Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-06/07/1994-RegularJune 7, 1994 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 7, 1994, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins, City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Azari, Apt, Janett, Horak, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Staff members present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Al Baccili, 520 Galaxy Court, opposed the City's membership to the Platte River Power Authority and opposed paying dues to the Chamber of Commerce. He suggested that the money would be better spent on housing and environmental needs. Leanne Tiemann, expressed concerns regarding the Shenandoah PUD and requested a variance be granted to reduce the number of dwelling units per acre. Robert Collins, concurred with Ms. Tiemann and spoke of traffic concerns in the area of Trilby Road. He stated additional growth in South Fort Collins would overtax roads that already can not handle the traffic flow. Don Taranto, 1316 La Eda Lane, concurred with comments made by Mr. Collins. Citizen Participation Follow-up Councilmember Horak stated he would like information regarding the Shenandoah PUD. He clarified the City does not pay Chamber of Commerce dues and spoke of the dues paid to the Platte River Power Authority. Agenda Review City Manager Steve Burkett stated that Items #35, Resolution 94-92 Eliminating Youth Fares on Transfort, and #44, Ordinance No. 97, 1994, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the Community Development Block Grant Fund, had been revised and placed in Council's Read Before the Meeting folder. Marlene Henderson, 3824 Nite Court, requested that Items #31, Items Related to the Robert Shields Annexation and Zoning, and #32, Items Related to the Strachan Farm Annexation and Zoning, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. 356 June 7, 1994 Consent Calendar This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important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 #40, Pulled Consent Items. 13. 14. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, rezones approximately 350 acres from the T-Transition District to the following zones: 30 acres of B-P, Planned Business, District; 60 acres of I-P, Industrial Park, District; and 260 acres of R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential. The T Zone is for properties in a transitional stage with regards to ultimate development. The property is located south of County Road #50, on either side of Summit View Road and one-half mile north of East Vine Drive. The I-P portion is to be located east of Summit View and south of County Road #50; the B-P portion is to be located southwest of the Summit View/County Road #50 intersection; and the balance of the property would be zoned R-L-P. According to the Code of the City of Fort Collins, within sixty days from the date the matter is considered by the Planning and Zoning Board, the City must change the zoning for a property in the T Zone to another zoning district included within the Zoning Code. APPLICANT: K & M Company c/o Lucia Liley 110 East Oak Street Fort Collins, CO 80524-2880 OWNER: Same On February 1, 1994 Council approved acquisition of 25-acres of land and water rights for natural area and storm drainage purposes for a total purchase price of $273,025. The acquisition was structured as a bargain - sale in which the total value was estimated at $335,000, and the sale included a gift value of $61,975 to the City of Fort Collins. Subsequent to Council approval, the sellers elected to restructure the agreement such that the City paid full value of the property and simultaneously received 357 F 15. 16. 17. June 7, 1994 a cash donation of $61,975. Ordinance No. 71, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, appropriates the donation back to the Natural Areas Project of the General Capital Fund. Community Decision -Making Process. The majority of costs for this process will likely be incurred in 1994. Staff has estimated that the costs for 1994 will total approximately $100,000. Council has voted to appropriate $10,000 for the design phase of this project. The City Manager will obtain up to an additional $10,000 to complete this phase from existing 1994 appropriations. At the completion of the design phase, the Organizational Task Force will bring forward a detailed recommendation for implementation and funding of the remainder of the process. Ordinance No. 72, 1994, was unanimously adopted as amended on First Reading on May 17. Ordinance No. 73, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, adjusts the 1994 amount to be paid to the Convention and Visitors Bureau and Cultural Development Programming Account, based on 1993 actual collections in accordance with the current contract. Ordinance No. 76, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, will implement a portion of the City's Water Demand Management Policy, as adopted by Council in April of 1992. It will amend various sections of Chapter 29 of the City Code, including the Land Development Guidance System, in order to establish water conservation standards for the design and installation of landscapes and irrigation systems. It is applicable to commercial, industrial, public, and residential "common area" landscapes, and their associated irrigation systems. It does not apply to the landscapes of single family residences. It is estimated that the adoption of this ordinance will result in a water savings of 2.7 to 5.4 million gallons of water per year, and 24,000 to 48,000 gallons per day in peak demand. 1 358 0 June 7, 1994 ' The full implementation of the City's Cross -Connection Control Program will require two separate actions by Council. The first, covered by this agenda item, is considered by staff to be "housekeeping" amendments to existing City Code. The proposed amendments change the definition of "an approved device" to reflect the current industry standard. As amended Section 26-189 will require that rules and regulations needed to implement and administer the City's Cross -Connection Control Program be adopted by City Council. Violating such rules and regulations will become a misdemeanor violation under the Code. The adoption of the proposed rules and regulations will be the second step to implement the cross -connection control program. These could have significant impact on the City's customers and will need careful review and consideration. The proposed rules and regulations are being reviewed ' by the Water Board and will be presented to City Council after Board review has been completed. Ordinance No. 77 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17. 19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 79, 1994, Amending Section 21-87 of the Code Relating to the Retirement Committee. The City of Fort Collins General Employees Retirement Plan as amended and restated effective January 1, 1992 was adopted by the City Council on April 7, 1992. The Plan provides for a Retirement Committee to administer the Plan, and sets out specific criteria for membership on the Committee. The Committee is composed of five members consisting of the Director of Finance, at least three employees who are covered by the Plan, and one other member who may be either an employee covered by the Plan or a taxpaying elector of the City. Ordinance No. 79, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, amends Section 21-87 of the City Code to be consistent with the provisions of the Plan. Specifically, it clarifies that only members who are not employees of the City must be taxpaying electors of the City. 359 1 J June 7, 1994 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 80, 1994, Authorizing the City to Convey a Farm House to the Fort Collins Housing Authority. The City acquired Ridgeview Park near Clarendon Hills in 1991. This ten acre undeveloped park site adjacent to McGraw Elementary School contains an old farm with eleven small buildings on it. The property was purchased from Poudre R-1 School District. In recent months a development proposal has been initiated to build 100 housing units on the remaining 50 acres around the school and park. It is estimated that residential development will begin this summer. Staff believes that the farm buildings may attract trespassers once housing in the area becomes a reality. Of all of the buildings, the farmhouse itself appears to be sound and could be relocated. Staff has contacted Jim Kline of the Fort Collins Housing Authority to determine the Housing Authority's interest in the house. After a site inspection and a lead paint inspection, Mr. Kline indicated the Housing Authority would like to have the house and had a lot on which it could be relocated. The Housing Authority would like to move the house in June of this year at its expense. Ordinance No. 80 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17 and conveys the farm house to the Fort Collins Housing Authority. 21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 81, 1994, Authorizing the City to Grant a Non -Exclusive Easement for a Domestic Waterline to Fort Collins -Loveland Water District, A Political Subdivision of the State of Colorado. 22. Ordinance No. 81, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, grants the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District a 30 foot easement through the Southside Service Center Site. This easement is needed to loop the District waterline from Portner Road to the Huntington Hills Subdivision. The waterline easement will parallel an existing sewer line easement. The looping of the waterline helps to ensure the continuous supply of water to the City's Transfort site, because it will allow water to be provided even if part of the line fails. Public Service Company is requesting a 30 foot easement for an electric line adjacent to Drake Road to better serve area homeowners. This land is owned by the City and used by the Light and Power Department. When Drake Road is improved, the easement area will be within the street right-of- way. The need for the easement was identified during the planning process for Hampshire Pond PUD. But, since the City's land is unplatted, the 360 23. 24. June 7, 1994 ' easement could not be included in the PUD. Ordinance No. 82, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, grants the easement and brings the utilities closer to the City's property. The City of Fort Collins has an unplatted storm drainage area bordered by Skyline Drive and Fort Ram Village II. Colorado State University is constructing a new housing project to the north of this area and needs to install an irrigation line. The Colorado State Board of Agriculture is requesting an 8 foot easement on the easterly edge of the existing utilities. Stormwat.er Utility personnel have reviewed this easement request and believe .this easement will not interfere with its detention area. Ordinance No. 83 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17. Revenue of $10,359 for the Library Outreach Program. ' In 1981 Larimer County phased out its "Yeller Feller" Bookmobile service and instead the County divides its library monies among the six (6) communities with library service. There is no Larimer County Library. The library funds are divided among existing libraries for the purpose of providing library service. The dollars allocated for library service are generated by property taxes. The dollars allocated to each jurisdiction is based on how many non-residents are served. This year the Fort Collins Public Library served a lower percent of non-residents than the previous year. The $103,590 represents a 6.2 percent decrease from 1993. This ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, appropriates $10,359 for the Library Outreach Program. 