HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 01/19/2010 - CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE D DATE: January 19, 2010
STAFF: Wanda Krajicek • ' • •
Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the December 1, 2009, December 15, 2009, and January 5, 2010,
Regular Meetings.
December 1, 2009
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, December 1,
2009, 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: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Jones, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, expressed concern regarding the City's loan of$5.3 million
to a private company in the form of tax increment financing for RMI2. He suggested that more
scrutiny should have been given to the decision.
Vivian Armendariz,820 Merganser Drive,expressed concern over a no-show letter she had received
from City staff regarding Dial-A-Ride. She commended Poudre Fire Authority for assistance she
received in the last year.
Lloyd Walker, 1756 Concord Drive, commended Council for action taken to preserve single family
neighborhoods, including fully funding Code Enforcement Staff and continuing to enforce the
Occupancy Ordinance. He encouraged Council to implement a program of rental licensing for
properties in single family neighborhoods which would allow penalties for frequent violations.
Eric Kronwall, 1613 Bamwood Drive, expressed concern regarding the Occupancy Ordinance and
enforcement thereof.
Stacy Lynne,216 Park Street,expressed concern about the City's involvement with the International
Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and the BE LOCAL program.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Mayor Hutchinson stated the City of Fort Collins does not currently belong to ICLEI.
Agenda Review
Deputy City Manager Jones stated there were no changes to the published agenda.
27
December 1, 2009
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, withdrew Item #11, First Reading of Ordinance No. 131,
2009,Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City Code to Establish the Budget Term for the City and
Item#18,Resolution 2009-110 Modifying the Schedule for Council Consideration of the Proposed
Pilot Trash and Recycling Services District.
Stacy Lynne, 216 Park Street, withdrew Item #12, First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2009,
Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by Replacing References to the Department of Advance
Planning and the Director ofAdvance Planning to the Department of Community Development and
Neighborhood Services and the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 20, 2009 Regular Meeting and
the October 27, 2009 Adjourned Meeting.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2009, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
General Employees' Retirement Plan.
The City Council created the General Employees' Retirement Plan in 1971 to provide a
retirement benefit in addition to the Social Security system. The plan has an allowance for
election of single-sum payments by the members. The Plan has distributed over$1.5 million
in single-sum payments to seven Plan members through the end of October 2009. This
amount was greater then what was budgeted at the beginning of 2009 and is the primary
reason for this appropriation. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on
November 17, 2009, appropriates $1,200,000 from prior year reserves in the trust fund.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2009, Authorizing the Sublease to Larimer County
of Portions of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Property Leased by the City from North Poudre
Irrigation Company.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 17, 2009, authorizes
a new sublease between the City and County will allow the County the ability to continue
enforcing County regulations on the south shore of the Fossil Creek Reservoir.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No.129, 2009, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Temporary
Construction Easement on Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area to Larimer County for the
Fossil Creek Restoration Project.
The Larimer County Engineering Department is working on the Fossil Creek Restoration
Project, designed to restore a portion of the existing Fossil Creek Channel. In 1972,
approximately 1,300 feet of Fossil Creek was shifted to its current location in order to
facilitate the operation of the Landfill. The current location of the Channel is on the Larimer
County Landfill property,just south of the boundary of Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area.
This section of Fossil Creek has eroded downward as much as 12 feet and is beginning to
28
December 1, 2009
widen due to continued erosion. This erosive process now threatens an adjacent existing
sewer main and the Landfill liner. To prevent the failure of the sewer main and the Landfill
liner,Latimer County is proposing to move Fossil Creek back into a historic channel located
on Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First
Reading on November 17, 2009, authorizes a temporary construction easement on Cathy
Fromme Prairie to accomplish this action.
10. Items Relating to the New Museum/Discovery Science Center Joint Facility.
A. Resolution 2009-105 Authorizing a Grant Agreement with the State of Colorado,
Department of Local Affairs,to Receive Grant Funds for the Environmental Cleanup
and Site Improvements Portion of the Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science
Center Joint Facility Project.
B. Resolution 2009-106 Authorizing a Grant Agreement with the Colorado Housing and
Finance Authority, to Receive Grant Funds for the Environmental Cleanup Portion
of the Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center Joint Facility Project.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130,2009,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in
the Capital Projects Fund for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center
Joint Facility Project.
The State of Colorado, Department of Local Affairs, Energy and Mineral Assistance
Program awarded the City of Fort Collins $200,000 toward the environmental cleanup and
site improvements for the Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center Joint Facility.
Additionally, the City received a Brownfields grant award of$200,000 from the Colorado
Housing and Finance Authority toward environmental site cleanup.
A commitment of$3,000,000 was received from the Downtown Development Authority,in
support of the new Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center Joint Facility.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2009,Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City Code
to Establish the Budget Term for the City.
This Ordinance changes the next two-year budget term and all future two-year terms of the
City budget. The City Council has just adopted the 2010-2011 City budget. With the
approval of this Ordinance, the next budget term will be 2011-2012 and future two-year
budget terms will begin in the odd-numbered years. The Budget process will take place in
the even-numbered years.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2009, Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by
Replacing References to the Department of Advance Planning and the Director of Advance
Planning to the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services and
the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services.
29
December 1, 2009
This Ordinance amends Chapter 14 of the City Code to replace references to the Department
of Advance Planning and Director of Advance Planning to the Department of Community
Development and Neighborhood Services and the Director of Community Development and
Neighborhood Services.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 133,2009,Vacating a Portion of the Harmony Road Right-
of-Way as Originally Dedicated by the Larimer County Road Viewers Report. ,
With the realignment of West Harmony Road between'Regency Drive and Taft Hill Road,
this portion of the"Old" Harmony Road right-of-way was left over as an unused section of
right-of-way, adjacent to the Harmony Ridge Subdivision. The property has remained
unused since the realignment of Harmony Road and has been maintained by the City, with
no future intended use.The Harmony Ridge Subdivision Home Owners Association(HOA)
has requested this section of unused right-of-way be vacated back to Harmony Ridge for the
purpose of landscape improvements by the Harmony Ridge HOA. Once vacated, the
Harmony Ridge HOA will accept all responsibility for maintenance of the property and all
improvements to the property will be governed by the City Land Use Code requirements.
A blanket utility easement will be reserved for maintenance of existing utilities.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2009, Authorizing Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements Related to the
Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project (Phase Three).
The Mason Express ("MAX"),bus rapid transit project is currently within the right-of-way
acquisition phase of the project. Project acquisitions have been broken into four phases,with
the possibility of additional phases as needed. This Ordinance pertains to the third phase
(Phase Three) and consists of six distinct property ownerships. Phases I and II were
previously adopted by City Council earlier this year, and acquisitions for these phases are
currently underway.
As a federally funded transportation project, acquisitions will conform to the provisions of
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies Act of 1970,as
amended (Public Law 91-646). In accordance with this act, property owners must be
informed about the possible use of eminent domain and their rights pursuant to Colorado
State Statute in the official Notice-of-Interest Letter. Authorization from City Council is
needed prior to sending this information to property owners. This letter is the first official
step in the acquisition phase, which must occur prior to the appraisals. Given the
recommended construction schedule for the Project and the fact that acquisitions must be
conducted under procedures for federally funded projects,timely acquisition of the property
interests is necessary. Therefore, staff requests authorization to utilize eminent domain for
the MAX Project, if necessary, and only if good faith negotiations break down.
30
December 1, 2009
15. Resolution 2009-107, Supporting the Grant Application for a Local Parks and Outdoor
Recreation Special Opportunity Grant from the State Board of Great Outdoors Colorado for
the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38-E.
Park Planning and Development is currently applying for a $500,000 Great Outdoors
Colorado Local Parks and Outdoor Recreation Special Opportunity Grant. Accordingly,
staff is preparing an application for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38-E project for
this special grant cycle.
As part of the application process, Great Outdoors Colorado requires a resolution which
indicates the City's support for the project, verifying matching funds are appropriated, the
land for the project is City owned by easement or title, the project will be maintained in a
high quality condition, and the City has completed similar grant sponsored projects.
16. Resolution 2009-108 Approving a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Fraternal
Order of Police.
The City and the Fraternal Order of Police ("FOP") entered into a collective bargaining
agreement for 2008 and 2009, which agreement will expire on December 31, 2009. 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 2010 and 2011. The
tentative agreement was ratified by a vote of the FOP membership on November 14, 2009.
17. Resolution 2009-109 Approving a Securities Lending Program as Part of the City's
Investment Policy.
The proposed revision to the 2008 Updated Investment Policy includes the following
significant changes:
1. Allows for an increase in the allocation amount ofAgency Security investments from
80 percent to 90 percent. This change will allow the City to maximize investment
returns while minimizing investment risk.
2. Accepts the Securities Lending amendment document that was created jointly by
Wells Fargo Bank and the City of Fort Collins to specify the investment options that
maybe utilized in the Securities Lending program. The amendment aligns with state
statute and is specific to the City of Fort Collins.
18. Resolution 2009-110 Modif3ing the Schedule for Council Consideration of the Proposed
Pilot Trash and Recycling Services District.
In July 2009, City Council adopted a Resolution which directed staff to issue a Request for
Proposals(RFP)for a Trash Services Pilot District. Within that Resolution,Council directed
staff to report to City Council on the outcome of the RFP process no later than December
31
December 1, 2009
15 2009. Ongoing contract negotiations regarding an agreement with a Service Provider
have caused the City Council to postpone both a planned Public Hearing and the First
Reading of enabling legislation to establish a Pilot District. This delay necessitates the
rescheduling of Council's review of the proposal.
The purpose of this Resolution is to formally postpone staff s report to Council until no later
than February 16, 2010.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2009, Appropriating Prior Years Reserves in the
Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds for a Commercial Redevelopment Study for the Midtown Commercial Corridor Area.
