Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-06/20/1989-RegularJune 20, 1989 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, June 20, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Staff Members Present A. Proclamations Re( their efforts in Drs. Murray and P B. Proclamation nam accepted by a DAV Burkett, Krajicek, Roy Citizen Participation representative. C. Proclamation naming July accepted by Cathy Mulcahy, D. Resolution 89-113 Exoress service to the City as Mun expressed his appreciation qualified people. were accept on acme was acceptea Dy ju opportunity to have wo Not uays was rks Month was ir. Tobin for his dge Tobin, who rked with many "Resolution 89-113 of The Council of The City of Fort Collins Expressing Appreciation and Gratitude to John J. Tobin for his Service to The City as Municipal Judge." Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Resolution 89-113. Mayor Winokur commented on the community's appreciation for the 37 years that Judge Tobin had given the City. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 89-113 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Horak out of the room) THE MOTION CARRIED. -312- June 20, 1989 E. A presentation and brief overviaw of 1988 Comprehensive Annual ' Financial Statement (CAFR) was made by City Controller Dave Agee. F. A presentation from the Poudre Fire Authority to Cable 27 staff was made by Poudre Fire Authority representative, Glen Levy who presented the "First Alarm" contest winner media awards to Cable 27 staff members Michael Schultz and Michael Gitter. Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, expressed comments and complaints regarding the trash in the streets. She requested Council take a leadership position and educate the public on solid waste pollution. Brad Edwards, 2828 Cherry Lane, commented on motorized transportation and traffic counters at specific intersections and expressed concern about unnecessary traffic signals. He commented on the extension of the trolley route and spoke against the elimination of center median parking. He commented on the Police Department policy for street blockage in emergency situations. William Kay, 310 Scott Avenue, expressed dissatisfaction about disabled and unregistered vehicles belonging to his neighbor. He stated the vehicles were parked on private property and on the street and asked for legislation to restrict unregistered vehicles on city streets. Agenda Review: City Manager ' Councilmember Kirkpatrick requested Item #16, Nearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 95, 1989, Appropriating Revenue in the Amount of $85,528 to the General Fund for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau Contract (CVB), Cultural Development and Programming Account and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. Tom McKenna, 3500 Rolling Green Drive, asked that Item #12, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 91, 1989 Amending Chapter 24 of the Code of Fort Collins Relating to the Industrial Development Incentive Program, be removed from the Consent Calendar. Consent Calendar This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Agenda Item #25, Pulled Consent Items. 5. -313- June 20, 1989 6. Postponing of Consideration of Items Relating to New Note Partnership ' First Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 40, 1989, Annexing Approximately 149.8 Acres Known as New Note Partnership First Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 41, 1989, Zoning Approximately 149.8 Acres Known as New Note Partnership First Annexation, into the IL Limited Industrial District, with a planned unit development condition. On March 21, Council adopted by a vote of 6-0 Resolution 89-59 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations and also adopted by a vote of 6-0 on First Reading Ordinance No. 40, 1989 and Ordinance No. 41, 1989 annexing and zoning approximately 149.8 acres, located east of Hewlett-Packard and north of Harmony Road. The requested zoning is the IL Limited Industrial District. On April 4 at the request of the petitioner, Council voted 5-0 to postpone consideration of these Ordinances on Second Reading until this date. The petitioner has submitted a letter requesting that the New Note and Koldeway Annexations be continued to August 1. Adoption of the Consent Calendar will postpone consideration of this item until August 1. APPLICANT: New Note Partnership OWNER: Same c/o Jack Blake, Managing Partner P. 0. Box 429 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Postponing of Consideration of Items Relating to New Note Partnership Second Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1989, Annexing Approximately 97 Acres Known as New Note Partnership Second Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1989, Zoning Approximately 97 Acres Known as New Note Partnership Second Annexation, into the IL Limited Industrial District, with a planned unit development condition. On March 21, Council by a vote of 6-0 adopted Resolution 89-60 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations and also adopted on First Reading by a vote of 6-0 Ordinance No. 42, 1989 and Ordinance No. 43, 1989 annexing and zoning approximately 97 acres, located west of I-25 and north of Harmony Road. The requested zoning is the IL Limited Industrial District. t At the request of the petitioner, on April 4,Council voted 5-0 to postpone consideration of these Ordinances on Second Reading until ' this date. The petitioner has submitted a letter requesting that the New Note and Koldeway Annexations be continued to August 1. Adoption -314- June 20, 1989 of the Consent Calendar will postpone consideration of this item until ' August 1. APPLICANT: New Note Partnership OWNER: Same c/o Jack Blake, Managing Partner P. 0. Box 429 Fort Collins, CO 80522 A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1989, Annexing Approximately 8.1 Acres Known as the Koldeway Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1989, Zoning Approximately 8.1 Acres Known as the Koldeway Annexation, into the BP Planned Business District. On March 21, Council unanimously adopted Resolution 89-61 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations and also unanimously adopted on First Reading Ordinance No. 44, 1989 and Ordinance No. 45, 1989 annexing and zoning approximately 8.1 acres, located at the northwest corner of I-25 and Harmony Road. The requested zoning is the BP Planned Business District. At the request of the petitioner, on April 4 Council voted unanimously ' (6-0) to postpone consideration of these Ordinances on Second Reading until this date. The petitioner has submitted a letter requesting that the New Note and Koldeway Annexations be continued to August 1. Adoption of the Consent Calendar will postpone consideration of this item until August 1. APPLICANT: Arthur T. Koldeway OWNER: Same 6229 Co. Rd. 13 Loveland, CO 80537 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 87, 1989, Zoninq Harmony Half Acres Annexation. On May 16, Council unanimously adopted on Second Reading Ordinance No. 81, 1989 annexing Harmony Half Acres and unanimously adopted on First Reading Ordinance No. 87, 1989 zoning Harmony Half Acres. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 30.69 acres located north of Harmony Road and west of Timberline Road. The requested zonings are: (1)30.35 acres of R-E, Estate Residential District; and (2) .34 acres of C, Commercial District with a PUD condition. This is the annexation of an enclave area. The property is presently developed residential with about 30dwelling units and two small businesses. Existing commercial signs located on the property will have to conform ' -315- June 20, 1989 10. to the City's Sign Code at the conclusion of a five year amortization period. APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, makes changes to the R-E Zone, including changing the defined purpose of the district and changing bulk and area requirements of the district in order to eliminate the problem of creating non -conforming lot sizes when the City annexes existing larger lot county subdivisions. The Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, amends the Code of the City of Fort Collins to allow staff review of sign proposals for historic buildings. The Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) has reviewed this matter, and supports the approval of the amendment. 12. Second R Code of Program. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted as amended on First Reading on May 16, amends the Street Oversizing Fund Ordinance to provide an exemption to eligible firms of all or part of the street oversizing fee required of new or expanding developments. The goals of this Industrial Development Incentive Program are to send a message that the City supports a healthy business climate, to influence a firm's decision to locate in Fort Collins, and to shape the quality of economic growth. The program would provide an exemption of the street oversizing fee up to a maximum of $50,000 for an eligible firm. 13. A majority of property owners in the Boardwalk Special Improvement District No. 77 requested that the City refund the bonds issued for the District. The goal was to refinance the cost of the District and extend the amount of time iin which the property owners would pay assessments. Ordinance No. 170, 1988 was enacted by the Council in December of 1988 for the purpose of meeting that goal. Because the assessment payment record for the District was not well established, ' the City purchased the bonds for its own portfolio rather than market them publicly. -316- June 20, 1989 14. 