Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 09/02/2014 - ITEMS RELATING TO THE GREELEY BELLVUE PIPELINE ONAgenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY September 2, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Jon Haukaas, Water Engr Field Operations Mgr Helen Matson, Real Estate Services Manager SUBJECT Items Relating to the Greeley Bellvue Pipeline on City Property. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Waterline Easement, Access Easement, and Temporary Construction Easement on City property to the City of Greeley. B. Resolution 2014-081, Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into a Shared Location Agreement for the Greeley Bellvue Pipeline to Cross a City Utility Easement. The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of easements to the City of Greeley (“Greeley”) across the City Property known as the City Ditch and authorize a shared location agreement for Greeley to cross a City utility easement. The City of Greeley is acquiring necessary easements for its Greeley Bellvue Pipeline Project (the “Project”). Greeley has requested easements for their Project across a strip of property owned by the City’s Utility Department extending south from the Poudre River. The property lies outside City limits and is the location of the City Ditch. The Larimer County Canal No. 2 Irrigating Company utilizes this ditch through an existing easement agreement with the City. The easements requested by Greeley include a .19 acre (8,265 square feet) permanent waterline easement, a .133 acre (5,808 square feet) temporary construction easement, and an access easement across the existing ditch access road. Greeley also plans to install its pipeline across an existing utility easement containing a 27-inch waterline owned by the City. In order to protect the City’s easement interest and existing utility improvements, Greeley has agreed to enter into a Shared Location Agreement regarding this crossing. The requested easements and agreement were presented and approved by the City’s Water Board at their December 2010 meeting. They were also presented to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board meeting on December 8, 2010. These items were previously presented to Council in June 2011, but the items were withdrawn due to concerns from citizens and City Council, including that Greeley had not yet obtained authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the Project and had not reached agreement with a neighboring property owner. Since that time, Greeley has obtained authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers but has not yet reached an agreement with the neighboring property owner. Greeley has agreed to pay the City for the value of the easements as well as City Real Estate staff time. Because Greeley wants to begin construction on this section of the Project soon, it has indicated that it will use eminent domain if necessary to acquire the requested property interests from the City. If Greeley acquires the requested easements through an eminent domain action, the City will not get the benefit of the terms and conditions of those easements that City staff previously negotiated with Greeley. Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Overall Project Description The Project involves the installation of about 30 miles of a 60-inch diameter pipeline and is designed to transport water from its Bellvue water treatment plant located northwest of Fort Collins to the City of Greeley water customers. Final design of the Northern Segment has been completed and Greeley will soon solicit bids for project construction. Greeley has procured 86 percent of the lineal footage of the pipeline easements needed for the project and is in negotiations with property owners for the remaining needed easements. An Executive Summary provided by the City of Greeley for the Project is attached (Attachment 4). Brief History As background, Greeley began delivering drinking water from its Bellvue Water Treatment Plant in 1907. Greeley constructed the original transmission line out of handcrafted wooden stave pipe. Two, and sometimes three, parallel steel or concrete pipelines provide current transmission capacity. Existing transmission capacity will soon constrain Greeley’s ability to service its customers from the Bellvue Water Treatment Plant due to increasing drinking water demand. The Project adds capacity to this transmission system for the first time in 50 years. Unfortunately, the existing 50-year-old transmission line easements are not large enough and were not intended to accommodate the additional line in many places. Greeley identified its preferred route corridor for the new transmission line through an extensive analysis that determined it minimized disruption of properties and the public at large, had moderate environmental impacts, operated on gravity, and ranked the best in terms of cost. Larimer County approved the location and extent of the preferred route corridor. In 2004, Greeley approached the City with a request to install a new water transmission line from the Bellvue Filter Plant to Greeley with a route going through Fort Collins. In an effort to allow plenty of time for review and collaboration, this request was made well in advance of the State Statue regulated 60-day Site Advisory Review time limit. A Technical Advisory Committee of City staff was formed and met on a monthly basis with representatives of the project for a year to discuss the pros and cons of several possible route alternatives. City staff from various departments including Natural Resources, Planning, Engineering, and the Utilities departments worked closely with the project engineers to analyze any potential impacts to properties in Fort Collins. The initial investigation focused on land use, environmental factors, impacts to existing structures, historic structures, natural areas, etc. All parties collaborated to ensure that the location of the proposed waterline would have the least amount of negative impacts and maximize opportunities for the City. All potential environmental impacts that were noted were planned to be avoided or temporary only. The proposed routes were then narrowed to one unanimous decision. The final “Location, Character, and Extent” report was submitted on April 15, 2005. City staff formed a Technical Advisory Committee and worked with Greeley staff to review the project per Colorado Revised Statute 31-23-209, using the Site Advisory Review process. This statute limits the City‘s regulatory review to the location, character, and extent of the proposal. A number of public open houses were held by Greeley, to which all impacted property owners and adjacent property owners were invited. The Project was taken before the Planning and Zoning Board per State statute and approved. Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 3 In 2006, the Fort Collins City Council passed Ordinance No. 135, 2006, which authorized the conveyance of easements on City property located in east Fort Collins near Timberline Road for the Project. In 2008, the City Council also passed Ordinance No. 102, 2008, authorizing easements for the Project on City property located at 1000 North College Avenue. These easements were then conveyed and Greeley has since installed the waterline improvements in these easement areas. Current Easement Request The Northern Segment is one of the last portions of the Project and involves the installation of the waterline improvements from Shields Street north of Fort Collins west to the Bellvue Filter Plant. City staff and Greeley staff began meeting in October 2010 to discuss the currently requested easements and the crossing of the City’s utility line. The water pipeline as it crosses the City’s property and adjacent properties will be constructed within a steel casing that will be bored approximately 6 feet underneath the City Property. This section of boring will run for approximately 700 feet and will be constructed by hand. The purpose of the hand boring is to minimize surface disturbances not only to City-owned facilities, but also to neighboring properties with significant natural and cultural resources. In February 2011, the City Leadership Team presented City staff with a question concerning the number of surface protrusions planned for Greeley’s Project. City staff explained the conditions that would require the installation of these features, as well as whether they would be installed within the area of the City’s easements. Greeley does not plan to install any above-ground facilities within the requested easement area. Blue marker posts are typically installed at property lines and fences and other locations to minimize obstructions in the properties. Greeley will work with property owners to determine the best location to place these markers. Greeley would consider using a natural color to paint any markers, if requested by an owner. Most of marker locations will be established during construction of the pipeline. Damage to vegetation will be limited to surface grading necessary for vehicle access across the ditch. The pipeline will also cross a nearby 27-inch water pipeline owned by the Utilities Department. Greeley plans to cross below this pipeline with a minimum of 12 inches of clearance between the two pipes. Greeley will work with the Utilities Department to determine what safety precautions need to be made when crossing this pipe. All work will be performed under the guidelines of the City’s General Resource Protection Standards for Easements or Rights of Way on City of Fort Collins Natural areas and Open Lands. Property owned by the Natural Area Program will not be affected by the requested easements. Eminent Domain On July 23, 2014, Greeley sent a letter to the City reiterating its offer to purchase the requested easements from the City and stating that if the City did not accept Greeley’s offer by September 5, 2014, Greeley would proceed to acquire the property interests by exercise of its power of eminent domain. However, on further discussion, Greeley was understanding of the timing of the City’s Council agenda process and agreed to refrain from filing an eminent domain action until later in September so that City staff could bring this item to the City Council seeking approval to convey the requested easements. Additional Issues As noted in the executive summary, various concerns have been raised by some Laporte area residents as well as Fort Collins citizens about the northern segment of the pipeline. Many of the concerns are addressed in the attached letter dated April 25, 2011, from Greeley City Manager, Roy Otto, to City of Fort Collins City Manager, Darin Atteberry. This Agenda Item Summary addresses several of the concerns from the perspective of City staff. Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 4 Save the Poudre, a conservation group focused on Poudre River issues, has previously raised a concern about potential Poudre River water depletions associated with the new pipeline. Although the primary purpose of the pipeline is to deliver Greeley’s existing water rights portfolio, there is the potential for additional future diversions that could be accommodated by the pipeline. These potential new diversions could reduce the flow between the Greeley pipeline diversion near the mouth of the Poudre canyon and the Larimer and Weld headgate, which is located close to Taft Hill Road. In addition to these diversions, other proposed projects also would have the potential to reduce flows at certain times in this reach of the Poudre River. These potential new depletions to the Poudre River, and their potential environmental impacts, were examined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Greeley received written verification in July 2014 from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that construction of the Northern Segment of the Bellvue Pipeline Project has been authorized pursuant to Nationwide Permit 12 (utility lines). A copy of this written verification is attached (Attachment 6). Greeley is tunneling by hand for 700 feet on the neighboring property and an adjoining parcel to avoid surface damages to important natural and cultural resources. Moreover, as noted in Roy Otto’s letter, Greeley participated in an extensive planning process with Larimer County, the entity with land planning jurisdiction in this area. Another issue that has been concerns the City’s ownership of the City Ditch. The ownership issue has been reviewed by City staff and discussed with a neighboring owner, Ms. Brinks, over the course of the past several years. The City acquired the property in 1883 through its eminent domain powers as the location for the original City ditch which was used to convey water from the Poudre River to the City’s original waterworks near Bingham Hill Road in 1883. The City became “seized in fee of the lands and real estate” by order of the Court in the eminent domain case. The condemnation order was recorded in 1892, in Book 87, page 556 of the real property records of Larimer County. When Ms. Brinks’ husband Jim acquired the Brinks property in 1977, the deed to Mr. Brinks referenced the City’s ownership, describing the property with the following exception: “except tract to City of Fort Collins by deed recorded in Book 87 at 556.” The City has continued to use the property for the location of the City Ditch since the late 1800’s. After the City’s early use of the ditch, the City leased the property for over 100 years to the Larimer No. 2 Irrigation Company, and in 2010 granted an easement to Larimer No. 2 for continued use of the City Ditch as the location for the Larimer No. 2. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Greeley has agreed to pay the following amounts for the easements: • Permanent Easement - $2,845.00 • Temporary Construction Easement - $200.00 • Access Easement - $500.00 • Staff time to process the request The value for the easements was calculated using $15,000 per acre. This value was determined by using comparable market data. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A Technical Advisory Committee of City staff was formed and met on a monthly basis with representatives of the project for a year to discuss the pros and cons of several possible route alternatives. City staff from various departments including Natural Resources, Planning, Engineering, and the Utilities departments worked closely with the project engineers to analyze any potential impacts to properties in Fort Collins. Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 5 The initial investigation focused on land use, environmental factors, impacts to existing structures, historic structures, natural areas, etc. All parties collaborated to ensure that the location of the proposed waterline would have the least amount of negative impacts and maximize opportunities for the City. All potential environmental impacts that were noted were planned to be avoided or temporary only. The proposed routes were then narrowed to one unanimous decision. The final “Location, Character, and Extent” report was submitted on April 15, 2005. City staff formed a Technical Advisory Committee and worked with Greeley staff to review the project per Colorado Revised Statute 31-23-209, using the Site Advisory Review process. This statute limits the City‘s regulatory review to the location, character, and extent of the proposal. A number of public open houses were held by Greeley, to which all impacted property owners and adjacent property owners were invited. Damage to vegetation will be limited to surface grading necessary for vehicle access across the ditch. The pipeline will also cross a nearby 27-inch water pipeline owned by the Utilities Department. Greeley plans to cross below this pipeline with a minimum of 12 inches of clearance between the two pipes. Greeley will work with the Utilities Department to determine what safety precautions need to be made when crossing this pipe. All work will be performed under the guidelines of the City’s General Resource Protection Standards for Easements or Rights of Way on City of Fort Collins Natural areas and Open Lands. Property owned by the Natural Area Program will not be affected by the requested easements. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its December 6, 2010 meeting, the Water Board unanimously voted to recommend approval of the requested easements. At its December 8, 2010, meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board unanimously voted to recommend approval of the requested easements. PUBLIC OUTREACH A number of public open houses were held by Greeley, to which all impacted property owners and adjacent property owners were invited. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Water Board Minutes - December 6 2010 (PDF) 3. LCSB Board Minutes - December 8 2010 (PDF) 4. Greeley Bellvue Pipeline Project Summary (PDF) 5. April 2011 Greeley City Manager Letter (PDF) 6. US Army Corps of Engineers Letter (PDF) City of Greeley Bellvue Pipeline Project Location Map Detail - Approximate location of requested easements - Approximate location of utility line crossing Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes Monday, December 6, 2010 (Excerpt of minutes to include Easement Request item only) Conveyance of Easement for Greeley Pipeline Water Resources Engineer Susan Smolnik introduced staff from the City of Greeley, Katy Wiktor and Dan Moore who have been involved with pipeline construction for treated water delivery to Greeley from their Bellvue treatment plant. The pipeline will cross a small amount of the City ditch, a Fort Collins Utilities-owned property and a 27-inch Utilities- owned pipeline. The easement is required to make a way for construction equipment to reach the area for boring. The City of Fort Collins’ Real Estate department has worked with Greeley staff on both the required temporary and permanent easement; a total of thirty different easements are involved. Staff recommended the Board supports the request for the easement. Board discussion: Are other permits involved? Staff is in the process of acquiring a nationwide permit, which is a form of permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Will any type of bentonite mud he used? Bentonite material will be used in a limited amount to provide lubrication as the pipe goes through the dirt. How will subsidence be managed? Surveys will take place before and after the operation to insure no more than a half inch of subsidence occurs. Crews will bore under the location to avoid disturbance of the ditch. Some easement oilers are still being developed, and some offers have been sent to land owners. As a result, some permissions have been acquired on this segment. Is it best to drill when no water is in the canal? Crews prefer to drill in the wintertime, hut due to the depth of the boring, they will encounter groundwater. Will there be a restoration requirement? Any surface disturbance will be treated within the City of Fort Collins’ Natural Resources standards for restoration. Capacity of the pipe is quite a bit larger than the water rights Greeley owns to go through it. What are the plans for using the capacity of the pipe? This pipeline positions Greeley for the future and prevents the need to go through this area again. Some water rights have been acquired presently. The pipe will carry water from the Colorado-Big Thompson watershed, as well as Water Supply and Storage Company water. The flows do not represent any that would have come through Fort Collins anyway. The point of diversion will be changed to a point higher upstream. Can staff speak to pros and cons? Ms. Smolnik noted, as a City utility, we often have to request similar easements to serve our customers and would like to he cooperative in these types of actions when other cities request easements of us. Greeley’s request has been sensitive to our Natural Areas guidelines. These are fairly small impacts. Greeley went through the location and extent approval with Larimer County. Motion: Board Member Waskom moved the Water Board recommends that City Council grant the easements requested by the City of Greeley for a water pipeline. Board Member Pillard seconded the motion. There was no further discussion on the motion. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND CONSERVATION & STEWARDSHIP BOARD Regular Meeting December 8, 2010 (Excerpt of minutes to include Easement Request item only) Utility Easement Request City of Greeley • Figgs: The City of Greeley is constructing a new 60 inch diameter pipeline to transport water from Greeley’s Bellvue water treatment plant to the City of Greeley and surrounding communities. The City of Fort Collins Utilities Department owns the City Ditch, a property that will be crossed by the pipeline. As such Greeley is requesting a 50’ permanent easement, a temporary easement, and a permanent access easement. In addition, Greeley is requesting a shared location agreement to cross an existing City utility line. There was a description of the project given by Dan Moore, Greeley Utility Department, with reference to maps of the pipeline location, which were provided to the Board for viewing. Ellis moved that the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (LCSB) recommends that City Council approve an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of a permanent utility easement, a temporary construction easement, and an access easement on City Utility property to the city of Greeley for construction of its water pipeline. The LCSB also recommends that City Council approve a shared location agreement to cross an existing City utility line. Stanley second. It was unanimously approved. Page 1 of 8 Greeley Water Pipeline Frequently Asked Questions 1. Why is Greeley building a new pipeline through Northern Colorado? Greeley’s population is growing and, therefore, water demand is increasing. To provide drinking water to this anticipated population, Greeley is building the first new pipeline from its Bellvue Water Treatment Plant in over 50 years. This new 60-inch pipeline will supplement the two, and in places three, existing 27-inch pipelines. The upgraded water transmission system is needed to meet demands within the service area of the City of Greeley and to meet some of the demands of Windsor, Evans, and Milliken pursuant to outside water service contracts. 2. Why doesn't Greeley build a new water treatment plant closer to the City? Greeley evaluated many options for expanding water treatment capacity, including building an additional plant in town. The analysis determined that using and upgrading the Bellvue Water Treatment Plant and transmission system, which has been operating since 1907, was in the community's best interest based on cost, water quality, water rights, and environmental concerns. 