25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 74, 1994, Authorizing the Long Term Lease of Property at the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport for the Construction of a Commercial Hangar. The Airport Manager has negotiated a lease of property to Gracon Leasing Company for the construction of a flight training facility. Gracon Leasing Company will construct a building and an aircraft parking ramp on the lots. The building, which will be at least 12,000 square feet, will house offices, and include an aircraft maintenance hangar area. At the expiration of the lease, the improvements revert to the ownership of the Cities. 361 , 26. 27. June 7, 1994 The construction of the commercial hangar will generate new revenue for the Airport and help meet the flight training needs of the local community. Colorado Municipalities", 1977 Edition. The CSU Police Department has requested the City's assistance to provide greater clarification for enforcement purposes in the existing Section 21- 5 of the Model Traffic Code, as adopted in the City Code, relating to skates, skateboards, in -line skates and other similar devices. These revisions to this Section specifically add skateboards, coasters and in - line skates to the list of devices currently covered by Section 21-5. They also clarify the language of the Section pertaining to the posting of traffic control devices to prohibit the use of such devices in certain public areas. In addition, these revisions state that persons riding on roller skates, skateboards, in -line skates, coasters or similar devices in designated areas, such as sidewalks, trails, public plaza areas or other public ways, must yield the right-of-way to pedestrians. On June 15, 1993, the City Council adopted Resolution 93-87 authorizing the City Manager to notify the Colorado State Board of Agriculture of the City's intent to terminate the 1974 service agreement, effective June 30, 1994. The 1974 Agreement set forth the terms and rates pursuant to which the City agreed to provide Colorado State University (CSU) with water and sewer services. Rate adjustments required an amendment to the agreement and were effective July 1st of each year, to accommodate CSU's budget cycle. The proposed Ordinance modifies Sections 26-127, 26-278, 26-279, 26-281, and 26-284 of the City Code to accommodate CSU as a "normal" customer of the Water and Wastewater Utility, but with unique monthly service charges. The rate adjustment reflected in this Ordinance is consistent with the rate increase (0% for water and 6% for wastewater) that went into effect for other customers on January 1, 1994. Future rate and cost of service adjustments will be implemented along with adjustments for other customer classes, effective the first of the year. 362 29 30. June 7, 1994 Ordinance No. 89, 1994 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins, amends Chapter 20, Article III, of the Code of the City regarding weeds, brush, and rubbish, and Article I regarding stagnant water. The Ordinance addresses (1) addition of some non-native plant species to the banned weed list; (2) deletion of all native species from the banned weed list; (3) variances to allow grass to grow to full height on certified natural areas and certified xeriscapes; (4) removal of Sec. 20-1: "Stagnant water declared a nuisance"; and (5) minor editorial changes of various sections for clarity, consistency with other sections, or revisions to names of plant species to be compatible with the most recent publication of Weeds of the West, which is the most widely used reference on weeds. First Reading of Ordinance No. 90, 1994 Amending Chapter 29 of the Code of the City so as to Revise and Extend the Review Process for Planned Unit Developments and Subdivisions. This is a request to amend the Land Development Guidance System and Subdivision Regulations to add two weeks to the current "7-week" review process schedule, for a total of "9-weeks", for processing of planned unit developments, subdivision plats and other development matters that appear before the Planning and Zoning Board. The new processing schedule maintains the current schedule of Planning and Zoning Board meetings, which generally occur on the 4th Monday of each month. The sequence of the stages of the review process will also not change. The major change will be that the date of submittal of a development application will be moved back two weeks. For example, the new submittal date for the October meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board will be on August 22 rather than on September 6 as the current schedule indicates. Staff opened the two bids received for the Shields Street - Street Improvements on May 29. The $1,053,000 low bid was 16 percent, $145,000, over the engineer's estimate of $908,000. Staff also opened the two bids received for the Shields Street Landscape Improvements on May 29.. The low bid of $196,000 was $4,000 over the engineer's estimate. 363 I June 7, 1994 Since the bid opening Council has added the right turn lane at Elizabeth back into the project. This will add an additional $30,000 to the bids. Also the cost of acquiring right-of-way may exceed the estimate by $20,000. Staff recommends funding the needed $200,000 from the Street Oversizing Fund, which has an estimated year end fund balance of 3.7 million. 31. Items Related to the Robert Shields Annexation and Zoning. A. Public Hearing and Resolution 94-88 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Robert Shields Annexation. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 92, 1994, Annexing Approximately 18.4 Acres, Known as the Robert Shields Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 93, 1994, Zoning Approximately 18.4 Acres, Known as the Robert Shields Annexation, Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD Condition. ' This is a request to annex and zone approximately 18.4 acres located east of County Road #9 and one-half mile north of Harmony Road. The property is currently zoned FA-1 Farming in the County which allows single-family residential development with a minimum lot size of 2.29 acres. The requested zoning is the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD condition. The R-L-P District could allow for a variety of housing types and densities through the PUD process, but due to the property's relatively small size a variety of uses is not likely to occur. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation of property located in the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. APPLICANT: The Everitt Companies c/o Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 OWNERS: Robert & Wendy Shields 3910 S. County Road #9 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 32. Items Related to the Strachan Farm Annexation and Zoning. A. Public Hearing and Resolution 94-89 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Strachan Farm Annexation. 364 33. 34. June 7, 1994 Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 94, 1994, Annexing Approximately 17.9 Acres, Known as the Strachan Farm Annexation. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 95, 1994, Zoning Approximately 17.9 Acres, Known as the Strachan Farm Annexation, Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD Condition. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 17.9 acres located east of County Road #9 and north of the Hewlett Packard Plant on Harmony Road. The property is currently zoned FA-1 Farming in the County which allows single-family residential development with a minimum lot size of 2.29 acres. The requested zoning is the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD condition. The R-L-P district could allow for a variety of housing types and densities through the PUD process, but due to the property's relatively small size a variety of uses is not likely to occur on the site. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation of property located in the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. APPLICANT: Chateau Custom Builders, Inc. c/o Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 OWNERS: Marvin D. & Doris E. Strachan 4108 S. County Road #9 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 At the March 9, 1994 meeting of the Quint Cities group (the group was recently expanded to include Wellington, Evans, and both Larimer and Weld Counties in addition to Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland and Berthoud) the City Managers and Town Administrators from each community were directed to prepare a resolution, work plan and project budget for a regional initiative designed to preserve the identities and physical separation between the various cities and towns of Northern Colorado. The purpose of the Commercial Loan Incentive Program (CLIP) is to provide Fort Collins commercial and industrial customers with additional financial 365 L' I June 7, 1994 incentives to invest in electrical energy efficiency improvements. CLIP is proposed to be a multi -faceted program which will provide financial support to Light and Power's Demand Side Management Programs (currently under development) as well as independently developed customer improvements that meet program parameters. 35. Resolution 94-92 Eliminating Youth fares on Transfort. This action authorizes the City Manager to eliminate fares charged to persons under the age of eighteen, effective June 9, 1994. Persons under the age of eighteen would thereby be allowed to ride Transfort without charge. 36. Resolution 94-93 Stating the City's Position on the Proposed Wilderness Designation for Rocky Mountain National Park. Congressman Skaggs has introduced a bill which would designate a total of 240,650 acres in four separate areas as a wilderness area in Rocky Mountain National Park. Ninety percent of the Park is currently managed as a wilderness area, and the bill would codify current management practices. Congressman Allard has asked for the City's position on this ' legislation. 37. Resolution 94-94 Making Appointments to the Commission on the Status of Women. Three vacancies currently due to the resignations Everett. Applications recruitment process and interviews on May 23 anc following individuals be expire as noted below: Name JoAnn Ginal Laima Skuja Diane Lathrop exist on the Commission on the Status of Women of Mary Zamora, Beryl McGraw, and Kathleen were recently solicited through the annual Councilmembers Janett and Azari conducted 24. The interview team is recommending the appointed to fill the vacancies with terms to Expiration of Term July 1, 1995 July 1, 1996 July 1, 1996 Additional appointments will be made to the Commission on the Status of Women on June 21 as a part of the annual appointments. 366 go 39 June 7, 1994 ' A. Postponement of Resolution 94-61 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Overland Trail Annexation, to July 19. B. Postponement of Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 54, 1994, Annexing Approximately 282 Acres, Known as the Overland Trail Annexation, to July 19. C. Postponement of Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 1994, Zoning Approximately 212 Acres of the Overland Trail Annexation Into the R-F, Foothills Residential, District and Placing the Remaining 70 Acres Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District, to July 19. The Planning Department staff met on April 16, 1994, with the applicants of the Overland Trail Annexation and Zoning request. Due to the alleged problems with notification of adjacent property owners, the applicants have agreed to re -process the request through the Planning and Zoning Board. The item will be scheduled for the Board's June 27 meeting for '. another public hearing. The item will then be scheduled for Council consideration on July 19. Routine Deeds and Easements. A. Easement Dedication from Dale L. Boehner and Dianna L. Boehner for the purpose of stormwater detention ponds located on the East and West ends of Lot 13 of Creger Plaza second Replat. Monetary consideration $0. B. Easement Dedication from Dale L. Boehner and Dianna L. Boehner along with Michael J. Hickey and Tracy J. Hickey for the purpose of access. The portion of land is located on the East end of the common line between Lots 12 and 13 of Creger Plaza. Monetary .consideration $0. Easement Dedication from Dale L. Boehner and Dianna L. Boehner for utility purposes over the portion of land in the Southeast corner of Lot 13 of Creger Plaza. Monetary consideration $0. Deed of Dedication from Gerald J. Dusbabek and Elizabeth Ann Dusbabek for drainage purposes over the West 40 feet of the East 105 feet of the said parcel described in Reception #93007441. Monetary consideration $10. 