Council directed staff to prepare a redevelopment study for the Midtown Commercial
Corridor at the June 9, 2009 Work Session. Staff solicited requests for proposal, resulting
in 18 responses from across the nation. Five finalists were interviewed by a selection
committee of Economic Health, Advanced Planning, and Current Planning staff. The
selection committee, using the City's purchasing process, selected a team led by ELS
Architecture and Urban Design, supported by Economic and Planning Systems and Warren
Wilson. The Ordinance appropriates residual funds from the capital project fund prior year
reserves to cover the cost of the Study and provide additional funds for implementation work
20. Routine Easement.
Non-exclusive permanent easement agreement from the Board of Governors of the CSU
System, to install above grade switch, located at Pitkin and Shields Streets. Monetary
consideration: $1500.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt and
approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz, Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2009, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
General Employees' Retirement Plan.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2009, Authorizing the Sublease to Larimer County
of Portions of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Property Leased by the City from North Poudre
Irrigation Company.
32
December 1, 2009
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No.129, 2009, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Temporary
Construction Easement on Cathy Fromme Prairie Natural Area to Latimer County for the
Fossil Creek Restoration Project.
24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2009, Imposing a Moratorium on the Acceptance
and Processing of Applications for the Issuance of Licenses or Permits Related to Businesses
That Seek to Dispense Medical Marijuana and on the Establishment or Operation of Any
Such New Businesses in the City.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2009, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Joint Facility
Project.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2009, Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City Code
to Establish the Budget Term for the City.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2009, Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by
Replacing References to the Department of Advance Planning and the Director of Advance
Planning to the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services and
the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 133,2009,Vacating a Portion of the Harmony Road Right-
of-Way as Originally Dedicated by the Latimer County Road Viewers Report.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2009, Authorizing Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements Related to the
Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project (Phase Three).
Staff Reports
Deputy City Manager Jones stated the Poudre Emergency Communications Center received
international recognition for being accredited as an Emergency Medical Dispatch Center of
Excellence from the National Academies of Emergency Dispatch.
Deputy City Manager Jones stated the City's water treatment and reclamation facilities have been
honored for statewide environmental leadership.
33
December 1, 2009
Ordinance No. 128, 2009,
Imposing a Moratorium on the Acceptance and Processing of Applications
For the Issuance of Licenses or Permits Related to Businesses that Seek to
Dispense Medical Marijuana and on the Establishment or
Operation of a Any Such New Businesses in the City, Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, which was presented for Council's consideration on November 17, 2009, as an
emergency measure, was instead approved by Council on First Reading. Council also amended the
Ordinance so that, if approved on Second Reading, it will impose a moratorium on new medical
marijuana dispensaries for approximately three months rather than ten months. At the end of the
Council discussion, staff was invited to inform the Council as to whether, in staff's opinion, a
moratorium is still advisable and, if so, what the length of the moratorium should be.
BA CKGR O UND/DIS C USSION
Staff does believe that a moratorium is still advisable. On Second Reading, staff is recommending
the following changes to the Ordinance:
1. Instead of imposing a ten-month moratorium, the moratorium will be in place from
the effective date of the ordinance, December 11, 2009, through March 31, 2010.
While this is more than three months, staff believes that extending the moratorium
beyond the second Council meeting in March will allow for better processing of the
proposed regulations that staff will be bringing forward. That process will include
development of the regulations, review of any Land Use Code changes with the
Planning and Zoning Board, review of the draft regulations with the Council in a
work session, and public outreach.
2. The Ordinance no longerprovides for a case-by-case review ofapplications forsales
tax license application for MMDs that are pending on December ]]. When the
Ordinance was presented as an emergency measure, that review was intended to
allow applicants additional time to have their applications processed after adoption
of the Ordinance if they had made substantial, nonrevocable,good faith investments
in real or personal property based upon the expectation that they would be able to
obtain a sales tax license for an MMD. Since Council decided not to adopt a
moratorium on MMDs on an emergency basis, staff believes that those members of
the public who are interested in establishing a new MMD will have had ample
opportunity to apply for and obtain a sales tax license by the time this Ordinance
takes effect. Therefore, under the Ordinance as presented on Second Reading, only
those MMDs that have actually had a sales tax licenses issued by December 11,
34
December 1, 2009
2009, that date and that conform to all existing zoning requirements will be allowed
to operate during the moratorium.
3. The declaration of emergency has been removed. The risks that the businesses
present to the City, which are listed in Section 2 of the ordinance, are now recited
in support the imposition of a moratorium rather than in support of a declaration of
emergency. Those risks, which were previously listed in one of the "whereas"
clauses of the Ordinance as well as in Section 2, have been consolidated and now
appear just in Section 2.
4. A new section has been added directing the City Manager and City Attorney to
present proposed regulations to Council for its formal consideration no later than
the March 2, 2010 Council meeting.
5. Minor wording changes have been made and some sections have been renumbered
or relocated.
Preliminary Schedule/Workplan:
The following is a preliminary outline of action items and schedule for completing the review of
potential regulations and enacting regulations by the time the moratorium expires on March 31,
2010.
December 2009 research; draft regulation concepts
January 2010 outreach(focus groups or a community meeting;modify regulation concepts
based on feedback and draft ordinance
February 9, 2010 Council Work Session
February 18, 2010 Planning and Zoning Review
March 2, 2010 First Reading of Regulating Ordinance
March 16, 2010 Second Reading of Regulating Ordinance
March 26, 2010 Ordinance and Regulations take effect
All other provisions of the Ordinance remain the same as on First Reading. "
Deputy City Manager Jones stated the original ordinance was presented to Council on November
17, 2009, as an emergency measure. At that time, the Council placed a moratorium on any new
medical marijuana dispensaries for approximately three months. Staff recommended the
moratorium continue and be in effect from December 11, 2009 through March 31, 2010.
Steve Dush, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, stated this is a non-
emergency ordinance and there is no longer a provision in the ordinance for a case-by-case review.
There is a new section directing the City Manager and the City Attorney to present an ordinance on
or before March 31, 2010. Dush stated a total of 58 licenses have been issued and 19 are pending,
for a total of 77 applications. The moratorium will allow all of the existing dispensaries to operate
35
December 1, 2009
as they are, with a sales tax license, and in compliance with all other requirements and will allow
the City to consider land use and traffic impacts. The ordinance prevents the acceptance and
processing of licenses and permits for additional dispensaries from December 11, 2009 through
March 31, 2010 and prevents licenses and permits that have been issued from being amended.
Lisa Gomez, 1303 Poppy Court, asked what types of businesses would be regulated by the
moratorium.
Evan Stafford, 417 East Plum, opposed the moratorium and supported regulation of medical
marijuana dispensaries in terms of zoning and licensing.
Timothy Tipton, Cannabis Therapy Institute, Boulder, Colorado, opposed the moratorium and its
provision preventing amendments to existing licenses and permits.
Monte Barry, 415 South Howes, supported regulation but opposed the moratorium.
Shane Miller,4325 Mill Creek, spoke regarding personal experience with medicinal marijuana and
stated the moratorium would artificially restrict the supply of the drug which has been approved by
voters.
Stacy Lynne, 216 Park Street, stated ICLEI has been present in Fort Collins since 1999. She asked
about the section of the ordinance regarding "good moral character" and asked who would be
responsible for making the judgment as to who meets those criteria.
Eric Kronwall, 1613 Barnwood Drive, supported the moratorium and cited previous examples of
moratoria in the City.
Philip Hales, 220 Fishback Avenue, suggested cannabis be of low law enforcement priority or be
de-criminalized and stated the moratorium is stifling free enterprise. He suggested the sales tax
gained from the dispensaries will likely boost the City's coffers.
Ian Leverette, 2649 Dunbar Avenue,discussed the difference between wholesale and retail licenses
for medical marijuana dispensaries and asked the City to take into consideration marijuana growers
who grow organically.
Alfred Reaud, 1104 Columbine Court, sated he is a medical marijuana patient and asked Council
to consider regulating medical marijuana dispensaries as apothecaries rather than pharmacies or
liquor stores. He supported regulation but expressed concern about over-regulation.
Travis Cutbirth, Medicinal Gardens of Colorado, 420 Howes Street, stated he is a dispensary co-
owner and discussed the difference between medical cannabis and other substances,noting there is
still a large black market for cannabis. He encouraged Council to consider the character of the
persons operating dispensaries. He noted that criminal enterprises are a concern and supported some
type of moratorium.
36
December 1, 2009
Tim Gordon, Medicinal Gardens of Colorado, 420 Howes Street, stated he is a co-owner of
Medicinal Gardens of Colorado and expressed concerns over the length of the moratorium. He
encouraged regulation of dispensary owners.
Ken Libby stated he represented Nature's Medicine, a dispensary in Loveland. He encouraged
regulation but asked that patients be able to seek counseling from their dispensaries.
Mayor Hutchinson re-iterated that this ordinance is simply to consider a moratorium on issuing new
licenses and it would not affect existing dispensaries.
Councilmember Manvel noted the definition of a medical marijuana dispensary is given in the
ordinance and asked how a dispensary which does not sell products,but rather just distributes,could
be required to have a sales tax license.
City Attorney Roy clarified the entities which have been issued a sales tax license up to this point
and are lawful will be able to continue operations during the moratorium.
Councilmember Manvel asked why the ordinance made an exception for properties or structures
used by an individual primary care giver to provide to a single patient.
City Attorney Roy replied the ordinance was not meant to be overly broad. By creating that
exception, we would not be allowing room for the type of harm we are trying to prevent during the
period of the moratorium.
Jerry Schiager,Police Lieutenant,stated the ordinance was not meant to include small,primary care
giver situations but only more retail-oriented operations.'
Councilmember Manvel asked if individuals growing medical marijuana for themselves, or as a
primary care giver, would be required to get a license because they aren't selling.
Schiager replied they would not need to get a license because there would be no sale and therefore
no sales tax implications.
Councilmember Manvel asked if those individuals would still need to go through the state procedure
to register as medical marijuana growers.
Schiager replied caregivers are not registered in that way, but rather, the patient registers and
designates a caregiver at that time.
Councilmember Manvel asked if individuals who are growing medical marijuana for friends or
family, but not selling it to them, would be required to get a sales tax license.