3. Who is funding this project? This project is completely funded by the City of Greeley ratepayers with possible grants to help manage any impacts to historic sites. No federal funds are involved. 4. Does this project impact Larimer County water supply or development? No. Greeley has separate water rights and a separate water system. This project does not promote growth or development in Larimer County. 5. Who at Greeley can affected parties contact to discuss their concerns regarding the project? Greeley supports an open and honest dialogue regarding this project and takes all citizen inquiries and comments seriously. The Greeley Water and Sewer Board is the ultimate governing board regarding the City's decisions on the project. Interested parties should contact Jon Monson, Greeley Water and Sewer Director, at 970-350-9820 or Dan Moore, Project Manager, at 970-350-9814 for more information or to express concerns. 6. Does Greeley coordinate with local jurisdictions and collect public input? Yes. The Larimer County Planning Commission, the Laporte Area Planning Advisory Committee, the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board, Weld County, and the Windsor Board of Trustees have either commented on or approved portions of the project. Greeley also hosted open house meetings in Fort Collins and Laporte to get feedback from local residents. Please see the attached timeline that documents all community outreach efforts and other project milestones. Specifically for the Northern Segment, Greeley met with the Laporte Area Planning Advisory Committee in September 2007 to solicit comments and Page 2 of 8 feedback. Greeley sent written invitations to 29 potentially affected property owners to attend an October 2007 open house. Both the LAPAC meeting and open house were covered in the local media. In addition, Greeley staff met with many landowners in the route corridor throughout the summer of 2007. 7. Did Greeley contact potentially affected property owners? During the evaluation process, many property owners throughout the area were contacted to gather information. Property owners who were located along the proposed route were notified or contacted specifically since they would be directly impacted by pipeline construction. It would have been unwieldy and unnecessarily disruptive to contact all property owners on the dozens of preliminary routes. 8. How were the routes selected? The City evaluated dozens of possible routes between the beginning and ends of the pipeline. Each route was analyzed and ranked by cost, environmental impacts, private property impacts, and public land use disruption (such as disruption to schools, traffic, utilities, businesses, and the general public) among other things. Greeley proposed a route corridor that scored the highest taking all these factors into account. The Larimer County Planning Commission approved the location and extent of this route. 9. Why not utilize the existing pipeline route? Where possible, Greeley follows existing utility or transportation corridors including existing pipeline routes to minimize disruption to nearby properties. Unfortunately, since the time Greeley installed its last Bellvue pipeline in the early 1950s, homes, schools, roads and other utilities have been built in the area, making it impossible to utilize the existing pipeline corridor in some areas. 10. Can Greeley choose a different route that would require pumping water? Certain routes would require pumping instead of letting the water flow by gravity. The energy consumed by pumping was one of the factors considered in the route analysis. Pumping water uses large amounts of energy and thus would increase Greeley’s carbon footprint. Cost and reliability factors also strongly disfavor a pumping alternative. As a result, Greeley uses gravity to transport water to the City whenever possible. Greeley has relied on gravity for its Bellvue transmission lines for over 100 years. 11. Are affected property owners compensated? Both the United States and Colorado constitutions require Greeley to compensate landowners for temporary or permanent use of their properties. Accordingly, Greeley pays landowners for the fair-market value for both temporary (for example, easements for surveying or construction) and permanent easements across their properties. Greeley also compensates landowners for any damages caused by Greeley’s use of the property. 12. How is the easement value determined? Greeley offers to acquire the necessary pipeline easements at a price based upon the opinions of a real estate appraiser. Greeley then considers any credible information provided by the landowner concerning the value of the easements and impacts of the acquisition on the value of the landowner’s remaining property. Greeley has power of condemnation if an agreement Page 3 of 8 cannot be reached on the acquisition. In that case, a court-appointed jury or commission of landowners determines just compensation. In the vast majority of cases, however, Greeley and the property owner agree on a value outside of court. 13. After construction of the pipeline, what are the long-term impacts to the property? Once the pipeline is installed and the ground surface is restored, the pipeline is typically unnoticeable. The easement agreement prohibits the property owner from constructing buildings or structures, impounding water, and planting large trees over the pipeline. However, with the consent of Greeley, utility crossings, roads, driveways, parking lots, and open space areas are usually permissible. Property owners are paid a fair market value for temporary and permanent use of their property. 14. What surface restoration measures will be provided to property owners? Greeley restores the surface of the ground, fences, roads and other improvements to the conditions existing prior to the City's activities on the property. Greeley's experience along the earlier phases of the pipeline has shown consistent success in restoring and reclaiming affected areas following construction. Greeley is also following a set of Best Management Practices submitted to Larimer County as part of its approval of the Northern Segment. Greeley’s Best Management Practices manual is available online: http://www.greeleygov.com/Water/Documents/Report_Best%20Management%20Practices_ Final_September%202008.pdf. Below are a few photos documenting restoration after pipeline construction. More photos are available on the City of Greeley website at www.greeleygov.com/water. 15. How long does it typically take to construct a segment? Typical construction pace for the pipeline installation varies from about 100 to 200 feet per day depending on the complexity of construction. This means it may take one or two days for installation to pass by a residence. Full restoration of the surface for things like pavement, Page 4 of 8 sidewalks and landscaping takes additional time, but are always accomplished as quickly as possible. 16. How will construction of the Northern Segment impact the Cache la Poudre River? The approved route for the Northern Segment has one direct crossing of the Poudre River. Based on a previous river crossing in Weld County, the pipeline is expected to result in minimal and temporary impacts. Greeley will restore the site once the pipe is laid. 17. Will the pipeline interrupt groundwater flow? No. The project is designed to allow water to flow freely past the pipe in areas with a high groundwater table. Trench plugs are used to assure that groundwater will continue to flow across the pipe and not along the trench. 