367 1 I June 7, 1994 E. Powerline Easement from Penny L. Snyder, 2409 Mathews, needed to install underground streetlight. Monetary consideration: $10. F. Powerline Easement from Chris J. and Georgia J. Christopher, 1511 Remington, needed to install underground streetlight. Monetary consideration: $10. G. Powerline Easement from Chester E. and Lucille L. Evans, 724 Mathews, needed to install new underground streetlight. Monetary consideration: $10. H. Powerline Easement from Colorado Delta Association of Sigma Alpha Epsilon, 306 West Laurel, needed to install new underground streetlight. Monetary consideration: $10. Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk, Wanda Krajicek. 13. I 14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 71, 1994, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue to the Natural Areas Project of the General Capital Fund. 15. 16. 17. !E?a Water Utility. 19. ME 368 9 June 7, 1994 ' 21. 22. 23. 24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 85, 1994, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue of $10,359 for the Library Outreach Program. 46. 47. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 86, 1994, Appropriating $162,662 of Unanticipated Revenue for the Construction of Bike Lanes on County Road 9 Between Horsetooth Road and Harmony Road. ' 48. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 78, 1994, Creating an Air Quality Advisory Board. Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk, Wanda Krajicek. 91 Collins. 25. 26. 27. 369 ' June 7, 1994 28. First Readinq of Ordinance No. 89. 1994. Amending Chanter 20. Articles I 29. 30. 31. Items Related to the Robert Shields Annexation and Zoning. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 92, 1994, Annexing Approximately 18.4 Acres, Known as the Robert Shields Annexation. B. Hearing and First. Reading of Ordinance No. 93, 1994, Zoning Approximately 18.4 Acres, Known as the Robert Shields Annexation, Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD ' Condition. 32. Items Related to the Strachan Farm Annexation and Zoning. A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 94, 1994, Annexing Approximately 17.9 Acres, Known as the Strachan Farm Annexation. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 95, 1994, Zoning Approximately 17.9 Acres, Known as the Strachan Farm Annexation, Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District with a PUD Condition. 38. Items Relating to the Overland Trail Annexation and Zoning Postponed to July 19. A. Postponement of Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 54, 1994, Annexing Approximately 282 Acres, Known as the Overland Trail Annexation, to July 19. Postponement of Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 1994, Zoning Approximately 212 Acres of the Overland Trail Annexation Into the R-F, Foothills Residential, District and Placing -the Remaining 70 Acres Into the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, District, to July 19. 1 370 June 7, 1994 ' 43. First Reading of Ordinance No. 96, 1994, Amending Section 29- 44. 45. Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Related to the ' Robert Shields Annexation and Zoning, Adopted on First Reading_ and Items Related to the Strachan Farm Annexation and Zoning. After adoption of the Consent Agenda, Chief Planner Ken Waido informed Council that there were people in the audience who were interested in speaking on items #31, Items Related to the Robert Shields Annexation and Zoning, and #32 Items Related to the Strachan Farm Annexation and Zoning, which was on the Consent Agenda. Marlene Henderson, 3824 Nite Court, spoke of density concerns stating the proposed annexations would result in hundreds of homes in the area. Dan Henderson, 3824 Nite Court, also expressed density concerns and urged Council to consider designating a natural area boundary. Sandy Thomas, a Fort Collins resident and representing her neighborhood, stated the neighborhood was opposed to higher density. She spoke of noise, pollution, traffic congestion, storm drainage, and safety issues and spoke of the need to maintain the rural character of the area. 371 June 7, 1994 Mayor Azari asked if Council wanted to reconsider adoption of these items since they were unanimously adopted on the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, that staff provide Council with more information before second reading of the ordinance, to include maps showing all adjacent land -uses within a 1/2 mile radius of the two annexation proposals as well as information regarding natural area restoration projects, and receive information on the Landscape Opportunities Plan. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Janett spoke of low cost loans for commercial businesses and stated anyone interested should contact the electric utility. She spoke of a transportation forum recently attended which will be re -televised. She stated transportation issues were discussed, and spoke of the Highway 287/14 study and stated the citizen group and staff have amended the goals and objectives of the ' study to include the goal to remove interstate trucks from Highway 287/14. Councilmember Apt stated the Growth Management Committee will be proposing phasing changes to the Land Development Guidance System for the July 19 meeting. Mayor Azari reported Channel 27 is broadcasting a new program called "Perspectives" and commented that the program deals with youth issues. Ordinance No. 96, 1994, Amending Section 29-526(D)(2) Activity "C" and Section 29-526(E)(5); and Amending the Harmonv Corridor Plan in Renard to the The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary On March 5, 1991, the City Council adopted the Harmony Corridor Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. This Plan constitutes a public statement of the City's policies with regard to the future development of the Harmony Corridor area in terms of land use and urban design. The Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) is the principal tool that is used to evaluate development proposals in the Harmony Road corridor. The need for the following ' amendments became apparent since adoption of the Plan in 1991. The recommended 372 June 7, 1994 , amendments are as follows: Section 1 clarifies that future community/regional shopping centers along Harmony Road should be located at the intersection of two arterial streets; Section 2 clarifies the right of the City to establish iocational and land use standards for the purposes of implementing and interpreting the provision of the LDGS; Section 3 establishes policies LU-4 and LU-5 of the Harmony Corridor Plan as mandatory locational standards in the Harmony Corridor; and, Section 4 eliminates a potential inconsistency in the LDGS with LU-5 as amended. On May 23, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed a similar set of amendments and recommended that they be tabled for a sixty day period during which additional citizen input would be received. The Planning and Zoning Board will be reviewing the currently proposed amendments on June 6, 1994. BACKGROUND: On March 5, 1991, the City Council adopted the Harmony Corridor Plan as an element of the -Comprehensive Plan of the City. This Plan constitutes a public statement of the City's policies with regard to the future development of the Harmony Road corridor in terms of land use and urban design, between College Avenue and 1-25. The Land Development Guidance System is the principal tool that is used to evaluate development proposals in the Harmony Road corridor. The need for the following amendments became apparent since adoption of the Plan in 1991. . The changes are as follows: Section 1: Policy LU-5 provides guidance for the location of "high intensity land uses" in the Harmony Road corridor. LU-4 requires that retail and commercial developments occur in shopping centers. The intent of both policies is to allow commercial development in the Harmony Road corridor in compact centers at limited locations and that there be lower intensity transition uses, such as limited retail, office, light industrial and residential, between these commercial developments, so that the corridor not become a long "strip" of commercial development. Two issues have arisen with regard to the interpretation of policy LU-5 as follows: How are "high intensity land uses" defined?; and, How are "major street intersections" defined? Staff believes that the intent of LU-5 is to limit the location and number of "Community/Regional Shopping Centers" which could otherwise occur along the Harmony Corridor. Community/regional shopping centers are generally large in scale and intensity and offer goods and services for the entire community or region. Examples include Foothills Fashion Mall, Arbor Plaza, the Marketplace and the Pavilion Shopping Center. Community/regional shopping centers have traditionally located along College Avenue, although there has been recent pressure for sites along Harmony Road. The Harmony , 373 June 7, 1994 Corridor Plan also permits lower intensity uses such as neighborhood scale shopping centers and ancillary business service uses. These land uses provide goods and services for nearby businesses and residential neighborhoods. The recommended amendment clarifies that "high intensity land uses" means community/regional shopping centers as defined in the LDGS. Staff is also concerned that the term "major street intersection" in LU-5 could be misinterpreted to include other intersections including collector/arterial intersections and/or any other intersections that are signalized. The result of this misinterpretation could mean many more potential locations for community/regional shopping centers than had been anticipated or desired and less opportunity for lower intensity transition uses along the frontage of Harmony Road. The proposed amendment clarifies that "major street intersections" is intended to mean intersections of two "arterial" streets. In the Harmony Road corridor, "arterial" street intersections include College Avenue, J.F.K. Parkway (extended), Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road, and County Road 9. ' The recommendation is to delete LU-5 in its entirety and reenact it as recommended. The recommended change to LU-4 is minor and is intended to eliminate ambiguity in the wording of the policy statement. The recommended changes are as follows (deletions are indicated by a strikeout; new additions are indicated by the shaded areas): Existing LU-5: "LU-5 Focus the location of high intensity land uses... retail, service, automotive, etc. at major street intersections and decrease intensity as the distance from the major such intersections increases." Recommended LU-5: All community regional shopping centers shall be located at the intersection of two arterial streets, and the intensity of retail and commercial development shall decrease as the distance from such intersections increases. Recommended LU-4: A11 retail and commercial developments shall be located ' in shopping centers. 