HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 11/06/2007 - CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE O ITEM NUMBER: 6
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: November 6, 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Wanda Krajicek
SUBJECT
Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 2, 2007 and October 16, 2007 Regular
Meetings.
October 2,2007
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,October 2,2007,
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: Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Harris, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Joe Kissell, 913 West Oak, urged Council to consider adopting a resolution calling for the
withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
Gary Wockner, 516 North Grant, stated City staff should examine how the war in Iraq has affected
the City's economy and the amount of federal dollars that are available for local use.
Al Bacilli, 520 Galaxy Court, asked if the City had donated funds to the Northern Labor Trades
Council. He did not want any funds provided to the Chamber of Commerce. He requested the City
stop providing vendor fees to the business community.
Bruce Lockhart,2500 East Harmony Road,did not support any resolution that called for withdrawal
of troops from Iraq. He did not support Council consideration of any measure that called for a halt
of uranium mining in Weld County.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset Street,stated Council was not listening to the citizens by avoiding
any discussion of a resolution calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and she urged
Council to pass the citizens' resolution that had been presented.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
City Manager Atteberry stated the questions regarding last year's expenses to the Chamber of
Commerce had been answered in a memo that was provided to Mr. Bacilli. The City did partially
fund Marcus Buckingham, a speaker at a Chamber of Commerce conference, as numerous city
employees and Councilmembers attended the conference and the City received a direct benefit from
the conference. Marketing of the City's golf courses and the Lincoln Center through Chamber
materials was another expense incurred over the past year. The City has not paid membership fees
to the Chamber.
183
October 2, 2007
Mayor Hutchinson stated the vendor fees are one of the potential revenue sources that could be
applied by Council to fund some items in the proposed budget. He stated Council was listening to
citizens regarding the resolution calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq but the citizens
should contact their federal representatives to voice their opinions. Councilmembers were not
elected to represent citizens on national issues.
Councilmember Roy asked if staff could determine what is the cost of the war in Iraq to the citizens
of Fort Collins and what dollar amount have the citizens contributed to the war.
City Manager Atteberry stated he would consult with staff to see if there are any federal metrics in
terms of income tax contribution or gas tax contribution that could provide any figures for the
amount of money paid by Fort Collins citizens used in the war effort. He stated the next work
session would include a discussion of the vendor fees and the option of using vendor fees as
additional revenue.
Councilmember Manvel stated his appreciation of the citizens who continued to bring the resolution
urging withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and urged those citizens to contact their federal
representatives, as well.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes from the published agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 4, 2007 and September 18,
2007 Regular Meetings.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2007, Temporarily Suspendingt he Operation and
Enforcement of the Land Use Code and Zoning Map Regarding the Usage of the "Ricker
Building" as an Emergency Daytime Severe Winter Weather Shelter for the Homeless.
Local health and human service agencies have asked the City to assist in providing a facility
to house a temporary emergency daytime shelter for the homeless in the event of severe
winter weather. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 18,
2007, allows the Ricker Building to be used for this purpose.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2007, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public
Improvements in Connection with Phase Two of the Harmony and Ziegler Roads Front
Range Village Improvements Project.
Front Range Village is a large commercial development planned for the area located at the
northwest corner of the Harmony Road and Ziegler Road intersection. As a result of this
184
October 2, 2007
new development, street improvements and various off-site improvements are necessary for
Harmony and Ziegler Roads and will be constructed through the Street Oversizing Program
as part ofthe Harmony and Ziegler Roads Front Range Village Improvements Project. Given
the construction schedule for the Project, timely acquisition of the property interests is
necessary. All property interests needed for Phase I have been successfully negotiated. This
Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 18,2007,authorizes the use
of eminent domain for all property acquisitions in Phase 11 of the Project, if such action is
necessary.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 104,2007,Authorizing the Conveyance of a Conservation
Easement on City Natural Area Property(Roman Ranch) to Larimer County.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 18,2007, authorizes
the conveyance by the City of a conservation easement on the 1,960-acre Roman Ranch
property to Larimer County. The City will receive a$976,000 grant from Great Outdoors
Colorado to support the conservation of the property as part of the Laramie Foothills
Mountains to Plains project approved in 2004. The grant requires that a conservation
easement be placed on the property and conveyed to a qualified third party. The conservation
easement acknowledges and protects the natural qualities of the property while allowing
some visitor services facilities associated with the recreational opportunities to be provided
at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2007, Designating the A.C. Kluver House (No.2),
323 East Magnolia Street, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
Ordinance No. 105, 2007, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 18, 2007,
designates the A. C. Kluver House (No. 2) as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owner of the
property, Charles F. Ferrie, is initiating this request.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and
Unanticipated Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated
Amounts Between Funds or Projects.
Following is a list of funds that make up the increase in appropriations:
General Fund
Unanticipated Revenue $ 239,639
Prior Year Reserves
Drug Task Force Reserves 144,603
Library Donation Reserves 125,000
Other Restricted Reserves 72,752
Cultural Services and Facilities Fund 85,728
Transportation Services Fund 837,861
Transit Fund 238,816
185
October 2, 2007
Recreation Fund 152,900
Capital Projects Fund 217,579
Natural Areas Fund 26,000
Neighborhood Parkland Fund 11,567
Communications Fund 37,861
Self Insurance Fund 793,344
Conservation Trust Fund 100,000
Cemeteries 6,900
The purpose ofthis annual"clean-up"ordinance is to combine dedicated revenues or reserves
that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were
not anticipated and, therefore, not included in the 2007 budget. The unanticipated revenue
is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City
departments to offset specific expenses. Prior year reserves are primarily being appropriated
for unanticipated operation expenses from reserves that are set aside for that purpose.
This Ordinance appropriates prior year reserves and unanticipated revenue in various City
funds,and authorizes the transfer of appropriated amounts between funds. The City Charter
permits the City Council to provide by ordinance for payment of any expense from prior year
reserves. The Charter also permits the City Council to appropriate unanticipated revenue
received as a result of rate or fee increases or new revenue sources. Additionally, it.
authorizes the City Council to transfer any unexpended appropriated amounts from one fund
to another upon recommendation of the City Manager,provided that the purpose for which
the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged;the purpose for which theywere
initially appropriated no longer exists; or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital
project account in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish
the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance.
If these appropriations are not approved, the City will have to reduce expenditures even
though revenue and reimbursements have been received to cover those expenditures.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 107,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and
Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Purchase an Armored Rescue Vehicle for Police
Services.
Police Services has applied for federal grant funding to purchase an armored rescue vehicle
for the past three years and has recently been awarded funding for over 60%of the expense.
This vehicle will significantly improve the safety of citizens and police officers in encounters
with armed suspects by giving police the ability to move people out of dangerous areas,
block armed offenders from the ability to shoot at citizens, and safely transport police
officers on their approach to dangerous scenes. The vehicle is very professional in
appearance and resembles a small ambulance, which is preferable in this environment to a
military-looking armored personnel carver. It will be routinely deployed on high risk police
operations to increase the margin of safety for citizens and police officers.
186
October 2, 2007
13. Items Relating to the Old Oak Estates Annexation and Zoning.
A. Resolution 2007-088 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding
the Old Oak Estates Annexation.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2007,Annexing Property Known
as the Old Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 109,2007,Amending the Zoning Map
of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included
in the Old Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
This is a 100% voluntary annexation and zoning of a property that is approximately 5.73
acres in size. The site is 5227 Strauss Cabin Road located approximately one-half mile south
of Harmony Road. Contiguity with the existing municipal boundary is gained along the
entire northern and western boundaries.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2007, Designating the Parsons/Morgan House and
Attached Garage,723 West Olive Street,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14
of the City Code.
The owner of the property, Myrne Watrous, is initiating this request for Fort Collins
Landmark designation for the property. The Parsons/Morgan House, located at 723 West
Olive Street, is eligible for Landmark Designation under Standard 3. The home remains a
very nice example of a Bungalow, which was a popular architectural form throughout the
1920s. Built circa 1927 for Anna and Fred Parsons, the home, while undergoing some
alteration,has retained apreponderance of integrity. The house also features a small attached
garage located on the southwest comer of the building. This historic garage dates to the
home's period of significance, and is a part of this designation application. The
Parsons/Morgan House and Attached Garage is located in the Loomis Addition,a noteworthy
neighborhood exemplified by its large number of architecturally and historically significant
homes. This designation will continue a legacy of historical recognition and protection of
this significant neighborhood.
15. Resolution 2007-089 Authorizing the Issuance of an Additional Revocable Permit to the
Colorado Department of Agriculture for the Urban Area Monitoring Network Project for the
Purpose of Developing Groundwater Monitoring Data.
The Colorado Department of Agriculture is developing the Urban Front Range Monitoring
Network which will cover urban areas from Fort Collins to Pueblo as part of the Colorado
Agricultural Chemicals and Groundwater Protection Program. The Colorado Department
of Agriculture has requested that the City of Fort Collins grant permission to enter various
parcels owned by the City to install monitoring wells and conduct periodic groundwater
testing as part of their Urban Area Monitoring Well Project. On September 4, 2007, City
Council authorized a revocable permit for this same purpose with Resolution 2007-078.
187
October 2, 2007
Since the adoption of that Resolution, the Department of Agriculture has identified two
additional monitoring well locations which were not included in the prior Council agenda
item. This Resolution will be to authorize a revocable permit to include the two additional
monitoring well locations as part of this program.
16. Resolution 2007-090 Authorizing a Revocable Permit to Front Ranee Internet, Inc. for the
Downtown Wi-Fi Pilot Project.
FRII has requested a revocable permit to attach communications equipment on City-owned
street light poles and other public property.
17. Resolution 2007-093 Rescinding Resolution 2007-073 and Acceptin t� he Improvements in
the Timberline and Prospect SID#94,the Statement of the City Engineer Showing the Cost
of Said District and the Assessment Roll Prepared by the Financial Officer for Said District.
The Timberline Road,Drake to Prospect Project was the most heavily congested intersection
in the City. In the absence of any City Capital Improvement funding for this intersection,
two impacted developers elected to privately fund these improvements in order to proceed
with their development projects. These developers are the majority property owners and will
receive the proceeds of Special Improvement District #94 to spread a portion of the costs
through assessments to other undeveloped property in the area benefitted by the
improvements.
On August 21 of this year,Council adopted an earlier resolution accepting the improvements,
statement of costs and assessment roll for the District. Recently, in preparing the assessing
ordinance for the District,City staffnoticed that some of the information originally contained
in the attachments to this original resolution may have been misleading or confusing as to
the total amount of District costs, the amounts to be assessed against properties in the
District, and the properties that would actually be assessed.
This Resolution corrects certain information contained in Resolution 2007-073 that was
approved by the City Council on August 21, 2007.
18. Routine Deed.
Deed of Dedication from Avago Technologies Wireless Manufacturing,Inc.,for apermanent
right-of-way for public street purposes, located at 4380 Ziegler Road. Monetary
consideration: $10.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Chief Deputy City Clerk Harris.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2007, Temporarily Suspending the Operation and
Enforcement of the Land Use Code and Zoning Map Regarding the Usage of the "Ricker
Building" as an Emergency Daytime Severe Winter Weather Shelter for the Homeless.
188
October 2, 2007
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2007, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public
Improvements in Connection with Phase Two of the Harmony and Ziegler Roads Front
Range Village Improvements Project.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 104,2007,Authorizing the Conveyance of a Conservation
Easement on City Natural Area Property(Roman Ranch) to Larimer County.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2007, Designating the A.C. Kluver House (No.2),
323 East Magnolia Street, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Chief Deputy City Clerk Harris.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and
Unanticipated Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated
Amounts Between Funds or Projects.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 107,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and
Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Purchase an Annored Rescue Vehicle for Police
Services.
13. Items Relating to the Old Oak Estates Annexation and Zoning.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 108,2007,Annexing Property Known
as the Old Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 109,2007,Amending the Zoning Map
of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included
in the Old Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2007, Designating the Parsons/Morgan House and
Attached Garage,723 West Olive Street,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14
of the City Code.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Troxell to adopt and approve
all items on the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
189
October 2, 2007
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry noted Transfort has been recognized for the "Transit Marketing Program
of the Year"by the Colorado Association of Transit Agencies. The award recognizes effective and
innovative marketing among the 90 transit agencies in Colorado. He congratulated Marlys Sittner,
Transfort/Dial-A-Ride General Manager, and staff for this award.
City Manager Atteberry stated Soapstone Prairie Natural Area has been recognized as part of a$5
million pilot program to implement "LandScope America," an online public conservation and
educational guide. Soapstone has been selected to be an example of how the online guide will work
and will provide information, photos, a video, and information on the history and recreational
opportunities of the area.
City Manager Atteberry introduced Ron Hill,Program Coordinator with the EPA,who presented the
EPA Clean Water PISCES Award to the City for using the state's revolving fund loans to provide
water quality through unique watershed approaches to stormwater treatment.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Troxell announced the Rocky Mountain Regional Biocontaimnent Laboratory,
located on the Foothills Campus, had its ribbon-cutting ceremony and opening, attended by the
Mayor and Councilmembers Brown and Troxell. This facility will deal with public health issues and
is an asset to the City.
Councilmember Manvel stated he attended the Colorado Municipal League Regional Quarterly
Meeting, a gathering of governments from Northern Colorado to discuss regional issues.
Resolution 2007-091
Approving a Collective Bargaining Agreement
with the Fraternal Order of Police, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City and the Fraternal OrderofPolice("FOP')entered into a collective bargaining agreement
for 2006 and 2007, which agreement will expire on December 31, 2007. City staff and the FOP
have tentatively reached an agreement which addresses the terms and conditions of employment of
the members of the bargaining unit for 2008 and 2009. This Resolution ratifies the terms and
conditions of a possible agreement, which would take effect on January 1, 2008 and terminate
December 31, 2009.
BACKGROUND
Passage of Citizen Ordinance No. 001 in August 2004 by City voters modified the City Code to
provide for collective bargaining between the City and members of the Police Services bargaining
190
October 2, 2007
unit. Members ofthe bargaining unit selected the Northern Colorado Lodge#3, Colorado Fraternal
Order of Police("FOP')to serve as their bargaining agent. A summary of the new terms contained
in the 2008 and 2009 agreement is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit "A".
Adoption of the Resolution would approve the terms and conditions of the 2008 and 2009 collective
bargaining agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the
City."
Wendy Williams,Assistant City Manager,stated the City has a two-year contract with the Fraternal
Order of Police(FOP)that expires at the end of 2007. A tentative agreement has been reached and
City was unable to complete the negotiations with
has been ratified by the FOP membership. The C y p g
the FOP and a mediator was brought in to assist in negotiations.
Martin Semple, chief negotiator and outside counsel, stated the collective bargaining process was
a long process. One problem encountered in the negotiations was a lack of preparation by the FOP
team that slowed down the process. The City team had to cancel sessions or cut them short because
the FOP team was not prepared. Another problem was that members of the City's bargaining team
received many contacts from different members of the FOP which led to confusion as to what the
bargaining unit wanted. When the bargaining process went to mediation, the FOP brought in the
same attorney who helped them two years ago,which helped the mediation become productive. The
collective bargaining agreement is a fair and balanced agreement from both sides. One unusual
aspect of the agreement was that the FOP rejected the City's proposal to increase vacation time and
instead wanted to maintain the current status. The City and the FOP agreed to maintain the current
split on health insurance. One proposal originally made by the FOP was to increase the pay Of a
number of its job categories significantly less than the cost of living. The City offered a higher
increase in pay for significant job categories within Police Services. Another unusual aspect of the
negotiations was in the final offer the City wanted to increase the pay of lieutenants and dispatch
supervisors more than the FOP ultimately was willing to accept. The final agreement contains a 3%
wage increase in 2008 for police officers,sergeants and CSOs and 4%for lieutenants and dispatchers
and dispatch supervisors. In 2009,there will be a 3%across-the-board increase for all job categories.
An additional item in the agreement includes a provision for a labor management committee to be
appointed by the Police Chief and the FOP President to meet on a regular basis to deal with issues
sooner than every two years during negotiations. The agreement is a fair and balanced agreement
for two years that covers all the wages, benefits and other conditions of employment subject to
bargaining under the Code.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, stated the criticism of the FOP was not warranted and
the criticism might make future bargaining more difficult.
Councilmember Troxell asked how much staff time was spent on negotiations and the expenses
incurred by the negotiating process. Assistant City Manager Williams stated a considerable amount
of time went into the negotiations,identifying the issues and figuring the cost of various proposals.
The cost of using Mr. Semple, chief negotiator, shared between the City and the FOP, was
191
October 2, 2007
considerable. The City, per the agreement, does provide a certain number of hours for the FOP
members to prepare for negotiations, which is another cost.
Councilmember Manvel asked for a total cost of the negotiations. City Manager Atteberry stated
$5,000 has been included in the 2008 budget and $55,000 was budgeted for the 2009 negotiations,
which does not include staff time.
Councilmember Manvel stated the percent of health insurance paid by the FOP and the City will stay
the same and asked what the current amount is and how does it compare with the amount paid by
other City employees. Williams stated the percentage paid by the employees and the City remain
the same for all employees, including the FOP. The dollar amount changes, but the percentage
remains the same. For example,a member of the Advantage Plan of the City's health insurance will
pay 15% of the premium, whether a member of the FOP or other City employee. A member of the
Core Plan will pay 10%of the premium. The percentages increase for employees with spouse and
family coverage. By 2008,the City will be"at market"with sharing of health insurance premiums
with its employees.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2007-091.
Councilmember Manvel stated he hoped this agreement would continue a good relationship with the
City's police officers.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Public Hearing
on the 2008-2009 Recommended Biennial
Budget for the City of Fort Collins
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the second official Public Hearing on the CityManager's 2008-2009Recommended Biennial
Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The first Public Hearing was held on September 18, 2007.
First Reading of the Ordinance adopting the 2008-2009 biennial budget is scheduled for October
16, 2007, with Second Reading of the Ordinance on November 20, 2007.
Additional public input was taken at Budget Open House and Public Education Session held
Monday, September 17, 2007.
192
October 2, 2007
The City Manager's 2008-2009 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the Main Library, the
Harmony Branch Library, or the City Clerk's Office. The recommended budget can also be viewed
on the internet at www.tegov.com/budget."
Barbara Hagen, 5920 Palmer Court,requested a dedicated handicap entrance to the Lincoln Center
on the Meldrum Street side and replacement of two or three parking places with a cement ramp that
joins the existing sidewalk. Handrails are needed, as well as adequate lighting and a crosswalk to
the parking lot across the street to provide safer access to the Lincoln Center.
Vicki Lutz, 1644 Foxbrook Way,Director of Crossroads Safe House, asked for funding for human
services that are essential to help citizens in need. These services, such as Crossroads Safe House,
have served Fort Collins and are as essential as police and fire service.
Jenny Merrill, Fort Collins citizen, supported more funding for transit as an essential City service.
The proposed budget does not contain any funding for evening Dial-A-Ride services which excludes
citizens who must use DAR for transportation to Council meetings.
Stephanie Barrett,400 Impala Circle,Fort Collins Housing Authority Commissioner,urged Council
to provide more funding for human services.
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive, supported funding for services for disabled people that
are currently not funded.
Tracy Schwartz,7805 Emerald Avenue,Resource Development Director for Neighbor to Neighbor,
a program which helps people establish and maintain housing stability,thanked Council for its years
of support of this essential service and requested an increase in funding as demands on the program
are greater each year. Current funding supports housing counseling and emergency rent assistance.
Providing assistance to people who are in danger of losing their homes provides a cost benefit to the
city and keeps people from becoming homeless. Families are struggling with mental health and
physical challenges, transportation, education, child care, domestic violence, substance abuse and
other issues and the need for more human services is growing greater, not lessening.
