HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-12/07/1993-Regularrt
' December 7, 1993
December 7, 1993
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
December 7, 1993, 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: Apt,
Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur.
Councilmembers Absent: Mayor Azari.
Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Brian Meagher and Becky Thurston, representing Olander Elementary School, spoke
of recycling and solid waste concerns and of possible solutions to reduce
dumping. They outlined their recycling plan and urged Council to review the
plan.
Mary Cosgrove, 2130 Eastwood Drive, representing the Affordable Housing Board,
stated she believed 100% cost recovery of planning fees by developers was
excessive and requested Council consider that while discussing planning fees.
Al Baccili, 520 Galaxy Court, spoke of public entity management concerns.
Stan Everitt, representing the Chamber of Commerce, congratulated Council for its
violence reduction efforts.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Janett thanked the representatives from Olander School for their
presentation and stated the Natural Resources Board would review the plan.
Councilmember Kneeland stated she would provide the Director of Natural Resources
with a copy of the proposed recycling plan.
Councilmember Winokur spoke of the need to discuss recycling efforts.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak suggested holding an outreach meeting with Brian Meagher and
Becky Thurston to discuss the plan and invited them to join an upcoming
worksession to be available to answer Council questions.
1 460
December 7, 1993 '
Agenda Review
City Manager Steve Burkett stated Item #17, Public Hearing and Resolution 93-194
Authorizing the City Manager to Submit the Fort Collins Comprehensive Housing
Affordable Strategy (CHAS) to the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
was a public hearing and noted if anyone in the public wanted to comment on the
item it should be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Janett requested that Item #25, Resolution 93-187 Creating a
Council/Staff Task Force to Review the City's Organizational Structure in
Relation to the Attainment of the 1993-1995 Council Policy Agenda, be pulled from
the Consent Calendar.
11
10.
Items Relating to the Kirschner Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1993, Annexing Approximately
72.6 Acres, Known as the Kirschner Annexation.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 1993, Amending the Zoning
District Map Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort '
Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in
the Kirschner Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
On October 19, Council unanimously adopted Resolution 93-154 Setting Forth
Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Kirschner Annexation.
On October 19, Council also unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 133, 1993
and Ordinance No. 134, 1993 which annex and zone approximately 72.6 acres,
located at the southeast corner of I-25 and East Vine Drive. The property
is currently zoned FA-1, Farming in the County. This is a voluntary
annexation. The requested zoning is IL, Limited Industrial, with a PUD
condition.
APPLICANT: Kirschner Family Partnership
c/o Cityscape Urban Design
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: Kirschner Family Partnership
8330 East Quincy Avenue, Unit A-111
Denver, CO 80237
461
1
11.
December 7, 1993
Avenue.
The replacement of the North College Avenue Bridge over the Poudre River
will allow the City to enhance the bridge for the north entrance into the
city and install a trail underpass. This new State Highway bridge will
allow the City to create a "Gateway" from the north into Fort Collins.
This theme has been proposed in many planning documents. Design materials
for the bridge follow the directions in the "Design Guidelines for
Pedestrian -Way Improvements, Downtown Development Authority." The main
enhancement items include: planters in the median south of and on the
bridge, decorative pedestrian lights matching "Old Town" lights, exposed
aggregate sidewalks, the use of sandstone as an accent stone, and
landscaping in the medians, trail lighting system, and special concrete
treatment (fluted finish) of the piers under the bridge for the trail.
The ISTEA program will be the main funding source for the bridge
enhancement items. The matching ratio for the work is 82% ($123,000)
Federal -aid funds and 18% ($28,000) City. The proposed City funding
source is the re-routing of the existing Mason/Howes Capital Project
funding which presently contains $50,000. Thirty-two Thousand Dollars
($32,000) of this amount was administratively allocated for trail work in
the North College area in 1990. The remaining $18,000 is unused funds
from other projects in the North College area. The $28,000 ISTEA match
will use $18,000 for bridge surface enhancement items and $10,000 for
trail enhancement items under the bridge. The remaining $22,000 in the
Mason/Howes Capital Project will be used for trail enhancement items near
the bridge. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
November 16, 1993.
In October, Phelps-Tointon Millwork, LLC, ("Phelps-Tointon") submitted an
application to the City for inducement of $1,500,000 of industrial
development revenue bonds pursuant to the City's established policies.
On November 2, 1993, the Council unanimously adopted the Inducement
Resolution for the Project in the amount of $1,500,000. This ordinance,
which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, authorizes
the issuance of the bonds to be used to finance the project. The
improvements include acquiring the site, constructing, and equipping a
manufacturing facility to be located on Buckingham Street, just west of
Lemay Avenue.
' 462
12.
December�7, 1993 '
Phelps-Tointon Millwork, LLC, was founded as Colorado Custom Cabinets by
Mr. Tim Brown in 1985. In early 1993, Phelps-Tointon acquired 75% of the
stock of Colorado Custom Cabinets, thus creating Phelps-Tointon Millwork.
The company manufactures custom kitchen cabinets, commercial and
institutional cabinetry, wooden athletic lockers and benches..
The owners of the property, Lee Rosen and Priscilla Verant, are initiating
this request for Local Landmark Designation for 816 West Mountain Avenue
known as the Issac W. Bennett House and Carriage House. A public hearing.
was held by the Landmark Preservation Commission on November 3, 1993, at
which time the Commission voted to recommend designation of this property.
The Landmark Preservation Commission and staff are pleased to recommend
the house and carriage house located at 816 West Mountain Avenue as a
local landmark, for their historical and architectural importance. This
Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 1993.
13. Items Relating to the Real Property Known as the Cunninqham Corner Barn.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 1993, Authorizing the '
Disposition of the Real Property Known as the Cunningham Corner
Barn.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 1993, Designating the
Cunningham Corner Barn as a Historic Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
Resolution 93-113 specified that: 1) the Barn be relocated to private
property within the Urban Growth Area; 2) an RFP be issued to identify
those parties interested in obtaining the Barn for private use and to
select an appropriate site for the Barn; and 3) the relocation of the Barn
be funded from the Historic Preservation Account within the Capital
Projects Fund. The RFP was issued and the committee reviewing the
proposals rated the one submitted by Doug and Patti Leidholt as the best.
On October 19, 1993, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 117, 1993
authorizing the relocation of the Cunningham Corner Barn to private
property owned by the Leidholts. Also, on November 16, 1993 Council
unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 149, 1993 and Ordinance 150, 1993. The
Leidholts subsequently withdrew their offer to relocate the Barn to their
property. The Purchasing Agent contacted Mr. Brad Pace who also submitted
a proposal for the Barn relocation which was rated a close second to that
of the Leidholts. Mr. Pace is still willing to have the Barn relocated to
his property at 2560 West Cedarwood which is the two -acre site of the old '
463
14.
December 7, 1993
Brown Farmhouse. That structure has been declared a historic landmark and
its restoration is nearly complete.
The owner of the Barn, the City of Fort Collins, is initiating the request
for local landmark designation for the Barn. The structure is currently
located at the northeast corner of Shields Street and Horsetooth Road. If
this ordinance is approved by the Council, the Barn will be moved, at the
City's expense, to Mr. Pace's property located at 2560 West Cedarwood
Drive, known as the Brown Farmhouse property. The Brown Farmhouse was
designated a local landmark on May 18, 1993. The landmark designation for
the Barn will initially apply to its current location and will transfer
with the Barn when it is moved to the Pace property. Moving the Barn will
require the review and approval of the Landmark Preservation Commission.
Mr. Pace is in agreement with the local landmark designation.
Ordinance No. 151, 1993 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
November 16, 1993. With this vote, Council asked for several changes in
the Ordinance relating to the area of notification for affected property
owners and for signs posted at proposed development sites.
Additional criteria have been incorporated into the Ordinance for
expanding the area of notification for proposed developments, based on
project land use, size and density and specific details on signage posted
at proposed development sites have been added. An additional criterion to
use in determining when a neighborhood meeting is required for fringe
development has also been added to the Ordinance.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 1993, Adopting the 1994 City of Fort
Collins Total Compensation Pay Plan.
In July 1993, Council adopted its Human Resource Management and
Productivity Policy, which includes the Total Compensation Policy for
classified employees and unclassified management employees. The policy
states that the total compensation for these City employees will average
4.5% above the median of the labor market.
Based on this Policy, staff has developed the proposed pay plan. The Code
requires that the Council adopt the classified employee pay plan by
ordinance.
Surveys for the 1994 Total Compensation plan have been completed and
indicate that the average total compensation adjustment for 1994 should be
' 2.97%. Average salary adjustments will equal 3.2%. These increases are
464
16.
17.
18.
December 7, 1993 '
within the amount budgeted for total compensation in the 1994 Budget, and
average 4.5% over the median of the labor market.
Under Chapter 22 of the Code, the City is authorized to sell property at
the annual tax sale conducted by the Larimer County Treasurer if special
assessments levied against the property have not been paid. The property
was sold at the 1989 tax sale and a tax certificate of purchase was issued
to the City as there were no interested private investors. The owner of
the property conveyed title to the City through a deed in lieu of
foreclosure. Last May, the City Council adopted Resolution 92-91
establishing policies for the sale of such property.
The City offered this property for sale by open bid on December 15, 1992.
The one offer received at that time was rejected _because it was
approximately half the appraised value of the property. The lot has been
open for offers since then and the contract from Holz Construction
represents the best offer received to date. The City Council Finance
Committee recommends adoption of this ordinance.
VUQ11C nearing ang Kesolutlon y3-ly4 AULnorizing Lne L1Ly manager to I
Submit the Fort Collins Comprehensive Housing Affordable Strategy (CHAS)
to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The National Affordable Housing Act (NAHA) requires that, in order to
apply for certain Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
programs, local governments must have an approved Comprehensive Housing
Affordable Strategy (CHAS). After HUD approves the City's CHAS, housing
agencies, such as the Housing Authority, Neighbor to Neighbor, Inc.,
Catholic Community Services/Northern, Habitat for Humanity, TRAC, etc.,
can apply for the various financial assistance grant programs authorized
under NAHA. HUD approval of the City's CHAS is also necessary for the
City to receive its annual entitlement of Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Program funds. The CHAS identifies housing needs and
integrates the proposed use of resources, from both public and private
sources, into one housing plan.
The proposed ordinance updates unit wastewater surcharge rates in Section
26-282(a) to conform with those in Section 26-280 included in Ordinance
No. 136, 1993 passed by the City Council on November 16, 1993. The
465
December 7, 1993
changes included in this ordinance were inadvertently omitted from the
changes included in Ordinance No. 136, 1993. The rate increases included
in this ordinance will have the same January 1, 1994 effective date as the
previously approved changes.
19.
The City of Fort Collins was awarded a grant from the Colorado Historical
Society in the amount of $8,000 to expand Fort Collins' developmental
period historic contexts to include more complete information on the theme
of agriculture in the Fort Collins UGA and to survey a minimum of 35
historic resources associated with agriculture and the Poudre River within
the Fort Collins UGA. The City will be matching this $8,000 grant with a
$2,000 cash match from the Planning Department's budget and $6,000 of in -
kind staff and volunteer time to administer the grant.
20.
' On October 25, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board gave final approval to
the Provincetowne P.U.D., First Filing, for Phases 1 through 4, located at
the southwest corner of Lemay Avenue and Trilby Road. Certain street
improvements in the area were constructed with Special Improvement
District #81. The right-of-way for those streets was dedicated by deed as
part of the S.I.D. At that time, it was anticipated that future
residential streets would intersect at particular locations along Brittany
Drive and right-of-way for those future intersections was dedicated.
However, the developer has since received final approval of the
Provincetowne P.U.D. which dedicates streets to serve the surrounding
property which intersect at other locations on Brittany Drive. Therefore,
the right-of-way for the old intersection locations is no longer necessary
and is proposed for vacation at this time.
21. Resolution 93-183 Adopting the Citv's 1994 Legislative Agenda
The Legislative Review Committee (LRC) has developed a Legislative Agenda
to assist the LRC in the analysis of pending legislation during the 1994
General Assembly. The Legislative Agenda states the City's'position on
common legislative topics.
The Legislative Review Committee has been working on compiling this Agenda
since July. The majority of the policy statements in the Legislative
Agenda are in line with past Council policy and Council actions. However,
there are new policy statements on education in the Agenda. The LRC
' solicited Council comment on the Agenda in October/November.
466
22.
23.
December 7, 1993
This Agenda is intended only to enhance the established legislative
process, and would not effect the current legislative review procedures.
A similar legislative agenda format has been successfully used by the City
of Colorado Springs for three years.