City Attorney Roy replied he would need to look at the sales tax code to determine what level of
sales triggers the obligation to collect sales tax. However,someone who is not selling is not subject
to sales tax collection. If individuals engage in distributing marijuana, under the auspices of
37
December 1, 2009
Amendment 20,this moratorium will apply in that their businesses cannot be established or operated
during the period of the moratorium.
Councilmember Manvel asked if individuals who already have a sales tax license for some other
purpose, and are located in an approved zone for dispensaries, could begin selling medical
marijuana.
City Attorney Roy replied pre-existing sales tax applications that did not mention marijuana or
licenses that were not issued to businesses that intended to sell marijuana can continue to operate.
He asked Lisa Gomez to clarify her question relating to the parties affected by the moratorium.
Ms. Gomez asked if the moratorium applies to individuals who are not having a transaction with a
patient, noting that not every caregiver is a grower and not every grower is technically a caregiver.
City Attorney Roy replied any entity or person that is using a property for the purpose of selling or
distributing marijuana under the protection of Amendment 20 is intended to be covered by the
moratorium. If individuals cannot claim to be primary caregivers, they may not be protected under
Amendment 20.
Mayor Hutchinson clarified this moratorium will simply halt the processing of new licenses and will
not affect existing operations.
Councilmember Ohlson discussed the processes that will occur during the period of the moratorium.
Deputy City Manager Jones replied that outreach is planned for affected interests, including those
in the dispensary business,other businesses,residents,law enforcement,schools,and patients. Staff
will then provide some perspective to Council.
Councilmember Ohlson asked about the "good moral character" phrase being used to describe a
requirement for individuals hoping to license a dispensary.
City Attorney Roy replied there is no existing requirement that anyone be of"good moral character"
in the context of this ordinance. There is reference to the fact that no such requirement presently
exists and that creates part of the unregulated environment which gives rise to the need for the
moratorium. The possibility exists that as staff explores the various ways of regulating dispensaries,
character might be taken into consideration as a factor. Staff will look at how Council should define
the term.
Councilmember Roy asked, if the moratorium is passed, how many applications would not be
processed and, therefore, not be given sales tax licenses.
Chuck Seest, Finance Director, replied that number would be difficult to project but those
applications not in by early the following week would likely be impacted.
38
December 1, 2009
Mayor Hutchinson noted should the moratorium pass,there will still be 10 days until it takes effect
during which time licenses could be processed.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the interplay between what the state may rule versus the City's
jurisdiction.
City Attorney Roy replied that the City's jurisdiction will likely fall with land use and the
appropriate location for dispensaries. As a home rule city, Fort Collins can adopt local rules that
conflict with state statutes in matters of local concern. If a conflict between state laws and city laws
should occur, it is likely Council will need to re-visit the regulations it adopts in March.
Councilmember Troxell asked about extending the length of the moratorium.
City Attorney Roy replied, in terms of the conservation of staff resources, it would be beneficial to
have only one moratorium; however, Council may determine the probable need to have another
moratorium at a later date does not outweigh the need to legislate locally more quickly.
Councilmember Troxell asked how medical marijuana production falls under City zoning in terms
of an industrial use.
Dush replied it would be defined as a greenhouse and there are specific zoning districts in which
those can be located. There may be additional considerations with growing this specific product.
Councilmember Troxell stated staff should be allowed prudent time to make the best decisions.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if the staff recommendation is for a three to four month moratorium.
Deputy City Manager Jones confirmed that recommendation.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the length of the moratorium could be extended.
City Attorney Roy replied that it could only be extended by subsequent action of the Council.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked what happens to a sales tax license application that is pending on
the effective date of the moratorium.
City Attorney Roy replied it is held in abeyance and comes back in the same state upon the
expiration date of the moratorium and may or may not be issued depending upon what kinds of
regulations Council adopts in the meantime.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if the ordinance is supported by Police Services.
Schiager replied the moratorium's timeline may be a bit tighter, it should still provide enough time
to make appropriate recommendations.
39
December 1, 2009
Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance
No. 128, 2009, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion for an amendment to Section 5(b)of the ordinance to change
the March 31, 2010 date to be June 30, 2010.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Councilmember Poppaw stated she would have liked to have seen some regulations proposed along
with the moratorium to avoid a run on applications for medical marijuana dispensaries. She stated
she would support the motion to allow some time for regulations to be developed.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed support for the process and the ability for the City to make its
own regulations.
Councilmember Roy stated he would not support the moratorium in part because it subverts the vote
of the people allowing medical marijuana dispensaries. He stated regulations could have been
developed without a moratorium.
Councilmember Manvel stated the needs of medical marijuana patients should be well served by the
dispensaries already in operation during the time of the moratorium and the regulations to come out
of that period will serve the public interests. He stated he would support the motion.
Mayor Hutchinson stated there will be ample opportunity for public involvement during the outreach
process and stated the moratorium will allow time to examine land use issues and others.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and
Troxell. Nays: Roy.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Roy asked for Council approval to insert language referencing the sales tax code in
section 5(c) should staff consider it to be necessary.
Mayor Hutchinson made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Kottwitz,to give the City Attorney
leeway to change the language regarding the sales tax code in section 5(c) of the ordinance.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and
Troxell. Nays: Roy.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
40
December 1, 2009
Ordinance No. 131, 2009,
Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City Code to
Establish the Budget Term for the City, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance changes the next two-year budget term and all future two-year terms of the City
budget. The City Council has just adopted the 2010-2011 City budget. With the approval of this
Ordinance, the next budget term will be 2011-2012 and future two-year budget terms will begin in
the odd-numbered years. The Budget process will take place in the even-numbered years. .
BA CKGRO UND/DISCUSSION
On April 8, 1997, the electorate of the City approved certain amendments to the City Charter. One
of the amendments added language to Article V, Section 1 of the Charter to provide that the City
Council shall set by ordinance the term for which it shall adopt budgets in accordance with the
provisions of Article V. Subsequently, Ordinance No. 092, 1997, which established a two-year
budget beginning with the 1998-1999 City budget, was adopted by City Council.
Beginning in 2005, to prepare the 2006-2007 budget, the City began using the Budgeting for
Outcomes(BFO)process. BFO has a number of advantages over traditional budgeting approaches
and helps the City meet several important goals, including:
• Create clarity about the overall budget process for the community
• Allocate revenues to the highest priorities and outcomes citizens want and need
• Understand the choices for funding programs and services
• Emphasize staff accountability, efficiency, innovation and partnership
With the BFO process, City Council input and decisions are needed earlier in the process. The
Council begins the budget process, using citizen input, by determining the outcomes citizens want
and need.
As the budget term is currently structured, the biennial budget process begins in the same year that
Councilmembers are facing an election and new members may be joining the City Council. In prior
year budgets, this has meant delaying parts of the budget process until after the Council election
and Council retreat. It also gives new Councilmembers almost no time to settle into their new role
before they are required to make decisions that will affect the next biennial budget.
Therefore, staff is requesting a change to the two-year budget term for a smoother budget process.
With the approval of this ordinance, the two-year budget term will now begin with the odd-
numbered years and budget preparation will take place in the even-numbered years. The City
Council has just adopted the 2010-2011 City budget. The next budget term will be 2011-2012 and
future two-year budget terms will begin in the odd-numbered years. "
41
December 1, 2009
Mayor Hutchinson stated this ordinance would change the two-year budget term to begin in odd-
numbered years to allow new councilmembers to gain some experience prior to working on a new
budget.
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, expressed concern about desynchronizing the budget cycle
from the electoral cycle. He stated separating the two creates a disconnect in the democratic system.
He asked Council to not adopt the ordinance.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
131, 2009, on First Reading.
Councilmember Roy stated this change will make for better budgets and more informed
councilmembers.
Councilmember Manvel stated the change is simply one of scheduling and expressed support for
the change.
Mayor Hutchinson expressed support for the change and noted the budget process is many months
long with many opportunities for citizen and staff participation.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed support for the change.
Councilmember Troxell expressed support for the change:
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 132, 2009,
Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by Replacing References to the
Department of Advance Planning and the Director of Advance Planning
to the Department of Community Development and
Neighborhood Services and the Director of
Community Development and Neighborhood Services, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance amends Chapter 14 of the City Code to replace references to the Department of
Advance Planning and Director ofAdvance Planning to the Department of Community Development
and Neighborhood Services and the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood
Services.
42
December 1, 2009
BA CKGRO UND/DISCUSSION
Planning, Development and Transportation has reorganized to provide more efficient services to
the community. As part of the reorganization, a new Community Development and Neighborhood
Services Department has been formed with the following responsibilities: Development Review,
Zoning, Plan Review and Building Inspection, Administration and Contractor Licensing, and
Historic Preservation. The functions and staff related to the administration of the City's Historic
Preservation Ordinance have been shifted from the Advance Planning Department to this new
department.
The City Code needs to be amended to reflect the change in department responsibilities. References
to the Advance Planning Department will be replaced with the Community Development and
Neighborhood Services Department. References to the Director of Advance Planning will be
replaced with the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. "
Deputy City Manager Jones stated these changes assure the City Code reflects some of the City's
recent departmental restructuring.
Shane Miller, 4325 Mill Creek, expressed concern regarding the timing of citizen participation at
meetings and suggested a change in the process be considered to allow citizens to ask questions or
make further comments at other times in the meeting.
Stacy Lynne, 216 Park Street, asked how many and which positions were, or will be, added or
eliminated as a result of the reorganization and expressed concern regarding the similarity of the
goals of the reorganization to the goals of ICLEI.
Councilmember Roy asked how many City employees were affected by the reorganization.
Deputy City Manager Jones replied the restructuring was designed to make things more effective
and efficient and increase sustainabilityby attempting to foster green building practices and increase
coordination. Six occupied positions were eliminated due to a reduction in resources.
Mayor Hutchinson added management has been streamlined and taxpayer dollars have been saved.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
1325 2009, on First Reading.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
43
December 1, 2009
Resolution 2009-110
Modifying the Schedule for Council Consideration
of the Proposed Pilot Trash and Recycling Services District, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In July 2009, City Council adopted a Resolution which directed staff to issue a Request for
Proposals (RFP)for a Trash Services Pilot District. Within that Resolution, Council directed staff
to report to City Council on the outcome of the RFP process no later than December 1, 2009.