374 June 7, 1994 Section 2: The LOGS, at Section 29-526(E)(5), presently allows the City to establish general design standards, guidelines and policies for the purpose of implementing and interpreting the provisions of the LDGS. Accordingly, with regard to the Harmony Corridor, the Council, by Ordinance No. 28, 1991, adopted the Harmony Corridor Design Standards and Guidelines. It is the staff's recommendation that this section of the LDGS be expanded to expressly allow for the establishment of not only design standards and guidelines, but also Iocational and land use standards, guidelines and policies to better enable the staff and the Planning and Zoning Board to implement and interpret the LDGS. In this way, the City will be better able to regulate Iocational issues in those areas of the City that are "sensitive," as is the Harmony Corridor and perhaps other areas of special concern. Accordingly, language has been drafted to amend the existing section of the LDGS so that it would read as follows: The City shall have the right to establish general Iocational, land use and design standards, guidelines, and policies for the purpose of implementing and interpreting the ' provisions of this section. Section 3: In response to the contemplated authorization as proposed in Section 2, it is recommended that LU-4 and LU-5 be established as Iocational/land use mandatory standards for implementation and interpretation of the LDGS as it relates to the Harmony Corridor Plan. Therefore, LU-4 and a modified version of LU-5 are presented in Section 3 of the ordinance as mandatory standards, with one modification to LU-5 being the deletion of explanatory details regarding the decreasing of the intensity of retail and commercial development as the distance from the twin arterial intersection increases. This is deleted because, as applied to particular development proposals, that policy statement could give rise to difficult questions of interpretation. Section 4: Criterion "b" of the Community/Regional Shopping Center land use category of the Land Development Guidance System could be interpreted to encourage the location of community/regional shopping centers at collector/arterial street intersections which would be in conflict with the proposed amendment to LU-5 (section 1). The proposed amendment deletes reference , 375 June 7, 1994 1 to being at a collector/arterial intersection. The specific changes are as follows (new additions are indicated by the shaded areas; deletions are indicated by a strikeout): "b. Is the project contiguous to an. eelleetor and/of arterial street?" PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION On May 23, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed a previous draft ordinance and voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council that the proposed changes be tabled for a period of sixty days during which additional citizen comment would be sought including holding "roundtable" discussions. The ordinance which was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board on May 23 did not include sections 2 and 4. Also, the wording of section 1 has been revised by City staff since the May 23 hearing. The Planning and Zoning Board will review the current draft ordinance at its June 6, 1994 special hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ' During the Planning and Zoning Board hearing on May 23, there was testimony and discussion in regard to other alternative policies for the location of commercial uses along Harmony Road, including: permit commercial development along Harmony Road west of Timberline Road but not east of Timberline Road; permit commercial development at the corner of an arterial and a collector street; and do not allow any commercial development along Harmony Road. These suggestions were discussed in 199011991 during the preparation of the Harmony Corridor Plan. The decision to allow "high intensity land uses" at "major street intersections" was recommended by the Harmony Corridor Steering Committee and City staff, and approved by Council as part of the Harmony Corridor Plan. Staff believes that the proposed amendment is consistent with the purpose of the Plan and should eliminate any questions in the interpretation of the policy statement. The suggestions offered at the May 23 hearing, staff believes, are "major" policy changes. The Planning and Zoning Board indicated some interest in having City staff, property owners and other affected interests, review alternative policies during the sixty day delay period. In response to the Board's recommendation, the Planning staff has begun arrangements to hold two informal meetings in the next sixty days to assess ' interest in making changes to the land use policies contained in the Plan. An 376 June 7, 1994 initial meeting is currently being scheduled with the original "Harmony Corridor Plan Steering Committee"; and a meeting will be scheduled with other interested neighborhood groups, property owners and other interested citizens. Staff will keep the City Council informed of recommended changes, if any, to the Harmony Corridor Plan which are identified during this informal meeting process. Staff recommends approval of the amendments to the Harmony Corridor Plan and Land Development Guidance System." Assistant Planning Director Joe Frank briefly spoke of the proposed changes to the Harmony Corridor Plan and the amendments to the Land Development Guidance System. He noted Councilmembers received a revised Ordinance in their packets and stated the revision adds additional language to Section 3. He read the revisions into the record. Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services Greg Byrne he spoke of the Planning and Zoning Board request for a 60 day review period and stated the Planning staff has started a public review process to identify any changes made to the land -use policy for Harmony Corridor. He spoke of "big box" retail sites, and stated during the next 6 months staff will be analyzing the issue and developing and proposing new policies and for big box retail store designs and I locations. He stated staff requests that Council consider a moratorium on big box retail until the studies have been completed. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt the Ordinance No. 96, 1994 (revised version ) on First Reading. Frank spoke of mixed -use concepts and stated that has not been addressed in the Plan. He spoke of the importance of assembling people with different interests on the issues to look at the policies in an attempt to come up with a better product. He responded to Council questions and clarified adoption of the amendments to the plan will not prevent any commercial developments on collector streets, but will limit the type. He stated the purpose of the Ordinance is to clarify the terms High Intensity Land -use and Major Street Intersections. Tim Dolan, 4212 New Hampton Court and representing 5 separate neighborhoods, urged Council to postpone adoption of the proposed revisions to the Plan until all revisions are completed. Milan Hanson, 1624 Redberry Court President of the Oakridge 7th Filing Homeowner's Association, stated he believed the Harmony Corridor Plan represents an excellent step in planned growth and urged Council to support staff's proposal. 377 June 7, 1994 Jennifer Carpenter, 1719 Hotchkiss and a representative of the Harmony Coalition, stated Council's response will set the foundation to determine Fort Collins' future. She requested that Council impose a moratorium on all commercial development along the Corridor until the process is complete. Scott Mason, 861 Sandy Cove Lane, member of the Harmony Coalition and President of Citizen Planners, stated the neighbors expected that employment park zones would be developed in the area, not regional community shopping centers. He spoke of his disappointment that the Planning and Zoning Board could not make a decision at its last meeting. He stated if Council feels the need for a 60 day discussion period then a 60 day moratorium should be placed on commercial development in the Harmony Corridor. Harold Swope, 4925 Hogan Drive and President of the Fairway Estates Homeowner's Association, spoke in support of the motion and felt the development of the Plan is an excellent step. He spoke in support of a 60 day moratorium until decisions on the Corridor can be clarified. Pam Becker, 1307 Cape Cod Circle, spoke in opposition of strip development, stating that is what may happen if a moratorium isn't imposed. Glenn Perica, 4416 Monte Carlo Place, supported the motion and spoke of concerns regarding neighborhood commercial development along Harmony Road. He urged staff to look at infill land development policies in the 60 day period. Tom Higley, representing the Local Legislative Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, requested that amendments to the Corridor Plan not be made until the effects of the amendments are known. He stated the Committee does not feel that there has been adequate time to review the proposed amendments to the original Plan and urged Council to table discussion on Ordinance No. 96, 1994 to enable the task force to review the issues as suggested by the Planning and Zoning Board. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, spoke in support of staff's recommendation and commended staff for its efforts. He spoke of the need for establishing a community vision to include involving effected neighborhoods. Bill King, 4413 San Remos Circle, spoke in support of issues raised by the Harmony Coalition and requested definitions, including the sizes, of Regional Community Shopping Centers, Neighborhood Shopping Centers and Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Centers. Mayor Azari noted that staff would respond after everyone had commented. Bob Penny, 4401 San Remos Circle, requested that proposals from developers be tabled until all issues have been addressed. 1 378 June 7, 1994 ' Dennis Polk, attorney representing the developer of the King Soopers proposal, spoke of the need to obtain a fair balance between the needs of the community and the rights of the property owner. John David Sullivan, 2015 Niagra Court, urged adoption of the Ordinance. Kathryn Powell, residing in Golden Meadows, expressed concerns regarding the safety of pedestrians and urged Council to place a moratorium on all development within the Corridor. Robin Rochelle, residing in Golden Meadows, concurred with Ms. Powell and spoke of traffic flow problems. Richard Poche, 4507 Seaboard Lane and member of the Harmony Coalition, spoke in support of the motion. Larry Batterton, 4512 Maxwell Court, requested the Council support the moratorium motion until concerns are addressed. Susan Smith, 800 Maxwell Court, supported the motion and opposed developments at major intersections. ' Douglas Meyer, 4537 Seaboard Lane, commended staff for its efforts and urged Council to adopt the amendments to the Plan. Frank gave a brief explanation on the differences between regional, community and neighborhood convenience shopping centers. Councilmember McCluskey supported the motion and stated a 4 to 6 month moratorium was too long and noted he would address that issue under the Other Business portion of the meeting. Councilmember Apt supported the motion. He spoke of the need to keep traffic moving at a reasonable rate and expressed concerns regarding pedestrian and bicycle traffic. He stated he believed the public process was a good. Councilmember Janett spoke of the need for a system that defines the Plan so that each time a development is proposed it won't be contested. She stated the Plan needs to be codified and spoke of the need for transitional land -uses to protect neighborhoods from commercial and industrial uses on the Corridor. Councilmember Horak spoke in support of the Ordinance, stating it fits well into the overall plan. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: none. ' 379 ' June 7, 1994 THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to postpone, for a period of not less than 60 days, the acceptance or processing of applications for retail and commercial projects in the Harmony Corridor until the plan can be reviewed, to be considered at the June 21 meeting. City Manager Steve Burkett stated staff could bring back an ordinance on July 5, complete with a staff analysis and report. Councilmember Janett expressed concerns that there may be proposals on the Planning and Zoning Board agenda, prior to the July 5 Council meeting, that would conflict with her motion. Based on those concerns Councilmember Horak requested a resolution or ordinance, on the complete analysis regarding .the impact of both land -use planning and legal aspects, be presented at the Council meeting of June 21. After further discussion Councilmember Janett withdrew her motion. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to the City's Fiscal Year 1994-95 Community Development Block Grant Program, Adopted on First Reading as Amended "Executive Summary A. Public Hearing and Resolution 94-95 Adopting Fiscal Year 1994-95 Community Development Block Grant Programs and Projects. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 97, 1994, 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 (HUD) to the City of Fort Collins which an 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 CDBG Program is an ongoing grant administration program funded by the ' Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fort Collins has 380 June 7, 1994 received CDBG Program funds since 1975. In 1975 and FY 1976-77 the City received HUD CDBG discretionary grants. Since FY 1977-78, the City has been an Entitlement Grant recipient of CDBG funds, meaning the City is guaranteed a certain level of funding each 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, minorities as a percentage of population, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Additional background information on the City's Community Development Block Grant Program is presented in Appendix "A" attached to this report. AVAILABLE FUNDS The City's Entitlement Grant for FY 1994-95 includes $1,187,000 from the Federal FY '94 Budget. The Entitlement Grant will be combined with $50,000 of Program Income and $30,000 of Reprogrammed funds. 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 $1,267,000 available for programs and projects during the next CDBG Program year. The following summarizes the amount and source of available funds: AMOUNT SOURCE ' ===--== ---------- S 1,187,000 FY 94 Entitlement Grant 30,000 Reprogrammed Funds 50,000 Program Income ----------------------------------------------- $ 1,267,000 Total Reprogrammed Funds are funds which were not expended during the previous program year. For FY 1994-95, $30,000 of Reprogrammed Funds will be available from the FY 1993-94 Contingency fund. Program Income includes funds returned to the City through the payment of past housing rehabilitation loans. Below is a summary of recent CDBG funding levels allocated from HUD to the City of Fort Collins: 3! June 7, 1994 Entitlement Reprogrammed Program Year Grant Funds Income Total Funds ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- 1985 S 799,000 $ 58,000 --------------------- $ 20,000 $ 877,000 1986 556,000 165,719 102,567 834,286 1987 685,000 99,614 50,000 807,614 1988 653,000 100,000 50,000 803,000 1989 679,000 90,000 100,000 869,000 1990 645,000 50,000 30,000 725,000 1991 728,000 160,000 30,000 918,000 1992 802,000 30,000 50,000 882,000 1993 1,091,000 50,000 90,000 1,231,000 1994 1,187,000 30,000 50,000 1,267,000 SELECTION PROCESS The selection process for the City's FY 1994-95 CDBG Program began on January 13, 1994, when the CDBG Commission 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 in January, and running through ' March, to solicit requests for CDBG funded programs and projects for FY 1994-95. The application deadline was Friday March 25. At the close of the deadline the City received 28 applications requesting a total of approximately $2.1 million. Copies of all applications were forwarded to the City Council through the City Manager's office on April 2. Copies of all applications were distributed to the CDBG Commission at the same time. On Wednesday May 4, and Thursday May 5, the Commission met to hear presentations and ask clarification questions from each applicant. The. Commission then met on Wednesday May 11, for the purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded for the FY 1994-95 program year. At this meeting the Commission reviewed the written applications, the applicant's verbal presentation, the information provided during the question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of agencies who received FY 1993-94 CDBG funds. The Commission then worked on formulation of their list of recommendations. A copy of the Commission's minutes from the meeting is attached. CDBG COMMISSION'S LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS 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 $1,187,000 and anticipated Program Income is $50,000. This means the 20Y 382 June 7, 1994 ' limitation for Planning and Administrative purposes is applied to a total of $1,237,000, making the 20Y funding limit a total of $247,400. Funds for Public Services are limited to 15% of the total of the Entitlement Grant and anticipated Program Income, making the 15% funding limit a total of $185,550. The Commission, 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. The Commission utilized several criteria to determine priorities in the process to establish its list of recommendations. These criteria were discussed with the Council at a work session conducted in December 1993 and include: HIGHER PRIORITY CRITERIA 1. Leveraging Guideline: The leveraging of private and non-federal funds is a very important consideration in making an allocation of CDBG funds. Applicants will be asked to indicate the amount of leveraging, including in -kind I services, dollars, and/or labor associated with their CDBG proposal. 2. Acquisition versus Operations Guideline: Acquisition proposals which provide assets to the community will be given greater weight over proposals which are operational in nature. 3. Success Rate Guideline: Applicants who demonstrate continued success in achieving community needs will receive extra consideration for funding. On the other hand, applicants who have failed to achieve their proposal in a timely manner may not receive additional funding. 4. Ability to Comp7ete the Proposal During a Program Year Guideline: Applicants who provide information indicating a capability to complete their proposal during the program year will receive consideration for funding over applicants whose abilities can be questioned. 5. Meeting Community Needs Guideline: Applicants must provide support of their application through some sort of needs assessment, preferably through the use of an objective ' 383 June 7, 1994 data source, and not rely solely on anecdotal information. An applicant may also submit a service history of projects from other communities. Funding allocations will be made to proposals which meet the greatest community needs. 6. Long -Term Impact Guideline: Applicants whose proposal has additional long-term impacts beyond the specifics of the proposal will receive greater consideration for funding. LOWER PRIORITY CRITERIA 1. Full or Partial Funding Guideline: If funds are not available to support a proposal at the lowest acceptable level, no funds will be granted to the proposal. 2. Competing Projects or Providers ' Guideline: Applicants will need to demonstrate their proposal is not a duplication of efforts or a duplication of service provision, including administrative, volunteer efforts, and acquired service ability. n 3. Alternate Funding Guideline: An applicant will need to discuss what other funding sources are available. Full disclosure of available and applied for funds is considered essential, required, and mandatory. The Commission needs to know if the project can continue if CDBG funds cease to exist. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 1. Equal Competition Guideline: A17 proposals are considered equally, there is no preference given to new proposals requesting "seed" money, and likewise, there is no preference given to proposals which were previous recipients of CDBG funds. Continued CDBG funding from one year to the next is not guaranteed and funding is not a "right" of any applicant. 2. Sequential Grant Limit Guideline: There is no limit to the number of times an applicant may receive funding from the CDBG Program, all applicants are considered 384 June 7, 1994 1 equally, however, continued CDBG funding from one year to the next is not guaranteed. Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding and the Commission's list of recommendations: PLANNING and ADMINISTRATION (2011 of Entitlement Grant and Program Income - $247,400) RECOMMENDED REQUEST FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT ======= ------- $100,147 $ 100,147 City of Fort Collins CDBG Administration $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Larimer County Human Affordable Housing Development Dept., Information System City of Fort Collins, et al. ACQUISITION RECOMMENDED REQUEST ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5220,000 FUNDING - APPLICANT Elderhaus PROGRAM/PROJECT Building Acquisition ' 116,000 58,000 Habitat for Humanity Land for Low -Income Housing 250,000 225,000 CARE Land for Low -Income Housing ACQUISITION RECOMMENDED REQUEST FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT 132,350 132,350 Neighbor to Neighbor, Inc. Associated Costs of Land Acquisition and Permanent Loan Costs in Support of Development of Affordable Rental Housing 90,000 60,000 DDA Facade Acquisition and Streetscape Improvement 500,000 205,000 Housing,Authority Acquisition Rehabilitation 385 1 June 7, 1994 PUBLIC FACILITIES RECOMMENDED REQUEST FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT $121,000 121,000 Volunteers Clearing House Addition to Existing Building 280,000 - New Bridges, Inc. (1) Purchase of Land and Construction of a Permanent Facility 31,388 Island Grove Reg. Treatment Construction of a New Facility REHABILITATION RECOMMENDED REQUEST FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ $100,980 100,980 DMA Plaza, Inc. Window Rehabilitation 6,520 - Housing Authority Lead -Based Paint Testing 80,000 60,000 One West Art Center, Inc. Exterior Restoration ' ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER REMOVAL RECOMMENDED REQUEST --------------------------------------------------- FUNDING --------------------- APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT ----------------- $ 15,750 15,750 ----------- Housing Authority --------------- Architectural Barrier Removal PUBLIC SERVICES (15% of Entitlement Grant and Program Income - $185,550) RECOMMENDED REQUEST FUNDING APPLICANT PROGRAM/PROJECT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ $ 10,500 10,500 Disabled Resource Services Youth Employment Program 39,131 39,131 Neighbor -to -Neighbor Comprehensive Housing Counseling 15,000 15,000 Project Self -Sufficiency Family Self -Sufficiency 17,850 17,850 Child Care Collaborative Sliding Scale Day Care 18,000 18,000 New Bridges Operating Expenses 9,520 9,520 Crossroads Safehouse Children's Program 12,625 12,625 Senior Employment Services Job Finding Help 7,650 - Care -A -Van Transportation for Low - Income Residents RM June 7, 1994 30,000 - CHOICES, Alt. Ed. Prog. Scholarships for Indigent Students 42,295 42,295 Healthy Start7Chi7dren's Increased Physician Services Clinic for 6 Indigent Children 20,000 - Children's Law Center Prevention Law Project 7,862 7,852 Choices for Senior Living Home Share Program & Housing Counseling for Seniors 25,000 - CCSN Hostel of Hospitality and Hope Job Bank 5,990 Contingency Total amount of funding requested = $2,176,751. NOTES: (1) The applicant revised the proposal at the time of their verbal presentation to the CDBG Commission from $280,000 to $487,966. A summary of the Commission's funding recommendation by category is as follows: RECOMMENDED ' FUNDING % of TOTAL CATEGORY $ 110,147 8.7 PLAPJNING and ADMINISTRATION (Maximum $169,000 based on 20% of Entitlement Grant and Program Income) 680,350 53.7 ACQUISITION 121,000 9.6 PUBLIC FACILITIES 160,980 12.7 REHABILITATION 15,750 1.2 ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER REMOVAL 172,783 13.6 PUBLIC SERVICES (Maximum $185,550 based on 15% of Entitlement Grant and Program Income) 5,990 .5 CONTINGENCY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ $1,257,000 100.0 TOTAL The total amount of requests considered by the CDBG Commission was approximately $2.1 million. With $2.1 million in total requests and only $1,267,000 available, obviously not all applications could be funded. Also, due to HUD funding limitations, some applications received less funds than requested in order to keep the generic category within program maximums. No applicant is recommended to receive more funds than requested. 