Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-01/03/1989-Regular' January 3, 1989 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, January 3, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy Citizen Participation Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, spoke of the shortage of signatures on a petition proposing a Charter Amendment relating to the direct election of the Mayor and asked questions regarding the completion of the bridge on West Prospect. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, asked Council to reconsider the Ordinance transferring money into the Street Oversizing Fund. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, asked for reconsideration of the direct election of the Mayor and requested answers to previous questions. Agenda Review: City Manager City Manager Burkett stated there were no changes to the agenda as published. Councilmember Estrada requested Item #10, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 2, 1989, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue for Operation of Block 31 Property, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, asked that Item #11, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 3, 1989 Amending Chapter 26 of the Code Relating to Rates and Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility, be removed from the Consent Calendar. Consent Calendar ' This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends -37- January 3, 1989 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 #16, Pulled Consent Items. 7. Consider aooroval of the minutes of the regular meeting of December 20. Items Relating to West Fossil Creek Rezoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 177, 1988, Rezoning 4.4 Acres Known as West Fossil Creek, Tract A Rezoning, from the T Transition to the H-B Highway Business Zoning District. B. Secorid Reading of Ordinance No. 178, 1988, Rezoning 44.6 Acres Known as West Fossil Creek, Tract B Rezoning, from the T Transition to the B-P Planned Business Zoning District. These Ordinances, which were adopted 6-0 on First Reading on December 20, rezone approximately 4.4 acres from T Transition to H-B Highway Business and to rezone approximately 44.6 acres from T Transition to B-P Planned Business. The property is located on the west side of South College Avenue in the vicinity of Fossil Creek Parkway. The property is presently undeveloped. APPLICANT: James Stewart and Associates 214 North Howes Fort Collins, CO 80524 OWNERS: U.S. 287 Limited and Foothills Office Park Limited 1624 Market Street, No. 204 Denver, CO 80202 The City contracts for repair, installation, consulting services and purchase of new equipment for its PBX telecommunications equipment. In May of 1987, after soliciting bids for this service, the City entered into a service contract with PacTel Information Systems (now known as Northern Telecom Meridian Systems Inc.). The contract would have terminated December 31, 1988. This Ordinance, which was adopted 6-0 on First Reading on December 20, authorizes the renewal of the contract. 1 The City has been very satisfied with the level of service provided by Northern Telecom and the relationship developed over the years has been constructive for the City. As the City began to move into new networking scenarios, Northern Telecom was also able to provide very ' valuable information and services related to this expansion. It is Im January 3, 1989 F1 1 00 10. currently assisting the City with the installation of the Fibre Optic network between the City Hall campus and the 700 Wood Street complex. As the service level has been quite between the two entities is beneficial in the telecommunication arena, staff the current service contract one year. remain at the 1987 level of $47,000. acceptable and the relationship to the City's continued success is recommending an extension of The fee for such services will Second Reading of Ordinance No. 180, 1988, Fixing the Salary of the Municipal Judge. City Council has met in Executive appraisal of Municipal Judge John adopted 6-0 on First Reading on salary for the Municipal Judge at approves a one-time performance bo January 20, 1989. Session to conduct the performance Tobin. This Ordinance, which was December 20, establishes the 1989 $52,000 effective January 9, and ws of $2,500 payable on or before The City Code requires Council approval of any case over $20,000 not requiring bidding. Staff recommends awarding a multi -year agreement with Planning Research Corporation (PRC) for hardware and software maintenance. PRC is the vendor selected in 1984 using a competitive process to provide the computer aided dispatch (CAD) system for the Police Department. Currently Block 31 expenditures of jointly -owned County/City monies occur from the 1) project cost center for property acquisition; 2) project cost center for parking lot construction; and 3) General Fund Restricted account for daily operation and maintenance. Rents and interest are deposited in the Capital Projects Fund. This appropriation consolidates the monies into one project cost center to fund operation and maintenance costs and building repair in order to make accounting and reporting for financial transactions simpler. -39- January 3, 1989 12. 13. 14. Utility. This ordinance provides for an increase in the Raw Water of 20% and monthly service fees of approximately 3%. Th( are needed to obtain water supplies for the long term t sufficient to meet the City's water demands during prolonged drought that typically occurs only once during years. Requirements se increases iat would be :he type of every fifty A. Resolution 89-1 Authorizing Application to Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District for Cancellation of Temporary Use Permits. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1989 to Apply and Contract for Beneficial Use of Water on Behalf of the City and Prescribing the Terms for Application for an Allotment of Water to the City from the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. This Resolution and Ordinance are needed to apply for the transfer of 1,735 acre-foot units of Colorado -Big Thompson (CBT) Project water held by the City under Temporary Use Permits to a permanent Class B Contract. The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD) requires that Temporary Use Permits be converted to a permanent Class B Contract every few years. Article VII, Section 1 of the Charter presently provides that the Municipal Court has exclusive original jurisdiction of all causes arising under the Charter and the Ordinances of the City. In order to clarify that the Council can, by ordinance, create civil remedies in other courts of competent jurisdiction, a proposed "housekeeping" amendment to that provision of the Charter is recommended. The amendment would delete the word "exclusive." Since 1975, the City has provided Transfort services to the student body of Colorado State University by and through the Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU). It is proposed that these services be provided for the term of this contract at the rate of $3.60 per semester for each full-time fee paying student and for 1 I 511E January 3, 1989 71 I� fee -paying international students enrolled in courses of study of the Office of International Training Programs (OTIP). 15. Routine Deeds and Easements. a. Utility easements from MSP Investment Co. needed for additional utility lines which service the Brittany Knolls development. Consideration: $0. b. Powerline easement from James P. Petersen, 1220 N. College, needed to underground the existing overhead electric system. Consideration: $120. (60 sq. ft @ $2.00/sq. ft.) Powerline easement from Rudolph Grenz and LaVerda B. Grenz, 1314 N. College Avenue, needed to underground the existing overhead electric system. Consideration: $652.50 (72 sq. ft. $2.50/sq.ft. plus 378 sq. ft. @ $1.25/sq. ft.) d. Easement from Fred W. Nussbaumer and Martelle W. Nussbaumer, 3816 South County Road 9 needed for Minor Road Waterline. The Timberline Waterline Phase III and Minor Road Waterline Project includes design of approximately 10,000 feet of a 24-inch pipeline and 2,000 feet of a 16-inch pipeline to improve water - service on the southeast side of the city. The Minor Road Waterline will extend east of Foxmeadows Subdivision along Horsetooth to Minor Road (So. County Road 9). It then goes south to Harmony Road where it ties into an existing 16-inch waterline. Consideration: $10 (temporary construction easement). Sidewalk Dedication from Lake Sherwood Home Owners Association for a sidewalk located on the south side of Drake Road from the Union Pacific Railroad west to Parklake Drive. Consideration: Dedication. Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #6. A. Item #7. Item #8. A -41- January 3, 1989 Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #9. Item #10. Property. Item #11. Item #12. B. Item #13. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 2 1989, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue for Operation of Block 31 Property, Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT This action consolidates and appropriates $330,897 from various sources into one cost center for Block 31 operations, maintenance and capital expenditures. , -42- January 3, 1989 1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Currently Block 31 expenditures of jointly -owned County/City monies occur from the 1) project cost center for property acquisition; 2) project cost center for parking lot construction; and 3) General Fund Restricted account for daily operation and maintenance. Rents and interest are deposited in the Capital Projects Fund. This appropriation consolidates the monies into one project cost center to fund operation and maintenance costs and building repair in order to make accounting and reporting for financial transactions simpler. In 1981, the City and Larimer County agreed to purchase property on Block 31 for future governmental uses. A project cost center, funded by equal contributions from the City and County, was established to acquire the property. In 1982, both entities agreed to construct a parking lot on a portion of the site with each agency sharing equally in the use of the lot. A project cost center was created for the parking lot. When the County and City began to receive rents and make repairs, a General Fund account was created to account for the operation expenses, rents collected and interest received. To more accurately account for the revenue and expenditures for, Block 31, these various monies should be combined and appropriated into a single project account." Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to adopt Ordinance No. 2, 1989 on First Reading. Councilmember Estrada posed questions regarding the future development of a joint City/County facility on Block 31 and requested a progress report. - City Manager Burkett commented on CHOICES 95 reviewed and noted that not ranked as a high priority. the list of proposed projects that City/County facility in Block 31 had City Manager Burkett noted the progress and the delays that have transpired regarding the development of a joint City/County facility. He spoke of the need for additional information before seeking requests for proposals. Councilmember Estrada strongly urged the concept be developed this year, and if not, Council should begin to discuss other options for the property. Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, spoke against the Block 31 proposals. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, spoke against a public/private venture to provide additional government office space. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, spoke against the current Council -Manager form of government. General Services Director Tom Frazier addressed the elements of the study, including public/private development issues and financial benefits. He VC10 January 3, 1989 estimated the approximate cost of the study would be five to fifteen i thousand dollars and noted the project could be broken down into two or three phases. Councilmember Estrada noted he was in favor of the Block 31 concept and stressed the need for County participation to ensure the viability of the concept. The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2, 1989 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada and Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 3, 1989 Amending Chapter 26 of the Code Relating to Rates and Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility. Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT Raw water requirements for new development will be increased by 20%. For a typical single family home, the fee will increase by $108, from $512 to $620. Monthly service rates will increase approximately 3%. Monthly ' service fees for a typical single family residence will increase $.58, from $19.24 to $19.82. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This ordinance provides for an increase in the Raw Water Requirements of 20% and monthly service fees of approximately 3%. These increases are needed to obtain water supplies for the long term that would be sufficient to meet the City's water demands during the type of prolonged drought that typically occurs only once during every fifty years. BACKGROUND Resolution 88-205 adopted on December 20, 1988, directed staff to present an ordinance to City Council which would implement a 20% increase in raw water requirements and a 3% increase in water service fees. Water supply policy issues have been examined in considerable detail during the last couple of years. In February 1988 a joint City Council and Water Board Committee was appointed to examine several key issues regarding supply reliability and acquisition. It concluded that it was desirable to obtain water supplies for the long term that would be sufficient to meet the City's water demands during the type 'of prolonged drought that ' typically occurs only once during every fifty years. To achieve this, a 20% increase in raw water requirements for new development, and a 7-8% increase in monthly service fees, spread over three years, is necessary. -44- January 3, 1989 ' Revenue from the service fees will be used to purchase approximately 7,400 acre feet of water during the next five years. The increase in the water service fees will be effective on all billings rendered on or after February 1, 1989. Raw water requirements under the existing requirements can be satisfied on all final plats prior to February 1, 1989. The adjusted requirements will be in effect beginning on February 1, 1989." Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 3, 1989 on First Reading. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane 44, raised questions regarding the credentials of employees involved in the preparation of City ordinances. Councilmember Horak spoke of the qualified people serving on the Water Board and noted their credentials and qualifications. He noted the three percent water rate increase was based on the annual investment into the Water Treatment Plant. Water and Sewer Director Mike Smith commented on the rate increases that have occurred over the last eight to nine years which ranged from zero to twenty-three percent. ' Councilmember Maxey noted the policy was necessary to implement the Council goal of the 1-in-50-year drought plan. Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, environmental activist, spoke regarding environmental concerns and urged water conservation measures be taken.. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 3, 1989 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Horak stated he was going to discuss the direct election of the Mayor under Other Business. Councilmember Estrada stated he also wanted to discuss the direct election of the Mayor. Items Related to the Noel Annexation and Zoning I Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -45- January 3, 1989 A. Resolution 89-3 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating ' Annexation Proceedings for the Noel Annexation. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 6, 1989 Annexing Approximately 287.5 Acres Known as the Noel Annexation. First Reading of Ordinance No. 7, 1989 Zoning Approximately 100.0 Acres of the Noel Annexation into the R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential District and Approximately 187.5 Acres into the R-F Foothills Residential District. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 287.5525 acres located west of Overland Trail and north of West Prospect Road (extended). Approximately 4.6123 acres of the annexation is owned by the City of Fort Collins and is the location of a water storage tank. The requested zoning is in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres of R-F Foothills Residential for the western portion of the property; and 2) 100.0105 acres of R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential for the eastern portion of the property; and is further conditioned by specific density and design conditions contained in an Annexation Agreement. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation. APPLICANT: Gefroh-Hattman Inc. OWNERS: Wallace Noel 135 West Swallow Rd. 253 Grey Rock Rd. ' Fort Collins, CO Laporte, CO City of Fort Collins BACKGROUND The applicant, Gefroh-Hattman Inc., on behalf of the owner, Wallace Noel, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of approximately 287.5525 acres located west of Overland Trail and north of West Prospect Road (extended). Approximately 4.6123 acres of the annexation is owned by the City of Fort Collins and is the location of a water storage tank. The requested zoning is in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres of R-F Foothills Residential for the western portion of the property; and 2) 100.0105 acres of R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential for the eastern portion of the property. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation which also contains a proposed Annexation Agreement outlining several total dwelling unit and land development restrictions. The owner's reasons for requesting this annexation and Annexation Agreement are outlined in the attached September 29, 1988, letter from the applicant. A copy of the proposed Annexation Agreement is also attached. The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and , Larimer County contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA, the City will annex property in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according to.%State law. The property Mile January 3, 1989 ' gains the required 116 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the Overland Trail Annexation to the east and the Second and Third Foothills Annexations to the south. Zonings The Noel Annexation was first submitted to the City for formal review in September 1987. The annexation application at that time requested the following zonings: 1) 267.702 acres of R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential; and 2) 19.8505 acres of B-P Planned Business. Staff began discussions with the applicant concerning the requested zonings. In staff's interpretation, the requests for R-L-P and B-P zoning departed from the foothills policies. After several months of discussion, the applicant requested an informal meeting with the Planning and Zoning Board to discuss potential alternative zoning requests. A special work session of the Board was held on March 9, 1988, to discuss the request. Staff presented a history of the development of the foothills policies and the applicant made a presentation justifying the annexation's zoning requests. After discussing the issue of the zoning requests, the Board indicated that it believed that the foothills policies would not support the R-L-P and B-P zoning requests, as presented. The present application for annexation proposes original zoning for the ' property in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres for R-F, Foothills Residential zone for the western portion of the property; and 2) 100.0105 acres of R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential zone for the eastern portion of the property. The R-F District designation is for low density residential areas located near the foothills. The R-L-P District designation is for areas planned as a unit to provide variation in use, density and building placement. The owner would like to develop the property with predominantly detached single-family- residential units. However, due to adjacent multi -family developments along the property's southeastern boundary, the owner would like the option to develop patio homes in no more than duplex configurations per structure as a buffer to the proposed single-family areas. The primary criteria for evaluating a zoning request is its compliance with the officially adopted elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. If the elements of the Comprehensive Plan lack specific guidance, zoning requests can be justified through several general welfare considerations such as: availability of adequate transportation, educational, utilities and other facilities to accommodate the uses permitted in the zone; the need in the vicinity and/or community as a whole for additional land of the zone; changing conditions in the surrounding area; and the evaluation of impacts of the zone upon the immediate neighborhood or area. Another alternative available is to modify or change the policies of the Comprehensive Plan or the geographic area to which the policies would apply. If policies are successfully changed or applicable boundaries modified, the zoning request ' can then be favorably considered. -47- January 3, 1989 t The requested zoning districts of this annexation again raise the issue of land uses near the foothills. Specifically, the request asks the City for a determination as to where the boundary of the foothills policies lies. Staff believes that properties west of Overland Trail should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis for conformity with foothills policies. This case -by -case evaluation is similar to the case -by -case evaluation the City provides within the LAND DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM development review process. The case -by -case evaluation must take into account existing adjacent uses and unique property attributes which may indicate land use and design options available for the development of the property while still adhering to the foothills area's goals, objectives and policies. In some cases for properties located west of Overland Trail, special annexation agreements and/or design conditions will be necessary to protect public aesthetic and open space interests. An example of a case -by -case approach to the implementation of the Foothills policies was the Overland Hills Annexation (Case #29-86, A). The applicant requested annexation of 83.54 acres, located west of Taft Hill Road and south of Horsetooth Road (extended), to be zoned 19.37 acres in the R-L-P district and 57.58 acres in the R-F district. The annexation was in an area for a possible relocation of Overland Trail, i.e., the potential relocation split the property. In recommending approval of the zoning requests staff stated, "Staff supports the applicant's request for these zoning designations feeling that Overland Trail can make a clear break ' between urban development to the east and lower density residential development to the west." The Overland Hills Annexation and requested zonings were approved by the City Council in October 1987 (see attached map). The Noel Annexation request is, thus, another property specific case -by -case evaluation. Staff believes, based on the property owner's willingness to place land use, density and development design conditions on the property, as indicated in the summary of the annexation agreement below, that the foothills goals, objectives and policies will be achieved. The owner is sensitive to the City's policy of preserving the foothills in their natural environmental setting. The owner has proposed, in his September 29, 1988 letter, to donate approximately 120 acres located above the 5200-foot elevation line to the City for open space purposes. Although the owner insists on making this offer, it must be understood that zoning decisions must be made based on sound principles of the City's Comprehensive Plan and not based on an offer by an applicant to dedicate land to the City as a gift. Further, there must be no requirement of a donation imposed upon the developer. In addition to annexation, the other issue before the Council is what is the appropriate zoning classification(s) for the property. The owner has proposed an Annexation Agreement outlining the density and development ' conditions he is willing to accept (see attached Annexation Agreement) subject to the property being placed in the R-L-P and R-F zones. In summary the conditions contained in the Annexation Agreement are: -48- January 3, 1989 1. Approval of the requested zoning districts. 2. No commercial or other non-residential development. 3. Only detached single-family residential units and some patio homes (to be determined) located near existing adjacent multi -family development to the south. 4. Maximum total of 587 residential units. This number is not guaranteed but is dependent upon City approvals through the LDGS. 5. All development proposals will be subject to site plan reviews. No development above the 5200-foot contour line. 7. The maximum height of any structure will be thirty (30) feet. The property under consideration for annexation has some unique aspects which may require broader interpretation of the boundaries and foothills policies in relationship to the requested zonings. Adjacent to the property are several developments of "urban" character. Multi -family residential development is located to the south and the Colorado State University Equine Center and Foothills Campus is located to the north. ' These developments suggest a "line" other than Overland Trail might be appropriate to delineate the area of applicability of the foothills policies. An Historical Background report on the development of the foothills policies is attached to this memorandum. Findings The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA. 2. The area meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 3. The attached Resolution accepts the annexation petition and determines that the petition is in compliance with State law. The Resolution also initiates the annexation process for this property by establishing the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. Public hearing and second reading of the Ordinances annexing and setting original zoning on the property. These will be considered by the City Council on February 7, 1989. ' 4. Staff believes that properties west of Overland Trail should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis for conformity with foothills policies. This case by -case evaluation must also take into account existing adjacent uses and unique property attributes which may -49- January 3, 1989 indicate land use and design options available for the development of ' the property while still adhering to the foothills area's goals, objectives, and policies. In some cases, special annexation agreements and/or design conditions will be necessary to protect public aesthetic and open space interests. 