15. 16. Bond Counsel has suggested requested that amendments be made to the ' refunding bond ordinance for Boardwalk SID #77. The changes will identify more precisely the special assessments pledged for the payment of the Boardwalk Special Improvement District No. 77 Special Assessment Refunding Bonds. The amendments should be made prior to the City's sale of the bonds to other investors if and when a decision is made to remove the refunding bonds from the City's investment portfolio. In July of 1986, Council established the Arbor Plaza Special Improvement District No. 88. This SID is located on the West side of College Avenue at Harmony Road. This District was created to finance the public improvements for the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center, P.U.D. In accordance with Chapter 22 of the City Code, the City began the closeout of this district with approval of Resolution 89-100 which accepted the improvements and ordered a notice to be sent to property owners informing them of the assessment. A public hearing date of June 20, 1989 (at the regular City Council meeting) was set to hear any objections from the property owners. All notice requirements have been met. ' This Ordinance places an assessment against each property in the district and outlines the procedure for collection. The assessment amount for each property is listed in the assessment roll and includes the cost of construction, engineering, formation and financing of the district. At the Worksession of May 23, staff presented Council with a number of policy issues associated with implementation of the CHOICES 95 Program. One of the items discussed at that time was the viability of utilizing $160,000 of current capital funding designed for the CHOICES Program to begin some planning, engineering and right-of-way efforts in 1989. Council directed that we bring this ordinance forward to appropriate the funds recommended. Specific appropriations recommended and included in the ordinance are as follows: Senior Center Architectural and Professional Services $ 55,000 Indoor Pool Consultant Services 5,000 Design and Acquisition for Streets/Transportation Projects 100,000 -317- June 20, 1989 Lodging tax receipts for 1988 were estimated to be $194,796 while the actual receipts totalled $208,675. The initial 1989 budget appropriation was calculated from estimated figure while the disbursement is based on the actual 1988 receipts pending the year end audit. This Ordinance, if adopted, would appropriate the additional 1988 Lodging tax receipts in the amount of $13,879 and would be disbursed according to Council's previous direction: Convention and Visitors Bureau 70% $ 9,715 (per current contract through 12/31/89) Cultural Development and Programming 20% 2,776 Maintenance & Mitigation 10% 1,388 $13,879 Additionally, the Cultural Development and Programming Account, and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account must appropriate carry-over funds not allocated in previous years totalling $71,649 as follows: Cultural Development and Programming $27,441 Maintenance & Mitigation Account 44,208 $71,649 17. Items Pertaining to a Transit Services Fund. I" Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 96, 1989, Creating a Transit Services Fund. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 97, 1989, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Transportation Services Fund to the Transit Services Fund. The intent of the Transit Services Fund is to create a separate fund which permits more effective financial management of revenues and expenditures related to the City's transit services. Such a fund is consistent with federal guidelines and requirements for transit systems receiving federal funds. This action also transfers 1989 appropriations of $1,377,546 from the Transportation Services Fund to the newly established Transit Services Fund. These appropriations will lapse at the completion of the related federal grants, consistent with Article V, Section 10 of the City Charter. The Annexation Ordinance for the Jewett Annexation was adopted on October 4, 1988. The Ordinance did not contain the standard clause stating the City's consent to the inclusion of the annexed property -318- June 20, 1989 19. 20. into the Municipal Subdistrict of the Northern Colorado Water I Conservancy District (NCWCD). This Ordinance gives the City's consent for such inclusion, which will allow the NCWCD to petition the court for the inclusion of the Jewett Annexation in the Municipal Subdistrict of NCWCD. The Resolution would authorize the Purchasing Agent to enter into a "Professional Services Agreement" with Robb, Brenner+Brelig, Inc. for the Design Service of the Expansion of the Wood Street Service Center - Phase I and Phase II. In 1974, the City entered into an agreement with the State Board of Agriculture concerning the furnishing of water and sewer service by the City to Colorado State University. Since that time, the agreement has been amended numerous times to adjust service fees as the City rates change. Percentage rate adjustments for CSU correspond to rate , adjustments for all other customers served by the City. The proposed amendment will increase CSU's water rate from f.95 to $.98 per 1000 gallons, or 3%. Rate adjustments for CSU are made effective July 1st of each year to accommodate its budgeting cycle. The proposed amendment to the agreement has been approved by CSU. 21. Resolution 89-116 Authorizing Signal Maintenance Contract With Larimer County. Larimer County does not have the technical staff required for traffic signal maintenance. After the County failed to locate a local private firm to perform this work, it asked the City of Fort Collins to provide the service. The City has, on an as -needed basis, assisted Larimer County with signal maintenance. Staff believes that given the increase in services, preventive maintenance and emergency repair should now be conducted under a signal maintenance contract. 22. Resolution 89- The property being considered for annexation has, for a period of not less than three (3) years, been completely surrounded by property contained within the boundaries of the City of Fort Collins. The property being considered for annexation is approximately 4.2 acres in -319- June 20, 1989 ' size and is located north of Harmony Road and west of the Union Pacific railroad tracks. 23. Resolution 89-118 Findinq Substantial Comoliance and Initiatino The owners have submitted a written petition requesting annexation of approximately 7.5 acres located east of I-25 and south of Prospect Road. The proposed Resolution makes a finding that the petition substantially complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, determines that a hearing should be established regarding the annexation, and directs that notice be given of the hearing. The hearing will be held at the time of first reading of the annexation ordinance. Not less than thirty days of prior notice is required by Colorado law. 24. Routine Deeds and Easements. a. Easements for South College Heights 2nd Sewer Improvements. (1) Easement from Clayton R. Hall and Janet Hall. Consideration: $517.50 (based on residential lot sales - $18,000) (2) Easement from George Ralph Guarini and Joy G. Guarini. Consideration: $517.50 (based on residential lot sales $18,000) ' (3) Easement from Glenn Christensen and Wilda Christensen. Consideration: $766.80 (based on residential lot sales $18,000) b. Easement dedications from Oak Farm Inc. needed for the construction of drainage, utility and access improvements connected with the development of the Harmony Market PUD, Filing 1. Consideration: None. c. Powerline Easement from Evelyn V. Law, Roscoe B. Law and Luise Law, 1233 Maple, needed to underground streetlight service. Consideration: $10 d. Powerline Easement from James M. Dwyer and Martha M. Dwyer, a/k/a Martha Maude Dwyer, 2004-6 Spring Court & 113 Johnson Drive, needed to underground existing overhead electric service. Consideration: $937.50 (750 sq. ft. @ E1.25/sq.ft.) e. Powerline Easement from Louis Brown, Jr. and Jeanise J. Brown, 304 North Howes, needed to underground existing overhead electric services. Considerationr $10. f. Powerline Easement from Edward Joseph Leo, Joseph Leo and Annabell Leo, 1307 West Mountain Avenue, needed to underground existing ' overhead electric services. Consideration: $10. -320- June 20, 1989 g. Powerline Easement from Keith Erskine, 115 Jackson, needed to ' underground existing overhead electric services. Consideration: $400 (based on a lot value of $20,000). h., Deed from the Colorado State Department of Highways for the Right of Access for the proposed new Corbett Drive access to Harmony Road (State Highway No. 68) related to the Charter Hospital development. Consideration: $1. i. Easements needed for Spring Creek Storm Drainage Improvements. The City is implementing drainageway improvements in the Spring Creek Drainage Basin from College Avenue to west of the Burlington Northern Railroad (B-N). (1) Colorado State Board of Agriculture -Easement for storm drainage improvements - $10 consideration. -Easement for an existing sanitary sewer line - $10 consideration. (2) Colorado State University Research Foundation -Easement dedications for storm drainage improvements, utilities and access. Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City I Clerk. Item #6. A. Annexation. 