Ongoing contract negotiations regarding an agreement with a Service Provider have caused the
City Council to postpone both a planned Public Hearing and the First Reading of enabling
legislation to establish a Pilot District. This delay necessitates the rescheduling of Council's review
of the proposal.
The purpose of this Resolution is to formally postpone staffs report to Council until no later than
February 16, 2010.
BA CKGR O UND/DIS C USSION
In July 2009, City Council directed staff to issue a Request for Proposals to seek qualified Service
Providers to provide residential trash and recyclable material collection services within a district
within the City. City Council directed staff to report on the outcome of the RFP process no later
than December 1, 2009.
The RFP process was conducted during September, and interviews with two haulers were held in
October. The City then entered into contract negotiations with a Service Provider. Contract
negotiations have taken longer than staff expected, making it impossible to complete the necessary
public outreach and report the outcome of the process to Council by the deadline set in Resolution
2009-075.
This Resolution extends the deadline for reporting the outcome of the RFP process until no later
than the regular Council meeting of February 16, 2010. "
Deputy City Manager Jones stated the sole purpose of this resolution is to modify the schedule for
this item to come before Council due to ongoing contract negotiations.
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, expressed concern regarding the trash districting plans and
expressed disappointment with another delay in the process.
Stacy Lynne, 216 Park Street, asked for the legal definition of"enabling legislation" as written in
the executive summary of the resolution. She asked which two trash haulers submitted RFPs,which
service provider is currently in contract negotiations, and why those negotiations have taken longer
44
December 1, 2009
than expected. Ms. Lynne expressed concern regarding the fiscal and social impacts to private
businesses and residents. She also asked that Susie Gordon, City employee, be removed from all
trash related duties within the City organization.
Mayor Hutchinson noted this resolution concerns the timing of the hearing at which the preceding
questions can be discussed.
Councilmember Troxell asked for a status update.
Ann Turnquist, Policy and Project Manager, stated staff has been in the process of conducting the
request for proposal, interviews, and contract negotiations since early September with the hope that
a public hearing can be rescheduled in January.
Councilmember Troxell asked about potential adverse financial impacts of the deadline extension
to the businesses involved.
Turnquist replied the financial impact section of the agenda item summary refers only to the City
and no financial impact analysis was done involving the businesses.
Councilmember Troxell asked about sustainability,economic,environmental and social impacts and
whether those were analyzed to include businesses.
Turnquist replied the analysis was of the impact to the change in schedule, not of the entire policy
question.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2009-110.
Councilmember Troxell noted the importance of providing outreach to the citizens in the pilot trash
district. He read questions from a recent Coloradoan article into the record: Why was the area
chosen and how is it representative of Fort Collins as a whole? What is the cost to the homeowners
of the trash services? Why can't the homeowners in the district opt out, particularly if the service
costs them more? What is the overall,quantified benefit of trash districting,including reduced wear
and tear on roads, public safety, improved air quality, and potential savings to the City? What are
the potential impacts on the trash hauling companies? Councilmember Troxell asked that those
questions be answered in the public hearing.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the public hearing will occur two weeks prior to the first reading of any
ordinance instituting a pilot trash district.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
45
December 1, 2009
Other Business
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adjourn until the
conclusion of the Urban Renewal Authority meeting, at which time Council will reconvene and
consider a motion to go into executive session.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy asked for a timeframe regarding staff s presentation to Council regarding pop-
ups and scrape-offs.
Deputy City Manager Jones replied staff had requested Council feedback in relation to 223 Park
Street.
Councilmember Roy asked that the issue be discussed at a work session in the first quarter of 2010.
Executive Session Authorized
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adjourn into
Executive Session as permitted under Section 2-3 1(a)(1)(a) of the City Code, for the purpose of
discussing the compensation and benefits of the City Attorney.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
46
December 15, 2009
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, December 15,
2009, 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: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Stacy Lynne, 221 Park Street, stated concerns with the pilot trash program and potential employee
conflicts of interest with the program.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Poppaw asked for clarification of the proper channels for citizens to use when
voicing a complaint against specific City employees. City Manager Atteberry stated any concern or
complaint a citizen has concerning a City employee can be expressed to Councilmembers through
email or phone calls, or citizens may contact the City Manager directly to voice complaints.
Personnel matters are confidential and may not be discussed publicly. The project manager of the
trash services study is Ann Turnquist, Policy and Project Manager for the City.
Councilmember Poppaw stated Council is the decision making entity for the City and any criticisms
or concerns should be directed at Council and not directly at specific employees.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published Agenda.
Eric Sutherland, 631' LaPorte, pulled Item #7 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2009,
Amending Chapter 8, Article 1 of the City Code to Establish the Budget Term for the City.
Councilmember Ohlson pulled Item #14 Resolution 2009-111 Approving the Stipulated
Determination of Vested Rights Between the City and South Harmony, LLC.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Second Readine of Ordinance No. 130, 2009, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Joint Facility
Project.
47
December 15, 2009
The City will receive $200,000 from the Energy and Mineral Assistance Program through
the Colorado Department of Local Affairs to facilitate the environmental site improvements
for the Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center Joint Facility. The City will also
receive$200,000 from the Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund through the Colorado Housing
and Finance Authority in support of the environmental site cleanup for this project. A
commitment of $3,000,000 was received from the Downtown Development Authority
supporting the construction of the new Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center
Joint Facility. A Grant Agreement with the Downtown Development Authority will be
completed as required. The Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December
1, 2009, appropriates a total of$3,400,000 in the Building on Basics(BOB),New Museum
Facility Project.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2009, Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City
Code to Establish the Budget Term for the City.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 1, 2009, changes the
next two-year budget term and all future two-year terms of the City budget. The City
Council has just adopted the 2010-2011 City budget. With the adoption of this Ordinance,
the next budget term will be 2011-2012 and future two-year budget terms will begin in the
odd-numbered years. The Budget process will take place in the even-numbered years.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2009, Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by
Replacing References to the Department of Advance Planning and the Director of Advance
Planning to the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services and the
Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 1, 2009, amends
Chapter 14 of the City Code to replace references to the Department of Advance Planning
and Director of Advance Planning to the Department of Community Development and
Neighborhood Services and the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood
Services.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2009, Vacating a Portion of the Harmony Road
Right-of-Way as Originally Dedicated by the Larimer County Road Viewers Report.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 1, 2009, vacates an
unused section of right-of-way on Harmony Road, adjacent to the Harmony Ridge
Subdivision, east of Seneca Street. The Harmony Ridge Subdivision Home Owners
Association (HOA) has requested this section of unused right-of-way be vacated back to
Harmony Ridge for the purpose of landscape improvements by the Harmony Ridge HOA.
Once vacated,the Harmony Ridge HOA will accept all responsibility for maintenance of the
property and all improvements to the property will be governed by the City Land Use Code
requirements. A blanket utility easement will be reserved for maintenance of existing
utilities.
48
December 15, 2009
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134,2009,Authorizing Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements Related to the
Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project (Phase Three).
The Mason Express ("MAX"), bus rapid transit'project is currently within the right-of-way
acquisition phase of the project. Project acquisitions have been broken into four phases,with
the possibility of additional phases as needed. This Ordinance pertains to the third phase
(Phase Three) and consists of six distinct property ownerships. Phases I and II were
previously adopted by City Council earlier this year, and acquisitions for these phases are
currently underway.
As a federally funded transportation project, acquisitions will conform to the provisions of
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies Act of 1970,as
amended (Public Law 91-646). In accordance with this act, property owners must be
informed about the possible use of eminent domain and their rights pursuant to Colorado
State Statute in the official Notice-of-Interest Letter. Authorization from City Council is
needed prior to sending this information to property owners. This letter is the first official
step in the acquisition phase, which must occur prior to the appraisals. Given the
recommended construction schedule for the Project and the fact that acquisitions must be
conducted under procedures for federally funded projects,timely acquisition fo the property
interests is necessary. Therefore, staff requests authorization to utilize eminent domain for
the MAX Project, if necessary, and only if good faith negotiations break down. This
Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 1,2009,authorizes the use
of eminent domain for the MAX Project.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2009, Appropriating Prior Years Reserves in the
Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds for a Commercial Redevelopment Study for the Midtown Commercial Corridor Area.
Council directed staff to prepare a redevelopment study for the Midtown Commercial
Corridor at the June 9, 2009 Work Session. Staff solicited requests for proposal, resulting
in 18 responses from across the nation. Five finalists were interviewed by a selection
committee of Economic Health, Advanced Planning, and Current Planning staff. The
selection committee, using the City's purchasing process, selected a team led by ELS
Architecture and Urban Design, supported by Economic and Planning Systems and Warren
Wilson. The Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 1, 2009,
appropriates residual funds from the capital project fund prior year reserves to cover the cost
of the Study and provide additional funds for implementation work.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2009, Amending Section 1-15 (g) of the City Code
Relating to General Penalties.
Currently, drivers of motor vehicles who can be assessed at least one(1)point on a moving
violation are required to pay an additional $35 traffic calming surcharge upon conviction.
The City has experienced a proliferation of bicycles and other nonmotorized users of the
49
December 15, 2009
City's roadways.It is recommended that bicyclists and other nonmotor vehicle operators who
receive citations for what would be considered moving violations if committed by an
operator of a motor vehicle also be required to pay the traffic calming surcharge. Examples
of violations where this surcharge would be applicable are,but not limited to,driving on the
wrong side of the road, failure to yield the right-of-way, driving at night with no lighting,
failure to stop for a red light, etc.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2009, Amending Section 24-96 of the City Code
Regarding Snow Emergencies.
This Ordinance amends the City Code Section 24-96 to provide the City Manager with the
authority to declare a snow emergency when conditions warrant. The current Code
designates the City Engineer as the official with the authority to declare a snow emergency.
14. Resolution 2009-111 Approving the Stipulated Determination of Vested Rights Between the
City and South Harmon,,
South Harmony, LLC is the developer of Brookfield Subdivision and has completed much
of the project,but there remains about half of the dwelling units to be sold and constructed.