5. The requested zonings are the major consideration. The R-f zone request is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The R-L-P zoning request asks the City to determine the appropriate "line" as to where the foothills policies begin to apply. Staff believes that the density and development related conditions of the Annexation Agreement protect the goals, objectives and policies the City's Comprehensive Plan for the foothills area and that the boundary line for the foothills property should be located approximately 2,100 feet west of the centerline of Overland Trail. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting of November 21, 1988, voted 6-0 to recommend denial of the requested annexation and zonings. A copy of the Board's minutes is attached. Two letters commenting on the proposed Noel Annexation and Zoning were received by the Planning and Zoning Board, one from Colorado State University and one from Mr. Alvin L. Miller. Copies of these letters are attached." Councilmember Kirkpatrick withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to interest. , a perceived conflict of Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry to adopt Resolution 89-3. City Attorney Roy gave a brief presentation and responded to questions from Council. He recommended that Council only consider the Resolution and upon passage, a hearing could be scheduled for February 7. He noted the Ordinances would be continued until February 7 for consideration on First Reading and recommended changes for future annexations. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, inquired about the identity of "City staff". Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, complimented City staff and the City's elected officials. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Resolution 89-3 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Kirkpatrick withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. -50- January 3, 1989 ' Items Relating to an Ordinance Imposing a 1/4 Cent Sales and Use Tax on all Taxable Items Except Food to Fund Street Maintenance Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT This Ordinance provides for a new 114 cent City Sales and Use Tax to be expended for street maintenance. This 114 cent tax would begin on July 1, 1989, immediately after the expiration of a current 114 cent Sales and Use Tax being used for General City Capital (necessary) Projects. Therefore, the net effect would be no increase in the current 5.75Y State and City sales tax. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 8, 1989, Imposing a 114 Cent Sales -and Use Tax for Street Maintenance. B. Resolution 89-4 Submitting Ordinance No. 8, 1989, to the Registered. City Electors at the March 7, 1989 Regular City Election. ' Under the Charter, Council has the power to adopt the Ordinance, to refer the adopted Ordinance to the voters, or to submit the Proposed Ordinance to the voters without adopting it. If adopted, the Resolution would submit the Proposed Ordinance to the voters at the March 7, 1989 regular election and would determine the ballot language for the Proposed Ordinance. Staff recommends that Council adopt this Ordinance. In order to maintain the current level of service on the City's 310 mile street network, $2 million per year of additional funds are needed according to an extensive street inventory analysis. The age of our residential streets coupled with increased traffic loading on arterials and collectors has become a significant concern to the Council and the citizens. A 114 cent City Sales and Use Tax on all taxable items except food is being proposed to supply the funds needed to properly maintain our streets. Recent citizens surveys, Choices 95 Projects committees, and City Council have identified street maintenance as one of their highest priorities. Providing funds now will save many streets from reconstruction which costs up to five times more than routine overlay maintenance. BACKGROUND A good street system is essential to the life and development of a community. Streets provide the physical link to our homes, to our ' businesses and to our places of recreation. They provide routes to school for our children. They are the lifeline between residents and emergency services --police, fire protection and hospitals. Few aspects of our daily We January 3, 1989 lives do not depend upon the effectiveness and condition of the public , street system. Fort Collins' street system has grown rapidly over the past few decades. Between 1965 and 1978 the street mileage doubled, growing from 100 to 200 miles. During the past ten years, another 100 miles has been added, increasing the City's total street mileage to more than 300 miles. Funding for maintenance of the street system has not kept pace with this rapid growth. Prior to 1979, expenditures for street maintenance totaled only $80,000 per year. The severe winter of 1979180 produced a record 120 inches of snow, and by spring the City's weak and water-logged streets were in serious disrepair. In response to this crisis, City expenditures for street maintenance rose to a level of nearly $1.1 million per year. With this increase in levels of expenditure came a change in the City's approach to street maintenance --an approach based on "pavement management". The following illustration describes the pavement management approach. A scientific approach to Pavement Management is critical because the condition of a particular street is not always apparent to the human eye. Rain, snow, heat and traffic loads constantly stress and age a pavement, but early damage can often go undetected. During the first 75 percent of a pavement's life, it performs well, and to the untrained eye, appears to be in good condition. After that, without effective preventive maintenance, the pavement deteriorates so rapidly that it may seem to fall apart , overnight. Street maintenance costs can be limited by applying effective preventive maintenance efforts early in this pavement life cycle. Preventive maintenance measures such as seal coats and overlays are usually less than one fourth the cost of reconstructing a pavement after it has been allowed to fail. Today, many of Fort .Collins' streets are nearing the critical point in their life cycle. Identifying the streets which require preventive maintenance efforts to avoid rapid deterioration is essential. This is accomplished using special laser -equipped vehicles to measure defects in pavement surfaces, non-destructive testing to determine the strength of the pavement section, and a computerized model to analyze this data and select streets for repair. The testing and analysis result in a rating of every street in the City. At the present time the average rating for streets in Fort Collins is 83--a relatively good rating. The following chart provides a further breakdown of the condition of the street system, and provides information on the kind of maintenance the streets will require over the next few years. The City's computerized Pavement Management Program uses the rating information, the condition of the street°;system and the amount and type of maintenance required to evaluate whether or not. the present level of ' Funding for street maintenance is adequate. If'the current level of -52- January 3, 1989 ' funding--$1.5 million per year --is maintained under the Pavement Management Program evaluation system the average rating of the City's streets will fall from 83 to a rating of only 74 over the next five years. This means there will be more potholes, more streets in need of patching, rougher rides, and ultimately, a much higher cost to restore the system to an acceptable condition. In order to maintain the present street rating of 83 over the next five years an investment of $3.4 million per year will be required. The City's five year budget projections anticipate that only about $1.5 million will be available per year for street maintenance. This leaves a shortfall of $2 million per year. Fort Collins streets are at a critical point in the life cycle. This 114 cent Sales and Use Tax to begin in July 1989 will provide the necessary funds to properly maintain our streets." City Manager Burkett summarized the provisions of both Item #20, Items Relating to an Ordinance Imposing a 114 Cent Sales and Use Tax on all Taxable Items Except Food to Fund Street Maintenance, and Item 21, Items Relating to an Ordinance Imposing a 114 Cent Sales and Use Tax on all Taxable Items Except Food to Fund Capital Projects," and presented background information on both. He noted how the different options could be modified and commented on scheduling proposals. He noted project cost ' variances among the projects. Deputy City Manager Noe summarized the cost figures contained in the different Options. Mayor Stoner indicated the need for Council to present a package that citizens can respond to including Timberline and/or the Southwest Community Park. He also suggested considering Councilmember Mabry's option that would include Timberline and Southwest Park, $500,000 from the sale of the existing Senior Center, and the $1.1 million from the 1984 Capital Improvements tax. Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to amend Option A and B, (Ordinance No. 9, 1989 included in Resolution 89-5) to include $500,000 from the resale of the Senior Center. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, encouraged funding for a new building for the Police Department and stressed the need for that issue to be given a high priority. Ruth McKee Hornberger, 1701 Dale Court, suggested a proposal to fund cultural programs for a "City" Center rather than a "Senior" Center. She noted how a "City" Center could meet the needs of all citizens and recommended using the old Post Office building which has 22,000 square feet of usable space. She asked Council to consider the purchase of the old ' Post Office. -53- January 3, 1989 Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she would not support a motion that ' included revenue from the sale of the Senior Center. Councilmember Estrada outlined the positive points of selling the Senior Center and described the use of the proceeds and the cost savings that would be realized. The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to amend Ordinance No. 9, 1989 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, and Winokur. 1�1�i[�>IfM(�12IdJ:1:i1��1A Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to initiate a program for the 1/4 cent sales and use tax for capital projects that would require the imposition of the 1/4 cent sales tax to sunset on December 31, 1997. He noted the program would include all of the capital projects under Option B including Southwest Park and the Timberline Extension. The following people spoke on proposed Capital projects contained in Ordinance No. 9, 1989: 1. Chuck Bowling, 1821 Cottonwood Point Drive, spoke in support of CHOICES ' 95 including the Timberline Extension. 2. Earl Wilkinson, Chairman of the Transportation Committee for the Chamber of Commerce, noted the main priority of the Transportation Committee was the completion of the Timberline Extension. 3. Bill Reynolds, Fort Collins resident, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 4. Brent Backman, Vice -President of Advanced Energy, spoke in favor of the Timberline Extension. 5. John Bales, Vipont representative, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 6. Joe Carroll, 805 East Elizabeth, Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce Vice -President, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 7. Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, spoke against the 1/4 cent sales tax for capital projects. 8. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, asked for support for the Police Department and encouraged a higher priority be placed on that department. I 9. Ramona Schoepflin, Shef Enterprises employee, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. r -54- January 3, 1989 10. Don Horak, 745 South Summitview Drive, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 11. Mike Blank, 905 South Summitview Drive, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 12. Don Hornberger, 1701 Dale Court, urged no additional tax extensions be imposed and suggested any additional taxes be applied to the homeless in Fort Collins. 13. Bill Suitts, 406 Paragon, Boulder, spoke in support of the Timberline Extension. 14. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, suggested alternative options for funding capital improvements. Director of Engineering Gary Diede responded to questions regarding the right-of-way acquisition. Councilmember Estrada encouraged purchase of property to develop the Southwest Community Park project while the land could be purchased at a reasonable price. The actual construction would begin at a later time. ' Councilmember Mabry noted his support of a Resolution submitting the entire 1/4 cent capital program to the voters in March and explained his reasons for supporting the extension of existing taxes. Councilmember Estrada stated he would be supporting the Resolution and stressed the importance of knowing the history of the City and the background of how specific proposals are developed. He noted the positive effect of the proposal on the future of Fort Collins. Councilmember Winokur expressed his support for the projects that have been recommended by the CHOICES 95 Committee and noted his concern regarding the additional 1/4 cent sales tax for street maintenance in a new extended tax form. He indicated support for additional funds for street maintenance, but expressed concern about the entire proposal and the total tax rate to be imposed upon the citizens of Fort Collins. Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted the letters of support for the Timberline Extension and commented on the lack of community support for the Southwest Community Park. She stated she would not be supporting a park development that would not be built until some time in the distant future. Councilmember Estrada stressed the need for examining the future needs of Fort Collins. Councilmember Horak noted his support for the entire proposal package and indicated his support for the Southwest Community Park. -55- January 3, 1989 Councilmember Winokur commented on the total tax level, the total user fee level, utility fees, and property tax levels. He stated he would support the tax if the amount proposed for street maintenance was 1/8 of a cent rather than 1/4 of a cent. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Kirkpartrick. (Councilmember Winokur abstained) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt a 1/8 cent sales tax increase to fund the street maintenance projects. He noted the 1/8 cent sales tax increase would replace the 1/4 cent tax that expires at the end of this year. Councilmember Mabry clarified Councilmember Winokur's motion to state that the 1/8 cent would be utilized for street maintenance while the 1/4 cent would be used for capital improvements and upon Council approval would be submitted to the voters. Councilmember Winokur noted that the effect of his motion would be a net decrease in the tax rate of 1/8 of a percent. He stressed the importance of street maintenance funding. City Manager Burkett commented on the direction he had received regarding the increase in the street maintenance budget from $500,000 to $1.5 million and how the 1/8 cent sales tax would affect the street maintenance program. He stated the excess of one million dollars would be helpful, but due to the poor condition of many of the major streets within the City, the funding would be inadequate. He noted the original recommendation of 1/4 cent would allow $2 million annually to fund the street maintenance program, thus preventing the streets from deteriorating below the current level. He stated that priorities could be reorganized and funds could be reallocated to make up for shortages in the street maintenance program. He noted that the twenty percent for capital improvements had been reallocated to street maintenance. He commented on the loss of annual revenue sharing funds. He noted that over the next five to seven years, street maintenance would remain a higher priority than building new streets and facilities. Yolonda C. Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, urged a balanced budget approach. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, objected to the tax increases and extensions. %Tim January 3, 1989 Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 8, 1989 with changes throughout the Ordinance to reflect the imposition of a .0125% (1/8 cent) sales and use tax to be effective January 1, 1990. Councilmember Horak supported reducing the sales tax to 1/8 cent. He clarified the tax extension was not limited to a time frame, but would continue indefinitely. He encouraged the proposal be submitted to the voters for consideration. Councilmember Mabry noted his support for lower taxes and expressed concern regarding the long term affect on the existing street system. He stated he would be supporting the Resolution based on its tax relief to the community, but noted he was not totally comfortable with the institution of the tax to continue indefinitely. Mayor Stoner stated he would not support the motion and indicated an on -going commitment to the street maintenance program. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 8, 1989 as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, and Stoner. THE MOTION FAILED. ' Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Resolution 89-4, including the previously stated changes in the above Ordinance, effective January 1, 1990. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Resolution 89-4 including the previously stated changes was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Resolution 89-4 as originally drafted effective July 1, 1989. Councilmember Horak expressed concern regarding the large amounts of money that will need to be spent in years to come versus the amount of money that can realistically be spent and indicated the funds should be handled with care and wisdom. Councilmember Estrada noted he would not support a 1/4 cent sales tax that would last indefinitely. Director of Engineering Gary Diede stated the management of the additional funds would be contracted outside the City and indicated a portion of the ' $2 million would go to the Street Department for additional sweeping, signing, striping, snowplowing, and maintenance. He stated the majority of -57- January 3, 1989 the funds would be used for street overlays and reconstruction and , indicated that at this time there would be no need for additional staff. City Manager Burkett noted that guarantees of additional staff requirements were not possible, but, should additional staff be required for the program, the request would be submitted as a part of the annual Budget process. Mayor Stoner stated he would not support submitting the Ordinance to a vote. The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Resolution 89-4 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmember Kirkpatrick. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 8, 1989 as written including a provision to make the tax effective July 1, 1989 and to sunset the 1/4 cent tax on December 31, 1997. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, spoke against the Ordinance. Councilmember Winokur commented on the inappropriateness of the high tax ' rates and Council's fiscal control over the Budget. Councilmember Winokur made an amendment to Councilmember Mabry's motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to amend Ordinance No. 8, 1989 to reduce the 1/4 cent sales tax to 1/8 cent effective January 1, 1990 and expiring December 31, 1997. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. THE MOTION FAILED. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 8, 1989 as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to an Ordinance Imposing a 1/4 Cent Sales and Use Tax on all Taxable Items Except Food to Fund Capital Projects Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT The Ordinance provides for a new 114 cent City Sales and Use Tax to be , expended for capital projects. This 114 cent tax would begin on January 1, 1990, immediately after the expiration of a current 1/4 cent Sales and Use -58- January 3, 1989 ' Tax being used to pay for the Edora Pool and Ice Center. Therefore, the net effect would be no increase in the current 5.75% State and City sales tax. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 9, 1989, Imposing a 114 Cent Sales and Use Tax to Fund Capital Projects. B. Resolution 89-5 Submitting Proposed Ordinance No. 9, 1989, to the Registered City Electors at the March 7, 1989 Regular City Election. Under the Charter, Council has the power to adopt the Ordinance, to refer the adopted Ordinance to the voters, or to submit the Proposed Ordinance to the voters. The Resolution would submit the Proposed Ordinance to the voters at the March 7, 1989 regular election and would determine the ballot language for the Proposed Ordinance. Staff recommends that Council place the Proposed Ordinance on the ballot after determining the final package of capital projects to be included in the proposal. Council needs to finalize the package before placing the Ordinance before the voters. The issue to be decided is the date the 114 cent sales and use tax will expire, which is dependent upon the projects included in the final capital package. BACKGROUND The City of Fort Collins has a history of funding capital improvements through citizen involvement processes. During 1988 such a process occurred called "Choices 95." The group of 41 citizens was charged with prioritizing capital project needs for the City and recommending financing mechanism(s). On October 8, 1988 the final recommendations of the Choices 95 Executive Committee were forwarded to Council. Since October, Council has held one public hearing and numerous work sessions to refine the list of capital projects and capital needs. The following projects are included in the capital package presently proposed and appear, from the worksession, to have the support of a majority of Council: - PFA Station 410 Land Acquisition - PFA South Battalion - Lincoln Center Restrooms - Shields - Laurel to Prospect ' - Prospect - Shields Intersection -59- January 3, 1989 - Prospect - College Intersection ' - Drake - Canterbury to Taft Hill - Prospect - Lemay Intersection - Eastside Neighborhood Intersection - College - Drake (double right turns) - Drake - Taft Hill Intersection - Prospect Taft Hill Intersection - Shields Raintree to Casa Grande - Prospect - Shields to Taft Hill - Older Adult Center - Eastside Neighborhood Park - Buckingham Park Enhancements - Edora Park Enhancements - Indoor Pool Renovation (10-15 year useful life) - Southwest Community Park/Youth Sports Complex Acquisition One additional project has also been discussed in relation to the Choices 95 package. The Timberline Road Extension from Prospect to Summitview is included only in Option B of the Ordinance. The following are options for the projects to be included in the package and for the expiration date of the proposed sales and use tax: Option A: If Timberline is not included in the package, the new quarter -cent sales and use tax would expire on December 31, 1996. Option 8: If the Timberline Extension is included, the quarter -cent sales and use tax would expire on April 30, 1998. The Ordinance presents both options, and Council needs to determine which option should be included in the Ordinance submitted to the voters. Revenues to finance the entire capital package include several sources beyond the quarter -cent sales tax. Traditionally, such capital packages usually are funded entirely by a single tax increment. The assumptions with this capital package, however, include $I.IM from the ;savings from the current quarter -cent capital; $270,000 per year from a vendor fee cap; and M January 3, 1989 I annual investment income based on investing the quarter -cent dollars during the process. Council would need to take official action to implement these parts of the package at a later date. Additionally, several projects have been pulled from the capital package, to be included in future operating budgets: Police Indoor Shooting Range, Emergency Communications Package, City Hall East Renovation, and the Performance Arts Complex Feasibility Study. Staff will also be bringing a proposal to Council with various options related to the Cemetery Expansion project." Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Resolution 89-5 with the following modifications: (1) to strike all references to Option A, (2) in the Resolution title, change 8 1/2 to 8 years, (3) on page two of the Ordinance, under the fourth WHEREAS, the amount under Option B should be changed to $23,236,079, (4) in Section 1, Item A, the date should be changed from April 30, 1998 to December 31, 1997, (5) in Section 3, under Option B, the date should be changed from May 1, 1997 to January 1, 1997, and (6) in the Proposed Ordinance title, the option of 8 1/2 should be changed to 8 years. Councilmember Winokur noted he would not support the Resolution because it does not indicate a clear message of fiscal responsibility. ' Mayor Stoner noted the majority of the projects that were recommended by CHOICES 95 are basic to the community. He stated that he believed the package was an excellent combination of projects and ideas and encouraged Council to support the Resolution. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Resolution 89-5 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to Street Oversizing Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 1988, as amended, Revising Chapter 95, Division 2 of the City Code Relating to Street Oversizing. B. Resolution 89-6 Adopting the Street Oversizing Criteria. The Ordinance revising Chapter 95 of the City Code relating to street oversizing was adopted by a 6-0 vote on First Reading on December 20. The Resolution adopts the Street Oversizing criteria. The revised street ' oversizing program will use these criteria to measure the community benefit of proposed oversized streets in new developments. The Ordinance requires new developments to be evaluated against these criteria to determine January 3, 1989 eligibility for street oversizing reimbursement. This Resolution adopts the street oversizing criteria as policy for city participation in the cost of street oversizing. BACKGROUND The Ordinance addresses many Street Oversizing changes to provide for a financially stable program. The Ordinance has been amended from First Reading as follows: Section 24-121, paragraph (b) was amended by the insertion of the words "if required" in the third sentence. This was added to clarify the intent of this paragraph. Section 24-121, paragraph (a) was amended by the insertion of the sentence "Those categories of cost which will be eligible for reimbursement from the fund shall be determined by the Director of Engineering, who shall maintain an itemization of the same in the form of administrative guidelines." This sentence was added to clarify the uses of the street oversizing funds and to indicate that there were guidelines available to developers as a matter of policy. It is staff's intent to include these administrative guidelines in the City streets specifications adopted by Council. 