91 Item #7. A. Annexation. Item #8. A. -321- June 20, 1989 ' B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1989 Zoning Approximately 8.1 Acres Known as the Koldeway Annexation into the BP Planned Business District. Item #9. Item #10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 88, 1989. Amending Chanter 29 of the Code Relating to the R-E, Estate Residential, Zoning District. Item #11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 89, 1989, Amending Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Concerning the Review of Sign Proposals Relating to Designated Landmarks. Item #12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 91, 1989 Amending Chapter 24 of the Code of Fort Collins Relating to the Industrial Development Incentive Program. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #13. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 92, 1989, Amending Ordinance No. 170, 1988 Regarding the Issuance of Boardwalk ' Special Bonds. Improvement District No. 77 Special Assessment Refunding Item #14. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 93, 1989, Assessing the Cost of Improvements in the Arbor Plaza Special Improvement District No. 88. Item #15. Item #16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 95. 1989. Aooro- Priating Revenue in the Amount of $85,528 to the General Fund for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau Contract (CVB), Cultural Development and Programming Account and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account. Item #17. A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 96, 1989, Creating a Transit Services Fund. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 97, 1989, Author- izing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Transportation Services Fund to thetTransit Services Fund. Item #18. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 98, 1989, Consenting to the Inclusion of Lands within the Municipal Subdistrict ' Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. -322- June 20, 1989 Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 91, 1989 Amending Chapter 24 of the Code of Fort Collins Relating to the Industrial Development Incentive Program. Adopted on Second Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted as amended on First Reading on May 16, amends the Street Oversizing Fund Ordinance to provide an exemption to eligible firms of all or part of the street oversizing fee required of new or expanding developments. The goals of this Industrial Development Incentive Program are to send a message that the City supports a healthy business climate, to influence a firm's decision to locate in Fort Collins, and to shape the quality of economic growth. The program would provide an exemption of the street oversizing fee up to a maximum of $50,000 for an eligible firm." Councilmember 'Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 91, 1989 on Second Reading. Tom McKenna, 3500 Rolling Green Drive, asked Council to defeat the Ordinance and suggested additional development fees be implemented to help new growth pay for itself. Ed Stoner, 701 Cherokee, presented literature from David Carson, President, CBW (Carson/Burger/Weekly), that supported the incentive program and gave reasons for new businesses to relocate to Fort Collins. Harold Fisher, supported the incentive program and suggested consideration of his personal situation regarding the development of the Poudre River Business Park. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, opposed the incentive program, specifically in cases where expansions will occur without incentives. He also spoke against the administrative process to decide who receives the incentives. t Development Services Director Mike Davis spoke regarding the notification and decision making process. 1 -323- June 20, 1989 ' Councilmember Horak noted his discomfort with the waived street oversizing fees not being paid back out of the General Fund and commented on the program applying equally to existing and new businesses. He stated he was undecided whether he would support the motion and commented on the appeals process being designed only for the applicant. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she would support the motion but indicated the need for further clarification regarding the opportunity to appeal. She stated her support for tabling the motion for two weeks to allow time for enhanced public notification. Councilmember Edwards expressed concern regarding the appeal and notification process and encouraged waiting a few weeks before pursuing the notification issue. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to postpone consideration of Ordinance No. 91, 1989 on Second Reading until July 18. Yeas: Councilmembers Edwards, Horak, and Kirkpatrick. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. THE MOTION FAILED. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 91, 1989 or Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Edwards, Horak, and Kirkpatrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 95, 1989, Appropriating Revenue in the Amount of $85,528 to the General•Fund for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau Contract (CVB), Cultural Development and Programming Account and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account. Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT This Ordinance appropriates the final 1988 Lodging tax receipts as well as prior year reserves in the total amount of $85,528. Lodging Tax Receipts above Original Estimate $13,879 Cultural Development and Programming Account Prior Year Reserves 27,441 Maintenance and Mitigation Account Prior Year Reserves 44.208 ' $85,528 -324- June 20, 1989 Lodging tax receipts are dedicated in accordance with Ordinance 32, 1987; therefore, this appropriation will have no financial impact on the General Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Lodging tax receipts for 1988 were estimated to be $194,796 while the actual receipts totalled $208,675. The initial 1989 budget appropriation was calculated from estimated figure while the disbursement is based on the actual 1988 receipts pending the year end audit. This Ordinance, if adopted, would appropriate the additional 1988 Lodging tax receipts in the amount of $13,879 and would be disbursed according to Council's previous direction: Convention and Visitors Bureau 70% $ 9,715 (per current contract through 12131189) Cultural Development and Programming 20% 2,776 Maintenance & Mitigation 10% 1.388 $13,879 Additionally, the Cultural Development and Programming Account, and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account must appropriate carry-over funds not allocated in previous years totalling $71,649 as follows: Cultural Development and Programming $27,441 Maintenance & Mitigation Account 44.208 $71,649 Based on actual lodging tax receipts of $208,675 for 1988, the Convention and Visitor's Bureau will receive a total of $146,072 (70%), the Cultural Development and Programming Account will receive $41,735 (20%) plus the carry-over of $27,441 for a total of $69,176, and the Maintenance and Mitigation Account will receive a total of $20,868 (10%) plus the carry-over of $44,208 for a total of $65,076." City Manager Burkett stated that proposals for the dispersement of lodging taxes will be reviewed by the Cultural Resources Board and then will be presented to Council at a worksession. Mayor Winokur suggested the proposals be presented to Council at the July 18 Council meeting. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt Ordinance No. 95, 1989 on First Reading. Councilmember Kirkpatrick expressed support for considering the allocation formula at a regular meeting rather than at a worksession. -325- June 20, 1989 ' The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 95, 1989 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. i Councilmember Reports Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the agenda items that involve Colorado State University and the State Board of Agriculture and requested clarification for a possible conflict of interest. Councilmember Mabry recommended participating in the Out to Lunch Concert Series on Fridays at the Lincoln Center. Ordinance No. 90, 1989, Rezoning Approximately 151.1 acres, Known as the Stromberger Zoning, from the T-Transition Zoning District to the I-P Industrial Park Zoning District, with a planned unit development condition. Adopted on Second Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, which was adopted 5-0 on First Reading on May 16, rezones approximately 151.1 acres, located at the southeast corner of Harmony Road and Timberline Road into the I-P Industrial Park Zoning District, with a planned unit development condition. The property is presently in the T-Transition Zoning District. APPLICANT: Everitt Enterprises, Ltd P. 0. Box 2125 Fort Collins, CO 80522 OWNER: Elmer and Betty Stromberger 2209 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525" Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt Ordinance No. 90, 1989 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. -326- June 20, 1989 Resolutions Making Findings of Fact ' Regarding two Appeals of the Planning and Zoning Board Decision of Approval on April 24, 1989 for the following three items: 1. Oak -Cottonwood Farm Amended Master Plan, 2. Harmony Market Preliminary P.U.D., and 3. Harmony Market P.U.D.. Phase One. Final, Adopted Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 89-119 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Bigelow Appeal. B. Resolution 89-120 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Multi -Party Appeal. On May 30, 1989, the City Council considered two appeals seeking to overturn the Planning and Zoning Board's decision of approval on the three above referenced items. The City Council considered the record on appeal and the presentations of the Planning Department, the appellants, and the developer of the Harmony Market P.U.D. In subsequent discussion, the Council determined that the Planning and Zoning Board's decision was not arbitrary and was properly supported by competent evidence in the record. The Council further found that the Board properly interpreted and applied ' the relevant provisions of the City Code. Finally, the Council determined that the Board conducted a fair hearing, did not ignore its previously established rules and procedures, and did not consider evidence that was false or grossly misleading. In separate votes, these two appeals were denied by the City Council thus upholding the decisions of the Planning and Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding the appeal, the City Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and upholding the Planning and Zoning Board decisions." Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Resolution 89-119. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Horak. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to adopt Resolution 89-120. Yeas: Councilmembers 'Atari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) I -327- June 20, 1989 THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Related to the City's Fiscal Year 1989-90 Community Development Block Grant Program Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Public Hearing and Resolution 89-121 Adopting Fiscal Year 1989-90 Community Development Block Grant Programs and Projects. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 99, 1989, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. The Community Development Block Grant Program provides federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the City of Fort Collins which can be allocated to housing and community development related programs and projects, thereby reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget to address such needs. BACKGROUND The Resolution establishes the individual programs and projects to be funded with Community Development Block Grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the FY 1989-90 Program year which begins October 1, 1989. The total amount of CDBG funds available to the City is $869,000. The CDBG Citizens Steering Committee has evaluated all applications and presents a list of priorities to the City Council as to which programs and projects should receive funding for the next program year. The Ordinance appropriates $679,000 from the City's FY 1989-90 Entitlement Grant, $90,000 from Reprogrammed CDBG funds, and $100,000 of anticipated Program Income. The CDBG Program is an ongoing grant administration program funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The City of Fort Collins has received CDBG Program funds since 1975. In 1975 and FY 1976-77 the City received HUD discretionary grants. Since FY 1977-78, the City has been an Entitlement Recipient of CDBG funds, meaning the City is guaranteed a certain ievel of funding ea4 year. The level of funding is dependent on the total amount of funds allocated to the program .by Congress and on a formula developed by HUD, which includes data on total population, minority percentage of population, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Programs and projects funded with Community Development Block Grants have ' to address at least one of the following three broad National Objectives: -328- June 20,,1989 1) be a benefit to low- and moderate -income persons, ' 2) eliminate or prevent slum and blight conditions, and 3) meet urgent needs. CDBG grants can fund a wide range of activities including acquiring deteriorated and/or inappropriately developed real property (including property for the purpose of building new housing) and acquiring, constructing, rehabilitating or installing publicly owned facilities and improvements. CDBG funds can also be used for restoration of historic sites, beautification of urban land, conservation of open spaces and preservation of natural resources and scenic areas. Housing rehabilitation can be funded if it benefits low- and moderate -income people. Economic development activities are eligible expenditures if they stimulate private investment or community revitalization and expand economic opportunities for low- and moderate -income people and the handicapped. Certain activities are ineligible, under most circumstances, for CDBG funds including purchase of equipment, operating and maintenance expenses including repair expenses and salaries, general government expenses, political activities,and new housing construction. Since its inception in 1975, the City's CDBG Program has focused on programs of housing rehabilitation and neighborhood revitalization. Three neighborhood strategy areas have been identified as in need of special ' assistance and attention. These neighborhoods are the Holy Family area, B.A. V.A. (Buckingham, Alta Vista, and Andersonville), and Laurel School neighborhoods. The downtown area is included in the strategy neighborhoods. Available Funds: The City's Entitlement Grant for FY 1989-90 is $679,000. The Entitlement Grant will be combined with $90,000 of reprogrammed funds from canceled projects and contingency funds from the FY 1988-89 program year, and $100,000 of Program Income, of which $36,000 will be collected during the period October 1, 1989, to September 30, 1990. HUD requires the City to estimate the total amount of anticipated Program Income which will be received during the program year. Combining all sources of income provides a total of $869,000 available for programs and projects during the next CDBG Program year. The U.S. Congress is currently considering a President Bush Administration request to reduce CDBG funds 1% across-the-board to all grant recipients. If Congress approves the request, the City's entitlement grant (only) will be reduced from $679,000 to $672,210; a total reduction of $6,790. One way to avoid the potential reduction of funds would be for the City to submit its FY 1989-90 CDBG application to HUD prior to Congressional action. In order to accomplish this task, Council would have to approve the entire FY 1989-90 CDBG Program at the June 20, 1989, Council meeting. ' -329- June 20, 1989 Selection Process: The selection process for the City's FY 1989-90 CDBG Program began on February 9, 1989, when the CDBG Citizens Steering Committee held a public hearing to obtain citizen input on community development and housing needs. The CDBG Program office placed legal advertisements in local newspapers starting on March 1, 1989, to solicit requests for CDBG funded programs and projects for FY 1989-90. The application deadline was Friday March 31, 1989. At the close of the deadline the City received 32 applications requesting a total of approximately $2.5 million. Copies of all applications were forwarded to the City Council through the City Manager's office on April 7, 1989. Copies of all applications were distributed to the CDBG Citizens Steering Committee at their regular monthly meeting on Thursday April 13, 1989. On Wednesday May 10, and Thursday May 11, 1989, the Steering Committee met to ask clarification questions from each applicant. The Steering Committee met on Wednesday May 17, 1989, for the purpose of preparing a list. of priorities to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded for the FY 1989-90 program year. At this meeting the Committee reviewed the written applications, the information provided during the question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of agencies who received FY 1988-89 CDBG funds. The Committee then worked on formulating their list of priorities. The Committee's list of priorities was presented and discussed with the City Council in a joint work session held on Tuesday May 23. The attached Resolution formally adopts the City's FY 1989-90 CDBG Program. List of Priorities: HUD CDBG regulations limit the amount of available funds which can be allocated to various generic categories. Funds for Planning and Administrative purposes are limited to 20% of the total of the Entitlement Grant and any anticipated Program Income. The City's Entitlement Grant for the next program year is $679,000 and anticipated Program Income is $100,000. This means the 20% limitation for Planning and Administrative purposes is applied to a total of $779,000, making the 20% funding limit a total of $155,800. Funds for Public Services are limited to 15% of the total of the Entitlement Grant (only), making the 15% funding limit a total of $101,850. The Steering Committee, thus, not only had to decide which applicants presented programs and projects which best fit into the City's CDBG Program, but also had to insure funding allocations were kept within HUD regulations. As indicated earlier, Congress is currently considering a 1% reduction to all CDBG funding. If approved, the 1% reduction. would affect the 20% Planning and Administration, and the 15% Public Service funding limitations. -330- June 20, 1989 Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding (some applications were modified at the time of verbal presentations to the Committee, see below) and the Steering Committee's list of priorities: REQUEST -------------------------------------------------------------------------- FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT Planning and Administration (20% - $155,800) $106,600 $106,600 City of Fort Collins CDBG Administration 10,000 - City of Fort Collins Downtown Zoning & Design Guidelines 10,000 10,000 City of Fort Collins East Side/West Side Neighborhood Plans Design Guidelines 31,223 31,223 Neighbor -to -Neighbor, Inc. Housing Counseling 7,417 7,417 Neighbor -to -Neighbor, Inc. CHOICE Senior Housing Counseling Acquisition 400,000 180,000 Housing Authority Acquisition of Distressed Properties 200,000 50,000 Power Plant Visual Arts Acquisition of the Center Old Post Office 17,000 (1) - Martin Luther Homes Individualized Living Alternatives for the Handicapped Homeless 53,620 - Neighbor -to -Neighbor, Inc. Transitional/Permanent Housing for the Handicapped Homeless 375,000 - Al Scott Burlington Northern Ft. Collins Station Housing Rehabilitation 100,000 - Northern Hotel Fire Sprinkler and Asbestos Removal 46,617 (2) 21,450 Volunteer's Clearing Building Renovation House Phase III 64,949 64,949 Neighbor -to -Neighbor, Inc. Housing Rehabilitation Emergency Repair Architectural Barrier Removal Public Facilities 28,000 28,000 City of Fort Collins Downtown Alleys 28,000 - City of Fort Collins Street Trees on North College Avenue 220,000 - City of Fort Collins Downtown Gateway Improvements 150,000 50,000 Community Horticulture Center Center 11 -331- June 20, 1989 1 1 1 150,000 81,576 225,000 (3) 100,000 Larimer County Food Distribution Larimer County Shelter Center, Office, and Warehouse Shelter Facility Relocation Public Services (15% - $101,850) 50,000 30,000 Children's Clinic 10,000 - Lutheran Social Services 10,605 - Crossroads Safehouse 1,500 - Crime Stoppers of Fort Collins, Inc. 20,000 20,000 United Day Care Center 17,640 17,640 Sunshine School, Inc. 8,000 6,000 Sunshine School, Inc. 13,400 - Project Self -Sufficiency 7,145 7,145 Disabled Resource Services 5,000 5,000 The Women's Center 14,755 - Larimer County Mental Health 17,000 16,000 Catholic Community Services/Northern Health Care for Indigent Children Fostering Family Strengths Community Outreach Program Delivery Sliding Scale Assistance Sliding Scale Program Childcare for the Homeless Business Link Employment Assistance Project Short-term Child Care Assistance Peer Counselor Program for Seniors Hostel of Hospitality Hope Job Bank 36,000 Contingency (Frozen Appropriation) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- $2,475,471 869,000 Total NOTES: (1) This proposal was withdrawn by the applicants. (2) The applicants submitted a revised proposal reducing their initial request from $46,617 to $21,450. (3) The applicants submitted a revised proposal reducing their initial request from $225,000 to $200,000. With the withdrawal of one application and the reduction of two other requests, the total amount of requests considered by the CDBG Citizens Steering Committee was approximately $2.4 million. With $2.4 million in total requests and only $869,0001available, obviously not all applications could be funded. Also, due to HUD funding limitations, some applicants received less funds than requested in order to keep the generic category within program maximums. No applicant received more funds than requested. Contingency Funds are based on $36,000 of anticipated Program Income expected to be received by the City during the program year from October 1, SICIl' June 20, 1989 1989, to September 30, 1990 can not be allocated to any uncertainty of collection, fund. These funds, according to HUD specific project(s). Because of they have been allocated to the regulations, the possible Contingency The Committee allocated full funding to eleven (11) applicants. In the Committee's opinion, the eleven applications recommended for funding best fit CDBG program objectives and City CDBG policies and deserved full funding. Proposals which did not receive funding were deemed of a lower priority and, in some cases, a lack of funds prohibited their funding. The following describes the reasons why certain projects did not receive their requested full funding amount: Children's Clinic Health Care for Indigent Children Requested: $50,000 Funded: $30,000 The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation could be allocated to Social Service applications and desire to support the provision of day care services. Catholic Community Services/Northern Hostel of Hospitality/Hope Job Bank Requested: $17,000 Funded: $16,000 The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation could be allocated to Social Service applications and desire to support the provision of day care services. Sunshine School, Inc. Child Care for the Homeless Requested: $8,000 Funded: $6,000 of funds which the Committee's of funds which the Committee's The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation of funds which could be allocated to Social Service applications. The $2,000 reduction was based on the elimination of administrative costs from the request. General Committee comment of Social Service applications: The Committee would like to work with the City Council during the next year to explore the possibility of establishing policies to limit the number of times an agency can receive CDBG funds. Larimer County Shelter Care Facility Requested: $200,000 Relocation Funded: $100,000 The Committee recommends that the City match the County's $100,000 level of funding for this project. Also, since the facility serves all county residents, the Committee feels that Loveland, Berthoud, Wellington, and Estes Park should also contribute their fair share. The Committee also 1 1 -333- June 20, 1989 ' feels the County should be able to receive Community Service Block Grant funds from the State of Colorado to help with the project. Fort Collins Housing Authority Acquisition of Distressed Properties Requested: $400,000 Funded: $180,000 The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation of funds. The Housing Authority's $400,000 request represents 46% of the total CDBG funds available to all applicants. The Committee also feels the Housing Authority could do a better job of leveraging CD8G funds and would like to see 18 to 20 units acquired and rehabilitated as a result of this grant. Larimer County Food Distribution Center Center/Office/Warehouse Requested: $150,000 Funded: $81,576 The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation of funds. The Committee also feel the applicant should seek to purchase an existing warehouse rather than trying to construct an new facility. Community Horticulture,Center Greenhouse Requested: $150,000 Funded: $50,000 The reduction in funding was mainly due to the limitation of funds. The Committee feels the City's CDBG funds should be considered seed money. The applicant has not identified a specific site for the project. The applicant seems to have broad community support and should be able to obtain funds from other sources. Power Plant Visual Arts Center Acquisition of the Old Post Office Requested: $250,000 Funded: $50,000 Challenge Grant The Committee feels the proposal is a good idea and could be a benefit to the downtown with additional spin-off effects but, does not consider it as high a priority as other projects. The $50,000 recommendation is in the Form of a challenge grant; if the applicant fails to obtain sufficient funds to acquire and- rehabilitate the property by March 31, 1990, the CDBG funds would be reprogrammed into the City's FY 1990-91 CDBG Program year. The Committee looks forward to the participating banks of the Community Development Corporation (CDC) accepting the challenge and raising the additional funds necessary to complete the project. The following describes the reasons why certain projects did not receive any funding amount: Lutheran Social Services - Fostering Family Strengths, $10,000 Project Self Sufficiency - Business Link, $13,400 ' Larimer County Mental Health Center - Peer Counselor Program for Seniors, $14,755 -334- June 20, 1989 Crossroads Safehouse, Inc. - Community Outreach Project, $10,605 ' Crime Stoppers of Ft. Collins, Inc. - Program Delivery, $1,500 Colorado Housing Assistance Corporation - Foreclosure Prevention Program, $30,000 The recommendation not to fund the above applicants was mainly due to the limitation of funds which could be allocated to Social Service applications and the Committee's desire to support the provision of day care services. City of Fort Collins - Downtown Zoning & Design Guidelines, $10,000 The recommendation not to fund this proposal was due, in part, to the limitation of funds which could be allocated to Planning and Administration category applications. The Committee also feels the proposal should be funded by the Downtown Development Authority and/or other organizations whose task it is to promote and improve the downtown area. City of Fort Collins - Street Trees on N. College Ave., $25,000 The Committee feels the proposal should be funded by the City's Capital Improvements Program, a Special and/or General Improvement District, the Downtown Development Authority and/or other organizations whose task it is to promote and improve the downtown area. Neighbor -to -Neighbor, Inc. - Transitional/Permanent Housing for the Handicapped Homeless, $53,620 ' The applicant admitted to failing to submit a request for matching McKinney Act funds for this proposal. The Committee thus felt that the timing was off for the proposal and did not want to commit funds for an entire year. The proposal would be better received next year with a concurrent request for McKinney Act funds. Northern Hotel - Fire Sprinkler and Asbestos Removal, $100,000 The Committee is very concerned about the Northern Hotel building, a major landmark of the downtown area. However, the Committee feels the applicant must first seek professional help for completing a feasibility study and a comprehensive plan for restoration of the building. Without such a study and plan, the proposal lacks direction and the Committee feels it is hard to assess the impact of CDBG funds. City of Fort Collins - Downtown Gateway Improvements, $220,000 The proposal is for implementation of the Downtown Plan, a plan which has not yet received official community approval. Thus in one sense, the Committee feels the proposal isipremature. The Committee, as with other downtown related projects, feels the proposal should be funded by the City's Capital Improvements Program, a Special and/or General Improvement District, the Downtown Development Authority and/or other organizations whose task it is to promote and improve the downtown area. ' -335- June 20, 1989 ' Al Scott - Burlington Northern Fort Collins Station, $375,000 The Committee feels that CDBG funds are the wrong source of funding for this proposal. The applicant should seek private funding or Small Business Association funds." Councilmember Azari withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Chief Planner Ken Waido outlined the list of projects to receive CDBG funds. Rosalyn Spencer, 813 Warren Landing, encouraged support for the relocation of the Power Plant Visual Arts Center to the old Post Office Building. Councilmember Kirkpatrick had comments regarding the funding guidelines. She commented on raising funds for the the Power Plant and thanked the Steering Committee for its hard work. Councilmember Edwards expressed concern about the policy ramifications of the appropriations and commented on the tremendous job done by the CDBG Steering Committee. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, ' to adopt Resolution 89-121. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to amend the Resolution to delete the $30,000 allocation for the Children's Clinic. (Secretary's note: See page 338 for Councilmember Mabry's withdrawal of his second to this motion to amend the Resolution) Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, questioned Councilmember Edwards' motives regarding the amendment and spoke against deleting the $30,000 allocation for the Children's Clinic. Dr. Charles Collopy, Fort Collins resident, representing the Children's Clinic, requested a procedural clarification and spoke to the merits of the project and the need for the clinic. Jacques Rieux, Fort Collins resident, spoke in support of the Children's Clinic and requested clarification regarding Councilmember Edwards' reservations about the Children's Clinic allocation. Chuck Solano, 2200 Berkshire Drive, supported.the clinic and spoke against the amendment. t Councilmember Edwards expressed his concerns about the City embarking on a new course and providing a health care delivery system. He noted his concern regarding the structure of the Clinic and the narrow target served ' by the Clinic and questioned the urgency of the need for such a clinic. He stated his discomfort with City funds providing care for citizens outside -336- June 20, 1989 the Fort Collins area and suggested the County and the hospital take the lead in the program. Dr. Collopy encouraged the City's involvement in the Children's Clinic program and described the citizens who will come to the clinic in need of health care. Harold Fisher spoke in support of the Children's Clinic. Ms. Nicely, described a personal experience with regard to her inability to provide health care for her children. Averil Strand, 1811 Rainbow Drive, Director of Community Health Services for Larimer County Health Department, spoke of the grave need for the health care clinic. Marcella Rose, Fort Collins resident, suggested placing restrictions to limit the health care service to only Fort Collins residents rather than dropping the whole project from funding allocation. Mr. Rieux, suggested that the timing of Councilmember Edwards' concerns was too late. Lou Stitzel, Fort Collins resident, expressed confidence in staff to ensure that monies would be used primarily for Fort Collins residents and stressed the fact that the $30,000 is a small portion of the total funding needed. Councilmember Edwards clarified his concerns regarding the degree of need for the clinic. He stated he was not denying the need for the clinic, but rather questioned how the community is addressing the need. He encouraged a more comprehensive study be conducted with additional involvement from other sectors in the community. He stated he believed that the $30,000 was just the beginning of larger funding that would be needed in the future. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commended Councilmember Edwards for his willingness to take a stand and raise questions on the issue and commented on the irony of federal dollars being used to fund a local need. She stated she would not support the amendment. Councilmember Mabry noted his appreciation for Councilmember Edwards bringing the issues to Council's attention and commented on the feasibility study that was conducted by a Denver firm which looked at the. City being asked to consider allocating funds for the project. He stated he believed that there was a need for the Children's Clinic and noted the importance of the City's assistance in starting the program. He stated that due to his belief in the clinic, he would withdraw his second to Councilmember Edwards' motion to amend the Resolution. THE MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Mayor Winokur expressed his appreciation 'to Councilmember Edwards for verbalizing his convictions regarding the clinic. 1 I -337- June 20, 1989 ' The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Resolution 89-121 was as follows: Yeas: Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Azari withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 99, 1989 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Azari withdrawn) Resolution 89-122 Setting Forth the Intention of the City to Issue Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Innovative Companies, Inc. Protect Adopted Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL SUMMARY Industrial Development Revenue Bonds ("IDRBs") are "on -behalf" of debt, that is, not actual debt of the City. The IDRBs will be repaid from revenue generated by the project. The bonds do not constitute a debt of the City. The City will receive a fee of 1116 of one percent of the present value of the projected outstanding annual debt of the project, as provided for in the City's IDRB policies, to be used for economic development purposes. This fee is dependent upon the interest rates and repayment schedule of the debt and is estimated to be approximately $20,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Innovative Companies, Inc., a Colorado corporation, submitted an application to the City for an Inducement Resolution for IDRBs in the amount of $7 million. The proposed resolution would induce the corporation to acquire, renovate, construct, and equip manufacturing facilities to be leased to Innovative Companies, Inc. Development would occur at two sites, 4401 Innovation Drive (construction and expansion of existing facilities) and 3842 Redman Drive (acquisition and renovation). The combined project facilities will contain approximately 141,000 square feet of space. Innovative Companies was founded in 1982. It has developed into a diversified cabinet manufacturer with nationally distributed product lines of commercial, institutional, and residential cabinetry along with store fixtures and other specialty w000t,products. The requested inducement amount is $7 million. The.City's allocation for 1989 was $1,853,000 and $1.4 million of the total has been used to induce ' the Carson, Burger & Weekly Project. This request envisions the use of the City's remaining amount to be supplemented with an allocation from the SUE June 20, 1989 statewide balance which must be applied for after the City's inducement is ' passed. Protect Budget and Use of Proceeds The estimated budget for the project is as follows: Bond Proceeds $7,000,000 less issuance costs 250,000 Cost of Assets 6,750,000 Building 3,000,000 Land & Site Improvements 250,000 Equipment 3,500,000 The proceeds of the issue will be applied to these total costs. The equipment cost consists of major equipment used in the cabinetry manufacturing process and has an expected useful life of 10 years. The buildings contemplated have an expected life of 40 years and the land and site improvements an expected life of 50 years. The average economic life of the assets contemplated in the project is about 25 years. The anticipated life of the bond issue is 20 to 25 years. Economic Benefits The project, if completed, will yield direct and indirect benefits to the I Fort Collins economy. Direct Benefits: Annual Property Tax (Assessed Value=31,960,000) $136,000 One-time Use Tax Receipts 50.000 $186,000 Indirect Benefits: It is estimated that nearly all of the companies' products will be sold outside the City limits, so the sales tax proceeds are expected to be minimal. However, about 60 percent of its expenditures will be made locally. t Projected new employment opportunities for local residents over the five-year expansion will be about 360 positions. Ninety percent of the employees are expected to be hired from the local job market. The average salary is projected to be about $26,000 per employee. Assuming one half of ' -339- June 20, 1989 ' the payroll is to be spent locally and be subject to the sales and use tax, about $80,000 per year will be generated when the expansion is complete. Financial Feasibility and Debt Coverage from Preliminary Cash Flow Analysis The preliminary cash flow is based on a 20-year bond life with an average interest rate of 7.2%. Monthly debt service payments will be approximately $55,100. Based on the preliminary estimates, the debt coverage ratio begins at 4.2 to 1 in the first year and grows to 13.1 to 1 in the fifth year. The applicant has pledged to acquire a bank letter of credit which will fully guarantee the payment of principal and interest on the bonds in the event that revenue from the project is insufficient. Presently, it is — expected that the letter of credit will be from a AAA Swiss Bank, one of the strongest credit securities available. Summary This analysis serves as an overview of the application. Staff has evaluated the application and finds that it is consistent with the City's policies and guidelines for issuing industrial development revenue bonds. The IDRB Criteria Evaluation sheet is attached for review. The project received 79 of a possible 100 points. Staff is therefore recommending approval of the inducement resolution. ' Planning staff has noted that the Redman Drive site of the project lies outside the City's corporate limits and suggested that an annexation agreement be required of the applicant. The applicant has expressed its desire to be located within the City limits and its willingness to cooperate with the City on future annexations in the area." Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari to adopt Resolution 89-122. Finance Director Alan Krcmarik presented an overview of Resolution 89-122 and introduced Gunter Preuss, President, Innovative Companies, Bill Griffith, Controller and Dave Dwyer, bond counsel. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 89-122 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 100, 1989 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Address Problems Associated with Cruising. Adopted on First Reading ' Following is staff's memorandum on this item: -340- June 20, 1989 "FINANCIAL IMPACT This appropriation ordinance will provide amount of $54,400 for implementation of the associated with cruising. Supplemental fund general fund reserves. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY s supplemental funding in the strategy to address problems will come from undesignated On May 30, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution 89-110 directing the City Manager, City Attorney, and Municipal Judge to develop a creative strategy to address the problems associated with cruising. This appropriation ordinance provides supplemental funding for implementation of the following elements of the cruising strategy: Police Services' overtime costs: $ 38,400 Traffic Engineering costs: 16,000 TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING REQUEST: $ 54,400 Police Services' overtime costs reflect full implementation of the cruising strategy for ten consecutive weekends beginning June 23 and running through August. Two additional weekends for the month of September are also funded. Traffic Engineering costs are for signage, barricades, cones, set-up and take -down expenses, personnel to operate traffic signals with a lap -top computer, and parking personnel to assist citizens. Recommendations regarding lighting needs along streets and in parking lots in the downtown area are still under development and will be reviewed with the Council Health and Safety Subcommittee at a later date." Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari to adopt Ordinance No. 100, 1989 on First Reading. Division Commander Lt. Brad Hurst explained how the dollars would be used and commented and meeting with business owners regarding diversion plans. Traffic Engineer Rick Ensdorff explained t traffic engineering costs would be used to to release and install barricades for twelve the appropriation Ordinance and on Wednesday's press conference the cruising problem and the he majority of the $16,000 for contract with a signing company consecutive weeks. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the appropriations relative to the problems associated with cruising'and indicated that information concerning lighting in the downtown area would be coming for Council's recommendation. Councilmember Azari noted her satisfaction with the meeting with the downtown business owners and commented on the disruptive behavior, the 1 -341- June 20, 1989 ' traffic congestion, and the atmosphere associated with the cruising problem. Councilmember Mabry complimented the Health and Safety Subcommittee for its hard work and involvement on the issue and stressed the success of the plan hinged on efforts by both the business owners and the City. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she had received a phone call from a downtown business owner regarding the skateboarding issue and expressed the need for Council to discuss the issue under Other Business. Mayor Winokur stated his appreciation to the Health and Safety Subcommittee for its involvement to address and resolve the problems associated with cruising. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 100, 1989 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to the 1989 Fireworks Display at Hughes Stadium Following is staff's memorandum on this item: ' "FINANCIAL IMPACT CSU is not charging a fee for use of the Stadium parking lot. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 89-123 Authorizing the Council of the City of Fort Collins to Enter Into an Intergovernmental Agreement with Colorado State University for Conducting the 1989 Fireworks Display at Hughes Stadium. B. Resolution 89-124 Waiving the Immunity Afforded under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act in Favor of Colorado State University for the 1989 Fireworks Display. These two Resolutions establish an agreement with CSU allowing the City to hold its fireworks display at the Stadium parking lot and waiving the City's right to assert defenses granted by the Governmental'Immunity Act as against CSU. BACKGROUND The fireworks committee has recommended that the .annual Fourth of July fireworks be moved from City Park to Hughes Stadium parking lot. Under this scenario, the Fourth of July day events will remain at City Park. At -342- June 20, 1989 7 p.m., the gates to Hughes Stadium parking lot would be open to the public. At approximately 9:30 p.m., the fireworks display would begin. ' The rationale for moving the display is based on crowd control and safety to the public. Essentially, the Hughes Stadium parking lot provides a better site to monitor crowd behavior and provides a safer distance from the fireworks firing area. Resolution No. 89-123 would authorize the Mayor to sign the intergovernmental agreement staff has negotiated with CSU. The agreement allows City preparation at the Stadium parking lot to begin July 3, the display to occur on July 4 and cleanup on July 5. Other highlights are: 1. The City will provide all necessary traffic, dust, fire (Poudre Fire Authority) and crowd control; 2. The City will secure temporary lighting for the parking lot, provide Port -A -Johns for public use and install temporary fencing; 3. The City will indemnify CSU against claims of third parties; 4. The City will not assert its defenses under the Governmental Immunity Act if the University files claims against it; and 5. The City and the University will be named as additional insureds on the display contractor's insurance policy. Resolution 89-124 would execute the City's agreement not to use the ' Governmental Immunity Act in its defense on any claims by the University which may arise out of this event. Under applicable law, such a waiver of immunity can be accomplished only by a resolution of the governing body. (Section 24-10-104, C.R.S.) The waiver would apply only to the University and would not affect the City's ability to assert statutory immunity against claims by any other person or entity." City Attorney Steve Roy explained the agreements with Colorado State University and outlined the potential liability involved and CSU's reasons for requesting the waiver of immunity. Director of Cultural, Library and Recreational Services Mike Powers explained the rationale behind the move to`Hughes Stadium and responded to questions from Council. Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, spoke of the popularity of the City Park location and opposed the move to Hughes Stadium. Edward J. faillace, 1747 Azaela, Triangle Review columnist, opposed the move to Hughes Stadium. �I -343- June 20, 1989 ' Arlene Tortoso, 3201 Sumac Street, representing the Westgate Homeowner's Association, expressed concerns regarding the move to Hughes Stadium, spoke of the associated parking problems, potential property damage, and spoke against moving the fireworks display to the stadium. Chuck Solano, 2200 Berkshire Drive, spoke in favor of the fireworks being held at City Park. Bob Lover, Fort Collins resident, spoke against moving the fireworks to Hughes Stadium. Councilmember Maxey spoke of the traffic and crowd problems that would arise by moving the fireworks to Hughes Stadium and suggested future consideration be given to the all day activities at City Park. Councilmember Edwards expressed concern regarding the issues of creating a family environment versus creating an unsafe situation in the park. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated that she believed that neither City Park or Hughes Stadium was an ideal place to hold the fireworks celebration. She noted her discomfort with the traffic congestion at City Park and the closeness of the fireworks to the spectators, buildings, and trees. She noted that the City Park location for July 4th celebration has not been ideal for the past few years and commented on specific problems that had ' been encountered. Councilmember Azari indicated her satisfaction with the July 4th celebration in Fort Collins and spoke in favor of the celebration to continue. She commented on drinking and drug use in the park and the responsibility of the Police Department to enforce the associated laws. Councilmember Horak commented on the negative impact that the fireworks have on the neighborhoods surrounding City Park and stated the need to develop goals regarding future firework displays. Mayor Winokur directed staff and the Health and Safety Subcommittee to look into the problems regarding the July 4th celebration at City Park and return to Council with a recommendation. City Manager Burkett assured Council that a better plan for future celebrations could be reached. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to have the Health and" Safety Subcommittee look.at the issue, evaluate this year's celebration and return to Council with recommendations on how to proceed with next year's celebration. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. ' (Secretary's note: Resolutions 89-123 and 89-124 were not considered) -344- June 20, 1989 Resolution 89-125 Making Appointments to Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vacancies currently exist, or shortly will exist, on various boards and commissions due to resignations from boardmembers and the expiration of terms of members of the boards and commissions. Advertisements were placed in March, and applications were accepted through April. Council received copies of the applications and Council teams interviewed applicants in May and June. Council teams have recommended individuals for appointment to the following boards and commissions: Airport Authority Building Review Board Cable TV Board Commission on Disability Commission the Status of Women Cultural Resources Board Downtown Development Authority Election Board Golf Board Housing Authority Human Relations Commission Landmark Preservation Commission Library Board Liquor/Massage Licensing Authority Natural Resources Advisory Board Parks and Recreation Board Planning and Zoning Board Retirement Committee Senior Advisory Board Storm Drainage Board Water Board Zoning Board of Appeals The attached Resolution contains the names of those individuals recommended for appointment by the Council interview teams." Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt Resolution 89-125 as revised. Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted the removal of the Human Relations Commission from the Resolution was due to a series of resignations and noted that the application period had been extended in an attempt to obtain additional applications to fill current vacancies. Councilmember Edwards encouraged individuals who applied for a board or commission and did not receive an appointment to maintain their involvement in the community. t Mayor Winokur commented on the number of applications and suggested the record response was due in part to the support and encouragement from the Coloradoan. -345- June 20, 1989 ' The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 89-125 as revised was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 89-126 Adopting Council Goals for the Period Ending April 2. 1991, Adopted as Amended Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Council has met on three separate occasions to discuss the needs of the city and to develop a list of goals to guide staff and Council efforts over the next 22 months. A list of Council Goals has been developed by the Council, and is ready for formal adoption. The Council Goals list includes a number of significant issues which Council intends to address during the current Council term. Upon adoption of the Council Goals, staff will develop a proposed time ' frame for Council consideration of the issues identified." Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards to adopt Resolution 89-126. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to amend Resolution 89-126 under #6 and insert a section C to read, "Develop, plan, and implement a community celebration/4th of July event for 1990". Councilmembers Maxey and Edwards accepted Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion as a friendly amendment to their previous motion. Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to amend Resolution 89-126 under #10 by adding a part B to read, "Create an Adhoc Committee of City Council to address issues of governance, -,in particular Council leadership, district representation, and the office of Mayor". Councilmember Azari commented on the scope of responsibilities of the proposed adhoc committee of Council with emphasis on the communication and leadership needs of the community. Edward J. Faillace, 1747 Azaela, Triangle Review columnist, commented on the appearance of a divided Council and divided motives and suggested that the needs and desires of the community should be considered. -346- June 20, 1989 Councilmember Horak stated he would support the amendment and commented on the process of establishing a mayor and how that process could be changed. Councilmember Mabry noted his support for the amendment and commented on Council's obligation to deal with the issue in a complete and thorough manner. Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted the amendment had the potential to address the issue and allow input and questions from Council and the citizens of the community. Councilmember Edwards indicated his support for the motion and the amendment. Mayor Winokur commented on the process for changing the issue concerning the election of the Mayor and stated he would support the amendment. The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion to amend Resolution 89-126 under #10 by adding part a B to read, "Create an Adhoc Committee of City Council to address issues of governance, in particular Council leadership, district representation, and the office of Mayor", was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion, to adopt adopt Resolution 89-126 I as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Maxey, made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to refer to the Ethics Committee his involvement and participation in the Fort Collins/Loveland Airport matters. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to refer to the Ethics Committee his involvement and participation in upcoming discussion with regard to the Poudre River National Recreation Area. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -347- June 20, 1989 ' Motion to Renew Hewlett-Packard lease on lot at Fort Collins/Loveland Airport, Adopted Councilmember Maxey withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Councilmember Azari commented on the desire of Hewlett-Packard to renew its lease/option for five years on a lot at the airport with the prospect of building a hanger. Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to allow Hewlett-Packard to renew its lease/option on the lot at the Fort Collins/Loveland Airport. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the manner in which Council received the information. Councilmember Azari apologized to Council for her oversight regarding the timing of the presentation of the item. The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion to allow Hewlett-Packard to renew its lease/option on the lot at the Fort Collins/Loveland Airport was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, ' and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Maxey withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Mabry expressed concern about the use of the $3.1 million that is available from accrued savings and commented on the importance of wisely using the funds on a one-time basis. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to direct staff to prepare for Council consideration on July 18, a Resolution or Ordinance that specifically identifies the $3.1 million as a line item in the 1989 and 1990 Budgets. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Mabry mentioned the possibility of an Executive Session to discuss personnel and legal matters. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel and legal matters. f Councilmember Horak stated his reluctance to support the motion due to the lateness of the hour. -348- June 20, 1989 Councilmember Azari suggested having the Executive Session at the beginning of the June 27 worksession. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel and legal matters was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Mabry and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, and Maxey. THE MOTION FAILED. AdJournment Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to adjourn the meeting until 6:15 p.m. on Tuesday, June 27, to consider adjourning into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel and legal matters. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. EST_ UL �&Sl "- City Clerk -349-