Mike Sollenberger, 3937 Harbor Walk Lane,Fort Collins Housing Authority Commissioner,urged
Council to increase funding for affordable housing. Support of affordable housing is good for the
economy as it allows employers to provide jobs and be competitive without moving to other
communities that have a better supply of lower cost housing. Having affordable housing in Fort
Collins will lessen the distance people must drive from work to a place they can afford to live,
providing an environmental benefit. Care Housing and the Housing Authority are funded with
federal monies but any funding provided by the City can be leveraged to provide greater funding for
projects that will assist people in need. He requested funding for the Land Bank for land acquisition
that would be used for future affordable housing projects.
Mary Smith, 1618 Sagewood, thanked Council for funding a trash districting study and she hoped
the data would show that a more efficient trash hauling system would help Fort Collins meet the
greenhouse gas reduction goals and reduce other pollutants.
193
October 2, 2007
Ellen Lawson, 519 East Plum, supported the proposed trash districting study for the sake of better
air quality. She suggested each trash hauler provide financial information on the profits and costs
each company incurs and the City then use that information to redistrict trash collection so each
business would have a City-mandated similar total customer make-up to what they currently have.
The revenues would not decline and each company's trucks would not be traveling throughout the
city. Trash company costs would go down,the City would save on street repair costs and residents
would have cleaner air, less noise and save on street assessments.
Lloyd Walker, 1756 Concord Drive, spoke in favor of the proposed trash districting study as the
current trash collection system is costing the City in terms of accelerated pavement wear and a
districting plan would be beneficial to the City and its residents. He proposed funding for
community policing that worked closely with Neighborhood Watch groups. The areas of
Neighborhood Quality, Safe Environment and Economic Development are tied together. He
suggested regional sales tax revenue sharing as one way to fund and promote regional projects.
Bruce Lockhart,2500 East Harmony,stated the funding for downtown district maintenance included
in the proposed budget should be eliminated. Parking and building maintenance is part of the cost
of doing business and the downtown businesses should be incurring that expense. He asked how
results would be measured from the funding for economic development and long range planning.
He asked what the plan was for the old police building. He did not support funding for the Mason
Corridor or the use of Certificates of Participation to renovate or build new buildings.
Gary Wockner, 516 North Grant, stated the proposed budget had no funding allocated to preserving
the Poudre River, but there was funding for the Halligan Reservoir expansion. He did not support
the Reservoir expansion as it was too expensive and involved environmental threats to the Poudre
River.
Shane Miller,4325 Mill Creek Court,supported funding to preserve the Poudre River as that would
be less expensive than building reservoirs. He requested funding for evening Dial-A-Ride service
as that is a critical service the City should provide.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset Street,stated the proposed budget did not contain enough funding
for paratransit services. Evening hours for Dial-A-Ride should be funded so that the disabled have
the opportunity to attend evening functions such as Council meetings.
Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, supported the funding included in the proposed budget for the
ClimateWise Program. She proposed turning off lights and computers as away to save money under
building and facilities maintenance. Creative ways are needed to reduce the City's fleet fuel funding.
She questioned the funds spent on holiday lighting and asked for a permanent holiday lighting plan
that would reuse lights.
Karen Miller, 4325 Mill Creek Court, thanked Council and the City Manager and staff for the
positive programs that have been developed, such as recycling asphalt and concrete. She requested
adequate funding for snow removal so people can receive emergency services even when large
amounts of snow fall.
194
October 2, 2007
Councilmember Ohlson stated Council would be examining funding allocated to make changes to
the Lincoln Center in the future and requested a memo on a short term fix to make the front entrance
more handicap accessible and safe. He asked for the total amount of money that was available and
what amount was in reserves,what was available for one-time expenditure or for ongoing expenses.
He asked for more details regarding how departments budget funds for existing staff. He stated there
was no funding in the proposed budget to renovate the old Police Building. He supported more
funding for affordable housing and other non-profits.
City Manager Atteberry stated the proposed budget contains one-time funding for Picnic Rock for
2008,but not for 2009. He noted funding for the proposed trash districting study could be reduced
from $135,000 to $75,000. The objectives of the study are to examine districting in terms of
pavement efficiencies, safety in neighborhoods, noise and more efficient delivery of services. He
noted the human services program is embedded within the offer of Neighborhood Livability entitled
Affordable Housing Funds and Community Development. Funding in the amount of$345,000 is
proposed at the same level as in 2006-2007 and is to be distributed through the competitive process.
The item not funded was an enhancement of the Human Services Program of$210,000 per year.
City Manager Atteberry stated the proposal to renovate the old Police Building was not funded and
the City is examining whether to sell or lease the building and is determining the cost to retrofit the
building to make it a usable space.
City Manager Atteberry stated a question was raised as to how the results would be measured from
the funding of economic development. There are related performance measures to any offer that are
accepted in the Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process. If the offer does not deliver the results
listed in the offer, then it would not be funded in the next budget cycle. The City has improved its
performance measurements and benchmarking so results can be measured. The BFO process allows
the benefit of scrutinizing the base-level budgets of each department and provides a lean budget. He
stated Certificates of Participation were used to fund the new Police Building and it is an often-used
method of financing capital projects by municipalities that has been in practice around the country
for many years.
Councilmember Troxell asked if there were performance benchmarks from previous years. City
Manager Atteberry stated some limited measures were available.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the City funds social services in two ways. One is with the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and the other is with General Fund dollars. He
requested a memo explaining the amount of funding from each and how the funds were allocated.
Councilmember Poppaw requested information as to how the funds for social services were
leveraged into larger amounts in combination with state and federal grants.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if the General Fund amount of$345,000 was paid to Latimer County to
provide social services. City Manager Atteberry stated the City did provide funds to Larimer County
in the past,but two years ago the City changed its methods and now distributes those dollars through
the CDBG process.
195
October 2, 2007
Councilmember Manvel asked for information comparing the amount of funding the City provides
for social services compared to assistance provided by other organizations in the area.
("Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Resolution 2007-092
Affirming the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall Project,Adopted as Amended
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCLIL IMPACT
The estimated cost of the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall Project is $21.5 million and is
anticipated in the Stormwater f and budgets from 2007 to 2010.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Canal Importation Basin Stormwater Master Plan, adopted by City Council in 2001 and
reaffirmed in 2004 as a part of the Citywide Stormwater Master Plan, called for $51.5 million in
flood control improvements in order to avoid an estimated$125 million of direct f ood damage over
the next 50 years. The Canal Importation Ponds & Outfall Project (CIPO) is one element of the
improvements in the Canal Importation Basin. The CIPO Project will reducef ood damages to both
public and private property and remove properties from the foodplain. The improvements to the
Red Fox Meadows Natural Area as a result of the project incorporate important environmental
benefits and are expected to improve water quality, habitat conditions and enhance public access
to the site.
BACKGROUND
Utilities and Natural Areas are ready to begin construction of the CIPO/Red Fox Meadows
Restoration and Improvement Project. This project was approved in 2004 as apart of the Citywide
Stormwater Master Plan. The first installment offunding was included in the 2007 budget and the
design is near completion.
The project includes the following elements:
• Creation of a new detention area at Taft Hill Road and Glenmoor Drive.
• Modification to the outlet structure at the existing Plum Detention Area, at Skyline and
Elizabeth.
• Expansion of the Avery Park Pond and modification of its outlet structure.
• Expansion of the Fairbrooke Detention Area, southwest corner of Prospect and Taft Hill.
• Relocation and enhancement of the outdoor classroom in the Fairbrooke Detention Area.
• Creation of a new detention area and wetlands, southeast corner of Prospect and Taft Hill
(Kane Detention Area).
• Expansion of the existing Red Fox Meadows Detention Area.
196
October 2, 2007
• Creation of water quality areas in Fairbrooke and Red Fox Meadows Detention Areas.
• Approximately 5,000 feet of 24-inch through 102-inch storm sewer pipe and associated
inlets.
• Restoration and enhancements to Red Fox Meadows Natural/Stormwater Detention Area.
The project team is aware of the interest and sensitivity to the design of the detention areas and
natural area enhancements at Red Fox Meadows.
The project team has incorporated the following elements into the restoration of the Red Fox
Meadows Natural Area:
• Gentle slopes on the banks of the new Kane detention area and the expanded Red Fox
Meadows detention area.
• Peninsulas and varied bank shapes to provide a natural look.
• A natural, meandering stream to carry low flow runoff and ground water.
• A small pond or riffle areas in the Kane detention area for improved wildlife habitat.
• Irrigation canals in current locations to minimize loss of riparian habitat.
• Removal of the existing flume over the Larimer County No. 2 Canal.
• Removal of the existing flume over the New Mercer Canal.
• A minimum of new exposed concrete structures.
• Special designs, treatments and landscaping to buffer necessary structures and minimize
potential for graffiti.
• Inlet trash collection devices upstream of Red Fox Meadows.
• Provisions for water quality improvement.
• Removal of Russian olive and small caliber Siberian elm trees.
• Larger caliper Siberian elms removed after collaboration with Natural Areas and Forestry
staff.
• High quality stands of native trees and shrubs preserved where possible.
• Existingfoxdenspreserved when possible;recreate dens in an isolated area ofsite when not
possible.
• Native species for re-vegetation.
• Clumps of trees and shrubs throughout newly constructed areas for future wildlife habitat.
• A temporary irrigation system to speed establishment of native grasses, shrubs, and trees.
• A new gravel parking area along Longworth Road for 7 cars, I handicap space and I bus.
• Educational kiosk, vault toilet, bike rack, trash receptacles near parking lot.
• A crushed rock trail system with access from parking area to Red Fox Meadows Detention
Area.
• An access from the south (via Stuart), including pedestrian bridges over irrigation canals.
• An access from the south from Promenade Way.
• A detached slightly meandering sidewalk along the east side of Taft Hill Road.
• A wetlands education area near the parking area for use by school groups.
Public outreach on this project has been extensive. The project mailing list contains over 3,500
addresses for newsletters and project updates. The project team has received input from a public
open house, meetings with neighborhood groups, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board,
197
October 2, 2007
City Council, the Water Board, two City Council worksessions,and hundreds ofindividual contacts.
Numerous changes to the project have resulted from this input.
The CIPO Project will reduce flood damages to both public and private property, remove properties
from the floodplain and for others remaining in the floodplain, reduce the levels offlooding on those
structures. The planned improvements to the Red Fox Meadows Natural Area as a result of the
CIPO project incorporate important environmental benefits and are expected to improve water
quality, habitat conditions and enhance public access to the site. For these reasons, it is staffs
professional recommendation that the Canal Importation Ponds & Outfall/Red Fox Meadows
Natural Area Restoration Project proceed. "
Jim Hibbard, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager, stated the Canal Importation Ponds
and Outfall Project (CIPO) is a joint project between the Natural Areas Program and the Utilities.
The project is not a stand-alone project but is designed to work with other projects in the Canal
Importation Basin that have already been built. The Canal Importation Basin has a history of
multiple floods, including the major flood of 1997. Repeat flooding can decrease a neighborhood's
vitality and cause it to decline. Removing a neighborhood from the floodplain can halt the decline
and lessen the economic impact of flooding from the neighborhood and the community as a whole.
The proposed improvements have been postponed for 10 years. The CIPO Project offers a
significant opportunity to improve water quality and restoration of a natural area back to its original
state. The design of the Project had to meet the objectives of the Natural Areas Program and the
Stormwater Program. The Project involves numerous detention ponds and significant pipeline
projects from Elizabeth Street to Prospect. The design has been modified by reducing the size of the
water quality area on Red Fox Meadows by using innovative technologies in the Basin and inlets to
collect the trash and sediment at those locations before it reaches Red Fox Meadows. Significant
stands of trees have been identified that will be saved. A new pedestrian access is proposed from
Promenade Way. The design team has designed an outlet that will be seen, but will blend in with
the surroundings. There has been significant public outreach, newsletters and mailings, meetings
with neighborhood groups and an open house was held in May. The Project has a cost estimate of
$21.5 million,$5 million of which was included in the 2007 budget and is now being used for design
efforts. Another$5 million will be included in the budget over the next three years. If the Project
is approved by Council, a preconstruction open house will be held in the early spring and
construction will begin on the site in March 2008. The initial efforts will be focused on Red Fox
Meadows and the Fairbrooke property, then the Project will move north and eventually end at
Glenmoor Pond. The total Project should be completed in 2011.
Doug Ernest, 1625 West Elizabeth, stated his condominium was flooded in the 1997 flood. He
believed his area was not naturally a floodplain, but rather a floodplain that was created by
development over the years. Since 1997,mitigation has taken place,such as making the Avery Park
holding pond deeper, but there are still only two or three drains on West Elizabeth which are very
inadequate for drainage. Flooding occurs in the area on a fairly frequent basis,such as the flooding
that occurred in August. He urged Council to move forward with the Project.
198
October 2, 2007
Rich Dvorak,2506 Bradbury Court,was concerned that the area on the southwest corner of Taft Hill
and Prospect was now a detention pond,mostly comprised of weeds,and the City does not maintain
the area. He questioned whether the area would be maintained once the Project is completed.
Lloyd Walker, 1756 Concord Drive, thanked staff for listening to public comment and making
adjustments to the design to incorporate those thoughts. He asked if it was necessary to have two
detention ponds on the Kane property and Fairbrooke property as the construction of the two ponds
would greatly damage the natural habitat. He also asked if the Fairbrooke area could be left
unmowed to allow the area to return to a more natural state.
Gary Wockner, 516 North Grant, Water Board member, stated he voted against this Project when
it was presented to the Water Board. He did not support the Project because of the expense, the
flood risk and because it is not ecologically-minded. He stated the City's stormwater fees were
extremely expensive and this project would add to those fees. The Project will take 180 homes out
of the 100-year floodplain at a cost of$21 million and that was not a good use of funds. The flood
of 1997 was a 500-year flood and this Project is designed to protect against 100-year floods. If
another major flood of the size of the 1997 flood occurs, the Project will not protect homes. He
questioned the design of the Project and stated it did not use current stormwater drainage methods
such as infiltration. He urged Council to delay the Project.
Larry Rosener,5926 Huntington Hills Drive,Civil and Environmental Engineering Professor,CSU,
stated he had spent eight years working on stormwater management practices to improve and protect
the urban environment and 31 years in stormwater management consulting work. He supported the
Project and felt it was required for the health and protection of citizens and property. The Project
can be done in an environmentally sensitive manner so that the final result will be an area that is
better than what is there today.
Lori Brunswig, 1901 Ridgewood Road, stated the Project was not right for the people who live in
the Canal Importation Basin. The Project should be located on different properties so that wetlands
were not destroyed. It did not remove enough homes from the floodplain to justify the expense. She
urged Council to delay the Project and request other options that will remove more homes from the
floodplain.
Shane Miller,4325 Mill Creek Court, asked if an alternative proposal was made that would look at
mitigation efforts to increase infiltration instead of diverting the stormwater. He asked if the Project
conflicted with the Land Use Code which states non-permeable surfaces should not be built on
natural stormwater drainage. He urged Council to delay the Project and review any alternative
proposals that used newer infiltration methods, instead of diversion of stormwater.
Councilmember Troxell stated information he had received from the previous owner of Red Fox
Meadows indicated there was an artesian spring flow under Red Fox Meadows and he asked if the
area could serve as a detention pond with this water source located beneath the ground. Hibbard
stated the City had ample opportunity to discover what lay underneath Red Fox Meadows as storm
sewer lines and water lines have been installed through that area numerous times. Extensive soil
borings have been done in preparation for the Project. Staff has dug test holes to determine what the
199
October 2, 2007
subsurface situation is in the area. The geotechnical consultant and civil engineering consultants are
confident the soils will perform as expected. There was a field drain in the area that used to run
water into that area,but no water has come out of the pipe at the corner of Prospect and Taft Hill in
many years. It is possible conditions upstream have changed enough to affect the flow of the artesian
spring flow.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the 30-inch sewer line to the south of Red Fox Meadows would
need to be rerouted. Hibbard stated portions of that sewer line would be relaid as a part of the
Project.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the current natural water flow from the area was required by
Colorado water law. Hibbard stated the Project will comply with Colorado water law. Some of the
ground water will be used to restore the stream but the direction of flow will not be changed nor
i� �
does the Project create any consumptive uses that would be in violation of Colorado water law.
Councilmember Manvel asked if it was possible to have a larger detention pond on the Fairbrooke
property and not disturb the Kane property. Hibbard stated that is not feasible. If the Fairbrooke
property were dug any deeper than currently proposed,it would become so deep that the water would
not drain out of the detention area. Both areas together are necessary to accomplish the Project.
Water coming from the west will be detained at Fairbrooke as well as Kane so that when water
comes into the Red Fox Meadows, there will be room for that drainage water and there will not be
any adverse impacts to the properties downstream.
Councilmember Manvel asked how the Project fits into the overall Stormwater Master Plan.
Hibbard stated the Project is one element in the Master Plan for the Canal Importation and Ponds
area. All the projects work together. The Sheldon Lake Project is completed and it works with this
Project. There are projects that come after this Project that will take more properties out of the
floodplain. Future projects that work with this Project will help other areas that will not receive any
flood relief from this Project. There will always be some flooding downstream in the Campus West
area because it is not economically feasible to totally remove it from the floodplain. Council has
directed staff to use the measure of the 100-year flood to determine economic feasibility of a project.
The Project will reduce the amount of flooding in Campus West significantly and the amount of
water crossing Shields street onto the CSU campus,crossing the campus,then exiting the other side
will be reduced by one-half. The Project fits nicely with CSU's Master Plan. Staff has fully
coordinated with CSU when designing this Project. Campus West is in the City's floodplain, not
a FEMA floodplain, and has been in the floodplain since 2001. This Project does not put anyone in
the floodplain and does not require anyone to get flood insurance because it is not a FEMA
floodplain so there is no federally-mandated flood insurance. The total cost of projects in this basin
is approximately$51 million and,based on conservative estimates,over the next 50 years,will save
$125 million in damages. These projects are cost-effective and beneficial.
Councilmember Roy requested a description of the plan to revegetate the area and a time frame for
completion. Hibbard stated the Utilities staff was working closely with the Natural Areas staff
specialists to ensure that all was done to speed revegetation. Natural grasses do grow slowly and a
recovery period will be necessary. A temporary irrigation system will be installed to speed the
200
October 2, 2007
process. A temporary cover crop might be necessary to help start the native vegetation. Trees will
be planted and temporarily irrigated. Recovery should be well underway after three growing seasons.
Karen Manci, Senior Environmental Planner, stated the recovery time could take longer,depending
on rainfall. The cover crop would lower the amount of weeds present at the site which would enable
the native grasses to become established more easily. Typical short-grass prairie restoration can take
up to ten years to get good grass established. The temporary irrigation should shorten that time.
Councilmember Roy asked how construction might impact citizens at times and what mitigation
efforts would be put into place. Hibbard stated there will be disruptions that occur along Castle
Rock as large-diameter pipe is installed and customer service will be provided so that those
disruptions will be minimal. Residents of Longworth Road could be heavily impacted with much
truck traffic occurring so the plan is to not use Longworth Road for truck traffic but to build a
parallel road to be used. The road will be removed when the work is completed at the site.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Project must be viewed in context of the entire Master Plan and asked
how the Project is in agreement with Council policy. Hibbard stated the Plan closely follows
previous Council policy direction,including the policy that Natural Areas and stormwater detention
sites be acquired jointly when feasible. There is not much "ultra new" technology in the area of
stormwater drainage. The Basin is 95% developed and the "low-impact" technologies such as
infiltration are best suited for areas that are under new development. This Project is very expensive
because it involves retro-fit technology. As each Basin heads south through the city,there are fewer
problems because the new developments incorporate newer technologies that were not available
when this Basin was developed.
