Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/21/2003 - CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE COUNCIL MEETING ITEM NUMBER: 7 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: October 21, 2003 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Wanda Krajicek SUBJECT Consideration and adoption of the Council meeting minutes of September 2, 2003. September 2,2003 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, September 2, 2003, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Councilmembers Absent: Roy Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Bill Carson, High Tech Network, spoke regarding his group's agenda that was focused on getting primary jobs back to Fort Collins and presented a progress report regarding the group's work with the City staff. Dick Dunn, co-chair of the Council for a True Bypass in 1998-99, stated he was interested in speaking with regard to Ordinance No. 102, 2003 on third reading. City Manager Fischbach stated Ordinances had two readings. Mayor Martinez stated the issue of transfer of funds from the truck bypass project was on the agenda later in the meeting and that citizen participation regarding that matter would be heard at that time. Maury Albertson,731 West Olive Street,stated he would like to speak regarding the implementation of the truck route that was voted on in 1999. Mayor Martinez stated the issue would be heard later in the agenda. Mr. Albertson stated the topic he wished to discuss was not germane to the later agenda item. Mayor Martinez ruled that the truck route topic was germane to the later agenda item and that citizen participation would be heard at that time. Mr. Albertson stated he would leave a copy of his statement with the City Clerk. Bob Haberstroh, 1209 Parkwood Drive, spoke in opposition to tiered water rates and stated water rates for his uniquely landscaped half acre lot were prohibitive for this summer. He stated the unfair water rates put him in a position of having to sell his house. He stated it would be more fair for everyone to pay the same rate per gallon of water. He stated his home was built in 1968 and that there was no way at that time to anticipate that the rules would change and that the water rates would become unbearable. He stated one month's bill was over$1,500. 88 Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated it was probably time to lift the watering restrictions and that he continued to support tiered water rates. He objected to comments from one Councilmember and the chair of the Water Board quoted in the newspaper saying that the City had plenty of water and that there would be no need to conserve. He stated this is a semi-arid area and that water conservation must be done year round. He expressed concerns about planned reservoir extensions and expansions that would be environmentally damaging and asked why this would be necessary if we had enough water. He stated fixed income or age should not be a factor in the tiered rates. He stated income levels would be an appropriate factor to consider. He stated tiered water rates were a fair and market driven approach. He also spoke regarding the High Tech Network's efforts and suggested lobbying the federal government for tax changes. He stated the jobs were not leaving because of bad City policies but were going offshore because of U.S. tax policies. Citizen Participation Follow-up Mayor Martinez stated he believed in water conservation and that the point of his comment to the newspaper was that restrictions were no longer needed at this time. Councilmember Bertschy stated Council would be hearing a staff report on water issues. He stated he reluctantly agreed with the decision to lift watering restrictions. He stated he would not support any adjustments to the tiered water system at this time. He stated the true test of that system would come during an average rather than drought year. He stated the Council would receive information on these issues at a December study session. Councilmember Hamrick commented that the metering program has been completed and that many people who are new to the meter program will have"sticker shock"because their actual consumption of water is reflected in their bill. He stated the metering program has been effective in convincing people to conserve water and that the tiered water rates approach conservation from a "consumer choice"perspective. He stated the program needs to be given a chance to work. He stated Council would be taking a look at water policies in December. Councilmember Tharp agreed that the City now has a good water supply and that the City owns enough to meet its needs. She stated drought years place the City in the position of not being able to carry over water because there is not enough storage space. She stated storage capacity was a different issue that whether the City has enough water in any given year. She stated the City needs to have adequate storage to serve our needs in dry years and accumulate water in wet years. Councilmember Kastein stated he opposed the tiered water rate structure and that some residents were being unfairly taxed for the water they used. He stated some people were being charged an exorbitant amount. He stated a water budgeting system that would allocate the amount of water that can be used based on lot size should be used instead. He stated the City should target the waste of water. He stated he would be suggesting that the Council reexamine this issue. He stated there is enough water storage at this time and that the City is collecting fees and water rights from development to provide water storage for the future. 89 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Weitkunat stated she was a proponent of looking at mechanisms for adequate water storage for the future. She stated she supported the tiered water rate plan with the intent that it was a mechanism that would be reviewed once any repercussions were known. She stated conservation had other principles besides the saving of water. She stated one side effect has been the loss of revenue because of lower water consumption. She stated she would like to see where adjustments could be made when the Council discusses the issue in December. She stated her assumption was that the tiered rated structure would be reviewed once information was collected on how it was working. Agenda Review City Manager Fischbach stated the agenda would stand as printed. CONSENT CALENDAR 7. Consideration and approval of the Council meeting minutes of July 15 2003 and the adjourned meeting minutes of July 22, 2003. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No 106 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Reserve Account and Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to Commission an Artist to Create a Front Entry Piece for the Lincoln Center. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, appropriates the donation by the Lincoln Center Support League and ArtWear Fund to the Art in Public Places Reserve Account, and authorize expenditure of the donated funds to commission the creation of the"Portal"project for the Lincoln Center. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for the Rehabilitation of 259 South College Avenue. the Mountain Empire (Historic Armstrong) Hotel. The City has been awarded a grant from the Colorado Historical Society's State Historical Fund for the rehabilitation of 259 South College Avenue. Matching funds will be provided by the owners of the building. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, appropriates the grant and matching funds for the restoration of 259 South College Avenue. 90 September 2, 2003 10. Items Relating to Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Downtown Development Authority perations and Maintenance Fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108,2003,Appropriating Funds from City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for the Payment of Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment Revenue Bonds. Ordinance No. 108, 2003, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, appropriates $1 million to pay the bonds the City anticipates issuing later this year. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2003, Appropriating Funds from the Downtown Development Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund for the Purpose of Making Certain Capital Improvements in the Downtown Area of Fort Collins and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves Designated for Capital Improvements. Ordinance No. 109, 2003, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, appropriates the $1 million of transferred money from the bond issue and another $850,000 from the DDA Operations and Maintenance Fund prior year reserves. These Ordinances have been modified slightly to clarify that bond proceeds will be used to pay for the capital improvements, while debt service funds will be used to pay the bonds. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to Be Returned to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing Related Activities. The Fort Collins Housing Authority(the "Authority") made a payment to the City from its 2003 budget for the sum of$11,113 as a "Payment in Lieu of Taxes"("PILOT")for public services and facilities. The Authority annually requests that the City refund the money"...to again fund sorely needed affordable housing related activities, to attend the low-income housing needs of Fort Collins residents." This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 111,2003 Authoriziny the City to Enter into a Revocable Lease with the Cortina Homeowners' Association for Portions of Public Right-of-Way for Underground Storage. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, authorizes the Mayor to enter into an agreement with the Cortina Homeowners' Association 91 September 2, 2003 for a revocable lease of portions of public right-of-way to be used as underground storage for a proposed building on the southwest corner of the intersection of Canyon Avenue and Howes Street. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 112,2003 Amending Article III of Chapter 17 of the Citv Code Pertaining to Offenses Against Property_ Like the State,the City of Fort Collins has maintained laws in its Code against theft of rental property, concealment and criminal mischief. Currently, under State law, such crimes may be considered either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending upon the amount of dollar loss. Under the City Code such crimes are misdemeanors if the value of the property stolen, concealed or damaged is less than$400. These crimes under the State statutes are considered misdemeanors if the value of the property is less than $500. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, amends Sections 17-37, 17-38,and 17-39 to raise the value limit of property to$500,which will be consistent with State Statutes relating to theft of rental property, concealment and criminal mischief. 14. Second Reading of OrdinanceNo. l13.2003.Amending Chapter IOftheCltyCOdeRelacing to General Provisions and Repealing Identical Sections Contained Elsewhere in the Code The City Code applies these principles only to the offenses contained in Chapter 17 and Section 12-99(e), relating to the sale and use of tobacco products. There are other offenses under the City Code, for example, sales tax and licensing violations, environmental regulation violations, fire code and noise violations, which cannot presently be prosecuted under the principles of complicity or corporate liability. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 114.2003.Authorizing Amendment#1totheLongTerm Lease of Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport with Cole Smith DBA Signal Construction, for the Construction of an Aircraft Hangar. The Cities entered into a ground lease agreement with Cole Smith on July 17, 2001, for the construction of an aircraft storage hangar. It has been discovered that the legal description for the property built upon is incorrect. This Ordinance,which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, amends the lease incorporating the correct legal description. 92 September 2, 2003 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2003, Amending Section 2-238 of the City Code Pertaining to the Functions of the Golf Board. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, amends the functions of the Golf Board,as contained in the City Code,to reflect the fact that it is the City Manager, rather than the City Council,who sets the annual fees and charges at City-owned golf courses. 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116. 2003, Amending the City Code Relating to Candidates for Municipal Election. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, amends the deadline for a nominated candidate for municipal election to withdraw his or her candidacy, and amends the deadline for a person to file an affidavit of intent with the City Clerk indicating that such person desires to be a write-in candidate and is qualified for the office. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No 117,2003 Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for That Certain Property Known as the Whitham Property Rezoning Ordinance No. 117,2003,which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, rezones 160.3 acres located on the south side of East Vine Drive between North Timberline Road (% mile to the west) and Interstate 25 (1/2 mile to the east). The site is currently vacant and is in the T - Transition District. 19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118,2003,Amending Article III of Chapter 12 of the City Code, Regarding Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment to Authorize Administrative Regulations. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2003, amends the Code to specifically authorize the City Manager to establish administrative regulations. 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No 119, 2003, Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Adding Categories ofNames to the List of Street Names to Be Used for Selecting Names for New Arterial and Collector Streets. Section 24-91 of the City Code requires arterial and collector streets to be named only from a list of names of citizens that the City would like to honor posthumously. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19,2003, amends this section 93 September 2, 2003 of the Code to also allow such streets to be named after natural areas, natural features, historic and/or well-known places other names that Council may approve. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to be Used to Evaluate and Determine the Cultural Affiliation of Human Remains and Cultural Artifacts in the Museum's Holdings On August 1,2003 the Museum received written notice that it had been awarded a$75,000 NAGPRA Documentation Grant from the National Park Service. This Documentation Grant will enable the Museum to evaluate and determine the cultural affiliation of human remains and cultural artifacts in the Museum's holdings. The overarching goal for this project is to submit three Notices of Inventory Completion to the National Park Service determined through consultation with several Californian and Puebloan tribes,the Hopi tribe, the Navajo Nation, and continued consultations with Plains Indian tribes. The Museum will utilize the grant funds to hire a NAGPRA Coordinator and part time Collections Manager, who will organize and facilitate the consultation with tribes, and to cover travel expenses and consultation fees. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No 122 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Operation of the Fort Collins Welcome Center. Pursuant to Resolution 99-97, the City contracted with Colorado State University for space at the Environmental Learning Center/Visitors Center,approximately one-quarter mile west of Interstate 25. The City, in its effort to welcome visitors to Fort Collins through the activities of its convention and visitor services contractor, the Fort Collins Convention and Visitors Bureau (the"CVB"), will use the space for the Fort Collins Welcome Center. The CVB, in addition to promoting tourism activity, will operate the Welcome Center pursuant to the City's agreement with the CVB, and consistent with the City's grant agreement with the State of Colorado. 23. Items Relating to the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport. A. Resolution 2003-098 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement with the Federal Aviation Administrator Regarding an Update to the Airport Master Plan. In July,the Federal Aviation Administration("FAA")awarded the Airport a$250,000 grant to be used toward the Airport's Master Plan Update Study ("Study"). Recently, the FAA offered the Airport additional grant funds in the amount of$200,000 to be used for the Study. Taken together, the grant funds will cover 90% of the costs to prepare an update to the 94 September 2, 2003 Airport's existing study. The Airport is currently negotiating fees with the consultant to prepare the Study based on the scope of work. It is anticipated that the Grant will be adequate to cover the total costs of the Study and the scope of work. Should any of the FAA money be left over once the Study is fully funded, the remaining funds can be recovered for other FAA eligible projects. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2003, Authorizing the Appropriation of Funds for Expenditure to Be Used for the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport's FAA Sponsored Airport Master Plan Update Study. This Ordinance appropriates the City's 50% share of the $200,000 additional grant money (or$100,000)as well as its 50%share of the$22,200 required matching funds(or$11,100). 24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2003, Amending Section 22-90 of the City Code Relating to Limit on Assessments. City staff has been discussing the possible formation of a special improvement district to construct streets, intersections, and other improvements along Timberline Road from the Drake Road intersection north past the Prospect Road Intersection. Some of the property owners and developers that would be benefited by the improvements have proposed that they provide the money necessary to construct the improvements,and that the City create a special improvement district to distribute the costs among other benefited property owners through the payment of special assessments against their property. Section 22-90 of the City Code restricts the amount of assessments that may be placed on benefited properties to one-half the actual value of the property, not including the proposed district improvements. This restriction was intended to protect the City and property owners from assessments that are too high for the property to bear. As envisioned, the proposed financing structure for a special improvement district for the Timberline Road improvements would not present any financial risk to the City,because the petitioning property owners and development companies would advance the cost of the improvements and would bear the risk of default, rather than the City. Under these circumstances, relaxation of the limits on assessments would not put the City at risk and would better enable the petitioning property owners to recover the costs they advance. Therefore,staff has developed new language for Section 22-90 of the City Code which would allow the amount of the assessment to be detennined in relation to the value of the benefited property includine the value of the improvements. However, the amount assessed against the property would still not be allowed to exceed the amount that the property's value is enhanced by reason of the construction of the district improvements. 95 September 2, 2003 25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125,2003,Designatingthe e Empire Grange Hall,2306 West Mulberry Street,Fort Collins.Colorado as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. The members of Empire Grange#148 are initiating this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the Grange Hall. Due to the Hall's excellent physical integrity and high degree of architectural and historical significance, the building may be regarded as individually eligible for landmark designation under City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Standards (A) - Association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; and (C) - Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The Grange Hall, still in use after 91 years,remains a tangible reminder of the presence in Fort Collins of the Order of the Patrons of Husbandry, or Grange. The building's architectural significance is derived not only from its architectural fonn as a locally rare vernacular brick meeting hall,but also from the fact that it was built, and most likely designed, by Empire Grange members. The Hall is remarkably unaltered from its date of construction in 1912. 26. Resolution 2003-099 Setting the Dates of the Public Hearings on the 2004 and 2005 Proposed City of Fort Collins Biennial Budget. The City will be adopting a biennial budget for the years 2004 and 2005. The City Charter requires that the City Council set a date for a public hearing on the proposed budget. This Resolution sets that hearing date for the Council meeting of September 16,2003. In an effort to receive further public input, this Resolution also sets an additional hearing date for the October 7, 2003 Council meeting. 27. Resolution 2003-100 Amending the Service Directors' Pension Plan to Adjust the Contribution Rate of the City Manager. The proposed change to the Service Directors' Pension Plan requires the City Manager to increase the amount of his personal contributions to the Plan. There is no additional cost to the City. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) introduced new retirement plan limits. Under EFTRRA, the maximum annual contribution to an individual'y defined contribution account is $41,000 in 2003. The City's defined contribution retirement plans are implemented through the ICMA Retirement Corporation (RC or the Retirement Corporation). The City Manager has requested that the City's plan for Service Directors' Pension Plan(Plan No. 8530-19)be amended to require contributions by the City Manager to be equal to the new limit. Pursuant to Section VI of the Third Addendum to the City Manager Employment Agreement, the City Council has agreed to 96 September 2, 2003 accommodate the request of the City Manager to increase the amount of his mandatory contributions to the Plan. Substantive changes to the Plan require approval by the City Council. If adopted, this Resolution would authorize the change requested by the City Manager. Upon adoption by Council, staff will take the appropriate actions to effect the change. This action does not increase the City's financial liability. 28. Routine Easements. A. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from Tim and Rosyln Stern, to underground electric services, located at 1608 Remington. Monetary consideration: $500. Staff: Patti Teraoka. B. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from Joel Lerich, to underground electric services, located at 212 East Stuart. Monetary consideration: $300. Staff: Patti Teraoka. ***END CONSENT*** Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No 106 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Reserve Account and Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to Commission an Artist to Create a Front Entry Piece for the Lincoln Center. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No 107 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for the Rehabilitation of 259 South College Avenue the Mountain Empire (Historic Armstrong) Hotel. 10. Items Relatingto Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Downtown Development Authority perations and Maintenance Fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108,2003,Appropriating Funds from City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for the Payment of Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment Revenue Bonds. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2003, Appropriating Funds from the Downtown Development Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund for the Purpose of Making Certain Capital Improvements in the Downtown Area of Fort Collins and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves Designated for Capital Improvements. 97 September 2, 2003 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to Be Returned to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing Related Activities. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 111,2003,Authorizingthe he City to Enter into a Revocable Lease with the Cortina Homeowners' Association for Portions of Public Right-of-Way for Underground Storage. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 112,2003 Amending Article III of Chapter 17 of the City Code Pertaining to Offenses Against Property. 14. Second Reading ofOrdinanceNo. 113 2003 Amending ChapterIoftheCityCodeRelating to General Provisions and Repealing Identical Sections Contained Elsewhere in the Code 15. Second Reading of OrdinanceNo. 114,2003.Authorizing Amendment#1to the Long-Tenn Lease of Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport with Cole Smith DBA Signal Construction, for the Construction of an Aircraft Hangar. 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2003, Amending Section 2-238 of the City Code Pertaining to the Functions of the Golf Board. 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 2003, Amending the City Code Relating to Candidates for Municipal Election. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No 117.2003,Amending the Zoning Map of the City ofFort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for That Certain Property Known as the Whitham Property Rezoning, 19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118,2003,Amending Article III of Chapter 12 of the City Code, Re ag rding Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment, to Authorize Administrative Regulations. 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2003, Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Adding Categories ofNames to the List of Street Names to Be Used for Selecting Names for New Arterial and Collector Streets. 35. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2003, Amending the City's Land Use Code to Implement the 1-25 Subarea Plan. Which is an Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan 98 September 2, 2003 Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No 121 2003 Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to be Used to Evaluate and Determine the Cultural Affiliation of Human Remains and Cultural Artifacts in the Museum's Holdinas. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Operation of the Fort Collins Welcome Center. 23. Items Relating to the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2003,Authorizing the Appropriation of Funds for Expenditure to Be Used for the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport's FAA Sponsored Airport Master Plan Update Study. 24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2003, Amending Section 22-90 of the City Code Relating to Limit on Assessments. 25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125,2003 Designating the Empire Grange Hall 2306 West Mulberry Street,Fort Collins,Colorado, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to adopt and approve all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Consent Calendar Follow-up Mayor Martinez noted that item#26 Resolution 2003-099 Setting the Dates of the Public Hearings on the 2004 and 2005 Proposed City of Fort Collins Biennial Budget established the budget hearing dates on which public input would be received on the budget. Councilmember Hamrick spoke regarding item 47 Consideration and approval of the Council meeting minutes ofJuly 15, 2003 and the adjourned meeting minutes ofJuly 22, 2003 and asked if it would be possible for the minutes to be included in the Council agenda document. City Manager Fischbach stated the minutes were always included in the Council's Thursday packet. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would like the minutes to be included in the agenda notebooks. Councilmember Hamrick also spoke regarding item#24 First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2003, 99 September 2, 2003 Amending Section 22-90 of the City Code Relating to Limit on Assessments and stated he would like some additional information relating to the impacts of Ordinance No. 124, 2003. Councilmember Tharp spoke regarding item #24 First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2003, Amending Section 22-90 of the City Code Relating to Limit on Assessments and stated she would also like some additional information regarding Ordinance No. 124,2003 prior to Second Reading. She also spoke regarding item #21 First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to be Used to Evaluate and Determine the Cultural Affiliation of Human Remains and Cultural Artifacts in the Museum's Holdings. Staff Reports City Manager Fischbach reported on the two budget hearing dates and stated the recommended budget could be reviewed at the main library,the Harmony Library,the City Clerk's office or on the Internet at www.fcgov.com/budget. He stated there were opportunities to comment on the budget on the Internet or by calling City Line. He reported on the receipt by the City of a$75,000 grant for the further documentation of the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act compliance process. He stated the City was one of the leaders in the country in complying with the act. He reported that the Museum hosted the first Native American Music Festival and that this could become an annual event. He reported that the bike trail expanded with the completion of the second section of the Power Trail on land donated by Platte River Power Authority. He reported that the Neighborhood Summit was planned for the coming weekend at CSU to discuss quality of life issues. He reported that the radon ordinance would be delayed until December 16. He reported that there were budget payment plans available for paying water bills. He stated the City's water customers had saved over 27%in indoor and outdoor water use this past year. He stated watering restrictions were being lifted as of September 12, 2003 and read a Memorandum of Determination and Declaration ofNo Water Supply Shortage and a Lifting of Temporary Water Restrictions. He noted that other water conservation provisions would remain in place. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to support the Memorandum of Determination and Declaration of No Water Supply Shortage and a Lifting of Temporary Water Restrictions. Councilmember Hamrick stated the lifting of watering restrictions needs to be monitored closely and that if there appears to be potential water supply problems, the watering restrictions should be reinstated as appropriate. Councilmember Kastein stated he supported the lifting of restrictions and asked when the tiered water pricing would be discussed by the Council. City Manager Fischbach stated water issues will be discussed in December when a full season's data is available. 100 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Kastein asked if the issue could be reviewed sooner if there is sufficient Council support to do so. City Manager Fischbach stated full information will not be available to the Council if the matter is discussed before the December meeting. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Reports Mayor Martinez stated the issue of importance to the tiered pricing discussion is the methodology rather than the data. He stated he would like to see the discussion of water issues earlier than December. Councilmember Bertschy reported on Poudre Fire Authority Board of Directors discussions regarding the budget. Councilmember Tharp reported on the Metropolitan Planning Organization's RTA Policy Board discussions regarding shaping of the RTA. She stated she would like to see the City more involved in leadership regarding the plan to ensure that the result is something the City can support. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the RTA draft document needed to be redistributed because of a copying error. Councilmember Kastein reported on the RTA discussions and stated he would support Fort Collins assuming more of a leadership role. Resolution 2003-096 Adopting the City Counci►'s 2003-2005 Policy Agenda Adopted The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary Every two years, the City Council adopts a Policy Agenda that outlines the policy initiatives it wishes to undertake in the two-year Council term. This proposed Policy Agenda has been developed through discussions with and among Councilmembers during a Council retreat and subsequent study session. 101 September 2, 2003 The 2003- 2005 Policy Agenda includes major theme areas on which Council would like to focus its policy work during the coming two years. The themes are supported by a number of policy targets and objectives that will provide focus and guidance to staff over the next two years. A.few edits have been made to the Policy Agenda since the prior draft was distributed and discussed at the July 22, 2003 study session, including: - Theme areas are now listed in a rank order of importance and urgency. This ranking was determined based on the combined input of Council members. This input was submitted to staff following the study session. - Within each theme, the individual targets have been ranked according to priority. As with the themes, this ranking is based on the combined input of Council members. - Additional wording changes were made throughout at the suggestion of individual Council members. These are intended to clarify, rather than change, the intent of some targets and objectives as needed. After Council has adopted the Policy Agenda, the City Manager will work with staffand the boards and commissions to create work plans which support these themes. Staff will also work to share information with the community regarding Council's goals." City Manager Fischbach stated staff was available to make a presentation and that Council had the lead on this agenda item. Don Kruse, 1820 Wallenburg Drive, vice-president of the Prospect-Shields Homeowners' Association, expressed concerns regarding high density neighborhoods with many rentals and the "tepid" enforcement of noise, parking and other nuisance ordinances. Councilmember Kastein stated he had indicated that he was interested in adding some of the objectives for the economy that had been taken off the list. He stated some of the items relating to the economy had been removed in favor of more general comments and that he favored adding some of these items once again. Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, stated some of the objectives were reorganized or reworded and that the items relating to the economy were reflected elsewhere in the list. Councilmember Kastein stated he wanted to ensure that the objective of implementing the Poudre River Corridor Plan was still on the list. Jones stated the Poudre River Corridor Plan was not specifically mentioned in the economic policies. Councilmember Kastein asked if the Poudre River Corridor Plan objective is included in a more general objective and suggested that some detail was being lost. Jones spoke regarding the 102 September 2, 2003 objectives of encouraging redevelopment and a diversified and healthy community. She stated more specific items could be added back into the policy agenda. Councilmember Tharp stated staff has the detailed direction and that some of the objectives are more detailed. City Manager Fischbach stated once the policy agenda is approved that staff will develop the City Manager's work plan,which will be very specific. He stated this agenda item provides staff with policy guidance. He stated items such as the Poudre River Corridor Plan will be mentioned in the staff work plan. Councilmember Kastein expressed concerns that the Poudre River Corridor Plan had been somewhat "deprioritized" because preference seemed to be given to using the Mason Street Corridor to revitalize the downtown. He requested a one-page memo regarding the Poudre River Corridor Plan. City Manager Fischbach stated the emphasis has been redirected to the Poudre River Corridor in recent weeks. Mayor Martinez asked if the Council would be willing to cut back on some of the workload being imposed on staff. He stated there were 11 policy agenda themes and suggested that many of the items listed within each theme were possibly too much work, some should not be the responsibility of the City, and some were repetitive, unnecessary or had already been done. He questioned the importance and validity of some of the items listed under some of the general themes. He suggested wording changes to some of the listed items. He stated some items had been"rehashed"many times and questioned whether closure could be reached on such items. He stated some policy items were too regulatory and constituted "social engineering." He questioned the cost,urgency and validity of some regulatory items. He asked that Council consider condensing the policy agenda. Councilmember Hamrick suggested that a motion be placed on the table. Councilmember Bertschy asked for clarification regarding the Mayor's objection to the process for the creation of the policy agenda, i.e. whether he objected to the process at the retreat to generate ideas, the staff condensing the items into a draft policy agenda, the study session where items were discussed item-by-item, the prioritization process, or the study session at which opinions were expressed. He stated he believed that the Council was ready to approve the policy agenda and that most of the items referenced by the Mayor were at the exploratory or consideration stage. He asked if there was a mistake in the Resolution that should read "11" rather than "7" major theme areas. Mayor Martinez stated he had no objection to the process that was followed. He noted that many of the items were not discussed at the retreat and that many were listed following e-mails and other dialogue. He stated he wanted the public to know how he felt about some of the regulatory versus service issues. 103 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Weitkunat stated the Council ranked items in tenns of importance and urgency and noted that staff would develop work plans after Council adopts the policy agenda. She stated she had a concern that certain items were established as being very important and that there would be a sacrifice of time needed for working on the urgent and priority items to work on items of lesser importance. She questioned asking staff to spend time working on lower priority items. She stated she would like an assurance that the important items will take the staff time. She stated including the lower priority items in the policy agenda was an indication to staff that they would be required to work on such items. She stated she was concerned that this would take staff time away from the important issues. Mayor Martinez suggested that Council determine which items were of primary importance and which items were secondary in order to give staff direction to work primarily on the top items. He stated the policy agenda as written could spread staff too thin. Councilmember Kastein asked that a motion be put on the floor for debate. Councilmember Kastein made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Hamrick,to adopt Resolution 2003-096 with an amendment to read "11" major theme areas rather than "T" Councilmember Kastein stated many of the policy agenda items were exploratory in nature and suggested that the Mayor identify a smaller list of items that he felt to be a waste of time. He asked that Council approve a policy agenda with the understanding that it was a prioritized list and to ask staff to give feedback on what could be accomplished in two years. Councilmember Tharp stated a number of items were already"on the plate" and that this was a way for the Council to restate significant issues to keep an emphasis on such issues. She stated some items such as rental licensing were possibilities to take a look at to determine how some situations could be improved. She stated some items were for continued discussion and work and that she wholeheartedly supported the process and the result. Councilmember Hamrick stated this was a general policy agenda and that Council had prioritized the agenda item. He stated he could not support any"absolute priority" for items because priorities could change in the next two years. He stated some flexibility needed to be retained and that Council might need to adjust the prioritization based on the feedback received from staff. He stated it was premature to argue the details at this point. He stated the policy agenda had many references to "investigate,review and explore"rather than to absolute direction for implementation. He stated he would support the policy agenda as written. Councilmember Bertschy stated there was "give and take" in the creation of the policy agenda. He stated he would not support opening a large scale discussion on this. He stated Council had given priority direction and that he was ready to move forward on this agenda item. 104 September 2, 2003 Mayor Martinez stated he felt this public discussion was necessary. He asked for consideration by the Council of streamlining the policy agenda and spoke regarding the staff time involved in exploring and investigating issues for the Council. Councilmember Kastein asked how staff would provide feedback to the Council regarding the policy agenda. City Manager Fischbach stated he would submit a work plan and that timelines would be developed for completion of work in 2004 and 2005. He stated Council could then react and provide feedback to staff on the timelines. Councilmember Kastein asked if staff would anticipate assigning a completion date to every item. City Manager Fischbach stated some items were ongoing and that most dates would have assigned dates. Councilmember Bertschy stated the issues on the policy agenda would require discussion and that he was not ready to support rental licensing but that rental housing issues needed to be discussed. He stated this would involve looking at all options, including rental licensing. He stated he was comfortable with the prioritization that had taken place. Mayor Martinez stated he felt that the policy agenda could spread the staff too thin and that he believed that the Council was asking for too much with regard to some items. Councilmember Tharp stated the Council had not discussed or received factual information with regard to some of these issues. She stated discussion about individual policy agenda items could wait until the item was brought forth for Council discussion and action. Councilmember Bertschy stated this was not the time to debate every single item. He stated it would be important to have a balanced discussion regarding the items at the appropriate time. He called for the question. Councilmember Hamrick asked what the Mayor meant by "social engineering." Mayor Martinez stated this included telling people where they had to live and shop. Councilmember Bertschy asked if the call for the question was a call for the end of debate. City Attorney Roy replied in the affirmative. He stated the call for the question did not automatically call for the vote and that the chair would be required to put before the assembly the question whether the assembly was ready to vote on the matter. Mayor Martinez asked if Council was ready to end the debate. 