Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 10/04/2016 - COMPLETE AGENDA
City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor City Council Chambers Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann City Attorney City Manager 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 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Regular Meeting October 4, 2016 Revised 10/4/16 Proclamations and Presentations 5:30 p.m. A. Proclamation Declaring October as Cyber Security Month. B. Proclamation Declaring October 2-8, 2016 as Public Power Week. C. Proclamation Declaring October 7, 2016 as Manufacturing Day. D. Proclamation Declaring October 2016 as National Disability Employment Awareness Month. E. Proclamation Declaring October 4, 2016 as CSU Day. Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL MEETING TO ORDER ROLL CALL AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City of Fort Collins Page 2 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. o Council-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered before Discussion Items. o Citizen-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered after Discussion Items. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Individuals may comment regarding items scheduled on the Consent Calendar and items not specifically scheduled on the agenda. Comments regarding land use projects for which a development application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to the Council. Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the table in the lobby (for recordkeeping purposes). All speakers will be asked by the presiding officer to identify themselves by raising their hand, and then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for those who are not able to stand while waiting). The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and general address for the record, and to keep comments brief. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be provided to the City Clerk. A timer will beep once and the timer light will turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain, and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time to speak has ended. [**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development, citizens should consult the Development Review Center page on the City’s website at fcgov.com/developmentreview, or contact the Development Review Center at 221-6750.] CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP Consent Calendar The Consent 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. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Pulled Consent Items. Items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved by City Council with one vote. 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. City of Fort Collins Page 3 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 20, 2016 Regular Council Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 20, 2016 Regular Council meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2016, Annexing Property Known as the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. This Ordinance unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 20, 2016, annexes the Cache La Poudre River enclave. This is a City-initiated request to annex 12.01 acres located along the northern boundary of the Lee Martinez Community Park/1873 Original Town Site Annex. From the intersection of North College Avenue and the Cache La Poudre River, the enclave spans approximately 3,190 feet to the northwest and 1,620 feet to the southeast. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on August 16, 2016. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on the agenda. 3. Public Hearing and Second Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 20, 2016, zones the property included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation into the Public Open Lands zone district. 4. First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2016, Authorizing Execution of the Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Amended and Restated Deed of Conservation Easement. The purpose of this item is to authorize the execution of the amended and restated Cribari/Gheen/Schuman conservation easement. The Cribari property was a 72 +/- acre property south of Timnath in unincorporated Larimer County that was conserved by the City with a conservation easement in 2005 with Chris Cribari. Cribari subdivided the parcel, then sold the subsequent two parcels to Ken and Deborah Gheen and Michael and Taryn Schuman. After the Gheens placed their parcel on the market, ambiguities were identified in the original conservation easement deed, including lack of clarity on residential development potential and approved land uses and activities for each parcel, in addition to a shared liability for each other’s parcels. This amended and restated conservation easement has addressed and clarified all the issues presented with no net-loss to the conservation value of the parcels. 5. First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Permanent Stormwater Easement on City Property at the Gardens on Spring Creek to Colorado State University. WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance to Colorado State University of a permanent stormwater easement on City property at the Gardens on Spring Creek. Colorado State University (CSU) needs to construct a water quality pond to handle the flows from its new construction at CSU, including the new stadium. The Center Outfall Water Quality Pond (Pond) will be constructed on land owned by CSU, as well as on a portion of the City's property at the Gardens on Spring Creek. The Pond will handle flows from both entities. City of Fort Collins Page 4 6. First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2016, Designating the H. W. Schroeder Property Located at 419 Mathews Street, Fort Collins, Colorado, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(e) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to designate the H. W. Schroeder property located at 419 Mathews Street as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owners of this property, the Carol Johnson Trust and the John McGowan Trust, are initiating this request. The 1901 Queen Anne-style residence is eligible for recognition as a Landmark due to its historic integrity and significance to Fort Collins under Designation Standard B, Persons/Groups, and Standard C, Design/Construction. 7. Resolution 2016-077 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Intergovernmental Agreement for Funding I-25 Improvements. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to enter into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Larimer County and seven other municipalities outlining the method by which local funds will be appropriated and contributed to Larimer County for the purpose of helping to accelerate improvements to I-25 in Northern Colorado. END CONSENT CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. STAFF REPORTS COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS 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 (three 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. City of Fort Collins Page 5 8. Public Hearing on the 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. (staff: Darin Atteberry, Mike Beckstead; 60 minutes) This is the second official public hearing on the City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on the 2017-2018 Budget. Public input will also be taken during the budget adoption meetings on Tuesday, November 1 and Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the Old Town Library, the Harmony Library, or the City Clerk’s Office. The recommended budget can also be viewed online at fcgov.com/budget. 9. Resolution 2016-078 Urging the City's Electors to Vote "Yes/For" Ballot Issue 2A on the Ballot of the November 8, 2016, Election, Which Asks City Voters to Confirm that the City May Keep and Spend All Revenues it has Received and Will Continue to Receive from the "Keep Fort Collins Great" .85% Sales and Use Tax City Voters Approved in 2010. (staff: Darin Atteberry; 15 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to bring forward a resolution in support of the November ballot question asking voters to confirm that the City may retain and spend all revenues it has received and will continue to receive relating to the “Keep Fort Collins Great” .85% sales and use tax voters approved in 2010. 10. Resolution 2016-079 Supporting and Approving the Statement of Collaboration Between the City of Fort Collins and Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (FVC). (staff: Josh Birks; 5 minute staff presentation; 10 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is for the City Council to acknowledge and support a Statement of Collaboration between the City of Fort Collins and Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (FVC). The City and FVC recognize the mutual business, educational and other interests related to the City's 2015 Economic Health Strategic Plan (EHS Plan) and FVC's mission. CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS OTHER BUSINESS A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) ADJOURNMENT 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 the Council, will be continued to the next regular Council meeting and will be placed first on the discussion agenda for such meeting. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, National Cyber Security Awareness Month, celebrated every October, was created as a collaborative effort between government and industry to ensure every American has the resources they need to stay safer and more secure online; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins recognizes the importance in identifying, responding to and protecting against cyber threats that may have significant impact to our individual and collective security and privacy; and WHEREAS, critical infrastructure sectors are increasingly reliant on information systems to support financial services, energy, telecommunications, transportation, utilities, health care, and emergency response systems; and WHEREAS, 2016 marks the sixth anniversary of the overall message of the “STOP.THINK.CONNECT.Campaign” as the National Public Awareness Campaign, implemented through a coalition of private companies, nonprofit and government organizations, as well as academic institutions working together to increase the understanding of cyber threats and empowering the American public to be safer and more secure online; and WHEREAS, maintaining the security of cyberspace is a shared responsibility in which each of us-elected officials, City staff and community members, has a critical role to play. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 2016 as NATIONAL CYBER SECURITY AWARENESS MONTH and encourage all citizens to learn about cyber security and put that knowledge into practice in their homes, schools, workplaces, and businesses. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 6 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, we the citizens of Fort Collins, Colorado, value local control of our community services and have chosen to operate a community-owned, locally controlled, not-for- profit electric utility; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power is the second largest municipal electric utility in Colorado; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins Utilities and Platte River Power Authority provide our homes, businesses and schools with safe, reliable, environmentally responsible and low-cost electricity; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins Utilities and Platte River Power Authority are valuable community partners that contribute substantially to the well-being of local citizens through energy efficiency, customer service, environmental protection, economic development and safety awareness. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the week of October 2-8, 2016, as PUBLIC POWER WEEK in Fort Collins to honor Fort Collins Utilities and Platte River Power Authority’s consumer- owners, policy makers, and employees who work together to provide the best possible electric service to our community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 7 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, manufacturers in Fort Collins represent the backbone of our thriving economy and nationally, manufacturing supports 18.5 million jobs in such areas as engineering, designing, machining and computer programming; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins is a place where these businesses provide well-paying jobs, shipping products around the world; and WHEREAS, every dollar spent in manufacturing creates $1.40 for the U.S. economy; and WHEREAS, Manufacturing Day, officially occurring on the first Friday in October, celebrates modern manufacturing and the opportunity for local businesses to highlight the importance of their work to the economy; and WHEREAS, the Fort Collins-Loveland area employs about 13,000 people in manufacturing jobs, making an average of $70,000 a year; and WHEREAS, the NoCo Manufacturing Partnership, a group of more than 50 northern Colorado manufacturing companies, was formed in 2013 to address common issues in the industry and spotlight the important manufacturing work in our region. NOW THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 7, as MANUFACTURING DAY in honor of manufacturing businesses in Fort Collins and their contribution to the economy. We celebrate our business community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 8 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, workplaces welcoming of the talents of all people, including people with disabilities, are a critical part of our efforts to build an inclusive community and strong economy; and WHEREAS, being employed is a critical piece of being a full participant in the community; and WHEREAS, individuals with disabilities have value and talent to add to our workplaces and community; and WHEREAS, employing individuals with disabilities has numerous benefits to employers, individuals, and our society as a whole; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is committed to building such an inclusive community and workforce, including encouraging employers to hire a diverse workforce that includes people with disabilities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby declare October as NATIONAL DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT AWARENESS MONTH in Fort Collins and call this observance to the attention of our citizens. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 9 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Colorado State University was founded in 1870 under the land grant heritage that is “committed to excellence, setting the standard for public research universities in teaching, research, service and extension for the benefit of the citizens of Colorado, the United States and the world”; and WHEREAS, CSU has improved the lives of the residents of the City of Fort Collins and has served northern Colorado as a whole with 146 years of memories and history; and WHEREAS, CSU has been recognized nationally and internationally for accomplishments in various fields such as reclamation, invention, sports and Olympic games, cooking and baking, space exploration, climate and natural resources, veterinary medicine, and more; and WHEREAS, in the past years the University has received several awards for initiatives such as the 2015 No. 1 Greenest College, the first institution in the world to receive a Stars Platinum rating for sustainability efforts, and has been named as an Innovation and Economic Prosperity University by the Association of Public Land-grant Universities; and WHEREAS, the theme of 2016 Homecoming is “Capture the Moment”, which serves as reminder for all Rams since the University’s establishment to cherish the values and memories bestowed upon them by CSU; and WHEREAS, Homecoming highlights the necessity of camaraderie and loyalty to one’s alma mater and strengthens community bonds through establishment of traditions. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 4, 2016 as CSU DAY and encourage all members of the community to take part in the celebration of CSU Day and all events following as a part of Homecoming Week. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ ATTEST: Mayor _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Wanda Winkelmann, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 20, 2016 Regular Council Meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 20, 2016 Regular Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. September 20, 2016 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 11 City of Fort Collins Page 102 September 20, 2016 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting – 6:00 PM ROLL CALL PRESENT: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff ABSENT: Campana, Horak Staff Present: Atteberry, Daggett, Winkelmann AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published agenda. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Deborah (no last name given) asked that Council not approve the proposed utility rate increases. Eric Sutherland opposed manual meter reading charges as being punitive. He opposed the ballot question regarding the Keep Fort Collins Great tax initiative and TABOR. Mike Pruznick discussed the name of the Keep Fort Collins Great tax, which was referenced as “Resourcing Our Future” and discussed the school bond issue. Cathy Kipp, Poudre School District Board President, requested support for the Poudre School District ballot measures. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP Councilmember Martinez requested information regarding the “Keep Fort Collins Great” name versus “Resourcing Our Future” tax. City Attorney Daggett replied the ballot question that went before the voters did not name the tax and since the time the tax was adopted, the City has routinely referred to the tax as the Keep Fort Collins Great tax. It was generally thought that using another name for the tax would be misleading for voters. Mayor Troxell requested the schedule for upcoming utility rate changes. City Manager Atteberry replied Council has yet to act on utility rate changes; however, the City Manager’s recommended budget includes rate increases. The item will be formally considered at the November 1Council meeting. Councilmember Cunniff requested the manual meter reading charge methodology. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to adopt and approve all items on the Consent Agenda. 1.1 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 103 RESULT: CONSENT CALENDAR ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Bob Overbeck, District 1 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff ABSENT: Campana, Horak 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the August 30, 2016 Adjourned Council Meeting and the September 6, 2016 Regular Council Meeting. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 30, 2016 Adjourned Council meeting and the September 6, 2016 Regular Council meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund for the Vida Sana Program. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2016, appropriates sub- grant funds in the amount of $64,646 from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, through the Poudre Valley Health Systems’ Community Health Improvement Department. The Vida Sana Grant will address the needs of targeted health disparate populations in Fort Collins by allowing specific discounted programming costs for Northside Aztlan Community Center fitness classes, fitness coaching and health screening programs. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2016 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Recreation Fund for Therapy Pool Repair and Tile Replacement at the Edora Pool Ice Center and Transferring Appropriations to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Program. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2016, appropriates $600,000 in recreation reserve funds for the Edora Pool Ice Center (EPIC) therapy pool repair and tile replacement. The funds will be used to repair the water leaks discovered in the therapy pool and replace the tile on the natatorium (pool) deck to match the tile throughout the area. This appropriation includes a $6,000 contribution to the APP program. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2016, Amending Article 3, Division 3.9.12 of the Land Use Code Regarding Corridor Activity Center Design Standards. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to amend to the Land Use Code for proposed changes related to design standards for the Fort Collins Corridor Activity Center area located west of I-25 at the I-25/Highway 392 Interchange. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Conservation Easement to Larimer County on Property to be Acquired by the City as Part of the Horsetooth Foothills Land Conservation Project. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2016, authorizes the conveyance of a conservation easement on 500 acres to Larimer County as required by Great Outdoors Colorado for the Horsetooth Foothills Land Conservation Project. The Project will conserve about 2,726 acres in the foothills south and west of Fort Collins. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2016, Amending Certain Provisions of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Related to Collection and Disposal of Refuse, Rubbish and Recyclables, and Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Services, including Repealing and Reenacting Chapter 15, Article XV of City Code. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 6, 2016, adopts the Community Recycling Ordinance (CRO). This ordinance allows private haulers the option to apply a 1.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 104 service surcharge on residential trash and recycling bills; requires private haulers to offer optional yard trimming collection to single family customers from April through November for a separate, opt- in fee; requires private haulers to provide recycling service to businesses and apartment complexes by 2020; and requires grocers to subscribe to compost collection service by the end of 2017. The CRO builds on existing policy and is designed to make progress toward Council’s adopted waste reduction goals. Since First Reading, three minor changes have been made and are highlighted in the Ordinance. The first two changes modify language related to variances to clarify that an extension can be requested at the end of any variance period, with no limitation as to how many variances may be requested so long as the variance criteria continue to be met (see pages 3 and 13 of the Ordinance). The third change is a grammatical correction on page 16. 7. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2016, Annexing Property Known as the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to annex the Cache La Poudre River enclave. This is a City-initiated request to annex 12.01 acres located along the northern boundary of the Lee Martinez Community Park/1873 Original Town Site Annex. From the intersection of North College Avenue and the Cache La Poudre River, the enclave spans approximately 3,190 feet to the northwest and 1,620 feet to the southeast. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on August 16, 2016. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on the agenda. 8. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. (Adopted) This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation into the Public Open Lands zone district. 9. Resolution 2016-074 Expressing Council's Intent and General Policy Considerations Regarding Night Sky Objectives. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to request City Council's support, by Resolution, for efforts related to protecting the night sky through best practices in outdoor lighting. The Night Sky Initiative was a City Council work session item on July 26, 2016. END CONSENT STAFF REPORTS Cassie Archuleta, Senior Environmental Planner, discussed the long-term air quality monitoring that occurs in the city. Fort Collins and the North Front Range are part of a non-attainment area, which means the health-based standard for ozone is sometimes exceeded. Archuleta also discussed visual air pollution and stated a local study on acceptance of various levels of visual air pollution could be valuable. 1.1 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 105 COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Councilmember Martinez reported on a Police Services memo regarding the impact of bike patrol activity. He asked Chief Hutto to discuss the citations issued on those patrols. Chief Hutto replied the extra bike patrols have been helpful and most of the citations were addressing public nuisance issues. Councilmember Martinez asked how the impact of these patrols is being measured. Chief Hutto replied much of the impact has been anecdotal and feedback has been very positive. Councilmember Overbeck asked when the bike patrol program will end. Chief Hutto replied the initial pilot program is set to go through the end of September. Councilmember Stephens asked if the program has expanded beyond Old Town. Chief Hutto replied Old Town was the initial focus; however, some expansion has occurred along the Mason Corridor and along the Harmony Corridor. Councilmember Overbeck reported on the Group Publishing lunch and Stadium Advisory Group meeting. Councilmember Stephens reported on her participation in the 9/11 memorial ceremony at Fire Station 3. Mayor Troxell reported on the business appreciation breakfast and the Linden Open Streets event. He discussed the recent waste shed public input session. DISCUSSION ITEMS 10. Public Hearing on the 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. (Hearing was Held) This is the first official public hearing on the City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on the 2017-2018 budget. In an effort to receive further public input, a second public hearing is scheduled for the Tuesday, October 4, 2016 Council meeting. Public input will also be taken during the budget adoption meetings on Tuesday, November 1 and Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the Main Library, the Harmony Branch Library, or the City Clerk’s Office. The recommended budget can also be viewed online at fcgov.com/budget. David Crowell requested funding support of the Community Innovation Center. Chris Johnson, Bike Fort Collins, requested funding support of the FC Walks program, FC Bikes enhancement, and limited Sunday Transfort service. Deborah (no last name given) opposed the proposed recommended utility rate increases. Frank Schwende requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service. 1.1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 106 Mike Pruznick discussed the budget process, the role of citizens serving on BFO teams, and the Poudre School District bond issue. Mark Brewer, Homeless Gear volunteer, requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service. Kalie McMonagle requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service. Tyler Green requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service. Ally (no last name given) read a letter from Jose (no last name given) requesting funding for additional affordable housing programs. Eric Sutherland discussed the general status and condition of the City’s budget and how it is presented. He opposed the presentation of the budget in terms of correlating fund balances to appropriations and opposed the funding of the Rocky Mountain Innosphere. Ally (no last name given) discussed her experiences in the community regarding housing instability. Will Hickey discussed the Climate Action Plan and requested support for funding Sunday Transfort service and FC Bikes. Marsiella Armendariz requested funding support for affordable housing and childhood education. Sara Kammlade requested funding support for the Neighborhood Improvement and Community Building Grant Fund and FC Walks. She discussed the lack of sidewalks in the Alta Vista area. Deirdre Sullivan, Vida Sana Program, discussed the importance of affordable housing, transportation and child care. Mike Pupiales discussed the importance of funding for affordable housing and systemic changes that affect the most marginalized populations. He requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service and art and cultural programming. Christine Disco requested funding support for Sunday Transfort service and expressed concern regarding the lack of equity in the budget in terms of certain marginalized groups. Mark Kinecker supported funding of affordable housing programs, Sunday Transfort service, and FC Bikes. Mike Truitt discussed the successes of energy efficiency programs and suggested funding small grants for low income residents who have high energy costs. Jeff Morrisette questioned the process of where the budget line is drawn across outcome areas. He supported funding for Sunday Transfort service. Mayor Troxell requested staff address the general budgeting process. City Manager Atteberry stated individuals serving on the budget committees provide many different perspectives during the budgeting process for the City. 1.1 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 107 Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer, stated revenue allocations for the budget involve a macro-level forecast of overall revenue and an examination of which parts of the City organization fall in each of the outcome areas. Funding is allocated based on how the organization is aligned among the outcome areas and where the typical funding for each part of the organization comes from. The Budget Lead Team has the ability to move funding as needed to ensure the City's highest priorities are funded. City Manager Atteberry noted next Tuesday's work session will involve a discussion regarding the transportation outcome area. Mayor Troxell thanked the citizens for their comments. Councilmember Cunniff thanked those who spoke and noted the City must be very deliberate in considering the addition of Sunday Transfort service. He requested an outline of the sorting of outcomes by fund source and asked for clarification regarding the Innosphere debt write-off discussed by Mr. Sutherland. Beckstead replied there is no $2.5 million write-off and stated he would follow up with a memo. Councilmember Overbeck thanked the citizens who spoke and noted sidewalks, affordable housing, equity and inclusion, and energy efficiency were primary themes. Councilmember Martinez requested information regarding affordable housing in the budget. Beckstead replied there is a $250,000 offer in Neighborhood Livability, among others. Councilmember Stephens asked if there is a land bank offer. Beckstead replied in the affirmative; however, it is not in the recommended budget at this time. Councilmember Martinez asked about the land bank policies. Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer, noted the core budget includes federal and city funding in the affordable housing fund which is overseen by the CDBG Commission. The land bank policy will be discussed at the October 25th work session. Mayor Troxell commended the work done by Ms. Sullivan regarding budget offers. Councilmember Overbeck suggested highlighting the City's work with Dr. Clayton Herd regarding displacement. Councilmember Stephens thanked the citizens who spoke and agreed certain items need to be reexamined. Councilmember Martinez supported examining the possibility of Sunday Transfort service. Mayor Troxell outlined the upcoming budget schedule. RESULT: HEARING WAS HELD CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS 1.1 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) September 20, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 108 ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Stephens made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunniff, to adjourn to 6:00 PM on Tuesday, September 27, 2016, for consideration of proposed metropolitan district service plans and such other business as may come before the Council. RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kristin Stephens, District 4 SECONDER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Troxell, Cunniff ABSENT: Campana, Horak The meeting adjourned at 8:05 PM. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk 1.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: September 20, 2016 (4863 : minutes-9/20) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Planning Technician SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2016, Annexing Property Known as the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 20, 2016, annexes the Cache La Poudre River enclave. This is a City-initiated request to annex 12.01 acres located along the northern boundary of the Lee Martinez Community Park/1873 Original Town Site Annex. From the intersection of North College Avenue and the Cache La Poudre River, the enclave spans approximately 3,190 feet to the northwest and 1,620 feet to the southeast. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on August 16, 2016. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on the agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 110, 2016 (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 19 Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY September 20, 2016 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Planning Technician SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2016, Annexing Property Known as the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to annex the Cache La Poudre River enclave. This is a City-initiated request to annex 12.01 acres located along the northern boundary of the Lee Martinez Community Park/1873 Original Town Site Annex. From the intersection of North College Avenue and the Cache La Poudre River, the enclave spans approximately 3,190 feet to the northwest and 1,620 feet to the southeast. The Initiating Resolution was adopted on August 16, 2016. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on the agenda. 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. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION During administrative review of the Poudre River Annexation staff determined that there was a naming conflict with a previously annexed section of the Poudre River. As a result the annexation name was changed to “Cache La Poudre River Annexation” on August 30, 2016. The Cache La Poudre River Annexation abuts the north side of Lee Martinez Community Park/1873 Original Town Site Annex. The subject property became an enclave after the annexation of the Wood Street Annexation on September 17, 2012. The City of Fort Collins owns the bulk of the annexation area. A small portion of the area is owned by the Union Pacific Railroad. Per State Statute (Section 31-12-106, Colorado Revised Statutes), municipalities may initiate an annexation proceeding for unincorporated areas that are contained entirely within the boundary of the municipality if said area has been so surrounded for three years. As of September 17, 2015, the property became eligible and meets all annexation requirements. Landowner consent is not required for annexation of an enclave. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 8, 2016 regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the annexation. Further, the Board recommended that the Enclave be placed into the POL, Public Open Lands District. The recommendations were part of the Planning and Zoning Board Consent Calendar and not discussed. ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (w/o attachments) (4861 : SR 110- Cache la Poudre Annexation) Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 2 PUBLIC OUTREACH No neighborhood meeting was held for this annexation and zoning. All required mailings and postings per Section 2.9 (Amending the Zoning Map) and 2.12 (Annexation of Land) of the Land Use Code have been followed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map (PDF) 2. Structure Plan Map (PDF) 3. Zoning Map (PDF) 2.1 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (w/o attachments) (4861 : SR 110- Cache la Poudre Annexation) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 110, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, Resolution 2016-060 stating the intent of the City to annex and initiating annexation proceedings for the Cache La Poudre River Annexation, as defined therein and described below, has heretofore been adopted by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that the area proposed to be annexed has been entirely contained within the boundaries of the City for a period of not less than three years prior to this date and complies with all requirements for enclave annexation set forth in Colorado Revised Statutes Section 31-12-106; 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 City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the following described property, to wit: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M.; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; BEING ALL THAT PORTION OF THE BED OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER AND ALL OF THE LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID BED THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY ANNEXED BY THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF THE TOWN OF FORT COLLINS, BY THE ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE, BY THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION, BY THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION, BY THE LINDEN STREET TECH CENTER ANNEXATION, OR BY THE McMURRY NATURAL AREA ANNEXATION; SAID TRACT ALSO BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12, AND CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 12 TO BEAR S00°23'32"W, SAID LINE BEING MONUMENTED ON ITS NORTH END BY A 3-1/4" ALUMINUM CAP WITH ILLEGIBLE MARKINGS, AND ON ITS SOUTH END BY A 2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 17497, BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS COORDINATE SYSTEM, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, S00°23'32"W, A DISTANCE OF 226.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13) COURSES: 1. S66°30'10"E, A DISTANCE OF 42.00 FEET; 2. S51°53'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET; 3. S67°13'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 37.00 FEET; 4. S74°51'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 176.40 FEET; 5. S79°06'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 66.50 FEET; 2.2 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Ordinance No. 110, 2016 (4861 : SR 110- Cache la Poudre Annexation) -2- 6. S74°16'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 94.11 FEET; 7. S71°59'41"E, A DISTANCE OF 360.45 FEET; 8. S42°21'29"E, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET; 9. S36°35'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 151.52 FEET; 10. S19°45'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 287.91 FEET; 11. S60°22'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 205.90 FEET; 12. S32°05'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 93.79 FEET; 13. S71°00'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 31.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THE LINDEN STREET TECH CENTER ANNEXATION; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 176 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE, A DISTANCE OF 135 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH BANK OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH BANK, BEING THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF THE TOWN OF FORT COLLINS, A DISTANCE OF 5607 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MCMURRY NATURAL AREA ANNEXATION; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 81 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE NORTH BANK OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BANK, BEING THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION, A DISTANCE OF 2993 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BANK, BEING THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION, A DISTANCE OF 622 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 12; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 70 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 12.01 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Cache La Poudre River Annexation. Section 3. 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. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 2.2 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Ordinance No. 110, 2016 (4861 : SR 110- Cache la Poudre Annexation) -3- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 2.2 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Ordinance No. 110, 2016 (4861 : SR 110- Cache la Poudre Annexation) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Planning Technician SUBJECT Public Hearing and Second Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 20, 2016, zones the property included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation into the Public Open Lands zone district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 111, 2016 (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 25 Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY September 20, 2016 City Council STAFF Kai Kleer, Planning Technician SUBJECT Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Cache La Poudre River Annexation into the Public Open Lands zone district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In compliance with the City’s Structure Plan Map, an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan (City Plan), the requested zoning is POL, Public Open Lands. Context The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses North Public Open Lands, Community Commercial Cache La Poudre River, Legacy Park, Rivers Edge Natural Area, Salyer Natural Area, Gustav Swanson Natural Area and Poudre Pet and Feed Supply South Public Open Lands, Community Commercial Cache La Poudre River, Powerhouse Energy Campus, Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Lee Martinez Park and Old Fort Collins Heritage Park East Employment District and Public Open Lands Ram Self Storage and Old Fort Collins Heritage Park West Urban Estate and Public Open Lands Pateros Creek and Salyer Natural Area Per the Structure Plan Map, the proposed zoning for the subject annexation is POL, Public Open Lands. The Land Use Code Describes this district as: ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (4862 : SR 111 Cache la Poudre Zoning) Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 2 “…large publicly owned parks and open lands which have a community-wide emphasis or other characteristics which warrant inclusion under this separate designation rather than inclusion in an adjoining neighborhood or other District designation.” Staff believes that the proposed zoning satisfies the requirements for zoning set forth in Land Use Code Section 2.9.4 because the proposed zoning: (1) is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it is consistent with the City’s Structure Plan which is an element of the Comprehensive Plan; (2) is compatible with existing and proposed land uses because the surrounding area is almost entirely zoned as Public Open Lands; and (3) would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 8, 2016 regular meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the annexation. Further, the Board recommended that the Enclave be placed into the POL, Public Open Lands District. The recommendations were part of the Planning and Zoning Board Consent Calendar and not discussed. PUBLIC OUTREACH No neighborhood meeting was held for this annexation and zoning. All required mailings and postings per Section 2.9 (Amending the Zoning Map) and 2.12 (Annexation of Land) of the Land Use Code have been followed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Zoning Map (PDF) 3.1 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, September 20, 2016 (4862 : SR 111 Cache la Poudre Zoning) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 111, 2016 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 CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER 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, the City Council finds that the proposed zoning of the Cache La Poudre River Annexation property, as described below (the “Property”) is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because the proposed zoning is consistent with the City’s Structure Plan which is an element of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 2.9.4, the City Council further finds that the proposed zoning: (1) is compatible with existing and proposed land uses because the surrounding area is almost entirely zoned as Public Open Lands; and (2) would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has considered the zoning of the Property described below, finds it to be in the best interests of the City, and has determined that the 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 City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. 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 Cache La Poudre River Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, in the Public Open Lands (“P-O-L”) Zone District, which property (the “Property”) is more particularly described as: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M.; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; BEING ALL THAT PORTION OF THE BED OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER AND ALL OF THE LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID BED THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY ANNEXED BY THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF THE TOWN OF FORT COLLINS, BY THE ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE, BY THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION, BY THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION, BY THE LINDEN STREET TECH CENTER ANNEXATION, OR BY THE McMURRY NATURAL AREA ANNEXATION; SAID TRACT ALSO BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 3.2 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Ordinance No. 111, 2016 (4862 : SR 111 Cache la Poudre Zoning) -2- COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12, AND CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 12 TO BEAR S00°23'32"W, SAID LINE BEING MONUMENTED ON ITS NORTH END BY A 3-1/4" ALUMINUM CAP WITH ILLEGIBLE MARKINGS, AND ON ITS SOUTH END BY A 2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 17497, BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS COORDINATE SYSTEM, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, S00°23'32"W, A DISTANCE OF 226.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13) COURSES: 1. S66°30'10"E, A DISTANCE OF 42.00 FEET; 2. S51°53'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET; 3. S67°13'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 37.00 FEET; 4. S74°51'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 176.40 FEET; 5. S79°06'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 66.50 FEET; 6. S74°16'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 94.11 FEET; 7. S71°59'41"E, A DISTANCE OF 360.45 FEET; 8. S42°21'29"E, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET; 9. S36°35'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 151.52 FEET; 10. S19°45'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 287.91 FEET; 11. S60°22'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 205.90 FEET; 12. S32°05'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 93.79 FEET; 13. S71°00'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 31.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THE LINDEN STREET TECH CENTER ANNEXATION; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 176 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION OF BUCKINGHAM PLACE, A DISTANCE OF 135 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH BANK OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH BANK, BEING THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF THE TOWN OF FORT COLLINS, A DISTANCE OF 5607 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MCMURRY NATURAL AREA ANNEXATION; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 81 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE NORTH BANK OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BANK, BEING THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE NORTH COLLEGE ANNEXATION, A DISTANCE OF 2993 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BANK, BEING THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE CORRECTED PLAT OF THE GRIFFIN ADDITION, A DISTANCE OF 622 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 12; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 70 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 12.01 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Section 3. 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 Property is not included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 4. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. 3.2 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Ordinance No. 111, 2016 (4862 : SR 111 Cache la Poudre Zoning) -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of September, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 3.2 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Ordinance No. 111, 2016 (4862 : SR 111 Cache la Poudre Zoning) Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Justin Scharton, Environmental Planner John Stokes, Natural Resources Director SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2016, Authorizing Execution of the Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Amended and Restated Deed of Conservation Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the execution of the amended and restated Cribari/Gheen/Schuman conservation easement. The Cribari property was a 72 +/- acre property south of Timnath in unincorporated Larimer County that was conserved by the City with a conservation easement in 2005 with Chris Cribari. Cribari subdivided the parcel, then sold the subsequent two parcels to Ken and Deborah Gheen and Michael and Taryn Schuman. After the Gheens placed their parcel on the market, ambiguities were identified in the original conservation easement deed, including lack of clarity on residential development potential and approved land uses and activities for each parcel, in addition to a shared liability for each other’s parcels. This amended and restated conservation easement has addressed and clarified all the issues presented with no net-loss to the conservation value of the parcels. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Cribari parcel, an approximately 72 acre property south of Timnath in unincorporated Larimer County, was conserved by the City of Fort Collins with a conservation easement (CE) in 2005 (Attachment 1). Chris Cribari exercised the reserved right in the original conservation deed to subdivide the property into two parcels of at least 35 acres each, resulting in one developed parcel and one undeveloped parcel, both subject to the 2005 CE (Attachment 2). In 2006 Cribari sold the northern parcel subject to the 2005 CE to Ken and Deborah Gheen and the southern parcel to Michael and Taryn Schuman. The Schuman parcel was previously developed and includes a residence, numerous outbuildings and stables. The Gheen parcel is farmed by the Gheens but remains undeveloped to present day. Issues with the existing CE deed In 2013 the Gheens placed their parcel for sale and the City was contacted by several realtors and potential buyers with questions about whether their specific development plans and land use activities would be allowed by the CE deed. It became evident to staff that there was some ambiguity in the language in the original CE deed and that the CE could better address some of the legal consequences of two separate landowners under the existing CE deed. 4 Packet Pg. 31 Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 2 Amending the CE deed The Conservation Easement Amendment Policy and Procedure (2011) provides guidance to the Natural Areas Department (NAD) on amending conservation easements. Further, the Policy outlines under what scenarios an amendment to an existing CE is appropriate. The overall philosophy of the Policy is to maintain the conservation value which was identified in the original CE (i.e., net-neutral conservation value). Amending the CE deed in this case would clarify: what type of activities could take place on the parcels; the extent and location of where the reserved residential development could take place; and the shared liability each landowner had for the other’s parcel in the current deed. Staff determined these reasons met the standards of the amendment policy and began working with the Gheens and Schumans on the amendments. Amendment Details The significant amendments to the new CE deed include clarification on location and extent of development within the parcels. The available square footage of residential development remains the same for both parcels as in the original deed, with the amended version providing more detail. Additionally, there has been clarification about the types of land use activities that can take place on the parcels, specifically agricultural uses, that were unclear in the original deed. Sections related to oil and gas royalties, commercial and industrial use, granting of utilities, and hunting were also updated to current City standards as defined by the City Attorney’s Office. Finally, language was added to provide clarification regarding the City’s interest in the parcels’ value and the structure of the document was changed slightly to reflect the current nature of two landowners instead of one. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The goal of the amendment to the Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE is to lessen enforcement efforts by the City caused by ambiguous language in the conservation deed. Over time this should result in less staff time spent enforcing the terms of the CE on these parcels and therefore a modest cost savings to the City. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 14, 2016 meeting, the Land Conservation Stewardship Board unanimously recommended this item to City Council. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Cribari-Gheen-Schuman Parcels (PDF) 3. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, September 14, 2016 (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 32 Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement Property Location Created by City of Fort Collins Natural Areas - 2016 Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE City Natural Areas Conservation Easements 0123 0.5 ²Miles ATTACHMENT 1 4.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Location Map (4844 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement Deed) Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors Cribari - Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement Parcels City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department Project Area Larimer County 0 125 250 500 Feet Building Envelopes ² Date Created: 9/6/2016 5:24:16 PM ATTACHMENT 2 GHEEN PARCEL COUNTY RD 5 SCHUMAN PARCEL COUNTY RD 42 4.2 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Cribari-Gheen-Schuman Parcels (4844 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement Deed) Excerpt: Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Meeting Minutes September 14, 2016 Action Item Gheen/Shuman Conservation Easement Amendments Justin Scharton, NAD Senior Environmental Planner presented to the Board proposed changes to the conservation easement that was originally placed on the Cribari property. The Cribari property was a 72 +/- acre property south of Timnath in unincorporated Larimer County that was conserved by the City with a conservation easement in 2005. Cribari subdivided the parcel then sold the subsequent two parcels to Ken and Deborah Gheen and Michael and Taryn Schuman. After the Gheen’s placed their parcel on the market, ambiguities were identified in the original conservation easement deed including lack of clarity on residential development potential and approved land uses and activities for each parcel, in addition to a shared liability for each other’s parcels. This amended and restated conservation easement has addressed and clarified all the issues presented with no net-loss to the conservation value of the parcels. Staff determined the needs and the standards of the amendment policy and began working with the Gheen’s and Schuman’s on the amendments. The significant amendments to the new CE deed include clarification on location and extent of development within the parcels. The available square footage of residential development remains the same for both parcels as in the original deed, with the amended version providing more detail. Additionally, there has been clarification about the types of land use activities that can take place on the parcels, specifically agricultural uses that were unclear in the original deed. Sections related to oil and gas royalties, commercial and industrial use, granting of utilities, and hunting were also updated to current City standards as defined by the City Attorney’s Office. Finally, language was added to provide clarification regarding the City’s financial interest in the parcels’ and the structure of the document was changed slightly to reflect the current nature of two landowners instead of one. Discussion: Kelly wanted to know if changes have been made to correct all the prior easement language mistakes. Justin explained that since the original easement in 2005, NAD has learned a lot and understands case law better. He also felt that new easement issues could potentially come up in the future as well and we would deal with those issues at that time. Some board members wanted to know if the amendments were subject to state review. Justin explained only those easements that have taken a tax credit were subject to state approval. The only ATTACHMENT 3 4.3 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, September 14, 2016 (4844 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement interested/affected parties right now are the two property owners and the City. Indirectly the state holds our certification over our head to insure that we do things by their standards. . . In the future Kelly would like to have a hard copy of any future easements. John reminded the board members that the responsibility of the board was to look at the prescription that we’re placing on the land and not the specific langue in the easement. Marcia Mallory-Patton made a motion requesting City Council to approve the amended and restated deed of conservation easement for the parcels known as Cribari- Gheen/Shuman conservation easement, held by the City of Fort Collins. Joe Piesman seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. 