Councilmember Brown asked for an explanation of the financing of the Project. Hibbard stated
funds for the operation of the stormwater system as well as capital improvements comes from the
rate payers and impact fees from developers. The current financing plan was adopted by Council
in 2005 and calls for no new debt service but is "pay-as-you-go." The debt load currently on the
Utilities was authorized by Council in the 1990s and early 2000s. Since 2002,no new debt has been
incurred. There has been no rate increase since 2004 nor is there a rate increase proposed in the near
future. The City's rates are relatively high when compared to other locations in the nation,but other
locations are raising their rates. The funding is available to finish the proposed projects.
Councilmember Ohlson asked what other options had been brought to Council such as providing
80%of the flood protection at half the cost or using the property south of Prospect, east of Shields
as a potential detention area rather than using the Kane property. Hibbard stated staff had examined
other options that had been presented to Council in 2004 when the Master Plan was adopted. Staff
presented an option that was 50-year flood protection and was economically feasible. Staff
discovered that using a lower criteria only provide a 10-20% savings in cost but left many more
homes in the 100-year floodplain. At the August 28 work session, staff presented an option for this
Project, based on a 50-year flood protection, but the cost savings was less than 5%. The only
difference in the cost between providing 50-year flood protection and 100-year flood protection is
in the size of the pipe to be laid. The other costs of the Project are the same. The property at
Prospect and Shields was considered during the Master Plan process in 2004,but not necessarily as
part of the design of this Project. Staff determined using the property at Prospect and Shields was
201
October 2, 2007
not feasible as it would require improvement of the water conveyance over a longer distance from
Red Fox Meadows than the current Project requires and would cost more and cause environmental
damage, as well.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if future development included new technology so that retro-fit
projects such as this one would not be necessary. Hibbard stated the City was doing a better job now
than five or ten years ago. The stormwater program has been continuously improving since 1980.
Staff is working with City planners to consider changing City Plan standards in the area of
landscaping and aesthetics in stormwater projects. The floodplain regulations protect the floodways
from development where most of the water is conveyed and are designed to prevent development
in areas that would need later flood control. The best management practices should be reviewed and
in some new developments there are new technologies that will help reduce run-off from new
developments and improve water quality.
Councilmember Ohlson asked what was proposed to improve the aesthetics of the
Glenmoor/Plum/Avery Park aspect of the Project. Hibbard stated the Glenmoor Pond will be
significantly excavated so that detention there will lessen the impact in Red Fox Meadows. There
will not be as many islands or as gentle a slope as in Red Fox Meadows but the intent is to create
something pleasant for people to enjoy. Plum Park does not require much work so there will belittle
disruption. Reforestation has already occurred in Plum Park but there will be more plantings there
as well as in Avery Park.
Councilmember Manvel stated the Fairbrooke area is now mowed and asked which areas would be
allowed to grow more naturally and not be mowed. Hibbard stated most of Glenmoor Pond would
be mowed with a riparian zone along the stream that would be left as a natural area. Plum Park will
also continue to be mowed. Fairbrooke has a diagonal sidewalk crossing it and currently it is
proposed that east of the sidewalk will be left in a more natural state and not be mowed,but west of
the sidewalk will continue to be mowed. Mowing occurs in these areas about five times during a
growing season that receives a fair amount of rain. If it is a dry year, it may only be mowed twice.
Occasional mowings help to control weeds. The western end of Avery Park is mowed, while the
eastern end stays more natural.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Resolution
2007-092.
Councilmember Roy stated this Project will provide flood protection for people primarily in an area
of modest homes and modest incomes and should be effective for a very long time. While a natural
habitat will be temporarily destroyed, the long term result will be greater protection of people and
the homes they live in and the natural areas will rebound. This Project meets the needs of many
citizens and will provide a great benefit for 80 years or more into the future.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if the Project would benefit the entire stormwater system,not just within
the Basin. Hibbard stated the Project has beneficial effects on Spring Creek, the CSU campus and
further on. This Project is one step in further improvements in other areas.
202
October 2, 2007
Councilmember Ohlson requested a friendly amendment to the Resolution that called for the
Fairbrooke area to be restored to a more natural state and not be mowed.
City Attorney Roy stated the Resolution, in part, approves the design of the Project and any desire
of the Council to modify the design should be documented in the Resolution.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if restoring Fairbrooke to a more natural state would be possible and would
that add significantly to the cost of the Project. Hibbard stated it was quite possible to make the
proposed change. Some of the adjacent property owners may object to the area not being mowed.
One solution might be to mow a strip around the property, leaving the core more natural, but
providing a transition from lawns to a more natural state. The area would probably be mowed for
the first few years as a weed control mechanism until native grasses are firmly established.
Councilmember Roy, maker of the motion, accepted the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Troxell questioned the need for any amendment to the Resolution as he believed
the current Resolution did allow flexibility in the design such as this proposed change. He asked if
Council was approving a detailed design as it was not attached to the Resolution.
City Attorney Roy stated the design was not attached as an exhibit to the Resolution but the
Resolution does affirm the design of the project as well as the timeline and the purpose. Materials
have been submitted to the Council that describe the design of the Project and are part of the record.
The Resolution approves what has been submitted to the Council. If this change is important to
Council, then it needs to record that by amending the Resolution. The proposed amendment does
address long-term maintenance as well as the design and would clarify such issues in the future.
City Manager Atteberry stated if Council wants the proposed design change incorporated into the
Project, then staff will do so. If Council wants to clarify the design change for the record, then the
amendment is needed.
Councilmember Troxell, who seconded the motion, also accepted the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Brown asked if the neighbors of the area had the expectation that mowing would
continue as it had in the past. Owen Randall,Chief Engineer,stated the majority of the people living
around the Fairbrooke Area expected the City to maintain the area as it has in the past.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if further outreach sessions were scheduled where this information could
be shared. Hibbard stated outreach was ongoing and a pre-construction open house was planned to
inform citizens what to expect in terms of the construction activities. At those times, information
about the proposed changed could be handed out. If a buffer strip could be mowed, then the
neighbors might be satisfied with the proposed change.
Councilmember Troxell stated the recent heavy rains of August 2 were a stark reminder of the
intense storms and amounts of water that can fall in this Basin. The Project has an excellent
engineering team doing the design. He supported the Project.
203
October 2, 2007
Councilmember Poppaw thanked staff for the extensive public outreach done for the Project. She
supported the Project as it would protect homes of citizens who did not have the financial means to
deal with the aftermath of a flood.
Councilmember Manvel thanked staff for its hard work and outreach efforts and stated the Project
is an important one for the City.
Councilmember Brown stated the Project was well-designed and planned and would protect both
property and the lives of citizens.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the Project had been greatly improved from its original design. The
average household pays$171 per year in stormwater fees and these projects need public scrutiny as
they are very expensive. He did not think the Project incorporated best practices and he hoped future
projects would incorporate newer technology and not be "deeper holes and bigger pipes." He did
not support the Resolution.
Mayor Hutchinson stated this Project was an excellent one that would improve drainage within the
City. Many newer technologies cannot be used in an area that has already been developed, but the
newer development areas in the City were incorporating these newer technologies. The stonmwater
system, of which this Project is a part, is expensive,but it is interconnected and it was important to
note that flooding in Fairbrooke could affect areas across town.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvell, Poppaw, Roy, and
Troxell. Nays: Ohlson.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adiournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:53 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
204
October 16, 2007
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,October 16,2007,
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: Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Eric Sutherland, 631 Laporte, stated a key provision in the Electric Energy Supply Policy specifies
that the Fort Collins Utilities is to continue diversifying the portfolio of energy sources in the City
and to increase the City's percentage of renewable energy to 15% by 2017. Utilities is currently
claiming to achieve part of that goal through renewable energy credits and he did not believe that
was a good practice. He urged Council to discontinue the practice of buying renewable energy
credits as the practice does not help reduce greenhouse gas vectors or reduce resource depletion
vectors.
Joe Kissel,913 West Oak,urged Council to adopt a resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal
of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq.
Israel Brener, 2224 Rollingwood Drive,stated the ordinance that established the"3-unrelated"rule
is difficult to understand and should be repealed.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset, urged Council to adopt a resolution calling for the immediate
withdrawal of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq.
NancyYork, 130 South Whitcomb,requested Council to adopt a resolution calling for the immediate
withdrawal of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq as it was far too costly in terns of both money and
lives.
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive, requested Council to allow the use of candles when a
vigil is held in Old Town Square.
Cyndy Tiley, 4412 East Mulberry Street, stated she has multiple sclerosis and needs to use Dial-A-
Ride. She requested continuation of paratransit services for herself and others who rely on the
service to navigate the city.
205
October 16, 2007
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Platte River Power Authority provides electric power to Fort Collins,
Longmont, Estes Park and Loveland. The policy of renewable energy needs that could be provided
through renewable energy credits has been changed from 83%to 50%. Renewable energy credits
are audited. Renewable energy is more expensive to produce and the renewable energy credits are
used to pay for energy from renewable sources to be placed into the power grid that supplies
electricity to all of the PRPA customers.
Councilmember Troxell stated the"3-unrelated"rule should be reviewed and a determination should
be made as to any unintended consequences to either renters or landlords.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the"3-unrelated"rule has been in effect only 10 months and had been
debated for several years before it was passed. Many neighborhoods in his district have been
postively impacted by the rule and it is working as it was intended.
Councilmember Roy noted his district also has seen positive results from the"3-unrelated"rule and
it appeared to be encouraging families to move into neighborhoods that had previously had many
problems.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry noted Item#15 First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2007, Amending the
City Code to Increase the Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and
Neighborhood Parkland Fee to Ref ect Inf ation in Associated Costs ofServices had an amended title
to the ordinance. In Item#23 Items Relating to the Prospect RoadII-25Interchange Rezonings, he
recommended pulling Resolution 2007-098 Amending the City Structure Plan Map Pertaining to
the Northeast Corner of Prospect Road and I--25 and First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2007,
Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for
that Certain Property Known as the Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning
and to consider an amended Resolution 200 7-099 Amending the I-25 Subarea Plan. A work session
will be scheduled to consider the pulled items.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CONSENT NON-BUDGET ITEMS
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and
Unanticipated Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated
Amounts Between Funds or Projects.
The purpose of this annual"clean-up"ordinance is to combine dedicated revenues or reserves
that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were
not anticipated and, therefore, not included in the 2007 budget. The unanticipated revenue
is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City
departments to offset specific expenses. Prior year reserves are primarily being appropriated
206
October 16, 2007
for unanticipated operation expenses from reserves that are set aside for that purpose. This
Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 2, 2007.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Purchase an Armored Rescue Vehicle for
Police Services.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 2, 2007, appropriates
federal grant funding Police Services has received to purchase an armored rescue vehicle.
This vehicle will significantly improve the safety of citizens and police officers in encounters
with armed suspects by giving police the ability to move people out of dangerous areas,
block armed offenders from the ability to shoot at citizens, and safely transport police
officers on their approach to dangerous scenes.
8. Items Relating to the Old Oak Estates Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108,2007,Annexing Property Known as the Old
Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109,2007,Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Old
Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 2, 2007, annex and
zone property located at 5227 Strauss Cabin Road,located approximately one-halfmile south
of Harmony Road. This is a 100%voluntary annexation.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2007, Designating the Parsons/Morgan House and
Attached Garage,723 West Olive Street,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chanter 14
of the City Code.
Ordinance No. 110, 2007, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 2, 2007,
designates the Parsons/Morgan House and Attached Garage,723 West Olive Street,as a Fort
Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Myrne Watrous, is initiating this request.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 111,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from
the Bureau of Justice Assistance in the General Fund for the Larimer County Drug Task
Force.
This Ordinance appropriates grant funds received by the City for the Larimer County Drug
Task Force from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. These funds are to be used to fund the
investigation of illegal narcotics activities in Larimer County.
207
October 16, 2007
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 112,2007,Appropriating Prior Year Reserves In the Street
Oversizing Fund for Transfer To the Capital Projects Fund - North College Avenue
hmvrovements Project to Be Used for to Acquire Property Necessary for Future
Immovements along North College Avenue.
The Fort Collins Master Street Plan provides for the eventual relocation of East Vine Drive
from its present location to a somewhat parallel location to the north. The designed
realignment location on North College Avenue will be opposite and east of Pinon Street.
There is a Building on Basics(BOB)Capital Improvement Project planned to improve North
College Avenue from Vine to Conifer, including the purchase of additional right-of-way,
scheduled in 2011. However,it has been determined that the best location for two proposed
water transmission lines running generally east-west to cross North College is at the same
location as the proposed realigned East Vine Street. One of the proposed water transmission
lines is a joint venture between ELCO(East Larimer County Water District) and NWCWD
(Northern Weld County Water District),known as NEWT. The other line is for the City of
Greeley,known as GWET. The construction of these two lines is scheduled to begin in early
2008.
The owner of a tract of land on the east side of North College Avenue needed for this
relocated street has offered that parcel for sale to the City. The requested price has been
determined by staff to be within fair market value. In order to have funds to acquire this
needed tract prior to the BOB funding, $225,000 must be appropriated from Street
Oversizing to acquire this parcel.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2007,Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
at 211 South Bryan Avenue for Up to Ten Years.
The Fort Collins Baseball Club (formerly the Fort Collins Youth Baseball Association), a
local non-profit that provides recreational and competitive baseball programming to more
than 3300 players ranging in age from 5 to 18 years old, resides and operates out of an
approximately 1,495 square-foot City facility located near the baseball diamonds at City
Park. The City has leased this facility to the baseball club at no cost since 1983 in
recognition of the community benefits derived from the organization's recreational
programming. The term of the current lease is expired and the Baseball Club wishes to
renew its lease arrangement with the City for up to ten years. Staff believes that it is in the
best interest of the community to renew this no-cost lease.
13. Resolution 2007-094 Authorizing a Revocable Permit to Kurt E.Zimmerman for Access to
a Stock Water Tank Located on Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.
This Resolution authorizes a revocable permit to Kurt E. Zimmerman to allow him to
continue to use overflow water from a City livestock watering system on Soapstone Prairie
Natural Area to water livestock on the Zimmerman property. This will not require a physical
change on the City's property and will allow an informal arrangement that had not previously
been documented to continue.
208
October 16, 2007
14. Resolution 2007-095 Amending Resolution 2007-062 to Extend the Deadline For a Task
Force of Citizens to Make Recommendations Regarding the Citv's Holiday Display Polio
The Holiday Display Task Force was appointed by the City Manager in early August 2007
for the purpose of reviewing the City's current Holiday Display Policy and recommending
possible modifications to the policy. The Task Force held its first meeting on August 22,
2007. Since then members have met regularly and investigated a number of options, with
the goal of developing a recommendation to City Council by the designated deadline of
October 31, 2007.
The Task Force was originally scheduled to present its recommendations to Council at its
regular meeting on November 6, 2007. The agenda schedule for that meeting necessitates
that the materials for the meeting be submitted by noon on October 17, 2007, effectively
eliminating two full weeks from the Task Force's original schedule.
The presentation of the Task Force's recommendations to City Council has been tentatively
rescheduled to November 20,2007,pending Council's approval of this Resolution,in order
to give Task Force members time to complete the group's recommendations. While the Task
Force fully intends to submit its recommendations as required for the November 20, 2007,
Council meeting, extending the deadline to the end of the year will allow additional
flexibility should Council wish the Task Force to develop any follow-up recommendations
as a result of the November 20, 2007, discussion. Therefore, the proposed Resolution will
extend the Task Force's deadline to December 31, 2007.
CONSENT BUDGET ITEMS
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2007,Amendingth e City Code to Increase the Capital
Improvement Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and Neighborhood Parkland Fee to
Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services.
This Ordinance increases the fee schedules for the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees and
Neighborhood Parkland Fee by the estimated 2007 changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley
Consumer Price Index ("CPI").
Costs in the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees ("CIEF") Study and the fee schedule for
the Neighborhood Parkland Fees were calculated using costs from 1995. The fees were last
adjusted in 2006. This Ordinance increases the CIEF and the neighborhood parkland fees
by the estimated 2007 increase in the CPI of 2.50%,and the Street Oversizing fees by 4.85%,
which reflects the projected increase reported in the Engineering News Record.
16. Items Relating to the 2008 Downtown Development Authority Budget.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 115,2007,Appropriating Downtown Development
Authority Operating Funds and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2008.
209
October 16, 2007
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 116,2007,Appropriating Revenue in the Downtown
Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service for the Year
2008.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2007, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development
Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment
Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A.
The Downtown Development Authority Board of Directors (the 'Board") adopted its
proposed budget for 2008 totaling $6,709,104 on September 13, 2007. The Board
determined the mill levy necessary
to provide for payment of administrative costs incurred
by the DDA at its regular meeting of September 13, 2007. Ordinance No. 115, 2007,
appropriates the DDA operating funds and sets the mill levy.
Ordinance No. 116,2007,appropriates funds for 2008 DDA debt service payments from the
tax increment received by the City.
Ordinance No. 117, 2007 authorizes the transfer of appropriations of$1,000,000 from the
City of Fort Collins Museum project to the funding of Beet Street for 2008.
17. Resolution 2007-096 Adopting a Revenue Allocation Formula to Define the City of Fort
Collins' Contribution to the Poudre Fire Authority Budget for the Year 2008 for Operations
and Maintenance.
This Resolution establishes a Revenue Allocation Formula between the City of Fort Collins
and the Poudre Fire Authority to contribute funding for maintenance and operating costs of
Poudre Fire Authority.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and
Unanticipated Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated
Amounts Between Funds or Projects.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Purchase an Armored Rescue Vehicle for
Police Services.
210
October 16, 2007
8. Items Relating to the Old Oak Estates Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108,2007,Annexing Property Known as the Old
Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109,2007,Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Old
Oak Estates Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2007, Designating the Parsons/Morgan House and
Attached Garage,723 West Olive Street,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14
of the City Code.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 111,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from
the Bureau of Justice Assistance in the General Fund for the Larimer County Drug Task
Force.
I t. First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves In the Street
Oversizing Fund for Transfer To the Capital Projects Fund - North College Avenue
Improvements Project to Be Used for to Acquire Property Necessary for Future
Improvements along North College Avenue.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2007,Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
at 211 South Bryan Avenue for Up to Ten Years.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2007, Amending the City Code To Increase the
Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the Code
So as To Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services.
16. Items Relating to the 2008 Downtown Development Authority Budget.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 115,2007,Appropriating Downtown Development
Authority Operating Funds and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2008.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 116,2007,Appropriating Revenue in the Downtown
Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service for the Year
2008.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2007, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development
Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment
Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A.
211
October 16, 2007
21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 2007, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance
Relating to the Annual Appropriations For the Fiscal Year 2008; Adopting the Budget For
the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1,2008,And Ending December 31,2009;and Fixing the
Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2008.
22. Items Relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2008.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Water Plant Investment Fees and Raw Water Requirements.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Wastewater Rates and Charges.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Sewer Plant Investment Fees.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Electric Rates and Charges.
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Electric Development Fees and Charges.
F. First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Stormwater Plant Investment Fees.
G. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges.
23. First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for That Certain Property Known as the
Southwest Corner of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning.
24. First Reading ofOrdinance No. 128,2007 Authorizing the Conveyance of 143 Acres of Land
To Colorado State University Research Foundation In Exchange for 267 Acres of Land
Adjacent to Reservoir Ridge Natural Area.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to approve the
Consent Calendar as amended. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
212
October 16, 2007
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Councilmember Manvel noted Item #14 Resolution 2007-095 Amending Resolution 2007-062 to
Extend the Deadline For a Task Force of Citizens to Make Recommendations Regarding the City's
Holiday Display Policy extended the time for the Holiday Task Force to report to Council until
December 31,but staff hoped the report would come before Thanksgiving.
