HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-05/21/1985-RegularMay 21, 1985
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on
Tuesday, May 21, 1985, 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: Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner.
Staff Members Present: Arnold, Huisjen, Shannon, M. Davis, C. Smith,
Feldman, Hays
Agenda Review: City Manager
City Manager Arnold requested that Item #9, Second Reading of Ordinance No.
46, 1985, Vacating a Portion of the Right -of -Way of Pine Street, be tabled
on the Consent Calendar to June 4, and that Item #32a, Dedication of a Part
of Vacated Pine Street from Blair Kiefer, be withdrawn from the agenda. He
also requested that Item #41, Resolution Approving a Revision to the Urban
Growth Area Boundary, Rezoning Approximately 345 Acres Into the UGA,
Retaining the Underlying FA-1 Zoning, be tabled to June 4. He noted that
dollar amounts needed to be inserted in blanks in the Ordinance in Item
#43, Items Relating to Provincetowne/Portner Estates South Special
Improvement District No. 81.
City Manager Arnold requested that this meeting be adjourned to May 28 to
hold an executive session to discuss personnel matters.
Councilmember Horak requested. that Item #24, Resolution Authorizing the
City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with the Humane Society, be
withdrawn from the Consent Calendar.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, requested that Item #17, Hearing
and First Reading of Ordinance No. 56, 1985, Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund for the Lincoln Center Canyon
West/Columbine Room Renovation, be pulled from the Consent Calendar for
discussion.
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
-234-
May 21, 1985
under Agenda Item #49, Pulled Consent Items, except items pulled by anyone
in the audience or items that any member of the audience is present to
discuss that were pulled be staff or Council. These items will be
discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar.
4. Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 2 and April 16 and Adjourned
Meeting of April 3U.
5. Defeat of the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 39, 1985, Appropriating
Prior Year Reserves to the General Fund for the Purpose of Economic
Development.
R
7
The purpose of this Ordinance, which was adopted as amended on First
Reading on March 19 by a 6-1 vote, was to appropriate a portion of the
more than $250,000 that has been paid to the City in the form of IORB
fees in order to waive any capital related development fees or agree to
construct public improvements up to the amount of $60,000 to property
owned by the Sunstrand Corporation..
Since the Sunstrand Corporation has announced its intent to locate
their facility in Grand Junction, staff recommends this ordinance be
defeated on Second Reading.
Second Readin
Appropriation c
rainl ing
of Ordinance No. 43, 1985, Authorizing the
Unanticipated Revenues to the General FuFd—tor
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16 and
would appropriate $7770 in unanticipated revenue from the registration
fees for conference and seminar attendees. This revenue comes from two
sources. The, central City training budget subsidizes a significant
portion of employee training. However, when the cost of training
sessions cannot be paid fully by this budget, the training is
complemented by minimal charges to the operating departments for their
employees to attend. These funds need to be put back into the training
budget for future City use.
The second source of revenue comes from conferences put on by the
training component of the Employee Development Department to both
provide quality training at low cost to our employees and create a
revenue source for future' training. This revenue is generated from
participants outside of the City government.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1985, Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the ransportation ervices und.
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16 and
appropriates $219,681 from prior year reserves in the Transportation
Services Fund as follows:
1
11
-235-
May 21, 1985
' Purchase of Asphalt Machine $ 43,000
Purchase of Tandem Truck 54,000
Building B Renovation 73,000
Railroad Grade Crossing Protection 15,000
Snow Removal 25,000
Rental of Street Sweeper 9,681
TOTAL $219,681
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1985, Appro,
Revenue in the Library Grants Fund.
riatina Unanticipated
This ordinance was unanimously adopted as amended on First Reading on
April 16. The Fort Collins Public Library has been awarded three
grants totalling $23,380. All three are federal Library Services and
Construction Act funds made available by competitive process to
Colorado libraries through the Colorado State Library and the Colorado
Department of Education.
These grant awards will provide funding for the following activities:
o $4,700 for transcription of 150 oral history cassette tapes of
Larimer County residents.
' o $2,275 for production of ten half-hour video tapes documenting
periods and places in Fort Collins history through the personal
reminiscences of older people who have lived most of their lives in
Fort Collins.
o $16,405 to establish an Adult Literacy Network.
9. Tabling of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 46, 1985, Vacating a
Portion of the Right -of -Way of Pine Street to June 4, 1985.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 16
and vacates a portion of the Right -of -Way of Pine Street. The owners
of the properties adjacent to Pine Street are requesting that the
Right -of -Way be vacated adjacent to their property. The street is to
be used as a parking lot and as access to the proposed Larimer
Community Services Center. Utility and access easements are being
retained on Pine Street. Utilities have been notified and have no
problems with the request.
IU. Items Relating to Appropriating Funds for Additional 1985 Capital
Projects, and Previously Approved Projects Which Require Additional
unding.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 47, 1985, Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund and Transferring
' Appropriations from the Appropriated Contingency and other Capital
projects for Additional 1985 General City Capital Projects.
-236-
May 21, 1985
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 48, 1985, Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Water Fund for Transfer to the Capital Projects
Fund for the Northside Transmission Water Line.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 49, 1985, Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Parkland Fund for Beattie Park Restrooms.
These ordinances were adopted on First Reading on April 3U. At the
Council worksession on April 9, 1985, a presentation was made on the
City's revised 1985 and proposed 1986-1990 Capital Improvement
Program. While no projects recommended by RECAP were deleted from the
1985-1989 Capital Improvement Program, as shown in the Adopted 1985
Budget, some project schedules were changed and several additional
projects were recommended for funding in 1985.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 50, 1985, Providing for the Granting
of Administrative Variances of the Flat Rate for Unmetered Water Use.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 30
and would provide for administrative variances to the flat rate for
unmetered water use in certain cases where the current rates may work
an injustice on the owner or user because of a duplication of charges.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 51, 1985, Vacating Easements on
lliott-Miller ootht is West Lbdivtston, Sixteenth titny.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 30.
The Planning and Zoning Board on June 25, 1984 approved on Consent
Agenda the Prospect -Overland P.U.U. which is a replat of the
Elliott -Miller Foothills West Subdivision, Sixteenth Filing.
The Prospect -Overland P.U.D. was recorded on January 29, 1985 thus
making the easements shown on The Elliott -Miller Foothills West
Subdivision, Sixteenth Filing of no use. The Utilities have all
indicated no problems with the request.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 52, 1985, Appropriating Unanticipated
Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Fund.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 30.
The City of Fort Collins has received notification of a grant award
for a rail planning study. This grant, coordinated through the
Colorado Department of Highways, will update the State of Colorado
Rail Plan in the Fort Collins area.
This study is expected to cost $26,000. The federal participation is
anticipated to be $18,20U. The local match share (30% or $7,800) will
be appropriated from prior year reserves in the Transportation Fund.
1
-237-
May 21, 1985
I
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 53, 1985, Calling a Special Election
and Placinq Referred Ordinance No. 27, 1985 on the Ballot.
The City Clerk's Office has certified a sufficient number of
signatures on a referendum petition received on April 17, 1985 to
determine the petition to be valid. Under the City Charter, at least
733 signatures of qualified electors (10% of the number of ballots
cast at the last General City Election on March 5, 1985) are required
to place a referendum before Council for action.
Since the petition is legally sufficient, Council decided on April 30
to place the issue on a Special City Election called by the City
Council for June 18, as a Council Referred Ordinance.
15. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 54, 1985, Annexing
Approximately 10.7 Acres, Known as Collopy Annexation.
The applicants, Charles and Francis Collopy, are requesting annexation
of approximately 10.7 acres, located on the southwest corner of
Breakwater Drive and Lemay Avenue.
16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 1985, Zoning
Approximately 1U.7 Acres, Known as Collopy Annexation into the R-L-P,
Low Density Planned Residential, Zoning District.
' The request is for R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential zoning. The
10.7 acre annexation site is located on the southwest corner of
Breakwater Drive and Lemay Avenue.
17, Heariny and First Reading of Ordinance No. 56, 1985, Appropriating
rior ear eserves in_ the apita rojects and for t e into n
Center Canyon West/Columbine Room Renovation.
The Canyon West/Columbine Room project will involve extensive
renovation to the former.gymnasium and auditorium which are the last
two major areas of the Lincoln Center to be completed. Renovation
will include: construction of a wall to close off existing (condemned)
bleacher area; installation of a lowered drop ceiling in both rooms,
covering the exposed mechanical equipment without impairing the
heating and air conditioning functions; addition of a storage area on
west end of Canyon West for table and chair storage, wall surfaces in
both rooms covered with carpet -like material to improve acoustics and
aesthetics; new carpet and wood floor refinishing; acoustical panels
from walls of Canyon West moved to': Columbine Room ceiling; and
addition of lighting and electrical outlets.
An appropriation of $1bO,000 in the Capital Projects Fund is
recommended. Private contributions of $50,000 will supplement the
City's cost of $100,000.
-238-
May 21, 1985
18. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 57, 1985, Authorizing the
ransfer of Appropriated mounts between Capital Projects for
Construction of Lemay U-inch Water Line.
In 1981, $140,000 was appropriated for design and construction of
approximately one-half mile of 20-inch water main to be constructed
along South Lemay Avenue. The City has been negotiating for the South
Lemay road riyht-of-way for several years. The design details and,
therefore, the budget of the project were subject to location and
alignment of that right-of-way. Early this year, the right-of-way was
acquired and design has begun.
