.1-201 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 14 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 2. Areas and Activities Described--Criteria for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-201 § 24-65.1-201. Areas of state interest as determined by local governments (1) Subject to the procedures set forth in part 4 of this article, a local government may designate certain areas of state interest from among the following: (a) Mineral resource areas; (b) Natural hazard areas; (c) Areas containing, or having a significant impact upon, historical, natural, or archaeological resources of statewide importance; and (d) Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or the surrounding community. 19.2 Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-202. Criteria for administration of areas of state interest, CO ST § 24-65.1-202 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 15 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 2. Areas and Activities Described--Criteria for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-202 § 24-65.1-202. Criteria for administration of areas of state interest Effective: April 16, 2019 (1)(a) Mineral resource areas designated as areas of state interest shall be protected and administered in such a manner as to permit the extraction and exploration of minerals therefrom, unless extraction and exploration would cause significant danger to public health and safety. If the local government having jurisdiction, after weighing sufficient technical or other evidence, finds that the economic value of the minerals present therein is less than the value of another existing or requested use, such other use should be given preference; however, other uses which would not interfere with the extraction and exploration of minerals may be permitted in such areas of state interest. (b) Areas containing only sand, gravel, quarry aggregate, or limestone used for construction purposes shall be administered as provided by part 3 of article 1 of title 34, C.R.S. (c) The extraction and exploration of minerals from any area shall be accomplished in a manner which causes the least practicable environmental disturbance, and surface areas disturbed thereby shall be reclaimed in accordance with the provisions of article 32 of title 34, C.R.S. (d) Repealed by Laws 2019, Ch. 120 (S.B. 19-181), § 2, eff. April 16, 2019. (2)(a) Natural hazard areas shall be administered as follows: (I)(A) Floodplains shall be administered so as to minimize significant hazards to public health and safety or to property. The Colorado water conservation board shall promulgate a model floodplain regulation no later than September 30, 1974. Open space activities such as agriculture, horticulture, floriculture, recreation, and mineral extraction shall be encouraged in the floodplains. Any combination of these activities shall be conducted in a mutually compatible manner. Building of structures in the floodplain shall be designed in terms of the availability of flood protection devices, proposed intensity of use, effects on the acceleration of floodwaters, potential significant hazards to public health and safety or to property, and other impact of such development on downstream communities such as the creation of obstructions during floods. Activities shall be discouraged that, in time of flooding, would create significant hazards to public health and safety or to property. Shallow 19.2 Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-202. Criteria for administration of areas of state interest, CO ST § 24-65.1-202 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 16 wells, solid waste disposal sites, and septic tanks and sewage disposal systems shall be protected from inundation by floodwaters. Unless an activity of state interest is to be conducted therein, an area of corrosive soil, expansive soil and rock, or siltation shall not be designated as an area of state interest unless the Colorado conservation board, through the local conservation district, identifies such area for designation. (B) Nothing in sub-subparagraph (A) of this subparagraph (I), as amended by House Bill 05-1180,1 as enacted at the first regular session of the sixty-fifth general assembly, shall be construed as changing the property tax classification of property owned by a horticultural or floricultural operation. (II) Wildfire hazard areas in which residential activity is to take place shall be administered so as to minimize significant hazards to public health and safety or to property. The Colorado state forest service shall promulgate a model wildfire hazard area control regulation no later than September 30, 1974. If development is to take place, roads shall be adequate for service by fire trucks and other safety equipment. Firebreaks and other means of reducing conditions conducive to fire shall be required for wildfire hazard areas in which development is authorized. (III) In geologic hazard areas all developments shall be engineered and administered in a manner that will minimize significant hazards to public health and safety or to property due to a geologic hazard. The Colorado geological survey shall promulgate a model geologic hazard area control regulation no later than September 30, 1974. (b) After promulgation of guidelines for land use in natural hazard areas by the Colorado water conservation board, the Colorado conservation board through the conservation districts, the Colorado state forest service, and the Colorado geological survey, natural hazard areas shall be administered by local government in a manner that is consistent with the guidelines for land use in each of the natural hazard areas. (3) Areas containing, or having a significant impact upon, historical, natural, or archaeological resources of statewide importance, as determined by the state historical society, the department of natural resources, and the appropriate local government, shall be administered by the appropriate state agency in conjunction with the appropriate local government in a manner that will allow man to function in harmony with, rather than be destructive to, these resources. Consideration is to be given to the protection of those areas essential for wildlife habitat. Development in areas containing historical, archaeological, or natural resources shall be conducted