Councilmember Ohlson stated Item#I I First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2007, Appropriating
Prior Year Reserves In the Street OversizingFund for Transfer To the Capital Projects Fund-North
College Avenue Improvements Project to Be Used for to Acquire Property Necessary for Future
Improvements along North College Avenue was a good move for the North College area. Item#12
First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property at 211
South Bryan Avenue for Up to Ten Years authorized a lease to help the Fort Collins Baseball Club
He requested information on its scholarship program for low-income participants.
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry noted the Water Treatment Facility had recently received two water quality
awards that honored the Facility's ongoing commitment and production of high quality water. For
the ninth year in a row,the Facility received the"Director's Certificate of Recognition"Award from
the Partnership for Safe Water. The Water Treatment Facility had also received the "Bronze
Achiever Award" from the Environmental Leadership Program which honors achievements in
improving drinking water quality as well as drinking water treatment and distribution operations.
He recognized Brian Janonis, Interim Utilities Director, and Kevin Gettig, Water Production
Manager, and their staff for performing quality work.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Manvel stated in early October, he met with the Regional Air Quality Council,
which is continuing to work on strategies to reduce ozone levels in Northern Colorado and the
Denver area. The "Repair Your Air" campaign, a drive-by exhaust test program that encourages
people to repair the high exhaust emissions from their vehicles, has begun in Denver and is being
evaluated for cost-effectiveness and reduction of emissions. If it is successful, the program could
be expanded throughout Northern Colorado. He also attended a meeting of the MPO, which is
working on transportation issues to improve air quality. He received a draft of the North Front
Range 2035 Regional Transportation Plan which projects transportation needs and solutions for the
next 30 years.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Colorado Climate Project was now completed and had been approved
by the Directors of the Project. The Project developed over 70 recommendations and actions that
will be given to the Governor concerning climate change. Mayor Hutchinson, as a Director of the
Project, appointed Dr. Tony Frank, CSU Provost,Brian Moeck, PRPA General Manager, and Judy
Dorsey,CEO of the Brendle Group,a local environmental engineering firm to the Project panel. The
Project was begun by the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization, a private, not-for-profit
213
October 16, 2007
organization,was nonpartisan and included an analytical examination of actions might be suggested
regarding climate change, including cost and benefit analysis.
Ordinance No. 118,2007,
Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to
the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2008 and
Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning
January 1, 2008 and Ending December 31, 2009, and
Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2008,Adopted as Amended on First Reading.
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
This Ordinance represents the annual appropriation for fiscal year 2008, and adopts the total City
budget for fiscal year 2008 at $569.6 million and for fiscal year 2009 at $537.3 million. This
Ordinance also sets the City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991,for fiscal year 2008.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Annual Appropriation Ordinance is presented for First Reading. This ordinance sets the City
Budget for the two year period 2008-2009. The Ordinance is based on the City Manager's
Recommended Budget, with several additions directed by City Council at its October 9, 2009 Work
Session. The additional offers total $1,038,916 in one-time General Fund expenditures and
$124,148 (2009 costs) in on-going General Fund offers. If approved on First Reading, these
additions to the Recommended Budget would be funded through the use of an additional$412,715
in General Fund Reserves and an increase in revenue from the Sales and Use Tax Vendor Fee of
$390,000 per year(on-going.)
These additions use all of the total available funds, including one-time Reserves and on-going
Vendor Fee revenue.
BACKGROUND
This biennial budget represents the work of many dedicated employees who have come together for
the second time to use the Budgetingfor Outcomes(BFO)approach to develop this recommendation.
Nearly 100 employees were involved in creating a recommended budget which builds on the ideas
of transparency in the budget process, clear choices for how to allocate limited revenues and
organizational accountability. These principles are the hallmark of the BFO process.
The purpose of utilizing the BFO approach is to:
• Identify what's important to the community and develop a sound financial and service plan
to achieve those outcomes;
214
October 16, 2007
• Allocate dollars based on current priorities and results, not simply increase last year's
spending;
• Effectively deal with revenue limitations; and
• Emphasize accountability, efficiency, innovation and partnerships
Using this approach, City Council and staff worked in close collaboration over the past two months
to build a financial plan, based on revenue available, that will achieve service outcomes which
matter most to our citizens and community. This work has resulted in the development of the Final
2008-2009 Budget. The approval of the Appropriation Ordinance on First Reading represents a
major milestone in this process.
The final budget is organized around seven Council approved Result Areas or Outcomes that
citizens want and need:
Economic Health Fort Collins has a healthy economy reflecting the values
of our unique community in a changing world.
Environmental Health Fort Collins creates, maintains and promotes a healthy
and sustainable environment with an adequate, high
quality water supply.
Safe Community Fort Collins is a safe place to live, work, learn and play.
Neighborhood Livability Fort Collins improves the livability, choices, and
affordability of our neighborhoods.
Cultural and Recreational Fort Collins provides diverse cultural and recreational
Opportunities opportunities that foster physical and mental well-being
for community members.
Transportation Fort Collins improves the safety and ease of traveling to,
from, and throughout the city.
High Performing Government Fort Collins is a model for an entrepreneurial, high
qualitv city government.
In developing the budget, City Council and staff has continued to use the BFO process because it
helps the City achieve a number ofgoals:
• Create clarity in the budget process for the community
• Allocate revenues to highest priorities and the outcomes citizens want and need
• Understand the trade-off between services funded and unfunded
• Emphasize accountability, efficiency, innovation and partnerships.
215
October 16, 2007
Budget Highlights
The 2008-09 Final Budget is a financial and service plan linked to the seven key outcomes and
results that matter most to our citizens. Some key highlights of the City Budget include:
1. The total budget for all City funds for 2008 is $569.6 million and$537.3 million for 2009.
(The total budget is lower in 2009 because of a major one-time expense in 2008 for the
Mason Corridor Project.)
2. The budget includes no tax increase.
3. The tax revenue projections for 2008-09 are based on formulas developed and reviewed with
City Council in May 2006 Sales and use taxis projected to increase by 2.03%in 2008 and
2.63% in 2009.
4. Minor inflation oriented fee adjustments are included for several programs. For example,
the Recreation Division will make its typical market oriented inflationary adjustments to its
user fees to reflect increased costs for hourly employees and supplies.
5. Wastewater rates will increase 12%in 2008 and 11%in 2009. Electric rates are projected
to increase 2.3% to 2.7% in response to increases from Platte River Power Authority.
6. The recommended budget includes no reductions in force. Several vacant positions were
eliminated as departments worked to develop offers which were lean, efficient and targeted
at the services citizens want and need.
Budget Assumptions
$320.1 $338.1 5.6% $351.5 4.09
$24.3 $23.9 -1.6% $26.2 9.69
$33.0 $105.7 220.3% $58.6 -44.6°
$377.4 $467.7 23.9% $436.3 -6.70
0 0
472.5 $569.6 20.6% $537.3 -5.70
As the budget development process began in early 2007, City Council and staff met on several
occasions to outline goals and assumptions for developing the recommended budget. Council also
reviewed the Key Outcomes during the first Council goal setting retreat in April.
216
October 16, 2007
Some of the key assumptions used in developing the Final Budget include:
1. Limited revenue growth for 2008 and 2009
The local economy has improved throughout 2007, and staff continues to plan for a limited
amount of sales tax revenue growth through 2008 and 2009.
2. Use of reserves
With new retail development under construction, staff expects that sales tax revenues will
improve significantly in 2010. To bridge the gap between our current sales tax level and an
expected improvement in 2010, the recommended budget used limited available reserves to
eliminate the need to reduce services in the short-term. Approximately$3 million in General
Fund reserves was used to balance the 2008-09 Recommended Budget. In the 2010-11
Budget, the City expects that sales tax revenues will improve as new retailers are open and
generating new sales tax revenue. Staffdiscussed the use ofreserves with the City Council
at its April 2007 retreat and received Council's consent to develop a recommended budget
based on this assumption.
At its October 9 Work Session, Council gave staffdirection to include an additional amount
of resources from General Fund reserves in the appropriation ordinance being considered
on First Reading. By using an additional$400,000 in Reserves, the balance in the General
Fund Reserve accounts would remain above the recommended level of 60 days Reserve
(16.67% of General Fund expenditures. Council further agreed to formally review a
General Fund reserve policy at an upcoming work session.
3. Vendor Fee Policy Change
The Appropriation Ordinance is based on the assumption that the City will modify its Vendor
Fee, thus yielding additional sales tax revenue that can be applied to General Fund
purposes. The Vendor Fee is paid to vendors who collect sales and use taxes on behalf of
the City. Currently, approximately$700,000 is kept each year by businesses as a vendorfee.
Staffproposed that the Vendor Fee could be reduced from 3%to I%,yielding approximately
$390,000 of additional revenue available to the City General Fund.
The proposed vendor fee would allow vendors to keep 1% ($45) of the first $4,500 in tax
collected. Vendors would keep approximately$310,000 annually, which would result in the
City realizing a greater share of the actual sales and use tax collected. This does not change
the sales tax rate that residents pay, but rather recoups a greater amount of it from the
vendors who collect the taxes on the City's behalf.
Council directed staff to include this revenue increase in the Final Budget Appropriations
Ordinance. To implement this change in the Vendor Fee for Collection of Sales Tax, an
Ordinance will be presented for First Reading on November 6. Second Reading will be
217
October 16, 2007
scheduled for November 20 to coincide with the Second Reading and final adoption of the
2008-09 Budget.
4. New facilities must be operated and maintained
In 2007, three new facilities will open: the new Police Services building, the new Northside
Aztlan Community Center, and Spring Canyon Community Park. While the capital fundsfor
these projects were provided through debt financing and voter approved capital programs,
the resources to operate and maintain them must be provided through existing General Fund
sources.
5. Public Safety needs and environmental issues are funding priorities
As initial revenue allocations between the various Budget Outcomes were made, new
resources were allocated to these priorities to enhance these services based on feedback
provided to staff at the City Council retreat.
6. Employee salary adjustments are planned for in 2008 and 2009
A basic assumption was made that employee salary adjustments would be funded. As a basic
cost of doing business, it is essential to ensure that these cost increases are funded before
making any decisions about additional services or enhancements.
7. Economic health programs are vital to future revenues
Investing in the local economy continues to be a priorityfor long-term financial stability, so
economic health programs are a high priority.
As staffdeveloped the recommended budget, one of the messages sent to both our employees
and residents is that 2008-09 are not expected to be "rebuilding years. " The City saw
significant budget cuts in 2006-07, including a large number of layoffs due to slow revenue
growth. For 2008-09, the budget is aimed at fine tuning our service level and addressing
a limited number of emerging issues and high priority services with neither significant cuts
nor enhancements expected. A limited number of enhancements which address the goals
outlined above were included in approved offers. Though many appealing service
enhancement offers were submitted by departments, Council found that they could fund only
a limited number, given limited revenue growth.
Adjustment to Recommended Budget
During September and October, 2007, City Council and staffinet in work sessions to review the City
Manager's Recommended Budget in detail. At its October 9 Work Session, Council gave staff
general direction to include a number of additional offers in the appropriations ordinance to be
218
October 16, 2007
considered on First Reading on October 16. (See Offer Descriptions,Attachment 1) These included
the following items:
�G
Ongoing 2008 2009
167.1 HPG Sustainable City Government $ 67,151 $ 69,048
TBD Envir. Air Quality Monitoring $ 20,000
211.2Neigh Neighborhood Services—Grant Enhancement $ 5,000 $ 5,000
211.3 Neigh Neighborhood Services-Code Enforcement $ 17,500 $ 17,500
213.1 HPG Development Review Center-Innovative Tech $ 12,600
Ongoing Total $ 89,651 $ 124,148
One time
30.4HPG Network Services-Equipment (Voice over JP)** $ 39,974 $ 37,342
213.1 HPG Development Review Center-Innovative Tech $ 121,600
203.3 Neigh Enhancement of Human Services Grant $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Program
TBD Envir Air Quality Monitoring $ 30,000
126.2 Transp. Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update $ 100,000
TBD Envir. Hazardous Waste Study $ 50,000
TBD Econ NCEDC Contribution $ 30,000 $ 30,000
203.2 Neigh Partial Restoration of Affordable Housing $ 200,000 $ 200,000
Fund
One time total $ 671,574 $ 367,342
"Note: Offer 30.4 partially funded through Telecommunications Fund
In order to fund these desired services, additional resources beyond those included in the 2008-09
City Manager's Recommended Budget will be required to balance the Appropriation Ordinance.
Council provided staff with direction to bring forward a proposal that includes the use of an
additional$400,000 in General Fund Reserves and a change to the Sales and Use Tax Vendor Fee
which would result in an additional $390,000 in sales tax revenue. In order to balance the
appropriation to these desired purchases, the use of General Fund Reserves was increased slightly
219
October 16, 2007
beyond the amount directed by Council to total $412,715. The Partial Restoration of Affordable
Housing Fund was also adjusted to be $200,000 in each year for a total of$400,000 in funds
restored.
In total, $1,252,715 in additional offers are included in the Final Budget. Of these offers,
$1,038,916fund one-time expenditures and$124,148 (2009 costs)fund on-going programs.
Conclusion
The 2008-2009 Final Budget is a sound financial plan to deliver the services we believe our citizens
value most. The budgeting process has enabled us to focus and apply the resources available to key
community outcomes. Citizens will receive excellent value for their tax dollars.
Any final amendments agreed to by Council will be included in the second(and final)reading of the
budget ordinances on November 20, 2007. By Charter, the budget must be adopted and
appropriations for the 2008 fiscal year must be approved by November 30. "
City Manager Atteberry stated this Ordinance was the first formal vote on the 2008-2009 budget.
The budget is based on the seven Key Outcomes: Economic Health, Environmental Health, Safe
Community,Neighborhood Livability, Cultural and Recreational Opportunities, Transportation and
High Performing Government. There has been much Council review and citizen input into the
process of developing the budget. The total resources in 2008 are$570 million, and includes one-
time and ongoing monies from all City funds,not just the General Fund. In 2009,the total resources
are $537 million. The City is committed to "World-Class" services, but there is concern the City
will not be able to keep up with the level of services provided in previous years. Sales and use tax
income increase is projected to be 2% for 2008 and 2.6% for 2009. The budget does not contain
any proposals for property tax or sales tax increases. The electric rates are proposed to be raised for
residents by 2.3% in 2008 and 2.6% increase in 2009. The rate changes are pass-through rate
increases from PR-PA. The wastewater rates will increase by 12% in 2008 and I I% in 2009, a
necessary increase to fund significant capital improvements to rebuild the Mulberry Wastewater
Treatment Plant. The budget does contain planned uses of reserve funds to help address short-term
funding needs with anticipated revenue increases in 2010. The proposed budget would change the
vendor fee allocation,which will generate about$390,000 of ongoing funds per year,beginning in
2008. There is also approximately$400,000 of one-time reserve funds to be used to address some
shortfalls to the budget. After several work sessions, Council has produced a short list of possible
additions to the budget that were not previously funded. These items total approximately $1.2
million of additional offers. Council has also requested one-time funding for nighttime Dial-A-Ride.
That funding would provide service while the Transfort Strategic Plan is updated,if Council chooses
to fund the Update. He recommended using one-time dollars in the amount of$65,000 to fund
nighttime Dial-A-Ride (DAR).
Mayor Hutchinson asked if adjustments are already made to the proposed budget or would they be
formally added at the second reading of the ordinance. City Attorney Roy stated as long as the City
220
October 16, 2007
Manager understands which changes are needed,the direction does not need to be through a formal
motion. The second reading of the ordinance is when the budget is adopted.
City Manager Atteberry clarified that the$65,000 for nighttime Dial-A-Ride service is not included
in the current ordinance. Council has three choices: (1) do nothing; (2) remove an offer from the
funded list and replace it with funding for DAR; or(3) look at alternative sources of revenue such
as using one-time reserves.
Julie Brewen, 1715 West Mountain, Fort Collins Housing Authority Executive Director, urged
Council to fund the partial restoration of the Affordable Housing offer. Affordable housing relies
on first-in local contribution in order to leverage other sources of funding. Funding of affordable
housing is complex,but must begin locally. Stable housing is the first step in allowing a person to
become a contributing member of the community. She also requested funding for the Human
Services Enhancement offer.
Chadrick Martinez, 1303 Swallow,Executive Director of CARE Housing,requested restoration of
affordable housing funds. CARE Housing has used City funds as leverage to receive$31.74 from
various grants for every dollar contributed by the City. For 2008, a sizable development is planned
for 156 units and each City dollar used for that development will generate$124 in leveraged funds.
The City funds have helped CARE Housing to serve a larger segment of the community and keep
its rents to $495 per unit, on average.
Susan Williams, 400 Impala Circle, urged Council to fully fund paratransit services, especially
nighttime Dial-A-Ride service.
Antoinette Lueck, 2400 North Taft Hill Road, requested Council to fund nighttime Dial-A-Ride
service.
Wendie Robinson,3539 Sunflower Way,Neighbor-to-Neighbor Executive Director,an organization
that helps homeless people find homes, counsels renters and home owners in unaffordable housing
situations, provides 159 affordable apartments and educates first-time home buyers, thanked the
Council, City Manager and staff for including$200,000 for the affordable housing program and for
reinstating$100,000 in the human services program. The funds are critical for citizens who are low-
income and are struggling to find safe, decent housing.
Jenny Merrill, Fort Collins citizen, urged Council to fully fund Dial-A-Ride services, especially
nighttime service.
Denise Rogers, 1503 Windcreek Court,Affordable Housing Board Chairperson,reminded Council
that affordable housing was a critical component of the economic health of the City and asked
Council to support the partial restoration of funding for the Affordable Housing fund. Whilehousing
costs have risen over the past seven years, the City's investment in affordable housing has
plummeted, yet the impact fees charged by the City have increased $1000/year over the past ten
years. Affordable housing developments cannot afford the increased fees. A partial restoration of
221
October 16, 2007
funding for the affordable housing funds allows the City to offset some of the impact of its own
policies on affordable housing projects.
Bruce Hall, Fort Collins citizen, requested increased funding for affordable housing, to improve
Dial-A-Ride and to strengthen neighborhood services. Improving services in those areas would
improve the quality of life in the city for low-income and handicapped citizens.
Valerie Baker-Easley,424 Pine Street,Director of the Homelessness Prevention Initiative,thanked
Council for the funding received from the Human Services program in 2006 as it provided rental
assistance for 100 families which saved $500,000 in potential homeless costs. She requested
additional human services funding to prevent homelessness.
Bruce Lockhart,2500 East Harmony Road,stated he did not want more funding provided for a trash
districting study, the Mason Corridor, or for the downtown area.
Jackie Ballard,3757 Celtic Lane,requested more funding for the Homelessness Prevention Initiative
as she had been a recipient of the Initiative and knew how beneficial it was.
Yvonne Longacre, 1550 Blue Spruce, was concerned that not enough funding was provided for
services for the disabled. She urged Council to fund nighttime Dial-A-Ride service as well as other
programs that serve the disabled community.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset, urged Council to fund nighttime Dial-A-Ride service and to
consider funding 24-hour Transfort service at a future date. She did not think partial funding or a
voucher system was a reasonable solution.
Mary Smith, 1618 Sagewood Drive,thanked the Council for including funding for a trash districting
study. The current trash collection system is inefficient and is destructive to city streets and the air
quality.
Shane Miller, 4325 Mill Creek, supported funding for a hazardous waste study and air quality
monitoring and funding for Dial-A-Ride services.
Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, supported funding the Transfort Strategic Plan Update as the
current system is inefficient and needs to be evaluated and improved. She urged Council to fund
Dial-a-Ride services,the air quality monitoring study,the Pavement Management Program and more
affordable housing.
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive, asked that Dial-A-Ride nighttime service be funded.
Richard Withey, 842 Wagonwheel Drive,urged Council to continue funding nighttime service for
Dial-A-Ride.
222
October 16, 2007
Mayor Hutchinson stated the City Manager was required to present Council with a balanced budget
in September. Each Outcome area had a prioritized list and when funds were depleted, a line was
drawn and all items beneath the line were unfunded. In work sessions, Council has identified items
that were under the line that it would consider restoring funding. Many items in the process fell
"below the line" and were not funded. Council is considering only a few of those items.
Councilmember Roy clarified the issue of holiday lighting. The budget offer of$75,000 for holiday
lights in the downtown area was an offer to improve the quality and quantity of downtown lighting
and in 2007, an upgrade in lighting was being investigated to change from incandescent lights to
LED lights. A one-time investment will be funded by the DDA to purchase energy-saving LED
lights. Funding to install and remove the lights and to cover other costs will be shared by the City,
the DDA, and the DBA. The lights will not be cut down,but taken down and reused.
clarified that the current Ordinance contained the items
Ann Turn uist Policy and Project Manager,
q � Y J
Council discussed at the work session and consequently,those items did not need to be added to the
Ordinance. Any items beyond those discussed at the work session would need to be added.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance
No. 118, 2007 on First Reading.
Councilmember Manvel asked if staff had included funding sources from reserves and from the
vendor fees for the additional expenditures in the budget. City Manager Atteberry answered in the
affirmative and he noted Council would need to adopt the vendor fee change which would be
brought to Council on November 6. Tumquist stated there were additional offers that used ongoing
funds and additional offers that used one-time funds. Together the offers total$1.2 million over two
years.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if the $1.2 million was within the available resources. City Manager
Atteber y stated resources were available,with the exception of$65,000 for nighttime Dial-A-Ride.
To fund the DAR service, Council could either choose to not fund something else or look at
additional revenue such as reserves. This fundingis one-time funding and could come from
g
reserves.
Councilmember Brown made a friendly amendment to amend the ordinance to use reserves as one-
time funding of$65,000 for DAR nighttime service for 2008 while the Transfort Strategic Plan is
updated.
The friendly amendment was accepted by Councilmembers Ohlson and Manvel.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the list of additions to the budget that were suggested by three or more
Councilmembers and discussed at work sessions were items that fell below the budget line and were
now under consideration to be funded. He called for discussion on an exception basis,of any items
that Councilmembers may not support.
223
October 16, 2007
City Attorney Roy clarified that Council had before it the motion to adopt the budget, as proposed,
including DAR funding coming from one-time reserves. The list of additional, potential
expenditures has available funding and Council needs to decide whether any item should be removed
from the list.
No suggested changes to the list of additions to the budget were made.
City Manager Atteberry clarified the friendly amendment provided funding for DAR service from
one-time reserve funds in 2008, not in 2009.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the funding for DAR does not negate what was previously decided for
nighttime DAR service during the 2007 budget discussions. It does allow funding for the service
while the Transfort Strategic Plan is updated which will allow more time to search for public/private
support for DAR service. This was one-time funding, not a permanent continuation of nighttime
DAR service.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the budget was far from perfect but included much compromise to
reach this point. He noted human services was enhanced by$100,000 and affordable housing was
enhanced by$200,000. He thanked the public for its input into the process and noted the input made
a difference.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the citizens for their input and stated the budget reflected what the
citizens wanted.
Mayor Hutchinson stated Budgeting for Outcomes has had a significant impact on the budgeting
process and the BFO process has made the budget transparent. It is focused on the needs of Fort
Collins citizens. Staff and Council have worked closely together and created a budget that is lean
and efficient. There was still opportunity for citizen input until November 20,when second reading
of the ordinance would occur.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting. Councilmember
Ohlson left the meeting at this point.)
Items relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2008, Adopted on First Reading.
The following is the staff memorandum on the item.
224
October 16, 2007
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
The rate Ordinances are projected to increase the annual operating revenues of the Wastewater
Fund by 12% and the Light and Power Fund by approximately 2.3%. No increases are proposed
for water and stormwater monthly rates. The combined utility fees for atypical single family
residence will increase $3.34 per month.
Proposed water, wastewater and stormwater plant investment fees (PIFs) are updated to reflect a
new customer's impact on the system and maintain existing customers' equity in the system.
Proposed electric development fees and charges cover costs of new commercial and residential
development. The financial impacts vary by the size and nature ofthe development. If the proposed
fees are adopted,water, wastewater and stormwater plant investment fees, and electric development
fees and charges will increase. The combined utility development fees for atypical single family
residence (exclusive of raw water requirements which are not changing)will increase from $9,213
to $10,639 or 15.5%.
The proposed fees will be effective January 1, 2008.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code to Revise
Water Plant Investment Fees and Raw Water Requirements.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2007Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating
to Wastewater Rates and Charges.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code to Revise
Sewer Plant Investment Fees.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating
to Electric Rates and Charges.
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code to Revise
Electric Development Fees and Charges.
F First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code to Revise
Stormwater Plant Investment Fees.
G. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code Relating
to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges.
Ordinance No. 120, 2007 and Ordinance No. 122, 2007 establish monthly wastewater and electric
rates for 2008 as follows:
225
October 16, 2007
%Increase
Wastewater 12
Electric 2.0-2.6
The electric rate Ordinance also includes a housekeeping change to the power adjustment clause.
Ordinance No. 125, 2007, updates utility connection fees and miscellaneous charges for returned
items and turn-off notices to recover the cost of these services.
Ordinances Nos. 119, 121, 123, and 124, 2007, adopt revised water, sewer and stormwater plant
investment fees and electric development fees. The fees are one-time charges paid by developers or
r r the cost o the utility infrastructure needed to serve new development. Per Council
builde s o h p
f f t1' .f
direction, plant investment fees are reviewed on an annual basis and revised during the biennial
budget cycle. Plant investmentfees(PIFs)for water, wastewater and stormwater were updated with
the 2006-2007 budget. Electric development fees and charges are updated annually.
BACKGROUND
PLANT INVESTMENT FEES
• WATER
The water plant investment fees are developed to recover the current value ofpast investment and
the current value of future growth-related investment through 2040. This method includes
calculating net water system equity, capacity units, and determining the net system equity per unit.
Water system assets are valued at replacement costs adjusted by the construction cost index as
published by Engineering News Record. Net system equity is determined by subtracting outstanding
debt principal from the total replacement costs plus estimated future growth related to capital
projects. That result is then divided by the future total plant capacity to determine unit cost. The
unit cost is applied to an estimated representative annual usage for each customer class to determine
the proposed water PIF.
The following schedule details PIFs for the various customer classes.
WATER PLANT INVESTMENT FEES BY CUSTOMER CLASS
2006 PIFs 2008-2009 Proposed
Peak Day Current Peak Day Proposed
Customer Class/Meter Size Usage d Char re Usage d Char re Change
nit Fee($per gallon) $3.69 $4.03 9.2°
Residential:
Single Family
Inside Use 191 $ 71 181 $ 73 39
Outside Use-$/S .Ft. 86 $ 0.37 77 $ 0.3 -3°
226
i
October 16, 2007
Multi-Family (per unit)
Inside Use 13 $ 496 12 $ 49 0°
Outside Use-$/S . Ft. 26 $ 0.28 23 $ 0.2 4°
Von-Residential(meter size)
/. inch 1,806 $ 6,64 1,73 $ 6,97 5°
1 inch 5236 $ 19306 5,11( $ 20,59 7
1 /:inc 10 47 $ 38 63 10,30 $ 41,51 7°
2 inch 16,711 $ 61,661 16 21 1 65 33 6°
3 inc 33 24 $122 66 35 37 $142 54 160
> than 3 inches Based on specific customer re uirements
*differences due to rounding
The impact to a typical single family residence (8,600 sq.ft lot) is a decrease of$66 from $3,892
to $1,826. The decrease is due to a reduction in average usage by the residential class.
Other
In addition to updating the wastewater PIF charges, the Ordinance revises Section 26-149 of the
City Code which describes Raw Water requirements for non-residential service. The revision
clarifies that the customer is required to provide Raw Water equal to 1.92 times the customer's
estimated peak annual use. The revisions apply (1) to a customer with two or more meters and(2)
to a customer who increases their annual allotment. An additional change is to correct a spelling
error wherein Raw Water Requirements are currently referenced as "RVR"and that is corrected
to be "RWR".
• WASTEWATER
The wastewater plant investment fees are developed using a method which assesses new customers
based on an allocation of the costs of the existing facilities and the projected growth-related
improvements. The utilityforesees a significant amount ofgrowth-related treatmentplantprojects
on the planning horizon. The 2005 study of the wastewater plant investment fees recommended a
174% increase. Due to the magnitude of the proposed increase, Council directed a three-year
phase-in of the fees which was implemented beginning January, 2006 The final phase of the 3-
phase implementation is included in the proposed 2008 wastewater PIFs.
The proposed fees are shown in the following tables:
WASTEWATER PLANT INVESTMENT FEES
Customer Class/Meter Size Existin 2007 Pro osed 2008
Volume Current Volume Proposed
G d Char re G d Char re Chan e
in le Family 340 $ 2 223 321 $ 3,194 43.7%
uld-Family236 $ 1,583 208 $ 2,069 30.7%
227
October 16, 2007
Von-Residential(meter size)
/.inc 709 $ 4,749 624 $ 6.206 30.7%
1 incl 1,814 $ 12 151 1.644 $ 16,361 34.6%
1 '/ inc 3,279 $21 965 2,854 $ 28,396 29.3%
2 inc 5,802 $38 865 5 122 $ 50,963 31.1%
3 inci 12,105 $81 086 12,209 $121 484 49.8%
4 inch and above assessed on individual basis
Wastewater plant investmentfees for a typical single-family residence in 2008 would increase from
$2,223 to $3,194, or 43.7%.
• STORMWATER
Plant investment fees for stormwater are adopted on a citywide basis. All new development must
provide on-site detention as specified in the master plan. Regional elements are sized to handle
existingfows and to work in coordination with on-site detention in new developments. Stormwater
PIFs pay for a developer's proportionate share of the system infrastructure as it exists at the time
they develop.
The unit of measure used to allocate the value of the existing system between new customers and
existing customers is acres of developed land, adjusted with a runoff coejf cient(a measure of how
water runs off various surfaces). Proposed development fees are calculated by dividing the value
of the current system, less outstanding debt, by the total acres of land (existing developed and
developable)in the service area. This number is then adjusted by the average runofffor the system.
The result is the unit value of the existing system per acre of developed land.
2008 %
2006 Proposed Change
Fees Fees
3 070 $4,420 43.97%
The significant increase in fees is due to the large investments in stormwater infrastructure over the
last few years.
• ELECTRIC
Electric development charges include the allocated and actual costs to the utility for each
commercial or residential development. The two components of these charges are the Electric
Capacity Fee for the off-site electric system, and the Building Site Charge for the on-site electric
costs. The electric development charges are typically increased annually to adjust for inflation and
cost increases. Increases range from 12%for residential and 20%for commercial development.
The increases are due primarily to the significant increases experienced in the cost of transformers,
metals and other construction materials.
The following tables compare current fees with proposed fees for residential and commercial
development:
228
October 16, 2007
ELECTRICDEVELOPMENT FEES& CHARGES
RESIDENTIAL
Category Charge 2007 2008 % diff.
Persquarefoo $0.04215 $0.04731 12°
Per lineal front foo $7.90 $9.53 21°
150A Single
t7 Fan $1078 $1177 9°
Electric
Capacity 200A Single
Fee ono Fan $1806 $1991 10°
150AMulti
Fa $719 $785 9°
200A Multi
Fa $1267 $1399 10°
1/ $585 $625 7°
4/ $756 $787 4°
Building �
' °a 350 W $732 $873 199
Site
Charges 1/0 mobil $458 $490 7°
410 mobil $593 $623 5°
2008
2006 Proposed Change
Fees Fees
3070 $4,420 1 43.97%
The significant increase in fees is due to the large investments in stormwater infrastructure over
the last few years.
• ELECTRIC
Electric development charges include the allocated and actual costs to the utility for each
commercial or residential development. The two components of these charges are the Electric
Capacity Fee for the off-site electric system, and the Building Site Charge for the on-site electric
costs. The electric development charges are typically increased annually to adjust for inflation
and cost increases. Increases range from 12%for residential and 20%for commercial
development. The increases are due primarily to the significant increases experienced in the
cost of transformers, metals and other construction materials.
The following tables compare current fees with proposed fees for residential and commercial
development:
229
October 16, 2007
ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT FEES& CHARGES
RESIDENTIAL
Category Charge 2007 2008 %diff.
Persquarefoo $0.04215 $0.04731 12°
Per lineal front foo $7.90 $9.53 21°
150A Single
C Fan $1078 $1177 99
Electric m
Capacity 200A Single °
Fee ado Fan $1806 $1991 10
c 150A Multi
Fa $719 $785 9°
200A Multi
Fa $1267 $1399 10°
1/ $585 $625 7°
4/ $756 $787 4°
Building 350 kC $732 $873 19°
Site
Charges 1/0 mobil $458 $490 7°
410 mobil $593 $623 5°
ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT FEES& CHARGES
COMMERCIAL
Category Charge 2007 2008 % diff.
Persquarefoo $0.04215 $0.04731 12°
Per lineal front foo $29.83 $35.52 19°
208V1-Ph $946 $1,146 219
Electric 240VI-P1 $1091 $1323 21°
Capacity Service
Fee Entrance(per 100 208V3-Pi $1 638 $1 985 21°
amps)
240V3-Pi $1 890 $2 291 21°
480V3-PI $3 779 $4 581 21°
Primary Circuit(1-phase $7.20 $8.78 22°
Primary Circuit(3 phase $13.10 $17.72 35°
Building
Site Transformer Installation-1
Charges 9hase $1 119 $1 148 3°
ransformer Installation-3
has ee $2 097 $2 132 29
The impact to a typical single family residence (8,600 sq.ft. lot, 150 amp service) is an increase
of$298 from $2,578 to $2,876, or 12%.
230
October 16, 2007
SUMMARY OF PIF CHANGES AND COMPARISONS
The following table shows the overall impact of the proposed Plant Investment Fees and Electric
Development Charges on a typical single family residence.
Impact on Single Famll
Current Proposed Chan e
Water* $ 3,892 $ 3,826 -2% $ 66
Raw Water** $ 5,203 $ 5,203 0% $ 0
Wastewater $ 2,223 $ 3,194 44% $ 971
Stormwater* $ 520 $ 743 43% $ 223
Electric* $ 2,578 $ 2,876 12% $ 298
Total $14,416 $15,842 10% $1,426
*Typical, based on lot size
**No increase for Raw Water
Comparison to other utilities is difficult due to differences in customer use patterns, the unique
capital needs of each utility, and different policy direction from governing bodies. The question
of how Fort Collins compares to other area utilities often arises. The graph below compares
water, wastewater, and stormwater PIFs and raw water requirements for a single family
residence for some neighboring communities.
Wastewater, Stormwater and Water Plant Investment Fees
(Including Cash in Lieu of Raw Water Fees)
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0 Fort Collins Fort Collins-
Fort Proposed Boulder Greeley Longmont Loveland Windsor
2008
Raw Water Fees 5203.09421 5203.09421 0 7505.7 7957.33 6487.8567 15000
®Water PIF 3892 3826 9710 9500 7856 5340 6725
■Storm Drainage PIF 516.741047 743.972452 2002 227 650 489 632
❑Wastewater PIF 2223 3194 1855 1 3900 3000 2360 3700
❑Wastewater PIF ■Storm Drainage PIF ®Water PIF p Raw Water Fees
231
October 16, 2007
MONTHLY RATES
Wastewater
The Ordinance increases the City's wastewater rates by 12%. The increase is applied "across the
board" to all customers. With the proposed rate, a typical single family residential customer's
monthly bill will increase from $19.70 to $22.07 or $2.37 per month in 2008. This is based on a
system average of 5,200 gallons per month winter quarter average (WQA) water use. The
wastewater rate increase is needed to generate sufficient revenue to fund the wastewater operations
and meet the increase in long-term debt service obligations for a major capital project to replace
the trickling filter, make odor control improvements and prepare for future regulation-based
improvements at the Mulberry facility.
The Mulberry plant was built in 1946 with upgrades in 1958 and 1972. In the past two years, the
treatment performance of the plant's 60 year old trickling filter (which provides first-stage
secondary treatment for the plant f ow)has degraded several times requiring it to be taken off-line,
cleaned and restarted. Failure of the trickling filter creates a significant increase in odors until it
has been cleaned. Even after restarting, the trickling filters effectiveness has not recovered to its
past efficiency. In late 2006, a study byMWH Consulting Engineers was commissioned to determine
the best solution for the long-term use of the Mulberry plant. Upgrading the plant's secondary
treatment processes by removing the trickling f lter and its associated facilities and installing a new
aeration basin and associated facilities is the most cost-effective solution. Because the trickling
filter is already recommended for replacement, odor control improvements will also take place.
Upgrading the facility will also allow the Utilities to prepare for future regulation-based
improvements. The improvements, including design and construction, are projected to cost$31.8
million and will be funded by debt.
An 11% increase is proposed for 2009, 10%for 2010, and 9%for 2011 to maintain reserve
requirements, meet debt service, and continue operations and maintenance functions.
As shown in the graph below, the City's wastewater rates remain comparable to those of other local
utilities:
Wastewater Rate Comparisons - WQA 5,200 gallons
Data July 25, 2007
A $30
$24.65
$25 $22.07
$20 $17.67 $18.38 $18.94 $19.70 $19.70 $20.00
E N.
t o $75
o $10.14
w V $10
m $5
d
a' $-
Denver Longmont Greeley aaulEer FL Coillns Loveland Windsor FLG- C0.80ra
3007 Propelled
]008
232
October 16, 2007
Electric
The Utilities are proposing an electric rate increase averaging 2.3% in 2008 and 2.7% in 2009.
The rate increase is wholly due to the increases in purchase power costs from Platte River Power
Authority, the City's wholesale energy supplier. On September 27, 2007, Platte River's Board
adopted a 3%wholesale rate increase for 2008 and projects a rate increase of about 3.5%in 2009.
Platte River's increases are due to several factors:
• Increased coal and rail costs at Rawhide and Craig power plants
• Increased purchased power costs from WAPA (Western Area Power Administration)
• Mercury mitigation costs
Expanded energy efficiency programs(1%of revenues per PR's 200 7 Integrated Resource
Plan)
• Capital expenditure increases(newprojects&increased material costsfor existingprojects)
• Reduction in surplus sales revenues
The proposed 2.3%increase in 2008 will vary slightly by rate class. Residential rates will increase
2.0%-2.2%, commercial rates will increase 2.2%-2.3%, and industrial rates will increase
approximately 2.6%. For a typical residential customer using 700 kilowatt-hours per month, the
monthly bill will increase 97 cents per month from $48.43 to$49.40.
The following chart compares average monthly residential electric rates with other front range
utilities:
Electric Rate Comparison - 700 kWh per Month
$80
m $65.88
d ^ $70 $56.70 $56.95
$60 $54.43
$50 $42.82 $47.41 $48.43 $49.40
` = $40
E c $30
d $20
2gyp L) $10
Q $ Layrvt ladatl R.Cdll.Z%1'! R.CRr W X -Waa %ad_8 Q.$rs R.V.R
2(p8 Bl1/2(U1
233
October 16, 2007
Other
In addition, the electric rate Ordinance includes a housekeeping change to the Power Factor
Adjustment clause ofthe commercial and industrial rate classes to reflect the changes in technology.
Prior to the capabilities of modern metering equipment, special recording equipment was
periodically installed on services to measure power factor. Meters now collect the data necessary
to make these calculations each month so periodic testing is no longer required.
Monthly Rate Summary
The following table summarizes the impact of the proposed rate increases on a typical single family
residential customer's monthly utility bill. In total, a "typical"customer's bill will increase$3.34
per month.
Typical Residential Customer-Monthl Utili Bill
Current Proposed %
2007 2008 Incre$ase Increase
Electric
700 kWh per month $ 48.43 $ 49.40 $0.97 2%
Wastewater
5,200 gallons/month
winter quarter use $ 19.70 $ 22.07 $2.37 12%
Stormwater
8,600 s . t. lot, light runoff $ 14.26 $ 14.26 $0.00 0%
Water
January 5,000 allons $ 22.56 $ 22.56 $0.00 0%
July 21,000 gallon $ 60.90 $ 60.90 $0.00 0%
Total JanuaryMonthly UtilityBill $704.95 $708.29 $3.34 3%
Total June Monthly Utili Bill 743.29 746.63 3.34 2%
The following charts compare water, wastewater,stormwater and electric utility costs for eight front
range cities. They include the recommended 2008 increases for wastewater and electric for Fort
Collins. Projected rate adjustments for the other cities are unknown at this time.
Residential Utilities 2007 Rate Gomparlson
January Water Use-5,000 Gallons
f140
$120
$100
$80
sa0
$40
$20
eo wat.o.rmrwwfm.1... s{fesx+aaws.m1.wps.. c(ffersu.aoP.ou�7l a(Hrmeoa..1p. eemn✓ is Rwp ionAmon+
s+4.aem ++.v 4ao +aaa.00 s+.47 $ iowmntl W{PslWn3
tle.0me9q
r
Na.af pna7 Nvo f20.00
f12A7 62106 1 62"6 1 N6.70 $14.06 1 $13.76 1 i20.N
Ol ll.aVlc fN.4a iN.Y6 fN.4a !J] .A. 1 5N.43 $42.12 1 N7.41 1 f66.88
234
October 16, 2007
Residential Utilities 2007 Rate Comparison
July Water Use 21,000 Gallons
$180
$160
$140
$120
$100
$80
$60
$40
$20
$ Boulder Co.Spra Denver FLCollins Ft.Co llins Greeley Windsor
(Xcel) (8/2007) (Xcel) '07 'OB (Xcel) Longmont Loveland (PVREA)
®Stormwater 6.75 6 ].396 U.260V6 U260V6 4.3 7.13 H.39 3.892
p Wastewater 18.94 24.65073119 H.N H.69904 22.07 18.384 17.67 H102 20
■Water 521234 71,11*2371 57.H 6 .90442 60.90442 54.38 60.11 39.35 60.5859]556
®Electric 58.7015 56.9 ,6"7 '6.7015 68.43 49.4 Sfi.708 62.822 67.407 65.875
CUSTOMER SERVICE FEES AND CHARGES
The Utilities is proposing increasing the turn-off notice fee from$7.00 to$10,00 and the return item
fee(returned checks, electronic transfers, credit card payments)from$15 to$25. The increases are
necessary to offset the associated costs and align with current business practices.
WATER BOARD AND ELECTRIC BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
The Water Board reviewed the 2008-2009 water utilities' budgets, water, sewer and stormwater
plant investment fee changes, and monthly wastewater rate increases at the August 23, 2007 Board
meeting. The Board voted 8 to 1 approving the proposed budget and fee changes with an amended
motion encouraging City Council to increase the appropriation for water conservation and demand
management.
The Electric Board reviewed the 2008-2009 Light and Power budget and the proposed increases to
the electric rates and development fees and charges at its meeting on August 15, 2007. The Board
unanimously approved a motion supporting the proposed budget and fee changes. "
Councilmember Manvel thanked staff for providing the comparison of wastewater, stormwater and
water plant investments fees of Fort Collins to other communities. He asked if Boulder had a small
stormwater monthly fee but a large plant investment fee because it has completed most of its
stormwater improvements and so it has already incurred a large investment that must be funded so
the plant investment fee is paid by people moving into the community,but Boulder is not investing
in a new system. Fort Collins is investing in a new system and that causes the City's stormwater fees
to be high since major investments are still being made into the stormwater system. He also noted
that Fort Collins residential utility rates are average for rates along the Front Range.
235
October 16, 2007
Jim Hibbard, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager, stated Boulder has significant
problems along Boulder Creek but he did not know whythere was such a large difference between
Boulder's plant investment fees and rates.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to adopt Ordinance No.
119, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to adopt Ordinance No.
120, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson,Manvel,Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance
No. 121, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance
No. 122, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adopt Ordinance No.
123, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
124, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adopt Ordinance No.
125, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson,Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
236
October 16, 2007
Items Relating to the Prospect Road/I-25 Interchange Rezonings,
Adopted as Amended on First Reading.
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 2007-097 Amending the City Plan Structure Plan Map Pertaining to the
Southwest Corner of Prospect Road and 1-25.
B. Resolution 2007-098 Amending the City Structure Plan Map Pertaining to the Northeast
Corner of Prospect Road and I-25.
C. Resolution 2007-099 Amending the I-25 Subarea Plan.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for That Certain Property Known as the
Southwest Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Rezoning.
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for that Certain Property Known as the
Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Rezoning.
This is a request to amend the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, and rezone
143 acres located at the southwest corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate 25 and rezone 105
acres located at the northeast corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate 25.
The current Structure Plan designations for the 143 acres in the southwest are Commercial Corridor
District,for a 25 acre parcel, and Open Lands, Parks and Stream Corridors,for a 118 acre parcel.
The current I-25 Subarea Plan designations are Commercial Corridor District and Proposed Open
Space, with corresponding zoning district designations of 25 acres of C, Commercial and 118 acres
of POL, Public Open Lands. The City proposes a Structure Plan amendment and amendments to
the I-25 Subarea Plan to change the area into the Employment District designation with a
corresponding rezoning to the E, Employment District.
The current Structure Plan designation for 86 of the 105 acres in the northeast is the Industrial
District and the current I-25 Subarea Plan designation for the area is also Industrial District. The
current Structure Plan designation for 19 of the 105 acres is the Urban Estate District and the
current I-25 Subarea Plan designation for the area is also Urban Estate. The applicant proposes
a Structure Plan amendment and amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan to change the area into
additional Commercial Corridor and Employment District designations with corresponding
rezonings to the C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District.
APPLICANT FOR REZONING OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER:
237
October 16, 2007
City of Fort Collins
Department of Natural Resources
City Planning and Community Development Department
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
OWNER OF PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER REZONING:
City of Fort Collins
c%Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager
300 LaPorte Avenue, City Hall West
Fort Collins, CO 80521
APPLICANT FOR REZONING OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER:
Land Acquisition and Management, LLC
7200 South Alton Way Suite B 150
Centennial, CO 80012
OWNER OF PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER REZONING:
Same
BACKGROUND
Staff is recommending changes to the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan, Structure Plan map and
the rezoning of 143 acres into the E, Employment District in the southwest and in the northeast, the
rezoning of 86 acres into 66 acres of C, Commercial District and 20 acres of E, Employment
District, and the rezoning of 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate District to the E,Employment District.
The northeast corner rezonings would result in at total of96 acres ofC, Commercial zoned area(66
rezoned acres added to 30 acres of existing C zoning)and 39 acres of E, Employment zoning. The
E,Employment zoned areas would provide a buffer between the 96 acres of Commercial zoning and
residential areas to the north and east.
The review of land uses and zoning around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange is based on:
1. City Council direction to staffindicating the Council's generalpreferencefor a higher level
of"commercial"use for portions of the former Resource Recovery Farm property located
in the southwest quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. Staff has concluded that
rezoning 25 acres of the property,from C, Commercial and 118 acres from POL, Public
Open Lands to E,Employment(for a total of 143 acres ofE,Employment)would encourage
new businesses and expansion of local businesses while preserving the area as an attractive
community gateway, and would be in the best interests of the City.
238
October 16, 2007
2. Simultaneously, the City received a rezoning request from the owners of property in the
northeast quadrant of the Prospect RoadII-25 interchange requesting a change in zoning of
86 acres of I, Industrial and 19 acres of UE, Urban Estate.
Staff decided to review the land uses around the Prospect RoadII-25 interchange as a result of the
rezoning requests from the City and the privateproperty owners to determine what would be the best
land use pattern for the area around the interchange for the City as a whole, independent of the
specific rezoning requests. The amendments to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but
are independent actions. If the amendments to the plans are approved, the rezoning requests are
simply implementation actions to the plan amendments.
The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in the rezoning request for the southwest corner is:
should City Plan be amended and zonings changed to cover an area currently preserved as open
space to an area that will permit the development of employment land uses in the SW quadrant of
the Prospect RoadII-25 interchange?
The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in the rezoning request for the northeast corner is:
should City Plan be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a
regional/community scale shopping center in the northeast quadrant of the Prospect RoadII-25
interchange? A regional/community shopping center in the northeast quadrant will help contribute
tax revenues necessary to fund Prospect RoadlI-25 interchange improvements and related
infrastructure. Given the cost to improve infrastructure, development from all four quadrants
around the interchange will need to contribute funding to improve the interchange.
The rezoning requests need to be viewed independently from the City's Adequate Public Facilities
(APF) requirements: All development plans for parcels impacting the Prospect RoadII-25
interchange must include a Transportation Impact Analysis(TIA). The TIA will determine whether
traffic generated by the development will result in reduced level ofservice(LOS)at the interchange
and the physical improvements that will need to be constructed to mitigate the impacts. In order to
begin construction, developments must either build the needed improvements, or have funding
appropriated that will cover improvement costs.
In summary, the specific plan amendments for the southwest request involves changing 25 acres of
commercial and 118 acres of open space designated land to create 143 acres of employment land
in the southwest quadrant of the interchange. The specific plan amendments for the northeast
quadrant of the interchange involve changing 86 acres of industrial to 66 acres of commercial and
20 acres of employment and changing 19 acres of urban estate to employment.
THE SOUTHWEST SITE
The properties proposed for rezoning are currently an undeveloped 25 acre parcel of land zoned C,
Commercial, and a 118 acreparcel of theformer Resource Recovery Farm zoned POL,Public Open
Lands.
The adjoining existing zoning and land uses are as follows:
239
October 16, 2007
N.• C, Commercial and E, Employment, mainly undeveloped
E: C, Commercial, and County Commercial and FA1, Farming zoning, partially developed
retail and office uses, and agricultural uses
S: POL, Public Open Lands, and RC, River Corridor, public open space and the Boxelder
Sanitation District's wastewater treatment facility
W.- POL, Public Open Lands, the Running Deer Natural Area, Colorado Welcome Center and
I-25 rest area
The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the 325 acre Sludge Farm
Annexation in June of 1988 and zoned RC, River Corridor District. In 1997, the 25 acre parcel was
placed into the C, Commercial District and the 118 acre parcel was placed into the E, Employment
District as a result of the City Plan comprehensive rezoning of the entire city. The sizes of the
commercial and employment areas were based on an Overall Development Plan(ODP)for the area
prepared by the Planning Department for the Utilities Department.
The Utilities Department operated a sludge application process on the property until transferring
that operation to other sites in northern Larimer County. The Natural Resources Department
purchased 144 acres from the Utilities Department to be preserved as open space(the Running Deer
Natural Area), and in 2003, purchased an additional 151 acres as open space. In May 2004, the
City Council,following thepolicies and implementation actions contained in the I-25 Subarea Plan,
rezoned the 151 acre parcel from E, Employment into the POL, Public Open Lands District. The
118 acres requested for rezoning is a portion of the 151 acre tract.
THE NORTHEAST SITE
The adjoining existing zoning and land uses are as follows:
N.• C, Commercial and LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood, undeveloped
E: County FA-1, Farming, Kitchell Estates, large lot residential subdivision, and UE, Urban
Estate, undeveloped 100 acre parcel owned by the Poudre School District
S: C, Commercial, and County Commercial,partially developed retail and office uses
W.- C, Commercial and E, Employment, mainly undeveloped
The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the 235 acre Galatia Annexation
in 1990 and zoned HB, Highway Business, IP, Planned Industrial, and RLP, Low Density Planned
Residential Districts. All of the zoning districts had a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning
condition attached which required development proposals to be reviewed against the criteria of the
Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) which was the City's PUD ordinance at the time.
In 1997, the Galatia Annexation were rezoned as part of the City Plan comprehensive community
rezoning. The 30 acres ofHB, Highway Business was rezoned C, Commercial; the 86 acres ofIP,
Planned Industrial was rezoned I, Industrial; and the 119 acres of RLP, Low Density Planned
Residential was rezoned UE, Urban Estate. The HB, IP, and RLP Districts were eliminated from
the Land Use Code in 1997. No parcels were rezoned as a result of adoption of the I-25 Subarea
Plan in 2003.
240
October 16, 2007
Approximately 100 acres of the 119 acres zoned UE are currently owned by the Poudre School
District. The property is undeveloped, but will likely be used for athletic fields and school bus
storage.
CITY PLAN AND THE I-25 SUBAREA PLAN
In 1997, the City adopted City Plan as the City's the new Comprehensive Plan. The Structure Plan
map showed Commercial Corridor land use designations in all four quadrants immediately adjacent
to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange; Employment District designations for other areas in the
southwest and southeast uadrants•Low Density Mixed-Use Residential designation in
northeast, q ty 8n
the northwest quadrant; and Rural/Open Lands and Stream Corridors designation for other areas
in all four quadrants. The Structure Plan map also identified the need for additional planning in
the I-25 corridor and designated the area as the "I-25 Special Study Corridor. " In addition, City
Plan's chapter on Principles and Policies contained the following:
PRINCIPLELU-4: More specific subareaplanning efforts willfollow the adoption
of these City Plan Principles and Policies which tailor City Plan's citywide
perspective to individual neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and edges.
Policy LU-4.5 Priority Subareas. The following areas have been identified as
priority for future subarea planning:
• I-25 Corridor
Concurrent with the development of the I-25 Subarea Plan, was a multi jurisdictional cooperative
planning effort to develop the Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan. The
planning boundaries ofthe two efforts overlapped. The regional plan studied the)--25 corridorfrom
County Road 52 on the north to an area south of the Town of Berthoud, while the subarea plan
studied the area from County Road 52 to County Road 32 (Carpenter Road). The most significant
difference between the two plans is that the subarea plan dealt with land uses in more detail than
the regional plan. The regional plan was based on existing land use plans of the participating
jurisdictions. The regional plan focused on developing a set of design standards, a transportation
element,and open lands/naturalareaspolicies. The Northern Colorado Regional Communities)-25
Corridor Plan was adopted by the City in November 2001.
In 2003, the City adopted the I-25 Subarea Plan as an element of City Plan. The key points,
conclusions, and policies of the I-25 Subarea Plan are summarized as follows:
1. The I-25 Subarea Plan mainly deals with the area located east ofI-25 from around
the Prospect Road interchange on the south to County Road 52 on the north, and
County Road 5 on the east.
2. No change in the City's GMA boundary was proposed.
3. Two activity centers were identified, one at the Mulberry Street interchange and the
other at the Prospect Road interchange. The NE quadrant of the Mulberry
interchange was plannedfor thepotential location ofa regional/community shopping
241
October 16, 2007
center. The NE quadrant of the Prospect interchange was designated as a mix use
activity center with commercial, industrial, and residential uses.
4. Employment and industrial districts adjacent to I-25 are to be designed in a manner
as to maintain a perception of openness through the corridor.
5. Secondary uses (retail and highway-oriented commercial uses) typically permitted
in employment/industrial districts will be required to be set back at least 114 mile
from I-25 to avoid a commercial strip appearance along I-25.
6. Detached single-family residential development isprohibited within 114mileofI-25.
7. Low density, mixed use neighborhoods are to be concentrated within 112 mile of
Mulberry Street.
8. The balance of areas planned for residential development are to be urban estate
developments.
9. The City's Resource Recovery Farm is to be preserved as open space.
10. The subarea is planned to eventually be served with multi-modal transportation
options. A supplemental street system will facilitate movement within the subarea,
thus, diminishing the need to utilize I-25 for short trips.
11. Most undeveloped land within the subarea is expected to annex prior to development.
LAND USE CODE
The regulations covering rezonings in the City of Fort Collins are contained in Division 2.9 of the
Land Use Code. Section 2.9.4 (H) (2) indicates the following:
Mandatory Requirements for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. Any amendment to the
Zoning Map involving the zoning or rezoning ofsix hundred forty(640)acres of land
or less (a quasi-judicial rezoning) shall be recommended for approval by the
Planning and Zoning Board or approved by the City Council only if the proposed
amendment is:
(a) consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan; and/or
(b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood
surrounding and including the subject property.
Section 2.9.4 (H) (3) of the Land Use Code indicates the following:
Additional Considerations for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. In determining whether to
recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning
Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors:
(a) whether and the extent to which theproposed amendment is compatible with
existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the
appropriate zone district for the land;
(b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not
242
October 16, 2007
limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation,
wetlands and natural functioning of the environment;
(c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a
logical and orderly development pattern.
SOUTHWEST CORNER APPLICANTS REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION:
In 2003, the Natural Resources Department Natural Areas Program completed purchase of the
Resource Recovery Farm (RRF) as a scenic and open lands buffer. At the time of purchase, the
eastern portion of the RRF was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Areas Program
in the Natural Areas Policy Plan, nor the various community separator plans adopted by the City.
Because the eastern portion was not shown in these plans, and because it has low natural resource
values, Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process to help guide the property's
ultimate management and disposition status.
In August 2005, the Natural Resources staffshared a series of options for the RRFproperty with the
Council and requested policy direction. The Council indicated its general preference for a higher
level of"commercial"usefortheproperty. Based on Council's perspective, the Natural Resources
Department staff concluded that rezoning a substantial portion of the property (118 acres)from
POL, Public Open Lands to E, Employment would be in the best interests of the City.
In addition, staffs perspective is that the 25 acre parcel zoned C, Commercial, immediately
adjacent to the interchange and owned by the City should be combined with the 118 acre parcel to
create a 143 acre parcel for employment type uses.
Employment zoning would allow the property to be used for economic development purposes. At
the same time, however, the adopted I-25 Subarea Plan - as well as other constraints on the
property, would allow the property to be developed in a manner that preserves an aesthetically
pleasing viewshed from I-25 as well as protects adjoining areas with high natural values (namely
Boxelder Creek and the Running Deer Natural Area). The rezoning request excludes Boxelder
Creek, it will remain zoned POL.
Regulations contained in the Land Use Code applicable to the I-25 corridor, and more generally
throughout the community, are intended to have employment/industrial districts designed in a
manner to maintain openness through the use ofsetback requirements, maximum buildingfrontage
allowances, restricting building heights,and proper management off oodplains. Minimum building
setback requirements are 205 feet from the centerline of I-25. Maximum building frontage
allowance is 50%at the 80 foot minimum setbackfrom the property line, which can be expanded
to 60%at an increased setback of 120 feet. Building heights are restricted to 40 feet within 600 feet
from the property line adjoining I-25.