3. A new subparagraph (b) has been added to Section 24-120 to read as follows: "(b) Contribution to economic development. The City Council may exempt in whole or in part any business, industry, corporation or organization which is identified as encouraging the economic development and opportunities of the city by providing primary employment opportunities, increasing private investment in the community, and improving the quality of life for Fort Collins residents. In the event of any such exemption and to the extent permitted by Section 15, Article V of the Charter, monies shall be transferred from the general fund or other appropriate fund of the city into the street oversizing fund in the amount of any exempted portion of the fee." This would allow City Council to payment of all or any portion equivalent amount is deposited from another source. exempt targeted industries from of the fee provided that an into the Street Oversizing Fund The recommended criteria were developed by staff and endorsed by the Street Oversizing Task Force, and with the exception of some wording, remain essentially unchanged. The criteria are based on four factors to determine community benefit of streets: contiguity, master Planning, traffic, and operations. -62- January 3, 1989 Contiguity is a requirement that all developments applying for reimbursement must meet. The contiguity requirement is modeled after the annexation contiguity, and states that a development should have 116 of its total boundary perimeter adjacent to existing development. This requirement is intended to encourage developments next to existing streets and utilities, and to expand infrastructure from existing outward into new developments. This would discourage leapfrog developments and the construction of expensive oversized streets through undeveloped areas. Master planning is a requirement that all developments must meet. It insures that arterials and collectors are constructed according to the approved master plan for the development. There are four traffic factors that indicate the need for construction of an oversized street. A development applying for reimbursement must meet at least two of these to be eligible. 1. The traffic volumes on the street indicate inadequate capacity to meet the present traffic volumes, or the capacity will be inadequate to meet the traffic volumes projected in the next five years. 2. A proposed arterial street connects to an existing full width ' improved arterial street. 3. The proposed street will connect between two fully improved streets. 4. The proposed streets will be located in an Will development. Any street that only meets one of the above traffic factors may qualify for street oversizing reimbursement if it makes an immediate traffic operational improvement. These improvements are identified by the City Traffic Engineer during the development's final approval process and are defined as follows: 1. The improvements would remove an existing capacity restriction or significantly increase needed system capacity. 2. The improvements would increase system safety or remove an obsolete design area. 3. The improvements would complete a portion of a system wide improvement. These criteria would be applied to developments during the normal approval process by the Engineering Department. Developments that meet the criteria would be eligible to apply for street oversizing reimbursement.' Those developments that did not meet the criteria would be required to construct only those street improvements which would be necessary to offset the traffic impacts of the development. -63- January 3, 1989 The criteria were not designed to severely limit development. Only about ' 5% of projects would not qualify for any street oversizing reimbursement. Those projects which would not qualify would be far outside existing city streets and have minimal traffic. It would be a financial and maintenance burden to build oversized streets in these outlying areas far in advance of any immediate need for increased capacity. The criteria does encourage infill and contiguous development so that new streets can be built and oversized in a cost effective manner." Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt Ordinance No. 152, 1988 on Second Reading. City Attorney Roy explained the difference between Option A and Option B. He clarified the purpose of the amendment identified in Option B. He noted that Option B would amend Section 24-120, to add an additional paragraph providing Council the authority to grant exemptions from payment of the street oversizing fee to specific industries. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, commented on the industries that would be recipients of the exemptions. Councilmember Mabry commented on the financial difficulty the street oversizing fund has experienced and made a motion, seconded by ' Councilmember Maxey, to add to Section 24-120, a Section (b) that would be the identical to Section (b) contained in Option B. He stressed the need for criteria to determine eligibility. City Manager Burkett commented on the time constraints involving the payment of street oversizing fees and explained the potential ramifications regarding the new business development in the community. He spoke of the impact that might be felt by the City by the relocation of C/B/W to Fort Collins. Councilmember Estrada suggested the need for an Amendment to the Ordinance to state a specific time frame for the exemption to the fee and suggested the provision be limited to a two month period (60 days). Councilmembers Mabry and Maxey accepted Councilmember Estrada's suggestion as a friendly amendment to their previous amendment. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, asked for clarification regarding targeted industries. Councilmember Horak expressed concern over the differences of knowledge and information that the Councilmembers had received regarding the street oversizing issue. Councilmember Winokur spoke of the work that went into the development of ' the street oversizing Ordinance and noted his discomfort with the idea of setting policy after decisions have been made. -64- January 3, 1989 Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted that difficulty in making good decisions prior to the end of the 60 days. lack of information sharing creates She suggested reviewing the item Councilmember Estrada noted he would support the Ordinance as amended and commented on the importance of information sharing. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to amend Ordinance No. 152, 1988 on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Winokur stated he would support the Ordinance and noted the positive revisions to the street oversizing program thus regaining fiscal control and responsibility. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 152, 1988 as amended on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt Resolution 89-6. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry. Maxev. Stoner. and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 10, 1989, Granting a Partial Exemption from Payment of the Street Oversizing Fee and Authorizing the Transfer of Prior Year Reserves into the Street Oversizing Fund. Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT Actual 1988 General Fund revenues will exceed projections, increasing the available Undesignated Reserve Balance. Thus, if the exemption provided for in the ordinance is granted, monies are available in prior year reserves for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund in lieu of the exempted portion of the fee. It is anticipated that use taxes on new equipment, property tax, and use tax generated by the construction of the C/B/W Inc. facility and new employment will help to offset this cost to the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY W-111 January 3, 1989 C/B/W Inc. is a Lawrence, Kansas manufacturing firm that would like to relocate in Fort Collins. It has selected a site and has worked with FCI, City staff, and the State Office of Economic Development to develop a financing package that is reasonable and helpful. The City Council has discussed the negative perception of the street oversizing fee and the potential impact on new business development and expansions and has approved, through the passage of the revised Street Oversizing Ordinance, a procedure for exempting targeted industries from payment of all or any portion of the fee, provided that an equivalent sum is available for transfer into the Street Oversizing Fund in lieu of the exempted portion of the fee. Staff has been directed to prepare a full program proposal for further Council discussion of additional options for subsidizing targeted industry relocations or local industry expansions. Based on the benefit to the community from a new base industry, it is reasonable that Council consider exempting C/B/W Inc. from payment of one-half, not to exceed $18,000 of the street oversizing fee and that a like amount be transferred into the fund from prior year reserves. C/B/W Inc. qualifies as a new base industry which will benefit the economic growth of Fort Collins. Passage of the proposed Ordinance would be consistent with Council's previously adopted goals and policies related to economic development and opportunities. BACKGROUND New base industry growth is fundamental to the expansion and long term health of the local economy. Base industries are generally exporting businesses that have the ability to import new dollars into the economy, provide employment opportunities, and boost local property and sales use tax revenues. The initial new investment has a multiplier effect of 2 - 4 times, as the monies turn over through the local economy. C/B/W Inc. fits the general parameters as outlined, as well as the criteria in Section 24-120(b) of the Street Oversizing Ordinance, as a new base industry, offers certain benefits to the community including: 50 25 - 30 $1.2 million Total jobs Local hires annual payroll Revenues to the City of Fort Collins $ 4,125 New equipment use tax $ 2,250 Estimated City property tax 13 750 Use tax on building permit M January 3, 1989 ' $20,125 Total direct dollars to City $25,410 Sales tax revenues -assumes 77 cents per payroll dollar spent locally on retail goods. $43,535 Total This is new investment in the community. Frequently the community's attitude toward business and the ability to be flexible in negotiating how and when the industry may pay for its development costs and impacts is an important reflection of business attitude and environment that can weigh heavily in relocation or expansion decisions. Businesses do not automatically expect or require waivers or substantial financial incentives, but do anticipate some acknowledgement of the valuable contributions they make to the local economy. It makes sense to use this new business investment to, in part, offset some of the up -front costs of new location, and local base industry expansions. Staff has determined that C/B/W Inc. meets the guidelines for new and expanding base industries. Undesignated General Fund Reserves are available to designate for payment of the designated portion of the street ' oversizing fee for the C/B/W plant. Contingencies are noted to protect the City: Transfer of the money will be made only at the time that C/B/W Inc. is issued a building permit for its new plant." Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to adopt revised Ordinance No. 10, 1989 on First Reading. Economic Development Administrator Linda Hopkins gave a brief presentation and responded to questions from Council. She profiled C/B/W, a corporation from Lawrence, Kansas. Mayor Stoner noted that C/B/W had looked at relocating its corporation in Loveland. The president of the company is looking to the Fort Collins community for a show of interest and support. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, questioned the benefits of C/B/W relocating its industry to Fort Collins. Councilmember Estrada stated he would support the Ordinance and added that C/B/W would enhance the economic growth of Fort Collins. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the street standards and the amenities that result in high development costs. ' Councilmember Maxey stated he would support the motion and noted he hoped as much effort would be put into retaining local industry. I"- A January 3, 1989 Councilmember Horak stated that despite the lack of information, he would support the Ordinance. Councilmember Winokur noted the positive points of C/B/W relocating to Fort Collins and clarified that the transfer of fees was contingent upon having the designated funds available in advance. Mayor Stoner acknowledged the concern regarding the lack of information that was available to Council and expressed his appreciation for Council's support for the Ordinance. Councilmember Estrada requested in the future that intake assessment information be provided to allow Council the opportunity to determine what prompts companies to look to Fort Collins as a prospective relocation area. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 10, 1989 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 89-7 Making Appointments to the Convention and Visitors' Bureau Board of Directors, ' Postponed Until January 17 Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vacancies currently exist on the Convention and Visitors' Bureau Board of Directors due to the expiration of two terms representing the community at -large and the area of visual arts. Advertisements were placed and Councilmembers Kirkpatrick and Maxey conducted interviews on December 27. In keeping with Council's policy, adoption of the Resolution should be postponed until January 17 to allow time for public input." Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Resolution 89-7 inserting the following names: Sarah Bennett At -large December 31, 1991 Rosalyn Spencer Visual arts December 31, 1991 Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted that both Ms. Bennett and Ms. Spencer are current Board members and spoke of their qualifications. ' Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to postpone consideration of Resolution 89-7 until January 17, 4989, to allow Sf:11 January 3, 1989 1 time for public input. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to direct staff to draft a Resolution creating a Charter Review Committee for Council consideration on February 7. He suggested the Committee would convene in May of 1989 to evaluate the present form of City government, look at the concept of a directly elected Mayor, including a strong Mayor concept, and based on Committee consensus, would propose Charter Amendment(s) to Council to be submitted at the 1991 regular City election. He also requested staff develop a mission statement for the proposed Charter Review Committee. Councilmember Maxey stated he would support the concept of a Charter Review Committee. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on her time involvement with the petition drive for a proposed Charter Amendment relating to the direct ' election of the Mayor. The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to direct staff to draft a Resolution creating a Charter Review Committee was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Horak and Kirkpatrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak commented on the report received from the Housing Authority and suggested a worksession with the Housing Authority to clarify the report findings. Councilmember Mabry spoke against scheduling a worksession with the Housing Authority and commented on the superb job the Authority was doing. Councilmember Maxey agreed with Councilmember Mabry and commended the Housing Authority for its fine work. Councilmember Winokur noted he was not totally comfortable with the idea of a worksession with the Housing Authority and encouraged other members of Council to review the Authority's operation and facilities. Mayor Stoner suggested that members of Council review the report with the Housing Authority on an individual basis. 11 January 3, 1989 Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, ' to rescind the prior vote on Ordinance No. 153, 1988 regarding the direct election of the Mayor. Councilmember Estrada noted that he would not support the motion since the issue would be considered by the proposed Charter Review Committee. Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the critical timing element involved in order for this proposed Ordinance to be placed on the March ballot. Councilmember Winokur pointed out the positive points of a Mayor -Council form of government and stressed his desire to obtain a clear answer from the community regarding the type of government preferred. Mayor Stoner indicated support for the motion. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to rescind the earlier vote on Ordinance No. 153, 1988 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. IIII IaTwit) 81112Eitq*%Dim Adjournment I Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to adjourn the meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry,.Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 12:35 a.m. Ma r -7o-