387 1 June 7, 1994 1 The CDBG Commission has recommended full funding for fifteen (15) applicants, nine (9) from the Public Services category where reduced funding creates problems for recipient agencies. In the Commission's opinion, the fifteen applications recommended for full funding best fit CDBG national program objectives, the City CDBG policies (presented in Appendix "A"), and the selection criteria. The following summarizes the Commission's reasoning for full funding: City of Fort Collins - CDBG Administration Requested/Recommended: $100,147 Since CDBG regulations allow for the utilization of grant funds for administrative purposes, the Commission believes direct administration of the CDBG Program should be taken from the grant. The amount allocated to administration has declined over the past few years and is currently below ten percent. The Program has also been successfully administered. Larimer County Human Development Dept., City of Fort Collins, et al. - Affordable Housing Information System Requested/Recommended: $10,000 The Commission discussed this application in some detail. Initially there were ' opinions that the project could proceed without CDBG funding. There were concerns that the information will not provide any new/unknown information since there already seems to be a clear established need for housing and services. However, as required by the City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), information and data which is more current than the 1990 Census will lead to a better utilization of limited financial resources. The Commission liked the fact that the project was a joint effort and had broad based support. The allocation of funding will be a one-time allocation and will allow for the development of current data. Neighbor to Neighbor, Inc. - Associated Costs of Land Acquisition in Support of the Development of Affordable Housing Requested/Recommended: $132,350 This project was noted by the Commission to be meeting a dire community need for affordable rental housing. The project will develop 120 units and has leveraged a large amount of additional funds, including last year's CDBG grant. The project has a leveraging ratio of $13 to $1. The project will also have a long- term impact by providing affordable units for at least 30 years. The Commission did have concerns that some of the costs, although part of the total project, are from the past. The Commission questioned the use of CDBG funds to pay for legal fees and a real estate commission which are costs usually paid by the seller of property. The Commission was also concerned with a possible conflict of interest for the payment of funds to a partner in the project. And finally, there is a ' possibility that some funds are for "pre -agreement" expenditures, that is, costs 388 June 7, 1994 1 incurred prior to grant approval and are, thus, ineligible. HUD has been asked For a ruling on these issues. If determined to be ineligible expenditures, the Commission recommends those funds to be allocated to the Housing Authority. On May 27, 1994, HUD submitted a letter to the City responding to the City's questions regarding this proposal (see attached letter of May 27). Essentially, HUD has determined the following: 1. The $25,000 requested for future project administration costs are clearly eligible expenditures of CDBG funds; 2. The $75,500 requested for permanent loan costs appear to be ineligible, but the Denver HUD office is seeking further clarification on the interpretation from HUD headquarters in Washington, D.C.; and 3. The $31,850 requested for costs associated with land acquisition remain in question as to eligibility according to the Denver HUD office. The Denver HUD office is asking the City to determine if the funds are an appropriate expenditure of CDBG funds, and if so, a waiver to pre -agreement costs will be necessary. Regarding the $75,500 for permanent loan costs, Denver HUD's interpretation is ' based on a section of CDBG regulations, 24 C.F.R. 570.206(g), which it believes is null and void. If HUD headquarters in Washington agrees that the section is null and void, then the proposed use of funds is ineligible. The funds would then be allocated in the Housing Authority's acquisition and rehabilitation project as per the CDBG Commission's alternate recommendation. If HUD headquarters in Washington approves the proposed use of funds, the funds would apparently need to be considered a part of the administrative cost category of the FV 1994-95 grant but would not place that category above the maximum 20% allowed. Regarding the $31,850 for costs associated with land acquisition, Denver HUD's question on eligibility involved the City's decision to exclude these costs from the original proposal and to limit CDBG funds for land costs only. In other words, when these costs were incurred, the City had already decided it would not be paid for with CDBG funds. Therefore, if the City changes its position and decides the costs would be an appropriate expenditure of CDBG funds, the City would need to request a waiver of pre -agreement costs, and if approved, only then could the costs be covered. The CDBG Commission's recommendation is that the costs should be covered by CDBG funds. If the Council approved the CDBG Commission's recommendation, the City would need to request a waiver from HUD. If HUD approves the waiver, then the funds could be used as requested. If HUD does not grant the waiver, then the funds would be allocated to the Housing 389 June 7, 1994 Authority's acquisition and rehabilitation project as per the CDBG Commission's alternate recommendation. Volunteer Clearing House - Addition to Existing Building Requested/Recommended: $121,000 The Commission noted that the request for funding represented only one-half of the funds necessary to complete the anticipated work and that matching money would need to be collected before CDBG funds were committed. There were some concerns expressed that the addition would not be handicapped accessible but that services could be provided on the first floor. The applicant was noted to have a good reputation and an excellent success rate. DMA Plaza, Inc. - Window Rehabilitation Requested/Recommended: $100,980 The Commission raised some concerns about the applicant returning year after year for funding rehabilitation projects. However, the Commission allocated funding because the applicant meets a great community need, the provision of housing for elderly citizens. Fort Collins Housing Authority - Architectural Barrier Removal Requested/Recommended: $15,570 The Commission noted this project meets a great community need for handicapped accessibility and believes these funds will be well spent. Disabled Resources Services - Youth Employment Program Requested/Recommended: $10,500 The Commission noted that this relatively small grant request was reaping great benefits. The project has a long-term impact by employing younger citizens of the community. Neighbor to Neighbor, Inc. - Comprehensive Housing Counseling Requested/Recommended: $39,131 This project represents the only comprehensive housing counseling program in the. community. Increased demand for service justifies the request for increased funding. The program has traditionally had a very high success rate. Project Self -Sufficiency - Family Self -Sufficiency Requested/Recommended: $39,131 The Commission supports this program because it will be expanded to include ' families and not just single parents. 390 June 7, 1994 1 Child Care Collaborative - Sliding Scale Day Care Requested/Recommended: $39,131 The Commission believes this program is critical because it provides services to working parents. New Bridges - Operating Expenses Requested/Recommended: $15,000 The Commission believes this program provides a much needed service within the community. The Commission noted that the United Way, which does a very detail needs assessment, has granted funding to the agency. The Commission is concerned that the agency will likely be forced to relocate. Crossroads Safehouse - Children's Program Requested/Recommended: $15,000 The Commission noted the agency provides a much needed service in the community and often demonstrates wide support for their programs. Senior Employment Services - Job Finding Help ' Requested/Recommended: $12,625 The Commission believes this program deals with a hidden problem in the community, finding suitable employment for elderly citizens. As such, the program meets a very important community need. Healthy Start/Children's Clinic - Increase Physician Services Requested/Recommended: $42,295 The Commission noted the applicant provides a vital service and has done an excellent job of leveraging funds from other sources and has about one-half million dollars in reserves. The patient load is increasing and therefore needs to be addressed with additional resources. Choices for Senior Living - Home Share Program and Counseling for Senior Requested/Recommended: $7,862 The Commission believes this is a very important program in that it helps keep senior citizens in their own homes. 391 ' June 7, 1994 Proposals which did not receive full funding were deemed of a lower priority and, in some cases, a lack of funds prohibited their full funding. The following describes the specific reason why the Commission believes certain projects should not receive their requested full funding amount: Community Affordable Residences Enterprises - Acquisition of Land for Low -Income Housing Requested: $250,000 Recommended: $225,000 The Commission noted the applicant has demonstrated the ability to leverage money from other sources. While the project fits all the high priority criteria the Commission has been concerned with the lack of production. The Commission is also concerned with the relatively high cost per unit, at about $75,000 when typical costs are in the neighborhood of $52,000. The project does have good leveraging at a ration of $11 to $1 due in part to donated labor and materials. The applicant has had good results and has a good reputation in the city. Habitat for Humanity - Land for Low -Income Housing Requested: $116,000 Recommended: $58,000 The Commission recommends partial funding of $58,000 for two houses. The Commission expressed some concerns over the slow progress being made by the applicant with other CDBG grants. The Commission also questions if this is the best model for homeownership and has concerns of eventually losing affordable housing stock. Would like to see methods of keeping units affordable. The Commission did note that these projects encourage infill development and provide desirable places for families to live. Fort Collins Housing Authority - Acquisition and Rehabilitation Requested: $500,000 Recommended: $205,000 The Commission expressed concerns with the vagueness of the application. The Commission also believes the housing problems in the city are not centered on rehabilitation but the need for additional newly constructed units. The Housing Authority is also having problems completing projects which were funded in past years. Overall, however, the Authority does have a good track record. The land proposed for acquisition is questionable. The Commission recommends a restriction be placed on the grant that the subject land in the proposal not be purchased with these funds but be used for acquisition, restoration and redevelopment. Downtown Development Authority - Facade Acquisition and Street Improvement Requested: $90,000 Recommended: $60,000 The Commission recommends partial funding to assist in cleaning up blight in the ' downtown area. CDBG regulations require all projects to meet a CDBG Program 392 June 7, 1994 National Objective. In this case, the appropriate National Objective is the "removal of slum and blight conditions." In approving this project, the City Council will have to designate the streets where the work is proposed to be a slum/blight area on a spot basis. One West Art Center, Inc. - Exterior