4.3 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, September 14, 2016 (4844 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman Conservation Easement -1- ORDINANCE NO. 112, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE CRIBARI-GHEEN/SCHUMAN AMENDED AND RESTATED DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT WHEREAS, in 2005 Chris Cribari (“Cribari”) granted the City a conservation easement (the “Conservation Easement”) on a parcel of property he owned south of Timnath (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Conservation Easement is managed by the City’s Natural Areas Department; and WHEREAS, in 2006, Cribari divided the Property into two parcels and sold one parcel (“Parcel I”) to Paradise Ranch, LLC, a company owned by Alex Schuman (“Schuman”), and the other parcel (“Parcel II”) to Kenneth and Deborah Gheen (“Gheens”), with both sales being subject to the Conservation Easement; and WHEREAS, in 2013, the Gheens put Parcel II up for sale, and through that process the City and the Gheens became aware that some aspects of the Conservation Easement were unclear as they related to the management issues and consequences of the Property being owned by two separate parties instead of just one owner; and WHEREAS, Natural Areas staff has been working with Schuman and the Gheens to revise the Conservation Easement to clarify the activities permitted on each parcel; the extent and location of where residential development could occur on each parcel; and to clarify that each parcel can be managed separately, rather than having either parcel owner responsible or liable to the City for actions or activities of the other parcel owner; and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Amended and Restated Deed of Conservation Easement for the Property is attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference (the “Amended Conservation Easement”); and WHEREAS, the Natural Areas Department’s Conservation Easement Amendment Policy and Procedure requires that proposed amendments to City-owned conservation easements receive formal review and a recommendation by the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board and approval by the City Council by ordinance after a public hearing; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on September 14, 2016, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve the Amended Conservation Easement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Packet Pg. 37 -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Amended Conservation Easement in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, along with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal description of the parcels conserved by the Amended Conservation Easement, as long as such changes do not materially reduce the size or change the character of the property. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 38 DRAFT October 4, 2016 1 AMENDED AND RESTATED DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT “Cribari Property” THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT (“Amended Conservation Easement” or “Deed”)) is made this _____ day of _____________, 2016, by PARADISE RANCH, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company (“Paradise”) as to Parcel I, and KENNETH M. GHEEN AND DEBORAH F. GHEEN (“Gheen”) as to Parcel II (collectively, “Owners”), in favor of the CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation (“City”). R E C I T A L S : WHEREAS, Paradise is the sole owner in fee simple of certain real property in Larimer County more particularly described as Parcel I in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and Gheen is the sole owner in fee simple of certain real property in Larimer County, more particularly described in Exhibit “A” as Parcel II. Parcel I and Parcel II are hereafter referred to collectively as “Parcels” or the “Property”; and WHEREAS, the Property possesses scenic, open space, agricultural and natural values (collectively, "Conservation Values") of great importance to the City and to the people of Fort Collins and the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS,; the total acreage protected by this Conservation Easement is 76 acres; and WHEREAS, by a deed of Conservation Easement dated March 16, 2005 and recorded in the records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder on March 21, 2005 at Reception No. 2005-0021923, CHRIS CRIBARI, the Owners’ predecessor in title to the Property, (“Cribari”) conveyed to the City the right to preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the Property in perpetuity in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. §38-30.5-101, et seq. (the "Easement"); and WHEREAS, the Property was subsequently divided into Parcel I and Parcel II via the Jack Hahn M.R.D. S-6-87 plat recorded July 21, 2006; and WHEREAS, Paradise took ownership of Parcel I by Quit Claim Deed dated June 11, 2013 and Gheen took ownership of Parcel II by Warranty Deed dated April 19, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Owners intend that the Conservation Values of the Property be preserved and maintained in perpetuity by continuing the land use patterns of agriculture and existing or lower density residential use on the Property; and EXHIBIT A 1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 2 WHEREAS, the Owners and the City intend by this Deed to serve the governmental, conservation and agricultural policies set forth in 7 U.S.C. §4201 et seq., C.R.S. §35-1-101, et seq., C.R.S. §38-30.5.101, et seq., and C.R.S. 33-1-101, et seq.; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to amend the Easement in order to clarify and refine certain terms within the Easement including but not limited to: the location of and allowable types of structures within the second building envelope, updating the Exhibits, the process of termination and extinguishment, the terms of subdivision, the oil and gas provisions and facilitate management of the Easement on each of the Parcels by treating the Parcels separately for purposes of the Easement; and WHEREAS, Section 22.J. of the Easement permits the parties to amend the Easement as long as the amendment does not affect the qualifications of the Easement under any applicable laws, is consistent with the conservation purposes in the Easement, and does not affect its perpetual duration. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, and pursuant to the laws of the State of Colorado, and in particular C.R.S. §38-30.5-101, et seq., the parties hereby agree that the terms of the Easement are hereby amended and restated to read as follows: 1. Purposes. A. The purposes of this Easement are to ensure that the Property will be retained predominately in its scenic, open space, and agricultural use and to prevent any use of the Property that will significantly impair or interfere with the Conservation Values of the Property. The Owners intend that this Deed will confine the use of the Property to activities that are not inconsistent with these purposes of this Easement. This Easement is intended to preserve the Property so as to maintain the Conservation Values of the Property. The Property shall not be used for activities that significantly diminish the Conservation Values or which significantly impair the ability of the Property to be used for cropland, animal grazing, or restoration to native vegetation. B. The specific Conservation Values of the Property, as generally described above, are documented in an inventory of relevant features of the Property to be kept on file in the offices of the City and incorporated by this reference (“Baseline Documentation”), which consists of a report, maps, photographs, and other documentation that Cribari and the City agreed provided, collectively, an accurate representation of the condition of the Property at the time of the original grant of the Easement and which is intended to serve as an objective, thorough nonexclusive, information baseline for monitoring compliance with terms of this Easement. 1 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 3 2. Rights of the City. To accomplish the purposes of the Easement, the following rights are conveyed to the City by this Deed: A. To preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the Property; B. To enter upon the Property at reasonable times in order to monitor the Owners’ compliance with and otherwise enforce the terms of this Deed. Such entry shall be upon prior reasonable notice to the Owners except when the City has a reasonable basis to believe that a use of or activity on the Property constitutes a violation of any of the terms of this Easement Agreement, in which case the City may gain immediate access to the Property without notice to document or prevent such violation. The City shall not interfere with the Owners’ use and quiet enjoyment of the Property except as reasonably necessary to enforce this Easement Agreement and exercise the City’s rights hereunder; and C. To prevent any activity on or use of the Property that is significantly inconsistent with the purposes of the Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features of the Property that may be damaged by inconsistent activity or use pursuant to paragraph 4 below; and D. To require the restoration of such areas or features of the Property that may be damaged by any inconsistent use or activity; and E. To consult with the Owners regarding the negotiations of any and all agreements between either or both of the Owners and third parties that may impact or disturb any portion of the surface of the Property including, but not limited to, easement agreements, utility easements, rights-of-way agreements, surface use agreements, and lease agreements, but not including agreements for services specifically related to the agricultural and recreational operations of the Property. The Owners shall be responsible for ensuring that any lessees comply with all terms of this Easement while on the Property. Owners agree that the City shall have the right to approve any such agreement described in the preceding sentence prior to such agreement being executed. Nothing herein is intended to require the City to approve any action or agreement that is inconsistent with the terms of this Easement Agreement. 3. Land Management. Each Parcel of the Property shall be operated and managed in accordance with a Land Management Plan for such Parcel prepared and accepted with the mutual consent of the Owner of such Parcel and the City, which plan shall be updated as necessary to reflect improved knowledge of conservation of land and the Conservation Values and substantial 1 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 4 new or changed conditions. Each Owner shall provide to the City each year a Land Management update describing the status of operations and management of such Owner’s Parcel in relation to the approved plan, and advising the City of any changes in the management of such Parcel or issues that the Owner has identified or anticipates may reasonably arise with regard to such Parcel and the preservation of the Conservation Values. If nothing has changed since an Owner’s prior report, in lieu of providing the update, such Owner may notify the City that nothing has changed with regard to the management of such Owner’s Parcel and that no new issues have arisen or are anticipated to arise with regard to such Parcel and preservation of the Conservation Values. 4. Use and Management of the Property. Any activity on or use of the Property significantly inconsistent with any of the purposes of the Easement is prohibited. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities and uses are expressly prohibited: A. Construction of Buildings and Other Structures – Parcel I. i. Single-Family Residential Dwellings. There is one existing primary single-family residential dwelling with an attached garage on Parcel I, located within a six (6)-acre building envelope in the northwest corner of Parcel I and described on Exhibit “B”, attached to and incorporated herein (the "Parcel I Building Area"). There is one existing secondary residential dwelling on the Parcel. No additional residential dwellings are permitted. Infrastructure normally associated with a single- family residence may also be constructed within the Parcel I Building Area, including but not limited to the following: driveway, sewage disposal system, water supply, electric and phone transmission, propane, and other similar residential services. Wherever practical, existing roadways shall be used, and new roadways shall be limited to the minimum reasonably necessary to serve the Parcel I Building Area, and shall be located so as to preserve scenic views, protect natural resources, minimize negative impact on agricultural operations, and prevent erosion. ii. Repair and Replacement of Single Family Residential Dwelling. The existing residential buildings described in Paragraph 4.A.i. may be repaired and replaced at their permitted location without further permission from the City. Owner shall have the right to expand the existing primary and secondary residential dwellings on the Parcel to a total square footage of no more than 3,720 square feet combined. The total square footage limit of the residences does not include any basement area or attached garages. .Permitted single-family residential dwellings may also be relocated anywhere within the boundaries of the Parcel I Building Area without further permission of the City. Prior to any such relocation of 1 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 5 a single-family residential dwelling, the Owner shall notify City of such relocation and provide the City with written plans describing the relocation so that the City can update its records with at least thirty (30) day advance notice prior to planned construction. iii. Agricultural Structures and Improvements. a. Major Agricultural Buildings. All existing major agricultural buildings and structures (the “Agricultural Improvements”) are located within the Parcel I Building Area. There are six agricultural buildings, including: a stable/horse barn, horse arena/large barn, hay shed, and three garage/shops/outbuildings. Construction, maintenance, and replacement of the Agricultural Improvements are permitted according to the Land Management Plan, or upon prior written approval of the City. The Agricultural Improvements are only permitted within the Parcel I Building Area. The Owner will notify the City prior to any construction within the Parcel I Building Area. Examples of Major Agricultural Buildings include barns, greenhouses, arenas, shops, large sheds, grain and feed storage facilities, etc. b. Minor Agricultural Buildings. Construction of minor agricultural structures solely designed for management or protection of livestock or reasonably advantageous for agricultural operations on Parcel I (such as small loafing sheds, water lines, water tanks, pumps and/or well houses and other minor agricultural structures and improvements) is permitted, provided that any such agricultural structure requiring a building permit or exceeding 1,000 square feet in total floor area and not expressly provided for in the Land Management Plan shall require prior written approval by the City, in its reasonable discretion. B. Construction of Buildings and Other Structures – Parcel II. i. Single-Family Residential Dwellings. There is no existing single- family residential dwelling on Parcel II. Not more than one (1) new primary and one (1) secondary single-family residential dwellings may be built on Parcel II within a four (4)-acre building envelope in the northern half of Parcel II and described on Exhibit “C”, attached to and incorporated herein (the "Parcel II Building Area"). Until any structure is constructed within the Parcel II Building Area, its location may be moved, with approval by the Grantee, but must be located primarily on the northern 1 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 6 half of the parcel. One primary residence and one secondary residence can be built within the Parcel II Building Area with the total square footage of the footprint for the residences not exceeding 6,000 square feet. The total square footage limit of the residences does not include any basement area or attached garage. The two residential dwellings may be one-story or two- story structures. No additional residential dwellings are permitted. Infrastructure normally associated with a single-family residence may also be constructed within the Parcel II Building Area, including but not limited to the following: Driveway, sewage disposal system, water supply, electric and phone transmission, propane, and other similar residential services. Wherever practical, existing roadways shall be used, and new roadways shall be limited to the minimum reasonably necessary to serve the Parcel II Building Area, and shall be located so as to preserve scenic views, protect natural resources, minimize negative impact on agricultural operations, and prevent erosion, and shall not be paved except as allowed in Paragraph E below. ii. Agricultural Structures and Improvements. a. Major Agricultural Buildings. There are no existing major agricultural buildings and structures (the “Agricultural Improvements”) located on Parcel II. Examples of Major Agricultural Buildings include barns, greenhouses, shops, large sheds, grain and feed storage facilities, detached garage, etc. Construction, maintenance, and replacement of Agricultural Improvements are permitted according to the Land Management Plan, or upon prior written approval of the City. The Agricultural Improvements are only permitted within the Parcel II Building Area. The Owner will notify the City prior to any construction within the Parcel II Building Area. b. Minor Agricultural Buildings. Construction of minor agricultural structures solely designed for management or protection of livestock or reasonably advantageous for agricultural operations on Parcel II (such as small loafing sheds, water lines, water tanks, pumps and/or well houses and other minor agricultural structures and improvements) is permitted, provided that any such agricultural structure requiring a building permit or exceeding 1,000 square feet in total floor area and not expressly provided for in the Land Management Plan shall require prior written approval by the City, in its reasonable discretion. 1 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 7 c. Water feature. Development of a water source for cattle and other livestock, such as a small pond, is permitted outside the Building Areas. C. Grazing. Livestock grazing shall be conducted in accordance with sound stewardship and management practices. Grazing shall be managed so that the overall condition of the Property is preserved at its baseline condition or better and in accordance with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Field Office Technical Guide. For the purposes of this Easement, “livestock” shall mean cattle, horses, sheep, goats, llamas, alpaca, poultry and bison. The raising of other livestock and/or game animals shall not be permitted unless specifically approved by the City and described in the Land Management Plan. Domestic pets such as dogs and cats are allowed on the Property. The City reserves the right to limit the stocking rate and/or grazing rotation on the Property, including removing grazing livestock from the pastures, if the range condition is below a “fair” rating, until such time as the range condition is returned to an acceptable condition. As necessary, grazing rotation, monitoring methods and requirements, and stocking rates will be detailed in the Land Management Plan. In times of drought or other natural disasters, City and the Owners will work together to manage the range to the best of their ability, even if the condition would be rated below “fair”. D. Fences. The Owners may repair or replace existing fences, and new fences may be built for purposes of reasonable and customary management of cropland, livestock, and wildlife. Gates wide enough for emergency access may be installed where necessary for cropland, pastureland, and wildlife habitat maintenance vehicles. Construction of wildlife friendly fencing is preferable whenever possible. E. Paving and Road Construction. No portion of the Parcels shall be paved or otherwise covered with concrete, asphalt, or any other permanent paving material, except; within the defined building envelopes and to provide one access drive from the nearest County Road to each building envelope; and for such public improvements as may be placed on the Property in accordance with Paragraph 4.O. Unimproved access entrances off County Road 5 for farm and emergency vehicles may remain in the location and general form and condition as in the past; new internal dirt roads for cropland management may be created or converted to cropland as necessary, provided that such internal roads are only for the use of the Owners, residents and their guests. Said internal roads shall be minimized in combination with any roads or access entrances otherwise constructed on the Parcels, whether by the Owners or as public roads. 1 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 8 F. Subdivision. Any further division or subdivision of title to the Parcels is prohibited, other than conveyances to public entities for public roads or other public improvements consistent with this Conservation Easement. Nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to prohibit joint ownership of the Parcels or ownership of the Parcel(s) by an entity consisting of more than one member. G. Timber Harvesting. Trees may be cut to control insects and disease, to control invasive non-native species, and as necessary to prevent personal injury and property damage. Commercial timber harvesting, except with regard to a tree farm or tree nursery operation, on the Property shall be prohibited. Any tree farm or tree nursery operation shall be permitted but shall not exceed five (5) acres in land usage per Parcel without the prior approval of City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. H. Mining. The mining or extraction of soil, sand, gravel, rock, or any other mineral substance (including moss rock and flagstone) using any surface mining method is prohibited, except for limited mining to the extent that the materials mined for are used for agricultural operations on the Property, and except for oil and gas exploration and extraction as permitted in paragraph I below. Where extraction is permitted, the method of extraction must have a limited, localized impact on the Property that will not substantially impair or impact the Conservation Values of the Property, whether on a temporary or permanent basis. No extraction permitted pursuant to this paragraph shall occur without prior written notice to and approval of the City, which notice shall include a description of the type of extraction, the areas within which such extraction shall occur, and the anticipated impact thereof. Any agreement of the Owners with a third party related to mining on the Property subsequent to the date of recording of this Easement Agreement shall be expressly subject to the restrictions of this Easement Agreement and shall contain terms consistent with the provisions of this Easement Agreement, and any such agreement shall be provided to the City in advance for the City’s review and approval. This paragraph shall in any event be interpreted so as to be no less restrictive than required by Section 170(h) of the United States Internal Revenue Code and the Treasury Regulations adopted pursuant thereto. I. Oil and Gas. Oil and gas exploration and extraction is allowed if the method of extraction is from another parcel, or is limited to the amount of disturbance associated with such well, including access roads, does not exceed one (1) acre of permanent disturbance and three (3) acres of temporary disturbance, and thus has minimal impact on the Property. The Owners must consult with the City on negotiation of any surface use agreement between the Owners and any owner or lessee of mineral rights. For any oil and gas leases in effect as of the date of this Easement, the Owners shall notify the City when 1 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 9 beginning negotiations of surface use agreements or any other agreements with the lessee regarding any new oil and gas operations on the Parcels, primarily so that the City may help ensure that none of the Parcel’s Conservation Values are substantially diminished, materially impaired, or adversely impacted by the operations, but also so that the City may share in surface impact payments to be made by the lessee for its operations on the Parcel, since any operations by the lessee will impair the Parcel’s Conservation Values that are protected by this Easement, regardless of whether any such payments are due and payable by the lessee pursuant to an agreement or pursuant to an award of damages resulting from the lessee’s use of the Parcel. (Note: The City does not receive a share of any royalty payments from the production of oil or gas on the Property, only those payments made as a result of damages to the surface or for any permanent/semi- permanent impacts to the surface such as new roads or wellpads. The portion of these applicable payments due to the City shall be proportionate to the City’s real property interest in the property, detailed in Paragraph 17.) Any drilling plan and restoration plan must be acceptable to the City. Any future oil and gas leases by the Owners or severed ownership interests must be subordinated to and made subject to the requirements of this Easement. J. Trash. The dumping or uncontained accumulation of any kind of trash or refuse on the Property is prohibited. This subparagraph shall not be construed to preclude the storage or disposal of agricultural products and byproducts on the Property, provided such storage or disposal is performed in accordance with all applicable governmental laws and regulations. K. Commercial or Industrial Activity. No industrial or commercial uses shall be allowed on the Property, except for agricultural related activities that don’t negatively impact the Conservation Values, all in accordance with all local and federal regulations. Residences on the Property may be used for single-family residential use only. Nothing in this Deed shall be construed to prohibit the Owners from engaging in agricultural related activities or leasing a portion of the Property for crop production, training and boarding of horses, or for the grazing of animals owned by others. The Owners or residents of the Property may carry out in-home business activities on the Property provided that such activities are contained within the existing buildings on the Property and provided that any home business is in compliance with applicable governmental regulations. L. Hunting. Commercial hunting, shooting and trapping are prohibited. Owners and their invited guests are permitted to engage in non-commercial hunting, shooting or trapping that is in compliance with Federal, state and local law, or hunting or trapping as required and conducted by Colorado Parks and Wildlife for nuisance, dangerous, or diseased animals. Owners retain the right to 1 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 10 maintain and use on the Property a non-commercial shooting range or target practice area in compliance with Federal, state and local law. M. Pest and Weed Control; Signage. Requirements for the control and eradication of weeds, prairie dogs, and other pests, and for the placement of signage on the Parcels, shall be in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations of Larimer County, except as expressly set forth herein. Only billboards or advertisements identifying the agricultural operation and consistent with the character of other signage in the area are allowed on the property. A sign identifying the site as a Conservation Easement is required and will be supplied by the City. Noxious weeds will be controlled on the property through various techniques, which may include herbicides, mowing, or introduction of biological control measures (e.g., thistle-eating insects) subject to the requirements of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and Larimer County Noxious Weed regulations. The use of chemicals for weed and pest control shall be addressed in the Land Management Plans for the Property, and Owners agree to cooperate with the City in order to investigate and consider the use of possible mutually beneficial alternatives for control of weeds and pests on the Property, taking into account the environmental impacts as well as effectiveness of such alternatives. In any event, the application of any fungicide, insecticide, herbicide, rodenticide, or other chemicals shall be conducted strictly in accordance with any applicable local, state, or federal laws. N. Granting of Easements for Utilities and Roads. There are existing easements on the Property as of the date of execution, and except as provided in subparagraph O below, granting of easements on the Parcels for utilities or roads is prohibited if the utility or road will materially impact, impair or interfere in an adverse manner with, the Conservation Values of the Parcel(s), including the use of the Parcels for agriculture. Pursuant to paragraph 18 below, the City must be notified in writing not less than thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed conveyance of any easement on the Parcel. All such conveyances are subject to the City's approval, which will not be unreasonably withheld. O. Public Roads and Other Public Improvements. The installation or construction of public road or street improvements, storm drainage culverts, swales or other drainageways, or underground public utility improvements are not prohibited by this Easement, provided that any such improvements are designed and constructed in accordance with the adopted plans and policies for such improvements of a governmental entity with the related jurisdiction and authority over the Parcel and further provided that City is provided notice of such installation or construction in accordance with the notice procedures set out in Paragraph 6. 1 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 11 P. Seeding and Planting. The parties acknowledge and agree that seeding and planting on the Property with other than native grasses or other native plants, shall be prohibited with the exception of crop plantings, wildlife plantings (non- native tree and shrub species must be approved by the City). The Owners shall be required to maintain the cropland and range condition of their respective Parcels in a manner consistent with the Land Management Plan for such parcel and otherwise consistent with generally accepted management practices for conservation and sustenance of agricultural or grazing land. 5. Reserved Rights. The Owners reserve unto themselves and to their beneficiaries, trustees, successors and assigns, all rights accruing from their ownership of the Property, including the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in all uses of the Property that are permitted hereunder and are not inconsistent with any of the purposes of the Easement or with the conditions, restrictions or other terms of this Easement. Owners shall be and hereby are permitted to engage in agricultural related activities that don’t negatively impact the Conservation Values of the Property. 