in a manner which will minimize damage to those resources for future use. (4) The following criteria shall be applicable to areas around key facilities: (a) If the operation of a key facility may cause a danger to public health and safety or to property, as determined by local government, the area around the key facility shall be designated and administered so as to minimize such danger; and (b) Areas around key facilities shall be developed in a manner that will discourage traffic congestion, incompatible uses, and expansion of the demand for government services beyond the reasonable capacity of the community or region to provide such services as determined by local government. Compatibility with nonmotorized traffic shall be encouraged. A development 19.2 Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-202. Criteria for administration of areas of state interest, CO ST § 24-65.1-202 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 17 that imposes burdens or deprivation on the communities of a region cannot be justified on the basis of local benefit alone. (5) In addition to the criteria described in subsection (4) of this section, the following criteria shall be applicable to areas around particular key facilities: (a) Areas around airports shall be administered so as to: (I) Encourage land use patterns for housing and other local government needs that will separate uncontrollable noise sources from residential and other noise-sensitive areas; and (II) Avoid danger to public safety and health or to property due to aircraft crashes. (b) Areas around major facilities of a public utility shall be administered so as to: (I) Minimize disruption of the service provided by the public utility; and (II) Preserve desirable existing community patterns. (c) Areas around interchanges involving arterial highways shall be administered so as to: (I) Encourage the smooth flow of motorized and nonmotorized traffic; (II) Foster the development of such areas in a manner calculated to preserve the smooth flow of such traffic; and (III) Preserve desirable existing community patterns. (d) Areas around rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, or guideways shall be developed in conformance with the applicable municipal master plan adopted pursuant to section 31-23-206, C.R.S., or any applicable master plan adopted pursuant to section 30-28-108, C.R.S. If no such master plan has been adopted, such areas shall be developed in a manner designed to minimize congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, floodwaters, and other dangers; to promote health and general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public 19.2 Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-202. Criteria for administration of areas of state interest, CO ST § 24-65.1-202 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 18 requirements. Such development in such areas shall be made with reasonable consideration, among other things, as to the character of the area and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdiction of the applicable local government. 19.2 Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-203. Activities of state interest as determined by..., CO ST § 24-65.1-203 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 19 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 2. Areas and Activities Described--Criteria for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-203 § 24-65.1-203. Activities of state interest as determined by local governments Effective: August 11, 2010 (1) Subject to the procedures set forth in part 4 of this article, a local government may designate certain activities of state interest from among the following: (a) Site selection and construction of major new domestic water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems; (b) Site selection and development of solid waste disposal sites except those sites specified in section 25-11-203(1), C.R.S., sites designated pursuant to part 3 of article 11 of title 25, C.R.S., and hazardous waste disposal sites, as defined in section 25-15-200.3, C.R.S.; (c) Site selection of airports; (d) Site selection of rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, and fixed guideways; (e) Site selection of arterial highways and interchanges and collector highways; (f) Site selection and construction of major facilities of a public utility; (g) Site selection and development of new communities; (h) Efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects; 19.2 Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-203. Activities of state interest as determined by..., CO ST § 24-65.1-203 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 20 (i) Conduct of nuclear detonations; and (j) The use of geothermal resources for the commercial production of electricity. 19.2 Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-204. Criteria for administration of activities of state..., CO ST § 24-65.1-204 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 21 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 2. Areas and Activities Described--Criteria for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-204 § 24-65.1-204. Criteria for administration of activities of state interest (1)(a) New domestic water and sewage treatment systems shall be constructed in areas which will result in the proper utilization of existing treatment plants and the orderly development of domestic water and sewage treatment systems of adjacent communities. (b) Major extensions of domestic water and sewage treatment systems shall be permitted in those areas in which the anticipated growth and development that may occur as a result of such extension can be accommodated within the financial and environmental capacity of the area to sustain such growth and development. (2) Major solid waste disposal sites shall be developed in accordance with sound conservation practices and shall emphasize, where feasible, the recycling of waste materials. Consideration shall be given to longevity and subsequent use of waste disposal sites, soil and wind conditions, the potential problems of pollution inherent in the proposed site, and the impact on adjacent property owners, compared with alternate locations. (3) Airports shall be located or expanded in a manner which will minimize disruption to the environment of existing communities, minimize the impact on existing community services, and complement the economic and transportation needs of the state and the area. (4)(a) Rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, or guideways shall be located in conformance with the applicable municipal master plan adopted pursuant to section 31-23-206, C.R.S., or any applicable master plan adopted pursuant to section 30-28-108, C.R.S. If no such master plan has been adopted, such areas shall be developed in a manner designed to minimize congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, floodwaters, and other dangers; to promote health and general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. Activities shall be conducted with reasonable consideration, among other things, as to the character of the area and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdiction of the applicable local government. 