No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 11/20/2012 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Mayor Pro Tem Council Chambers Ben Manvel, District 1 City Hall West Lisa Poppaw, District 2 300 LaPorte Avenue Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 Gerry Horak, District 6 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Assisted hearing devices are available to the public for Council meetings. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. REGULAR MEETING November 20, 2012 Proclamations and Presentations 5:30 p.m. A. Proclamation Declaring November as Native American Awareness Month. B. Proclamation Declaring November 25 - December 10 as “16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence”. Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER. 2. ROLL CALL. Page 2 3. AGENDA REVIEW: • City Manager Review of Agenda. • Consent Calendar Review. This Review provides an opportunity for Council and citizens to pull items from the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this Calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. N Council opportunity to pull Consent Calendar items. (will be considered under Item No. 33) N Citizen opportunity to pull Consent Calendar items. (will be considered under Item. No. 36) 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 5. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for the Mayor or Councilmembers to follow-up on issues raised during Citizen Participation. CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar consists of Items 6 through 29. This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. The Consent Calendar consists of: ! Ordinances on First Reading that are routine ! Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine ! Those of no perceived controversy ! Routine administrative actions. Individuals who wish to make comments regarding items remaining on the Consent Calendar or wish to address the Council on items not specifically scheduled on the agenda must first be recognized by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem. Before speaking, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz once when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. The timer will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Each speaker is allowed 5 minutes. If there are more than 6 individuals who wish to speak, the Mayor may reduce the time allowed for each individual. ! State your name and address for the record. ! Applause, outbursts or other demonstrations by the audience are not allowed ! Keep comments brief; if available, provide a written copy of statement to City Clerk Page 3 6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 30, 2012 Adjourned Meeting and the November 6, 2012 Regular Meeting. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing and Related Activities. The Fort Collins Housing Authority paid the City of Fort Collins $15,457 as the 2010 and 2011 payments for public services and facilities. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, refunds the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) to fund sorely needed affordable housing related activities and to attend to the low-income housing needs of Fort Collins residents. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Great Outdoors Colorado in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E Project. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, appropriates the grant payment received from Great Outdoors Colorado for the construction of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E project. Great Outdoors Colorado awarded the City a Special Opportunity Grant for the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail from north of Cathy Fromme Prairie to the Spring Canyon Community Park. Construction of the project was completed this past spring. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. The City Code requires annual adjustments to certain building permit related fees. Capital Improvement Expansion fees and Neighborhood Parkland fees are to follow the changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index (CPI). Street Oversizing fees are adjusted by the changes posted in the Engineering News Record (ENR). The CPI has increased 1.8% and the ENR has increased 1.6%. Additionally the Code is being updated to reference to the most recent amended manual, The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, 2008. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2012, Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code Pertaining to Contractor Licenses. Community Development and Neighborhood Services is responsible for the enforcement of the contractor licensing requirements found in Chapter 15 of the City Code. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the current Code by: • clarifying minimum experience and qualification requirements at the application stage • creating license categories that better align with the adopted residential and commercial building codes • streamlining the application and project verification process • establishing registration requirements for the currently non-licensed category of workers • increasing minimum liability amounts to recognized industry levels. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2012 Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Regarding the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the City Code relating to naming new arterial and collector streets so that City Council ,rather than the developer, would select the name of the new street. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2012, Amending Section 2-427 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Transportation Board. The Transportation Board currently consists of eleven members appointed by the City Council, and is one of the larger advisory boards. At the end of 2012, the terms of four members will expire. One Page 4 of those members is not eligible for reappointment because that member has met the Council- adopted two term limit. Another member is eligible but is not interested in reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from eleven to nine members. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to nine members. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration. The City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Master Plan has been updated to include stormwater quality and stream restoration projects, alongside the already identified stormwater flood control projects. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, incorporates basin-specific water quality best management practices and stream restoration and stability improvements in the form of updates to the existing City drainage master plan to promote the purposes of the Stormwater Utility and advance the holistic and integrated management of stormwater in Fort Collins. 14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm and Related Water Rights Subject to a Conservation Easement and Authorizing a Related Raw Water Transfer Agreement. The Natural Areas Department (NAD) purchased the 137-acre Maxwell Farm, along with 12 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) water, with the intent of placing it under a conservation easement to help conserve a buffer between Fort Collins and Wellington; protect the open space and scenic values adjacent to I-25; and, sell it as an agricultural property with limited development rights. The land has been leased to Larry Maxwell, the previous owner, for farming and livestock feeding since the initial purchase in 2009. Natural Areas and Utilities have worked out an agreement for the NAD to sell eleven of the twelve NPIC shares to Utilities for approximately 50% of the estimated market value, which is $14,000 per share (based on recent sales information from NPIC). In exchange, Utilities will enter into a raw water transfer agreement with the buyer of Maxwell Farm, and per the terms of the agreement, Utilities will transfer the equivalent of eleven shares of NPIC water on an annual basis to the Maxwell Farm in perpetuity. The advantage to Utilities is that water decreed solely for agricultural use derived from other Utilities-owned NPIC shares, can be substituted for water decreed for municipal use derived from the eleven NPIC shares, which Utilities can use. The buyer will purchase the remaining share of NPIC water as it is a NPIC policy that a farm must own at least some NPIC water in order to receive any rented or transferred water. The single NPIC share to be owned by the buyer will also be tied to the land by the conservation easement agreement. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Vangbo Property Subject to a Conservation Easement. The Vangbo Property was purchased by the Natural Areas Department (NAD) in 2005 with the intent to place a conservation easement on the property to conserve the open space and scenic values along the I-25 corridor and then sell it as an agricultural property with limited development options. The land is currently leased to Alison Person, a neighboring landowner, for grazing. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of the 105- acre Vangbo property and associated ditch and water rights with a reserved conservation easement to Alison Person for $300,000. The conservation easement does not allow any future development, but does give the landowner the option to request the purchase of one building envelope on the property from a future City Council. The undeveloped portion would remain in agricultural use. Page 5 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Drainage Easement on City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC. Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC is planning a 39.53 acre residential development called Mail Creek Crossing PLD/PD, located just north of Bacon Elementary School on South Timberline Road. This development will require the construction of off-site stormwater outfall improvements on adjacent property to the north in order to connect with a stormwater pipe in Kechter Road. The alignment of these improvements will cross the northwest corner of a property owned by the City’s Social Sustainability Department. The City’s 16-acre property was purchased in 2006 as a Land Bank property and is currently leased as a residential/horse property. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of a 2,346 square foot non-exclusive drainage easement from the City in the northwest corner of the City property adjacent to Kechter Road to facilitate the installation of the planned improvements. 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) currently provides telephone and internet services to portions of northwest Weld County and northeast Larimer County. With an increase in demand from their customers for broadband services, NTC has begun upgrading copper based telephone lines to fiber optic broadband lines. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of a utility easement to NTC from the City across a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch in order to install approximately 7.0 miles of fiber optic line as part of this upgrade project. The proposed easement alignment would follow an abandoned state highway now used by the City as an access road to the City’s property. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2012, Amending the Land Use Code by Designating Certain Types of Multi-family Housing Development Projects as Being Subject to Planning and Zoning Board Review. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012 amends the Land Use Code (LUC) to require larger multi-family housing developments (50 dwelling units, or 75 bedrooms) to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). A Type 2 review requires that the developer hold a pre-submittal neighborhood meeting. The benefit to the neighborhood meeting is that the public is given an opportunity to provide input on a project while it is still in the early stages of development. In recent months a large amount of multi-family housing developments have been appealed by concerned citizens to Council based on the assertion that the projects are not compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. This procedural change seeks to provide more opportunity for the public to participate in the development review process for multi-family housing projects. 19. Items Relating to the 2012 Fall Cycle of the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing and Community Development Activities Utilizing Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs, and the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. A. Public Hearing and Resolution 2012-105 Approving the Programs and Projects that Will Receive Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs, and the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2012, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Program Years in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. This Resolution will complete the 2012 fall cycle of the Competitive Process for allocating $1,670,130 in City financial resources to affordable housing projects and public facility activities. Ordinance No. 131, 2012, reappropriates Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that have been returned to the program for allocation in the fall 2012 Competitive Process. Page 6 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2012, Amending Section 2-237 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Golf Board. The Golf Board currently consists of nine members appointed by the City Council. At the end of 2012, the terms of three members will expire. Two of those members are eligible for reappointment but did not reapply for reappointment. One member did apply for reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from nine to seven members. This Ordinance amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to seven members. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2012, Amending Section 2-500 of the City Code Pertaining to a City Service Area. The City’s Charter provides that service areas are provided by ordinance upon the recommendation of the City Manager. This Ordinance amends the City Code, per the City Manager’s recommendation, to create a Planning, Development, and Transportation Service Area, reflecting changes in roles and reporting relationships. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2012, Amending Various Provisions of the Fort Collins Traffic Code. The Colorado General Assembly amended certain statutory provisions this legislative session relating to state traffic laws. This Ordinance ensures that the Fort Collins Traffic Code (the “Traffic Code”) is consistent with state traffic laws. During a review of the statutory changes, staff identified additional amendments that would make the Traffic Code more consistent and provide more effective and efficient local enforcement. 23. Items Relating to the Kechter Crossing Annexation. A. Resolution 2012-106 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Kechter Crossing Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2012, Annexing Property Known as the Kechter Crossing Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2012, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Kechter Crossing Annexation. This is a request to annex and zone 28.9 acres located on the south side of Kechter Road, approximately 900 feet east of the intersection of South Timberline Road and Kechter Road. This annexation is not associated with the proposed Kechter Farm development, which is located southeast of the Kechter Crossing Annexation. The Kechter Crossing Annexation does not create an enclave. The surrounding properties are existing residential land uses currently zoned FA-1 – Farming Zoning District in Larimer County to the north, south, and west. Adjacent to the east is a City-owned property that is part of the affordable housing Land Bank program, which was annexed and zoned Low Density Mixed–Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) on September 4, 2012. The Kechter Crossing Annexation is not proposing affordable housing as part of the approved County plan. 24. Resolution 2012-107 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Hansen Farm Annexation. The applicant and property owner, HTC, LLC (McWhinney), has submitted a written petition requesting annexation 69.42 acres located on the west side of Timberline Road, approximately 1.5 miles south of Harmony Road. The property, formerly a farm, is mostly vacant, with the exception of the farmhouse (single-family dwelling) and some out-buildings. It is in the FA1 – Farming Zone District in Larimer County. Page 7 The requested zoning for this annexation is NC – Neighborhood Commercial (6.33 acres), and MMN – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (16.69 acres), and LMN – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (46.40 acres). 25. Resolution 2012-108 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of the Decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals Relating to the Approval of a Variance to Allow the Existing Off- premise Sign (Billboard) in the Bnsf Railroad Right-of-Way at 190 West Prospect Road to Be Removed and Reinstalled at a New Location Within the Same Railroad Right-of-way at 190 West Prospect Road. On August 9, 2012, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) approved a variance to allow the existing off- premise sign in the BNSF Railroad right of way on the north side of West Prospect Road to be relocated within the railroad right of way 70 feet west of its current location. On August 23, 2012, Richard L. Anderson filed a Notice of Appeal, alleging that the ZBA failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. On November 6, 2012, City Council, by a vote of 5 - 2 (Nays: Manvel, Poppaw) determined that the ZBA did conduct a fair hearing, and by a 7 - 0 vote determined that the ZBA failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. The determination that the ZBA failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code resulted in the City Council overturning the decision of the ZBA to approve Appeal No. 2714. In order to finalize this appeal process, Council is required to adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing it decision on the Appeal. 26. Resolution 2012-109 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of the Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to Approve the Regency Lakeview Addition of a Permitted Use for Multi-family Dwellings at Christ Center Community Church and the Associated Project Development Plan. On July 19, 2012, the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approved Regency Lakeview Addition of a Permitted Use and Project Development Plan. On August 2, 2012, Mr. Andy Lewis et.al, filed a Notice of Appeal seeking redress of the Planning and Zoning Board decisions. On November 8, 2012, City Council took the following actions: 1. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in consideration of the Addition of a Permitted Use, the Council voted 6 – 0 that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. 2. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter in consideration of the Addition of a Permitted Use, the Council voted 4 – 2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat) that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code thus overturning the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. 3. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter in consideration of the Project Development Plan, the Council voted 6 – 0 that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the of the Land Use Code, thus overturning the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the Appeal. 27. Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. The Fort Collins Utilities staff has updated the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy), which will provide further direction regarding the planning, management and maintenance Page 8 of the City’s water supplies and demands. The updated Policy was brought before City Council for adoption on October 30, 2012. Council requested some minor adjustments to the updated Policy language. Utilities staff has made the requested changes to the updated Policy. 28. Resolution 2012-110 Adopting the City’s 2013 Legislative Policy Agenda. Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) develops a legislative agenda to assist in the analysis of pending legislation. The Legislative Policy Agenda is used as a guide by Council and staff to determine positions on legislation pending at the state and federal levels and as a general reference for state legislators and the congressional delegation. 29. Resolution 2012-111 Reappointing Councilmember Gerry Horak to the Platte River Power Authority Board of Directors The Platte River Power Authority Board of Directors is comprised of two representatives from each of the four member cities. The Mayor (or Mayor’s designate) fills one slot and the second representative is appointed by the Council. Councilmember Gerry Horak has served as the City’s representative since September 2011 to the expiration of his term on December 31, 2012. This Resolution reappoints Councilmember Horak for the new term which expires December 31, 2016 or until such appointment is changed by the Council. END CONSENT 30. Consent Calendar Follow-up. This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. 31. Staff Reports. a. Water Supply Outlook for 2013 and Update on High Park Fire follow-up 32. Councilmember Reports. 33. Consideration of Council-Pulled Consent Items. DISCUSSION ITEMS The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ! Mayor introduces the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ! Staff presentation (optional) ! Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (five-minute limit for each citizen) ! Council questions of staff on the item ! Council motion on the item ! Council discussion ! Final Council comments ! Council vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Page 9 34. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2012, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2013; Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1, 2013, and Ending December 31, 2014; and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Fiscal Year 2013. (staff: Darin Atteberry, Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 30 minute discussion) The Annual Appropriation Ordinance is presented for Second Reading. This Ordinance sets the City Budget for the two-year period (2013–14) which becomes the City’s financial plan for the next two fiscal years. This Ordinance sets the amount of $483,637,562 to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013. Including the 2013 adopted budgets for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 of $193,666 and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) of $1,038,682 the total City operated appropriations amount to $484,869,910. City Budget (in $ million) Adopted 2013 Adopted 2014 Operations $431.5 $440.5 Debt Service 21.2 20.5 Capital 32.2 27.6 Total City Operated Appropriations * $484.9 $488.6 Less Urban Renewal Authority (URA) (1.0) (1.8) Less General Improvement District (GID) (0.2) (0.2) Total City of Fort Collins Appropriation $483.7** $486.6 * This includes GID and URA which are appropriated in separate ordinances. ** Delta due to rounding to $K This Ordinance also sets the 2012 City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991. 35. First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2012, Authorizing the Appropriation of 2013 Fiscal Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds for the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. (staff: Jason Licon, Mike Beckstead; 5 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion) The 2013 annual operating budget for the Airport totals $693,100, and will be funded from Airport operating revenues, contributions from the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland ($177,500 from each City), and interest earnings. This amount for each city is $92,500 greater than the previous year contributions of $85,000. For the City of Fort Collins the original $85,000 is funded from General Fund ongoing revenue, while the one-time increase of $92,500 will be funded from General Fund reserves. This Ordinance authorizes the City of Loveland to appropriate the City of Fort Collins portion of the Airport’s annual operating budget in the amount of $346,550. This is 50% of the entire Airport annual operating budget of $693,100. This Ordinance also appropriates the City’s 50% share of capital funds, totaling $1,100,000 for the Airport from federal and state grants; contributions from Fort Collins and Loveland; and the Airport General Fund. Most of the 2013 Airport capital funds, totaling $2,200,000, will be used to complete major Airport improvements, such as taxiway and apron rehabilitation and some funds are slated for utility master planning and design engineering to accommodate Airport business development. 36. Consideration of Citizen-Pulled Consent Items. 37. Other Business. 38. Adjournment. a. Motion to adjourn to 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 27. Page 10 Every Council meeting will end no later than 10:30 p.m., except that: (1) any item of business commenced before 10:30 p.m. may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the City Council may, by majority vote, extend a meeting until no later than 12:00 a.m. for the purpose of considering additional items of business. Any matter which has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council meeting, and all matters scheduled for consideration at the meeting which have not yet been considered by Council, will be continued to the next regular Council meeting and will be placed first on the discussion agenda for such meeting. Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the Regular Council Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 Meeting. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation. (staff: Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 5 minute discussion) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, sets the mill levy for General Improvement District No. 1 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. 4. Other Business. 5. Adjournment. GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AGENDA Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the General Improvement District No. 1 Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 Meeting. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 003, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County. (staff: Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 5 minute discussion) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, fixes the mill levy of 10.0 mills for fiscal year 2012 for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15. The sum of $24,615 is anticipated to be collected and will be used in the future to maintain and repair roads in the Skyview subdivision. 4. Other Business. 5. Adjournment. SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AGENDA Individuals who wish to address the Board on items not specifically scheduled on the agenda must first be recognized by the Chairperson or Vice Chair. Before speaking, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz once when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. The timer will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Each speaker is allowed 5 minutes. If there are more than 6 individuals who wish to speak, the Chairperson may reduce the time allowed for each individual. ! State your name and address for the record. ! Applause, outbursts or other demonstrations by the audience are not allowed ! Keep comments brief; if available, provide a written copy of statement to u r b a n r e n e w a l a u t h o r i t y Karen Weitkunat, Chairperson City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, Vice-Chairperson City Hall West Ben Manvel 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz Wade Troxell Gerry Horak Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, Executive Director Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, Secretary The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the Skyview South General Improvement District Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Agenda Review: • Executive Director’s Review of Agenda. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 5. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for the Chairperson and Commissioners to follow-up on issues raised during Citizen Participation. 6. Staff Reports. 7. Commissioner Reports. DISCUSSION ITEMS The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ! Chairperson introduces the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ! Staff presentation (optional) ! Chairperson requests citizen comment on the item (five-minute limit for each citizen) ! Board questions of staff on the item ! Board motion on the item ! Board discussion ! Final Board comments ! Board vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Chairperson, to ensure all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. 8. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 23, 2012 Urban Renewal Authority Meeting. 9. Resolution No. 048 Adopting the 2013 Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. (staff: Bruce Hendee, Josh Birks, Megan Bolin; 5 minute staff presentation; 15 minute discussion) This Resolution adopts the 2013 Budget for the Urban Renewal Authority (URA). Budget revenues include property tax increment and interest earned on investments, totaling $1,355,034. Budget expenses include general operations, the new North College Storefront Improvement Program, and debt service payments totaling $1,038,683. 9. Other Business. 10. Adjournment. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the history and culture of our great nation have been significantly influenced by American Indians and indigenous peoples: and WHEREAS, the contributions of American Indians have enhanced the freedom, prosperity, and greatness of America today, and WHEREAS, their customs and traditions are respected and celebrated as part of a rich legacy throughout the United States, and WHEREAS, a Native American presence has been established in the Northern Colorado area for over 12,000 years; and WHEREAS, Native American Awareness Week began in 1976 and recognition was expanded by Congress and approved by President George Bush in August 1990, designating the month of November as National American Indian Heritage Month; and WHEREAS, in honor of National American Indian Heritage Month, community celebrations as well as numerous cultural, artistic, educational and historical activities have been planned; and WHEREAS, local resources such as the Native American Cultural Center and Colorado State University play a vital role in assisting and providing the Fort Collins community with diverse programming. NOW, THEREFORE I, Kelly Ohlson, Mayor Pro Tem of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the month of November 2012 as NATIVE AMERICAN AWARENESS MONTH in the city of Fort Collins and urge all our citizens to observe this month with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, we, as citizens of this community, recognize the worldwide problem of violence against women occurs even here in Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, gender violence is traumatic to the body, mind, and spirit and can prevent people from being fully active participants at home and in the world; and WHEREAS, gender violence costs the nation billions of dollars annually in medical expenses, police and court costs, shelters and foster care, sick leave, absenteeism and non- productivity; and WHEREAS, in spite of some progress, we need only to look at our newspapers or watch a television newscast to see the unfortunate truth that gender violence has not yet been eliminated here or around the world; and WHEREAS, we support efforts of individuals and organizations to raise awareness, stimulate discussion, and advocate for local solutions that will curb gender violence; and WHEREAS, the right of women and men to be free of violence is a fundamental human right. NOW THEREFORE, I, Kelly Ohlson, Mayor Pro Tem of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim November 25-December 10 as 16 DAYS OF ACTIVISM AGAINST GENDER VIOLENCE and urge citizens to support work to end gender violence and to eliminate the detrimental consequences gender violence has on the well-being of our community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 6 SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 30, 2012 Adjourned Meeting and the November 6, 2012 Regular Meeting. October 30, 2012 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting - 6:00 p.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, October 30, 2012, 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: Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Kottwitz and Weitkunat. (**Secretary’s note: Councilmember Troxell arrived at 6:04 p.m.) Councilmembers Absent: Horak Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Roy. Mayor Weitkunat stated Item No. 3, Consideration of the appeal of the August 9, 2012 Zoning Board of Appeals Decision to Approve a Variance to Allow the Existing Off-Premise Sign (Billboard) Located in the BNSF Railroad Right of Way at 190 West Prospect Road to be Removed and Reinstalled at a New Location Within the Same Railroad Right of Way at 190 West Prospect Road, has been postponed to the November 6, 2012 Council meeting. Consideration of an Appeal of the Hearing Officer’s August 16, 2012 Decision to Approve Aspen Heights Project Development Plan, #PDP110018, Hearing Officer Decision Upheld with Conditions The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In December 2011, Breckenridge Land Acquisition, LLP, submitted a Project Development Plan (PDP) for a combination of single family detached, two-family and multi-family dwellings in the C- C-N, Community Commercial North College zone district. As proposed, the project consists of 220 dwellings on 31 acres located south of Conifer Street, west of Redwood Street and north of Old Town North subdivision. On August 7, 2012, the Hearing Officer conducted a public hearing in consideration of Aspen Heights PDP. On August 16, 2012, after consideration of testimony from the applicant, the public and staff, the Hearing Officer issued a written decision approving the PDP. with one condition ensuring proper submittal of a landscape plan for the clubhouse. On August 30, 2012, Tom Lawton filed a Notice of Appeal seeking redress of the Hearing Officer’s decision. 116 October 30, 2012 The appeal alleges that the Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code and that the Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This is a request for 220 dwellings on 31 acres located south of Conifer Street, west of Redwood Street and north of Old Town North subdivision. The dwellings, and the number of bedrooms, would be divided in the following manner: 82 Single Family Detached (3 bedrooms per unit) 62 Two Family (duplexes) (2-3 bedrooms per unit); 76 Multi-Family (row-houses, 3 – 6 units per building) (2-3 bedrooms per unit). There would be a total of 600 bedrooms each of which would be leased individually. (The applicant has indicated that there is a potential for all 82 single family detached dwellings to be converted to Extra Occupancy Rental Houses featuring a mix of 4-5 bedrooms per unit at some point in the future. Such conversion would be subject to the procedures and standards of Section 3.8.16 and could possibly increase the total bedroom count to 720. Such conversion is not the subject of this PDP.) All dwellings would be two-story. There would be 786 off-street parking spaces. The project includes a clubhouse, pool, outdoor sport court and leasing office. Blue Spruce Drive and Lupine Drive are two public streets that would be extended to serve the site. Blue Spruce Drive would not be extended south to Blondell Street. Redwood Street would be extended south to connect with the existing Redwood Street so there would be a complete roadway between existing East Vine Drive and Conifer Street. A segment of the new, re-aligned Vine Drive would be constructed along the project’s southern property line but will not extend to North College Avenue. ACTION OF THE HEARING OFFICER At the public hearing, the Hearing Officer considered the testimony of the applicant, affected property owners, the public and staff. The Administrative Review process allows the Hearing Officer ten working days to render a written decision. On August 16, 2012, the Hearing Officer provided a written decision approving the PDP. with the one condition as recommended by staff that a landscape plan be provided for the clubhouse. ALLEGATIONS ON APPEAL On August 30, 2012, Tom Lawton filed an appeal alleging that the Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code and that the Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing. THE QUESTIONS COUNCIL NEEDS TO ANSWER 1. Did the Hearing Officer fail to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code? 117 October 30, 2012 2. Did the Hearing Officer fail to conduct a fair hearing in that the Hearing Officer exceeded his authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Land Use Code or Charter? 3. Did the Hearing Officer fail to conduct a fair hearing in that the Hearing Officer substantially ignored his previously established rules of procedure? 4. Did the Hearing Officer fail to conduct a fair hearing in that the Hearing Officer considered evidence relevant to his findings which were substantially false or grossly misleading? ALLEGATIONS ON APPEAL A. Failure to Conduct a Fair Hearing and/or Failure Properly Interpret and Apply Relevant Provisions of the Land Use Code Specifically Section 2.2.6(B)(D). Land Use Code Section 2.2.6(B) reads as follows: “(B) Posted Notice. The real property proposed to be developed shall also be posted with a sign, giving notice to the general public of the proposed development. For parcels of land exceeding ten (10) acres in size, two (2) signs shall be posted. The size of the sign(s) required to be posted shall be as established in the Supplemental Notice Requirements of Section 2.2.6(D). Such signs shall be provided by the Director and shall be posted on the subject property in a manner and at a location or locations reasonably calculated by the Director to afford the best notice to the public, which posting shall occur within fourteen (14) days following submittal of a development application to the Director.” The appellant alleges that the property was not posted with a sign in a timely manner and that the location of the sign that was posted was not in a sufficiently prominent location. The appellant asserts that the intention of the Development Review Guide, as found on the City of Fort Collins Current Planning website, was not followed. On page three, lines 4 – 9 of the verbatim transcript, the following was read into the record by the Hearing Officer: Mr. Lopez: “The common development review procedures are codified in Section 2.2. The submittal of the PDP is step three; the public hearing is step seven. As per City Council Resolution 2012-064, the PDP was remanded back to the public hearing, step seven, not back to the submittal, step three. The project was submitted on December 14, 2011. City records indicate that two signs were posted by December 27, 2011.” Land Use Code Section 2.2.6(D) reads as follows: 118 October 30, 2012 D) Supplemental Notice Requirements. Minimum Notice Radius Sign Size All developments except as described below. 800 feet 12 square feet Developments proposing more than fifty (50) and less than one hundred (100) single-family or two-family lots or dwelling units. 800 feet 12 square feet Developments proposing more than twenty-five (25) and less than one hundred (100) multi- family dwelling units. 800 feet 12 square feet Nonresidential developments containing more than twenty-five thousand (25,000) and less than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of floor area. 800 feet 12 square feet Developments proposing one hundred (100) or more single-family or two-family lots or dwelling units. 1,000 feet 12 square feet Developments proposing one hundred (100) or more multi-family dwelling units. 1,000 feet 12 square feet Nonresidential developments containing fifty thousand (50,000) or more square feet of floor area. 1,000 feet 12 square feet Nonresidential 1,000 feet; plus, 12 square feet 119 October 30, 2012 Minimum Notice Radius Sign Size developments which propose land uses or activities which, in the judgment of the Director, create community or regional impacts. with respect to neighborhood meetings, publication of a notice not less than seven (7) days prior to the meeting in a newspaper of general circulation in the city. Zonings and rezonings of forty (40) acres or less. 800 feet 12 square feet Zonings and rezonings of more than forty (40) acres. 1,000 feet 12 square feet The appellant does not provide any specific allegation with regard to Section 2.2.6(D). As to mailed notice, the verbatim transcript states on page three, lines 10 – 13: Mr. Lopez: “Also in compliance with Section 2.2.6(A), mailed notices advertising the public hearing of August 7, 2012 were mailed to affected property owners within the specific notification area fourteen days prior to the public hearing date. The notification letter was mailed out on July 25, 2012, thus complying with the standard.” B. The Decision Maker failed to conduct a fair hearing by considering grossly misleading evidence in the hearing due to disingenuous presentation of the proposal. The appellant does not provide a Land Use Code citation regarding this allegation. The appellant alleges that the applicant’s presentation indicated that the PDP would contain 600 bedrooms. The developer, in fact, will construct 712 bedrooms. The developer has indicated that, at some point after issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a request for a variance or a waiver will be made to convert the single family homes to Extra Occupancy Rental Houses. Therefore, the applicant’s presentation to the Hearing Officer was disingenuous, suggesting a pattern of occupancy which is not that which is intended. The Hearing Officer stated in his decision on page 18: “16. Section 3.8.28 – Extra Occupancy Rental House Regulations. After issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, the single family detached dwellings will seek conversion to Extra Occupancy Rental Houses to allow four to five tenants per unit. This request is not before the Hearing Officer at this time.” 120 October 30, 2012 The verbatim transcript states on page 45, lines 15 – 19: Mr. Shepard: “I think the last one before Ward or Mark come up here is the, to again reference that the three-unrelated and how we get more than three into a dwelling unit. That’s originally part of the Code that was adopted even before the Land Use Code when Fort Ram Village on Plum Street desired that. It’s been expanded now to allow extra occupancy rental house, which is in 3.8.16. It’s a basic development review, it is not a modification, it’s not a variance as was stated.” C. The Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code in that the Hearing Officer or the City of Fort Collins conducted an Administrative Hearing when the PDP should have been considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. The appellant does not provide a Land Use Code citation regarding this allegation. The appellant asserts that the Development Review Guide, as found on the Current Planning website, indicates that while the zoning of the proposed development site is not residential, the surroundings of the site on two sides are. As such, this application matches almost exactly the City’s example development requiring a Type 2 review. The Hearing Officer stated in his decision on pages 5 and 6: “1. Section 4.19(B)(2)(a) – Permitted Use. This standard lists the permitted uses in the CCN District, subject to administrative review. Residential uses including single family, two-family, single family attached, multi-family dwellings, group homes, extra occupancy rental house and mixed use dwellings are permitted per subsection (a).” The verbatim transcript states on page 45, lines 1 – 5: Mr. Shepard: “There was a comment about some vagueness as to a Type I or Type II review. It’s not vague, it’s a hard and fast rule, it’s very strict. The Land Use Code, in Article IV, very explicitly says either you are a P and Z review, or you are an Administrative Hearing Officer review. There’s no crossing over. The only way that you can cross over requires a text amendment which has to go to the Planning and Zoning Board and then two readings by Council.” D. The Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing in that he exceeded his authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Land Use Code or ignored its previously established rules of procedure in failing to consider City Plan in his decision. The appellant does not provide a Land Use Code citation regarding this allegation. The appellant asserts that two policies from City Plan were not properly considered by the Hearing Officer: • Policy LIV 7.7 – Accommodate the Student Population 121 October 30, 2012 “Plan for and incorporate new housing for the student population on campuses and in areas near educational campuses and/or that are well-served by public transportation.” • Policy LIV 37.3 – Supporting Uses and Housing “Include student-oriented housing, retail services, and entertainment designed to function as part of the Campus District. Form strong pedestrian and bicycle linkages throughout the district and provide connections to city systems beyond the campus.” The Hearing Officer stated on page 18 of his decision that the PDP complied with Section 3.6.5(B) – Location of Existing Transit Routes due to the fact that the PDP is located along Transit Routes 8/81which serves Conifer Street in both directions. The Hearing Officer included in his decision on pages 3 and 4, six excerpts from the North College Corridor Plan. This is a geographically specific sub-area plan that formed the basis of the C-C-N zone district and includes the subject property. An adopted sub-area plan is considered a component of City Plan. The Hearing Officer concluded on page 19 that the decision that the PDP complied with the 2007 North College Subarea Plan. E. The Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair remanded hearing by substantially ignoring previously established rules of procedure by reason of the Hearing Officer already having decided the case in the original hearing. Lands Use Code Section 2.2.7(A) reads as follows: “2.2.7 Step 7: Public Hearing (A) Decision maker. (1) Administrative Review (Type 1 review). An administrative review process is hereby established wherein certain development applications shall be processed, reviewed, considered and approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Director pursuant to the general procedural requirements contained in Division 2.1, and the common development review procedures contained in Division 2.2. For those development applications that are subject to administrative review, the Director shall be the designated decision maker. (2) Planning and Zoning Board Review (Type 2 review). A Planning and Zoning Board review process is hereby established wherein certain development applications shall be processed, reviewed, considered and approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Board pursuant to the general procedural requirements contained in Division 2.1, and the common development review procedures contained in Division 2.2. For those development applications 122 October 30, 2012 that are subject to Planning and Zoning Board review, the Planning and Zoning Board shall be the designated decision maker.” The appellant asserts that having already ruled in the affirmative in the original hearing, the Hearing Officer is, therefore, biased and unqualified to consider the PDP in the remanded hearing. Hearing the same case a second time, regardless of differing testimony, it would be extremely hard to issue a decision contrary to the original. Further, Section 2.2.7(A) gives no indication that “the Director”, as the “designated decision maker,” can delegate the role. Finally, Section 2.2.7(D)(1) requires that “the Director” (not “the designated decision maker) close the public hearing. The Hearing Officer read into the public record a memorandum prepared by staff. The relevant subsection of this memorandum is found in the verbatim transcript which states on page 2, lines 24 - 34: Mr. Lopez: “One of these allegations challenged the legitimacy of the City of Fort Collins using a Hearing Officer. In response, please note the following from Section 1.4.9(E) (emphasis added): “(E) Delegation of Authority. Whenever a provision appears requiring the Director or some other City officer or employee to do some act or perform some duty, such provision shall be construed as authorizing the Director or other officer or employee to designate, delegate and authorize professional-level subordinates to perform the required act or duty unless the terms of the provision specify otherwise. With respect to the review of development applications eligible for Type 1 review, in addition to or in substitution for delegation to subordinates as above authorized, the Director may engage the services of an attorney with experience in land use matters.” City Attorney Roy outlined the appeal process. He noted no new evidence is admissible except in response to an allegation that a fair hearing was not held because the hearing officer relied upon evidence that was substantially false or grossly misleading, or in response to Council questions. He discussed the options Council has upon hearing the appeal. Mayor Weitkunat asked for general procedural objections. Tom Lawton, appellant, stated two documents were not included in the Council packet and two documents in the packet did not have a source cited. He stated the two missing documents were a Student Housing Action Plan preparation document and a Power Point presentation. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner, stated the first document is referred to as the Student Housing Action Plan Process Summary. The document was referenced by Mr. Lawton during his testimony before the hearing officer, as per the verbatim transcript. The actual Process Summary itself was not submitted until after the close of citizen input. It was submitted electronically near the end of the hearing. Shepard stated he does have ten hard copies of the document available should Council wish to review it. Shepard clarified that Exhibit 2 was submitted by Mr. Mickey Willis, though the document is an email from Mr. Lawton. 123 October 30, 2012 Shepard stated the Power Point presentation referenced by Mr. Lawton was presented from an iPad. An electronic version, to be converted to hard copy, was not received until after the close of citizen input. There are no objections to giving Mr. Lawton additional time to present his documents. Shepard stated Exhibit 7 was submitted by the applicant to the Hearing Officer at the public hearing during the time set aside for applicant rebuttal. Councilmember Manvel stated he would like to see the visuals of Mr. Lawton’s presentation. City Attorney Roy suggested the applicant be allowed to speak to the issues. Lucia Liley, 300 South Howes Street, attorney for the applicant, stated the applicant did not have any objections to Mr. Lawton showing what was presented at the public hearing. Shepard stated the public hearing was a remanded hearing held on August 7, 2012. He presented project statistics and summarized the appeal allegations. Mayor Weitkunat asked that Councilmembers reveal any observations made or discussions held on a site visit. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson stated he did attend the site visit to view the property. APPELLANT PRESENTATION Mr. Lawton discussed the fact that the Student Housing Action Plan was in process, but not completed, at the time the Aspen Heights project was submitted. He discussed the points of his appeal. His first allegation related to the notification sign posting on the property proposed for development. Mr. Lawton also alleged the Hearing Officer considered grossly misleading evidence relating to the project’s proposed number of bedrooms. Mr. Lawton alleged an unfair hearing and claimed the project should have gone before the Planning and Zoning Board. The proposed site is not near an educational campus and is not served by public transportation. He opposed the fact that the same Hearing Officer presided over the remanded hearing. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Deanne Frederickson, Aspen Heights Planner, discussed the proposed Aspen Heights development. She discussed the benefits of the project to the area and students and noted the project meets all Land Use Code standards without any modifications or variances. Ms. Liley discussed the appeal allegations. She noted the extra-occupancy process, per the Land Use Code, must occur after the PDP process and discussed the fact that the proposed project is a permitted use. Ms. Liley discussed the public transportation availability for the site and noted student housing is encouraged to be placed throughout the city. Additionally, Ms. Liley noted remands always go back to the original Hearing Officer. She requested the Hearing Officer’s decision be upheld. 124 October 30, 2012 Mickey Willis, 150 Fairway Lane, spoke in favor of the project. He noted affordable housing options are often taken by students and these types of projects will aid in freeing up affordable housing for families and others who need it. Monica Sweere, Old Town North, LLC Manager, supported the project. APPELLANT REBUTTAL Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, questioned the adequacy of the Transfort system to serve such a large development and questioned the fact that the project did not go before the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Lawton opposed certain aspects of the Land Use Code regulations. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Ms. Liley stated the appeal did not address issues with the project itself, but rather the process. She stated the applicant has consistently followed the currently outlined process. She requested that the decision of the hearing officer be upheld. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilmember Manvel asked about the impact of the potential of increasing the number of bedrooms on the traffic analysis . Ward Stanford, Traffic Engineer, replied the traffic analysis was done based upon the potential for additional bedrooms, with a ten percent downgrade for alternative modes, though there is likely to be a higher usage of alternative modes. Councilmember Manvel asked, whether or not the community will provide shuttle bus service as no additional Transfort bus service is planned. Stanford replied those issues are not part of the overall traffic analysis. Shepard replied the developer has publically indicated that shuttle service will be considered, should demand exist. There is no condition, at this point, that would mandate shuttle service. Ms. Liley stated the developer is willing to provide shuttle service if the demand exists. Councilmember Poppaw asked about the possible need for additional bus service on the route that would serve this development. Shepard replied Transfort Planning has not indicated the buses on that route are at capacity. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked what the City is requiring with regard to on-site ditches, one of which is to be eliminated and one of which is to be enhanced. Lindsay Ex, Environmental Planner, replied the main north-south corridor will be preserved through the project. A second drainage that runs into the main area will be removed. The area that will be preserved will be widened to from twenty feet to fifty feet and will be planted with native grasses, shrubs, and trees. Mitigation for the area that is going to be removed will occur in the regional pond. 125 October 30, 2012 Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked if this irrigation ditch will have a buffer. Ex replied it is not an irrigation ditch, but is a wildlife corridor and will be preserved at a width of fifty feet and will not have a fifty-foot buffer on each side. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about on-site trees. Ex replied most of the trees, particularly in the wildlife corridor, are Russian Olive and will be replaced. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about the timeline for prairie dog habitat restoration. Ex replied the development agreement for the project will stipulate how the funds are transferred in the restoration process. Mark Sears, Natural Areas Program Manager, replied the mitigation funds will be applied the following restoration season. It takes up to ten years to fully restore a piece of property to prairie. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson suggested changes may need to be made at some point with the mitigation dollar amount when the time it takes for restoration is considered. He disagreed with one-to-one mitigation for wetlands as well. Ex noted the quality of the wetland is being considered rather than just the acreage. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about the possibility of relocating the prairie dogs to Soapstone Natural Area. Sears replied part of the management plan for Soapstone is to not relocate prairie dogs from off-site. Existing on-site prairie dogs will be allowed to exist and grow a colony naturally. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked how many prairie dogs are estimated to be on-site. Ex replied she was unsure. Mayor Weitkunat suggested Council address the fair hearing issue of the appeal. Councilmember Manvel stated the signage complies with existing regulations and traffic impacts were calculated based upon the possibility of adding more bedrooms Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, that the Council find that the Hearing Officer did not fail to conduct a fair hearing in consideration of the Aspen Heights Project Development Plan #110018. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to uphold the decision of the Hearing Officer approving the Aspen Heights Project Development Plan #110018, because the Hearing Officer properly interpreted and applied the provisions of the Land Use Code. Councilmember Manvel noted discrepancies between City Plan and the Land Use Code may need to be addressed; however, this project has abided by the regulations in the Land Use Code. While the project may not be optimal from the perspective of nearby residents, City Plan calls for infill projects. He noted the stormwater and street improvements in the area will benefit the community. 126 October 30, 2012 Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson stated there is room for improvement in the City’s policies and processes, though the developer should not be punished because of that. He suggested restoration and wetland mitigation policies should be examined as well as possibly improving the wildlife corridor area to a greater extent. Ms. Liley stated the applicant is willing to work with staff on the issue of improving the wildlife corridor area. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson suggested the stormwater area look a bit more natural with contours and interest. City Manager Atteberry replied staff would address the issue. Councilmember Poppaw asked if the applicant would be willing to work with Transfort to discover a trigger point for the need for shuttle service and to address capacity issues. Ms. Liley replied she would prefer that issue be a condition of approval. City Attorney Roy clarified that the motion should include the condition that the developer work with staff on improving and/or enlarging the wildlife corridor area and should include the condition that shuttle service be provided unless it is found to be unnecessary. Councilmembers Troxell and Manvel accepted the conditions to be part of the motion. Mayor Weitkunat noted public input on the Land Use Code process is appreciated and should be brought forth for the next set of Land Use Code changes in May. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. (Secretary’s note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, Postponed to November 6, 2012 The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Utilities staff has been working on updating the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. The current Policy was adopted by City Council in September 2003 (Resolution 2003-104). Since the Policy’s adoption, the Utility has seen a significant reduction in water use while continuing to plan for future water needs. The updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water supply and provide for an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. 127 October 30, 2012 BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION History Since the Fort Collins Water Utility’s origin in the 1880s, the City has been focused on providing a high quality and reliable water supply to its customers. Policies that have supported the Utility in providing this water supply, as well as encouraging water conservation, have included the 1988 Water Supply Policy, the 1992 Water Demand Management Policy and the current 2003 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. This Policy update should continue the objectives of providing a sustainable and integrated approach to ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community, while managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource. Much of the work on the Policy update was performed in 2011 and included educating and gathering input from a Community Working Group (CWG) that had diverse water related backgrounds and perspectives. After six meetings with the CWG, a draft Policy update was developed that incorporated many of their issues and concerns. The proposed Policy update was presented to Water Board at its November 17, 2011 meeting. After much discussion, the Board voted unanimously to recommend to City Council support for the draft policy. The Policy update was presented to City Council during a work session on January 10, 2012. Council did not feel the Policy update was ready for adoption and requested additional information. Much of the material developed for the Policy update, CWG and Water Board was provided to the City Council for the January 10, 2012 work session. Materials provided for that meeting are available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. One of the key updated Policy sections that was discussed during the January 10, 2012 work session (as well as by the CWG and Water Board) was the water supply planning criteria. The three main planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the drought criterion, storage reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The following describes each of these criteria separately. Drought Criterion The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In general, water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water supply system that can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought might only be able to provide 20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date, but not without issues during the early 2000s drought. Storage Reserve Factor A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve provides a short- term supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have 128 October 30, 2012 occurred during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The storage reserve factor can be equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown in the following table: Storage Reserve Factor # of Winter Month Demands # of Summer (July) Month Demands 0% 0.0 0.0 5% 0.9 0.4 10% 1.8 0.7 15% 2.8 1.1 20% 3.7 1.5 25% 4.6 1.8 Planning Demand Level The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired. The planning demand level is measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used along with projected population and large contractual use needs to determine future demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or facilities to acquire). The planning demand level can be higher than current use or water conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield of the City’s water supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020. The water supply planning criteria values initially presented in the updated Policy were those being used by the Corps in the permitting process for the Utilities proposed enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, which has been ongoing for several years. The criteria originally presented in the updated Policy were the values currently being used in the Halligan permitting process of the 1-in- 50 year drought criterion, a planning demand level of 162 GPCD (2002-2007 average use), and a 15% storage reserve factor. Although there were some divergent views from CWG members on these planning criteria, the majority of CWG members felt that the water supply planning criteria (used in the Halligan permitting process) were set at reasonable levels. The Water Board also discussed and considered changes to these criteria during its November 2011 meeting, but decided they should remain the same to avoid potential delay to the Halligan permitting process. At the January 2012 work session, some Council expressed concern with having a planning demand level that is above our current water use level (150 GPCD) and water conservation goal (140 GPCD), and wanted a clearer explanation of the planning criteria and how they relate to the City’s water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and the City’s water use and conservation efforts. As a result, Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption. A summary of its feedback during the work session is attached (Attachment 1), along with staff responses to Council’s issues (Attachment 2). 129 October 30, 2012 Following the City Council work session, Utilities staff contacted the Corps to ask how changes to the planning criteria in the Policy would affect the Halligan Reservoir permitting process. The Corps stated it conducts an independent study of the City’s water supply needs and that the planning criteria values being used in the process seemed reasonable. Prior to issuance of a permit, the Corps will revisit these values and make adjustments as necessary. This input allowed for some flexibility in the planning criteria values used in the updated Policy. Utilities staff met with the Water Board’s Water Supply Committee on April 16, 2012 and the full Water Board on July 19, 2012 to discuss potential options for changing the water supply planning criteria. Changes to these criteria focused mainly on revising the planning demand level (in GPCD) and the storage reserve factor (SRF). Several options for changing these criteria were presented by staff, including the previous 162 GPCD and 15% SRF, 150 GPCD and 15% SRF and 140 GPCD and 20% SRF. After some discussion, the Water Board voted unanimously to revise the updated Policy to include the planning criteria suggested by the Water Supply Committee of 150 GPCD and 20% storage reserve factor. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board minutes (Attachments 3 and 4). In addition to the issues regarding the water supply planning criteria, Council wanted the updated Policy to include more focus on economic development and water innovation as well as a discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning. The updated Policy now includes these changes, along with the revised water supply planning criteria recommended by Water Board. The Council work session, scheduled for August 28, 2012 to further discuss the updated Policy (among other topics), was cancelled. Following the cancelled work session, Council Leadership reviewed the material provided and determined that an additional work session was not necessary and asked that the updated Policy be presented to City Council for formal adoption. Supporting Information Water Use The City currently delivers about 26,000 acre-feet/year of treated water and 4,000 acre-feet/year of raw water (which irrigates the City’s parks, golf courses, etc.). Demand levels have declined significantly over the last few decades from around 230 GPCD in the early 1990s to about 200 GPCD before the drought year of 2002. The average use over the last several years (2006-2011 normalized use) has been about 150 GPCD, indicating a 25 percent reduction in per capita water use from before 2002. The majority of these water use reductions have come from the City’s residential customers, but the commercial sector has also reduced its water use significantly. These reductions are a result of water conservation efforts by our customers that have been aided by the City becoming fully water metered in 2003 (along with tiered and seasonal rate structures) and the Utilities water conservation program. Utilities conducted a landscape preference survey with an online survey panel to gage customer’s desire for changing landscapes in Fort Collins as it relates to the potential for additional water conservation and its potential impact on existing landscapes. Results of the survey indicated general satisfaction with current landscapes in Fort Collins (especially trees) and support for additional xeriscape. Results indicated no strong opinion regarding additional water conservation, which coincides with recent general Utilities surveys that indicate the majority of customers believe water conservation efforts are at the correct level. 130 October 30, 2012 Water Supply Sources The City’s water supplies generally come from two main sources: the Poudre River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT). On average, the City gets about half its treated water supply from each of these sources each year. The City’s Poudre River water supplies include its senior direct flow rights, converted agricultural rights (mostly from shares in the irrigation ditches that run through the City) and the Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir system. The CBT supplies are administered by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD), which allocates the supplies to unit owners through a variable annual quota. The City receives delivery of its allocated water from Horsetooth Reservoir and does not own or operate that reservoir. Policies of the NCWCD limit carryover of unused CBT water in the project facilities (including Horsetooth Reservoir). The yield of the City’s water supplies is mostly dependent on snowmelt runoff, which is subject to high annual and monthly variability. Because the City plans for its water supply system to meet demands through a 1-in-50 year drought, there are adequate supplies in most years. The City can currently meet about 31,000 acre-feet/year of treated water demands through the 1-in-50 year drought without restrictions. Future Water Demands and Supplies The Water Utility is expecting a future projected need of approximately 37,400 acre-feet/year of treated water demands by 2050 (at 150 GPCD). The increase in demand is mostly from a projected increase in population of around 35,000 people in the Water Utility service area, but also includes an increase in large contractual use of approximately 3,000 acre-feet/year. This future demand should be near a build-out condition, since the Water Utility has a limited growth potential due to surrounding water districts. These districts will meet some of the future water demands projected within the City’s Growth Management Area. The City will continue to acquire additional water rights and/or cash in-lieu-of water rights through Raw Water Requirements, which requires developers to turn in water rights or cash to meet the water needs of additional development. The City has been working towards acquiring and/or developing storage capacity to help manage its current and future water rights. Operational storage is a critical need to help meet legal requirements associated with the City’s converted agricultural rights. The City is pursuing local gravel pits to meet these operational storage needs. Carryover and vulnerability protection storage can help meet the City’s projected future demands, as well as provide a storage reserve for disruptions to the City’s supply system. The City is pursuing the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir to meet these types of storage needs. Water Supply Planning Criteria As discussed above, these criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The 1-in-50 year drought criterion defines the level of risk for the City’s water supply system. The 20% storage reserve factor provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations. This factor incorporates having 20% of annual demand in storage (through the 1-in-50 year drought), which equates to about 3.5 months of winter (indoor) demand or about 1.5 months of summer demand. Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The 150 GPCD planning demand level is higher than the 140 GPCD water conservation 131 October 30, 2012 goal to account for uncertainties in water supply planning, such as the potential effects of climate change. Water supply planning is a long-term process with many uncertainties. The water supply planning criteria seek to balance the benefits and risks of developing a reliable water supply with the associated costs and impacts of doing so. These criteria determine the amount of supplies and/or facilities needed, but it is the City’s water use that mostly impacts the river system (except for construction and inundation impacts to the river). Planning for higher water use levels could provide the City more flexibility to use supplies for other benefits such as supporting local agriculture, if the City continues to reduce water use (e.g., meets the water conservation goal). Surplus Raw Water The City has surplus supplies in many years as a result of planning its supplies for meeting demands through a 1-in-50 year drought. Most of these surplus supplies are currently rented to agriculture on a year-to-year basis that generate revenue and help reduce water customer rates. The City recognizes recent interest in entering long-term arrangements with agricultural renters. Any unused or unrented surplus water is essentially left in the River, which is typically diverted by the next senior water right(s). Using the City’s surplus supplies for instream flows is currently difficult under current Colorado water law. However, Utilities staff is working with other City departments and the State of Colorado on initiatives to improve Poudre River flows. Environmental Considerations The City’s water use reduces flows in the Poudre River and other watersheds. However, most of the flow reductions on the Poudre River (between the lower Poudre Canyon and the middle of Fort Collins) are from irrigation company diversions. Most diversions for the City’s future uses will not reduce flows through Fort Collins, since the City will mostly use water from converted agricultural shares that have historically diverted upstream of Fort Collins. Key Policy Elements The Policy update has significantly changed from the current Policy adopted in 2003 and was developed with much input from the CWG, as well as some revisions from the Water Board and City Council. The following are the key updated Policy elements: • General Policy Language and Introduction In order to align with Plan Fort Collins and incorporate sustainability concepts, references to policies stated in Plan Fort Collins and incorporation of triple bottom line concepts (considering economic, environmental and social aspects) have been added throughout the Policy update, especially in the introduction. • Water Use Efficiency and Demand Management This section reduces the average daily use (water conservation) goal to 140 GPCD by 2020, compared to 185 GPCD in the current policy. This revised goal was developed in the 2009 Water Conservation Plan, which includes programs and measures used to reach the goal. Since it may be 132 October 30, 2012 updated on a more regular basis (at least every 7 years), future conservation goals will be adjusted by subsequent Water Conservation Plans. The Policy also states the peak day use goal of 350 GPCD by 2020, compared to 475 GPCD in the current policy. In addition, this section mentions the use of water rate structures to provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently and how population growth is connected to water supply and use. • Water Supply Reliability This section uses the three main planning criteria discussed above to develop the City’s water supply system. The Policy states that the City’s water supplies should be maintained to meet an average demand of 150 GPCD through at least a 1-in-50 year drought, while maintaining 20% of annual demand in storage through that drought. These criteria are designed to deal with potential uncertainties in water supply planning, one of which is the potential effects of climate change. In addition, this section mentions maintaining a plan for responding to projected water supply shortages. • Additional Supplies and Facilities This section addresses alternatives for meeting the City’s future needs that best fit the City’s water supply system. It includes working towards long-term water sharing arrangements with agriculture and is not specific about the amount of storage capacity required. • Water Quality This section focuses on protecting our watersheds and maintaining the taste and quality of our treated water. • Surplus Raw Water This section includes a strong commitment to use the Utilities surplus supplies for beneficial purposes such as supporting local agriculture and supplementing flows in the Poudre River. • Regional Cooperation This section directs the City to maintain good working relationships with regional entities that are affected by the City’s water use and supply planning. Once the updated Policy is approved, Utilities staff and consultants will create a report that summarizes the updated Policy and provide supporting information. This report will be provided to City Council and others once completed. Summary The Water Board’s recommended changes to the water supply planning criteria and the options presented to it should provide an adequate and reliable water supply with only a slight change to the previously projected amount of water supplies and/or facilities required to meet the City’s future needs. Also, the updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management, and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water 133 October 30, 2012 supply and incorporates an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Reliable water supplies are essential to providing economic health and sustainability in Fort Collins. These supplies provide economic and social benefits to the City’s citizens, businesses and surrounding community by having adequate water for health and public safety; home, school and industrial use; and healthy landscapes. The updated Policy will guide the Utilities in preparing for future water supply needs and continued demand management. Most of the Utilities operations associated with the Policy update are currently funded, such as the Water Resources Division and the Water Conservation Program. Most of the actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy are either already approved (including funding) by City Council or will be brought before them in future individual actions. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The updated Policy will guide the Utilities’ actions, projects and programs that may have both positive and negative environmental impacts. In general, the City’s use of local and regional water supplies has adverse effects on its surrounding natural environments. However, actions taken through the City’s water conservation and other efforts help to reduce those impacts. The updated Policy seeks to balance the benefits of providing a reliable water supply with the environmental impacts associated with providing that supply. Individual actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy will be brought before the City Council in the future, at which point the environmental impacts can be more fully described. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Water Board unanimously voted to approve the updated Policy with adjustments to the water supply planning criteria mentioned above in the background section. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board Minutes. PUBLIC OUTREACH Much of the work for the Policy update was performed in 2011, including an extensive public outreach effort mainly through the formation of a Community Working Group (CWG). Six meetings were held with the CWG to inform and discuss policy issues and their direct input was used to develop the updated Policy. Their input and discussions were documented in a memorandum that was provided with the January 10, 2012 work session materials, which is still available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. A letter from CWG member Gary Wockner (Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper), who requested it be given to City Council and Water Board, along with staff responses to those comments are attached for review (Attachments 5 and 6). The Water Board was involved throughout the entire Policy update process in order to provide City Council with its recommendations. In addition to the outreach with the CWG and Water Board, much of the Policy update information was posted on the City’s website, a landscape preference survey was conducted with a Utilities customer online survey panel, and presentations were given to 12 other City boards and interested organizations (22 groups were contacted). A 134 October 30, 2012 letter from the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners is attached for review (Attachment 7). Through these various public outreach efforts, the three levels of the public engagement spectrum (inform and consult, involve and collaborate) were employed. Opportunities were provided in all these efforts for individuals to provide comments on the Policy update, which provided few comments which were similar to the CWG and Water Board input. Given this level of public outreach and since additional outreach was not requested during the January 10, 2012 work session, no additional outreach was performed.” Donnie Dustin, Water Resources Manager, stated this Policy helps guide the Utilities in balancing water supplies and demands. The objective of the Policy is to ensure a safe, adequate, and reliable supply of water for the use of customers and the community, while managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource. A community working group helped develop the language with participation from the Water Board and other boards, as well. Dustin discussed the main changes in the Policy, which include a reduced water conservation goal, acknowledgment of planning criteria which consider climate change, and a stronger commitment to use surplus supplies. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated the term “sustainability” is over-used and discussed the possibility of re-using water. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked how building Halligan Reservoir supports the healthy, natural environment. Dustin replied the wording referenced by Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson attempts to relay a triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental objectives. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson suggested alternative wording. Dustin replied the item could return before Council at a later date or could possibly be amended this evening. Mayor Weitkunat asked how fires and other water supply disruptions fit into the Policy. Dustin replied disasters and disruptions are included in the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan. The Plan has not gone into effect as a result of the High Park fire, though there is a potential for restrictions in the future. Councilmember Manvel asked about the impact of Halligan Reservoir on water storage. Dustin replied it will double the amount of storage in the Poudre basin. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked if staff is comfortable with the final Policy document. Dustin replied the working group represents the community and he is comfortable with the document. Kevin Gertig, Water Resources/Treatment Operations Manager, replied he is comfortable with the document as it is proactive; however, staff would like to take Council’s input and adapt accordingly. Councilmember Troxell commended staff work on the Policy. He suggested the Policy allow for the explicit inclusion of innovation. Councilmember Manvel stated the inclusion of in-stream flow information and climate change are examples of innovation. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson suggested the item be postponed to future consent agenda after wording changes are made to include Council’s suggestions. 135 October 30, 2012 Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to postpone consideration of Resolution 2012-099 to the November 6, 2012 meeting. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Troxell. Nays: none. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 136 November 6, 2012 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, November 6, 2012, 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: Horak, Manvel, Ohlson, Troxell and Weitkunat. (Secretary’s note: Councilmembers Kottwitz and Poppaw arrived at 6:03 p.m.) Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Eckman, Nelson, Roy. Agenda Review City Manager Atteberry withdrew Item No. 27, Resolution 2012-103 Making Findings of Fact and Related Determinations Regarding the Appeal of the August 7, 2012 Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision Regarding the Aspen Heights PDP, to the Discussion Agenda. Citizen Participation Stacy Lynne, 305 West Magnolia, discussed the United States Constitution and its relationship to the duties of public officials. Bill Mullaney accused City officials of corruption. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, discussed the appropriate role of government and opposed City funding of the Rocky Mountain Innosphere and expressed concern regarding the fact that the downtown ice skating rink was not funded. CONSENT CALENDAR BUDGET CONSENT ITEMS 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2012, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance of the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2013 and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for Fiscal Year 2013. Ordinance No. 107, 2012, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, sets the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) 2013 Operations and Maintenance Budget amount of $769,440 to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013 for the administrative operations budget; appropriates the 2013 Line of Credit Draw in the amount of $1,000,000; sets the amount of $3,197,535 for debt service payments to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013; and 137 November 6, 2012 sets the 2013 Mill Levy for the Fort Collins DDA at five (5) mills, unchanged since tax year 2002. The approved Budget becomes the Downtown Development Authority’s financial plan for 2013. 7. Items Relating to Water and Electric Development Fees and Charges for 2013. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Water Rates and Charges. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Development Fees and Charges. The proposed water increase is a flat 4% across the board to all customer classes. Electric development fees are proposed to decrease an average of 2.4% for residential and decrease an average of 1.6% for commercial development. There are no changes in the monthly rates for wastewater or stormwater services being proposed for 2013. Both Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012. NON- BUDGET CONSENT ITEMS 8. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 Regular Meeting and the October 23, 2012 Adjourned Meeting. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Colorado Parks and Wildlife in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at East Trilby Road. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, appropriates a $200,000 trail grant received from Colorado Parks and Wildlife for the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail at East Trilby Road. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2012, Appropriating a Grant from Great Outdoors Colorado for the City’s Portion of Larimer County’s Poudre River Corridor and Regional Trail Initiative Grant. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, appropriates a grant received from Great Outdoors Colorado in the amount of $737,597. The funds will be used as part of Fort Collins’ portion of the Poudre River Corridor & Regional Trail Initiative project. The grant request includes open space acquisitions, trail easements, and trail development along the Poudre River from Fort Collins to Greeley. The total grant project cost is $8,074,826, with the Great Outdoors Colorado grant being in the amount of $5,098,150. The City of Fort Collins portion of the project is $1,558,880, with the Great Outdoors Colorado grant amount being $737,597. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2012, Approving a Fourth Amendment to the Fort Collins-Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation, Growth Management, and Related Issues, Eliminating Original Terms Related to the 138 November 6, 2012 Boxelder Overflow Project and Establishing the Terms of Cost Sharing for Design Engineering of Substituted Improvements in the Boxelder Basin. On February 17, 2009, the City of Fort Collins (City) and the Town of Timnath (Timnath) entered into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) regarding annexations, growth management, and related issues. The IGA resolved certain differences that had arisen between the City and Timnath concerning a variety of planning and growth management issues. The IGA sets forth provisions for the funding, design and construction of the Boxelder Overflow Project. The IGA has been amended three times since for items such as the extension of deadlines for approval of the respective growth management areas and the deletion of all references to Timnath’s possible purchase of the Vangbo property. The parties have determined that development of the Boxelder Overflow Project originally contemplated by Timnath as described in the Intergovernmental Agreement is neither feasible nor desirable, and have further identified a mutually beneficial alternative approach to address flood impacts in the Boxelder Creek Basin as it impacts Timnath and Fort Collins, referred to as the Boxelder Creek Flood Mitigation Projects. In order to move forward cooperatively to further investigate, conceptually plan and preliminarily design the Boxelder Creek Flood Mitigation Projects, the parties desire to apply toward those Projects a portion of the funds previously paid into an escrow account by Fort Collins in accordance with Article 7 of the Intergovernmental Agreement. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, approves the Fourth Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement in order to clarify and document the City and Timnath’s intentions and mutual rights and responsibilities with respect to the Boxelder Overflow Project and Boxelder Creek Flood Mitigation Projects. Between First Reading and Second Reading the proposed Amendment has been revised to specifically allow for Timnath to carry out the funding of the Boxelder Creek Flood Mitigation Projects through the Timnath Development Agency. 12. Items Relating to the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Project. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2012, Establishing a Special Fee to Be Paid by the Owners of Property Within Close Proximity to the Reconstructed Interchange at the Intersection of Interstate 25 and State Highway 392. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 2012, Approving the First Amended Intergovernmental Agreement Pertaining to the Development of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange. On December 21, 2010, the City Council approved an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Town of Windsor pertaining to the development of the I-25 interchange at the intersection of State Highway 392. The IGA states that, by March 31, 2011, the City and Windsor will take certain actions to implement the fee requirements identified in the IGA. City Council has adopted several resolutions extending this deadline, the most recent extension being to October 16, 2012. 139 November 6, 2012 Ordinance No. 117, 2012, will establish the specifics of a special fee to be paid by the Property Owners near the interchange. The fee includes two parts and is summarized as follows: • The first part of the fee is in proportion to the anticipated appreciation in property value as a result of the interchange improvements. This amount has been determined from an appraisal report prepared by a licensed MAI appraiser (the "Foster Study"). • The second part of the fee is based on the relative impacts that the development or redevelopment of the properties will have on the Interchange, as measured by the estimated number of additional vehicular trips that will be generated by the developed use of the properties. Based on negotiation with the Property Owners, the City and Town have created a second option for Property Owners. Property Owners signing an agreement with the City would be permitted to defer payment of the entire amount of the fee until their properties are developed or redeveloped, the amount of their fee would be capped at the amount estimated in the agreement, and no interest would accrue on their fee for a period of two years from the date of execution of the agreement. Ordinance No. 118, 2012, adopts the modified IGA first approved by City Council on December 21, 2010, now revised to be consistent with the implementation of the fees as described above. Both Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 23, 2012. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing and Related Activities. The Fort Collins Housing Authority paid the City of Fort Collins $15,457 as the 2010 and 2011 payments for public services and facilities. The Authority requests that the City refund the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) to fund sorely needed affordable housing-related activities and to attend to the low-income housing needs of Fort Collins residents. Resolution 1992-093 reinstated the requirement that the Authority make annual PILOT payments to the City. The City may spend the PILOT revenues as it deems appropriate in accordance with law, including remitting the funds to the Authority if the Council determines that such remittal serves a valid public purpose. The Council has remitted the PILOT payment to the Authority since 1992. 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Great Outdoors Colorado in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E Project. The City has received the grant payment from Great Outdoors Colorado for the construction of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E project. Great Outdoors Colorado had awarded the City a Special Opportunity Grant for the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail 140 November 6, 2012 from north of Cathy Fromme Prairie to the Spring Canyon Community Park. Construction of the project was completed this past spring. 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. The City Code requires annual adjustments to certain building permit related fees. Capital Improvement Expansion fees and Neighborhood Parkland fees are to follow the changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index (CPI). Street Oversizing fees are adjusted by the changes posted in the Engineering News Record (ENR). The CPI has increased 1.8% and the ENR has increased 1.6%. Additionally the Code is being updated to reference to the most recent amended manual, The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, 2008. Staff is working with a consultant who specializes in capital impact fees to re-evaluate the underlying assumptions and formulas used to calculate the City’s fees. A presentation is scheduled for a work session on February 12, 2013 and formal consideration on March 5, 2013. 16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2012, Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code Pertaining to Contractor Licenses. Community Development and Neighborhood Services is responsible for the enforcement of the contractor licensing requirements found in Chapter 15 of the City Code. The changes proposed will update the current Code by: • clarifying minimum experience and qualification requirements at the application stage • creating license categories that better align with the adopted residential and commercial building codes • streamlining the application and project verification process • establishing registration requirements for the currently non-licensed category of workers • increasing minimum liability amounts to recognized industry levels. 17. Items Relating to the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2012 Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Regarding the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. B. Resolution 2012-100 Updating the List of Names for Arterial and Collector Streets. This Ordinance amends the City Code relating to naming new arterial and collector streets so that City Council ,rather than the developer, would select the name of the new street. The Resolution will update the current list of names for arterial and collector streets. 141 November 6, 2012 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2012, Amending Section 2-427 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Transportation Board. The Transportation Board currently consists of eleven members appointed by the City Council, and is one of the larger advisory boards. At the end of 2012, the terms of four members will expire. One of those members is not eligible for reappointment because that member has met the Council-adopted two term limit. Another member is eligible but is not interested in reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from eleven to nine members. This Ordinance amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to nine members. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2012, Amending the Land Use Code by Designating Certain Types of Multi-family Housing Development Projects as Being Subject to Planning and Zoning Board Review. On October 9, 2012, Council directed staff to draft an ordinance amending the Land Use Code (LUC) to require larger multi-family housing developments (50 dwelling units, or 75 bedrooms) to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). A Type 2 review requires that the developer hold a pre-submittal neighborhood meeting. The benefit to the neighborhood meeting is that the public is given an opportunity to provide input on a project while it is still in the early stages of development. In recent months a large amount of multi- family housing developments have been appealed by concerned citizens to Council based on the assertion that the projects are not compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. This proposed procedural change seeks to provide more opportunity for the public to participate in the development review process for multi-family housing projects. 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration. The City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Master Plan has been updated to include stormwater quality and stream restoration projects, alongside the already identified stormwater flood control projects. The Master Plan update utilizes results and information obtained from the Stormwater Utility Repurposing program in conjunction with basin and stream specific recommendations obtained from the following two program efforts: A. Basin-Specific Stormwater Quality Best Management Practices (BMP) Selected Plans; and, B. Stream Restoration and Stability Study and Prioritization with the Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Tool. The BMP Selected Plans include recommendations for the treatment of stormwater within portions of the City that developed prior to the adoption of stormwater quality criteria. The majority of the BMP projects include the retrofit of existing stormwater detention ponds to include water quality treatment facilities. Funding for the construction of the identified BMP 142 November 6, 2012 and stream restoration projects will be drawn from existing stormwater fees. This funding request is included in the current 2013/2014 Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process for Environmental Health. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm and Related Water Rights Subject to a Conservation Easement and Authorizing a Related Raw Water Transfer Agreement. The Natural Areas Department (NAD) purchased the 137-acre Maxwell Farm, along with 12 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) water, with the intent of placing it under a conservation easement to help conserve a buffer between Fort Collins and Wellington; protect the open space and scenic values adjacent to I-25; and, sell it as an agricultural property with limited development rights. These purposes are supported by the Natural Areas Land Conservation and Stewardship Plan, the Council-adopted master plan for the Department. The land has been leased to Larry Maxwell, the previous owner, for farming and livestock feeding since the initial purchase in 2009. Natural Areas and Utilities have worked out an agreement for the NAD to sell eleven of the twelve NPIC shares to Utilities for approximately 50% of the estimated market value, which is $14,000 per share (based on recent sales information from NPIC). In exchange, Utilities will enter into a raw water transfer agreement with the buyer of Maxwell Farm, and per the terms of the agreement, Utilities will transfer the equivalent of eleven shares of NPIC water on an annual basis to the Maxwell Farm in perpetuity. The advantage to Utilities is that water decreed solely for agricultural use derived from other Utilities-owned NPIC shares, can be substituted for water decreed for municipal use derived from the eleven NPIC shares, which Utilities can use. The buyer will purchase the remaining share of NPIC water as it is a NPIC policy that a farm must own at least some NPIC water in order to receive any rented or transferred water. The single NPIC share to be owned by the buyer will also be tied to the land by the conservation easement agreement. The funds received from the sale of the land and water will be used to conserve additional land and water. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Vangbo Property Subject to a Conservation Easement. The Vangbo Property was purchased by the Natural Areas Department (NAD) in 2005 with the intent to place a conservation easement on the property to conserve the open space and scenic values along the I-25 corridor and then sell it as an agricultural property with limited development options. These purposes are supported by the Natural Areas Land Conservation and Stewardship Plan, the Council-adopted master plan for the Department. The land is currently leased to Alison Person, a neighboring landowner, for grazing. Staff recommends selling the 105-acre Vangbo property and associated ditch and water rights with a reserved conservation easement to Alison Person for $300,000. The conservation easement does not allow any future development, but does give the landowner the option to request the purchase of one building envelope on the property from a future City Council. The undeveloped portion would remain in agricultural use. 143 November 6, 2012 23. First Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Drainage Easement on City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC. Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC is planning a 39.53 acre residential development called Mail Creek Crossing PLD/PD located just north of Bacon Elementary School on South Timberline Road. This development will require the construction of off-site stormwater outfall improvements on adjacent property to the north in order to connect with a stormwater pipe in Kechter Road. The alignment of these improvements will cross the northwest corner of a property owned by the City’s Social Sustainability Department. The City’s 16-acre property was purchased in 2006 as a Land Bank property and is currently leased as a residential/horse property. In order to facilitate the installation of the planned improvements, the developer has requested a 2,346 square foot non-exclusive drainage easement from the City in the northwest corner of the City property adjacent to Kechter Road. 24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) currently provides telephone and internet services to portions of northwest Weld County and northeast Larimer County. With an increase in demand from their customers for broadband services, NTC has begun upgrading copper based telephone lines to fiber optic broadband lines. NTC has requested a utility easement from the City of Fort Collins across a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch in order to install approximately 7.0 miles of fiber optic line as part of this upgrade project. The proposed easement alignment would follow an abandoned state highway now used by the City as an access road to the City’s property. 25. Resolution 2012-101 Authorizing a Revocable Permit for Brinkman Construction, Inc. to Access City Property to Complete Mitigation Activities for the Construction of Tilden Street. In 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 030, 2008, authorizing the dedication of a portion of City property located at 2313 Kechter Road as Tilden Street. The property located west of the City property has been planned as the Kechter Crossing development. Tilden Street is located along the property boundary between the two properties. The developer of Kechter Crossing, Brinkman Construction, Inc., plans to begin construction of its development soon, including work within the new right-of-way of Tilden Street. This work will require the relocation of a number of site improvements in the right-of-way areas that are owned by the City. City staff has asked the Developer to relocate and replace a number of these site improvements elsewhere on the City property. The revocable permit will allow the developer access to the City property to perform the requested mitigation activities. 26. Resolution 2012-102 Naming Three Alleys Within the Block Bounded by South College Avenue, West Laurel Street, South Mason Street and West Myrtle Street. The Downtown Development Authority has completed a capital improvement project to enhance three public alleys in the aforementioned block. In conjunction with this project, the City of Fort Collins is preparing to name these three alleys. The three proposed names are “Dalzell Alley,” “Corbin Alley,” and “Wattles Alley.” If approved, the alley naming will 144 November 6, 2012 simplify way-finding for pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers, delivery personnel and emergency responders. 27. Resolution 2012-103 Making Findings of Fact and Related Determinations Regarding the Appeal of the August 7, 2012 Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision Regarding the Aspen Heights PDP. On August 16, 2012, the City of Fort Collins Hearing Officer issued a written decision approving Aspen Heights PDP, with one condition ensuring proper landscaping associated with the clubhouse. On August 30, 2012, Mr. Tom Lawton filed a Notice of Appeal seeking redress of the Hearing Officer’s decision. On October 30, 2012, City Council voted 5 - 0 to modify the Hearing Officer’s decision by requiring the following: 1. It shall be a condition of approval of the PDP that the applicant provide a shuttle bus for use of project residents, with the understanding that if there is insufficient ridership demand to sustain such shuttle bus, then the applicant may apply for a minor amendment to the approved Final Plan to reduce or eliminate the shuttle bus requirements of this condition. 2. It shall be a condition of approval of the P.D.P. that the applicant shall, at the time of submittal of the Final Plan and in consultation with City staff, enhance the design of the naturalized drainage channel transecting the property in such a manner as to provide an increased width and vegetation diversity; and to enhance the regional stormwater detention pond through variation in grading patterns and vegetation diversity, to the extent reasonably feasible. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the Appeal. 28. Postponement of Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy to November 20, 2012. At the October 30, 2012 Adjourned Meeting, Council voted to postpone consideration of this Resolution to November 6 to allow time for staff to revise the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, based on Council’s input. There is not adequate time to make these revisions and provide supporting material before the publication of the November 6 agenda. Staff requests postponement of consideration of this Resolution to November 20, 2012. 29. Routine Deeds. Three quit claim deeds, encompassing 105 easements within the Southwest Enclave Annexation from Poudre Valley REA. These easements were transferred to the City along with the purchase of Poudre Valley REA’s electric systems in the annexation. 30. Routine Easement. 145 November 6, 2012 Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from TAV Property Management, Inc., to install an electric transformer at 504 South College Avenue. ***END CONSENT*** Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Nelson. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2012, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance of the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2013 and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for Fiscal Year 2013. 7. Items Relating to Water and Electric Development Fees and Charges for 2013. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Water Rates and Charges. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Development Fees and Charges. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Colorado Parks and Wildlife in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at East Trilby Road. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2012, Appropriating a Grant from Great Outdoors Colorado for the City’s Portion of Larimer County’s Poudre River Corridor and Regional Trail Initiative Grant. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2012, Approving a Fourth Amendment to the Fort Collins-Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation, Growth Management, and Related Issues, Eliminating Original Terms Related to the Boxelder Overflow Project and Establishing the Terms of Cost Sharing for Design Engineering of Substituted Improvements in the Boxelder Basin. 12. Items Relating to the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Project. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2012, Establishing a Special Fee to Be Paid by the Owners of Property Within Close Proximity to the Reconstructed Interchange at the Intersection of Interstate 25 and State Highway 392. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 2012, Approving the First Amended Intergovernmental Agreement Pertaining to the Development of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange. 36. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Rates, Fees and Charges 146 November 6, 2012 Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Nelson. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing and Related Activities. 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Great Outdoors Colorado in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E Project. 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. 16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2012, Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code Pertaining to Contractor Licenses. 17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2012 Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Regarding the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2012, Amending Section 2-427 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Transportation Board. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2012, Amending the Land Use Code by Designating Certain Types of Multi-family Housing Development Projects as Being Subject to Planning and Zoning Board Review. 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm and Related Water Rights Subject to a Conservation Easement and Authorizing a Related Raw Water Transfer Agreement. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Vangbo Property Subject to a Conservation Easement. 23. First Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Drainage Easement on City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC. 24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt and approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 147 November 6, 2012 Consent Calendar Follow-up Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson requested follow-up and details regarding community parkland fees and capital expansion fees prior to Second Reading regarding Item No. 15, First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson noted, with regard to Item No. 20, First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration, that 90% of the public wants streams restored in Fort Collins but the current funding scenario means it will take at least 80 years or longer to accomplish that goal. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Troxell reported on a tour of Colorado Iron and Metal. He requested a report regarding waste diversion and the relationship of these types of private sector businesses to the City. Councilmember Manvel reported on an event for the Dental Connections Program and discussed Make a Difference Day. Councilmember Horak reported on a winter clothing distribution program sponsored by the North Fort Collins Business Association. Resolution 2012-103 Making Findings of Fact and Related Determinations Regarding the Appeal of the August 7, 2012 Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision Regarding the Aspen Heights PDP, Adopted The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 16, 2012, the City of Fort Collins Hearing Officer issued a written decision approving Aspen Heights PDP, with one condition ensuring proper landscaping associated with the clubhouse. On August 30, 2012, Mr. Tom Lawton filed a Notice of Appeal seeking redress of the Hearing Officer’s decision. On October 30, 2012, City Council voted 5 - 0 to modify the Hearing Officer’s decision by requiring the following: 1. The applicant must provide a shuttle bus for use of project residents, with the understanding that if there is insufficient ridership demand to support the need for the shuttle bus, the applicant may apply for a minor amendment to the approved Final Plan to reduce or eliminate this shuttle bus requirement. 148 November 6, 2012 2. To the extent reasonably feasible, the applicant shall, at the time of submittal of the Final Plan and in consultation with City staff: (a) enhance the design of the naturalized drainage channel transecting the property in such a manner as to provide an increased width and/or vegetation diversity provided that such enhancement does not unduly diminish the capacity of the channel to carry the anticipated stormwater flow; and (b) enhance the wetland mitigation area through increased size and/or vegetation diversity. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the Appeal. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Appellants’ Notices of Appeal were based on allegations that the Hearing Officer failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. At the October 30, 2012 hearing on the matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the appellants and the applicants. In subsequent discussion at this hearing, Council determined that the Hearing Officer did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. Regarding the issue of whether or not the Hearing Officer properly interpreted and applied relevant provisions of the Land Use Code, Council offered a motion to determine that the Hearing Officer did not fail to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code subject to two conditions. This motion had the effect of modifying the Hearing Officer’s decision by adding the two aforementioned requirements. City Council voted 5 – 0 to approve the motion thus modifying the decision of the Hearing Officer.” Councilmembers Horak and Kottwitz recused themselves from the discussion of Resolution 2012- 103 Making Findings of Fact and Related Determinations Regarding the Appeal of the August 7, 2012 Administrative Hearing Officer’s Decision Regarding the Aspen Heights PDP. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution 2012-103. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated a contract does not exist between the City and the developer to require shuttle service from the development. Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson requested a friendly amendment to rephrase a statement relating to the wildlife corridor to be: “as to provide an increased width and vegetation diversity.” Councilmembers Manvel and Poppaw accepted the amendment to the motion. Councilmember Manvel requested input as to whether or not statements made in this Resolution have any legal weight. Deputy City Attorney Eckman replied the Land Use Code allows for both the Planning and Zoning Board and Council to impose conditions on the approval of a development project. All requirements and conditions are outlined in a development agreement with the developer, which is recorded with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. The methods of enforcement are set out in the Land Use Code. 149 November 6, 2012 The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Consideration of the Appeal of the August 9, 2012 Zoning Board of Appeals Decision to Approve a Variance to Allow the Existing Off-premise Sign (Billboard) Located in the BNSF Railroad Right of Way at 190 West Prospect Road to Be Removed and Reinstalled at a New Location Within the Same Railroad Right of Way at 190 West Prospect Road, Board’s Decision Overturned The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 9, 2012, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) considered Appeal #2714, submitted by the City of Fort Collins Engineering Department. This Appeal was for a variance to Section 3.8.7(P) of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), which prohibits the construction of new off- premise signs. The variance was requested in order to allow the existing off-premise sign in the BNSF Railroad right of way on the north side of Prospect Road to be relocated within the railroad right of way 70 feet west of its current location. The sign’s current location is in direct conflict with the guideway alignment for the MAX BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) project. The ZBA unanimously approved the variance request as authorized by Section 2.10.1 of the LUC. On August 23, 2012, Richard L. Anderson (the Appellant) filed a Notice of Appeal with the City Clerk. The Appellant alleges that the ZBA: A. Failed to conduct a fair hearing in that: 1. The Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was grossly misleading; 2. The Board substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure; 3. The Board exceeded its authority and jurisdiction. B. The Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The Sign Code was amended in 1994 to prohibit the construction of new off-premise signs (aka billboards) anywhere in the city. Existing off-premise signs were grandfathered in due to protection afforded them by the Federal Highway Beautification Act. The sign that is the subject of this appeal was constructed pursuant to a sign permit issued prior to 1994 and falls within the scope of the Federal Highway Beautification Act. The City of Fort Collins has purchased an easement within the BNSF Railroad right of way on the east side of the tracks for the proposed MAX BRT guideway alignment. At the current location, the 150 November 6, 2012 existing off-premise sign is in direct conflict with the proposed guideway alignment. Removing the sign without relocating it will require monetary compensation, as required by the Federal Highway Beautification Act. The City of Fort Collins Engineering Department submitted an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting a variance to relocate the existing sign within the railroad right of way, 70 feet west of its current location. Removing an existing off-premise sign and reconstructing it in a different location is equivalent to the construction of a new off-premise sign; therefore, a variance is needed, even though the new location is on the same property. The setback distance from Prospect Road at the new location will remain unchanged from the Prospect Road setback at the sign’s current location. The appellant, Richard Anderson, owns the two commercial properties at 200 and 220 West Prospect Road, directly west of the Railroad right of way. Mr. Anderson testified at the August 9, 2012 ZBA meeting that he had concerns with billboards in general and with the effect that the relocation of the subject sign might have on the value of his property. In particular, he was concerned about the impact to his two properties if his tenant at 200 West Prospect decided to advertise on the billboard, thereby increasing his business and creating a parking problem for the tenants of his other building (lines 19 – 39, page 5 and lines 1 – 2, page 6 of the verbatim transcript, Attachment 5). Mr. Anderson is appealing the decision of the ZBA. ACTION OF THE ZBA ZBA Appeal #2714 originally appeared on the July 12, 2012 ZBA agenda, but was postponed to the August 9, 2012 hearing. After testimony from the staff, the applicant, and the public, the ZBA unanimously approved the variance request on August 9, 2012 to allow the sign to be moved 70 feet west of its current location. THE QUESTIONS COUNCIL NEEDS TO ANSWER 1. Did the ZBA fail to conduct a fair hearing? 2. Did the ZBA fail to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code? ALLEGATIONS ON APPEAL On August 23, 2012, Richard L. Anderson filed a Notice of Appeal with the City Clerk. The appeal alleges that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code, specifically Section 2.10.2(H). A. Failure to Conduct a Fair Hearing Allegation: The ZBA considered evidence relevant to its findings which was grossly misleading. Mr. Anderson states in the Notice of Appeal, “The ZBA further considered the facts that were misleading in that information presented reflected that the signage was to be continued in substantially the same form as it currently or has historically existed. The current sign has only one used/usable sign face (viewable by eastbound traffic). It is understood that there is intent to 151 November 6, 2012 significantly increase the impact of the sign by allowing signage on both sides of the pole (viewable from both east and west). The proposed signage would have a substantially greater impact than the existing signage.” Staff Response The staff report provided to the ZBA and the verbatim transcript of the hearing contain no mention of the existing sign having only one used or usable face or that the relocated sign might have two. However, the slides contained in the staff’s Powerpoint presentation for the ZBA meeting show that the existing sign has only one face and that a mock-up of the relocated sign at the new location shows sign faces on both sides of the sign (see slides 3, 16, and 17 on Attachment 3). The motion- maker moved to approve the variance based on the nominal, inconsequential standard of the LUC, noting that “It’s on the same property, it’s the same sign, it’s moving west.” (Lines 14 - 17, page 12, and lines 11 - 23, page 13 of the verbatim transcript, Attachment 5). Since there was no discussion during the hearing about the number of faces of the existing sign or of the proposed, relocated sign, it’s difficult to determine that the board members considered evidence which was grossly misleading or that they “understood that there is an intent to significantly increase the impact of the sign…” as stated by Mr. Anderson. Allegation: The ZBA substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure. Another fair hearing argument raised by Mr. Anderson is that the ZBA ignored previously established rules of procedure. However, the Appeal does not contain any specific assertions as to how the ZBA ignored its established rules of procedure. Staff Response There are no specific assertions to respond to. Allegation: The ZBA exceeded its authority and jurisdiction. The Appellant argues that the Board exceeded its authority and jurisdiction in granting the variance but presents no specific argument in support of that assertion, other than referencing Section 2.10.2 – Step 8 of the Land Use Code, which reads as follows: Section 2.10.2 Variance Review Procedures (H) Step 8 (Standards): Applicable, and the Zoning Board of Appeals may grant a variance from the standards of Articles 3 and 4 only if it finds that the granting of the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor authorize any change in use other than to a use that is allowed subject to basic development review; and that: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be varied would result in unusual and 152 November 6, 2012 exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the occupant of such property, or upon the applicant, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the occupant or applicant; (2) the proposal as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; or (3) the proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be varied except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2) or (3) above shall be supported by specific findings showing how the proposal, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2) or (3). Staff Response It is possible that the Appellant is arguing that a “new sign” could not be authorized by variance because the granting of such a variance would be a “use variance” or a “change in use” which would conflict with the standards in the aforementioned Section 2.10.2(H). However, that Section and other Sections of 2.10 only prohibit the Board from authorizing certain types of “changes in use” and there’s no mention at all of a prohibition against “use variances”. ZBA Appeal #2714 was presented before the Board as a request for a variance from the requirement of Land Use Code Section 3.8.7(P), which prohibits the construction of any new off-premise sign. Since all of the permitted and prohibited uses in the Land Use Code are contained in the Article 4 zone district standards, and not in Article 3, the variance request was not for a variance to any of the use standards in Article 4, but was rather a request only for relief from Section 3.8.7(P) of the Land Use Code. Section 3.8.7(A)(1) of the Land Use Code states that “Signs shall be permitted in the various zone districts as accessory uses in accordance with the regulations contained in this Section.” Additionally, Section 3.8.1, “Accessory Buildings, Structures and Uses”, lists signs as an accessory use. All zone districts in Article 4 authorize “accessory uses”. The property in question is located in the CC – Community Commercial zone district wherein “accessory uses” are listed as a permitted use (Section 4.18(B)(1)(a)2.). Staff believes that the construction of this billboard on the other side of the railroad track does not constitute a “use variance” since the sign is classified as an accessory use, which is a permitted use. Similarly, it is not a change in use since the current use is an accessory use sign and the proposed use is an accessory use sign. City Council must determine whether or not the ZBA exceeded its authority or jurisdiction by granting the variance on the basis of any violation of Section 2.10.2(H) regarding uses. B. Failure to Properly Interpret and Apply Relevant Provisions of the City Code, the Land Use Code and Charter, Specifically Land Use Code Section 2.10.2(H). 153 November 6, 2012 Allegation: The ZBA based its granting of the variance on the desire to save the City money. The appellant argues that “The purpose for the ZBA’s granting of the subject variance can be explained in no other way than a desire to save the City money. While it is certainly laudable that the that City staff and the ZBA focused on preserving taxpayer dollars, Section 2.10.2 does not allow the ZBA to grant a variance on the basis that there will be a positive impact on the public coffers.” Staff response On the question of the proper interpretation of the Land Use Code, Section 2.10.2(H) of the Land Use Code is the section that is referenced in the Notice of Appeal. This section sets forth the standards by which the ZBA is to make a determination as to whether or not a variance application can be approved, approved with conditions, or denied. In order to approve a variance, the Board must find that the application satisfies one or more of the following criteria: 2.10.2(H)(1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be varied would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the occupant of such property, or upon the applicant, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the occupant or applicant; 2.10.2(H)(2) the proposal as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; or 2.10.2(H)(3) the proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be varied except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. The record reflects that the Board granted the variance after finding that it would not be detrimental to the public good to grant the variance and that the proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. (Beginning on line 14, page 12 of the verbatim transcript and continuing to the end, Attachment 5). The Appellant argues that the Board based its granting of the variance solely on the desire to save money for the City (first paragraph on Page 1 of the Appellant’s attachment to the Notice of Appeal). The record shows that there was discussion at the ZBA hearing regarding the requirement to compensate the sign owner in the event the sign is required to be removed and not allowed to be relocated. The staff report and the City Engineering Department’s justification statement that were presented to the board also contained references to monetary compensation. However, the record shows that no further discussion regarding such compensation occurred just prior to the motion to 154 November 6, 2012 approve the variance or during discussion on the motion and the actual vote. The Board granted the variance upon the finding that it would not be detrimental to the public good to do so, and that the granting of the variance fit the nominal and inconsequential requirement of Land Use Code Section 2.10.2(H)(3). The Council should examine the findings and motion of the Board in granting of the variance to determine if the decision to approve the variance was on the basis of saving money or on the finding that it would not be detrimental to the public good and that it satisfied the nominal and inconsequential standard in Sec. 2.10.2(H)(3) of the LUC. SUMMARY The appellant alleges that the Zoning Board of Appeals failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Fort Collins Land Use Code. The Staff Report presented to the Board concluded that the variance request satisfied one or more of the standards necessary for the granting of a variance as required in Section 2.10.2(H) of the Land Use Code. The ZBA unanimously approved ZBA Appeal #2714 after finding that the variance request satisfied the nominal, inconsequential standard in Section 2.10.2(H)(3) of the Land Use Code. Council should review the record to determine whether or not the Board held a fair hearing and whether or not the Board properly interpreted and applied the relevant provisions of the Land Use Code in approving the variance to allow the existing off-premise sign at 190 West Prospect Road to be relocated 70 feet to the west.” City Attorney Roy stated Council will be considering an appeal of a Zoning Board of Appeals decision. He outlined the appeal process and Council’s possible actions. Councilmember Troxell stated he attended a site visit in order to determine the current and proposed location of the sign. Peter Barnes, Zoning Supervisor, discussed the need for the sign relocation as its current location is in direct conflict with the proposed route for the MAX/BRT project. The variance request to relocate the sign was unanimously approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals which found the variance would not be detrimental to the public good and found that the proposal satisfied the nominal and inconsequential standard. Barnes briefly discussed the allegations of the appeal and the staff response to those allegations. He noted the possibility of the new sign having two faces was never discussed at the hearing. APPELLANT PRESENTATION Brad March, attorney representing the Anderson family, Appellant, stated the relocated sign would be five feet from the border of the Anderson property. He argued the reason for the variance is solely to save taxpayer dollars. He stated the Land Use Code no longer allows billboard signs; therefore the relocation of this sign is detrimental to the public good. 155 November 6, 2012 APPLICANT PRESENTATION Terry Tyrrell, Design Consultant Project Manager for the MAX/BRT project, Applicant, stated the variance to relocate the sign was requested in order to allow for the MAX/BRT project to go forward. He argued the Zoning Board of Appeals did conduct a fair hearing. Mark Barnes, Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, and Shreck, LLC, Next Media representative, discussed the cooperation and negotiations between the City and Next Media to relocate the sign. He noted the Code does not define the term “detrimental to the public good” and argued that it is clear the Zoning Board of Appeals determined this met the standard for a variance regardless of the cost. He stated the existing sign will be relocated and there is nothing to prohibit Next Media from displaying advertisements on both sides of the sign. APPELLANT REBUTTAL Mr. March again argued the sole reason for this variance is money savings; however, this sign is detrimental to the public good as no billboard signs are allowed in the City. Additionally, it appears this is going to be a two-sided sign which was never discussed at the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mr. Barnes stated the fact the two-sided aspect was not discussed was because the exact sign, which is already two-sided, is going to be relocated. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilmember Troxell stated there is no frame on the now empty side of the sign. He argued a modification would be required in order to display on that side. Mr. Barnes replied this sign does have brackets in place that will allow for the display of advertising on the second side. Councilmember Troxell argued there is no existing framework for advertising on the second side. Jamie Rideout, Next Media, replied the sign’s east face is engineered and built to have a face on it; currently, it only has angle iron on which to attach a face. Councilmember Troxell requested that Barnes explain his quote referencing the sign as a “new sign.” Barnes replied the variance would not have been required if it were not a new sign. If a structure is moved, it ceases to exist at its original location and needs to comply with all regulations at the new location. Mayor Weitkunat asked if the new sign would need to comply with existing regulations. Barnes replied regulations have not changed regarding height and setback for this particular sign since 1985. The regulation that has changed, and therefore required a variance, was that the City no longer allows off-premise signs. Councilmember Manvel noted this variance is not nominal and inconsequential to the Anderson family, nor is it nominal and inconsequential to the City as the sign’s value may now double with 156 November 6, 2012 advertising on two sides. Barnes replied the nominal and inconsequential finding is to be in the context of the neighborhood. Councilmember Manvel noted the long-term goal of the City is to remove these types of signs and asked how it is not detrimental to the public good to up the future cost of that removal by changing a one-sided sign to a two-sided sign. Barnes replied the original permit was issued for a two-sided sign; therefore, the second side could have been installed at any point without an additional permit. The replacement cost of the sign would be based on the sign being a two-sided sign, from the perspective of Next Media. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kottwitz, that the Zoning Board of Appeals did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. Councilmember Manvel noted a comment was made at the original hearing that the new sign was to be substantially the same; however, a sign displaying two sides of advertising does not appear to be substantially the same as a sign displaying one side of advertising. Yeas: Weitkunat, Horak, Kottwitz, Troxell, and Ohlson. Nays: Manvel and Poppaw. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, that the Zoning Board of Appeals did fail to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of Land Use Code Section 2.10.2(H), due to the fact that this particular sign relocation is detrimental to the public good. Councilmember Horak stated this sign relocation is not good for the public as the City’s policy is to have fewer, and less prominent, billboards. Councilmember Troxell stated the City’s sign code was ignored by the Zoning Board of Appeals in making its decision. Councilmember Manvel stated that the fair market value for the sign to be dismantled should be based on the existing revenue stream of the single-sided sign. Mayor Weitkunat noted public goods other than just the cost of the sign need to be considered. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 114, 2012, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Rates, Fees and Charges, Adopted on Second Reading The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. 157 November 6, 2012 “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2013 electric rate increases which average 4.33% are proposed to vary by customer class from 3.35% to 5.33%. The proposed changes will impact individual electric customers more or less than the customer class averages and will vary by season. This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, by a vote of 6-1 (Nays: Kottwitz).” Lance Smith, Utilities Strategic Financial Planning Manager, briefly discussed the proposed rate changes. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, requested information regarding the new substation rate class. He supported time of use rates with Smart Meter usage. Sean Dougherty, 1344 Catalpa, asked about the difference between commercial and residential class rates. Steve Catanach, Light and Power Operations Manager, stated a contract customer is now moving to a standard rate as a result of the contract expiration. Due to the configuration with which the customer is served, the substation rate was developed. He noted commercial rates are not subsidizing residential rates, nor are residential rates subsidizing commercial rates. Each service class pays for its own cost. Councilmember Troxell asked how the AMI structure supports tiered rates. Catanach replied the newly installed meters will provide data allowing billing on a time of use rate. He stated staff plans to bring back the issue before Council next year. The AMI infrastructure is not needed to bill on a tiered rate basis. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Ordinance No. 114, 2012, on Second Reading. Councilmember Horak noted 83% of the rate increase is directly due to the wholesale increase from Platte River Power Authority. Of that, the majority of the increase is from fuel expense and the reduction in surplus revenues. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Horak. Nays: Kottwitz and Troxell. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2012-104 Accepting Advisory Opinion and Recommendation No. 2012-2 of the Ethics Review Board, Adopted The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. 158 November 6, 2012 “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under City Code Section 2-569, City Councilmembers may present to the Council Ethics Review Board inquiries regarding the application of state or local ethical rules to actual or hypothetical situations involving potential conflicts of interest. On October 22, 2012, and October 30, 2012, the Ethics Review Board met for the purpose of responding to an inquiry submitted to the Board by Mayor Weitkunat. The question submitted by the Mayor is whether, in the Board’s opinion, she would have a conflict of interest in participating in upcoming decisions of either the City Council or the Urban Renewal Authority regarding the possible redevelopment of the Foothills Mall. The Mayor has presented the question because of the proximity of her residence to the redevelopment site. As required by the Code, the Board has forwarded its opinion and recommendations to the full Council for its consideration. Adoption of the Resolution would indicate that the majority of the Council agrees with the Board’s opinion and recommendations.” Mayor Weitkunat recused herself from the discussion of the item. City Attorney Roy reviewed the role of the Ethics Review Board. He stated the Board came to the conclusion that the Mayor does have a conflict of interest with regard to the possible mall redevelopment, due to the proximity of her residence to the site. However, the Board came to the conclusion that the Mayor does not, at the present time, have a conflict of interest in her role as the Chair of the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) as its current rules regarding conflicts of interest are different. Additionally, the Board recommended that the Council consider modifying the City Code, which presently exempts the Urban Renewal Authority from the City Charter’s conflict of interest rules, and make the rules the same for the URA Board and Council. Councilmember Manvel stated, as a member of the Ethics Review Board, it did appear the Mayor’s property value would increase as a result of the mall redevelopment. Councilmember Poppaw, as a member of the Ethics Review Board, agreed with Councilmember Manvel’s assessment. It did appear the benefit to Mayor Weitkunat’s property value would be greater than that of the general public. Councilmember Troxell noted there is a possibility that the Mayor’s neighborhood could be negatively impacted due to the redevelopment. Councilmember Manvel stated real estate professionals were consulted and did indicate an increase in property values. Councilmember Kottwitz stated, as a member of the Ethics Review Board, she disagreed that there was potentially a substantial financial impact, particularly given the property location being across Swallow Road. Councilmember Horak stated the real estate professional’s report does not appear to be as clear as the conclusion made by the Board. Councilmember Poppaw replied the process needed to move quickly and it would have been extraordinarily expensive to have an actual appraisal done. The Board came to the decision that a reasonable person may conclude that the Mayor’s property value may increase. 159 November 6, 2012 Councilmember Troxell asked if the Board could have come to the conclusion that there was not enough information, thereby allowing the Mayor to make her own decision regarding the recusal. City Attorney Roy replied there is no requirement that the Board render a definitive opinion. Ultimately, under the Charter and the Code, it remains the responsibility of the individual Councilmember to decide whether or not to declare a conflict of interest. The purpose of getting an advisory opinion is to assist the Mayor in that decision. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution 2012-104. Councilmember Manvel noted the URA rules are different than those of the City and only require recusal should a member have a financial interest in the URA project itself. He encouraged the Mayor to follow the rules of the City with regard to her recusal from the URA aspects of the issue. Councilmember Poppaw stated the URA rules should be in line with those of the City. Councilmember Horak stated he would support the motion but suggested the conflict of interest rules may need to be clarified in the future. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Horak. Nays: Kottwitz and Troxell. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Horak suggested billboard signs be treated the same as all other properties with regard to public projects. Adjournment Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adjourn to Thursday, November 8, 2012 at 6:00 p.m., so that the Council may consider any additional business that may come before the Council. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. The meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 160 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 7 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing and Related Activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Housing Authority paid the City of Fort Collins $15,457 as the 2010 and 2011 payments for public services and facilities. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, refunds the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) to fund sorely needed affordable housing related activities and to attend to the low- income housing needs of Fort Collins residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 13 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Fund Affordable Housing and Related Activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Housing Authority paid the City of Fort Collins $15,457 as the 2010 and 2011 payments for public services and facilities. The Authority requests that the City refund the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) to fund sorely needed affordable housing-related activities and to attend to the low-income housing needs of Fort Collins residents. Resolution 1992-093 reinstated the requirement that the Authority make annual PILOT payments to the City. The City may spend the PILOT revenues as it deems appropriate in accordance with law, including remitting the funds to the Authority if the Council determines that such remittal serves a valid public purpose. The Council has remitted the PILOT payment to the Authority since 1992. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On December 16, 1971, the City and the Authority entered into a Cooperative Agreement which provided that the Authority must make annual PILOT payments to the City for the public services and facilities furnished by the City. In 1986, upon request of the Authority, the City Council adopted a resolution which relieved the Authority of its obligation to make the PILOT payments. Based on that resolution, the Authority did not make PILOT payments from 1987 through 1990. The Authority also received a refund from the City of PILOT payments for the years 1984, 1985 and 1986. In 1992, the City Council approved a change in the Cooperative Agreement to reinstate the requirement that the Authority pay the annual PILOT payment. The change was done to clarify that PILOT payments are owed to the City and to avoid the possibility that the Department of Housing and Urban Development might require the Authority to return the PILOT payments to the federal government. Since that time, the City has refunded the annual PILOT payments to the Housing Authority. Staff recommends that the 2010 and 2011 PILOT payments of $15,457 be appropriated as unanticipated revenue in the General Fund and remitted to the Authority with the recommendation that the Authority use the funds in the manner consistent with HUD guidelines. The intended use for the funds is affordable housing and related activities. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The City received unanticipated revenue from the Fort Collins Housing Authority in the amount of $15,457.00 as 2010 and 2011 payments for public services and facilities. The revenue was placed in the General Fund. This Ordinance will return the funds to the Housing Authority to be used for affordable housing and related activities. 2010 PILOT $ 7,966 2011 PILOT $ 7,491 $15,457 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 13 ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from the Fort Collins Housing Authority, August 1, 2012. ORDINANCE NO. 119, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE GENERAL FUND TO THE FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND RELATED ACTIVITIES WHEREAS, the City has received a payment from the Fort Collins Housing Authority (the “Authority”) of $15,457 in satisfaction of its 2010 and 2011 payments in lieu of taxes (“PILOTs”); and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested that the 2010 and 2011 PILOT payments be appropriated by the City Council for expenditure by the Authority to fund affordable housing related activities and to attend to the housing needs of low-income Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, said payment of $15,457 was not projected as a revenue source in the 2012 City budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the provision of affordable housing serves an important public purpose and is an appropriate use of these funds; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of the Authority PILOT payment as described herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated revenue in the General Fund the sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY SEVEN DOLLARS ($15,457) to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to fund affordable housing and related activities for Fort Collins residents consistent with the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development guidelines. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Craig Foreman AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 8 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Great Outdoors Colorado in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, appropriates the grant payment received from Great Outdoors Colorado for the construction of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E project. Great Outdoors Colorado awarded the City a Special Opportunity Grant for the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail from north of Cathy Fromme Prairie to the Spring Canyon Community Park. Construction of the project was completed this past spring. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Craig Foreman AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 14 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2012, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue from Great Outdoors Colorado in the Conservation Trust Fund for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City has received the grant payment from Great Outdoors Colorado for the construction of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E project. Great Outdoors Colorado had awarded the City a Special Opportunity Grant for the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail from north of Cathy Fromme Prairie to the Spring Canyon Community Park. Construction of the project was completed this past spring. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Fossil Creek Trail had ended at Luther Lane since the late 1990s. The recent acquisition of a trail easement north of County Road 38E allowed this trail section to become a reality. A safe crossing of the County Road was critical for the success of the trail segment. The trail underpass provides a safe crossing of the road which can experience up to 7,000 cars per day. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The City of Fort Collins had been awarded a grant of $500,000 from Great Outdoors Colorado for the development of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E. The total cost for this trail section was about $1,200,000. The City’s share of the cost (about $700,000) was available in the Conservation Trust Fund and the Natural Areas Trails Program. The grant will free up Conservation Trust trail funds to provide funding for other needed trail projects. Funding for the annual operation and maintenance cost of the 0.9 mile of new trail is estimated at $8,000 and is available in the approved Park Maintenance budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The new trail on Pineridge Natural Area replaced a heavily used natural surface trail. A new spur trail to the Park replaced an existing trail situated in a drainage that had erosion problems. The unused existing spur trail was rehabilitated and returned to nature. The new Fossil Creek Trail south of Pineridge, crosses Spring Creek at a 90 degree angle to minimize impacts to the Creek. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Parks and Recreation Board was informed of the project through numerous staff updates and was supportive of the project. The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board was also informed of the project through numerous staff updates and was supportive of the project. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 14 PUBLIC OUTREACH The trail segment was discussed with residents during the design and construction phases of the project. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map ORDINANCE NO. 120, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE FROM GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO IN THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND FOR THE FOSSIL CREEK TRAIL AT COUNTY ROAD 38E PROJECT WHEREAS, Great Outdoors Colorado (“GOCO”) has awarded the City of Fort Collins a grant in the amount of $500,000 for the construction of the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E; and WHEREAS, the grant revenue made possible the completion of the Fossil Creek Trail from north of Cathy Fromme Prairie to Spring Canyon Community Park; and WHEREAS, this project included a trail underpass for a safe crossing of County Road 38E; and WHEREAS, the total cost for this section of trail was approximately $1,200,000, with $500,000 from the GOCO grant and approximately $700,000 from Conservation Trust Funds and the Natural Areas Trails program; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of grant funds as described herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Conservation Trust Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year. WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to transfer by ordinance any unexpected and unencumbered amount or portion thereof from one project to another project, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated grant revenue in the Conservation Trust Fund the sum of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) for the Fossil Creek Trail at County Road 38E project. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: John Voss Jessica Ping-Small AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 9 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Code requires annual adjustments to certain building permit related fees. Capital Improvement Expansion fees and Neighborhood Parkland fees are to follow the changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index (CPI). Street Oversizing fees are adjusted by the changes posted in the Engineering News Record (ENR). The CPI has increased 1.8% and the ENR has increased 1.6%. Additionally the Code is being updated to reference to the most recent amended manual, The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, 2008. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On First Reading on November 6, 2012, additional information was requested about the 2012 projected ending balances and a description of how the monies can be spent. Rate Changes 2010 2011 2012 2013 Fee Type Authorized Authorized Authorized Proposed Community Parkland Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Police Capital Expansion Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Fire Protection Capital Expansion Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% General Government Capital Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Neighborhood Parkland Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Street Oversizing Fees 0.00% 5.48% 7.55% 1.60% 1. Community Parkland Fees: Expenditures shall be made for the acquisition, construction and development of capital improvements related to the provision of community parklands. • Fund Balance as of 12/31/2012: $8,750,000 • Offers Funded in the 2013 Budget: $1,270,000 2. Police Capital Expansion Fees: Expenditures shall be made for the acquisition, construction and development of capital improvements related to the provision of police services as described in the capital improvements plan for police services. • Fund Balance as of December 31, 2012: $960,000. The balance is being used to pay debt service on new Police Facility. 