The plan has expired. Accordingly, South Harmony, LLC has filed an application for a
Determination of Vested Rights under Division 2.13 of the Land Use Code and the City
Manager and City Attorney agree that the application for Determination of Vested Rights
should be granted. The proposed resolution would formalize the determination of vested
rights.
15. Resolution 2009-112 Making Appointments to Various Boards, Commissions, and
Authorities of the City of Fort Collins.
Vacancies currently exist on various boards,commissions,and authorities due to resignations
of board members and the expiration of terms of current members. Applications were
solicited during September and Council teams interviewed applicants during October and
November. This Resolution appoints boardmembers to fill current vacancies and term
expirations.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2009, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Joint Facility
Project.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2009, Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City
Code to Establish the Budget Term for the City.
50
December 15, 2009
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2009, Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code by
Replacing References to the Department of Advance Planning and the Director of Advance
Planning to the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services and the
Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2009, Vacating a Portion of the Harmony Road
Right-of-Way as Originally Dedicated by the Larimer County Road Viewers Report.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134,2009,Authorizing Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements Related to the
Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project (Phase Three).
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2009, Appropriating Prior Years Reserves in the
Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds for a Commercial Redevelopment Study for the Midtown Commercial Corridor Area.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2009, Amending Section 1-15 (g) of the City Code
Relating to General Penalties.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2009, Amending Section 24-96 of the City Code
Regarding Snow Emergencies.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2009, Amending Section 4 of the City Code Relating
to Animals, Particularly Dogs.
20. Items Relating to the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation and Zoning.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2009, Annexing Property Known
as the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 140, 2009, Amending the Zoning Map
of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included
in the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adopt and approve all
items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
51
December 15, 2009
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Councilmember Roy asked for more information about the soil contamination at the site of the
Museum/Discovery Center because the location is in a sensitive area.
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry stated the Council Tree Library has been certified LEED Platinum.
City Manager Atteberry thanked Ward Stanford,Traffic Engineer and Rich Brubaker, Crew Chief,
for their work in assisting CSU make traffic flow smoothly to and from CSU football games.
Beth Sowder,Neighborhood Services Manager,introduced the new Code Compliance Officer,Dale
Wood.
Councilmember Reports
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Platte River Power Authority Board has received Fort Collins'
suggested changes to the Organic Contract. The next step is for the Platte River attorney to speak
with the member city attorneys about the proposed changes, then the member cities will vote on
whether to amend the contract. The Platte River Board discussed a potential analysis to determine
an exit strategy to the use of coal at the Rawhide Power Plant.
Ordinance No. 138, 2009,
Amending Section 4 of the City Code Relating to Animals,
Particularly Dogs, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed changes to the animal provisions of the City Code are primarily intended to better
identify and define behaviors associated with dangerous and vicious animals and specify more
appropriate alternatives for dealing with such animals. Thus, the revisions set forth a number of
requirements regarding the impounding and disposition of animals found to be dangerous or
vicious. These provisions also provide a broader range of conditions that a judge may order in
order for animal owners to keep an animal found to be dangerous or vicious as an alternative to
surrendering the animal for euthanasia or removing it from the jurisdiction. In addition, the
proposed revisions address the proper method of tethering animals.
BA CKGR O UND/D IS C USSION
The mainpurpose ofanimal ordinances is to keep people and animals cohabitating safely. It is also
to promote the humane treatment of animals. Some of the older ordinances need to be changed to
52
December 15, 2009
reflect the population growth as well as animals in Fort Collins. They also need to be changed to
promote safer keeping of animals.
The current provisions of the City Code dealing with vicious animals are broadly worded and open
to interpretation and have led to frustration and confusion from victims, defendants and enforcement
agencies. In addition, if a person is found guilty of owning a vicious animal there are only two
options - euthanasia or banning from the City. Therefore, under the current ordinance, if a dog
barks and growls at a person walking their dog or chases a person on a skate board, that dog could
be considered vicious and be ordered euthanized. A truly vicious dog could be banned from the City
for lack of other viable alternatives, thereby transferring the problem to another jurisdiction. The
proposed ordinance seeks to address these concerns by distinguishing between a "dangerous
animal"and a "vicious animal"and providing different sentencing options.
Another matter addressed by the proposed Ordinance is the tethering ofanimals, which also relates
to vicious animal behavior. Dogs tethered for long periods can become highly aggressive. Dogs
feel naturally protective of their territory; when confronted with a perceived threat, they respond
according to their fight-or flight instinct. A chained dog, unable to take flight, often feels forced to
fight, attacking any unfamiliar animal or person who unwittingly wanders into his or her territory.
Unincorporated Larimer County and over 100 U.S.jurisdictions in 30 plus states have passed anti-
tethering legislation regulating chaining. Chaining is proactive rather than reactive. Chaining laws
gives officers a tool to crack down on illegal dogfighting, since most fighting dogs are chained out
rather than kept in a kennel or inside a home. Proper chaining can help prevent dogs from
becoming vicious.
The proposed revisions to the Code would result in three basic changes.
• A new category of"dangerous animal" would be created, to be distinguished from the
existing category of"vicious animal"which would be retained.
• It would be unlawful for any person to keep an animal that is the subject of a dangerous
animal citation unless a permit had been issued for the animal by the animal control officer
who issued the citation. Such a permit would be subject to conditions deemed necessary by
the animal control officer to protect other animals and members of the public,.pending the
disposition of the citation. Upon such disposition, the permit would either be made
permanent, modified or rescinded as deemed appropriate by the Municipal Court Judge.
• Any animal that is the subject of a vicious dog citation would be impounded pending
disposition of the citation. If the Municipal Judge determined that the animal was vicious,
the animal would be euthanized unless the Judge authorized the return of the animal to the
owner under conditions similar to, but more stringent than, those that might be imposed
upon the issuance of a dangerous animal permit. The option of having the vicious animal
removed from the City, which is currently available to the Judge, would be eliminated.
Animals determined by the Judge to be dangerous would not be subject to euthanasia unless
subsequently determined to be vicious.
53
December 15, 2009
More specifically:
• Section 4-70 would address the proper tethering of animals to ensure humane treatment of
the animal and the safety of both the animal and passersby.
• Section 4-95 would exempt dangerous and vicious animals from the public nuisance
category since they would be separately treated.
• Section 4-96 would create a new category of"dangerous animal."
• Subsection(a)would make it unlawful for any person to keep a dangerous animal in the City
without a permit.
• Section 4-96(b)would:list the kinds of requirements thatAnimal Control could impose upon
the owner of a dangerous animal in order for such animal to be kept in the City;specify how
a dangerous animal permit could be made permanent, modified or rescinded; authorize
impoundment of a dangerous animal that is not kept or confined according to the permit
requirements; and impose fees for the permit.
• Section 4-97, dealing with vicious animals, would prohibit the keeping of a vicious animal
in the City, except as approved by the Court and allow for its impoundment, at the owner's
expense, until final disposition of the vicious animal citation. The affirmative defenses to
such a charge would be retained.
• Section 4-197 would change the remedies available to the Municipal Court if an animal is
found to be dangerous or vicious. At present, the Court has two options if an animal is
determined to be vicious: have the animal euthanized or removed from the City. The
proposed revisions would provide the Judge with two options: have the dog euthanized or
allow the animal to be kept in the City under strict constraints. These could include
registration; the issuance of an identifying collar;neutering if not already done; implanting
an electronic identification microchip; no animal violations; and very specific measures to
ensure that the animal is securely muzzled and harnessed when it is on a lead and properly
confined, with appropriate warning signs, when it is not.
SUSTAINABILITY.•ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,AND SOCIAL IMPACTS
This Ordinance places greater responsibility and accountability on animal owners for the care and
supervision of their animals. The intended result is that neighbors and citizens will be able to
interact without fear of being attacked by a vicious animal. Additionally, it is anticipated that the
expanded options for disposition of dangerous or vicious animals will help prevent a recurrence of
vicious behavior of the animal. "
City Manager Atteberry stated the Humane Society and the City Attorney's Office initiated this item
to amend the City Code to provide reasonable problem solving solutions and give enforcement the
right tools to address problems with vicious dogs. The proposed Ordinance distinguishes between
54
December 15, 2009
vicious animals and other less dangerous animals. The current Code does not differentiate between
animals that threaten and those that inflict serious injury. The only options available for the
disposition of dangerous and vicious animals is to euthanize the animal or remove the animal from
the city. Removal only transfers the problem to another jurisdiction. Euthanasia may not be the
correct solution.
Teresa Ablao, Senior Assistant Attorney, stated the proposed provisions create a new category of
dangerous animals in addition to the existing category of vicious animals. It will be unlawful to keep
an allegedly dangerous animal unless a permit is issued by the Animal Control Officer. The permit
would be subject to certain conditions to address the health and safety of the community. The
current prohibition against vicious animals will be maintained. Immediate impoundment of an
allegedly vicious animal will be required at the owner's expense, pending the outcome of the
citation. The option of removing vicious animals from the city will be eliminated. Once a
determination is made that the animal is vicious, the animal will either be euthanized or left under
the control of the owner under stringent requirements. Animals that are determined to be dangerous
are not subject to euthanasia unless they are later determined to be vicious.
Proper tethering is another provision of the proposed ordinance. This requirement is intended to
ensure the humane treatment of animals and protect the safety of animals and others. Proper
tethering can help prevent dogs from becoming vicious.
A new category of dangerous animals will be created. The proposed Ordinance defines a dangerous
animal and prohibits the keeping of a dangerous animal unless a permit is issued by Animal Control
or the Municipal Judge. An owner can request to modify or rescind permit conditions, but only
twelve months from the Judge's determination that the animal is dangerous. A fee will be charged
for a modification of the permit or recission.
The vicious animal provisions still prohibit keeping vicious animals except as permitted by the
Municipal Judge. The proposed Ordinance defines a vicious animal and provides options for the
Municipal Judge upon determination that an animal is vicious.