19.2 Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-204. Criteria for administration of activities of state..., CO ST § 24-65.1-204 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 22 (b) Proposed locations of rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, and fixed guideways which will not require the demolition of residences or businesses shall be given preferred consideration over competing alternatives. (c) A proposed location of a rapid or mass transit terminal, station, or fixed guideway that imposes a burden or deprivation on a local government cannot be justified on the basis of local benefit alone, nor shall a permit for such a location be denied solely because the location places a burden or deprivation on one local government. (5) Arterial highways and interchanges and collector highways shall be located so that: (a) Community traffic needs are met; (b) Desirable community patterns are not disrupted; and (c) Direct conflicts with adopted local government, regional, and state master plans are avoided. (6) Where feasible, major facilities of public utilities shall be located so as to avoid direct conflict with adopted local government, regional, and state master plans. (7) When applicable, or as may otherwise be provided by law, a new community design shall, at a minimum, provide for transportation, waste disposal, schools, and other governmental services in a manner that will not overload facilities of existing communities of the region. Priority shall be given to the development of total communities which provide for commercial and industrial activity, as well as residences, and for internal transportation and circulation patterns. (8) Municipal and industrial water projects shall emphasize the most efficient use of water, including, to the extent permissible under existing law, the recycling and reuse of water. Urban development, population densities, and site layout and design of storm water and sanitation systems shall be accomplished in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. (9) Nuclear detonations shall be conducted so as to present no material danger to public health and safety. Any danger to property shall not be disproportionate to the benefits to be derived from a detonation. 19.2 Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-301. Functions of local government, CO ST § 24-65.1-301 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 23 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 3. Levels of Government Involved and Their Functions C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-301 § 24-65.1-301. Functions of local government (1) Pursuant to this article, it is the function of local government to: (a) Designate matters of state interest after public hearing, taking into consideration: (I) The intensity of current and foreseeable development pressures; and (II) Applicable guidelines for designation issued by the applicable state agencies; (b) Hold hearings on applications for permits for development in areas of state interest and for activities of state interest; (c) Grant or deny applications for permits for development in areas of state interest and for activities of state interest; (d) Receive recommendations from state agencies and other local governments relating to matters of state interest; (e) Send recommendations to other local governments relating to matters of state interest. (f) Deleted by Laws 2005, Ch. 192, § 2, eff. June 1, 2005. 19.2 Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-302. Functions of other state agencies, CO ST § 24-65.1-302 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 24 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 3. Levels of Government Involved and Their Functions C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-302 § 24-65.1-302. Functions of other state agencies Effective: April 16, 2019 (1) Pursuant to this article, it is the function of other state agencies to: (a) Send recommendations to local governments relating to designation of matters of state interest on the basis of current and developing information; and (b) Provide technical assistance to local governments concerning designation of and guidelines for matters of state interest. (2) Primary responsibility for the recommendation and provision of technical assistance functions described in subsection (1) of this section is upon: (a) The Colorado water conservation board, acting in cooperation with the Colorado conservation board, with regard to floodplains; (b) The Colorado state forest service, with regard to wildfire hazard areas; (c) The Colorado geological survey, with regard to geologic hazard areas, geologic reports, and the identification of mineral resource areas; (d) The division of reclamation, mining, and safety, with regard to mineral extraction and the reclamation of land disturbed thereby; (e) The Colorado conservation board and conservation districts, with regard to resource data inventories, soils, soil suitability, 19.2 Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-302. Functions of other state agencies, CO ST § 24-65.1-302 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 25 erosion and sedimentation, floodwater problems, and watershed protection; and (f) The division of parks and wildlife of the department of natural resources, with regard to significant wildlife habitats. (3) Repealed by Laws 2019, (S.B. 19-181), § 2, eff. April 16, 2019. 