NORTHEAST CORNER APPLICANTS REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION
The following has been submitted by the applicant as a justification for the rezoning requests:
243
October 16, 2007
• The Prospect /1-25 interchange was constructed in 1966. Since its construction, traffic
volumes have increased significantly and the interchange structure has deteriorated.
• A recent North 1-25 Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)team analysis of the interchange
indicates that portions of the interchange are CURRENTLY experiencing a failing Level of
Service (LOS) quality F(failure).
• Furthermore, the EIS team projects increases of roughly 4 times the current traffic volume
for the interchange in the next 20 years.
• North I-25 EIS projections call for a 200 foot widening of interstate right-of-way (ROW) to
accommodate an additional lane of traff c in each direction and improvements to the on/off
ramps and safety lanes. As a result, any reconstruction of the Prospect interchange must
accommodate a wider footprint. The current interchange ROW will not accommodate this
widening.
• Cost estimates/projections for the interchange and Prospect Road improvements are
substantial:
a The projection for the interchange itself is $25,000,000.00 (excluding ROW
acquisition costs).
a Boxelder Creek crossing of Prospect Road west of interchange is $3,000,000.
a Prospect Road east of the interchange to County Road 5 is$1,700,000 to$2,300,000
(excluding design, entitlements, utilities, structures, relocation of Timnath inlet
canal, and CR5/Prospect intersection).
a Prospect Road west of interchange to Summit View is $1,000,000 to 1,300,000
(similar exclusions).
a The total, thus, ranges from $30,700,000 to $31,600,000, at a minimum.
• Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the Federal Highway Administration
(FHwA) and the City have little funds to aid in the construction of this interchange and
related street improvements.
• A new interchange is needed to meet the Adequate Public Facilities (APF) requirement for
the new CSU R&D center in the southwest quadrant as well as for the property owner's
anticipated project or other developments on the interchange corners. A new interchange
will serve as a "Gateway to CSU", as envisioned by the University. If the City wishes to
have this interchange constructed anytime in the near future, it will likely need to be funded
by a public/private financing vehicle.
• The 1-25 Subarea Plan and the current Overall Development Plan (ODP) on the property
were developed prior to the current interchange cost projections and proposed land use
changes on the City-owned property becoming available. Clearly such magnitude of
interchange constructions costs and such land use changes could not have been anticipated.
• Gene Andrist, a financial planner involved with the financing of many interchanges and
other major projects throughout the state, has developed a number offunding scenarios for
public/private financing of the interchange. Increased levels of retail space at the
interchange corners appears to be the key to provide increased revenue sources to the City
to pay for interchange and related improvements.
• A recent Economic Planning Systems (EPS) study commissioned by the City to evaluate
future retail capacity in the vicinity of Fort Collins, determined that over the next few years
244
October 16, 2007
an increase of approximately 1.5 million feet of retail space is anticipated. The City is in a
very competitive market with the Towns of Timnath, Windsor and Wellington for this retail
space. If the City wishes to capture any of this increased retail space (and its related sales
tax) the City needs to move quickly and aggressively.
The property owners (the Whites) have been very involved is a series of planning related
studies/projects for the interchange, the surrounding area, and along the I-25 corridor. Listed
below is a summary of their involvement:
BOXELDER CREEK REGIONAL STORMWATER ALLJANCE
• Served from the inception of the Boxelder Alliance until present as the representative for a
group ofprivate property owners.
• Was one of 5 groups (Landowners, City, Wellington, Larimer County, Colorado Water
Conservation Board) who EQUALLYfunded the stormwater masterplan.
• Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which
provided overall direction to the Alliance's efforts. The TAC.•
0 Prepared the Scope of Work for the engineering consultant,
0 Selected the engineering consultant,
0 Provided ongoing direction to%oordination with the selected consultant
a Reviewed/commented on work products,
o Held monthly public meetings to discuss progress,
o Participated in weekly/biweekly meetings to complete tasks for the Alliance,
o Reviewed/commented on final Regional Master Plan,
o Participated in Alliance presentations to Alliance members and town councils.
• Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC).
0 FAC was formed to ensure financial feasibility to the engineering options.
0 Independently funded legal consultant to the FAC.
0 The FAC.•
Completed funding analyses of the Master Plan alternatives,
• Researched project financing options,
Completed damages & consequences assessments,
Developed Funding/Implementation Strategy for final Master Plan,
Coordinated with TA in developing a recommended alternative.
• Prepared list ofproperty owners in vicinity ofI-25/Prospect(400 names)for public notices.
• Advised local property owners group of Alliance financing issues.
• Coordinated with Alliance members including: Lorimer County, Town of Wellington, the
City, Town of Timnath, Town of Windsor, North Poudre Irrigation Company, Boxelder
Sanitation Distirict, New Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company, Colorado Water
Conservation Board, Colorado Department of Transportation and others.
NORTHI-25 EIS
• Attended North I-25 EIS Technical Advisory Committee meetings (usually was the only
member of the public in attendance).
• Participated in all local(Group 7) meetings.
245
October 16, 2007
• Organized group of landowners in the neighborhood of I-25/Prospect and advised them of
interchange issues.
• Met regularly with City Transportation staff as well as CDOT and Felsburg Holt Ullevig.,
consultants on the North 1-25 EIS project.
• With City Transportation staffandotherproperty owners, influenced theproposed alignment
and details of the Prospect/I-25 interchange to the advantage of City.
• Facilitated meetings between North I-25 EIS and Boxelder Creek Stormwater Alliance to
resolve mutual issues.
• Researched and resolved historic preservation issue with North I-25 EIS team.
PROSPECT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
• Organized group of local property owners concerning issues pertaining to future Prospect
Road improvements.
• Coordinated regularly with City Transportation and Engineering staff.
• Facilitated series of public/private meetings with the City, Timnath Engineer, and local
property owners to address future improvements to Prospect before they became problems.
These issues included:
o Boxelder Creek crossing of Prospect west of I-25,
o Greeley Water Extension & Transmission Project(GWET) crossing of Prospect,
o Boxelder Sanitation District sewer crossing of Prospect at McLaughlin Lane,
o Relocation of Timnath Inlet canal to allow future widening of Prospect,
o Prospect/County Road 5 intersection issues,
o Boxelder Creek stormwater overflow canal crossing of Prospect(the Grand Canal).
o With Town ofTimnath,Don Bachman, Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company,Poudre
Valley School District and a local developer, developed cross section profile of
future Prospect ROW which is in use today.
GREELEY WATER EXTENSION AND TRANSMISSION PROJECT(GWET)
Greeley's GWETproject is a 60-inch diameter waterline delivering water from their pre-treatment
plant northwest of Fort Collins to Greeley. In its nominal configuration, the bottom of the pipeline
is to be placed on top of approximately 2 feet ofgravel and covered with at least 60 inches of soil
making the total depth of their pipeline excavation and backfill approximately 12 feet. The sheer
size of this project makes it important to anticipate related issues in advance of the project's
construction. The 200 7 segment ofthisproject included a crossing ofProspect Road at McLaughlin
Lane, a crossing ofI-25 at a location north of Prospect and completion to a point in the vicinity of
the Fort Collins Airpark. The 1-25 crossing is particularly complicated since three irrigation
company canal crossings, the Boxelder Creek crossing, a Boxelder Sanitation District sewer line
crossing as well as various other utility crossings are located in close proximity to one another.
• The Whites facilitated several public/private meetings with representatives from Greeley,
Timnath,BoxelderAlliance, City Transportation/Engineering and Stormwater Departments,
the Poudre Valley School District, Boxelder Sanitation District, CDOT, a group of affected
landowners, and others to discuss details of the project.
246
October 16, 2007
• Arranged to have GWET representatives attend several Boxelder Alliance TAC meetings to
coordinate the particularly tight and complex I-25 crossing as well as other mutual issues.
• Facilitated meetings with the Timnath Engineer and Timnath GMA developers to discuss
project alignment to minimize impacts to properties in vicinity of Timnath.
• Worked closely with Poudre Valley School District personnel regarding crossing of the
GWET project across the District's and White's properties.
• The 2007 segment of the GWET pipeline is nearing completion.
AMENDMENTS TO THE STRUCTURE PLAN MAP AND THE I-25 SUBAREA PLAN.•
The Structure Plan map, a component of City Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan, sets forth a
basic pattern of development, showing how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 20
years. The I-25 Subarea Plan is an element of City Plan and provides greater detail and policies
for the I-25 corridor. For the southwest corner, the maps in these existingplans currently designate
the 25 acre parcel as commercial and the 118 acre parcel as open space. For the northeast corner,
the maps in these existing plans currently designate 30 acres as commercial, 86 acres as industrial,
and 19 acres as urban estate (not including the 100 acres owned by the Poudre School District) in
the northeast quadrant of the Prospect RoadII-25 interchange. To recommend approval of the City
Plan and I-25 Subarea Plan amendments, the City Council has to find that:(])the existing Structure
Plan is in need of change; and(2) the proposed changes would promote the public welfare and be
consistent with the vision, goals,principles, and policies of City Plan. The applicable criteria are
contained in Appendix C of City Plan.
Review Criteria for Structure Plan Minor Amendments: Appendix C of City Plan outlines
mandatory requirements for public notice, review process and evaluation criteria for minor
amendments to City Plan, including Structure Plan map amendments. The Plan text states:
"A plan amendment will be approved if the City Council makes specific findings
that• The existing City Plan and/or related element thereof is in need of the proposed
amendment;and The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and
will be consistent with the vision,goals,principles and policies of City Plan and the
elements thereof. "
To support the requested rezoning, amendments to existing plans will be necessary. Attachment 1
contains the statements,policies,and maps which need to be amended within the I-25 Subarea Plan.
Attachment 2 is a summary of the recommended changes to the City Plan Structure Plan map.
ANALYSIS BASED ON REZONING REVIEW CRITERIA
How the rezoning requests address the requirements in the City's Land Use Code are summarized
below:
(a) consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan;
247
October 16, 2007
Staff decided to review the land uses around the Prospect RoadlI-25 interchange as a result of the
rezoning requests from the City,for the southwest quadrant, and the private property owner,for the
northeast quadrant, to determine what would be the best land use pattern for the area around the
interchange for the City as a whole, independent ofthe specific rezoning requests. The amendments
to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are independent actions. If the amendments to
the plans are approved, the rezoning requests are simply implementation actions to the plan
amendments. Staff is recommending the plans be amended to allow the commercial and open space
lands in the southwest quadrant to be changed to the employment district designation. Basically,
the plan amendments revert the property back to the land uses planned and zoned prior to the 1-25
Subarea Plan adoption.
Staff is recommending the plans be amended to allow additional commercial and employment land
uses to develop in the northeast quadrant of the Prospect RoadlI-25 interchange. It is becoming
more apparent that 1-25 is not a logical urban edge to the community. The importance of the I-25
corridor to the economic development of Northern Colorado can be viewed all along the corridor.
The towns of Timnath, Windsor, and Wellington are changing the character of areas east of I-25
from the rural, low density residential areas envisioned in both the initial City Plan of 1997, and the
2004 update, to urban types of uses. In staffs opinion, the City's plans need to be changed to
address the new regional context of what is happening beyond the City's Growth ManagementArea
(GMA) boundary.
In City Plan, one of the stated community goals is:
Fort Collins will maintain its role as a regional economic center.
The downtown, the Foothills Mall, and South College Avenue are typically the areas cited as the
most important retail shopping locations to help achieve this goal. Staff believes that interstate
interchanges need to be elevated to share a similar importance.
Principle ECON-2 states:
Economic Sustainability: The City will strive to develop an economy which will be
self-sustaining within the limits of its GMA.
Policy ECON-2.2 states:
Fort Collins will be a leader in developing an economy which continues to
"develop" within its GMA.
The southwest and northeast quadrants of the Prospect RoadlI-25 interchange are within the City's
GMA boundary. The plan amendments and rezonings will help strengthen the interchange for an
expanded role in the City's economic development strategies.
Policy GM-4.2 states:
248
October 16, 2007
Capital Improvement Policy. The City will continue to operate under the following
Capital Improvement Policies:
e. The City will use a variety ofdifferentfunding sources to f end capital
projects with an emphasis on the "Pay-as-you-go"philosophy.
One of the northeast applicant's stated justifications for the plan amendments and rezoning is to
provide a land use basis for the ability to generate sufficient tax revenues from the development of
parcels around the Prospect Road/I--25 interchanges to cover the costs of necessary infrastructure
improvements, including the major expense of reconstructing the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange.
This would be consistent with the pay-as-you-go philosophy.
(b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhoodsurroundingandincludingthe
subject property.
When identified for open space preservation in the I-25 Subarea Plan, the eastern portion of the
Resource Recovery Farm (RRF) was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Resources
Department's Natural Areas Program in the Natural Areas Policy Plan, nor the various community
separator plans adopted by the City. Because the RRF was not shown in these plans, and because
it has low natural resource values, Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process
to help guide the property's ultimate management and disposition status. Staff has concluded that
the eastern portion is not needed for open space in order to achieve any of the City's natural area
preservation goals.
There are several changed conditions that help justify the plan amendments and rezoning request.
When the 1-25 Subarea Plan was adopted in 2003, it was assumed that the necessary improvements
to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange would be funded by the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) and/or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)since it was part of
the federal/state highway system. It was not anticipated that the responsibility for improving the
interchange would fall on local governments and/or adjacent property owners using public/private
partnerships. The plan amendments and rezoning request will help address this changed condition
whereby local revenues will need to be created in order to finance interchange improvements.
The competition for retail sales tax dollars is also significantly different now in 2007 than it was in
2003. In order for the City to remain competitive in the Northern Colorado market, undeveloped
retail commercial sites in desirable locations need to be provided. The City is lacking in areas to
attract regional/community scale retail establishments. Interstate interchanges are the type of
desirable sites for such regional serving retail uses.
Land use plans by other jurisdictions,particularly the Town ofTimnath, are changing the character
ofareas east ofI-25 from the rural, low density residential, areas shown on the City's plans, to more
intense urban uses. In June 2007, the Timnath Town Board approved an amendment to Timnath's
Land Use Plan which extended Timnath's Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary north of
Timnath to County Road 52 (the northern boundary of the A-B brewery). The Timnath Land Use
Plan also intensified the residential densities and land uses in the area to include commercial and
249
October 16, 2007
employment uses. This is a significant change of conditions that affects areas within the Fort
Collins GMA boundary. I-25 is no longer a line from which land uses begin to decrease in intensity
from employment and commercial uses adjacent to the highway, to urban residential, to urban estate
residential, to rural uses. The land uses in areas east of I-25 are beginning to mirror the urban
types of land uses west of I-25. Even the 100 acres of UE zoned property owned by the Poudre
School District slated for use as athletic fields and school bus storage are not low intensity, rural
types of land uses.
In addition to the above, Section 2.9.4[HJ[3]provides factors that may be considered along with
the mandatory requirements for quasi-judicial rezonings. Staff has prepared a response to each of
the additional factors, demonstrating how the optional criteria could also be met:
(a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and
proposed uses surrounding the subject land,and is the appropriate zone districtfor the land;
The E, Employment District is the appropriate zone for the southwest corner. Areas to the north,
northeast, and east are designated for a mix of commercial, industrial, and employment uses. Also,
the regulations contained in the Land Use Code are intended to have employment districts along the
I-25 corridor designed in a manner to maintain openness through the use of: setback requirements,
maximum building frontage allowances, restricting building heights, and proper management of
floodplains.
The C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District are the appropriate zones for the
northeast corner. The E, Employment District will provide for a land use transition from the C,
Commercial District areas to the surrounding residential properties to the north and east. The E,
Employment District is more restrictive than the previous I, Industrial District for the property to
the north.Areas to the south and west are designated for a mix of commercial and employment uses.
And again, the regulations contained in the Land Use Code are intended to have employment
districts along the I-25 corridor designed in a manner to maintain openness through the use of
setback requirements, maximum building frontage allowances, restricting building heights, and
proper management offloodplains.
(b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise,
stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the
environment;
Staff believes that development in the E, Employment District at the southwest corner would have
no significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Any development application will be
subject to the City's development standards relative to natural habitat, energy conservation,
stormwater and landscape design.
Staff's perspective is that development in the C, Commercial District and the E,EmploymentDistrict
at the northeast corner would have no significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Again, development applications will be subject to the City's development standards relative to
250
October 16, 2007
natural habitat, energy conservation, stormwater and landscape design. Part of the reason for
enlarging the C, Commercial zoning in the NE quadrant was to devote land to the proper
management of the Boxelder Creekfoodplain.
(c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and
orderly development pattern.
The Prospect RoadII-25 interchange represents an opportunity to create a key community gateway,
combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation. It is logical that such
an important interchange maximize the ability to have land available for the development of a mix
of commercial and employment types of uses. The City's development standards will require
adequate public utilities and infrastructure to be in place to assure an orderly development pattern.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS
After reviewing the East Prospect Road and I-25 rezonings and amendments to the I-25 Subarea
Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, staff makes the following findings of fact and
conclusions as explained in detail above:
1. The request for amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map
would be consistent with the City Plan's overall vision, goals,principles, and policies.
2. The rezoning requests are consistent with City Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan, based
on the Structure Plan map amendment and amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan.
3. The proposed E,Employment District is appropriate for the parcels at the southwest corner
of Prospect Road and I-25.
4. The proposed C, Commercial District and E, Employment District are appropriate for the
northeast corner and will help provide tax revenues necessary to cover local funding
required to improve the Prospect RoadlI-25 interchange as well as other infrastructure
improvements.
5. The proposed rezonings will not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural
environment.
6. The proposed rezonings will result in a logical and orderly pattern of development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staffrecommends approval ofthe amendments to thel--25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure
Plan map and the rezoning of 25 acres of C, Commercial and 118 acres ofPOL, Public Open Lands
to to 143 acres of E, Employment at the SW corner and for the NE corner, the rezoning of 86 acres
ofl, Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 acres of E, Employment and the rezoning of 19
acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment. to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C,
Commercial zoned area (a total of 96 acres) and residential areas to the north and east.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting on September 20, 2007, voted 7-0
to recommend approval of the plan amendments and the requested rezonings. "
251
October 16, 2007
Councilmember Troxell withdrew from the discussion of Items Relating to the Prospect RoadII-25
Interchange Rezonings due to a conflict of interest.
City Manager Atteberry noted Resolution 2007-098 Amending the City Structure Plan Map
Pertaining to the Northeast Corner of Prospect Road andI--25 and First Reading of Ordinance No.
127, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning
Classifications for that Certain Property Known as the Northeast Corner ofEast Prospect Road and
I-25 Rezoning have been pulled and will be discussed at a work session. Resolution 2007-099
Amending the I--25 Subarea Plan has been amended to reflect the changes.
Ken Waido,Chief Planner, stated the item was a request to rezone 25 acres that are currently zoned
C-Commercial and 118 acres that are currently zoned POL-Public Open Lands into 143 acres of the
E-Employment zone. This is a quasi-judicial rezone as it is less than 640 acres and Council must
decide if the two criteria for rezoning have been met. The first criteria is that the rezoning must be
consistent with City Plan and/or warranted by changed conditions in the neighborhood, including
the subject property. City Plan contains a Structure Plan Map that gives the Land Use Code a
structure of neighborhoods, districts and corridors. At the time City Plan was adopted, it was
recognized that the I-25 corridor needed additional planning so that corridor was identified as a
special study corridor. The City participated in the Northern Colorado Regional Community's I-25
Corridor Plan, which discussed a unified set of quality development controls, a multimodal
transportation network and methods of protecting significant natural areas and open spaces.