6. Notice of Intention to Undertake Certain Permitted Actions. The purpose of requiring the Owners to notify the City prior to undertaking certain permitted activities is to afford the City an opportunity to ensure that the activities in question are designed and carried out in a manner consistent with all the terms and purposes of the Easement and the Conservation Values of the Property. Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever notice is required, an Owner shall notify the City in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date such Owner intends to undertake the activity in question. The notice shall describe the nature, scope, design, location, timetable, and any other material aspect of the proposed activity in sufficient detail to permit City to make an informed judgment as to its consistency with the purposes of the Easement. 7. City's Approval. Where the City's approval is required hereunder, the City shall grant or withhold its approval in writing within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of an Owner’s written notice therefor. The City's approval may be withheld upon a reasonable determination by the City that the action as proposed would be inconsistent with any term or purpose of the Easement. 8. Enforcement. The City shall have the right to prevent and correct or require correction of violations of the terms of this Deed and the purposes of the Easement. The Owner of one (1) Parcel will not be held liable for violations located entirely on the other Parcel, so long as such violations were not caused by the non-occupying Owner. The City may enter either or both Parcels for the purpose of inspecting for violations. If the City finds what it believes is a violation, the City shall notify, in writing, the Owner of each Parcel upon which the violation is located of the nature of the alleged violation. Upon receipt of this written notice, the Owner shall either: (a) restore the Parcel to its condition prior to the violation; or (b) provide a written explanation to the City of the reason why the alleged violation should be permitted. In the event 1 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 12 that the parties are in dispute as to the actions required of an Owner hereunder, the Owner and City will meet as soon as possible to resolve the difference. If either the City or the Owner(s) determines that mediation would be advantageous in connection with such meeting, or if a resolution of this difference cannot be achieved at the meeting, both parties agree to make a reasonable effort to work through and with a mutually acceptable mediator to attempt to resolve the dispute. Notwithstanding the foregoing, when, in the City's opinion, an ongoing or imminent violation could irreversibly diminish or impair the Conservation Values of the Property or will not otherwise be resolved in a sufficiently prompt and effective manner, the City may, at its discretion, take such legal action and seek such legal or equitable remedies as it determines to be appropriate or necessary. Such remedies may include, without limitation, an injunction to stop an alleged violation, temporarily or permanently, or an order requiring the Owner to restore its Parcel to its condition prior to the alleged violation. Such Owner shall discontinue any activity which could increase or expand the alleged violation during any mediation process or any legal proceeding pertaining to the alleged violation. 9. Costs of Enforcement. Any costs incurred by the City in enforcing a breach of the terms of this Deed against an Owner, including, without limitation, costs of suit and reasonable attorneys' fees, and any costs of restoration necessitated by such Owner’s violation of the terms of this Deed, shall be borne by such Owner. If the Owner prevails in any action to enforce an alleged breach of the terms of this Deed, the Owner’s costs of suit, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the City. 10. City's Discretion. Enforcement of the terms of this Deed shall be at the discretion of the City, and any forbearance by the City to exercise its rights under this Deed in the event of any breach of any term of this Deed by either Owner shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver by the City of such term or of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term of this Deed of any of the City's rights under this Deed. No delay or omission by the City in the exercise of any right or remedy upon any breach by either Owner shall impair such right or remedy or be construed as a waiver with respect to either Owner. 11. Waiver of Certain Defenses. Each of the Owners hereby waives any defense of laches or prescription. 12. Acts Beyond Owners’ Control. Nothing contained in this Deed shall be construed to entitle the City to bring any action against the Owners for any injury to or change in the Property resulting from causes beyond the Owners’ control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, drought, storm, landslides and seismic activity, or from any prudent action taken by the Owners under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to the Parcel resulting from such causes. 13. Access. No right of access by the general public to any portion of the Property is conveyed by this Deed. 1 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 13 14. Costs and Liabilities. The Owners retain all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to the ownership, operation, upkeep, repair, and maintenance of their respective Parcels, including the maintenance of adequate comprehensive general liability insurance coverage. The Owners shall keep their respective Parcels free of any liens arising out of any work performed for, materials furnished to, or obligations incurred by the Owners (not including mortgages made subject and subordinate to this Deed.) 15. Taxes. Each Owner shall pay before delinquency all taxes, assessments, fees, and charges of whatever description levied on or assessed against their respective Parcels by competent authority. 16. Liability. A. General Indemnification. Each Owner shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the City and its members, directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors and the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of each of them (collectively “Indemnified Parties”) from and against all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, legal costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from or in any way connected with: (1) injury to or the death of any person, or physical damage to any property, resulting from any act, omission, condition, or other matter related to or occurring on or about such Owner’s Parcel, regardless of cause when the indemnified party performs a duty under this Easement Agreement, unless and only to the extent the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties was a proximate cause; (2) the obligations specified in paragraph 14, Costs and Liabilities, and paragraph 8, Enforcement, herein; and (3) the presence or release of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or about such Owner’s Parcel, unless caused or released by the Indemnified Parties. For the purpose of this paragraph, hazardous or toxic substances shall mean any hazardous or toxic substance that is regulated under any federal, state or local law. Without limiting the foregoing, nothing in this Deed shall be construed as giving rise to any right or ability in the City, nor shall the City have any right or ability to exercise physical or managerial control over the day-to-day operations of the Property, or otherwise to become an operator with respect to the Property within the meaning of The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended. B. No Waiver of Governmental Immunity. Anything else in this Easement Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, no term or condition of this Easement Agreement shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, either express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights, benefits or protection provided to the City under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. §24-10-101, et seq., as amended or as may be amended in the future (including, without limitation, any 1 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 14 amendments to such statute, or under any similar statute which is subsequently enacted) (“CGIA”), subject to any applicable provisions of the Colorado Constitution and applicable laws. The City acknowledges that liability for claims for injury to persons or property arising out of the negligence of the City, its members, officials, agents and employees may be controlled and/or limited by the provisions of the CGIA. The parties agree that no provision of this Easement Agreement shall be construed in such a manner as to reduce the extent to which the CGIA limits the liability of any governmental party, its members, officers, agents and employees. C. Environmental Warranty and Indemnification. Each Owner warrants that it is in compliance with, and shall at all times remain in compliance with, all applicable Environmental Laws. Each Owner hereby promises to hold harmless and indemnify the City against all litigation, claims, demands, penalties and damages, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, arising from or connected with the release or threatened release of any Hazardous Materials on, at, beneath or from their respective Parcel, or arising from or connected with a violation of any Environmental Laws by such Owner or any party authorized or permitted on their respective Parcel by or through such Owner. “Environmental Law” or “Environmental Laws” means any and all Federal, state, local or municipal laws, rules, orders, regulations, statutes, ordinances, codes, guidelines, policies or requirements of any governmental authority regulating or imposing standards of liability or standards of conduct (including common law) concerning air, water, solid waste, hazardous materials, worker and community right-to-know, hazard communication, noise, radioactive material, resource protection, subdivision, inland wetlands and watercourses, health protection and similar environmental health, safety, building and land use as may now or at any time hereafter be in effect. “Hazardous Materials” means any petroleum, petroleum products, fuel oil, waste oils, explosives, reactive materials, ignitable materials, corrosive materials, hazardous chemicals, hazardous wastes, hazardous substances, extremely hazardous substances, toxic substances, toxic chemicals, radioactive materials, infectious materials and any other element, compound, mixture, solution or substance which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health or the environment. 17. Real Property Interest. This Easement constitutes a real property interest vested in the Grantee. The parties stipulate that this Easement has a fair market value equal to Seventy One percent (71%) of the full fair market value of the Property (not including building improvements), as unencumbered by the Easement, as of the Effective Date. (Note: The fair 1 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 15 market value of the Easement was established by an independent third party appraisal at the time the original conservation easement was granted and did not include valuation of any existing structures on the property.) For the purposes of this Easement Agreement, the ratio of the value of the Easement to the value of the Property as unencumbered by the Easement shall remain constant. 18. Subsequent Transfer, Condemnation and Extinguishment. A. Subsequent Transfer. An Owner shall notify the City in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed conveyance of any interest in all or any portion of their Parcel, including any conveyance under threat of condemnation, and shall incorporate the terms and conditions of this Easement Agreement in any deed or other legal instrument by which an Owner divests itself of any interest in all or a portion of their Parcel, except conveyance of a leasehold interest that is no longer than one year in duration or an agricultural lease and is otherwise consistent in all respects with the terms of this Easement Agreement. The failure of an Owner to perform any act required by this paragraph shall not impair the validity of the Easement or limit its enforceability in any way. B. Condemnation. If condemnation of a part of the Property or of the entire Property by public authority will render it impossible to fulfill any of the purposes of this Easement, the Easement may be terminated through condemnation proceedings, or by action of the City if the condemnation proceeding is resolved through a conveyance or stipulated settlement that includes the City. Owners and the City shall act jointly to recover the full fair market value of the affected portion of the Property and all damages resulting from the condemnation. All expenses reasonably incurred by the Owners and the City in connection with the condemnation shall be paid out of the total amount recovered prior to the allocation of such damages award between the Owners and the City, as described in paragraph 18.D. C. Extinguishment. If circumstances arise in the future that render the purpose of the Easement impossible or undesirable to accomplish on all or a portion of the Property, the Easement can be terminated or extinguished, whether in whole or in part, by judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by action of the City. A party that learns of any such circumstances shall promptly notify the other party. D. Compensation to the City. The City shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with applicable law, after the satisfaction of prior claims, from the proceeds of any sale, exchange, condemnation, extinguishment, termination, or other involuntary or voluntary conversion of all or any portion of the Property that 1 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 16 is not made subject to and in accordance with the terms of this Easement or that reduces the scope or value of the Easement. The City’s compensation shall be an amount equal to the Easement value percentage listed in paragraph 17 above, multiplied by the full amount of the proceeds from any sale, exchange, condemnation, or other involuntary or voluntary conversion of all or a portion of the Property (not including the value of any building improvements) or, in the case of extinguishment or termination, the full fair market value of the Easement calculated as described below. E. Calculation of Fair Market Value. Should the parties agree to terminate the Easement as to all or a portion of the Property, and if the parties cannot agree on the fair market value (FMV) at the time of termination, then the parties shall make a good faith effort to select an appraiser that is acceptable to all parties to determine the FMV. If the parties cannot agree on one appraiser, then the FMV shall be calculated as follows: each Owner and the City shall obtain an independent written appraisal, at their own cost and expense, from the appraisers of their choice, subject to the requirements of the next sentence. Each person designated to participate in the appraisal of the Easement shall (a) be a professional appraiser with at least five (5) years’ experience and prior experience appraising conservation easements; (b) be a member of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers; and (c) have no other material, financial or other business interest in common with a party to this Easement. If the parties still cannot agree on a purchase price within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the last of the written appraisals, the parties shall cause their respective appraisers to select another appraiser within ten (10) days thereafter. This additional appraiser shall provide a written appraisal within thirty (30) days of appointment (“Final Appraisal”), the cost of which shall be split by the parties. The fair market value of the Easement will be deemed to be the average of the Final Appraisal with the previous appraisal that is closest to the Final Appraisal, and the appraisal(s) being the furthest away from the Final Appraisal will be disregarded. The determination as to purchase price (as determined by averaging the two appraisals as provided above) shall be final and binding on the parties, absent fraud or gross error. 19. Assignment. The Easement is transferable, but the City may assign its rights and obligations under this Deed only to an organization that is: (a) a qualified organization at the time of transfer under Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (or any successor provision then applicable), and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder; (b) authorized to acquire and hold conservation easements in gross under Colorado law; or (c) a governmental entity. In the event that the City seeks to assign this Easement, City agrees that it will make reasonable efforts to identify two or three potential conservation organizations that meet the requirements of this Paragraph and have a strong basis in Larimer County to receive assignment of the conservation easement, to be presented to the Owners or their successors-in- 1 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 17 interest, from which the Owners will select the organization to which City may assign this Easement. If the Owners cannot agree, the City will select such organization. 20. Recordation/Subsequent Transfers. The City shall record this instrument in timely fashion in the official records of each county in which the Property is situated, and may re-record it at any time as maybe required to preserve its rights in this Deed. 21. Notices. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval, or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other under this Deed shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows and shall be deemed given when personally served or on the third business day after being so mailed: If to the Owner of Parcel 1: Alex Schuman 2950 S. CR 5 Fort Collins, CO 80525 If to the Owner of Parcel II: Kenneth and Deborah Gheen P.O. Box 270685 Fort Collins, CO 80527 If to the City: Director, Natural Areas Department 1745 Hoffman Mill Road P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 or to such other address as either party from time to time shall designate by written notice to the other. 22. General Provisions. A. Controlling Law. The interpretation and performance of the Easement and this Deed shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. B. Liberal construction. Any general rule of construction to the contrary notwithstanding, the Easement and this Deed shall be liberally construed in favor of the grant to effect the purpose of the Easement and the policy and purpose of C.R.S. §38-30.5-101, et seq. If any provision in this Deed is found to be ambiguous, an interpretation consistent with the purposes of the Easement that 1 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 18 would render the provision valid shall be favored over any interpretation that would render it invalid. C. Severability. If any provision of this Deed or application thereof to any person or circumstance, is found to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Deed, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, as the case may be, shall not be affected thereby. D. Entire Agreement. This Deed sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings, or agreements relating to the Easement, all of which are merged herein. E. No Forfeiture. Nothing contained herein shall result in a forfeiture or reversion of an Owner’s fee title to its Parcel. F. Joint Obligation. In the event that there is more than one owner of a Parcel at any time, the obligations imposed by this Deed upon the Owners shall be joint and several upon each of the owners of such Parcel. The owners of one Parcel are not liable for the obligations of the owners of the other Parcel. G. Successors: Third Party Beneficiaries. The covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions of this Deed shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective personal representatives, heirs, beneficiaries, trustees, successors, and assigns and shall continue as a servitude running in perpetuity with the Property. It is expressly understood and agreed that the enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Deed and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the parties. Nothing contained in this Deed shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other third person, or by the Owner of one Parcel against the Owner of the other Parcel. It is the express intention of the Parties that any person or entity, other than the parties, receiving services or benefits under this Deed shall be deemed an incidental beneficiary only, and that the Owner of one Parcel is not a beneficiary of the rights or responsibilities of the Owner of the other Parcel under this Deed. H. Termination of Rights and Obligations. A party's rights and obligations under this Deed terminate upon transfer of the party's interest in the Easement or the Property, except that liability for acts or omissions occurring prior to transfer shall survive transfer. 1 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 19 I. Captions. The captions in this instrument have been inserted solely for convenience of reference and are not a part of this instrument and shall have no effect upon construction or interpretation. J. Amendment. If the circumstances arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Deed with respect to either Parcel would be appropriate, the Owner of such Parcel and the City are free to jointly amend this Deed with respect to such Parcel without the consent of the Owner of the other Parcel; however, any amendment or modification affecting the entire Property must be approved in writing by all parties. No amendment shall be allowed that will affect the qualifications of this Deed under any applicable laws. Any amendment must be consistent with the conservation purposes of this Deed and may not affect its perpetual duration. Any amendment must be in writing, signed by the duly authorized officials of each affected party, and recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County in which the Property is located. K. Obligations Subject to Annual Appropriation. Any obligations of the Grantee under this Easement Agreement for fiscal years after the year of this Easement Agreement are subject to annual appropriation by the Fort Collins City Council, in its sole discretion, of funds sufficient and intended for such purposes. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto the City and its successors and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owners and the City have executed this Amended Deed of Conservation Easement on the day and year first above written. 1 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 20 OWNER PARCEL I: PARADISE RANCH, LLC a Colorado Limited Liability Company Date: By: Alex Schuman, Member STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ____________, 2016, by Alex Schuman, as Member of Paradise Ranch, LLC. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: ______________ ____ Notary Public 1 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 21 OWNER PARCEL II: Date: Kenneth M. Gheen Date:____________________ _________________________________ Deborah F. Gheen STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of _________, 2016, by Kenneth M. Gheen and Deborah F. Gheen. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: __________________________ Notary Public 1 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 22 CITY: THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO a Municipal Corporation Date: By: Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF LARIMER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ___________, 2016, by Darin A. Atteberry as City Manager of the City of Fort Collins. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: Notary Public 1 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 23 EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description of the Property Parcel I: Parcel II: 1 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) DRAFT October 4, 2016 24 1 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Exhibit A (4855 : Cribari-Gheen/Schuman CE Amendment ORD) Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION STAFF Helen Matson, Real Estate Services Manager Ken Sampley, Stormwater/Floodplain Program Mgr SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Permanent Stormwater Easement on City Property at the Gardens on Spring Creek to Colorado State University. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance to Colorado State University of a permanent stormwater easement on City property at the Gardens on Spring Creek. Colorado State University (CSU) needs to construct a water quality pond to handle the flows from its new construction at CSU, including the new stadium. The Center Outfall Water Quality Pond (Pond) will be constructed on land owned by CSU, as well as on a portion of the City's property at the Gardens on Spring Creek. The Pond will handle flows from both entities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2013, the City’s Water Quality Master Plan was adopted by Council. This Master Plan included the Spring Creek Basin Water Quality Master Plan. The Master Plan included proposed improvements in the CSU Sub- basin. These proposed improvements included a Proprietary Mechanical BMP (best management practice) to be installed underground at Prospect and Burlington Northern Railroad. With this mechanical device, the water is treated underground; the device requires more maintenance and is less efficient. The Master Plan also included plans for a Ropes Water Quality Pond. This Pond was planned to be much smaller and would only be constructed on City property. To more efficiently handle the area flows, staff members from the City and CSU worked together on the design of a larger pond that will accept more flows than if both entities developed smaller ponds. Most of the land area of the Pond will be on CSU land; however the flows being handled by the Pond will be approximately the same in volume for both CSU and the City. Previously the City’s Parks Planning and Development (PPD) had been included in these discussions, but PPD had not communicated with CSU for some time. Staff delayed taking this item to Council to incorporate design considerations for PPD. These changes include: The spillway has been shortened to 35 feet long and relocated to the southeast area of the pond, which also results in a shorter spillway slope. Spillway material will be sandstone blocks, stepped down in a pleasing fashion. The trail spur is reconfigured to move it away from Spring Creek at the southeast portion, and possibly expansion in the southwest triangle. The length of the trail spur, except for spillway, is above the 100-year base flood elevations Ten-foot trail and three foot shoulders with a 3:1 side slopes works with all these changes, and allows the cut and fill in floodway to balance. Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 2 The top of the berm where the concrete trail will be built will be graded and seeded in this project. Concrete trail, fence and other trail materials will be constructed as a future project. CSU will be constructing the Pond and pay the upfront costs, estimated to be between $400,000 and $500,000; CSU will then bill the City for its share. The split of the project cost will be based on flow spillage. The City will reimburse CSU out of a future budget for stream rehabilitation and water quality budget. CSU will perform the necessary maintenance on the Pond. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The total cost of constructing the pond is estimated to be between $400,000 and $500,000. The City will reimburse CSU for 48% of the costs of construction, as approximately 48% of the flows into the pond will be the City’s flows. Working together on the Center Outfall Water Quality Pond is advantageous for both the City and CSU. This combined Pond will handle more flows for the area than if each entity built a smaller pond. If the Center Outfall Water Quality Pond was not being constructed, the City would need to build more water quality ponds, which would require more land and more money. The City’s cost to build its own pond and proprietary mechanical BMP in this area would be approximately $300,000 Due to the benefits being provided by granting this easement to construct the larger Pond, staff does not recommend charging CSU for this easement. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its August 24, 2016 meeting, the Parks and Recreation Board voted 8–0 to recommend approval of the easement and found it appropriate to utilize this portion of the City’s land to develop and construct the water quality pond and trail connectivity with the City’s assistance in the design and neighborhood outreach. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map (PDF) 2. Parks and Recreation Board minutes, August 24, 2016 (PDF) COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY PROPERTY CITY OF FORT COLLINS PROPERTY GARDENS AT SPRING CREEK HILTON HOTEL FUTURE WATER QUALITY POND FUTURE WATER QUALITY POND BAY RD CENTRE AVE BAY DR CENTER AVE Easement Location ± Location Map of Easement to CSU at Center Outfall Water Quality Pond ATTACHMENT 1 5.