105 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Kastein stated he would look forward to the discussion on individual items and to seeing the work plan from staff. He noted that the arguments from residents about neighborhoods were not falling on deaf ears and that he agreed that ordinances should be enforced. He stated this was a matter of allocating resources to the Police Department. Councilmember Tharp stated she liked the process and that the neighborhood and rental issues were of particular concern to her. She stated she was having two neighborhood meetings to talk about such issues. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would support the policy agenda as discussed. She spoke regarding the need to work on the primary issues facing the community now and in the future. She stated her urgent priorities were the economy, transportation and water. Councilmember Bertschy stated he supported the policy agenda and that it was a fair document that represented the will of the Council. Mayor Martinez stated he would support the motion because he wanted to support the Council. He stated he would work hard to make sure that work focused on the top five policy agenda priorities: budget and finance, public health and safety, the economy, transportation and water. He spoke regarding the difficulty of enforcing ordinances with limited police and fire resources. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE, MOTION CARRIED ("Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point.) Consideration of the Appeal of the July 14, 2003 Determination of the Administrative Hearing Officer to Impose the Following Condition on the Approval of the Discount Tire at Fossil Creek Project Development Plan: "The Applicant Shall Include on the Final Plan, the Hours of Operation of 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday Through Saturday" Remanded The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary The Appellant has alleged, as the grounds for appeal, that the Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing in that evidence upon which the Hearing Officer based his decision was substantially 106 September 2, 2003 false. If the Council finds that the applicant was denied a.fair hearing, then, in accordance with Section 2-56(d) of the Fort Collins City Code, the City Council must remand the matter for rehearing. BACKGROUND: On July 14, 2003, the administrative Hearing Officer approved the Discount Tire at Fossil Creek Project Development Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. The City shall vacate portions of South College Avenue (SH287) and Fossil Creek Parkway, as described on the Vacation Request Exhibit dated June 20, 2003. 2. The Applicant shall include on the Final Plan, the hours of operation of 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Saturday. The property is zoned C- Commercial. The property is located on the southeast corner of South College Avenue and Fossil Creek Parkway. On July 24, 2003, a Notice ofAppeal was received by the City Clerk's office regarding the decision of the administrative Hearing Officer.In the Notice ofAppeal, the grounds for appeal were unclear, so at the request of the City Clerk, the applicant filed an Amended Notice ofAppeal. On August ll, 2003, such Amended Notice ofAppeal was received by the Clerk's office. In this Amended Notice ofAppeal, theAppellant,James SilhasekofDiscount Tire Company,alleges that the Hearing Of failed to conduct a fair hearing in that he considered evidence relevant to the finding which was substantially false. At the hearing, a representative of Discount Tire Company mistakenly stated the normal hours of operation for the proposed Discount Tire Company building would be from 8:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Saturday, closed on Sundays(see line 17 through 25 on page 52 continued through lines 1 through 12 ofpage 53 of the transcript of the hearing). The Appellant contends that the actual hours of operation for all Discount Tire Company stores, nationwide, is 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday." City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. Troy Jones, City Planner, presented an overview of the history of the project and the appeal. He stated the applicant appealed the hours of operation imposed as a condition for the project and that the grounds for appeal were that the hearing officer failed to conduct a fair hearing in that he considered evidence relative to the finding that was substantially false. He stated the Code provided 107 September 2, 2003 that the Council could uphold the condition or remand the decision to the hearing officer for a rehearing. Mayor Martinez stated each side would be allowed 20 minutes to make a presentation and that each side would then be allowed 10 minutes for rebuttal. He stated all testimony must be relevant to the appeal. City Attorney Roy explained the appeal and hearing process and the options available to the Council. He stated Council's determination would relate to the hours of operation and that if Council found that the evidence the hearing officer relied upon was substantially false or grossly misleading the matter must be remanded to the hearing officer to make a new decision about the hours of operation. Mayor Martinez stated each side would have 20 minutes for a presentation. He stated those parties- in-interest in favor of the appeal would have 20 minutes. Dave Parker,project architect for Discount Tire Company,appellant,stated he provided the incorrect hours of operation at the public meeting. He stated the appellant was appealing the part of the Hearing Officer's decision addressing the hours of operation. He stated the appellant could provide further documentation of the reason for the requested hours of operation. Rob Hyler,assistant vice-president of Discount Tire Company, stated the company's hours had been 8:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m. Saturday for 40 years. He stated this was an honest mistake by Mr. Parker. He stated the company did huge advertising campaigns nationwide regarding the hours of operation and that one store without those hours would be costly to the company. Jeff Murray, assistant vice-president of Discount Tire Company, stated the hours of operation were crucial to the business. Jay Freeman, Discount Tire Company store manager, 1751 South College Avenue, stated he managed the other company store in Fort Collins and that both stores needed to have the same hours to better serve customers. Mayor Martinez stated those parties-in-interest opposed to the appeal would have 20 minutes for a presentation. Gene Fiecht], 5430 Fossil Court North, stated the hours of operation were stated incorrectly at the public meeting and that many in the audience felt that some kind of a compromise had been reached and that many therefore chose not to speak regarding their concerns. He stated stores in California have different hours than those in the national advertising. He stated the Notice of Appeal indicated that the company was requesting a change in the hours to 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and that the 108 September 2, 2003 appellant was now indicating that they wanted the hours to be 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. He stated this would make it difficult for neighborhood residents to get in and out at one entrance given those hours of operation. Cindy South, 5201 Fossil Ridge Drive, stated several different hours of operation had been stated throughout the discussions on this project. She expressed a concern that the company could not get the time straight. Lynn Block,Fossil Creek Meadows resident,stated the Fossil Creek neighborhood has a longhistory of fighting for neighborhood compatible businesses. She asked that the Council consider the impact and the compatibility of the hours of operation with regard to the school community and the neighborhood. Chris Corman, 5212 Fossil Ridge Drive, expressed concerns about the hours of operation due to noise concerns. He stated he believed that the incorrect hours of operation were stated at the public meeting to quell the discussion and that he saw the statement as a compromise. Marilee Lobe, 5326 Fossil Ridge Drive, stated this is the neighborhood's only access point. She stated the neighborhood has no other outlet. She stated Discount Tire's noise will be even louder now because the company had to move its access road 15 feet. She stated there would be even more noise if the hours were extended. She asked the Council to consider whether the company was appropriate for this neighborhood. Erin Branchflower, 5306 Fossil Ridge Drive, stated there were other companies that published nationwide hours, although the individual stores had different hours. Mayor Martinez stated each side would have 10 minutes for rebuttal. Hearing none, he stated the Council would have an opportunity for questions. Mayor Martinez asked that Discount Tires clarify the requested hours of operation. Mr.Hyler stated the company is requesting hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. He stated the company is closed on Sundays. He stated those are the same hours in all of the 38 Colorado stores. Mayor Martinez asked about the hours of operation in other states. Mr. Hyler stated there are some states where the hours of operation varied. City Attorney Roy stated that in his view, the Council is not being asked to decide the hours of operation. 109 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Bertschy stated the Notice of Appeal indicated that the hours of operation were mistated and that the appellant is requesting that the hours of operation be changed to 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Mr. Parker stated the appellant is appealing based on wrong information being presented to the Hearing Officer. He stated the specific hours would be up for discussion at the hearing if the matter was remanded to the Hearing Officer. Councilmember Bertschy asked if the correct hours of operation should have been included in the Notice of Appeal. City Attorney Roy stated it would be helpful if there was no discrepancy in the requested hours of operation. He stated what is relevant for this hearing is whether the Hearing Officer relied upon misinformation, and if so, if that misinformation was substantially false or grossly misleading,the matter should be remanded. He stated the discrepancy in the requested hours of operation did not matter in the appeal and that it would matter when a new decision was made by the Hearing Officer regarding the hours of operation to be allowed. He stated the discrepancy is not relevant to a determination by the Council. Councilmember Hamrick asked if there was any agreement or understanding between the applicants and the neighborhood regarding the hours of operation. Jones read pertinent portions of the transcript starting with line 17 on page 52 (Mr. Parker speaking): "And to address the hours issue, I know that as a company we specify our hours are -- I wish I could quote them -- 8:30 to 5:00 or 8:30 to 5:30, Monday through Saturday, closed on Sundays. What happens is that citizens like yourselves who are not opposed to buying tires from Discount Tire, will show up there right at closing and say, I got to have four new tires, I'm leaving on vacation in the morning. And we-- the manager of that store who is an employee of that company but he runs that store not independently because it is not his store. It isn't a franchise but he's the manager, at his discretion he says, geez, 1 want to help these guys out and I want to make sale so I'm going to sell this guy some tires. And it may take him until 6:00 to get tires on that guy's vehicle before he gets him out the door. So as a company we say our hours are such and such and we will stand behind those hours. If the manager chooses to, you know, go over those hours, all we have to do is address the problem and he'll say okay, I've got to close my doors at 5:30 or whatever the hours that we all agree on." Councilmember Hamrick asked if staff had a sense from the meeting that the neighborhood understood that those would be the agreed upon hours. Jones stated the neighborhood understood from Discount Tire that those would be the hours and that he did not know if the neighborhood was comfortable with that. Councilmember Hamrick asked if noise and hours of operation were discussed at the hearing. Jones replied in the affirmative. He stated noise was the primary topic of discussion and that the hours of operation were linked to the noise concerns. 