Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-03/17/1992-RegularMarch 17, 1992 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday March 17, 1992, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Councilmembers Absent: Kirkpatrick and Winokur. Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, requested that all messages by all employees be a matter of public record and suggested a computer be available for public use. Rob Cagen, 1807 Creekwood Drive, representing the Performance Store at the Center for Advanced Technology, presented a petition to Council requesting a traffic ' signal be installed at the intersection of Shields and Centre. Citizen Participation Follow-up Councilmember Horak clarified the item relating to the distribution of electronic mail would be addressed during the "Other Business" portion of the meeting. Agenda Review City Manager Steve Burkett noted there was an monetary increase in Item #18, Resolution 92-52 Amending Resolution 92-44 Setting Forth the Intention of the City to Issue Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the DB Company/Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. Project. City Manager Steve Burkett stated there was an additional Resolution included in packets, Resolution 92-55 Supporting the Passage of the Associated Students of Colorado State University's (ASCSU) Bill #2156, "Transfort Bus Service" at Student Referendum on April 6, 7, and 8, 1992, and requested Council consider the item under the "Other Business" portion of the meeting. Councilmember Horak requested that 'Item #10, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 35, 1992, Appropriating Funds For The City's Share of the Downtown Railroad Track Consolidation Project, and Item #17, Resolution 92-51 Establishing Rental Rates to be Charged for the City's Surplus Water for the 1992 Season, be withdrawn from ' the Consent Calendar. 235 March 17, 1992 Frank Just requested that Item #15, Items Pertaining to the K-2 Annexation and Zoning, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Consent Calendar This 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 Agenda Item #20, Pulled Consent Items. 7. up A. Tabling of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 30, 1992, Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins General Obligation Water Bonds, Series 1992A. B. Tabling of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 31, 1992, Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins General Obligation Water Refunding Bonds, Series 1992B. On March 3, Council unanimously adopted Resolution 92-42, Authorizing the Execution of a Bond Purchase Agreement Relating to the General Obligation Water Bonds, Series 1992A and 1992B. Investment banking practices require that the underwriters enter into a bond purchase agreement reasonably soon after the marketing of the bonds. Under the terms of the agreement, the purchase and sale of the bonds is contingent upon ratification by the Council through the passage of the ordinances on second reading. Interest rates will not reach the levels necessary to provide the appropriate amount of savings by March 17, 1992. It is possible that the desired levels will be reached shortly after March 16, and the bonds may be sold prior to the next regular Council meeting of April 7. The 1992 Concrete Improvement Program is the eighth year of an annual program to encourage property owners to construct, repair, replace, and maintain their concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalks. This program is voluntary on the part of the property owners. To encourage participation by property owners, the City splits the cost of construction with the property owners (50/50), hires the contractor, and oversees the construction. In addition to paying 50 percent of the cost of the 236 a March 17, 1992 improvements, the City also pays the costs of oversizing sidewalks on major streets and the costs of constructing pedestrian access ramps at intersections. The City also pays for extending sidewalks across irrigation canals, alleys, or other public property. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3, appropriates the amount estimated to be received from participating property owners (unanticipated revenue) for the 1992 program. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 33, 1992, Repealing Section 5 of Ordinance No. 117, 1991. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 34, 1992, Reaffirming and Reenacting Section 26-127(C) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Both ordinances are necessary to correct technical errors in the preparation of two earlier ordinances. Ordinance No. 33, 1992, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3, corrects an oversight in the preparation of Ordinance No. 117, ' 1991, which deals with conversions from residential to non-residential uses in the R-H zone. Essentially, that ordinance failed to take into account the earlier renumbering of certain Code sections. Ordinance No. 34, 1992, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3, corrects Ordinance No. 120, 1991, which was adopted by Council, in part, for the purpose of changing the Schedule B, Meter Rates of the Water and Wastewater Utility. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 35, 1992, Appropriating Funds For The City's Share of the Downtown Railroad Track Consolidation Project. The City of Fort Collins, the Burlington Northern Railroad, the Union Pacific Railroad, and the Colorado Department of Transportation have a unique opportunity to work together to consolidate the railroad tracks in the downtown area to provide major benefits for the City, COOT, and both Railroads. Staff has worked with both railroads to develop a track consolidation plan which would improve train operations and eliminate a majority of the tracks in the downtown area. Staff worked with the DDA, Poudre River Trust, Planning, Economic Development, Landmark Preservation, and area businesses and residents to establish the consolidated track alignment. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3, ' appropriates the funds for the City's share of the costs.of this track consolidation project. 237 11. 12. 13 March 17, 1992 A. Tabling of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 36, 1992, Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority Tax Increment Refunding Bonds. B. Resolution 92-54 Authorizing the Execution of a Bond Purchase Agreement Relating to the Downtown Development Authority Tax Increment Refunding Bonds. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3. Staff recommends tabling of this Ordinance on Second Reading to April 7, 1992. Between March 17th and April 7th, staff will receive the insurance commitment from the insurance company and market the bonds. Investment banking practices require that the underwriters enter into a bond purchase agreement reasonably soon after the marketing of the bonds. Staff recommends that the Council adopt the resolution which authorizes the City Manager to sign the bond purchase agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, the purchase and sale of the bonds is contingent upon the ratification by the Council through the passage of the ordinances on second reading. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 37. 1992, Aporoariating ' Unanticipated Revenue in the Transit Services Fund for the Purchase of Paratransit Mini -Buses and Vans for Care -A -Van. Inc. This action appropriates $434,668 in unanticipated revenue which allows for the purchase of new paratransit mini -buses and vans for Care -A -Van, Inc. These new vehicles will support the City's contract for paratransit services. The City received notice that the U.S. Department of Transportation has approved federal funds for the purchase of ten new mini -buses and vans through the City of Fort Collins for support of paratransit services. These grants are competitive in nature and the award was not "expected" in the way federal operating funds are received each year. Items Pertaining to the Barnes Annexation and Zoning_ Resolution 92-47 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Barnes Annexation and Zoning. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 38, 1992, Annexing Approximately 2.31 Acres, Known as the Barnes Annexation. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 39, 1992, Zoning Approximately 2.31 Acres, Known as the Barnes Annexation, into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, Zoning District. PW." ' March 17, 1992 This is a request to annex and zone approximately 2.31 acres located at 2637 W. County Road 40, located south of Horsetooth Road, west of Taft Hill Road, and north of County Road 38E. There is a single family residence on the property. The property is currently zoned FA, Farming, in the County. The proposed zoning is RLP, Low Density Planned Residential. This is the annexation of an enclave area. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins OWNERS: Al and Clare Barnes 2637 W. County Road 40 Fort Collins, CO 80521 14. Items Pertaining to the Cameron Park Annexation and Zoning_ A. Resolution 92-48 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Cameron Park Annexation and Zoning. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 40, 1992, Annexing Approximately 5.78 Acres, Known as the Cameron Park Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 41, 1992, Zoning Approximately 5.78 Acres, Known as the Cameron Park Annexation, into the B-L, Limited Business, Zoning District. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 5.78 acres located west of Highway 287, 1/2 mile south of Harmony Road at Cameron Drive. The area to be annexed consists of ten separate parcels with eight different owners. The area is currently zoned B, Business, in the County. The proposed zoning is BL, Limited Business. This is the annexation of an enclave area. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins OWNERS: A.D and H.S Thompson Robert D. Ghent 2901 S. College Ave. 1433 41st Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 Greeley, CO 80634 James P. Johnson Meldrum Properties 922 Gregory Rd. 519 S. Meldrum St. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Fort Collins, CO Thomas and Martha Noonan Genevive Enterprises 109 Cameron Drive 1142 Cobblestone Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Fort Collins, CO 239 15 16 Joseph K. Larson 1350 Teakwood Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80525 March 17, 1992 F.L. Musgrave & R.W. Tobey 2715 E. Floral Place Denver, Co 80210 Items Pertaining to the K-2 Annexation and Zoning. A. Resolution 92-49 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the K-2 Annexation and Zoning. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1992, Annexing Approximately 29.72 Acres, Known as the K-2 Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1992, Zoning Approximately 29.72 Acres, Known as the K-2 Annexation, into the I- L, Limited Industrial, Zoning District, subject to a Planned Unit Development condition. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 29.72 acres located east of I-25, north of Vine Drive and south of the Larimer and Weld Canal, consisting of three separate parcels with three different owners. The property is currently zoned I, Industrial and FA-1, Farming, in the County. The proposed zoning is IL, Limited Industrial, with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) condition. This is the annexation of an enclave area. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins OWNERS: Matrix Investment Co. 1118 NE Frontage Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Frank A. Just 1050 Greenfield Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Newhall Land and Farming Co 23823 Valencia Blvd. Valencia, CA 91355 Items Pertaining to the Strobel Annexation and Zoning. A. Resolution 92-50 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Strobel Annexation and Zoning. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1992, Annexing 5.1614 Acres, Known as the Strobel Annexation. 240 March 17, 1992 C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1992, Zoning 5.1614 Acres, Known as the Strobel Annexation, into the RLP, Low Density Planned Residential Zoning District. This is a request to annex and zone 5.1614 acres located east of County Road No. 9 and south of East Horsetooth Road (County Road No. 40). The requested zoning is the RLP, Low Density Planned Residential District. The property is largely undeveloped, with one single family residence and agricultural use (cornfield) located on the property. The intent is to subdivide this property into three single family residential lots. The property is currently zoned FA-1, Farming in the County. This is a voluntary annexation. APPLICANT: Greg Fisher . 4308 Picadilly Drive Fort Collins, CO. 80526 OWNERS: Calvin J. Strobel 3808 South County Road #9 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Beverly Strobel ' 3808 South County Road #9 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 17. Resolution 92-51 Establishinq Rental Rates H� This resolution would approve rates for the rental of the City's surplus raw water. Each year prior to the irrigation season, the Water Board makes a recommendation to the Council on the rental rates to be charged for the City's surplus water. The surplus water rental program was discussed at the February 21, 1992 meeting of the Water Board. The proposed rental rates are based on several factors including past rental rates, assessment rates, and anticipated supply and demand conditions. On March 3, 1992, the Council adopted an inducement resolution (Resolution 92-44) for the Advanced Energy project in the amount of $6,570,000. Since that time, the Company has met with the underwriters for the transaction and are contemplating a different financing structure than the original one secured by a letter of credit. The new financing structure provides that the transaction would be secured by a reserve fund of approximately 1 241 March 17, 1992 , $730,000. The reserve fund would be included in the amount of bonds issued. Therefore, the inducement resolution amends Resolution 92-44 and increases the amount of the inducement to $7,300,000. 19. Routine Deeds and Easements. a. Powerline easement from Donald M. and Lee J. Parsons, 713 Ponderosa Drive, needed to install electric oval vault to underground existing overhead electric system. Monetary consideration: $20.80 (4' x 4' @ $1.30/square foot) b. Powerline easement from Thomas H. Peck & Mary McQuaid Peck, 509 Ponderosa Drive, needed to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $10.00. 23. Resolution 92-53 Providing Direction on the Council Work Plan Item Related to the Cost of Growth and Development. On February 11, Council conducted a work session on the work plan item related to the Cost of Growth. From that discussion, staff has prepared this resolution which provides the formal direction as to how staff should proceed with this item. This Resolution directs the City Manager to, develop a work plan. ' Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Fromme, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 35, 1992, Appropriating Funds For The City's Share of the Downtown Railroad Track Consolidation Project, Adopted on Second Reading. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fort Collins, the Burlington Northern Railroad, the Union Pacific Railroad, and the Colorado Department of Transportation have a unique opportunity to work together to consolidate the railroad tracks in the downtown area to provide major benefits for the City, CDOT, and both Railroads. Staff has worked with both railroads to develop a track consolidation plan which would improve train operations and eliminate a majority of the tracks in the downtown area. Staff worked with the DDA, Poudre River Trust, Planning, Economic ' Development, Landmark Preservation, and area businesses and residents to 242 March 17, 1992 1 establish the consolidated track alignment. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 3, appropriates the funds for the City's share of the costs of this track consolidation project." Civil Engineer Mark Sears spoke of concerns and impacts relating to the project. City Manager Steve Burkett reported on his meeting with the Regional General Manager of Burlington Northern and stated Burlington Northern has committed $15,000 toward the start of the project. Burkett recommended appropriating the total amount allocated for the project. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Fromme, to adopt Ordinance No. 35, 1992 on Second Reading. Councilmember Horak asked if it was imperative to approve the project in the current fiscal year and asked if monies appropriated from the state and crossing funds were contingent upon beginning the project in the current fiscal year. Sears clarified State funding would be available until the end of the 1993 fiscal year and the Rail Project funding would be available as long as there is proof of activity on the project. ' Councilmember Horak suggested time restrictions be placed on the fund appropriations and questioned if there would be any legal issues or concerns with placing time limitations on funding appropriations. City Attorney Steve Roy stated there were no legal concerns raised by placing a condition on the appropriation. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Fromme, to amend Ordinance No. 35, 1992, inserting a sentence to read "the appropriation for the project is for the 1992 budget year and the appropriation would lapse unless reappropriated by Council in the 1993 budget". Mayor Pro Tem Azari opposed the amendment, stating the project is a partnership and is necessary to demonstrate the City's commitment to the partnership. Councilmember Edwards concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Azari. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to amend Ordinance No. 35, 1992 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Fromme and Horak. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards and Maxey. THE MOTION FAILED. 243 March 17, 1992 ' The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion to adopt Ordinance No. 35, 1992 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Pertaining to the K-2 Annexation and Zoning. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 92-49 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the K-2 Annexation and Zoning. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1992, Annexing Approximately 29.72 Acres, Known as the K-2 Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1992, Zoning Approximately 29.72 Acres, Known as the K-2 Annexation, into the 1-L, Limited Industrial, Zoning District, subject to a Planned Unit Development condition. ' This is a request to annex and zone approximately 29.72 acres located east of I- 25, north of Vine Drive and south of the Larimer and Weld Canal, consisting of three separate parcels with three different owners. The property is currently zoned I, Industrial and FA-1, Farming, in the County. The proposed zoning is IL, Limited Industrial, with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) condition. This is the annexation of an enclave area. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins OWNERS: Matrix Investment Co. 1118 NE Frontage Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Frank A. Just 1050 Greenfield Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Newhall Land and Farming Co 23823 Valencia Blvd. Valencia, CA 91355 244 ' March 17, 1992 BACKGROUND: Approximately three quarters of this area is currently vacant, undeveloped, or agricultural with the remaining areas used for offices, warehouses, and minor repair and maintenance of trucks. There are six metal buildings on the properties. Any existing commercial signs will have to conform to the City's Sign Code at the conclusion of a five year amortization period. This annexation will not increase the total number of off -premise signs that currently exist in the City of Fort Collins. The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA, the City will agree to consider for annexation, property in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. Enclave areas become eligible for annexation when they have been completely surrounded, by properties annexed into the City, for at least three years. The area to be annexed has been a county enclave for at least three years and is therefore eligible for annexation. The properties became completely surrounded by the City of Fort Collins through the following annexations: N: Buckeye Farms, Inc. and Harold D. Einarsen Annexation, October 18, 1988 E: Buckeye Farms, Inc. and Harold D. Einarsen Annexation, October 18, 1988 S: Front Range Farms II Annexation, January 19, 1988 W: Allen, Lind, Moore Annexation February 21, 1984 Approximately three quarters of this area is currently vacant, undeveloped, or used for agriculture with the remaining quarter used for offices, warehouses, and minor repair, maintenance, and cleaning of trucks. There are three parcels in this annexation. Parcel one is owned by Matrix Investment Corporation. They use the large metal building as an office and warehouse for a wholesale distribution business. Their products are gifts and decorative accessories. Parcel two is owned by Frank Just who leases the two metal buildings to C and W Transportation Company. This company uses the smaller building as an office for a commodities shipping business with minor truck repair and storage occurring inside the larger metal building. Parcel