18. Will the pipeline affect the historic properties in the area? The approved route through Laporte is along the abandoned rail bed of the Greeley, Salt Lake & Pacific Railroad. Utilizing the area previously disturbed by the old rail bed construction helps minimize new environmental impacts. Greeley is aware of the historic designation and significance of this railroad. Greeley will work with property owners, community members and the relevant state and federal agencies to assess any potential impacts to the historic structures. If there are going to be any adverse impacts to the structures, Greeley will seek ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate these impacts. 19. Will the pipeline have an adverse affect on endangered or rare animals or plants? The Northern Segment of Greeley's pipeline could pass through areas with potential habitat for the Preble's meadow jumping mouse, the Ute ladies'-tresses orchid and the Colorado butterfly plant. There could also be raptors nesting in the area. Greeley anticipates that it will address Preble's mouse and raptor concerns largely through seasonal timing of construction and avoidance of potential habitat. Based on past experience, Greeley does not expect the Ute ladies'-tresses orchid or the Colorado butterfly plant to be present in the construction area, but will mitigate impacts if necessary. 20. Will the approved route result in significant road closures or utility disruptions? No. Some short-term road closures and utility disruptions may be necessary depending on the final pipeline alignment. Roads are crossed in a variety of ways, but closures typically do not last more than several days and an alternative route will be provided. The selected route crosses few streets and utility lines, therefore disruptions will be minimal. Page 5 of 8 Greeley’s Bellvue Pipeline Project Timeline For the last 100 years, the City of Greeley 's Bellvue Water Treatment plant at the mouth of the Poudre Canyon has treated drinking water for Greeley. The pipeline delivers drinking water from the plant to the city and is integral to ensuring a reliable water supply for Greeley water customers. Today, Greeley is building a new 30- mile, 60-inch pipeline to supplement the existing pipelines to accommodate the water demands of anticipated population growth. To build this pipeline, Greeley conducted extensive engineering studies to determine a route that would have the least impact and would ensure that the water could flow by gravity. Gravity flow eliminates the need for expensive, power-consuming pumping facilities. Because this route goes through the cities of Fort Collins, Windsor, and Laporte, as well as unincorporated sections of Larimer and Weld counties, Greeley conducted an extensive public outreach effort to ensure that the concerns of residents and city and county government officials would be heard and addressed. The pipeline is being built in five segments. A segment may be broken up into several phases. Below is the chronology of the pipeline through the fall of 2010. As of the fall of 2010, approximately two thirds of the pipeline has been built.  December 17, 2002 – Design work on the pipeline begins and the design engineer is hired.  April 13, 2003 – The Windsor Board of Trustees approves the Utility Plan Review of the Chimney Park Segment.  July 24, 2004 – The Windsor Board of Trustees approves the Utility Plan Review of the Farmer's Segment.  September 14, 2004 – The Larimer County Planning Commission approves the location and extent of the Farmer's Segment.  November 29, 2004 – The Chimney Park Segment that runs through the town of Windsor is completed and put in service.  May 26, 2005 – Greeley holds an Open House with residents of Fort Collins to inform them of the location and extent of the Fort Collins Segment and to solicit their concerns and input.  June 15, 2005 – The Larimer County Planning Commission approves the location and extent of the Fort Collins Segment.  June 16, 2005 – The City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approves the location and extent of the Fort Collins Segment. Page 6 of 8  February 22, 2006 – The Farmer's Segment is completed and put in service.  September 18, 2007 – Greeley briefs the Laporte Area Planning Advisory Committee (LAPAC) on the location and extent of the Northern Segment. LAPAC prepared comments that were forwarded to the Larimer County Planning Commission.  October 2, 2007 – Greeley holds an Open House with the residents of Laporte to inform them of the location and extent of the Northern Segment and to solicit their concerns and input.  October 17, 2007 – The Larimer County Planning Commission approves the location and extent of the Northern Segment.  March 7, 2008 – The first phase of the Fort Collins Segment, the Mulberry Phase, is completed and put in service.  December 16, 2008 – Construction of the second phase of the Fort Collins Segment, the Vine Drive Phase, begins.  August 10, 2009 – Settlement reached with several Laporte area landowners that allowed Greeley access to their properties to gather biological, historical, and geotechnical data.  August 20, 2009 – Site visit and tour of Point of Rocks area with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State Historic Preservation Office, City of Greeley representatives, Point of Rocks area property owners and other interested parties.  September 29-October 1, 2009 – Cultural resource survey performed for Point of Rocks area.  Fall 2009 - Vine Drive Phase construction is completed.  November 2009 – Water Department staff and consultants finalize an alignment that avoids the historic bridges located within the Larimer County approved Northern Segment route.  December 2009 – Preliminary alignment maps sent to Point of Rocks area property owners.  Winter 2010 – Construction of the third phase of the Fort Collins Segment, the UP Railroad Phase, begins.  April 2010 – Water Department staff begin sending easement offers to Northern Segment property owners.  April and September 2010 – Cultural resource surveys performed on remaining acreage of Northern Segment.  September 2010 -- Report detailing the findings of the Point of Rocks area cultural resource survey sent to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for review.  Fall 2010 – UP Railroad Phase construction completed. Page 7 of 8  December 2010 – Biological Assessment sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for review.  January 2011 -- Report detailing the findings of the cultural resource surveys performed on the remainder of the Northern Segment sent to U.S. Corps of Engineers for review.  Fall 2011 - Construction of the Northern Segment to begin.  Spring 2013 – Construction of the Northern Segment to be complete.  To be determined - Construction of the Gold Hill Segment to begin.  