The replacement of the North College Avenue Bridge by the State Highway
Department will allow the Poudre Trail to connect Lee Martinez park and
Old Fort Collins Heritage Park with underpasses of the bridge and adjacent
railroads. Agreements to construct underpasses of the Union Pacific and
Burlington Northern Railroads are required for the trail. This project is
part of the City's "Four -Year Trail Plan" to complete the Poudre and
Spring Creek Trails. Trail users will be able to avoid the existing
surface crossing of College Avenue when this project is completed in the
summer of 1994.
The City of Fort Collins General Employees Retirement Plan ("GERP") is
intended to provide retirement benefits for the majority of the City's
employees. As of the most recent actuarial report, January 1, 1993, the
Plan had 705 active members, 99 terminated members with vested pension
rights, 86 retired members and 7 beneficiaries, a total of 897
individuals.
Over the past eighteen months, the General Employees Retirement Committee
("GERC"), with comments solicited from the members and with assistance
from the Plan's actuary and legal counsel, identified and studied several
potential changes to the plan. The changes recommended in this resolution
include two with additional costs:
1. Changes in the vesting schedule
2. Removing the age 55 requirement from the pre -retirement
death benefit.
Four other administrative and compliance changes are also recommended:
Allowing automatic lump sum payments for spouses and
beneficiaries when the monthly benefit payment is less than $100.
Offering a lump sum disbursement option to spouses and
beneficiaries.
Adds a direct rollover provision as required by the
Unemployment Compensation Amendments of 1992, and
467
1
' December 7, 1993
4. Adds changes required by thg Family Medical Leave Act of
1993.
24. Resolution 93-
In April 1993, the City Council adopted its 1993-95 Goals and Policy
Agenda. At a June 15 worksession, Council met with the Planning and
Zoning Board to discuss land use issues, including policy items contained
in the Agenda. Then, on August 10, the Council conducted a worksession
to review the CPES work plan to address growth management issues of the
Council Policy Agenda.
At the most recent worksession on growth management on November 23,
Councilmembers agreed to consider formation of a Growth Management
Committee of the Council.
Staff recommends that the ad hoc Committee membership include three
members of the City Council and that the Committee begin meeting
immediately in order to review work in progress on the Congestion
Management Plan, Corridor Study, and Prospect Shields Neighborhood Plan,
and to select other members of the Committee.
' 25. Resolution 93-187 Creating a Council/Staff Task Force to Review the Citv's
Organizational Structure in Relation to the Attainment of the 1993-1995
Council Policy Agenda.
The City Council has expressed an interest in reviewing the organizational
structure of the City. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the
City's resources are organized in a way that best maintains quality
service delivery and supports. the implementation of the City Council
policy agenda. These issues were recently discussed at a joint meeting of
the City Council and the Executive Lead Team. Council expressed concerns
about the timing of some of the policy agenda items coming back to the
Council for action and wanted to ensure that the organizational structure
was promoting an integrated review and response to policy agenda items.
Staff requested help in this regard and suggested staff work with Council
to prioritize the policy agenda.
As a result of the joint work session, there was agreement that a Council
committee would be appointed to work with the staff to both review the
organizational structure and help address the question of prioritizing the
Council policy agenda. Council asked that the organizational review be
completed no later than March 1, 1994.
TIO
December 7, 1993 '
26. Resolution 93-
A vacancy currently exists on the Community Air Quality Task Force due to
the resignation of Gene Wooldridge.
Councilmembers Apt and Janett reviewed the active applications on file and
are recommending Rob Cagen be appointed to fill the vacancy.
27. Postaonement of Resolution 93-
the New Laurel School to December 21, 1993.
Staff is requesting this Resolution be postponed to December 21, 1993
because of the congestion on the December 7, 1993 agenda and to allow time
to develop solutions to the pedestrian/bike access problems. A letter was
sent to the neighborhood to advise them of the City's plans.
28. Routine Deeds and Easements.
a. Deed of Easement from BIG D PROPERTIES for detention pond purposes
over a portion of land
located in Lot 2, Mourning Subdivision, 2nd
Filing.
b.
Deed of Easement from
'
Mel Price for turn -around purposes over a
portion of land adjacent
to and south of the south end of Underhill
Drive.
C.
Deed of Easement from Wild Wood Farm, Inc., for Corbett Drive right-
of-way over a portion
of land located south of Harmony Road and
adjacent to the future
Southeast Junior High School.
d.
Deed of Easement from
Wild Wood Farm, Inc., for a 15 foot wide
utility easement over a
portion of land adjacent to and east of the
right-of-way dedicated
for Corbett Drive.
e.
Deed of Easement from
Wild Wood Farm, Inc., for a 15 foot wide
utility easement over a
portion of land adjacent to and west of the
right-of-way dedicated
for Corbett Drive.
f.
Deed of Easement from
Wild Wood Farm, Inc., for a 50 foot wide
drainage and utility easement over a portion of land east of the
future Southeast Junior
High School.
g. Deed of Easement from Mountainridge Farm, Inc., for utility purposes
over a, 15' wide portion of land adjacent to and west of South
Shields Street.
469
1
December 7, 1993
h. Deed of Easement from Mountainridge Farm, Inc., for utility purposes
over a 10' wide portion of land running from the end of proposed
Wabash Street to the southern line of Mountainridge Farm property.
i. Deed of Easement from Kim H. Yee for detention pond purposes over a
portion of land located in Lot 11, Creger Plaza, 2nd Replat.
j. Deed of Easement from Dennis and Noreen Houska for right-of-way
purposes and for utility purposes over portions of land adjacent to
Riverside Avenue and in parts of Lots 1 and 2, Houska Minor
Subdivision.
k. Deed of Easement from Dennis and Noreen Houska for detention pond
purposes over a portion of land located in parts of Lots 1 and 2,
Houska Minor Subdivision.
1. Deed of Easement from Peter J. Long for detention pond purposes over
a portion of land located in Lot 2, Mason Street P.U.D.
M. Deed of Easement from P&B Partnership for utility purposes over a
34' wide portion of land adjacent to and east of Seneca Street.
Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
9. Items Relating to the Kirschner Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1993, Annexing Approximately
72.6 Acres, Known as the Kirschner Annexation.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 1993, Amending the Zoning
District Map Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in
the Kirschner Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
10.
Avenue.
11.
12.
1
470
December 7, 1993 '
13. Items Relating to the Real Property Known as the Cunningham Corner Barn.
A. Second .Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 1993, Authorizing the
Disposition of the Real Property Known as the Cunningham Corner
Barn.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 1993, Designating the
Cunningham Corner Barn as a Historic Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
14.
Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 1993, Adopting the 1994 City of Fort
Collins Total Compensation Pay Plan.
16
18.
19.
20.
33.
34.
First Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 1993, Authorizing the Sale of Real
Property Described as Lot 55, Replat of Greenbriar P.
Items Relating to the N-C-M, Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density,
Zone.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1993, Amending Section 29-167 of
the Code of the City of Fort Collins Increasing the Minimum Lot Size
in the N-C-M, Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density Zoning
District.
471
1 December 7, 1993
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1993, Imposing a Moratorium Upon
the Issuance of Building Permits for Certain Uses in the N-C-M,
Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density Zoning District, as
Described in Section 29-166 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
35. Items Related to the REA Annexation and Zoning.
A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1993, Annexing
Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1993, Zoning
Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation, into the H-B,
Highway Business, Zone with a PUD Condition.
Tdll
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 164, 1993, of the Council of the City
of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale to Christ Fellowship Church of
Real Property Described as Tracts G & H of the Fairbrooke Special
Improvement District. OR
' B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 165, 1993, of the Council of the City
of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale to Nebarado Construction Inc.
of Real Property Described as Tracts G & H of the Fairbrooke Special
Improvement District.
37. Items Relating to the Sale of Real Property Described as Tract A of the
Fairbrooke SID and of Tax Certificates of Purchase for Lots 1 through 25,
inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 16, inclusive, Block 2, Brittany
Knolls PUD, First Filing.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 166, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to
Colorado Land Source, Ltd. of Real Property Described as Tract A of
the Fairbrooke SID; OR
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to
William L. Neal and Charlotte E. Jorgensen of Real Property
Described as Tract A of the Fairbrooke SID; OR
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to
Everitt Investments, Inc. of Real Property Described as Tract A of
the Fairbrooke SID.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to
Colorado Land Source, Ltd. of Tax Sale Certificates of Purchase for
Lots 1 through 25, inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 16,
inclusive, Block 2, Brittany Knolls PUD, First Filing; OR
472
December 7, 1993
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 1993 Authorizing the Sale to
Everitt Investments, Inc. of Tax Sale Certificates of Purchase for
Lots 1 through 25, inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 16,
inclusive, Block 2, Brittany Knolls PUD, First Filing.
39. First Rea
Code of t
Attorney.
40. First Rea
Code of
Municipal
41.
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to
adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Staff Reports I
Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services Greg Byrne introduced
interim Planning Director Ron Phillips.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Apt withdrew from discussion on the Bonner Peak TV transmission
item due to a perceived conflict of interest.
Councilmember McCluskey stated the Ethics Review Board meet earlier in the
evening and decided that the Council should not act on Item #38, Items Relating
to the KWXU TV Channel 22 Special Review, and recommended removing it from the
agenda.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to
remove Agenda Item #38, Items Relating to the KWXU TV Channel 22 Special Review,
from the Agenda. Yeas: Councilmembers Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and
Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Apt withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Janett reported she had recently attended the National League of
Cities conference and had attended several valuable seminars.
473
December 7, 1993
Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated he also attend the National League of Cities
conference and briefly outlined seminars attended.
Councilmember Apt stated he received a mailer from Western Area Power Association
on a program for demand site management and suggested staff review it.
Appeal of the October 14, 1993
Decision of the Zoning Board of
Appeals to Deny a Rear Setback Reduction Variance
for a Detached Storage Shed at 1104 Green Street, Overturned
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council should consider the appeal based upon the record and the relevant
provisions of the Code and Charter, and after consideration, determine: (1)
whether the matter should be remanded to the Zoning Board of Appeals because the
appellant was denied a fair hearing, or (2) whether to uphold, ov6kurn, or
modify the Board's decision.
On October 14, 1993, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered a variance request
for the property at 1104 Green Street.
the required building setback from the r
in order to allow the construction of a .
the back yard of the property. This
unanimously denied by a vote of four to
a hardship as the reason for voting to
owner of the property, is appealing the
BACKGROUND:
The variance sought would have reduced
ear property line from 15 feet to 6 feet
168 square foot detached storage shed in
request, heard as Appeal #2087, was
zero. Board members cited the lack of
deny the variance. Mr. Jerry Roselle,
decision.
On September 3, 1993, Jerry Roselle applied for a building permit to allow a
storage shed to be constructed in the back yard of his home at 1104 Green Street.
Specifically, the permit application was for a 12 foot by 14 foot, 10 foot high
detached storage shed. Review of the site plan which was submitted indicated
that the structure was proposed to be built only 6 feet from the rear property
line. Since the Zoning Code requires that structures of this size in the RL (Low
Density Residential) zone be at least 15 feet from the rear property line, the
permit was denied.
On September 29, 1993, Mr. Roselle applied for
setback requirement. In his application, he
hardships which make it impracticable to comply
474
a zoning variance to reduce the
cited the following reasons as
with the ordinance:
December 7, 1993 '
The back yard contains a number of mature deciduous and evergreen
trees which limit the possible locations for the shed.
The lot to the rear is a medical office with a 9 foot high fence
along the property line, meaning that the shed will not be visible
from the lot most affected. Thus the intent of the Code is
satisfied.
Locating the shed at the required setback would place it close to
the house and bring it in to view of the neighbors to the north, who
would prefer it to be located as proposed so that it is screened by
the trees on their lot.
The Zoning Board of Appeals heard and considered Mr. Roselle's request at its
October 14, 1993 meeting. At that time, the appellant elaborated on his
hardships by stating that a 15 foot setback would decrease the value of the
property because the shed would look out of place and would decrease the
usefulness of the yard. A letter from Brian Hahn, Mr. Roselle's neighbor to the
north, was received and read into the record. Mr. Hahn expressed his opinion
that placing the shed at the required setback would diminish his view, therefore
he encouraged the Board to grant the setback reduction.
Members of the Board discussed the various issues and concerns which had been '
raised, but had difficulty determining that a valid hardship existed. Some
members agreed that there are benefits to placing the shed at the proposed
location, and that it would be aesthetically pleasing to the neighbors. One of
the Board members stated that a smaller shed could be built at the proposed
location without a variance, and therefore alternatives were available to the
petitioner. (Sheds which do not exceed 120 square feet, and/or 8 feet in height
are exempted from building and zoning code requirements). After due
consideration and discussion, members of the Board expressed their findings that
there was nothing unusual about this lot which prevented compliance with the
Code. Therefore, the Board voted unanimously to deny the variance due to lack
of hardship.
On October 28, 1993, Mr. Roselle filed an appeal with the City Clerk's office
regarding the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals. In the statement of
appeal, it is alleged that the ZBA erred in denying the variance by:
"Abusing its discretion in arbitrarily concluding that no hardship
was established and failed to support its decision with competent
evidence in the record.
Abusing its discretion in arbitrarily concluding that an appeal
heard earlier that morning presented a hardship (Appeal 2082) in
that a garden would be destroyed if the variance was not granted but
that in Appellant's request the effect on his back lawn was not
considered a hardship. '
475
' December 7, 1993
By improperly applying and interpreting relevant laws and provisions
of the Code and Charter, to wit: Chapter 29.
By exceeding its authority or jurisdiction in that Appellant's
request for a building permit is not a zoning issue."
Staff Response to Appeal:
1. It is alleged that the ZBA abused its discretion in arbitrarily concluding
that no hardship was established and failed to support its decision with
competent evidence in the record.
Response: The record shows that the Board asked Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman
to explain the criteria contained in the Zoning Code that authorizes the Board
to grant variances. Mr. Eckman read from Section 29-41 (c), which states:
"The Zoning Board of Appeals shall authorize, upon appeal in
specific cases, variances from the terms of this Article where by
reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or slope of a specific
piece of property at the time of the enactment of this Article or by
reason of exceptional topographical conditions or other
extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions of such piece
of property, including situations or conditions which hinder the
owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict
application of any regulation enacted herein would result in
peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to or exceptional or
undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided such relief
may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and
without substantially impairing the intent and purposes of this
Article....".
Board members discussed these criteria in relation to the requested variance and
tried to find a hardship. There was general agreement that the granting of the
variance would not cause a detriment to the neighborhood, but that in itself was
not enough to warrant the variance and that a hardship must sti11 be found. The
record shows that there was considerable discussion between members of the Board
and Mr. Roselle regarding various factors which might be considered to be a
hardship. However, the Board determined that there was nothing unusual about Mr.
Roselle's property with respect to narrowness, topography and the like, and
therefore no hardship existed.
2. The Board abused its discretion in arbitrarily concluding that an appeal
heard earlier that morning presented a hardship in that a garden would be
destroyed if the variance was not granted, but that in the Appellant's request
the affect on his back lawn was not considered a hardship.
1 476
December 7, 1993 '
Response: The appeal referred to, Appeal #2082, dealt with a side setback
reduction from 5 feet to 2 feet for an addition to a detached garage. The
petitioner in that case did claim as a hardship the desire to preserve a
cultivated garden of raspberries and asparagus. This garden would need to be
removed if the garage addition had to comply with the required setback. However,
the Board did not consider this to be a valid hardship. The Acting Chairperson
explained to the petitioner that, while they are sympathetic to the desire to
save a garden which had taken years to cultivate, this is not the sort of
"landscape" hardship which the board has used for a basis of granting other
variances. For landscaping to be considered as a topographic or other type of
hardship, it has to be of a more significant and substantial scale then a
vegetable garden. For instance, the Board might consider the existence of a
large tree as a basis for the granting of a variance. In this particular appeal
the Board determined that other circumstances existed on this property that were
consistent with other properties in the old part of town which had been granted
similar variances. These circumstances are the narrowness of the lot and the
fact that the existing garage was already at only a 2 foot setback, and the
addition was going to line up with the existing wall. These factors, along with
issues related to the location of other existing structures, seemed to be the
elements of hardship which the Board relied upon in the granting of Appeal #2082.
The existence of the garden appears to have been dismissed as having any role in
the granting of the variance.
3. The Board improperly applied and interpreted relevant laws and provisions
of the Code and Charter.
Response: As discussed earlier, the Board expressly applied Section 29-41,
"Zoning Board of Appeals; duties and powers" in its decision making process.
This Section allows the Board to grant variances in cases where a hardship is
found to exist. In applying this section, the Board determined that there were
no characteristics of the lot, such as narrowness, shallowness, or topography,
which would prevent the appellant from, building the shed in a location which
complies with the Code. In interpreting this section, the Board determined that
there are two criteria which must be met before a variance can be granted.
First, it must be determined that there is a valid hardship, and second, it must
be determined that there will be no substantial detriment to the public good if
the variance is granted. Board members expressed their belief that if both of
these criteria cannot be met, then a variance should not be granted.
4. The Board exceeded its authority or jurisdiction in that the Appellant's
request for a building permit is not a zoning issue.
Response: The appellant has indicated his intention to build the shed on a wood
platform and not permanently affix the structure to the ground, and thus, the
definition of "building" in the Zoning Code does not apply to his shed and the
Code is irrelevant. Section 29-1 defines "building" as "...any permanent
structure built for the shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels or
property of any kind, which is governed by the following characteristics: (1) Is '
477
I
December 7, 1993
permanently affixed to the land; (2) Has one or more floors and a roof; (3) Is
bounded by either open space or the lot lines of a lot."
The Uniform Building Code, however, does require a building permit for any
detached accessory building over 120 square feet. Since the appellant's shed is
168 square feet, a permit is required, and construction standards of the Building
Code do apply. The Code classifies the building as a permanent structure, but
allows the Building Official to authorize the use of alternative materials and
methods which might be used in constructing a shed. In the case of detached
storage sheds, the Building Official has authorized the use of wood platforms as
an acceptable foundation, in place of concrete. However, when wood materials are
.used, the Building Official requires that the shed be affixed to the ground using
some sort of acceptable anchoring method. The weight of the building alone is
not satisfactory. As a condition of a building permit, Mr. Roselle will be
required to affix his shed to the ground in a permanent manner by means of an
acceptable anchoring system. Thus, the shed will comply with all the elements
contained in the definition of "building" as found in the Zoning Code.
Section 29-5 (a) of the Zoning Code states that "No building shall be erected,
moved or structurally altered unless a building permit has been issued by the
Building Permits and Inspections Administrator. A17 permits shall be issued in
conformance with the provisions of this Chapter...". Thus the Zoning Code is
' quite clear that a request for a building permit is a zoning. issue.
Additionally, Section 29-476 (d) of the Code states that "No detached accessory
building may exceed eight (8) feet in height unless such building complies with
all of the yard setbacks for the district in which such building is located."
Since the proposed shed is 10 feet in height, the relevant setbacks do apply, and
therefore the location of the shed is a zoning issue.
City Council is being furnished with a copy of the summary minutes of Appeals
#2082 and #2087, and all other materials presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding Mr. Roselles's variance request. In addition, the appellant is
furnishing the Council with a verbatim transcript of Appeals #2082 and #2087.
The procedures for deciding the appeal are described in Chapter 2, Article 11,
Division 3 of the City Code."
City Attorney Steve Roy briefly outlined the procedures for hearing appeals and
spoke of Council's options.
Jerry Roselle, appellant, spoke of his reasons for appealing the decision of the
Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak ruled transcripts of appeals for variance requests heard
earlier in the October 14 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting would not be considered
as evidence for Mr. Roselle's appeal.
1 478
December 7; 1993 '
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, that
sufficient grounds exist to hear the appeal. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Code Administrator Peter Barnes gave a staff presentation on the item and showed
slides of the appellant's property.
Mr. Roselle spoke of the uniqueness of the lot size and shape and stated the
building would be lower than the top of the fence. He spoke of the hardship that
had been imposed on him by the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals and asked
Council to grant the variance.
Barnes responded to Council questions regarding minimum setback requirements.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to deny
the grounds that the Board had abused its discretion and find that the appellant
had a fair hearing by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt,
Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to uphold the '
appeal and grant the variance because a hardship does exist. Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember
McCluskey.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Adoption of the
Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan, Adopted.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
To support the proposed improvements the estimated cost to a 8,600 sq. ft. single
family lot would.cost $3.58 per month. Of this amount about $0.60 is identified
for minor capital improvements. For commercial properties, generally, the amount
of impervious area about doubles that, of single family lots. Actual fees will
be based on both lot area and impervious area. A new development fee would be
included at $4,150 per acre. A small area that is included in the Old Town
drainage basin but not tributary to the proposed improvement would only see the
minor capital fee on their utility bills.
479 9
I
December 7, 1993
A. Resolution 93-189 Adopting a Revised Version of the Stormwater Basin Map
of the City.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 1993 Amending Chapter 26 of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins by the Adoption of the Old Town Master
Drainage Basin Plan and by Adopting Fees Therefor.
Currently there is no master plan or financing plan for improvements in the Old
Town drainage basin to address flooding problems. The Old Town Master Plan is
one of the last basins to have a master plan prepared. The adoption of the
master plan will include improvements and a funding source to provide
improvements to address flooding problems in the basin. The funding for the
improvements is proposed to be a maximum of $3.58 per month for a 8,600 sq. ft.
single family lot and a new development basin fee base rate of $4,150 per acre.
This funding will support a pay as you go philosophy for a capital improvements
program over a 23 year period.
BACKGROUND:
The Old Town area is one of the last basins in which a master plan has been
prepared. The major goals of the master plan were to inventory existing
infrastructure to establish its integrity and identify areas in need of
improvement, identify flow patterns and related flooding problems, and propose
solutions to mitigate those problem areas. The existing stormsewer system in the
Old Town basin is the oldest drainage system in the City and dates back to the
early 1900's. Staff then developed a financing plan to support the proposed
improvements consistent with the other drainage basins in the City where
financial plans and improvements are already under way.
Like other basins the cost of proposed improvements is to be spread among those
properties in the Old Town basin. Those properties are the same properties that
contribute runoff to the properties with problems. The basis of the fee
structure is to define each property's runoff contribution to the drainage system
by considering lot area and the property's impervious area, such as buildings,
asphalt and concrete areas. In essence, the higher the impervious area, the
higher the runoff contribution, therefore the higher the fee for that parcel.
The monthly capital fee is included on that property's monthly utility bill and
paid with other city utilities. A new development fee is proposed as well.
Monies collected in the Old Town or any specific drainage basin must be spent in
that basin and cannot be transferred to other basins.
Proposed Improvements
An integral part of the master planning process was the identification of
improvement alternatives to address the flooding problems identified. Three
51-H
December 7, 1993 '
scenarios were analyzed in detail and the level of protection was identified for
each alternative. Those were enlarging the existing stormsewer system, detention
storage and street regrading.
The. detention storage alternative had a benefit to cost ratio of 0.62 and
provided protection levels ranging from the 10-yr to the 100-yr storms depending
on the location of the property. The 100-yr design storm has a 1% chance of
occurring in any given year, while a 10-yr storm has a 10% chance of occurring
in any year.
The stormsewer alternative had a benefit to cost ratio of 1.12 and protection at
the 10-yr design storm level. If improvements were proposed for a higher level
of protection than the ten year storm it would result in substantially higher
costs than benefits received. This would result in a benefit to cost ratio of
less than one.
The street regrading alternative (recommended) had a benefit to cost ratio of
1.12 and protection levels ranging from the 10-yr to 100-yr design storms. This
alternative provided the best overall level of protection from flood damage and
provides the greatest net benefits.
The improvements recommended include:
* the regrading of city streets at strategically located sites to allow and I
direct the passage of storm runoff;
* open channels where its infeasible to use the city street system;
* culverts under the streets or in areas where site conditions dictate
undergrounding the system is necessary;
* wetland areas to clean the runoff before it drains into the Poudre River,
and;
* stormsewers in the downtown area.
Improvements are also proposed in the area of minor capital improvements. These
improvements are generally smaller in nature compared to the master plan
improvements and designed to address smaller or localized problem areas. These
improvements can be characterized as including improvements to the existing
infrastructure to ensure its functioning properly; repair of the system when it
is either damaged or no longer meets current standards; and site by site
improvements to mitigate flooding problems to individual properties. These flood
mitigation activities might include flood proofing of, properties through the
installation of berms, flood proofing entrances and minor street improvements.
Financial Impacts
The initial strategy developed during the creation of the Stormwater Utility was
for the gradual escalation of rates with- in each basin. This allowed for the
funding in each basin to grow as capital projects were designed and right-of-way
acquired before construction started. During the issuance of revenue bonds in ,
481
December 7, 1993
1988 an informal policy was adopted where the maximum fee in any drainage basin
would be $3.58 for a single family residential lot of 8,600 sq. ft. and no
increase in capital monthly rates would exceed 15Y per year. The proposed
financing plan for Old Town proposes a fee at the $3.58 maximum rate to support
the schedule of improvements. The selection of the $3.58 rate treats the Old
Town basin no different than the other basins at the maximum rate. A new
development fee would be included at $4,150.00 per acre. The monies from this
fee would pay new developments share of the proposed improvements.
The cost of the improvements total some $6.3 million while achieving an average
annual damage reduction or benefit of $585,000 per year. Damages are calculated
by considering all of the design storms of varying degrees of intensity, the
frequency of those storms over a 100 year period, and the damages created by each
of these storms. These damages are then calculated on an annual basis and are
the basis to compare the benefits of a particular improvement.
Improvements are identified and modeled to show their reduction in flood damages.
The reduction in flood damages is the benefit of the project. The cost of the
improvements is identified and calculated on an annual basis considering the life
of the project. Comparing the benefit in flood damages and the cost of the
improvements gives the benefit to cost ratio of the project. For the proposed
street regrading improvements in the Old Town basin the benefit to cost ratio is
1.12.
A small area that is included in the Old Town drainage basin but not tributary
to the proposalimprovement would only see the minor capital fee on their
monthly utility bills. This area has been titled "01d Town North Tributary Sub
Basin". Surface waters generated in this sub basin do not contribute to the
Master Planned Improvements, however, by being included in the Minor Capital
Improvements Program, minor capital improvements can be made sooner by pooling
monies with other minor capital monies generated by the basin as a whole.
Citizen Input
A key ingredient to the master planning process is the solicitation of public
comments. A mailing was sent to some 4,200 addresses in the basin notifying them
of the proposed project, the financial impact and dates of open houses where
information was available for review. Attached to the letter was a questionnaire
to be returned with their comments and preference for which financial option.
Over 590 of the questionnaires were returned with 60Y of those selecting a
financial option where something should be done. Of these about 33% preferred
the option which would have the smallest financial impact if improvements were
made or the $3.58 per month fee option. Of the total questionnaires returned
about 27Y felt nothing should be done.
Open houses were held in January at the Fort Collins Public Library. The purpose
of the open houses was to provide an opportunity for citizens to review the
' proposal and ask questions of staff. About 65 people attended these open houses.
482
December 7, 1993 '
There has been newspaper and TV coverage of the master plan and about the June
24th, 1992 storm.
Several people either contacted Stormwater by phone or came by the office as a
result of the press releases or the mailings. A wide range of comments have been
received.
In total about 700 people either returned questionnaires, attended the open
houses or contacted staff either through the mail, by calling in or coming to the
office.
Letters were also sent to special interest groups and Boards and Commissions
interested in the Old Town area requesting if a presentation by staff was
necessary. In response, staff presented the proposal to the DDA and the North
College Business Association.
Council Questions and Concerns
During the worksession when City Council discussed the Old Town Master Drainage
Basin Plan, several questions or concerns were raised. Following is a summary
of those items.
The Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan doesn't have the same sense as the other '
drainage basin master plans.
This is correct. The improvements that are being proposed are different than the
other basins because in the other basins drainageways or creeks are still in
existence. In Old Town the drainageway was eliminated a number of years ago.
Any opportunities were lost to enhance the natural drainage system. Urbanization
has transferred any natural drainageways that may have existed before
urbanization into surface flows on city streets. The results are that any
changes to make the system more efficient necessitates the final grading of the
street system and not natural drainageways. Where it is possible grass open
channels and natural area improvements are being made.
The impact to low income families.
By percentage, the Old Town drainage basin probably includes the highest
percentage of fixed income residents. This issue was considered in the
development of the recommended improvement schedule and financial support for
that option. The recommended option identifies the maximum rate of $3.58 which
is similar to other basins. Some respondents requested the improvements be
installed at a more aggressive schedule which would have resulted in higher
monthly rates. Also the city has rebate programs where property owners can
receive rebates on utility fees paid. Currently the city has rebate programs for
sales tax, utility bills and property taxes. Currently the utility rebate
program includes Water, Wastewater and Light and Power. It is planned to bring
to council next spring legislative action to include Stormwater in the rebate '
483
December 7, 1993
Program. A variance process is also available if a property owner wishes to
dispute their Stormwater fee amount.
The benefit to cost ratio seems marginal and what magnitude of variation can be
expected in these ratios.
Currently the benefit to cost ratio of the recommended improvements is 1.12.
This ratio reflects property values in 1987 when the study generated this
information. Using current property values it can be expected that values would
increase some 10-15Y. This would raise or increase the benefit to cost ratio.
In regard to the question asked about the degree of accuracy of the benefit to
cost analysis, it was determined that the accuracy can be in a range of plus (+)
or minus (-) 10%. When you consider both the property increase of 10-15% and the
accuracy range of a +/- IOY the final benefit to cost ratio would be between 1:11
to 1:42.
Considering the improvements that are proposed, how are they integrated with
other City programs?
There are a number of City projects/activities that may, in the future, be
integrated with some of stormwater construction projects. This list is not meant
to be all encompassing but an initial list.
-Natural areas in core areas
-Street Rehabilitation in future years
-Downtown redevelopment
-Canyon Avenue sculpture garden
In other basins, the combination of resources from several departments has
resulted in an overall better community improvement. The adoption of this Master
Plan will allow similar planning to be done in the Old Town Basin. The
improvements recommended in the master plan are considered conceptual and can be
improved upon at the time of final design as long as the overall intent of the
improvements are met.
Storm Drainage Board
The Storm Drainage Board has discussed the proposed master plan for Old Town in
detail. The Board reviewed the recommended improvements in the master plan and
improvement alternatives considered in the plan, comments received from citizen
input, financial implications of the plan, benefits of the proposed plan and the
Boards role in making a recommendation. The Board recommends City Council adopt
the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Master Plan and funding source as recommended.
A letter from the Board making its recommendation is included in the packet."
Councilmember McCluskey withdrew from discussion on this item due to a perceived
conflict of interest.
1
484
December 7, 1993 '
Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated he and Councilmember Janett lived in the area but did
not believe they had a conflict regarding the item.
Stormwater Utility Director Bob Smith gave a brief staff presentation on this
item and outlined the drainage and sewer routes. He reported on a questionaire
in which 60% of the citizens who responded said improvements should be made.
George Reed, Chair of the Storm Drainage Board, stated the Board arrived at the
conclusion that this basin should be treated identically to the 9 other basins
in the City.
Smith responded to Council questions and spoke of the costs of other basins and
stated property owners are currently paying flood insurance. He clarified CSU
does not pay any fees, noting CSU retains all its flow on its property.
Will Huett, Executive Director of Larimer County Red Cross, spoke in support of
the resolution and gave a brief report of the Red Cross' involvement with flood
emergencies.
Scott Malen, Red Cross Emergency Services Director, reported on damage
assessments of the June 24, 1992 flood and explained how the assessments were
completed. He stated the Larimer County Red Cross supports the Storm Drainage
Board proposal and urged Council to adopt the resolution. '
John Huisjen, property owner at 412 W. Mountain, stated businesses in the area
of Mountain Avenue and College Avenue would benefit more from the plan and stated
it has not been clearly demonstrated that it is needed. He believed it was not
equitable because the streets system is causing impacts for residential property
owners who have to bear the expense.
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt
Resolution 93-189. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, and
Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember McCloskey withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Janett spoke of the possibility of incorporating stormwater fees
in the City's utility rebate program to help offset hardships imposed on
residents with fixed incomes.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak thanked the board and staff for its efforts on the project.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt
Ordinance No. 159, 1993 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak,
Janett, Kneeland, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember McCluskey withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
485
December 7, 1993
Items Relating to the N-C-M,
Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density, Zone
Adopted Option A as Amended.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1993, Amending Section 29-167 of the
Code of the City of Fort Collins Increasing the Minimum Lot Size in the N-
C-M, Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density Zoning District.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1993, Imposing a Moratorium Upon the
Issuance of Building Permits for Certain Uses in the N-C-M, Neighborhood
Conservation Medium Density Zoning District, as Described in Section 29-
166 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
Ordinance No. 162, 1993, is an amendment to the text of the Zoning Code to
increase the minimum lot size requirement in the N-C-M, Neighborhood Conservation
Medium Density, Zone, from 4,500 square feet to 5,000 square feet. The proposed
increase to the minimum lot size is in response to neighborhood residents'
concerns on the development of a secondary residential structure on a lot which
' already contained a structure. Many lots in the N-C-M Zone have typical
dimensions of 50 feet wide by 190 feet deep, for a total of 9,500 square feet.
A 9,500 square foot lot would allow for two 4,500 square foot "lots," each of
which could contain a residential structure of a density allowed in the zone.
The N-C-M Zone allows a duplex (2 units in one structure) to be constructed on
a 4,500 square foot lot. Thus, it is possible for a 9,500 square foot lot to
contain two duplexes, one on the "front" part of the lot and a second on the
"back" part of the lot, provided the uses are approved by the Planning and Zoning
Board. This amendment to the Zoning Code would prohibit secondary structures on
single lots which are less than 10,000 square feet in size and would require such
uses to acquire additional lot area from adjacent lots.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council place
a moratorium on certain development in the N-C-M Zone, and Ordinance No. 163,
1993, reflects the Board's recommendation.
The Affordable Housing Board voted 7-0 to forward the following comment and
recommendation to the Council:
The Affordable Housing Board cannot support a moratorium for any
purpose in the N-C-M Zone because of the negative impacts such an
action would have on the provision of affordable housing in the
city.
M
December 7, 1993 '
2. The Affordable Housing Board recommends the City establish a "Minor
PUD" process to review the architectural character of building
permits in the N-C-M Zone over the next 12 months. Applications for
building permits shall be reviewed by a committee consisting of 2
Planning and Zoning Board Members and a neighborhood representative
to be appointed by the Council. The committee could utilize the
existing "Neighborhood Compatibility" criteria in the LAND
DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM, including the criteria just added as a
result of the Neighborhood Compatibility Study. Appeals of the
Committee's decisions can be made to the Planning and Zoning Board,
and if necessary, to the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
NOTE: A more detailed historical background to the East Side/West Side
Neighborhood Plans Rezonings Project is presented in an Appendix to
this staff report. A summary of that history is presented in this
section.
On March 1, 1986, the City Council adopted the EAST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, and
on July 18, 1989, the Council adopted the WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. Both
neighborhood plans are elements of the CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. The Plans
essentially categorize the neighborhoods into areas according to their '
sensitivity to change from their existing land use characteristics. Some
portions of the neighborhoods are almost exclusively devoted to single-family
dwellings and, as such, are very sensitive to any proposed change in land use.
There are other areas which are predominantly single-family in nature, but over
the years some redevelopment has occurred. Most redevelopment activity in these
areas have been conversions to moderate density multi -family structures (such as
duplexes, tri-plexes and four-plexes), although some larger apartment complexes
(24-36 units each) have also developed. These areas are not as sensitive to
moderate density residential redevelopment, but could be negatively impacted by
conversions to non-residential uses. Finally, there are portions of the
neighborhoods which have seen significant redevelopment and conversion activity.
These areas, thus, are the least sensitive to new redevelopment and conversion
activity.
In October 1991, the City Council approved Ordinance 113, 1991, adopting several
new zoning districts, and making amendments to the regulations of several other
zones, which were intended to help implement the land use policies of the EAST
SIDE and WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS (specifically the land use section of
Chapter 2 and Appendices A and B of the EAST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, and Chapter
3 of the WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. The rezonings represented a massive
"downzoning" of large portions of the neighborhoods. A downzoning occurs when
a new zoning district is more restrictive, in terms of allowable uses, when
compared to the previous zoning district. In summary, the downzoning of the
numerous parcels in these two neighborhoods resulted in: '
487
I
December 7, 1993
1. reduction of the areas within the neighborhoods that would allow
multi -family residential redevelopment and non-residential
conversions as uses -by -right; however, new review processes were
established for these uses to determine their appropriateness in
other parts of the neighborhoods based on criteria included in the
neighborhood plans;
2. residential density was limited to four-plexes as uses -by -right
within areas open to redevelopment activities; however, special
review process, including the PUD option, were established requiring
public hearings and Planning and Zoning Board review for higher
density residential projects; and
3. commercial and business activities were limited within and along the
edges of the neighborhoods; 'however, special review processes,
including the PUD option, were made available to propose such uses
in other parts of the neighborhoods.
The neighborhood plans, thus, provided the policy guidance for the East Side/West
Side Neighborhood Plans Rezoning Project. Due to their nature, neighborhood
plans are very specific in their policy direction. The new zoning regulations,
in many cases, were taken almost word-for-word from the Plans. In terms of the
' zoning district boundaries, they are consistent with the different land use areas
proposed within the neighborhood plans.
The concepts, goals, and policies presented in the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS are very similar for categories of land use types, although
they may be called by different names in each plan. For example, the
"Preservation Areas" of the EAST SIDE PLAN are very similar in nature to the
"Conservation Areas" of the WEST SIDE PLAN. In summary, the major goals and land
use policies of the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE PLANS are:
1. Preserve the existing residential character of the neighborhoods.
2. Protect the neighborhoods from incompatible land uses which could
locate internally to the neighborhood and undermine the stability of
the neighborhood.
3. Protect the neighborhoods from incompatible land uses which could
locate along the periphery of the neighborhood and have negative
impacts and influences within the neighborhood.
The adoption of the new and amended zones represented an important step on behalf
of the City to implement the land use policies of the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS. The following table presents a summary of the N-C-M Zone,
its allowable uses, the review process for the uses, and the minimum lot size
' requirements.
488
December 7, 1993
N-C-M, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION MEDIUM DENSITY, DISTRICT
ALLOWABLE USES APPROVAL PROCESS MINIMUM LOT SIZE
Single-family dwellings Use -by -right
4,500
Two-family dwellings Use -by -right
4,500
(provided no structural additions
are made to the existing building
or the units are constructed on
a vacant lot)
Churches Use -by -right
6,000
Child-care centers Use -by -right
6,000
Multi -family (max. 4-plex) Administrative
6,000
(provided no structural additions
are made to the existing building
or the units are constructed on
a vacant lot)
Group homes Administrative
6,000
Two-family dwellings P & Z Board
4,500
(with structural additions
or the units are constructed
on a lot containing a structure)
ALLOWABLE USES APPROVAL PROCESS
MINIMUM LOT SIZE
Multi -family (max. 4-plex) P & Z Board 6,000
(with structural additions
or the units are constructed
on a lot containing a structure)
Any use through a PUD P & Z Board Site Plan
NOTE: In all cases, the minimum lot area must be the equivalent of two (2)
times the floor area of the building, but not less than the minimums
listed above.
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING CODE
Zoning ordinances legally define what land use types can or cannot locate on a
specific property. Uses which may be allowed to locate in "Zone A" may not be
allowed to locate in "Zone B." In Fort Collins, land use restrictions are not
as rigid as in most zoning ordinances due to the ability, through the PUD process
H.0
December 7, 1993
(LAND DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM), to propose a land use which would not
automatically be allowed in a zone. The appropriateness of a proposed use is
evaluated against the criteria in the LOGS; if the use meets the criteria, the
use can be approved.
Amendments to Zoning Regulations (referred to in the City's Code as "schedules")
are allowed according to the procedures set forth in Sections 29-44, and 29-73
of the CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. The Code allows the City Council, after
receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board, to approve
amendments to the text of zoning regulations. In order to approve an amendment
to the Zoning Code, the Council must determine that the changes are in the best
interest of the' community as a whole, and not simply the best interest of a
specific individual or group of people.
On November 4, 1993, the Planning Department sent a letter to all property owners
within the N-C-M Zone notifying them of the pending minimum lot size change and
announcing the Planning and Zoning Board's and City Council's public hearing
dates.
AMENDMENT TO THE N-C-M, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION MEDIUM DENSITY, ZONE
This is an amendment to the Zoning Code to specifically consider an increase to
the minimum lot size requirement in the N-C-M, Neighborhood Conservation Medium
Density, Zone, from 4,500 square feet to 5,000 square feet. The proposed
increase to the minimum lot size is in response to neighborhood residents'
concerns on the development of a secondary residential structure on a lot which
already contained a structure. Many lots in the N-C-M Zone have typical
dimensions of 50 feet wide by 190 feet deep, for a total of 9,500 square feet.
A 9,500 square foot lot would allow for two 4,500 square foot "lots" each of
which could contain a residential structure of a density allowed in the zone.
The N-C-M Zone allows a duplex (2 units in one structure) to be constructed on
a 4,500 square foot lot. Thus, it is possible for a 9,500 square foot lot to
contain two duplexes, one on the "front" part of the lot and a second on the
"back" part of the lot, provided the units are approved by the Planning and
Zoning Board
Neighborhood residents' concerns about the construction of a secondary structure
on a lot which already contained a structure stem from two separate issues
related to the City's Zoning Ordinance. First, in the East Side/West Side
Neighborhood Plans Rezoning Project, the minimum lot size for lots in the
neighborhoods placed into the N-C-M, and N-C-B, Neighborhood Conservation Buffer,
Zone, were reduced from 6,000 to 4,500 square feet. And second, as long as
minimum lot sizes and set -back requirements are met, single lots may contain more
than one structure, i.e., single lots do not need to be subdivided into two lots,
for example, in order to contain a residential structure on each lot.
' The following issues and criteria are among those to be considered in an analysis
and evaluation of amendments to the Zoning/Code:
490
December 7, 1993 '
A. The primary criteria for evaluating an amendment to the zoning code is its
compliance with the officially adopted LAND USE POLICIES PLAN and GOALS
AND OBJECTIVES document, as well as other appropriate elements of the
CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, including any officially adopted neighborhood
or area -wide plans, such as the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANS.
The first criterion to be reviewed is whether or not the request to increase the
minimum lot size in the N-C-M Zone from 4,500 to 5,000 square feet is consistent
with the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS. The answer to this
important criterion is technically a "no" since the 4,500 minimum lot size in the
N-C-M Zone was taken directly from the neighborhood plans.
As indicated above, the neighborhood plans were very specific in their policy
guidance. In Appendix A of the EAST SIDE PLAN, the recommended zoning districts
specifically listed a 4,500 square foot minimum lot size for one -family and two-
family dwellings. This recommendation formed the basis for the 4,500 minimum in
the N-C-M Zone. Thus, a change to 5,000 is technically not supported by the
plans. In fact, during the rezoning process, the City received several comments
from neighborhood residents that the reduction of lot sizes and set -backs did not
go low enough to eliminate the necessity for property -owners to see variances
from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) if they, in the future, wanted to expand,
or add on, to their houses. '
However, the land use policies and rezonings adopted for the neighborhoods were
intended to be part of a more complete implementation package. Both plans
contain goals and policies encouraging the preservation of the architectural and
historic character of the neighborhoods. It was initially intended that the
rezonings would be supplemented by "design criteria" to assure the preservation
of important neighborhood characteristics. To date, these design criteria have
not been developed, meaning the implementation package remains incomplete for the
land use policies of the neighborhood plans. Staff's recommendation would put
a temporary "hold" on the initial N-C-M rezoning until the additional materials
could be developed. It is important to make sure the amendment is temporary
(ending on December 31, 1994) and that the design criteria are developed within
that time frame because temporary amendments are construed with less strictness
than permanent ordinances as far as legal requirements (such as conformance with
the Comprehensive Plan) are concerned.
B. In addition to elements of the CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, an amendment to
the Zoning Code may be reviewed against the following general welfare
considerations.
Has there been a substantial change of conditions in the area in
question? Have time and experience demonstrated that the existing
zoning schedule is unwise or in need of change?
491
December 7, 1993
As indicated above, the N-C-M Zone was adopted in October 1991, a little over two
years ago. While the construction of a single additional unit on an existing lot
has raised some local neighborhood resident concerns, a single development is
difficult to categorize as a substantial change of conditions within the
neighborhood.
In fact, the lot on which the new structure was constructed is an example of what
has historically happened within the neighborhood on larger lots which have
"frontages" on two streets, i.e., corner lots. Of the 55 full or partial blocks
zoned N-C-M in the East Side Neighborhood, 47 (85Y) have corner lots which have
more than one structure on them; most have two or three corner lots devoted to
more than one structure. Several of the lots actually have three structures on
them, and a few have four structures. In some cases, the corner lot has been
combined with the adjacent lot to provide more "lot area" for the structures.
In the West Side Neighborhood, of the 53 full or partial blocks zoned N-C-M, 43
(81%) have corner lots which have more than one structure. Accordingly, it would
be difficult to justify the amendment based on any substantial change of
conditions.
2. Are there adequate transportation, recreation, educational, utility,
and other facilities to accommodate the uses allowed in N-C-M zone?
' The N-C-M Zone was established to help implement the land use policies of the two
neighborhood plans. The land use policies were developed after a long process
of citizen involvement which evaluated such issues as the adequacy of
transportation systems, utilities, etc. It was determined during the development
of the neighborhood plans that certain portions of the neighborhoods could accept
higher density development without affecting public health, safety, or welfare.
These areas were identified on the maps contained within the Plans, and
subsequently placed into the N-C-M Zone.
Essentially, increasing the minimum lot size would represent a further rezoning
of density within the neighborhood, so the literal answer to the question about
adequate services would be a "yes." While there are adequate services, the
requested lot size change, in fact, would actually lead to less efficient
utilization of public facilities and services because less density would be
allowed within the N-C-M Zone.
3. What is the need in the vicinity and/or community as a whole for the
N-C-M Zone? Where are there existing undeveloped parcels of N-C-M
or similar zones?
The N-C-M Zone was developed, as indicated above, to implement the neighborhood
plans, but also to assist in implementation other City-wide land use goals and
policies, such as Policy #80a from the LAND USE POLICIES PLAN which calls for
higher density residential development to locate near the core area (downtown)
' and the Colorado State University main campus. The DOWNTOWN PLAN, encourages
additional residential development in the downtown and adjacent residential
492
December 7, 1993 '
neighborhoods. The neighborhood plans blended the City's overall policies with
neighbor preservation concerns. From the community -wide perspective, the N-C-M
Zone is necessary and must be allowed to offer opportunities for increase
residential densities near the downtown and CSU. Such development helps address
other City goals to encourage alternative modes of transportation which will
assist in reducing the community's air quality problems, foster cost-effective
public services, provide affordable housing, and, decrease urban sprawl.
It is recognized by the City that older residential neighborhoods are unique and
offer a variety of lifestyles, housing opportunities, and a quality of life that
can not be found, or duplicated, in other parts of the community. So,
essentially, there are no other locations in the community which can offer the
environment of older neighborhoods. From an affordable housing perspective,
older neighborhoods offer a reservoir of housing whose older age and smaller size
provide unique cost-effective housing and unique opportunities for additional
cost-effective housing.
4. What might be the impact of this amendment to the zoning code upon
the immediate neighborhood, district, and City as a whole?
The immediate impact of the amendment would be to prohibit two structures
utilizing the 4,500 square foot minimum lot size to locate on a single, typical
9,500 square foot lot. An increase to a 5,000 square foot minimum lot size would '
require two adjacent 9,500 lots to be utilized in order fora secondary structure
to be constructed on the "back part" of both lots. Additional impacts would
include an overall lowering of the potential redevelopment density within the
neighborhoods and reduce the potential for additional affordable housing units.
The Affordable Housing Land Planning and Housing Development Mini -Task Force
forwarded a recommendation to the City Council calling for establishment of
zoning regulations allowing for the development of secondary structures, often
called "granny flats," on lots within existing older neighborhoods. The concept
was supported by the Council which directed the new Affordable Housing Board to
develop specific criteria and .regulations for greater public review. The
criteria and regulations could be produced by mid-1994.
The continued lowering of density and an increased inability to redevelop, or
develop "infill" sites, will make it difficult to achieve other City goals to
encourage alternative modes of transportation which will assist in reducing the
community's air quality problems, foster cost-effective public services, provide
affordable housing, and, decrease urban sprawl. While such decisions, such as
this request, are difficult, community -wide goals will need to be viewed as of
greater importance in trading -off neighborhood concerns.
5. An amendment to the Zoning Code can be approved if there was a
technical mistake made in delineating the present zoning boundaries
or regulations.
493 1
' December 7, 1993
In this case, the "technical mistake" made was the failure to complete the design
criteria portion of the East Side/West Side Neighborhood Plans Rezonings Project
The rezonings and the design criteria were to be a package of implementation
strategies for the neighborhood plans.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Zoning Code as a temporary
solution to issues related to the development of secondary residential structures
on lots already containing a structure. This temporary solution will govern
related land use and redevelopment issues until further criteria can be developed
which control the architectural character, square footage size, and the
percentage of lots in a block which may contain secondary units.
Staff would recommend the 4,500 square foot minimum lot size be reinstated in the
N-C-M Zone once all of the following items are completed or by December 31, 1994,
whichever first occurs:
1. A set of neighborhood design criteria are developed which would help
assure that the architectural character of new structures would
blend with the existing characteristics of the neighborhood.
2. Regulations are developed which limit the square footage size or
number of bedrooms, and lot coverage of secondary units on a single
lot.
3. Regulations are developed which limit the percentage of lots which
could redevelop with secondary structures.
With regards to the first item listed above, a project to develop neighborhood
design criteria is currently in the Planning Department's Work Program for 1994.
The project is due to start in March and be completed by the end of the year.
The second and third items, indicated above, are included in the Affordable
Housing Board's Work Program for 1994-1995. The Board has established a "medium"
priority for these items and they likely will start in mid-1994. From the
affordable housing perspective, the development of "granny flats" provide
excellent opportunities to increase the supply of lower cost housing without
greatly increasing density or destroying the characteristics of an existing
neighborhood. Two critical components. in allowing such secondary units on lots
with existing structures is to first, either limit the number of bedrooms allowed
in the unit or the square footage of the unit, and second, to limit the
percentage of 'lots within a block which would be allowed to develop secondary
units. As an alternative to limiting only the square footage of the second unit,
is to establish a total square footage regulation to address the square footage
of both structures on the lot.
1 494
December 7, 1993 1
Options
The following options to amending the Zoning Code were considered, but not
recommended, by staff:
1. Amend the Zoning Code to only allow one structure on a subdivided
lot (in order to obtain a building permit, the proposed use must be
on a subdivided lot).
As discussed above, the secondary unit constructed on a single lot was the result
of two separate issues related to the Zoning Code. First was the reduction of
the minimum lot size from 6,000 to 4,500 square feet, and second was the
interpretation that as long as minimum lot sizes and set -back requirements are
met, single lots may contain more than one structure. Staff considered but
rejected the option of a city-wide Code amendment limiting each lot to only one
structure because there are too many lots within the city which contain more than
one structure. Almost all multi -family residential projects contain more than
one structure on single lots, as do shopping centers in commercial zones. Too
many "legal non -conforming uses" would be created with such a code amendment and
staff believes there are better ways to address neighborhood resident's concerns.
2. Increase the minimum lot size from 4,500 to 6,000 square feet.
Prior to the establishment of the N-C-M Zone, the minimum lot size in the '
neighborhoods was 6,000 square feet. Staff considered and rejected the option
to increase the minimum lot size back to 6,000 square feet because staff believes
that would be in direct conflict with the policy direction in the neighborhood
plans. Whether minimum lot sizes of 4,500 or 5,000 square feet are consistent
with the policies of the plans is probably open to enough debate, but one thing
is definitely certain, the neighborhood residents wanted a reduction in the
minimum lot sizes. During the public hearings on the rezoning project, the only
comments from neighborhood residents on the lot size reductions (and set -back
reductions) was that they did not go low enough to eliminate all properties from
the necessity of seeking variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals if additions
were proposed. Staff believes the reductions eliminated the vast majority of
lots from the need to seek variances from the ZBA, and of those that would need
to submit variances were the lots which should have some type of public review.
3. Deny the Change to the Minimum Lot Size.
As discussed above, the neighborhood plans were specific in recommending that the
minimum lot sizes in the new zoning districts be reduced to 4,500 square feet.
Thus, a literal interpretation of the neighborhood plans in regards to the
consideration to increase the minimum lot size to 5,000 square feet implies that
the change is not consistent with adopted elements of the CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN. And, since the Comprehensive Plan is the primary criteria for considering
amendments to the zoning code, the requested change should not be made. In
addition to the neighborhood plans, other elements of the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN '
495
December 7, 1993
encourage a general increasing of residential density in the city to help achieve
goals to encourage alternative modes of transportation to help achieve
improvements in air quality, and provide cost-effective public services and
facilities.
Amend the East Side and West Side Neighborhood Plans.
Another option staff considered was to amend the EAST SIDE and WEST SIDE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS to make the considered increase in the minimum lot size
literally conform to the recommendations in the plans. Plans are policy
documents to aid decision making,..inc7uding the creation of new zoning districts
and regulations. The City can make decisions which do not exactly conform to the
policies of the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN but must make decisions which conform to the
Zone Code. For example, while the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN contains policies which
encourage residential densities in the city to be 3 or more units per acre, some
properties are zoned for a maximum density of I unit per acre. Development of
such properties cannot exceed I unit per acre. Also, several projects have been
constructed under zoning, which only establishes minimum lot sizes, at densities
less than 3 units per acre. Staff does not believe amendments to the
neighborhood plans are necessary, since staff anticipates the minimum lot size
in the N-C-M Zone to be reduced back to 4,500 once design criteria, building
square footage regulations, and limitations as to the number of lots in a block
whi,:h can contain two structures are developed.
5. Limit Secondary Structures to Lots with Double Street Frontages
In reviewing the pattern of development in the older neighborhoods, of the lots
which contain two structures, all are lots with double street frontages, i.e.,
corner lots. Staff considered recommending a zoning change to limit development
of secondary units to corner lots. This change is not currently being processed,
but may be included when staff returns with the regulations which limit the
number of lots which can contain two structures. Staff believes it is better to
consider such a limitation in the greater context of limitations within the
entire block rather than as a "stop gap" measure at this time.
The Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation (Ordinance No. 163, 1993) is
presented below, followed by the Affordable Housing Board's recommendation.
Staff believes the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation for the City
Council to establish a moratorium on the development of certain uses in the N-C-M
Zone is too extreme. Moratoriums, as a planning tool, are usually utilized when
there is an immediate threat to public health and safety (for example, the lack
of adequate sewer service in an area would be justification for a moratorium
until increased sewer service could be provided). While the secondary unit
constructed at 651 Whedbee Street may not be desirable form an "infill"
development perspective, it may or may not constitute a threat to public health
and safety. That is a determination that is up to the Council to make.
496
December 7, 1993
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting on November 15,
1993, voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council that a moratorium be place on
of certain uses in the N-C-M Zone until further criteria and regulations can be
developed which control the architectural character, square footage size, and the
percentage of lots in a block which may contain secondary units.. A copy of the
Board's minutes is attached.
Based on discussions at the Board's November 15 meeting, staff has prepared the
following list of uses which would not be allowed to locate in the N-C-M Zone
during the moratorium (for clarity, a list of uses which would be allowed is also
presented):
Uses to be prohibited by a moratorium in the N-C-M Zone:
1. The following listed uses would be prohibited by.a moratorium if the
uses were proposed as new construction or modifications to existing
uses that propose structural additions or exterior alterations:
A. Single-family dwellings.
B. Two-family dwellings.
C. Churches. '
D. Child-care centers.
E. Multi -family dwellings.
F. Public and nonprofit quasi -public recreational uses as a
principal use.
G. Group homes.
H. Public and private schools for elementary and high school
education.
2. Uses allowed to continue to locate in the N-C-M Zone during a
moratorium, utilizing existing buildings provided no structural
additions or exterior alterations are made to the existing building:
A. Single-family dwellings.
B. Two-family dwellings.
C. Churches.
497 '
December 7, 1993
D. Child-care centers.
E. Multi -family dwellings up to four (4) units.
F. Public and nonprofit quasi -public recreational uses as a
principal use.
G. Group homes.
H. Public and private schools for elementary and high school
education.
3. The following newly constructed uses would be allowed to locate in
the N-C-M Zone during a moratorium:
A. Accessory buildings and uses.
B. Essential public utility and public service installations and
facilities for the protection and welfare of the surrounding
area.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
'
The Affordable Housing Board,
discussed the proposed change to
at a meeting on November 10, 1993, briefly
the minimum lot size in the N-C-M Zone and voted
7-0 to request that the Planning
and Zoning Board delay
the official formulation
of its recommendation to the Council until December
to allow the Affordable
Housing Board an opportunity to
review the proposal in
greater detail.
The Affordable Housing Board, on November 29, 1993, voted 7-0 to forward the
following comment and recommendation to the Council:
1. The Affordable Housing Board cannot support a moratorium for any
purpose in the N-C-M Zone because of the negative impacts such an
action would have on the provision of affordable housing in the
city.
2. The Affordable Housing Board recommends the City establish a "Minor
PUD" process to review the architectural character of building
permits in the N-C-M Zone over the next 12 months. Applications for
building permits sha11 be reviewed by a committee consisting of 2
Planning and Zoning Board Members and a neighborhood representative
to be appointed by the Council. The committee could utilize the
existing "Neighborhood Compatibility" criteria in the LAND
DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM, including the criteria just added as a
result of the Neighborhood Compatibility Study. Appeals of the
Committee's decisions can be made to the Planning and Zoning Board,
and if necessary, to the City Council."
1. 498
December 7, 1993 '
Chief Planner Ken Waido gave a staff presentation on this item. He outlined the
boundaries of the N-C-M zone and stated the zone covered a large portion of the
older neighborhoods in the City. He outlined various recommendations from staff,
the Planning and Zoning Board, and the Affordable Housing Board.
Craig Welling, representing the Affordable Housing Board, opposed a moratorium
being placed on the zoning and stated the Board proposed a compromise among the
neighbors. He proposed a three member board with representatives from Planning
and Zoning and one neighbor/resident to review architectural compatibility of a
proposed development with full appeal rights to the Planning and Zoning Board and
Council. He stated he believed this proposal would not have negative impacts on
affordable housing potential.
Waido explained the definition of use -by -right and approving the architectural
character. He spoke of staff's reasoning for increasing the minimum lot size.
Councilmember Apt asked if recommendations from the Affordable Housing Board were
being considered by the Planning and Zoning Board.
Waido stated the Planning and Zoning Board did not have adequate time to review
and consider recommendations from the Affordable Housing Board. He clarified the
Affordable Housing Board did make a request that the Planning and Zoning Board
allow them a month to provide its recommendations and the Planning and Zoning '
Board denied its request.
Councilmember McCluskey questioned the difference between a moratorium and
increasing the lot size.
Waido stated the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation for a moratorium was
to stop all development in the neighborhood until the design criteria was
adopted. He clarified staff's recommendation to increase the lot size would
prohibit that use from occurring on the typical lot size and it would take 2
adjacent lots being utilized to build a secondary structure and the likelihood
would be very remote. He stated the moratorium option would prohibit adding
additional rooms to existing residences due to changing the architectural
characteristics of the structure.
Steven Schwartz, 627 Whedbee, spoke of a recently constructed rental unit near
his residence that has caused concern among him and his neighbors.
Sandy Huett, 645 Whedbee, spoke of declining property values and density
concerns.
Bob Castner, 721 Smith Street, spoke in support of older neighborhoods and stated
such small lots can not support any more density.
499
'
December 7, 1993
Kevin
Colby, 715 Smith Street, spoke of the need for affordable
housing but
stated it was not fair that older neighborhoods should satisfy a
disproportionate
share
of the demand. He supported a moratorium., an increase in
minimum lot size
and a
limitation on density. He suggested second structures be
limited to corner
lots.
David Scheel, 605 Whedbee, opposed building affordable housing units in the
neighborhood and spoke of existing structures that are inappropriate in size and
character.
Lou Stitzel, 521 E. Laurel, supported the Affordable Housing Board recommendation
and spoke of the need to perform an overall study of neighborhood design similar
to what has been done in Denver relating to older neighborhoods with different
lot sizes.
Ernie McQuiddy, 421 E. Laurel, suggested placing a moratorium on current zoning
and suggested the entire Eastside Neighborhood Plan be adopted.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt
Ordinance No. 162, 1993 on First Reading.
City Manager Steve Burkett stated the only way to stop the building would be to
' temporarily prohibit development in the area until solutions are in place.
Councilmember Janett offered an amendment to change the "minimum lot/parcel size"
in the 7th WHEREAS paragraph from 5,000 to 5,500, stating it would reduce the
number of lots that would fit in the use -by -right category. Councilmembers Apt
and McCluskey accepted the amendment as a friendly amendment to the original
motion.
Craig Welling, representing the Affordable Housing Board, stated reviewing
architectural characteristics would be a desired approach.
Councilmember Apt spoke in support of the motion and thanked the Affordable
Housing Board for its ideas and opinions.
Councilmember Janett spoke of the need for a comprehensive plan that addresses
what type of units would be developed.
The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion as amended was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
500
December 7, 1993 '
Items Relating to the
REA Annexation and Zoning.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 93-190 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations
Regarding the REA Annexation.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1993, Annexing
Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1993, Zoning Approximately
9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation, into the H-B, Highway Business,
Zone with a PUD Condition.
This is a request to annex and zone approximately 9.4 acres located west of
College Avenue and south of Harmony Road, south of the Arbor Plaza Shopping
Center (Wal-Mart). The requested zoning is the H-B, Highway Business District.
The property is presently developed as the main office of the Poudre Valley Rural
Electric Association. The property is currently zoned B-Business and C-
Commercial in the County. This is a voluntary annexation. '
APPLICANT: Ronald J. Carey, General Manager
Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, Inc.
4809 S. College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80526
OWNER: Same
BACKGROUND:
Annexation Eligibility
The applicant and owner, Ronald J. Carey, General Manager, Poudre Valley Rural
Electric Association, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of
approximately 9.4 acres located west of College Avenue and south of Harmony Road,
south of the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center (Wal-Mart). The requested zoning is the
H-B, Highway Business District. The property is presently developed as the main
office of the Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association. The eastern third of the
property is currently zoned B-Business, while the western two-thirds of the
property is zoned C-Commercial in the County. This is a voluntary annexation.
Any existing commercial signs on the property will have to conform to the City's
Sign Code at the conclusion of.a five-year amortization period or upon
redevelopment of the property.
501
December 7, 1993
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 consider the annexation of property in the UGA when the
property is eligible for annexation according to State law. The property meets
the State's eligibility criteria - 116 contiguity to existing city limits from
a common boundaries with the Arbor Commercial Annexation to the north and the
Fairway Estates Business Annexation to the east. (See Attached Map)
Zoning Designations
The surrounding zoning and existing land uses are as follows:
N: H-8, Highway Business, Arbor Plaza Shopping Center
E: 8-L, Limited Business, variety of retail, commercial and office uses
S: T-Tourist (County), Fort Collins Nursery
W: FA-1, Farming (County), large lot residential development
The requested zoning for this annexation is the H-B, Highway Business District.
The H-B District designation is for automobile oriented businesses. The property
will probably eventually redevelop with a commercial use which has a
regional/community focus. According to the City's LAND USE POLICIES PLAN,
' regional/community commercial uses should located near transportation facilities
that offer the required access to the uses, in ares served by public
transportation, and in areas served by existing water and sewer utilities. This
site addresses these ]ocational policies. A Preliminary PUD for a new/used car
dealership has been submitted to the City for this property. The Planning and
Zoning Board will review the proposal on December 13, 1993.
Findings
1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements
between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins 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 a
voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
3. On October 19, 1993, the City Council approved a resolution which accepts
the annexation petition and determines that the petition is in compliance
with State law. The resolution also initiates the annexation process for
this property 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 H-B Highway Business District is in conformance with the
policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
1 i
502
December 7, 1993 '
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the annexation and requested zoning. Staff also
recommends that a PUD condition be attached to the H-B Zone for the property
which would require all redevelopment proposals for the property to be reviewed
against the criteria of the LAND DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting of October 25,
1993, voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation and requested zoning.
A copy of the Board's minutes is attached."
Chief Planner Ken Waido gave a brief presentation on this item. He clarified
since the project runs along Highway 287, the State and the City have entered
into an agreement. He gave a brief description of the definitions of various
zones.
Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design, stated he was available to answer questions.
Harold Swope, President of Fairway Estates Property Owners Association, speaking
on behalf of the association requested the annexation be denied until the City
develops a plan for South College Avenue. '
Calla Pott, 4675 Venturi Lane, requested a comprehensive plan or a sub -area plan
be developed for the South College area before the property is annexed. She
asked if the annexation fit into the City's comprehensive growth plan and
requested that the City restrict zoning and placing conditions on the property
zoning. She requested the property be zoned IL, Limited Business, with
conditions placed on the limited business use.
Richard Pott, 4675 Venturi Lane, spoke of the need for a comprehensive plan for
the area between Harmony and Trilby Roads. He requested denial of the annexation
and asked Council to set a timeframe for the completion of a South College Plan.
Fran Tate, 170 Palmer Drive, expressed concern regarding development along South
College Avenue and spoke of the need for a comprehensive plan before annexing
additional property.
Ed Harper, 120 Palmer Drive, urged Council to delay the annexation and concurred
with previous comments regarding a South College Avenue plan.
Chief Planner Ken Waido clarified that there is a South College Access Plan
addressing the number of traffic lanes, signals and turn cuts and stated there
is not a land use component to the plan. It is strictly a transportation
facility plan.
503 1
' December 7, 1993
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Horak, to adopt
Resolution 93-190. Yeas: Councilmembers Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and
Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Apt.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to deny
Ordinance No. 160, 1993 on First Reading.
Waido stated if the annexation was not approved, the County could approve any
development it desired, he spoke of the differences between the City and County's
PUD process.
Councilmember McCluskey stated he would not support the motion and suggested
annexing the property and placing it in the T, Transitional zone, allowing
additional time to address neighborhood concerns.
Councilmember Janett supported the motion and spoke of the need for a South
College transportation plan, she stated if commercial strip retail on South
College Avenue is continued it will evetually flow over into Loveland.
Waido explained the differences between the LB, Limited Business Zone and the BP,
Planned Business Zone and stated the area to the south of the proposed annexation
is zoned BP with a PUD condition. He stated there is basically no difference
between a Highway Business Zone with a PUD condition, a Limited Business Zone
with a PUD condition and a Planned Business Zone with a PUD condition.
Councilmember Apt expressed frustration with traffic impact on South College
Avenue and stated the lack of an overall comprehensive plan for South College or
the City is a great concern.
City Attorney Steve Roy stated Council could attach additional conditions either
to the type of PUD submitted or to the types of uses permitted on the property.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated he would not support the motion and stated he would
rather put restrictions on the use.
The vote on Councilmember Apt's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt
and Janett. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to
adopt Ordinance No. 160, 1993 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt,
Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
504
December 7, 1993 '
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to postpone
consideration of Ordinance No. 161, on First Reading until the Planning and
Zoning Board makes a recommendation and addresses transportation concerns. Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Steve Roy suggested postponing second reading of the annexation
ordinance until a recommendation is received.from the Planning and Zoning Board.
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to
postpone second reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1993 until Ordinance No. 161, 1993
is considered on First Reading.
Ron Carey, General Manager of Poudre Valley REA, stated the REA was only
interested in working with the City to facilitate the sale of the property. He
believed the zoning process would kill the deal and urged annexation of the
property.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated the City is responsible for land use, not buying and
selling property.
The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers '
Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Sale of Real Property
Described as Tracts G&H of the Fairbrooke SID, Adopted.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The real property was acquired by the City in satisfaction of the City's lien for
special assessments. A breakdown of the application of the proceeds for the
proposed sale is included in the body of this agenda item summary.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 164, 1993, of the Council of the City of
Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale to Christ Fellowship Church of Real
Property Described as Tracts G & H of the Fairbrooke Special Improvement
District. OR
505
December 7, 1993
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 165, 1993, of the Council of the City of
Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale to Nebarado Construction Inc. of Real
Property Described as Tracts G & H of the Fairbrooke Special Improvement
District.
Under Chapter 22 of the Code, the City is authorized to sell property at the
annual tax sale conducted by the Larimer County Treasurer if special assessments
levied against the property have not been paid. The property was sold at the
1988 tax sale and a tax certificate of purchase was issued to the City as there
were no interested private investors. The property was conveyed to the City
through a treasurer's deed. Last May, the City Council adopted Resolution 92-91
establishing policies for the sale of such property.
The City offered this property for sale in April and the only bid received was
less than appraised value and was rejected. The property has been appraised at
$72,000 for a church/day care center and $100,000 for residential use. The two
offers represented by these Ordinances are for those amounts and uses.
BACKGROUND:
Fairbrooke SID #79 was created in 1983 to provide infrastructure improvement for
' a 100 acre single-family residential development. Sale of homes did not occur
as anticipated and the developer was not able to make timely payment of
assessments on.Tracts A, D, G & H. Tax certificates were issued on those parcels
and the City obtained deeds in 1992. The City offered Tracts G & H for sale in
April and the only bid received was less than appraised value and was rejected.
Offer from Christ Fellowship Church
Purchase Price
Christ Fellowship Church would like to purchase Tracts G & H of the Fairbrooke
SID for $72,000. The property would be developed as a church with a day-care
facility included. This is the approved use on the current master plan for
Fairbrooke Subdivision. Christ Fellowship Church will, however, be required to
develop the land as a planned unit development and follow all planning procedures
to secure approval for the development.
Contingencies
This offer includes four contingencies: 1) the City's completion of the quiet
title action and ability to convey marketable title to the purchaser; 2)
ordinance approval by City Council of the agreement for sale on or before
December 21, 1993; 3) the purchaser securing financing on or before April 15,
1994; and 4) the approval of the sales contract by the church congregation on or
before January 15, 1994.
506
December 7, 1993
Offer from Nebarado Construction, Inc.
Purchase Price
Nebarado Construction, Inc. has offered $100,000 for the purchase of Tracts G &
H of Fairbrooke PUD. The property would be developed as patio homes. This use
would require an amendment to the master plan for the Fairbrooke Subdivision.
Contingencies
The sale of Tracts G & H is subject to three contingencies: 1) the City's
completion of the quiet title action and ability to convey marketable title to
the purchaser; 2) ordinance approval by City Council of the agreement for sale
on or before December 21, 1993; and 3) the purchaser securing financing on or
before May 1, 1994.
Summary of Offers
Purchase Price
Closing Date
Financing
Contingency
Broker's Fee
Christ Fellowship Church
$72,000
Earlier of: (1)
30 days after all
satisfied; or (2)
contingencies
March 1, 1995.
Yes -to April 15, 1994
None
Other Issues Must follow PUD requirements
requirements
Special Assessment Liens
Nebarado Const.
$100,000
August 30, 1994
Yes -to May 1, 1994
None
Will need amendment
to master plan and
must follow PUD
The following is an itemization of the remaining assessment lien and City costs
on Tracts G & H:
507
�I
IDecember 7, 1993
Assessment Lien:
Tracts G & H
Principal $165,060
Interest to 311194 99,472
Total $264,532
Costs:
General Taxes 13,734
Title Policy and
other 616
Total $ 14,350
Total All Costs: $278.882
In order to evaluate the bid offers, it is important to know what the sales price
wi71 provide the City in terms of debt payment. The following chart illustrates
the per acre sales price needed to pay all costs or principal and interest only
versus the appraised per,acre value of the land.
' Price per Acre
To recover all costs: $ 46,480
To recover P & I: 44,087
Per appraisal: 12,000 to $16,000
Christ Fellowship Offer: $ 12,000
Nebarado Offer: 16,000
Options
1. Approve. The Council can adopt either Ordinance. If Ordinance No. 164,
1993, is adopted, no action should be taken on Ordinance No. 165, 1993 and vice
versa.
2. Amend. The Council can adopt either of the Ordinances with changes to the
agreement as currently written. Staff would then present the revised agreement
to the buyer. The buyer would have the opportunity to reject or counteroffer.
3. Reject. The Council can fail to pass or take no action on both of the
Ordinances. Staff would then continue to market Tracts G & H."
Financial Analyst Susanne Edminster gave a brief presentation on this item and
clarified Nebarado has waived its financing contingency.
1 508
December 7, 1993 1
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt
Ordinance No. 165, 1993 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Sale of Real Property
Described as Tract A of the Fairbrooke SID
and of Tax Certificates of Purchase for Lots 1
through 25, inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 16,
inclusive. Block 2. Brittany Knolls PUD, First Filing, Adopted.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The real property and tax certificates were acquired by the City in satisfaction
of the City's lien for special assessments. A breakdown of the application of
the proceeds for the proposed sales is included in the body of this agenda item
summary.
First Reading of Ordinance No. 166, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to Colorado I
Land Source, Ltd. of Real Property Described as Tract A of the Fairbrooke
SID; OR
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to William
L. Neal and Charlotte E. Jorgensen of Real Property Described as Tract A
of the Fairbrooke SID; OR
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to Everitt
Investments, Inc. of Real Property Described as Tract A of the Fairbrooke
SID
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 1993, Authorizing the Sale to Colorado
Land Source, Ltd. of Tax Sale Certificates of Purchase for Lots 1 through
25, inclusive, Block 1 and Lots I through 16, inclusive, Block 2, Brittany
Knolls PUD, First Filing; OR
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 1993 Authorizing the Sale to Everitt
Investments, Inc. of Tax Sale Certificates of Purchase for Lots 1 through
25, inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 16, inclusive, Block 2, Brittany
Knolls PUD, First Filing.
On September 7, 1993 the Council adopted Ordinance No. 102, 1993, which provided
for the sale of Tract A of the Fairbrooke SID ("Tract A") to Colorado Land
Source, Ltd. with the stipulation that the sales agreement not contain any '
509
December 7, 1993
contingency based on approval of land use by the Planning and Zoning Board. In
response to this new stipulation, Colorado Land Source, Ltd. submitted a new
sales agreement which included the purchase of tax certificates held by the City
on forty-one lots in the Brittany Kno11s PUD. The Ordinance authorizing the sale
of Tract A and the tax certificates on Brittany Knolls PUD was considered by the
Council on October 5, 1993. The Council took no action on the offer at that
time.
A revised offer has been submitted by Colorado Land Source, Ltd. which increases
the offer on the tax certificates from $168,000 to $201,500. The City has also
received two more purchase offers on Tract A from William Neal and Charlotte
Jorgensen and from Everitt Investments, Inc. ("Everitt"). Everitt also wishes
to purchase the Brittany Knolls tax certificates. The Council must decide which,
if any, of the offers to accept.
BACKGROUND:
Fairbrooke SID #79 was created in 1983 to provide infrastructure improvement for
a 100 acre single-family residential development. Sale of homes did not occur
as anticipated and the developer was not able to make timely payment of
assessments on Tracts A, D, G & H. Tax certificates were issued on those parcels
and the City obtained deeds in 1992. The City offered Tract A for sale in April
' and the only bid received was less than appraised value and was rejected.
The tax certificates are for special assessments due for the
Provincetowne/Portner SID #81 and South Lemay SID #86. They are held on forty-
one platted single-family residential lots owned by DCB Investments of Dallas,
Texas. The City approached the owner this year in an attempt to negotiate a deed
in lieu of foreclosure. Difficulties in communication have been complicated by
the fact that a bank in Texas also holds a lien on the property. A deed in lieu
of foreclosure can only be obtained if all junior Iienholders agree to the
transaction. Negotiations with the owner and the lienholder are at an impasse
and the only routes available for the City to obtain title to the property are
through a treasurer's deed application or judicial foreclosure. Once tax
certificates have been held for three years, the owner can apply for a deed to
the property from the county treasurer. This process can take as long as nine
months. Once the deed is issued, a quiet title action must be commenced which
adds another year to the process before marketable title is obtained. As a
governmental entity, the City can also use a judicial process to foreclose the
lien and obtain a deed to the property. This takes less time but requires more
participation by the City in conducting the legal action.
1
510
December 7, 1993 '
Tract A Offers
Colorado Land Source, Ltd.
Purchase Price
Colorado Land Source, Ltd. would like to purchase Tract A of Fairbrooke PUD for
$300,000. Tract A would be developed as single-family detached residential homes
with a density of not less than four (4) units per acre.
Contingencies
The sale of Tract A is subject to three contingencies: 1) the City's completion
of the quiet title action and ability to convey marketable title to the
purchaser; 2) the approval by City Council of the agreement for sale on or before
December 21, 1993; and 3) the purchaser securing a first purchase money mortgage
loan for Tract A within 180 days after Council approves the agreement for sale.
The City is also required to pay a real estate commission of $15,000 at the time
of closing.
Offer from William L. Neal and Charlotte Jorgensen
Purchase Price
Neal and Jorgensen have offered $330,000 for the purchase of Tract A of
Fairbrooke PUD. Tract A would be developed as single-family detached residential '
homes.
Contingencies
The sale of Tract A is subject to two contingencies: 1) the City's completion of
the quiet title action and ability to convey marketable title to the purchaser;
and 2) the approval by City Council of the agreement for sale on or before
December 21, 1993.
Offer from Everitt Investments, Inc.
Purchase Price
Everitt has offered $316,000 for the purchase of Tract A of Fairbrooke PUD.
Tract A would be developed as single-family detached residential homes.
Contingencies
The sale of Tract A is subject to two contingencies: 1) the City's completion of
the quiet title action and ability to convey marketable title to the purchaser;
and 2) the approval by City Council of the agreement for sale on or before
December 21, 1993.
511
December 7, 1993
Summary of Offers on Tract A
Colo. Land Neal et al. Everitt
Purchase Price $300,000 $330,000
$316,000
Closing Date 30 days On or before
30 days after
after quiet Aug 30, 1994
quiet title
title action
action
completed
completed
(@7/1/94)
(@7/1/94)
Financing Yes 180 None
None
Contingency days after
2nd reading
Broker's Fee $15,000 None
None
Tax Certificate Offers
Colorado Land Source. Ltd.
'
Purchase Price
Colorado Land Source, Ltd. would like to
purchase the tax certificates on
Brittany Knolls PUD for $201,500. The land
represented by the certificates is
currently platted as 41 single-family residential lots.
Contingencies
The purchase of the tax certificates is subject only to the contingency that City
Council approves the agreement for sale on or before December 21, 1993.
Offer from Everitt Investments. Inc.
Purchase Price
Everitt has offered $185,000 for the purchase of the tax certificates on Brittany
Kno11s PUD.
Contingencies
The purchase of the tax certificates is subject only to the contingency that City
Council approves the agreement for sale on or before December 21, 1993.
512
December 7, 1993
'
Summary of Offers on Brittany
Knolls Tax Certificates
Colo. Land
Everitt
Purchase Price
$201,500
$185,000
Closing Date
Dec. 31, 1993
Dec. 31, 1993
Financing
None
None
Contingency
Broker's Fee
None
None
Special Assessment Liens
The following is an itemization of the remaining assessment lien and City costs
on Tract A and the DCB Lots:
Assessment Lien:
Tract A Tax Certificate Property
Principal $296,284 $176,256 '
Interest to closing 185,123, 127,524
Total $481,407 $303,780
Costs:
General Taxes 35,582 10,194
Title Policy and
other 1,825 4.737
Total $ 37,407 $ 14,931
Total A71 Costs: $518.814 318 711
In order to evaluate the bid offers, it is important to know what the sales price
will provide the City in terms of debt payment. The following chart illustrates
the per acre sales price needed to pay all costs or principal and interest only
versus the appraised per acre value of the land.
Price per Acre Tract A Tax Certificate Property
To recover all costs: $ 27,893 $ 30,353
To recover P & I: 25,882 28,931
Per appraisal: 16,129 16,000
513
December 7, 1993
Colorado Land Offer: $ 15,322 19,190
Neal Offer: 17,742 N/A
Everitt Offer: 16,989 17,619
Options
1. Approve. The Council can adopt any one but not all of the Ordinances for the
sale of Tract A and the sale of the tax certificates.
2. Amend The Council can adopt any of the Ordinances with changes to the
agreement as currently written. Staff would then present the revised
agreement(s) to the buyer(s). The buyer(s) would have the opportunity to reject
or counteroffer.
3. Reject The Council can fail to pass or take no action on any or all of the
Ordinances. Staff would then continue to market Tract A and would begin
foreclosure on the tax certificates for the Brittany Knolls Property.
Recommendation
The Council Finance Committee recommends that Council adopt one of the ordinances
for the sale of Tract A and one of the ordinances for the sale of the tax
' certificates."
Financial Analyst Susanne Edminster gave a brief presentation on this item and
outlined offers.
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt
Ordinance No. 167, 1993 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt
Ordinance No. 169, 1993 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
1 514
December 7, 1993
Ordinance No. 171, 1993, '
Amending Section 2-581 of the Code of the City
of Fort Collins and Fixing the Compensation of the City Attorney, Adopted
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of
City Attorney, Steve Roy. This Ordinance establishes the 1994 salary of the City
Attorney.
BACKGROUND:
City Council is committed to compensating
employees in a manner which is fair,
competitive, and understandable. The goal
as an employer is to attract and
retain quality employees and to recognize
and reward quality performance.
In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Attorney meet once
a year to discuss last year's performance
and set goals for the coming year.
In 1993, the Total Compensation paid to the
City Attorney included the following:
SALARY AND BENEFIT
Base salary:
ANNUAL
$77,175.00
,
Medical Insurance:
4,632.00
Life Insurance:
185.22
Long Term Disability:
578.81
Dental Reimbursement:
120.00
Pension: ICMA 401(a) &
ICMA 457
10,032.75
FICA
4,690.24
Non -Monetary Benefits
Vacation: (20 days per year)
Holidays: (11 days per year)
Total Monetary Compensation =
$97,414.02"
Employee Development Director Jaime Mares supplied Council with copies of
handouts illustrating the amounts of various percentage increases.
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded
by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt
Ordinance No. 171, 1993 on First Reading increasing
the total compensation for
the City Attorney by 4%. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland,
McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
'
515
' December 7, 1993
Ordinance No. 172, 1993,
Amending Section 2-606 of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins and Fixing
the Compensation of the Municipal Judge, Adopted.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of
Municipal Judge, Kathleen M. Allin. This Ordinance establishes the 1994 salary
of the Municipal Judge.
BACKGROUND:
City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair,
competitive, and understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and
retain quality employees and to recognize
and reward quality performance.
In order to accomplish this goal the City
Council and the Municipal Judge meet
once a year to discuss last year's performance
and set goals for the coming year.
In 1993, the Total Compensation paid to the Municipal Judge included the
'
following:
SALARY AND BENEFIT
ANNUAL
Base salary:
$57,000.00
Medical Insurance:
4,632.00
Life Insurance:
136.80
Long Term Disability:
427.50
Dental Reimbursement:
120.00
Pension: ICMA 401(a) &
ICMA 457
7,410.00
FICA
4,397.70
Non -Monetary Benefits
Vacation: (20 days per year)
Holidays: (11 days per year)
Total Monetary Compensation
$74,124.00"
1
516
December 7, 1993 '
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to adopt
Ordinance No. 172, 1993 on First Reading and increasing the total compensation
for the Municipal Judge by 3.2%. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett,
Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Fixing the
Compensation for the City Manager.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 173, 1993, Amending Section 2-596 of the
Code of the City of Fort Collins and Fixing the Compensation of the City
Manager. OR
B. Resolution 93-193 Postponing Consideration of the Council's Review of the
City Manager's Compensation.
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of the '
City Manager, Steve Burkett. The Ordinance (Item A) would establish the 1994
salary for the City Manager. Item B would postpone such action until after the
City Council has reviewed the performance goals established for the City Manager
on or after March 1, 1994.
BACKGROUND:
City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair,
competitive, and understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and
retain quality employees and to recognize and reward quality performance.
In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Manager meet once
a year to discuss last year's performance and set goals for the coming year.
In 1993, the Total Compensation paid to the City Manager included the following:
SALARY AND BENEFIT ANNUAL
Base salary: $88,000.00
Medical Insurance: 4,632.00
Life Insurance: 211.20
Long Term Disability: 660.00
Dental Reimbursement: 120.00
517
December 7, 1993
Pension: ICMA 401(a) &
ICMA 457 11,440.00
FICA 4,847.20
Non -Monetary Benefits
Vacation: (20 days per year)
Holidays: (11 days per year)
Total Monetary Compensation
$109,910.40"
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey to
adopt Ordinance No. 173, 1993 on First Reading inserting a 3.2% total
compensation increase.
City Manager Steve Burkett clarified for Council that the draft action plan would
be a part of either the ordinance or the resolution.
Councilmember Apt opposed the motion, stating he would like to see part of the
increase given at the present time with the balance to be given after completion
of the draft action plan.
City Attorney Steve Roy clarified that Council could make a retroactive
compensation adjustment.
Councilmember McCluskey supported adopting the increase and spoke of the need to
work on the Action Plan.
Councilmember Kneeland spoke in support of the increase and spoke of the diverse
challenges of the City Manager's position. She commented that several items that
are listed on the Council's Work Plan are being addressed and commented that
progress is being made.
Councilmember Janett noted there has been a lot of communication regarding work
plan items, and stated the most important part of the Action Plan is the
implementation. She suggested a retroactive increase to begin in March or a
partial raise at this time.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated he supported the motion and spoke of the need for
leadership in the areas of transportation, air quality and land use. He
commended the City Manager for his performance.
Councilmember Winokur spoke in support of the motion and stated he wants to
assist the City Manager and staff in successfully meeting and exceeding Council
and the community's expectations.
Councilmember Janett stated she was ready to cooperate in any way needed to make
it a productive 3 months.
518
December 7, 1993 1
Councilmember Apt stated although progress has been made in many areas there is
a long way to go and stated he has a lot of faith and confidence in staff.
The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Horak, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Apt
and Janett.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 93-187
Creating a Council/Staff Task Force
to Review the City's Organizational
Structure in Relation to the Attainment
of the 1993-1995 Council Policy Agenda, Postponed to 12/21.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council has expressed an interest in reviewing the organizational
structure of the City. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the City's
resources are organized in a way that best maintains quality service delivery and '
supports the implementation of the City Council policy agenda. These issues were
recently discussed at a joint meeting of the City Council and the Executive Lead
Team. Council expressed concerns about the timing of some of the policy agenda
items coming back to the Council for action and wanted to ensure that the
organizational structure was promoting an integrated review and response to
policy agenda items. Staff requested help in this regard and suggested staff
work with Council to prioritize the policy agenda.
As a result of the joint work session, there was agreement that a Council
committee would be appointed to work with the staff to both review the
organizational structure and help address the question of prioritizing the
Council policy agenda. Council asked that the organizational review be completed
no later than March 1, 1994."
Councilmember Janett stated she was originally appointed to serve on the
committee and requested Council appointed someone else to serve as she did not
have time to serve.
Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to postpone
consideration of Resolution 93-187 to December 21. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt,
Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
519 1
December 7, 1993
Other Business
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to bring back
an ordinance at the January 18 meeting to impose a waiting period for the
demolition of historical buildings. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett,
Kneeland, McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested recommendations regarding historical structures
from the Landmark Preservation Commission prior to the January 18 meeting.
Councilmember Janett stated the Affordable Housing Board is requesting
clarification regarding the review of the role of the Housing Authority, which
is an item on its work plan. She asked Council to have any questions to her
before the next Affordable Housing Board Meeting.
Councilmember Apt requested information regarding the strategy for electric usage
increases.
Councilmember Winokur asked if Council wanted him, as representative to the
Platte River Power Authority Board, to pursue the City's policy regarding PRPA's
' Chamber membership.
Councilmember McCluskey requested more information regarding memberships
historically held by PRPA.
Councilmember Apt stated he felt the policy should be consistent.
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adjourn
to 6:30 p.m. on December 14. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett, Kneeland,
McCluskey and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:45 a.m.
City Clerk
520