110 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Tharp stated the Council has few options with regard to this appeal. She stated it appears that there was confusion regarding the hours of operation and that if the Hearing Officer received incorrect information, it is Council's job to remand the matter to the Hearing Officer. She stated it did not appear that Council had the option of discussion the pros and cons of specific hours of operation. She asked if the Council had any choice in the matter. City Attorney Roy clarified that the information received by the Hearing Officer must have been substantially false or grossly misleading and that the Council has an opportunity to weigh the seriousness of the mistake in terms of the Hearing Officer's decision. He stated the Council had heard evidence that this was a substantial error in the view of the appellants and if Council agreed with that, there is no choice except to remand the matter for a new hearing. Councilmember Bertschy noted that the hearing was on July 2 and that the appeal was filed on August 8 and asked if the appellant contacted the City immediately after the hearing. Jones stated the written decision was made on July 14, the first Notice of Appeal was filed on July 23 and the amended Notice of Appeal was submitted on August 8 in response to the City's request for further clarification of the grounds for appeal. City Attorney Roy stated the Notice of Appeal was filed within 14 days of the decision of the Hearing Officer. Mayor Martinez asked a representative of the opponents if there was an agreement or confusion regarding the hours of operation. Mr. Fiechtl stated the sense of the neighborhood was that when the incorrect hours of operation were stated, this was a compromise in response to the neighborhood's concerns about noise and traffic. Councilmember Weitkunat requested clarification regarding the transcript's reference to a "male speaker" in the section read by Mr. Jones and asked if an architect was the person who made the statement regarding the hours of operation. Jones stated Mr.Parker,an architect,made the incorrect statement. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the statement by Mr. Parker in the transcript seemed to indicate that he was unsure about the hours of operation. She asked if there were any other direct statements in the transcript that alluded to hours. Jones stated the transcript on page 28 also referenced hours of operation. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to find that the Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing because he considered evidence relative to his findings that was substantially false or grossly misleading and to remand the matter to the Hearing Officer. Councilmember Weitkunat stated there was an error in the information presented at the hearing and that this matter needed to go back to the Hearing Officer so that the proper information could be III September 2, 2003 included in the hearing. She stated the misinformation was grossly misleading because the hours of operation were critical to a business. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would not support the motion. He stated he found it to be ironic that the appellant was stating that he presented the grossly false and misleading information. He stated the hours of operation were a big topic for the neighborhood and that the neighborhood had a reasonable expectation to go into the hearing and hear the exact hours of operation from the applicant. He stated the inaccurate information was not grossly false or misleading and was simply inaccurate information. Councilmember Kastein stated the information presented was wrong and grossly misleading forboth sides of the issue. He stated both sides will have an opportunity to argue the matter based on the new proposed hours, if this is remanded. Councilmember Bertschy stated the misinformation was misleading for all parties-in-interest. He expressed disappointment that the Notice of Appeal also contained the wrong hours of operation. Mayor Martinez spoke in favor of remanding the matter to the Hearing Officer so that both sides can present their arguments again. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Hamrick. THE MOTION CARRIED Resolution 2003-101 Submitting to the Registered Electors of the City a Proposed Ballot Measure Which Would Authorize a Change in the Use of Certain Building Community Choices Tax Revenues (Option A and Option B) Failed. The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary At the August 12, 2003 Study Session, City Council directed staff to bring forward a proposal to place a measure on the November election ballot that would reallocate funds from two Building Community Choices transportation projects toward two higher priority transportation projects. In 1997, voters approved the Building Community Choices capital improvement program, including 20 specific projects in three sales and use tax funded packages. 112 September 2, 2003 Voter approval of the projects means that the City cannot change the projects without voter approval. However,changing circumstances suggest that thesefunds could be more effectively used for other transportation needs. If the Council wishes to reallocate a portion of these.funds, voter approval would be required. The Resolution would authorize City staff to submit the proposed reallocation to the voters and change the use of the,funds,from the Truck Route and Prospect Road projects to the Timberline Road and Harmony Road projects. Two options ofthe Resolution are presented for Council's consideration. Option A presents a single ballot measure to the voters. Option B divides the measure into two separate questions. RESOLUTION OPTIONS Option presents the reallocation ofthe funds in one ballot measure. The measure provides for the release of$5.1 million from the Prospect Road project and $1.4 million from the Truck Route project,for a total of reallocated resources of$6.5 million. These funds are then directed toward completing the Timberline Road and Harmony Road projects. By presenting one ballot measure, a complete funding strategy is presented to the voters for approval and both projects detailed in the ballot language would be completed. While this option does not offer voters the opportunity to support one reallocation and reject the other reallocation, the single ballot measure provides a more direct, clear and accurate description of the funding strategy. If the measure is approved, the funds will be available to complete both the Timberline and Harmony projects. Option B presents two reallocation questions to voters. Ballot Question No. I asks voters to release $5.1 million from the Prospect Road Building Community Choices sales tax fund, and Ballot Question No. 2 asks voters to release$1.4 million from the Truck Route BCCfund. Both questions identify two projects that the funds will "help pay the costs" of Timberline Road and Harmony Road. Neither funding source alone will provide adequate resources to complete both projects, so voters would need to approve both ballot measures to implement the full funding strategy. If one measure passes and the other fails, only a portion of the work described in the ballot measures could be completed. The ballot structure may confuse or mislead voters is a couple of ways: a. Voters may believe that they can voter for one measure or the other and still ensure completion of both projects; or b. Voters may believe they are voting to support one project or another rather than voting whether or not to release and reallocate existing funds. 113 September 2, 2003 Ifonly Question No. 2($1.4 million from the Truck Route) is approved by voters, the City would be unable to complete either of the projects because funds would not be adequate. This potential for confusion and misunderstanding are the basis ofstaff s recommendation to place Option A, with one measure, on the November 4 ballot. PROJECT SUMMARY Four separate transportation projects are involved in the reallocation proposal: Truck Route In 1999, voters approved an ordinance that significantly restricted the location and construction of a Northeast Truck Route. High cost estimates and the requirement that the route be well outside the city limits of Fort Collins have made it impossible for the project to proceed without the involvement of Larimer County and Colorado Department of Transportation. The$1.4 million that the City has available for the project represents less than 2% of the over $80 million in projected costs for the completion of a truck bypass outside the city Growth Management Area. Construction remains unlikely, given the lack offunding and priority status from Larimer County and CDOT, so staffhas recommended that a portion of the BCC funding for this project be redirected to higher priority transportation needs within the City. The City would continue to pursue non-route based strategies for reducingpass thru truck traffic, and has reserved$1 million of the remaining BCC funds to fund implementation of these strategies. The balance of$1.4 million of the remaining$2.4 million could then be reallocated to other transportation needs. Prospect Road In the BCC program, the Prospect Road project included a 2-lane arterial with sidewalks and bike lanes at an estimated cost of$5.4 million. This level offunding would only provide a portion of the needed improvements along Prospect Road, and would not include adding vehicle travel lanes or any improvements,from Summitview to 1-25. This incompletefunding and changing traffic patterns make the project a lower priority than other nearby needs, such as Timberline Road. If the project were completed as originally envisioned,portions of the work would need to be removed when full funding later becomes available. Prospect Road improvements have become less critical than other needs, so staff is also recommending reallocating these funds. Some funds have been expended on preliminary engineering work, so voters would be asked to reallocate the remaining $5.1 million of project funding. Prospect Road improvements would then be postponed until full funding is available in the future. 114 September 2, 2003 Significant existing resourcesfrom these two projects would be reallocated to higherpriority transportation needs, without increasing any taxes: Prospect Road improvements, Poudre River to Summitview $5.1 million Highway 14 truck by-pass project $1.4 million Balance for contingency $0.2 million TOTAL $6.5 Million Harmony Road Seneca to BNSF Railroad The proposed improvements to Harmony Road would include a full feature 4-lane arterial ,from Seneca Avenue to the BNSF Railroad and full improvements to the Shields/Harmony intersection. Existing Street Oversizing funds provide the balance of funding to complete this project. The project would not include funding for bike lanes between the railroad tracks and College Avenue. These improvements would address one of the most significant traffic bottlenecks in the community and make improvements to the intersection with the highest accident rate in the city Harmony Road and Shields Street. The reallocation of funding from the Prospect Road and Truck Route projects would add $3.2 million to the Harmony Road project and to better ensure adequate,funds for its completion. Street Oversizing share $4.3 million Unfunded share (to be funded by reallocated resources) $3.2 million Total Project Cost $7.5 million Timberline Road. Drake to Prospect The proposed improvements to Timberline Road would include full feature arterial improvements from Drake Road to Prospect Road with four vehicle lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, medians and parkways. Some funding is already available for a portion of these improvements from developer Street Oversizing Fees and the developer share of local streets. These funds, plus the funds reallocated from the Prospect Road and Truck Route projects, would be combined with$2.3 million in additional financingfrom developers along Timberline, to better ensure adequate funding for completion of a full arterial. Developers'local access shares $1.5 million Street Oversizing share $4.5 million Unfunded share (to be funded by reallocated resources) $3.1 million Unfunded share (development pledged financing) $2.3 million Total Project Cost $11.4 million 115 September 2, 2003 A balance,for contingency of$200,000 remains available from the reallocated funds if both projects are completed within the total projected costs. FUNDING SUMMARY The funding strategy provides.funds for two of the highest priority needs, and does not ask voters to increase taxes to accomplish the projects. The approach is a short-term solution to the significant funding gap that the City still has in addressing capital needs. This strategy addresses two urgent needs in our community. Funds Needed - Best Option Reallocated Funds Available $6,500,000 Potentially Funded by SID $2,300,000 TOTAL $8,600,000 Timberline (full improvements) <$5,400,000 > Harmony (Seneca to BNSF RR) <$3,200.000> Balance for Contingency $200 000 If voters approve the reallocation, funds for engineering and design work would be available immediately, and construction would likely begin in 2005. BALLOTMEASURE The proposed ballot measure(s) would ask voters to do two things: • Reallocate funds from two projects: Prospect Road--$5.1 Million Highway 14 Truck Route--$1.4 Million • Allow the funds to be used for two higher priority projects: Timberline Road Harmony Road The ballot measure would also provide that any excess revenues remaining after the completion of the projects would be used tp remedy other deficiencies in the City's transportation system. This Resolution would place the measure(s) on the November 4 coordinated election ballot. Early voting for this election begins on October 20." 