To be determined – Construction of the Gold Hill Segment to be complete, thus completing all construction of the new pipeline Page 8 of 8 Northern Segment Alternatives Evaluation Process The City of Greeley evaluated dozens of possible alternatives to make the final six-mile connection between the end of the existing pipe at Shields Street in Fort Collins and the Bellvue Water Treatment Plant at the mouth of the Poudre Canyon. The various alternatives were eventually combined into 18 different possible pipeline routes. Each of the 18 routes was then ranked by cost, land use disruption, and environmental effects (e.g. aquatic resources, Preble's mouse, raptors, forest, with historic sites noted). Based on this evaluation, Greeley narrowed the 18 possible routes: Approved Alternative The alternative selected by Greeley and approved by the Larimer County Planning Commission would affect the fewest parcels of land – 28, would cause the least amount of public disruption (i.e., road and driveway closures during construction), and would allow Greeley to utilize gravity to transport water – thus saving on power costs and reducing Greeley’s carbon footprint. The approved alternative follows Greeley’s existing pipeline for approximately two-thirds of the Northern Segment. It then follows existing railroad right-of-way for much of the remainder of the segment. Northern Parallel Alternative This alternative was one of the first evaluated because we wanted to find corridors that were previously used. This alternative parallels our existing pipeline for a great majority of the Northern Segment. It was eliminated because, during our evaluation, we found that we do not have a sufficient easement to construct another pipeline parallel to our existing one without impacting dozens of private properties. Since construction of the existing pipeline in 1952, the Cache la Poudre School and significant housing developments were built on both sides of the pipeline along both Vernon Drive and Shannon Drive. This alternative would affect 65 parcels of land, twice as many as the approved alternative. 54-G Alternative The 54-G alternative follows the existing pipeline for about a third of the Northern Segment and then follows along County Road (CR) 54-G for most of the remainder of the segment. This route would cause the greatest amount of public disruption as it would cause substantial road closures along 54- G, Laporte’s main transportation artery, for almost a year. It also would affect 153 parcels of land in the business district and surrounding residential areas, five times as many as the approved alternative. cy Mr. Dorin Atteberry, City Monoger City of Fort Collins 300 Loporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 8052ì Re: Eosement Acquisition from Fort Collins ond the Northern Segment of Greeley's Bellvue Pipeline Project Deor Dorin: This letter responds to your request lhis week for the CiÌy of Greeley to provide you. your stoff, ond Fort Collins' City Council members with supplementol informotion regording the Northern Segment of Greeley's Bellvue Pipeline Project ond the pending eosement ocquisition. First off, the City of Greeley wonts lo thonk you ond your stoff ond legol counsel for the professionol ond cooperotive monner in which they hove worked with Greeley's stoff ond legol counsel in developing ond preporing the eosement ocquisition documents. We hope this letter helps you ond your Council better understond this importont projecf ond the underlying eosemenl request. By woy of bockground. Greeley begon delivering drinking woter from its Bellvue Woter Treotment Plont in 1902. For over 100 yeors the plont hos provided high-quolity drinking woter to Greeley customers, including some Loporte residents. Greeley constructed the originoltronsmission line through Loporte out of hondcrofted wooden stove pipe. Two, ond sometimes three. porollel steel or concrete pipelines provide current tronsmission copocily. Existing tronsmission copocity will soon constroin Greeley's obilily to serve its customers from the Woter Treotmenf Plont due to increosing drinking woter demond. The current project odds copocify to this tronsmission system for the first time in over 50 yeors. The overoll projecl involves the instollotion of obout 30 miles of óO-inch pipeline from Greeley's Bellvue Woter Treqtment Plont to the City's distribution system. Due lo logistics ond cost considerotions, the City is constructing the lronsmission line in segments. The segment of issue here. the Norfhern Segment, is one of the losl portions of the tronsmission line. The Northern Segment will connect the previously constructed ond fully operotionol Fort Collins Segment with Greeley's Bellvue Plont. As summorized in llem No. 28 of your City Council ogendo pocket, doted April ì9, 2011, the Fort Collins Cily Council previously outhorized the conveyonce of two eosements on Fort Collins-owned property to the City of Greeley for the Fort Collins Segment. Greeley Dorin Atteberry April26,201l Poge 2 hos olreody instolled opproximotely 19 miles of the line, ond is scheduled to begin construclion this yeor on the Northern Segment. Greeley commenced the overoll project in 2003 ond plons to compleie the consfruction of the Northern Segment in 2013. Agoinst this bockground, Greeley would like lo oddress certoin specific issues: l. Greeley considered numerous foclors in ils route seleclion. Greeley's consulting engineer evoluoted dozens of possible route segments for the Northern Segment. The consultont evenluolly combined these route segments into l8 poteniiol routes for the entire Norihern Segment. Some of the potentiol routes could hove offected hundreds of properties. The consultont then scored eoch of the l8 routes by cost, environmentol ond energy impocts, ond lond use disruption to norrow down the olternotives. The onolysis olso considered other importont effects such os troffic ond business disruption. For exomple, o route thot crossed or disrupted 20 developed properties scored worse thon o route thot crossed two undeveloped properties. Greeley further evoluoted lhree of the potentiol routes ond presented the results to Lorimer County os port of Greeley's obligotion to get Locotion ond Extent opprovol from the County. The three routes evoluoted were: (1) A route through downtown Loporte olong County Rood 54G thot possed directly in front of the grommor qnd middle schools ond mony businesses; (2) A route following the existing Greeley tronsmission lines through two subdivisions, which would require the demolition of of leost two (possibly more) residences ond go right through the Coche Lo Poudre School footboll field; ond (3) A route following the existing Greeley tronsmission lines by 65% of the woy but detouring through ogriculturol lond to ovoid two subdivisions. Unfortunotely, mony of the existing SO-yeor old tronsmission line eosements ore not lorge enough, nor were they ever intended to occommodote the oddifionol line. Greeley identified the lost route corridor (3) os its preferred route becouse it minimized disruption of properties ond the public of lorge, hod moderote environmentol impocts, operotes on grovity, ond ronked the best in terms of cost. Lorimer County opproved the Locotion ond Extent of the preferred route. 2. Greeley's selection of o route corridor for lhe Northern Segment included coordinotion wilh locoljurisdictions ond public inpul. Dorin Atteberry April26,2011 Poge 3 As it hos with previous phoses of this project, Greeley filed on opplicotion with the Lorimer Counly Plonning Commission to review the Locofion ond Extent of ils proposed pipeline route corridor for consislency with the County Comprehensive Plon. Greeley voluntorily submitted the opplicotion two weeks eorlier thon usuol to ollow review by the Loporte Areo Plonning Advisory Committee ("LAPAC"). which occurred September 18,2007. LAPAC provided input to the Plonning Commission bosed on its review. Greeley olso sent o copy of the opplicotion io fhe Lorimer County Environmentol Advisory Boord, which olso provided input to the Lorimer County Plonning Commission. Greeley held on open house in Loporte on October 2, 2007. The City provided notificotion of the open house of the LAPAC meeting ond on the pipeline project website. Additionolly, Greeley moiled direct notificotion to oll property owners thot moy hove pipe instolled on their property olong with o mop of the possible pipeline locotion. The Plonning Commission opproved the Locotion ond Extent of Greeley's preferred route corridor, with conditions, ot its public meeting on October 17,2007. One of the conditions ploced on Greeley's Locotion ond Extent review opprovol wos for Greeley to develop ond implement o Best Monogement Prqctices ("BMP") monuol specificolly for Northern Segment construction. The BMP monuol is intended to minimize short- ond long-term disturbonce to offected londs, including mitigoting effects on locol hobitots, ecosystems, crops, vegetotion. woter quolity. surfoce ond groundwoter flow chorocteristics, ond londowners. Greeley sought ond received input from Fort Collins' stoff on ihe BMP monuol. Greeley olso provided copies of the BMP monuol to oll offected londowners locoted on the Northern Segment. 