Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-04/06/1982-RegularI April 6, 1982 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 5:30 p.m. Presentation of flag by Brownie Troop #250. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, April 6, 1982, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Absent: None. Staff Members Present: Arnold, Krajicek, Huisjen, Lewis, Meitl, C. Smith, Barnes, Carnahan. I"End of Year Review & Focus on the Future" City Manager John Arnold gave a presentation on the present condition of the City, highlighting the significant events of the past year. He noted several recent awards that have been presented to the City and pointed out Councilmembers' involvement in state and national policy making forums. Mayor Wilmarth's Response Mayor Wilmarth expressed his thanks and appreciation to Councilmembers, staff, and his family for their contributions during his year as Mayor. He then called for nominations for the office of Mayor for 1982-83. Election of Mayor and Assistant Mayor Article II, Section 4 of the Charter provides that the Mayor and Assistant Mayor shall be elected from among the Councilmembers for terms of one year. -132- April 6, 1982 Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to nominate Gary Cassell for the office of Mayor. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wilmarth, to nominate John Knezovich for the office of Assistant Mayor. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Cassell assumed the chair and presented former Mayor Wilmarth with a plaque recognizing his leadership and dedication as Mayor of the City of Fort Collins. Agenda Review: City Manager City Manager John Arnold noted Item # 21, Resolution Approving the Execu- tion of a Contract with ARIX, Inc. for Professional Services for the He added -that there had been a request from the appellant 35, Appeal of Zoning Board of Appeals Decision (ZBA #1305), also that the meeting would need to be adj7 -urned to 1:3 13 to allow an Executive Session to be held. 0 to table to April p.m. on Item # 20 and April Councilmember Wilmarth requested Item #18, Resolution Authorizing City staff to make all necessary preparations Relative to the Issuance o Storm Drainage and Sewer Revenue Bonds, and Item 2 , Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Facilities Transfer Agreement with Poudre Val ey Rural_Electric Association, Inc., be removed from the Consent aaen a. Councilmember Horak asked that Item #22, Resolution Approving an Addendum to an Agreement with CSU Relating to Water an ewer ervices, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Elliott requested Item #23, Resolution Approving Rental Rates for Surplus Water for the 1982 Season, be removed from the Consent Calendar. 1 -133- April 6, 1982 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. 7. Consider approval of the minutes of the adjourned meeting of March 9 and the regular meeting of March 16, 1982. 8. Second Reading Ordinance No. 29, 1982, Vacating Portions of Utility Easements in Lots an of Ban center Square, First FiTing. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 9 and is a request for vacation of certain utility easements in Lots 1 and 3 of Bankcenter Square, First Filing. These easements are not needed to serve the site. The applicants are Earl Wilkinson (412 S. Howes) and Bill Waugh (Dallas, Texas). ' 9. Second Reading Ordinance No. 31, 1982, Relating to Provisions and Fees for Access to State Highways. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 9 and would allow the City to charge a fee of $25 for administrative ex- penses associated with processing each State Highway Access Permit. 10. Second Reading Ordinance No. 32, 1982, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue to the Larimer County CDBG Fund-. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 16. The construction bid received to perform rehabilitation work on Floyd E. Loader's house came in at $26,983.79. Because the maximum allow- able grant from the County for housing rehabilitation projects is $25,000, Mr. Loader agreed to pay for the balance of the construction work totalling $1,984. In order to consolidate project resources and construction contracts, Mr. Loader has paid this money directly to the City and the City will issue one contract for the construction work to be performed. This Ordinance appropriates the $1,984 in the Larimer County Community Development Block Grant Fund for housing rehabilitation on the Load- er's house. -134- 11. Second Readi Ordinance No. 33, 1982 ects Fun . April 6, 1982 riating Bond Proceeds in This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 16. Ordinance No. 100, 1981, authorized the issuance of $3,000,000 and Ordinance No. 13, 1982, authorized the issuance of $2,065,000 in General Obligation Bonds to finance community park projects construc- tion. To date, we have appropriated $1,295,000 of the total $5,065,000 and now need to appropriate $3,092,000 in Rolland Moore Park for the development/construction of the parking area, maintenance building, tennis complex, playground, utilities, site grading, ballfields, final grading, and irrigation. We also need to appropriate $5,000 to cover additional bond issuance costs. The original estimated cost to issue the bonds was $60,000; to date we have appropriated $35,000 of that amount and we need $40,000 in appropriation. 12. Second Reading Ordinance No. 34, 1982, Amending a Certain Section of Chapter 99 of -the Code of the City of Fort Co ins. 13 14 The present Subdivision Ordinance requires streets of subdivisions to conform to the "Plan for Progress of the City of Fort Collins." The "Plan for Progress" was officially adopted in 1967 as the Comprehen- sive Plan for the City. Since that time the City has adopted updated elements of the Comprehensive Plan making any references to the "Plan for Progress" obsolete. This Ordinance makes the recommended "house- cleaning" change to the Subdivision Ordinance and was unanimously adopted on'First Reading on March 16. Second Reading Ordinance No. 35, 1982, Amending Certain Sections of Chapter 118—of the Code o t o ity of Fort Collins, Beinq a Part o e nance. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 16 and is a staff initiated request to amend certain portions of the Zoning Codes. While most of these changes are basically housecleaning items, several are amendments which would update the ordinance rela- tive to current City policies and plans. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 37, 1982, Reappropriating 1991- Fun s. As of December 31, 1981, there existed a Charter provision (Article V, Section 10) whereby all appropriations unexpended or unencumbered at -135- April 6, 1982 the end of the budget year lapsed to the applicable general or special fund, with the exception of appropriations for capital projects and federal or state grants which do not lapse until the completion of the capital project or the expiration of the particular grant. Although the appropriations do not lapse in the capital or grant fund, the appropriations do lapse in the financing funds and need to be re - appropriated. If these funds are not re -appropriated, all affected projects/programs cannot be completed as scheduled. 15. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 38, 1982, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Equipment FunT. This ordinance appropriates $40,282 to the Equipment Fund for the expenses of outside vehicle repair. 16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 39, 1982, Appropriatinq Unanticipated Revenue in the Larimer County Community Development Block rant Fund. In September of 1980, the City of Fort Collins agreed to administer a Housing Rehabilitation Program for Larimer County. Under this program the City entered into a series of contracts with Crown Enter- prises, a local contractor, for the purpose of rehabilitating several houses. Crown Enterprises has gone out of business and the sub- contractors they engaged have filed mechanics liens on the houses that were rehabilitated, totalling $30,575. HUD has authorized the payment of amounts owed to the sub -contractors using County CDBG funds and the County has agreed to reimburse the City of Fort Collins for payments to be made to these sub -contractors. This ordinance appropriates the $30,575 in the Larimer County CDBG Fund. 17. Hearing ments an and First Reading of Ordinance No. 40, 1982, Vacating Ease - Rights -of -Way in the Coachlight Plaza PUD. This is a request for vacation of all utility, drainage and lake easements and rights -of -way dedicated on the Coachlight Plaza PUD, approved by City Council in November, 1974. The applicant has re- cently replatted this area to meet all requirements to conform to an amended PUD approved by the Planning and Zoning Board on January 26, 1981. 