Subsequently,the City developed its own I-25 Subarea Plan that included the previous Plan's items
and was more detailed in its land use description. The City has Plans that cover the areas west of
I-25, so the I-25 Subarea Plan was concentrated on the east side of I-25 from Prospect north to
Anheuser-Busch. This rezoning does not result in any change to the Growth Management Area
boundary. Employment districts adjacent to I-25 were designed to maintain the perception of
openness throughout the corridor and the Resource Recovery Farm was to be preserved as open
space. The land use designation for areas surrounding the interchange is C-Commercial. There are
Employment and Industrial areas to the north of the Commercial zone. The Land Use Code contains
specific development standards for the I-25 corridor, aimed at maintaining a sense of openness.
Depth, width and height restrictions have been developed to maintain a sense of openness. The
request to rezone 143 acres to E-Employment is not consistent with the adopted I-25 Subarea Plan
so the existing Plan must be amended.
The second criteria to rezone is changed conditions. The eastern portion of the Resource Recovery
Farm was not identified as an "area of interest" by the Natural Areas Policy Plan or any of the
community separator plans and has low natural resources value. CDOT and the Federal Highway
Administration are likely not to fund the needed interchange improvements and local revenue
sources must be found to improve the interchange. Interchanges are very desirable sites for
employment centers and regional commercial uses. Land use plans of other jurisdictions are
changing the character of areas east of 1-25 from rural, low density to more urban-intense uses.
Timnath is considering modifying its I-25 Plan and drastically change the land use character of areas
east of I-25. The new Plan would create much higher density of residential uses, and would remove
any separator between Timnath and Fort Collins. Timnath is proposing a Growth Management
boundary IGA with Larimer County that would encompass the area east of the Prospect/I-25
252
October 16, 2007
interchange. These current plans significantly change the use of the land east of I-25 from the vision
created in City Plan.
Additional considerations are: (1)will the development of the area be compatible with surrounding
uses, will development create any adverse impact on the natural environment and; (2) will the
amendment of the Plan lead to a logical and orderly development pattern. Areas north,northeast and
east ofthe subject property are designated for commercial and industrial employment uses which can
be higher intensity uses than the E-Employment zone would permit. Any development would go
throughthe development process. The interchange represents a key community gateway and can
combine a balance of economic development and open space preservation.
Shane Miller,4325 Mill Creek,asked what"and/or"means in the Land Use Code and how does this
rezoning preserve open space. The fact that Timnath is changing its Plan is not a good reason for
the City to change its vision of the I-25 corridor.
W aido stated the 1-25 Subarea Plan discusses maintaining the perception of openness,not necessarily
open space. The Plan recognizes the 1-25 corridor will develop and has standards that would
maintain low building heights and separation between buildings so the view corridors are
maintained. The changes Timnath is considering in its Plan for the area east of 1-25 directly affect
the City's Plan for that area and the City needs to reexamine what it is planning for the area.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the purpose was to preserve the viewshed with limited commercial
development and to keep an open-feeling space but not keeping the land as actually open space to
be used by citizens for hiking and bird watching. Waido stated that purpose was what the Land Use
Code was designed to protect.
City Attorney Roy stated, according to the Code, "and"indicates all connected words or provisions
apply. "And/or"indicates the connected words may apply singly or in any combination. "Either/or"
indicates the connected words or provisions apply singly but not in combination.
Councilmember Roy asked if the I-25 Subarea Plan had become null and void. Joe Frank,Advance
Planning Director, stated the Plan has been adopted and is part of the Comprehensive Plan and used
to make land use decisions. The Northern Colorado 1-25 Corridor Plan was originally eight
jurisdictions that joined together to look at the 27-mile stretch of 1-25 from Berthoud to north of Fort
Collins. It was adopted by all jurisdictions, except Weld County and Johnstown. A MOU was
adopted by the six jurisdictions that had adopted the Plan to continue to participate and there is an
I-25 Policy Committee that meets quarterly to consider implementation of the Plan.
Councilmember Roy requested a map of the I-25 Corridor Plan area from when it was adopted and
what has occurred since adoption,including any known future plans. He asked what was the relative
value was of open lands in the I-25 corridor. John Stokes,Natural Resources Director,stated the 143
acres under consideration was acquired by the Natural Areas Program in 2003 for open space
purposes. When the land was acquired, it was not in any plans the Natural Areas Program had for
open space or conservation. A year ago, Natural Resources asked Council for direction regarding
the property. One option was to rehabilitate the property and replant it in native vegetation or to
253
i
October 16, 2007
develop a build-out plan for the property. Council was comfortable with the development option,
using the Land Use Code standards. Currently,the property is a cornfield and is not an area that fits
into the Natural Areas system. Portions of the property are not involved in the proposed rezoning
that do fit into the Natural Areas system.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2007-097.
Councilmember Roystated Fort Collins had a continuing responsibility to determine how best to
g P Y
improve the I-25 interchanges and fund those improvements. Opportunities must be created locally
to fund improvements which are extremely costly.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if Council should consider the future expense of interchange improvements
as part of the criteria in making its decision. City Attorney Roy stated the basic criteria for Council's
decision was that the rezoning had to either be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and/or
warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood. An additional consideration is whether,
and the extent to which, the amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses and is the
appropriate zone district. Another consideration is whether, and the extent to which, the proposed
amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. A third
consideration is whether,and the extent to which,the proposed amendment would result in a logical
and orderly development pattern. Potential expenditures for infrastructures do not fit into those
considerations.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, and Roy.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt the revised
version of Resolution 2007-099.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the revised version of the Resolution removes some changes that
were originally proposed by staff. City Attorney Roy stated the original version of the Resolution
contained two reasons that supported the change to the 1-25 Subarea Plan for the northeast corner
of I-25/Prospect and the revised version only contains reasons to support changes for the southwest
comer of the interchange.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, and Roy.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
126, 2007 on First Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, and Roy. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
254
October 16, 2007
Ordinance No. 128, 2007,
Authorizing the Conveyance of 143 Acres of Land
to Colorado State University Research Foundation
in Exchange for 267 Acres of Land Adjacent to
Reservoir Ridge Natural Area.Adopted on First Reading.
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
The value of each of the exchange properties has been determined to be $4 million respectively.
Both parties have made adjustments to the size of the exchange properties and negotiated various
provisions in order to arrive at an equal exchange value. In addition to the exchange transaction,
the City will obtain an option to buy 27 acres from CSURFfor $405,000. There also will be an
internal transfer of funds from the Natural Areas Program in the amount of$2,000,000 to the
general fund to compensate the general fund for 25 of the 143-acre City-owned exchange parcel.
Thus, the net cash investment of new Natural Area Program funds for the exchange and the
acquisition will be $2,450,000.
Of the 143-acre City-owned exchange parcel, 118 acres were acquired by the Natural Areas
Program in 2003 for$12,317 per acre, or$1,453,509. Thus, the total investment by Natural Areas
in the 143-acre exchange parcel is$3,453,509($2,000,000 for the 25-acre general fund parcel, and
$1,453,509 for the 118-acre parcel). This $3,453,509 investment will traded for the 267-acre
CSURF exchange parcel valued at$4,000,000.
The City's Natural Areas Program will own/manage all of the property acquired from Colorado
State University. Ongoing management costs for the 267 acres (and the 27 acres)are expected to
be fairly low ($35,000 annually), since the City already manages much of the surrounding land.
In the future there could be modest capital costs associated with constructing a trail and a small
bridge to cross an irrigation canal. All costs for managing and/or improving the land will be born
by the City's dedicated Natural Areas funds.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The adoption of this Ordinance will authorize a land exchange between the City offort Collins and
the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF). The proposed exchange consists of
the City trading 143-acres of City-owned land at the southwest corner of I-25 and Prospect (a
portion oftheformer Resource Recovery Farm)for 267-acres ofstate-owned landon Colorado State
University's foothills campus. The exchange land currently owned by the City would become a
gateway for Colorado State University into the City, and ultimately would include research,
development, educational, and light manufacturing facilities. The exchange land currently owned
by Colorado State University would become part of the Reservoir Ridge Natural Area, which is
owned/managed by the City's Natural Areas Program. In addition to the exchange, the City would
acquire an option to purchase an additional 27 acres from CSURF that is adjacent to the CSURF
exchange property and Reservoir Ridge.
255
October 16, 2007
BACKGROUND
For the past year, the City and Colorado State University (CSU) have been discussing various
concepts related to land conservation as well as CSU's desire to have a significant gateway
presence on the 1-25 corridor. Those conversations recently crystallized as it became apparent to
both parties that significant, advantageous arrangements could be made that would greatly benefit
both parties.
The 143-acre City-owned exchange property at the southwest corner of I-25 and Prospect(known
as the Resource Recovery Farm) has been owned by the City since around 1980. It originally was
acquired for use as a bio-solids land-application site for the Wastewater Utility. The property's
original size was 325 acres; over time much of that land was acquired by the City's Natural Areas
Program to become part of Running Deer Natural Area. The most recent acquisition was in 2003,
when 151 acres were acquired by the Natural Areas Program at the direction of City Council to
protect open space along 1-25. Of those 151 acres, 118 acres are proposed to be part of the land
trade with CSU. The remaining 33 acres would be retained by the Natural Areas Program to
protect Boxelder Creek and the Poudre River corridors. An additional 25 acres that is held by the
general fund of the City at the corner ofI-25 and Prospect would bring the total amount of the trade
parcel to 143 acres. (See attached map)
In the proposed transaction with CSURF, the 143-acre trade parcel is described as two pieces, the
25 acres at the corner ofI-25 and Prospect and the additional 118-acres to the south. The 25 acres
would be conveyed to CSURF subject to all applicable zoning and development regulations. The
118 acres also would be conveyed subject to all applicable zoning and development regulations with
the additional proviso thatforty percent(4091o) of the 118 acres would be required to be "outdoor
spaces. " Outdoor spaces are defined to be landscaped orpark areas, native vegetation areas, water
features,paths, or trails, but no other paved or surfaced areas. In addition to this requirement, the
outdoor spaces are not allowed to be aggregated in a single contiguous area and must be distributed
throughout the 118-acre parcel. The intention of these provisions is to continue to provide a
relatively "transparent"built environment at the site, so that good views are maintainedfrom 1-25
to the west.
CSU's intention in acquiring the 143-acre property is several fold: (1) to establish a gateway
presence on I-25 that will lead visitors to CSU to the main campus by way of Prospect; (2)to create
a research and development "campus-like"facility primarily focused on green technologies; and
(3) to provide a location in partnership to a major start-up company with plans to begin
manufacturing solar panels as soon as 2008. The start-up company developed its technology at
CSU and intends to have as many as 300 employees within a year.
The 267-acre CSURF-owned property that would be conveyed to the City is land that has
traditionally been utilized by CSUfor grazing and animal husbandry. The east and west boundaries
of the property adjoin existing natural areas. The south boundary adjoins other CSU lands; the
north boundary adjoins City-owned natural area as well as the 2 7-acreparcel held by CSURF that
will be optioned for purchase by the Natural Area Program (see attached map)for Four Hundred
and Five Thousand Dollars($405,000). When the 267-acre and 27-acre parcel are combined with
existing natural areas, the total contiguous conserved area will be 748 acres, one ofthe largest local
256
October 16, 2007
natural areas. The conserved area will stretch from the top of the first major foothill west of town
to Overland Trail Road. In addition to habitat contiguity, conservation values include wetlands,
shortgrass prairie, and prairie dog colonies. Scenically, this area will be one of the few, if not the
only place in north Fort Collins, where an unobstructed vista to the foothills is preserved.
In addition to the conservation values, the area will provide trail connection opportunities from
Overland Trail to the foothills and contributes to a longer-term plan to connect this area by trail to
the Poudre River. Moreover, the protected area will surround and be adjacent to the Primrose
Studio. The Primrose Studio, along with land was donated to the City of Fort Collins NaturalAreas
Program by Rob and Mary Udall with the stipulation that the art studio be made available to the
public for classes and meetings related to conservation. Primrose Studio is planned to be open
November 18th. "
Councilmember Troxell withdrew from the discussion ofFirst Reading ofOrdinance No. 128, 2007
Authorizing the Conveyance of 143 Acres of Land To Colorado State University Research
Foundation In Exchange for 267 Acres of Land Adjacent to Reservoir Ridge Natural Area due to
a conflict of interest.
John Stokes,Natural Resources Director,thanked CSU and the Colorado State University Research
Foundation(CSURF)for working together with the Natural Areas Program to create this project that
was of mutual benefit to both organizations. The property was formerly known as the Resource
Recovery Farm and is different from other properties in the Natural Areas system. The property was
acquired to help preserve the viewshed from I-25 and is located on the southwest corner of 1-25 and
East Propect. The property owned by CSURF is 267 acres located on Colorado State University's
foothills campus. An additional 27-acre tract located next to the property will be optioned for
purchase from CSURF. A land trade is proposed between the City and CSURF. 143 acres of land
in the Natural Areas system will be traded for 267 acres owned by CSURF. The two parcels are
valued at $4 million each. Two outside appraisers have placed this value on the properties. The
additional 27-acre tract to be optioned would be bought for$15,000 per acre,which is the same price
per acre as the two properties being traded. The property can be bought any time over the next three
years at the discretion of the Natural Areas Program. The 143-acre tract is in two pieces. The
General Fund owns 25 acres and the Natural Areas Program owns 118 acres. Natural Areas would
acquire the 25-acre tract from the General Fund for$2 million and then the 25 acre tract would be
conveyed as part of the land exchange with all development rights intact. The 118-acre tract was
acquired in 2003 for$1.4 million as part of a 151-acre acquisition. Natural Areas would retain 33
acres that would not be conveyed in the land exchange. The 33 acres is located on the south end of
the property,near the Poudre River and on the west side,near Boxelder Creek and those areas do fit
into the Natural Areas Program.
The I I8-acre parcel conveyed is subject to a 40% development restriction, which means 40% is
required to be outdoor spaces such as landscape,park areas,native vegetation,water features,paths
or trails,but no other paved or surface area. The outdoor spaces must be distributed throughout the
118-acre parcel. The purpose is to promote a campus-like development that would be aesthetically
pleasing. This restriction would be in addition to the 1-25 Subarea Plan development regulations and
zoning requirements. CSU has been supportive of this restriction throughout negotiations.
257
October 16, 2007
One issue that has been raised is the need to raise funds for improvements at the I-25/Prospect
interchange. Having a taxable entity own the 143-acre parcel would be beneficial in this regard. The
parcel will be held by CSU, a taxable entity and would be part of any special district that might be
formed in the future to pay for improvements. The City will retain a"right of first refusal"on the
143-acre parcel to ensure it will not be conveyed to a tax-exempt entity.
The total investment by the Natural Areas Program is $3.5 million and it is proposed to be traded
for 267 acres that has been valued at$4 million. The land the City will receive will create a premiere
natural area on the northwest side of town. At the corner of I-25 and Prospect, an academic and
business hub devoted to sustainable technology will be created by CSU, along with the potential
location of a solar manufacturing company that could provide over 300 new jobs.
Reservoir Ridge Natural Area is adjacent to the 267-acre parcel that would be acquired in the land
exchange. When the 267-acre parcel and the 27-acre parcel are acquired, an area of 748 acres of
natural area will be created and would connect from Horsetooth to Overland Trail. It has great
habitat values and opportunities for trail connection. It surrounds Primrose Studio, located at
Claymore Lake. Primrose Studio, an art studio,was donated to the Natural Areas Program by Rob
and Mary Udall with the stipulation that the art studio would be restored and made available to the
public for art and nature classes. The remodel is almost complete and the building will be opened
to the public on November 18.
Bruce Lockhart,2500 East Harmony Road,stated the zoning change that just occurred for the parcel
of land located at the southwest corner of 1-25 and Prospect created a much higher value for the
property and he did not think the land exchange was a good deal for the City. Instead,the property
should be sold to the highest bidder to provide funds for the City.
Shane Miller, 4325 Mill Creek, asked if the 40% development restriction that was put on the I-
25/Prospect parcel was subject to any waivers in mitigation during the development process. He
asked how the property would be valued if the City chose to exercise the "right of first refusal",
should CSU want to sell the property. He asked what the time frame was to exercise the option to
buy the 27-acre parcel from CSURF and how would the property be valued.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the City is not trying to sell the land and make money. This is a proposal
to swap land of equal value and would provide great benefit to the public in terms of usable open
space. The City's interest has been carefully preserved.
Stokes stated the development restriction on the I-25/Prospect parcel is included in the deed and
cannot be waived or changed and runs in perpetuity. If the City decided to exercise its right of first
refusal, then the property would be valued at fair market value at the time of the sale.
Carrie Daggett,Assistant City Attorney, stated the deed restriction bases the right of first refusal on
the owner having received a legitimate offer to purchase the property. It is based on the offer on the
table at the time. The development restrictions contained in the deed adds another layer of restriction
and does not eliminate the regulatory restrictions that apply.
258
October 16, 2007
Councilmember Roy asked if the 33 acres that Natural Areas is keeping could be exchanged for the
27 acres CSURF currently owns and that the City has an option to buy. He wondered if a
conservation easement could be placed on the 33 acres to protect the habitat, yet let CSU still use
the land. Stokes stated the 27-acre parcel is held in a trust and was donated to CSU by the Udall
family. CSU needs to receive cash compensation so the trust can be funded. Kathleen Henry,
President of CSURF, stated the gift agreement between the Udall family and CSU states that if the
property is sold,the proceeds are to be used to fund an endowment to support the College of Natural
Resources. CSU must have cash to meet the provisions of the agreement.
Councilmember Roy asked for the value of the 27-acre parcel. Stokes stated it was valued at
$405,000, using the same price per acre that was used to value the two parcels involved in the land
exchange.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
128, 2007 on First Reading.
Councilmember Manvel stated the exchange was an exciting prospect and noted that while the City
was losing some open space next to I-25,the 33 acres that was retained by Natural Areas is located
next to Running Deer Natural Area. The large area created in the foothills will be a great resource
for recreation uses that are not possible on the property located at I-25 and Prospect.
Mayor Hutchinson stated staff had been very careful to ensure this exchange was beneficial to the
City and was valued appropriately. The exchange offers a great benefit to the public.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, and Roy.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Brown stated a Fort Collins family, Jerry and Margaret Walsh, lost their son,
Sergeant Nick Walsh, in the war in Iraq. Fort Collins has a tradition of naming streets after those
who have distinguished themselves through service or sacrifice for their community and country.
He made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to add the name of Sergeant Nick Walsh to
the list of possible names for future streets in Fort Collins.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the name was to be "Sergeant Nick Walsh," "Nick Walsh,"
"Nicholas Walsh," "Walsh,"or any combination. Councilmember Brown stated any combination
of the name would be acceptable.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
259
October 16, 2007
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adjourn the
Council meeting and to reconvene after the meetings of the General Improvement District No. 1 and
the Urban Renewal Authority are completed. Yeas: Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel,Poppaw,Roy and
Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
(**Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned at 9:45 p.m.and reconvened at 9:55 p.m. following the
meetings of the General Improvement District No. 1 and Urban Renewal Authority)
Executive Sessions Authorized
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Brown,for Council to go into
Executive Session,as permitted under Section 2-31(a)(2)ofthe City Code for the purpose of meeting
with attorneys of the City regarding pending litigation and other legal matters. Yeas: Brown,
Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
(**Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 9:55 p.m. and reconvened
following the Executive Session at 10:40 p.m.)
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to go back into
Executive Session, as permitted under Sections 2-31(a)(2) and(3)of the City Code for the purpose
of meeting with attorneys of the City regarding pending litigation and other legal matters and for the
additional purpose of considering a possible real property acquisition. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson,
Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
(**Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 10:40 p.m. and reconvened
following the Executive Session at 11:10 p.m.)
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
260