3. Greeley is in fhe process of receiving verificotion of coveroge for lhe project under o U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Nofionwide Permil. As it did for other pipeline segments, Greeley requested verificotion of coveroge under Notionwide Permit No. l2 (Utility Lines) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As porl of its evoluotion, the Corps requested informotion regording threotened ond endongered species, culturol resources. ond the depletive effects of the project on the Poudre River. Greeley hos conducted both biologicol ond culturol resource surveys throughout the entire Northern Segmeni. Greeley sent reports on those surveys to the Corps for review. Specific to culturol resources locoted in the vicinity of Fort Collins' City Ditch property, the Corps determined thot there will be no odverse effect to the seven historic properties eligible for listing in the Notionol Register of Hisioric Ploces ("NRHP"): the Brinks Form, the Greeley Solt Loke ond Pocific Roilrood (fwo segments), the Pleosont Volley ond Loke Conol, the Lorimer County Conol No. 2. the New Mercer Ditch, ond the Cloymore Loke Return Dilch. The no odverse effect determinotion is lorgely bosed on Greeley's plons to Dorin Atteberry April 26,2011 Poge 4 utilize tunneling, which ollows pipeline conslruction to ovoid oll of the historic ond prehistoric structures ond culturol feolures of sites eligible for NRHP listing in the oreo. except for the historic form postures through which the pipeline will poss. ln oddition to tunneling, Greeley will employ further protections ond reclomotion proctices to limit impocts to culturol resources including hoving o professionol orcheologisf on-site lo inspecl excovotions ond other construction octivities. The Corps is olso exomining the depletive effects of Greeley's Bellvue Pipeline Project olong with severol other onticipoted projects thot moy offect the Poudre River. This onolysis will rely on o model known os the Common Technicol Plotform. Greeley ond Fort Collins ore octive porticiponts in developing the Common Technicol Plotform ond both hove submitted doto to the Corps lo ossist in the onolysis. The results of this modeling ore expected sometime fhis yeor. The Poudre River hos been subject to ogriculturol ond municipol diversion for well over 100 yeors. Greeley will be the first entity required to mitigote the depletive impocts of such o diversion. Greeley provided the Corps introductory informotion on depletions in September,20OB. The Corps' quthorizotion for this project will ollow Greeley to divert Colorodo River. Loromie River, or chonged ogriculturol woter thot is currently diverted from the Poudre River. The only difference will be the point of diversion. which will move from the current ogricullurol ditch to the Greeley Woter Treotment Plont lntoke Pipeline. Since bolh ihe existing ond future diversion points ore locoied upstreom of Fort Collins, the project will not offect Poudre River flows through the City of Fort Collins. 4. Greeley's pipeline will nol moleriolly otfecl groundwoter flow. Some londowners hove expressed concern thot the Northern Segment moy interrupt groundwoter flow in certoin oreos. This concern is opporently bosed on the experiences thot others hod wiih the instollotion of onother pipeline in the oreo. Greeley will design ond instoll its pipeline in o woy thot ollows woter to flow freely post the pipe (but not olong it) in oreos with o high groundwoter toble. Greeley will utilize trench plugs, engineered bockfill, ond similor methods to ensure thot groundwoter will coniinue to flow post Ihe pipe ond not olong the trench. Additionolly, one of the suggestions of the BMP monuol is for Greeley to develop o groundwoter monogement control plon. Greeley is currently implementing its groundwoter control plon, which includes octively monitoring groundwoler wells Greeley recently instolled throughout the entire Norlhern Segment. ln foct, Greeley hos osked permission to instoll Dorin Atleberry April26,2011 Poge 5 groundwoter monitoring wells on property neor the Fort Collins' City Ditch property. Greeley is owore of concerns rqised by certoin londowners whose property the Northern Segment will offect. Controry to some ossertions, Greeley tokes these concerns seriously ond hos token extroordinory steps to oddress them, including lunneling for o section of the pipeline. Notwithslonding, tronsmission infrostructure is o fundomentol necessity of oll uiiliiies. Moreover, onyone who receives service from o utility does so becouse someone else's property is burdened by on eosemeni. such os the Forl Collins woter pipeline locoted on on odjocent property thot Greeley's pipeline will cross. lt is unovoidoble. We osk your Council to consider this reolily when evoluoting Greeley's eosement request, os Greeley would if osked the some by Fort Collins. ln oddition, Greeley ossures you thot it is following oll federol, stote, ond locol regulotions while boloncing the needs of the citizens of Greeley with the concerns of others. The Corps of Engineers is the leod regulotory ogency onolyzing the effects of Greeley's project ond is consulting with the U.S. Fish ond Wildlife Service ond the Stote Historic Preservotion Office, omong others. Greeley hos complied with oll of the informotion requests from the Corps ond other federol ogencies involved. The request before your Council is for on eosement ocross o strip of property owned by the City of Fort Collins (opproximotely 0.19 ocre permqnenl eosement ond 0.133 ocre temporory construction eosement). Greeley worked diligently with Fort Collins stoff ond legol counsel on the eosement forms. This included preseniotions before the Fort Collins Woter Boord ond the Lond Conservotion ond Stewordship Boord. Both Boords unonimously opproved Greeley's request for the eosements. Greeley hos sent or is currently sending offers to londowners who will be offected by Northern Segment pipeline construction. Greeley hos olreody ocquired ten of lhe 24 permonent eosements. To ollow time to review ond respond to londowners' comments ond concerns reloted to Greeley's offers. eosement ocquisition must stort well in odvonce of construction ond on o porollel irock with studies required by the Corps. Greeley must obtoin the necessory eosement ocquisitions from oll offecied londowners prior to construction. Greeley oppreciotes the opporlunity to shore its perspective on this importont project. Pleose let us know if you hove ony odditionol questions or would like ony further informotion. - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 123, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A WATERLINE EASEMENT, ACCESS EASEMENT, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF GREELEY WHEREAS, the City owns a certain parcel of real property located in Larimer County, Colorado, known as the City