19.2 Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-401. Designation of matters of state interest, CO ST § 24-65.1-401 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 26 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 4. Designation of Matters of State Interest--Guidelines for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-401 § 24-65.1-401. Designation of matters of state interest Currentness (1) After public hearing, a local government may designate matters of state interest within its jurisdiction, taking into consideration: (a) The intensity of current and foreseeable development pressures. (b) Repealed by Laws 2005, Ch. 192, § 1, eff. June 1, 2005. (2) A designation shall: (a) Specify the boundaries of the proposed area; and (b) State reasons why the particular area or activity is of state interest, the dangers that would result from uncontrolled development of any such area or uncontrolled conduct of such activity, and the advantages of development of such area or conduct of such activity in a coordinated manner. 19.2 Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-402. Guidelines--regulations, CO ST § 24-65.1-402 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 27 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 4. Designation of Matters of State Interest--Guidelines for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-402 § 24-65.1-402. Guidelines--regulations (1) The local government shall develop guidelines for administration of the designated matters of state interest. The content of such guidelines shall be such as to facilitate administration of matters of state interest consistent with sections 24-65.1-202 and 24-65.1-204. (2) A local government may adopt regulations interpreting and applying its adopted guidelines in relation to specific developments in areas of state interest and to specific activities of state interest. (3) No provision in this article shall be construed as prohibiting a local government from adopting guidelines or regulations containing requirements which are more stringent than the requirements of the criteria listed in sections 24-65.1-202 and 24-65.1-204. 19.2 Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-403. Technical and financial assistance, CO ST § 24-65.1-403 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 28 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 4. Designation of Matters of State Interest--Guidelines for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-403 § 24-65.1-403. Technical and financial assistance (1) Appropriate state agencies shall provide technical assistance to local governments in order to assist local governments in designating matters of state interest and adopting guidelines for the administration thereof. (2)(a) The department of local affairs shall oversee and coordinate the provision of technical assistance and provide financial assistance as may be authorized by law. (b) The department of local affairs shall determine whether technical or financial assistance or both are to be given to a local government on the basis of the local government’s: (I) Showing that current or reasonably foreseeable development pressures exist within the local government’s jurisdiction; and (II) Plan describing the proposed use of technical assistance and expenditure of financial assistance. (3)(a) Any local government applying for federal or state financial assistance for floodplain studies shall provide prior notification to the Colorado water conservation board. The board shall coordinate and prescribe the standards for all floodplain studies conducted pursuant to this article, including those conducted by federal, local, or other state agencies, to the end that reasonably uniform standards can be applied to the identification and designation of all floodplains within the state and to minimize duplication of effort. (b) No floodplains shall be designated by any local government until such designation has been first approved by the Colorado water conservation board as provided in sections 30-28-111 and 31-23-301, C.R.S. 19.2 Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-404. Public hearing--designation of an area or..., CO ST § 24-65.1-404 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 29 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 4. Designation of Matters of State Interest--Guidelines for Administration (Refs & Annos) C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-404 § 24-65.1-404. Public hearing--designation of an area or activity of state interest and adoption of guidelines by order of local government (1) The local government shall hold a public hearing before designating an area or activity of state interest and adopting guidelines for administration thereof. (2)(a) Notice, stating the time and place of the hearing and the place at which materials relating to the matter to be designated and guidelines may be examined, shall be published once at least thirty days and not more than sixty days before the public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the county. (b) Any person may request, in writing, that his name and address be placed on a mailing list to receive notice of all hearings held pursuant to this section. If the local government decides to maintain such a mailing list, it shall mail notices to each person paying an annual fee reasonably related to the cost of production, handling, and mailing of such notice. In order to have his name and address retained on said mailing list, the person shall resubmit his name and address and pay such fee before January 31 of each year. (3) Within thirty days after completion of the public hearing, the local government, by order, may adopt, adopt with modification, or reject the particular designation and guidelines; but the local government, in any case, shall have the duty to designate any matter which has been finally determined to be a matter of state interest and adopt guidelines for the administration thereof. (4) After a matter of state interest is designated pursuant to this section, no person shall engage in development in such area, and no such activity shall be conducted until the designation and guidelines for such area or activity are finally determined pursuant to this article. (5) Deleted by Laws 2005, Ch. 192, § 4, eff. June 1, 2005. 19.2 Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-501. Permit for development in area of state..., CO ST § 24-65.1-501 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 30 KeyCite Yellow Flag - Negative Treatment Proposed Legislation West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 5. Permits for Development in Areas of State Interest and for Conduct of Activities of State Interest C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-501 § 24-65.1-501. Permit for development in area of state interest or to conduct an activity of state interest required (1)(a) Any person desiring to engage in development in an area of state interest or to conduct an activity of state interest shall file an application for a permit with the local government in which such development or activity is to take place. A reasonable fee determined by the local government sufficient to cover the cost of processing the application, including the cost of holding the necessary hearings, shall be paid at the time of filing such application. (b) The requirement of paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) that a public utility obtain a permit shall not be deemed to waive the requirements of article 5 of title 40, C.R.S., that a public utility obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity. (2)(a) Not later than thirty days after receipt of an application for a permit, the local government shall publish notice of a hearing on said application. Such notice shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, not less than thirty days nor more than sixty days before the date set for hearing. (b) If a person proposes to engage in development in an area of state interest or to conduct an activity of state interest not previously designated and for which guidelines have not been adopted, the local government may hold one hearing for determination of designation and guidelines and granting or denying the permit. (c) The local government may maintain a mailing list and send notice of hearings relating to permits in a manner similar to that described in section 24-65.1-404(2)(b). (3) The local government may approve an application for a permit to engage in development in an area of state interest if the proposed development complies with the local government’s guidelines and regulations governing such area. If the proposed development does not comply with the guidelines and regulations, the permit shall be denied. 19.2 Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-501. Permit for development in area of state..., CO ST § 24-65.1-501 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 31 (4) The local government may approve an application for a permit to conduct an activity of state interest if the proposed activity complies with the local government’s regulations and guidelines for conduct of such activity. If the proposed activity does not comply with the guidelines and regulations, the permit shall be denied. (5) The local government conducting a hearing pursuant to this section shall: (a) State, in writing, reasons for its decision, and its findings and conclusions; and (b) Preserve a record of such proceedings. (6) After May 17, 1974, any person desiring to engage in a development in a designated area of state interest or to conduct a designated activity of state interest who does not obtain a permit pursuant to this section may be enjoined by the appropriate local government from engaging in such development or conducting such activity. 19.2 Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) § 24-65.1-502. Judicial review, CO ST § 24-65.1-502 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 32 West’s Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated Title 24. Government--State Planning--State Article 65.1. Areas and Activities of State Interest (Refs & Annos) Part 5. Permits for Development in Areas of State Interest and for Conduct of Activities of State Interest C.R.S.A. § 24-65.1-502 § 24-65.1-502. Judicial review The denial of a permit by a local government agency shall be subject to judicial review in the district court for the judicial district in which the major development or activity is to occur. 19.2 Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (10256 : 1041 Regulations) -1- RESOLUTION 2021-055 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE AND EVALUATE THE REGULATION OF AREAS AND ACTIVITIES OF STATE INTEREST PURSUANT TO POWERS ESTABLISHED IN STATE LAW COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 1041 POWERS WHEREAS, in 1974, Colorado enacted House Bill 74-1041, the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act (the “Act”), that allows municipalities and counties by means of a statutorily defined process to designate certain areas and activities of state interest and to adopt certain regulations for the review of permits for development in such designated areas and for such activities; and WHEREAS, the Act is set forth in Title 24, Article 65.1, of the Colorado Revised Statutes and the regulatory powers granted by the Act are commonly referred to as “1041 powers” and the regulations adopted by a municipality or county pursuant to the Act are commonly referred to as “1041 regulations”; and WHEREAS, 1041 powers provide a possible regulatory tool by which the City may better achieve its policy and regulatory goals in furtherance of the best interests of the citizens of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, City staff investigation and evaluation of the 1041 powers and possible 1041 regulations is necessary to enable City Council to determine whether initiating the process for adopting certain 1041 regulations is desirable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Council hereby directs the City Manager to investigate and evaluate ways in which 1041 powers and 1041 regulations may better allow the City to achieve its policy and regulatory goals and to report its findings to City Council. Section 3. That this Resolution is not intended to initiate the process for designating an area or activity of state interest and adopting guidelines set forth in Colorado Revised Statutes § 24-65.1-404. Packet Pg. 276 -2- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of May, A.D. 2021. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Packet Pg. 277