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Location map (4848 : Water Quality Pond Easement to Coloado State Land Board) Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – August 24 2016 Page 1 of 2 BE A GOOD STEWARD: Protect & Respect your Parks, Trails & Recreation Facilities Meeting Summary • The Board was informed that CSU is ready to start work on a portion of their Master Plan regarding Centre Avenue Outfall Water Quality Pond & Trail Planning which will create a water quality pond, providing a Stormwater quality benefit before water reaches Spring Creek. The development and construction of the pond would encroach into a portion of the northeast corner of City property which will be developed into Lilac Park. CSU would like to request help from the P&R Board and other boards for a positive outcome to use this portion of land for the Water Quality Pond and Bay Farm Trail extension. The timeframe is accelerated due to the neighborhood expectation to be further developed, and the challenges due to the floodway. Neighborhood meetings are planned in the near future. This Water Quality Pond and the Bay Farm Trail extension will be developed before Lilac Park. Motion: Bruce Henderson made a motion - The P&R Board finds that it would be appropriate for CSU to utilize this portion of the City’s land to develop and construct the water quality pond and trail connectivity with the City’s assistance in the design and immediate neighborhood outreach. Discussion: None Second: Ragan Adams Vote: 8:0 in favor Full Minutes AGENDA ITEMS: Lilac Park Update The Gardens on Spring Creek and the area noted as Lilac Park was land originally owned by CSU; which was a land transfer to the City in exchange for the trials garden area off of College Avenue; which was vetted through the Natural Areas Board and adopted by Council in 2012. Through CSU’s Master Plan they are ready to start work on the Centre Avenue Outfall Water Quality Pond & Trail Planning which will create a water quality pond, providing a stormwater quality benefit before water reaches Spring Creek. The pond will be northeast of the Spring Creek Trail & Gardens on Spring Creek and west of Centre Avenue, and the trail will link the Spring Creek Trail at the Gardens on Spring Creek to the Bay Farm Trail that goes through CSU campus. Along with the proposed Bay Farm trail extension would be a proposed trail underpass of the Bay Farm trail at Prospect and Centre Avenue. The development and constructions of the pond would encroach into a portion of the northeast corner of City property which will be developed into Lilac Park. CSU would like to request help from the P&R Board and other boards for a positive outcome to use this portion of land for the Water Quality Pond and Bay Farm Trail extension. The timeframe is excelerated due to the neighborhood expectation to be further developed, and the challenges due to the floodway. Neighborhood meetings are planned in the near future. This Water Quality Pond and the Bay Farm Trail extension will be developed before Lilac Park. Discussion Board – Are you working with the Gardens on Spring Creek? Staff – Yes, the Gardens has been involved and looking forward to the improvements this development will make. It will enhance the visitors’ connectivity to the Gardens; and will provide opportunities in partnering with CSU and Natural Areas for classes at the Gardens. Board – If this is a floodway how does that affect the Lilac Park? Are other Parks in floodways? Staff – Yes, there are other parks in floodway areas. The only affect is structures can’t be built in the floodway. PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD MINUTES Regular Meeting Wednesday, August 24, 2016 5:30 p.m. Board Chair: Scott Sinn - 2016 scott.sinn@ymail.com Council Liaison: Gino Campana – gcampana@fcgov.com Staff Liaisons: Mike Calhoon, 970-416-2079 – mcalhoon@fcgov.com Kurt Friesen, 970-221-6618 – kfriesen@fcgov.com Bob Adams, 970-221-6354 – badams@fcgov.com ATTACHMENT 2 5.2 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Parks and Recreation Board minutes, August 24, 2016 (4848 : Water Quality Pond Easement to Coloado State Land Board) Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – August 24 2016 Page 2 of 2 Board – What do the neighbors expect? CSU – We’re not sure yet, normally we would have had outreach discussions, but those discussions are planned in the very near future. Board – What is the timeframe for constructions? CSU – Because the area is a floodway, construction would start in the fall/winter of 2016/2017 before spring runoff would be a concern. Board – What’s the size of the spillway? CSU – The berm would be 9’ maximum on the east and into the pond at 4’ it’s a 3-1 slope and about 100’ in length. The pond would only detain a 2 year storm event before flowing over the spillway. It’s not a flood control detention pond; it’s being developed for water quality control into Spring Creek. Board – What do you need from the Board? CSU – A statement that it’s appropriate for CSU to use this City land and as strong proponents work with Kurt Friesen for trail development. Board – Do we have a motion? Motion: Bruce Henderson made a motion - The P&R Board finds that it would be appropriate for CSU to utilize this portion of the City’s land to develop and construct the water quality pond and trail connectivity with the City’s assistance in the design and immediate neighborhood outreach. Discussion: None Second: Ragan Adams Vote: 8:0 in favor Additional Comments from Kurt Friesen, Director of Park Planning & Development pertaining to this project after review of the minutes: There were some conditions to approval of the Lilac Park project that aren’t described clearly enough. These are: 1. The project must provide for future safe trail connections to Spring Creek Trail 2. The project will support a shared CSU/City of FC Stormwater water quality pond on a portion of the park property. 3. The future trail section must be improved from what is currently shown 4. Outreach to the surrounding neighbors will occur regarding the future park project. Board Attendance Board Members: Ragan Adams, Mary Carlson, Brian Carroll, Bruce Henderson, Kenneth Layton, Scott Sinn, Kelly Smith, Dawn Theis Staff: Bob Adams, Mike Calhoon, Kurt Friesen, Carol Rankin, Coleen Elliott, Michelle Provaznik, Clark Mapes, Ken Sampley Guest: CSU Representatives: Fred Haberecht, Landscape Architect 5.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Parks and Recreation Board minutes, August 24, 2016 (4848 : Water Quality Pond Easement to Coloado State Land Board) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 113, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A PERMANENT STORMWATER EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY AT THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK TO COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY WHEREAS, the City is the owner of property known as the Gardens on Spring Creek, more particularly described as Tract A, Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the City and Colorado State University (CSU) have been working on the design of water quality pond for the Spring Creek Basin that would be located partially on the City Property and partially on CSU property, and would accept flows from both CSU’s property and other properties in the area (the “Center Outfall Water Quality Pond” or “Pond”); and WHEREAS, the Pond would be more efficient and handle more flows from the area than if the City and CSU built separate ponds; and WHEREAS, CSU would be responsible for construction and maintenance of the Pond, and would pay the upfront costs of construction, estimated to be between $400,000 and $500,000, with the City reimbursing CSU for 48% of such costs; and WHEREAS, in order to construct the Pond, CSU requires an easement on the City Property in the location described and shown on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, the City’s cost to build its own pond and proprietary mechanical best management practice (BMP) would be approximately $300,000, and the fair market value of the Easement is approximately $2,130; and WHEREAS, because the cost savings to the City from not having to build its own pond exceed the amount the City will pay for construction of the Center Outfall Water Quality Pond and the value of the Easement combined, City staff is recommending that the City not charge CSU for the Easement; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code authorizes the City Council to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property owned by 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: Packet Pg. 68 -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the City’s conveyance of the Easement to CSU as provided herein is in the best interests of the City. Section 3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easement to CSU 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, 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 interest to be conveyed. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 69 SITUATE IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO EXHIBIT A DATE: 09.13.2016 DRAWN BY: LHG CHECKED BY: DLS www.olssonassociates.com TEL 303.237.2072 FAX 303.237.2659 4690 Table Mountain Drive, Suite 200 Golden, CO 80403 R PATH: F:\ Projects\ 015-2343\ 40-Design\ Survey\ Sheets\ 2016-09-13_Pond Easement.dwg SHEET 1 OF 2 EXHIBIT A: WATER QUALITY POND EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL OF LAND TO BE DEDICATED AS A WATER QUALITY POND EASEMENT BEING A PART OF TRACT A, CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING, AS DEPICTED IN THE PLAT RECORDED APRIL 2, 2003 AT RECEPTION NUMBER 20030039524, SITUATED IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23, BEING MONUMENTED BY A 3.25" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "PLS 17497," FROM WHICH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION, BEING MONUMENTED BY A 3.25" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "PLS 17497," BEARS S89°38'54"E WITH A DISTANCE OF 2655.63 FEET AS MEASURED IN THE FIELD WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE S33°22'38"E A DISTANCE OF 1261.41 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT A THAT LIES S62°08'08"W A DISTANCE OF 2218.89 FEET FROM SAID NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 23, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING S04°08'46"W A DISTANCE OF 58.35 FEET; THENCE S11°32'50"W A DISTANCE OF 201.75 FEET; THENCE S29°20'04"E A DISTANCE OF 31.25 FEET; THENCE S46°09'27"W A DISTANCE OF 22.18 FEET; THENCE S80°22'04"W A DISTANCE OF 68.98 FEET TO SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT A SAID POINT BEING ALSO A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT A THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) COURSES: 1) 147.34 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, SAID ARC HAVING A RADIUS OF 148.89 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 56°41'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N02°33'24"E A DISTANCE OF 141.40 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 2) N30°40'41"E A DISTANCE OF 140.40 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE TO THE RIGHT; 3) 59.71 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, SAID ARC HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°24'13" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N36°22'49"E A DISTANCE OF 59.61 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 19,323 SQUARE FEET OR 0.444 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DANA L. SPERLING PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR COLORADO LICENSE NUMBER 38012 D A N A L . S P SITUATE IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO EXHIBIT A DATE: 09.13.2016 DRAWN BY: LHG CHECKED BY: DLS www.olssonassociates.com TEL 303.237.2072 FAX 303.237.2659 4690 Table Mountain Drive, Suite 200 Golden, CO 80403 R PATH: F:\ Projects\ 015-2343\ 40-Design\ Survey\ Sheets\ 2016-09-13_Pond Easement.dwg SHEET 2 OF 2 NOTE: THIS EXHIBIT DOES NOT REPRESENT A MONUMENTED LAND SURVEY. IT IS INTENDED ONLY AS A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION. EXHIBIT A: WATER QUALITY POND EASEMENT D A N A L . S P E R L I N G P R O F E S S I O N A L L A N D S U R V E Y Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2016, Designating the H. W. Schroeder Property Located at 419 Mathews Street, Fort Collins, Colorado, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda, it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(e) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2015-091. The purpose of this item is to designate the H. W. Schroeder property located at 419 Mathews Street as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owners of this property, the Carol Johnson Trust and the John McGowan Trust, are initiating this request. The 1901 Queen Anne-style residence is eligible for recognition as a Landmark due to its historic integrity and significance to Fort Collins under Designation Standard B, Persons/Groups, and Standard C, Design/Construction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The H. W. Schroeder Property is an excellent example of a Queen Anne-style residence. Constructed in 1901, the residence exhibits many character-defining architectural features, including the wrap around porch, pediment with sunburst-imbricated shingles, asymmetrical facade, and projecting gable ends. The detached garage is noncontributing due to its age. Undated alterations to the residence undertaken are subordinate with compatible design and do not adversely impact the building’s overall integrity. The H. W. Schroeder Property is located on the west side of the 400 block of Mathews Street, which has retained its overall historic character and pattern of development. The property is already listed on the National and State Registers of Historic Places as a contributing property in the Laurel School National Register Historic District. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Recognition of this property as a Fort Collins Landmark enables its owners to qualify for local financial incentive programs available only to Landmark designated properties. Based upon research conducted by Clarion Associates, the property will likely see an increase in value following designation. Clarion Associates attributed this increase to the fact that current and future owners qualify for financial incentives; the appeal of owning a recognized historic landmark; and the assurance of predictability that design review offers. 6 Packet Pg. 72 Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 2 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) recommends that City Council designate the H.W. Schroeder property as a Fort Collins landmark. At a public hearing held on September 14, 2016, the Landmark Preservation Commission adopted a motion on a vote of 6-0 to recommend that City Council designate the H. W. Schroeder Property as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 14, based on the property’s significance under Standards B and C, and its exterior integrity based upon all seven aspects of integrity. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map (PDF) 2. Landmark Designation application, with photos (PDF) 3. Staff report to Landmark Preservation Commission (PDF) 4. Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution 3, 2016 (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 73 Remington St E Mulberry St E Magnolia St E Myrtle St Mathews St 419 Mathews Street © Location Map 1 inch = 145 feet ATTACHMENT 1 6.1 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Location map (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 1 Fort Collins Landmark Designation LOCATION INFORMATION: Address: 419 Mathews Street Legal Description: Lot 4, Block 134, City of Fort Collins Property Name (historic and/or common): The H. W. Schroeder Property OWNER INFORMATION: Name: John P. McGowan Trust and Carol M. Johnson Trust Phone: 703-475-0064; 703-242-2323 Email: rockdog405@yahoo.com Address: 419 Mathews Street, Fort Collins, CO 80524 CLASSIFICATION Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing Designation Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register Site Religious Object Residential District Entertainment Government Other FORM PREPARED BY: Name and Title: Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, P.O. Box 580, Fort Collins, CO 80522 Phone: 828-499-1235 Email: cbumgarner@fcgov.com Relationship to Owner: None. DATE: 08/23/2016 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 ATTACHMENT 2 6.2 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 2 TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES Individual Landmark Property Landmark District Explanation of Boundaries: The boundaries of the property being designated as a Fort Collins Landmark correspond to the legal description of the property, above. The property contains a historic residence and a noncontributing, modern garage. SIGNIFICANCE Properties are eligible for designation if they possess significance, which is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards: Standard A: Events. This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events: 1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or 2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. Standard B: Persons/Groups. This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. Standard C: Design/Construction. This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. 6.2 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 3 EXTERIOR INTEGRITY Properties are eligible for designation if they possess exterior integrity, which is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The exterior integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Standard A: Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an historic event occurred. Standard B: Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic form, plan space, structure, and style. Standard C: Setting.This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings that reflect how and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and open space. Standard D: Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that originally formed the property. Standard E: Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site. Standard F: Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time. This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. Standard G: Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an important historic event or person. It retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. 6.2 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 4 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY (Please describe why the property is significant, relative to the Standard(s) above, and how it possesses exterior integrity.) The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street is significant under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Significance Standard B, for its association with Herman W. Schroeder, a prominent builder and leader in the community who lived there for almost twenty years; and Standard C, for its identifiable design, construction, and Queen Anne style. The property retains a strong preponderance of exterior integrity under Standards A through G. The H.W. Schroder Property is listed on the National and State Registers of Historic Places as a contributing property in the Laurel School National Register Historic District. Integrity of setting is defined as "the physical environment of a historic property." While it has changed over time, the historically residential neighborhood on the west side of the 400 block of Mathews Street still retains numerous late 19th century and early 20th century houses. The character of these houses and the neighborhood has been retained. Integrity of location is defined as "the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred." The dwelling is in the location, on this property, where it was originally constructed. Integrity of design is defined as "the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property." The dwelling's original form, massing, scale, and proportion are wholly discernible. An enclosed rear addition detracts minimally from the dwelling’s overall integrity of design. Integrity of materials is defined as "the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property." The original construction materials remain intact and highly visible. Integrity of workmanship is defined as "the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory." The home retains a high level of workmanship, seen in the Queen Anne-style details of the residence including, but not limited to, the brick belt course, shingled gable ends, a wraparound porch, and dentils on both the porch and gable ends. The fact that the dwelling continues to exist and has served as a residence for more than 100 years is evidence of a high level of workmanship. Integrity of feeling is defined as "a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time." The property’s physical characteristics and its environment evoke strong feelings relating to what life was like in Fort Collins during the early decades of the twentieth-century. Integrity of association is defined as "the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property." The property has a strong association with H. W. Schroeder’s life in Fort Collins. 6.2 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 5 HISTORICAL INFORMATION Herman W. Schroeder was born April 2, 1855 near Doty Island, Wisconsin. At a young age, Mr. and Mrs. Aaron F. Watrous, of Charlestown, (Calumet County) Wisconsin, became his foster parents. He learned the carpentry and joinery trades and moved to Fort Collins in April of 1878.0F 1 In 1880, the census data indicates Schroeder resided at 365 Oak Street as a boarder in William and Clara Gilbertson’s boarding house. This was next door to Ansel and Florelle Watrous, distant relatives of Aaron Watrous.1F 2 Herman W. Schroeder and Emma Bennett married on July 20, 1881.2F 3 In 1897, he was appointed alderman for the Fort Collins fourth ward. An alderman was an elected member of the town council comparable to today’s Fort Collins’ City Council. The Fort Collins Courier noted that this was “a good appointment.”3F 4 The following year the newspaper reported that he and several other aldermen were “all good substantial citizens who have the interests of the city at heart.”4F 5 Schroeder’s construction work included substantial projects such as the 1899 Remington School annex. The newspaper described the addition as a “neat and substantial frame structure.”5F 6 Furthermore, the reporter praised Schroeder as a fast and efficient contractor.6F 7 Prior to the Remington school annex, Schroeder worked on multiple structures for both public and private use. A sample of the buildings he worked on includes Old Main on the Colorado Agricultural College campus (1878), a large brick barn for Abner Loomis (1885), and repairs on both the Grout barn and City Hall (1897). Additionally, he worked on residences throughout the city such as John Beers’s home on Mathews Street and an addition to E. J. Bennett’s residence on Oak Street.7F 8 The Schroeders found themselves in the same social circle as many of the prominent people in early Fort Collins history. In 1899, the newspaper reported about a party Mrs. F. C. Avery gave, where Mrs. Schroeder was in attendance. Mrs. Avery “gave an exceedingly pleasant ‘at home,’ on Wednesday afternoon. The guests were entertained in various ways and enjoyed a delightful season.”8F 9 Several prominent people from the community attended, such as Aylesworth, Ammons, and Anderson.9F 10 A few years later in 1901, the newspaper mentioned that Mr. and Mrs. W. C. Stover entertained friends, which included the Schroeders.10F 11 Additionally, the Schroeders maintained connections to Wisconsin. In August of 1899, they hosted “Mr. and Mrs. W. A. Hume of Chilton, Wisconsin, and Mr. and Mrs. Hiram 1 Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado, 1911 (The Old Army Press), 418; Affidavit no. 199254, June 18, 1919. 2 "United States Census, 1880," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MFDV-QLH : 14 July 2016), Hermon Schroeder in household of William Gilbertson, Fort Collins, Larimer, Colorado, United States. 3 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 8, 1906. 4 Fort Collins Courier, October 21, 1897. 5 Fort Collins Courier, March 17, 1898. 6 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 31, 1899. 7 Ibid. 8 Fort Collins Express-Courier, December 28, 1932, 8; Fort Collins Courier, December 31, 1885, 1; Fort Collins Courier, January Revised 08-2014 Page 6 Pierce, and Mr. and Mrs. Ansel Watrous of this city, at a delightfully appointed tea.”11F 12 While their Wisconsin friends visited, they also had “a merry party, mostly ‘badgers,’” and spent the day in the Poudre canyon “fishing, shooting, taking snapshots with a Kodak and enjoying themselves in a variety of ways.”12F 13 This party consisted of Mrs. and Mrs. William A. Hume of Chilton, Wisconsin, Mr. and Mrs. Hiram Pierce, Mr. Ansel Pierce, Mr. and Mrs. Schroeder, Beulah Schroeder, and Mr. and Mrs. Ansel Watrous.13F 14 Schroeder’s foster parents in Wisconsin were distantly related to Ansel Watrous, the newspaper editor and historian, which may have helped him make successful connections in Fort Collins. Throughout the years, Schroeder made trips back to Wisconsin and friends from Wisconsin traveled to Fort Collins to visit.14F 15 Schroeder retained a close bond with the people of Calumet County, Wisconsin. He left Fort Collins for a month to go back to his hometown of Gravesville, Wisconsin in September of 1908, which the newspaper reported.15F 16 They even produced a follow up story a few weeks later, which they received from the Wisconsin Times in Chilton, the Calumet County seat. It spoke of Herman’s departure from Wisconsin some thirty odd years before upon completion of learning the carpenter trade. They wrote “in this time he has been more than successful as a contractor and now is one of the leading citizens of Fort Collins.”16F 17 The newspaper reported that he returned back to Gravesville the following year to attend the funeral of his foster mother.17F 18 In the same article, the newspaper reported that Schroeder called the Wisconsin Times office to inform them “that the colony of Calumet County people residing at Fort Collins is doing well.”18F 19 Colony movements assisted in development of the area that became Fort Collins. In an attempt to reduce risks associated with moving westward, communities of like-minded people moved together to begin new settlements, which created these colonies.19F 20 While not a colony in the formal sense, those from Calumet County seemed to depend on each other once they came into the area and networked. Prior to the completion of 419 Mathews the Schroeders lived in two other homes on Mathews Street that Herman Schroeder built. First, Herman, Emma, Herman Jr., and Beulah Schroeder lived and owned a home at 129 Mathews Street. Herman Jr. was away at school and the patriarch continued his trade as a carpenter.20F 21 The newspaper sporadically covered the building of another home, which would be 415 Mathews. On March 23, 1899, “good progress is being made on ex-alderman Herman Schroeder’s new house. It will soon be ready for the plasterers.”21F 22 On August 3, the Schroeders were days 12 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 31, 1899. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 15 For example, the Fort Collins Weekly Courier reported that “On Wednesday evening Mrs. H. W. Schroeder entertained Mrs. W. V. McMullen of Brillion, Wisconsin, Miss Demice Vincent of Hayton, Wisconsin, and Mr. and Mrs. Ansel Watrous at a delightfully appointed six o’clock dinner,” in their August 9, 1900 edition. 16 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, September 16, 1908. Revised 08-2014 Page 7 away from moving into their new brick residence.22F 23 They continued to live at 415 Mathews until their new home was built in 1901. Schroeder continued working as a builder and worked on many of the homes in Fort Collins. This was a time of huge prosperity and growth. Schroeder, as a prominent builder, contributed to the construction boom in the early-twentieth century. The average yearly construction expenditures in the city rose from $477,760 in 1904 to over $1,000,000 in 1907.23F 24 In 1901, in addition to several other homes in the area, Schroeder built a home for his family at 419 Mathews Street. It was a six room, brick cottage that cost $1,500.24F 25 In April of 1902, he added a porch onto his home, which the newspaper reported as “handsome.”25F 26 The Schroeders continued to live at 419 Mathews until 1919 while he continued to work as a contractor and carpenter.26F 27 During his residence at 419 Mathews, Schroeder worked on multiple properties, which include additional, fine homes on Mathews Street and the old hospital at 301 East Magnolia.27F 28 After occupying the house for almost twenty years, Schroeder and his family bought and moved into the adjacent lot, 415 Mathews, in July 1919, shortly after the previous neighbor, Duke Whistleman, died of typhoid.28F 29 The Schroeders sold 419 Mathews to John and Annie Greenwalt.29F 30 John and Annie Greenwalt continued to live at 419 Mathews through 1940.30F 31 In 1942, Alexander and Marie E. Wilhelm bought the home from John Greenwalt Jr, who acted as the executor of the estate of John Greenwalt.31F 32 The 1948 city directory lists Henry Wiedeman as the next person to live in the home. Henry and his wife Sarah lived in the home until 1966.32F 33 The home was vacant from 1968 until 1970 when Ronald Miller moved into the home.33F 34 In 1975, Mary Kay Miller sold the home to Kirk E and Mary Kay Herzman.34F 35 In 1977, the Herzmans sold the property to George Scavo and T-J Investments.35F 36 23 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 3, 1899. 24 Fort Collins History Connection, “Sugar beets, Streetcar Suburbs, and the City Beautiful, 1900-1919.” 25 1902 Fort Collins City Directory, 105. 26 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, April 9, 1902. 27 "United States Census, 1910," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MK4C-V7P : 29 October 2015), Herman Schroder, Fort Collins Ward 4, Larimer, Colorado, United States. 28 Fort Collins Express-Courier, December 28, 1932, 8; Fort Collins Weekly Courier, January 2, 1902; Fort Collins Weekly Courier, January 4, 1905. 