Restoration Requested: $80,000 Recommended: $60,000 The Commission believes this project will help meet the need of historic preservation which is another component of the CDBG Program's mission. This project will help maintain a vibrant downtown area. While there was some discussion if the project was a good use of CDBG funds, it was agreed that it was difficult to find funding for the arts. The Commission recommends the allocated funding be utilized to repair the roof first before any excess funds are utilized on another restoration component. CDBG regulations require all projects to meet a CDBG Program National Objective. In this case, as in the DDA project above, the appropriate National Objective is the "removal of slum/blight conditions." In approving this project, the City Council will have to designate the structure as a slum/blight area on a spot basis. The following applicants did not receive a recommendation for funding. The ' following describes the specific reasons why the Commission believes these projects should not receive the requested funding: Elderhaus - Building Acquisition Requested: $220,000 The Commission believes that failure to acquire the structure will not affect the agency's ability to provide their services. The proposal did not have a high leverage of other funds, in fact, the applicant did not demonstrate sufficient evidence that other sources of funding were being requested. The.Commission could also not understand the church's role in the project. New Bridges, Inc. - Purchase of Land and Construction of Permanent Facility Requested: $280,000 The Commission had many concerns with this proposal. While there is a need for these services, the Commission questioned the success rate of the job finding function, and did not want to help create a bigger problem by providing a new facility noting that fifty percent of the people who use the facility are not from the community. The project had not additional leveraging of other funds. The Commission discussed the need to focus on citizens of the community and not create a new set of clientele by having a new facility. The Commission questions if other people are the community's responsibility. The Commission also still questions why CCSN's "The Mission" could not be utilized, or expanded, to provide similar daytime services. ' 393 June 7, 1994 Island Grove Regional Treatment - Construction of a New Facility Requested: $31,388 The Commission questioned the use of CDBG funds to acquire a facility that would create an asset in another community. While the Commission agreed there was a community need for such a facility, they noted the proposal did not receive, although requested, a letter of support from the Fort Collins Police Department. The Commission would like to see such services provided within the community. Housing Authority - Lead -Based Paint Testing Requested: $5,520 The Commission believes the Housing Authority has the responsibility as a landlord to place funds in their maintenance budget for this program. Care -A -Van - Transportation for Low -Income Residents, Requested $6,520 The Commission did not support this proposal because of the small population benefit and they were not sure the target population could not be served by other categories of the service. There was also no leveraging of any additional funds for the project. Choices, Alternative Education Program - Scholarships for Indigent Students Requested: $30,000 The Commission was very concerned with some misinformation contained in the application specifically noting the Director was not associated with the Poudre School District. The cost per student in the project also seemed to be very high. It was noted that schools are mandated to provide similar services and that there was no support from the District for the proposal. Children's Law Center - Prevention Law Project Requested $20,000 The Commission could find no justification to fund this proposal. Catholic Community Services Northern - Hostel of Hospitality and Hope Job Bank Requested: $25,000 While the Commission agreed the applicant provides a necessary service and had a good track record, there were concerns about the lack of mutual cooperation with other agencies. The salaries also seemed to be too high. The Commission's recommendation is an attempt to send a message that the applicant must cooperate with other agencies." 394 June 7, 1994 Chief Planner Ken Waido gave a brief description on this item and noted the revisions to the Resolution. Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt Resolution 94-95. Linda Coxson, Chair of the Community Development Block Grant Commission, thanked Council for holding the joint worksession prior to the regular Council meeting. Ernie Giron, Director of Catholic Community Services Northern (CCSN), requested Council approve the funding requested by CCSN and spoke of the services they provide. Mary Cosgrove, representing Project Self-sufficiency, stated the funds requested are critical and urged Council to approve the funding requested. She asked Council to reconsider the funding request for the CCSN. B.J. Dean, Executive Director of Island Groves Center, asked Council to reconsider the Center's request for funding. She stated Patrol Commander Bud Reed was available to answer questions regarding the type of services Island Groves provides. Rusty Collins, Executive Director of Neighbor to Neighbor, introduced himself to ' Council as the new Executive Director and thanked the CDBG Commission for its funding recommendation. Betty Maloney, 1309 City Park Avenue, representing the Larimer County Affordable Housing Task Force, urged Council to reconsider its funding request, and spoke of the important services the Task Force provides. Lani VanEck, from the Larimer County Department of Human Development and representing the Larimer County Affordable Housing Consortion, thanked the CDBG Commission for its funding recommendation of $10,000. She briefly described the function of the Consortion and presented Council with packets of information. Jim Overman, Director of the Hospitality Center Programs at Catholic Community Services Northern, requested Council grant the request of $25,000 for the shelter and job bank. Eddie Jo Yost, Executive Director of Choices for Senior Living, urged Council to support its funding request of $7,800 which was recommended by the CDBG. Bill Bertche, member of the CDBG Commission, spoke of the reasons for denying CCSN's funding request. 395 June 7, 1994 1 Robert Thompson, Community Development Specialist with Larimer County Human Development and Homeless Assistance Team Coordinator, spoke in support of Catholic Community Services Northern and spoke of its efforts to assist the needy people of Fort Collins. Carol Landhorn, Administrative Director of the Children's Clinic, thanked the CDBG Commission for its recommendation. Steve Slezak, Chair of the Downtown Development Association, spoke of funding sources for the DDA and asked Council to supplement its resources with the $60,000 recommended by the CDBG. He spoke of the facade programs and of the jobs it has created. He urged Council to approve the DDA's request. Lynn Dean, Boardmember of the Catholic Community Services Northern, urged Council to reconsider the funding request by CCSN and spoke of the services offered. She stated that when funding determinations are made it would be beneficial for Council to see what CDBG funds are paying for. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to amend Resolution 94-95 as follows: ' Reduce funding for DMA Plaza to - $94,303 Add Funding for CCSN - 12,767 Deleting the Contingency Fund - 5,990 The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to amend Resolution 94-95 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Division Commander Bud Reed clarified Fort Collins Police Services makes an annual contribution of $5,000 to the Island Groves Center. Councilmember Horak stated during the budget process it would be helpful to determine what level of service the City is receiving from Island Groves to decide what amount of funding needs to be allocated to pay for those services. Councilmember McCluskey commended the CDBG Commission for its efforts. Councilmember Kneeland concurred with Councilmember McCluskey. Mayor Azari stated it would be beneficial for the CDBG Commission to have a copy of the Human Services Policy and emphasized other funding sources were available for people to consider. 1 396 Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Ordinance No. 97, 1994 on First Reading. Yeas: Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays THE MOTION CARRIED. June 7, 1994 Councilmember Apt, to adopt Councilmembers Apt, Azari, None. Ordinance No. 98, 1994 Appropriating Funds from Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between Funds for the Purpose of Providing Funding to Construct Streetscape Improvements to Linden and Walnut Streets within the Downtown General Improvement District #1. Adopted on First Reading. The following is staff's recommendation on this item. "Executive Summary This Ordinance appropriates monies from prior year reserves in the Sales and Use Tax Fund and from the Capital Projects Fund for transfer to the City Capital Project Fund (the "GID") to be used for the Linden streetscape improvements. Appropriations of $200,000 from the Use Tax Carryover prior year reserve and $100,000 from prior year reserves in the 114 Cent Necessary Capital Projects Fund are recommended. Reserve balances following the appropriation are estimated at $553,000 in the Use Tax Carryover reserve and $53,000 in the 114 Cent Necessary fund balance. Ongoing maintenance expenses for these improvements that will be incurred by the Parks and Forestry Divisions for 1995 is estimated at $10,400. NOTE: These figures do not include snow removal and sidewalk cleaning for the Linden street project. Those duties will be the responsibility of the adjacent business and/or property owners. Major renovation, loss, theft, and vandalism are not covered in this budget. This only covers small items and day to day repairs and general maintenance. Items such as replacement of drinking fountains, bollards, benches, clocks, bike racks, kiosks, ornamental lights/poles, interlocking pavers, art -structures, tree grates, trees, trash containers, banners, etc. will have to identified elsewhere in an infrastructure renovation budget such as the Downtown GID M1 or a similar source. 397 ' June 7, 1994 Staff has completed preliminary design concepts and cost estimates for the construction of the Linden Streetscape improvements. Three options were evaluated: complete the full improvements for Linden Street from Walnut to Jefferson Street and widen the sidewalk to 18'; construct half -block improvements from Walnut to the mid -block alley and widen the sidewalk to 18'; or renovate the existing 12' wide sidewalk on both sides of Linden Street between Walnut and Linden Streets. Earlier in the meeting, Council was asked to endorse Option 1 (See Attachment 1) and approve funding from the General Improvements District #1 Fund on First Reading (Ordinance No. 35). The Ordinance also authorized the construction of streetscape improvements for Linden Street from Walnut to Jefferson Street. The cost of Option I for full improvements is $623,245. Staff is recommending approval of the Ordinance at this time to provide matching funding for construction. Option I will be less disruptive to the surrounding property owners and tenants by completing the construction in one phase. The project as described will be less expensive if completed in one phase and will provide continuity with the Linden Hotel renovation and integrate Old Town Square with the Historic downtown. ' City Council has endorsed the redevelopment of the Linden Block as a priority project and has recognized that the Linden Block is critical to the overall revitalization of the downtown area. City Council has also identified the continued implementation of the Downtown Plan as a priority in 1993-1995 Policy Agenda. The vision of the Downtown Plan is to provide a pleasing appearance - with attractive walks, plazas and wide tree lined streets. The downtown should also be accessible by pedestrians and vehicles - walking and bicycling facilities should be provided. Option I as described, is consistent with the vision of the Downtown Plan and for this reason staff is requesting that funds be appropriated from undesignated General Fund reserves for the construction of streetscape improvements on Linden Street from Walnut to Jefferson Streets. The current cost estimates include a $60,000 allowance for pedestrian lights and street art; this allowance may be reduced if the Project costs exceed the amount of funding provided for this project. Staff will make the appropriate adjustments to the cost estimate and will work within the fund balances accordingly. For additional information, please refer to the Agenda Item Summary for General Improvement District #1 (Agenda Item #3)." City Manager Steve Burkett stated if Council adopted the Ordinance on First Reading, staff would bring back different funding options prior to Second Reading. RM June 7, 1994 Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt Ordinance No. 98, 1994 on First Reading. Dan MacArthur, 617 Maple and member of the Downtown Business Association, spoke in support of the motion. Jeff Bridges, 725 Mathews, spoke of storm drainage problems in the area and suggested while the area is under construction the City save money by replacing old storm drainage pipes. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, stated since the Linden Street Improvement Project was not included in the original ballot language in 1984, he did not believe the funds could be applied to this project. He stated the funds should be refunded to the voters. Councilmember McCluskey stated he would be supporting the motion, but had concerns regarding where the funds were going to come from. Stormwater Utility Manager Bob Smith presented a map outlining the storm drainage system. Utility Director Rich Shannon stated there may be cost benefits in installing new ' pipe in the area at the same time of construction, spoke of funding for the project and stated potential savings would be gone within a short period of time to pay back the interest on the funds borrowed to install the piping. Councilmember Janett supported the motion and stated in the future, if General Fund money is requested, it should be handled through the budget process. The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 75, 1994 Amending Chapter 7 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Prohibit False Campaign Statements. Failed on Second Reading. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary The Council Governance Committee has investigated the need for the City to adopt an ordinance prohibiting false campaign statements. This Ordinance, which was ' 399 , June 7, 1994 adopted 5-1 as amended on First Reading on May 17, prohibits any person from knowingly making, publishing or circulating any writing containing a false statement that is designed to affect a vote on any issue or relating to any candidate at any election held in the City and the ordinance may be prosecuted in and penalties for its violation may be imposed by the Fort Collins Municipal Court." Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt Ordinance No. 75, 1994 on Second Reading. City Attorney Steve Roy explained the term "false statement". Paul Thompson, 705 Cherokee Drive, opposed the ordinance. Tom Maloney, 1309 City Park and representing the Larimer County Chapter of the ACLU, questioned who would assess and impose the penalties if the ordinance were violated. David Lipp, 626 Remmington Street, stated the Ordinance was unnecessary and a waste of time. I Tom Higley, 1612 Scarborough, spoke in opposition of the motion, stating it was absurd and questioned the harshness of the penalties. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, strongly opposed the motion. Councilmember Janett stated she opposed the motion and noted law enforcement and judicial people have more important things to do than enforce an ordinance which is not needed. Councilmember Kneeland stated that although she supported the Ordinance on First Reading, she would not be supporting it on Second Reading. Councilmember Apt concurred with Councilmember Kneeland stating it would be difficult to enforce and stated it may suppress the political process. Councilmember McCluskey supported the motion stating it was important for people to be able to believe what they read. Councilmember Smith stated he supported the motion and that it sends a message that high ethical standards must be upheld. The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: Councilmembers Apt, Horak, Janett and Kneeland. ' THE MOTION FAILED. 400 June 7, 1994 1 Ordinance No. 86, 1994 Appropriating $162,662 of Unanticipated Revenue for the Construction of Bike Lanes on County Road 9 Between Horsetooth Road and Harmony Road, No Action Taken. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "Financial Impact Constructing bike lanes on County Road 9 is a $162,662 project that was selected by the North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council (NFRT & AQPC) as an enhancement project for fiscal year 1994. With the recent development proposals of NCR and English Ranch, much of County Road 9 will be improved with bike lanes using street oversizing funds budgeted and appropriated. Federal Enhancement Funds totalling $116,639 can then be used for another regional ISTEA Enhancement project. The City's local matching funds of $46,023 were appropriated from the Engineering Minor Street Capital Fund and are, available for other bike/pedestrian improvements. Executive Summary , City staff has looked at improvements to County Road 9 for the last few years. Several years ago staff identified this roadway as a major bicycle commuter route to Hewlett -Packard, however funding for these improvements was not available until the Federal ISTEA program. Two years ago a bicycle lane enhancement project was proposed and selected by the North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council for funding in 1994. Resolution 94-75 and Ordinance No. 86, 1994 approved on First Reading on May 17, 1994 were a part of this process. The proposed scope of the enhancement was to add 6' wide bicycle lanes to the existing county roadway section. Recent interest by development along most of County Road 9 make permanent improvements imminent. Permanent improvements would remove the existing pavement and improve the road to arterial standards. Staff believes the City should not proceed with the federal enhancement project because these bike lane improvements would be removed when permanent street improvements are constructed later this fall. Staff recommends that the ordinance not be adopted by the Council on second reading. BACKGROUND: Several years ago, County Road 9 was identified as a major bikeway to the HP facility. It was listed in the NFRT & AQPC's Regional Plan (Bikeway Element) as a key connection in both the regional and local system. At the time, major , 401 June 7, 1994 development along County Road 9 was unanticipated. The bike lane construction project was selected by the NFRT & AQPC as an Enhancement Project and budged for 1994. The project scope was to add 6' bike lanes to the existing County Road 9. Recently development projects have been planned on County Road 9 which will improve its frontage to arterial standards, including bike lanes. If the Federal Enhancement bike lanes were constructed this fall, between 75% to 98% of these improvements would be removed within the next year with the permanent roadway construction. NCR has proposed the first phase of a new office complex on the northwest corner of Harmony Road and County Road 9. As part of the development, County Road 9 will be improved for approximately 2200 feet. Staff has been in contact with NCR representative and they indicate a desire to build as soon as possible. Hewlett- Packard, on the northwest corner of Harmony Road and County Road 9, has an agreement with the City through its original PUD to improve its portion of County Road 9 when the other side (NCR site) develops. Staff has contacted HP and it has indicated its cooperation and financial responsibility for this improvement. Bartran and Company is working to submit the last phase of the English Ranch Subdivision at Horsetooth and County Road 9. As a part of their development, County Road 9 will be improved for approximately 1400 feet. Staff has contacted ' Nr. Bartran and he indicates his willingness to cooperate and assume financial responsibility for his company's portion of the improvements. Spring Creek Farms also has approximately 1300 feet of frontage on County Road 9. Although not quite ready for development, the property owner has indicated a willingness to work with the City on the roadway improvements. Staff believes that through coordinating the developing properties along County Road 9, improvements to County Road 9 can be completed this year, making the Federal Enhancement project unnecessary. County Road 9 would be improved through the development process using normal street oversizing reimbursements to accomplish an improved arterial section with bicycle lanes. These improvements would be completed this fall with NCR's development or early next spring with the English Ranch development. The ISTEA Funds ($116,639) that would not be used for this project would be released for other NFRT & AQPC projects identified for funding in later years. Although there is the possibility that the City of Fort Collins would "lose" these funds to other Northern Front Range cities, they would be available for alternative transportation projects. The NFRT & AQPC has a process in place to reallocate these funds. Fiscal Year 1994 ISTEA funds must be committed to a project by a September 1994 deadline. By releasing these funds now, there is time to select and commit these funds to another alternative transportation project: 402 June 7, 1994 Staff recommends that the local matching funds appropriated ($46,O23) from the Minor Street Capital Fund be retained for matching funds for the possibility that the next Federal Enhancement Project selected by the NFRT & AQPC is in Fort Collins. If not, staff proposes these matching funds for this project then be used to fund another local alternative transportation project(s)." City Manager Steve Burkett stated that staff recommended no action be taken. Items Relating to the Air Quality Advisory Board, Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 78, 1994, Creating an Air Quality Advisory Board. B. Resolution 94-96 Assigning a Councilmember as Liaison to the Air Quality Advisory Board. This Resolution appoints a Councilmember to act as the liaison to the Air Quality ' Advisory Board. Council will need to select a Counci7member prior to adoption of the Resolution." Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to adopt Ordinance No. 78, 1994 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt Resolution 94-96 inserting the name of Alan Apt. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other. Business Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, directing staff to review and make comments on County proposals in the corridor outside the Urban Growth Area. City Manager Steve Burkett suggested staff provide Council with a 2 page memo outlining current policies. 403 June 7, 1994 The vote on Councilmember Janett's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Apt spoke of a recent decision by the PRPA Board that would improve the Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process and stated the Board planned on conducting a telephone survey to gather public input on the IRP. He stated he wanted to see a sample of the questionnaire. Mayor Azari spoke of recent vandalism at the cemetery and of the need for harsher penalties and requested staff explore different ways to enforce the law. Adjour The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. TEST: City Clerk 404