3. Fire Protection Capital Improvement Expansion Fees: Expenditures shall be made for the acquisition, construction and development of capital improvements related to the provision of fire protection services to City residents, as described in the capital improvements plan for fire protection. • Fund Balance as of December 31, 2012: $190,000. The balance is being used by Poudre Fire Authority to pay debt service on Station #4. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 9 4. General Government Capital Expansion Fees: Expenditures shall be made for the purpose of funding capital improvements related to the provision of general governmental services. • Fund Balance as of December 31, 2012: $ 6,030,000 of which $5,000,000 has been loaned to the URA for North College Marketplace and JAX, leaving only $1,030,000 in liquid investments, it was not anticipated this money was needed before the loan will be repaid. 5. Neighborhood Parkland Fees: Expenditures shall be made for approved purposes for the acquisition, development and administration of neighborhood parks, including purchases of new or replacement park site equipment and plantings. • Fund Balance as of December 31, 2012: $5,580,000 • Offers Funded in 2013 Budget: $750,000 • Offers Funded in 2014 Budget: $1,050,000 5. Street Oversizing Fees: Expenditures shall be made for construction of arterial and collector streets. • Fund Balance as of December 31, 2012: $7,860,000 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: John Voss Jessica Ping-Small AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 15 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2012, Amending the City Code to Increase the Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the City Code so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Code requires annual adjustments to certain building permit related fees. Capital Improvement Expansion fees and Neighborhood Parkland fees are to follow the changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index (CPI). Street Oversizing fees are adjusted by the changes posted in the Engineering News Record (ENR). The CPI has increased 1.8% and the ENR has increased 1.6%. Additionally the Code is being updated to reference to the most recent amended manual, The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, 2008. Staff is working with a consultant who specializes in capital impact fees to re-evaluate the underlying assumptions and formulas used to calculate the City’s fees. A presentation is scheduled for a work session on February 12, 2013 and formal consideration on March 5, 2013. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In May 1996, Council adopted Ordinance No. 051, 1996, which established capital improvement expansion fees for Community Parkland, Police, Fire, and General Government services. The purpose of the fees is to have new development pay a proportionate share of the capital improvements and equipment that will be necessary to provide services to the development. The Code provisions provide for the annual adjustment of the fees to keep up with inflation, using the Denver-Boulder (now Denver-Boulder-Greeley) Consumer Price Index. The City has imposed a Parkland fee for neighborhood parks since 1968. In August 1996, Council adopted Ordinance No. 105, 1996, which aligned the Neighborhood Parkland fee to the housing size differentials in the Capital Improvement Expansion fee ordinance, and updated the fee schedule to reflect pre-1996 inflation. The Neighborhood Parkland fees were adjusted for inflation in 1997-2007, along with the Capital Improvement Expansion fees. Based on the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, the inflation level since the last annual adjustment is an increase of 1.8% for 2013. This Ordinance adjusts the fee schedules in Chapter 7.5 and Chapter 23 of the City Code to account for inflation. In the Ordinance, all amounts for the capital improvement expansion fees have been rounded to the nearest dollar. The Ordinance increases Street Oversizing Fees by 1.6% to reflect the index published in the Engineering News Record, as well as the average weekday vehicle trips as indicated by The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, 2008. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The 2012 revenue budget in the table below reflects changes in both the rates and volume of building activity. Summary information: Revenue 2010 2011 2012 2013 Fee Type Actual Actual Forecast Comparison Capital Expansion Fees $ 777,353 $ 1,326,962 $ 1,845,000 $ 1,878,000 Neighborhood Parkland Fees 346,749 884,092 1,253,000 1,276,000 COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 15 Street Oversizing Fees 2,121,165 1,441,107 2,445,000 2,484,000 Rate Change 2010 2011 2012 2012 Fee Type Authorized Authorized Authorized Proposed Capital Expansion Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Neighborhood Parkland Fees 0.00% 1.10% 3.80% 1.80% Street Oversizing Fees 0.00% 5.48% 7.55% 1.60% At year-end of 2012, staff estimates that the total available balance in the Capital Improvement Expansion Fund will be approximately $15.9 million, the Neighborhood Parkland Fund about $5.6 million, and the Street Oversizing Fund nearly $7.9 million. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ORDINANCE NO. 121, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO INCREASE THE AMOUNTS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT EXPANSION FEES CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 7.5 OF THE CITY CODE SO AS TO REFLECT INFLATION IN ASSOCIATED COSTS OF SERVICES WHEREAS, the City is a home rule municipality having the full right of self-government in local and municipal matters under the provisions of Article XX, Section 6 of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, among the home rule powers of the City is the power to regulate, as a matter of purely local concern, the development of real property within the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s Comprehensive Plan shows that the rate of future growth and development in Fort Collins will require a substantial expansion in community park, police, fire, and general government facilities, and related capital equipment, if its level of service standards for such facilities are to be maintained; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development should contribute its proportionate share of providing such capital improvements; and WHEREAS, the City Council has broad legislative discretion in determining the appropriate funding mechanisms for financing the construction of public facilities in the City; and WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 051, 1996, establishing certain capital improvement expansion fees; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 7.5-18 provides for annual fee increases in the capital improvement expansion fees corresponding to the increases in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers; and WHEREAS, in September 1968, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 038, 1968, which established the original Neighborhood Parkland Fee to fund the acquisition and development of parkland, which ordinance has since been amended on several occasions to adjust the fee and to refine related procedures and requirements; and WHEREAS, with the adoption in August 1993, of Ordinance No. 082, 1993, the City Council directed the City Manager to annually review the Neighborhood Parkland Fee and submit to the Council proposed inflation-related increases based on the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index; and WHEREAS, the City Code calls for the annual adjustment of all Capital Improvement Expansion Fees, including the Neighborhood Parkland Fee, for inflation; and WHEREAS, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics most recent Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price index for all urban consumers, staff anticipates that the Index will reflect an inflation increase of 1.8 percent since the last annual adjustment of the fees in 2012, effective January 1, 2013. WHEREAS, the City has historically used the Engineering News Record as a reference to determine whether the street oversizing capital improvement expansion fee should be increased to account for rising construction costs; and WHEREAS, based on the Engineering News record, the cost of constructing street improvements has increased 1.6 percent since the last adjustment of the Street Oversizing Capital Improvement expansion fee; and WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons, the City Council has determined that it is necessary in the interests of the protection of the public health, safety and welfare, that the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees, including the neighborhood Parkland Fee and the Street Oversizing Fee, be increased as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the fee schedule in Section 7.5-28(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, establishing the Community Parkland Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, is hereby amended to read as follows: 700 sq. ft. and under $ 1,041.00 701 to 1,200 sq. ft. 1,477.00 1,201 to 1,700 sq. ft. 1,735.00 1,701 to 2,200 sq. ft. 1,996.00 2,201 sq. ft. and over 2,428.00 Section 2. That the fee schedule in Section 7.5-29(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, establishing the Police Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, is hereby amended to read as follows: 700 sq. ft. and under $ 75.00 701 to 1,200 sq. ft. 109.00 1,201 to 1,700 sq. ft. 129.00 1,701 to 2,200 sq. ft. 148.00 2,201 sq. ft. and over 180.00 Commercial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 160.00 -2- Industrial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 44.00 Section 3. That the fee schedule in Section 7.5-30(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, establishing the Fire Protection Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, is hereby amended to read as follows: 700 sq. ft. and under $ 112.00 701 to 1,200 sq. ft. 160.00 1,201 to 1,700 sq. ft. 186.00 1,701 to 2,200 sq. ft. 215.00 2,201 sq. ft. and over 262.00 Commercial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 229.00 Industrial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 63.00 Section 4. That the fee schedule in Section 7.5-31(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, establishing the General Government Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, is hereby amended to read as follows: 700 sq. ft. and under $ 142.00 701 to 1,200 sq. ft. 201.00 1,201 to 1,700 sq. ft. 235.00 1,701 to 2,200 sq. ft. 272.00 2,201 sq. ft. and over 330.00 Commercial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 257.00 Industrial buildings (per 1,000 square feet) 71.00 Section 5. That Section 7.5-71(b) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, regarding the Neighborhood Parkland Fee is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 7.51-71. Collection of neighborhood parkland fee. (b) The amount of the fee established in this Section shall be determined for each dwelling unit as follows: 700 sq. ft. and under $ 937.00 701 to 1,200 sq. ft. 1,325.00 -3- 1,201 to 1,700 sq. ft. 1,559.00 1,701 to 2,200 sq. ft. 1,791.00 2,201 sq. ft. and over 2,181.00 Section 6. That Section 7.5-32 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, regarding the Street Oversizing Capital Improvement Fee is hereby amended to read as follows: STREET OVERSIZING CAPITAL EXPANSION FEE SCHEDULE Average Weekday Transportation Vehicle Trips Impact Fee Rate Residential (per housing unit) SF Detached 9.57 3,112 per D.U. MF and Other Housing 6.59 2,143 per D.U. Hotel/Motel 9.02 2,931 per room Apartment 6.65 2,162 per D.U. Retirement Community 2.81 914 per D.U. Assisted Living 4.52 1,470 per D.U. Congregate Care Facility 2.02 657 per D.U. Residential Condominium 5.81 1,889 per D.U. Duplex 7.18 2,335 per D.U. Townhome 5.86 1,905 per D.U. Mobile Home 4.99 1,623 per D.U. Non Residential (per 1,000 sq. ft.) Community/Shopping Center 1000K GLA 32.09 6.08 /sq. ft. 500K GLA 38.65 7.32 /sq. ft. 200K GLA 54.50 10.32 /sq. ft. 50K GLA 91.65 11.93 /sq. ft. Movie theater 78.06 14.78 /sq. ft. Fitness/racquet club 14.03 2.86 /sq. ft. Day care 79.26 6.30 /sq. ft. Government office 68.93 14.04 /sq. ft. Building materials/lumber 45.16 8.55 /sq. ft. Specialty retail 44.32 8.39 /sq. ft. Discount superstore 53.15 10.06 /sq. ft. Nursery (garden center) 36.08 7.35 /sq. ft. Sit-down restaurant 127.15 16.55 /sq. ft. Fast food with drive-up 496.12 39.46 /sq. ft. Car sales 33.34 6.79 /sq. ft. Service station 168.56/pump 13,407.17/pump Wholesale tire store 20.36 4.15 /sq. ft. Self-service car wash 5.79/stall 460.53 /stall -4- Supermarket 102.24 13.31/sq. ft. Convenience market with gas 542.60 43.16/sq. ft. Pharmacy/drugstore 88.16 7.01/sq. ft. Furniture store 5.06 1.61/sq. ft. Bank 80.87 5.98/sq. ft. Drive-in bank 148.15 11.78/sq. ft. Insurance building 11.45 2.33/sq. ft. Manufacturing 3.82 1.22/sq. ft. Warehousing 3.56 1.13/sq. ft. Light industrial 6.97 2.22/sq. ft. Mini-warehouse 2.50 0.80/sq. ft. Business park 12.76 4.06/sq. ft. General Office 200K GLA 11.54 3.67/sq. ft. 50K GLA 16.31 5.19/sq. ft. 10K GLA 24.39 7.76/sq. ft. Recreational 3.64/ac 1,158.09/acre City park 3.66/ac 1,164.46/acre Golf course 5.04/ac 1,603.52/acre Elementary school 1.29/student 410.42/student Private school (K-8) 2.48/student 789.03/student Church/synagogue 9.11 2.90/sq. ft. Library 56.24 4.47/sq. ft. Hospital 16.50 5.25/sq. ft. Nursing home 2.37/bed 754.03/bed Medical clinic 31.45 10.01/sq. ft. *Notes: 1. Rate calculation for each item based on the product of Number of Weekday Trips, Trip Adjustment Factor, and Cost Per Unit of Trip. 2. Italicized building types indicate that high pass-by trip adjustment factor is used when calculating SOS rate. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -5- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -6- DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Mike Gebo AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 10 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2012, Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code Pertaining to Contractor Licenses. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Community Development and Neighborhood Services is responsible for the enforcement of the contractor licensing requirements found in Chapter 15 of the City Code. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the current Code by: • clarifying minimum experience and qualification requirements at the application stage • creating license categories that better align with the adopted residential and commercial building codes • streamlining the application and project verification process • establishing registration requirements for the currently non-licensed category of workers • increasing minimum liability amounts to recognized industry levels. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Mike Gebo AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 16 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 2012, Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code Pertaining to Contractor Licenses. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Community Development and Neighborhood Services is responsible for the enforcement of the contractor licensing requirements found in Chapter 15 of the City Code. The changes proposed will update the current Code by: • clarifying minimum experience and qualification requirements at the application stage • creating license categories that better align with the adopted residential and commercial building codes • streamlining the application and project verification process • establishing registration requirements for the currently non-licensed category of workers • increasing minimum liability amounts to recognized industry levels. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 1981, the City of Fort Collins has mandated that contractors are licensed before performing work which requires a building permit. The purpose of this requirement is to establish minimum qualifications, set liability insurance limits, and develop conduct standards for persons engaged in construction, alteration, or repair of buildings, including persons performing specialized trades. The requirement has been amended four times to improve the City’s enforcement abilities and to address the needs of a changing construction industry. Over the past few years the construction industry continued to evolve to where individual contractors have become more specialized in the services they provide their customers. Some contractors only provide repair and restoration services on residential properties while other contractors repair and restore only commercial properties. The City’s current licensing ordinance does not have license categories that easily fit the specialized work being performed. To address this shift, several sub-categories of licenses were developed administratively and are in need of incorporation into the City Code. Additionally, the International Code Consultants (ICC), the code writing body that publishes the adopted building codes, has developed national contractor license exams based around the International Codes. Staff wished to evaluate the ICC exams and move away from being a testing agency. As a result of these changes, staff recognized the need to re-evaluate the Code on several levels. A committee of licensed general contractors, familiar with all aspects of construction was convened for the purpose of reviewing the City’s licensing ordinance and make recommendations for amendments. See Attachment 1 for the list of committee members involved in the review. Purposes for the Review 1. Identify which current licenses do not easily fit within the specialized work being offered, and develop appropriate new classes of licenses. 2. Align all classes of license with the ICC’s exams using the residential and/or commercial building codes. 3. Streamline the application, review, and renewal processes. 4. Develop registration requirements for the specialty trades subcontractors which are currently exempt from licensing. 5. Review the responsibilities of property owner/builders who certify that they will be performing the work and establish enforcement criteria for violations. Key Changes Proposed (Attachment 2) 1. During the next building code review process (currently underway) the review committee will discuss “deconstruction” of buildings, possibly in lieu of demolition. Staff proposes to provide a definition of deconstruction in the contractor license ordinance in order to clarify that licensed contractors only can COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 16 construct and deconstruct buildings. Deconstruction is really construction in reverse and requires a level of expertise and experience that the license requirement will assure. 2. Staff wanted to re-examine the “exempt specialized trade subcontractor” license classification during this review. For certain types of specialized work, such as roofing or framing, an individual can be classified as an exempt specialized trade subcontractor and would not need to be licensed, provided his work is under direct supervision of a licensed specialized trade contractor. The changes proposed will establish a registration program for this classification of workers and clarify that one exempt specialized trade subcontractor cannot sub-contract to another exempt specialized trade subcontractor. The changes will improve the City’s ability to provide better oversight of this construction group. 3. Owners of commercial buildings can perform limited work on their buildings without a contractor’s license. The proposed changes clarify the type of work that an owner cannot do without a license. Additionally, owners can perform all work on their own primary residence; the proposed changes would specify that owners who hire unlicensed contractors are in violation of the ordinance and subject to penalties of a misdemeanor. 4. Holders of currently active contractor licenses are responsible for keeping informed and knowledgeable on any new adopted codes and local amendments. Staff proposes to eliminate the requirement that contractors must register and attend a City sponsored code amendment training in order to renew a license after the adoption of a new code. The City will continue to provide and film a half-day seminar on new local amendments. Contractors will be allowed to attend the live presentation or view the taping on the City’s website. 5. Applications for contractor licenses require documentation supporting three projects under the direct supervision of the applicant, signed by an individual directly involved in the project. The changes proposed will stipulate that one individual cannot sign all three references. 6. Staff proposes to codify license categories with the DR suffix indicating an individual’s specialty of repairing damaged buildings and structures rather than constructing new buildings. These new categories were added administratively over the past few years and staff proposes to include these categories in the ordinance. 7. Electrical and plumbing contractors are licensed at the state level and are currently addressed in different sections of the City Code. Staff proposes to move these two trades under this section of the code in order to clarify that these trades are subject to the same responsibilities and violations of other contractor license categories. 8. In cases of contractor violations, the building official may bring the contractor before a hearing by the Building Review Board for the purpose of reviewing the contractor’s license. The building official may temporarily revoke the contractor’s license fifteen days prior to the hearing. Staff proposes to increase the revocation time to 45 days prior to the hearing. 9. Owners may perform any work on their own primary residence without needing a contractor’s license. Owners will sign an affidavit that they are acting as their own contractor and agree to hire only licensed tradesmen. The proposed changes clarify that an owner who signs the affidavit and then hires unlicensed contractors is subject the same penalties as contractors, which is considered a misdemeanor with fines of up to $1,000/day/violation. 10. Staff proposes to increase the general liability minimum from $300,000/$600,000 to the industry standard minimum of $1,000,000/$2,000,000. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The proposed changes streamline and clarify the application process and align contractor testing with the National ICC exams. The application and testing review performed by staff remains unchanged. Staff’s involvement with licensing renewal after a code adoption will be reduced to administering only the one live presentation of the new adopted codes and amendments. The registration fees of the “exempt specialty trade subcontractors” are proposed to be $200, valid for two years per company. These fees are the same as currently charged other license categories and are anticipated to cover the cost of administering the registration program. No other impacts are expected. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -3- ITEM 16 The proposal to streamline the application process by reducing the number of references from five to three may result in a slight benefit to the applicant in terms of time needed to document his work history. The proposal is not anticipated to have any impact on development or construction. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposal to define “deconstruction”, and the resulting requirement that licensed contractors perform deconstruction, reaffirms the City’s goal of promoting sustainability in the built environment. Deconstruction verses demolition will be discussed further with the Code Review Committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Affordable Housing Board The City’s liaison to the Affordable Housing Board reviewed and discussed the proposed changes with the Board’s chair and vice-chair. Due to the board’s schedule, there was no need for a formal presentation of the changes as it was agreed that the changes were administrative in nature and had no impact on affordable housing. Building Review Board On August 30, 2012, staff presented the proposed changes to the Board. No concerns were raised during discussion or questions. The Board agreed that the changes were administrative in nature and would have no impact on the construction industry. The Board voted unanimously to support the proposed changes. Fort Collins Housing Authority On September 5, 2012, staff presented the proposed changes to the Housing Authority. No concerns were raised during discussion or questions. The Authority agreed that the changes were administrative in nature and would have no impact on the construction industry. The Authority voted unanimously to support the proposed changes. PUBLIC OUTREACH Home Builders Association (HBA) Northern Colorado On August 14, 2012, staff presented the proposed changes to the HBA. No concerns were raised during discussion or questions. The HBA agreed that the changes were administrative in nature and would have no impact on the construction industry. However, the HBA requested to review the Draft Ordinance Legal Review Pending and received copies on August 16th. No negative feedback has been received from the HBA. Board of Realtors In early August, the Board of Realtors was contacted and asked if it wished to hear a presentation regarding proposed changes to the ordinance. The Board reviewed the significant changes outlined in Attachment 2 and determined that the changes were administrative in nature and would not have any impact on the construction industry. Due to the Board’s schedule, it declined a staff presentation but supported the proposed changes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Contractor License Review Committee members list 2 Key changes proposed 3: Building Review Board minutes from August 30, 2012 ORDINANCE NO. 122, 2012, OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS PERTAINING TO CONTRACTOR LICENSES WHEREAS, since 1981, the City has required that contractors be licensed before performing work for which a building permit must be issued, the purpose of which requirement is to establish minimum qualifications, set liability insurance limits and develop standards of conduct for persons engaged in construction, alteration or repair of buildings, including persons performing specialized trades; and WHEREAS, in recent years the construction industry has evolved such that contractors have become more specialized in the services they provide, and the City's current licensing ordinance does not have license categories that easily fit the specialized work being performed; and WHEREAS, in order to address this evolution, several subcategories of licenses were developed administratively and should be incorporated into the City Code; and WHEREAS, the International Code Consultants has developed national contractor license examinations based on the International Codes which the City desires to utilize for license examination purposes; and WHEREAS, among other things, the purpose of this Ordinance is to help clarify the minimum experience and qualification requirements of an applicant, create license categories that better align with the adopted residential and commercial building codes, streamline the application and project verification process, establish registration requirements for the currently non-licensed category of workers and increase minimum liability amounts to recognized industry levels; and WHEREAS, in pursuance of these proposed changes, City staff organized a committee of licensed general contractors to act as a "Code Review Committee"; and WHEREAS, City staff conducted significant public outreach, particularly with the Homebuilders Association of Northern Colorado and the Board of Realtors without receiving negative feedback from either agency; and WHEREAS, the Code Review Committee has unanimously supported the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Board, Building Review Board and Fort Collins Housing Authority have all supported the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed changes to Chapter 15, Article V regarding contractor licenses are in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 15-153 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition "Deconstruction" which reads in its entirety as follows: Deconstruction shall mean the systematic total removal of building components for the purpose of recycling or re-use. Section 2. That the definition "Exempt specialized trade subcontractor" contained in Section 15-153 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Exempt specialized trade subcontractor shall mean any personwho is registered with the City as an Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractor, which subcontractor is not an employee as defined in this Section, and which subcontractor is paid or otherwise compensated to perform construction or a trade for which a specialized trade contractor license as specified in this Article is required, except that any such subcontractor may perform such work without obtaining a license when such work is exclusively performed pursuant to a direct subcontract with a licensed specialized trade contractor. No subcontractor shall be exempt from the licensing requirements of this Article as an exempt specialized trade subcontractor when such subcontractor works pursuant to a direct subcontract with any of the Classes A, B, C-1, C-2, D-1, D-2 or E general contractors to perform construction regulated under this Article. Section 3. That Section 15-154 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-154. License and registration required. (a) Except as otherwise permitted in this Article, no person may perform construction work or trade as a contractor, including deconstruction work, named in this Article within the City without first obtaining a license and designating an approved supervisor, or register as specified in this Article. No building permits shall be issued to any contractor who has not obtained a license, does not have valid insurance as set forth herein, is delinquent in the payment of the biennial license fee or whose license is expired or has been suspended or revoked. (b) For any construction requiring a licensed contractor, permits shall be issued only to the property owner or to a licensed contractor or to the contractor's authorized representative. Should a contractor be released from or abandon such construction project, said contractor shall immediately notify the Building Official, in writing, of such action. No further work shall be done on such project until the Building Official is notified in writing of such intended resumption of work by a licensed contractor. -2- (c) No person shall engage in the business of contracting for the installation of electrical work in the City without registering as an electrical contractor with the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. In order to register as required herein, the person must perform the following: (1) Be licensed as a master electrician by the State Electrical Board or have an employee so licensed. The registration required herein shall be valid only as long as the registrant is licensed or employs a person so licensed; (2) Provide worker’s compensation and general liability insurance as specified in Section 15-163; (3) Provide supervision and maintain licenses as required by the State Electrical Board for all apprentice and journeyman electricians. (d) No person shall engage in the plumbing trade or business in the City without registering as a plumber with the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services, and no person shall engage in the business of a plumbing contractor in the City without registering as a plumbing contractor with the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. For the purpose of this Section, plumbing contractor means any person who undertakes or offers to undertake for another the planning, laying out, supervising and installing or the making of additions, alterations and repairs to potable water supply and distribution pipes and piping, plumbing fixtures, drainage and vent pipes and building drains, including their respective joints and connections, devices, receptacles and appurtenances. A registered professional engineer who plans or designs plumbing installations shall not be classified as a plumbing contractor. In order to register as a plumbing contractor, the person desiring to engage in such business must do the following: (1) Be licensed as a master plumber by the State Examining Board of Plumbers or have an employee so licensed and registered. The registration as a plumbing contractor shall be valid only so long as the person registered is so licensed and registered or employs a person so licensed and registered; (2) Provide worker’s compensation and general liability insurance as specified in Section 15-163; (3) Pay a registration fee of two hundred dollars ($200) to the City, valid for a period of two years from the date of payment; -3- (4) Provide supervision and maintain licenses as required by the State Examining Board of Plumbers for all apprentice and journeyman plumbers. (e) No person shall engage in the business of an Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractor in the City without registering as an Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractor with the Department of Community Development and Neighborhood Services. In order to register as an Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractor, the person(s) desiring to engage in such business must do the following: (1) Register as an individual or as a company listing all employees to be recognized by the registration. (2) List all Specialized Trade Contractors that are under contract with the Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractor. (3) Pay a registration fee of two hundred ($200.) to the City, valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of payment. (4) Provide worker’s compensation and general liability insurance as specified in Section 15-163. Section 4. That Section 15-155 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-155. Exemptions. The parties and conditions described herein shall be exempt from the general requirements specified in this Article: (1) A building owner and any unpaid volunteers or paid workers employed by said owner who perform only minor alterations and repairs to such building, provided that all such work is under the continuous personal supervision of said owner, and further provided that no building owner, or unpaid volunteer or paid worker employed by said owner, may engage in the following types of work without obtaining the appropriate contractor license: a. Alterations to the primary or secondary structural frame work (except for the repair and replacement of existing windows and doors, provided that such repair or replacement does not create larger openings or greater spans for headers); b. Alterations to fire-resistive assemblies as defined in the building code; -4- c. Alterations to or the installation of electrical, plumbing or mechanical systems, except for fixture replacement and emergency repairs; d. Replacement of more than a total of one (1) square (100 square feet) of roofing; or e. Nonstructural construction, alterations or repairs to a building performed by the building owner(s) or by his or her unpaid volunteers or paid workers,; when the total construction value of all work (including the related work done on the project by licensed specialized trade contractors), exceeds two thousand dollars ($2,000.). (2) An owner of a detached single-family dwelling, and his or her unpaid volunteers working under the continuous personal supervision of the owner, may perform construction work on such dwelling and any associated accessory buildings, provided that the dwelling is the owner’s personal primary residence, and further provided that the owner commences construction of no more than one (1) such new dwelling within any twenty-four-month period. In the event such dwelling is destroyed or damaged, reconstruction thereof shall be exempt from the foregoing time period. Prior to performing any such construction, demolition, or deconstruction the owner must demonstrate sufficient knowledge and proficiency required to perform said construction as determined by the Building Official. (3) An employee of a contractor who is not otherwise regulated under this Article. (4) A partner, owner, or other company official of a licensed contractor who performs on-site construction under the direction of a qualified supervisor. (5) An exempt specialized trade subcontractor registered with the City and under a direct contract with a licensed specialized trade contractor as defined in this Article. (6) Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation performing the following types of construction or installations: wallboard; nonstructural masonry; nonstructural wood frame systems; finish and trim carpentry; nonstructural concrete floors, sidewalks, stairs, landings, and drives; nonstructural steel systems; siding; ceramic and synthetic tile; counter surfaces and cabinets; flooring and carpet; wall and ceiling finishes; insulation; glazing; windows and doors and associated hardware; rain gutters; fences; above ground manufactured swimming pools and spas; entertainment, data, and communication systems within any building including related wiring supplying not more than fifty (50) volts and which does not require a state electrical license; excavation and grading; landscaping; irrigation systems excluding back-flow prevention devices; sewer lines downstream of any building -5- drain as defined in the Colorado Plumbing Code; elevators and escalators; and radon piping systems. (7) Any person who is, without pay or compensation of any kind, performing construction and who is supervised directly by a licensed contractor and supervisor as specified in this Article. Section 5. That Section 15-157 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-157. Supervisor certificate; fees; examinations; renewals. (a) No contractor as defined in this Article shall perform construction, demolition or deconstruction that requires a permit without designating a supervisor to supervise such construction, demolition or deconstruction pursuant to this Article. (b) Prior to issuance of a building permit to the holder of any contractor license specified in this Article, the holder of said license shall possess a supervisor certificate or shall have employed at least one (1) supervisor who has obtained a certificate for the specific class or specialized trade specified in this Article required to perform the scope of construction described on said permit. A supervisor certificate is valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of issuance and the biennial fee for such certificate is twenty-five dollars ($25.). Supervisors shall observe reasonable standards of attendance on construction sites as necessary to perform adequate supervision of such construction as further specified in § 15-161 of this Article. (c) Prior to obtaining a supervisor certificate, except as provided otherwise in this Article, an applicant for such certificate shall have passed a written examination administered or approved by the City or the equivalent of such examination as determined by the Building Official. Every applicant who undergoes a written examination administered by the City shall pay a nonrefundable examination fee of seventy-five dollars ($75.) prior to such examination. Any applicant who fails to achieve a minimum score of seventy-five (75) percent shall be entitled to another examination covering the same license class or specialized trade, provided that the applicant shall not be permitted more than two (2) such examinations within any six- month period unless otherwise approved by the Board. Alternatively, an applicant may be granted a third such examination within any six-month period upon the applicant demonstrating to the satisfaction of the Building Official adequate preparation for the examination by successfully completing a class or course work covering the building code or other code as applicable, or the equivalent thereof as approved by the Building Official. The applicant shall pay a nonrefundable re- examination fee of fifty dollars ($50.) for each subsequent examination covering the same license class or specialized trade. Examinations shall be given at a time and place designated by the Building Official. The written examination for a supervisor -6- certificate may be waived by the Building Official provided that the applicant can prove that he or she has passed a satisfactory written examination equivalent in scope to that administered by the City. (d) A supervisor certificate may be renewed provided that the biennial fee is paid and renewal occurs within sixty (60) days following the anniversary date such certificate was issued, and further provided that the adopted building code or other applicable code over which an examination was administered remains in effect at the time of renewal. When such adopted code over which the renewing certificate holder passed an examination has been substantially revised prior to the time of such renewal, the certificate holder must attest and certify, on a form provided by the City, that he has received and reviewed a copy of the City's latest amendments, or has attended a City-provided training class. The holder of an expired certificate may be reissued such certificate by submitting a new application and paying all applicable fees as set forth in § 15-158. Such applicant shall not be required to pass an examination as prescribed in Subsection (c) above, provided that the adopted building code or other applicable code over which such applicant passed an examination remains in effect at the time the renewed certificate is obtained. (e) The Building Official may grant a temporary supervisor certificate valid for thirty (30) days without an examination based upon individual extraordinary circumstances and upon finding that any petitioner for such certificate is otherwise qualified. Any person seeking such temporary certificate must submit a written request describing in detail the justification for such certificate and a completed application for a supervisor certificate, including all necessary fees as provided in § 15-158. Section 6. That Section 15-158 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-158. Applications; review; issuance. (a) Prior to being issued any license or certificate specified in this Article, all applicants for such license or certificate shall complete and submit to the Building Official an application containing the following information: (1) The individual applicant's name, the contractor's business name under which license the applicant is associated or will be working, a current mailing address and telephone number, email address and one (1) form of photographic identification of the applicant; (2) Documents verifying that the applicant has acted in the principal role of contractor or primary project supervisor on no less than three (3) separate completed building construction or specialized trade projects. A person other than the applicant must sign such documents, -7- and the same person can not be the signatory on all three (3) documents. Said signatory shall be a project owner, contractor, architect, or professional engineer directly involved in the construction of said project, and said person shall have worked directly with the applicant. Additionally, said documents shall contain the following information where applicable to the license or contractor certificate sought: a. The total floor area and number of stories (as defined in the building code) of each building in the project; b. The building construction type as defined in the building code; c. The building occupancy classification as defined in the building code; d. The date the project was completed; e. The address, contractor of record, and permit number (when applicable) for the project; f. A description of the project which the applicant directly supervised or for which the applicant was the contractor of record, whichever is applicable, in sufficient detail to fully describe the extent of the construction or alteration or specialized trade work. Such description must describe all relevant work, such as that involving the foundation, the exterior structural elements, the interior bearing walls, the nonbearing walls and elements, the electrical systems, the plumbing systems, the mechanical systems, roofing, and any other specialized trade work that may be applicable to the license or certificate sought; g. A complete description of the applicant's position and responsibilities on the project; and h. The signatory's role in the project. (3) The applicant's disclosure of any disciplinary action (whether by the City or any other jurisdiction) taken against the applicant or against any licenses currently or previously held by the applicant; and (4) A signed statement by the applicant acknowledging the obligations associated with such license or certificate. (b) All such applications shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable processing fee of seventy-five dollars ($75.) for each such application. (c) Subject to the qualification requirements of § 15-159 and subject to any applicable variances which may have been granted by the Board pursuant to § 15-156 and provided further that the applicant has not committed any acts described in § 15- -8- 162 of this Article without the Board having first conducted a hearing and having made a determination regarding the applicant's fitness to be granted a license or supervisor certificate, the Building Official shall issue to the applicant the license or supervisor certificate applied for upon receipt of all of the following: (1) Evidence of a passing score on the applicable written examination or equivalent as specified in this Article; (2) Payment of the applicable fee; (3) Written proof of general liability and workers' compensation insurance as required in this Article; and (4) All documents required to be provided in (a) above. Section 8. That Section 15-159 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-159. Minimum experience qualifications. (a) Minimum experience requirements for Classes A, A-DR, B, B-DR, C-1, C-1- DR, C-2, C-2-DR, D-1, D-2, D-DR, E, ER, and MM general contractor licenses, specialized trade contractor licenses, and associated supervisor certificates as described in § 15-160 are as hereafter provided in this Section. In order to qualify for such minimum experience, all construction and specialized trade installation projects are subject to the Building Official's review and approval for sufficient variety and complexity. All such projects shall have been constructed or installed primarily by the applicant or under the applicant's direct control. The particular license type and respective required minimum documented experience are described as follows: (1) To qualify for a Class A license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire buildings each of which must have exceeded five (5) stories in height. (2) To qualify for a Class A-DR license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have acted principally in the role of supervisor for the significant structural repair construction on three (3) buildings, each of which must have exceeded five (5) stories in height. (3) To qualify for a Class B license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire buildings each of which must have exceeded three (3) stories in height. -9- (4) To qualify for a Class B-DR license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have acted principally in the role of supervisor for the significant structural repair construction on three (3) buildings, each of which must have exceeded three (3) stories in height. (5) To qualify for a Class C-1 license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire buildings of type III, IV, or V construction with one (1) or more buildings being at least three (3) stories in height. (6) To qualify for a Class C-1-DR license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have acted principally in the role of supervisor for the significant structural repair construction on three (3) buildings of Type III, IV, or V construction, with one (1) or more buildings being at least three (3) stories in height. (7) To qualify for a Class C-2 license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire buildingsclassified as Type V construction and of Group R occupancy. At least one (1) such building described herein shall not be less than three (3) stories in height as defined in the building code. (8) To qualify for a Class C-2-DR license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have acted principally in the role of supervisor for the significant structural repair construction on three (3) buildings of Type V construction, with one (1) building being at least three (3) stories in height. (9) To qualify for a Class D-1 license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire buildings classified as R-3 Occupancies (single-family or townhomes). (10) To qualify for a Class D-2 license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) completed projectsclassified as additions or alterations to R-3 Occupancies (single-family or townhomes) each project being at least one thousand (1,000) square feet. (11) To qualify for a Class D-DR license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have acted principally in the role of supervisor for the significant structural repair construction on three (3) buildings of Type V Construction classified as R-3 Occupancy (single-family or townhome). -10- (12) To qualify for a Class E (commercial) license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the non-structural alteration of three (3) entire projects, each of which shall be non-residential in use. Each such project shall exceed twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.) in total construction value and at least one (1) such project shall exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.) in total construction value. (13) To qualify for a Class ER (residential) license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the non-structural alteration of three (3) entire residential projects. Each such project must have exceeded fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.) in total construction value and at least one (1) such project must have exceeded thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.) in total construction value. (14) To qualify for a Class MM license or supervisor certificate, the applicant must have constructed or acted principally in the role of supervisor for the construction of three (3) entire projects, such as storage sheds, playhouses, greenhouses, gazebos; unenclosed structures such as carports and patio covers, open porches and decks, each of which must have been associated with a detached single-family dwelling. (15) To qualify for any of the specialized trade contractor licenses or certificates regulated under this Article, the applicant must submit to the Building Official written verification describing experience in such specialized trade as prescribed hereunder: a. An applicant must submit written verification to the Building Official describing not less than three (3) completed projects which demonstrate that the applicant possesses at least two (2) years of supervisor experience in the specialized trade applicable to the particular license or contractor supervisor certificate sough. Section 9. That Section 15-160 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-160. License classifications; fees; renewals. (a) The particular contractor license required and corresponding maximum scope of construction authorized under each license is described hereunder. All licenses are valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of issuance and the fee for each license is two hundred dollars ($200.). A license may be renewed provided said biennial fee is paid within sixty (60) days following the anniversary date such license was issued. When the license fee is not paid within such sixty-day period, the license shall expire and is not eligible for renewal. The holder of an expired license may be -11- reissued such license by submitting a new application and paying all applicable fees as set forth in § 15-158. (b) Plumbers and Exempt Specialized Trade Subcontractors shall pay registration fees in accordance with §15-154. (c) The Class A, A-DR, B, B-DR, C-1, C-1-DR, C-2, C-2-DR, D-1, D-2, D-DR, E, ER, and MM general contractor licenses described in this Section and their employees may perform Specialized Trade Contractor work such as roofing, demolition or deconstruction, framing, and awnings on projects for which permits have been issued to the general contractor. The listed licenses do not authorize the holders thereof or their employees to perform Specialized Trade Contractor work described to the following specialized construction trades: electric, plumbing, HVAC, refrigeration, solar energy, alarms, fire-sprinkler systems, special fire extinguishing, gas piping, WTS, and flammable fuel facilities. (1) A Class A general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct or demolish, or deconstruct any building or structure in the City that is regulated under the building code, including all work authorized by license types below this level. (2) A Class A-DR Structural Damage Repair/Restoration license holder shall be authorized to make repairs or restoration to structural damage to any building or structure in the City regulated under the building code, including all work authorized by damage repair and restoration license types below this level. (3) A Class B general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct or demolish, or deconstruct any building or structure in the City regulated under the building code up to and including five (5) stories in height and including all work authorized by license types below this level. (4) Class B-DR Structural Damage Repair/Restoration license holder shall be authorized to make repairs or restoration to structural damage to any building in the City regulated under the building code, up to and including five (5) stories in height, and including all work authorized by damage repair and restoration license types below this level. (5) A Class C-1 general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct or demolish, or deconstruct any building or structure in the City that is regulated under the building code and which does not exceed three (3) stories in height of construction types III, IV, and V, and including all work authorized by license types below this level. -12- (6) A Class C-1DR Structural Damage Repair/Restoration license holder shall be authorized to make repairs or restoration to structural damage to any building or structure in the City regulated under the building code that does not exceed three (3) stories in height and limited to construction types III, IV, and V, including all work authorized by damage repair and restoration license types below this level. (7) A Class C-2 general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct or demolish, or deconstruct any building or structure in the City classified by the building code as Type V construction and a Group R or a Group U, Division 1 occupancy that does not exceed three (3) stories in height, including all work authorized by license types below this level, and including other ancillary Type V buildings or structures that are associated with a particular multi-family housing project, such as management offices, community and recreation buildings, maintenance buildings and similar uses. (8) A Class C-2DR Structural Damage Repair/Restoration license holder shall be authorized to make repairs or restoration to: (1) structural damage to any building or structure in the City regulated under the building code classified as Type V construction and a Group R or a Group U, Division 1 occupancy which does not exceed three (3) stories in height; and (2) structural damage to other ancillary Type V buildings or structures that are associated with a particular multiple-unit housing project, including all work authorized by damage repair and restoration license types below this level. (9) A Class D-1 general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct, demolish, or deconstruct any building or structure in the City classified by the building code as a Group R, Division 3 occupancy housing not more than two (2) dwelling units, or a Group U, Division 1 occupancy or townhomes (aka single-family attached) as regulated by the International Residential Code, including all work authorized by residential license types below this level. (10) A Class D-2 general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct, demolish or deconstruct residential garages of Group U, Division 1 occupancies up to one thousand (1,000) square feet; construct, demolish or deconstruct additions to detached single family dwellings not exceeding one thousand (1,000) square feet in total floor area; perform any structural alterationsor repairs to any building or structure in the City classified by the building code as a Group R, Division 3 occupancy housing not more than two (2) dwelling units, or a Group U, Division 1 occupancy; and construct or repair exterior decks of any size associated with single-family and/or multi- family project, including all work authorized by residential license types below this level. -13- (11) A Class D-DR Structural Damage Repair/Restoration license holder shall be authorized to make repairs or restoration to structural damage to any building or structure in the City regulated under the building code as a Group R, Division 3 occupancy housing not more than two (2) dwelling units, or a Group U, Division 1 occupancy or townhomes (aka single-family attached) as regulated by the International Residential Code. (12) A Class E (commercial) general contractor license holder shall be authorized to perform any non-structural alteration work to any building or structure in the City, including all work authorized by license types below this level. (13) A Class ER (residential) general contractor license holder shall be authorized to perform any non-structural alteration work to any residential building or structure in the City regulated under the International Residential Code including single-family, duplex, and townhomes (aka attached single- family), including all work authorized by Class MM (Miscellaneous and Minor Structures). (14) A Class MM (Miscellaneous and Minor Structures) general contractor license holder shall be authorized to construct, demolish or deconstruct the following projects associated with detached single family dwellings: detached structures such as shelters, storage sheds, playhouses, greenhouses, and gazebos, unenclosed structures such as open carports, patio covers, open porches, and decks. All such projects shall be limited to one-story buildings or structures not exceeding three hundred (300) square feet in floor area. (d) A specialized trade contractor license and a specialized trade contractor supervisor certificate shall be required for any contractor performing any specialized trade listed herein. Prior to any specialized trade supervisor being issued a supervisor certificate, the applicant for such certificate shall successfully complete a written examination as provided in § 15-157, or the applicant shall provide proof of equivalent technical qualification as determined by the Building Official. Applicants for a specialized trade contractor license or a specialized trade contractor supervisor certificate shall submit an application and documents verifying that the applicant has acted in the principal role of contractor or primary project supervisor on no less than three (3) separate completed specialized trade projects as set forth under § 15-158 of this Article. Each specialized trade contractor license regulated under this Article is listed and described hereunder with respect to the scope of work authorized by each such license as follows: Alarm systems authorizes the installation, testing, maintenance, and servicing of fire alarms as specified in the applicable provisions of the National Fire Alarm Code, NFPA 72 and the National Electrical Code, NFPA 70; including related wiring supplying not more than fifty (50) volts that does not require a state electrical license. -14- Awnings authorizes the erection and attachment of awnings to buildings as regulated under the building code, including such awnings incorporating signage or graphics requiring a sign permit from the City. Demolition authorizes the razing of entire buildings and other structures regulated by the building code, excluding such work as deconstruction, partial or interior demolition work associated with alterations. Electricians authorizes the installation of electrical systems as regulated by the State of Colorado. Fire sprinkler system authorizes the installation of automatic fire suppression systems, including standpipes that use pressurized water as the primary extinguishing agent, and which are designed to protect entire buildings, rooms or areas and processes, other than combination potable water/residential fire sprinkler systems regulated under the International Residential code. Fireplace appliances authorizes the installation of nonportable listed manufactured fuel-burning fireplace appliances and associated chimneys or vents excluding equipment for industrial processes or for providing primary space heating, ventilation, cooling or water heating; and excluding any building modifications, alterations or additions. Flammable fuel facilities authorizes the installation, alteration or removal of tanks, piping and dispensing equipment for petroleum fuels or other fuels as regulated by the City fire code, including related electrical wiring supplying not more than fifty (50) volts. Gas piping authorizes the installation of piping and fittings for supplying fuel-gas, and the replacement of water heaters when such water heater replacement does not involve alteration of water supply piping or appliance venting. HVAC-C (commercial) authorizes the installation of environmental nonportable heating, ventilation, air conditioning systems including commercial boilers and the related piping, ducts, venting, appliances, controls and electrical wiring (supplying not more than fifty [50] volts), including all work authorized by HVAC-R and HVAC-RR. HVAC-R (residential) authorizes the installation of environmental non-portable heating, ventilation, air conditioning systems, including residential boilers and replacement of equipment, for single-family dwelling units including duplex, multi- family and townhomes (aka single-family attached) and the related piping, ducts, venting, appliances, controls and electrical wiring (supplying not more than fifty [50] volts). -15- HVAC-RR (repair and replacement) authorizes the replacement installation of environmental non-portable heating, ventilation, air conditioning equipment and the related piping, ducts, venting, appliances, controls and electrical wiring (supplying not more than fifty [50] volts) associated with the repair or replacement. Plumbers authorizes the installation of plumbing systems as regulated by the State of Colorado. Refrigeration authorizes the installation of nonportable evaporative, absorption and mechanically operated refrigeration equipment, including piping, vessels, controls and electrical wiring (supplying not more than fifty [50] volts). Roofing authorizes the application of nonstructural roof covering and materials as regulated by the building code, including the replacement or repair of sheathing on existing roofs of slopes two (2) inch in twelve (12) inch or steeper. Roofing Plus authorizes the application of nonstructural roof covering and materials as regulated by the building code, including the replacement or repair of sheathing on existing roofs of slopes less than two (2) inch in twelve (12) inch. Signs authorizes the installation and erection of permanent signs requiring a sign permit from the City, excluding electrical work regulated by the City electrical code requiring a state license. Solar energy hydronic authorizes the installation of solar heat collectors, storage tanks and related piping, and related electrical wiring supplying not more than fifty (50) volts. Solar energy PV authorizes the installation of photovoltaic collectors, and related electrical wiring supplying stand alone or utility grid systems. Wood frame construction (framing) authorizes the construction of Type IV and Type V structural framing systems as regulated under the building code, including the application of sheathing and siding. WTS authorizes the installation of outdoor wireless telecommunication systems, including related equipment, towers, antennas and the construction of unoccupied minor related buildings housing only equipment, and associated cables and electrical wiring supplying not more than fifty (50) volts that does not require a state electrical license. Section 10. That Section 15-161 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: -16- Sec. 15-161. Responsibilities of contractor; supervisor. (a) The contractor of record as authorized by a building permit shall be responsible for all work performed under said permit without substantial departure from the drawings and specifications filed and approved by the City as specified on the permit issued for said construction, unless changes are approved by the City, and shall observe the following standards: (1) The contractor of record shall obey any order or notice issued pursuant to adopted codes of the City. (2) The contractor of record shall observe generally accepted safety standards. (3) The contractor of record shall employ an approved on-site supervisor as specified in this Article. (4) The contractor of record shall maintain liability insurance and workers' compensation insurance as specified in this Article and provide proof of such insurance to the Building Official. (5) The contractor of record shall provide proof of employment for employees who are performing construction work that is regulated under this Article by providing to the Building Official a copy of the signed Internal Revenue Service "Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate (Form W- 4)" for each such employee. (6) The contractor of record shall identify all exempt specialized trade subcontractors under the contractor's supervision. (7) When the contractor of record is a specialized trade contractor that directly subcontracts work to an exempt specialized trade subcontractor, the specialized trade contractor shall employ a supervisor who shall be present full-time on the project site where such subcontracted work is being performed. (8) The contractor of record shall maintain a current mailing address, telephone number, and email address with the Building Official. (9) The contractor of record may proceed with work only after all required permits have been obtained and shall obtain required inspections and authorization to proceed with the work authorized under the permit. -17- (b) All supervisors shall be responsible for the supervision of construction in accordance with the requirements of this Article, and shall observe the following standards: (1) All supervisors shall be on-site on a regular basis, as approved by the Building Official, throughout the entire construction or installation process to supervise the construction or installation work under the responsibility of a licensed contractor without substantial departure from the drawings and specifications filed and approved by the City as specified on the permit issued for said construction, unless changes are approved by the City. When the contractor of record is a specialized trade contractor that directly subcontracts work to an exempt specialized trade subcontractor, a supervisor employed by such specialized trade contractor shall be present full-time on the project site where such subcontracted work is being performed. A specialized trade contractor shall directly contract with only one level of exempt specialized trade subcontractor. Exempt specialized trade subcontractors shall not contract with another exempt specialized trade subcontractor. (2) All supervisors shall obey any order or notice issued pursuant to adopted codes of the City. (3) All supervisors shall observe generally accepted safety standards. (4) All supervisors shall present the supervisor certificate, or proof thereof, during the supervision of a project for which said certificate is required when so requested by the Building Official. (5) All supervisors shall maintain a current mailing address, telephone number, and email address with the Building Official. Section 11. That Section 15-162 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-162. Disciplinary procedures; violations and penalties. (a) When the Building Official determines that a license holder or supervisor described in this Article has committed any of the acts outlined in Subsection (d) herein, or when a supervisor fails to provide adequate personal supervision on the work site, the Building Official may order a suspension of all privileges granted under such license or certificate pending a hearing by the Board. Such suspension shall not exceed a period of forty-five (45) days following the first commission of any such act and shall become effective immediately or when otherwise determined by the Building Official. Such forty-five (45) day suspension limitation shall not apply to any subsequent commission of any such act. Notification of said suspension shall be in writing and shall be promptly delivered to the certificate holder or an -18- authorized person listed on such license application by mail or email to the last known address or by personal delivery. The notification shall state in reasonable detail the essential facts and reasons for said action and shall advise the affected license holder or supervisor of the right to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the Board. A copy of any such suspension shall be placed in the public record of the affected license holder or supervisor. Failure of any such person to receive such notification of suspension shall not invalidate any suspension imposed hereunder. (b) The Building Official shall, upon the verified complaint in writing of any person alleging any of the acts outlined in Subsection (d), convene the Board for the purpose of determining the verity of such complaint and taking appropriate action thereon. Notification shall be served to the affected license or certificate holder as prescribed in Subsection (a) above. (c) In the absence of a personal appearance on behalf of the licensee or certificate holder, the Board may take action on the matter based on the record. Any member of the City staff or any other party in interest may appear at such meeting and present evidence to the Board. (d) The Board shall have the power to suspend or revoke (or take other disciplinary action on) any license or certificate when the Board determines that a holder thereof has committed any of the following: (1) Knowing or deliberate disregard of the building code or any other code adopted by the City related to a specific construction project under the responsibility of the supervisor or license holder; (2) Failure to comply with any provision of the Code related to a specific construction project under the responsibility of the supervisor certificate holder or license holder; (3) Failure to comply with any lawful order of the Building Official; (4) Misrepresentation of a material fact in obtaining a building permit, license or supervisor certificate; (5) The authorized holder of a license or supervisor certificate lending of or consenting to the use of such credential by persons other than the holder thereof; (6) Failure to obtain any required permit for the work performed or to be performed; -19- (7) Commitment of any act of negligence, incompetence or misconduct in the performance of the contractor's specific trade which results in posing a threat to public health and safety; (8) Performance of work for which a license or supervisor certificate is required without a valid, current license or supervisor certificate; (9) The act of employing compensated workers who are performing construction or who are working in a trade for which a license or certificate is otherwise required under this Article when such workers are neither employees nor exempt specialized trade subcontractors as defined under this Article; or (10) The act of requesting of repeated inspections by a license holder or supervisor when such inspections are related to construction or trade regulated under this Article and which reveal that the work performed or supervised by said license holder or certificate holder failed to comply with the building code or other applicable code; and such repeated noncompliance occurs in a manner or to an extent that demonstrates that the license holder or supervisor is either negligent, is not providing adequate supervision or is not qualified to perform or supervise the work. (e) When a license or supervisor certificate is revoked, the holder thereof shall not be granted another license or supervisor certificate under this Article without approval of the Board. In deciding whether to approve a new such license or supervisor certificate, the Board shall determine whether the applicant has demonstrated that any disciplinary actions that have been taken against any contractor license or supervisor certificate currently or previously held by the applicant (whether with the City or any other jurisdiction) have resulted in the rehabilitation of the applicant to good and disciplined character for lawful conduct as a licensed contractor or certified supervisor (as applicable). When the Board suspends a license or supervisor certificate, the Board shall state the period and conditions of the suspension. (f) In addition to the suspension or revocation of a license or supervisor certificate by the Board as provided herein, any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this Article or any lawful rule or regulation of the Board, or any lawful order of the Building Official, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the penalties set forth in § 1-15 of the Code. (g) Owners who obtain permits for work on their primary residence and hire un- licensed contractors for work which requires a licensed contractor or licensed specialty trade contractors shall be deemed to have violated the provisions of this Article and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in § 1-15 of the Code. -20- (h) Any person, firm, partnership, corporation, association, other organization or any combination thereof shall pay an investigation fee to the Building Official when such party performs or causes to be performed construction or a trade for which a contractor license as specified in this Article is required without first obtaining the required license. Such fee shall be equal and in addition to the license fee and shall be paid before the applicable license may be issued. Section 12. That Section 15-163 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-163. Safety and insurance requirements. All laws relating to safety of employees and the public shall be observed at all times by any contractor or exempt specialized trade subcontractor. Every such contractor or exempt specialized trade subcontractor shall maintain workers' compensation insurance as required by state law, and general liability insurance in the minimum amounts as follows: one million dollars ($1,000,000) per person, two million dollars ($2,000,000) per accident and two million dollars ($2,000,000) per accident involving public property. Section 13. That Section 15-164 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-164. Transition provisions. (a) Any holder of a valid contractor license or supervisor certificate prior to the effective date of this Article shall be eligible to maintain the same such license or certificate without additional application fees or examination provided that such license or certificate remains valid throughout the current annual term of such license or certificate. Thereafter, any such contractor license or supervisor certificate shall be subject to renewal provisions as prescribed in this Article. (b) Any person holding a valid specialized trade contractor license prior to the effective date of this Article shall be eligible for the applicable specialized trade supervisor certificate without additional application fees or further written examination, provided that such person is performing the duties of a supervisor and is verified as having passed a written examination or the equivalent as approved by the Building Official. Failure of the license holder by July 1, 2001, to obtain either such supervisor certificate or employ a person who holds such supervisor certificate authorizing the performance of such specialized trades in the City, shall be grounds for imposing the penalties as prescribed under this Article. -21- Section 14. That Section 15-171 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby deleted in its entirety as follows and Section 15-172 is hereby renubmered as Section 15-171: Section 15. That Section 15-305 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby deleted in its entirety as follows and Section 15-306 is hereby renumbered as Section 15-305: Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -22- DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Laurie Kadrich AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 11 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2012 Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Regarding the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the City Code relating to naming new arterial and collector streets so that City Council ,rather than the developer, would select the name of the new street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Laurie Kadrich AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 17 SUBJECT Items Relating to the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2012 Amending Section 24-91 of the City Code Regarding the Naming of Arterial and Collector Streets. B. Resolution 2012-100 Updating the List of Names for Arterial and Collector Streets. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance amends the City Code relating to naming new arterial and collector streets so that City Council ,rather than the developer, would select the name of the new street. The Resolution will update the current list of names for arterial and collector streets. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On October 8, 2012, the City Leadership Team was reviewing suitable names for public alleys that have been improved by the Downtown Development Authority. During that discussion several prominent individual names were suggested but not selected in anticipation of reserving those names for a future collector or arterial street. City Code currently allows Council to add those names to an official list for future consideration by a developer as roads are constructed. Council suggested changing the Ordinance to allow only Council to name the streets, rather than the developer. During this review two names were deemed worthy of consideration for a future arterial or collector street: A.E. Blount and Charles Lauterbach. Staff requests those names be added to the official street name list. In addition, staff recommends adding Ann Azari to the list, as it is customary to honor those who have provided a significant contribution and public service to our community. The rationale for these additions is: • Charles Lauterbach In 1882, Charles Lauterbach was the first to establish a cigar business within Fort Collins on the Vandewark Block of Jefferson Street. Lauterbach touted he obtained the best quality tobacco from the great tobacco mart in Baltimore. His cigars were well-regarded and one of the editors of the Fort Collins Courier even outlined six reasons why Fort Collins smokers should purchase Lauterbach cigars. Lauterbach’s cigar factory would eventually move to 210 Linden Street, where the building still remains. • Ainsworth E. Blount (A.E. Blount) Ainsworth E. Blount was the first farm manager and the first professor of practical agriculture at the new Agricultural College of Colorado. His work at the College lasted fourteen years, beginning in 1879. Blount was famous for his agricultural research and experiments, focusing primarily on small grains. His experiments helped farmers statewide manage their grain practice in Colorado’s unique and arid climate and his work established his reputation as a prominent and scientific agricultural researcher. Years later, Blount’s wife took charge of floral work at the College and helped to beautify the campus grounds. • Ann Azari Ms. Azari was a Councilmember from 1989 to 1993 and Mayor from 1993 to April 1999. She and her husband and five children moved to Fort Collins in 1963. Her community involvement including serving on the boards COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 17 of the Colorado Municipal League, the Downtown Development Authority, the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters of Larimer County and the Girl Scouts Council. History of Street Naming since 2000 The last new arterial was Mountain Vista Drive, named when Anheuser-Busch located the brewery here in the mid- 1980s. Four collector streets have been named in the past five years and eight were named between 2000 – 2007, or about an average of one per year. This information was based on the Master Street Plan collector designation. In the spring 2000, Council updated the official list to delete nine names that had been previously selected and added seven new names. Of these seven, five were selected to re-name existing County roads in the southeast quadrant of the city. The Board of County Commissioners then approved an action to continue these newly selected names to the limits of the Growth Management Area. The affected roads were: Changed From: To: County Road 7 Strauss Cabin Road County Road 9 Ziegler Road County Road 11 Timberline Road County Road 32 Carpenter Road County Road 36 Kechter Road In the fall 2003, Council again updated the list add 16 new names. Of these 16, six were selected to re-name existing County roads in the northeast quadrant of the City. Five were arterial streets and one was a state highway. In addition, four names were selected to name new collector streets. Again, the Board of County Commissioners approved the continuation of the newly selected names for the arterials and state highway to logical termination points both inside and outside the Growth Management Area. The affected arterial/minor arterial roads were: Changed From: To: County Road 50 Mountain Vista Drive County Road 52 Richards Lake Road County Road 54 Douglas Road County Road 11 Turnberry Road County Road 9 Giddings Road State Highway One Terry Lake Road In September 2005, four new names were added for selection and 18 names were deleted as duplicates. From this updated list, three collector streets were renamed as: Changed From: To: Coffey Parkway William Neal Parkway Katahdin Drive Charles Brockman Drive Sagebrush Drive Joseph Allen Drive In February 2006, 41 new names were added based on the recommendation from a citizen advisory committee and five names were deleted. In addition, Council took the following specific action to rename a collector street in the southeast quadrant: Changed From: To: Cambridge Avenue Lady Moon Drive On October 16, 2007, Council voted to add Sergeant Nicholas Walsh to the list but did not do so by Resolution. In January 2009, Council deleted three previously selected names (Lady Moon, Council Tree and Montezuma Fuller) and added four new names (Maurice Albertson, Louis Brown Jr., Dr. Karl Carson, and Sergeant Nicholas Walsh). COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -3- ITEM 17 In October 2011, Council adopted a Resolution naming an access drive into Spring Canyon Park in honor of Sergeant Nicholas Walsh. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading and the Resolution. ORDINANCE NO. 123, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 24-91 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS REGARDING THE NAMING OF ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS WHEREAS, Section 24-91 of the City Code presently provides for the City Council to establish a list of street names to be used by City staff, developers and others in the naming of arterial and collector streets in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it should be the responsibility of the City Council to select the names of arterial and collector streets in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 24-91 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-91. List of street names. All new arterial and collector streets, as defined in the City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan, are to be named from the list of street names approved by the City Council and the naming of such arterial and collector streets shall be done by the City Council by resolution. The list of street names shall be composed of names of natural areas, natural features, historic and/or well-known places, citizens of the City or Growth Management Area whom the City Council would like to honor posthumously, and such other names of places, things or deceased persons as the City Council may approve. With respect to citizens of the City whom the City Council desires to honor posthumously, such citizens must have devoted much time and effort to the City either as a former City officer or employee, a former Colorado State University officer or employee, a person important in the founding of the City or a former citizen of exemplary character deserving of special recognition. The list of street names shall be adopted and amended by the City Council by resolution. All new arterial and collector streets which are not extensions of existing arterial and collector streets must be named from the foregoing list of street names, and the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services shall strike names from the list as they are used in the naming of such new arterial and collector streets and shall promptly file an updated list in the Office of the City Clerk. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 12 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2012, Amending Section 2-427 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Transportation Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Transportation Board currently consists of eleven members appointed by the City Council, and is one of the larger advisory boards. At the end of 2012, the terms of four members will expire. One of those members is not eligible for reappointment because that member has met the Council-adopted two term limit. Another member is eligible but is not interested in reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from eleven to nine members. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to nine members. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 18 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2012, Amending Section 2-427 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Transportation Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Transportation Board currently consists of eleven members appointed by the City Council, and is one of the larger advisory boards. At the end of 2012, the terms of four members will expire. One of those members is not eligible for reappointment because that member has met the Council-adopted two term limit. Another member is eligible but is not interested in reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from eleven to nine members. This Ordinance amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to nine members. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION At the time of creation in 1992, the Transportation Board consisted of nine members. In August 1995, upon recommendation of the Board, the Council increased the size of the Board to eleven, to provide for more diverse representation on the Board, and to accommodate the Board’s increasing workload. Staff has now identified the opportunity to resize the Board without negatively impacting any current members or the Board's work plan. The idea was presented to the Transportation Board, and, at its October 17, 2012 regular meeting, the Board voted unanimously to reduce the size of the board from eleven to nine members. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its October 17, 2012, the Transportation voted unanimously to recommend that the Council reduce the size of the Board from eleven to nine members. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Transportation Board Minutes - October 17, 2012 ORDINANCE NO. 124, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 2-427 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO MEMBERSHIP OF THE TRANSPORTATION BOARD WHEREAS, on March 3, 1992, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 029, 1992, creating the Transportation Board (the “Board”), which currently consists of eleven members; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that nine members is the appropriate number of members for a board of this nature; and WHEREAS, an opportunity to reduce the number of Board members through attrition exists due to the expiration of four members' terms, only two of whom have applied for reappointment; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on October 17, 2012, the Board considered the possibility of reducing the size of the Board and voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council to reduce the size of the Board by two members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 2-427(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-437. Membership; term. (a) The Board shall consist of nine (9) members appointed by the City Council. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley Mark Kempton AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 13 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Master Plan has been updated to include stormwater quality and stream restoration projects, alongside the already identified stormwater flood control projects. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, incorporates basin-specific water quality best management practices and stream restoration and stability improvements in the form of updates to the existing City drainage master plan to promote the purposes of the Stormwater Utility and advance the holistic and integrated management of stormwater in Fort Collins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley Mark Kempton AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 20 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2012 Amending Section 26-543 of the City Code to Update the Stormwater Master Drainage Plans to Include Basin-Specific Water Quality Best Management Practices and Stream Restoration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Master Plan has been updated to include stormwater quality and stream restoration projects, alongside the already identified stormwater flood control projects. The Master Plan update utilizes results and information obtained from the Stormwater Utility Repurposing program in conjunction with basin and stream specific recommendations obtained from the following two program efforts: A. Basin-Specific Stormwater Quality Best Management Practices (BMP) Selected Plans; and, B. Stream Restoration and Stability Study and Prioritization with the Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Tool. The BMP Selected Plans include recommendations for the treatment of stormwater within portions of the City that developed prior to the adoption of stormwater quality criteria. The majority of the BMP projects include the retrofit of existing stormwater detention ponds to include water quality treatment facilities. Funding for the construction of the identified BMP and stream restoration projects will be drawn from existing stormwater fees. This funding request is included in the current 2013/2014 Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process for Environmental Health. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City of Fort Collins updated the Stormwater Master Plans and 100-Year event Floodplain Maps for each of the City’s thirteen (13) drainage basins after the devastating 1997 flood. The Stormwater Drainage Basin Master Plan (a combination of separately completed master plans for all 13 drainage basins), approved by City Council in June 2004, describes the flooding history of each basin, identifies potential problem areas and recommends improvements. The Master Plan: • Recommends cost-effective projects to remove properties from floodplains, reduce risk and reduce street flooding; • Offers guidance for new development in the basins; • Identifies approaches to enhance riparian habitat along stream corridors and improve water quality; and, • Offers broad guidance to stabilize streams where necessary. In 2008, Council directed staff to review the purpose and components of the City’s Stormwater Program. Staff organized the Stormwater Utility Repurposing program review into 14 major components as outlined below: A. Stormwater Purpose Statement B. Best Management Practices (BMP) Policy Update C. Stormwater Criteria Update D. Detention Pond Construction / Landscape Guidelines E. Stormwater Quality GIS Coverage F. Low Impact Development (LID) Demonstration Projects G. LID Policy Review H. Stormwater Quality Sampling Review I. City-Owned BMP Review J. Home Owners Association (HOA) Assistance Program K. Level of Protection Policy L. Rates COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 20 M. Floodplain Regulations N. Urban Stream Health Assessment Information and results from these major components were utilized to update the Stormwater Master Plans to address storm water quality considerations and to include stream restoration and stability projects that will protect the City’s urban watersheds, and preserve the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains. The purpose of the Master Plan Update is not to re-evaluate the previously-identified flood control capital improvement projects; but, to identify areas where storm water quality and stream improvements are necessary and identify where they may be incorporated into existing or future flood-control projects. Studies and Results 1. Basin-Specific Stormwater Quality BMP Selected Plans In 2011, the Utilities Stormwater Division contracted with three local engineering consultants to prepare basin-specific water quality Best Management Practices (BMP) selected plans for ten of the City’s master drainage basins: Spring Creek Dry Creek Fox Meadows Old Town Mail Creek Canal Importation Fossil Creek West Vine Foothills McClelland’s Creek Boxelder Creek and Cooper Slough were preliminarily evaluated, then removed from further analysis since the majority of these basins are currently undeveloped; they exceed the goal of at least 40% of undeveloped/BMP coverage land. Future development within the two basins will be required to install water quality BMP facilities in accordance with City stormwater criteria. The 40% coverage goal was obtained from the Urban Stream Health Assessment study, performed by CSU in 2010. In all basins, the stormwater quality BMPs were analyzed and sited to meet or exceed the recommended 40% coverage goal. In order to complete the basin-specific BMP selected plans, the following work was performed: • Hydrologic model updates (to include significant urban development since 2002) • Hydrologic sensitivity analyses • Conceptual water quality BMPs • Alternative analysis of BMPs • Triple Bottom Line (TBL) analysis of the BMP alternatives • Draft Selected Plans • Public outreach process • Stream Restoration MCDA Prioritization • Final Selected Plan. Exhibits of the proposed stormwater quality BMP improvements for each of the ten drainage basins are included as Attachment 1. A map for the Boxelder Creek/Cooper Slough basin is also included to display the proposed stream restoration reaches within the basin. The majority of the BMP improvements consist of retrofitting existing stormwater detention ponds to include water quality treatment. Other BMPs include in-pipe mechanical BMPs, and irrigation ditch relocations. Typical pond retrofits include adding new water quality outlets to existing ponds; excavating the sides of existing ponds to achieve additional water quality volume; moving, replanting, or planting new trees; along with close coordination with neighboring properties. 2. Stream Restoration/Stability Study and Prioritization of Stream Restoration Projects In 2011, a study conducted by Colorado State University, on behalf of the Fort Collins Stormwater Division, was authorized to help prioritize future stream management and rehabilitation work within the City. Assessments (including field work) were completed between June and October of 2011. The study built upon work completed previously in the Urban Stream Health Assessment Study and specifically investigated the following ten stream sections within the city limits of Fort Collins: COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -3- ITEM 20 Burns Tributary Clearview Channel Foothills Creek Fossil Creek Langs Gulch Mail Creek McClellands Creek Spring Creek Stanton Creek Boxelder Creek (downstream of Vine Drive) The study provided detailed habitat, susceptibility, and baseline geomorphic data for roughly 17 miles of channels across ten streams. The objectives of the study were to: • Perform a geomorphic assessment on a segment-by-segment basis of the ten streams listed above to determine channel evolution stage, channel susceptibility to vertical and lateral erosion, and stream habitat condition; • Use the resulting data to identify geomorphic thresholds that sustain meandering channels and other heterogeneous physical habitats and use this information to assess candidate restoration reaches; and, • Identify and prioritize future stream management and rehabilitation work through the development of a Multi- Criterion Decision Analysis (MCDA) matrix that can be used to select projects that simultaneously improve habitat, reduce susceptibility, and provide the geomorphic conditions that sustain diverse and stable channels. - Issues identified within the study include obstacles to fish passage caused by irrigation diversion structures, dams, and rock grade control structures, which are usually in place to protect existing infrastructure. Other identified issues include severe bank erosion which contributes to poor water quality, unsafe areas for the public, threats to infrastructure such as sewer lines, and the loss of property to the stream. Irrigation flows conveyed through the many of the City’s streams contribute to the bank erosion through sustained, unvarying flows. These irrigation flows also affect the frequency of flows in the streams, negatively affecting aquatic and riparian habitats. 2a. Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Tool Prioritization of Stream Restoration Projects and associated BMP Installations A MCDA framework for prioritizing stream rehabilitation projects was completed to target areas where the greatest opportunities exist for simultaneously improving habitat and connectivity while stabilizing high-risk, erosion-susceptible reaches. The four major criteria for MCDA scoring were: • Environmental Benefit • Economics • Social Value • Erosion Potential Based upon Triple Bottom Line (TBL) principles, all criteria were given equal weight within the MCDA tool. The MCDA sub-criteria, weights, and reach scores were developed by a multi-discipline team consisting of staff from several City Departments including Utilities, Natural Areas, Environmental Sustainability, and Environmental Planning. A member of the public, representing the Natural Resources Advisory Board also participated in the MCDA tool completion process. The completed MCDA Tool is included as Attachment 2 to this AIS. The stream prioritization results also include the tributary stormwater BMPs that link to the appropriate downstream stream restoration reach. The goal of the stream restoration projects is to restore the City’s streams to a natural state, or as natural state as possible, given the constraints of the urban setting in which they occur. The restoration will be achieved by stopping and repairing stream bank erosion, removing obstacles to fish passage such as grade controls, ensuring good stormwater quality, re-vegetating stream banks, and promoting good stream and watershed management practices. Future stream restoration and stormwater quality BMPs will be implemented according to the project ranking within the finalized MCDA Tool. Projects will be analyzed and designed using the same multi-disciplinary approach utilized in the completion of the MCDA Tool, with input from affected property owners being a crucial part of the design, construction, and maintenance of several of the stream restoration and BMP projects. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -4- ITEM 20 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Based upon input from Council at the April 24, 2012 Work Session, a percentage of current stormwater fees will be used to fund the completion of the identified stormwater quality BMP and stream restoration projects. Beginning in 2013, Stormwater Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funding will be allocated into separate sub-categories in accordance with the following percentages (dollar amounts to be rounded): • 16% Stream restoration and stormwater quality BMPs • 20% Opportunity fund to address unforeseen projects such as development related storm sewers, or cash matches with government entities (i.e. West Vine Basin Stormwater Improvements with Larimer County) • 64% Flood control capital improvement projects (previously 100% of funds) Accordingly, to achieve the goals of the Stormwater Master Plan, Fort Collins Utilities has submitted a $650,000 per year Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) offer for stream restoration/stormwater quality in the 2013/2014 budget process. It should be noted that there is no proposed increase in stormwater fees to construct these additional projects. Staff will continue to investigate additional funding sources such as the utilization of the Natural Resources Department Stream Rehabilitation Funds identified in the 2010 Keep Fort Collins Great Sales Tax package ($250,000 per year); applying for various grant programs such as the Colorado Healthy Rivers Grant Fund, or the EPA Small Watershed Grant Program. Estimated ranges of project costs* for stream restoration and stormwater quality BMPs in the City’s streams and basins are as follows: Boxelder Creek (Stream only) $1,117,800 to $2,353,500 Canal Importation Basin (Stream and BMP) $1,586,000 to $1,816,000 Dry Creek Basin (Stream and BMP) $2,976,900 to $5,111,900 Foothills Creek Basin (Stream and BMP) $2,922,000 to $3,777,000 Fossil Creek Basin (Stream and BMP) $20,605,800 to $26,153,500 Fox Meadows Basin (BMP only) $808,200 Mail Creek (Stream and BMP) $4,837,200 McClellands Creek Basin (Stream and BMP) $5,380,400 to $9,679,900 Old Town Basin (BMP only) $1,539,100 Spring Creek Basin (Stream and BMP) $7,648,700 to $10,157,600 West Vine Basin (Stream and BMP) $2,835,300 to $4,144,700 Total costs range from: $52,257,400 to $70,378,500 * Upper cost ranges are based upon a per linear foot construction cost. Cost ranges are presented due to the fact that not all stream restoration work requires capital construction. Several stream reaches may be rehabilitated through minor construction and watershed/vegetation management. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The health of the City’s physical environment will be positively affected as a result of the Master Plan Update. Water quality throughout the City will be greatly improved, while several of the eroding banks within the City’s waterways will be repaired and stabilized. Wildlife habitat will be improved and new riparian habitat will be planted along the streams. Impediments to the passage of fish throughout the streams will be removed, allowing for a greater number and diversity of aquatic species along the streams. Excessive sediment and pollutants will be removed from the streams as a result of the installation of new stormwater quality BMPs in basins that currently have no stormwater quality treatment. The projects in the Plan will also serve to protect existing infrastructures such as sanitary sewers, preventing potential sewage spills in the City’s natural streams. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -5- ITEM 20 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Master Plan Update was presented to boards and City Council on previous occasions. They include: 1. Water Board – January 19, 2012 2. Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) - February 22, 2012 3. Water Board – April 19, 2012 4. City Council Work Session – April 24, 2012 5. NRAB – September 19, 2012 6. Water Board – September 20, 2012 The Stormwater Master Plan Update was presented to both the NRAB and the Water Board on September 19 and September 20, 2012, respectively. The Plan Update was unanimously recommended for adoption by both Boards. Draft minutes from both meetings are included as Attachments 3 and 4. PUBLIC OUTREACH The public outreach process for the Stormwater Master Plan Update has been ongoing since June 2011, and has included the following elements: • Basin-specific focus group meetings for affected stakeholders such as CSU, Poudre School District, home owners associations (HOA), various City departments, and the Downtown Development Authority. • Website explaining the Master Plan Update – fcgov.com/stormwater-plan - 170 unique hits as of September 25. • Article in the City News flyer – included in Utility Bills to all Utilities customers directing customers to the Master Plan website • Booth at the New West Fest – direct contact with over 250 people, with several thousand people stopping to look at the booth signage • Online survey of 674 citizens about general stormwater issues within the City, including water quality and stream restoration • Facebook update directing City followers to the Master Plan website • Twitter update directing City followers to the Master Plan website The conceptual BMP alternatives were presented for initial public review and input through a series of Focus Group meetings in summer 2011. Representatives from City departments, homeowners associations, management companies for existing BMP facilities, large businesses and institutions (i.e., Colorado State University), and interested citizen groups (i.e., Save the Poudre). The future public outreach process for the individual stormwater quality and stream restoration projects identified in the Master Plan Update will include the following elements; • Project-specific meetings and/or Open Houses for affected stakeholders such as HOAs, individual property owners, City departments, and interested organizations • Website explaining the individual project, the project schedule, and ways for the public to provide feedback and comments • Mailers to potentially affected stakeholders informing them of Open House times and topics • Ongoing social media updates The projects will be presented and discussed with all affected parties through a collaborative outreach process where all participants will be allowed the opportunity to provide meaningful feedback and potentially affect the final design of the project. A Public Engagement Plan, which details the current and ongoing outreach process for the update and for future projects, is included as Attachment 5. The Public Engagement Plan was submitted to City Council for review in June 2012. In an online Stormwater survey conducted by Fort Collins Utilities in August 2012, over 90% of the 674 respondents indicated that protecting and improving water quality is important to them. The reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff was ranked second in importance only second to maintaining existing stormwater infrastructure. 75% of COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -6- ITEM 20 respondents also felt that the City’s streams have become more polluted over the last 20 years. Fort Collins Utilities will use the results of the survey to guide and inform our future public outreach efforts regarding the specific projects identified within the Master Plan Update. ATTACHMENTS 1. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Selected Plans for 11 Drainage Basins 2. Stream Rehabilitation Project Prioritization Results (MCDA Tool) 3. Excerpt from Draft Water Board Meeting Minutes 4. Draft Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting Minutes 5. Public Engagement Plan ORDINANCE NO. 125, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 26-543 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO UPDATE THE STORMWATER MASTER DRAINAGE PLANS TO INCLUDE BASIN-SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND STREAM RESTORATION WHEREAS, Section 26-543 of the City Code adopted a master drainage plan for drainage basins in and affecting the City, to be used as the basis for City storm drainage capital improvements planning and determinations related to storm drainage impacts and requirements for developments in the city; and WHEREAS, on April 6, 2010, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 030, 2010, amending Section 26-492 of the City Code so as to declare that the purpose of the City Stormwater Utility is to provide an integrated, sustainable stormwater management program that reflects the community’s values of protecting and restoring the City’s watersheds, including the Cache la Poudre River and its tributaries; and WHEREAS, the environmental benefits identified in Section 26-492 include preserving the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains, enhancing stormwater quality, and preserving riparian habitat; and WHEREAS, in order to identify areas in which stormwater quality and stream improvements are needed to promote these benefits, and identify opportunities to incorporate such improvements into existing and future flood control projects, City staff has completed extensive analysis and assessment of these concerns in cooperation with Colorado State University; and WHEREAS, based on such review, staff has prepared for Council consideration basin- specific water quality best management practices and stream restoration and stability improvements in the form of updates to the existing City drainage master plan (the “2012 Updates”), and WHEREAS, the conceptual basis for the 2012 Updates was presented to the Council for consideration at its work session on April 24, 2012, and staff has incorporated the input provided by the Council at that time in the 2012 Updates; and WHEREAS, the 2012 Updates were presented to the Natural Resources Advisory Board (“NRAB”) on September 19, 2012, and at that time the NRAB voted unanimously to recommend that the Council adopt them; and WHEREAS, the 2012 Updates were also presented to the Water Board on September 20, 2012, and at that time the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend that the Council adopt them; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2012 Updates will promote the purposes of the Stormwater Utility and advance the holistic and integrated management of stormwater in Fort Collins. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 26-543(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 26-543. Master drainage plans. (a) Master drainage plans are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this Article for the following stormwater basins of the City: (1) Boxelder Creek/Cooper Slough Basin: a.. Boxelder/Cooper Slough Basin, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated December 2002 and revised November 2003; b. Boxelder Regional Stormwater Master Plan, prepared by PBS&J, Inc., dated October 2006; and c. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Boxelder Creek/Cooper Slough Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 2012. (2) Cache la Poudre River Basin: a. Cache la Poudre River Master Drainageway Plan, prepared by Ayres Associates, Inc., dated August 2001. (3) Canal Importation Basin: a. Canal Importation Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated April 2001; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Canal Importation Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 2012. (4) Dry Creek Basin: a. Dry Creek Master Plan, prepared by URS Corporation, Inc., dated December 2002; b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Dry Creek Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Ayres Associates, dated October 2012. (5) Foothills Basin: a. Foothills Basin, prepared by URS Corporation, Inc., dated April 2003; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Foothills Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Ayres Associates, dated October 2012. -2- (6) Fossil Creek Basin: a. Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Master Drainageway Planning Restudy, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated February 2003; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Fossil Creek Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated October 2012. (7) Fox Meadows Basin: a. Fox Meadows Basin Drainage Master Plan Update, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated December 2002 and revised February 2003; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Fox Meadows Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated October 2012. (8) Mail Creek Basin: a. Mail Creek Master Plan, prepared by URS Corporation, Inc., dated April 2003; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Mail Creek Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Ayres Associates, dated October 2012. (9) McClellands Creek Basin: a. McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated November 2000 and revised March 2003; b. East Harmony Portion of McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated August 1999 and revised July 2001; and c. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the McClellands Creek Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated October 2012. (10) Old Town Basin: a. Old Town Basin Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Engineering Consultants, Inc., dated September 2003; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Old Town Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 2012. (11) Spring Creek Basin: a. Spring Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated June 2003; and -3- b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Spring Creek Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 2012. (12) West Vine Basin: a. West Vine Master Plan, prepared by URS Corporation Inc., dated November 2002; and b. Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the West Vine Basin Stormwater Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 2012. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -4- DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Mark Sears, Tawyna Ernst Donnie Dustin AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 14 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm and Related Water Rights Subject to a Conservation Easement and Authorizing a Related Raw Water Transfer Agreement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Natural Areas Department (NAD) purchased the 137-acre Maxwell Farm, along with 12 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) water, with the intent of placing it under a conservation easement to help conserve a buffer between Fort Collins and Wellington; protect the open space and scenic values adjacent to I-25; and, sell it as an agricultural property with limited development rights. The land has been leased to Larry Maxwell, the previous owner, for farming and livestock feeding since the initial purchase in 2009. Natural Areas and Utilities have worked out an agreement for the NAD to sell eleven of the twelve NPIC shares to Utilities for approximately 50% of the estimated market value, which is $14,000 per share (based on recent sales information from NPIC). In exchange, Utilities will enter into a raw water transfer agreement with the buyer of Maxwell Farm, and per the terms of the agreement, Utilities will transfer the equivalent of eleven shares of NPIC water on an annual basis to the Maxwell Farm in perpetuity. The advantage to Utilities is that water decreed solely for agricultural use derived from other Utilities-owned NPIC shares, can be substituted for water decreed for municipal use derived from the eleven NPIC shares, which Utilities can use. The buyer will purchase the remaining share of NPIC water as it is a NPIC policy that a farm must own at least some NPIC water in order to receive any rented or transferred water. The single NPIC share to be owned by the buyer will also be tied to the land by the conservation easement agreement. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Mark Sears Tawnya Ernst, Donnie Dustin AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 21 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm and Related Water Rights Subject to a Conservation Easement and Authorizing a Related Raw Water Transfer Agreement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Natural Areas Department (NAD) purchased the 137-acre Maxwell Farm, along with 12 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) water, with the intent of placing it under a conservation easement to help conserve a buffer between Fort Collins and Wellington; protect the open space and scenic values adjacent to I-25; and, sell it as an agricultural property with limited development rights. These purposes are supported by the Natural Areas Land Conservation and Stewardship Plan, the Council-adopted master plan for the Department. The land has been leased to Larry Maxwell, the previous owner, for farming and livestock feeding since the initial purchase in 2009. Natural Areas and Utilities have worked out an agreement for the NAD to sell eleven of the twelve NPIC shares to Utilities for approximately 50% of the estimated market value, which is $14,000 per share (based on recent sales information from NPIC). In exchange, Utilities will enter into a raw water transfer agreement with the buyer of Maxwell Farm, and per the terms of the agreement, Utilities will transfer the equivalent of eleven shares of NPIC water on an annual basis to the Maxwell Farm in perpetuity. The advantage to Utilities is that water decreed solely for agricultural use derived from other Utilities-owned NPIC shares, can be substituted for water decreed for municipal use derived from the eleven NPIC shares, which Utilities can use. The buyer will purchase the remaining share of NPIC water as it is a NPIC policy that a farm must own at least some NPIC water in order to receive any rented or transferred water. The single NPIC share to be owned by the buyer will also be tied to the land by the conservation easement agreement. The funds received from the sale of the land and water will be used to conserve additional land and water. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Maxwell Farm, near County Road 56 and I-25 (approximately two miles north of Fort Collins), is one of 10 farms conserved in the Wellington Community Separator through individual and combined efforts of the NAD, Larimer County and the Natural Resources Conservation Service since 2002. The seller, Larry Maxwell, was not willing or able to sell a conservation easement, so NAD purchased the property with the intent to resell the property with a conservation easement to limit residential or commercial development on the site. The water rights acquired are 3 augmented irrigation wells, 12 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company Water, and one East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) water tap. The site improvements consist of an irrigation sprinkler pivot, a house, numerous out buildings, hay storage sheds, silage pit, loafing sheds and corrals that are in poor to fair condition. In October 2012, NAD closed on the purchase of Larry Maxwell’s house (0.83 acre parcel) which is surrounded on two sides by the farm and an additional ELCO water tap for $130,000 to resolve access and water service issues. This purchase will save the City in excess of $35,000 in costs to resolve access and water service issues and increased the value of the farm sale by $100,000, resulting in a net cost savings to the City and increased conservation value. Within the existing approximately 12-acre building envelope, there will be two primary home sites and one secondary home site. Staff recommends that Council approve the sale of the entire Maxwell property with a conservation easement, which restricts any further development, along with the following water rights: two ELCO water taps, one share of North Poudre Irrigation water, which is tied to the land via the conservation easement, and three irrigation wells. The partial mineral rights are to be retained by the City. Staff recommends that Council approve both the sale to Utilities of eleven of the twelve NPIC shares purchased with this property for approximately 50% of the estimated market value and the Raw Water Transfer Agreement for the perpetual use of 11 shares of North Poudre Irrigation water. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 21 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Natural Areas Department will recoup $700,000 from the sale of the property and $154,000 from the sale of the NPIC shares to Utilities. The total $854,000 in revenues will be used for additional conservation efforts.. The approximate fair market price of $700,000 for the sale of this agricultural land and its improvements with a conservation easement is based upon recent land appraisals in the area and discussions with an appraiser who recently appraised three nearby farms for the NAD. The land and water rights were acquired for $1,530,000 in two separate transactions: 136 acres and NPIC water in 2009 and 0.83 acres in 2012. The cost to conserve the 137 acres by removing the potential industrial, commercial and all but two residential development rights and tying the water rights to the property is $676,000. The economic health of Fort Collins and northern Larimer County will be positively impacted by this sale. The buyer is a local farmer/rancher and conducts business in and around Fort Collins. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The conservation easement will conserve the agricultural values of the property and scenic values along I-25, and help maintain the open space buffer between the City and Wellington. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 12, 2012 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the sale of the Maxwell Farm with a conservation easement and the associated water rights. At its January 19, 2012 meeting, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the purchase of the 11 shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company water from the Natural Areas Department at approximately 50% of the current value and to approve the Raw Water Transfer Agreement for the purpose of delivering water annually to the Maxwell Farm as a part of a conservation easement. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map 2. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, September 12, 2012 3. Water Board minutes, January 19, 2012 ORDINANCE NO. 126, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE MAXWELL FARM AND RELATED WATER RIGHTS SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND AUTHORIZING A RELATED RAW WATER TRANSFER AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain real property known as the Maxwell Farm, located in Larimer County, Colorado, as more particularly described in Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the City purchased 136 acres of the Property, including twelve shares of North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) water, in 2009, and the remaining .83 acres of the Property in October, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City purchased the Property as part of the Wellington Community Separator and to protect the view from I-25, with the intent of eventually selling the Property subject to a conservation easement that would maintain the agricultural and open space values of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Natural Areas Department is proposing to sell the Property and related water rights, including two ELCO water taps, one share of NPIC water and three irrigations wells, for $700,000, subject to a reserved conservation easement that would limit future commercial and residential development on the Property; and WHEREAS, the Natural Areas Department is also proposing to sell the remaining eleven shares of NPIC water associated with the Property to the City’s Water Utility for $154,000, which price is approximately one-half of the fair market value of the shares; and WHEREAS, in exchange for the conveyance of the NPIC shares to the Utility, the Utility would enter into an agreement with the proposed buyer of the Property that would allow the NPIC shares to continue to be used for the benefit of the Property in perpetuity; and WHEREAS, City staff is in the process of negotiating with the proposed buyer of the Property conservation easement terms and conditions subject to which the Property would be conveyed, as well as the terms and conditions of the water agreement; and WHEREAS, copies of the proposed conservation easement and the proposed water agreement, both dated October 26, 2012, are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection (respectively, the “Conservation Easement” and the “Raw Water Transfer Agreement”); and WHEREAS, under the proposed Raw Water Transfer Agreement the owner of the Property would be responsible for paying any assessments and other charges due to NPIC for the eleven shares of NPIC water delivered to the Property, but the owner would not have to pay any fees or charges to the City for use of the water; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code provides 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 WHEREAS, Article XII, Section 3 of the City Charter states that the City Council shall establish by ordinance rates, fees or charges for water, electricity or other utility services furnished by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the conveyance of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement and the conveyance of eleven shares of NPIC water to the Water Utility in exchange for the execution of the Raw Water Transfer Agreement, all as provided herein, are 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 Property on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance and subject to the Conservation Easement in substantially the form for the same dated October 26, 2012, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, 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 or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary corrections to the legal description of the Property, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the property to be conveyed. Section 3. That the City Council hereby finds that the execution of the Raw Water Transfer Agreement is for the betterment of the Water Utility, will be beneficial to the rate payers of the Water Utility, and is for the benefit of the citizens of Fort Collins. Section 4. That the Utilities Executive Director is hereby authorized to execute the Raw Water Transfer Agreement in substantially the form for the same dated October 26, 2012, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, together with such additional terms and conditions as the Utilities Executive Director, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance. -2- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -3- Page 1 of 2 General Warranty Deed Maxwell Farm Legal Description PARCEL I: THE N 1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 8 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, EXCEPT A STRIP OF LAND OFF THE WEST END OF SAID LAND AND BEING 25 FEET EAST OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PARCELS OF LAND AS CONVEYED BY DEEDS RECORDED JUNE 29, 1949 IN BOOK 877 AT PAGE 28, RECORDED JANUARY 7, 1965 IN BOOK 1276 AT PAGE 259, AND RECORDED AUGUST 9, 1971 IN BOOK 1471 AT PAGE 674, IN THE RECORDS OF THE LARIMER COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL II: THE S 1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 8 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; EXCEPTING THOSE PARCELS OF LAND AS CONVEYED BY DEEDS RECORDED JANUARY 11, 1909 IN BOOK 237 AT PAGE 256, NOVEMBER 16, 1911 IN BOOK 304 AT PAGE 390, SEPTEMBER 28, 1917 IN BOOK 359 AT PAGE 501, JANUARY 10, 1918 IN BOOK 364 AT PAGE 99, MAY 26, 1949 IN BOOK 874 AT PAGE 177, AND JANUARY 7, 1965 IN BOOK 1276 AT PAGE 259 IN THE RECORDS OF THE LARIMER COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL III: A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 8 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6 TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; CONSIDERING THE EAST LINE OF THE SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER AS BEARING NORTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES WEST AND ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO IS CONTAINED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY LINES WHICH BEGIN AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE 25 WHICH POINT BEARS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 52 MINUTES WEST 233.01 FEET FROM THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16 AND RUNS THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES EAST 131.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY Page 2 of 2 General Warranty Deed 25; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 30 MINUTES WEST 277.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 30 MINUTES EAST 131.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 30 MINUTES EAST 275.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Mark Sears Tawyna Ernst AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 15 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Vangbo Property Subject to a Conservation Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Vangbo Property was purchased by the Natural Areas Department (NAD) in 2005 with the intent to place a conservation easement on the property to conserve the open space and scenic values along the I-25 corridor and then sell it as an agricultural property with limited development options. The land is currently leased to Alison Person, a neighboring landowner, for grazing. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of the 105-acre Vangbo property and associated ditch and water rights with a reserved conservation easement to Alison Person for $300,000. The conservation easement does not allow any future development, but does give the landowner the option to request the purchase of one building envelope on the property from a future City Council. The undeveloped portion would remain in agricultural use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Mark Sears Tawnya Ernst AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 22 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of City-owned Property Known as the Vangbo Property Subject to a Conservation Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Vangbo Property was purchased by the Natural Areas Department (NAD) in 2005 with the intent to place a conservation easement on the property to conserve the open space and scenic values along the I-25 corridor and then sell it as an agricultural property with limited development options. These purposes are supported by the Natural Areas Land Conservation and Stewardship Plan, the Council-adopted master plan for the Department. The land is currently leased to Alison Person, a neighboring landowner, for grazing. Staff recommends selling the 105-acre Vangbo property and associated ditch and water rights with a reserved conservation easement to Alison Person for $300,000. The conservation easement does not allow any future development, but does give the landowner the option to request the purchase of one building envelope on the property from a future City Council. The undeveloped portion would remain in agricultural use. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The 105-acre Vangbo Property, located on the east side of I-25 near Prospect Road, was purchased in 2005. At the time, the property was identified as part of the Timnath Community Separator and was also selected for conservation to protect the view from I-25. The seller resided out of state and had no interest in selling the City a conservation easement, so Natural Areas purchased the property with the intent to resell the property with a conservation easement placed on it to limit commercial and residential development on the site. The property has been historically used for irrigated agriculture and is currently a smooth brome grass pasture/hay field with a few scattered cottonwood trees and a large wet meadow. Irrigation infrastructure exists to irrigate the property via the Sand Dike Lateral. The property has one irrigation well and four shares of Sand Dike Ditch Rights. The City intends to include a 1/2 share of Lake Canal Reservoir water rights in the sale to enable Ms. Person to rent more water which will help sustain the vegetation on the site. These water and ditch rights are of nominal financial value but are beneficial for maintaining the agricultural uses on the property. This property was being leased by Ms. Person as a pasture and hay field to help support her commercial horse stable prior to NAD's purchase of the property. NAD has continued leasing the property to Ms. Person since 2005. Also in 2005, NAD acquired a conservation easement from Ms. Person on her 35-acre horse stable property. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The sale of this property will generate $300,000 in revenue which will be used to conserve additional land and water. The sale price is the approximate fair market sale price of this agricultural land and its minor improvements with a conservation easement that precludes all development. The value is based upon recent land appraisals of similar properties and discussions with an appraiser who recently appraised a similar conservation easement for NAD. This land was purchased in 2005 for $1,417,500; the cost to conserve this 105 acres by removing the potential residential and commercial development rights from this I-25 frontage road property is $1,117,500. The economic health of Fort Collins and northern Larimer County will be positively influenced by this sale. The Vangbo property will continue to be an integral part of the successful operation of the Mountain View Stables, a popular local horse boarding stable owned by Ms. Person. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 22 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The conservation easement will conserve the agricultural and scenic values along I-25. The property will continue to be irrigated, hayed and grazed using a managed rotational system that will allow periods of rest from grazing to promote the regrowth of vegetation and to protect the wet meadow. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 12, 2012 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the sale of the Vangbo Property and associated ditch/water rights to Ms. Person. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map 2. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, September 12, 2012 ORDINANCE NO. 127, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE VANGBO PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain real property known as the Vangbo Property, located in Larimer County, Colorado, as more particularly described in Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property, which is approximately 105 acres in size, was purchased in 2005 by the City’s Natural Areas Department as part of the Timnath Community Separator and to protect the view from I-25, with the intent of eventually selling the Property subject to a conservation easement that would maintain the agricultural value of the Property; and WHEREAS, Natural Areas staff is proposing to sell the Property and related water rights, including the McLaughlin Well, four shares of Sand Dike Ditch rights, and a one-half share of Lake Canal Reservoir rights, for $300,000, subject to a reserved conservation easement that would limit future commercial and residential development on the Property; and WHEREAS, City staff is in the process of negotiating with the proposed buyer of the Property conservation easement terms and conditions subject to which the Property would be conveyed; and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed conservation easement, dated October 26, 2012, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection (the “Conservation Easement”); and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code provides 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the conveyance of the Vangbo Property subject to the Conservation Easement as provided herein 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 Property on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance and subject to the Conservation Easement in substantially the form for the same dated October 26, 2012, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, 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 or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary corrections to the legal description of the Property, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the property to be conveyed. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk RET Form Version 3/16/07 - 13 - Vangbo Property Legal Description DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Lindsay Kuntz AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 16 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Drainage Easement on City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC is planning a 39.53 acre residential development called Mail Creek Crossing PLD/PD, located just north of Bacon Elementary School on South Timberline Road. This development will require the construction of off-site stormwater outfall improvements on adjacent property to the north in order to connect with a stormwater pipe in Kechter Road. The alignment of these improvements will cross the northwest corner of a property owned by the City’s Social Sustainability Department. The City’s 16-acre property was purchased in 2006 as a Land Bank property and is currently leased as a residential/horse property. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of a 2,346 square foot non-exclusive drainage easement from the City in the northwest corner of the City property adjacent to Kechter Road to facilitate the installation of the planned improvements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Lindsay Kuntz AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 23 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Drainage Easement on City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC is planning a 39.53 acre residential development called Mail Creek Crossing PLD/PD located just north of Bacon Elementary School on South Timberline Road. This development will require the construction of off-site stormwater outfall improvements on adjacent property to the north in order to connect with a stormwater pipe in Kechter Road. The alignment of these improvements will cross the northwest corner of a property owned by the City’s Social Sustainability Department. The City’s 16-acre property was purchased in 2006 as a Land Bank property and is currently leased as a residential/horse property. In order to facilitate the installation of the planned improvements, the developer has requested a 2,346 square foot non-exclusive drainage easement from the City in the northwest corner of the City property adjacent to Kechter Road. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Mail Creek Crossing PLD is a proposed residential development in the beginning stages of the County’s planning review process. The development will be annexed into the City after county development approval. The development, consisting of 39.53 acres, is located just north of Bacon Elementary School and south of the Kechter Crossing development on Kechter Road. To provide stormwater outfall for the development, the plans for Mail Creek Crossing PLD show a stormwater pipe extending north from the property, through the Kechter Crossing development via Tilden Street, and then connecting with a pipe in Kechter Road. The majority of the stormwater pipe will be within Tilden Street right-of-way; however, it will need to cross a portion of the City’s property to connect to a line within Kechter Road. The City property located at 2313 Kechter Road was purchased in 2006 as part the of the City’s Land Bank program. The City Real Estate Services Department manages this 16-acre property as a residential rental property until the property is ready to be developed. The location of the proposed easement is located in the northwest corner of the property which is currently used by the City’s tenant as horse pasture. The stormwater pipe to be installed on the City property consists of a 15-inch diameter pipe as approved by City Utilities staff. This pipe has been sized to accommodate additional flows when the City property develops in the future. The timing of the stormwater pipe installation corresponds with the construction of the Kechter Crossing development. Since the majority of the alignment for Mail Creek Crossing’s stormwater outfall will lie within Tilden Street, the developers for both developments have agreed to install the pipe prior to the construction of the road. This will avoid tearing up the newly constructed road improvements. After installation of the stormwater pipe is complete, the City’s property will be restored and reseeded. Affordable Housing staff has reviewed the easement request and believes that conveyance of the requested easement will not interfere with the City’s intended use of the Property as part of the Land Bank program. The size of the pipe to be installed has also been designed to accommodate future flows from the City’s property, thus avoiding the costs to upgrade the pipe when the City property develops in the future. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Real Estate Services reviewed appraisal information and sales comparable information for the City’s property to prepare a value estimate for the requested easement. The estimated just compensation for the drainage easement and fee for staff time for processing the easement request is $2,690. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 23 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Development and Easement Location Detail 3 Site Aerial and Photograph ORDINANCE NO. 128, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A NON-EXCLUSIVE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO CLOUD PEAK RANCH, LLC WHEREAS, the City is the owner of a parcel of real property located at 2313 Kechter Road in Fort Collins, Colorado, identified in the County records as parcel number 86080-00-913 (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the City Property is approximately 16 acres in size and is managed by the City’s Real Estate Services Department as part of the Land Bank Program; and WHEREAS, Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC (the “Developer”) is planning a 39.53 acre development south of the City Property called Mail Creek Crossing PLD/PD (the “Development”); and WHEREAS, in order to provide stormwater drainage for the Development, the Developer is requesting a 2,346 square foot drainage easement across the City Property for the installation and maintenance of new stormwater drainage improvements (the “Improvements”); and WHEREAS, the Improvements would be sized appropriately in order to sufficiently accommodate stormwater drainage flows from the Development as well as future flows from the City Property after it is developed; and WHEREAS, the proposed easement would cross a portion of the northwest corner of the City Property as shown on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, the Developer has agreed to pay the City $2,690 as compensation for the Easement and for City staff’s time to process this request; and WHEREAS, City staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City Property resulting from the grant of the Easement and related work; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code provides 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the conveyance of the Easement on the City Property to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC as provided herein 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 Easement to Cloud Peak Ranch, LLC on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, 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 or to effectuate the purpose of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal description of the Easement, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easement. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Jason Graham, Ron Russell Lindsay Kuntz AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 17 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) currently provides telephone and internet services to portions of northwest Weld County and northeast Larimer County. With an increase in demand from their customers for broadband services, NTC has begun upgrading copper based telephone lines to fiber optic broadband lines. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, authorizes the conveyance of a utility easement to NTC from the City across a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch in order to install approximately 7.0 miles of fiber optic line as part of this upgrade project. The proposed easement alignment would follow an abandoned state highway now used by the City as an access road to the City’s property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Jason Graham Ron Russell, Lindsay Kuntz AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 24 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2012, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) currently provides telephone and internet services to portions of northwest Weld County and northeast Larimer County. With an increase in demand from their customers for broadband services, NTC has begun upgrading copper based telephone lines to fiber optic broadband lines. NTC has requested a utility easement from the City of Fort Collins across a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch in order to install approximately 7.0 miles of fiber optic line as part of this upgrade project. The proposed easement alignment would follow an abandoned state highway now used by the City as an access road to the City’s property. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Meadow Springs Ranch (MSR) is owned by the City of Fort Collins and is managed by the Water Reclamation and Biosolids (WR&B) Division as a site for land application of biosolids. NTC has requested an easement for placing fiber optic cable across approximately 7.0 miles of MSR. The easement route will primarily be located 15 feet east of the centerline of abandoned Highway 87, following the shoulder of the road. The highway was abandoned by the Colorado Department of Transportation after I-25 was completed and has since been used by the City as an access road across MSR. The asphalt surface of the old highway has since deteriorated and some portions are now gravel. NTC has determined that it is unable to use its old original easements along I-25 for the new upgraded cables due to new rules regarding the separation of cables from the roadway. It was determined by the Colorado Department of Transportation that the right-of-way of I-25 was not wide enough to accommodate the new lines and comply with the new rules. NTC has also been in negotiations with property owners adjacent to I-25; however, their negotiations have been unsuccessful as the owners do not want to allow the fiber optic cable on their property. NTC feels it has exhausted all other reasonable alternatives to the proposed route. NTC is the only wireline telecommunications service provider for the customers along this route. According to NTC, other telecommunication service providers in the area include wireless carriers (AT&T and Verizon) and long-haul transport providers. The long-haul transport providers have cable that passes through the area, but do not provide service to the local homes and businesses. Installation of the fiber optic cable will involve a system of cutting narrow slots along the alignment, laying a section of cable in the slot and then replacing and compacting the soil to its previous state. There are three gullies where the cable route will deviate from the road shoulder. At one of these gullies the cable will be buried beneath the road surface. At the other two gullies, the cable route will leave the road shoulder to cross the gulley and rejoin the road on the gully’s other side. The easement alignment will also have two spurs to access neighboring properties. One spur will follow an existing ranch road and the other will cross a pasture in an area where other easements already exist. NTC will restore the areas disturbed after its work is complete. After reviewing NTC’s easement proposal and visiting a site where NTC recently installed cable, WR&B believes the easement would cause minimal lasting disturbance. City staff provided NTC with a list of terms for approval of the proposed easement which have been reviewed and accepted by NTC. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Real Estate Services reviewed value information for Meadows Springs Ranch to prepare a compensation value estimate for the requested easement. Along with the value of the easement, NTC will be required to compensate the COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 24 City for staff time for processing the easement, as well as, a WR&B fee. The estimated total compensation is $6,000, but the final compensation will be calculated prior to transfer of the easement deed, with any additional costs after the transfer of the deed being paid by NTC within 30 days. In addition, NTC will be required to restore the affected areas including fences, gates, road surfaces, and drainage. NTC has also agreed to provide the City with a connection for internet services for the headquarters building at MSR. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Utilities staff has reviewed the easement proposal from Nunn Telephone Company and found the easement will cause minimal environmental disturbance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On October 18, 2012, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend that City Council authorize the conveyance of a utility easement on the City property to Nunn Telephone Company ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2 Easement Alignment Photos 3 Gully and Spur Location Photos 4 NTC Easement Proposal 5 NTC Easement Terms 6 Excerpt of Minutes from October 18, 2012 Water Board Meeting ORDINANCE NO. 129, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITY EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO THE NUNN TELEPHONE COMPANY WHEREAS, the City is the owner of real property located in Larimer County and Weld County, Colorado, known as Meadow Springs Ranch (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the City Property is managed by the City’s Water Reclamation and Biosolids Division as a site for land application of biosolids; and WHEREAS, Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) is requesting a ten foot wide utility easement across the City Property for the installation and maintenance of new telecommunication improvements that will serve their customers in portions of northeast Larimer County and northwest Weld County; and WHEREAS, the proposed easement will follow the shoulder of an existing access road on the City Property with the exception of two spurs leading to nearby customers, as shown on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, NTC has agreed to pay the City $6,000 as compensation for the Easement and for City staff’s time to process this request; and WHEREAS, City Utilities staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City Property resulting from the grant of the Easement and related work; and WHEREAS, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Easement conveyance at its regular meeting on October 18, 2012; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code provides 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 interest of the City and, with respect to real property that is 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 that it will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the conveyance of the Easement on the City Property to NTC as provided herein is in the best interest of the City, will not impair the City's wastewater utility system, and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easement to NTC on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, 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 or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary corrections to the legal description of the Easement, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easement. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Pg. 1 EXHIBIT “A” Telecommunications Easement from City of Fort Collins to Nunn Telephone Company This Exhibit A describes three parcels of land included as part of this easement PARCEL “A” A parcel of land, five feet either side of a line generally running parallel to and 15 ft. east of the centerline of a private road extending northward from Larimer County Road 92 to the Colorado-Wyoming state line, situated in T11N R68W, T11N R67W and T12N R67W and more particularly described as follows: (NOTE: APPROXIMATE DISTANCES/BEARINGS SUBJECT TO FIELD VERIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR) BEGINNING at the southeast corner of Section 13, T11N, R68W, thence west 1,793 ft. along the south line of said Section 13, thence due north 30 feet to a point located on the north right-of-way line of Larimer County Road 92 and approximately 52 ft. east of the centerline of an existing private road, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence N63⁰10’W 35 ft. to a point on the east edge of said private road; Thence N26⁰50’E 2,902 ft. to a fence, Thence N26⁰50’E 1,228 ft. to a point on the east line of Section 13, Thence N26⁰50’E 254 ft., Thence 901 ft. along a curve to the left which curve has a central angle of 15 degrees and whose chord bears N21⁰53’E 899ft., Thence N11⁰47’E 3,499 ft., Thence 549 ft. along a curve to the right, which curve has a central angle of 13 degrees and whose chord bears N18⁰26’’E 544 ft., Thence N23⁰34’E 1,679 ft., Thence N25⁰22’E 1000 ft., Thence 790 ft. along a curve to the left which curve has a central angle of 38 degrees and whose chord bears N7⁰17’E 785 ft., Thence N11⁰47’W 222 ft. to a bridge, Thence N34⁰00’ E 20 ft., Thence N11⁰47’W 260 ft., Thence N68⁰00’W 20 ft., Thence N11⁰47’W 1998 ft., Thence 535 ft. along a curve to the right, which curve has a central angle of 24 degrees and whose chord bears N1⁰26’W 529 ft., Thence N12⁰24’E 3,628 ft., Thence 442 ft. along a curve to the right, which curve has a central angle of 18 degrees and whose chord bears N20⁰43’E 441 ft., Pg. 2 Thence N28⁰13’E 1,777 ft. to a gate and fence, also known as “POINT A”, Thence N28⁰13’E 3,770 ft., to a bridge Thence N80⁰00’E 20 ft., Thence N28⁰13’E 60 ft., Thence N20⁰00’W 20 ft., Thence N28⁰13’E 3,146 ft., Thence 468 ft. along a curve to the right, which curve has a central angle of 15 degrees and whose chord bears N34⁰23’E 466 ft., Thence N43⁰07’ 2,318 ft., Thence 2,278 ft. along a curve to the left which curve has a central angle of 43 degrees and whose chord bears N23⁰22’E 2,245 ft., To a point on the Colorado-Wyoming state line, a total distance of 33,819 ft., more or less; PARCEL “B” A parcel of land, five feet either side of a line generally running parallel to and 5 ft. south of an existing fenceline situated in the NE¼ Section 31, T12N, R67W and more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the northeast corner of Section 31, T12N, R67W, thence west 1,158 ft. along the north line of said Section 31, thence south 695 feet to a point located on the east side of an existing private road, said point being referenced in PARCEL “A” as “POINT A” and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 5 ft., Thence S50⁰00’E 1,530 ft. to the east line of said Section 31, a total distance of 1,535 ft., more or less PARCEL “C” A parcel of land, five feet either side of a line generally running parallel to and 15 ft. north of an existing aerial powerline situated in the SW¼SE¼ Section 20, T12N, R67W and more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeast corner of Section 20, T12N, R67W, thence north 1,093 ft. along the east line of said Section 20, thence west 2,430 feet to a point located 15 ft. east of the centerline of an existing private road and 15 ft. north of an existing aerial power line crossing said road and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence S54⁰27’E 618 ft., Thence S70⁰16’E 335 ft. to a point five feet west of the west right-of-way line of Interstate 25, Thence parallel to and five feet west of the west right-of-way line of Interstate 25 on a bearing of N20⁰ 53’E a distance of 422 ft; a distance of 1,375 ft., more or less. DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Laurie Kadrich, Seth Lorson Ted Shepard, Beth Sowder AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 18 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2012, Amending the Land Use Code by Designating Certain Types of Multi- family Housing Development Projects as Being Subject to Planning and Zoning Board Review. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2012, amends the Land Use Code to require larger multi-family housing developments (50 dwelling units, or 75 bedrooms) to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). A Type 2 review requires that the developer hold a pre-submittal neighborhood meeting. The benefit to the neighborhood meeting is that the public is given an opportunity to provide input on a project while it is still in the early stages of development. In recent months a large amount of multi-family housing developments have been appealed by concerned citizens to Council based on the assertion that the projects are not compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. This procedural change seeks to provide more opportunity for the public to participate in the development review process for multi-family housing projects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: November 6, 2012 STAFF: Laurie Kadrich, Ted Shepard Seth Lorson, Beth Sowder AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 19 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2012, Amending the Land Use Code by Designating Certain Types of Multi-family Housing Development Projects as Being Subject to Planning and Zoning Board Review. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On October 9, 2012, Council directed staff to draft an ordinance amending the Land Use Code (LUC) to require larger multi-family housing developments (50 dwelling units, or 75 bedrooms) to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). A Type 2 review requires that the developer hold a pre-submittal neighborhood meeting. The benefit to the neighborhood meeting is that the public is given an opportunity to provide input on a project while it is still in the early stages of development. In recent months a large amount of multi-family housing developments have been appealed by concerned citizens to Council based on the assertion that the projects are not compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. This proposed procedural change seeks to provide more opportunity for the public to participate in the development review process for multi-family housing projects. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council directed staff to move forward with a three-phase approach to Land Use Code (LUC) changes for multi-family housing. Phase 1 was adopted by Council on September 18, 2012. The principal purpose for Phase 2 is to address intensity concerns as voiced by concerned citizens and recommended in the West Central Neighborhoods Plan. At the October 9 Work Session, City staff presented four potential LUC changes to address these concerns. City Council provided the following feedback: 1. Consider creating a threshold size for multi-family developments that can be reviewed administratively (Type 1) up to a maximum of 50 dwelling units or 75 bedrooms. Any larger must be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). Council Feedback: City Council directed staff to develop an ordinance and schedule it for Council consideration on November 6, 2012. 2. Consider creating a 30% limit on the amount of 4-bedroom units that can be permitted in multi-family developments. Council Feedback: This option is being forwarded to the Student Housing Action Plan (SHAP) for further evaluation. (See Attachment 1 for more details.) 3. Consider creating a definition of student housing and/or create a university district. Council Feedback: Council agreed with the staff recommendation not to define “student” housing. Council directed that the University District options be moved to the Student Housing Action Plan (SHAP) process for further vetting. 4. Consider adjusting the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone boundary. Council Feedback: Council agreed with the staff recommendation to leave the TOD boundary in its current location. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. COPY COPY COPY COPY November 6, 2012 -2- ITEM 19 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board agreed with Council’s direction to create a threshold of 50 DUs(Dwelling Units)/75 Bedrooms for multi-family housing projects to be reviewed by Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). PUBLIC OUTREACH The Student Housing Action Plan (SHAP) has done extensive outreach to stakeholders since summer 2011. Six meetings in September were specifically held in order to hear feedback regarding Phase 2 LUC proposals: 9/6/12 – Affordable Housing Board 9/11/12 – Fort Collins Board of Realtors Governmental Affairs committee 9/14/12 – Planning and Zoning Board 9/18/12 – Northern Colorado Rental Housing Association 9/26/12 – Landmark Preservation Commission 9/27/12 – Building Review Board 10/17/12 – Women’s Commission ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council Work Session Summary, October 9, 2012 2. Letter from Affordable Housing Board 3. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, September 20, 2012 1 ORDINANCE NO. 130, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE BY DESIGNATING CERTAIN TYPES OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AS BEING SUBJECT TO PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW WHEREAS, on October 8, 2012, the City Council directed staff to prepare and present to the City Council an ordinance amending the Land Use Code to require larger multi-family housing developments to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that review by the Planning and Zoning Board is beneficial for an enhanced public project review of larger multi-family housing developments because review by the Planning and Zoning Board also requires the holding of a neighborhood meeting which affords the public an opportunity to provide input on a project while it is still in the early stages of development; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amendments proposed by this Ordinance are in the best interests of the City because they provide more opportunity for the public to participate in the development review process for larger multi-family housing development projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 4.5(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the L-M-N District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings. 2. Two-family dwellings. 3. Single-family attached dwellings. 4. Multi-family dwellings (limited to eight [8] or less units per building) containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 2 5. Group homes for up to eight (8) developmentally disabled or elderly persons. 6. Mixed-use dwellings. 7. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than four (4) tenants. Section 2. That Section 4.5(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the L-M-N District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Mobile home parks. 2. Group homes, other than allowed in subparagraph (2)(a)5 above. 3. Multi-family dwellings containing more than eight (8) units per building; or, containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 3. That Section 4.6(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the M-M-N District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings on lots containing no more than six thousand (6,000) square feet. 2. Two-family dwellings. 3. Single-family attached dwellings. 4. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 5. Mixed-use dwellings. 3 6. Group homes for up to eight (8) developmentally disabled or elderly persons. 7. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. Section 4. That Section 4.6(B)(3)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the M-M-N District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Group homes, other than allowed in subparagraph (2)(a) above. 2. Fraternity and sorority houses. 3. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 5. That Section 4.10(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the H-M-N District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 2. Mixed-use dwellings. 3. Group homes for up to eight (8) developmentally disabled or elderly persons. 4. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. 5. Fraternity and sorority houses. 4 Section 6. That Section 4.10(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the H-M-N District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Group homes, other than those permitted pursuant to subparagraph (2)(a) above. 2. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 7. That the table contained in Section 4.16(B)(2)A. of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 8. That Section 4.17(B)(2)(a) of the Land use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use Old City Center Canyon Avenue Civic Center A. RESIDENTIAL Two-family dwellings Not Permitted Type 1 Not Permitted Single-family attached dwellings (up to four [4] units per building) Not Permitted Type 1 Type 1 Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. BDR Type 2 Type 2 Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 (2) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family attached dwellings. 2. Single-family detached dwellings containing no more than eight hundred (800) square feet of floor area, constructed on lots which contain existing dwellings. 3. Two-family dwellings. 4. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 5. Group homes for up to eight (8) developmentally disabled or elderly persons. 6. Mixed-use dwellings. 7. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. Section 9. That Section 4.17(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Group homes other than those in 2(a) above. 2. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 10. That Section 4.18 (B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the C-C District, subject to administrative review: 6 (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family attached dwellings. 2. Two-family dwellings. 3. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 4. Group homes. 5. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. 6. Mixed-use dwellings. Section 11. That Section 4.18(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the C-C District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Fraternity and sorority houses. 2. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 12. That Section 4.19(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the C-C-N District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings on lots containing less than six thousand (6,000) square feet. 2. Two-family dwellings. 3. Single-family attached dwelling. 7 4. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 5. Group homes for up to eight (8) developmentally disabled or elderly persons. 6. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. 7. Mixed-use dwellings. Section 13. That Section 4.19(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the C-C-N District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Group homes, other than allowed in subparagraph (2)(a)6 above. 2. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 14. That Section 4.20(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following land uses are permitted in the C-C-R District, subject to administrative review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family attached dwellings. 2. Two-family dwellings. 3. Group homes. 4. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. 5. Mixed-use dwellings. 8 6. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants. Section 15. That Section 4.20(B)(3)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the C-C-R District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family detached houses located on lots containing no more than six thousand (6,000) square feet. 2. Fraternity and sorority houses. 3. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Section 16. That the table contained in Section 4.21(B)(2)A. of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use I-25/SH 392 (CAC) General Commercial District (C-G) A. RESIDENTIAL Extra occupancy rental houses with 5 or fewer tenants Not permitted BDR Shelters for victims of domestic violence Not permitted BDR Mixed-use dwellings Type 1 Type 1 Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. Not permitted Type 1 Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Not permitted Type 2 . . . . . . . . . Section 17. That Section 4.22(B)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the C-S District, subject to administrative review: 9 (a) Residential Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings located on lots containing less than six thousand (6,000) square feet.* 2. Two-family dwellings.* 3. Single-family attached dwellings.* 4. Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less.* 5. Group homes.* 6. Extra occupancy rental houses with more than five (5) tenants.* 7. Mixed-use dwellings. * Not allowed within two hundred (200) feet of North College Avenue. Section 18. That Section 4.22(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the C-S District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. (b) Institutional/Civic/Public Uses: 1. Major public facilities. (c) Commercial/Retail Uses: 1. Drive-in restaurants. 2. Large retail establishments. 10 3. Day shelters, provided that they do not exceed ten thousand (10,000) square feet and are located within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-quarter [¼] mile) of a Transfort route. 4. Outdoor amphitheaters. (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Recycling facilities. 2. Transport terminals (truck terminals, public works yards, container storage). Section 19. That the table contained in Section 4.24(B)(2)A of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use Riverside Area All Other Areas A. RESIDENTIAL Single-family detached dwellings BDR BDR Two-family dwellings BDR BDR Single-family attached dwellings BDR BDR Multi-family dwellings containing fifty (50) dwelling units or less; and, containing seventy-five (75) bedrooms or less. BDR Type 1 Multi-family dwellings containing more than fifty (50) dwelling units; or, containing more than seventy-five (75) bedrooms. Type 2 Type 2 . . . . . . . . . 11 Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Sharon Thomas Heidi Phelps AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 19 SUBJECT Items Relating to the 2012 Fall Cycle of the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing and Community Development Activities Utilizing Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs, and the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. A. Public Hearing and Resolution 2012-105 Approving the Programs and Projects that Will Receive Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs, and the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2012, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Program Years in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Resolution will complete the 2012 fall cycle of the Competitive Process for allocating $1,670,130 in City financial resources to affordable housing projects and public facility activities. Ordinance No. 131, 2012, reappropriates Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that have been returned to the program for allocation in the fall 2012 Competitive Process. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Resolution 2012-105 establishes which programs and projects will receive funding with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) and Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) dollars for the FY 2012 program year which began on October 1, 2012. A combined total of $1,670,130 was available for funding in the fall cycle. The CDBG Commission presents to the City Council a list of recommendations as to which programs and projects should receive funding. The following table summarizes the total amount and sources of available CDBG, HOME and AHF funds for distribution during the 2012 fall cycle of the Competitive Process: Available Funding AMOUNT SOURCE $750,000 FY 2010 and 2011 CDBG Reprogrammed funds $407,570 FY 2012 HOME Participating Jurisdiction Grant $198,020 FY 2012 HOME Program Income $81,497 FY 2012 HOME CHDO Set-aside $89,888 FY 2011 HOME CHDO Set-aside $143,155 FY 2012 Affordable Housing Fund $1,670,130 Total Funding Available During the spring 2011 cycle of the Competitive Process, Merten, Inc. was awarded $750,000 of CDBG funds for the affordable housing senior project, Union Place. In July 2012, the funds were returned to the City because the developer was unable to continue with the project. Ordinance No.131, 2012 reappropriates those CDBG funds to be reprogrammed into the 2012 fall cycle of the Competitive Process. Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) funds are HOME grant funds required to be specifically earmarked for use by CHDOs in the city. City CHDO agencies include CARE Housing, Neighbor-to-Neighbor, and Villages (formerly the Fort Collins Housing Corporation). Villages was the only CHDO agency requesting funding in the 2012 fall cycle. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 19 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, and the Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program provide federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to the City of Fort Collins which can be allocated to housing and community development related programs and projects, thereby, reducing the demand on the City’s General Fund Budget to address such needs. The total amount of CDBG funds available for allocation for the fall cycle of the Competitive Process is $750,000 and $776,975 from HOME funds. The City’s General Fund contributes $325,047 of Affordable Housing Fund dollars for the fall cycle of the competitive process. Of those funds, $131,892 were allocated to the Fort Collins Housing Authority’s Supportive Housing project following the spring cycle and $50,000 was allocated to developing the Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Plan, leaving $143,155 to fund projects/programs in the fall 2012 cycle of the Competitive Process. Through the provision of affordable housing, more of Fort Collins’ work force can reside within the community. This means there is an available labor pool within the city, which is a positive benefit to economic sustainability. Public/human services programs contribute to economic sustainability by providing such programs as job training and child care so workers can maintain their employment and housing situations. By providing funding for needed upgrades to their facilities or for partial purchase of service locations, the agencies are better able to utilize funds to serve their clients. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Affordable housing programs help provide for a healthy environment. By offering affordable housing options for lower income people, more of Fort Collins’ work force can live in the community instead of being forced to live outside the community and commute into the city for work. This helps reduce traffic congestion and, thus, improves air quality. Affordable housing developers, including for-profit and non-profit agencies, are utilizing green building practices. Green building practices are being used in both new construction and major rehabilitation of existing housing unit projects. These practices include geothermal applications and other energy saving techniques. All affordable housing projects utilizing CDBG and HOME funds are required to pass a HUD Environmental Review which covers such items as noise impacts, floodplains, hazardous materials, etc. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission Recommendations The CDBG Commission presents recommendations as to which programs and projects should receive funding from the available funding sources presented above, including CDBG, HOME and AHF funds. The following tables present the allocations recommended by the Commission to the City Council within each major category: Economic Development Category Applicant Project/Program Funding Request Commission’s Recommendation Unfunded Balance Percent of Request Funded ED-1 Fort Collins Local Development Company: Revolving Loan Fund for Start- up Companies $300,000 $0 $300,000 0% November 20, 2012 -3- ITEM 19 Affordable Housing Category Applicant Project/Program Funding Request Commission’s Recommendation Unfunded Balance Percent of Request Funded HO-1 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program – Affordable Housing Funds $50,000 $50,000 AHF $0 100% HO-2 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program – HOME Funds $50,000 $50,000 HOME $0 100% HO-3 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for CDDT $156,240 (Grant) $156,240 HOME (Grant) $0 100% HO-4 Fort Collins Housing Authority: TBRA Administrative Costs $17,434 (Grant) $17,434 AHF (Grant) $0 100% HO-5 Housing Authority of the City of Loveland: Larimer Home Improvement Program $75,000 (Grant) $67,721 AHF (Grant) $7,279 90% HO-6 Villages Ltd.: Property Acquisition $1,072,811 $1,072,811 CDBG/HOME 0% 100% All funding recommendations in the Affordable Housing category are in the form of a “Due on Sale Loan + 5% Simple Interest” unless noted as a grant. November 20, 2012 -4- ITEM 19 PUBLIC OUTREACH HUD regulations require a 30-day public comment period on the proposed allocation of CDBG and HOME funds as recommended by the CDBG Commission. Staff placed an ad in the Coloradoan presenting the list of recommended funding for programs/projects and indicated the public comment period would start on October 15, 2012, and end on November 13, 2012. To date, no public comments have been received. ATTACHMENTS 1. Background and Summary of the CDBG Commission’s Recommendations for Funding 2. Background Information on the Competitive Process 3. Affordable Housing Board’s Comments, Meeting Minutes September 20, 2012 4. Background Information on the CDBG and HOME Federal Programs 5. CDBG Commission’s Funding Recommendations, Meeting Minutes October 11, 2012 1 ATTACHMENT 1 Background And Summary of CDBG Commission’s Recommendations for Funding At the November 20, 2012, regular City Council meeting, the Council will be conducting a public hearing and consider the adoption of a resolution establishing which programs and projects will receive funding from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Federal Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program and the City’s Affordable Housing Fund for the FY 2012 Program year. The resolution establishing which programs and projects will receive funds represents the culmination of the fall cycle of the 2012 Competitive Process approved in January 2000 by the Council for the allocation of the City’s financial resources to affordable housing programs/projects and community development activities. Additional background material about the Competitive Process is included in Attachment 2. Since early January of this year, the CDBG Commission and members of the City staff’s Affordable Housing and Grants Administration Work Group have conducted public hearings to assess community development and housing needs in Fort Collins, conducted technical assistance training workshops for applicants, and solicited applications for funding. The City’s Affordable Housing Board reviewed the written applications for affordable housing projects and forwarded a priority ranking of proposals, as well as comments and questions, to the CDBG Commission. See Attachment 3 for a copy of the Board’s materials sent to the CDBG Commission. The CDBG Commission, in addition to reviewing the written applications, personally interviewed each applicant, analyzed the applications, and formulated a list of recommendations to the City Council as to which programs and projects should receive funding. The CDBG and HOME Programs are ongoing grant administration programs funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fort Collins has received CDBG Program funds since 1975 and HOME Program funds since 1994. The City is an Entitlement Community recipient of CDBG funds and a Participating Jurisdiction recipient of HOME funds, meaning the City is guaranteed a certain level of funding each year. The level of funding is dependent on the total amount of funds allocated to the programs by Congress and on a formula developed by HUD, which includes data on total population, minorities as a percentage of population, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Additional background information on the City's HOME and CDBG Programs is presented in Attachment 4. The City’s Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) was established in 2000 to supplement federal funding from the CDBG and HOME Programs. One purpose of the AHF was to have a source of funding free of federal rules and regulations. 2 SELECTION PROCESS The selection process for the City's FY 2012 Competitive Process began in January when the CDBG Commission held a public hearing to obtain citizen input on community development and affordable housing needs. The City’s Social Sustainability Department placed legal advertisements in local newspapers starting in July to solicit requests for housing, community development and public facility projects for FY 2012. In addition emails were sent to potential applicants. The application deadline was Thursday August 16, 2012. At the close of the deadline the City received ten (10) applications requesting a total of $2,102,685. Copies of the housing applications were distributed to the Affordable Housing Board and all applications were made available to the CDBG Commission in early September. On Thursday September 20, 2012, the Affordable Housing Board conducted a special meeting to review the housing proposals and prepared a priority listing of applications to the CDBG Commission (see Attachment 3). On Thursday, September 27, the Commission met to hear presentations and ask clarification questions from each applicant. The Commission then met on Thursday, October 11 for the purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded for the FY 2012 program year. At this meeting, the Commission reviewed the written applications, the applicant's verbal presentation, the information provided during the question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of agencies who received funding in previous years. The Commission then worked on the formulation of its list of recommendations. CDBG COMMISSION'S LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS The Commission had to decide which applicants presented programs and projects which best fit the City's needs, had to insure funding allocations were kept within HUD regulations, and followed the priorities contained in the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan. Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding and the Commission's funding recommendations. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS ED-1 Fort Collins Local Development Company – Revolving Loan Funds for Start- up Companies Amount of Request: $300,000 (Due-on-Sale Loan) CDBG Funding Recommendation: $0 This request seeks to provide monies for a revolving loan fund for start-up companies. Funding for such early-stage companies is not an option through traditional revenue sources, such as the Small Business Administration (SBA). The goal of the project is to create 10 jobs for low- to moderate-income employees. The LDC was formed in 1977 to 3 provide micro-finance funding to local businesses, and has $600,000 in assets to lend. The CDBG funding would augment and mitigate risk for the LDC debt fund. AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS HO-1 City of Fort Collins – Homebuyer Assistance Program - AHF Amount of Request: $50,000 (Due-on-sale Loan) AHF Funding Recommendation: $50,000 (Due-on-sale Loan) AHF The Social Sustainability Department is requesting $50,000 in Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) dollars to assist with homebuyer assistance applications that don’t meet federal guidelines (e.g., rentals) and to provide required City funding program match. The overall program funding is anticipated to serve a minimum of 42 households. For this request, $27,200 will provide for a minimum of five (5) loans, and $22,800 will fund the 12 hours per week needed for the Administrator to operate this City program. The project provides loans up to 6% of the purchase price (to a maximum of $10,000) for downpayment and closing costs for households earning less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). HO-2 City of Fort Collins – Homebuyer Assistance Program - HOME Amount of Request: $50,000 (Due-on-sale Loan) HOME Funding Recommendation: $50,000 (Due-on-sale Loan) HOME The Social Sustainability Department is requesting $50,000 in HOME dollars to assist with homebuyer assistance applications. The overall program funding is anticipated to serve a minimum of 42 households. This request is anticipated to serve a minimum of ten (10) loans. The project provides loans up to 6% of the purchase price (to a maximum of $10,000) for downpayment and closing costs for households earning less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). HO-3 Fort Collins Housing Authority – Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for CDDT Amount of Request: $156,240 (Grant) HOME Funding Recommendation: $156,240 (Grant) HOME As part of a the Community Dual Disorders Team’s (CDDT) collaborative service program, the Fort Collins Housing Authority is submitting an application for HOME funds for the rental assistance component to support chronically homeless people. The $156,240 request would provide for 24 months of rental and deposit assistance for up to 10 individuals suffering from both severe mental illness and a severe substance abuse disorder. HO-4 Fort Collins Housing Authority – Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for CDDT - Administration Amount of Request: $17,434 (Grant) AHF Funding Recommendation: $17,434 (Grant) AHF 4 The Fort Collins Housing Authority is requesting $17,434 from the Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) for housing assistance administration that supports the currently requested Tenant Based Rental Assistance funds for the Community Dual Disorders Team (CDDT) treatment program participants. The housing eligibility, compliance, coaching, housing search, lease negotiations, housing retention and re-housing issues are among the functions of the administrative support. HO-5 Housing Authority of Loveland – Larimer Home Improvement Program Amount of Request: $75,000 (Grant) AHF Funding Recommendation: $67,721 (Grant) AHF This a request from the Loveland Housing Authority to provide funding for the Larimer Home Improvement Program (LHIP) which provides low- to no-interest loans for homeowners in Larimer County-- including within the City Limits of Fort Collins--to address health, safety, and energy efficient repairs to their homes. The program is available to families earning no more than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), but the average participant is closer to 50% AMI. The Emergency Funds Program provides a one-time-only grant of up to $1,000 to very low income families (50% or below of AMI) who have emergency repair needs (e.g., no hot water, leaking or burst pipes, dangerous electrical issues). HO-6 Villages, Ltd. – Property Acquisition Amount of Request: $1,072,811 (Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG, HOME and AHF Funding Recommendation: $1,072,811(Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG and HOME This request from the non-profit development arm partner of the Fort Collins Housing Authority seeks to provide partial financing for the purchase of 284 affordable rental units at risk of converting to market rate rents. The proposal seeks five percent (5%) of the total purchase price of $21,456,215. The acquisition consists of three adjacent properties at the northeast corner of Horsetooth Road and Shields Street, with a mix of unit types: 1-bedroom (52), 2-bedroom (210), and 3-bedroom (16). The current portfolio serves a range of households between 45% and 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), with the majority of tenant households below 60% AMI. PUBLIC FACILITY APPLICATIONS PF-1 Respite Care – Life Skills Program Area for Teens with Developmental Disabilities Amount of Request: $72,700 (Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG Funding Recommendation: $72,700 (Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG This proposal seeks funding to upgrade the Respite Care facility’s unfinished basement area to provide more effective programming and care for this agency’s youth population, ages 13-21. The universally designed additional space will include: handicap 5 accessibility; plumbing and electrical; walls and ceiling; a separate storage area; a bathroom and small kitchen; patio, fence and walkway; and furnishings. Overall cost of project is $136,200. PF-2 Sexual Assault Victim Advocate Center – SAVA Center Capital Campaign Amount of Request: $300,000 (Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG Funding Recommendation: $175,224 (Due-on-sale Loan) CDBG Request is for funds to support the purchase of 4,000 square feet of program delivery space at 4812 S. College Ave.; to accommodate SAVA’s 14 Fort Collins staff and 3-4 interns. Annually, SAVA provides over 17,000 units of service to over 600 victims of sexual assault from all over Larimer County. SAVA also has an education component, serving 6,000 PSD students. The acquisition cost for the anticipated site is $540,000. PF-3 Turning Point Center for Youth and Family Development Inc. – Wheelchair Accessibility – Mathews Boy’s Facility Amount of Request: $8,500 (Grant) CDBG Funding Recommendation: $8,000 (Grant) AHF The request is for a wheelchair lift purchase and installation at the rear of the current residential boys’ facility, located at 614 Mathews Street. The former facility had wheelchair access. The current facility does not, creating a barrier for both residents with disabilities and family members with disabilities who are visiting or engaged in co- treatment programming. CDBG COMMISSION'S SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The CDBG Commission has recommended that $1,670,130 (100.0%) of the available funding be allocated to Affordable Housing and Public Facility programs and projects. The following table summarizes the utilization of funds from all sources. Recommended Funding % of Total Category $0 0.00% Economic Development $1,414,206 84.7% Affordable Housing Programs and Projects $255,924 15.3% Public Facility Projects $1,670,130 100.0% Total Funds Available Attachment 5 contains information from the CDBG Commission meeting on October 11, 2012 outlining how formulation of the funding recommendations was conducted. 1 ATTACHMENT 2 Background Information on the Competitive Process for the Allocation of City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing Programs/Projects and Other Community Development Activities In February of 1999, the City Council approved the Priority Affordable Housing Needs and Strategies report, which contained the following strategy: Change from an administrative funding mechanism...to a competitive application process for the Affordable Housing Fund. Between September and November of 1999, a subcommittee consisting of members from the Affordable Housing Board and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission met with staff to review issues and develop options for establishment of a competitive process. In addition, the staff solicited ideas from existing affordable housing providers. The subcommittee established the following Mission Statement for their work: Develop a competitive application process and establish a set of shared criteria for the allocation of the City’s financial assistance resources to affordable housing projects/programs that address the City’s priority affordable housing needs. Competitive Process Five options for a competitive process were reviewed and discussed by the subcommittee. The subcommittee reached a general consensus to support a competitive process that involved both the Affordable Housing Board and the CDBG Commission. The option selected would have the Affordable Housing Board providing recommendations to the City Council in regards to affordable housing policy. In addition, the option would have the Affordable Housing Board reviewing all affordable housing applications for CDBG, HOME and Affordable Housing funds. The Board would then provide a priority listing of proposals to the CDBG Commission. The CDBG Commission would then make the final recommendations to the City Council for funding. Funding Cycles The subcommittee also agreed that there should be two funding cycles per year, one in the spring and the other in the fall. CDBG Program funds would be allocated in the spring to affordable housing programs/projects and other community development activities (public services, public facilities, etc.). HOME Program and Affordable Housing Fund monies would be allocated in the fall primarily to affordable housing programs/projects. The staff and subcommittee agreed that overlaying the new process and cycles would be 2 heightened staff technical assistance to applicants. Both the subcommittee and staff recognize that a bi-annual process will require additional meetings by both the CDBG Commission and Affordable Housing Board, and will require more time from current City staff, and increase the City Council’s involvement. Schedule The subcommittee also discussed two alternative schedules for the funding cycles. The option selected incorporates a spring cycle that starts in January and ends in May, and a fall cycle that starts in July and end in November. Review Criteria The subcommittee also discussed and agreed to a new set of review criteria to be used to rank proposals. The criteria are divided into the following five major categories: 1. Impact/Benefit 2. Need/Priority 3. Feasibility 4. Leveraging Resources 5. Capacity and History The Impact/Benefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups and provide longer benefits. The Need/Priority criteria help assure the proposal meets adopted City goals and priorities. The Feasibility criteria reward projects for timeliness and documented additional funding. The Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds to the City (loans) and for their ability to leverage other resources. And, the Capacity and History criteria help gage an applicant’s ability to do the project and reward applicants that have completed successful projects in the past (have good track records). See next page for a detailed criteria scoring sheet. Application Forms Two new application forms have also been developed for a new on-line application process using a web-based platform through a product called ZoomGrants. One form is used in the fall for Housing and Public Facility proposals, while the other form is used in the spring and incorporates questions for all types of applicants. City Council Adoption On January 18, 2000, the City Council approved Resolution 2000-13, formally adopting the Competitive Process for the allocation of City financial resources to affordable housing programs/projects and community development activities and the component parts discussed above. 3 Guidance Charts for CDBG, HOME and Affordable Housing Funding There are two different “ranking sheets” which are used as guidelines for the Competitive Process. Primarily, the components listed serve to ensure that federal regulations and local policies and preferences are being addressed. These guidance charts are one set of many tools to assist the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission and the Affordable Housing Board (AHB) in Competitive Process decision making. The ranking sheets are completed by staff, based on information provided in proposal applications. 1 ATTACHMENT 3 City Of Fort Collins Affordable Housing Board Draft Minutes of the Priority Ranking Meeting Segment Special Board Meeting 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, Colorado September 20, 2012, 4 to 6 p.m. Chair: Dan Byers Staff Liaison: Ken Waido 970-221-6753 City Council Liaison: Lisa Poppaw Board Members present: Dan Byers, Jeff Johnson Troy Jones, Mike Sollenberger, Wayne Thompson Board Members absent: Ben Blonder, Karen Miller Staff present: Ken Waido Council Members present: None Other Staff present: Chadrick Martinez, Development Director, Fort Collins Housing Authority; Kristin Fritz, Senior Project Manager, Fort Collins Housing Authority; Kate Jeracki, Note Taker Guests: Marilyn Heller, League of Women Voters Meeting called to order with a quorum present at 4:15 p.m. by Chair Dan Byers PRIORITY RANKING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSALS — Ken Waido reviewed the six applications for Affordable Housing funds have been received for the fall cycle of the Competitive Process. The Board discussed each request, then assigned priority ranking for recommendations to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission. Jeff Johnson recused himself from the discussion because of a conflict of interest; he sits on the board of Funding Partners, which is involved in request HO-6 (Villages Ltd.: Property Acquisition). 2 HO-1 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program - AHF -- $50,000 loan from the Affordable Housing Fund for the City of Fort Collins Homebuyer Assistance Program (HBA) HO-2 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program - HOME -- $50,000 loan from HOME funds for the City of Fort Collins Homebuyer Assistance Program The overall program funding is anticipated to serve a minimum of 42 households earning less than 80 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) with loans of up to 6 percent of a home’s purchase price (up to $10,000) for downpayment and closing costs. AHF monies provide the City’s portion of the funding match for CDBG HBA loans; HOME funds provide the required federal match. Funds paid back from loans to homeowners are returned to general Competitive Process coffers. HO-3 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant Based Rental Assistance for CDDT -- $156,240 grant from HOME funds for the Fort Collins Housing Authority’s Tenant- Based Rental Assistance Community Dual Disorders Treatment (CDDT) program HO-4 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant Based Rental Assistance for CDDT Administrative Costs -- $17,434 grant from the Affordable Housing Fund for administrative support for Fort Collins Housing Authority’s Tenant-Based Rental Assistance for CDDT program HO-3 is for the rental assistance component of the Community Dual Disorders Team’s program to support chronically homeless people. The amount requested would provide for 24 months of rental and deposit assistance for up to 10 individuals suffering from both severe mental illness and a severe substance abuse disorder. Such assistance is eligible for HOME funding only. HO-4 is to support administrative functions of the program: eligibility, compliance, coaching, housing search, ease negotiations, housing retention and re-housing issues. HO-4 could be covered by HOME or CDBG funds, but there is no current funding available in those budgets, so the funding must come from the AHF. HO-5 Housing Authority of the City of Loveland: Larimer Home Improvement Program -- $75,000 grant from the Affordable Housing Fund for the Larimer Home Improvement Program (LHIP) LHIP is administered by the Loveland Housing Authority and provides low- and no- interest loans to county homeowners – including within the city limits of Fort Collins – to address health, safety and energy-efficiency repairs to their homes. The program is available to families earning no more than 80 percent AMI, but the average participant is closer to 50 percent. The Emergency Funds Program provides a one-time-only grant of up to $1,000 to very low-income families – 50 percent AMI or below – for emergency repair needs. The amount requested will match the larger state Division of Housing (DOH) grant for housing rehabilitation. Request components are: $42,500 for rehab for an estimated three households; $25,000 for emergency repairs for an estimated 25 households; and $7,500 for program administration. Repaid loans are returned to the program; funds must come from the AHF. 3 HO-6 Villages Ltd.: Property Acquisition -- $1,072,081 loan to Villages Ltd. For Property Acquisition: Phase 1 This request from the nonprofit development arm of the Fort Collins Housing Authority seeks to provide partial financing for the purchase of 284 affordable rental units at risk of converting to market rate rents. The amount requested is 5 percent of the total purchase price of $21,456,215 for three adjacent properties at the northeast corner of Horsetooth Road and Shields Street which serve households between 45 percent and 80 percent of AMI. The applicant has secured significant commitments for other financial layering of the project, which must close by December 15, 2012. Purchase of the property will extend affordability of units to 2043. Chadrick Martinez of the Fort Collins Housing Authority explained that HO-6, the Villages project, is being underwritten by First Bank and Funding Partners. Villages has also applied for a $2 million grant from the Colorado Division of Housing for the first phase of the project. Phase II will be the tax credit phase, in which the nonprofit will take out short-term – 12-24 month – debt for rehabilitation of the units. Dan Byers asked if the financing should fall through on the acquisition, would the units go to market rate rentals. Ken Waido said yes. Martinez explained that the current owner’s 15-year tax credits are expiring at the end of the year. The Villages represents 15 percent of the City’s tax-credit portfolio and has since the early 1990s. If they were to go to market rates, it would take 10-15 years to replace 60-80 units at a time, and longer than 2 years to approve a deal, and another 15 years to get back to where we are right now. He added that the property is worth keeping affordable, given the number of units in one spot, but some components are at the end of their useful life and will require $20,000 to $30,000 per unit to rehab. The location has passed all HUD-required environmental reviews, and FirstBank is not requiring any additional. Full funding of the amount requested is required because of the many pieces of the financial puzzle that need to fit together, Martinez said. If they don’t make the closing, the deal’s off the table. Mike Sollenberger said this was the most exciting opportunity to retain and expand the city’s affordable housing base he has seen and offered kudos to Martinez. He asked if there was enough money to fund all of the projects fully. Ken Waido said that all of the housing projects could be funded, but the CDBG has an additional $680,000 in requests for four additional proposals – three for Public Facilities and one for Economic Development – in the Fall Cycle. After discussion, the Affordable Housing Board gave the proposals the following ranking: 1. HO-6 (Villages: Property Acquisition); recommended full funding 4 2. HO-3 (FCHA: TBRA) and HO-4 (FCHA: TBRA – Administrative Support); partial funding acceptable 3. HO-1 (City of Fort Collins: HBA Program – AHF) and HO-2 (City of Fort Collins HBA Program – HOME); partial funding acceptable 4. HO-5 (Housing Authority of the City of Loveland: LHIP); partial funding acceptable Dan Byers felt they were all good programs, and asked Board members for comments on the rankings to share with the CDBG Commission at its meeting on October 11th. HO-6 was the obvious first choice, and the Board felt it should be fully funded even if other proposals were not. Wayne Thompson pointed out that it keeps a huge number of units affordable, units that would take a decade and a half to replace. Troy Jones said HO-3 and HO-4 are important because of the very-low income population served. Ken Waido added that it is part of the city’s effort to break the cycle of homelessness. Wayne Thompson said it seemed that HO-3 and HO-4 spend a lot of money to help 10 people, and HO-1 and HO-2 provided more bang for the buck. Ken said he expects demand for homebuyer’s assistance will pick up soon, now that the City has hired someone to administer the program. Mike Sollenberger thought HO-5 should be a lower priority because the people served are already in a home. Wayne Thompson felt that it was something that could help people stay in their homes by addressing safety and quality of life issues. -- Meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. by Chair Dan Byers. -- 1 ATTACHMENT 4 Background Information on the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) Programs COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM CDBG PROGRAM NATIONAL OBJECTIVES The primary objective of the CDBG Program is the development of viable urban communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income. Programs and projects funded with CDBG funds must address at least one of the following three broad National Objectives: (1) provide a benefit to low or moderate income households or persons, (2) eliminate or prevent slum and blight conditions, or (3) meet urgent community development needs which pose an immediate and serious threat to the health and welfare of the community. Presented below is a comparison of City CDBG expenditures for programs and projects categorized according to the National Objectives. HUD regulations require at least 70% of CDBG funds be used for activities that primarily benefit low and moderate-income persons. National Objectives Low/Moderate Income Benefit Slum/Blight Elimination Urgent Need National Average 90% 10% 0% City Expenditures for: 2011 100% 0% 0% 2010 100% 0% 0% 2009 100% 0% 0% 2008 100% 0% 0% 2007 100% 0% 0% 2006 100% 0% 0% 2005 100% 0% 0% 2004 100% 0% 0% 2003 100% 0% 0% 2002 100% 0% 0% 2 CDBG PROGRAM ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES CDBG funds can be used on a wide range of activities including: (1) acquiring deteriorated and/or inappropriately developed real property (including property for the purpose of building new housing); (2) acquiring, constructing, rehabilitating or installing publicly owned facilities and improvements; (3) restoration of historic sites; (4) beautification of urban land; (5) conservation of open spaces and preservation of natural resources and scenic areas; (6) housing rehabilitation can be funded if it benefits low and moderate income people; and (7) economic development activities are eligible expenditures if they stimulate private investment of community revitalization and expand economic opportunities for low and moderate income people and the handicapped. Certain activities are ineligible, under most circumstances, for CDBG funds including: (1) purchase of equipment, (2) operating and maintenance expenses including repair expenses and salaries, (3) general government expenses, (4) political and religious activities, and (5) new housing construction. HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) PROGRAM HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GUIDELINES (Adopted by the Fort Collins City Council, July 18, 1995) PURPOSE: The purpose of the Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program is to increase the supply of decent, safe, and affordable housing in the City of Fort Collins for an extended period of time. All of the HOME funds must benefit low and very low income households which are defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development as having a total household income not exceeding 80% of the median household income for the Fort Collins area. 3 ELIGIBLE PROJECTS: HOME funds must be used in the following ways: 1. DIRECT HOUSING ASSISTANCE: Down payment assistance: To help low-income individuals to purchase housing for their principal residence. Applicants must meet income guidelines of no more than 80% of the current median household income for the Fort Collins area and will be required to attend a homebuyer workshop. Assistance is in the form of zero percent deferred loan up to a maximum of $10,000 to help cover downpayment and closing cost expenses. The funding is repaid with a 5% simple interest charge when the property is sold or transferred out of the buyer’s name. Tenant based rental assistance: To help low-income households avoid eviction and homelessness, TBRA provides up to two years of housing subsidy and case management services to stabilize households and put them on the road to self- sufficiency. 2. NEW CONSTRUCTION of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy targeted for low-income individuals and families which are developed, sponsored, or owned by community housing development organizations (CHDOs), non-profit agencies, and for-profit developers. 3. ACQUISITION of undeveloped, or developed, land resulting in the development or purchase of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy. All regulations regarding income guidelines, purchase price limitations, resale limitations, rental rates, etc., will apply to acquisition projects. ELIGIBLE PROPERTY TYPES: Eligible property types for purchase include both existing property and newly constructed homes. Eligible property includes a single-family property, a condominium unit, a manufactured home (including mobile homes on a permanent foundation), or a cooperative unit. For purposes of the HOME program, homeownership means: (1) ownership in fee simple title, or (2) a 99 year leasehold interest, or (3) ownership or membership in a cooperative, or (4) an equivalent form of ownership which has been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The value and purchase price of the HOME assisted property to be acquired must not exceed 95% of the area median purchase price for that type of housing as established by HUD. RECAPTURE RESTRICTIONS WILL APPLY. (The value must be verified by a qualified appraiser or current tax assessment.) Initial purchase price limit established by HUD is currently $212,015. 4 HOME PROGRAM PRIORITIES The 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan, a planning document required for HUD by entities receiving federal monies for housing and community development activities, identifies the following priorities for housing related needs: 1. Stimulate housing production for very low, low and moderate income households. 2. Increase home ownership opportunities for very low, low and moderate income households. 3. Increase the supply of public housing for families and those with special needs. Implementation and funding of activities to address these priorities will come, in part, from the City of Fort Collins HOME Investment Partnership Program. 1 ATTACHMENT 5 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission Funding Deliberations 215 N. Mason Street, Fort Collins, Colorado October 11, 2012, 5:30 p.m. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Kay Rios, Chair Anita Basham Robert Browning Catherine Costlow Jamaal Curry Margaret Long Emily Sander Kristin Stephens COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Gordon Coombes STAFF PRESENT: Mackenzie Cartin, Intern; Heidi Phelps; Beth Rosen; Sharon Thomas; Ken Waido OTHERS PRESENT: Ray Roth, citizen; Julie Brewen, Executive Director, Fort Collins Housing Authority; Jennifer Jones, Executive Director, SAVA; other citizens; Kate Jeracki, Note Taker The meeting was called to order by Chair Kay Rios at 6 p.m. The purpose of the meeting was to allocate funds requested during the 2012 Fall Cycle of the Competitive Process. The Commission deliberated one Economic Development request; six Housing requests; and three Public Facility requests. ED-1 Fort Collins Local Development Company: Revolving Loan Funds for Start-up Companies -- $300,000 requested Anita Basham moved that the Commission award zero funding to ED-1. Margaret Long seconded. Basham said this request was not a high priority for CDBG funding. Long added that the proposal presentation had not been persuasive, and suggested that more tracking of the present program might produce more results. Kristen Stephens said that even though it was presented as providing jobs, those jobs were in high tech, not for those having a hard time finding any kind of work, and she questioned the actual impact of the proposal. Motion passed unanimously. Zero funding recommended. 2 HO-1 City of Fort Collins Homebuyer Assistance (HBA) Program -- $50,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund Bob Browning moved the Commission fully fund HO-1. Emily Sander seconded. Browning said he liked the flexibility of using Affordable Housing Funds to provide short-term funding to help get people into homes. Motion passed unanimously. Full funding recommended. HO-2 City of Fort Collins Homebuyer Assistance (HBA) Program -- $50,000 from HOME funds Bob Browning moved the Commission fully fund HO-2. Jamaal Curry seconded. Browning said this program has been doing a lot of good for a long time, and he liked that it is now helping with refinancing. Curry said the Commission should always support homeownership. Motion passed unanimously. Full funding recommended. HO-3 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for the CDDT Program -- $156,240 requested Emily Sander moved that the Commission fully fund HO-3. Margaret Long seconded. Sander said this proposal helps a vulnerable population, and she liked the inclusion of case management and other services that are important for success. Motion passed 7-0, with Kay Rios abstaining. Full funding recommended. HO-4 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for the CDDT Program--Administrative Support -- $17,434 requested Emily Sander moved that the Commission fully fund HO-4. Bob Browning seconded. Sander said this money was necessary to support the program. Browning liked that the funds had to come out of the Affordable Housing Fund. Motion passed 7-0, with Kay Rios abstaining. Full funding recommended. HO-5 Housing Authority of the City of Loveland: Larimer Home Improvement Program -- $75,000 requested Kristen Stephens moved the Commission fully fund HO-5. Margaret Long seconded. 3 Stephens said it was important to help low-income residents stay in the homes they already own by providing assistance with emergency repairs for safety issues, like water heaters. Margaret Long said she was glad to hear that the program also funds energy efficiency services to mobile homes, which often have no other resources available. Motion passed 5-2, with Jamaal Curry abstaining, Bob Browning and Emily Sander opposed. Bob Browning moved to reduce funding for HO-5 to $67,721. Kay Rios seconded. Browning explained that the small reduction doesn’t affect the program, which has surplus funds available from previous years, and it balances the expenditures in the Affordable Housing Fund. Motion passed unanimously. Partial funding of $67,721 recommended. HO-6 Villages Ltd.: Property Acquisition -- $1,072,811 requested Bob Browning moved the Commission approve full funding for HO-6. Kristen Stephens seconded. Browning pointed out that the Affordable Housing Board had ranked this request as its first priority. It presents a unique opportunity to preserve 284 existing affordable housing units and the Commission should jump on it. Motion passed unanimously. Full funding recommended. PF-1 Respite Care: Life Skills Program Area for Teens with Developmental Disabilities -- $72,700 requested Bob Browning moved the Commission fully fund PF-1. Kristen Stephens seconded. Browning said Respite Care is a good program, and this is a good public facility project not in the housing arena. Stephens pointed out that this is the only child care program for children with disabilities, and they really need the space for older youth programming. Motion passed unanimously. Full funding recommended. PF-2 Sexual Assault Victim Center (SAVA): SAVA Center Capital Campaign -- $300,000 requested Anita Basham moved that the Commission fund PF-2 at the reduced amount of $200,000. Jamaal Curry seconded. Basham said she understood that in negotiations with City staff, SAVA indicated that $200,000 would be acceptable to help with moving to a larger location. Curry said he supported the work the organization is doing for the population served. Margaret Long added that providing treatment for the incredible damage done to victims of sexual assault can save lives and money in other support programs. Kay Rios pointed out that the majority of SAVA clients are from Fort 4 Collins. Kristen Stephens said that SAVA is actively pursuing other funding, and with the whole community supporting it, the Commission should, too. Motion passed 6-2, with Bob Browning and Catherine Costlow opposed. Bob Browning moved the Commission reduce funding to PF-2 to $175,224. Kay Rios seconded. Browning said that while he is in favor of the program and hates to see the numbers reduced at all--given other priorities, the City does not have funds available to give that that large of an allocation to SAVA at this time. Margaret Long said she had concerns about that much of a cut, especially since the majority of SAVA clients are from Fort Collins. She wondered if it would be possible to reduce the amount Respite Care is requesting for furniture, so SAVA would have to take a smaller cut. Margaret Long offered a friendly amendment to reduce the proposed reduction of $24,776 by $15,000. Bob Browning did not accept the amendment. Kristen Stephens said she agreed with Browning. She did not want to see Respite Care funding reduced, and SAVA is seeking additional funding from other sources. She said she was in favor of the motion as it stands. Kay Rios also agreed. Motion passed 7-1, with Margaret Long opposed. Partial funding of $175,224 approved. PF-3 Turning Point Center for Youth and Family Development, Inc.: Wheelchair Accessibility -- $8,500 requested from CDBG funds Kristen Stephens moved the Commission approve full funding for PF-3. Anita Basham seconded. Stephens said this is very little money to provide something that is greatly needed. Bob Browning offered a friendly amendment to reduce the amount funded to $8,000, with the stipulation the money comes out of the Affordable Housing Fund. Kay Rios explained that the additional $500 was for an impact study required for federal CDBG funds but not for the City’s AHF. Stephens and Basham both accepted the amendment. The amended motion passed unanimously. Funding for $8,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund recommended. Staff updated the draft Funding Matrix to reflect the CDBG Commission’s decisions. In response to a question from Anita Basham, Sharon Thomas explained that the final amounts in each HOME and CDBG subaccount had been redistributed to balance the final numbers. Bob Browning moved that the Commission approve the final Funding Matrix as presented. Kristen Stephens seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. RESOLUTION 2012-105 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING THE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS THAT WILL RECEIVE FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS, AND THE CITY’S AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and the Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program are ongoing grant administration programs funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and WHEREAS, the City has received CDBG Program funds since 1975 and HOME Program funds since 1994; and WHEREAS, the City Council has budgeted General Fund dollars into an Affordable Housing Fund for use in assisting affordable housing programs and projects; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2000, the City Council approved Resolution 2000-13, formally adopting a competitive process for the allocation of City financial resources to affordable housing programs and projects, and community development activities; and WHEREAS, in January and September 2012, the CDBG Commission held two public hearings to obtain citizen input on community development and affordable housing needs, and since then has heard presentations and asked clarification questions from each applicant that submitted a proposal to the City requesting funding; and WHEREAS, on October 11, 2012, the CDBG Commission met in a special meeting for the purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded with carry-over FY 2010 and 2011 CDBG funds, HOME funds from the FY 2011 and 2012 HOME grants, HOME Program Income, and funds from the City’s Affordable Housing Fund; and WHEREAS, as required by HUD regulations, a 30-day public comment period on the proposed allocation of CDBG and HOME funds as recommended by the CDBG Commission began on October 15, 2012 and ended on November 13, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendations of the CDBG Commission, and has determined that the City’s 2012 allocation should be made as set out in this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that City staff is hereby authorized to submit an application to HUD as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING $50,000 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program – Affordable Housing Funds Affordable Housing Funds $50,000 City of Fort Collins: Homebuyer Assistance Program – HOME Funds HOME Funds $156,240 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant Based Rental Assistance for CDDT HOME Funds $17,434 Fort Collins Housing Authority: Tenant Based Rental Assistance for CDDT – Administrative Support Affordable Housing Funds $67,721 Housing Authority of the City of Loveland: Larimer Home Improvement Program Affordable Housing Funds $1,072,811 Villages, Ltd.: Property Acquisition HOME and CDBG Funds PUBLIC FACILITY $72,700 Respite Care: Life Skills Program Area for Teens with Developmental Disabilities CDBG Funds $175,224 Sex Assault Victim Advocate Center (SAVA): Capital Campaign CDBG Funds $8,000 Turning Point Center for Youth and Family Development: Wheelchair Accessibility – Mathews Boy’s Facility Affordable Housing Funds Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 131, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATIONS BETWEEN PROGRAM YEARS IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND WHEREAS, unexpended funds are available from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program from prior fiscal years in the amount of $750,000; and WHEREAS, the unexpended appropriations are available to be transferred and re-allocated to a 2012 CDBG program; and WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution 2012-105 the City Council approved the 2012 Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to transfer by ordinance any unexpected and unencumbered amount or portion thereof from one fund or capital project to another fund or capital project, provided that the purpose for which the funds were initially appropriated no longer exists; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 11, of the City Charter provides that federal grant appropriations shall not lapse if unexpended at the end of the budget year until the expiration of the federal grant; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of all unanticipated CDBG grant and program revenue as described herein will not result in total appropriations in excess of the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues for fiscal year 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the unexpended and unencumbered amount of SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($750,000) is hereby authorized for transfer from the 2010 and 2011 Community Development Block Grant Program to the 2012-2013 Community Development Block Grant Program and appropriated therein. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 20 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2012, Amending Section 2-237 of the City Code Relating to Membership of the Golf Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Golf Board currently consists of nine members appointed by the City Council. At the end of 2012, the terms of three members will expire. Two of those members are eligible for reappointment but did not reapply for reappointment. One member did apply for reappointment. This provides an opportunity for Council to consider changes to the size of the Board without negatively impacting any current members. This opportunity was presented to the Board by staff, and the Board voted to recommend that the Council reduce the size from nine to seven members. This Ordinance amends the City Code to reduce the size of the Board to seven members. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION At the time of creation in 1970, the Golf Board consisted of seven members. In July 1992, upon recommendation of the Council liaison to the Board, the Council increased the size of the Board to nine. There is no information on record to explain the reason for the increase in membership. Staff has now identified the opportunity to resize the Board back to seven without negatively impacting any current members or the Board's work plan. The idea was presented to the Golf Board, and, at its November 7, 2012 regular meeting, the Board voted unanimously to reduce the size of the board from nine to seven members. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its November 7, 2012, the Golf Board voted unanimously to recommend that the Council reduce the size of the Board from nine to seven members. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Golf Board Minutes - November 7, 2012 Golf Administration 215 North Mason Street 3rdFloor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.416.2265 970.221.6586 - fax fcgov.com/golf Golf Board Minutes: October 17, 2012 J.R. mentioned that we have had to cancel some meetings this year due to a lack of quorum so it might be beneficial for the Board to consider decreasing the number of Board members from 9 to 7. He also mentioned that Council has been reviewing the various Boards and Commissions to determine if it would be beneficial to combine some of the Boards. J.R. stated that it might be beneficial to combine Golf into the Parks and Recreation Board. He reminded the Board that he is the staff liaison for the Parks and Recreation Board so they are familiar with what is taking place in Golf. Kevin asked if they were aware that Golf generates their own revenue and J.R. stated that they are aware that Golf is an Enterprise Fund. He said that they wouldn’t be interested in Golf helping fund Parks. J.R. suggested that the Board further discuss these options at their November meeting. Golf Board Minutes: November 7, 2012 J.R. Schnelzer, Director of Parks, reminded the Board that Michele Marquitz and Bob Gerard chose not to reapply for another term; therefore they would be down two members if the vacancies were not filled. J.R. mentioned that he spoke to Rita Harris, Chief Deputy City Clerk, and Ingrid Decker, Senior Assistant City Attorney, and updated the Board on the legal process. Shane Houska, Board Chairperson, and Johnny Hodges, Board Vice Chairperson, informed the Board that they attended the Strategic Planning meeting of the Boards and Commissions in October and that they heard other Boards have also elected to decrease their number of members. J.R. stated that he would need a vote from the Board to begin this process and he would like to get the item on Council’s Agenda for later this month. On a motion by Shane Houska seconded by Bob Visocky the Board voted (7:0) to decrease the number of Golf Board members from 9 to 7. ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. 132, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 2-237 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO MEMBERSHIP OF THE GOLF BOARD WHEREAS, on May 7, 1970, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 026, 1970 creating the Golf Board (the “Board”), which currently consists of nine members; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that seven members is the appropriate number of members for a board of this nature; and WHEREAS, an opportunity to reduce the number of Board members through attrition exists due to the expiration of three members' terms, only one of whom has applied for reappointment; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on November 7, 2012, the Board considered the possibility of reducing the size of the Board and voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council to reduce the size of the Board by two members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 2-237(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-237. Membership; term. (a) The Board shall consist of nine (9) seven (7) members appointed by the City Council. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 21 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2012, Amending Section 2-500 of the City Code Pertaining to a City Service Area. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City’s Charter provides that service areas are provided by ordinance upon the recommendation of the City Manager. This Ordinance amends the City Code, per the City Manager’s recommendation, to create a Planning, Development, and Transportation Service Area, reflecting changes in roles and reporting relationships. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City’s Charter provides that service areas are to be established by ordinance upon the recommendation of the City Manager. The City Code was amended in 2011 to establish a Policy, Planning, and Transportation (PPT) Service Area comprised of the Planning, Development, and Transportation (PDT) Service Unit and the Policy and Project Manager. Deputy City Manager Jones oversees the PPT service area. The current City organizational structure is reflected in Attachment 1. As Deputy City Manager Jones’ roles and responsibilities change, PDT, led by Director Karen Cumbo, will become a direct report to City Manager Darin Atteberry. As a result, it is necessary to amend the existing City Code provisions to reflect the new Planning, Development and Transportation Service Area name and to remove the policy, special projects and strategic planning from the responsibilities of the service area. Deputy City Manager Jones will retain supervision of those functions, as well as supervision of the City Clerk’s Office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Existing City of Fort Collins organizational chart 2. Proposed City of Fort Collins organizational chart city council Karen WeitKunat, mayor Kelly ohlson, mayor Pro tem, district 5 Ben manvel, district 1 Wade troxell, district 4 lisa PoPPaW, district 2 Gerry horaK, district 6 aislinn KottWitz, district 3 city Manager darin atteBerry city attorney steve roy Municipal court judge Kathleen lane boards & coMMissions police serVices John hutto inVestigations don vaGGe inforMation serVices cory christensen patrol Jim szaKmeister adMinistration Jerry schiaGer assistant to the city Manager/eMployee & coMMunication serVices Kelly dimartino chief sustainability officer/ sustainability serVices area Bruce hendee coMMunications & public inVolVeMent Kim neWcomer econoMic deVelopMent Josh BirKs huMan resources Janet miller citizens of fort collins financial serVices miKe BecKstead finance John voss fort collins/ loVeland airport Jason licon other goVernMental units and joint Ventures: downtown development authority, Fort collins housing authority, metropolitan Planning organization, Platte river Power authority, Poudre Fire authority updated october 2012 serVice area serVice unit city council Karen WeitKunat, mayor Kelly ohlson, mayor Pro tem, district 5 Ben manvel, district 1 Wade troxell, district 4 lisa PoPPaW, district 2 Gerry horaK, district 6 aislinn KottWitz, district 3 city Manager darin atteBerry city attorney steve roy Municipal court judge Kathleen lane boards & coMMissions police serVices John hutto inVestigations don vaGGe inforMation serVices cory christensen patrol Jim szaKmeister adMinistration Jerry schiaGer assistant to the city Manager/eMployee & coMMunication serVices Kelly dimartino chief sustainability officer/ sustainability serVices area Bruce hendee coMMunications & public inVolVeMent Kim neWcomer econoMic deVelopMent Josh BirKs huMan resources Janet miller citizens of fort collins financial serVices miKe BecKstead finance John voss fort collins/ loVeland airport Jason licon noVeMber 2012 serVice area serVice unit departMent ORDINANCE NO. 133, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 2-500 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS PERTAINING TO A CITY SERVICE AREA WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 2 of the City Charter provides that the administrative branch of the City government shall be composed of the offices, service areas and agencies established by ordinance upon report and recommendation of the City Manager; and WHEREAS, Article V of Chapter 2 of the City Code describes the administrative organization of the City, including service areas and offices established by the City Council pursuant to the recommendations of the City Manager; and WHEREAS, Section 2-500 of Article V of Chapter 2 of the City Code needs to be amended to reflect the proposed new administrative organization of the City government; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended that the Policy, Planning and Transportation Services service area be changed, to be known as the “Planning, Development and Transportation Service Area”; and WHEREAS, in addition, the City Manager has recommended that the duties and functions of policy formulation, special projects and strategic planning be removed from the Policy, Planning and Transportation service area, to either be retained in the City Manager's Office or assigned elsewhere as deemed appropriate by the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that these changes are in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 2-500 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-500. Policy, Planning, Development and Transportation Services. Policy, Planning, Development and Transportation Services is hereby created. Policy, Planning, Development and Transportation Services shall be in the charge of a Director who shall be directly responsible to the City Manager for the functions and duties necessary to provide internal strategic planning and policy development services to the City, as well as community planning, development and transportation services, and who shall have control and supervision over such agencies, service units, departments, offices or persons as may be deemed appropriate by the City Manager. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Hal Dean Joe Olson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 22 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2012, Amending Various Provisions of the Fort Collins Traffic Code. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Colorado General Assembly amended certain statutory provisions this legislative session relating to state traffic laws. This Ordinance ensures that the Fort Collins Traffic Code (the “Traffic Code”) is consistent with state traffic laws. During a review of the statutory changes, staff identified additional amendments that would make the Traffic Code more consistent and provide more effective and efficient local enforcement. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Colorado General Assembly regularly amends certain statutory provisions relating to traffic laws. At the time of the most recent adoption of the Traffic Code, it was the understanding of staff and Council that the Traffic Code would most likely be subject to future amendments, not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also to ensure that the Traffic Code remains consistent with state traffic laws. This Ordinance reflects proposed changes to the Fort Collins Traffic Code to maintain consistency with state law and also includes changes recommended by City Traffic and Police Services staff intended to make the Traffic Code more consistent and to provide more effective and efficient traffic and parking enforcement. The changes recommended by staff involve modifications and clarifications to infractions such as obstruction of view, child seatbelt restraints, low-speed electric vehicles, longer vehicle combinations, and related definitions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ORDINANCE NO. 134, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE FORT COLLINS TRAFFIC CODE WHEREAS, on February 18, 2003, by Ordinance No. 016, 2003, the City Council adopted the Fort Collins Traffic Code (the “Traffic Code”); and WHEREAS, at the time of the adoption of the Traffic Code, it was the expectation of staff and the City Council that the Traffic Code would likely be subject to future amendments, not only for the purposes of clarification and correction of errors, but also to ensure that the Traffic Code remains consistent with State law; and WHEREAS, the Colorado General Assembly has amended certain statutory provisions relating to obstruction of view, child restraint, low speed vehicles, and operation of longer vehicle combinations; and WHEREAS, City staff have made suggestions for clarifying the provisions of the Traffic Code related to parking and definition changes to be consistent with state law; and WHEREAS, it is the City Council’s desire to amend the Fort Collins Traffic Code to reflect the changes made by the General Assembly and adopt clarifying modifications proposed by the City staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Traffic Code amendments which have been proposed are in the best interest of the City and are necessary for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 201(3) of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 201. Obstruction of view or driving mechanism - hazardous situation. . . . (3) No person shall drive any motor vehicle equipped with any television viewer, screen or other means of visually receiving a television broadcast which is located in the motor vehicle at any point forward of the back of the driver's seat or which is visible to the driver while operating the motor vehicle, except law enforcement or emergency services personnel while operating an emergency vehicle. The provisions of this Subsection (3) shall not be interpreted to prohibit the usage of any computer, data terminal or other similar devicesafety equipment in a motor vehicle as long as the computer, data terminal, or safety equipment is not used to display visual entertainment, including internet browsing, social media, and e-mail, to the driver while the motor vehicle is in motion. . . . Section 2. That Section 236(3) of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 236. Child restraint systems required - definitions - exceptions. . . . (3) Except as provided in Section 116(4) of this Traffic Code, the requirement of Subsection (2) of this Section shall not apply to a child who: (a) Is less than eight (8) years of age and is being transported in a motor vehicle as a result of a medical or other life-threatening emergency and a child restraint system is not available; or (b) Is being transported in a commercial motor vehicle, as defined in Section 42-2-402(4)(a), C.R.S., that is operated by a child care center; or (c) Is the driver of a motor vehicle and is subject to the safety belt requirements provided in Section 237; or (d) Weighs more than forty (40) pounds and is being transported in a motor vehicle in which the rear seat of the vehicle was not equipped at the time of manufacture with combination lap and shoulder belts; or (ed) Is being transported in a motor vehicle that is operated in the business of transporting persons for compensation or hire by or on behalf of a motor vehicle carrier as defined in Section 40-10-101(4)(a)40-10.1- 101, C.R.S., a contract carrier by motor vehicle as defined in Section 40-11-101(3), C.R.S., or an operator of a luxury limousine service as defined in Section 40-16-101(3.3)40-10.1-301, C.R.S. . . . Section 3. That Section 505(2)(b) of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: -2- 505. Longer vehicle combinations. . . . (2) The permits shall allow operation, over designated highways, of the following vehicle combinations of not more than three (3) cargo units and neither fewer than six (6) axles nor more than nine (9) axles: . . . (b) An unladen truck tractor, semi-trailer and single trailer. A semi-trailer used with a converter dolly shall be considered a trailer. Semi-trailers and trailers shall be of approximately equal lengths not to exceed forty-eight (48) feet in length. Notwithstanding any other restriction set forth in this Section, such combination may have up to eleven (11) axles when used to transport empty trailers. . . . Section 4. That Section 1204(2)(g) of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1204. Stopping, standing or parking prohibited in specified places. . . . (2) Except as otherwise provided in Subsection (4) of this Section, in addition to the restrictions specified in Subsection (1) of this Section, no person shall stand or park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer, emergency services personnel, or an official traffic control device, in any of the following places: . . . (g) At any other place where official signs or red curb markings are used to prohibit standing or parking. Section 5. That Section 1410.1 of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1410.1 NeighborhoodLow-speed electric vehicles. (1) Except as provided in Section 42-4-111(1)(aa), C.R.S., no person shall operate a neighborhoodlow-speed electric vehicle on a highway. -3- (2) No person shall operate a neighborhoodlow-speed electric vehicle on a limited access highway. Section 6. That Section 2002 of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Low-speed electric vehicle” which reads in its entirety as follows: Low-speed electric vehicle. A vehicle that: (a) is self-propelled utilizing electricity as its primary propulsion method; (b) has at least three wheels in contact with the ground; (c) does not use handlebars to steer; and (d) exhibits the manufacturer's compliance with 49 CFR 565 or displays a seventeen-character vehicle identification number as provided in 49 CFR 565. Section 7. That the definition “Motor vehicle” contained in Section 2002 of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (15) Motor vehicle. Any self-propelled vehicle that is designed primarily for travel on the public highways and that is generally and commonly used to transport persons and property over the public highways, except that the term does not include low-power scooters, wheelchairs, or vehicles moved solely by human power. Motor vehicle includes a neighborhoodlow-speed electric vehicle. For the purposes of the offenses described in Section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., for farm tractors operated on streets and highways,1401 of the Traffic Code, motor vehicle includes a farm tractor, whichor an off-highway vehicle that is not otherwise classified as a motor vehicle. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -4- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -5- This 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 the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Jason Holland AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 23 SUBJECT Items Relating to the Kechter Crossing Annexation. A. Resolution 2012-106 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Kechter Crossing Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2012, Annexing Property Known as the Kechter Crossing Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2012, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Kechter Crossing Annexation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a request to annex and zone 28.9 acres located on the south side of Kechter Road, approximately 900 feet east of the intersection of South Timberline Road and Kechter Road. This annexation is not associated with the proposed Kechter Farm development, which is located southeast of the Kechter Crossing Annexation. The Kechter Crossing Annexation does not create an enclave. The surrounding properties are existing residential land uses currently zoned FA-1 – Farming Zoning District in Larimer County to the north, south, and west. Adjacent to the east is a City-owned property that is part of the affordable housing Land Bank program, which was annexed and zoned Low Density Mixed–Use Neighborhood (L-M-N) on September 4, 2012. The Kechter Crossing Annexation is not proposing affordable housing as part of the approved County plan. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This is a 100% voluntary annexation for a property located within the Growth Management Area (GMA). According to policies and agreements contained in the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements, the City will agree to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. The Kechter Crossing property is in the “Receiving Area” as part of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Transfer of Density Units (TDU) Program, adopted September 22, 1998, by the Larimer County Board of Commissioners. In accordance with this program, proposed developments in the Transfer Density Unit “Receiving Area” (described below) are reviewed in the County prior to consideration for annexation. This process of County plan review, followed by annexation, was also undertaken with the Westchase and Fossil Lake neighborhoods. The TDU program provides landowners the means to transfer development potential from one parcel of land to another. The purpose is to guide future growth in the County toward areas designated for higher density development, and away from areas that have important community values. The TDU program establishes a procedure to evaluate the development potential of a parcel and translate it into tradable units, or TDU’s. Lands within the Fossil Creek TDU program area fall within either the “Sending Area” or the “Receiving Area”. Higher residential densities required by this Plan are located in the Receiving Area, which consists of approximately 900 acres north of Fossil Creek Reservoir. The remainder of lands covered by this Plan are in the Sending Area. Landowners who choose to develop must either cluster residential development without using TDUs or may develop by acquiring TDUs. A landowner or developer in the Receiving Area may bargain to arrive at a fair market price for November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 23 TDUs with any willing seller in the Sending Area holding a TDU certificate. To develop in the Receiving Area without using TDUs, the landowner or developer must have the County Planning Department determine an acceptable range of dwelling units allowed for the parcel. This number will be based on County zoning and site constraints. Dwelling units must be clustered to meet land use and density requirements with any remaining developable land being designated for “future development”, and developed only by transferring TDUs from Sending Areas. Larimer County Planning Department is the primary reviewing authority for landowners and developers with land in the Receiving Area. Landowners in Sending Areas who wish to be compensated for limiting or foregoing the development of their land can sell transferable density units to buyers in the Receiving Area. The TDU Administrator evaluates the parcel to determine the number of transferable density units, or basic allowable TDUs. The Kechter Crossing Annexation gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the City of Fort Collins Land Bank Property, also known as Kechter Annexation No. 3. Kechter Crossing has 50.2% of its perimeter boundary contiguous with existing City limits from this common boundary, thus satisfying the requirement that no less than one-sixth (16.66%) of the perimeter boundary be contiguous to the existing City boundary. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: Zoning: Land Uses: N: County FA-1 – Farming Zoning District Blehm residential subdivision S: County FA-1 – Farming Zoning District Existing single family residence E: City L-M-N – Low Density Mixed Use City-owned Land Bank property Neighborhood District W: County FA-1 – Farming Zoning District Existing single family residence The requested zoning for this annexation is the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N). The Land Use Code describes this zone district as follows: Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this District shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. The Kechter Crossing property was reviewed by Larimer County staff as a 75-lot residential neighborhood and has received final approval for development by the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners. The Petitioner and Larimer County coordinated and cooperated with the City of Fort Collins on development approvals in anticipation of this Petition for Annexation. The Kechter Crossing 75-lot single-family development is approved pursuant to a County Development Agreement dated September 18, 2012 by and between the Petitioner, Larimer County, and the City of Fort Collins. The City of Fort Collins is a party to the County Development Agreement in anticipation of this Petition for Annexation. Lot sizes on the County-approved site plan range from 6,993 square feet to 35,861 square feet, with an average lot size of 9,521 square feet. City staff reviewed the final development plan documents for the Kechter Crossing property in anticipation of this Petition for Annexation. In addition to the County Development Agreement, the Petitioner and the City of Fort Collins have executed and recorded a City Development Agreement. The City Development Agreement also anticipates the timely annexation of the property into the City of Fort Collins. At the time of annexation, the City Development Agreement will supersede the County Development Agreement. Staff recommends this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, which was established for the purpose of regulating signs for non-residential uses in certain geographical areas of the City that may be particularly affected by such signs because of their predominantly residential use and character. A map amendment request is included with the annexation and initial zoning ordinances. November 20, 2012 -3- ITEM 23 Findings 1. The property meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 2. The requested placement into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan Map and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan Map. 3. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Amended Intergovernmental Agreement – Growth Management Area. 4. On October 16, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution 2012-095 that 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. 5. The requested L-M-N, Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood Zoning District is in conformance with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 6. The annexation and zoning request is in conformance with the Land Use Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinances on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board conducted a public hearing regarding the annexation and zoning request on October 18, 2012 and voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the annexation, placing the property in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood Zone District and to recommend an amendment of the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map to include the Kechter Crossing Annexation. PUBLIC OUTREACH The public notification of the annexation and zoning request occurred two weeks prior to the item going before the Planning and Zoning Board at its scheduled public hearing on October 18, 2012. A letter of notification of the public hearing was mailed to all affected property owners within 800 feet of the property, 14 days prior to the hearing. The Land Use Code does not require a neighborhood meeting for annexation and initial zonings. A meeting was not held for this annexation and zoning request, due to the fact that the development project was reviewed and approved in the County and a neighborhood meeting was conducted as part of the County review. As part of the County review process and approval of the Kechter Crossing Planned Land Division / Planned Development (PLD/PD), the following public hearings were conducted: 1. The Larimer County Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Kechter Crossing PLD/PD on November 21, 2007. The item remained on the consent agenda and there was no public testimony submitted at the hearing for this item. 2. The Kechter Crossing PLD/PD was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in a public hearing on January 7, 2008. The item remained on the consent agenda and there was no public testimony submitted at the hearing for this item. There has been no activity since the 2008 approval of the PLD/PD until the recent approval of the County Development Agreement dated September 18, 2012 by and between the Petitioner, Larimer County, and the City of Fort Collins. November 20, 2012 -4- ITEM 23 ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Structure Plan Map 4. Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Land Use Map 5. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, October 18, 2012 RL LMN LMN LMN UE UE UE LMN MMN BACON ELEMENTARY Mail Creek Ditch McClellands Channel S TIMBERLINE RD OLD MILL RD ZEPHYR RD OWENS AVE WHITE WILLOW DR E COUNTY ROAD 36 STETSON CREEK DR ROCK CREEK DR KECHTER RD CHANDLER ST COUNTRY SQUIRE WAY RABBIT CREEK RD COPPER CREEK DR Kechter Vicinity Crossing Map 1 inch = 600 feet ± Legend City Limits - Area City Limits - Outline Annexation - Area Kechter Site Location Crossing Annexation Annexations Kechter 1, 2 & 3 Kechter Farm ATTACHMENT 1 BACON ELEMENTARY Mail Creek Ditch McClellands Channel RL LMN LMN UE LMN UE UE LMN MMN S TIMBERLINE RD ZEPHYR RD OWENS AVE OLD MILL RD WHITE WILLOW DR KECHTER RD E COUNTY ROAD 36 RABBIT CREEK RD Kechter Crossing 1 inch = ± 600 feet City of Fort Collins Zoning Map Legend City Zoning ZONE NCM Limited Commercial Service Commercial Employment Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood Neighborhood Conservation Buffer Neighborhood Conservation Low Density Public Open Lands River Conservation Urban Estate LowWaterBodies Density Residential (RL) Kechter Farm Kechter Proposed Crossing Zoning: Annexation L-M-N Annexations Kechter 1, 2 & 3 ATTACHMENT 2 Fossil Reservo Cre © Kechter Structure Crossing Plan Boundaries Fort Collins GMA Potential GMA Expansion Other City GMA Planning Area Adjacent Planning Areas City Limits Districts Downtown District Community Commercial District General Commercial District Neighborhood Commercial District Campus District Employment District Industrial District Neighborhoods Urban Estate Low Density Mixed-Use Medium Density Mixed-Use Edges Community Separator Foothills Rural Lands Corridors Open Lands, Parks and Water Corridors Poudre River Corridor Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit) KECHTER RD E CR 36 S TIMBERLINE RD 1 inch = 0.3 miles ZIEGLER RD Crossing Site - Kechter Annexation Annexation - Area KFeacrhmter (under review) ATTACHMENT 3 INTERSTATE 25 E HARMONY RD S TIMBERLINE RD E COUNTY ROAD 32 E TRILBY RD KECHTER RD ZIEGLER RD CARPENTER RD S COUNTY ROAD 7 S COUNTY ROAD 9 S COUNTY ROAD 11 STRAUSS CABIN RD S COUNTY ROAD 9 S TIMBERLINE RD ZIEGLER RD INTERSTATE 25 0 ©7M5iles 0.25 0.5 0. CITY GEOGRAPHIC These and were map OF not products FORT designed and INFORMATION COLLINS or all intended underlying for general data SYSTEM are use developed by members MAP for use PRODUCTS of the by the public. City The of Fort City Collins makes for no its representation internal purposes or only, warranty dimensions, as to contours, its accuracy, property timeliness, boundaries, or completeness, or placement and of location in particular, of any its map accuracy features in thereon. labeling or THE displaying CITY OF FORT COLLINS PARTICULAR MAKES PURPOSE, NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OF MERCHANTABILITY OR IMPLIED, WITH OR RESPECT WARRANTY TO THESE FOR FITNESS MAP PRODUCTS OF USE FOR OR THE UNDERLYING FAULTS, and assumes DATA. Any all responsibility users of these of map the use products, thereof, map and applications, further covenants or data, and accepts agrees them to hold AS the IS, City WITH harmless ALL from made and this against information all damage, available. loss, Independent or liability arising verification from any of all use data of contained this map product, herein should in consideration be obtained of by the any City's users having of these liability, products, whether or direct, underlying indirect, data. or consequential, The City disclaims, which and arises shall or not may be arise held from liable these for any map and products all damage, or the loss, use thereof or by any person or entity. Amended: September 19, 2006 Adopted: March 28, 1998 City Limits Growth Management Area Loveland GMA Fossil Creek Project Area Resource Management Area Unified Development Plan Needed Parcels Natural Areas Water Proposed Trail Existing Trail Master Street Plan Collector 2 Lanes Arterial 2 Lanes Arterial 4 Lanes Major Arterial 6 Lanes Interstate Collector 2 Lanes - Outside GMA Arterial 2 Lanes - Outside GMA Arterial 4 Lanes - Outside GMA Major Arterial 6 Lanes - Outside GMA > Potential Grade Sep Rail Crossing R Potential Interchange Future Land Use Commercial Corridor District Neighborhood Commercial District Employment District Urban Estate Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods ATTACHMENT 5 RESOLUTION 2012-106 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE KECHTER CROSSING ANNEXATION WHEREAS, annexation proceedings were heretofore initiated by the City Council for property to be known as the Kechter Crossing Annexation; and WHEREAS, following notice given as required by law, the City Council has held a hearing on said annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the petition for annexation complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, Section 31-12-101, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that there is at least one-sixth (1/6) contiguity between the City and the property proposed to be annexed; that a community of interest exists between the property proposed to be annexed and the City; that said property is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said property is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City. Section 3. That the City Council further determines that the applicable parts of said Act have been met, that an election is not required under said Act and that there are no other terms and conditions to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 4. That the City Council further finds that notice was duly given and a hearing was held regarding the annexation in accordance with said Act. Section 5. That the City Council concludes that the area proposed to be annexed in the Kechter Crossing Annexation is eligible for annexation to the City and should be so annexed. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 135, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE KECHTER CROSSING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, Resolution 2012-095, finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings, has heretofore been adopted by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City to annex said area to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the following described property, to wit: Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 1, Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 2, Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, Block 3, Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 4, Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 5, Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, Block 6, Lots 1 through 2, inclusive, Block 7, Lots 1 through 6, inclusive, Block 8, Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 9, Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 10, Lots 1 through 8, inclusive, Block 11, Lots 1 through 8, inclusive, Block 12, Common Area A, Common Area B, Common Area C, Common Area D, Outlot A, and Outlot B, inclusive, Kechter Crossing PLD, Being a Replat of Lots 1 and 2, Feldman M.R.D. #97- EX1094, County of Larimer, State of Colorado is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Kechter Crossing Annexation, which annexation shall become effective upon completion of the conditions contained in Section 31-12-113, C.R.S., including, without limitation, all required filings for recording with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 2. That, in annexing said property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the property hereby annexed except as may be provided by the ordinances of the City. Section 3. That the City hereby consents, pursuant to Section 37-45-136(3.6), C.R.S., to the inclusion of said property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 136, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE KECHTER CROSSING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the zoning of land; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has considered the zoning of the property which is the subject of this ordinance, and has determined that said property should be zoned as hereafter provided. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by including the property known as the Kechter Crossing Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“L-M-N”) Zone District, which property is more particularly described as: Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 1, Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 2, Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, Block 3, Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 4, Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 5, Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, Block 6, Lots 1 through 2, inclusive, Block 7, Lots 1 through 6, inclusive, Block 8, Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 9, Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 10, Lots 1 through 8, inclusive, Block 11, Lots 1 through 8, inclusive, Block 12, Common Area A, Common Area B, Common Area C, Common Area D, Outlot A, and Outlot B, inclusive, Kechter Crossing PLD, Being a Replat of Lots 1 and 2, Feldman M.R.D. #97- EX1094, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. Section 2. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7(E) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the above- described property is included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk This 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 the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements. DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Seth Lorson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 24 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-107 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Hansen Farm Annexation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant and property owner, HTC, LLC (McWhinney), has submitted a written petition requesting annexation 69.42 acres located on the west side of Timberline Road, approximately 1.5 miles south of Harmony Road. The property, formerly a farm, is mostly vacant, with the exception of the farmhouse (single-family dwelling) and some out- buildings. It is in the FA1 – Farming Zone District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is NC – Neighborhood Commercial (6.33 acres), and MMN – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (16.69 acres), and LMN – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (46.40 acres). BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The proposed Resolution makes a finding that the petition substantially complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, determines that a hearing should be established regarding the annexation, and directs that notice be given of the hearing. The hearing will be held at the time of First Reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances on January 15, 2013; not less than thirty days of prior notice is required by State law. This is a 100% voluntary annexation of a property owned by HTC, LLC (McWhinney) located within the 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 Growth Management Area, the City will agree to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. This property gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing City limits from a common boundary with the Willow Springs Subdivision (2002) to the north, thus satisfying the requirement that no less than one-sixth of the perimeter boundary be contiguous to the existing City boundary. The requested zoning for this annexation is NC – Neighborhood Commercial (6.33 acres), MMN – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (15.95 acres), and LMN – Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (46.40 acres). The surrounding properties are currently zoned FA1 - Farming in the Larimer County to the south, east and west; beyond which, to the west, is the Union Pacific Railroad and the Southridge Golf Course and, to the south, is LMN – Low Density Mixed-Use Residential and MMN – Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood; RL – Low Density Residential and LMN – Low Density Mixed-Use Residential to the north in the City. The proposed area and acreage for the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone has been slightly altered from what exists on the City Structure Plan. The City Structure Plan calls for 8.4 acres of NC in the area bordering the north edge of Zephyr Road, when continued west of Timberline. The proposed NC acreage is 6.33 acres and borders the south edge of Zephyr Road, when continued west of Timberline. Long Range Planning has determined that this alteration is minor in nature and the proposal still meets the intent of the City Structure Plan and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 24 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board will conduct a public hearing on the annexation and zoning request on December 20, 2012. The Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to City Council as part of the First Reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances on January 15, 2013. PUBLIC OUTREACH There was no public outreach for this Initiating Resolution as this Resolution simply accepts the Annexation Petition and provides a schedule for upcoming Council hearings with a schedule and notification requirements that comply with State Statutes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Structure Plan Map 3. Existing Zoning Map 4. Proposed Zoning Map ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4 RESOLUTION 2012-107 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FINDING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE AND INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR THE HANSEN FARM ANNEXATION WHEREAS, a written petition, together with four (4) prints of an annexation map, has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the annexation of certain property to be known as the Hansen Farm Annexation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to initiate annexation proceedings in accordance with the Municipal Annexation Act, Section 31-12-101, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby accepts the annexation petition for the Hansen Farm Annexation, more particularly described as situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to wit: A parcel of land located in the East Half of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 as bearing South 00º00'53" East and with all bearings herein relative thereto: COMMENCING at the East Quarter Corner of said Section 7; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 30.00 feet to a point on the westerly right-of-way line of South Timberline Road, said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said westerly right-of-way line, South 00º05'58" West, 150.36 feet to a point on the northeasterly line of Johnston Annexation; thence along said northeasterly line the following 4 courses and distances: North 86º55'07" West, 81.60 feet; thence, North 70º20'07" West, 286.00 feet; thence, North 39º29'33" West, 64.42 feet; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 314.41 feet to the West line of that tract of land described in Reception No. 20100066406, Larimer County Records; thence along said West line the following 16 courses and distances: North 18º53'29"East, 280.05 feet; thence, South 80º52'47" East, 140.66 feet; thence, North 43º24'32"East, 68.46 feet; thence, North 45º20'54" West,193.08 feet; thence, North 57º52'49" West, 191.24 feet; thence, North 48º06'28" West, 109.43 feet; thence, North 63º34'52" West, 198.72 feet; thence, North 49º45'28" West, 330.86 feet; thence, North 47º12'15" West, 783.31 feet; thence, North 55º07'00" West, 318.91 feet; thence, North 74º09'59" West, 184.15 feet; thence, North 03º02'18" West, 367.61 feet; thence, North 05º59'16" West, 117.72 feet; thence, North 11º32'10" West, 221.70 feet; thence, North 02º51'46" West, 122.76 feet; thence, North 09º31'29" West, 49.42 feet to the southerly line of Willow Springs Annexation; thence along said southerly line the following 18 courses and distances: North 89º11'07" East, 307.33 feet; thence, North 88º58'07" East, 235.40 feet; thence, South 73º22'53" East, 83.20 feet; thence, South 46º25'53" East, 80.40 feet; thence, South 51º11'53" East, 67.70 feet; thence, South 33º06'53" East, 44.10 feet; thence, South 30º14'53" East, 82.50 feet; thence, South 03º55'53" East, 86.50 feet; thence, South 21º48'53" East, 44.90 feet; thence, South 55º53'53" East, 54.20 feet; thence, South 74º38'53" East, 367.20 feet; thence, South 67º46'53" East, 227.00 feet; thence, South 54º53'53" East, 152.80 feet; thence, South 71º51'53" East, 121.50 feet; thence, South 68º22'53" East, 243.40 feet; thence South 68º41'53" East, 208.00 feet; thence, South 55º18'53" East, 82.70 feet; thence, South 52º11'53" East, 234.62 feet to a point on the westerly right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said westerly right-of-way line, South 00º00'53" East, 190.54 feet; thence, North 89º40'37" East, 60.00 feet to a point on the East right-of- way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said East line, South 00º00'53" East, 536.20 feet; thence, South 89º43'20" West, 60.00 feet to the West right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said West line, South 00º00'53" East, 771.38 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel of land contains 69.417 acres, more or less. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds and determines that the annexation petition for the Hansen Farm Annexation and accompanying map are in substantial compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act. Section 3. That the Notice attached hereto is hereby adopted as a part of this Resolution. Said Notice establishes the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the passage of annexation and zoning ordinances pertaining to the above described property. The City Clerk is directed to publish a copy of this Resolution and said Notice as provided in the Municipal Annexation Act. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk NOTICE TO ALL PERSONS INTERESTED: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Fort Collins has adopted a Resolution initiating annexation proceedings for the Hansen Farm Annexation, said Annexation being more particularly described in said Resolution, a copy of which precedes this Notice. That, on January 15, 2013, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, the Fort Collins City Council will hold a public hearing upon the annexation petition and zoning request for the purpose of finding and determining whether the property proposed to be annexed meets the applicable requirements of Colorado law and is considered eligible for annexation and for the purpose of determining the appropriate zoning for the property included in the Annexation. At such hearing, any persons may appear and present such evidence as they may desire. This annexation is being broken out into three zone districts. The Petitioner has requested that the following property be placed in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“L-M-N”) Zone District: A parcel of land located in the East Half of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 as bearing South 00º00'53" East and with all bearings herein relative thereto: COMMENCING at the East Quarter Corner of said Section 7; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 30.00 feet to a point on the west right-of-way line South Timberline Road; the thence along said west right-of-way line, North 00º00'53" West, 1,278.95 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, South 89º59'07" West, 822.00 feet; thence, South 00º00'53" East, 670.19 feet; thence, North 63º34'52" West, 185.84feet; thence, North 49º45'28" West, 330.86 feet; thence, North 47º12'15" West, 783.31 feet; thence, North 55º07'00" West, 318.91 feet; thence, North 74º09'59" West, 184.15 feet; thence, North 03º02'18" West, 367.61 feet; thence, North 05º59'16" West, 117.72 feet; thence, North 11º32'10" West, 221.70 feet; thence, North 02º51'46" West, 122.76 feet; thence, North 09º31'29" West, 49.42 feet; thence, North 89º11'07" East, 307.33 feet; thence, North 88º58'07" East, 235.40 feet; thence, South 73º22'53" East, 83.20 feet; thence, South 46º25'53" East, 80.40 feet; thence, South 51º11'53" East, 67.70 feet; thence, South 33º06'53" East, 44.10 feet; thence, South 30º14'53" East, 82.50 feet; thence, South 03º55'53" East, 86.50 feet; thence, South 21º48'53" East, 44.90 feet; thence, South 55º53'53" East, 54.20 feet; thence, South 74º38'53" East, 367.20 feet; thence, South 67º46'53" East, 227.00 feet; thence, South 54º53'53" East, 152.80 feet; thence, South 71º51'53" East, 121.50 feet; thence, South 68º22'53" East, 243.40 feet; thence, South 68º41'53" East, 208.00 feet; thence, South 55º18'53" East, 82.70 feet; thence, South 52º11'53" East, 234.62 feet to the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said west right-of-way line, South 00º00'53" East, 219.13 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel of land contains 46.40 acres, more or less. The Petitioner has requested that the following property be placed in the Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (“M-M-N”) Zone District: A parcel of land located in the East Half of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 as bearing South 00º00'53" East and with all bearings herein relative thereto: COMMENCING at the East Quarter Corner of said Section 7; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 30.00 feet to a point on the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said west right-of-way line, North 00º00'53" West, 398.44 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, South 89º43'20" West, 534.49 feet; thence, North 45º20'54" West, 45.84 feet; thence, North 57º52'49" West, 191.24 feet; thence, North 48º06'28" West, 109.43 feet; thence, North 63º34'52" West, 12.88 feet; thence, North 00º00'53" West, 670.19 feet; thence, North 89º59'07" East, 822.00 feet to the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said west right-of-way line, North 00º00'50" West 28.59 feet; thence, North 89º40'37" East, 60.00 feet to the east right-of-way line of South Timberline road; thence along said east right-of-way line, South 00º00'53" East, 536.20 feet; thence, South 89º43'20" West, 60.00 feet to the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said west right-of-way line, South 00º00'53" East, 372.94 feet to the PONT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel of land contains 16.69 acres, more or less. The Petitioner has requested that the following property be placed in the Neighborhood Commercial (“N-C”) Zone District: A parcel of land located in the East Half of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 as bearing South 00º00'53" East and with all bearings herein relative thereto: COMMENCING at the East Quarter Corner of said Section 7; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 30.00 feet to a point on the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road, said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said west right-of-way line, South 00º05'58" West, 150.36 feet; thence, North 86º55'07" West, 81.60 feet; thence, North 70º20'07" West, 286.00 feet; thence, North 39º29'33" West, 64.42 feet; thence, South 89º59'49" West, 314.41 feet; thence, North 18º53'29" East, 280.05 feet; thence, South 80º52'47" East, 140.66 feet; thence, North 43º24'32" East, 68.46 feet; thence, North 45º20'54" West, 147.24 feet; thence, North 89º43'20" East, 534.49 feet to the west right-of-way line of South Timberline Road; thence along said west right-of-way line, South 00º00'53" East, 398.44 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel of land contains 6.33 acres, more or less. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Dated this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _______________________________ City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Peter Barnes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 25 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-108 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of the Decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals Relating to the Approval of a Variance to Allow the Existing Off-premise Sign (Billboard) in the BNSF Railroad Right-of-Way at 190 West Prospect Road to Be Removed and Reinstalled at a New Location Within the Same Railroad Right-of-way at 190 West Prospect Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 9, 2012, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) approved a variance to allow the existing off-premise sign in the BNSF Railroad right of way on the north side of West Prospect Road to be relocated within the railroad right of way 70 feet west of its current location. On August 23, 2012, Richard L. Anderson filed a Notice of Appeal, alleging that the ZBA failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. On November 6, 2012, City Council, by a vote of 5 - 2 (Nays: Manvel, Poppaw) determined that the ZBA did conduct a fair hearing, and by a 7 - 0 vote determined that the ZBA failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. The determination that the ZBA failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Land Use Code resulted in the City Council overturning the decision of the ZBA to approve Appeal No. 2714. In order to finalize this appeal process, Council is required to adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing it decision on the Appeal. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal was based on allegations that the ZBA failed to conduct a fair hearing in that the Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was grossly misleading, the Board substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure, and the Board exceeded its authority and jurisdiction. The Appellant also alleged that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. At the November 6, 2012 hearing on the matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the applicant, the appellant, and other parties in interest. After consideration of the record and discussion, City Council determined that the ZBA did conduct a fair hearing. After further consideration and discussion, City Council determined that the ZBA did not properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of Section 2.10.2(H) of the Land Use Code, and found instead that relocating the off-premise sign would be detrimental to the public good because the City has established in its sign code a policy that new off-premise signs should not be allowed, and that the relocation of the sign would, in effect, increase the presence of off-premise signs in the City because it would allow the owner to establish a two- sided sign while the existing sign is displaying one sign only on the west side of the sign structure. By determining that the ZBA failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code, City Council overturned the decision of the ZBA to approve the relocation of the off-premise sign at 190 West Prospect Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. RESOLUTION 2012-108 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE EXISTING OFF-PREMISE SIGN (BILLBOARD) IN THE BNSF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 190 WEST PROSPECT ROAD TO BE REMOVED AND REINSTALLED AT A NEW LOCATION WITHIN THE SAME RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 190 WEST PROSPECT ROAD WHEREAS, on August 9, 2012, the Zoning Board of Appeals (the “Board”) approved a variance to allow the existing off-premise sign (billboard) located in the BNSF railroad right-of-way at 190 West Prospect Road to be removed and reinstalled at a new location within the same railroad right-of-way at 190 West Prospect Road (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, on August 23, 2012, a Notice of Appeal of the Board’s decision was filed with the City Clerk by Richard L. Anderson (the “Appellant”); and WHEREAS, on November 6, 2012, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, considered said appeal, reviewed the record on appeal, heard presentations from the Appellant and other parties in interest and, after discussion, overturned the decision of the Board; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 2-56(e) provides that no later than the date of its next regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, City Council shall adopt, by resolution, findings of fact in support of its decision on the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that, pursuant to City Code Section 2-56(e), the Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: 1. That the grounds for appeal stated in the Appellant’s Notice of Appeal conform to the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code. 2. That the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. 3. That the Board failed to properly interpret and apply the Land Use Code in the granting of the variance because the Board based its decision, in part, upon its finding that the granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public good when, in fact, the granting of the variance would be detrimental to the public good. 4. That the granting of the variance would be detrimental to the public good because: a. the City has established in its sign code a policy that newly erected off-premise signs should be prohibited because they generate negative impacts on the aesthetics of the City, including visual clutter, and also exacerbate traffic safety risks; and b. the relocation of the billboard would increase the presence of off- premise signage in the City, contrary to the foregoing policy, since the relocation would enable a sign that has historically been used as a one-sided sign to instead be used as a two-sided sign. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk 2 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Ted Shepard AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 26 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-109 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of the Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to Approve the Regency Lakeview Addition of a Permitted Use for Multi-family Dwellings at Christ Center Community Church and the Associated Project Development Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On July 19, 2012, the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approved Regency Lakeview Addition of a Permitted Use and Project Development Plan. On August 2, 2012, Mr. Andy Lewis et.al, filed a Notice of Appeal seeking redress of the Planning and Zoning Board decisions. On November 8, 2012, City Council took the following actions: 1. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in consideration of the Addition of a Permitted Use, the Council voted 6 – 0 that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. 2. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter in consideration of the Addition of a Permitted Use, the Council voted 4 – 2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat) that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code thus overturning the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. 3. With regard to the allegation that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter in consideration of the Project Development Plan, the Council voted 6 – 0 that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the of the Land Use Code, thus overturning the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the Appeal. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Appellants’ Notices of Appeal were based on allegations that the Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing and failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Land Use Code. At the November 8, 2012 hearing on the matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the appellants and the applicants. In subsequent discussion at this hearing, Council determined that the Planning and Zoning Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. Regarding the issue of whether or not the Planning and Zoning Board properly interpreted and applied relevant provisions of the Land Use Code in consideration of the Addition of a Permitted Use, Council voted to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. Regarding the issue of whether or not the Planning and Zoning Board properly interpreted and applied relevant provisions of the Land Use Code in consideration of the Project Development Plan, Council voted to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. RESOLUTION 2012-109 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO APPROVE THE REGENCY LAKEVIEW ADDITION OF A PERMITTED USE FOR MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS AT CHRIST CENTER COMMUNITY CHURCH AND THE ASSOCIATED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, on July 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board (the “Board”) approved the Regency Lakeview addition of a permitted use for multi-family dwellings at Christ Center Community Church and the associated Project Development Plan (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, on August 2, 2012, a Notice of Appeal of the Board’s decision was filed with the City Clerk by Andrew Lewis (the “Appellant”); and WHEREAS, on November 8, 2012, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, considered said appeal, reviewed the record on appeal, heard presentations from the Appellant and other parties in interest and, after discussion, overturned the decisions of the Board; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 2-56(e) provides that no later than the date of its next regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, City Council shall adopt, by resolution, findings of fact in support of its decision on the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that, pursuant to City Code Section 2-56(e), the Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: 1. The grounds for appeal stated in the Appellant’s Notice of Appeal conform to the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code. 2. On the issue of the addition of the permitted use, the City Council determined that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing, but did fail to properly interpret and apply the Land Use Code in adding the requested permitted use for multi-family dwellings at the Christ Center Community Church because the proposed use was not appropriate in the R-L zone district to which it was added and therefore did not comply with the required finding as contained in Section 1.3.4(A)(1) of the Land Use Code that the use must be appropriate in the zone district to which it is added. 3. Since the City Council has determined that the decision of the Board in adding the permitted use should be overturned, the Board's decision approving the Project Development Plan must also be overturned since the Project Development Plan was dependant upon the addition of the permitted use. 4. Accordingly, the City Council hereby overturns the decision of the Board that approved the addition of the permitted use for multi-family dwellings at the Christ Center Community Church and also overturns the decision of the Board that approved the associated Project Development Plan. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk 2 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Donnie Dustin Kevin Gertig AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 27 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Utilities staff has updated the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy), which will provide further direction regarding the planning, management and maintenance of the City’s water supplies and demands. The updated Policy was brought before City Council for adoption on October 30, 2012. Council requested some minor adjustments to the updated Policy language. Utilities staff has made the requested changes to the updated Policy. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The process of updating the Policy has been ongoing for over two years. A full description of the history, supporting information, economic and environmental impacts, recommendations and public outreach are provided in the attached agenda item summary from the October 30, 2012 City Council meeting. Additional materials from this meeting are available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. At its October 30 meeting, Council requested two adjustments be made to the Policy. The first request was to adjust the second bulleted item in the introduction of the Policy update to not combine social and economic issues. This request was addressed by taking out portions of the second bullet and making a slight change to the third bullet to more clearly denote the three elements of sustainability; environmental, social and economic considerations. The second request was to incorporate language in the Policy that directs the Utilities to continue to provide a “culture of innovation”. This request was addressed by including additional language throughout the Policy. Language was added to the introduction of the Policy (just after the bulleted items), the bulleted items in Sections 1.0 and 2.0, and in the last sentence of Section 5.0. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. October 30, 2012 Agenda Item Summary for Policy Update COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: October 30, 2012 STAFF: Donnie Dustin Kevin Gertig AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 5 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Utilities staff has been working on updating the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. The current Policy was adopted by City Council in September 2003 (Resolution 2003-104). Since the Policy’s adoption, the Utility has seen a significant reduction in water use while continuing to plan for future water needs. The updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water supply and provide for an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION History Since the Fort Collins Water Utility’s origin in the 1880s, the City has been focused on providing a high quality and reliable water supply to its customers. Policies that have supported the Utility in providing this water supply, as well as encouraging water conservation, have included the 1988 Water Supply Policy, the 1992 Water Demand Management Policy and the current 2003 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. This Policy update should continue the objectives of providing a sustainable and integrated approach to ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community, while managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource. Much of the work on the Policy update was performed in 2011 and included educating and gathering input from a Community Working Group (CWG) that had diverse water related backgrounds and perspectives. After six meetings with the CWG, a draft Policy update was developed that incorporated many of their issues and concerns. The proposed Policy update was presented to Water Board at its November 17, 2011 meeting. After much discussion, the Board voted unanimously to recommend to City Council support for the draft policy. The Policy update was presented to City Council during a work session on January 10, 2012. Council did not feel the Policy update was ready for adoption and requested additional information. Much of the material developed for the Policy update, CWG and Water Board was provided to the City Council for the January 10, 2012 work session. Materials provided for that meeting are available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. One of the key updated Policy sections that was discussed during the January 10, 2012 work session (as well as by the CWG and Water Board) was the water supply planning criteria. The three main planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the drought criterion, storage reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The following describes each of these criteria separately. Drought Criterion The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In general, water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water supply system that can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought might only be able to provide 20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date, but not without issues during the early 2000s drought. COPY COPY COPY COPY October 30, 2012 -2- ITEM 5 Storage Reserve Factor A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have occurred during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The storage reserve factor can be equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown in the following table: Storage Reserve Factor # of Winter Month Demands # of Summer (July) Month Demands 0% 0.0 0.0 5% 0.9 0.4 10% 1.8 0.7 15% 2.8 1.1 20% 3.7 1.5 25% 4.6 1.8 Planning Demand Level The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired. The planning demand level is measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used along with projected population and large contractual use needs to determine future demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or facilities to acquire). The planning demand level can be higher than current use or water conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield of the City’s water supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020. The water supply planning criteria values initially presented in the updated Policy were those being used by the Corps in the permitting process for the Utilities proposed enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, which has been ongoing for several years. The criteria originally presented in the updated Policy were the values currently being used in the Halligan permitting process of the 1-in-50 year drought criterion, a planning demand level of 162 GPCD (2002-2007 average use), and a 15% storage reserve factor. Although there were some divergent views from CWG members on these planning criteria, the majority of CWG members felt that the water supply planning criteria (used in the Halligan permitting process) were set at reasonable levels. The Water Board also discussed and considered changes to these criteria during its November 2011 meeting, but decided they should remain the same to avoid potential delay to the Halligan permitting process. At the January 2012 work session, some Council expressed concern with having a planning demand level that is above our current water use level (150 GPCD) and water conservation goal (140 GPCD), and wanted a clearer explanation of the planning criteria and how they relate to the City’s water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and the City’s water use and conservation efforts. As a result, Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption. A summary of its feedback during the work session is attached (Attachment 1), along with staff responses to Council’s issues (Attachment 2). Following the City Council work session, Utilities staff contacted the Corps to ask how changes to the planning criteria in the Policy would affect the Halligan Reservoir permitting process. The Corps stated it conducts an independent study of the City’s water supply needs and that the planning criteria values being used in the process seemed reasonable. Prior to issuance of a permit, the Corps will revisit these values and make adjustments as necessary. This input allowed for some flexibility in the planning criteria values used in the updated Policy. Utilities staff met with the Water Board’s Water Supply Committee on April 16, 2012 and the full Water Board on July 19, 2012 to discuss potential options for changing the water supply planning criteria. Changes to these criteria focused mainly on revising the planning demand level (in GPCD) and the storage reserve factor (SRF). Several options for COPY COPY COPY COPY October 30, 2012 -3- ITEM 5 Policy to include the planning criteria suggested by the Water Supply Committee of 150 GPCD and 20% storage reserve factor. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board minutes (Attachments 3 and 4). In addition to the issues regarding the water supply planning criteria, Council wanted the updated Policy to include more focus on economic development and water innovation as well as a discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning. The updated Policy now includes these changes, along with the revised water supply planning criteria recommended by Water Board. The Council work session, scheduled for August 28, 2012 to further discuss the updated Policy (among other topics), was cancelled. Following the cancelled work session, Council Leadership reviewed the material provided and determined that an additional work session was not necessary and asked that the updated Policy be presented to City Council for formal adoption. Supporting Information Water Use The City currently delivers about 26,000 acre-feet/year of treated water and 4,000 acre-feet/year of raw water (which irrigates the City’s parks, golf courses, etc.). Demand levels have declined significantly over the last few decades from around 230 GPCD in the early 1990s to about 200 GPCD before the drought year of 2002. The average use over the last several years (2006-2011 normalized use) has been about 150 GPCD, indicating a 25 percent reduction in per capita water use from before 2002. The majority of these water use reductions have come from the City’s residential customers, but the commercial sector has also reduced its water use significantly. These reductions are a result of water conservation efforts by our customers that have been aided by the City becoming fully water metered in 2003 (along with tiered and seasonal rate structures) and the Utilities water conservation program. Utilities conducted a landscape preference survey with an online survey panel to gage customer’s desire for changing landscapes in Fort Collins as it relates to the potential for additional water conservation and its potential impact on existing landscapes. Results of the survey indicated general satisfaction with current landscapes in Fort Collins (especially trees) and support for additional xeriscape. Results indicated no strong opinion regarding additional water conservation, which coincides with recent general Utilities surveys that indicate the majority of customers believe water conservation efforts are at the correct level. Water Supply Sources The City’s water supplies generally come from two main sources: the Poudre River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT). On average, the City gets about half its treated water supply from each of these sources each year. The City’s Poudre River water supplies include its senior direct flow rights, converted agricultural rights (mostly from shares in the irrigation ditches that run through the City) and the Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir system. The CBT supplies are administered by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD), which allocates the supplies to unit owners through a variable annual quota. The City receives delivery of its allocated water from Horsetooth Reservoir and does not own or operate that reservoir. Policies of the NCWCD limit carryover of unused CBT water in the project facilities (including Horsetooth Reservoir). The yield of the City’s water supplies is mostly dependent on snowmelt runoff, which is subject to high annual and monthly variability. Because the City plans for its water supply system to meet demands through a 1-in-50 year drought, there are adequate supplies in most years. The City can currently meet about 31,000 acre-feet/year of treated water demands through the 1-in-50 year drought without restrictions. Future Water Demands and Supplies The Water Utility is expecting a future projected need of approximately 37,400 acre-feet/year of treated water demands by 2050 (at 150 GPCD). The increase in demand is mostly from a projected increase in population of around 35,000 people in the Water Utility service area, but also includes an increase in large contractual use of approximately 3,000 acre-feet/year. This future demand should be near a build-out condition, since the Water Utility has a limited growth potential due to surrounding water districts. These districts will meet some of the future water demands projected within the City’s Growth Management Area. The City will continue to acquire additional water rights and/or cash in-lieu-of water rights through Raw Water Requirements, which requires developers to turn in water rights or cash to meet the water needs of additional COPY COPY COPY COPY October 30, 2012 -4- ITEM 5 development. The City has been working towards acquiring and/or developing storage capacity to help manage its current and future water rights. Operational storage is a critical need to help meet legal requirements associated with the City’s converted agricultural rights. The City is pursuing local gravel pits to meet these operational storage needs. Carryover and vulnerability protection storage can help meet the City’s projected future demands, as well as provide a storage reserve for disruptions to the City’s supply system. The City is pursuing the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir to meet these types of storage needs. Water Supply Planning Criteria As discussed above, these criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The 1-in-50 year drought criterion defines the level of risk for the City’s water supply system. The 20% storage reserve factor provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations. This factor incorporates having 20% of annual demand in storage (through the 1-in-50 year drought), which equates to about 3.5 months of winter (indoor) demand or about 1.5 months of summer demand. Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The 150 GPCD planning demand level is higher than the 140 GPCD water conservation goal to account for uncertainties in water supply planning, such as the potential effects of climate change. Water supply planning is a long-term process with many uncertainties. The water supply planning criteria seek to balance the benefits and risks of developing a reliable water supply with the associated costs and impacts of doing so. These criteria determine the amount of supplies and/or facilities needed, but it is the City’s water use that mostly impacts the river system (except for construction and inundation impacts to the river). Planning for higher water use levels could provide the City more flexibility to use supplies for other benefits such as supporting local agriculture, if the City continues to reduce water use (e.g., meets the water conservation goal). Surplus Raw Water The City has surplus supplies in many years as a result of planning its supplies for meeting demands through a 1-in-50 year drought. Most of these surplus supplies are currently rented to agriculture on a year-to-year basis that generate revenue and help reduce water customer rates. The City recognizes recent interest in entering long-term arrangements with agricultural renters. Any unused or unrented surplus water is essentially left in the River, which is typically diverted by the next senior water right(s). Using the City’s surplus supplies for instream flows is currently difficult under current Colorado water law. However, Utilities staff is working with other City departments and the State of Colorado on initiatives to improve Poudre River flows. Environmental Considerations The City’s water use reduces flows in the Poudre River and other watersheds. However, most of the flow reductions on the Poudre River (between the lower Poudre Canyon and the middle of Fort Collins) are from irrigation company diversions. Most diversions for the City’s future uses will not reduce flows through Fort Collins, since the City will mostly use water from converted agricultural shares that have historically diverted upstream of Fort Collins. Key Policy Elements The Policy update has significantly changed from the current Policy adopted in 2003 and was developed with much input from the CWG, as well as some revisions from the Water Board and City Council. The following are the key updated Policy elements: • General Policy Language and Introduction In order to align with Plan Fort Collins and incorporate sustainability concepts, references to policies stated in Plan Fort Collins and incorporation of triple bottom line concepts (considering economic, environmental and social aspects) have been added throughout the Policy update, especially in the introduction. • Water Use Efficiency and Demand Management This section reduces the average daily use (water conservation) goal to 140 GPCD by 2020, compared to 185 GPCD in the current policy. This revised goal was developed in the 2009 Water Conservation Plan, which COPY COPY COPY COPY October 30, 2012 -5- ITEM 5 includes programs and measures used to reach the goal. Since it may be updated on a more regular basis (at least every 7 years), future conservation goals will be adjusted by subsequent Water Conservation Plans. The Policy also states the peak day use goal of 350 GPCD by 2020, compared to 475 GPCD in the current policy. In addition, this section mentions the use of water rate structures to provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently and how population growth is connected to water supply and use. • Water Supply Reliability This section uses the three main planning criteria discussed above to develop the City’s water supply system. The Policy states that the City’s water supplies should be maintained to meet an average demand of 150 GPCD through at least a 1-in-50 year drought, while maintaining 20% of annual demand in storage through that drought. These criteria are designed to deal with potential uncertainties in water supply planning, one of which is the potential effects of climate change. In addition, this section mentions maintaining a plan for responding to projected water supply shortages. • Additional Supplies and Facilities This section addresses alternatives for meeting the City’s future needs that best fit the City’s water supply system. It includes working towards long-term water sharing arrangements with agriculture and is not specific about the amount of storage capacity required. • Water Quality This section focuses on protecting our watersheds and maintaining the taste and quality of our treated water. • Surplus Raw Water This section includes a strong commitment to use the Utilities surplus supplies for beneficial purposes such as supporting local agriculture and supplementing flows in the Poudre River. • Regional Cooperation This section directs the City to maintain good working relationships with regional entities that are affected by the City’s water use and supply planning. Once the updated Policy is approved, Utilities staff and consultants will create a report that summarizes the updated Policy and provide supporting information. This report will be provided to City Council and others once completed. Summary The Water Board’s recommended changes to the water supply planning criteria and the options presented to it should provide an adequate and reliable water supply with only a slight change to the previously projected amount of water supplies and/or facilities required to meet the City’s future needs. Also, the updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management, and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water supply and incorporates an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Reliable water supplies are essential to providing economic health and sustainability in Fort Collins. These supplies provide economic and social benefits to the City’s citizens, businesses and surrounding community by having adequate water for health and public safety; home, school and industrial use; and healthy landscapes. The updated Policy will guide the Utilities in preparing for future water supply needs and continued demand management. Most of the Utilities operations associated with the Policy update are currently funded, such as the Water Resources Division and the Water Conservation Program. Most of the actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy are either already approved (including funding) by City Council or will be brought before them in future individual actions. COPY COPY COPY COPY October 30, 2012 -6- ITEM 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The updated Policy will guide the Utilities’ actions, projects and programs that may have both positive and negative environmental impacts. In general, the City’s use of local and regional water supplies has adverse effects on its surrounding natural environments. However, actions taken through the City’s water conservation and other efforts help to reduce those impacts. The updated Policy seeks to balance the benefits of providing a reliable water supply with the environmental impacts associated with providing that supply. Individual actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy will be brought before the City Council in the future, at which point the environmental impacts can be more fully described. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Water Board unanimously voted to approve the updated Policy with adjustments to the water supply planning criteria mentioned above in the background section. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board Minutes. PUBLIC OUTREACH Much of the work for the Policy update was performed in 2011, including an extensive public outreach effort mainly through the formation of a Community Working Group (CWG). Six meetings were held with the CWG to inform and discuss policy issues and their direct input was used to develop the updated Policy. Their input and discussions were documented in a memorandum that was provided with the January 10, 2012 work session materials, which is still available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. A letter from CWG member Gary Wockner (Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper), who requested it be given to City Council and Water Board, along with staff responses to those comments are attached for review (Attachments 5 and 6). The Water Board was involved throughout the entire Policy update process in order to provide City Council with its recommendations. In addition to the outreach with the CWG and Water Board, much of the Policy update information was posted on the City’s website, a landscape preference survey was conducted with a Utilities customer online survey panel, and presentations were given to 12 other City boards and interested organizations (22 groups were contacted). A letter from the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners is attached for review (Attachment 7). Through these various public outreach efforts, the three levels of the public engagement spectrum (inform and consult, involve and collaborate) were employed. Opportunities were provided in all these efforts for individuals to provide comments on the Policy update, which provided few comments which were similar to the CWG and Water Board input. Given this level of public outreach and since additional outreach was not requested during the January 10, 2012 work session, no additional outreach was performed. ATTACHMENTS 1. January 10, 2012 City Council Work Session Summary 2. Response to City Council Work Session Feedback 3. Water Board Recommendation 4. Water Board Minutes (relevant portion from July 19, 2012 meeting) 5. Save the Poudre Letter 6. Response to Save the Poudre Letter 7. Larimer County Board of Commissioner’s Letter 8. Glossary of Water Resources Terms 9. Powerpoint Presentation RESOLUTION 2012-099 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING A WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT POLICY WHEREAS, a Water Supply Policy was adopted by the City Council in December 1988 to help direct the acquisition, development, and management of the City’s water supplies since that time; and WHEREAS, a Water Demand Management Policy was adopted by the City Council in April 1992, which set water use goals and provided for measures to help meet those goals; and WHEREAS, in 2003, the City Council approved Resolution 2003-104, adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy to provide guidance regarding the future development and use of the City’s water supplies; and WHEREAS, since that time, there have been significant reductions in the City’s water use; and WHEREAS, it is a high priority of the City to provide an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for our community, while considering the potential effects of climate change on those supplies; and WHEREAS, managing water use in Fort Collins to reduce impacts to the environments from which the City’s supplies come is an important community value; and WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, and following discussions with interested citizens, stakeholder groups, the Water Board and City Council, City staff has developed a proposed Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, dated October 2, 2012, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Policy”); and WHEREAS, the concepts and principles to be incorporated into the Policy and a draft of the Policy were presented to, and discussed with, the City Council at a work session on January 10, 2012, and at the City Council's October 2, 2012, regular meeting; and WHEREAS, a draft of the Policy was also presented to, and discussed with, the Water Board at the Board’s July 19, 2012, meeting, and the Board’s recommendations have been incorporated into the Policy attached hereto; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to formally adopt and approve the Policy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the City Council hereby adopts the Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, to provide general criteria for City decision making regarding water supply projects, acquisition of water rights, demand management measures, and other water supply and demand related issues. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk 1 City of Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy The City of Fort Collins’ Water Supply and Demand Management Policy provides a foundational framework for water supply and demand management decisions concerning the City’s water supply system. Operational and management actions and decisions by the Water Utility will be consistent with the provisions of this policy. Objective To provide a sustainable and integrated approach to 1) ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community and 2) managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource consistent with the preferences of Water Utility customers and in recognition of the region’s semi-arid climate. This objective aligns with the 2010 Plan Fort Collins that provides a comprehensive 25-year vision for the future development of Fort Collins. Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Abide by Water Supply and Demand Management Policy: Provide for an integrated approach to providing a reliable water supply to meet the beneficial needs of customers and the community while promoting the efficient and wise use of water.” This Water Supply and Demand Management Policy calls for a “sustainable and integrated approach” to water demand and water resources management. Sustainability is defined within the context of the triple-bottom-line decision making in Plan Fort Collins as, “To systematically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend.” Aligning with Plan Fort Collins, the Water Utility will take a leadership role by incorporating the triple-bottom-line in its management of water supply and demand. When this core value is applied to the use and development of our valuable water resources, the Utility will strive to:  Avoid, minimize or offset impacts to our environment  Consider the social benefits and impacts of having a reliable and high quality water supply  Analyze the economic cost to provide such supplies, while also considering the effects it has to our local and regional economies The Utility will continue to provide a culture of innovation that finds proactive and creative solutions in managing its water supplies and demands, which is a dynamic process that evolves along with changes in data management and technology, legal and political environments, economic development and water innovation, and as the State’s population continues to increase. Given these factors, it is important to maintain an up-to-date effective policy that is based on current data. The policy’s terms and conditions should be reviewed and updated by 2020, or sooner if desired by the City Council or the Utilities Executive Director. EXHIBIT A 2 1.0 WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT The City views its water use efficiency program as an important proactive response to supply variability and climate change. Elements of the City’s conservation program include reducing indoor demand through improved technology, leak reduction and behavior change and reducing outdoor demand through improved irrigation efficiency and reasonable changes in landscaping. The City believes water use efficiency is of vital importance for many reasons, including to:  Foster a conservation ethic and eliminate waste  Demonstrate a commitment to sustainability  Provide water for multiple beneficial purposes  Reduce the need for capital expansion projects and certain operational costs  Encourage and promote innovation in water demand management  Prepare for potential impacts of climate change 1.1 Water Use Efficiency Goals for Treated Water Use The City’s 2009 Water Conservation Plan1 established a goal of reducing the City’s treated water use to 140 gallons per capita per day (gpcd)2 by the year 20203. The City will utilize water use efficiency measures and programs with the aim of reducing its water use to an average of 140 gpcd, subject to 1) continuing study of the water requirements of the City’s urban landscaping, 2) impacts on water demand due to changes in land use policies, building codes and housing trends, 3) additional studies on climate change, and 4) changes in the water use goal as may be adjusted by any subsequent water conservation plans. This water use goal is subject to change as discussed above and is intended as a goal that can be met while sustaining reasonable indoor and outdoor values of the City. The per capita peak daily demand4 will be reduced or maintained to be no more than 350 gpcd by the year 2020, but may be adjusted by any subsequent water conservation plans. 1.2 Water Use Efficiency Program Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Conservation measures should be implemented in accordance with the Water Conservation Plan and periodically adjusted to reflect new and effective conservation measures.” The City will optimize water use efficiency through the programs and measures specified in its Water Conservation Plan. These programs and measures include educational programs, incentive programs, regulatory measures and operational 1 State guidelines are changing the terminology of Water Conservation Plans to Water Use Efficiency Plans, and likewise conservation is being changed to water use efficiency. For purposes of this policy, water use efficiency is referred to as water conservation; however, the terminology may be used interchangeably. 2 Gallon per capita per day (gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange arrangements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area. 3 This goal represents an 8.5% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ 2006-2010 average daily water use of 153 gpcd. It represents a 29% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ pre-drought (1992-2001) average daily water use of 197 gpcd. 4 The peak daily demand is 2.5 times the average daily use water conservation goal and is based on historic ratios of average to peak daily use. 3 measures. Specific measures and programs are outlined in the Water Conservation Plan. The overall effectiveness of these measures and programs will be evaluated on a regular basis and if necessary, modifications will be made to increase effectiveness or to modify the City’s water use goal. An annual water conservation report will be prepared to describe the status and results of the various measures and programs. The Water Conservation Plan will be updated at a minimum of every seven years, as currently required by the State of Colorado. 1.3 Water Rate Structures The City will have stable water rate structures with transparent accountability for all classes of customers. The water rate structures will provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently while also providing sufficient revenue for operational and maintenance purposes. Examples of structures that may be utilized include 1) tiered rates with increasing prices as water use increases, 2) seasonal blocks with higher rates during the irrigation season, and 3) water budget approaches based on appropriate targets for individual customers. The City will annually review the effectiveness of its water rate structures as part of its financial analyses regarding Water Utility revenue, expenses and rates. Specific studies or changes to the rate structure may be made upon identification of the need to revise it. Any changes to the rate structure will require City Council approval. 1.4 Population Growth Population growth is an important factor in determining the City’s water supply needs, since increases in population generally increase the need for additional supplies. Population growth projections and associated water demand are mostly a function of land use planning, development densities, annexation and other growth related issues that can be affected by City Council decisions. The Water Utility will continue to work closely with the Current Planning Department, which provides population projections that may be effected by changes in City policies related to growth. 2.0 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY The City needs to meet future water demands in an efficient and reliable manner. Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Water supply reliability criteria will take into consideration potential effects of climate change and other vulnerabilities. Water supplies and related facilities shall be acquired or developed after careful consideration of social, economic and environmental factors.” One of the Water Utility’s primary objectives is to provide an adequate and reliable supply of water to its customers and other water users. Key principles that need to be considered when addressing water supply for municipal use include:  Providing water supply system reliability and flexibility  Considering a broad portfolio of resources that do not overly depend on any one source  Maintaining a water storage reserve for unforeseen circumstances  Maintaining water supply infrastructure and system security  Being a steward of the City’s water resources, which includes watershed management  Collaboration with the City’s regional water providers and users 4  Maintaining awareness of state, national and worldwide trends and adapting as needed to meet our customer needs  Promoting education, awareness and a culture of innovation among the Water Utility and others to enable creative responses to future water supply uncertainties 2.1 Water Supply Planning Criteria An integral component of the City’s water supply planning efforts is to maintain computer models that estimate the yield of its existing and future water supplies. The following water supply planning criteria are key parameters used in these models that provide a foundation for planning future supplies. 2.1.1 Planning Demand Level The reliability of the City’s water supply should be maintained to meet an average per capita demand level of 150 gpcd5,6. This planning level provides a value that is higher than the water use goal to address uncertainties inherent in water supply planning. It is important to have a planning number that can be used for development of long-range water supply facilities. Because water supply system infrastructure may take many years to permit and construct, it is desirable to use conservative assumptions to size facilities that may be needed for the long-term. A planning demand level should be larger than the water use goal, primarily because of the uncertainties related to projected water demands, yields from specific water rights, climate change and other unanticipated effects. 2.1.2 Drought Criterion The reliability and capacity of the City’s water supply system should be maintained to meet the planning level demand during at least a l-in-50 year drought event in the Cache la Poudre River Basin. Water rights should be acquired and facilities (including storage capacity) should be planned and constructed sufficiently ahead of the time to maintain the 1-in-50 year drought criterion, considering the time required to obtain water court decrees and permit and construct diversion, conveyance and/or storage facilities. In using this criterion, the City seeks to provide a balance among water supply reliability, the financial investment necessary to secure such reliability and the environmental impacts associated with water storage and diversions. 2.1.3 Storage Reserve Factor The City’s water supply planning criteria will include a storage reserve factor that equates to 20% of annual demand in storage through a 1-in-50 year drought7,8. This factor provides an 5 The 150 gpcd value is based upon the normalized 2006-2011 average daily use. 6 The average per capita demand planning level is used for facility planning purposes. Gallons per capita per day (gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange arrangements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area. This number is multiplied by population projections developed by the City’s Planning Department to calculate future water demands. 7 For the Water Utility, 20% of annual demand is equivalent to around 3.7 months of average winter demand and about 1.5 months of average July demand. 5 additional layer of protection intended to address dimensions of risk outside of the other reliability criteria, including emergency situations (i.e. pipeline failure) and droughts that exceed a 1-in-50 year drought. 2.2 Climate Change Climate change could significantly impact the reliability of the City’s supplies and/or the amount of water required to maintain existing landscapes9; however, there is a great deal of uncertainty related to current climate change projections along the Colorado Front Range and its impact on municipal demands and water supply systems. The City’s planning criteria and assumptions are conservative in part to account for climate change based on the information to date. The City will continue to monitor climate change information and, if necessary, will revise its water supply planning criteria and assumptions to ensure future water supply reliability. 2.3 Water Supply Shortage Response Plan The City will maintain a plan for responding to situations where there are projected water supply shortages, either because of severe drought conditions (i.e., greater than a 1-in-50 year drought) or because of disruptions in the raw water delivery system. When needed, the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan will be activated based on the projected water supply shortage. This plan will include measures to temporarily reduce water use through media campaigns, regulations, restrictions, rate adjustments and other measures. The plan may also include provisions to temporarily supplement the supply through interruptible water supply contracts, leases, exchanges and operational measures. Reducing the City’s water use during supply short situations may lessen adverse impacts to irrigated agriculture and flows in the Poudre River. The plan will be reviewed periodically and, if necessary, updated to reflect changes in the City’s water use and its water supply system. 2.4 Additional Supplies and Facilities In order to meet projected growth within the Water Utility’s service area, as well as maintain system reliability and operational flexibility, the City will need to increase the firm yield of its current water supply system. The following policy elements address ways of meeting these needs. 8 In meeting this factor, it is assumed that the City cannot rely on the existing Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT) carryover program. This program currently allows each CBT unit holder to carry over up to 20% of its CBT unit ownership in CBT reservoirs for use in the following year. However, this program has varied over the years and there is no guarantee that it will be continued in the future. 9 Current research indicates that changes in precipitation in this area are uncertain but that temperatures will increase and therefore it is likely that runoff will come earlier and in a shorter amount of time, precipitation may more often come as rain, and higher temperatures will increase outdoor demands and change growing seasons for existing landscapes. 6 2.4.1 Raw Water Requirements for New Development The City shall require developers to turn over water rights as approved by the City, or cash in- lieu-of water rights, such that supplies can be made available to meet or exceed the demands of the Water Utility’s treated water customers during a l-in-50 year drought. Cash collected shall be used to increase the firm yield and long-term reliability of the City’s supply system. Potential uses of cash include acquiring additional water rights, entering into water sharing arrangements with agricultural entities, purchasing or developing storage facilities and pursuing other actions toward developing a reliable water supply system. Consideration will be given to providing a diversified system that can withstand the annual variability inherent in both water demands and supplies. The balance between water rights being turned over and cash received by developers should be monitored and adjusted as needed to develop a reliable and effective system. 2.4.2 Acquisition and/or Sharing of Agricultural Water Supplies The City currently owns and will acquire additional water rights that are decreed only for agricultural use. The City will periodically need to change these water rights from agricultural use to municipal use to meet its water supply needs. The City will change those rights that come from areas upon which the City is growing, or from areas where the irrigation has ceased, when needed. For water rights that were derived from irrigated agricultural lands that remain in viable agricultural areas, the City will refrain from converting agricultural decrees to municipal use as long as other water supply options are available or other factors make it prudent to do so. The City will also work towards water sharing arrangements that provide water for municipal uses when critically needed and that allow for continued agricultural use of water at other times, in a manner that preserves irrigated agricultural lands over the long-term. 2.4.3 Facilities The City will pursue the acquisition or development of facilities that are needed to manage the City’s water rights in an efficient and effective manner and enhance the City’s ability to meet demands through at least a 1-in-50 year drought. These facilities may include storage capacity, diversion structures, pipelines or other conveyances, pumping equipment, or other facilities that increase the firm yield of the City’s supply system. Additional storage will be acquired or constructed considering 1) the City’s return flow obligations incurred from changes of water rights, 2) the City’s need to carryover water from wet years to dry years in order to meet its drought criteria, 3) operational flexibility, redundancy and reliability of the City’s water supply system, and 4) potential multiple-use benefits (i.e., environmental flows, recreational uses, etc.). The City will analyze the potential environmental impacts of developing storage along with other associated costs and benefits, and will develop that storage in a manner that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment. Storage capacity options include the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, the development of local gravel pits into storage ponds, the acquisition of storage capacity in new or existing reservoirs, the development of aquifer storage, or some combination of the above. 7 3.0 TREATED AND RAW WATER QUALITY Policy ENV 21.1 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Develop and adhere to drinking water quality standards, treatment practices, and procedures that provide the highest level of health protection that can be realistically achieved.” In addition, the City will take an active role in protecting the quality of water in the various watersheds from which the City’s raw water is derived and maintaining the taste and quality of the City’s treated water. This may include mixing of the City’s source waters to maintain high water quality and require collaboration with private, county, state and federal land owners and managers. The acquisition, development, and management of the City’s raw and treated water will be consistent with the City’s Drinking Water Quality Policy and other applicable policies related to watershed protection and water treatment. 4.0 USE OF SURPLUS RAW WATER The City will use its existing supplies to meet municipal obligations with the following priorities: 1) to meet water demands by the City’s treated water customers, and 2) to meet the City’s raw water needs as well as other City raw water obligations. Raw water needs include use for such purposes as irrigation of City parks, golf courses, cemeteries and other greenbelt areas. Additional raw water obligations include primarily water transfers to other entities because of agreements or exchanges made to manage the water supply system more effectively. Water not needed for the above purposes is referred to as surplus water and may be made available to others in accordance with decrees and other applicable policies. Since the City plans its water supply system using a 1-in-50 year drought criterion, it typically has significant quantities of surplus raw water in many years. This surplus water may be available on a year-to- year basis or through multi-year arrangements that do not significantly impair the City’s ability to meet municipal demands. The City will continue to rent its surplus supplies at a fair market price that helps offset the cost of owning such supplies and benefits the Water Utility ratepayers. 4.1 Commitment to Other Beneficial Purposes Acknowledging that the City’s use of its valuable water resources has impacts to the environment and the region, the City will commit to using its surplus supplies for other beneficial purposes such as supporting irrigated agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre River or providing other regional benefits. The City’s surplus supplies come from a variety of sources, each of which has unique characteristics. These sources include CBT water and shares in several irrigation companies. Some sources are more suitable and available than others to meet beneficial purposes. Whether the surplus raw water can be used for these other purposes is dependent upon a number of factors, including the type of water, place of use and other decree limitations. Any potential use of these supplies should consider, and will likely require coordination with, other water users, state agencies and other groups. Some uses of the surplus supplies, such as maintaining an instream flow according to the State’s Instream Flow Program, may require a change of water rights through the water court process. The City will engage in a thorough evaluation of these issues as part of assessing the use of its surplus supplies for these beneficial purposes. 8 Utilities will evaluate implementing a program to allow voluntary contributions from its ratepayers (i.e., Utility bill “check-off box”) for programs that are designed to support the following purposes: preserving local agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre River, or meeting other beneficial purposes that our community may desire. 4.1.1 Agriculture and Open Space Policy SW 3.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Participate in and follow the Northern Colorado Regional Food System Assessment project and other Larimer County agricultural efforts, and implement their recommendations at a local level, if appropriate.” In addition, Policy LIV 44.1 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Maintain a system of publicly-owned open lands to protect the integrity of wildlife habitat and conservation sites, protect corridors between natural areas, conserve outstanding examples of Fort Collins' diverse natural heritage, and provide a broad range of opportunities for educational, interpretive, and recreational programs to meet community needs.” To the extent that surplus water is available, the City will continue to support the local agricultural economy and help preserve the associated open spaces by renting surplus agricultural water back to irrigators under the respective irrigation companies. The City will explore long-term rental and sharing arrangements with irrigators10 in order to support the regional food system, encourage agricultural open space and other benefits provided by irrigated agriculture, as well as benefit the Water Utility ratepayers. 4.1.2 Instream Flows Policy ENV 24.5 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Work to quantify and provide adequate instream flows to maintain the ecological functionality, and recreational and scenic values of the Cache la Poudre River through Fort Collins.” Recognizing that its water use depletes natural streamflows, the City will seek innovative opportunities to improve, beyond any associated minimum regulatory requirements, the ecological function of the streams and rivers affected by its diversions. The Water Utility will take a leadership role in working with other City departments, local and regional groups and agencies towards the following objectives in accordance with Colorado water law and the administration of water rights in Colorado: 1) encourage flows in local streams to protect the ecosystem, 2) pursue the operation of its water supplies and facilities in a manner that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment while meeting customer demands, and 3) explore projects or measures that would provide flows in streams and water in reservoirs for recreational and aesthetic purposes. 4.1.3 Other Arrangements The City will consider and participate in other surplus water supply arrangements with other entities that provide mutual benefits and support the region. These may include other rental agreements, augmentation plans and other cooperative arrangements with regional partners. These types of arrangements should be limited to unique opportunities that are mutually 10 The City’s largest irrigation company ownership interest is in the North Poudre Irrigation Company, which still has substantial lands in irrigated agricultural production and has a unique mix of native water and CBT water that lends itself to these types of partnership arrangements. 9 beneficial to the parties and provide significant social, economic or environmental benefits to the region. 5.0 REGIONAL COOPERATION The City recognizes the importance in maintaining good relationships with regional entities and coordinating efforts to achieve mutual goals. The City also recognizes that growing Colorado municipalities are currently struggling to define a way to meet future water supply needs in a manner that minimizes negative impacts to agricultural economies and river ecosystems. The Water Utility will endeavor to be a leader in demonstrating how water supply can be provided in a manner that respects other interests and provides a culture of innovation. 5.1 Working with Other Municipal Providers The City will continue to work with the water suppliers throughout the northern Colorado Front Range to assure that adequate supplies are maintained in the region. When benefits are identified, the City will cooperate with area entities in studying, building, sharing capacity and operating water transmission lines, distribution systems and storage reservoirs for greater mutual benefit. The City has common interests and the potential to cooperate with regional entities including the water districts around Fort Collins, the City of Greeley and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, as well as other Colorado water providers. In particular, the City should work closely with water districts that serve Fort Collins residents to encourage similar policies regarding drought protection, conservation and to provide mutual assistance during emergencies. 5.2 Working with Local Irrigation Companies The City will continue to cooperate with local irrigation companies regarding the use, exchange and transfer of water in the Cache la Poudre River Basin. As a major shareholder in many of the local irrigation companies, it is necessary and desirable that the City work closely with these companies. Much of the water supply available to the City is through the ownership of shares in local irrigation companies. 5.3 Working with Others City Departments will work together and also cooperate with local, state and federal agencies, civic organizations, environmental groups and other non-governmental organizations when common goals would benefit City residents and the surrounding community. Examples of goals that may involve City water supplies and be worthy of collaborative efforts include support for existing and development of new local food sources, promoting open space, improving river flows and supporting the local economy. Such efforts should identify appropriate entities and sources of revenue for specific goals or projects. DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Dan Weinheimer AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 28 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-110 Adopting the City’s 2013 Legislative Policy Agenda. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) develops a legislative agenda to assist in the analysis of pending legislation. The Legislative Policy Agenda is used as a guide by Council and staff to determine positions on legislation pending at the state and federal levels and as a general reference for state legislators and the congressional delegation. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Legislative Policy Agenda includes policies on issues that affect the quality of life and governance of our community. It is used as a guide by Council and staff to determine positions on pending legislation, and as a general reference for our state legislators and congressional delegation. The 2013 Agenda was developed with input from City staff and review by the Legislative Review Committee. It contains policy statements on a wide variety of topics. This year, the document was formatted to coincide with the City’s adopted strategic outcome areas. Areas covered in the document include: • Culture, Parks and Recreation Cultural Services Parks and Recreation • Economic Health Finance Investments Privatization • Environmental Health Air Quality Climate and Environmental Protection Recycling and Solid Waste Natural Areas and Open Lands • High Performing Government Home Rule Human Resources Risk Management Sovereign and Governmental Immunity Telecommunications Utility Services • Energy Water Supply and Quality • Neighborhood Livability Affordable Housing Planning and Land Use • Safe Community Fire Protection Hazardous Materials Management Public Safety • Transportation Transportation The proposed 2013 Legislative Policy Agenda is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit A. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 28 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Legislative Policy Agenda contains a number of policies that speak to economic impacts. The Finance section (page 5) contains several statements that address the need to protect the City’s revenue base. It also calls for support for legislation “that promotes sustainable economic development.” Other policies that support sound fiscal practices are imbedded throughout the document. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Several sections of the Legislative Policy Agenda directly address environmental impacts and support for legislation that will help the City forward its environmental goals. These include statements under the headings of Air Quality (page 6), Climate and Environmental Protection (page 8), Natural Areas and Open Lands (page 8), Recycling and Solid Waste (page 9), Energy (page 12) and Water Supply and Quality (page 13). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. RESOLUTION 2012-110 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING THE CITY’S 2013 LEGISLATIVE POLICY AGENDA WHEREAS, state and federal legislation may impact the citizens of Fort Collins, affecting their quality of life; and WHEREAS, such state and federal legislation may also influence the operations of municipal governments, including the City; and WHEREAS, the City has an interest in providing input on proposed legislation; and WHEREAS, Councilmembers and staff are asked to state the City’s policy position on legislation; and WHEREAS, establishing the City’s policy position on legislation assists the members of the Legislative Review Committee in their review of, and response to, state and federal legislation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the policy statements contained in the attached 2013 Legislative Policy Agenda accurately reflect the City's policies on these issues. Section 2. That the City Council hereby adopts the 2013 Legislative Policy Agenda attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk LEGISLATIVE POLICY AGENDA 2013 Adopted November 20, 2012 EXHIBIT A 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TOPIC PAGE INTRODUCTION 3 FORT COLLINS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE 3 LEGISLATIVE POLICY STATEMENTS 5 CULTURE, PARKS AND RECREATION CULTURAL SERVICES 5 PARKS AND RECREATION 5 ECONOMIC HEALTH FINANCE 6 INVESTMENTS 6 PRIVATIZATION 7 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AIR QUALITY 7 CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 9 NATURAL AREAS AND OPEN LANDS 9 RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE 10 HIGH PERFORMING GOVERNMENT HOME RULE 10 HUMAN RESOURCES 11 RISK MANAGEMENT 12 SOVEREIGN AND GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY 12 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 13 UTILITY SERVICES 13 ENERGY 13 WATER SUPPLY AND QUALITY 14 NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING 15 PLANNING AND LAND USE 15 SAFE COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION 16 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 16 PUBLIC SAFETY 17 TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION 18 CITY LEGISLATIVE STAFF 20 3 INTRODUCTION Fort Collins is a community of 145,000 residents located at the foot of the Rocky Mountains along Colorado’s Front Range. Incorporated in 1873, the City has grown to become the commercial, educational and cultural hub of northern Colorado. The City adopted a home rule charter in 1954 and operates under a Council-Manager form of government. The 2013 City of Fort Collins Legislative Policy Agenda identifies issues of importance to the City of Fort Collins. The Agenda expresses policies and positions on issues that affect the quality of life and the governance of our community. Our policy agenda is structured to address areas of local concern and to also reflect the strategic planning that guides resource allocation and other decision making within the City organization. Seven outcome areas have been identified by the City to ensure appropriate and effective resource allocation to support the community’s priorities. Fort Collins’ outcome areas include High Performing Government, Transportation, Culture, Parks and Recreation, Economic Health, Neighborhood Livability, Environmental Health, and Safe Community. We offer this Agenda to our Legislators as a guideline when considering legislation that impacts Fort Collins. We encourage Legislators to contact Fort Collins City Council Members and our Legislative Policy Manager should they have any questions regarding our policy positions on specific legislation. CITY OF FORT COLLINS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE The Legislative Review Committee (LRC) is a representative group of Council members that reviews and reacts to proposed legislation on behalf of City Council and the City. In taking a position on particular bills, the LRC interprets and applies the various policies that are included in the Legislative Policy Agenda. The policies are written in terms of supporting or opposing particular kinds of legislation; however, the policies are intended to guide positions of either support or opposition, depending upon how a bill is written and whether the LRC believes that, if approved, the bill would advance or impede the City’s interests. If a bill is governed by two or more competing policies, then the LRC may decide how to balance those policies in taking a position. If a bill falls outside of the Legislative Policy Agenda, the LRC refers the bill to the full Council for consideration before a position is taken on behalf of the City. Council Members presently serving on the Legislative Review Committee are: • Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Ohlson • Councilmember Lisa Poppaw • Councilmember Wade Troxell 4 Staff liaisons support the LRC by contributing expertise in various areas of municipal service. The City works closely with the Colorado Municipal League on many legislative items. 5 LEGISLATIVE POLICY STATEMENTS Cultural, Parks and Recreation CULTURAL SERVICES The City recognizes that art and culture are vitally important to the quality of life in our community and is committed to providing the citizens of Fort Collins with excellent cultural services. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support funding for cultural services for the education, entertainment and enrichment of the community. 2. Support legislation that facilitates the creation, performance and presentation of the arts. 3. Support legislation that protects and preserves our cultural heritage. PARKS AND RECREATION The City is committed to providing the community with excellent parks and recreation services and facilities. Our citizens enjoy a better quality of life, improved health, less crime and a greater sense of community because of our quality parks and recreation programs. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that maintains or enhances funding for parks, trails, forestry, horticulture and recreation services and facilities. 2. Support use of Great Outdoors Colorado and other sources for full funding of municipal government projects, with maximum local discretion regarding local needs and priorities. 3. Support continued availability of Great Outdoors Colorado grants to municipalities in equal or greater funding levels. 4. Support legislation that enhances the City’s ability to provide quality parks and recreation services and facilities for its citizens. 5. Support measures that offer enhanced protection for community trees and natural assets against invasive species, pests and other threats. 6 ECONOMIC HEALTH FINANCE As a municipality, the City of Fort Collins faces many complex financial issues. Strong fiscal planning, prudent debt management and preservation of the City’s revenue base are vital in maintaining and improving the City’s financial health. Considering the known impacts of legislation on the City’s business community can help foster a stronger tax base and retain a strong quality of life. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that maintains or expands municipal authority to establish alternative funding mechanisms, including financing tools such as public improvement fees (PIF) and certificates of participation (COP). 2. Support tax increment financing as a tool to support Downtown Development Authorities and Urban Renewal Authorities, taking into consideration the land use impacts of such legislation (e.g., sprawl) and the compelling interests and concerns of other taxing entities. 3. Support legislation that promotes sustainable economic development. 4. Support increased funding and budgetary autonomy for Colorado State University and Front Range Community College. 5. Support legislation promoting the equitable treatment of sales and use taxes to residents and corporations residing or doing business in Colorado. The City strongly recommends that taxes be as broad-based as possible and that exemptions be limited. 6. Support federal legislation that recognizes the importance of sales and use tax to local, self-collecting municipalities and equitably distributes sales tax collections on e-commerce transactions. 7. Support legislation that would maintain or increase the City’s revenue base (sales, use and property tax). INVESTMENTS The Fort Collins City Council has adopted investment polices to be used by the City. The policies are reviewed and update periodically to ensure the safety and quality of the portfolio to maintain liquidity and to maximize portfolio earnings. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 7 1. Support legislation designed to protect, without unnecessarily restricting, the investments of government entities. 2. Support legislation that provides for adequate transparency of the City’s investment activity. 3. Support legislation that would provide municipalities freedom to participate in investments that meet their objectives. 4. Oppose restrictions on the City’s ability to adopt its own investment policies. PRIVATIZATION The City of Fort Collins utilizes outside contracts for procurement of many goods and services. This practice of privatization provides citizens with a balance of quality and cost efficiency. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation enabling provision of services through private enterprise in a manner that fosters cost effective, sustainable, quality services. 2. Support local control of the awarding of contracts and the accountability of local officials for those actions. 3. Oppose mandates that increase the complexity and cost of services without improving those services. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AIR QUALITY The City’s Air Quality Plan establishes a strong overall goal to “continually improve Fort Collins air quality.” Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation and regulations adopting programs and policies that improve public health and air quality. 2. Support legislation that maintains or increases the stringency of air quality standards. 3. Support legislation that enhances local government authority to improve air quality beyond minimum State or Federal requirements. 8 4. Support legislation that promotes regional improvement of air quality, recognizing that air pollution does not follow jurisdictional boundaries. 5. Support legislation to assure that Federal, State and County agencies have adequate authority and resources (funding and personnel) to enforce air quality regulations. 6. Support legislation that removes barriers and promotes voluntary actions to reduce air pollution. 7. Support legislation and regulations that reduce vehicle emissions by: - Using the price mechanisms of the free market to shift citizen and business travel behavior toward actions that reduce vehicle emissions and vehicle miles of travel, including removing hidden cost subsidies to motor vehicle users - Employing economic incentives and disincentives and other market approaches - Encouraging behavior changes, such as limiting unnecessary idling of vehicles - Implementing State motor vehicle emissions testing programs consistent with City air quality goals 8. Support legislation and regulations that provide authority for local governments to implement vehicle emissions reductions programs. 9. Support legislation and regulations that make tailpipe emissions and fuel economy standards more stringent for all vehicles. 10. Support programs and policies that promote advanced low emission vehicle technology; and encourage or promote alternative fuels such as biodiesel, cellulosic ethanol, hydrogen and compressed natural gas. 11. Support legislation and regulations that reduce residential wood smoke emissions in order to achieve compliance with air quality standards. 12. Support legislation that helps to reduce fossil fuel consumption in the transportation and building sector. 13. Support programs and policies that allow local officials to establish baseline levels and understand the ongoing contributions of the oil and gas industry to air pollution. CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION The City of Fort Collins encourages local, state and national efforts to protect and enhance our environment. Additionally, the City has a policy goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% below 2005 levels by 2050. 9 Therefore the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation and regulation that reduce Fort Collins’ vulnerability to climate change impacts. 2. Support legislation that establishes reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions. 3. Support legislation that establishes market-based mechanisms to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including providing incentives to business and citizens to reduce emissions and for green building and sustainable design. 4. Support legislation and regulations to promote pollution prevention. 5. Support the Colorado self-audit law. 6. Support legislation that provides local government the authority to inspect oil and gas sites and ensure operator compliance through enforcement of federal, state and local regulations. NATURAL AREAS AND OPEN LANDS The City has a vigorous program to protect natural areas and other important open lands within Fort Collins, within our Community Growth Management Area, and regionally. The City works in partnership with other communities, Larimer County, private land trusts, Great Outdoors Colorado, community groups, and state and federal agencies to achieve community and regional conservation goals. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that maintains or enhances tax incentives for voluntary land conservation by private landowners. 2. Support legislation that expands the effectiveness of existing protection for wetlands, wildlife habitats, and other sensitive natural areas. 3. Support additional funding for land conservation programs. 4. Support legislation protecting the Cache la Poudre River. 5. Support legislation that would increase the availability of Great Outdoors Colorado grants to municipalities in amounts equal to or greater than are currently offered. 10 RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE The City of Fort Collins endorses a multi-pronged approach to waste minimization that includes recycling, re-use, composting and source reduction. Additionally, the City has adopted a goal of diverting 50% of the community’s waste stream from landfill disposal. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that clarifies and broadens the regulatory authority of local government to ensure the efficient management of recyclable material and solid waste. 2. Support legislation that encourages integrated waste management planning and implementation, including but not limited to creation of a State waste diversion goal. 3. Support legislation that provides incentives and funding for programs that promote waste reduction, reuse and recycling and development of related infrastructure. 4. Support legislation that enables “buy recycled” or “environmentally preferable purchasing” policies for government agency procurement. 5. Support legislation that continues or increases funding for programs to collect and monitor data on trash volumes, rates of diversion from landfill disposal and economic impacts of recycling. 6. Support legislation to require greater producer responsibility, such as “take back” regulations that assist consumers to appropriately recycle electronic equipment (e- waste.) 7. Support legislation that establishes a deposit fee on beverage containers and that would be used to pay for recycling programs. 8. Support legislation that strengthens the “renewable energy” standard; oppose expanding the definition to include pyrolysis (burning of materials). High Performing Government HOME RULE The City of Fort Collins is a home rule municipality under Article XX of the Colorado Constitution, which grants home rule municipalities “full right of self-government in local and municipal matters.” Home rule authority affords the citizens of Fort Collins greater access to government and increased opportunity for participation and contribution to the decision making process. 11 Home rule is of utmost importance to the City of Fort Collins. The City recognizes, however, that there are particular areas in which insistence on local control may be untimely or unwise. Therefore, proposed legislation must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine when it is in the City's best interest to assert home rule authority and when the City should support statewide intervention. For example, the City must be free to regulate local activities that primarily impact the area within the City's boundaries, such as the speed of local traffic or the effects of particular land use developments. On the other hand, the cumulative effect of these and other activities has substantial statewide ramifications which may call for statewide regulation, so that, for example, state regulation may be needed to effectively manage overall growth and development in the state, traffic congestion in major transportation corridors and environmental quality. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislative efforts to strengthen home rule authority of municipal governments. 2. Oppose legislation that requires State or Federal intervention in matters of local concern and which unnecessarily or adversely affect the City’s ability to manage pursuant to its home rule authority. HUMAN RESOURCES The City of Fort Collins is committed to the safety and well-being of its employees. The City works diligently to be an efficient and responsible steward of tax dollars while ensuring that employees receive fair and competitive compensation and benefits. The City believes that its citizens, through their elected representatives on City Council, are in the best position to determine appropriate City employee compensation, benefits, and policies. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that enhances the City’s ability to decide employment issues, including collective bargaining, arbitration, compensation, benefits and leaves. 2. Support legislation that expands the City’s ability to offer health, welfare and wellness services for employees. 3. Support legislation that maintains current state funding for police officer death and disability benefits. 4. Oppose legislation that would permit employees with defined contribution plans to return to defined benefit plans if there is a cost to local government. 12 RISK MANAGEMENT The City of Fort Collins recognizes the dual purpose of the workers’ compensation system – providing benefits promptly to injured employees in a cost-effective manner and minimizing costly litigation. Council also recognizes that the City’s self-insurance program is a cost efficient method to insure workers’ compensation and that government intervention or taxation can negatively impact the City. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that improves administrative efficiency of the Division of Workers’ Compensation. 2. Support legislation that prevents increased insurance premium costs to employers. 3. Support legislation that would limit or reduce administrative burdens or taxes to self-insurance programs. 4. Support legislation that would check insurance claim litigation. 5. Support legislation that increases the City’s options and ability to manage workers’ compensation claims; oppose actions like removing existing off-sets to workers’ compensation benefits or limiting the City’s ability to designate treating physicians. 6. Oppose legislation that presumptively expands workers compensation coverage to illnesses or injuries that are not work related. SOVEREIGN AND GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY The Fort Collins City Council recognizes that the complexity and diversity of City operations and services required to meet the needs of the citizens of Fort Collins may expose the City and its officers and employees to liability for damage and injury. The Council further recognizes that City officers and employees must be confident that they have the City’s support in the lawful and proper performance of their assigned duties and responsibilities. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that protects the interests of municipalities and their officers and employees in the lawful and proper performance of their duties and responsibilities. 2. Support legislation that discourages baseless and frivolous claims and demands made against municipalities, their officers and employees. 13 3. Support legislation that limits or enhances municipal liability protections, or expands municipal immunity. TELECOMMUNICATIONS The City of Fort Collins encourages a competitive, open market for cable and telecommunications services in order to ensure the public has access to a variety of programming and services at the lowest cost possible. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statement: 1. Support legislation that maintains and enhances local franchising authority. This helps ensure local governments’ ability to negotiate, in the public interest, for cable channel space, institutional networks and public education and government programming. 2. Support legislation that re-establishes the rights of municipalities to provide low cost, accessible telecommunications services and related infrastructure. UTILITY SERVICES It is critical that the City operate its electric distribution, drinking water, stormwater and wastewater services in a financially sound, reliable, safe and environmentally acceptable manner. Like other municipal utilities across the country, Fort Collins is faced with many new and evolving challenges associated with changes in the industry, the age and security of its infrastructure and the necessity of managing a changing workforce. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: ENERGY 1. Support legislation that recognizes the importance of infrastructure security while minimizing restriction to the Utility’s ability to manage security as an integral part of the system. 2. Support programs that provide assistance to local government, and that encourage and allow for local design and implementation of greenhouse gas reduction strategies. 3. Support legislation that establishes uniform standards for the reduction of carbon emissions. 4. Support legislation that removes barriers to financing for energy efficiency, and encourages and funds energy efficiency and conservation while allowing local design and implementation of the programs. 14 5. Support legislation that reduces community energy use and net energy use of existing buildings. 6. Support legislation and regulations that provide incentives to encourage renewable energy production, including wind power, and provide for “State Implementation Plan” credits for renewable energy (excluding residential wood burning and corn- based ethanol) and energy efficiency. 7. Oppose legislation that attempts to prevent or inhibit provision of municipal electric service in newly annexed areas. 8. Support legislation that encourages grid modernization and smart grid technologies WATER SUPPLY AND QUALITY 1. Support legislation that maintains or expands the authority delegated to the State to administer federally mandated water, stormwater and wastewater environmental regulatory programs (primacy). 2. Support water quality legislation that results in reasonable water quality control regulations that are cost effective and can show identifiable benefits. 3. Support legislation that enables local development of watershed protection. 4. Support legislation that provides the City the flexibility to enhance in-stream flows to preserve or improve the natural environment of the stream while protecting the integrity of Colorado’s appropriation doctrine and City water supply. 5. Support legislation that recognizes the importance of infrastructure security while minimizing restriction to the Utility’s ability to manage security as an integral part of the system. 6. Support adequate funding of mandated programs. 7. Support legislation that removes barriers to financing for water conservation projects. 8. Support legislation that would fund recovery and treatment of Cache la Poudre and other waterways impacted by 2012 wildfires. 9. Support programs and policies that allow local officials to understand water sources, disposition of produced water, and clearly understand the ongoing impacts of the oil and gas industry to water quality. 15 Neighborhood Livability AFFORDABLE HOUSING The City of Fort Collins supports policy and funding mechanisms that help the City develop and maintain affordable housing for our community’s lowest income families. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that maintains or enhances current levels of funding for affordable housing throughout Colorado. 2. Support legislation that increases local government’s ability to regulate, manage or generate alternative sources of funding for affordable housing, including public-private partnerships. 3. Support legislation that protects the rights of low-income and/or disabled residents in tenant-landlord disputes, especially as it relates to safety issues. 4. Support legislation that retains flexibility for City to adopt and enforce rental terms that allow it to appropriately maintain and manage City-owned affordable rental properties. PLANNING AND LAND USE Effective local land use planning and land development regulation contributes to the quality of life enjoyed primarily by Fort Collins residents, yet shared regionally within Larimer County. State legislation can influence local governments’ ability to develop and implement land use plans for their communities. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that requires regional cooperation in land use and transportation planning, and legislation that fosters sustainable development, without unduly constraining the City’s home rule powers. 2. Support legislation that prohibits the annexation of land that is located within the boundaries of a Growth Management Area that was legally established by an intergovernmental agreement between a municipality and a county by any municipality not a party to the agreement. 3. Support legislation to limit the definition of a compensable taking and/or the definition of vested property rights beyond the provisions of existing law. 4. Support legislation that would retain local government authority to impose development impact fees. 16 5. Support legislation that would increase cities’ ability to regulate industrial land uses like oil and gas exploration and extraction. 6. Support public housing policies that equitably balance protection of tenants and landlords. 7. Support legislation allowing greater local regulation of oil and gas exploration activities within municipal boundaries. Safe Community FIRE PROTECTION The Fort Collins City Council recognizes the critical importance of maintaining a safe environment and protecting the lives and property of the citizens of Fort Collins from fire. Therefore the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation adopting a State fire code, the code of choice being the 2012 International Building and Fire Code, and allow municipalities to adopt their own amendments. 2. Oppose legislation that limits local enforcement of the International Fire Code as adopted with local amendments, or imposes inspection requirements or prevents collection of permit or inspection fees as required by the local jurisdiction. 3. Support legislation that requires the installation of fire protection systems in structures to enhance life safety and property protection when appropriate. 4. Support legislation that strengthens the City’s ability to prohibit the use and sale of fireworks and that allows counties and fire districts to prohibit and otherwise control fireworks. 5. Support legislation that promotes fire safety, education and prevention with the goal of reducing injury, loss of life and property damage. 6. Support legislation that allows local jurisdictions to implement open burning restrictions. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT It is an important concern of the City to safeguard Fort Collins’ health and environmental safety by reducing risks from the unauthorized release of hazardous materials or hazardous waste. 17 Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that allows the City to continue controlling risks from hazardous materials use, storage and transportation through the International Building and Fire Code and related local amendments. 2. Support legislation that allows Fort Collins adopt local regulations for hazardous materials, including review and approval of the location of facilities that use or store hazardous materials or hazardous waste. 3. Support legislation that strengthens the enforcement of hazardous materials regulations. 4. Support legislation strengthening the diversion of hazardous waste from landfills. 5. Support policies or legislation to establish greater flexibility and more options for local government in the management of publicly-owned areas thought to have asbestos containing soils. 6. Support policies and legislation to prevent and penalize improper storage and disposal of hazardous or exploration and production (E&P) wastes from oil and gas operations within municipal boundaries. PUBLIC SAFETY The Fort Collins City Council recognizes the critical importance of maintaining public order, providing a safe environment, and protecting the lives and property of the citizens of Fort Collins. Therefore, the City supports the following policy statements: 1. Support legislation that has the potential to reduce incidents of violence in the community, especially through the development of treatment and intervention programs for youth. 2. Support legislation and funding that provides greater protection to victims of crime. 3. Support legislation that maintains or enhances the City’s right to use camera enforcement of traffic laws, reduces operational restrictions on the use of camera enforcement, and increases the fines associated with violations. 4. Support legislation establishing protocols and funding for shared, statewide emergency response communications. 18 5. Support legislation that regulates medical marijuana manufacture, distribution and dispensaries. 6. Oppose programs that have the potential to compromise officer safety. 7. Support legislation that formally legitimizes the field of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) by establishing minimum training criteria and professional mediator certification. 8. Support legislation that regulates the use of cell phones by a motorist while operating a vehicle. 9. Support legislation that preserves or increases funding for treatment of mental illness and substance abuse disorders. 10. Support legislation that maintains or enhances a statewide database of concealed weapons permits. 11. Support legislation to reduce community flood risks. 12. Support legislation that reduces City liability for prisoners’ self-inflicted wounds while in police custody or detention facility. 13. Support legislation and policies restricting access to illegal substances. 14. Support legislation to require greater producer responsibility such as “take back” for prescription drugs to avoid these substances being abused or being disposed of into the water supply. Transportation TRANSPORTATION The City actively promotes the safety and ease of traveling to, from and throughout the community using a variety of modes of transportation. Additionally, the City’s policy is to encourage the use of alternative transportation whenever appropriate. Therefore, the City supports the following policies: 1. Support legislation that facilitates cooperative programs among government agencies in order to help the City meet its basic transportation needs, including transit, street, highway, road and bridge construction and maintenance, and safe corridors for bicyclists and pedestrians. 19 2. Oppose legislation that seeks to reduce the present allocation formula of 60% state, 22% counties, and 18% municipalities for Highway User Tax Fund (HUTF) or any appropriations from the State using the same formula. 3. Support exploration and analysis of alternative methods of funding transportation infrastructure needs. 4. Support legislation to fund analysis and implementation of inter- and intra-regional transit linkages, including future commuter rail connectivity. 5. Support legislation that facilitates regional planning for various modes of transportation with the goal of providing practical solutions to reduce reliance on single occupant vehicles. 6. Support efforts to encourage flexibility in federal funding and regulations in order to better meet the needs of small to medium size communities. 7. Support preservation of the federal guaranteed levels of funding for transportation, and allocation of all federal motor fuel taxes and other federal transportation trust funds for their intended transportation purposes. 8. Support legislation broadening the definition of the gasoline tax to a “fuel tax” that encompasses other fuel options as they become more prevalent. 9. Support legislation that limits the ability of railroad trains to block street and highway grade crossings for unreasonable periods. 10. Support legislation that facilitates the implementation of railroad quiet zones in municipalities and that reduces current train horn decibel and duration requirements. 11. Oppose legislation intended to divest key highway roads in urban areas from the State and make them the sole responsibility of local jurisdictions. 20 CITY OF FORT COLLINS LEGISLATIVE STAFF Legislative Review Committee Name District/Title Email Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Ohlson District 5 kohlson@fcgov.com Councilmember Lisa Poppaw District 2 lpoppaw@fcgov.com Councilmember Wade Troxell District 4 wtroxell@fcgov.com Wendy Williams Assistant City Manager wwilliams@fcgov.com Steve Roy City Attorney sroy@fcgov.com Dan Weinheimer Legislative Policy Manager dweinheimer@fcgov.com Legislative Staff Liaison Members Topic Area Name Email Affordable Housing Julie Brewen jbrewen@fcgov.com Air Quality Lucinda Smith lsmith@fcgov.com Cable Television Franchise Carson Hamlin chamlin@fcgov.com Climate and Environmental Protection Natural Areas and Open Lands John Stokes jstokes@fcgov.com City Clerk Wanda Nelson wnelson@fcgov.com Cultural Services Parks and Recreation J.R. Schnelzer jrschnelzer@fcgov.com Energy Water Supply and Quality Lisa Rosintoski lrosintoski@fcgov.com Finance Michael Beckstead mbeckstead@fcgov.com Economic Health Josh Birks jbirks@fcgov.com Fire Protection Hazardous Materials Management Bob Poncelow bponcelow@poudre-fire.org Human Resources Janet Miller jmiller@fcgov.com Legal Carrie Daggett cdaggett@fcgov.com Neighborhood and Building Services Mike Gebo mgebo@fcgov.com Planning and Land Use Timothy Wilder twilder@fcgov.com Public Safety Rita Davis rdavis@fcgov.com Recycling and Solid Waste Susie Gordon sgordon@fcgov.com Risk Management Lance Murray lmurray@fcgov.com Transportation Mark Jackson mjackson@fcgov.com DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 29 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-111 Reappointing Councilmember Gerry Horak to the Platte River Power Authority Board of Directors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Platte River Power Authority Board of Directors is comprised of two representatives from each of the four member cities. The Mayor (or Mayor’s designate) fills one slot and the second representative is appointed by the Council. Councilmember Gerry Horak has served as the City’s representative since September 2011 to the expiration of his term on December 31, 2012. This Resolution reappoints Councilmember Horak for the new term which expires December 31, 2016 or until such appointment is changed by the Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. RESOLUTION 2012-111 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS REAPPOINTING COUNCILMEMBER GERRY HORAK TO THE PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, the City is one of four municipalities that established the Platte River Power Authority (“Platte River”) in 1975 to generate and transmit electric energy to the four member municipalities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of an Organic Contract establishing PRPA, each member municipality is represented by two members on the board of directors of PRPA (the “Board”); and WHEREAS, one of the two members on the Board is the Mayor of each member municipality or the Mayor's designee, and the other is a City Council appointee who is to be selected on the basis of judgment, experience, and expertise which make that person particularly qualified to serve as a director of an electric utility; and WHEREAS, on September 6, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution 2011-083 appointing Councilmember Gerry Horak as the City’s appointed representative for a term to expire on December 31, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council wish to reappoint Councilmember Horak as the City’s appointed representative to the Platte River Board of Directors. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Councilmember Gerry Horak is hereby reappointed as the City’s representative to the Platte River Power Authority Board of Directors, for a term to expire on December 31, 2016, or until such appointment is changed by the City Council, whichever first occurs. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 34 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2012, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2013; Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1, 2013, and Ending December 31, 2014; and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Fiscal Year 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Annual Appropriation Ordinance is presented for Second Reading. This Ordinance sets the City Budget for the two-year period (2013–14) which becomes the City’s financial plan for the next two fiscal years. This Ordinance sets the amount of $483,637,562 to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013. Including the 2013 adopted budgets for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 of $193,666 and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) of $1,038,682 the total City operated appropriations amount to $484,869,910. City Budget (in $ million) Adopted 2013 Adopted 2014 Operations $431.5 $440.5 Debt Service 21.2 20.5 Capital 32.2 27.6 Total City Operated Appropriations * $484.9 $488.6 Less Urban Renewal Authority (URA) (1.0) (1.8) Less General Improvement District (GID) (0.2) (0.2) Total City of Fort Collins Appropriation $483.7** $486.6 * This includes GID and URA which are appropriated in separate ordinances. ** Delta due to rounding to $K This Ordinance also sets the 2012 City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Annual Appropriation Ordinance for 2013 was adopted unanimously on First Reading with the following changes to be incorporated for Second Reading: • Fund Offer 25.10 ENHANCEMENT: Workplace Safety Initiative Fund for $100,000 in both 2013 and 2014 • Update the Ordinance by shifting $735,154 from Capital to Operating in the Conservation Trust Fund Since First Reading, there have also been changes made to the Fort Collins / Loveland Airport budget which requires an additional City of Fort Collins contribution of $92,500 for 2013. This one-time expense will come from General Fund reserves. These changes, as applicable, are reflected in the numbers above and have been updated in the Annual Appropriation Ordinance for Second Reading. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 34 ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - October 16, 2012 (w/o attachments) COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: October 16, 2012 STAFF: Darin Atteberry Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 21 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2012, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2013; Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1, 2013, and Ending December 31, 2014; and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Fiscal Year 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Annual Appropriation Ordinance is presented for First Reading. This Ordinance sets the City Budget for the two- year period (2013–14) which becomes the City’s financial plan for the next two fiscal years. This Ordinance sets the amount of $483,445,062 to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013. Including the 2013 adopted budgets for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 of $193,666 and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) of $1,038,682 the total City operated appropriations amount to $484,677,410. This Ordinance also sets the 2012 City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION For the fifth time the City has used a budgeting process called Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO). This process is a recommended best practice by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). It is a systematic process driven by goals and performance, to provide information that relates budgeting to planning and results. Its purpose is to better align the services delivered by the City with the things that are most important to the community. The 2013-14 City Manager’s Recommended Budget was delivered to Council in August. The Recommended Budget strengthens key services related to transportation, police, fire, parks and recreation and other community priorities such as the environment, economic development and social sustainability, delivering on the commitment made to voters who approved the Keep Fort Collins Great sales tax increase in 2010. The budget also and makes smart, long- term investments in the future, with investments in the Poudre River, North College, and FortZED. City Council reviewed the Recommended Budget during four Council Work Sessions. In addition, citizens have been able to provide input to Councilmembers through two public hearings and an online feedback tool. From these discussions and additional information provided by staff, City Council has provided direction and guidance for changes to be incorporated into 1st reading of the 2013-14 Biennial Budget. The following table summarizes the Offers not originally included in the Recommended Budget. Note: GF = General Fund COPY COPY COPY COPY October 16, 2012 -2- ITEM 21 To fund these Offers requires a combination of funding sources. The first prudent place to evaluate is Offers that have a lower priority and, thus, should not be funded or can have their amounts reduced. The table below lists Offers that were eliminated or modified. The gap between Offers funded per Council direction and Offers eliminated or modified is addressed by other funding sources. As the table below indicates, the gap was addressed by utilizing funds available in the Sales and Use (S&U) Tax reserves, increasing the Sales Tax forecast from 2.20% and 2.05% to 2.70% and 2.55% for 2013 and 2014 respectively, increasing the Use Tax forecasts by $500K in each year of the budget, and utilizing General Fund reserves. Of the available $6.5M Sales and Use Tax reserve being transferred to the General Fund via the annual Clean-up Ordinance, only $700K has been used in this budget. The increase of both the Sales and Use Tax forecasts is based on the strong results we continue to see through the end of the third quarter of 2012 and the anticipation of slightly higher growth rates in 2013 and 2014. Lastly, the use of General Fund reserves comes from anticipated contribution to General Fund balance based upon actual 2012 revenue results greater than forecast. The combination of the above table results in the following summarized changes between the recommended budget and the amounts included in First Reading of the 2013-14 Biennial Budget. Additionally, in final preparation it was determined that the Benefits Programs and Services Offer was originally overstated and indicated a use of Benefit fund reserves greater than actually required. This has been recalculated and the significantly reduced expense is reflected in the summary table below. The $1.2 million will remain in the Benefits fund reserves and has no impact on services or other Offers. COPY COPY COPY COPY October 16, 2012 -3- ITEM 21 This annual Appropriation Ordinance sets the amount of $483,445,062 to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013. Including the 2013 adopted budgets for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 of $193,666 and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) of $1,038,682 the total City operated appropriations amount to $484,677,410. Below is a summary of the proposed 2013-14 City budget: City Budget (in $ million) Adopted 2013 Adopted 2014 Operations $431.3 $440.4 Debt Service 21.2 20.5 Capital 32.2 27.6 Total City Operated Appropriations * $484.7 $488.5 Less Urban Renewal Authority (URA) (1.0) (1.8) Less General Improvement District (GID) (0.2) (0.2) Total City of Fort Collins Appropriation $483.5** $486.5 * This includes GID and URA which are appropriated in separate ordinances. ** Delta due to rounding to $K FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance sets the annual appropriation for fiscal year 2013 in the amount of 483,445,062. The Ordinance also sets the City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Budget contains multiple offers that will have positive environmental impacts, particularly those funded by the Environmental Health Result Area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Budget on First Reading. PUBLIC OUTREACH In preparation for First Reading of the 2013-14 Budget, there were two public hearings, as well as an online tool whereby citizens could vote for the Offers for programs and services most important to them. The data from the online tool was presented to Council for their review. Additionally, during the budget development there was a citizen on each of the Result Teams and two public open houses were conducted to gain citizen input. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation ORDINANCE NO. 112, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BEING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013; ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEARS BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2013, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2014; AND FIXING THE MILL LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013 WHEREAS, the City Manager has, prior to the first Monday in September, 2012, submitted to the City Council a proposed budget for the next ensuing budget term, along with an explanatory and complete financial plan for each fund of the City, pursuant to the provisions of Article V, Section 2, of the City Charter; and WHEREAS, within ten days after the filing of said budget estimate, the City Council set September 18th and October 2nd , 2012, as the dates for the public hearings thereon and caused notice of such public hearings to be given by publication pursuant to Article V, Section 3, of the City Charter; and WHEREAS, the public hearings were held on those dates and persons were given the opportunity to appear and object to any or all items and estimates in the proposed budget; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 4, of the City Charter requires that, before the last day of November of each fiscal year, the City Council adopt the budget for the ensuing term by ordinance and appropriate such sums of money as the Council deems necessary to defray all expenditures of the City during the ensuing fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 5, of the City Charter provides that the annual appropriation ordinance shall also fix the tax levy upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the City, such levy representing the amount of taxes for City purposes necessary to provide for payment during the ensuing fiscal year for all properly authorized expenditures to be incurred by the City; and WHEREAS, Article XII, Section 6, of the City Charter permits the City Council to fix, establish, maintain, and provide for the collection of such rates, fees, or charges for water and electricity, and for other utility services furnished by the City as will produce revenues sufficient to pay into the General Fund in lieu of taxes on account of the City-owned utilities such amount as may be established by City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. Budget a. That the City Council has reviewed the City Manager's 2013-2014 Recommended Budget, a copy of which is on file with the office of the City Clerk, and has approved certain amendments thereto. b. That the City Manager’s 2013-2014 Recommended Budget, as amended by the Council, is hereby adopted, in accordance with the provisions of Article V, Section 4, of the City Charter and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that the comparative figures contained in the adopted budget may be subsequently revised as deemed necessary by the City Manager to reflect actual revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year 2012. c. That the adopted budget, as amended, shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and identified as "The Budget for the City of Fort Collins for the Fiscal Years Ending December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2014, as Adopted by the City Council on November 20, 2012." Section 2. Appropriations. That there is hereby appropriated out of the revenues of the City of Fort Collins, for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2013, and ending December 31, 2013, the sum of FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE MILLION FOUR SIX HUNDRED THIRTY SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY TWO DOLLARS ($483,445637,5062) to be raised by taxation and otherwise, which sum is deemed by the City Council to be necessary to defray all expenditures of the City during said budget year, to be divided and appropriated for the following purposes, to wit: GENERAL FUND $112,765,370 $112,857,870 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Golf $2,884,456 Light & Power Operating Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118,816,167 Capital Projects: Art in Public Places 2,000 Computerized Maintenance Mgmt. System 381,129 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations 100,000 Electric Substation Improvements 200,000 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683,129 Total Light & Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119,499,296 -2- Storm Drainage Operating Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,692,091 Capital Projects: Art in Public Places 23,129 Boxelder Authority 255,000 Computerized Maintenance Mgmt. System 239,463 Drainage & Detention System Replacement 262,870 Stormwater Basin Improvements 1,400,000 Stormwater Developer Repays 100,000 Stormwater Master Plan 225,000 Stream Restoration & Best Mgmt. Practices 650,000 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,155,462 Total Storm Drainage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,847,553 Wastewater Operating Total.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,399,807 Capital Projects: Art in Public Places 33,563 Collection System Replacement 1,629,838 Computerized Maintenance Mgmt. System 239,462 Drake Water Reclamation Facility Impr. 150,000 Mulberry Bridge Sewer Relocation 560,000 Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility Impr. 60,500 Sludge Disposal Improvements 199,800 Water Reclamation Replacement 1,166,500 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,039,663 Total Wastewater.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,439,470 Water Operating Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,926,541 Capital Projects: Art in Public Places 43,937 Cathodic Protection 552,000 Computerized Maintenance Mgmt. System 239,463 Distribution System Replacement 1,780,708 Dual System Design with Colorado State Univ. 100,000 Engineering Distribution System Replacement 800,000 Halligan Reservoir Enlargement 190,000 High Park Fire Water Mitigation 987,953 Mulberry/Poudre Water Main 200,000 Source of Supply Replacements 550,000 Water Meter Replacement & Rehabilitation 800,000 Water Production Replacement Program 521,000 -3- Water Supply Development 100,000 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,865,061 Total Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,791,602 TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS $191,462,377 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Benefits $20,923,638 Data & Communications 8,310,682 Equipment 10,706,119 Self Insurance 3,1251,406 Utility Customer Service & Administration 14,663,067 TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS $ 57,7854,912 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Capital Improvement Expansion $ 3,025,353 Capital Leasing Corporation 4,653,344 Cemeteries 579,374 Conservation Trust Operating Total - Administration and Parks Maintenance. . . . . . . . . . 281,436 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,016,590 Capital Projects: Fossil Creek Trail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,000 Hughes Stadium Disc Golf Course. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000 Open Space Acquisition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270,000 Trail Acquisition & Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145,500 Parks Maintenance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735,154 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,260,654 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525,500 Total Conservation Trust.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,542,090 Cultural Services & Facilities .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,003,169 Capital Projects: Arts in Public Places. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,990 Total Cultural Services & Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,094,159 General Employees' Retirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,227,950 Keep Fort Collins Great Operating Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,604,884 Capital Projects: City Bridge Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,700,000 -4- Fort Collins Bike Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217,950 Trail Acquisition & Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153,000 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,070,950 Total Keep Fort Collins Great. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,675,834 Museum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,181,420 Natural Areas.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,681,563 Neighborhood Parkland Operating Total - Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416,160 Capital Projects: Golden Meadows Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000 Lee Martinez Park Addition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000 New Site Acquisition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457,521 New Park Site Development.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170,000 Richards Lake. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,000 Side Hill Neighborhood Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000 Soft Gold Neighborhood Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000 Capital Projects Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,352,521 Total Neighborhood Parkland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,768,681 Perpetual Care. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,145 Recreation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,726,230 Sales and Use Tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,294,000 Street Oversizing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,601,384 Timberline/Prospect SID #94. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,534 Transit Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,157,400 Transportation Services.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,472,002 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE & DEBT SERVICE FUNDS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $108,766,463 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND General City Capital Projects: Block 32 Redevelopment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 135,000 Downtown Poudre River Improvements.. . . . . . . . . . 175,000 East Community Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,700,000 Great Lawn at the Gardens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250,000 I-25 Interchange Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000 I-25/392 Project - Signage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000 Integrated Recycling Facility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448,000 Lemay/Vine Grade Separated Crossing. . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000 City Bridge Project - Mulberry Bridge. . . . . . . . . . . . 500,000 Natural Areas Office Building. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440,000 Natural Resources Research Center Overpass. . . . . 1,200,000 North College-Conifer/Willox Improvements. . . . . 1,940,000 -5- Railroad Crossing Replacement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000 Southeast Community Park.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500,000 Total General City Capital Projects.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,638,000 Building on Basics Operating - Administrative Charge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,013 Capital Projects: Bicycle Program Plan Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . 125,000 Intersection Improvements & Traffic Signals.. . . . . . 780,000 Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements. . . . . . . . . . 300,000 Senior Center Expansion.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,044,559 Timberline Rd-Drake to Prospect Improvements. . . 763,368 Total Building on Basics Capital Projects.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,012,927 Total Building on Basics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,057,940 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12,695,940 TOTAL CITY FUNDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $483,445,062 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $483,637,562 Section 3. Mill Levy a. That the 2013 mill levy rate for the taxation upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all the taxable property within the City of Fort Collins as of December 31, 2012, shall be 9.797 mills, which levy represents the amount of taxes for City purposes necessary to provide for payment during the aforementioned budget year of all properly authorized expenditures to be incurred by the City. b. That the City Clerk shall certify this levy of 9.797 mills to the County Assessor and the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado, in accordance with the applicable provisions of law, as required by Article V, Section 5, of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of October, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -6- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk -7- DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Jason Licon Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 35 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2012, Authorizing the Appropriation of 2013 Fiscal Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds for the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2013 annual operating budget for the Airport totals $693,100, and will be funded from Airport operating revenues, contributions from the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland ($177,500 from each City), and interest earnings. This amount for each city is $92,500 greater than the previous year contributions of $85,000. For the City of Fort Collins the original $85,000 is funded from General Fund ongoing revenue, while the one-time increase of $92,500 will be funded from General Fund reserves. This Ordinance authorizes the City of Loveland to appropriate the City of Fort Collins portion of the Airport’s annual operating budget in the amount of $346,550. This is 50% of the entire Airport annual operating budget of $693,100. This Ordinance also appropriates the City’s 50% share of capital funds, totaling $1,100,000 for the Airport from federal and state grants; contributions from Fort Collins and Loveland; and the Airport General Fund. Most of the 2013 Airport capital funds, totaling $2,200,000, will be used to complete major Airport improvements, such as taxiway and apron rehabilitation and some funds are slated for utility master planning and design engineering to accommodate Airport business development. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 1963, the City of Fort Collins and the City of Loveland agreed to the establishment of a regional aviation facility and became owners and operators of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport, located approximately 16 miles southeast of downtown Fort Collins, just west of Interstate 25 on Earhart Road. The Airport is operated as a joint venture between the City of Fort Collins and the City of Loveland, with each city retaining a 50% ownership interest, sharing equally in policy-making and management, and with each assuming responsibility for 50% of the capital and operating costs associated with the Airport. The Airport’s mission is to provide a safe and efficient air transportation airport facility to the general public and aviation community by providing airport facilities that meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) safety standards and to implement a plan that ensures the efficient development of the Airport to meet the needs of the Fort Collins and Loveland communities. Airport revenues cover operating costs and capital projects. Each city contributes equal funding for Airport operating and capital costs. Airport development and improvement funds are also received, for eligible projects, from the FAA and the Colorado Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics. The annual operating costs for 2013 for the Airport are $693,100, and the City of Fort Collins contribution is $346,550. In addition, the Airport Manager is recommending additional capital expenditures and has identified the following funding sources: FAA Entitlement Grant $1,000,000 State Grant 1,000,000 Airport Revenues 200,000 Total $2,200,000 The additional capital expenditures will be to continue aircraft parking apron phase two improvements and for utility master planning and design engineering to accommodate Airport business development, $2,200,000. Thus, the City of Fort Collins appropriation for the capital expenditures identified above is $1,100,000 (50% of the total). November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 35 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance appropriates the City’s 50% share ($1,446,558) of the annual appropriation for fiscal year 2013 for Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport budget. The City of Loveland manages the Airport’s budget and finances; however, since the City of Fort Collins owns 50% of the Airport, it is necessary for the City to appropriate its 50% portion of the Airport budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation 1 Fort Collins City Council Meeting November 20, 2012 Historical Funding Breakdown • Since the Airport began offering commercial services in 2003 the Airport has: – Acquired $24 million in funding • $18 million in direct capital investment • $6 million in Airport operations and equipment costs – The breakdown of investment sources are: • Federal: $15,472,199 or 65.2% • State: $1,251,335 or 5.3% • Self generated: $5,842,862 or 24.6% • Contributions from Cities: $1,160,000 or 4.9% ATTACHMENT 1 2 Projected Budgetary Shortfall ‐ 2013 • The Airport no longer has scheduled air carrier services • Commercial air service revenues account for $295,000 of Airport operational revenues • In addition $185,000 in passenger facilities charges (PFC) will be lost – PFC funding helps pay for local matches on Federal and State grants as well as local projects – PFC funds are use restricted similar to Federal and State grants, therefore are classified as capital expenditures – $340,000 will be necessary for planned FAA & State grant matches for 2013 & 2014 Airport projects • A total of $480,000 annually will be lost in operational and capital revenue Airport Operational Expenses • Expenses have increased over time due to Airport growth and regulatory requirements • Allegiant’s decision will have little effect on required regulatory compliance for the FAA, TSA, DOT, and CDOT • Airport operations & maintenance will continue to keep the Airport maintained and operational for all Airport users 3 Airport Operational Budget • The proposed 2013 budget was $803,100 – $435,890 is total for personnel cost for 5 FTE & 1 Intern – $36,750 for supplies • Office, computer, fuel, paint, electrical, landscaping, safety, building, etc. – $330,460 for purchased services • Utilities, support services, training, meetings, insurance, vehicle maintenance, assessments, postage, etc. Revised Budget Proposal • The revised proposed 2013 budget is $693,100 – $360,100 total personnel cost for 4 FTE & 1 intern – $30,350 for supplies – $302,650 for purchased services • This is a total proposed reduction of $110,000 • Will require an additional $92,500 from each City until commercial air service is reestablished or other revenues are increased • Total $177,500 annually from each City 4 Planned 2013 Capital Projects • $2.5 million aircraft parking apron rehabilitation – Last paved in 1977 – Is the parking area for transient aircraft and for the Airport’s corporate and business users • Funding source breakdown: – $1.4 million derived from Federal Grants – $900,000 from a State of Colorado Grant – $200,000 local share match Planned Actions Moving Forward • The Airport over the next year will be focused on ways to increase revenues • Air service development has taken a top priority, and total cost is yet to be determined – Is key to financial sustainability as outlined in the adopted Airport business plan – The Airport will utilize the Small Community Air Service Development Grant to fund a significant portion of air service development costs – Without commercial service, total Airport revenues will fall to 46% or $1.15 million by 2015 from a projected $2.5 million ORDINANCE NO. 137, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF 2013 FISCAL YEAR OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS FOR THE FORT COLLINS-LOVELAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT WHEREAS, in 1963, the City of Fort Collins and the City of Loveland (the “Cities”) agreed to establish a regional general aviation facility and became owners and operators of the Fort Collins- Loveland Municipal Airport (the “Airport”); and WHEREAS, the Airport is operated as a joint venture between the Cities, with each city retaining a 50% ownership interest, sharing equally in policy-making and management, and assuming responsibility for 50% of the capital and operating costs associated with the Airport; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement, dated May 16, 2000, between the Cities for the joint operation of the Airport (the “IGA”), the Airport Manager is responsible for preparing the Airport’s annual operating budget and submitting it to the Cities for their approval; and WHEREAS, the Airport Manager has submitted for City Council consideration a 2013 Airport operating budget totaling $693,100 and the City’s share is $346,550; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to authorize the City of Loveland to appropriate the City’s share of the necessary funds for operating costs of the Airport, totaling $346,550, for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2013, and ending December 31, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Airport Manager recommends the following capital improvements for 2013, totaling $2,200,000, that are not included in the 2012 Airport operating budget: Taxiway Improvements and Utility Master Planning and Design Engineering $2,200,000 WHEREAS, funding for the 2013 capital improvements has been identified as follows: FAA Entitlement Grants $ 1,000,000 State Grant 1,000,000 Airport Revenues 200,000 Total $ 2,200,000 WHEREAS, the City’s 50% share of the 2013 capital improvement costs is $1,100,000; and WHEREAS, under the IGA, the City’s share of existing and unanticipated Airport revenue will be held and disbursed by the City of Loveland as an agent on behalf of the Cities since the City of Loveland provides finance and accounting services for the Airport; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Article V, Section 8(b), of the City Charter, any expense or liability entered into by an agent of the City, on behalf of the City, shall not be made unless an appropriation therefor shall have been made by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby adopts the 2013 Airport operating budget. Section 2. That the City Council hereby authorizes the appropriation of THREE HUNDRED FORTY-SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($346,550) to be expended to defray the operating costs of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. Section 3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the appropriation of ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,100,000) to be used for 2013 capital improvements at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of November, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of December, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the Regular Council Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 Meeting. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation. (staff: Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 5 minute discussion) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, sets the mill levy for General Improvement District No. 1 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. 4. Other Business. 5. Adjournment. GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AGENDA DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 3 SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 Meeting. October 16, 2012 GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 A meeting of the General Improvement District No. 1 was held on Tuesday, October 16, 2012, at 11:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Boardmembers: Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Troxell, Horak and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Roy. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 4, 2012 and September 18, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 Meetings, Approved Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kottwitz, to approve the September 4 and September 18, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 meetings. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation, Adopted on First Reading The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy of 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The recommended appropriations for this amount are as follows: Projects: • $115,000 to be used for holiday lighting in the downtown core area • $26,000 to be used for capital improvements in the downtown area for projects yet to be determined 126 October 16, 2012 Other expenses: • $15,356 for staffing • $11,500 for the Larimer County Treasurer’s fee for collecting the property tax • $23,000 for the property tax rebate program • $2,500 for estimated electrical costs for downtown lighting and water • $310 for miscellaneous expenses FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance includes the annual appropriation for 2013 at $193,666. This item also sets the General Improvement District No. 1 mill levy, which will generate about $273,523 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional 2013 revenue for the GID No. 1 includes auto specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest which are projected to be $38,769 in 2013.” Boardmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Boardmember Kottwitz, to adopt Ordinance No. 064. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:16 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor, Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary 127 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 4 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, sets the mill levy for General Improvement District No. 1 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - October 16, 2012 (w/o attachments) 2. Boundary map COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: October 16, 2012 STAFF: Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 4 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy of 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The recommended appropriations for this amount are as follows: Projects: • $115,000 to be used for holiday lighting in the downtown core area • $26,000 to be used for capital improvements in the downtown area for projects yet to be determined Other expenses: • $15,356 for staffing • $11,500 for the Larimer County Treasurer’s fee for collecting the property tax • $23,000 for the property tax rebate program • $2,500 for estimated electrical costs for downtown lighting and water • $310 for miscellaneous expenses FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance includes the annual appropriation for 2013 at $193,666. This item also sets the General Improvement District No. 1 mill levy, which will generate about $273,523 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional 2013 revenue for the GID No. 1 includes auto specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest which are projected to be $38,769 in 2013. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. GID No. 1 Boundary map ATTACHMENT 2 ORDINANCE NO. 064 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EX-OFFICIO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1, DETERMINING AND FIXING THE MILL LEVY FOR THE GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013; DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO CERTIFY SUCH LEVY TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF LARIMER COUNTY AND MAKING THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins General Improvement District No. 1 (the “GID”) has been duly organized in accordance with the ordinances of the City and the statutes of the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, the GID staff has considered the amount of money to be raised by a levy on the taxable property in the GID and recommends that a levy of 4.924 mills upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the limits of the GID is required during 2013 to pay the cost of operating the GID; and WHEREAS, staff estimates a levy of 4.924 mill will result in $279,523 of revenue; and WHEREAS, the amount of this proposed mill levy is not an increase over prior years, so that prior voter approval of the levy is not required under Article X, Section 20 of the State Constitution; and WHEREAS, Section 39-5-128(1), C.R.S., requires certification of any tax levy to the Board of County Commissioners no later than December 15; and WHEREAS, additional revenue is collected by the GID from such sources as the automobile ownership tax, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings and that revenue for 2013 is anticipated to be $38,769; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council, acting as the ex-officio Board of Directors of the GID, to appropriate the necessary funds for operating costs and capital improvements of the GID for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2013, and ending December 31, 2013. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, Ex-Officio the Board of Directors of City of Fort Collins General Improvement District No. 1, as follows: Section 1. That, for the purpose of providing the necessary funds to meet the expenses to be incurred in the General Improvement District No. 1 in 2013, 4.924 mills is hereby levied upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the General Improvement District No.1 as of December 31, 2012. Section 2. That the Secretary of the General Improvement District No. 1 is hereby authorized and directed to certify such levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County as provided by law. Section 3. That the City Council, acting ex-officio as the Board of Directors of City of Fort Collins General Improvement District No. 1, hereby appropriates out of the revenues of General Improvement District No. 1 for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2013 and ending December 31, 2013 the sum of ONE HUNDRED NINETY THREE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SIXTY SIX DOLLARS ($193,666) to be raised by taxation and additional revenue to be expended for the authorized purposes of the General Improvement District No.1. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of October, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor, Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor, Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the General Improvement District No. 1 Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 Meeting. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 003, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County. (staff: Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 5 minute discussion) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, fixes the mill levy of 10.0 mills for fiscal year 2012 for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15. The sum of $24,615 is anticipated to be collected and will be used in the future to maintain and repair roads in the Skyview subdivision. 4. Other Business. 5. Adjournment. SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AGENDA DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SKYVIEW SOUTH IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 3 SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2012 Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 Meeting. October 16, 2012 GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 A meeting of the General Improvement District No. 1 was held on Tuesday, October 16, 2012, at 11:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Boardmembers: Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Troxell, Horak and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Roy. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 4, 2012 and September 18, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 Meetings, Approved Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kottwitz, to approve the September 4 and September 18, 2012 General Improvement District No. 1 meetings. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 064, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the General Improvement District No. 1 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County; and Making the Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Appropriation, Adopted on First Reading The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The sum of $273,523 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy of 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional revenue for the General Improvement District (GID) No. 1 from sources like automobile specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest earnings are anticipated to total $38,769. The total 2013 revenue for GID No. 1 is expected to be $312,292. Recommended appropriations for 2013 projects and expenditures will be $193,666. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The recommended appropriations for this amount are as follows: Projects: • $115,000 to be used for holiday lighting in the downtown core area • $26,000 to be used for capital improvements in the downtown area for projects yet to be determined 126 October 16, 2012 Other expenses: • $15,356 for staffing • $11,500 for the Larimer County Treasurer’s fee for collecting the property tax • $23,000 for the property tax rebate program • $2,500 for estimated electrical costs for downtown lighting and water • $310 for miscellaneous expenses FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance includes the annual appropriation for 2013 at $193,666. This item also sets the General Improvement District No. 1 mill levy, which will generate about $273,523 at 4.924 mills for fiscal year 2013. Additional 2013 revenue for the GID No. 1 includes auto specific ownership taxes, ad valorem taxes, and interest which are projected to be $38,769 in 2013.” Boardmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Boardmember Kottwitz, to adopt Ordinance No. 064. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:16 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor, Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary 127 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 4 SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 003, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2012, fixes the mill levy of 10.0 mills for fiscal year 2012 for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15. The sum of $24,615 is anticipated to be collected and will be used in the future to maintain and repair roads in the Skyview subdivision. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 6, 2012 (w/o attachments) 2. Boundary map COPY COPY COPY COPY ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: October 16, 2012 STAFF: Mike Beckstead AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 3 SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 003, Determining and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 for the Fiscal Year 2013; Directing the Secretary of the District to Certify Such Levy to the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The sum of $24,615 is anticipated to be collected from the mill levy of 10.0 mills for fiscal year 2013. The total amount will be used in the future to maintain and repair roads in the Skyview subdivision. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2009, the City annexed Phase 3 of the Southwest Enclave Annexation. The area annexed included the entire Larimer County Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 (“GID No.15”). A map of the GID No. 15 is attached. The County organized GID No. 15 in 1997. Pursuant to Section 31-25-603, C.R.S., since the annexation involved the entire improvement district, GID No.15 became a City-operated district and Council acts as the ex officio board of directors of the district. Under state law, the City is required to set the mill levy for the district and to certify the amount of the levy to Larimer County. This ordinance continues the establishment, as in years past, of a levy of 10.0 mills. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance sets the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 mill levy, which will generate about $24,615 at 10.0 mills for fiscal year 2013. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. Boundary map W TRILBY RD S COLLEGE AVE W SKYWAY DR CONSTELLATION DR MARS DR VENUS AVE ARAN ST ORBIT WAY DEBRA DR H OLYOKE C T P O L A R I S DR S T A R W A Y S T AV O NDALE R D RAMA H D R N E P T U N E D R GALA X Y W A Y URANUS ST F LA G L E R R D ORDINANCE NO. 003 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EX-OFFICIO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15, DETERMINING AND FIXING THE MILL LEVY FOR THE SKYVIEW SOUTH GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 AND DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO CERTIFY SUCH LEVY TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF LARIMER COUNTY WHEREAS, the Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15 (the “GID”) was created by Larimer County in 1997 and annexed into the City by phase three of the Southwest Enclave Annexation in 2009; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 31-25-603, C.R.S., and Section 37-25-609, C.R.S., as a result of the annexation of the entire GID into the City, the GID is now a district of the City and the City Council is to act as the ex-officio board of directors of the GID; and WHEREAS, the GID staff has considered the amount of money to be raised by a levy on the taxable property in the GID and recommends establishing a levy of 10.0 mills upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the limits of the GID for 2013; and WHEREAS, the GID staff estimates a levy of 10.0 mills will result in $24,615 of revenue; and WHEREAS, the amount of this proposed mill levy is not an increase over prior years so that prior voter approval of the levy is not required under Article X, Section 20 of the State Constitution; and WHEREAS, Section 39-5-128(1), C.R.S., requires certification of any tax levy to the Board of County Commissioners no later than December 15; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, Ex-Officio the Board of Directors of City of Fort Collins Skyview South General Improvement District No. 15, as follows: Section 1. That the 2013 mill levy rate for taxation upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the GID shall be 10.0 mills. Section 2. That the City Clerk shall certify this levy of 10.0 mills to the County Assessor and the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado as provided by law. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of October, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor, Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor , Ex Officio President ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk, Ex Officio Secretary Individuals who wish to address the Board on items not specifically scheduled on the agenda must first be recognized by the Chairperson or Vice Chair. Before speaking, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz once when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. The timer will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Each speaker is allowed 5 minutes. If there are more than 6 individuals who wish to speak, the Chairperson may reduce the time allowed for each individual. ! State your name and address for the record. ! Applause, outbursts or other demonstrations by the audience are not allowed ! Keep comments brief; if available, provide a written copy of statement to u r b a n r e n e w a l a u t h o r i t y Karen Weitkunat, Chairperson City Council Chambers Kelly Ohlson, Vice-Chairperson City Hall West Ben Manvel 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw Fort Collins, Colorado Aislinn Kottwitz Wade Troxell Gerry Horak Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, Executive Director Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, Secretary The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING November 20, 2012 (after the Skyview South General Improvement District Meeting) 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Agenda Review: • Executive Director’s Review of Agenda. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 5. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for the Chairperson and Commissioners to follow-up on issues raised during Citizen Participation. 6. Staff Reports. 7. Commissioner Reports. DISCUSSION ITEMS The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ! Chairperson introduces the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ! Staff presentation (optional) ! Chairperson requests citizen comment on the item (five-minute limit for each citizen) ! Board questions of staff on the item ! Board motion on the item ! Board discussion ! Final Board comments ! Board vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Chairperson, to ensure all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. 8. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 23, 2012 Urban Renewal Authority Meeting. 9. Resolution No. 048 Adopting the 2013 Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. (staff: Bruce Hendee, Josh Birks, Megan Bolin; 5 minute staff presentation; 15 minute discussion) This Resolution adopts the 2013 Budget for the Urban Renewal Authority (URA). Budget revenues include property tax increment and interest earned on investments, totaling $1,355,034. Budget expenses include general operations, the new North College Storefront Improvement Program, and debt service payments totaling $1,038,683. 9. Other Business. 10. Adjournment. DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Wanda Nelson AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY 8 SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the October 23, 2012 Urban Renewal Authority Meeting. October 23, 2012 Urban Renewal Authority A meeting of the fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority was held on Tuesday, October 23, 2012, at 6:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, and Weitkunat. Councilmembers Absent: Horak, Troxell Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Roy, Daggett. CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Resolution No. 042, Adopting Amendments to the Bylaws of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. The Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Board will be asked to create formal Rules of Procedures for governing the conduct of Board meetings. By doing so, it creates a redundancy in the existing URA Bylaws because the Bylaws also contain a small section regarding meeting order. Staff recognized this redundancy and consequently reviewed the Bylaws and found other, minor inaccuracies. Therefore, several amendments to the Bylaws are proposed for consideration and are considered housekeeping in nature. 4. Resolution No. 043 Adopting Rules of Procedure for the Conduct of Meetings of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. Resolution No. 043 creates formal Rules of Procedure for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority Board. The purpose of the document is to provide a clear structure for meetings, and would establish the order of business, time and length of meetings, procedures for citizen comment and Commissioner question/debate, and the basic rules of order. 5. Resolution No. 044, Establishing a Board Finance Committee and Appointing Committee Members. This Resolution establishes an Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Finance Committee. This committee of the URA Board would consist of the same members that serve on the Council Finance Committee. Having a separate committee allows the URA Finance Committee to discuss all matters related the URA, including receiving and discussing privileged and confidential URA information. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt all items on the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Kottwitz, Ohlson and Poppaw. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 165 October 23, 2012 Resolution No. 045 Adopting Updated Policies and Procedures for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority, Adopted The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Resolution makes several changes to the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority’s (URA) Policies and Administrative Procedures document. This document provides guidance to the Board, staff, and community stakeholders when considering whether to provide tax increment financing (TIF) assistance to a project in a URA Plan area. Revisions to the existing 2010 policies have been discussed over the past year at several Board work sessions. Only select changes are being brought forward at this time; remaining controversial changes will be postponed until additional benchmarking research is completed. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Resolution would make several changes to the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority’s (URA) Policies and Administrative Procedures document. This document provides guidance to the Board, staff, and community stakeholders when considering whether to provide tax increment financing (TIF) assistance to a project in a URA Plan area. The proposed changes have been discussed at previous work sessions held by the URA Board (see Attachments 1-4). There has been an increase in development activity, and there are several projects that are anticipated to request URA participation in the coming months. For this reason, staff recommends adopting a series of changes that are considered non-controversial and administrative in nature; these changes would help to clarify and improve the URA process for all parties involved. The URA Board originally adopted policies in 2006, and subsequently revised them in 2010. In spring of 2011, staff was directed to review the policies and consider additional revisions. Several iterations of the proposed revisions have been presented and discussed with the Board and community stakeholders. While there has been agreement on some of the changes, others remain controversial. The non-controversial changes are recommended for adoption and are explained in Table 1 below; the complete Policy and Administrative Procedures document is attached as Exhibit A to Resolution No. 045. The remaining controversial changes will be postponed until they can be reevaluated based on additional benchmarking when the new Redevelopment Program Manager is hired (anticipated within the next 90 days). Table 1: Revisions for Consideration Change Rationale Including the mission statement The 2006 policies included the mission statement, but the existing 2010 version does not. Clarifying affordable housing definition The 2010 policies contained a mistake regarding the City’s code definition of a qualified affordable housing project. 166 October 23, 2012 Change Rationale No interest will be paid on the applicant’s expenses Now a standard practice that is not specified in the existing policies. Describing who is on the URA Team The URA Team is an interdisciplinary team of staff that reviews URA applications; a Board member requested that the Departments that comprise the Team be listed. An approved Redevelopment Agreement must be executed within 12 months Standard practice that is not specified in the existing policies. Giving extra consideration for projects that achieve LEED Silver certification If substantial costs to the URA are involved to screen, review, or negotiate a project, the other party may be asked to pay a deposit in advance; a contractual commitment to fund such work may be required in advance of, or in connection with, a formal application. This is not a requirement but would put achieving LEED Silver certification among other public benefits that receive extra consideration, e.g., affordable housing. This is intended for cases where extraordinary work is required by the URA to process a request for tax increment assistance. In such cases, the other party may be asked to pay a deposit for substantial costs in advance of the URA incurring such expenses. Staff will not bring an application to the Board for consideration if it does not meet the fundamental objectives of the URA Standard practice that is not specified in the existing policies. Note that the iterative process over the past year has resulted in some significant changes in terms of the format of the document. For example, the proposed 2012 version separates policies from administrative procedures. Additional minor text changes were made throughout the document for clarification purposes. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Resolution does not have a direct financial/economic impact, but clarifies how and when the URA provides financial assistance to a project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Resolution does not have a direct environmental impact. One revision to the policies may have an indirect impact; the URA would begin to give “extra consideration” for projects that achieve LEED Silver Certification or higher. While this is not a requirement, it may induce some projects to go beyond the City’s Building Code and implement more sustainable building principles. PUBLIC OUTREACH An informational meeting on the pros and cons of the LEED certification process was held on April 5, 2012. 167 October 23, 2012 An open house was held on May 30, 2012 to present and discuss proposed policy changes with the general public. Ongoing conversations have been had with members of the South Fort Collins Business Association, North Fort Collins Business Association, Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee, and the Fort Collins Board of Realtors.” Josh Birks, Economic Health Director, stated three items have not been brought forward for consideration: (1) a requirement for an independent financial analysis at the applicants’ cost; (2) certain building requirements and (3) the requirement that an application be in the entitlement process through the first round of PDP. Megan Bolin, Economic Health Analyst, detailed the proposed policies and procedures revisions. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, opposed the basic foundation of the Urban Renewal Authority policies. Vice-President Ohlson asked about the phrase referencing floodplains being characterized as negative. Birks replied floodplains were listed as one of a variety of possible impediments to development. If a floodplain hinders reasonable development and can be modified in a way that works with FEMA regulations, it is an item that could be participated in subject to the individual redevelopment agreement of the particular project. President Weitkunat noted the North College Avenue redevelopment area could not have occurred without the removal of pieces of the Dry Creek floodplain. Boardmember Manvel recommended adding the phrase “or redevelopment” in order to clarify the floodplain statement. Boardmember Poppaw suggested the entire document should be analyzed while considering the triple bottom line. She stated she would like to see a matrix relating to AMI. Birks replied the North College Citizen Advisory Group does use a scoring matrix when it makes recommendations to the URA. Vice-President Ohlson asked when the possibility of changing the definition of affordable housing would be coming before Council for consideration. Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer, replied he would research the issue. Boardmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Boardmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution No. 045. President Weitkunat noted the URA is an economic tool to be used to redevelop and revitalize areas of the city which are in need. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Kottwitz. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 168 October 23, 2012 Resolution No. 046 Adopting a Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition Policy for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority, Adopted The following is staff’s memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Resolution for consideration would adopt a Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition Policy to be used by the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) in cases where a URA-assisted project results in the displacement of residents and/or businesses, or the URA intends to acquire real property. The Policy is based on federal and state regulations, and provides a uniform process by which relocation services and financial assistance is offered, and/or real property is acquired. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The fundamental purpose of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is to eliminate blighted conditions in targeted redevelopment areas. In some cases, supporting a project that eliminates blight and provides a tax benefit to the area results in the displacement of businesses and/or residents. When displacement is inevitable and requires relocation, the URA can provide service and sometimes financial relief to assist with the relocation. In the past, the URA has managed relocation on a case-by-case basis. Considering the increase in redevelopment activity within URA plan areas, it is anticipated that displacement will continue to be a potential issue. In fact, potential displacement of current tenants due to the Foothills Mall redevelopment has been made public. Rather than continuing to manage these situations individually, staff recommends that the URA Board adopt policies that can be universally applied to any displacement situation created by a URA-assisted project. This approach ensures consistency with how services and financial assistance are provided. Additionally, there may be cases when the URA exercises its power to acquire real property to facilitate development or redevelopment. Colorado Revised Statutes provide guidance for such circumstances in terms of how the acquisition process should be managed to ensure fairness and consistency. The Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition Policy under consideration has been adapted from other Colorado URAs and is intended to be a living document. While it is imperative to have this policy in place as soon as possible, it will be continuously evaluated as it is implemented and improved, as needed. The Policy is based on the following federal and state regulations: the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform Act) and implementing regulations including 49 CFR Part 24; US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Handbook 1378, and; Colorado Revised Statue 24-56-101 through 113. The document is divided in to two sections: Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition, summarized in detail below. The complete Policy document is attached as Exhibit A to Resolution No. 046. 169 October 23, 2012 RELOCATION ASSISTANCE This section consists of five components: Relocation Planning, Notices, Advisory Services, Relocation Assistance Payments, and Appeals. Relocation Planning This component acknowledges that successful relocation requires planning and considerable coordination; the earlier impacts are considered, the easier it will be to manage any challenges. Therefore, the URA will prepare a Relocation Plan that addresses relocation impacts and potential solutions as early in the development stages of a project as possible. Notices Certain information will be communicated to displaced persons through personal contact and a series of notices to minimize disruption and maximize the chances of successful relocation. Three primary notices are described in the Policy: 1. General Information Notice – provided as soon as feasible in the early stages of a project. The purpose is to provide a general description of the URA’s Relocation Assistance Policy. 2. Notice of Relocation Eligibility – provided later when it has been determined that particular persons will be displaced. The purpose is to inform the occupant that (s)he will be displaced as a result of the project and, therefore, will be eligible for relocation benefits, as applicable. 3. 90-Day Notice – basic protection of the Uniform Act to be sent at least 90 days in advance of the earliest date the occupant will be required to move. In addition, a 30-day notice will be delivered no less than 30 days prior to the specific date required for the move. Advisory Services Services will provide displaced persons with information, counseling, and advice as necessary. Typical basic services include, but are not limited to: • Explanation of relocation services and appropriate payments. • Discussion of eligibility requirements for each relevant type of relocation payment. • Determination of needs and preferences of the occupant to be displaced through a personal interview. • Providing current listings of replacement properties. • Transportation to inspect potential relocation housing if the person is unable to do so on his/her own. • Assistance in obtaining and completing applications or claim forms for relocation payment or other related assistance. 170 October 23, 2012 Relocation Assistance Payments There are two main categories of payments: residential and non-residential. Within each category there are several types of payments that address expenses incurred as a result of a required move. Note that the Social Sustainability Office is currently developing city-wide relocation policies for residential displacement; the outcome of that effort will inform and could change the URA’s policy towards residential relocation. Residential moving and related expenses includes the reasonable and necessary costs for: • Transportation costs to the new site within a 50 mile radius. • Packing, moving, and unpacking of household goods. • Disconnecting and reconnecting household appliances and other personal property. • Storage of household goods. • Insurance for replacement value of property during the move and necessary storage. • Replacement value of property lost, stolen, or damaged in the move if insurance is not reasonably available. Residential replacement housing payments are for the difference, if any, between the actual acquisition price or rent plus utilities of a comparable replacement dwelling and the price of the dwelling from which the occupant is being displaced. These payments are made based on eligibility requirements found in 49 CFR Part 24, and have statutory caps of $5,250.00 for 90-day occupants and $22,500.00 for 180-day owners. Another requirement of the Uniform Act is that the replacement housing meets certain standards, and the Policy reiterates specific criteria for complying. Business and non-profit (non-residential) relocation payments for moving expenses not to exceed $50,000 include, but are not limited to: • Transportation of personal property. • Packing, crating, uncrating, and unpacking of personal property. • Disconnecting, dismantling, removing, reassembling, and installing equipment/machinery. • Insurance for replacement value of personal property. • Re-lettering signs and replacing stationary on hand at time of displacement. • Actual direct loss of tangible personal property. Business relocation payments for reestablishment expenses not to exceed $10,000 are available for: • Repairs/improvements to replacement real property as required by law/code. • Construction and installation costs for exterior signs. • Provision of utilities from right-of-way to improvements on replacement site. • Licenses, fees, and permits not paid as part of moving expenses. • Feasibility surveys, soil testing, and market studies. Additionally, costs in connection with searching for a replacement location can be paid to the displaced person up to $1,000. Certain businesses and non-profit organizations are eligible to obtain a fixed payment; if a business receives this payment, it will not receive moving/reestablishment/search expense payments. 171 October 23, 2012 Appeals It is anticipated that an individual or entity may disagree with the URA’s relocation assistance decisions, and the Policy outlines a process by which such decisions can be appealed. LAND ACQUISITION This Section provides policies to guide the URA should it intend to acquire real property, and includes the following: • Every reasonable effort shall be made to expeditiously acquire the property by negotiation. • Prior to negotiations, the property shall be appraised. The appraisal may be waived if the case involves the acquisition by sale or donation of property with a fair market value below $5,000. • The URA shall offer an amount reasonably believed to be just compensation; in no event shall the amount offered be less than the approved appraisal of the fair market value. The offer shall be in writing and include a summary of the basis for the amount established as just compensation. • The owner of the property to be acquired shall not be required to surrender possession of the property before the agreed purchase price is paid or before there is a deposit with the court for the amount awarded as a result of condemnation proceedings. • If an owner or tenant is permitted to occupy the real property on a rental basis, the amount of rent shall not exceed the fair rental value of the property. • If a real property is to be acquired by exercise of the power of eminent domain, formal condemnation proceedings shall be instituted. • If the acquisition of only part of the property would leave the owner with an uneconomical remnant, an offer to acquire the entire property shall be made. Relationship to “Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategies” On the same evening the URA Board is asked to consider this Resolution, City Council will hold a work session to discuss another project addressing displacement, Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategies. This project is managed by the Social Sustainability Department and differs from the URA relocation policies in two primary ways: • It only addresses residential displacement, whereas the URA’s policies address both residential and non-residential (business). • It will be applied citywide, whereas the URA’s only apply in designated Plan Areas/TIF Districts. URA staff is coordinating closely with the other project. The timing is such that the URA policies are needed immediately and cannot wait on the forthcoming recommendations from the other effort; 172 October 23, 2012 however, it is staff’s intention to update the URA policies, with regard to the residential component, to be consistent with any new recommendations that emerge. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS In the event that residential or business occupants are displaced because of a URA-assisted project, the URA will be responsible for making associated payments using tax increment revenue to that individual or entity. While the Policy provides caps for certain types of payments, the total amount provided for each displaced individual/entity will vary based on needs. Those needs will be thoroughly assessed by the URA to ensure payments are for necessary and reasonable costs that result directly from the displacement. In terms of acquiring real property, the Policy is clear that the value paid by the URA will be based upon an appraisal and an amount reasonably believed to be just compensation.” Josh Birks, Economic Health Director, stated this is an initial policy, likely to be revisited over the next several years, related to relocation and land acquisition. This policy is only applicable to URA actions and addresses both residential and commercial relocations. Megan Bolin, Economic Health Analyst, stated this item primarily takes direction from federal regulations outlined in the Uniform Relocation Act. She detailed the relocation assistance and appeal aspects of the policy. Relocation payments are to be paid on a reimbursement basis. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated the regulations protecting those who are forced to be relocated should be made legally binding and discussed eminent domain. Boardmember Kottwitz asked if there is a plan for eminent domain issues to come before the Board for a vote. Deputy City Attorney Daggett replied the Midtown Urban Renewal Plan, for example, has specific language for the use of eminent domain by the URA and discusses a decision by the Authority which has been interpreted to mean a decision by the Board to authorize the use of eminent domain. Boardmember Kottwitz asked how eminent domain would be governed. Deputy City Attorney Daggett replied the use of eminent domain by the URA would be governed by Title 38 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, which is the same set of regulations used when the City applies eminent domain. Boardmember Kottwitz expressed concern that eminent domain could be used too easily and items involving it could be overlooked. City Attorney Roy replied there will be an opportunity for those affected by an eminent domain to appear before the Board and eminent domain will only be used by a deliberate decision of the majority of the Board. Boardmember Manvel asked if this issue addresses properties only where the City is the agency or if it also addresses businesses within the URA. Bolin replied these policies address any URA project. Deputy City Attorney Daggett clarified that relocation assistance applies only to projects receiving URA funding. 173 October 23, 2012 Vice-President Ohlson asked about resolution versus ordinance. Deputy City Attorney Daggett replied the URA does not have a code; therefore, all adopted resolutions and these policies form the operating rules for the URA. Vice-President Ohlson asked if staff is aware of the potential upcoming use of eminent domain in this urban renewal area. City Manager Atteberry replied in the affirmative. Boardmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Boardmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution No. 046. Boardmember Manvel questioned how much flexibility this Resolution is giving the Board to assign a particular amount for relocation assistance and asked if relocation assistance is always appropriate. Bolin replied a needs assessment of those to be displaced would occur in each instance. There is some flexibility in the amount of assistance and the appeal process would allow individuals to appeal. The relocation assistance funds will come from the developer. Boardmember Kottwitz stated she does not believe the City has misused eminent domain, but stated she does not believe it should be part of the policies at all. President Weitkunat stated addressing this issue makes it available for changes in the future. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Manvel, Ohlson and Poppaw. Nays: Kottwitz. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business President Weitkunat suggested a URA manual be developed to address all of the bylaws, policies and procedures as appropriate. Hendee clarified the affordable housing issue will be coming before Council on March 5, 2013. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:53 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 174 DATE: November 20, 2012 STAFF: Bruce Hendee, Josh Birks Megan Bolin AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 9 SUBJECT Resolution No. 048 Adopting the 2013 Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Resolution adopts the 2013 Budget for the Urban Renewal Authority (URA). Budget revenues include property tax increment and interest earned on investments, totaling $1,355,034. Budget expenses include general operations, the new North College Storefront Improvement Program, and debt service payments totaling $1,038,683. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Revenue for the URA is generated from property tax increment collections as well as interest earned on investments. Tax increment is determined by the County Assessor’s Office; although the URA will not receive the final 2012 tax warrant until January 2013, the 2012 August Certification is used to inform budget preparations. Tax increment sources include the North College Plan Area and the Prospect South tax increment financing (TIF) District; however, Prospect South is too new to produce revenue for the URA, leaving North College as the sole tax increment revenue stream for 2013. The total tax increment revenue for the North College Plan Area in 2013 is projected to be $1,262,251. Additional revenue is collected from interest earned on investments, which totals $92,783. Combined, the 2013 total estimated revenue for the URA is $1,355,034. URA expenses are a combination of operating costs and debt service payments. Operating expenses for 2013 include the following: •Operations $ 209,627 North College Storefront Improvement Program $ 25,000 Total $ 234,627 The operations line item includes cost for personnel and on-call consulting services. New in 2013 is the Storefront Improvement Program, which would provide five-year forgivable loans to business owners or tenants in the North College Plan Area for facade-related improvements. This Program is intended to augment traditional TIF assistance for smaller-scale improvements that add value, but do not necessarily generate significant increment. The URA’s annual debt service payments (principal and interest) are from the following outstanding loans: North College Marketplace – phase 1 $ 354,821 JAX $ 37,186 Northeast College Corridor Outfall (NECCO) $ 9,827 North College Road Improvements – Vine to Conifer $ 158,760 Kaufman and Robinson $ 4,745 North College Marketplace – phase 2 $ 238,717 Total $ 804,056 The Resolution appropriates the operating and debt service budget for the URA, which totals $1,038,683 for 2013. The Prospect South TIF District was created in September 2011 and the URA Board approved $5 million in TIF assistance to Capstone Development Partners for a 678-bed student housing project. Deconstruction and site preparation began in fall 2011, which included the removal of three buildings. Since the Assessor’s Office bases its valuation on the condition of the parcels as of January 2012, there was no new, significant construction value captured in this TIF District. In fact, the value for the District has actually decreased from the base because the three buildings were removed. Therefore, the URA will not receive revenue from Prospect South in 2013; revenue will be captured in 2014 based on Capstone’s progress and any other significant improvements as of January 2013. November 20, 2012 -2- ITEM 9 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Resolution includes the annual operating appropriation for 2013 at $1,038,683. Any specific appropriations related to URA participation in projects will be presented to the URA Board separately so that the URA funding is approved on a project by project basis. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation 1 1 Urban Renewal Authority (URA) 2013 Budget URA Board November 20, 2012 2 2012 Highlights Tax increment revenue: Budgeted = $ 913,815 Anticipated = $ 925,521 Interest collected on loans and investments: Budgeted = $ 109,500 Anticipated = $ 110,513 ATTACHMENT 1 2 3 2012 Highlights Loan Agreements: • Northeast College Corridor Outfall (NECCO) – $326,742 • North College Road Improvements – Vine to Conifer – $2.7 M Redevelopment Agreements: None 4 2013 Budget Revenues $1,355,034 • Property Tax Increment Collection • Interest Earned on Investments Expenses $1,038,683 • Operations • North College Storefront Improvement Program • Debt Service 3 5 Existing Loans Project Lender Original Loan 2013 Debt Service Payment Year Paid Off Valley Steel Storm Drainage Fund $150 K $0 2011 NC Mktplace Capital Expansion Fund $5 M $354,821 2029 NC Mktplace 2 Water Fund $3 M $238,717 2029 RMI General Fund $5.3 M $0 2029 JAX Capital Expansion Fund $173 K $37,186 2015 NECCO Storm Drainage Fund $326 K $9,827 2021 NC Rd Imprv BCC $2.7 M $158,760 2029 Kaufman General Fund $193 K $4,745 2016 TOTAL $16.8 M $804,056 6 Staff Recommendation • Adoption of the Resolution 4 7 Questions? RESOLUTION NO. 048 OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the “Authority”) was created on January 5, 1982 by City Council’s adoption of Resolution 1982-010, which resolution designated the City Council as the Board of Commissioners of the Authority; and WHEREAS, the Authority operates to eliminate blight and prevent the spread of blight within the urban renewal area in accordance with the Urban Renewal Law of Colorado, Section 31- 25-101; and WHEREAS, the Authority has considered a proposed budget for fiscal year 2013 and wishes to adopt the 2013 URA budget as described herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY as follows: Section 1. That the budget shown on Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved and the amounts stated therein are appropriated for fiscal year 2013. Section 2. That the City of Fort Collins’ Financial Officer is directed to file a certified copy of the attached budget with the office of the Division of Local Government, Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority this 20th day of November A.D. 2012. Vice Chairperson ATTEST: Secretary EXHIBIT A North College Urban Renewal Plan Area Estimated Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $ 1,262,251 Interest on Investments $ 12,119 Interest from RMI2 Loan $ 80,664 Total estimated Revenue for the URA $ 1,355,034 Expenses: Operations $ 209,627 Project Storefront $ 25,000 Total Operational Costs $ 234,627 Annual Debt Service Payments North College Marketplace 2009 ($5M) $ 354,821 JAX 2010 ($173K) $ 37,186 NECCO 2011 ($326K) $ 9,827 North College Vine to Conifer ($2.7M) $ 158,760 Kaufman and Robinson 2011 ($192K) $ 4,745 North College Marketplace 2011 ($3M) $ 238,717 Total Debt Service Payments $ 804,056 Fund 800 2013 Budget $ 1,038,683 Midtown Urban Renewal Plan Area (Prospect South TIF District) *no revenue projected in 2012 *no expenses projected in 2012 URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY 2013 BUDGET IDALIA DR Y U M A CT I D A L I A CT RICK DR SOLAR CT M E R C U R Y D R W SATURN DR F O S S IL CREST DR E TRILBY RD E SATURN DR G A L A X Y CT E SKYWAY DR PLATEAU CT AURORA WAY LEO CT OR I O N CT PLUTO CT SUNDOWN CT FL A G L E R RD General Improvement Skyview South District No. 15 Legend General Improvement District #15 Parcels 1 inch = 600 feet ATTACHMENT 2 changing these criteria were presented by staff, including the previous 162 GPCD and 15% SRF, 150 GPCD and 15% SRF and 140 GPCD and 20% SRF. After some discussion, the Water Board voted unanimously to revise the updated Rural Lands Community Separator Open Lands, Parks and Stream Corridors Adjacent Planning Areas Printed: May 17, 2011 Fossil Land Creek Use Framework Reservoir Plan Area Crossing Site - Kechter Annexation ATTACHMENT 4 Attachment #2 utility serVices Brian Janonis water resources & treatMent operations Kevin GertiG water engineering & field serVices Jon hauKaas custoMer connections lisa rosintosKi light & power operations steve catanach electric field serVices dept. tom rocK assistant city Manager/coMMunity & operations serVices Wendy Williams planning, deVelopMent & transportation Karen cumBo coMMunity serVices marty heffernan inforMation technology dan coldiron enVironMental serVices lucinda smith social sustainability Joe franK streets larry schneider engineering ricK richter interim traffic Joe olson transfort dial-a-ride Kurt ravenschlaG cultural serVices Jill stillWell recreation BoB adams parks J.r. schnelzer park planning & deVelopMent craiG foreman natural areas parking serVices John stoKes randy hensley transportation planning aaron iverson interim coMMunity deVelopMent & neighborhood serVices laurie Kadrich operation serVices Ken mannon legislatiVe dan Weinheimer deputy city Mgr/ policy diane Jones city clerk’s office Wanda nelson perforMance excellence terri runyon council policy vacant proposed organization chart departMent utility serVices Brian Janonis water resources & treatMent operations Kevin GertiG water engineering & field serVices Jon hauKaas custoMer connections lisa rosintosKi light & power operations steve catanach electric field serVices dept. tom rocK assistant city Manager/coMMunity & operations serVices Wendy Williams deputy city Mgr/ policy, planning & transportation serVices diane Jones coMMunity serVices marty heFFernan planning, deVelopMent & transportation Karen cumBo inforMation technology dan coldiron city clerk’s office Wanda nelson enVironMental serVices lucinda smith social sustainability Joe FranK streets larry schneider engineering ricK richter interim traffic Joe olson transfort dial-a-ride Kurt ravenschlaG cultural serVices Jill stillWell recreation BoB adams parks J.r. schnelzer park planning & deVelopMent craiG Foreman natural areas John stoKes parking serVices randy hensley coMMunity deVelopMent & neighborhood serVices laurie Kadrich operation serVices Ken mannon perforMance excellence terri runyon legislatiVe dan Weinheimer council policy dan Weinheimer organization chart Public Facility Category Applicant Project/Program Funding Request Commission’s Recommendation Unfunded Balance Percent of Request Funded PF-1 Respite Care: Life Skills Program Area for Teens with Developmental Disabilities $72,700 $72,700 CDBG $0 100% PF-2 SAVA: Capital Campaign $300,000 $175,224 CDBG $124,776 71% PF-3 Turning Point Center for Youth and Family Development: Wheelchair Accessibility $8,500 $8,000 AHF (Grant) $500 94% All funding recommendations in the Public Facility category are in the form of a “Due on Sale Loan + 5% Simple Interest” unless noted as a grant. The CDBG Commission has recommended all (100%) of the available funding amount of $1,670,130 be allocated. Because there are not enough funds available to fund all proposals, the Commission has recommended that the economic development proposal receive 0% of its funding request. Economic development is a lower priority in the Consolidated Plan. Of the six affordable housing proposals, five are being recommended for full funding, and the sixth (Housing Authority of Loveland: LHIP) is receiving a recommendation for funding at 90% of the request. All three public facility proposals are being recommended for funding, one full and two partial. SAVA is being recommended for 71% of its request and Turning Point for 94% of its request. The justifications for the CDBG Commission’s recommendations can be found in Attachment 5.