City Attorney Roy read a revision to Section 15 of the proposed Ordinance into the record.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if records will be kept to track an animal that attacks or bites twice
or more outside the twelve-month period. Ablao stated twelve months is the statute of limitations
within which the City has to file a particular case. The Municipal Judge has the option to take
previous attacks into consideration when making a determination about the disposition of an animal.
City Attorney Roy stated staff can determine whether to add other restrictions to the Ordinance for
Second Reading. The intent is to distinguish between a dangerous animal with an isolated incident
and a vicious animal with a recurrence of the problem.
Councilmember Manvel noted an animal can be labeled "dangerous" with its first bite and be
required to meet conditions of a permit. If an attack occurs again outside of the twelve-month time
period, the Judge will have the option of modifying or rescinding the permit.
55
December 15, 2009
Councilmember Ohlson asked why attempting to stop a fight between the animal and any other
animal is allowed as a defense against the charge of dangerous or vicious animal. Captain Bill
Porter, Latimer Humane Society, stated this defense could be used if two dogs living in the same
house are fighting and the owner attempts to stop the fight and get bitten in the process. City
Attorney Roy stated the affirmative defenses listed in the Ordinance are not limited to the confines
of one's home. Staff will review the intent to ensure the correct meaning.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked who will be enforcing the Ordinance. Ablao stated the Animal
Control officer will have the discretion to determine if a citation should be issued.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked for information on the required owner education classes and the cost
of permit fees. Captain Porter stated the owner will be required to attend educational classes on the
responsible keeping of dangerous animals. The classes are privately run and the owner will pay for
the classes with private trainers. The permit fee will be $75 if an officer issues a dangerous dog
citation. As part of the citation, the owner must comply with certain conditions, such ensuring the
dangerous animal wears an identifying collar and posting a sign on the front door. The owner will
receive a$50 refund when the sign and collar are returned to the Humane Society. The entire $75
fee will be refunded if the animal is found not guilty of the charge. If the animal is found guilty of
the charge by the Municipal Judge,the fee will be approximately$200. The fee helps to pay for an
officer to inspect the animal owner's house to ensure all requirements of the permit are met.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if the Ordinance will make enforcement easier for Animal Control.
Captain Porter stated the Ordinance provides greater clarification to animal owners than the current
Code does and offers more options for different situations. City Attorney Roy noted future
amendments to the Ordinance may be necessary to fine-tune the process.
Councilmember Poppaw asked if other animal control jurisdictions will be notified when a
dangerous or vicious animal is transferred out of the city. Captain Porter stated the Humane Society
will notify other jurisdictions.
Councilmember Troxell asked between Larimer County Animal Control,Humane Society and Police
Services,who has jurisdiction in enforcing the animal regulations. Jim Szakmeister,Police Services,
stated the Larimer County Humane Society is divided into two areas. One area provides care for
animals and the other area is animal control. The City has no animal control officers and contracts
with the Humane Society to enforce the animal control regulations. He is the liaison between the
City and the Humane Society and handles any complaints. City Manager Atteberry stated
enforcement is done by Animal Control officers and Lieutenant Szakmeister oversees the program.
Ablao stated once a citation is written by an animal control officer,the citation is filed in Municipal
Court. The animal owner enters a plea and a court date is set if the plea is "not guilty". Attorneys
from the City Attorney's Office prosecute the cases and work closely with the animal control officers
to determine the merits of a case and possible disposition. The attorneys make recommendations
to the Municipal Judge regarding dangerous or vicious animals. City Attorney Roy noted the current
Code limits the options the Judge has in offering ways to allow an animal to remain with its owner
under stringent conditions. The proposed Ordinance provides a system where an animal can be kept
56
December 15, 2009
and regulated. When the new system is implemented, some unintended consequences or loopholes
may arise and amendments to the Ordinance will be necessary to fine tune the process.
Councilmember Roy asked if the signs must be posted before the animal is released to the owner and
if a standard sign will be issued by the Humane Society. Captain Porter held up the sign and collar
that would be issued to the animal owner when the animal control officer issues a permit.
Councilmember Roy asked for the consequences to the animal owner if the sign is taken down or
other conditions of the permit are not met. Ablao stated an annual registration of the animal will be
required as part of the permit. An animal control officer would physically inspect the home before
the registration is issued.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the definition of a dangerous or vicious animal includes biting
another animal only when off the owner's property. City Attorney Roy stated the Ordinance defines
dangerous or vicious animal as one that, while off the property of its owner, killed or seriously
injured another animal.
Councilmember Manvel asked if an animal that bites a person or animal while on the owner's
property is a different level of problem than if the animal bites a person or animal while off the
owner's property. Captain Porter noted there is a difference between a dog biting another animal that
has come onto its property and the same animal biting another animal with off its own property.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
138, 2009, as revised, on First Reading.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the Ordinance will greatly improve enforcement of animal control
regulations. He would prefer breed-specific regulations.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the involvement of the Humane Society and animal control officers in the
development of the Ordinance has helped to create regulations that will be more useful to Fort
Collins.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation and Zoning Adopted on First Reading
The following is staffs memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 2009-113 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation and Zoning.
57
December 15, 2009
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2009, Annexing Property Known as the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 140, 2009, Amending the Zoning Map of the
City of Fort Collins and Classifyingfor Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Fossil
Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
This is a request to annex and zone 28 acres located on the south side of Carpenter Road(SH 392),
at the southwest corner of Interstate 25 and Carpenter Road. The property is undeveloped and is
in the AP - Airport District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is C -
Commercial.
Staff is recommending that this property not be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign
District.A map amendment will be necessary to place this property on the Residential Neighborhood
Sign District Map as an "Area Not in the Sign District". The "Residential Neighborhood Sign
District" was established for the purpose of regulating signs for nonresidential uses in certain
geographical areas of the City which may be particularly affected by such signs because of their
predominantly residential use and character. The subject property is in an identified commercial
corridor along I-25, with the closest predominantly residential uses approximately 1,000 feet to the
west.
BA CKGR O UND/DIS C USSION
The applicant, Larry Gilleland, for the property owners, VPD 392 LLC and Peter Prato, has
submitted a written petition requesting annexation of 28.9 acres located on the south side of
Carpenter Road (SH 392), at the southwest corner of Interstate 25 and Carpenter Road. The
property is undeveloped and is in the AP-Airport District in Larimer County. The requested zoning
in the City of Fort Collins is C- Commercial. The surroundingproperties are currently zoned POL
—Public Open Lands in the City to the north, C— Commercial and T— Tourist in Larimer County
to the north,AP-Airport in Larimer County to the west and south, and C-Commercial in the Town
of Windsor to the east. This is a 100%voluntary annexation.
The property is located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. According to policies
and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the
Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area, the City will agree to
consider annexation ofproperty in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according
to State law. The property lies within the Corridor Activity Center boundary in the I-251SH 392
Interchange Improvement Plan. It gains the required 116 contiguity to existing City limits from a
common boundary with the Fossil Creek Reservoir Open Space Annexation (June, 2008) to the
north.
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: POL in the City of Fort Collins, C and Tin Larimer County; undeveloped
E: C in the Town of Windsor; existing commercial development
58
December 15, 2009
S: AP in Larimer County; existing large acreage residential, commercial
W.• AP in Larimer County; existing large acreage residential, commercial
The requested zoningfor this annexation is the C-Commercial Zoning District. There are numerous
uses permitted in this District, subject to either administrative review or review by the Planning and
Zoning Board. The adopted City Structure Plan, a part of the Comprehensive Plan (City Plan),
identifies that Commercial is appropriate in this location. The request is in conformance with the
State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Land Use
Code, the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan, the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins
Intergovernmental Agreement, the City of Fort Collins and Town of Windsor Intergovernmental
Agreement, and the 1-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan.
A few issues to be addressed as part ofa future site specific developmentplan relate to coordination
of the SH392 and southwest frontage road alignments and right-of-way delineations and,potential
impacts on the existing wetlands on the middle portion of the property. The development review
process has protection measures within Section 3.4.1(E) of the Land Use Code to ensure that
existing wetlands on the property are adequately protected and buffered. Within this section is the
requirement for the provision of an ecological characterization study, which is the foundation for
establishing buffer zones to protect the wetlands.
Findings:
1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer
County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the
Fort Collins Urban Growth Area.
2. The area meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary
annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
3. On November 3, 2009, the City Council adopted'Resolution 2009-099 which accepted the
annexation petition and determined that the petition was in compliance with State law. The
Resolution also initiated the annexation process for the property by establishing the date,
time and place when a public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the
Ordinances annexing and zoning the area.
4. The requested C— Commercial Zoning District is in conformance with the policies of the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
SUSTAINABILITY. ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS
No direct economic impacts will result with this proposed annexation and zoning as the property
is undeveloped at the present time. With new commercial development, the City may participate in
infrastructure financing along with private development. Future commercial development will also
generate sales and use tax revenues for the City.
59
December 15, 2009
The physical environment will not be directly impacted by the proposed annexation and zoning of
the property. The zoning standards described in the Land Use Code establish regulations to
determine the appropriate land uses and design and development standards required for new
development. New development is required to comply with the City's Land Use Code Natural Area
Standards to assess and address any potential environmental impacts.
The health, safety and well-being of the community and its citizens will not be adversely impacted
by the proposed annexation and zoning of the property. The annexation request is in conformance
with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Code, the Fossil CreekReservoirArea Plan, the Larimer County
and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement, the City of Fort Collins and Town of
Windsor Intergovernmental Agreement, and the I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan. "
Jeff Scheick, Planning, Development, and Transportation Director, stated the property is 28 acres,
located on the southwest corner the I-25/SH 392 interchange. The property meets all state
annexation requirements for voluntary annexation. The requested zoning is C-Commercial.
Approval of the annexation of the property is not the same as approving a particular development
for the property. Any development proposal would be required to go through the development
review process to ensure the development is in compliance with the City's Land Use Code.
Steve Olt,City Planner,stated the property is undeveloped and the center of the site contain' wetland
areas. Fossil Creek Reservoir is located just north of Carpenter Road (SH392). The proposed
zoning is C-Commercial, which conforms with the City's Structure Plan designation for the
property. The zoning request is in conformance with other City Plans and agreements. The Planning
and Zoning Board recommends annexation of the property and zoning the property C-Commercial.
Staff recommended a condition of approval of zoning for the property that required an ecological
characterization study be completed prior to a developer submitting a complete project development
plan. The Planning and Zoning Board did not recommend the condition of approval and the staff
recommendation has not been included in the zoning ordinance. After lengthy discussion, the
Planning and Zoning Board determined that requiring the ecological characterization study prior to
formal submittal of a project development plan should be a Citywide policy and not applied only to
one request. Staff did not bring its recommendation to Council because it determined the request
can wait until a review of the policy requiring an ecological characterization study prior to submittal
of a project development plan is completed as part of the Spring Land Use Code review.
Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, stated the Northern Colorado Communities I-25 Corridor Plan,
adopted in 2001,addressed the I-25 corridor from Berthoud north to Wellington. The Plan identifies
activity centers at each interchange along I-25, with the intent of focusing development at the
primary transportation interchanges and developing supportive land uses for the jurisdictions
adjacent to the interchanges. The annexation and zoning of the subject property aligns with the
vision and goals set forth in this Plan and conforms with other City Plans and agreements. The I-25
Subarea Plan,adopted in 2003,was a more specific Plan and focused on the Harmony Corridor north
to Douglas Road and does not address the I-25/SH392 interchange.
60
December 15, 2009
Dana Leavitt, Environmental Planner, stated an ecological characterization study identifies all the
natural habitats and features on or adjacent to a proposed development parcel. The study includes
an inventory and analysis of wildlife use, wetlands evaluation,prominent views, significant native
vegetation, streams and bodies of water, sensitive and specially valued species, special habitat
features,wildlife corridors, ecological function and issues pertaining to timing of development and
relationship to the ecological character of the area. The study also requires mitigation measures to
be proposed for any impacts to the natural features and habitats. The purpose of the study is to
establish a baseline for buffer zones to protect features and habitats identified in the study. The Land
Use Code requires an ecological characterization study as part of the project review.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if staff recommends amending the zoning ordinance to include the
condition that requires an ecological characterization study before the project development proposal
is submitted. Steve Dush, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, stated
staff does recommend the ecological characterization study be done before a development proposal
is submitted to identify issues that need to be addressed.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if staff is developing new gateway overlays or zoning requirements
that would affect this interchange and other I-25 interchanges that lead into Fort Collins. Wray
stated annexing and zoning the property C-Commercial does not preclude any future consideration
for additional standards such as new gateway standards. The Town of Windsor has been supportive
of developing gateway standards for this interchange. Development of gateway standards or overlays
is not currently in staff s work plan but could be considered as part of the City Plan update that will
be occurring in 2010. Gateway standards could be developed that would be above and beyond the
current commercial zoning standards.
Council directed that gateway standards be included in the City Plan update. City Manager
Atteberry stated staff will include the development of gateway standards in its review of City Plan.
The Town of Windsor has been supportive of developing joint standards and a vision for the entire
interchange.
Mayor Hutchinson asked about the difference between an ecological characterization study and other
environmental impact studies. Leavitt stated an ecological characterization study is an actual
inventory, down to a square foot, of what environmental features and habitats are located on the
property. An environmental impact study is broader and does not provide as great detail of the
property features.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2009-113. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
139, 2009 on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
61
December 15, 2009
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
140, 2009 on First Reading with the amendment to Section 1 of the Ordinance that the ecological
characterization study be required as a condition of zoning. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2009-114 Making an Appointment to the Planning and Zoning Board, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A vacancy currently exists on the Planning and Zoning Board due to the expiration of term of Ruth
Rollins who did not reapply.
Councilmembers Poppaw and Troxell conducted interviews but did not agree on a recommendation
for the Planning and Zoning Board. The Council interview team wishes to submit two names (John
Hatfield and Daniel Lenskold, Sr.)for Council's consideration for thatposition. "
Councilmember Troxell made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Kottwitz,to adopt Resolution
2009-114, appointing Daniel Lenskold, Sr. to the Planning and Zoning Board. Yeas: Hutchinson,
Kottwitz, and Troxell. Nays: Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2009-114,appointing John Hatfield to the Planning and Zoning Board. Yeas: Hutchinson,Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy. Nays: Kottwitz, Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 131, 2009,
Amending Chapter 8, Article I of the City Code to Establish the
Budget Term for the City, Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on FirstReading on December 1, 2009, changes the next two-
year budget term and all future two-year terms of the City budget. The City Council has just
adopted the 2010-2011 City budget. With the adoption of this Ordinance, the next budget term will
62
December 15, 2009
be 2011-2012 and future two-year budget terms will begin in the odd-numbered years. The Budget
process will take place in the even-numbered years. "
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte, questioned the rationale for changing the budget cycle.
Mayor Hutchinson noted Council requested this change in the budget cycle to shift the budget cycle
so that future two-year budget terms will begin in odd-numbered years will allow new
Councilmembers time to gain more experience and make better informed decisions.
Councilmember Roy stated future Councils will have the ability to change the budget cycle if they
determine it will better meet the needs of the community.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to adopt Ordinance No.
131, 2009 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Manvel stated allowing extra time for new Councilmembers to gain experience will
enable them to make better decisions regarding future budgets.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2009-111 Approving the Stipulated Determination of
Vested Rights Between the City and South Harmony, LLC, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
South Harmony, LLC is the developer of Brookfield Subdivision and has completed much of the
project, but there remains about half of the dwelling units to be sold and constructed. The plan has
expired. Accordingly, South Harmony, LLC has filed an application for a Determination of Vested
Rights under Division 2.13 of the Land Use Code and the City Manager and CityAttorney agree that
the application for Determination of Vested Rights should be granted. The proposed resolution
would formalize the determination of vested rights.
BA CKGR O UNDIDIS C USSION
Division 2.13 of the Land Use Code of the City establishes a procedure whereby the City can
provide relief, where appropriate, to persons who claim that the application of the Land Use Code
has interfered with their vested rights to develop property. This procedure has been established in
order to prevent manifest injustice in cases where application of the "lapse"provisions of the Land
Use Code would work an undue hardship. Vested rights determinations are allowed where:
63
December 15, 2009
1. Some authorized act has been performed by the City;
2. There has been reasonable good faith reliance upon such act by the applicant;
and
3. There has been a substantial change in position or expenditure by the applicant
such that it would be highly inequitable and unjust to destroy the rights
acquired.
South Harmony,LLC owns a parcel ofproperty at the northeast corner of Cinquefoil Lane and Rock
Creek Drive in the City which has been developed in the City under the name of"Brookfield". The
entire parcel contains 42.39 acres and has been largely developed, but there remains about ha f of
the dwelling units to be sold and constructed. This development has lapsed under the expiration
provisions of the Land Use Code because the infrastructure has not been completed. Because of this
lapse, South Harmony has sought relief under the vested rights determination process set out in
Division 2.13 of the Land Use Code.
Section 2.13.5 provides that if the Director and the City Attorney agree, based on the review and
evaluation of the application, that the application should be granted, then they may enter into a
written stipulation with the applicant, in lieu of the hearing which would otherwise be required
under Division 2.13. Any such stipulated determination must be approved by the City Council by
resolution and must include findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which the determination
is based.
Both an overall developmentplan and final plans have been approved for the property and the City's
utility or other utility servicing districts have also approved the completion of utilities for the
property. The City has issued approximately 148 buildingpermitsfor dwellings on theproperty and
the applicant has received certificates of occupancy for 138 homes, all of which have been sold to
purchasers. South Harmony maintains an active sales presence on the property, and has dedicated
public rights-of-way to the City in accordance with the plans. South Harmony has received
development financing for the entire parcel, and this financing was based upon the complete
development of the entire parcel such that South Harmony is at risk of violating the terms of its
development financing if it does not obtain a vested right to continue the project to completion.
South Harmony has budgeted some $9,749,488 to develop the property and has spent$8,733,755
in doing so.
From the perspective of the staff and the City Attorney's office, it appears that the applicant has
incurred substantial expenditures in reliance upon the City's approval of the plans and that the
applicant has been diligent in trying to develop the property to completion and that South Harmony
should be afforded an additional three years within which to completely install the infrastructure
improvements for the remaining portion of the property. "
Councilmember Ohlson asked why an overall development plan (ODP) does not expire and if an
extension to the development will allow the development to avoid meeting new land use
requirements. He asked if a project requesting an extension would be required to meet any new Land
Use Code regulations that might have been adopted since an ODP was issued. Steve Dush,
Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, stated staff has discretion on
64
December 15, 2009
whether to recommend an extension of vested rights. Staff could make a different recommendation
if Land Use Code changes would greatly affect the project. Half of this development is already
developed with the streets and utilities in place. If an application for this project were received
today, no new regulations would apply. Any issuance of a building permit for the development
requires compliance with all existing Codes.
Councilmember Ohlson asked when a project development plan(PDP)expires. Dush stated a PDP
expires after three years. Final development plans are also good for three years.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2009-111. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Roy asked when Council will consider the issue of pop-ups and scrape-offs at a
work session. City Manager Atteberry stated a work session will be scheduled.
Adiournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
65
January 5, 2010
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,January 5, 2010,
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: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy, and
Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Mayor Hutchinson presented the Character Fort Collins Legacy Award to the family of Ann Azari,
former Fort Collins mayor.
Citizen Participation
Vivian Armendariz,820 Merganser Drive,expressed concerns regarding long waits for Dial-A-Ride
vehicles in inclement weather. She also expressed concerns about accessibility to Soapstone Natural
Area.
Bruce Lockhart,2500 East Harmony Road,expressed concern regarding future tax hikes and stated
Council should reconsider financing the pilot trash district. He stated the City's green building
standards will increase the costs of building in Fort Collins.
Stacy Lynne, 216 Park Street, expressed concern regarding Council's response to her comments at
the December 15, 2009 Council meeting.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
City Manager Atteberry stated, in response to prior concerns regarding Susie Gordon's potential
conflict of interest in her work with the City's trash hauling policies, Ms. Gordon is a professional
City employee with great integrity and work ethic. He stated an outside agency, Mountain States
Employers Council,investigated the potential conflict of interest which may have existed due to Ms.
Gordon's employment outside the City organization. The results indicated Ms. Gordon's outside
employment with SERA did not violate any local or state conflict of interest policies, regulations,
or laws. There was no overlap in the timing of Ms.,Gordon's employment with SERA and the
award of any City contract to SERA and, at no point in time did Ms. Gordon have anything to gain
from the contracts awarded by the City to SERA. There is no evidence that Ms. Gordon worked on
any City projects or contracts as a SERA employee.
66
January 5, 2010
City Manager Atteberry stated the conflict of interest concerns were initially raised privately by
Councilmember Troxell and then publically by a citizen. He thanked Ms. Gordon for her
professionalism and restraint in handling the issue and stated staff will be working on a new internal
administrative policy that will aid in keeping track of potential conflict of interest situations with
outside employment.
Agenda Review
City Manger Atteberry recommended Item#11,Resolution 2010-001 Approving Revised Costs and
Fees for Fort Collins Municipal Court, be postponed to the January 19, 2010, Council meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes ofNovember 3 and November 17,2009 Regular
Meetings and the November 10, 2009 Adjourned Meeting.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2009, Amending Section 1-15(g) of the Cites
Relating to General Penalties.
Currently, drivers of motor vehicles who can be assessed at least one(1) point on a moving
violation are required to pay an additional $35 traffic calming surcharge upon conviction.
The City has experienced a proliferation of bicycles and other nonmotorized users of the
City's roadways. This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 15,
2009,amends the City Code to require bicyclists and other nonmotor vehicle operators who
receive citations for what would be considered moving violations if committed by an
operator of a motor vehicle to pay the traffic calming surcharge. Examples of violations
where this surcharge would be applicable are,but not limited to, driving on the wrong side
of the road, failure to yield the right-of-way,driving at night with no lighting, failure to stop
for a red light, etc.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2009, Amending Section 24-96 of the City Code
Regarding Snow Emergencies.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 15, 2009,amends the
City Code to provide the City Manager with the authority to declare a snow emergency when
conditions warrant. The current Code designated the City Engineer as the official with the
authority to declare a snow emergency.
9. Items Relating to the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2009, Annexing Property Known as the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
67
January 5, 2010
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 140,2009,Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
These Ordinances,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 15,2009,annex and
zone 28 acres located on the south side of Carpenter Road(SH 392), at the southwest corner
of Interstate 25 and Carpenter Road. The property is undeveloped and is in the AP—Airport
District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for the annexation is C—Commercial.
Pursuant to direction for the Council on First Reading, Ordinance No. 140, 2009, which
places the property in the C—Commercial District, has been revised to include a condition
that, prior to the submittal of a Project Development Plan for all or any portion of the
property,a comprehensive Ecological Characterization Study of the entire property must be
prepared by a qualified consultant and submitted to and approved by the City.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No 001, 2010, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
The Fort Collins Police Services Victim Services Team has been awarded a 12-month grant
in the amount of$34,000 for the period from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010,
by the Eighth Judicial District Victims Assistance and Law Enforcement(V.A.L.E.) Board
to help fund services provided by this Team. These funds will be used for a paid victim
advocate who provides crisis intervention services during weekday hours and is housed in
the Victim Services office. These funds will also pay for some of the operational expenses
needed to provide 24-hours a day, 7-days a week services to victims of crime in the
community. Fort Collins Police Services/Victim Services Team has received this grant each
year since 1996.
11. Resolution 2010-001 Approving Revised Costs and Fees for Fort Collins Municipal
Court.
The Fort Collins Municipal Court assesses various costs and fees, in addition to fines and
other penalties. According to the City Charter,these costs and fees are enacted by Council,
upon recommendation of the Judge. Various costs and fees have been approved by
resolution over the years. At this time, Judge Lane recommends increasing the amount or
applicability of certain existing costs and fees and adding certain new fees.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2009, Amending Section 1-15(g) of the City Code
Relating to General Penalties.
68
January 5, 2010
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2009, Amending Section 24-96 of the City Code
Regarding Snow Emergencies.
9. Items Relating to the Fossil Creek 392 Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2009, Annexing Property Known as the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 140,2009,Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Fossil Creek 392 Annexation to the City.
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138,2009,Amending Section 4 of the City Code Relating
to Animals, Particularly Dogs.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No 001, 2010, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt and approve
all items on the Consent Calendar as amended. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 138, 2009,
Amending Section 4 of the City Code Relating to
Animals, Particularly Dogs, Adopted as Revised on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 15, 2009, amends the animal
provisions of the City Code to better identify and define behaviors associated with dangerous and
vicious animals and specify more appropriate alternatives for dealing with such animals. The
revisions set forth a number of requirements regarding the impounding and disposition of animals
found to be dangerous or vicious. These provisions also provide a broader range of conditions that
the Municipal Judge may order in order for animal owners to keep an animal found to be dangerous
or vicious as an alternative to surrendering the animal for euthanasia or removing it from the
jurisdiction. In addition, the proposed revisions address the proper method of tethering animals.
Several changes have been made to the Ordinance on Second Reading in light of the discussion of
the item on First Reading.
69
January 5, 2010
The following changes have been made to the Ordinance on Second Reading in light of the
discussion of the item on First Reading.
1. The phrase "while off the property of its owner" has been deleted from the definitions of
"dangerous animal"and "vicious animal." The purpose of this phrase was to distinguish
situations where animals might attack other, "trespassing" animals that came onto the
owner's property from other situations off the owner's property. However, the situation
involving "trespassing"animals is already covered as an affirmative defenses in Sections
4-96(b)(c) and 4-97(b)(2).
2. The phrase 'pet animal"has been substituted for "animal"in the definitions of"dangerous
animal"and "vicious animal" to ensure that animals will not be considered dangerous or
vicious for killing wild animals that are their natural prey, such as mice or squirrels.
3. The definition of"vicious animal" has been changed to eliminate the 12-month period of
time within which multiple attacks must occur in order for an animal to be considered
dangerous or vicious.
4., The options available to the Municipal Judge upon finding that an animal is dangerous have
been expanded to include euthanasia. Staff believes that this option may be warranted if,
for example, the owner ofa dangerous animal refuses to accept the imposition ofconditions
necessary to ensure public safety or fails to abide by such conditions. "
Teresa Ablao, Assistant City Attorney, detailed the changes made by staff to the ordinance based
on the discussion at First Reading.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if a dog could be considered vicious if it bit the owner of another dog
after attacking the owner's dog. City Attorney Roy replied that issue was discussed among staff
with a consensus that, if a dog attacked another dog, the characterization of that aggressor as
dangerous or vicious results from that initial attack. Also,a person trying to intervene in a dog fight
is likely seen by the attacking dog as an additional threat. Captain Bill Porter, Larimer County
Humane Society,stated this situation is one of the most common in which people get bit. He added
the attacking dog and its owner should be held accountable.
Councilmember Manvel asked if an animal would be called dangerous or vicious if it attacked
another dog but caused no bodily injury to that dog. Captain Porter replied it would be qualified as
a dangerous animal with a propensity to attack, not a vicious animal.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the treatment of wild animals in the context of dangerous and
vicious animals. Captain Porter replied the Division of Wildlife deals with animals such as bears
and cougars and the Humane Society deals with smaller animals such as fox and coyotes.
Councilmember Troxell asked how this ordinance would relate to animals other than pets. Captain
Porter replied this ordinance applies only to pet animals. City Attorney Roy stated wildlife officials
70
January 5, 2010
are given the authority to tranquilize, if necessary, and remove any animal at large, or deemed
dangerous, to an animal shelter or other suitable facility. Ablao stated there is also state law
authority given to animal control human societies in order to capture and dispose of wild animals.
There is also a City Code section that prohibits people from capturing and keeping wild animals as
pets. City Attorney Roy stated the particular provisions in this ordinance are relating only to pet
animals.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the public is better off with these changes. Lieutenant Jim
Szakmeister, Police Services,replied the changes are an improvement,providing more alternatives
and a wider scope. It allows the safety of the citizens as well as the safety of pet animals to be
paramount and allows for judgment and reason to be used. Captain Porter expressed support for the
ordinance in that it holds owners accountable for pets' actions. He stated the ordinance is clear and
fair to victims as well as owners.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
138, 2009, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Manvel expressed support for staff s work on the issue and for the improved
ordinance.
Mayor Hutchinson expressed support for having various alternatives available for various situations,
making for a more effective, enforceable ordinance.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohl son,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Ohlson asked if Council could receive an annual report regarding food tax rebates.
City Manager Atteberry replied the program is coordinated in the Finance Department and a report
would be prepared for Council. He stated there have been increased efforts to promote the food tax
rebate program.
Councilmember Ohlson asked about one establishment in town that serves alcohol receiving 112
police calls in a year and at what point liquor licenses should be revoked. He expressed concern
about the strain on police resources. City Manager Atteberry replied a response will be coordinated
between the City Clerk's Office, City Attorney's Office and Police Services.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the Scouts for attending Council meetings.
71
January 5, 2010
Councilmember Troxell asked for a status update regarding the February 2 and 16, 2010 tentative
discussions regarding the pilot trash district. He asked if residents in the district have been notified
of the hearing dates.
City Manger Atteberry replied staff is on track with those dates, though some negotiations are still
pending. He stated he understood Council's direction was not to send individual notices,but rather
to promote and advertise the hearings as for any other items coming before Council.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the format of the hearing and expressed concern that a meeting
with other agenda items may not provide the appropriate forum.
City Manager Atteberry replied the hearing will allow staff to answer frequently asked questions
relating to the pilot trash district and a specific contract.
Mayor Hutchinson stated this is the first time a special hearing has been held since at least 2005.
He stated the hearing will involve both questions and answers and stated it is appropriate that some
of the most frequently asked questions be answered in summary at the beginning of the hearing. He
added the special hearing will be the first agenda item at the February 2, 2010 meeting.
Councilmember Troxell encouraged residents to send in questions prior to the meeting to allow staff
appropriate time to research and provide answers at the hearing.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
72