18. Resolution Authorizing City staff to make all necessary preparations Relative to the Issuance of Storm Drainage and Sewer Revenue Bonds. ' The 1982 adopted budget includes appropriations for Sewer and Storm Drainage improvements to be financed by revenue bond proceeds. -136- 19 April 6, 1982 The original budgeted amount for bond financed sewer improvements totaled $4,790,000 in 1982. This has since been revised downward to $1,810,000. The original budgeted amount for bond financed storm drainage improve- ments totaled $269,540. This estimate has been revised to $275,000 in order to include bond issuance expenses. Resolution Authorizing the City to Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with t e Pou re Valley Hospital District for Te ecommuni- cation Services. Since 1980, the Poudre Valley Hospital District has been one of the agencies served by the Fort Collins Communication Center. The inclu- sion of the Hospital District's emergency services in the City's system enhances our ability to provide quality services to the public, particularly in the critical area of emergency communications. Under the terms of the intergovernmental agreement, the District is to ' pay the City $15,000 in quarterly installments from April 1, 1982 through March 31, 1983. The charges to the Hospital District for these communications services have been increased by about 10% each year since 1980. The following is a summary of past charges for these dispatching services: April 15, 1980- April 1, 1981- April 1, 1982- March 31, 1981 March 31, 1982 March 31, 1983 year year year Resolution Adoptinq Revisions to the Master Street Plan. The Master Street Plan was adopted by Council on March 17, 1981, as a transportation planning tool. The Master Street Plan defines the City's basic street system needs throughout the city and classifies them in relation to their transportation function. One of the impor- tant functions of this plan is to guide the development community in regard to the street needs adjacent to new development. The plan must be firm enough to make sure the functional street system needs of the city are maintained, yet flexible enough to address specific areas where it may pose an unnecessary burden on development. Development has necessitated minor changes to the adopted Master Street Plan. The proposed changes meet street system needs as origin- I ally approved. -137- April 6, 1982 21. Resolution Approving the Execution of a Contract with ARIX, Inc. for Professional Services for the Preliminary Design of North College Avenue rom e erson Street to tate Hig way No. This project covers that portion of North College Avenue from the northern boundary of the downtown area to the "Y" near Terry Lake. This portion of College Avenue has been receiving increasing traffic pressure over the past several years. This pressure was partially relieved last year with the widening of the pavement' and the addition of a continuous left turn lane. Although this step has provided some temporary relief, the traffic problems on College need a permanent solution. The preliminary design work will provide a planning guide for new developments or redevelopment of existing properties. The plan will provide information regarding any additional right-of-way needed, new alignment for curb and gutter, and storm drainage needs. The plans will also be used to help plan any future utility work to meet the street needs. ' 22. Resolution Approving an Addendum to an Agreement with CSU Relating to Water and Sewer Services. This Resolution approves an addendum to an agreement with the State Board of Agriculture, under which the City has supplied CSU with water and sewer services for a number of years. From time to time, it is necessary to increase the rates charged for these services in accor- dance with the City's increased costs in making the services avail- able. The services reflect the latest water and sewer rate increases as approved by the Council. The addendum also provides that CSU is subject to any appropriate sewer surcharge that might be applicable in connection with the delivery of sewage to the City which requires additional treatment. 23. Resolution Approving Rental Rates for Surplus Water for the 1982 Season. Each year after the irrigation companies have established the annual assessment rates.for their water, the Water Board makes a recommenda- tion to the Council on the rental rates to be charged for the City's surplus water. The rental rates for 1982 were discussed at the March 10, 1982 meeting of the Water Board. The proposed rates for Horse - tooth, North Poudre, and Water Supply and Storage water are based on recent rental rates and an attempt to keep the per acre foot rates -138- April 6, 1982 approximately even. The rates for the southside ditches are based primarily on their respective assessment rates. The table shows the assessment rates and proposed rental rates for 1982, as well as the corresponding rates for 1980 and 1981. The Water Board and staff recommend that the following rental rates be adopted: Irrigation Company Horsetooth Water (NCWCD or CBT) North Poudre Irrigation Company Water Supply & Storage Company Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal New Mercer Ditch Company Larimer County Canal #2 Arthur Irrigation Company Proposed 1982 Rental Charge $ 14.00/ac-ft $ 85.00/share $1500.00/share $ 120.00/share $ 180.00/share $ 160.00/share $ 6.00/share 24. Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Facilities Transfer Agreement with Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, Inc. At the direction of City Council, staff has negotiated a territorial service agreement with Poudre Valley REA for the purposes of avoiding duplication of service facilities, establishing a working relationship with Poudre Valley and preserving the option for Fort Collins to serve electric consumers within the city limits which, by annexation, may include areas certified to Poudre Valley. 25. Resolution Authorizing Purchase of a Street Paint Stripinq Machine. Council approval is needed to purchase this $70,539.72 paint striper from Idaho Norland. The financing of the machine is part of the lease/purchase package for 1982. 26. Routine Easements. The following are routine easements which have been reviewed and approved by affected departments and the legal staff: a) Grant and Dedication of Easement from HMS Associates, Ltd. for a five foot strip of right-of-way fronting property located at Horse - tooth and College (#8 on Map 1). The right-of-way is needed for Street Improvement District No. 76 and is being acquired for a con- sideration of $4367. The property owner has also agreed to dedicate an additional 15 feet for street widening. The City has now acquired four of the seven parcels needed for the project. A total of $29,701 has been spent out of the land acquisition budget for the project, leaving a balance of $119,699. -139- April 6, 1982 b) Agreement with the Larimer County Canal No. 2 for demolition and construction of an auto bridge and sidewa s across the ditch at Bryan Avenue in City Park. Consideration: $300. c) Temporary Access Easement from Jack R. and Dona L. Hahn, for the Spring Creek Trail project, needed for access from Lemay Avenue to the west for constructing the trail segment between Alpert Court and Lemay Avenue (#4 on Map 2). This access is needed regardless of pending decisions concerning the permanent trail alignment affecting the Hahn and Geriatrics properties. Consideration: $1. Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #8. Second Reading Ordinance No. 29, 1982, Vacating Portions of Utility Easements in Lots 1 and 3 of Bankcenter—Sq'uare, First Filing. Item #,9. Second Reading Ordinance No. 31, 1982, Relating to Provisions ' and Fees for Access to State Highways. Item #10. Second Reading Ordinance No. 32, 1982, Appropriating Unantici- pated Revenue in the Larimer County CDBG Fund. Item #11. Second Reading Ordinance No. 33, 1982, Appropriating Bond Proceeds to the apita Projects Fund. Item #12. Second Reading Ordinance No. 34, 1982, Amending a Certain Section of Chapter 99 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. - Item #13. Second Reading Ordinance No. 35, 1982, Amending Certain Sections o C apter t o t e Code of the City of Fort Co ins, A ­Being a Part of the Zoning Ordinance. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #14. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 37, 1982, Reappro- priating un s. Item #15. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 38, 1982, Appro- priating Unanticipated Revenue in the Equipment Fund. Item #16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 39, 1982 ' priating nantici pated Revenue in the arimer ounty Development Block Grant Fund. -140- Item #17. Hearing and First Readi Easements and RTi_gFt_s­-­cT-_W April 6, 1982 of Ordinance No. 40, 1982. Vacatin Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Adopted Authorizing City staff to make all necessary preparations Relative to the Issuance of Storm Drainage and Sewer Revenue Bonds Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "The 1982 adopted budget includes appropriations for Sewer and Storm Drain- age improvements to be financed by revenue bond proceeds. ' The original budgeted amount for bond financed sewer improvements totaled $4,790,000 in 1982. This has since been revised downward to $1,810,000. The original budgeted amount for bond financed storm drainage improvements totaled $269,540. This estimate has been revised to $275,000 in order to include bond issuance expenses. The City of Fort Collins has not had its Sewer Revenue bonds rated since 1977. In order to sell these bonds at favorable rates and obtain a good bond rating, disclosure counsel will need to be retained. Also, Bond Counsel will need to be retained in order to prepare the bond ordinances required by the City Charter. If this resolution is not passed and adopted, the staff will not proceed with preparations relative to the issuance of these bonds. Also, construc- tion of the projects financed by these bonds will be delayed until other funding sources can be provided." Councilmember Wilmarth noted he was opposed to this project at this item in light of the current significant downturn in City revenues and because of the condition of the bond market. Councilmember Knezovich urged adoption of the Resolution so that the bonds may be issued whenever the bond market appears to be most optimum. I -141- April 6, 1982 Councilmember Reeves pointed out that one of the projects in the sewer improvement is for sludge disposal. She added the last of the 208 money had been received and until Congress reappropriates additional money for the program, she felt the City needs to make a good faith effort to con- tinue the project. The storm drainage improvements are for developing areas of the City and it should be financially better for the City to make these improvements before development occurs. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich and Reeves. Nays: Councilmember Wilmarth. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Approving the Execution of a Contract with ARIX, Inc. for Professional Services for the Preliminary Design of North College Avenue from ' Jefferson Street to State Highway No. 1, Adopted Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "This project covers that portion of North College Avenue from the northern boundary of the downtown area to the "Y" near Terry Lake. This portion of College Avenue has been receiving increasing traffic pressure over the past several years. This pressure was partially relieved last year with the widening of the pavement and the addition of a continuous left turn lane. Although this step has provided some temporary relief, the traffic problems on College need -a permanent solution. The preliminary design work will provide a planning guide for new develop- ments or redevelopment of existing properties. The plan will provide information regarding any additional right-of-way needed, new alignment for curb and gutter, and storm drainage needs. The plans will also be used to help plan any future utility work to meet the street needs. Since College Avenue is also a part of the State Highway system the project will also include coordination with the Colorado Department of Highways. The process used in selecting the consultant followed the City's formal selection process, consisting of reviewing and rating written proposals submitted by 10 consulting firms. Formal interviews were held with the four highest ranked firms, URS, ARIX, Cornell Consulting Company and ' Weidmann Associates. The consultant selection process resulted in ARIX being ranked first. -142- April 6, 1982 The proposed contract is the standard contract form adopted by the City. The contract is for a set fee of $30,000. Completion is scheduled for July of 1982. The contract amount was negotiated down from an original amount of $36,000. The items eliminated to reach the final contract amount of $30,000 were a detailed right-of-way appraisal and analysis process, an involved bridge structure analysis and miscellaneous other minor costs. The first two items that were deleted will be covered by the final design process. The miscellaneous costs that were deleted were based on clarification of minor points on the design during the negotia- tions. The contract amount matches closely with the amount estimated for such a project. The project budget of $30,000 was approved by City Council as a part of the 1980 Capital Improvement Program." City Manager Arnold explained that the contract had been negotiated down- ward from $30,000 to $25,000 and the Resolution would need to be amended accordingly. The scope of services has been reduced with staff taking over some of the functions. ' Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to amend the Resolution as described by City Manager Arnold. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt the Resolution as amended. Councilmember Knezovich noted he felt the findings of ARIX, Inc. would never be funded and questioned the use of the money for the preliminary design. City Manager Arnold stated he felt the City could benefit from having this design whether or not North College was ever funded to be entirely redone. The vote on Councilmember Reeves' motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Knezovich and Wilmarth. THE MOTION CARRIED. -143- April 6, 1982 Resolution Adopted Approving an Addendum to an Agreement with CSU Relating to Water and Sewer Services Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "The attached Resolution approves an addendum to an agreement with the State Board of Agriculture, under which the City has supplied CSU with water and sewer services for a number of years. From time to time, it is necessary to increase the rates charged for these services in accordance with the City's increased costs in making the services available. The services as set forth in the Resolution reflect the latest water and sewer rate increases as approved by the Council. The addendum also provides that CSU is subject to any appropriate sewer surcharge that might be applicable in connection with the delivery of sewage to the City which requires additional treatment. The following is a comparison of the recommended rates with previous years: Oct. 1, 1980- July 1, 1981- July 1, 1982- Type of Service July 1, 1981 July 1, 1982 July 1, 1983 Water Service (per 1000 gallons) $.453 $.56 $.62 Sanitary Sewer Service (per 1000 gallons of treated water service) $.47 $.60 $.76" Councilmember Horak asked how these rates compare with other large users in the community, what quantities were involved, as well as what C.S.U. con- sumption patterns have been over the years. City Manager Arnold replied the C.S.U. water cost was $.62 per thousand gallons compared to $.52 for residential and industrial. On the sewer, C.S.U. is 10 per thousand gallons less than other customers. These rates were set up by a 1972 Black and Veatch study and since then the increases have been proportionate. He added the revenue figures could be provided at a later time but were not available now. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt the Resolution. Councilmember Horak made a motion, to table the Resolution to April 20 Yeas: Councilmembers Elliott, Horak Cassell, Clarke, Knezovich and Reeves. seconded by Councilmember Wilmarth, because of insufficient information. and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmembers -144- April 6, 1982 THE MOTION FAILED. The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt the Resolution was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmember Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Adopted Approving Rental Rates for Surplus Water for the 1982 Season Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "Each year after the irrigation companies have established the annual assessment rates for their water, the Water Board makes a recommendation to the Council on the rental rates to be charged for the City's surplus water. The rental rates for 1982 were discussed at the March 10, 1982 meeting of the Water Board. The proposed rates for Horsetooth, North Poudre, and Water Supply and Storage water are based on recent rental rates and an attempt to keep the per acre foot rates approximately even. The rates for the southside ditches are based primarily on their respective assessment rates. The attached table shows the assessment rates and proposed rental rates for 1982, as well as the corresponding rates for 1980 and 1981. The Water Board and staff recommend that the following rental rates be adopted: Irrigation Company Horsetooth Water (NCWCD or CBT) North Poudre Irrigation Company Water Supply & Storage Company Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal New Mercer Ditch Company Larimer County Canal #2 Arthur Irrigation Company Proposed 1982 Rental Charge* $ 14.00/ac-ft $ 85.00/share $1500.00/share $ 120.00/share $ 180.00/share $ 160.00/share $ 6.00/share * For late season rentals, rates may be adjusted to reflect the proportional remaining yield of the water stock being rented (if applicable). -145- April 6, 1982 The amount of surplus water rented will depend on both the City's surplus and demand for 1982 as well as the need for water by area farmers. In 1980, 5,927 acre-feet were rented for $50,840 and in 1981, 9,413 acre-feet were rented for $105,967. Municipal supply and demand will be monitored closely and quantities available for rent will be determined periodically. An adequate amount of water will be reserved to ensure that the City's requirements are met." Councilmember Elliott asked what type rate change was being proposed compared to previous years. Public Works Director Roger Krempel replied the rates were higher by approximately 25-30%. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. ITHE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Adopted Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Facilities Transfer Agreement with Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, Inc. Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "At the direction of City Council, staff has negotiated a territorial service agreement with Poudre Valley REA for the purposes of avoiding duplication of service facilities, establishing a working relationship with Poudre Valley and preserving the option for Fort Collins to serve electric consumers within the city limits which, by annexation, may include areas certified to Poudre Valley. Staff believes that the attached agreement satisfies these objectives. At its board meeting, March 18, 1982, the Board of Directors of Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association authorized the signing and execution of the Agreement contingent on the City's approval and execution. This agreement has been in negotiation for several years. It's to Bill Carnahan's and Leon Wick's credit that this agreement has finally been completed. It's importance is in dealing with growth and annexation in the future; as such it aids our growth management program, our relationship with the County, and our relationship with our rural neighbors." -146- April 6, 1982 Councilmember Wilmarth expressed concern about several sections of the agreement. He suggested the section relating to the service right for- feiture provision be amended to read "until the City shall make payment for all service rights in that area." He also suggested Section 6 on page 7 contain an arbitration procedure to see the City through unanticipated problems between R.E.A. and the City. Councilmember Elliott asked if changes to the agreement could jeopardize the execution of the agreement. City Attorney John Huisjen replied that they could as all the points have been negotiated and to make changes could create problems. Light and Power Director Bill Carnahan addressed Councilmember Wilmarth's two suggestions. He stated that although he felt changes to the agreement would place the agreement in jeopardy, he wanted Council to be comfortable with the agreement and noted staff would be happy to attempt to negotiate any sections Council had reservations about. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, ' to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Citizen Participation A. 1) Proclamation Designating August 4 as Raoul Wallenberg Day was accepted by Dr. John Levine. 2) Resolution Changing the Name of River Meadows Drive to Wallen- berg Drive. Councilmember Wilmarth made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Council members Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. B. Proclamation Designating April 18-25 as Days of Remembrance of the Victims of Holocaust was accepted by Dr. John Hanck, president of , Congregation Har Shalom. -147- April 6, 1982 C. Proclamation Naming the Week of April 4-10 as Motorcycle Awareness Week was accepted by Dan Hodges, Fort Collins Motorcycle Association. D. Proclamation Naming April 11-17 as Arbor Week will be sent to appro- priate persons. E. Proclamation Naming April 18-24 as Volunteer Recognition Week to be sent to appropriate persons. F. Proclamation Naming 1982 as National Year of Disabled Persons in Fort Collins to be sent to appropriate persons. G. Proclamation Naming April 19-23 as Save Our Fuel Week was accepted by Gwen Feit of the Junior Womens Club. H. Recognition of the efforts of Senior Partner Volunteers in dealing with "in -conflict" youth from the community. ' Howard Burgeson, Director of Larimer County Partners, gave background information on the Partners program. Mayor Cassell then presented "Mayor for the Day" certificates to the following Senior Partners and their Junior Partners: Kathy Bryer Janelle Rick Perez Kevin Jim Stehle Jeff Nan Walters Tammy Wanda and Dave McBee Don Jerry Mitchell Ray Scott Sampl Brad Peg and Harley Witte Dewey Dan Fanning Ricky Carol and Fred Johnson Fabian Bob Gaines, 1412 Ticonderoga, representing homeowners of Golden Meadows area, recommended South Lemay Avenue be closed south of Horsetooth until the situation involving the condition of the road is improved. He ex- pressed appreciation for the improvements recently made but added they were to no avail and are not helping the situation. He again stated the Golden Meadows homeowners were recommending the road be closed until Council takes action in terms of budgeting dollars to address their concerns. Councilmember Horak suggested this item come back as an April 20 agenda ' item so that all interested persons could attend. -148- April 6, 1982 Mayor Cassell agreed and stated the issue would be scheduled as an item for the regular meeting of April 20. Jed Schlosberg, Executive Director of Hospice, representing approximately 14 human resource agencies, spoke about the need for serious consideration by the City on the allocation of human resource funds to the agencies in 1983. Barbara Keinholz, 633 Stuart, RSVP Director, spoke about the 1983 human resource funding issue. Christine Stark, Director of Respite Care, introduced 9 representatives of service agencies who expressed concern over human resource funding. Esther Moore, 3921 Crescent Drive, social worker, spoke on problems in the community associated with the needs of low income residents. Margaret Mitchell, 809 E. Elizabeth, expressed her concerns that the community development monies be spent effectively and efficiently. Ordinance Vacating Portions of a Utility Easement ' in Lot 1, Strachan Subdivision, Second Filing, Adopted on Second Readinq Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading by a 5-0 vote (Knezovich withdrawn and Cassell absent) on March 9 and is a request for vacation of certain utility easement located at Foothills Square, Lot 1, Strachan Subdivision Second Filing. The applicant has submitted an amendment to the Foothills Square PUD for the addition of a remote transaction bank facility considered by the Planning and Zoning Board at their February 22, 1982 hearing. The vacation and construction of the facility would not affect the existing utilities or sidewalk. The applicants are Mitchell & Company and United Bank." Councilmember Knezovich asked the record show he did not vote or partici- pate in the discussion of this item. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 30, 1982, on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None (Knezo- vich withdrawn). THE MOTION CARRIED. -149- April 6, 1982 Ordinance Creating Street Improvement District #76 on Horsetooth Road from College Avenue west to the New Mercer Canal, Adopted on Second Readi Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on March 16 by a 5-0 vote (Wilmarth withdrawn and Cassell absent). On February 2nd, Council accepted the Director of Public Works report of the project costs and the recom- mended distribution of those costs. At the same time Council set March 16 as the date for the public hearing for comments regarding the assessment of costs. The properties are being assessed for that portion of the improvements equal to a local street and the City is paying for the remaining street construction costs. The assessment rate of $55.89 per front foot also includes costs for engineering and handling. The total property owner share of the construction cost is $57,432. The City's portion of the costs are $1,042,126. The total estimated project cost is $1,099,558. Staff has been meeting with the motorcycle dealership to attempt to resolve their display and parking problems. Graphic displays will be available at the Council meeting to illustrate alternatives." Councilmember Wilmarth withdrew from vote and discussion of this item. City Manager John Arnold noted staff had been working with the people along Horsetooth since the last meeting. City Engineer Tom Hays reported staff had met with the owners of the Yamaha dealership to discuss alternate layouts for their parking and display areas and have reached two alternatives. Staff is attempting to reach agreement with them on what compensation might be on the property and will continue the negotiations over the next several weeks. If agreement cannot be reached by the middle of May, some quick acquisition of the property will be necessary to avoid delay of the construction of the project. Councilmember Horak asked if the $57,000 to be assessed the property owners was a fair allocation and could the street be built for that amount. City Engineer Hays replied that a street could be built to local standards for $57,000 but not the entire project as proposed. Councilmember Clarke questioned the need for bicycle lanes on both sides of Horsetooth. -150- April 6, 1982 City Engineer Hays replied that bike lanes have usually been placed on both sides of the street so that bikes may travel in the same direction as the automobile traffic. The experience has been that trying to travel in opposing directions in a narrow (6 foot) lane would tend to make one or the other of the cyclists swerve out into the traffic lanes. Treating bikes as auto traffic provides the safest manner for them to travel. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 36, 1982, on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich and Reeves. Nays: None (Wil- marth withdrawn). THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Appointing Councilmembers to Serve on the Board of Ethics. Tabled to April 20 Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: ' "Council adopted a Policy Statement on Ethics last October, which author- ized the creation of an Ethics Board composed of three Councilmembers. The Councilmembers appointed at that time to serve on the Ethics Board until this April were Gary Cassell, John Clarke, and Bill Elliott. The Resolution makes appointments to the Board and sets the new terms of appointment to run until the 1983 Mayoral election, which will follow either the March General Election or the April Run -Off Election if one occurs." Mayor Cassell suggested this Resolution be tabled to April 20 to allow all the committee appointments to be made at that time. Councilmember Wilmarth made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to table the Resolution until April 20. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Making an Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Adopted Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: ' -151- I April 6, 1982 "There is currently one vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board because of the resignation of Wes Sargent. The person appointed to fill this vacancy will serve for the remainder of the unexpired term which expires July 1, 1984. Applications for this position on the Board are included in the agenda for Council review." Councilmember Elliott stated the recommendation of the interview committee would be Dave Adamson. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt the Resolution inserting the name of Dave Adamson. Yeas: Coun- cilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Authorizing an Agreement with Triad Development Corporation, Inc. Regarding the Fort ' Collins - Loveland Airpark, Adopted Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "This item was withdrawn from the March 16th Agenda at the request of the Triad Development Corporation. Triad Development Corporation, 'Inc., an Arizona Corporation, is in the process of developing an industrial airpark adjacent to the Fort Collins - Loveland Airport in the vicinity of the east -west runway. In order for Triad's airpark to be feasible, it is necessary for them to obtain an access easement onto the Airport property in order to put a taxiway from the Triad Development property to the existing north -south runway. The prospect of Triad locating adjacent to the Airport has met with the ap- proval of the Fort Collins - Loveland Airport Ad Hoc Committee and the negotiated contract has also been approved with some modifications. The contract between the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland and Triad Development Corporation, as modified, contains the following provisions: 1. Triad will be granted an easement on Airport property allowing access from Triad's private property to the north -south runway. 2. Triad will be responsible for the construction of a forty (40) foot paved taxiway on the easement granted. Upon the completion of the ' construction of the taxiway, title to said taxiway shall be conveyed to the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland. -152- April 6, 1982 3. The initial cost of the taxiway is to be paid by Triad, however, Triad will be able to recoup fifty percent (50%) of the costs for the installation of the taxiway upon the development or improvement for aeronautical related activities of the property located on the Airport adjacent to the taxiway. The specific amount of money to be recouped by Triad would be generally on the basis of that percentage of the adjacent Airport property which is improved. In no event shall the cost of the City exceed fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the taxiway and further, the provision for reimbursement extends only for a period of fifteen years from the date of completion of the improve- ments. 4. Triad would agree to impose covenants upon the property in the Triad development area prohibiting uses of the property for commercial aeronautical activities and further prohibiting the sale of aviation fuel to the public. 5. The City would accept the obligation to maintain the taxiway. How- ever, the agreement calls for reimbursement to the Cities by the I property owners in the Triad development area of a portion of the maintenance costs. 6. The agreement is to provide that any private companies locating in the Triad development area that have self-service aviation fuel facility will be required to pay to the Cities eight percent (8%) of the whole- sale cost of the fuel used. 7. The final -provision of the agreement allows for the Cities to charge whatever fees, rental or other charges they so desire for the use of the Airport by the aircraft located on the Triad development area with the exception of fees for the purpose of defraying or reimbursing to the Cities any costs of the improvement of the taxiway. In sum, the agreement will provide access from the Triad property on to the Airport by the companies locating in the Triad development area. The cost of the taxiway will be shared by both Triad and the City on a reimbursement basis by the Cities with a maximum payment of fifty percent (50%) of the cost of those improvements. Further, the Cities may impose whatever fees are necessary for the purpose of maintaining the economic integrity of the Airport." Eldon Ward, ZVFK, consultants to Triad, expressed appreciation to the Airport Ad Hoc Committee and the City staff for their help in putting the I agreement together. -153- April 6, 1982 Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Council members Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Ways: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Appeal of Zoning Board of Appeals Decision (ZBA #1312), Decision of Zoning Board of Appeals Upheld Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "On March 11, 1982, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered a variance request for the property at 2914 W. Prospect. This request, heard as Appeal #1312, was granted by a vote of five to zero. Some of the adjacent property owners are appealing this decision. The property at 2914 W. Prospect is located in the RL (low density resi- dential) zone, which allows both single-family dwellings and churches as permitted uses. The structure on the property has always been a single- family dwelling. The petitioner, Melvin Johnson, desires to convert the building to a church and parsonage. Although a church is permitted in the RL zone as a use by right, a variance is required because the existing side yard setback is deficient by five feet. Specifically, the variance would reduce the side yard setback requirement along the east lot line from 25 feet to 20 feet. On March 11, 1982, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered the variance request for 2914 W. Prospect. The City did not receive any letters or phone calls in oposition to the variance prior to the meeting, nor was anyone present at the meeting to voice any objection. The City Clerk's records indicate that all of the adjacent property owners within the required distance were mailed notices, and that none of the notices were returned undelivered. The Board granted the variance by a unanimous vote of five to zero based on the hardship stated in the application that the building and lot are existing with no additional land available to buy, and that all of the other requirements are being compiled with, including parking and screening. Petitioner Melvin Johnson indicated that the building would not be enlarged and that it would maintain its current external appearance. It should be pointed out to Council that the lot in question is large enough that the existing house could be demolished and a typical -looking church building with 6000 square feet of floor area could be erected on the lot without the need for variances or a public hearing. -154- April 6, 1982 City Council will be reviewing the decision made by the Zoning Board of Appeals rather than conducting a new hearing. Council members are being furnished with verbatim transcripts of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, as well as those materials submitted to the Board by the petitioner. In view of these facts, it may be advisable to limit presentations to the introduction of information not presented at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting." Zoning Administrator Pete Barnes gave a slide presentation showing the appearance of the property. The following persons spoke in opposition to the granting of the variance: 1. Charles Wallbye, 2906 W. Prospect. 2. Steve Putnam, 2909 W. Lake 3. Herb Schroeder, 3000 W. Lake 4. Paul Johnson, 1600 Palm, read a letter from Carolyn Taylor stating her objections to the variance. Councilmember Horak asked why a variance was needed here. ' Zoning Administrator Barnes explained that when the use of a property is changed it must comply with the zoning requirements for that use in that zone. A single-family dwelling is required to have a 5' side yard setback as compared to 25' for a church. The building conforms for a single-family dwelling but the change in use --to a church requires the 5' variance as there is only a 20' side yard setback. Councilmember Wilmarth expressed his concerns about the "appeal on the record" concept and the notice requirements. He noted he would vote against the granting of the variance as there was nothing to convince him that the person who requested the variance has met the burden of proof toward granting the variance. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to uphold the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the property at 2914 W. Prospect. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich and Reeves. Nays: Councilmember Wilmarth. THE MOTION CARRIED. Appeal of Zoning Board of Appeals Decision (ZBA #1305), Tabled to April 20 ' Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: -155- April 6, 1982 "On March 11, 1982, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered a variance request for the property at 301 East Magnolia Street. This request, heard as Appeal #1305, was conditionally granted by a vote of four to one. ZVFK Architects and Reid Rosenthal, owner of the property, are appealing this decision. The property at 301 E. Magnolia is located in the RH (high density resi- dential) zone, which allows both residential development and certain business uses, including offices. The building was built in 1906 as Fort Collins' first hospital. Over the years, the building changed uses to its current use of a multiple family dwelling. The petitioners now desire to convert the building to an office use. Since they would be changing the use from residential to non-residential, it is necessary that they go'first to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the necessary zoning variances and then to the Planning & Zoning Board for approval of the change in use. The need for the variances arises from the limited size of the existing property and from the inadequacy of the lot to accommodate enough off- street parking spaces for an office building of 7,677 square feet. Speci- fically, the variances requested would: 1) Reduce the lot area requirement for an office use from 12,000 square feet to 9,500 square feet. 2) Reduce the lot width requirement from 100 feet to 50 feet. 3) Reduce the front yard setback requirement from 15 feet to zero feet. - 4) Reduce the side yard setback along the east lot line from 11 feet to two feet. 5) Reduce the side yard setback along the west lot line from 15 feet to 3.5 feet. 6) Allow one parking space to be located closer to the street than the building setback on the west side of the lot. 7) Reduce the parking lot setback on the west side from 10 feet to 3.5 feet. 8) Reduce the parking lot setback on the east lot line from five feet to zero feet. 9) Reduce the parking lot setback on the south lot line from five feet to zero feet. 10) Reduce the required number of off-street parking spaces from 22 to 13. 11) Eliminate the requirement to provide one off-street loading zone. On March 11, 1982, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered the variance requests for 301 E. Magnolia. The Board granted the variances dealing with ' lot area, lot width, and side yard setback reductions, along with granting -156- April 6, 1982 the elimination of the loading zone. They denied all of the variances dealing with parking code requirements (items 6-10 on the above list). The vote to conditionally grant the variance was four to one. Essentially, this means that the petitioners can proceed with their conversion plans if they design a parking lot which complies with all requirements of the parking code. The end result would be an office use scaled down from the original proposal of 32 employees to about 12 employees, since the number of employees allowed is tied to the number of off-street parking spaces provided. The petitioners feel that such a limited number of employees would make the project economically unfeasible, and therefore are ap- pealing the decision. City Council will be reviewing the decision made by the Zoning Board of Appeals rather than conducting a new hearing. Council members are being furnished with verbatim transcripts of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, as well as those materials submitted to the Board by the petitioners. In view of these facts, it may be advisable to limit presentations to the introduction of information not presented at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting." Mayor Cassell noted the appellant had asked that this matter be tabled to ' April 20 as Mr. Rosenthal is out of town. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to table this item until April 20. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement for the Lease/ Purchase of Vehicles and Equipment, Adopted as Amended on First Reading Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "The adopted 1982 Budget includes approximately $200,000 to finance the lease/purchase of approximately $800,000 of equipment needs. Lease/ Purchase financing was recommended by staff during Council budget work sessions as an alternative to the City's past method of providing for equipment needs. Staff continues to recommend lease/purchase as a viable alternative. The City solicited lease/purchasing financing proposals from approximately , 26 firms. The bids will be opened at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, April 6 and the blanks in the Ordinance will be filled in at the Council meetino after -157- J April 6, 1982 an evaluation of the interest rates submitted by the firms. The best interest rate will be obtained if the bids are opened on the same day Council approval is given. The City proposes in the Ordinance to lease/purchase: TERM OF FINANCING QUANTITY ITEM TOTAL COST (in years) 19 Police Patrol Cars $ 180,000 4 1 Royfax 15 Copy Machine 3,800 4 1 Sub -compact Sedan 8,500 4 1 72" Rotary Trim Mower 9,500 4 1 4-Wheel Drive Passenger 10,000 4 Vehicle 3 Vans 22,700 4 1 Truckster Utility Vehicle 6,500 4 1 Street Crack Sealing Unit 25,000 5 2 3/4 Ton Pickup Trucks 20,000 5 3 Compact Pickups 21,000 5 24 Mobile Radios, Packsets 58,000 6 and Chargers 1 Small Motor Grader 45,000 7 1 Tandem Dump Truck 45,000 7 1 Soil Shredder, Mixer 14,000 7 1 Vermeer Tree Spade 15,000 7 1 Idaho Norland Paint Striper 71,000 7 The terms of the agreement provide for quarterly payments at a fixed interest rate." City Manager John Arnold noted the low net effective interest rate was submitted by the Merit Financial Corporation at 11.838% and those pieces of information would need to be inserted into the ordinance in the appropriate places. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 41, 1982, on First Reading, amending it by inserting the name of Merit Financial Corporation and the interest rate of 11.838% in the appropriate places. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -158- April 6, 1982 Ordinances Relating to the Repealing and Reenacting of the Land Development Guidance System, Adopted Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1982, Repealing and Reenacting the Land Development Guidance System. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 45, 1982, Relating to the Definition of Major Employment Center. The Land Development Guidance System was enacted on March 13, 1981 after extensive public hearing and scrutiny. The System was approved with the condition that it be reviewed by the City Council approximately one year after that date and any changes would be made to the System deemed neces- sary and proper after reviewing recommendations of the Planning Division staff, the Planning and Zoning Board, and the public. Since its adoption, the Planning Division staff has monitored the System's performance, and in September of 1981, prepared the first draft of revi- sions. The Planning and Zoning Board has taken a lead role in these revisions. The Board reviewed numerous drafts at work sessions held on October 16, 1981, December 8, 1981, February 17, 1982, and again on March 19, 1982. The staff conducted separate meetings with the public and builders, developers, and design professionals on January 27, 1982 to present, discuss and answer questions on the proposed revisions. City staff members were invited to a" meeting on January 28, 1982 to provide their input. In addition, the staff has spent a considerable amount of time meeting individually or talking on the telephone with the public, Board members, and City staff discussing the revisions. On February 23, 1982, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Board met at a joint work session to discuss the draft revisions and directed staff to prepare the final revisions and proceed with public hearings and adoption. On March 29, 1982, the Planning and Zoning Board held a special hearing to solicit public comment and unanimously recommended to the City Council approval of the proposed revisions with some minor conditions. Performance Since its adoption, approximately 45 projects have been reviewed under the LOGS. While it is too early to tell if the broader range goals of the Land Use Policies Plan are being achieved, it is certainly time to look close y at its functiona-T operation and success or failure to achieve some of the System's shorter range objectives. Some of the more positive aspects of I the System are as follows: -159- April 6, 1982 1. That the site design of a project and its ultimate use should be reviewed simultaneously has been proven to be effective. 2. The flexibility in density and location of use has enabled the property owner to better respond to market conditions and City goals than did the rigid and arbitrary limits of traditional zoning ordinances. We have seen a great deal of interest in developing infill properties in the City that might have other- wise been overlooked because of this use flexibility. 3. The general public as well as the land owners appear to be better informed as to what is required for development as a result of the explicit listing of review criteria. This has also made develop- ers feel much more secure with their plans. 4. Finally, the incentives for energy conservation appear to be a success. A number of projects (both solar and conservation) have taken advantage of solar credits that otherwise might have ignored ' this factor. With any innovative and new system, problems will be encountered. The need for making changes to the System was recognized from its adoption. While the revisions are substantial in quantity, the philosophy of the System remains generally intact. Some of the problems encountered with the System over the past year include: 1. The System lacks the criteria to review the overall design concept of the plan; 2. The tradeoff assumption among design criteria is undesirable; 3. Some of the criteria were found to be irrelevant or unclear which often led to inconsistent use; 4. The Density Chart was being misinterpreted and misused; and 5. Neighborhood input into the design of a project is usually too late to be effective. Proposed Changes The primary modification in the LOGS is the elimination of the lettered or variable criteria of the ALL DEVELOPMENT category (Point Chart A) and ' adding a series of new absolute criteria that deal specifically with design. Under the new system, similar uses would be reviewed by the same -160- April 6, 1982 set of absolute criteria. Several of the lettered criteria have been shifted into other land use categories. Two new design criteria have been added which address the overall cohesiveness of a site plan. Many criteria have been eliminated or rewritten that were unclear. The major change to the DENSITY CHART is that instead of calculating dwelling units, it calculates percentage points. The dwelling unit figure in the chart had been misused and misinterpreted as to what it actually meant. The use of percentage points should eliminate that confusion. Some of the multipliers have been adjusted for several locational criteria in response to City Council and Planning and Zoning Board comments. Also, four new criteria (U, S, T and U) have been added. In order to respond to the problems identified with public input into the planning process, Absolute Criteria #1 of the ALL DEVELOPMENT category has been added. Appendix D outlines a process which requires informal meetings between citizen groups, developers and City staff on development projects perceived as having significant neighborhood impact. It is hoped that the neighborhood problems can be worked out at the conceptual stages of planning before time and effort have been expended by both the City and the developer to submit a formal development applicant. Planninq and Zoninq Board Recommendation At their March 29, 1982 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board unanimously on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval of the revisions to the Land Develop-. ment Guidance System and change to the definition of "major employment, center" with the following conditions: 1. Page 1, Section B, Purpose: To be amended to include as follows: (13) To protect existing neighborhoods from harmful encroachment by intrusive or disruptive development. 2. Page 9, Criterion #29: To be supplemented by a staff prepared appendix which provides more specific guidelines as to the types of energy conservation measures that may be used in development. 3. Page 43 (13): To be amended as follows: Floodplain as designated in the design criteria as established by the City. 4. Page 45 (9) [2]: To be amended as follows: 100-year floodplain for each period as designated in the design criteria as established by the City. -161- April 6, 1982 5. Appendix D, Paragraph 2: To include a statement that the neighborhood meeting must be held at least 10 days prior to the Planning and Zoning Board hearing. 6. That the outline for the appeal process to City Council be made more visible and readily available by making it an appendix to the LDGS. 7. That the Planning and Zoning Board review the progress of the new neighborhood participation process in one year." Director of Planning and Development Curt Smith highlighted the development review process and the amendments proposed to the Land Development Guidance System. Lloyd Walker, 1027 W. Lake, Prospect -Shields Neighborhood Association, noted his organization has been responsible for some of the social com- patibility changes to the system. He thanked staff for their cooperation in including their needs in producing this document. He referred to a memo ' from their Association proposing the three following amendments to the document: 1. Page 32, Item (1), Paragraph (b), add the following sentence: "If the Planning Director identifies the development proposal as having significant neighborhood impact, the conceptual review will include a neighborhood meeting as outlined in Appendix D." 2. Page D-1, Paragraph numbered (2), shall read as follows: "If the developer wishes to continue the conceptual review of a project identified as having significant neighborhood impact, part of the conceptual review will include a meeting held with the neighborhood. The Planning Director shall attempt to notify the impacted neighborhood of the development proposed by written notice to owners of property within 500 feet of the project and/or notification of applicable neighborhood homeowners associations and/or press release." 3. Page D-1, Paragraph numbered (3), first sentence shall read: "As part of the conceptual review, a meeting will be held with the .,neighborhood." Ruth Francis, 1904 Sheely Drive, expressed appreciation to the Planning staff for their cooperation. ' Freeman Smith, 1000 W. Prospect, suggested the title of the density chart on Page 30 be changed to better reflect its purpose. -162- April 6, 1982 ' Curt Smith stated staff had groped for another name for the chart such as "Housing Unit Verification Chart" and decided to leave it as a density chart. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 44, 1982 on First Reading, taking in the Planning and Zoning Board recommendations with the exception of No. 5, calling for a neighborhood meeting to be held 10 days prior to the Planning and Zoning Board hearing. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to amend the Land Development Guidance System to include the 3 points included in the memo from the Prospect -Shields Neighborhood Association. Yeas: Councilmembers Elliott, Horak and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Knezovich and Wilmarth. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Horak made a motion to change the name of the density chart to something like "Is the Density Proposed Allowable?" THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. , The vote on Councilmember Clarke's original motion to adopt Ordinance No. 44, 1982, as amended on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 45, 1982 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Regarding Campaign Expenditures, Adopted on First Reading Ordinance Regarding Campaign Contributions Tabled to May 4 Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1982, Repealing I Chapter 9, Article V, Section 13, as it Relates to Campaign Expendi- tures. -163- April 6, 1982 B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1982, Repealing and Reenacting Chapter 9, Article VI, Section 15 of the Code as it Relates to Campaign Contributions. Recently, the City Attorney presented information relating to two Supreme Court rulings, the first in the case of Buckley vs. Valeo and the second, the case of the Citizens Against Rent Control, et. al. vs. City of Berkley, California. As a result of this information, the City ounce expresse an niterest in investigating the constitutionality of Chapter 9, Sections 13 and 15 of the City Code. The City Attorney has determined that Chapter 9, Section 13 which relates to campaign expenditure limits is, in its entirety, unconstitutional. He has further determined that the portion of Chapter 9, Section 15 which relates to campaign contribution limits for issues is unconstitutional. To remedy this situation, the City Attorney's Office has prepared the two attached ordinances. If passed, the first ordinance (item A) would repeal §9-13 of the City Code. Passage of the second ordinance (item B) would ' repeal the unconstitutional provision contained in §9-15 and reenact the remaining limitations on campaign contributions." City Attorney John Huisjen suggested these ordinances be tabled and brought to a work session so the materials concerning the Colorado Campaign Reform Act could be presented to Council and so that he might obtain Council's response and prepare an Ordinance which is supplemental to the Campaign Reform Act where appropriate and also meet Council's needs for disclosure and publication of campaign contributions. Councilmember Knezovich urged that staff be given some time to put together an ordinance that Council feels the people by their vote mandated them to adopt. Councilmember Reeves favored tabling the ordinances to be able to draft companion ordinances dealing with disclosure. Councilmember Elliott favored eliminating the unconstitutional portions of Chapter 9 and drafting an additional ordinance dealing with disclosure at a later date. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to adopt Ordinance No. 42, 1982 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: ' None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -164- April 6, 1982 Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to table Ordinance No. 43, 1982 on First Reading to May 4 and ask staff to bring information regarding disclosure provisions to the next work session. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Horak, Knezovich and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Elliott and Wilmarth. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Approving the Downtown Development Authority's Call for a Special Election Regarding the Issuance of Bonds and the Irrevocable Pledge of Property Tax Increments, Adopted on First Reading Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item: "On April 5, 1982, the Downtown Development Authority is to consider adop- ting a Resolution which would call for an election submitting to the qualified electors of the Downtown Development District the question of ' whether the City of Fort Collins shall issue bonds for the Downtown Devel- opment Authority and whether the City should irrevocably pledge into a special fund the property tax increment heretofore approved by the City Council. Pursuant to the state statute, in order for the election to be called, the City Council must approve the calling of the election in accordance with the election laws of the City of Fort Collins. Heretofore, the Downtown Development Authority had approached City Council suggesting that all or a portion of the sales tax increment from the Downtown Development District be included in its plan of development and approved by the City Council in order to put the question of whether such sales tax increments could also be irrevocably pledged to the special fund for the purpose of paying bonds of the Downtown Development Authority. Recently, however, the Downtown Development Authority has changed its position regarding its desire to receive sales tax increment and now desires to concentrate on reaching an agreement with the City whereby the D.D.A. would receive funds from the City not directly tied to the sales tax increment. Therefore, the only remaining issues to be presented to the electors would be the question of whether the City is to issue bonds for the D.D.A. and whether the property tax increment should be irrevocably pledged. The Ordinance presented for your consideration is simply a ratification or approval of the call for election to be voted on by the D.D.A. In the ordinance are the necessary procedural requirements for the election I to be held." -165- April 6, 1982 Downtown Development Authority Board Chairman Earl Wilkinson noted the terms of Boardmembers Carson and Everitt would expire July 1 and they have chosen not to reapply for appointment. The Board's unanimous recommen- dation is to reduce the Board to 9 members and not appoint two new members. They will bring a recommendation to change the Downtown Development Au- thority Bylaws if Council approves the change. Councilmember Wilmarth made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 46, 1982 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Known as the Hahn Property in the City, Adopted Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Known as the Geriatrics Property in the City, Denied These Resolutions were tabled to this date from March 9th to give the Chamber of Commerce Committee time to negotiate further with both owners. The legal description for the condemnation of the Hahn property has been revised to reflect the desired alignment. On March 25th, City staff members met with Jack Hahn and members of the Chamber of Commerce to discuss details of the trail alignment on Mr. Hahn's property. Mr. Hahn proposed that we cross his property using the original staff alignment shown on the attached map. This would allow usage of our exist- ing easement in Spring Meadows and avoidance of the problems encountered in passing along the north side of his garage. Access to Lemay would be accomplished by paving a 12-foot wide driveway from his bridge to the street. This driveway would be shared by trail users and Mr. Hahn's vehicles. Mr. Hahn requested the City to provide the following items: Grant to Hahn an access easement across that property as described in Exhibit "A" for the purpose of obtaining access to existing water and natural gas utilities. Any reasonable additional costs incurred by Hahn in obtaining access to said utilities directly caused by the existence of the trail shall be borne by the City after City verification of the same. -166- April 6, 1982 2. Reseed with ground cover the creek bank from the Hahn's private bridge east to the Lemay bridge. 3. Pave Hahn's driveway with asphalt from a point five feet south of Hahn's private bridge to a point thirteen feet north of Hahn's west gate, as determined by drainage plans; and grade Hahn's driveway as it approaches the Lemay bridge. 4. Install new yard light west of property boundary on existing trail easement. 5. As between the parties hereto and to the extent permitted by law, City shall be solely liable for any damages which in any way relate to or arise out of the use of the easement for the purposes stated herein. 6. Relocate Hahn's existing sign and wagon wheel out of trail easement. 7. Extend the existing board fence approximately twenty feet to the east and relocate existing fence as necessary. An agreement is now being reviewed by Mr. Hahn and his attorney. Mr. Hahn is also reviewing the appraisal of his property to determine what consider- ation he requires for granting the easement. The initial indication was that the consideration would be between $15,000-$20,000. This amount may be revised at Mr. Hahn's request. Mr. Hahn will not be in town until Tuesday so we will not have a final figure until then. In the interim, Mr. Hahn has granted a temporary easement for construction vehicles to use his driveway in building the trail west of his property. The temporary access easement has been submitted to Council under Routine Deeds and Easements. Recommendation The advantages of this approach are (1) that it ties into our existing trail path and (2) that it allows us to deal with only one property owner (not Johnson and Geriatrics). The disadvantage is that his "willing seller" consideration is high, $15/20,000 versus the appraisal value of $3,348. The appraised value also does not provide for damages to Hahn's property by virtue of separating his garage from his house. However, since Mr. Hahn prefers this location, that would seem to imply at least that no damage has occurred. Cost analysis shows that each option is about a "wash" in total dollars -- at least based on numbers available at the time this memo is written. L_ -167- I April 6, 1982 Staff recommends Council negotiate a bit with Mr. Hahn on Tuesday and if a reasonable deal can be set, then approve and direct it. If a reasonable deal in Council's judgment cannot be made, then we recommend Council move to pass Resolution A on the Hahn property. In either event, Council should move to defeat Resolution B on the Geriat- rics property." Councilmember Elliott asked if this route was the original route. City Manager Arnold replied that it was the original through the Hahn property but not over the Geriatrics property. Councilmember Knezovich asked why we were paying fair market or appraised value for the Hahn property and then performing construction costs that benefit his property. He suggested the construction costs be deducted from the total amount paid. Councilmember Wilmarth expressed his concern about the cost, adding he felt $15,000 was too much and that the City has not negotiated adequately. He stated he would vote for the acquisition by eminent domain with negotia- tions to continue. Councilmember Clarke stated he felt there was the issue of damages to Hahn's property to be considered if eminent domain is considered. City Manager Arnold noted in response to Councilmember Knezovich's state- ment, that on most easements the City has had to do extra work and pay for the property. Councilmember Horak stated he felt if negotiations continued, more than 120 hours of staff time would be spent and, at the rate of $10/hour, would be $12,000 which is the difference. He recommended going ahead with the purchase for $15,000. Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wilmarth, to adopt the Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of the Hahn property. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmembers Elliott and Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Wilmarth made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to deny the Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of the Geriatrics property. -Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. ' THE MOTION CARRIED. 11 April 6, 1982 City Attorney's Report City Attorney Huisjen reported he had transmitted to the Division of Insurance a statement from Mary Shortridge concerning information she had on the City's insurance coverage with the L. C. Wilson Agency along with other material from the City's file concerning this issue. City Manager's Report City Manager Arnold reported the opinion letter from the auditing firin of Erickson, Hunt, Spillman, P.C. would be in hand within 2 days. The entire document will be presented to Council by the end of next week. Other Business Councilmember Horak noted he had been approached by some citizens of the community who are considering circulating a petition dealing with the I nuclear freeze. He asked the City Attorney to review the petition for validity. He then noted it had come to his attention that a business he owns a small percentage of has a small contract with the City which is prohibited by Charter. He asked for a ruling from the Ethics Committee. Councilmember Knezovich asked that staff respond to the concerns of the citizen who raised questions about the administration of the Community Development Block Grant programs. He also expressed his concerns about the appeals procedure and asked that new evidence be presented in advance. Mayor Cassell suggested the ordinance may need to be modified to correct the problems witnessed in the hearing held earlier. Adjournment Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adjourn the meeting to 1:30 p.m. on April 13. Yeas: Councilmembers Cas- sell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -169- FJ The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Mayor -170- April 6, 1982