A consultant was retained by Public Works to design the roadway and
the water main. The consultant has prepared a preliminary cost
estimate for construction which totals $163,000 and exceeds our budget
by $5U,000. To proceed to bid and have an appropriate contingency, it
will be necessary to transfer $50,000 into this project. Funds of
approximately $100,000 are expected to be available from the
contingency phase of the Water Treatment Plant #2 Improvements capital
project when the project is completed. We recommend that $50,000 be
transferred to avoid any possible delay.
19. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 1985, Amendin Section
114-2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Model
Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities", 1977 Edition.
This Ordinance contains three changes to the parking regulations
contained in the Model Traffic Code which are intended to address
problems encountered by the Police Department and Parking Enforcement
Officers in their attempts to regulate parking in the City. The
changes relate to angle parking, official markings (such as red paint)
and public parking lot restrictions.
2U. Hearing and First Reading
Portion of an Easement in
Parkwood East and of Tract
of Ordinance No. 59, 1985, Vacating a
:he Replat of Lots 156, 157 and 158 of
rKwood tast [nd FiIin
A revision of building envelopes as approved in the Second Replat of
Lots 156, 157 and 158 of Parkwood East and Tract "B" of Parkwood East
Second Filing requires a relocation of this easement. Utility
replacement easements have been provided in the Second Replat. The
Utilities have been notified and have no problems with the request.
21, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 60, 1985, Vacating Streets
and Easements at Park Place at the Landings.
Park Place at the Landings has been replatted as Somerset P.U.D.,
therefore all streets and easements need to be vacated at Park Place
at the Landings. All Utilities have been notified.and indicate no
problems with the request.
1
-239-
May 21, 1985
I
22. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 61, 1985, Vacating
Easements of Sandcreek Village P.U.D.
Sandcreek Village has been replatted, therefore all easements need to
be vacated on the original plat of Sandcreek Village. All Utilities
have been notified and indicate no problems with the request.
23. Items Relating to an Agreement with the Colorado Department of
A. A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an
Agreement with the Colorado Department of Highways Allocating
Federal Aid Urban System Funds to a Street Pavement Marking
Project. Marking -will include crosswalks, railroad and turning
symbols, and street lane lines. The cost for these items is
$150,000.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 1985, Appropriating
Anticipated Grant Funds for a Street Pavement Marking Project in
the Amount of $15U,000.
These items relate to the use of the City's Federal Aid Urban Systems
(FAUS) funds. FAUS funds are formula appropriated to the City of
Fort Collins based upon the 1980 population census. This project
' allows these funds to be used for the installation of long-lasting
thermoplastic and Stamark pavement markings. The major emphasis in
this project will be to provide school crossing delineation at major
school crosswalks.
24. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement
with the Humane Society —
The agreement provides for the Humane Society of Larimer County to
continue providing animal control services to the City of Fort Collins
as in the past three years.
The agreement proposed for 1985 is basically the same as the agreement
which has been used in the past, except that funding increases in the
1985 agreement have been included to provide for the replacement of an
animal control vehicle, the addition of an animal control officer for
summer months coverage to increase patrol in the parks and bike paths,
and offset a new fee incurred by the Society for the disposition of
dead animals at the County Landfill.
The actual total contract fee for 1985 is $117,000. Because of a
Council requested review of animal control services, no agreement was
finalized at the beginning of this year. The City of Fort Collins has
already paid the Humane Society $8900 since the first of the year.
That $8900 has been deducted from the total $117,000, resulting in the
' current agreement sum of $1U8,100.
-240-
May 21, 1985
25. kesolution Approving a Temporary Use Permit with the Northern '
Colorado Water Conservancy District for 9 Acre -Foot Units of CB
Water.
From time to time Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD)
water is turned over to the City of Fort Collins for satisfaction of
water rights requirements or in exchange for city water certificates.
Thelma Johnson is transferring 9 units of CBT water to the City in
exchange for a city water certificate.
26. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Amend an Existin
Agreement with the State Board of Agriculture to Increase 'dater an
Sewer Service Fees for Providing Water -and Sewer Service to CSU.
In 1974, the City entered into an agreement with the State Board of
Agriculture of the State of Colorado concerning the furnishing of
water and sewer service by the City to Colorado State University.
Since that time, the agreement has been amended numerous times for the
purpose of adjusting the service fees the City charges CSU for water
and sewer service. Rate adjustments for CSU correspond, percentage
wise, to the rate adjustments experienced by all the other customers
served by the City Water and Sewer Utilities. Rate adjustments for
CSU are made effective July 1st of each year to accommodate their
budgeting process.
27. Resolution Assigning Councilmembers as Liaison Representatives to the
Various Boards and Commissions.
At the May 14th Worksession Council informally discussed the
assignment of Councilmembers as liaison representatives to the City's
various Boards and Commissions.
This Resolution would formally make these assignments until such time
as the Council makes new assignments.
28. Resolution Approving the Nomination of John B. Knezovich to the Board
of Directors of the Colorado Municipal League.
This Resolution formally approves the nomination of Councilmember
Knezovich to the Colorado Municipal League's Board of Directors.
29. Resolution Granting Encroachment Permits to Old Town Partners I and
Old own Partners lI
Staff has prepared a resolution granting an encroachment permit to the
owners of property abutting Walnut Street and Mountain Avenue for
various building, canopies and cornices which project into the public
right-of-way slightly.
11
-241-
May 21, 1985
' This could have been handled routinely by staff but the owners want a
more secure, non -revokable permit from the City Council for purposes
of obtaining title insurance for the buildings.
3U. Withdrawal of the Appeal of the Pier PUD, 5th
The 5th Amendment to the Pier PUD was denied by the Planning and
Zoning Board at their December 17, 1984 meeting. This denial was
subsequently appealed by Osprey, the developer, and scheduled for the
January 15, 1985 Council meeting. At that meeting, the appeal was
tabled to the February 19, 1985, meeting to give the appellant time to
try to satisfy the concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board. The
appeal was again tabled to March 19 and to this date on March 19. At
this time, the appellant has decided to withdraw the appeal and is
committed to working with the Planning and Zoning Board in coming up
with an acceptable PUD design.
31. Approval of Acquisition of Rights -of -Way for Improvements to the
College Avenue -Prospect Road Intersection.
The City signed a Development Agreement with John Q. Hammons, the
developer of University Place P.U.D. (Holiday Inn), on February 17,
1984. This agreement provided for the developer to participate in the
' construction of the right turn lane from eastbound Prospect Road onto
southbound College Avenue. The agreement provided further that the
City would be responsible for the needed extra riyhts-of-way for this
corner (southwest) as well as extra rights -of -way and construction for
increasing the radii of the other three corners and improved traffic
signalization and striping.
The Holiday Inn will contribute $60,000 for their portion of the
improvements.
Approval is requested for acquisition of five parcels for
rights -of -way from: 1) Lewan; 2) Maloney and Dudzinski; 3)
Buechner/Sevier; 4) Schrader; and 5) Safeway Holdings, Inc. The funds
for acquisition of the needed rights -of -way are budgeted from street
oversizing.
32. Routine Deeds and Easements.
The following are routine deeds and easements which have been reviewed
and approved by the affected departments and legal staff:
Dedication of a Part of Vacated Pine Street from Blair Kiefer.
Dedication of Access Easement from Prospect Industrial Park.
' Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Molly Davis, Deputy City
Clerk.
-242-
May 21, 1985
Item #5.
Defeat of the Second Reading of Ordinance No.
Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fu
Purpose of Economic Development.
Item #6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1985, Authorizing the
39, 1985, '
d for the
Appropriation of Unanticipated Revenues to the General Fund for
raining.
Item V . Second Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1985, Appropriating Prior
ear Reserves in the Fransportation Services Fund.
Item #8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1985, Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Library Grants und.
Item #9. Tabling of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 46, 1985, Vacating a
Portion of the Right -of -Way of Pine Street.
Item #10. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 47, 1985, Appropriating
Prior Year Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund and
Transferring Appropriations from the Appropriated
Contingency and other Capital projects for Additional 1985
General City Capital Projects.
B. Second Heading of Ordinance No. 48, 1985, Appropriating
15 rior ear eserves to the Water Fund for lransfer to the I
Capital Projects Fund for the Northside ransmission Water
Line.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 49, 1985, Appropriating
Prior Year Reserves in the Parkland Fund for Beattie Park
Item #11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 50, 1985, Providing for the
Granting of Administrative Variances of the Flat Rate for
unmetered water use..
Item #12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 51, 1985, Vacating Easements on
Elliott -Miller Foothills West Subdivision. Sixteenth Filinq.
Item #13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 52, 1985, Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the
ransportation Fund.
Item #14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 53, 1985, Calling a Special
Election and Placing Referred Ordinance No. 27, 1985 on the
Ballot.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Molly Davis, Deputy City
Clerk. ,
Item #15. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 54, 1985, Annexing
Approximately 15.7 Acres, Known as Collopy Annexation.
-243-
May 21, 1985
Item #16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 1985, Zoni
Approximately 10.7 Acres, Known as Collopy Annexation into t
R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, Zoninq District.
Item #17. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 56, 1985, Appro-
priating rior Year Res
erves in the Capital Projects Fund for
the Lincoln Center Canyon West/Columbine Room Renovation.
Item #18. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 57, 1985, Authorizing
the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts between Capital Projects
for onstruction of emay LO-inch Water Line.
Item #19. Hearing and First treading of Ordinance No. 58, 1985, Amendin
Section 114-2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating
to the Model Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities 1977
Item #2U. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 59, 1985, Vacatiny a
Portion of an Easement in the Replat of Lots 156, 157 and 158 of
Parkwood East and of Tract B' of Parkwood East 2nd Filina.