Ditch (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the Larimer County Canal No. 2 Irrigating Company (the “Canal Company”) uses the City Property through an existing easement agreement with the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Greeley (“Greeley”) is in the process of acquiring the necessary easements for its Bellvue Waterline Project, which will transport water from Greeley’s Bellvue Water Treatment Plant to Greeley water customers (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, as part of the Project, Greeley has asked the City to convey to it a permanent waterline easement (the “Permanent Easement”) and a temporary construction easement (the “TCE”) on the City Property, as described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Greeley has also asked the City to convey an access easement on the existing ditch access road, to the extent that the ditch access road is on property owned by the City, in the location depicted on Exhibit “B”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Access Easement”); WHEREAS, the Permanent Easement is .19 acres in size and the TCE is .133 acres in size; and WHEREAS, the Permanent Easement, TCE and Access Easement are collectively referred to hereafter as the “Easements”; and WHEREAS, City staff has evaluated whether the Easements would interfere with use of the City Property by the City or the Canal Company, and has determined that the Easements would not result in any such interference; and WHEREAS, City staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City or the City’s Water Utility that would result from the grant of the requested Easements or the Project; and WHEREAS, as consideration for the Easements, Greeley has agreed to pay the City compensation of $3,545 for the value of the Easements, and to pay the cost of City staff time required for the review, approval and processing of the Easements; and WHEREAS, City staff has negotiated easement agreements with Greeley (the “Easement Agreements”) providing for City review and approval of construction plans for the portions of the Project on the City Property; avoidance of surface and other potential impacts from the - 2 - construction and operation of the improvements; and restoration of the Easement areas in accordance with the Natural Areas Resource Protection Standards; and WHEREAS, the three draft Easement Agreements are attached as Exhibits “C-1”, “C-2” and “C-3”, and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 2010, the proposed Easements were presented to the Water Board for consideration, and the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Easements; and WHEREAS, on December 8, 2010, the proposed Easements were presented to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board for consideration, and the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Easements; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111of the City Code states that the City Council is authorized to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City, provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City and, with respect to real property that is a part of the City’s water or utility systems, that the disposition will not materially impair the viability of the particular utility system as a whole and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, Greeley has indicated that, if necessary, it will use eminent domain to acquire the Easements; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the best interests of the City and will benefit the citizens of the City to convey the Easements on negotiated terms rather than have the court in an eminent domain action grant Greeley the Easements on terms that may not be as desirable to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the conveyance of the Easements to Greeley as provided herein will not materially impair the viability of the City’s water utility system as a whole, will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City, and is in the best interests of the City. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easements to Greeley, on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance and in a form substantially the same as the Easement Agreements, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal descriptions of the Easements, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easements. - 3 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 16th day of September, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 16th day of September, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Exhibit “A” Exhibit “A” Exhibit “A” Exhibit “A” Exhibit “A” Exhibit “A” - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-081 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A SHARED LOCATION AGREEMENT FOR THE GREELEY BELLVUE PIPELINE TO CROSS A CITY UTILITY EASEMENT WHEREAS, on November 3, 1956, the City acquired an easement for a 27-inch drinking water pipeline to serve certain areas northwest of Fort Collins, which easement was recorded on July 18, 1958, in the real property records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder at Reception No. 746577 (the “City Easement”); and WHEREAS, the City of Greeley (“Greeley”) is in the process of acquiring the necessary easements and other permits and approvals necessary for its Bellvue Waterline Project, which will transport water from Greeley’s Bellvue Water Treatment Plant to Greeley water customers (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, as part of the Project, Greeley has asked the City to consent to the encroachment of the Project on the City Easement, and specifically the installation of Greeley’s new water transmission line across and under the City’s existing 27-inch water pipeline; and WHEREAS, City staff has evaluated whether the proposed construction and location of the Greeley water pipeline would interfere with the City’s intended use of the City Easement or the City’s improvements, and has determined that no such interference would result from the proposed encroachment; and WHEREAS to protect the City’s interests, City staff negotiated with Greeley a Shared Location Agreement documenting terms and conditions for the proposed encroachment, including City review and approval of construction plans for the portions of the Project on the City Easement, and advance notice to the City of any future work on the City Easement; and WHEREAS, the proposed Shared Location Agreement is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, City staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City Easement or the City Water Utility that would result from entering into the Shared Location Agreement and allowing Greeley’s Project to proceed as requested; and WHEREAS, Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter empowers the City Council of the City, by ordinance or resolution, to enter into contracts with other governmental bodies to furnish governmental services and make charges for such services, or enter into cooperative or joint activities with other governmental bodies; and WHEREAS, Section 29-1-203 of the Colorado Revised Statutes provides that governments may cooperate or contract with one another to provide certain services or facilities when such cooperation or contracts are authorized by each party thereto with the approval of its legislative body or other authority having the power to so approve. - 2 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Shared Location Agreement in substantially the same form as is attached hereto, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk