HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-05/07/1996-RegularMay 7, 1996
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, May 7, 1996, 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, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Councilmember Absent: None.
Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Roy, Krajicek.
Citizen Participation
Carolyn Mita, P.O. Box 456, Ault, CO, expressed concerns about the Highway 14/Interstate 25
intersection and offered options for short and long term solutions.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Smith stated that since the intersection is located in the County, is a State highway
' and is located in the Fort Collins UGA, the MPO is probably the appropriate body to consider the
issue. The MPO is drafting a letter to CDOT asking it to move quickly on this project.
Agenda Review
City Manager Fischbach stated there was a new Item No. 27, Resolution 96-60 Making Appointments
to the Affordable Housing Board and the Planning and Zoning Board. One additional name, Jeff
Bridges, has been added to the appointments for the P&Z Board.
***CONSENT CALENDAR***
This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important
items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may
request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately.
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by the Public will be considered separately under
Agenda Item #29, Public Pulled Consent Items.
Councilmember Apt asked that Item No. 22, Resolution 96-55 Approving the Air Quality Action
Plan Update for 1996-1998, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda.
233
May 7, 1996
Consideration and approval of the regular meeting minutes of March 5 March 19 and April
2, and the adjourned meeting minutes of March 5 and March 26, 1996.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 44. 1996, Authorizing the Sale of Real Pro e�rty Known
as Lot 1, Super Block Property;
Resolution 92-91 established the policies for the sale of SID properties. A request for
proposal was issued in compliance with these policies. Ordinance No. 44, 1996, which was
unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16, 1996, authorizes the sale of real property
known as Lot 1, Super Block Property to Troutman Office Park Associates, LLC.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No 45 1996 Amending Chapter I of the "Design Criteria and
Standards For Streets' dated July. 1986 Pertaining to Pedestrian Ramp Standards
The "Pedestrian Ramp Design and Technical Criteria" dated April, 1996, ("the Pedestrian
Ramp Criteria") have been prepared to accommodate requirements of the Americans With
Disabilities Act, to provide a functional design standard which meets the needs of all
pedestrians, and to minimize the financial impact on the City and the development
community. Ordinance No. 45, 1996, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April
16, 1996, and amends Chapter 1 of the "Design Criteria and Standards for Streets" pertaining
to Pedestrian Ramp Standards.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No 46 1996 Appropriating Reserves in the General Fund for '
Police Seizure Activity.
Nearly 100 years ago, Colorado law created a process for the seizure of illegal contraband
used in or gained from criminal activity. The intent is to deter crime and to have criminals
help defray the costs of policing.
State statutes specify that the proceeds from such seizures are to be used for law enforcement
purposes, and require that the governing body (City Council) of the seizing agency (Police
Services) appropriate these proceeds to supplement the seizing agency's budget or forfeit the
proceeds to the general fund of the State of Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court and the
United States Supreme Court have consistently upheld the constitutionality of these statutes.
Ordinance No. 46, 1996, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16,
1996, appropriates $73,159 into Police Services' budget.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No 47 1996 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue for the
HOME Program.
On March 1, 1996, the City of Fort Collins entered into a contract with the Colorado
Department of Local Affairs to receive a grant of $613,000 in State HOME funds. The City '
234
May 7, 1996
' of Fort Collins will loan the State HOME funds to Affordable Housing Partners of Fort
Collins, a Limited Partnership, and owner/developer of The Woodlands, an affordable rental
housing/new construction project at the northeast corner of Shields Street and Harmony
Road.
Ordinance No. 47, 1996, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16,
1996, appropriates $613,000 granted to the City of Fort Collins HOME Program from the
Colorado Department of Local Affairs for the sole purpose of providing construction loan
for The Woodlands, a new construction/affordable housing rental project at the northeast
corner of Shields Street and Harmony Road.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 48, 1996. Authorizing the Transfer of a Tract of Land
Along the Foothills Regional Drainage Channel.
This ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16, 1996,
authorizes the transfer of Tract A of the channel right-of-way to the Dakota Ridge property
owner. Tract A was not needed for construction, nor is it needed for maintenance of the
channel.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 49, 1996. Approving the Terms of a Sublease Agreement
for a Portion of 405 Canyon Avenue to the State Board of Agriculture.
Ordinance No. 49, 1996, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16, 1996,
approves the sublease agreement with CSU's Educational Opportunity Office, leasing the
space on the same terms as the existing City lease: $1 1.25 per square foot plus expenses for
utilities, routine maintenance, and janitorial services.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No 53 1996 Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins
General Obligation Refunding Bonds in the Amount of $2.180,000 for the Purpose of
Refunding and Providing for the Payment Of and Refinancing At a Lower Interest Rate
Certain Outstanding Special Assessment Refunding and Improvement Bonds of the City and
Providing for the Levy of Ad Valorem Taxes To Pay the Principal of and Interest on the
Bond.
The City issued its 1989 Consolidated Special Improvement District Bonds to consolidate
several special improvement districts into one financing structure. The total amount of the
1989 bonds was $13,140,000. The bonds contained the City's general obligation pledge on
the final 25% of the bonds. As of May 1, $2,180,000, about 17% of the original amount, of
the 1989 remained outstanding. Through the proposed refinancing and refunding the City
will reduce its annual interest costs by about $60,000.
The new bonds are expected to carry an interest rate not to exceed 6.0% and the maturities
235
May 7, 1996
will remain at 2001. The repayment schedule called for interest only payments in 1996 and
1997 with principal to be paid in the remaining years. This will allow the City to sell some
of the special district properties and apply the proceeds to the payment on the new bonds.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No 54 1996 Amending Several Sections of Article XII of
Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Billing Procedures of City
Utilities
The City Manager is recommending the transfer of the utility billing operations from the
City's Finance Department to the City's Electric Utility. The City Code currently assigns
utility billing operations to Customer Information and Services ("CIS"), a division within the
Finance Department. However, under the City Charter, the Financial Officer is exclusively
given the ministerial power and duty to collect all funds received by the City. Therefore, it
is the Financial Officer who should be identified in the City Code as being responsible for
the function of collecting revenues rather than the particular department to which the
function may be assigned. This Ordinance would amend several sections of the City Code
to recognize the fact that the function of collecting City revenues belongs to the Financial
Officer, and that the Financial Officer can delegate this ministerial function to other City
officials or service areas. As required by the City Charter, the Financial Officer will continue
to establish policies and procedures for all cash collecting and accounting operations for the
City, including for utility billing collections.
In delegating to the City's Electric Utility the Financial Officer's function of collecting the '
revenues received by the City's utilities, there will be little or no change in the current
operations of the CIS, except that it will become a division of the Electric Utility. Through
the use of a lead team comprised of the Finance Director, Water Utilities General Manager,
the Electric Utility General Manager and the Director of Administrative Services, the City
Manager will periodically review the services provided by CIS to ensure that it continues to
meet the needs of all affected City departments and their customers.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 1996, Amending Chapter 3 of the City Code Relating to
Alcoholic Beverages.
The proposed Ordinance amends Chapter 3 of the City Code relating to alcoholic beverages
in order to clarify and simplify certain provisions relating to modification of liquor licensed
premises. These amendments are made in order to conform with a recent opinion received
from the Colorado Department of Revenue Liquor Enforcement Division regarding
application and interpretation of its regulation relating to modifications.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No 56 1996 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General
Fund.
236
May 7, 1996
The funds dedicated to the promotion of convention and visitor activities will not be
appropriated with this ordinance. The 1996 budget appropriated the full amount dedicated
for tourism -related purposes ($277,500). Pursuant to Resolution 95-177, passed by City
Council in December 1995, the one-year renewable contract with the Convention and
Visitors Bureau ("CVB") sets the City's 1996 contribution amount at $250,000. In
accordance with the 1996 contract, $250,000 will be used to fund the CVB and the remaining
$27,500 is available to fund other projects. The excess 1995 lodging tax receipts of $6,861
to be dedicated for tourism -related purposes will be held along with the $27,500. Staff is
working with affected stakeholders and others to identify alternative uses for lodging tax
receipts in excess of the $250,000 to be used to fund the CVB. These options will be
presented to Council early in the 1997 budget process.
18. Items Authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Colorado Department of
Transportation and the Appropriating of Unanticipated Revenue for the Construction of
Traffic Signals at the Intersections of Mulberry and Meldrum and US 287 and County Road
32
A. Resolution 96-53 Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Enter into an
Intergovernmental Agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation for
the Allocation of $95,000 of Surface Transportation Urban Funds to the Construction
of Traffic Signals.
' B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 57, 1996, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue from
the Federal Surface Transportation Urban Fund.
This Resolution authorizes the approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement with the CDOT
allocating $95,000 of Federal STU funds and $5,000 local agency non -participating funds
for the construction of two traffic signals.
The City has received Federal and state approval to use the STU funds totaling $95,000 for
the construction of traffic signals at Mulberry/Meldrum and at CR 32 and US 287. The funds
will be used for the engineering, material procurement, and the construction of the traffic
signals.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No 58. 1996 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Deed of
Conveyance for the Exchange of a Portion of Tract B Cedar Village First Filing to John L.
and Carolyn B Bloomberg for That Portion of Lot 90Cedar Village First Filing Needed for
the Drake Road Widening and Spring Creek Improvement Project
The City is seeking to acquire right-of-way (ROW) for the construction of a
transportation/storm drainage/recreation trail capital improvement project --the Drake Road
Widening and Spring Creek Improvement Project. The construction of the project is
237
May 7, 1996
currently scheduled for the summer and fall of 1996. Part of the project calls for the
construction of a new bridge on Drake Road and Spring Creek as well as providing for the
extension of the Spring Creek Trail under the new bridge.
During the planning process, the need for a trail access point from the south side of Drake
Road and Hanover Drive was identified. Negotiations with the property owner provided a
win -win solution whereby the City is exchanging a part of its Storm Drainage Channel,
which is out of the 100- year floodplain, for the portion of the property owner's lot that is
needed for the City's construction project. Appropriate City staff representing the
Stormwater Utility and Engineering have reviewed the land trade and concur with exchange.
20. First Reading of Ordinance No 59 1996 Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Lease to The
Poudre Landmarks Foundation the City's Historic Water Works Property located at 2005
North Overland Trail.
The City is currently the owner of an approximately 25-acre parcel of land located at 2005
North Overland Trail (the "Property"). A brief history of the Property is included in the
project description, provided by the Poudre Landmarks Foundation. While the Property is
no longer a part of the Water Utility's operating infrastructure, it is a valuable historic
resource. The proposed lease recognizes and helps preserve the site's historic value. The
Foundation will restore the inside of the Water Works building and develop the site into an
interpretive center/museum for water. Part of the Property will be used by the Rocky
Mountain Raptor Program to shelter, raise, and care for raptors.
The term of the lease is for 15 years for a total rental fee of $15. The City will be responsible
for the maintenance of the exterior of the Water Works building and the residential structure
located on the Property. The City will pay up to $17,500 for the renovation of the residential
structure. The Foundation will be responsible for the maintenance of the interior of the
buildings, including the renovation of the interior of the Water Works building. Cost of
utility service for the Water Works building will be paid by the City. Cost of utility service
for the residence will be paid by the Foundation.
21. Resolution 96-54 Adopting Amendments to the Financial and Management Policies for 1997
and Subsequent Fiscal Years.
The Financial and Management Policies are used to establish guidelines for budget
preparation and long-range financial planning. The policies reflect Council direction and
commitment to sound financial planning and management.
The amendments adopted by this Resolution will become part of the Financial and
Management Policies for 1997 and subsequent years.
238 1
May 7, 1996
22. Resolution 96-55 Approving the Air Quality Action Plan Update for 1996-1998
The proposed Air Quality Action Plan update is a set of actions to continue implementation
of the Air Quality Policy Plan (AQPP), an element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted in
1993. Adopting this resolution would complete the first biennial review and redirection of
the City's air quality programs, as called for in the AQPP. Once approved by City Council,
the Action Plan becomes the basis for staff work programs and budget recommendations.
23. Resolution 96-56 Recommending County Approval of a Waiver of the Public Street Capacity
Phasing Criteria of the UGA Agreement for the Fort Collins In -Line Sportrink Special
Review.
The waiver request pertains to the proposed Fort Collins In -Line Sportrink Special Review,
located on Racquette Drive, which is north of Highway 14 (Mulberry Street) and about one
half ('/z) of a mile west of Summitview Drive, in the Fort Collins Community Air Park
Industrial Park. The developing portion of the site contains approximately 1.6 acres.
The Fort Collins In -Line Sportrink Special Review is a proposal for an outdoor recreational
facility for In -Line Hockey League play (a commercial use), as an accessory use to an
existing private tennis club. Use of the semi -private facility would be restricted to leagues
where patrons register and pay fees, and to members/users of the tennis club. Projected
' months of operation could range from April through November, every day of the week. The
facility would operate from 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays, and from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. on
weekends. In the summer months (from June through August), however, the rink would be
open from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m.
A waiver from the public street capacity phasing criteria as established in the City's and
County's Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area (the "UGA
Agreement") is permitted under the terms of the UGA Agreement. The Fort Collins In -Line
Sportrink qualifies as an "infill" development. A major goal of the policies of the UGA
Agreement is to encourage "infill" development proposals versus proposals in essentially
undeveloped portions of the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area ("UGA").
24. Resolution 96-57 Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enter into a Contract with the
University of Oregon as an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process
Staff has been trying to finalize a contract with the University of Oregon for over 18 months.
A final scope of work was provided to the City at the end of 1995. Staff proceeded with this
exception to the competitive process believing it fell within the authority of the City Manager
to approve this exception. When contract documents were presented to the City Attorney,
it was determined that the contract would also need Council approval.
239
May 7, 1996
25. Resolution 96-58 Approving the "Design Assistance Program" Which Is an Element of the '
Historic Resources Preservation Program Plan of the Citv.
The Fort Collins Historic Resources Preservation Program Plan (the "Plan"), adopted in
1994, identified the Design Assistance Program as an incentive technique for implementing
the Plan. In order to implement this recommendation of the Plan, Design Assistance
Program was funded in 1996 by the General Fund of the City in the amount of $10,000.
These funds have been included in the Advance Planning 1996 Budget. The Landmark
Preservation Commission recommended the program with its procedures and implementation
on February 27, 1996.
According to the Plan, the Design Assistance Program is intended to "encourage private
sector preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources." Design assistance, using pre -
qualified and trained professionals would be provided by the City, free of charge, to locally
designated landmarks or contributing buildings in a locally designated landmark district. The
Program should result in improving the level and quality of information with which the
Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) reviews regular design and state tax credit
applications, reducing the need for the LPC to design projects during hearings, serving as an
incentive for property owners considering local landmark designation, and serving as a
natural adjunct to the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program by providing design assistance
for projects presented to the City for grant approval.
26. Resolution 96-59 Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enter into a Contract with the Boys '
and Girls Clubs of Larimer County to Provide Educational Personal Growth and Recreation
Programs for Youth of Ages 8 to 18 as an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process.
The Boys and Girls Club, formerly the Youth Activities Center (YAC), has been in existence
since October, 1986. In 1988, the City entered into a services agreement with YAC to
provide recreational and social services to youth ages 12 to 18. On November 20, 1990 City
Council adopted Resolution 90-166 approving a service contract with AYC for teen/youth
services as an exception to the competitive process and increasing funding to $60,000
starting in 1991. Boys and Girls Club has received the same funding since that date.
The Boys and Girls Club provides a game room which offers social and recreation
opportunities such as pool, ping pong, foosball, music and dances at least thirty-three (33)
hours per week during the school year and forty-eight (480 hours during the summer. Hours
are to be posted at the center. They also provide 324 hours of a program entitled
"Adventures for Youth". These are activities held away from the Center and Scheduled
seasonally.
27. Resolution 96-60 Making Appointments to the Affordable Housing Board and the Planning
and Zoning Board.
240 '
May 7, /996
' A vacancy currently exists on the Affordable Housing Board due to the resignation of Christa
Sarrazin. In addition, 3 vacancies will occur on June 30 when the terms of several members
expire. Council recently recruited applications for the annual appointment process and
Councilmembers Janett and Smith interviewed applicants for the Affordable Housing Board
on April 23.
Due to the limited number of applications received, the interview team has requested that
staff readvertise the Affordable Housing Board. The remaining vacancy will be filled along
with other annual appointments in June.
Vacancies also exist on the Planning and Zoning Board due to the resignations of Jennifer
Mickelsen and Lloyd Walker. An additional vacancy will occur on June 30 when Bernie
Strom's term expires. Applications were solicited during the annual recruitment process in
addition to a special advertisement for the Planning and Zoning Board.
28. Resolution 96-61 Endorsing the Nomination of Ron Phillips to the Board of Directors of the
Colorado Municipal League.
The Resolution formally endorses the nomination of Ron Phillips to the Colorado Municipal
League Board of Directors.
City Council has expressed its strong support in nominating Ron Phillips to the Board of
Directors of the Colorado Municipal League.
29. Routine Deeds and Easements.
A. Powerline Easement from Terrell and Beverly Juhl, 504 North Loomis, needed to
underground existing overhead electric services.
Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
Consideration and approval of the regular meeting minutes of March 5 March 19 and April
2. and the adjourned meeting minutes of March 5 and March 26, 1996.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 44. 1996, Authorizing the Sale of Real Property Known
as Lot 1. Super Block Property.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No 45, 1996 Amending Chapter 1 of the "Design Criteria and
Standards For Streets" dated July, 1986 Pertaining to Pedestrian Ramp Standards
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No 46 1996 Appropriating Reserves in the General Fund for
Police Seizure Activity.
I
241
May 7, 1996
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No 47 1996 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue for the
HOME Program.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 48, 1996. Authorizing the Transfer of a Tract of Land
Along the Foothills Regional Drainage Channel
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 49. 1996. Approving the Terms of a Sublease Agreement
for a Portion of 405 Canyon Avenue to the State Board of Agriculture.
35. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 52, 1996. Rezoning Approximately 140.1 Acres from the
T. Transition District to the I-L Light Industrial District with a P.U.D. Condition This
Rezoning Is Known as the Country Club Farms Rezoning
Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No 53 1996 Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins
General Obligation Refunding Bonds in the Amount of $2,180,000 for the Purpose of
Refunding and Providing for the Payment Of and Refinancing At a Lower Interest Rate
Certain Outstanding Special Assessment Refunding and Improvement Bonds of the City and
Providing for the Levy of Ad Valorem Taxes To Pay the Principal of and Interest on the
Bond.
15.
First Reading of
Ordinance No
54 1996 Amending Several Sections of Article XII of
Chanter 26 of the
Code of the City
of Fort Collins Relating to the Billing Procedures of City
Utilities,
16.
First Reading of Ordinance
No.
55, 1996. Amending Chapter 3'of the City Code Relating
Alcoholic Beverages,
17.
First Reading of Ordinance
No
56 . 1996, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General
Fund.
18.
First Reading of
Ordinance No.
57, 1996, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue from the
Federal Surface Transportation
Urban Fund.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 1996, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Deed of .
Conveyance for the Exchange of a Portion of Tract B Cedar Village First Filing to John L.
and Carolyn B. Bloomberg for That Portion of Lot 90. Cedar Village, First Filing Needed for
the Drake Road Widening and Spring Creek Improvement Project.
20. First Reading of Ordinance No 59, 1996 Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Lease to The
242
1
May 7, 1996
' Poudre Landmarks Foundation the City's Historic Water Works Property located at 2005
North Overland Trail.
34. Items Relating to Camera -Radar and Red -Light Camera Enforcement Systems.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 60, 1996, Relating to Camera -Radar Speed
Enforcement Under the "Model Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities," 1977
Edition.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 61, 1996, Relating to the Enforcement of Red-light
Violations Under Section 15-5(c) of the "Model Traffic Code for Colorado
Municipalities," 1977 Edition, by the Use of Automated Red -Light Camera
Enforcement Systems.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 1996, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in
the General Fund for Camera Radar and Red -Light Cameras to Enforce Traffic
Violations.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt and
approve all items on the Consent Calendar, except Item No. 22, Resolution 96-55 Approving the Air
Quality Action Plan Update for 1996-1998. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt,
Janett, Kneeland, McCloskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Staff Reports
Deputy City Manager Diane Jones gave an update on the youth convocation that the City is
participating in and planning. She spoke of the concept of student convocation that was initiated by
Mayor Azari and Amy Scott of ASCSU. The event will take place sometime this fall and would be
'focused on the youth and student leaders of the community. The event would provide a way for
them to be recognized for their leadership efforts and for them to be mentored by people in the
community.
Ann Turnquist, Council Policy Analyst, gave an update on the Council's Policy Agenda. She stated
considerable progress has been made on the major projects and added 28 of the approximately 70
projects have been completed. Thirteen of the projects are on schedule, 9 are on -going, and 18 have
had project schedule revision but still are on target to be completed by the end of the two-year
planning cycle. She stated six new projects have been added to the Policy Agenda and three of the
six are complete.
City Manager Fischbach reported on status of private sector composting opportunities. He stated
243
May 7, 1996
Roger Hageman on East Prospect has agreed to take all yard waste materials at no cost and will take
limbs for $2.50/cubic yard.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Smith reported on the Public Access Committee meeting. He stated the Committee
is looking at what the City's information/technology structure needs to look like for some of the
capital assets that are being developed. He reported that the Metropolitan Planning Organization is
looking at passenger rail corridors, regional impact fees, and the funding for the I-25/Highway 14
intersection improvement project.
Councilmember Apt stated the Regional Cities Elected Officials group is supportive of front range
rail transportation. He stated the Growth Management Committee is discussing street standards and
City Plan implementation.
Councilmember McCluskey reported the Finance Committee is studying the City sales tax
exemption policy, revenue projections and budget issues for 1997, and has looked at several tax
increment financing proposals.
Councilmember Kneeland reported on the Health and Safety Committee meeting and stated the
Committee has asked staff to prepare some options for restricting youth access to tobacco products.
The Committee reviewed Police Services' "use of force" policy. The Poudre R- I Liaison Committee
has looked at the Partnership Land Use System (PLUS) that Larimer County is going through and
has requested that the school district be included in the PLUS process in a more formal way.
Councilmember Janett called attention to a Consent Agenda item approving a lease for the City's
historic waterworks building on Overland Trail. The building will be used as an interpretive
museum by the Landmark Preservation Foundation and will house the Rocky Mountain Raptor
Society that cares for injured raptors. She commended Police Services for good police work in
apprehending the suspects in the downtown mugging issues and in solving the Susan Dahl case.
Appeal of the March 6, 1996 Decision of the
Planning and Zoning Board Approving, With Conditions,
Siena Final PUD P&Z Board Decision Upheld.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On March 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Board approved, with conditions, Siena Final PUD
The request consisted of 116 single.family lots on 28.26 acres located on the south side of West
Elizabeth Street at Rocky Road. The property is zoned R-L, Low Density Residential. '
244
May 7, 1996
' On March 21, 1996, a Notice of Appeal was received by the City Clerk's Office. On April 11, an
Amended Notice of Appeal was received. In the Amended Notice of Appeal it is alleged that:
The Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter.
The Board failed to hold a fair hearing by considering evidence that was substantially false
or grossly misleading.
The attached documents include the Notice of Appeal and the Planning Department's summary of
the Board's action in response to the appeal. Also attached is the Planning Department Staff Report
that was received by the Planning and Zoning Board as part of the information packet. In addition,
minutes of the March 6, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing are included. Video tapes of the
hearing have been made available through the City Manager's Office.
The procedures for considering and deciding the Appeal are described in Chapter 2, Article II,
Division 3 of the City Code. "
City Attorney Roy explained the nature of the appeal process and the alternatives available to
Council.
Ted Shepard, Senior Planner and Project Planner, gave the staff presentation. He presented slides
of the site.
Councilmember Smith asked about the long term plan for the portion of West Elizabeth abutting the
project. He asked about the average daily traffic volume.
Shepard responded that there is no long term capital plan to improve West Elizabeth. It will be
improved on an incremental basis by the abutting developing properties. The long term street plan
stated West Elizabeth will be a minor arterial west of the commercial area along Taft Hill Rd. It will
transition to an arterial near King Soopers.
Sherri Wamhoff, Civil Engineer, clarified that the width of West Elizabeth is two lanes although
along portions of it, the road is wide enough to park on the south side. This development will
continue the curb and gutter on the south side.
Eric Bracke, Traffic Engineer, responded that West Elizabeth currently carries about 4,500 vehicles
per day.
Judy Harrington, 2613 Flintridge PI., appellant, stated she was appealing the P&Z Board decision
because she believed this development would be detrimental to her neighborhood. It would increase
traffic, conflict with the character of the neighborhood, destroy the open feeling of the park, and
1 245
May 7, 1996
needlessly interfere with residents' enjoyment of the park for this summer and several summers to '
come. She asked that the project be denied outright and the developer advised to bring back a plan
that is more in keeping with the values of the neighbors. If the project is not denied, she asked
Council to reduce the impact it will have on the neighborhood by reducing the number of houses,
restricting the access at Deerfield, requiring a buffer between the houses and the park, limiting house
heights to one and one-half stories, and preventing the developer from disturbing the detention pond.
Robert Clark, 2613 Flintridge Pl., expressed concern about the lack of adequate screening and
buffering to separate the proposed development from the existing public recreation areas.
Dennis Stenson, Happy Heart Farms, 2820 W. Elizabeth, opposed the project.
John Minatta, 2037 Lexington Ct., representing the Minatta Family Partnership, gave the history of
the site. He stated he had decided against developing the infill property under the City's use by right
entitlement and to instead attempt some creative ideas that would improve the design, quality and
character of the development. He described the architectural features proposed, addressed traffic
concerns, and spoke of street and sidewalk plans. He addressed wetland and landscaping concerns.
Doug Kindsfather, adjacent property owner, supported the Minatta family proposal and urged
Council approval.
Rebuttal:
Appellants:
Judy Harrington, 2613 Flintridge PI., expressed traffic concerns about the intersection of Clearview
and Deerfield. She spoke of the wetlands and of the landscaping requirements.
Robert Clark, 2613 Flintridge Pl., expressed concern about the P&Z process and stated the issues
of the neighborhood had not been heard and addressed.
Dan Alberts, Deerfield Drive resident, expressed concern about the traffic study. He stated the
traffic flow had been underestimated.
Erin Bishop, 1006 Timber Lane, asked that there be a guarantee with regard to the distance of the
homes from the trail.
246 1
May 7, 1996
I
Developer:
John Minatta, 2037 Lexington Ct., spoke of the number of students in the proposed project. He
stated it will stabilize declining enrollments at Bennett and Irish schools. He stated he was open to
developing a better buffering situation.
Cindy Minatta, 2037 Lexington Ct., spoke of the importance of not disturbing nature. She stated the
Partnership has taken major measures to accomplish this with the project.
Al Minatta, 1313 Fairway Five Dr., spoke of the Partnership's attempts to accommodate the
neighborhood and to meet staff requirements.
Councilmember McCluskey asked about projections for traffic and signage near the project.
Traffic Engineer Eric Bracke stated the intersection control at Deerfield and Clearview will be a
three-way stop. He stated West Elizabeth will be a minor arterial intended to carry between 5,000
and 15,000 vehicles per day which is within the City's acceptable standards. The intersection at Taft
Hill and Elizabeth is operating at level of service C and is projected to operate at level of service D.
He stated he believed the traffic study was reasonable in its assumptions.
Councilmember Smith expressed safety concerns about West Elizabeth between Taft Hill and
Overland Trail. He stated that although it is within the acceptable trips per day, he was concerned
about intersection treatment along the stretch.
Bracke stated there will be stop sign controlled intersections with auxiliary left turn lanes on West
Elizabeth.
John Minatta addressed Councilmember concerns relating to lot size, set backs, and the amount of
buffering and landscaping.
Councilmember Janett asked where the conditions imposed by the P&Z Board, the stop sign and
Clearview and Deerfield and the landscaping condition, will appear.
Shepard responded that the landscaping condition would be part of the PUD and the stop sign would
be a requirement of the utility plans and the development agreement.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, that a fair
hearing was held and that the P&Z Board followed the rules and regulations designated for its
hearing process. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland,
McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
1
247
May 7, 1996
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to uphold the '
decision of the P&Z Board and to find that the Board did properly interpret and apply the relevant
provisions of the Code.
Councilmember Apt suggested a friendly amendment to Councilmember McCluskey's motion, to
include as conditions: that the houses along the storm drainage area be required to have a 30 ft.
setback from the rear property line; and that the developer provide two additional trees in addition
to the one tree to be furnished by the Parks and Recreation Division; and that the developer provide
foundation plantings.
Councilmembers McCluskey and Kneeland agreed to the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Smith stated he would not support the motion. He stated he believed one last
opportunity to have neighbors talk in general about design, site plan modifications and access had
been missed. One more iteration might have made the difference.
The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion to uphold the decision of the P&Z Board was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Wanner. Nays:
Councilmember Smith.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Camera -Radar and '
Red -Light Camera Enforcement Systems, Adopted.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Financial Impact
After conducting a competitive bid process, American Traffic Systems ("ATS") has been selected
to be the City's contractor to provide camera radar and red-light camera services for the
enforcement of traffic violations, assuming of course that the Council adopts these Ordinances. A
contract is currently being negotiated with ATS concerning the provision of such services. As part
of this contract, ATS would provide one camera radar unit and two red-light camera systems and
all the necessary equipment and supplies including hardware, software, a vehicle complete with
mobile speed camera equipment, film, printing of violation notices, court materials, routine
maintenance and cleaning of the equipment, necessary training, expert witnesses for court hearings,
monthly reports, and the costs of mailing violation notices and serving citations. Additionally, an
ATS employee, in a local office, would match license plates to vehicle registrations, send out
violation notices and citations, and electronically forward all violation information to the Municipal
Court. ATS will also provide public relations and education services totaling $10,000 to help the
City highlight the speeding traffic enforcement problems in Fort Collins and the effectiveness of '
248
May 7, 1996
cameral radar and red-light camera systems. The contract period is for one year and may be
extended for two additional one-year periods.
Asa condition of this contract, the City would pay ATS during the first year of the contract a fee of
$25 for each speeding ticket and $35 for each red-light violation generated by a camera radar or
a red-light camera system AND paid to the City. The City would only reimburse ATS for violations
with a final disposition, meaning those tickets paid and those tickets for which the violator is found
guilty, but the fine is suspended or not imposed by the court; not simply those tickets generated.
This arrangement ensures that the program is self -funded from violations and would not require City
funds to subsidize the costs to operate the program.
Based upon the number of present violations and corresponding fine amounts, we anticipate that
the fines for traffic citations that will be issued from camera radar and red-light camera systems
may total approximately $600,000 annually in unanticipated revenue. This would be offset by an
estimated contract payment of approximately $400,000 annually to ATS. Additional funds of
$27,000 would need to be appropriated in the Municipal Court budget to hire a contractual
municipal court clerk to handle the increased work load that will residt from the use of camera
radar and red-light camera systems. The impacts on the Municipal Court clerk and the court
prosecutors have been estimated. Once local experience is gathered, enhanced workload demands
may be identified and additional support may be requested.
Executive Summary
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 60, 1996, Relating to Camera -Radar Speed Enforcement
Under the "Model Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities, " 1977 Edition.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 61, 1996, Relating to the Enforcement of Red-light
Violations Under Section 15-5(c) of the "Model Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities, "
1977 Edition, by the Use of Automated Red -Light Camera Enforcement Systems.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 1996 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Use of Camera Radar and Red -Light Cameras to Enforce Traffic
Violations.
Over 3,400 citizens have been injured and twenty-three individuals have lost their lives in the more
than 25,000 traffic crashes that have been reported in Fort Collins since 1990. Last year over 4,700
traffic crashes were reported in Fort Collins, a number the community is not proud of. Traffic
crashes don't just happen, they are caused. And vehicle speeds are a contributing factor to crashes
and their severity.
The Police Service's Traffic Unit has tried several approaches to achieve a reduction in the number
and severity of automobile crashes. These approaches have included the more traditional
1 249
May 7, 1996
enforcement method of issuing more tickets and education through the use of the SMART trailer, to '
the more creative approaches of using the "lawn chair" radar officer. Unfortunately, the results are
not encouraging. The fact is we have been unsuccessful in changing the behavior of the motoring
public.
Approval of the Resolution and Ordinances would allow the City to utilize camera -radar and red-
light camera systems, a not -so -new (but new to Fort Collins) technology as a tool to address the
problem of excessive speeding and red-light violations in our community, ultimately making our
streets safer for all users.
BACKGROUND:
In the last 5 years, the average annual increase in the number of traffic crashes, and in particular -
injury accidents, has out -paced the average annual rate of population growth as well as the average
daily traffic. Since 1990, total crashes have increase by 15%, population by 14%, and injury
accidents by 43% (see attached charts and graphs). As the number of traffic crashes continues to
grow, both citizens and City Councilmembers are asking that something be done.
How can we reduce the accident rate and make our streets safer for all users - vehicles, bicycles,
and pedestrians? By reducing vehicle speeds.
To accomplish this, several Fort Collins City Councilmembers have asked Fort Collins Police
Services to look at new tools and technologies, such as camera radar, to help reduce excessive
vehicle speeding and red light violations. In addition to exploring camera radar, the Traffic
Engineering Department is using or considering several other tools, such as retiming the traffic
signals to improve traffic progression, posting progression speeds on certain streets, and using
pavement markings to remind motorists of the posted speed limits, as well as other more traditional
traffic -calming devices, to help control speeding.
What Are Camera Radar and Red -Light Cameras?
"Camera radar" is a not -so -new technology (used since 1971 in other countries) which combines
a camera, a radar unit and a computer set up in the back of a police -attended utility vehicle to track
motorists' speeds, take photographs of speeding drivers and their licenses plates, and generate
citations that will be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. Camera radar is an attended
mobile unit that an officer moves from one location to another to monitor vehicle speeds. It is used
to target excessive speeding and ONLY photographs vehicles that exceed a designated speed above
the posted speed limit. A red-light camera radar system, used at high -accident intersections, works
similarly to camera radar and ONLY photographs those vehicles that enter the intersection on a red
light. If you drive the speed limit and do not run red lights at traffic signals, you and your vehicle
will NOT be photographed.
250
May 7, 1996
The Goal of Camera Radar and Red -Light Cameras:
The goal in using camera radar and red-light cameras is simply to reduce the number and severity
of traffic crashes and reduce the total number of injury accidents.
In order to accomplish the above -mentioned goal, a comprehensive program utilizing several tools
is necessary. The components include:
• looking at new tools and technologies, such as camera radar, to reduce excessive speeding
and red light violations,
• continued use of the SMART trailer,
• partnering with Traffic Engineering for the use of traffic -calming tools, such as:
traffic signal progression timings,
posting progression speeds for motorists' awareness,
painting speed limits on the pavement for motorist awareness,
using design features, when appropriate, to calm traffic, and
sharing data to identify problem areas and potential solutions, and
• educating citizens on the problem and our progress in reducing accidents.
Internal Analysis:
' To understand the project complexities and potential implementation impacts, a cross junctional task
team was formed to address the issues. Members of the team consist of representatives from the City
Attorney's office, Traffic Engineering, Municipal Court, Purchasing, and Police Services (patrol and
records). This group has been meeting since September to become familiar with camera radar and
red-light cainera capabilities/operations, identify issues, and develop countermeasures to overcome
potential obstacles. Some of the issues included the need for new ordinances allowing the use of
camera -radar and red-light camera systems, the impact of the systems on the Municipal Court and
court prosecutors' case loads, the integration of the data into both police records and Municipal
Court computer systems, and data sharing/coordination with Traffic Engineering.
After much discussion and research, it was determined that at least one (1) additional municipal
court clerk would be needed at this time to handle the increased work load generated by these traffic
enforcement systems. Once local experience on the impacts of camera radar on the court system
are realized, additional court support may be needed. The court prosecutors believe they can
absorb the impact at this time, but if the prosecutors' case load becomes excessive, the City
Attorney's Office may also have to add staff resources. The additional municipal court clerk
position would be contractual and be paid from the anticipated revenues generated from the use of
these traffic enforcement systems.
251
May 7, 1996
Public Process:
In addition to the internal analysis, since late summer Police Services has hosted or attended
approximately 25 public and neighborhood camera radar demonstrations, open houses, and service
club/group presentations designed to gather public input. Police Services has also demonstrated
camera radar at the Foothills Fashion mall, conducted media interviews, prepared press releases,
and utilized Channel 27 and Police Beat. Most citizens we have spoken with are concerned about
excessive speeding and the blatant running of red lights and believe these behaviors are unsafe.
While there is a basic apprehension about what traffic enforcement systems do and do not do, once
people have had a chance to observe camera radar and ask questions, most support its use and want
the City to pursue it. Recently, an informational item on camera radar was posted in the news group
on Foruiet.
Why Consider Camera Radar?
• Safer Streets & School Zones: camera radar reduces speeding which affects the number and
severity of traffic crashes. U. S. communities (i.e. Paradise Valley, AZ., West Valley, UT)
using camera radar have experienced a 40 to 50% reduction in the number of accidents
within a 2 to 4 year period.
• Fewer Speeders: streets may be safer as the perception of enforcement is increased.
• Reduces Speed -Related Fatalities by Lowering Overall Traffic Speeds.
• Enforces Traffic Laws Without Discrimination: everyone is treated equally and only
violators are photographed.
• Puts The Cost Of The Program On The Violator, Not Taxpayers: the cost of camera radar
is paid entirely by tickets issued to violators.
• Has The Potential To Lower Insurance Costs: camera radar usage could result in lower
average insurance costs for safe drivers or at least delay cost increases. Additional savings
may be realized due to decrease in property damage and crash -related injury.
• Offers Scorings For The Community: fewer accidents mean fewer fire and police call -outs
which drastically reduces the costs for accident investigation and clean-up. This translates
to more resources available for other community needs.
• Increases Safety For All: patrol officers using camera radar versus standard radar increase
roadway safety as no high speed pursuits occur, officer/violator confrontations are
eliminated, and traffic congestion is reduced since violators are not stopped.
Pros and Cons of Camera Radar:
Pros:
Cost Effective:
• One camera radar equals several traffic officers
• minimal cost to the City
• completely funded by violators, not taxpayers
252
I
1
Court
Cons:
May 7, 1996
• reduces call -outs and reports
Accident Reductions:
• Some cities such as West Valley, UT and Paradise Valley, AZ have realized
a 40 to 50% reduction in traffic crashes within 2 to 4 years after
implementing camera radar.
• potential to lower insurance rates or delay cost increases
• property, injury and fatality reductions realized
• accident reduction results in patrol time savings
Equitable Enforcement:
• everyone is treated equally and only violators are photographed
• good image for Fort Collins
Increases Safety For All:
• no high speed pursuits occur to catch violator
• officer/violator confrontations are eliminated
• traffic congestion reduced since violators are not stopped
• school zones and local streets are safer as speeding is reduced
• reduces fatalities by lowering overall traffic speeds
Better Police Protection:
• technology frees officers to concentrate on other serious crime prevention,
DUI enforcement, and neighborhood patrol.
Public/Private Partnership
Driver Only Photographed (passengers' pictures punched out)
Data Gathering Capabilities for Traffic Engineering, Traffic Enforcement & Municipal
Portable, Easy To Move
Computerized Data Download (state-of-the-art concept)
Red -Light Violation Capabilities
Personal Contact Removed
"Big Brother Watching" a concept reinforced
Do Not Catch Other Violations:
• driving under suspension, DUIs, no insurance, outstanding warrants
Privacy Issue
Ticket Initially Issued To Vehicle Owner, Not Necessarily Violator
Wrong Image For Fort Collins
Camera Radar and Red -Light Cameras - Commonly Asked Questions. Comments and Answers:
Q Would the City buy, lease the equipment, or contract with a company to provide
the equipment and services?
A The equipment is costly. Consequently, the City is looking to contract with a private
253
May 7, 1996
company to provide the equipment, software, etc. I
Q How many can we get?
A Depends upon the individual community needs, often governed by geography.
Q Does camera radar reduce the number of police officers?
A No, it allows officers to be deployed elsewhere.
Q What is the tolerance level for speeding? Is camera radar set exactly on the speed
limit or is it set at a designated speed above the posted limit?
A Camera radar is used to target excessive speeding. Each community's police
department determines the amount of speed above posted limit that will he tolerated.
Q Is there much vandalism of the units and if so, how is it dealt with?
A A camera radar unit is attended by an officer and therefore not unattractive target
for vandalism. The stationary red-light cameras are pole mounted, generally 13 feet
high, receiving no more vandalism than other traffic control devices.
Q How are fines set and how much of the fine goes to the service provider and the
City?
A The traffic violation fine is set by the court. The service provider has a set fee for
service on each ticket collected. Anything collected in excess of the set fee and cost '
of the program goes into the City's General Fund. The goal of the program is to
reduce traffic crashes, not to generate revenue.
Q How long does it take to set up a camera -radar system?
A Five minutes or less.
Q How many communities use camera radar?
A Thousands. It is used in 75 countries and 200 U.S. cities are considering or have
implemented it.
Q Could the system be operated by a community service officer, rather than by a
police officer?
Yes.
Q Is camera radar recognized by radar detectors?
A Not necessarily. The camera radar beam is so narrow and focused that the motor
vehicle is in the beam and tagged before radar detectors are activated.
Q Is there a surcharge on top of the ticket?
A No. However, in Fort Collins Municipal Court, if the ticket is contested and upheld,
254 1
May 7, 1996
an administrative court fee is assessed, but this fee is imposed on all traffic tickets.
Q Does Police Services have access to the funds generated by camera radar tickets?
A The ticket revenues go into the City's General Fund which requires City Council to
pass an ordinance appropriating the funds for specifically designated uses.
Q Does the City buy or lease the equipment from the service provider?
A Neither. The camera radar and red-light camera systems would be handled as a
service contract.
Q Can the pole mounted red-light cameras be easily moved as motorists will quickly
catch on to their locations?
A Yes, they can be moved, however, it is recommended that stationary boxes be
installed at key intersections and the location of the camera be rotated from one
location to another. That way, motorists will always see the box but will not know
whether the camera is operational inside.
Q Since the violations are mailed, won't it be easy to disregard and ignore the notice
without consequences?
A Service providers are very committed to the enforcement of the citations issued.
Overdue notices will be issued if the citations is not acknowledged (paid or
contested) and may be followed up by personal service, if necessary.
Q Are there health risks associated with the operation1scanning of the radar beam?
A A low power, directed radar beam of less than 2.5 milliwatts is used and does not
pose a health hazard.
Q Who will be in charge of all the information gathered ?
A No lists are generated by the service provider, nothing is sold to airy company and
the data is destroyed afterwards. The Court will keep records based upon its current
standards.
Q Who is allowed to view the photo of the driver once the ticket arrives in the mail
and how will the driver/registered owner know who was driving and therefore
responsible for the violation?
A The photo will be on file with the Municipal Court and may be viewed by the
registered owner. The photo is considered part of the public record. Any passenger's
picture is blocked out. The photo is NOT mailed with the violation notice. The
driver of the vehicle will know that his or her picture was taken at the time the
violation occurred as the flash is noticeable.
Q Who is actually being accused, the driver or the vehicle owner?
255
May 7, 1996
A The registered owner of the vehicle will be presumed to be the driver of the vehicle. ,
However, this presumption can be rebutted by the vehicle owner. In fact, the
photograph will in most cases be conclusive proof of whether the registered owner
was the driver of the vehicle. If the driver photographed is not the registered owner,
the citation issued to the registered owner will have to be dismissed. Speeding
violations and red-light violations are civil traffic infractions and the violator is not
charged with a crime.
Q How many communities/states presently use camera radar?
A Colorado -0-; Arizona -1-; Utah -several; California - several; Alaska -several.
Several Front Range Colorado communities are actively pursuing the use of camera
radar systems.
Q Fort Collins has a lot of out-of-state plates with the university here. How will this
affect the system?
A The service provider has access to all states' motor vehicle information and out-of-
state vehicles will be handled the same as in -state.
Q Has there been any trouble or complaints with the camera's flash bulb blinding
drivers at night?
A No. The angle of the flash is positioned so as not to interfere with the driver's
visibility. I
Comments Received From Camera Radar Open House and Demonstrations:
In Favor Of:
• You answered my questions, thank you.
• This is a cost effective method of reducing traffic crashes and the cost to the community these
crashes incur. 1'd like to see a continuance of alternative methods of enforcement - red light
cameras, etc.
• I think it would help to reduce speed/or adhere to speed limits.
•Safi= would be the main reason! Why do we have posted speed limits, and the limits are
ignored by so many drivers? There isn't adequate law enforcement for speeding. People are
driving 10+ mph over the posted speed limit. When 1 drive the posted speed limit, other
drivers go around me - they follow too closely on my bumper and then whip around me going
over the speed limit. The traffic in this city is getting worse - it is necessary to do something
for sae ! The homeowners on Faraday Circle have signed a petition to have the speed limit
lowered on Horsetooth from Lemay to Timberline. We are living adjacent to a street,
Horsetooth, which will have increased bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle traffic clue to Fort
256
May 7, 1996
' Collins high school opening in a few days. The speed limit on Horsetooth Road begins as
35 mph at College going east and increases to 40 at Warren Park near Lemay. This is a
reason for many motorists to speed, traveling over 50 mph! (From Lemay to Timberline on
Horsetooth) Horsetooth Road from Lemay to Timberline would be a good test site for this
Photo Radar with the increased traffic on this road. Sa e -for the children using the park
and the teenagers attending the high school.
• The morning after that photo and story appeared in the Coloradoan, I noticed a marked
lowering of the average speed on Lemay, etc. Wonderful! I would prefer to keep to the posted
limit! Station the camera in two different spots daily - get the paper to publish the "where"
each clay after. It will work! "Red light" camera? This is needed!!
• Our street has become unsafe due to heavy use by people who don't obey traffic laws -
anything to slow people clown and keep our children safe.
• For example - last week I was passed on Swallow for only going 25 mph - the driver of the
car nearly hit a kid on a bike - something must be done!
• . It's obvious that a great portion of the public refuses to obey the speed "limits" which are
obviously in our best interest. The old saying "Haste makes waste" applies here also. The
disregard of safe speeds only adds to out everyday stress, causes "noise pollution ", puts
' people on edge, robs its all of our "peace " in our neighborhoods, safetyfor our children and
elderly (all of its actually) and in general does not benefit those themselves. Those who live
a 'fast" life need to slow down, relax and take note of what their hurriedness really
accomplishes - not much in a positive way. They need to plan their schedules a little better
so they don't need to feel they have to hurry all the time. What ever the reason for their
"speeding", it isn't necessary.
Safety/Speeding reduction. Fort Collins needs to slow down its traffic flow. Also think funds
generated for the City'by Camera Radar should go into Police Dept. Funds, not the general
fund. We need more Police Dept. funding.
With average 20-30 accidents a day - speeding form 10-20 mph above posted speeds. We
need a mandatory defensive driving course, cost paid by each driver before they can obtain
a drivers license, and absolute proof of insurance. Absolutely no warning tickets, but fines -
for each action. Also parking on sidewalks and blocking driveways in residential
neighborhoods. Going through stop signs.
Frees up police officers to fight crime. Parents need to take more responsibility for both
children and teenagers.
Speeding is seriously out of control in Fort Collins. (Not the only place in the USA!)
1 257
May 7, 1996
• Safety and peace of mind!
• To allow "expansion" of the patrol departments capabilities to combat speeding within the
existing budget framework.
• It's time something should be done to slow down the traffic in Fort Collins especially on
College Avenue, the school zones, and the hospital zone. Also it may have to come to no left
turn on College at the major intersections between 4 to 5:30 PM to keep traffic flow moving
at the posted speed.
• Photo radar. Do it! We need it!
• Reduce Speeding. We have young children and are concerned about accidents!
• To control speeding.
• 1 think it would cause a lot less accidents & deaths, thus making Ft. Collins a safer/slower
town! I am 20 years old, and think this is a great idea!
• It's safer, better use of police dept's time. And it will gradually send a message --- slow
down in Ft. Collins or pay --- hopefully the fines will be "large" to send the message where I
it hurts --- people's cash!!
• With the rate of accidents increasing 3 to 5% a year, I don't see any alternative but to very
quickly put camera radar to work for us. I see no other solution to the problem. It's
unbelievable that drivers are so thoughtless of others safety. We must simply get to it.
• Positive use of technology without overhead. Tremendous idea!
• The system can reduce risk to our children. The normal speed on W. Stuart is 30 mph,
posted speed is 25 mph. Occasionally, people go 40-50 mph on W. Stuart. This threatens
the lives of our children. The camera radar can reduce this risk.
• Seems to be a "no questions - black & white" type of policing. Picture would be the plus.
• 1 think it would be excellent to lower the amount of accidents that occur. My personal pet
peeve is school zones. I guess because I have children. People especially from out of town
go too fast.
• Anything constructive to help reduce speeds & accidents in our school & residential areas.
WN
May 7, I996
I
If the city is going to enjoy such an increase in income, will someone waste the money or
reduce taxes.
• I feel the benefits far outweigh the drawback of not having one of these setups.
• Would like to see fewer accidents. Would also like to seethe students driving slower and
more carefully.
• Eventually we will train drivers to follow the limits and hopefully save a few lives. This is
a wonderful answer to an age old problem!
• Less accidents! More saved lives.
• We were impressed with the camera radar unit. More officers will be available in areas
where they can do a greater service to our community.
• Less accidents/less death ---- more drunks caught!
Opposed:
• I am opposed to the device because of the lack of accountability between the owner of the
license plate and the actual speed. A shared car is not tracked to the actual driver with this
system. Businesses with mail drivers will be penalized when the actual driver is the only
one at fault. The current speed limits are already inappropriately low in many areas. This
device just creates a speed trap which creates revenue. The real problems of traffic in Fort
Collins are not addressed by this device in any way.
I am opposed to camera surveillance in public places on general principles of personal
freedom.
Freedom, if Europe puts up with the "stuff" they can keep it, we are not part of a police
state! We don't want corporate Big Brother of civic spying.
The automobile has already eroded many of the safeguards enunciated in the Bill of Rights.
Having Photo Radar would be the nail in the coffin of our liberties. I realize speeders need
to be caught, but the present system suffices to do that. We have plenty of police, let them
be on patrol to catch speeders. They lay in wait sufficiently already. The Photo presumes
the driver is guilty. In our judicial system mry accused is presumed innocent. This reverses
the Bill of Rights. The solution is education and cut the use of the automobile.
This is a legal quagmire. Since there are no witnesses to the infraction and no one is
arrested - has a violation occurred, is there no other evidence than a picture?
1
259
• Legal problems, no due process; presumption of guilt.
• Photos are not sent to the accused, so the car owner is responsible to check things out.
Need additional information:
• What calibration is required and how often is it calibrated? (In favor of)
• Only if revenues generated are directly tied to reduction of taxes... if increased revenue
doesn't reduce taxes or have a direct purpose above a baseline decided by the voters, I
oppose this program.
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
TotalMVAs*
4,171
3,792
4,047
4,533
4,583
4,787
Annual %Change
-9.1%
+6.7%
+12%
+1.1 %
+4.5916
Average Annual % of Change
+3.0%
*per FCPS Records Management Division
INJURYACCIDENTS
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Total Injury Accidents*
519
468
489
570
672
744
Annual %Change
-9.8%
+4.5%
+16.69vo
+17.9Yo
+10.7%
Average Annual % of Change
+8.09vo
*per FCPS Records Management Division
260 1
POPULATION
M
=j
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
5
TotalPopulation *
87,758
89,439
91,117
93,181
95,889
99,726
a„
Annual % Change
1.92%
1.88%
2.27%
2.91 %
4.0%
Average Annual % of Change
2.6910
*per Trends document published by Fort Collins Planning Departinent
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
1990 1995 2015
1
w
Average Daily Traffic (ADT)* 1.9 Ind 2.3 nnil 3.25 mil
Average Annual % of Change 3.5%
*per Fort Collins Transportation Department
ECONOMIC COSTS OF TRAFFIC CRASHES
E
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Approximate Total Cost
$10.6 tail
$9.5 mil
$10.0 mil
$11.6 mil
$13.7 rail
$15.1 tail
Injury Crashes*
Approximate Cost
5.5 and
5.0 mil
5.3 toil
6.0 nill
6.0 in il
6.3 mil
Vehicle Crashes* es*
Estimated Total Cost
16.1 mil
14.5 nil
15.3 mil
17.6 mil
19.7 mil
21.4 mil
*Average cost per injury crash - $20,348
*Average cost per vehicle crash - $1,316
Source: Western Insurance I formation Service Cost Statistics for State of
Colorado (1994)"
Police Chief Fred Rainguet spoke of the involvement of the various departments and agencies in
getting these systems implemented. He stated that although this technology is new to Fort Collins,
it has been around for some time. He stated it is a new and creative way to address an issue of
concern to many Fort Collins residents.
1
261
Police Lt. Myron Lloyd, gave the background leading up to the proposed implementation of these
enforcement systems. He presented traffic and accident/injury statistics and explained how the
systems operate and will be implemented.
Adam Tueten, American Traffic Systems, answered questions posed by Councilmembers and
relating to system operation details.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance
No. 60, 1996, on First Reading.
The following persons spoke on this issue:
Jeff Bridges, 725 Mathews, supported the implementation of camera -radar and red-light camera
enforcement systems.
David Gallup, 1412 Pikes Peak Ave., supported the systems.
Mike Long, 1718 W. Stuart, supported the enforcement systems and spoke of speed concerns on W.
Stuart.
Ginny Baxter, W. Stuart resident, voiced concerns about speeders on W. Stuart and asked that speed
humps be installed.
Carroll Knight, 1725 W. Stuart, spoke of the lack of stop signs and traffic signals between Shields I
and Taft Hill Road on W. Stuart. He suggested stop signs to slow the traffic.
Bev Weiss, 1924 E. Vine, expressed concern about the legal ramifications of implementing the
systems and asked about the actual costs, additional staffing and return to the City if the systems are
implemented.
Chief Rainguet addressed issues raised by the public.
John Duval, Assistant City Attorney, clarified that in the case of tickets issued to drivers of rental
cars, the rental car companies usually have a provision in their agreements that drivers of rental cars
are obligated to pay any tickets received.
Councilmember McCluskey stated he would support the ordinance and added he was persuaded by
the cost effectiveness and the safety factors mentioned.
Councilmember Janett stated she was impressed by the declining rate of injury and accidents in
jurisdictions that have implemented camera radar. She expressed her support and stated it was time
to move forward with technology.
262
Councilmember Smith expressed his support for the systems and spoke of the effects of motor
' vehicle speed on pedestrian injury and death.
Councilmember Kneeland stated she would not be supporting the ordinance. She stated because a
system is efficient does not always mean it is good for the community. She stated she was not
convinced that this is the best technology to use at this time.
Mayor Azari stated she would support the ordinance but expressed concern that these systems not
be viewed as a total problem solver.
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 60, 1996 was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, McCloskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember
Kneeland.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance
No. 61, 1996, on First Reading. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember Kneeland.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt Ordinance
' No. 62, 1996, on First Reading. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember Kneeland.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 52, 1996, Rezoning Approximately 140.1 Acres
from the T, Transition District to the '
I-L, Light Industrial District with a PUD Condition,
Second Reading Postponed to May 21.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On April 16, 1996, the City Council voted 5-2 to approve Ordinance No. 52, 1996 as amended on
First Reading to rezone the property from the T, Transition District to the I-L, Light Industrial
District with a PUD condition. In addition, Mayor Pro -Tent Janett requested that staff research the
potential of placing an additional condition on the zoning which requires any residential
development on this property to have some uninimuan overall average density of greater than 3
dwelling units per acre. Staff has prepared two options for Ordinance No. 52, 1996. Option A of
1
263
Ordinance No. 52, 1996 will only place a PUD condition on the I-L zoning. Option B of Ordinance
No. 52, 1996 will place a PUD condition and a condition requiring a minimum overall average '
residential density of 6 dwelling units per acre on the I-L Zoning. The adoption of either option of
Ordinance No. 52, 1996 does not grant any land use approval for this property. The PUD condition
will require any development proposal on this property to be submitted as a Planned Unit
Development subject to the requirements of the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS).
Adoption of a condition regarding a minimum overall average residential density of 6 dwelling units
per acre (Option B) may not be superseded by a Planned Unit Development (PUD). According to
Section 29-423 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the City Council must change the zoning of
a property in the T zone to another zoning district within 60 days from the date the matter is
considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. Therefore, the property must be rezoned by June 7,
1996.
APPLICANT.- Vaught -Frye Architects
H 13 Stoney Hill Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: Country Club Forms, L.L.C.
c% Vaught -Frye Architects
1113 Stoney Hill Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
BACKGROUND
The current zoning and existing land uses of surrounding properties are as follows: '
N. r-l-p; undeveloped.
b-p; undeveloped.
S: 1, Industrial (County); industrial uses, railroad yard.
O, Open (County); existing mobile home park (Collins Aire Mobile Home Park).
MM (City); undeveloped.
E: FA-1; Plummer School, farming, undeveloped.
W FA-1; farming, undeveloped.
t; undeveloped.
This property was annexed into the City as part of the East Vine Drive 6th Annexation on August
2, 1983 and the East Vine Drive 7th Annexation on August 16, 1983 and was placed in the T,
Transition zoning district.
The T Transition Zone is for properties which are in a transitional stage with regard to ultimate
development. No development is allowed to occur in the "T" Zone. The only uses permitted on
properties in the "T" zone are those uses that existed on the date the property was placed into the
district.
264 1
Petition for Rezoning:
The applicant, Vaught -Frye Architects, on behalf of the owner, Country Club Farms, L.G.C., filed
a rezoning petition with the City Clerk on February 29, 1996. The petitioner requested that the City
rezone approximately 140.1 acres located north of East Vine Drive and west of Summit View Drive
from the T, Transition Zoning District to the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential Zoning
District with a P. U.D. condition. The applicant stated in the rezoning justification that "This request
is to simply prepare the site for development and is not indicative of any specific land use. " Staff
and the Planning and Zoning Board recommended that the property be rezoned to the R-L-P, Low
Density Planned Residential Zoning District with a P. U.D. condition.
First Reading of Ordinance No, 52 1996:
On April 16, 1996, the City Council voted 5-2 to approve Ordinance No. 52, 1996 as amended on
First Reading to rezone the propertyfrom the T, Transition District to the I-L, Light Industrial
District with a P. U.D. In addition, Mayor Pro-Tem Janett requested that staff research the potential
of placing an additional condition on the zoning which requires any residential development on this
property to have some minimum overall average density greater than 3 dwelling units per acre. In
response staff has prepared two options to Ordinance No. 52, 1996.
Option A:
Option A of Ordinance No. 52, 1996 will place the property in the I-L, Light Industrial District with
' a P. U.D. condition. This single condition will require any proposed development of the property
to be submitted as a Planned Unit Development (P. U.D.) subject to the requirements of the Land
Development Guidance System (LDGS). While a P. U.D. condition does not restrict development to
the permitted land uses of the underlying zoning district, I-L zoning is in conformance with a number
of policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Some examples from the City's
Comprehensive Plan are as follows:
From the Goals and Objectives document:
Promote increased development in the north and northeastern areas of the City.
Provide a rational pattern of land use for the older parts of the City which promotes the
integrated redevelopment and development of business, industrial, and residential areas in
the northern and northeastern areas of the City.
Encourage residential, commercial, and industrial development in the northeastern area of
Fort Collins in a manner conducive to the desirable redevelopment of North College Avenue
and the Central City, especially downtown.
The above themes are repeated in the following policies from the Land Use Policies Plan:
1
265
#3a The City shall promote maximum utilization of land within the City.
#19 The City shall establish a project impact system as a growth management tool which '
would cover:
a. Positive and negative environmental impacts;
b. Positive and negative social impacts;
C. Positive and negative economicalffiscal impacts;
d.. Positive and negative impacts on public services and facilities, including
transportation.
(Note: Regardless of the underlving zoning, the P.U.D. condition will require any
proposed land use to be evaluated against the LDGS which is the City's "project
impact system ".)
#39 The City should direct efforts to promote improved traffic and pedestrian circulation
and public transit to areas north and northeast of the City.
(Note: The Transit Development Plan suggests that transit should follow
development. Any proposed development on the site would be required to make
improvements to traffic and pedestrian circulation and would generate a need for
transit.)
#60 Industrial uses should locate near transportation facilities that offer the required ,
access to the industry but will not be allowed to create demands which exceed the
capacity of the existing and future transportation network of the City.
#61 Industrial development should locate within the City or consistent with the phasing
plan for the urban growth area, where the proper sizing of facilities such as water,
sewer and transportation has occurred or is planned. '
If residential development is proposed on the property, the Residential Uses Point Chart of the
LDGS will be used to determine the maximum allowable density for the site. Criterion I of the
Residential Uses Point Chart requires all residential P. U.D.'s of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre to
achieve a minimum of 60 points on Density Chart H. Criterion 2 of the Residential Uses Point
Chart requires a project to earn at least 40 of the minimum 60 points from base points. If the
applicant proposes a density higher than 6 dwelling units per acre, they must achieve more points
on the residential uses point chart. The single, P. U.D. condition will guarantee that any residential
development of the property will have a minimum overall average density between 3 and 6 dwelling
units per acre. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Option A.
266 1
Q12tiQn B:
' Option B of Ordinance No. 52, 1996 will also place the property in the I-L, Light Industrial District
with a P. U.D. condition. In addition, it will require any residential development on the property to
have a minimum overall average density of 6 dwelling units per acre. Adoption of a condition
regarding minimum overall average residential density may not be superseded by a Planned Unit
Development (PUD). Mayor Pro-Tem Janett stated the additional condition is supported by the fact
that the property is located at the corner of two -arterials and will have transit service in the future.
While placing a minimum overall average residential density condition on the property is an option,
several factors should be considered:
All Development Criterion A-1.12 "Residential Density" of the L.D. G.S. already requires
an overall average residential density of at least 3 dwelling units per acre.
2. Site characteristics which may limit the development potential have not been inventoried or
analyzed. Overall average residential density calculations are based on gross acreage of a
development site including any constraining features. If the constraining features are
substantial, the L residential density (calculated using only developable land) could be
significant in order to meet the minimum overall average density. (Example: If 50% of the
site is constrained by wetlands and the overall average residential density niinimmn is 6
dwelling units per acre, the net density may be 12 dwelling units per acre.)
3. A condition requiring a minimum overall average density of greater than 3 dwelling units
per acre further limits opportunities for a developer, City Staff, the Planning and Zoning
Board, or City Council to flexibly respond to neighborhood concerns regarding
compatibility.
4. Staff is not aware of any previous rezoning actions by the City Council that have included
a condition requiring a inininuan overall average density of greater than 3 dwelling units
per acre (maximums, yes, but no minimums).
The additional condition requiring a minimum overall average residential density of greater than
3 dwelling units per acre could be supported by the following policies of the Land Use Policies Plan:
#3d The City shall promote the location of residential development which is close to
employment, recreation, and shopping facilities.
#12 Urban density residential development usually at three or more units to the acre
should be encouraged in the urban growth area.
#41 The City should encourage residential development in the northeast......
1
267
#75 Residential areas should provide for a mix of housing densities.
#78 Residential development should be directed into areas which reinforce the phasing '
plan in the urban growth area.
#80b Higher density residential uses should locate within close proximity to community
or neighborhood park facilities.
#80c Higher density residential uses should locate where water and sewer facilities can
be adequately provided.
#80d Higher density residential uses should locate within easy access to major
employment centers:
#80e Higher density residential uses should locate with access to public transportation.
In addition, the following statements from the adopted Community Vision and Goals 2015 document
could be used to support a condition requiring a minimum overall average density of greater than
3 dwelling units per acre:
Our City will develop in a form that makes comprehensive, convenient, and efficient transit
service possible.
Our neighborhoods will include a variety of housing types to support a diverse population '
and allow people of different ages, cultures, races and incomes to live in each neighborhood.
Our neighborhoods will have the environment, amenities, mix of uses, and housing attributes
to support,a diverse population.
Fort Collins will promote development of well -designed, compatible, high -quality multi-
family developments and accessory homes throughout the community.
Finally, 6 dwelling units per acre is the maximum allowable density for a Planned Unit Development
(P.U.D.) which achieves the minimum sixty percentage points as required by Criteria I of the
Residential Uses Point Chart of the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS).
According to Section 29-423 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the City Council must change
the zoning of a property in the "T" Zone to another zoning district within 60 days from the date the
matter is considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. Therefore, the property must be rezoned
by June 7, 1996. "
Mike Ludwig, City Planner, gave background information and explained the options presented to
Council. He noted Option A will only place a PUD condition on the I-L zoning. Option B will also
place a condition on the I-L zoning and in addition will place condition requiring a minimum overall
average density of six dwelling units per acre. He added the adoption of either option would not
' grant any land use approval on the property. The PUD condition will require any development
proposal to be submitted as a Planned Unit Development subject to the requirements of the LDGS.
The minimum overall average density required by Option B cannot be superseded by a PUD. He
stated staff recommends adoption of Option A.
Councilmember Janett asked how the proposed zoning would address the fact that Vine Drive is to
become a transit route and the concerns about appropriate buffers along the southern part of the
property. She expressed concern that the proposed zoning is not the best for the property.
Ludwig responded that those issues will be addressed in the PUD review process when there is a site
specific development plan in place.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt
Ordinance No. 52, 1996, (Option A) on Second Reading.
Frank Vaught, Vaught -Frye Architects, representing the applicant, stated a density requirement at
this stage seems difficult and perhaps inappropriate. He stated there is no plan to react to and no
plan for staff to review. He spoke of the constraints of the site and stated those constraints will
contribute to any plan evolving for the site and a density arrived at. He suggested it would be
inappropriate to attach a density requirement to the site and stated the applicant is open to discussion.
He urged adoption of Option A.
' Councilmember Janett stated she believed zoning this property I-L would put into place a negative
impact system that gives the City criteria that are short term in nature and site specific to mitigate
the negative impacts of unwanted proposed land uses. She stated the long term policy documents
in place need to be reviewed when zoning categories for a piece of land are identified. She stated
she would not support the ordinance.
Councilmember Kneeland stated the City is bound by the system in place at this time. While the
PUD system has shortcomings, Council should zone this property in order to continue with the PUD
process.
Councilmember Smith stated he would not support the ordinance because in order to look at the
City's long term future, properties in the UGA need to develop to an urban density.
The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 52, 1996, (Option A) on
Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Kneeland and McCluskey. Nays:
Councilmembers Apt, Janett, Smith and Wanner.
THE MOTION FAILED.
269
Councilmember Smith stated he was uncomfortable with certain provisions of Option B and
suggested additional discussion was needed. He suggested the item be postponed. 1
City Attorney Roy stated Ordinance No. 52, 1996, would need to be reconsidered in order to be
postponed to a later date.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to reconsider Ordinance
No. 52, 1996, (Option A) on Second Reading. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to postpone
consideration of the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 52, 1996, until May 21.
Councilmember Smith suggested it may be appropriate to condition the property, when looking at
the net usable acreage, at a level that creates a mixture of uses on the property.
Mayor Azari stated staff needs to develop other options for Council consideration.
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED. '
Resolution 96-55 Approving the
Air Quality Action Plan Update for 1996-1998,
Postponed to May21•
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
The proposed Air Quality Action Plan update is a set of actions to implement the Air Quality Policy
Plan (AQPP), an element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted in March 1993. Adopting the
resolution completes the first biennial review and redirection of the City's air quality programs, as
called far in the AQPP. Once approved by City Council, the Action Plan becomes the basis for staff
work programs and budget recommendations. "
Because of previous commitments of both staff and Councilmembers, staff is recommending that
action on the Air Quality Action Plan be postponed to June 18. Adoption of the Consent Agenda
will postpone this item to June 18.
270 1
Councilmember Apt stated he had 10-12 questions on this item. He suggested that because of the
late hour, the resolution be postponed to give the public an opportunity to participate.
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to postpone the
consideration of Resolution 96-55 to May 21. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Apt asked for a two -page memo on the traffic concerns expressed by the residents
on W. Stuart.
Mayor Azari suggested staff work with Councilmembers Apt and Kneeland with regard to the W.
Stuart concerns and come up with ideas to alleviate the traffic concerns.
Adjournment
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adjourn the
meeting to 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 14, to consider adjourning into Executive Session to discuss
legal matters relating to an adversarial situan
The meeting adjourned at 12:15 a.m.
271