Item #21. Hearing and
First Reading of
Ordinance No. 60, 1985, Vacating
Streets and
Easements at Park
Place at the Landings.
'
Item #22. Hearing and
First Reading of
Ordinance No. 61, 1985, Vacating
Casements of
Sandcreek Villaqe
P.U.U.
Item #23. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 1986
Appropriating Anticipated Grant Funds for a Street avemen
Mark.ina Proiect in the Amount of 150.0u_
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada,
to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar, with
the tabling of Item #9, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 46, 1985, Vacating
a Portion of the Right -of -Way of Pine Street, to June 4. Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Appropriating Prior Year Reserves
in the Capital Projects Fund for the
Lincoln Center Canyon,West/Columbine Room
Renovation, Adopt'ed"on First Readinq
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
-244-
May 21, 1985
"Executive Summary
The Canyon West/Columbine Room project will involve extensive renovation to
the former gymnasium and auditorium which are the last two major areas of
the Lincoln Center to be completed. Renovation will include: construction
of a wall to close off existing (condemned) bleacher area; installation of
a lowered drop ceiling in both rooms, covering the exposed mechanical
equipment without impairing the heating and air conditioning functions;
addition of a storage area on west end of Canyon West for table and chair
storage, wall surfaces in both rooms covered with carpet -like material to
improve acoustics and aesthetics; new carpet and wood floor refinishing;
acoustical panels from walls of Canyon West moved to Columbine Room
ceiling; and addition of lighting and electrical outlets.
An appropriation of $150,000 in the Capital Projects Fund is recommended.
Private contributions of $5U,000 will supplement the City's cost of
$IUU,000.
Background
At the
Council
worksession on April 9, 1985, a presentation was made on the
City's
revised
1985 and proposed 1986-1990 Capital Improvement Program.
Several
additional projects were recommended for funding in 1985. One of
these projects
was the renovation of the Canyon West and Columbine Rooms.
Canyon
West,
which was the former gymnasium of Lincoln Jr. High, and
'
Columbine,
which
was part of the auditorium of Lincoln Jr. High, were
opened
for use
as part of the Lincoln Center even though at that time there
was not
enough
money to complete the rooms.
In 1983 a proposal to renovate the rooms was considered and the cost,
approximately $350,000, was the prime factor in the decision to postpone
the renovation until a more feasible plan could be produced.
In 1984, with funding from private sources, an Ad Hoc committee for the
Canyon West/Columbine Room project commissioned a set of plans. Jim Cox of
Architecture Plus has developed a proposal with a preliminary estimate of
$150,000. The proposal has been developed with input from the Ad Hoc
committee, Lincoln Center Design Committee, Lincoln Center Board of
Directors and the Cultural Resources Board. The project cost of $150,000
would be a public/private partnership with $5U,000 of the total project
cost repaid to the City from private funding.
The City would appropriate all $150,000, allowing the project to commence,
as renovation needs to be completed in August/September 1985 due to
scheduling at the Center. The majority of the reimbursement from the
private sector contribution is expected by the end of 1985. Letters of
endorsement and commitment are attached.
The Capital Projects Fund has adequate prior year reserves to fund the I
Canyon West/Columbine Room project."
-245-
May 21, 1985
Bruce Lockhart, 25UU East Harmony Road, stated this renovation was rated as
a low need by the RECAP committee, and he does not see a need for this
renovation.
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Ordinance No. 56, 1985 on First Reading.
Councilmember Clarke noted that with private contributions of $50,000 the
cost to the City for this renovation is less than one-third what the RECAP
committee originally considered.
Mayor Rutstein noted a letter had been received from the Lincoln Center
Committee raising private funds for the project stating anticipated sources
for the $50,000.
The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 56, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager
to Enter Into an Agreement with the
Humane Society, Adopted as Amended
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The agreement prov.ides for the Humane Society of Larimer County to continue
providing animal control services to the City of Fort Collins as in the
past three years.
The agreement proposed for 1985 is basically the same as the agreement
which has been used in the past, except that funding increases in the 1985
agreement have been included to provide for the replacement of an animal
control vehicle, the addition of an animal control officer for summer
months coverage to increase patrol in the parks and bike paths, and offset
a new fee incurred by the Society for the disposition of dead animals at
the County Landfill.
The actual total expenditure for 1985 will be $117,000. Because of a
Council requested review of animal control services, no agreement was
finalized at the beginning of this year. The City of Fort Collins has
already paid the Humane -Society $8900 since the first of the year. That
$890U has been deducted from the total $117,000, resulting in the current
agreement sum of $108,100.
-246-
May 21, 1985
Background
The City of Fort Collins has contracted with the Humane Society of Larimer
County for the last three years. The service from the Humane Society has
been acceptable. The level of service in the city has been consistent and
the animal control officers are professionals. The dedication of the people
associated with the Humane Society has been impressive. Through the Humane
Society, the animal control officers enjoy the public support that was
lacking when the program was under the City. Quite simply, animals are
their only business and it shows in their single-minded dedication.
The agreement proposed for 1985 is the same as the agreement which has been
used in the past, with the following exceptions:
1. The Police Department, in its 1985 budget, allocated $111,000 for
the Humane Society agreement. The current agreement reflects an
increase of $6,000, for a total contract amount of $117,000. A
number of concerns were brought to the attention of members of the
Council concerning animal control services provided to the city of
Fort Collins by the Humane Society for Larimer County. Staff has
provided Council with information relative to present services and
possible ideas and alternatives relative to more effective animal
control.
1
The $6,000 increase provides for the following: '
a. One new vehicle to replace the existing van which has in
excess of 150,000 miles.
b. An additional animal control officer for summer months
coverage to increase patrol in the parks and bike paths.
c. Increase in shelter care proportionment.
d. Offset a new fee incurred by the Society for the disposition
of dead animals at the County Landfill.
2. Two new subsections have been added which shift the responsibility
of issuing dog licenses pursuant to the requirements of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins to the Humane Society. In order to
compensate the Society for assuming that responsibility, the
Society will be allowed to retain license fees collected by the
City and the Society. Such license fee revenues are to be used by
the Society only for paying costs of veterinary care incurred by
the Society unless such revenues exceed the cost of veterinarian
care, in which case the Society may use the excess revenues for
other animal control purposes consistent with the agreement. This
agreement was approved and adopted in the 1985 City of Fort
Collins budget and was implemented January, 1985 by the City and
the Humane Society.
'
-247-
May Z1, 1985
' 3. N section has been expanded to state that the Society will provide
for emergency calls when a life is in danger, either human or
animal, after the regular hours of service. In exchange, the
Society will be allowed ten holidays per year on which calls
relating to animal control will be handled on an emergency basis
only. The agreement specifically states that the Fourth of July
may not be designated as such a holiday.
4. Since the City pays the Humane Society on a month to month basis,
the performance bond required in previous agreements has been
eliminated. In exchange for eliminating the performance bond, a
new section has been added which states that if the Society
discontinues its provisions of animal control enforcement
services, the City may immediately take possession of the two
vehicles relating to the provision of such services to the City.
This would enable the City to immediately begin providing
enforcement on its own in the event that the Humane Society
terminated the agreement prior to its expiration.
5. A section has been expanded to indicate that if the parties are
unable to reach an agreement for the next year by the end of the
year covered by the agreement, the additional six months of
service provided by the Society will be provided at the same rate
of compensation listed in the current agreement, increased only by
the City's budget inflation factor for that year."
Councilmember Uhlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-74.
Councilmember Knezovich asked how much revenue from dog tag fees would go
to the Humane Society under this contract.
Division Chief David Feldman stated that additional revenue of
approximately $1U,000 would be generated from the sale of dog tags and
would be designated to offset costs for emergency veterinary care by local
veterinarians.
Councilmember Horak noted there are not enough animal control officers, and
the level of service provided is below the level provided previously by the
Police Department, especially in after hours service. He supported
increased funding to provide for additional staffing, expanded service
hours, and fewer delays in handling calls. He stated animal control is a
basic service which should be better funded.
Councilmember Stoner questioned the need for additional funding.
Mayor Rutstein asked for information on the number of calls that can't be
handled in a timely manner.
-248-
May 21, 1985
Division Chief Feldman noted that the Police Department responds to after '
hours animal control calls, and he summarized the proper procedures that
are normally followed.
Mayor Rutstein asked how long it would take the Humane Society to add new
staff and a van if additional funds are obtained.
Division Chief Feldman replied there would be a delay in outfitting a new
vehicle, and increased service would not be readily apparent.
Councilmember Stoner asked if increased service is needed.
Margaret Triplett, Executive Secretary for the Humane Society, noted that
increased service is needed during the daytime and after hours.
Councilmember Horak asked how soon the hours of service could be expanded
if additional funds are made available.
Ms. Triplett stated that the hours of service could be expanded.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
amend Resolution 85-74 by adding an additional $20,000 to set the funding
at $101,400 for the remainder of the year, with the intent to provide for
an extra officer and equipment, and direct staff to work out how the '
funding should be spent to make the increased service available.
Councilmember Knezovich asked about the source of funding for the
additional $20,000.
City Manager Arnold stated the funds will be available from the
contingencies or increased sales tax revenue.
The vote on the motion to amend the Resolution was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 85-74 as amended was as follows:
Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein,
and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Adopting Findings and
Setting Forth the Conditions for
Approval of the CSU Bull Farm POD, '
Preliminary Plan, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
-249-
May 21, 1985
"Executive Summa
On April 30, 1985, the Council heard an appeal of the March 25, 1985,
decision of the Planning and Zoning Board which granted preliminary
approval to the CSU Bull Farm PUD. Following testimony by staff, the
applicant and neighbors, Council, on a vote of 4-2, concluded the
preliminary approval of the CSU Bull Farm PUD was appropriate.
Background
On April 30, 1985, the City Council reviewed the decision of the Planning
and Zoning Board of March 25, 1985, concerning the CSU Bull Farm PUD,
Preliminary Plan. A number of neighbors had appealed the decision of the
Planning and Zoning Board stating that the project would cause traffic
problems and that the project was too dense. The Council heard a brief
statement from the planning staff concerning background information and a
brief statement from the applicant (Colorado State University) concerning
the approval. There was then a lengthy presentation from various citizens
concerning the project.
City Council heard the appeal and upon considerationon a vote of 4=2,
affirmed the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to grant preliminary
approval to the CSU Bull Farm Planned Unit Development."
Councilmember Estrada withdrew from the discussion because of a possible
conflict of interest.
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-79. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Knezovich, Rutstein,
and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak and Ohlson. (Councilmember
Estrada withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
(Secretary's Note: Councilmember Estrada returned to the meeting at this
point.)
Resolution Authorizing Eminent Domain
Proceedings for,South Lemay Avenue and
Hors'etooth Road.Improvements, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
Staff has been 'unable to reach an agreement with Ronald and Sally Bockman
' for the purchase of the R.O.W. needed for the construction of South Lemay
around Warren Lake. While staff continues to negotiate with the Bockmans,
it was explained to them that staff would recommend to Council the adoption
of a resolution initiating acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings. The
-250-
May 21, 1985
immediate possession of the R.O.W. is necessary for the project to begin
this summer and still be completed this year.
Background
Staff has presented the Bockmans with an offer of $106,167, the appraised
value, for approximately 3 acres of R.O.W. and easements needed for the S.
Lemay project. They have countered with an offer of $250,000. They would
prefer to sell the City their entire parcel for $675,000, or they would
accept the $106,167 offer for the R.O.W. if the City also gave them 2.5
acres of the golf course.
Staff has evaluated the Bockmans' counter offers and finds them higher than
the appraised values. The City's appraisal, prepared by a private
appraiser, was based on the highest and best use for the property as
determined by the Land Development Guidance System. The Bockmans do not
feel that the appraisal was based on an appropriate land use. As a part
of the on going negotiations, the Bockmans have agreed to consult with
another appraiser and contact staff with that information.
The Bockmans have expressed several concerns about the alignment of Lemay
through their property. They believe that the road could be built on the
dam or that with better planning it could have gone through the golf
course. Two alternative alignments along the dam were investigated.. Both
alternatives involved complicated construction, extended construction
schedules, and significant additional expense.
Staff recommends adoption of this Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition by
Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Property owned by Ronald and Sally
Buckman. Staff believes this action is necessary to keep the project on
schedule. In the meantime staff will continue to negotiate with the
Bockmans."
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Resolution 85-80.
Councilmember Knezovich commented on the City Council's commitment to
complete the project on South Lemay because of safety concerns, and he
supported the use of eminent domain to take the land.
Councilmember Stoner asked that staff use this as an opportunity to pursue
negotiations in earnest.
The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 85-80 was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
1
J
-251-
May 21, 1985
I
Items Relating to a Xeriscape Demonstration Garden
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The Resolution endorses the concept of installing a xeriscape demonstration
garden on the south side of New City Hall to encourage water conservation
in the community. The cost of installation is expected to be about
$105,000. The Water Utility will fund $8U,000, with the remainder expected
to be paid through voluntary help from private industry. The Ordinance
appropriates prior year reserves in the Water Fund in the amount of $80,000
to install such a garden.
Background
A. Resolution Endorsing the Installation of Xeriscape Demonstration Garden
on the south side of New City Hall.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 63, 1985, Appropriating
Prior Year Reserves in the Water Fund.
A committee consisting of personnel from the City and private industry was
formed over a year ago to investigate the installation of a "xeriscape
demonstration garden" in Fort Collins. Xeriscape refers to landscaping
which uses a variety of low water using plants that can save water but
still be highly attractive. A demonstration garden at a convenient and
highly visible location would help to encourage developers, architects, and
residents to use the concepts demonstrated in the garden. An education
program would be developed to make the concept more visible in the
community. These appropriations will be included in the 1986 Budget.
The cost of installing the xeriscape demonstration garden is expected to be
about $105,000. The Water Utility has adequate prior year reserves to fund
$8U,000 with the remainder to be paid through voluntary help from private
industry.
Members of the Xeriscape Committee will make a short presentation at the
meeting."
Councilmember Uhlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to
adopt Resolution 85-81.
Councilmember Estrada asked about',plans for'.an educational program to
accompany the xeriscape demonstrat.i'on'project.
City Manager Arnold stated that brochures will be prepared to provide
information on the project.
Councilmember Estrada commented on the educational opportunity this would
provide for school classes.
-252-
May 21, 1985
Steve Mill, representing the staff/citizen Xeriscape Task Force, summarized '
the purpose of the demonstration garden and the reasons the City Hall site
was selected.
Councilmember Knezovich withdrew from the discussion at this point because
of a possible conflict of interest.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, discussed projected water rate
increases and noted the high cost for the demonstration garden. He stated
water meters would encourage water conservation.
Terry Foppe, 622 Whedbee, objected to the site selected and opposed
removing existing landscaping. She supported the demonstration project at
a site that needs new landscaping.
Mr. Mill commented that the City Hall site was selected because of its high
visibility and because this site would be a strong statement for
conservation.
Mayor Rutstein asked how much water xeriscape landscaping would save.
Mr. Mill stated that voluntary participation would delay the need for
meters.
Greg Hurst, Xeriscape Task Force member, stated that traditional ,
landscaping would cost more than xeriscape landscaping.
Don Woeber, 2706 Dundee Court, commented on the high cost of the
demonstration project and noted this duplicates CSU demonstration projects.
Councilmember Ohlson noted that City Hall has high visibility, that direct
taxpayer savings will result from water conservation efforts, and that much
of the existing landscaping will be used in this project.
Councilmember Clarke noted that builders must do business at City Hall and
this xeriscape demonstration project will be highly visible for this group.
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
table the Resolution to June 4 to allow development of an educational
program to accompany the demonstration project. Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Clarke, Horak, Ohlson, and
Rutstein. (Councilmember'Knezovich withdrawn)
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Horak commented that the xeriscape demonstration program
material could be included in the City's extensive water conservation
program.
City Manager Arnold stated that the xeriscape project is designed as an I
educational effort.
-253-
May 21, 1985
11
'7
The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 85-81 was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None. (Councilmember Knezovich withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Ordinance No. 63, 1985 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. (Councilmember
Knezovich withdrawn; Councilmember Uhlson out of room during vote)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Citizen Participation
A. Proclamation Naming May as Multiple Sclerosis Month.
Mayor Rutstein requested this proclamation be forwarded to the
appropriate person.
B. Proclamation Naming May as Older Americans Month.
Mayor Rutstein requested the proclamation be forwarded to the
appropriate person.
C. Proclamation Naming May 22 as Records and Information Management Day.
Albin Wagner, president of the Northern Colorado Chapter of the
Association of Records Managers and Administrators, received the
proclamation.:
D. Proclamation Naming May 13-17 as National Dispatcher Week.
Susanne Vincent, Communications Coordinator, received the proclamation.
E. Proclamation Naming May 19-25 as World Trade Week.
Mayor Rutstein requested the proclamation be forwarded to the
appropriate person.
Citizen Participation
Gun Control
Mayor Rutstein read a prepared statement signed by all Councilmembers which
stated that the City Council 'has no intent to pursue further action
concerning a buy back program or cooling off period. The Council will
continue to encourage firearms educational programs.
Rick Traynor, 1412 Edgewood Court, read a statement from a group that had
circulated petitions opposing any gun control legislation. He stated that
since the goals of the group have been met, the matter will be dropped.
-254-
May 21, 1985
Gordon Muffly, Executive Officer for the Colorado Wildlife Federation, '
supported Council's position concerning firearms and requested endorsement
of local efforts to build a rifle range that could be used for educational
and recreation purposed.
Citizen Participation
Proposal for Buggy Rides in the Downtown
Gary McMahan, representing the T Lazy 7 Ranch in Aspen, presented a
proposal for a buggy ride operation in the downtown as a tourist
attraction. He requested Council's feelings about such a business.
Mayor Rutstein stated the Council would be interested in looking at a
detailed proposal.
City Manager Arnold stated that staff would work with Mr. McMahan to review
a proposal, although the City would have little regulatory authority in
such an operation.
Councilmember Knezovich supported the idea of bringing additional tourist
attractions to Fort Collins.
Ordinance Appropriating Prior Year '
Undesignated Reserves in the Parkland Fund
for the Reimbursement of Street Improvement
Costs Associated with the Greenbriar Park
Site Acquisition, Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
At the meeting of April 16, 1985, Council approved the agreement for the
acquisition of the Greenbriar Neighborhood Park site in northeast Fort
Collins on a vote of 4-3. The funding of the purchase was budgeted in
1985, in the amount of $300,000 in the Parkland Fund, listed as New Park
Site Acquisition(s) - Sites to be Determined. In addition to the cost of
the land itself, staff estimated that the City would eventually have to
budget approximately $152,350 for road improvement costs to be paid at some
later date, as residential construction proceeded in that area. This
amount is now estimated to be $156,763. As the purchase agreement for the
property refers to the City's financial obligation with regard to the road
improvements, the funds must be budgeted and appropriated for that purpose
prior to entering into the final purchase agreement.
Background
Council approved Resolution 85-69 by a vote of 4-3 at the meeting of '
April 16, 1985. The resolution authorized the City Manager to enter into
an agreement to purchase property in the Greenbriar Subdivision to be
-255-
May 21, 1985
' developed as a neighborhood park. The
this site (originally estimated to be
22.1 acres) which is located near the
extension of Willox Lane. The purchase
($13,500/acre) which is for the land
available in the 1985 Parkland Fund,
Acquisition - Sites to be Determined,
time.
attached map shows a sketch plan for
21 acres but later determined to be
intersection of North Lemay and the
price for the park site is $298,358
only. Money for the acquisition is
under the category of New Park Site
which has $300,000 available at this
City policy states that growth will pay its own way. Therefore, the City
is responsible for appropriate street improvement costs just the same as
any other developer. In the park purchase agreement, the City will agree
to reimburse the subdivision developer for its share of such street
improvement costs, being 50% of the cost of improvements to streets
adjacent to the park property. It is now anticipated that Willox Lane may
be improved this year, and the City's reimbursement payment would be due 3U
days after receipt of the bill. The reimbursement for the improvement to
Bramblebush Street and Briarcliff Road will be due after April 1, 1986.
In order to avoid an unbudgeted liability, the City must appropriate the
funds, at this time, to cover the costs of the street improvements, though
the money may not be spent until later this year and next year.
As a part of the Agenda Item Summary for the April 16 Council meeting, it
was noted that staff estimated the City's costs for street reimbursement to
be approximately $152,350. The estimate of the City's cost for street
improvements has been revised to $156,763, as estimated in conjunction with
James H. Stewart and Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Surveyors
of Fort Collins, and the City Engineering Office.
The estimate was arrived at in the following manner. The frontage of the
Greenbriar Park site along the streets to which it abutts and the estimated
road improvement costs are as follows:
Willox Lane - 627.08 linear feet at $100 per foot $62,708.00
Plus 10 percent contingency 6,270.80
$68,978.80
Bramblebush Street and Briarcliff Road -
2,280.09 linear feet at $35 per foot $79,803.15
Plus 10 percent contingency 7,980.31
$87,783.46
Grand Total $156,762.26
-256-
May 21, 1985
This reimbursement will be paid to the
percent contingency is consistent with
Control System to cover the actual cost i
Parks and Recreation Board Recommendation
f
The Parks and Recreation Board, at its meeting of March 26, votec
unanimously 6-0 (three members absent) to recommend the acquisition of the
Greenbriar Park site. The Board was fully aware of the street
reimbursement cost estimate and considered that element in their decision.
Summary
The City has preliminarily agreed to pay for its share of the street
improvement cost associated with the neighborhood park purchase in the
Greenbriar Subdivision. The City Charter requires that costs committed in
any contract must be clearly budgeted and appropriated. Therefore, staff
requests that $156,763 be appropriated from the Parkland Fund prior year
undesiynated reserves to pay for these street improvement costs.
Sufficient funding is available in the Parkland Fund for this expenditure."
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Ordinance No. 64, 1985 on First Reading.
Councilmember Knezovich commented on the high price of the land and the
absence of development in the area, and he supported allowing funds to
accumulate at interest to purchase parkland when needed at a later date.
The vote on the motion
Estrada, Horak, ;Ohlson,
Knezovich.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember
Ordinance Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund
for the Northside Aztlan Community
Center Renovation and Gymnasium Floor
Resurfacing Projects, Tabled to June 4
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
Additional funding of $98,000 is being requested to be added to the
previously appropriated $162,000, in order to complete the renovation of
the Northside Aztlan Community Center. This also includes the total
resurfacing of the gymnasium floor. A consultant retained to study
renovation and expansion possibilities found that, unless structural
stabilization efforts are undertaken, the building will. be usable for only
1
-257-
May 21, 1985
three to six more years. The consultant,
Recreation Board have examined the various
range in cost from $75,000 to $550,000, have
constructing a new Northside Aztlan Community
that a "medium fix" option of $260,000 is
logical alternative for renovation.
Background
staff, and the Parks and
stabilization options, which
reviewed the possibility of
Center, and have all agreed
the most cost effective and
Since the opening in 1978, the Northside Aztlan Community Center building
has experienced substantial floor and wall settlement. Last year a
consultant was retained to study renovation and expansion possibilities and
found that unless structural stabilization efforts were undertaken, the
building would serve its intended purpose for only three to six more years.
The study offered three stabilization options ranging in cost from $75,000
to $550,000, the latter involving total reconstruction of interior walls
and slabs. Essentially the three approaches to renovation have become
known as:
1. the band -aid fix;
2. the medium fix; and
3. the big fix.
The consultant, staff, and the Parks and Recreation Board are all
recommending the medium fix (for $260,000) which should stabilize the life
of the building.
s and Recreation Board Involvement
The Parks and Recreation Board held a special meeting on May 1, at the
Northside Aztlan Community Center. All Board Members received copies of
the complete report from the consultant (Sutter Architects and Planners of
Fort Collins), as well as the staff report summary prepared by Project
Manager Ted Rutledge. Consultant Bob Sutter attended the meeting and
discussed the technological elements of the building and the possible
solutions, including the mechanical system, new roof, gym floor, and all
other modifications, which have been addressed and added to the medium fix.
Mr. Sutter said if we choose to go with the big fix for $550,000, we might
as well spend more money and actually build a new center. The medium fix
has the highest probability of success while being most cost effective.
Mr. Sutter went on to explain the foundation and soil conditions,
settlements and voids, structural failures, where bedrock is located, the
potentials of methane gas, etc. He stated that the methane gas impact is
minimal, as verified by Health Department testing. He then explained the
proposed stabilization efforts included in the medium fix. Shallow
foundations would be underpinned (shored up) by a system of concrete piers
and beams or, alternatively, by the "Perma Jack" method where steel rods
are driven to bedrock and anchored to the foundation. Slabs would be
stabilized by mudjacking or thick grout column to bedrock and allowing
floors to rest on a grid of such columns.
-258-
May 21, 1985
The medium fix should increase floor life by 10 to 30 years and structural
life by 20 to 30 years. Future additional mudjacking of the floor may be
required at an estimated annual cost of approximately $3,000 on a periodic
basis. Because of the "unknown" settlement conditions, it is possible that
the floor could stabilize at anytime and future mudjacking may become
unnecessary. It is also possible that mudjacking could go on for many
years.
Medium Fix Costs and Scope
In addition to structural stabilization, this renovation project also will
provide:
1. New roofing over the office area to improve moisture resistance and add
insulation.
2. Door weatherproofing.
3. Replacement of obsolete heating and cooling units.
4. A new storage room to be added to the building's east side.
5. Resurfacing the gym floor to reduce the hazard presented by the
existing uneven surface.
The total project cost is estimated to be $260,000. Existing
appropriations total $162,000, leaving a funding need of $98,000. (These
figures do not reflect $18,000, which was appropriated in CDBG monies for
resurfacing the gym floor. If that money is added to the project budget,
Davis -Bacon Act wage provisions will apply to the entire project and the
resulting cost inflation will exceed the $18,000 grant. Therefore, staff
recommends the $18,000 to be returned to CDBG for some other purpose.)
Final design of the renovation project is underway, and construction is
anticipated for late summer. or fall. Closure of the center may be
necessary at times, but should not exceed two weeks for any given period.
This work will be coordinated with the Center's Recreation Staff so that
the down time and public inconveniences can be minimized.
Project Funding Summary
Appropriated from Capital Projects Fund
Appropriated from Energy Fund
Available Funds
-Plus-
Center Renovation Request
Gymnasium Floor Resurfacing Request
Additional Requested
$125,000
37,000
$162,000
$ 58,000
'40,000
$ 98,000
-259-
May 21, 1985
' Total Project Cost $260,000
Recommendation
The Parks and Recreation Board, at their meeting of May 1, 1985, voted
unanimously 6:0 (three members absent) to STRONGLY recommend to City
Council the medium fix solution of $260,000 for renovation. Parks and
Recreation Staff agrees.
In addition, the Board voted 4:2 to also recommend expansion of the NACC
for an additional $312,000 (as detailed in the consultant report), with the
funding for expansion coming from the General City portion of the Capital
Projects Fund. The Board had voted 7:1 at their meeting of April 23, to
recommend the $260,000 medium fix, but also ask Council to consider somehow
funding the full $550,000 big fix, even if it would take two years worth of
funding sources to accomplish it. The Board's new vote on May 1, now
rejects the big fix, and recommends using the additional money identified
in the consultants report as needed for the big fix (approximately
$300,000) to accomplish expansion of the facility. The Board feels that
expansion would meet the original expectations of the community when the
building was first built, as well as provide for the real needs and growth
that have occurred over the years. The consultant stated that the medium
fix should stabilize the structure for up to 30 years, and an expansion
addition would last up to 40 years, so any expansion should be done within
the next five years or not at all. The two Board Members who voted no (Ann
Schroeder and Karen Schubert) said they feel the concept is right, but the
site is wrong. Board President Bill Loy is preparing a letter to Council
asking for a joint meeting of the Board and Council, or a worksession, to
discuss expansion of Northside."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 65, 1985 on First Reading.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
table Ordinance No. 65, 1985, to June 4 following a work session meeting
with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
Councilmember Estrada supported tabling the ordinance until after a work
session to allow a discussion of all alternatives.
City Manager Arnold noted that Council could meet with the Parks and
Recreation Board on May„ 28.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, suggested more review of the
proposed renovation as relates to replacement of obsolete heating and
cooling units.
' Ausencio Perez, 2613 Stanford Road, supported allowing citizen input at the
work session.
-260-
May 21, 1985
Mayor Rutstein stated that some citizen input would be allowed at the work I
session.
The vote on the motion to table Ordinance No. 65, 1985 on First Reading to
June 4 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak,
Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Knezovich asked for a report on undesignated reserves prior
to June 4.
City Manager Arnold stated that a list of funded and unfunded projects will
be prepared.
Ordinance Establishing a School Site
quisition Fee, Denied on First Readin
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
This item was first considered by Council in December 1984 and subsequently
tabled to March 19th, to April 16th, and again to May 21st. Since the most '
recent tabling, the school bond issue was approved by the voters of the
Poudre R-1 School District. Action by Council is appropriate at this time
to either approve or deny the request of the school districts to establish
a county -wide fee to cover school site acquisition costs. This fee would
be assessed only on residential development.
Background
This fee is requested by the Poudre and Thompson School Districts as a
county -wide fee. As of this time, only Berthoud has approved the fee
contingent upon adoption by the rest of the County. The ordinance
presented for your consideration has been amended to include a similar
contingency provision, and also includes a provision for the districts to
hold the City harmless in the event that adoption of this ordinance is
responsible for any injury or loss to the City.
The Poudre R-1 bond issue that was approved on May 7th for $24.5 million
covers anticipated capital needs for the next five years.
The requested fee amounts to $272.40 per single family unit and $136.80 per
multi -family unit. Calculation of the fee is based on school district
statistics on the number of children per unit.
Previously submitted materials are attached." I
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
adopt Ordinance No. 189, 1984 on First Reading.
-261-
May 21, 1985
' Jim Law, Administrative Services Director for Poudre R-1 School District,
spoke concerning the need for additional schools and the philosophy of
having growth pay its own way.
Councilmember Estrada commented on the recently approved school bond issue
and asked about the proposed use of the additional funding.
Councilmember Horak asked about documentation to support the school's
request.
Jim Mokler, Fort Collins Board of Realtors, opposed the school site
acquisition fee and stated that each new fee is a disincentive for new
projects.
David Moore, Aurora, whose company is a property owner in the Thompson
School District, asked what benefit would be received from payment of the
fee. He supported using improvement districts or bond issues to finance
school costs.
Councilmember Knezovich
commented on
the
mechanism
to require the
fees
collected to be spent
for schools in
the
Fort Collins
Urban Growth Area.
He asked about reversion provisions
if no
schools
would be built in
the
UGA.
City Attorney Huisjen
stated the
UGA
agreement
would provide
for
reimbursement, but the
matter is still
subject to
negotiation with
the
school district.
Ralph Waldo, 1336 Tarrington Drive, Fort Collins Board of Realtors, opposed
the fee in light of the recently adopted school bond issue, and asked about
use of the fee for maintenance.
Mr. Law stated the fees could only be used for the purchase of land.
Councilmember Clarke stated the fee would be substantial, and he opposed
increased fees as a negative force. He commented that he opposes City
involvement in this issue.
Councilmember Estrada stated the fee could be a double assessment. He
commented concerning the degeneration of schools in the north part of town
and spoke concerning efforts needed to address inequities in some schools.
He opposed the school site acquisition fee until the equity issue is
addressed by Poudre R-1.
Councilmember Ohlson stated this issue is clouded by the passage of the
Poudre R-1 bond issue. He opposed the ordinance but stated he still
supports the philosophy of growth paying its own way.
' Councilmember Horak opposed this fee and stated that new ideas need to be
developed to provide needed services.
-262-
May 21, 1985
Councilmember Knezovich opposed the fee and stated that important issues I
need to be resolved by the two school boards involved.
The vote on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 189, 1984 on First Reading
was as follows: Yeas: None. Nays: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Reconsideration of the Decision on
ooeal of the Arbor Commercial Plaza
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The Arbor Commercial Plaza PUD received preliminary approval from the
Planning and Zoning Board on January 31, 1985 by a vote of 4 to 3. (The
Planning and Zoning Board's preliminary approval included a number of
provisions primarily relating to landscaping and building elevations.) The
decision of the Planning and Zoning Board was subsequently appealed by
staff because of a number of natural resource issues and the location of a
grocery store on College Avenue. On March 21, 1985, Council held a
worksession on this item, followed by an official hearing. The action '
taken by Council on a 6 to 1 vote was to uphold the preliminary approval
with the conditions that Mail Creek remain open, that existing trees on
site be preserved to the maximum extent possible, and that the project
should incorporate existing natural areas into development of the site; and
accept the location of a grocery store on College Avenue. When the findings
of the appeal were presented for Council resolution on April 2, 1985, the
item was reconsidered and tabled to May 21st.
Background
As a result of the natural resource issues raised with this proposed
project, the Department of Natural Resources prepared a policy paper on
Urban Wildlife Mitigation and Alternative Strategies which was presented at
the Council worksession on May 14th. The Department of Natural Resources
has taken the position that the specific site under consideration is not
appropriate for mitigation and should be,protected.
Given this recommendation from Natural Resources, staff is now recommending
that Council overturn the Planning and Zoning Board decision and deny the
proposed Arbor Commercial Plaza PUD. The condition that Mail Creek must
remain open significantly affects the preliminary plans that were submitted
to the extent that the project must be redesigned. A denial based on the
need to preserve the natural area gives a clear message to all involved and
tells staff and the applicant that to proceed will require a new design to '
be reviewed through the normal planning process.
-263-
May 21, 1985
' If Council should decide that this site is not a significant wildlife
habitat that needs to be preserved and that the site is appropriate for
mitigation, then Council should consider mitigation options and uphold the
Planning and Zoning Board approval with the addition of appropriate
mitigation.
For background materials on this subject, Council is referred to the
complete agenda item packet for the March 21st Council meeting (attached)
and the Natural Resources materials from the May 14th worksession. The
minutes of the March 21st and April 2, 1985 Council meetings are attached."
Mayor Rutstein asked whether the motion from March 21 was on the floor for
reconsideration.
City Attorney Huisjen replied the reconsideration of the March 21 motion
was on the floor and needed no further motion to introduce it.
(Secretary's Note: The motion being reconsidered is contained on page 170
of the City Council minutes for March 21, 1985.)
David Wood, attorney for Kroh Brothers, stated that the conditions as
specified would be tantamount to a no vote on the project. He expressed
the developer's concerns for safety if the creek is left open. He stated
that the developer is prepared to pay $25,000 for mitigation.
Councilmember Estrada asked about whether mitigation could be used in this
case.
Natural Resources Director Roger Krempel stated that mitigation could be
used, although the City has no established mitigation policies.
Natural Resources staff member Andrea Lapointe spoke concerning the
wildlife habitat in the creek bottom.
Councilmember Clarke commented on mitigation and asked about substituting
other equal habitats.
Councilmember Knezovich asked what makes this habitat unique.
Mayor Rutstein asked about the plans for filling the creek or keeping it
open.
Community Development Director Curt Smith stated the initial plan would
have kept the creek open but would not have preserved the habitat in its
natural state.
Mr. Wood stated the prior plan would not be economically feasible.
I
Mayor Rutstein stated that mitigation should not be a substitute for
project planning and asked about the possibility of a design without
filling the creek.
-264-
May 21, 1985
Councilmember Stoner asked whether keeping the habitat intact would
constitute a taking of property.
Curt Smith stated that development of a plan preserving the habitat as an
amenity is not a taking of property.
Councilmember Knezovich asked if this property is sufficiently unique that
it should be preserved at all cost.
Andrea Lapointe stated that there are few class 1 properties left.
Mayor Rutstein stated that development may not be an "all or nothing"
proposition for this property since an open creek was incorporated in an
earlier plan.
Councilmember Clarke stated that incorporating the creek in the plan may
not be economically feasible and that development could make the property
no longer valuable as habitat. He supported using the mitigation funds for
like habitat in a better location.
Councilmember Horak stated this area along South College is not a good
place to maintain habitat, and commented on the overall open space system
and the existing open space plan that specifies other areas as a critical
need. He stated that criteria for open space would need to be determined
after public hearings on a policy.
Councilmember Ohlson supported continued efforts in the area of natural
resources, whatever the outcome on this issue.
Councilmember Stoner stated he did not support the $25,000 mitigation,
which sets a precedent. He stated any mitigation should be negotiated by
staff.
Mayor Rutstein suggested denial of the motion, which would still allow the
developer to go back to the Planning and Zoning Board with another
proposal.
The vote on the motion on the floor to approve the Arbor Commercial POD
Preliminary Plan with the conditions, placed by the Planning and Zoning
Board as amended by Councilmember Ohlson to provide that the creek bed be
left open, and that efforts be taken to preserve the trees in the creek bed
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, and Knezovich.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
uphold the Planning and Zoning Board decision and approve the Arbor
Commercial Plaza Preliminary POD, with a stipulation that the developer pay
$25,000 to the City for mitigation for the lost habitat.
1
Ll
-265-
May 21, 1985
ICouncilmember Clarke commented on the opportunity to allow projects to go
forward with the payment of mitigation to find good quality habitat
elsewhere.
Councilmember Knezovich stated this area is doomed to development. He
supported developing mitigation procedures.
Councilmember Horak commented on the value of existing land and the need
for compensation to the community.
Councilmember Ohlson addressed environmental concerns.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, and Knezovich. Nays: Councilmembers Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Approving a Revision to the
Urban Growth Area Boundary, Rezoning
Approximately 345 Acres Into the UGA,
Retaining the Underlying FA-1 Zoning,
Tabled to June 4, 1985
' Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
The applicant, Everitt Enterprises, is requesting the amendment to include
approximately 345: acres in the Urban Growth Area on behalf of the four
affected property owners: Lyle Nelson, Gerald and Elizabeth Ann Dusbabek,
H.H. Investments, and Ronald and Paula Ruff. The land is located south of
Harmony Road and east of Lemay Avenue (see attached map). The existing
underlying FA-1 zoning would remain in place until the property is annexed
to the City of Fort Collins.
Background
The amendment will facilitate construction of a sewer trunk line within the
new UGA in the most feasible location, allow property owners in the area to
benefit from the line's service as well as inclusion in the UGA, and paves
the way for creation of a Special Improvement District consisting of the
affected property owners and the City to finance construction of the line.
The trunk line will serve areas north of Mail Creek which are not served by
the South Fort Collins Sanitation District. This includes development
within the Oakridge Master Plan and the area west of Lemay Avenue owned by
G.T. Land and Everitt Enterprises. Cost information on different line
' location options is attached.
Specific criteria have been adopted to provide guidance for review of UGA
Amendment requests (attached). The applicant is approaching the amendment
-266-
May 21, 1985
from the standpoint of a technical mistake having been made when the '
original boundary was adopted since there was no detailed analysis of sewer
service needs.
In Staff's analysis of the request, the rationale behind creation of the
UGA was explored. The UGA is essentially a growth management boundary, its
location determined by land use and utility issues. In some instances,
such as preserving an open space corridor or views to the foothills, land
use is the dominant consideration, based on the need to provide control.
In this case however, the utility service issue is the primary
consideration. The technical adjustment requested helps define the sewer
service area boundary for the City and the South Fort Collins Sanitation
District. All the land north of the new boundary will be serviced by the
City while land south will be serviced by the District.
Staff believes that the original line would have been drawn as proposed,
had the information available today been available in 1980. The Planning
and Zoning Board members who did not support the request felt that the
integrity of the existing boundary should be maintained and that the
applicant had not demonstrated that the community as a whole would benefit
from the request.
The following series of events led to the determination of where the sewer
trunk line should be located and subsequently to the UGA Amendment request.
The applicants "Justification For Rezoning" is attached and provides I
additional insight.
The Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area was
adopted by City Council on May 1, 1980. In the process of City Council
adoption, the boundary was moved from Harmony Road, one half mile south
based on the desire to have both sides of Harmony Road within one planning
jurisdiction.
Substantial areas were annexed south of Harmony Road and it was anticipated
that the City would provide water and sewer service, although the details
of how service would be provided had not been worked out.
A feasibility study was done in late 1980 for location of the trunk sewer
and more information became available on cost and location options.
Negotiations between the City of Fort Collins, the South Fort Collins
Sanitation District and the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District on service
area boundaries had been underway for several years. The Intergovernmental
Agreement, adopted by the City and South Fort Collins Sanitation District
originally designated these areas to be served by the District. However,
based on what is now agreed as the most effective way to provide service to
these areas, the District has agreed to have the City serve all properties
north of the proposed UGA boundary."
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to I
table the Resolution to June 4, 1985. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
-267-
May 21, 1985
ITHE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager
to Enter into an Engineering Services Agreement
with Black & Veatch Engineers in the Amount of
$1,647,935 for the Design of Various Facilities
at Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
This is a sole source request to contract with Black & Veatch Engineers for
the design of improvements at Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 (WWTP#2).
The improvements consist of (1) modifications to the WWTP#2 - South Complex
and sludge thickening, digestion and dewatering facilities, and (2) the
oversizing of sludge thickening, digestion, and dewatering facilities for
the City's sole use.
These improvements relate to the City's Master Agreement with
AnheuserBusch.
' Background
The staff believes that it is in the City's best interest to contract with
Black & Veatch for the proposed work at WWTP#2 for the following reasons:
1. During the past ten years, Black & Veatch has been involved in the
design and construction all of the City's wastewater treatment
facilities. Black & Veatch was initially selected to design the
Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 expansion back in the early
1970's. As a continuation of that project, Black & Veatch was
selected to develop the City's sludge management plan in 1977 and
design the sludge management facilities in 1981. During this
time, Black & Veatch has acquired considerable knowledge of the
City's wastewater treatment operations. This is a significant
benefit to the City because when a consultant has a good
understanding of the facilities and operation that interface with
their design the likelihood of costly construction and operational
problems occurring is reduced.
2. The overall quality of Black & Veatch's work has been very good.
3. Black & Veatch
has performed the conceptual design work on
this
project to the satisfaction
of both the City staff
and
Anheuser-Busch
staff. ,
4. Negotiations
between Black
& Veatch and the City
and
'
Anheuser-Busch
have resulted in
a fair and reasonable price
for
the work to be
performed.
-268-
May 21, 1985
'
5. There are not any apparent advantages to either the City or
Anheuser-Busch to request proposals from other consultants.
The total cost for the services which will be provided by Black & Veatch is
$1,647,935. These services include:
Complete Conceptual Design $ 9,400
Final Design 1,391,824
Bidding Phase Services 78,988
Shop Drawing Review 167,723
Total $1,647,935
The design services provided by Black & Veatch do not include the design of
any composting facilities. Although it is intended that composting
facilities be constructed, the staff believes that all the composting
alternatives have not been thoroughly evaluated and therefore final design
should not begin.
The engineering services for the remaining components of the work
(composting design and the construction management and inspection for the
entire project) is estimated to cost between $600,000 to $700,000.
Contracts for that work will be considered sometime in the future."
Councilmember Clarke asked about local involvement in working on the
'
project.
Carl Houck, Black and Veatch, stated there will be no direct local
subcontracting on the project because the scope of the work has changed and
because of the tight time schedule.
City Manager Arnold noted the revised design allows composting, which will
be handled as a separate contract through the normal selection process.
Councilmember Knezovich asked about an escape clause if the master
agreement is not modified.
City Attorney Huisjen stated that the A-B master agreement specifies that
A-B pays for the cost of engineering services including this work, and if
the project is terminated, A-B would pay for the cost of work incurred.
Councilmember 0hlson asked about problems with the existing sludge
management facility designed by Black and Veatch.
City Manager Arnold stated a report will be forthcoming after completion of
an investigation into design and operating problems. He stated the sludge
farm problems will be resolved. He reported on a letter received from A.H.
Litichin of A-B Engineering stating that A-B will pay the cost if the City
decides to waive off later.
'
-269-
May 21, 1985
' Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to
adopt Resolution 85-84.
Councilmember Knezovich noted the Council and the Water Board have
discussed the issue. The project will cost less to the City and provide
flexibility by placing two treatment facilities at the south side of town.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember
Ohlson.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Provincetowne/Portner
Estates South Special Improvement District No. 81
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summar
This Resolution establishes amendments that would modify the phasing of the
construction and financing of certain improvements to the Provincetown/
' Portner Estates South Special Improvement District No. 81.
The Ordinance authorizes the issuance of $2,440,000 in Special Assessment
Bonds for the Provincetowne/Portner Estates South Special Improvement
District No. 81 (Phase 1). Terms for the issuance of the bonds and the use
of proceeds are outlined in the Ordinance.
Background
A. Resolution Amending the Phasing of Improvements to be Constructed and
Financed as Part of the.Provincetowne/Portner Estates South Special
Improvement District No. 81.
The owners of the property within the District have requested the
modification of the phasing of construction and financing of certain
District improvements, including certain street, water, sanitary sewer, and
storm drainage improvements.
This Resolution provides a new phasing schedule for construction and
financing of District improvements, and provides that any future amendments
to the phasing schedule for construction and financing of District
improvements may be approved by the City Engineer of the City without
further action of City Council.
8. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 11, 1985, Authorizing the
the Issuance of Special Assessment Bonds for Provincetowne/Portner
Estates South Special Improvement District No. 81 (Phase 1) in the
Principal Amount of $2,440,000.
-27U-
May 21, 1985
The Provincetowne/Portner Estates South Special Improvement District No. 81 '
(Phase 1) was formed by the City Council on October 31, 1984. It is a
voluntary Special Improvement District. The District was established under
the City's policies.
Pursuant to an agreement between the City and owners of the land, owners of
the land in the district acting on behalf of the City have or expect to
invite various contractors to bid for the construction contracts on the
Phase 1 Improvements.
The bonds are 15-year term bonds, the principal amount of which can be
called at any time there is sufficient money from assessments. The use of
proceeds is as follows:
Construction and Engineering Costs $1,609,919
Issuance Costs 100,000
Underwriting Discount 60,942
Capitalized Interest 669,139
Amount of Issue $2,44U,000
The capitalized interest will be utilized to pay the interest on the bonds.
for three years, allowing construction and dispersion to take place within
the development. The three years of capitalized interest has been in '
nearly all the City's voluntary Special Improvement District bond issues.
Boettcher & Co. is acting as the underwriter on this bond issue at the
specific request of the developers. Their discount is 2.5% of the
principal amount of the bond issue.
As is our normal practice on bond issues, the interest rates will be read
as an amendment to the Ordinance during the meeting."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich,
to adopt Resolution 85-85.
Mayor Rutstein asked about special improvement districts that are being
prepared for assessment.
Finance Director Jim Harmon stated that special improvement districts will
be closed out by mid -September.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 66, 1985 on First Reading.
City Attorney Huisjen read insertions to be made in the Ordinance.
-271-
May 21, 1985
' The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Setting Forth the Intention
of the City of Fort Collins to Issue
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds
for the Timberline Tech Center Project
in the Amount of $1,800,000, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summar
The applicant is requesting Industrial Development Revenue Bond funds to
acquire, develop, construct and equip a 25,000 square foot multi -tenant
office and light manufacturing and assembly building to be owned by
Timberline Tech. The building will be located in the Timberline Plaza PUD
Development at the southeast corner of Vermont and Eastbrook Drives.
Projects of this type are commonly referred to as incubator projects.
' Background
Pursuant to State of Colorado Executive Order No. D006284, the City of Fort
Collins received an initial allocation authority of $5,263,875, which funds
could be used for the inducement of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds by
the City by May 15, 1985. Thus far in 1985, $1,800,000 in IDRB's have been
induced by the City.
The City is eligible for a second allocation of up to $10,000,000 between
the dates of January 1, 1985 and June 1, 1985. It is to this allocation
that the present $1,800,000 request will be applied.
Between the dates of June 1, 1985 and September 1, 1985, the City may
induce an additional $5,000,000 in Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for
local projects. Depending on the amount of funds available at the State
level, local issuers such as Fort Collins may apply for unlimited
allocations beginning September 1, 1985 for the remainder of the year,
although there is no assurance that funds will be available during this
period.
A copy of the application for the inducement of City of Fort Collins,
Colorado Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Series 1985) for Timberline
Tech Center in the amount of $1,800,000 has been forwarded under separate
cover. The project consists of acquiring, developing, constructing and
' equipping a 25,000 square foot multi -tenant office and light manufacturing
and assembly building. The project is located within a P.U.D. which has
received final approval from the Planning and Zoning Board.
-272-
May 21, 1985
Staff has reviewed the application using criteria established by Resolution
'
84-92, adopting Industrial Development Revenue Bond Policies and Criteria.
In order to highlight critical information, a summary sheet has been
attached, as well as the IDRB Criteria Evaluation sheet."
Dave Dwyer, representing the applicant, described the proposed project and
the incubator concept.
Jon Gregory, Vice -President, Everitt Enterprises, discussed the incubator
concept based on shared facilities and equipment,
resulting in an economic
advantage and improved survivorship for those involved.
Councilmember Estrada asked about the difference between this type of
facility and normal office space, what interest has been generated, and
whether this would divert business from office space that is already
occupied.
Mr. Gregory stated this type of facility would attract new businesses to
Fort Collins. He stated existing facilities do not meet the need of some
companies.
Councilmember Stoner asked about a guarantee for continuation of the
incubator facility.
Mr. Gregory stated it is unlikely that one company would take over the
building.
,
Councilmember Ohlson questioned the impact on existing businesses and noted
that another incubator facility is currently under construction.
Community Development Director Curt Smith stated that a similar facility in
Prospect Park has obtained building permits, but no application has been
made for IDRB's.
Councilmember Knezovich asked about similarities to "spec" buildings.
Mr. Gregory stated the policy is not to build a "spec" building, and this
is not a "spec" building.
Mayor Rutstein asked what percentage of the proposed facility is office
space and what the rental would be.
Mr. Gregory stated' there is a blurred distinction between office and
assembly space. He stated that a lower rental could be charged if IDRB's
are obtained.
Councilmember Estrada asked about rental competition with the other
incubator facility being constructed.
City Attorney Huisjen stated that IDRB's can be issued in response to a
community need, can not prohibit competition, and must provide a positive
,
incentive for a project that benefits the community.
-273-
May 21, 1985
IMr. Dwyer noted that application for IDRB's is open to competitors.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to
adopt Resolution 85-88.
Larry Salman, Vice -President of Touch Dialogues, commented on the need for
this type of innovation center facility for small companies.
Richard Meyer, President of Colorado Research Development Corporation,
spoke concerning the need for this type of facility and supported the use
of IDRB's for this project.
Jim Woodward, 430 Garfield, asked about the fees charged by bond counsel,
the names of members of the partnership, the impact on the City's credit
rating if the developer defaults, and competition between revenue bonds and
GO bonds on the tax exempt bond market. He asked about the ramifications
of a 1983 campaign contribution from Fischer, Brown, Huddleson, and Gunn to
Councilmember Clarke.
Finance Director Jim Harmon stated the City would have no liability if the
company defaults.
Councilmember Estrada supported the Resolution because this type of space
is needed and there is little City liability.
Councilmember Stoner expressed concerns about future limits on IDRB's and
competition with private industry. He also stated the proposal is too open
ended.
Councilmember Horak stated his understanding of the City Attorney's ruling
concerning campaign contributions. He stated that the campaign
contribution issue is not relevant to this decision.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, and Knezovich. Nays: Councilmembers Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Indoor Pool/Ice Arena Project
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
The Indoor Pool/Ice Arena project is ready to begin construction. In order
' to start, Council action is needed on two items:
-274-
May 21, 1985
A. Resolution Approving the Preliminary Design Report and Authorizing the '
City Manager to Proceed with Construction Using the Fast Track
Construction Method Based Upon a Project Budget of $8.8 Million.
B. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Construction
Management Agreement with Reid Burton Construction Company, Inc.
Background
On May 14, 1985, staff presented to Council the Preliminary Design Report.
This report described the project as a 83,300 square foot facility designed
in accordance with the recommendations and requests of the neighborhood,
community groups, ice rink and swimming committees, Parks and Recreation
Board, and other City departments. The facility is projected to cost $8.8
million dollars, and it is projected to be completed by December 31, 1986,
the date stated in the voter -approved ordinance relating to the project.
In order to meet the December 31, 1986 date, it will be necessary to begin
soils testing and foundation construction prior to final design being
completed. The other design packages, except for landscaping, will be
completed in August 1985. By following this schedule, we are projecting to
have the building enclosed in time to minimize the impact of the winter
months.
At the time of this printing, staff has reached a tentative agreement with
'
Reid Burton Construction Company, Inc. on construction manager fees and
general conditions. Prior to finalizing these numbers, the Company needs
to have them reviewed by its legal counsel. These figures will be
available to you as an insert to your agenda item packet on May 21, 1985."
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-86.
City Manager Arnold noted thatthe fast track construction method addresses
the bidding process.
Luke Santangelo, 708 Smith, supported the Resolution and stated that the
cost increases are necessary for a quality facility. He stated that most
citizens want this facility.
Councilmember Knezovich commented on the deficit that sales tax revenue
will not cover.
Karen Schubert, 1419 Winfield Drive, Parks and Recreation Boardmember,
noted the unanticipated costs of the Spring Creek Bridge and access road.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, spoke concerning the cost of the
facility and the possibility that the sales tax might need to be extended '
to finance the project. He suggested cutting specified capital costs.
-275-
May 21, 1985
' Joe Tomlinson, 1700 Constitution Court, stated the pool/rink would be
self-supporting in a convention city.
Larry Hanford, 2924 Sagebrush Drive, supported proceeding with the project.
Peter Jacobs, 2643 Silver Creek Drive, stated that enhancements have been
added to widen the appeal of the facility.
Mary Margaret, 1317 Lakewood Drive, opposed the pool/rink project and the
increased costs.
Councilmember Knezovich questioned whether the voters believed the deficit
would be at zero in five years when the issue was placed on the ballot.
Finance Director Jim Harmon noted that the election information stated the
costs would not be totally covered through fees and charges, and a deficit
was projected from the beginning.
Mayor Rutstein read a letter that commented that the facility has been
designed in response to citizen needs, and increased costs will mean a
superior facility.
Dot Tomlinson, 1700 Constitution Court, spoke concerning swim meets that
' would utilize the facility.
Councilmember Estrada asked what costs could be cut.
City Manager Arnold stated that cuts would reduce the functionality of the
facility. He stated that the information presented to the voters was to
break even after five years.- The proposed changes in the project have been
for improved quality, size, and programming capability.
Councilmember Clarke supported making the facility the best possible and
proceeding with the project.
Councilmember Stoner expressed concern that the new facility not be
undersized as was the Lincoln pool.
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion to amend Resolution 85-86 to
eliminate the fast track and place a $8.1 million cap on the project.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 85-86 was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
Councilmember Knezovich.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
' (Secretary's Note: Councilmember Clarke left the room at this point in the
discussion.)
-276-
May 21, 1985
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-87 with the insertion of figures in the blanks.
Councilmember Ohlson asked why the contract was not awarded on a
competitive basis.
City Manager Arnold replied that Council authorized staff to proceed to
contract with Hastings and Chivetta and Reid Burton last year. He stated
that Reid Burton was selected through the normal competitive process
originally. He noted that a complaint had been received from Sinnett
Builders on the process followed.
Jack Gianola, Project Manager, presented information concerning the fast
track process and outlined the 12 bid packages, which will each be bid
separately.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada,
Horak, Ohl son, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Knezovich.
(Councilmember Clarke out of room)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Manager's Report
City Manager Arnold reported on a recent APPA magazine which features two
Fort Collins linemen on the cover.
City Manager Arnold reported on Denver Post articles concerning the smoking
ordinance.
Adjournment
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adjourn the meeting to 7:30 p.m. on May 28, 1985 to conduct an executive
session concerning personnel matters. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
The meeting adjourned at 1:00 a.m.
1
�L'�i...i 01 011
1
-277-