116 September 2, 2003 City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, presented background information regarding the agenda item. She spoke regarding transportation congestion problems on Timberline and Harmony. She stated Council directed staff at the August 12 Study Session to bring forward a proposal to place a measure on the November 2003 ballot asking voters to approve reallocating funds from two Building Community Choices projects to the two high priority projects on Timberline and Harmony. She stated there were many other unfunded transportation needs. She stated staff was proposing to reprogram funds from two voter-approved projects(the truck route and Prospect Road). She stated voters approved approximately $3 million for the northeast truck route project and that a study completed in 2001 concluded that it would not be feasible to develop a new east-west truck route between I-25 and US 287 north of Fort Collins without the endorsement and financial support of the County and the State. She stated part of the voter-approved ballot measure regarding the truck route was to work to keep truck traffic on the Interstate highway system. She stated approximately $1 million of remaining northeast truck route project funds would be used to implement non-route- based strategies to keep the truck traffic on the Interstate. She stated approximately $1.4 million would remain for the northeast truck route project. She stated an east-west truck route between I-25 and US 287 would cost between $40 and $80 million and that completion seems to be a remote possibility. She stated part of the short term strategy is to ask voters to reprogram the $1.4 million to two immediate street improvement needs. She stated voters approved $5.8 million in Building Community Choices for Prospect Road between the Poudre River and Summitview. She stated transportation priorities had changed because of changing traffic and development patterns and that the short term strategy was to ask voters to reprogram the remaining Prospect Road funds for Timberline and Harmony. She stated $5.4 million is unfunded for Timberline (Drake to Prospect) and that$3.2 million is unfunded for Harmony Road(Seneca to the railroad tracks). She stated the reprogrammed Building Community Choices funds would amount to $6.5 million and that there is a potential for contributions by developers in the amount of $2.3 million. She described the proposed Timberline and Harmony projects. She summarized the proposed ballot language. She stated Option A would be one ballot measure and that Option B would be two ballot measures. She stated Council is being asked to decide whether or not to place the issue on the ballot and how to structure the ballot language. Councilmember Kastein asked for clarification regarding one of the slides illustrating costs for the Harmony Road and Timberline Road projects. Jones stated Council will be deciding on reallocation of funds rather than on the total cost of the projects. Joe Dumais, Transportation Board member, stated he was speaking on his own behalf. He stated staff should not be allowed to decide which voter-approved projects should be executed and which should be remanded to the voters for a second consideration. He stated the voters might have approved the Prospect Road funding in 1997 because the bike lanes added balance to the project. He stated rather than trying to overturn past voter actions it was more important to look to the future 117 September 2, 2003 to ensure that such "bundled" ballot measures are not brought forward again. He stated the real solution would be a comprehensive funding package for transportation. James Butzek, Smallwood Court resident, Campus Vice-President and Chief Executive Officer for the Larimer Campus of Front Range Community College,spoke regarding the growth of the College and stated over 6,000 people went to the College each week. He stated he was disturbed to read that the intersection of Harmony and Shields was one of the most dangerous intersections in the City. He stated something needed to be done to reduce traffic congestion and decrease the number of accidents. He stated there was a need for general improvements to Harmony Road between Seneca and the railroad tracks. He asked that Front Range Community College be included in any planning regarding any street improvements that might occur on Harmony by the College. Judy Sorbie Dunn, 1405 Lindenwood Drive, stated every time the truck route is discussed, misinformation must be corrected. She stated there were many errors in the Coloradoan's editorial and that the newspaper had indicated that most of its information came from the City. She presented the following clarifications in response to the Coloradoan editorial: (1)the NEPA study would be funded by the State in order to be independent and impartial; (2) a new vote is not needed because the State would do the NEPA study;(3)the bypass will probably become State Highway 14 and will largely be funded by State and federal funds when available,which means that the City will not foot the whole bill. She asked why two intersections would be so much more important that highly polluting trucks rolling through the City on City streets. She spoke regarding the distrust between the City and County governments and stated the two governments should come together to solve the problem of truck traffic on City streets. She asked for support for a NEPA study to find a feasible solution. She stated taking away the bypass funds will indicate to the State that this was not a priority for the City. Bruce Henderson,Transportation Board Chairman,reiterated the points made by the Board in a letter submitted to the Council. He stated the Board would like to see an accounting of what had been accomplished and what could be accomplished with the funding for the study. He stated the Board has not seen any comprehensive summary of work on the route-based alternatives and that the Board would like to see that to ensure that the remaining funding will not be needed for route-based alternatives. He stated the Board pointed out that the expansion of Prospect Road will promote alternative modes of transportation and that reallocating the funds for that project will hurt the potential improvements for alternative modes of transportation. He stated the Board also pointed out that the intersection of Timberline and Prospect is subject to the adequate public facilities ordinance and that investing the money in making improvements will remove it from that regulation. He stated the Board wants to make sure that if that were done, the street oversizing program is reviewed to ensure that there are adequate contributions to that area of the City. Maury Albertson, 731 West Olive Street, registered professional engineer, spoke regarding the growth of the City. He stated the voters sent a clear and direct message to the City Council four 118 September 2, 2003 years ago to pursue implementation of a "plan to cause the relocation of the Colorado Highway 14 truck route outside the City's current urban growth area." He stated voters approved this by a 2-1 vote and that this was a mandate to get the trucks out of Fort Collins. He stated he did not understand how the City Council could reallocate funds to another purpose until the job was done. He stated a representative of CDOT(Karla Harding)had indicated that the State would conduct the NEPA study at no cost to the City as soon as it heard from the City and the County that they wanted to get the trucks out of the City. He stated the NEPA study would recommend a location for an alternate route and that the remaining money could be used to buy right-of-way, conduct additional surveys or for other purposes. He stated the City has not worked with the County to request that CDOT proceed. He questioned how the City Council could ignore a 2-1 voter mandate. He stated there has been a truck traffic increase on Vine Drive. He stated a new truck survey needs to be conducted. He asked that the remaining money from the original $3 million be held in the bank and used only as originally intended to help get the trucks out of Fort Collins. He asked that the City Council work with all possible diligence and speed to reach an agreement with the County regarding the need for a truck bypass outside of the Urban Growth Area. Dick Dunn, 1405 Lindenwood Drive,stated the citizens had voted favorably twice on a truck bypass and that the City Council has never considered an action that would move the truck bypass project forward to a NEPA study, which would be funded and executed by CDOT. He stated CDOT had stated the only action required was for "the County and the City to agree that a truck bypass was necessary." He stated the voters have already indicated that this was a priority. He stated that in 1998, staff was recommending the Vine Drive route and that at that time there did not seem to be any problems that could not be overcome. He stated staff is now indicating that the current situation precluded the construction of a bypass and that the money should be used "where needed." He questioned this given the fact that this is the first vote by the City Council on the transfer of funds. He asked that the City Council consider whether everything possible had been done to move the truck bypass project forward. Gene Markley, Fort Collins Automobile Dealers Association, stated the Association had met to discuss the critical transportation issues and that the Association endorsed the plan as submitted by City staff to reallocate funds toward immediate and urgent needs. He spoke regarding the work done on non-route-based alternatives. Betty Aragon, Buckingham Neighborhood, expressed disappointment that the Council would consider reallocating funds from the truck bypass project to other projects. She asked that the Hispanic minority not be asked to pay the price of having a bypass on Vine Drive. She stated the voters had voted for a true bypass and that the neighborhoods feared that the City would work to take away that victory. She stated the Council had been inconsistent with regard to making the bypass a priority. 119 September 2, 2003 Mayor Martinez asked who would fund a NEPA study. Ron Phillips, Transportation Services Director, stated Regional CDOT Director Karla Harding in a letter of March 13, 2002 to Richard Dunn indicated that the County and City needed to agree that a truck route is necessary and that they would prioritize the necessary funding and support the preferred route that would be selected during the NEPA process. Mayor Martinez asked if this meant that CDOT would support funding for NEPA expense or truck route expense. Phillips stated he believed that it meant both. He stated CDOT would expect some participation from the local level in funding the NEPA process. Mayor Martinez referenced the memo from Mark Jackson regarding the March 22 letter from Ms. Harding to Mr.Dunn and asked if staff believed that this referred to funding for the NEPA study and for the truck route. Phillips replied in the affirmative and stated the letter explained the process that would be followed. Mayor Martinez asked if the City would have any say in the prioritization of funding for the truck route by the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission. Phillips stated the City would not have any say in this prioritization. He stated a regional transportation planning entity in which Fort Collins was a member would have to recommend to CDOT that State funds be used for a project that would not benefit their region and that staff felt that this would be highly unlikely. Mayor Martinez stated Mr. Jackson's memo also indicated that CDOT had said that the City and County must both agree to support the preferred route that would be selected in the NEPA process and asked how this support would be expressed i.e. a Resolution, an IGA, etc. Phillips stated the support would probably be expressed by Resolution and that it might be necessary to have a Memorandum of Understanding or an IGA with the County and CDOT. Mayor Martinez stated this seems to indicate that the City cannot not opt out,if the NEPA preferred alternative is within the Growth Management Area,although the ballot language stated such a route could not be considered. Phillips stated if the City entered into a partnership with CDOT for an environmental impact statement process that staff believed that it was highly unlikely that CDOT will continue in the process, if they believe one entity has the option to withdraw if results are not to its liking. He stated CDOT has made it clear that they want the City to participate in the process fully, for all options, and not have an opt-out provision. Mayor Martinez asked how many times there has been a vote on the Timberline Road extension. Phillips stated the community voted on the issue once and that the City Council voted 2 or 3 times. Mayor Martinez asked if a truck route had been voted on since 1968 and what the results were. Phillips stated this had been before the voters several times and that the voters had supported investigating or building a truck route multiple times. 120 September 2, 2003 Mayor Martinez asked if a truck route had been voted on at least twice in recent years. Phillips replied in the affirmative. Mayor Martinez asked who would fund the bypass if it was located in Owl Canyon. Phillips stated the State would participate in the largest amount of funding and that there would likely be a negotiated agreement for the local share from the City and possibly from the County. He stated normally there would be about 20% in local funding and 80% for State and federal funding. Mayor Martinez asked what staff perceived as the "Catch 22s" if the City would proceed with the truck bypass. Phillips stated CDOT had asked that the City and County agree to pursue the process and that the County had not been willing to pursue the project because they felt that the City would have to be open to and participate in looking at all alternatives, including those south of County Road 58. He stated the 1999 ballot language citizens initiative stated the City could not examine or participate in alignments for the relocation of Highway 14 truck route in any alignment south of County Road 58. City Manager Fischbach stated the City would not be able to participate in a NEPA study if that study concluded that the truck route should be south of County Road 58. Mayor Martinez stated there were several "Catch 22s" because it would be illegal for the City to provide funding for a NEPA study that would look at areas required by CDOT due to the ballot language. Phillips stated there are no legal restrictions preventing CDOT from paying for something like this 100%on its own but that is not the recent pattern followed by CDOT because of the State's economic situation and lack of funding for transportation. He stated there is a $33 billion shortfall for capital transportation projects in need of funding. He stated it is doubtful that the State would give priority to a project to move trucks out of one City. Mayor Martinez asked if it would be in the best interest of the State to fund the NEPA study to arrive at an independent decision. Phillips stated the State would first look at projects that had full support of all affected jurisidictions and which were not facing controversy or conflict. Councilmember W eitkunat stated a primary issue was the 1999 truck bypass ballot issue that directed the Council to pursue a truck bypass beyond the Growth Management Area. She stated more than a years' time was put into that effort. She stated there is some perception that the City has not fulfilled the direction of the ballot measure and that there is a stalemate regarding the bypass beyond the Growth Management Area. Phillips stated the City pursued the truck bypass vigorously with participation from all affected public interests and that the result was the selection of three alternatives to be studied further. He stated the Council's direction was for the City Manager to continue to meet annually with the County to determine if any condition has changed to allow forward movement with CDOT toward a NEPA study. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the City pursued the matter with due speed. She stated the second direction from the ballot measure was that the City would not pursue a route along Vine Drive or 121 September 2, 2003 within the Growth Management Area and that the City did not pursue those options. She stated this created a problem because the NEPA study would look at all possible routes. She stated the City was honoring the third direction of the ballot measure by pursuing strategies to convince truckers to use alternative routes. She asked if money was allocated to continue those non-route-based strategies. City Manager Fischbach stated the fund had approximately$2.4 million of the$3 million that was approved. He stated$1 million had been set aside for the route-based efforts. He stated the voters would be asked to reallocate $1.4 million to higher priorities. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the City is still following the ballot measure's direction to get the trucks to use I-25 and I-80 and if there is money to honor the third direction of the measure. City Manager Fischbach replied in the affirmative and stated this vote would not change anything set out in the citizen initiative of 1999, other than the reallocation of$1.4 million. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the $1.4 million was "money going nowhere." She stated Prospect Road was included on the ballot as part of a "wish list" of other projects and that the problems on Prospect Road exceed the amount of money available. Jones stated the Building Community Choices projects included Prospect for a full range of improvements and that the project was scaled back to fit the available money. She stated any improvements that would be done at this time would have to be torn out when Prospect is eventually brought up to arterial standards. Councilmember Weitkunat stated Timberline was considered at that time to be a primary transportation corridor that had severe problems and that Prospect was included in the package because of its direct connection to Timberline. She stated there have been changes because priorities and directions had changed since 1999. Jones stated the projects were initially identified in 1995-96 for the 1997 ballot and that the priorities have changed since that time. Councilmember Kastein asked how much more money would be needed for the full width of Prospect Road if the$5.1 million is left intact. Phillips stated the estimate is that at least another$1 million will be needed to widen Prospect to four lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks from the river to Summitview. Councilmember Kastein asked if Prospect would then be four lanes from Timberline to 1-25. Phillips stated it will be four lanes from Timberline to Summitview and the Prospect/Timberline intersection will not be affected by that project. Councilmember Kastein asked about the approximate cost of the Prospect/Timberline intersection. Phillips stated it will cost about$11.4 million for Timberline improvements from Drake to north of the Prospect intersection and the estimated cost of the intersection,bridge and railroad crossing will be about $34 million. 122 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Kastein noted that the City is working on a Master Transportation Plan update that will prioritize projects and asked where Prospect would be on the list of priorities. Phillips stated the draft priorities places Prospect in the top five projects for widening to four lanes from the bridge to 1-25. Councilmember Kastein asked about the study done to identify three possible bypass routes north of the City and what the County's opinion was regarding the three possible routes. Phillips stated the County participated in the process. Councilmember Kastein asked about the March 13 letter from Karla Harding to Mr.Dunn and asked how the project would be incorporated into the financially constrained 20 year plan of the Upper Front Range and which entities would drive that plan. Phillips stated Larimer County is a member of the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission and that the City is not a member. He stated the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission has jurisdiction in the area north of the North Front Range MPO's planning boundary north of the City. He stated the City could make a request of the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission to include the project in its regional plan. He stated it would be more effective if Larimer County did that jointly with the City or requested it on the City's behalf. He stated this project will have to be important to the County before there could be any progress on this complicated process. Councilmember Kastein noted that the City Manager had met with Larimer County twice and asked where we were headed with the route-based strategies. City Manager Fischbach stated there was an impasse on the route-based strategies because the County is not in a position to be willing to take Vine Drive out of consideration. He stated the County indicated that it was willing to enter into a NEPA study if the City would put all routes back into consideration. He stated the City could not agree to that because of the 1999 ballot measure. Councilmember Hamrick asked if staff had considered going back to the voters to ask for changes to the 1999 ballot measure, such as allowing the City to look at routes inside the Growth Management Area. City Manager Fischbach stated staff had not looked at that as an option. Phillips stated this did not seem to be a practical approach. Councilmember Hamrick asked if public feedback was received on the proposed reallocation of funds. Jones stated staff had addressed some of the civic organizations and that most of the feedback appeared to be that this was a reasonable approach. Councilmember Hamrick stated no O&M figures are included in the budget projections for the projects and asked what those figures might be. Phillips stated the pavement management program would be the largest part of O&M and that factors were built in to account for the growth in lane miles of the street system. 123 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Hamrick stated he would prefer to see O&M costs for a fair and accurate reporting of all involved costs. He asked why the Harmony project from Seneca to the railroad would not include funding for bike lanes between the railroad tracks and College Avenue. Phillips stated there were two blocks with sidewalks from the railroad tracks to College. He stated that when this project was presented to the voters in November and April,the project went to College Avenue rather than the railroad tracks. He stated for the two block section it was estimated that approximately $1.1 million would be required to acquire right-of-way and make the changes necessary to add bike lanes. He stated that portion of the project was not financially feasible. Mayor Martinez stated there have been references to federal regulations that would prohibit the building of truck routes through low income neighborhood areas. Phillips stated the regulation states there would be extensive study, outreach and examination of the impacts of a federally funded transportation facility on minority and low income neighborhoods. Mayor Martinez asked if this would be part of the consideration of a NEPA study. City Manager Fischbach stated the regulation would not prohibit the construction but would require separate study and the development of mitigation plans. Mayor Martinez stated the NEPA study could say that Vine was the preferred route and that this would place the City in another"Catch 22"situation. Phillips stated the proposal for Vine Drive was a realignment to the north. Mayor Martinez asked if the City had asked for a citizen poll on this proposed ballot issue. City Manager Fischbach stated that was normally not done until after the Council makes a decision to put something on the ballot. Mayor Martinez asked for the most recent truck travel count figures for North College. Phillips stated the 2001 figures reflected an extensive origination and destination study. He stated a new study will be done as part of the next step in working on the non-route-based strategies to determine the effectiveness of the strategies. Councilmember Kastein made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Bertschy,to adopt Resolution 2003-101 (Option B). Councilmember Weitkunat asked why Councilmember Kastein would support Option B. Councilmember Kastein stated he saw a need to do both and that there is significant opposition to the truck bypass reallocation. Mayor Martinez asked if Councilmember Kastein was considering revised language relating to Option B that would provide that any excess revenues remaining after the completion of the projects 124 September 2, 2003 would be used to acquire right-of-way for the possible future improvement of Lemay from Lincoln to Conifer. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she viewed the revised language as a positive addition to replace the language relating to the use of any excess revenues to "remedy deficiencies." She stated she believed that the City had done everything possible for more than 20 years to achieve a truck bypass. She stated she would favor the addition of the revised language relating to Lemay. Councilmembers Kastein and Bertschy accepted the revised language as a friendly amendment. Councilmember Kastein stated he was interested in hearing the opinion of the Council on this important topic. Councilmember Hamrick stated he had not previously supported the Resolution reserving space on the November ballot and that he did not support either option of this Resolution. He stated the citizens had voted on this issue by a substantial margin and it would send the wrong message for Council to decide that there were higher priorities. He stated there had not been enough public outreach and work to meet the voters'intent on the truck bypass or on Prospect Road. He stated he did not support the City "delaying by management" the implementation of any voter-approved measures. He stated he felt that this would set a bad precedent. Councilmember Tharp stated she had many issues with this process and noted that there are conflicting interpretations by the citizens and staff regarding what can be done with the truck bypass. She stated the voters had turned down two significant transportation funding ballot measures and that both included Harmony and Timberline Roads. She stated this appeared to be"a way to get around that." She stated she saw this as a "band-aid approach that distracts the City from its long term transportation funding issues." She stated she did not see this as a good solution and that Prospect could be done with an additional $1 million. She stated there are ways to cut costs for that project if the City wants to move ahead on it. She stated there are other ways to deal with Timberline as well without "insulting the voters" by overturning past votes. She stated the truck bypass issue is a totally separate issue. She questioned shifting money around to do two makeshift improvements. She stated she would support working on Timberline with available money(street oversizing fees, impact fees, etc.) and wait until the voters are willing to support funding for the rest of the City's transportation issues. She stated she would support leaving the Prospect Road project "on line" to do and questioned why it had not been done pursuant to the direction of the voters. Mayor Martinez asked if there is a time limit on using the Building Community Choices money for Prospect Road. City Manager Fischbach stated the money is not available until the end of the period (2005) because it is being collected. 125 September 2, 2003 Mayor Martinez asked if there is a time limit for spending of the money. City Attorney Roy stated there is no specific time frame and that the monies can only be used for the specified project. Mayor Martinez stated the biggest concern was installing the bicycle lanes and then having to rip them up to widen Prospect Road in the future. He stated it would make more sense to wait to install the bike lanes until Prospect Road is widened. City Attorney Roy stated the ordinance would specifically allow the Council to augment or expand the project and to use excess Building Community Choices revenues for that purpose if all of the other projects had been constructed or to use any other available funds. He stated it would be permissible to wait to do the bike lane project until monies became available for the larger project. Mayor Martinez asked if it is inevitable that Prospect Road will have to be widened. Jones replied in the affirmative. Mayor Martinez stated he would not support installing the bike lanes before Prospect Road was widened. Jones stated it was unknown when funds would be available for the larger Prospect Road project. She spoke regarding the unfunded needs for Harmony Road and Timberline Road. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she did not feel that it was "insulting" to ask voters to look at something that they voted against previously. She stated she had been under the impression that this was the direction that Council wanted to follow. Councilmember Bertschy stated he had expressed reservations at the subcommittee meeting. He stated he had participated on the subcommittee to try to help resolve transportation funding needs. He stated an attempt was made to have a balanced approach to funding and that the voters turned it down. He stated the voters also turned down a second request for funding. He stated the voters had previously approved the Choices 95 and Building Community Choices packages and that two of the items in the BCC package were Prospect Road improvements and the truck bypass. He spoke regarding other tax measures and possible future tax measures. He expressed concern that this proposal has created significant controversy and that questions are being asked about looking at other projects, such as the Mason Street Corridor, for the needed funding. He stated the City needs a "big win" and that a package needed to be crafted that would be more than a stopgap measure. He stated he feared that this ballot issue will fail for the wrong reasons and would be mired in political misunderstandings. Councilmember Tharp stated she had indicated at the Study Session that this issue needed to be debated and that she did not consider her stance on this matter to be a change in her position. She stated the long term transportation funding needs are great and that this "band-aid" will cause problems with getting anything passed in the future. 126 September 2, 2003 Mayor Martinez stated he was concerned about the truck route issue because it had been voted on twice. He stated the language that was voted on by the People put the City into a "Catch 22" situation. He stated he would support the Prospect Road reallocation and holding off on the bike lanes until Prospect could be widened. He stated there were creative ways to work on Harmony and Timberline Roads. Councilmember Kastein stated he would support the motion. He spoke regarding the unfunded transportation needs of the City. He stated he saw this as a practical way to fund improvements to the dangerous Harmony/Shields intersection. He stated this could be a"temporary fix"or"stopgap" but it could be a way to fund two of the highest priority projects in the City. He stated did not like the idea of"holding these two projects over the voters' heads for a future ballot item." He stated transportation funding is one of the highest priorities for the City. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would support the motion. She stated transportation funding matters such as the truck bypass have often been skirted because of divisiveness. She stated Councils have stated transportation was a high priority and have not followed through with funding. She stated she would like to let the voters decide if they are willing to support this ballot measure. Councilmember Hamrick stated he had never indicated that roads were his first priority. He stated the Council needed to be strategic about ballot issues that it puts before the voters. He stated Harmony is a priority and that improving intersections of existing roads has a higher priority than Timberline to him. He stated the issue is honoring the intent of the voters. Councilmember Tharp stated roads are a priority and that she would not support the motion because she did not believe that this is a good plan because it would discount past votes. She stated this would be a distraction from long term transportation funding solutions. She stated she would be more in favor of taking the truck route ballot language back to the voters than taking money away from the truck route to do something else. She stated the City has almost enough money to do what the voters directed on Prospect Road and that she believed the City has a responsibility to follow through on that project. Mayor Martinez stated he would support reallocating the Prospect Road monies but not the truck route monies. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez and Tharp. THE MOTION FAILED TO PASS Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein,to ask the voters for the transfer of funds from the Prospect Road project only(and not from the truck route project). 127 September 2, 2003 The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez and Weitkunat. Nays Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick and Tharp. THE MOTION FAILED TO PASS Ordinance No. 120, 2003 Amending the City's Land Use Code to Implement the 1-25 Subarea Plan, Which is an Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, Adopted on Second Reading The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary The planning area of the 1-25 Subarea Plan includes only lands located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area(GMA)boundary. Theplanning area includes approximately 5,561 acres (8.7 square miles)of land of which approximately 2,128 acres(3.3 square miles), or 38%of the 8.7 square miles of the planning area, is currently annexed into the City. The vision, goals,principles and policies contained within the 1-25 Subarea Plan apply only to the 8.7 square mile planning area. In addition, the 1-25 Subarea Plan describes a variety of implementation actions that should be taken if the Subarea Plan is to be successful. Based on concerns expressed by some property-owners staff has amended Ordinance No. 120, 2003, to have most distance measurements be made from the center-line oft--25 instead of the edge of the 1-25 right-of-way. For example, instead ofstating a distance of one hundred twenry (120)feet the ordinance contains a distance oftwo hundred forty-five(245)feet(120feet plus 125feet[one-half of the 1-25 250'right-of-way]). Another example is to change some distances from one thousand three hundred twenty(1,320)feet to one thousand four hundred forty-five(1,445)feet(1,320+125). Ord finance No. 120,2003,was adopted 4-2(Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy opposed,Mayor Pro Tem Bertschy absent), on August 19, 2003." City Manager Fischbach stated Council had received information regarding amendments to the Plan to clearly set forth that the Plan only includes the area within the Growth Management Area. He stated the item appeared on the discussion agenda because the vote on First Reading was not unanimous. Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Ordinance No. 120, 2003 on Second Reading. 128 September 2, 2003 Councilmember Hamrick stated he would not support the motion because he had issues with the Subarea Plan. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Bertschy and Hamrick. THE MOTION CARRIED Public Hearing on Fossil Creek Trail Options Through Paragon Point Subdivision, Held. The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Financial Impact The City previously paid $40,000 to widen the trail during development of Paragon Point. Additional trail construction and improvements would be funded by the Conservation Trust Fund. The estimated cost to leave the trail in its present location is about$70,000 (excluding any legal costs). This would include costs for acquiring the remaining portion of the trail easement, work to adjust the trail away from six homes, completion of the trail to Trilby Road, additional landscaping, fencing and signs. Previous maintenance costs performed on the trail by the Paragon Point HOA may also need to be reimbursed by the City if the City negotiates an agreement with the property owners. The estimated construction cost to place the trail along Lemay Avenue and Trilby Road is about $145,000. This would include costsfor widening the sidewalk along Lemay Avenue, thenewsection of trail along Trilby Road, additional landscaping,fencing and signs. A $20,000 repay from the Paragon Point HOA (which was part of a previously negotiated agreement) would adjust the cost downward to about $125,000. Executive Summary The City does not have a formally dedicated easement through the Paragon Point Subdivision for a previously constructed section of the Fossil Creek Trail. The purpose ofthis hearing is to provide the Council with background information and public input regarding options for the trail, in order to assist the Council in deciding whether to leave the trail in its present location, or relocate it. 129 September 2, 2003 Current Trail Location The Paragon Point Overall Development Plan,approved by the City in 1992,shows the City's Fossil Creek Trail going through the subdivision. The Fossil Creek Trail was planned to utilize the east sidewalk of Lemay Avenue from Southridge Golf Course to the private park at which point the trail goes on the route through the subdivision to Trilby Road. From 1992 to 1997, the City paid S40,000 to widen the Developer's planned 7-foot wide trail to 10 foot wide (City trail standard) through Paragon Point. The trail segment in question starts at Lemay Avenue at the Paragon Point private park and goes south and east into the private open space to Trilby Road. The constructed section of the trail stops about 200 feet north of Trilby Road. The trail does not connect to Trilby Road since there are not yet any sidewalks or bike lanes on Trilby Road for trail users to access. There are safety concerns for bikes and pedestrians on Trilby Road until sidewalks and bike lanes are developed. The remaining 200 feet of trail to Trilby Road would be completed when City Stormwater makes improvements to the drainage structure under Trilby Road. The constructed trail segment has been open and used by the public since its development. The trail segment was known to some but not all residents of Paragon Point as a City trail. Whenever members of the public asked about the trail, City Park Planning Development staff replied that the trail was part of the City's Fossil Creek Trail and would be signed and placed on trail maps when this segment connected to future segments. The City has not provided maintenance on the trail segment in the past, but is willing to reimburse the HOA for reasonable and appropriate costs incurred by the HOA in maintaining the trail in prior years. The 1996 Parks and Recreation Policy Plan shows the conceptual trail alignment in a north-south route through the Paragon Point Open Space, not the actual developed route. Trail routes on the Plan map are intended to show the general route for trails. Negotiations with developers and landowners shape the final trail location. The Plan is Council adopted with changes to the Plan being made typically at 10 year intervals. Alternative Trail Alignment City staff worked with the Paragon Point HOA in 2002 to develop an alternative trail route. This route would use the east sidewalk along Lemay Avenue from the private park south to Trilby Road. The trail would turn east and detach up to 75'on the north side qf Trilby Road to the future Fossil Creek underpass. The sidewalk along the east side ofLemay Avenue would be widened to eightfeet. It appears existing utilities and landscaping will prevent the sidewalkfrom being widened to the full ten feet. 130 September 2, 2003 This route has the approval of the Paragon Point FIOA since it removes the trail from the private park area and reduces the impact on the private open space area. The HOA has agreed to repay the City $20,000 if this alternate route is utilized. The HOA also grant needed easements for the trail at no cost. The trail user on this route would be impacted by about another 1,200-feet of length along Lemay Avenue with traffic, noise and two additional street crossings. Residents in Paragon Point along the route have expressed a concern about the additional traffic on the sidewalk/trail near their homes. The Paragon PointHOA has expressed some concern about its liability ifa public trail runs through HOA property. The City's Risk Management Department has reviewed claims on the entire trail system over the past five years. During this timeframe five claims related to the trails were filed against the City. None of the claims involved private property adjacent to or beyond the trail easement area." Mayor Martinez stated this item had commenced prior to 10:30 p.m. and that it could be concluded at this meeting. He stated each side would have 20 minutes to make a presentation. (**Secretary's Note: Council took a brief recess at this point.) City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. Craig Foreman, Manager of Parks Planning and Development, presented background information regarding the agenda item and presented visual information regarding the proposed trail alignments and the potential problems with each alignment. The following individuals spoke in favor of retaining the current trail alignment: Daryll Knoblock, 1813 Seminole Drive. Richard McGowen, Miramont resident. Patrick Mahoney, 720 Roma Valley Drive. Paul Van Valkenberg, Parks and Recreation Board President. Bruce Henderson, Transportation Board member. The following individuals spoke in favor of the alternative trail ali ng ment: Joel Lamer, President of the Paragon Point Community Estates Association. Steve Leary, 1242 Canvasback Court. Chuck Darst, 6313 Cattail Court. 131 September 2, 2003 Mary Wells, 1236 Canvasback Court. Mary Turner, Paragon Point resident. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to conduct an Executive Session under Section 2-31 of the City Code to consider legal advice from the City Attorney. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED ("Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at approximately 11:15 p.m.and reconvened following the Executive Session at 11:50 p.m.) Councilmember Weitkunat asked for examples of trails cutting through residential developments. Foreman stated the Spring Creek trail went through the edge of some open space area next to Lemay and the Hill Pond area. He stated the Maple Hill development will have a trail through the center of its open space detention area. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the proximity was similar in these other cases to the proposed trail. Foreman stated there were other situations where the houses and backyards were fairly close to trails. Councilmember Weitkunat asked for examples of where trails would go along an arterial street. Foreman stated there was an example with the Fossil Creek trail at Shields by the Cathy Fromme Prairie. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the distance this proposed trail would run along an arterial. Foreman stated the new section on Lemay would be 1,200 feet and the section on Trilby would be about 900 feet. Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to direct staff to bring back the item for a decision at the September 16, 2003 meeting. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Other Business Councilmember Hamrick asked about the status of the budget committee. He also request a one- page memo about compliance with Residential Energy Code and the City's compliance goals. 132 September 2, 2003 Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 133