three is owned by Newhall Land and Farming Co. This company runs a trucking operation from the two buildings, using the small building as an office and the larger metal building for minor truck repair and storage. They have a truck wash on the site as well. This company purchases wet brewers grain from Anheuser-Busch and sells it to dairies and feed lots in the area. They do not load or unload trucks on the site. 245 March 17, 1992 ' Existing uses will be non -conforming uses because of the proposed PUD condition. If active and continuous operations are not carried on in a nonconforming use during a continuous period of one year, the building, structure, or land where such non -conforming uses previously existed would revert back to conforming uses only. Any existing commercial signs will have to conform to the City's Sign Code at the conclusion of a five year amortization period. This annexation will not increase the total number of off -premise signs that currently exist in the City of Fort Collins. There are no redevelopment plans for these properties at this time. The property became eligible for involuntary annexation into the City on October 18, 1991. On December 16, 1991, staff sent a letter to the property owners informing them of the pending annexation, potential zoning district designation, and the various meeting dates for review by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Fort Collins City Council. Zoning: The property is currently zoned 1, Industrial, (along the frontage road) and FA- T, Farming (the remainder of the area), in the County. The proposed zoning for this annexation is the IL, Limited Industrial, Zoning District, with a PUD condition. The IL District designation is primarily for light industrial uses. The IL, Limited Industrial, District designation and the proposed PUD condition ' are consistent with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and are compatible with the existing uses and surrounding zoning. The existing uses will become non -conforming uses because they were not developed as Planned Unit Developments. Findings: The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins as contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA. 2. The area meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 3. On February 4, 1992, City Council considered a resolution setting forth the intent to annex this property and initiating the annexation process by establishing the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. 4. The requested zoning of IL, Limited Industrial, with a PUD condition, is in conformance with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 246 March 17, 1992 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting on January 27, 1992, voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation and requested zoning." Frank Just, 1050 Greenfield Court and property owner, opposed the resolution and stated annexing the property would cause him financial hardship. Planning Director Tom Peterson gave a brief explanation of annexation and zoning requirements and enclave procedures. He stated the Intergovernmental Agreement between Larimer County and the City contains annexation guidelines. He clarified there are no developments proposed for the site and spoke of benefits incurred by the City when an annexation occurs. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt Resolution 92-49. Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, spoke in.opposition to forced annexation. The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion to adopt Resolution 92-49 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. ' THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to adopt Ordinance No. 42, 1992 on First Reading. City Attorney Steve Roy clarified that neither state statutes nor the Intergovernmental Agreement with the County mandates that enclaves be annexed. Frank Just, 1050 Greenfield Court, requested the annexation be denied. Pete Delgado, 1313 Coulter, spoke of his concerns regarding forced annexations and stated there are inconsistencies between the City and County's annexation policies. . Christopher Zell, 4404 N. County Road 13, opposed the motion and asked if the Ordinance could be brought back for consideration when development is proposed. Councilmember Fromme spoke in opposition to the annexation stating the City would .not directly benefit from annexing the property at this time. Councilmember Maxey spoke in opposition to the annexation stating the property should be able to remain in its present zoning status. Councilmember Edwards supported the Ordinance noting there is. a need to be ' consistent with enclave annexations. 247 March 17, 1992 Councilmember Azari opposed the Ordinance stating presently there is nothing to be gained by annexing the property. Councilmember Horak spoke in support of the Ordinance. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Councilmembers Edwards and Horak. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Fromme and Maxey. THE MOTION FAILED. Resolution 92-51 Establishing Rental Rates to be Charged for the City's Surplus Water for the 1992 Season, Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. °FINANCIAL IMPACT The revenue from rental water is expected to be approximately $200,000. The actual amount of surplus water rented will depend on both the City's supply and demand for 1992, as well as the need for water by area farmers. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This resolution would approve rates for the rental of the City's surplus raw water. Each year prior to the irrigation season, the Water Board makes a recommendation to the Council on the rental rates to be charged for the City's surplus water. The surplus water rental program was discussed at the February 21, 1992 meeting of the Water Board. The proposed rental rates are based on several factors including past rental rates, assessment rates, and anticipated supply and demand conditions. BACKGROUND: The surplus water rental program benefits the community by providing water to users in the area that might otherwise be short, and, also provides revenue to the Utility which offsets annual assessment charges by the various irrigation companies. The Water Supply Committee of the Water Board reviewed and discussed rental guidelines developed by Utility staff. Its review included the following items: 1. How much water should be rented? The amount of surplus water available first making an estimate of the City's which statistically may occur with a years. Next an estimate is made of should be available from each of the 248 for rent is determined by water demand for a dry year frequency of once every 20 the quantity of water that City's sources taking into March 17, 1992 account the CBT quota, snow survey data, and historic yield information. After considering each individual source and the ability to use it, the amount of surplus water is determined by subtracting the dry -year demand from the supply. As the year progresses, adjustments are made to reflect actual conditions. 2. Who should the surplus water be rented to? In most years with above average supply or rainfall, the amount of surplus water exceeds the amount requested and everybody is satisfied. In years of shorter supply or less rainfall; the requests for rental water may exceed the amount of water the City has available to rent. In this case the City may receive 150 or more requests between January 1st and May 1st. When all requests cannot be satisfied as of May 1st, water is rented in the following order: (1) to customers with lease -back agreements, (2) to customers who have rented water previously from the City, and (3) to customers making first-time requests. After.May Ist, customers are satisfied on a first come,.first served basis. 3. How should rental rates be determined? ' Rental rates have been based on several factors including past rental rates in the area, current irrigation 'company assessments, and anticipated supply and demand conditions. The rental prices of CBT, North Poudre, and Water Supply and Storage Company shares have been based primarily on market rental rates since there is an active rental market for these shares. For shares in the other irrigation companies, the rental prices are based primarily on assessment rates because of the very limited demand for these shares. 4. How do other entities set rental rates for their surplus water? Fort Collins was compared to three other cities and three water districts in this region. Of these, Fort Collins is the only entity to have the rental rates approved by its governing body. The rates in one city are set by the Water Board and, for all the other entities, the rates are set by staff. Fort Collins appears to have the most formal procedures of any of the entities compared. After reviewing and discussing the City's rental procedures and guidelines, the members of the Water Board Committee believe the guidelines represent a fair, consistent, and efficient method of providing rental water to others in this region. March 17, 1992 ' The City is expected to have about 15,000 acre feet of surplus raw water that will be available for rent to approximately 150 customers. Most of this will be in the form of Colorado Big Thompson Project water, shares in the North Poudre Irrigation Company, and shares in the Water Supply and Storage Company. The amount of surplus water actually rented will depend on both the City's supply and demand for 1992 as well as the need for water by area farmers. In both 1990 and 1991, supplies were short and demands were high resulting in an active rental market. In 1990, 14,725 acre feet was rented for $196,128. In 1991, 16,498 acre feet was rented for $223,997. Municipal supply and demand will be monitored closely and quantities available for rent will be determined periodically. An adequate amount of water will be reserved to ensure that the City's needs are met. The attached table shows the assessment rates and proposed rental rates for 1992, as well as the corresponding rates for 1990 and 1991. The Water Board and staff recommend that the following rental rates be adopted: TVDe of Water Proposed 1992 Rental Charge* NCWCD Water (CBT) $ 18.00/ac-ft North Poudre Irrigation Company $ 85.00/share Water Supply & Storage Company f1,800.00/share ' Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal Co. $ 100.00/share New Mercer Ditch Company f 250.00/share Larimer County Canal No. 2 $ 170.00/share Arthur Irrigation Company f 9.00/share Warren Lake Reservoir Co. f 120.00/share Joe Wright Reservoir Water f 18.00/ac-ft * For late season rentals, rates may be adjusted to reflect the remaining yield or the prevalent market price of the water stock being rented." Water Resources and Plan Manager Dennis Bode outlined the procedure used in allocating surplus water. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Fromme, to adopt Resolution 92-51. Councilmember Horak requested written water rental instructions be available to individuals wanting to rent surplus water and recommended initiating a lottery system to determine who would acquire the water. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. ' 250 March 17, 1992 Staff Reports City Manager Steve Burkett responding to a recent article in the Coloradoan stated the City has no plans now or in the future to annex the property surrounding East Mulberry between the Fort Collins city limits and I-25. Councilmember Reports Mayor Pro Tem Azari stated the topic of the Commission on the Status of Women's upcoming workshop will be serving on Boards and Commissions. She reported the Human Relations Commission is soliciting nominees for the annual Human Relations Awards. Councilmember Maxey reported on a National League of Cities meeting he and Councilmembers Azari, Fromme, Horak, and Kirkpatrick recently attended in Washington D.C. Resolution 92-53 Providing Direction on the Council Work Plan Item Related to the Cost of Growth and Development, Adopted. ' The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On February 11, Council conducted a work session on the work plan item related to the Cost of Growth. From that discussion, staff has prepared this resolution which provides the formal direction as to how staff should proceed with this item. This Resolution directs the City Manager to develop a work plan that addresses the following issues: 1. the interrelationship of various policies of the City which deal with growth_ and development; 2. whether the various development fees imposed by the City are consistent with those City policies and advance the objectives stated therein; 3. whether the cost of the new development is being adequately recovered through the imposition of existing development fees or whether additional fees are needed to fully reimburse the City for the cost of development; and 4. whether there are additional economic indicators that should be identified and utilized by the City to better understand the health of the City's economy and the impacts of growth and development. After a formal work plan is developed it will be forwarded to Council for its information." 251 March 17, 1992 Deputy City Manager Diane Jones gave a presentation on the item and spoke of issues Council requested be addressed in the work plan. Councilmember Fromme made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt Resolution 92-53. Bill Bartran, 1601 Lakeridge Court, stated that he would like to see citizen involvement on the proposed work plan. Mayor Pro Tem Azari clarified Section 2 of the Resolution addresses how interested and affected parties will be involved. Councilmember Fromme suggested an emphasis be placed on the study of impact fees and recommended that previous studies relating to the matter be compiled and reviewed prior to starting on the work plan. Councilmember Maxey expressed concern that the focus of the growth issue not be confined to the number of new homes built. The vote on Councilmember Fromme's motion was as follows: Yeas Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Resolution 92-55 Supporting the Passage of the Associated Students of Colorado State University's (ASCSU) Bill #2156, •Transfort Bus Service" at Student Referendum on April 6. 7, and B. 1992. Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "FINANCIAL IMPACT Councilmembers Passage of this bi17 by Colorado State University students wi77 increase fees in support of Transfort and produce additional revenue of approximately $114,000 in 1992 and $232,000 annually thereafter in order to continue current service levels. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This action supports passage of new fee levels for Colorado State University students consistent with the increased service that has been provided since August, 1991. 252 F March 17, 1992 BACKGROUND: In 1988, the City of Fort Collins restructured routes to redirect Transfort services to 1) the transit dependent and 2) Colorado State University students. A mission statement and the 1991-1995 Transit Development Program (TDP) were adopted by City Council in 1990. The first phase of service in the TDP was implemented in August 1991, and established a new transit center on the Colorado State University campus. Service planned to meet the travel needs of CSU students increased significantly through the Colorado State Transit Center." Transit Administrator John Daggett gave a presentation on this item. He stated the City had two options available if ASCSU Bill #2156 was not passed; 1) cut back summer services, or 2) fund the revenue shortfall out of City funds. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Fromme, to adopt Resolution 92-55. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Fromme, Horak and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. ' Councilmember Horak requested an item be placed on the April 7 agenda addressing the public distribution of electronic mail information. Mayor Pro Tem Azari requested that Councilmember Maxey, as liaison to the Water Board, convey to the Board, Council's interest in providing the broadest possible access to surplus rental water. AdJournment The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: F�i�l