29 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, October 11, 1918; Fort Collins Courier, July 10, 1919. Revised 08-2014 Page 8 In 1994, Scavo gave his notice of withdrawal from the investment, leaving full ownership to TJG Investments.36F 37 When TJG Investments dissolved in 2002, the properties became legal ownership of Thomas N. Dougherty and James Scavo.37F 38 Thomas N. Dougherty sold Jan Hogeboom the property in 2004.38F 39 One May 9, 2011, owners Judson P. Sherwood and Jan C. Hogeboom obtained a building permit to construct a new garage behind the home.39F 40 The construction of the new, detached 22 x 22 outbuilding was completed and inspected for conformance with the applicable codes of the City of Fort Collins on May 21, 2013.40F 41 Judson Sherwood and Jan Hogeboom sold the property to John P McGowan and Carol M Johnson on July 2, 2013.41F 42 The date of the rear addition is unknown; however it is subordinate to the historic home. 37 Notice, Instrument # 19940021573, March 10, 1994, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=306053&rn=3&pi=0&ref=search. 38 Notice, Instrument # 20020074055, July 11, 2002, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=1003371&rn=13&pi=0&ref=search. 39 Warranty Deed, Instrument # 20040045563, May 12, 2004, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=1406002&rn=5&pi=0&ref=search. 40 Permit B1101954, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=1766458&dt=AFFIDAVITS. 41 Letter of Completion, Permit Number B1101954, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=2097472&dt=CO%2FLOC. 42 Warranty Deed, Instrument # 20130052167, July 9, 2013, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=5765673&rn=86&pi=5&ref=search. 6.2 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 9 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION Construction Date: 1901 Architect/Builder: H. W. Schroeder Building Materials: Brick, sandstone Architectural Style: Queen Anne Description: The H. W. Schroeder Property includes the Queen Anne style residence and a garage (non-contributing). The lot is in the middle of the 400 Mathews block with street parking and alley access to the garage. The 1 1/2-story, brick residence has a shingled, steeply pitched hip roof and an irregular footprint. There are projecting gables on the east, north, and south elevations. The most distinctive feature is a curved, wraparound porch around the southeast corner of the residence held up by Tuscan columns. There is a rear, addition covered with HardiePlank lap siding, built at an unknown date, but this is the only notable modification to the home. All of the brick sections of the home have a low belt course that aligns with several of the sills of the windows. The east elevation of the residence faces Mathews Street. The porch access on this side is under a formal portico beneath a pedimented gable, which contains a relief sunburst design bordered by dentils. The east elevation also has a large gable with returning eaves. The gable end is embellished with imbricated fish-scale shingles and dentils. It also contains a 4 over 4 light window. This window is framed by ornate surrounds that include a projecting stepped molding lintel above a dentil strip. Below the gable end on the east elevation are two windows. One is a small, stained glass window and to the right of it is a 1 over 1 light window. Both of these windows have sandstone lintels and sills. There are two front entrances to the home from Mathews Street. One is to the right (facing south) after coming onto the porch from the east elevation. The wooden four panel and 1 light door has a sandstone lintel. The porch has two 1 over 1 windows with sandstone lintels and sills; one on the east elevation has stained glass in the upper portion, one on the south elevation. Facing the east at the most western edge of the porch is another door. This door has a single light and stained glass transom above it. This door also has a sandstone lintel. Both doors have modern screen doors. The north elevation is partially obscured because of a wooden fence. There are three 1 over 1 windows with sandstone lintels and sills on the north elevation. There is another gable end on the north elevation with imbricated and fish scale shingles. This window, a three vertical light window, is framed by ornate surrounds that include a projecting stepped molding lintel above a dentil strip. On the west elevation is an addition that is a lower height, hip-roofed wing. This addition is finished with HardiePlank lap siding and has two entrances on the west elevation: framed by two 1 over 1 light windows are a set of double, swing out doors and a two vertical wood panel door with a single light. There is another one over one window facing south. This window and the pair of windows around the double, swing out doors are the same type of windows. These elements are all on the most western piece of the addition. The other section of the addition projects to the south. Beside the two vertical wood panel door with a single light on this door is a single pane window that faces south. 6.2 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 10 The south elevation has no doors, but has several windows. On the wraparound porch on the southeast corner of the residence there is a single one over one window on the south elevation with a stone lintel and sill. Directly west of the porch is a bay projection with a pedimented gable. The gable end has imbricated and fish scale shingles with a window. This window, a three vertical light window, is framed by ornate surrounds that include a projecting stepped molding lintel above a dentil strip. The bay projection has two one over one windows with sandstone lintels and sills. West of the bay projection is a small one over one window with a curved lintel built into the brick and a sandstone sill. On the rear addition on the south elevation are two windows, one single pane window and another one over one window. In the rear of the lot is a noncontributing, rectangular, pyramidal roofed outbuilding constructed in 2013. It has a single, paneled door. Southeast elevation 6.2 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 11 East elevation Northeast elevation 6.2 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 12 North elevation, including rear addition West elevation, including rear addition 6.2 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 13 South elevation, including rear addition 6.2 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 14 South elevation 6.2 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 15 South elevation Noncontributing garage—Southeast elevation 6.2 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 16 Noncontributing garage—South elevation Noncontributing garage—Northeast elevation 6.2 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Revised 08-2014 Page 17 REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION (attach a separate sheet if needed) Affidavit no. 199254, June 18, 1919. Permit B1101954, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=1766458&dt=AFFIDAVITS. Fort Collins City Directory, 1902-1970, accessed through Fort Collins History Connection, an online collaboration of the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery and the Poudre River Public Library District. Fort Collins History Connection, “Fort Collins History and Architecture,” accessed via history.poudrelibraries.org. Fort Collins Weekly Courier and Fort Collins Courier, from 1897 to 1919, accessed via coloradohistoricnewspapers.org. Letter of Completion, Permit Number B1101954, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=2097472&dt=CO%2FLOC. Notice, Instrument # 19940021573, March 10, 1994, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=306053&rn=3&pi=0&ref=search. Notice, Instrument # 20020074055, July 11, 2002, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=1003371&rn=13&pi=0&ref=search. United States Federal Census, 1880-1940. Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado. Warranty Deed no. 523040, September 21, 1942. Warranty Deed, January 3, 1975, Book 1630, page 284. Warranty Deed, August 11, 1977, Book 1790, page 168. Warranty Deed, Instrument # 20040045563, May 12, 2004, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=1406002&rn=5&pi=0&ref=search. Warranty Deed, Instrument # 20130052167, July 9, 2013, http://www.larimer.org/clerk/search/showdetails.aspx?id=5765673&rn=86&pi=5&ref=search. 6.2 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) 6.2 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 STAFF REPORT September 14, 2016 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 419 MATHEWS - APPLICATION FOR FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION STAFF Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council regarding landmark designation for The H. W. Schroeder Property, a 1901 Queen Anne-style residence and newer detached garage at 419 Mathews Street. APPLICANT: Carol Johnson Trust and John McGowan Trust 419 Mathews Street, Fort Collins, CO 80524 OWNER: Carol Johnson Trust and John McGowan Trust 419 Mathews Street, Fort Collins, CO 80524 RECOMMENDATION: As all seven aspects of integrity are intact and the history of the property supports designation under Standards B and C, staff finds that The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street qualifies as a Fort Collins Landmar EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street consists of a Queen Anne-style residence with a detached, non-contributing garage. The Queen Anne style of architecture was immensely popular between 1880 and 1910. Constructed in 1901, the home exhibits several character-defining features of the Queen Anne style such as asymmetry, shaped shingled gable ends, a steeply pitched roof, contrasting materials, and projecting gables. H. W. Schroeder was a well-known builder in early-twentieth century Fort Collins. He built his home at 419 Mathews and several other residences in the neighborhood, including 425, 527, and 633 Mathews. Furthermore, he worked on several other residential and public buildings such as the Remington School annex, the Grout barn, and the old hospital at 301 East Magnolia. Schroeder was also appointed as an alderman in 1897. Schroeder and his family lived at 419 Mathews from 1901 to 1919. The H.W. Schroeder Property is listed on the National and State Registers of Historic Places as a contributing property in the Laurel School National Register Historic District. The current owners of this property have submitted an application requesting consideration for Fort Collins local landmark designation. COMMISSION ACTION Chapter 14, Article II of the Municipal Code, “Designation Procedures,” requires that the Commission shall determine if The H.W. Schroeder Property meets the criteria of a Fort Collins landmark. Properties eligible for designation must possess both significance and exterior integrity. In making a determination of eligibility, the context of the area surrounding the property shall be considered. ATTACHMENT 3 6.3 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Staff report to Landmark Preservation Commission (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 2 According to Sec. 14-22(a), “If all owners of the property to be designated consent in writing to such designation, the Commission, upon the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present, may adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council the designation of the landmark or landmark district. . .” Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. Significance is achieved through meeting one (1) or more of four (4) standards recognized by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. These standards define how properties are significant for their association with events or persons, in design or construction, or for their information potential. Section 14-5(2) contains the standards for determining significance: a. Events. Properties may be determined to be significant if they are associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. A property can be associated with either (or both) of two (2) types of events: 1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or 2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. b. Persons/Groups. Properties may be determined to be significant if they are associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. c. Design/Construction. Properties may be determined to be significant if they embody the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represent the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possess high artistic values or design concepts; or are part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. This standard applies to such disciplines as formal and vernacular architecture, landscape architecture, engineering and artwork, by either an individual or a group. A property can be significant not only for the way it was originally constructed or crafted, but also for the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and/or uses over a period of time. Examples are residential buildings which represent the socioeconomic classes within a community, but which frequently are vernacular in nature and do not have high artistic values. d. Information potential. Properties may be determined to be significant if they have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Exterior integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The exterior integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities established by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven (7) qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Section 14-5(4) contains the standards for determining exterior integrity: a. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. b. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a property. c. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. d. Materials are the physical elements that form a historic property. 6.3 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Staff report to Landmark Preservation Commission (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 3 e. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure or site. f. Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. g. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. Context: Section14-1 provides the definition of context: “Context shall mean the totality of interrelated conditions in which a site, structure, object or district exists. The context of an area is the sum of the existing buildings and spaces, and the pattern of physical development in the area. It can also be a measurement of the scarcity or profusion of a particular resource type.” STAFF EVALUATION Applications must contain a description of the property proposed to be designated; detailed information on the reasons why the property should be designated; and reasons why the boundary should be determined as described in the application. Staff has reviewed the application, and finds that all required elements are present in the application. Staff finds that The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street qualifies for Fort Collins Landmark designation under Designation Standard B because of its association with Herman W. Schroeder. Herman W. Schroeder was an influential resident in early Fort Collins history, constructing and repairing public and private buildings throughout the city. In addition to his work on the development of Fort Collins’s built environment, Schroeder was also politically and socially active. Staff also finds that The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street qualifies for Fort Collins Landmark designation under Designation Standard C as an excellent example of a Queen Anne-style residence. The rear addition, undated, is subordinate and minor to the historic home. The rear addition is compatible and does not diminish the property’s high degree of integrity. It continues to meet all seven aspects of integrity: materials, association, design, feeling, location, workmanship, and setting. As the seven aspects of integrity are intact and the history of the property supports designation under Standards B and C, staff finds that The H. W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street qualifies as a Fort Collins Landmark. SAMPLE MOTIONS If the Commission finds that The H. W. Schroeder Property meets one or more of the criteria for Fort Collins landmark designation, the Commission shall adopt the following motion: That the Landmark Preservation Commission pass a resolution recommending that City Council designate the H.W. Schroeder Property at 419 Mathews Street as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 14, based on the property’s significance under Standard B for its association with builder H. W. Schroeder and Standard C as an excellent example of a Queen Anne-style residence and its exterior integrity based on all seven aspects of integrity. If the Commission does not find that The H. W. Schroeder Property meets the criteria for landmark designation, it shall adopt a motion noting which designation standard(s) it does not qualify under, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 14-21, and state its reasoning. 6.3 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Staff report to Landmark Preservation Commission (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Presentation - 419 Mathews Landmark Designation (PDF) 2. 419 Mathews_Designation Form (PDF) 6.3 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Staff report to Landmark Preservation Commission (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134- fax fcgov.com Planning, Development & Transportation Services RESOLUTION 03, 2016 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE THE H. W. SCHROEDER PROPERTY, 419 MATHEWS STREET, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, it is a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects, and districts of historical, architectural, or geographic significance, located within the city, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this city cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architectural and geographical heritage of the city and by ignoring the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets; and WHEREAS, the H. W. Schroeder Property, located at 419 Mathews Street in Fort Collins (the “Property”) is eligible for Landmark designation for its high degree of exterior integrity and for its significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Standard B, Persons/Groups, as the home of local, prominent builder H. W. Schroeder, and Standard C, Design/Construction, as an excellent example of a Queen Anne-style residence; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has determined that the Property meets the criteria of a landmark as set forth in Section l4-5 of the code and is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property have consented to such landmark designation. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins as follows: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are incorporated herein by the Landmark Preservation Commission as findings of fact. ATTACHMENT 4 6.4 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution 3, 2016 (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) 6.4 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution 3, 2016 (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 114, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS DESIGNATING THE H. W. SCHROEDER PROPERTY LOCATED AT 419 MATHEWS STREET, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARKPURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a public policy encouraging the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of historic landmarks within the City; and WHEREAS, by Resolution dated September 14, 2016, the Landmark Preservation Commission (the “Commission”) has determined that the H. W. Schroeder Property located at 419 Mathews Street in Fort Collins as more specifically described below (the “Property”) is eligible for Landmark designation for its high degree of exterior integrity, and for its significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Standard B (Persons/Groups) and Standard C (Design/Construction) as contained in Section 14-5(2)(c) of the City Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission has further determined that the Property meets the criteria of a landmark as set forth in City Code Section 14-5 and is eligible for designation as a landmark, and has recommended to the City Council that the Property be designated by the City Council as a landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property have consented to such landmark designation; and WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the Property’s significance to the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and desires to approve such recommendation and designate the Property as a landmark; and WHEREAS, designation of the Property as a landmark is necessary for the prosperity, civic pride, and welfare of the public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Property located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: Packet Pg. 99 -2- LOT 4, BLOCK 134, FORT COLLINS be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Code. Section 3. That alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the Property will be reviewed for compliance with City Code Chapter 14, Article III, as currently enacted or hereafter amended. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of October, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 100 Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Mark Jackson, PDT Deputy Director SUBJECT Resolution 2016-077 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Intergovernmental Agreement for Funding I-25 Improvements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to enter into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Larimer County and seven other municipalities outlining the method by which local funds will be appropriated and contributed to Larimer County for the purpose of helping to accelerate improvements to I-25 in Northern Colorado. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Numerous efforts, initiatives, and actions have been taken or are underway to accelerate improvements to Interstate 25 (I-25) in Northern Colorado. I-25 is the key interstate linkage in Northern Colorado, and serves as a major freight route as well as traveler connection between the Denver metro area to the south. Current infrastructure deficiencies, combined with increasing travel demand on the corridor result in safety and congestion issues along the Northern Colorado I-25 Corridor. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) estimates improvements to I-25 between SH-14 (Mulberry) and SH-402 to cost $237 million. Council adopted Resolution 2015-100 (Attachment 1) on November 17, 2015, stating its support for a Larimer County proposal to use increased County mill levy funds to facilitate funding for Interstate 25 (I-25) improvements. Larimer County proposes to temporarily reapportion part of its General Fund mill levy funds to the County’s Road and Bridge Fund for a period of five years. These reapportioned funds are estimated to generate a total of $10 million over the course of the five year period. The increase in the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy revenues received by the City and the other municipalities will be available to fund construction of roads and streets within their boundaries, making funds from the City’s general fund or other funds available for contribution to the I-25 improvements. The County proposes using these contributions for improvements and local match opportunities on the I-25 Corridor within Larimer County. All eight Larimer County municipalities adopted resolutions supporting the proposal. Fort Collins currently receives approximately $550,000 per year from the County Road and Bridge Fund. This proposal will not affect the amount of funds Fort Collins currently receives. Because of increased property valuations, only an amount equal to the resulting incremental increase in revenue will be contributed to Larimer County under the IGA for I-25 uses. As the local share of County Road and Bridge levy funds must be used for improvements within the City boundaries, the City of Fort Collins proposes to annually remit Transportation Fund reserves equal to the amount of increased funding received from Larimer County, preserving the County Road and Bridge funds received specifically for local transportation projects. 7 Packet Pg. 101 Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 2 It is estimated that Fort Collins’ share of increased Larimer County Road and Bridge Funds will total approximately $2.22 million over the span of five years as proposed. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Larimer County’s proposal does not modify the total mill levy, and does not decrease the amount of Road and Bridge Levy funds currently received by the City of Fort Collins. Creation of a source of local match funding is advantageous in order to take advantage of funding partnerships and grant opportunities that may arise to help improve the I-25 corridor. This contribution, combined with additional commitments from regional agencies and private development, results in $25 million identified and committed for local match. This regional collaboration and commitment helped accelerate the schedule for I-25 improvements in Northern Colorado by fifteen years. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Transportation Board was briefed in February 2016 (Attachment 3) about pending improvements to I-25 and strategies for accelerating the schedule of construction, including the proposed IGA with Larimer County to contribute funds for I-25. Board response was positive and supportive. PUBLIC OUTREACH The Colorado Department of Transportation has held numerous open house meetings and provided project information for many years about I-25 improvements, including the I-25 Environmental Impact Statement (2011), and more recent improvements including the I-25/SH-392 interchange, Berthoud Hill Climbing Lane project and Crossroad Boulevard Bridge Improvement project. The City of Fort Collins has been an active partner in CDOT efforts impacting Fort Collins. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2015-100 (PDF) 2. Larimer County Letter-Funding Package (PDF) 3. Transportation Board minutes, February 17, 2016 (PDF) 7 Packet Pg. 102 ATTACHMENT 1 7.1 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Resolution 2015-100 (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) 7.1 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Resolution 2015-100 (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) August 2016 Great news! Northern Colorado successfully put together a funding package to expand I-25, adding one lane in each direction for 14 miles from Johnstown/Loveland to Ft. Collins. The project includes important transit, pedestrian, and cycling improvements that will connect Northern Colorado communities to each other and to the Denver Metro region, enhancing economic opportunities for residents and businesses. Key components of the expansion include: x Construct 14 miles of Managed Lanes, High Occupant Vehicles/Tolled Express Lane (HOV/TEL) from the Highway 14 exit in Fort Collins to the Highway 402 exit in Johnstown/Loveland x Replace 2 aging bridges and widen 2 additional structures x Relocate the US 34 Park-n-Ride to Kendall Parkway, improving regional bus service performance x Create new pedestrian and bicycle access under I-25 at Kendall Parkway x Connect 34.4 miles of the Cache la Poudre Regional Trail under I-25. The trail will also serve as a wildlife corridor. The list below breaks down the funding that make up the $237 million dollar project. x $157 million CDOT State Funds, including up to $50 million in tolls from High Performance Toll Enterprise (HPTE) x $30 million Federal Funds x $25 million Local and District Government Contributions o Larimer County Mill Levy, $10m o Metro District, $6m o City of Fort Collins, $2m o City of Loveland, $2m o Weld County, $2m o Town of Johnstown, $1m o Town of Windsor, $1m ATTACHMENT 2 7.2 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Larimer County Letter-Funding Package (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) August 2016 o Town of Berthoud, $500k o Town of Timnath, $500k x $15 million TIGER x $10 million GOCO, Other state funds All of the municipalities in Larimer County agreed last fall to utilize revenue raised by a temporary increase in the County’s road and bridge mill levy to help pay for I-25 improvements. An IGA is in process to formalize the agreement amongst the eight municipalities and the County. An estimate of the Mill Levy funds through Larimer County breakdown as follows: 7.2 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Larimer County Letter-Funding Package (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) 3 Transportation Board February 17, 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 • FC Bikes Program Update – Greegor/Heimann/Gaskill-Fox Greegor introduced Nick Heimann and Jamie Gaskill-Fox. She stated two goals fundamental to the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan relate to increasing bicycling and improving safety. She briefly discussed the bicycle wayfinding plan and the 2020 low-stress network. Thomas noted there is only one plow truck in the City fleet that can plow the roundabouts and asked if the roundabouts on bicycle routes are being plowed well enough. Greegor replied she has not heard feedback specific to the roundabouts. Sizemore stated FC Moves will be working with Streets for a collaborative budget offer looking at enhancements to the low-stress network snow maintenance. Greegor made an announcement about the upcoming bike share program. Heimann stated FC Bikes has been making efforts to coordinate its program with the Bicycle Master Plan and announced new seasonal bike campaigns for 2016. Additionally, he stated the program has pushed a consistent, seasonally branded look on social media sites. Heimann went on to discuss the success of the Winter Bike to Work Day and announced various spring campaigns and events. Brown asked about Women’s Bicycling Month. Heimann replied it is not a brand new initiative; however, it takes some existing classes for women and brands them together and incorporates a large social media aspect. Heimann discussed the two 2015 open streets events and announced possible streets for the upcoming 2016 events. Gaskill-Fox provided handouts for the Bicycle Ambassador Program and the Bicycle- Friendly Driver Program. She discussed educational and collaboration efforts in relation to the Bicycle Master Plan and discussed the class for the Bicycle-Friendly Driver Program, which has been focused on companies with vehicle fleets. Gaskill-Fox also discussed the School Bicycle Ambassador Program noting the Bicycle-Friendly Driver Program will likely be part of that program. Thomas suggested the Board take the class and Gaskill-Fox noted there are public sessions available through the Recreator. Thomas asked if vehicles can use bike lanes when turning right. Gaskill-Fox replied in the affirmative. (**Secretary’s Note: The Board took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) • Interstate 25 Status Update – Jackson Jackson discussed the importance of I-25 to the region and noted a great deal of Interstate-oriented development has occurred in neighboring communities. He noted Fort Collins has specifically opted out of that type of development, at least for the time being. Jackson stated the overarching document which will be used to make improvements to the corridor in Northern Colorado is the North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was passed in 2011. Jackson discussed the components of the EIS relating to high-occupancy vehicle lanes, new bridges, and transit, as well as 7.3 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Transportation Board minutes, February 17, 2016 (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) 4 commuter rail service. Additionally, Jackson discussed upcoming construction projects to create a semi-truck climbing lane and to address safety issues at the Crossroads intersection. He stated Colorado was not selected for the Presidential Sustainability Resiliency Grant and went on to discuss funding sources which do exist, including those from Larimer County. Jackson also discussed lobbying efforts for funding at the State level, noting CDOT can barely afford to maintain its existing infrastructure. The state is currently seeking a sustainable funding source for maintenance. Jackson discussed possible plans for the corridor in terms of transit and discussed the Bustang service and its success to this point. He stated transit is polling more popularly than ever. 8. ACTION ITEMS • Election of Officers – Duvall/Sizemore Duvall noted this is her last year on the Board and expressed concern regarding a Chair vacancy for January and February of 2017. She asked Berklund if she would consider the Chair position. Thomas suggested the possibility of Shenk moving from Vice Chair to Chair. Sizemore noted the Board has until March to make the decision should members want to wait until more members are present. After a brief discussion, the Board opted to reschedule the item to March and email suggestions on Chair and Vice Chair nominations as necessary. 9. REPORTS • Boardmember Reports Duvall announced the Super Board meeting for tomorrow. • Staff Report Sizemore provided an update on snow plowing to this point in the season. He stated he is working to get a meeting scheduled at Traffic Operations. 10. OTHER BUSINESS None. 11. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m. by unanimous consent. 7.3 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Transportation Board minutes, February 17, 2016 (4830 : I-25 funding IGA) -1- RESOLUTION 2016-077 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING I-25 IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, Interstate 25 (“I-25”) serves as the primary north-south highway connection for Northern Colorado, including Larimer County, Colorado (“County”), the City of Fort Collins, Colorado (“City”), and the City of Loveland, Colorado, the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, the Town of Timnath, Colorado, the Town of Berthoud, Colorado, the Town of Windsor, Colorado, the Town of Wellington, Colorado, and the Town of Johnstown, Colorado (individually referred to as “Municipality” or collectively as “Municipalities”). WHEREAS, I-25 is the primary roadway route for regional connectivity to commerce, health care, education and employment; and WHEREAS, I-25 is designated as a federal freight route; and WHEREAS, I-25 in Northern Colorado is considered significantly congested such that traffic flow is impaired and quality of life is adversely affected; and WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) completed an Environmental Impact Statement in August 2011 that identified and evaluated multi-modal transportation improvements along approximately 60 miles of the I-25 corridor from the Fort Collins/Wellington area to Denver and identified areas of I-25 and associated structures such as bridges that needed to be expanded and/or improved; and WHEREAS, CDOT has proposed to expand I-25 from two lanes (north and south) to three lanes (north and south) for approximately fourteen miles between State Highway14 and State Highway 402, replace the Cache la Poudre Bridge and the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge north of State Highway 34, expand the Kendall Parkway Crossing under I-25 and expand the Bridge over the Big Thompson River and the Bridge over the Great Western Railway to accommodate a third travel lane (collectively “Project”); and WHEREAS, funding for the Project is proposed to include contributions from government at federal, state, county, and municipal levels and other sources; and WHEREAS, increased property values for Larimer County property owners in 2015 have provided an opportunity to increase the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy within the County’s total Mill Levy commencing in 2016 and for a period of four years thereafter without detriment to other County programs, without decreasing the amount shared back to the Municipalities in 2015 pursuant to C.R,S. §43-2-202(2), and without increasing the total County Mill Levy; and WHEREAS, the increased County Road and Bridge Mill Levy is projected to generate additional revenues to the Municipalities, including the City, of approximately $10 million over five years commencing with calendar year 2016 , and Packet Pg. 109 -2- WHEREAS, on November 17, 2015, City Council adopted Resolution 2015-100 expressing its support for and willingness to contribute funds to County annually for five years for CDOT’s use on the Project; and WHEREAS, each of the Municipalities has also adopted a Resolution expressing its support for and willingness to contribute funds to County annually for five years for CDOT’s use on the Project; and WHEREAS, C.R,S. §43-2-202(4), requires that the City and each Municipality spend its share of the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy revenues for the construction of roads and streets located within its corporate boundaries and the City; and WHEREAS, the increase in the City’s share of the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy revenues will be utilized to fund construction of roads and streets within its corporate boundaries, making funds available from the City’s general fund or other designated fund for contribution to the Project in an amount equal to its share of increased County Road and Bridge Mill Levy revenues; and WHEREAS, the City’s contribution to the Project will serve a public purpose by producing significant economic benefits to the citizens of Fort Collins, including preserving the economic vitality of the City, maintaining and increasing employment in the City, stabilizing and improving the long term tax base of the City, and providing additional economic health benefits and improvements to the quality of life for the City citizens by improving transportation facilities connecting the City and its citizens to commerce, health care, education and employment in the Northern Colorado region; and WHEREAS, in light of the benefits to the City and its citizens, it is in the best interest of the City to enter into an agreement with the County and the Municipalities to fund the Project; and WHEREAS, the City, the County and the Municipalities are authorized pursuant to Article XIV, Section 18 of the Colorado Constitution and Section 29-1-201, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes, to enter into intergovernmental agreements for the purpose of providing any service or performing any function which they can perform individually. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement for Funding I-25 Improvements substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Resolution. Packet Pg. 110 -3- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 111 Page 1 of 15 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING I-25 IMPROVEMENTS This Intergovernmental Agreement for Funding I-25 Improvements (“Agreement”) is made and effective on ____________________, 2016, by and among the Board of County Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado (referred to as “County”), and the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, the City of Loveland, Colorado, the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, the Town of Timnath, Colorado, the Town of Berthoud, Colorado, the Town of Windsor, Colorado, the Town of Wellington, Colorado, and the Town of Johnstown, Colorado (individually referred to as “Municipality” or collectively as “Municipalities”). (The County and Municipalities will jointly be referred to as the “Parties.”) I. RECITALS A. Interstate 25 (“I-25”) serves as the primary north-south highway connection for Northern Colorado, including the County and the Municipalities. B. I-25 is the primary roadway route for regional connectivity to commerce, health care, education and employment. C. I-25 is designated as a federal freight route. D. I-25 in Northern Colorado is considered significantly congested such that traffic flow is impaired and quality of life is adversely affected. E. The Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) completed an Environmental Impact Statement in August 2011 that identified and evaluated multi-modal transportation improvements along approximately 60 miles of the I-25 corridor from the Fort Collins/Wellington area to Denver. The Statement identified areas of I-25 and associated structures such as bridges that needed to be expanded and/or improved. F. CDOT has proposed to expand I-25 from two lanes (north and south) to three lanes (north and south) for approximately fourteen miles between State Highway14 and State Highway 402, replace the Cache la Poudre Bridge and the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge north of State Highway 34, expand the Kendall Parkway Crossing under I-25 and expand the Bridge over the Big Thompson River and the Bridge over the Great Western Railway to accommodate a third travel lane (collectively “Project”). G. Funding for the Project is proposed to include contributions from government at federal, state, county, and municipal levels and other sources. H. Increased property values for Larimer County property owners in 2015 have provided an opportunity to increase the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy within the County’s total Mill Levy commencing in 2016 and for a period of four years thereafter by an estimated EXHIBIT A 1 Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 2 of 15 amount sufficient to generate an additional $2 million annually without detriment to other County programs, without decreasing the amount shared back to the Municipalities in 2015 pursuant to C.R,S. §43-2-202(2) (the “2015 Share Back”), and without increasing the total County Mill Levy. I. The increased County Road and Bridge Mill Levy is projected to generate approximately $10 million in excess of the 2015 Share Back (the “Increased Municipal Share Back”) over five years commencing with calendar year 2016 for CDOT’s use on the Project. J. The Municipalities have each adopted Resolutions expressing their willingness to contribute funds to County annually for five years for CDOT’s use on the Project subject to the terms of this Agreement. K. County and Municipalities are authorized pursuant to Article XIV, Section 18 of the Colorado Constitution and Section 29-1-201, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes, to enter into intergovernmental agreements for the purpose of providing any service or performing any function which they can perform individually. II. CONSIDERATION NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and obligations herein expressed, the County and Municipalities agree as follows. III. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Commencing in calendar year 2017 and continuing for calendar years 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, each Municipality shall pay to County from such Municipality’s general fund or such other fund as such Municipality may designate, an annual contribution in an amount equal to that portion of the Increased Municipal Share Back paid by the County to each Municipality pursuant to C.R.S. §43-2-202 (2) (“Municipality Contribution”) to be used as a portion of the “local match” for the Project, subject to the terms set forth in this Agreement. 2. County shall notify (“Notification”) each Municipality in writing no later than January 31 in calendar years 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 the total amount of the Increased Municipal Share Back” received by such Municipality during the previous calendar year. 3. Within 30 days after receipt of the Notification, each Municipality shall give written notice to the County stating whether or not such Municipality has budgeted and appropriated funds for the current calendar year to make its annual Municipality Contribution as set forth in Paragraph 1 above. 4. Provided the Municipality has budgeted and appropriated funds, such Municipality shall pay its Municipality Contribution to County within 60 days following such Municipality’s receipt from County of its Notification. 1 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 3 of 15 5. County shall contribute an amount equal to the County’s share of the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy revenues received pursuant to C.R.S. §43-2-202(2) attributable to the increase in the County Road and Bridge Mill Levy specified in Recital H above (“County Contribution). No later than February 28 in calendar years 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, County shall give written notice to each Municipality affirming that County has (or has not) budgeted and appropriated funds for the current calendar year to make its annual County Contribution. 6. County shall deposit the County Contribution and the Municipality Contributions into a separately identifiable account (“Contributions Fund”) and shall maintain records as to such account sufficient to identify all deposits and withdrawals from such account. 7. County is authorized to pay to CDOT funds in the Contributions Fund for CDOT’s use in the Project pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement to be executed between County and CDOT. 8. County shall maintain accurate accounts of any and all amounts paid to CDOT from the Contributions Fund. County shall provide to Municipalities information detailing Project payments to CDOT from the Contributions Fund. 9. If County or a majority of Municipalities, after consultation with the other Parties, determines all or any part of the Project is not feasible due to inadequacy of funds or other impediments, and provided amounts remain in the Contributions Fund, County shall so notify Municipalities in writing. Within 90 days after such notification, a. County shall make a payment to County and to each Municipality of any amount remaining in the Contributions Fund attributable to County and such Municipality’s respective percentage contribution , OR, b. In lieu of such payment, the Parties may agree in writing to an alternative use of the Contribution Funds, provided such alternative use benefits roads or transportation systems located within the jurisdiction(s) of the Parties so agreeing. 10. Any notice or other communication given by any party to another relating to this Agreement must be hand-delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight commercial courier, addressed to such other party at its respective addresses set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and such notice or other communication will be deemed given when so hand-delivered or three (3) business days after so mailed, or the next business day after being deposited with an overnight commercial courier. 11. The obligations of the County and Municipalities to commit or expend funds after calendar year 2016 are subject to and conditioned on the annual appropriation of funds sufficient and intended to carry out said obligations by the respective governing bodies of County and Municipalities in their sole discretion. 1 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 4 of 15 12. This Agreement is to be construed according to its fair meaning and as if prepared by all parties hereto and is deemed to be and contain the entire understanding and agreement between the parties hereto. There shall be deemed to be no other terms, conditions, promises, understandings, statements, or representations, expressed or implied, concerning this Agreement unless set forth in writing and signed by the Parties hereto. 13. This Agreement cannot be modified except in writing signed by all Parties. 14. This Agreement will be governed by and its terms construed under the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action shall be in Larimer County, State of Colorado. 15. Nothing contained herein is deemed or should be construed by the Parties or by any third party as creating the relationship of principle and agent, a partnership or a joint venture between the Parties, or an employment relationship between the Parties. 16. This Agreement is made for the sole and exclusive benefit of County and Municipalities, their successors and assigns, and it is not made for the benefit of any third party. 17. If any term or condition of this Agreement is held to be invalid by final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity of such a term or condition, will not in any way affect any of the other terms or conditions of this Agreement, provided that the invalidity of any such term or condition does not materially prejudice any Party in their respective rights and obligations under the valid terms and conditions of this Agreement. 18. No party will be deemed in violation of this Agreement if prevented from performing any of its respective obligations hereunder by reason of strikes, boycotts, labor disputes, embargoes, shortage of energy or materials, acts of God, acts of public enemies, acts of superior governmental authorities, weather conditions, rights, rebellions, sabotage, or any other circumstances for which it is not responsible or that are not within its control. 19. This Agreement may be signed by the Parties in counterpart. 1 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 5 of 15 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: ____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ County Attorney Jshdocs/county/Agreement for funding I-25 improvements Final 1 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 6 of 15 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ City Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 7 of 15 CITY OF LOVELAND, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ City Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 8 of 15 TOWN OF ESTES PARK By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 9 of 15 TOWN OF TIMNATH, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 10 of 15 TOWN OF BERTHOUD, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 11 of 15 TOWN OF WINDSOR, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 12 of 15 TOWN OF WELLINGTON, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 13 of 15 TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO By: _____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ Approved as to form: ___________________________________ Town Attorney 1 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 14 of 15 EXHIBIT “A” To County: County Manager Larimer County, Colorado P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522 To Fort Collins: City Manager City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 With copy to: City Attorney City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 To Loveland: City Manager City of Loveland 500 East 3 rd Street, Suite 330 Loveland, CO 80537 With copy to: City Attorney City of Loveland 500 East 3 rd Street, Suite 330 Loveland, CO 80537 To Estes Park: Town Administrator P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 1 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Page 15 of 15 To Timnath: Town Manager 4800 Goodman Street Timnath, CO 80547 To Berthoud: Town Administrator P.O. Box 1229 Berthoud, CO 80513 To Windsor: Town Manager 301 Walnut Street Windsor, CO 80550 To Wellington: The Town of Wellington 3735 Cleveland Avenue P.O. Box 127 Wellington, CO 80549 With copy to: March, Olive and Pharris, LLC Attn: Brad March 1312 S. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 To Johnstown: Town Manager 450 S. Parish Ave. Johnstown, CO 80534 1 Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Exhibit A (4827 : I-25 Funding IGA RESO) Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Darin Atteberry, City Manager Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT Public Hearing on the 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the second official public hearing on the City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Biennial Budget for the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on the 2017-2018 Budget. Public input will also be taken during the budget adoption meetings on Tuesday, November 1 and Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The City Manager’s 2017-2018 Recommended Budget can be reviewed at the Old Town Library, the Harmony Library, or the City Clerk’s Office. The recommended budget can also be viewed online at fcgov.com/budget. 8 Packet Pg. 127 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Darin Atteberry, City Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2016-078 Urging the City's Electors to Vote "Yes/For" Ballot Issue 2A on the Ballot of the November 8, 2016, Election, Which Asks City Voters to Confirm that the City May Keep and Spend All Revenues it has Received and Will Continue to Receive from the "Keep Fort Collins Great" .85% Sales and Use Tax City Voters Approved in 2010. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to bring forward a resolution in support of the November ballot question asking voters to confirm that the City may retain and spend all revenues it has received and will continue to receive relating to the “Keep Fort Collins Great” .85% sales and use tax voters approved in 2010. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Leadership Planning Team requested staff to draft and bring forward the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 128 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 30, 2016 City Council STAFF Wanda Winkelmann, City Clerk Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer Darin Atteberry, City Manager SUBJECT Items Relating to Submitting a Ballot Question for the November 8, 2016 Election EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Possible Public Hearing and Motion Regarding Protest of Ballot Language B. Resolution 2016-068 Submitting a Ballot Question to the Registered Electors of the City at a Special Municipal Election to be Held on November 8, 2016, and Conducted as a Coordinated Election with Larimer County, Asking the Voters to Confirm that the City May Retain and Spend All Revenues it has Received and will Continue to Receive Relating to the “Keep Fort Collins Great” .85% Sales and Use Tax Voters Approved in 2010. The purpose of this item is to is to set ballot language for the voters of Fort Collins to confirm that they intended for the City to collect, keep, and spend all revenues collected as authorized and directed in the 2010 “Keep Fort Collins Great” ballot question. Ballot language is being set at the earliest possible date. Any protest of the proposed ballot language must be received no later than Monday, August 29 at noon. The protest(s) shall be heard, considered, and resolved by Council prior to adoption of Resolution 2016, 068. If protest(s) are received, copies will be included in Council’s “Read-before” packet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2010 voters approved a .85% sales and use tax increase to be spent for the following purposes: x 33% for street maintenance and repair, x 17% for other street and transportation needs, x 17% for police services, x 11% for fire protection and other emergency services, x 11% for parks maintenance and recreation services, and x 11% for other community priorities as determined by the City Council. The 2010 ballot language also asked voters whether: “the full revenues derived from the tax, and investment earnings thereon, may be retained and expended by the City for such purposes, notwithstanding any State revenue or expenditure limitations including but not limited to [TABOR]” (“KFCG Revenue Change”) ATTACHMENT 1 9.1 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 2 The KFCG initiative passed with 60% approval. In the state of Colorado, any proposed tax increase is subject to the Colorado Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). The City asked voters in 1997 for exclusion from the revenue-limitation provisions of TABOR. This is commonly called “de-Brucing.” Voters approved this ballot measure by 57%. TABOR requires for tax increases that the first year’s tax revenue, as well as the expected fiscal year spending without the tax increase, be estimated in the TABOR notice that is mailed to voters before the election. TABOR also contains language addressing the consequences of when actual revenues collected exceed these estimates. In 2010, the TABOR notice for the KFCG tax estimated one-year (2011) revenue from the .85% increase to be $18.7 million. Actual revenue in 2011 was $19.7 million. Although voters approved in 1997 a general “de-Brucing” question authorizing the City to retain and spend all excess TABOR revenues collected by the City in all future years, and also approved in 2010 the KFCG ballot question with language stating that the City could keep and expend “all revenues” from the KFCG tax, a citizen has indicated they will sue the City under TABOR asking the courts to require the City to refund a portion of the KFCG tax revenues the City has already collected and spent for the voter-authorized purposes described because the City’s actual revenues in 2011 exceeded the estimates in the TABOR notice for the KFCG tax. Similar concerns were recently raised relating to the State of Colorado’s November 2015 ballot question for Proposition BB, which asked the State’s voters to allow the State to retain and spend the revenues it received in fiscal year 2014-15 from the marijuana taxes the State’s voters approved in Proposition AA at the November 2013 election. The State appears to have done this on the basis of a legal opinion from the Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services (“LLS”) (Attachment 2), which raised questions about whether the State’s de- Brucing waivers of TABOR’s revenue limitations were sufficient to avoid refunding its excess revenues relating to the marijuana taxes without seeking additional voter approval. Unfortunately, as the LLS opinion indicates, this question has not been answered by the Colorado appellate courts. Consequently, rather than litigate this issue, which could take years and would leave City budgeting in a state of uncertainty, the City believes it is more prudent to ask voters as soon as possible to confirm that in approving the KFCG tax in 2010 they did intend for the City to use all KFCG revenue as outlined in the original ballot language. On an annual basis, Council and citizens are provided complete accounting of KFGC collections and expenditures. These reports can be found at fcgov.com/kfcg. Some examples of KFCG tax provided services include: x Streets. More than 300 lane miles have been resurfaced, and surface patching, centerline marking, sidewalk and concrete work throughout the City has been completed. x Other Transportation. Nine bridges have been designed and/or constructed (including Shields at Rolland Moore, East and West Prospect, and multiple bridges over Arthur Ditch). Safe Routes to School, Neighborhood Plans and Neighborhood Parking initiatives have been designed and implemented. Transfort, Max and Dial-a-Ride have expanded service, including Saturday and evening trips. Signals and sidewalks have been upgraded throughout the City, improving traffic flow and ADA accessibility. x Police. Thirty positions have been added, including 19 sworn police officers. With additional resources, there has been an increase in Community Policing efforts, resulting in reduced call volumes for both neighborhoods and in Old Town. x Fire. Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) has hired 13 firefighters and staffed the South Battalion. Response times have been reduced by more than 2 minutes in PFA’s southern jurisdiction. Funding has also been used to ensure first responders have up-to-date equipment including breathing apparatuses. x Parks and Recreation. Approximately 3,000 scholarships per year have been provided to low-income citizens, Fossil Creek Trail was expanded and connected to Spring Creek trail, more than 4,000 hours per year of Adaptive Recreation programming was provided, and the existing service hours and levels at all City Recreation centers has been maintained. Various park improvements were completed, 9.1 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 3 including Rolland Moore restrooms, Veteran’s Plaza, field lighting and playground equipment upgrades. x Other Community Priorities. Funding has been provided for Poudre River capital restoration projects, more than 10 community agencies supporting before/after school care, school lunch programs and other meals for low income citizens, the annual 4th of July celebration for citizens at City Park, and staffing/supplies to maintain the downtown flowers. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Potential financial impacts to the City are varied. Many communities are struggling with untested TABOR interpretations. With no clear case law, litigation could be both lengthy and the outcomes unknown. If the City were to choose not to go to the voters but await threatened litigation, there would be cost for defending the anticipated case, and also in the uncertainty of the outcome. Should the City be required to refund overages in collections, those refund mechanisms are also undetermined. Regardless of the mechanism, citizens would see a reduction in service going forward related to KFCG funded services including police, fire, transportation, parks and recreation and other community priorities. The cost of placing this item on the November ballot is expected to be $300k - $500k. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff has attempted to keep the public informed of this complex TABOR question and City actions addressing the suggested lawsuit through press releases. Once the ballot language is adopted, the City will be bound by campaign laws and will be limited in what and how information is communicated. With this in mind, and in anticipation that City Council may put this measure on the ballot, staff has developed a timeline and a set of FAQs. ATTACHMENTS 1. KFCG TABOR FAQs (PDF) 2. Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services Opinion Dated March 10, 2014 (PDF) 9.1 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort TABOR/KFCG FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS What is the issue? In 2010, voters approved a new .85 sales tax, “Keep Fort Collins Great” (KFCG). Recently a citizen has argued that under Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), the City must either refund a portion of the KFCG tax revenues or seek voter approval to keep them. The City has been operating with the understanding that past voter approval and the broad language used in the 2010 KFCG ballot question allowed all revenue to be retained and spent according to the outcomes outlined by the citizens. Based on new and evolving interpretations of “de-Brucing” measures, the City has decided to confirm this with voters. What is TABOR and “de-Brucing?” In 1992, Colorado voters approved TABOR. TABOR is a complex provision of the Colorado Constitution that places limitations on how governments impose taxes and issue debt. It also places limitations on the amount of revenues governments can retain and spend. Governments may ask voters to waive TABOR revenue limitations. This is commonly called “de-Brucing,” named after TABOR’s main proponent in 1992, Douglas Bruce. In 1997, Fort Collins voters approved a general “de-Brucing” question authorizing the City to retain and spend all of its TABOR revenues in all future years. The voters also approved broad “de-Brucing” language in the KFCG ballot question. If voters already authorized the City to retain and spend all KFCG revenues, why do we need another vote? As mentioned above, a citizen has indicated he will sue the City under TABOR asking the courts to require the City to refund a portion of the KFCG tax revenues the City has already collected and spent for the purposes the voters approved in the KFCG ballot question. Rather than litigate this issue, which could take years and would leave City budgeting in a state of uncertainty, the City believes it is more prudent to ask voters as soon as possible to confirm that they did intend for the City to use all KFCG revenue as the voters directed in the original ballot language. A timeline of key dates is attached. What was originally approved by voters? In 2010, City voters approved the .85% “Keep Fort Collins Great” (KFCG) sales and use tax by 60% approval to be spent in the following percentages for these purposes: • 33% for street maintenance and repair • 17% for other street and transportation needs • 17% for police services • 11% for fire protection and other emergency services • 11% for parks maintenance and recreation services • 11% for other community priorities as determined by the City Council The 2010 ballot measure approved by voters also asked whether: “the full revenues derived from the tax, and investment earnings thereon, may be retained and expended by the City for such purposes, notwithstanding any State revenue or expenditure limitations including but not limited to TABOR.” 9.1 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort How much excess tax revenue was collected, and how was it spent? In 2010, the ballot estimated one-year (2011) revenue from the .85% increase to be $18.7 million. Actual revenue was $19.7 million. On an annual basis, Council and citizens are provided complete accounting of KFGC collections and expenditures. These reports can be found at fcgov.com/kfcg. Some examples of KFCG tax provided services include: x Streets. More than 300 lane miles have been resurfaced, and surface patching, centerline marking, sidewalk and concrete work throughout the City has been completed. x Other Transportation. Nine bridges have been designed and/or constructed (including Shields at Rolland Moore, East and West Prospect, and multiple bridges over Arthur Ditch). Safe Routes to School, Neighborhood Plans and Neighborhood Parking initiatives have been designed and implemented. Transfort, Max and Dial-a-Ride have expanded service, including Saturday and evening trips. Signals and sidewalks have been upgraded throughout the City, improving traffic flow and ADA accessibility. x Police. Thirty positions have been added, including 19 sworn police officers. With additional resources, there has been an increase in Community Policing efforts, resulting in reduced call volumes for both neighborhoods and in Old Town. x Fire. Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) has hired 13 firefighters and staffed the South Battalion. Response times have been reduced by more than 2 minutes in PFA’s southern jurisdiction. Funding has also been used to ensure first responders have up-to-date equipment including breathing apparatuses. x Parks and Recreation. Approximately 3,000 scholarships per year have been provided to low- income citizens, Fossil Creek Trail was expanded and connected to Spring Creek trail, more than 4,000 hours per year of Adaptive Recreation programming was provided, and the existing service hours and levels at all City Recreation centers has been maintained. Various park improvements were completed, including Rolland Moore restrooms, Veteran’s Plaza, field lighting and playground equipment upgrades. x Other Community Priorities. Funding has been provided for Poudre River capital restoration projects, more than 10 community agencies supporting before/after school care, school lunch programs and other meals for low income citizens, the annual 4th of July celebration for citizens at City Park, and staffing/supplies to maintain the downtown flowers. If this is not approved, what happens next? That’s unknown at this point. If the City were required to provide a refund or reduce future collections, citizens would see a direct reduction in City services going forward. August 25, 2016 9.1 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort 9.1 Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -1- RESOLUTION 2016, 068 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SUBMITTING A BALLOT QUESTION TO THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY AT A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 2016, AND CONDUCTED AS A COORDINATED ELECTION WITH LARIMER COUNTY, ASKING THE VOTERS TO CONFIRM THAT THE CITY MAY RETAIN AND SPEND ALL REVENUES IT HAS RECEIVED AND WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE RELATING TO THE “KEEP FORT COLLINS GREAT” .85% SALES AND USE TAX VOTERS APPROVED IN 2010 WHEREAS, on November 2, 2010, the City held a special election conducted as a coordinated election with Larimer County; and WHEREAS, at that election, the City’s electorate considered, and 60% of those voting approved, a ballot question asking whether the City shall increase its taxes in 2011 by an estimated $18.7 million and by such amounts as generated thereafter by increasing the City’s sales and use tax rate from 3.00 % to 3.85% commencing on January 1, 2011, and ending midnight on December 31, 2020, to be spent only for these purposes: (a) 33% for street maintenance and repair, (b) 17% for other street and transportation needs, (c) 17% for police services, (d) 11% for fire protection and other emergency services, (e) 11% for parks maintenance and recreation services, and (f) 11% for other community priorities as determined by the City Council, which tax rate increase is commonly known as the “Keep Fort Collins Great” tax (the “KFCG Tax”); and WHEREAS, as a proposed increase in the rate of the City’s sales and use tax, the KFCG Tax was required to be approved by the voters under Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution (“TABOR”); and WHEREAS, the KFCG Tax ballot question voters approved also asked whether “all revenue generated” from the KFCG Tax could be spent for the purposes specified in the ballot question and whether “the full revenues derived from the tax, and investment earnings thereon, may be retained and expended by the City for such purposes, notwithstanding any State revenue or expenditure limitations including but not limited to [TABOR]” (“KFCG Revenue Change”); and WHEREAS, in the years 2011 to the present, the City has collected over $144 million of KFCG Tax revenues and spent these revenues for the following purposes as specifically authorized by the voters in the KFCG Tax ballot question: 9.1 Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -2- (a) Streets. More than 300 lane miles have been resurfaced, and surface patching, centerline marking, sidewalk and concrete work throughout the City has been completed. (b) Other Transportation. Nine bridges have been designed and/or constructed (including Shields at Rolland Moore, East and West Prospect, and multiple bridges over Arthur Ditch). Safe Routes to School, Neighborhood Plans and Neighborhood Parking initiatives have been designed and implemented. Transfort, the Max and Dial-a-Ride have expanded service, including Saturday and evening trips. Signals and sidewalks have been upgraded throughout the City improving traffic flow and ADA accessibility. (c) Police. Thirty positions have been added, including 19 sworn police officers. With additional resources, there has been an increase in Community Policing efforts, resulting in reduced call volumes for both neighborhoods and in Old Town. (d) Fire. The Poudre Fire Authority (“PFA”) has hired 13 firefighters and staffed the South Battalion. Response times have been reduced by more than 2 minutes in PFA’s southern jurisdiction. Funding has also been used to ensure first responders have up-to-date equipment including breathing apparatuses. (e) Parks and Recreation. Approximately 3,000 scholarships per year have been provided to low-income citizens, Fossil Creek Trail was expanded and connected to Spring Creek trail, more than 4,000 hours per year of Adaptive Recreation programming was provided, and the existing service hours and levels at all City Recreation centers has been maintained. Various park improvements were completed, including Rolland Moore restrooms, Veteran’s Plaza, field lighting and playground equipment upgrades. (f) Other Community Priorities. Funding has been provided for the Poudre River capital restoration projects, to more than 10 community agencies supporting before and after school care, school lunch programs and meals for low income citizens, the annual 4 th of July celebration at City Park, and staffing and supplies to maintain the downtown flowers; and WHEREAS, a Fort Collins citizen has raised the prospect of a lawsuit against the City under TABOR to require the City to refund a substantial portion of the KFCG Tax revenues the City has already collected and spent for the voter-authorized purposes described above and to require the City to substantially reduce the KFCG Tax .85% rate voters approved in 2010; and WHEREAS, litigating this issue, rather than promptly presenting a ballot question to the voters for their resolution of the issue, will result in several years of uncertainty concerning how the City should plan and budget for current and future City services and capital projects and whether the City should continue to collect the KFCG Tax; and WHEREAS, this uncertainty will likely result in an immediate and substantial reduction of City services to the community, particularly those funded with KFCG Tax revenues, which would include: (i) police, fire and other emergency services, (ii) construction, maintenance and operation of streets and transportation services, and (iii) the operation and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities; and 9.1 Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -3- WHEREAS, as with any litigation, the City will also incur its own court costs and attorney fees in defending the lawsuit, and if the City does not prevail, the City might have to pay the plaintiff’s court costs and attorney fees; and WHEREAS, if the courts require the City to refund taxpayers any amount of the KFCG Tax revenues, the City may also be required to add 10% annual simple interest to that refund amount; and WHEREAS, the threatened lawsuit relates to two TABOR provisions, one of which, Section 20(3)(b)(iii), required that voters be mailed a notice before the 2010 election to provide them with two different estimates of City revenues in 2011, the first full fiscal year of the proposed KFCG Tax (the “TABOR Notice”); and WHEREAS, the first revenue estimate in the TABOR Notice was an estimate of the maximum dollar amount the City expected to receive in 2011 from the KFCG Tax, which the City estimated would be $18.7 million, and the second revenue estimate was an estimate of the City’s “fiscal year spending” in 2011 without the KFCG Tax increase, which the City estimated would be $146.5 million in 2011; and WHEREAS, in 2011 the City’s actual KFCG Tax revenues were $19.8 million and its “fiscal year spending” without the KFCG Tax revenues was approximately $160 million; and WHEREAS, the other related TABOR provision, Section 20(3)(c), provides that if either of these two revenue estimates in a TABOR election notice is exceeded in the first full fiscal year of a tax increase, as occurred with the KFCG Tax, certain excess revenues must be refunded to the taxpayers and the tax increase is thereafter to be reduced, unless there is “later voter approval;” and WHEREAS, the City believes this “later voter approval” may be satisfied by including in the ballot question for a proposed tax increase language like that in the KFCG Revenue Change quoted above or by a ballot question approved by voters to allow a government more generally to collect, retain and spend all of the TABOR revenues it receives notwithstanding any limitations on those revenues in TABOR, like those in TABOR Section 20(3)(c); and WHEREAS, in 1997, the City’s voters approved a ballot question that has generally authorized the City “to collect, retain and expend the full proceeds of the City’s property taxes and all other funds and revenue sources . . . in 1996 and all revenues received in every year thereafter . . . notwithstanding any state revenue or expenditure limitations, including without limitation those contained in [TABOR]” (“General Revenue Change”), which further reflects the intent of the City’s voters to exempt all of the City’s TABOR revenues from all of TABOR’s revenue limitations, including those limitations in TABOR Section 20(3)(c); and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the voters’ approval of the KFCG Revenue Change and the General Revenue Change, questions have been raised recently as to whether these voter- approved waivers of TABOR revenue limitations are sufficient to satisfy the later-voter-approval requirement in TABOR Section 20(3)(c); and 9.1 Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -4- WHEREAS, these questions have arisen largely related to the State of Colorado’s November 2015 ballot question for Proposition BB, which asked the State’s voters under TABOR Section 20(3)(c) to allow the State to retain and spend the revenues it received in fiscal year 2014-15 from the marijuana taxes the State’s voters approved in Proposition AA at the State’s November 2013 election; and WHEREAS, although the ballot question for Proposition AA contained language approving the waiver of any revenue limitations provided by law for these marijuana tax revenues, much like the City’s KFCG Revenue Change language, and in 2005 the State’s voters approved Referendum C that generally waived TABOR’s revenue limitations for most of the State’s future TABOR revenues, like the City’s General Revenue Change has done for the City’s TABOR revenues, the State nevertheless presented Proposition BB to the voters; and WHEREAS, the State appears to have done this on the basis of a legal opinion from the Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services (“LLS”), which provides legal advice to the Colorado General Assembly, that questioned whether these waivers of TABOR revenue limitations by the State satisfied Section 20(3)(c)’s later-voter-approval requirement, although in doing so, the LLS opinion concedes that there is currently no decision by the Colorado appellate courts that squarely addresses the question of what is required for “later voter approval” under Section 20(3)(c); and WHEREAS, while there are not any judicial decisions squarely addressing this question, the Colorado Supreme Court has in past decisions approved of voters, in various circumstances, waiving the revenue limitations imposed by TABOR for all revenues of a specific tax and even for all of a government’s TABOR revenues; and WHEREAS, considering the clear and all-inclusive language of the KFCG Revenue Change in the KFCG Tax ballot question voters approved in 2010 and the equally clear and all- inclusive language voters approved in the General Revenue Change, it is reasonable to conclude that the City’s voters have already and sufficiently determined that they want the City to collect, retain and spend all of the KFCG Tax and any other revenue TABOR Section 20(3)(c) might otherwise require to be refunded, without the electorate having to vote a third time to decide this issue; and WHEREAS, in addition, the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected a rigid interpretation of TABOR that would have the effect of working a reduction in government services or unreasonably curtail the everyday functions of government; and WHEREAS, since lengthy litigation would nevertheless stall current City programs that clearly benefit citizens and taxpayers, the Council has determined that is in the City’s best interest to promptly confirm the voters’ intent with respect to this matter, rather than allow the uncertainty of litigation to interfere with the City’s provision of the services the voters requested through their 2010 approval of the KFCG Tax; and 9.1 Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -5- WHEREAS, in order to eliminate this uncertainty and to also avoid the financial risks to the City that would come with litigating this issue, the City Council finds and determines that it is in the best interest of the City and its taxpayers and is necessary for the public’s health, safety and welfare that a ballot question be submitted to the City’s electorate as hereafter provided; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2016, the City Council adopted on final reading Ordinance No. 097, 2016, calling a special City election to be held on November 8, 2016, to be conducted as a coordinated election with Larimer County; and WHEREAS, Article X, Section 3 of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins authorizes the City Council to submit any question to a vote of the people at a special election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby submitted to the registered electors of the City at the City’s special municipal election to be held in conjunction with the November 8, 2016, Larimer County General Election as a coordinated election, the following ballot question: City-Initiated Question Concerning Whether the City May Keep and Spend All Revenues Related to the “Keep Fort Collins Great” Sales and Use Tax City Voters Approved in 2010 MAY THE CITY KEEP ALL OF THE REVENUES THAT IT HAS COLLECTED FROM THE CITY’S “KEEP FORT COLLINS GREAT” .85% SALES AND USE TAX APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IN 2010, WHETHER OR NOT SUCH REVENUES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SPENT, AND CONTINUE TO COLLECT THE TAX AT THE .85% RATE AND SPEND ALL OF THE REVENUES IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS DIRECTED BY THE VOTERS IN 2010: 33% FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR; 17% FOR OTHER STREET AND TRANSPORTATION NEEDS; 17% FOR POLICE SERVICES; 11% FOR FIRE PROTECTION AND OTHER EMERGENCY SERVICES; 11% FOR PARKS MAINTENANCE AND RECREATION SERVICES; AND 11% FOR COMMUNITY PRIORITIES OTHER THAN THOSE LISTED ABOVE, AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL; WITHOUT REFUNDING ANY AMOUNT FOR EXCEEDING THE REVENUE ESTIMATES IN THE ELECTION NOTICE MAILED TO VOTERS IN 2010? 9.1 Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -6- _____ Yes/For _____ No/Against Passed and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 30th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 9.1 Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Agenda Item Summary Relating to Submittal of a Ballot Question to Electors, August 30, 2016 (4829 : Supporting the Keep Fort -1- RESOLUTION 2016-078 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS URGING THE CITY’S ELECTORS TO VOTE “YES/FOR” BALLOT ISSUE 2A ON THE BALLOT OF THE NOVEMBER 8, 2016 ELECTION, WHICH ASKS CITY VOTERS TO CONFIRM THAT THE CITY MAY KEEP AND SPEND ALL REVENUES IT HAS RECEIVED AND WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE FROM THE “KEEP FORT COLLINS GREAT” .85% SALES AND USE TAX CITY VOTERS APPROVED IN 2010 WHEREAS, at the City’s November 2, 2010 election, the City’s electorate considered, and 60% of those voting approved, a ballot question asking whether the City shall increase its taxes in 2011 by an estimated $18.7 million and by such amounts as generated thereafter by increasing the City’s sales and use tax rate from 3.00 % to 3.85% commencing on January 1, 2011, and ending midnight on December 31, 2020, to be spent only for these purposes: (a) 33% for street maintenance and repair, (b) 17% for other street and transportation needs, (c) 17% for police services, (d) 11% for fire protection and other emergency services, (e) 11% for parks maintenance and recreation services, and (f) 11% for other community priorities as determined by City Council, which tax rate increase is commonly known as the “Keep Fort Collins Great” tax (the “KFCG Tax”); and WHEREAS, as a proposed increase in the rate of the City’s sales and use tax, the KFCG Tax was required to be approved by the voters under Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution (“TABOR”); and WHEREAS, the City has collected $117 million of KFCG Tax revenues during 2011 through 2015 and it is estimated the City will collect another $28 million in 2016, and of this $145 million total amount, the City has already spent or appropriated for spending $134 million for the purposes specifically directed by the voters in the 2010 KFCG Tax ballot question, examples of which include: (a) Streets. More than 300 lane miles have been resurfaced, and surface patching, centerline marking, sidewalk and concrete work throughout the City has been completed. (b) Other Transportation. Nine bridges have been designed and/or constructed (including Shields at Rolland Moore, East and West Prospect, and multiple bridges over Arthur Ditch). Safe Routes to School, Neighborhood Plans and Neighborhood Parking initiatives have been designed and implemented. Transfort, the Max and Dial-a-Ride have expanded service, including Saturday and evening trips. Signals and sidewalks have been upgraded throughout the City, improving traffic flow and ADA accessibility. (c) Police. Thirty positions have been added, including 19 sworn police officers. With additional resources, there has been an increase in Community Policing efforts, resulting in reduced call volumes for both neighborhoods and in Old Town. Packet Pg. 155 -2- (d) Fire. The Poudre Fire Authority (“PFA”) has hired 13 firefighters and staffed the South Battalion. Response times have been reduced by more than 2 minutes in PFA’s southern jurisdiction. Funding has also been used to ensure first responders have up-to- date equipment including breathing apparatuses. (e) Parks and Recreation. Approximately 3,000 scholarships per year have been provided to low-income citizens, Fossil Creek Trail was expanded and connected to Spring Creek trail, more than 4,000 hours per year of Adaptive Recreation programming was provided, and the existing service hours and levels at all City recreation centers has been maintained. Various park improvements were completed, including Rolland Moore Park restrooms, Veteran’s Plaza, field lighting and playground equipment upgrades. (f) Other Community Priorities. Funding has been provided for the Poudre River capital restoration projects, to more than 10 community agencies supporting before and after school care, school lunch programs and meals for low income citizens, the annual 4th of July celebration at City Park, and staffing and supplies to maintain the downtown flowers; and WHEREAS, the KFCG Tax ballot question voters approved in 2010 specifically asked whether “all revenue generated” from the KFCG Tax could be spent for the purposes specified in the ballot question and whether “the full revenues derived from the tax, and investment earnings thereon, may be retained and expended by the City for such purposes, notwithstanding any State revenue or expenditure limitations including but not limited to [TABOR]” (“KFCG Revenue Change”); and WHEREAS, in 1997 the City’s voters also approved a ballot question that has generally authorized the City “to collect, retain and expend the full proceeds of the City’s property taxes and all other funds and revenue sources . . . in 1996 and all revenues received in every year thereafter . . . notwithstanding any state revenue or expenditure limitations, including without limitation those contained in [TABOR]” (“General Revenue Change”); and WHEREAS, a Fort Collins citizen recently raised the prospect of a lawsuit against the City under TABOR to require the City to refund a substantial portion of the KFCG Tax revenues the City has already collected and spent for the voter-authorized purposes described above, and to require the City to substantially reduce the KFCG Tax .85% rate the voters approved in 2010; and WHEREAS, promptly presenting a ballot question to the voters for their confirmation as to their intent regarding the KFCG Tax revenues will avoid uncertainty concerning how the City should plan and budget for current and future City services and capital projects and whether the City should continue to collect the KFCG Tax; and WHEREAS, the Council has therefore previously determined that is in the City’s best interest to promptly confirm the voters’ intent regarding this matter, by submitting to the Packet Pg. 156 -3- electorate at the November 8 special election a ballot question with the following title, that is designated on the ballot as Ballot Issue 2A: “City-Initiated Question Concerning Whether the City May Keep and Spend All Revenues Related to the “Keep Fort Collins Great” Sales and Use Tax City Voters Approved in 2010. ; and WHEREAS, the Council believes it is important and in the best interest of this community that Ballot Issue 2A be approved by the voters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that, for the foregoing reasons, the City Council supports the passage of Ballot Issue 2A and strongly urges registered electors of the City to vote “Yes/For” on Ballot Issue 2A in the November 2016 election to confirm that the City is allowed to keep and spend all the revenues it has received and will continue to receive from the KFCG Tax and to continue to impose the KFCG Tax at the rate of .85%, as the City’s voters approved in 2010. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 157 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 4, 2016 City Council STAFF Josh Birks, Economic Health Director SUBJECT Resolution 2016-079 Supporting and Approving the Statement of Collaboration Between the City of Fort Collins and Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (FVC). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is for the City Council to acknowledge and support a Statement of Collaboration between the City of Fort Collins and Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (FVC). The City and FVC recognize the mutual business, educational and other interests related to the City's 2015 Economic Health Strategic Plan (EHS Plan) and FVC's mission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On September 1, 2016, representatives from the City of Fort Collins met with representatives of Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (FVC) based in Kyoto, Japan. FVC was introduced to the Fort Collins startup ecosystem through Denny Otsuga, who has worked with CSU Ventures and the Rockies Venture Club. FVC focuses on education for entrepreneurs, investment, and incubation, through a variety of different activities. Most notably, these activities include the creation of investment funds targeting start-ups. Prior to the September 1, 2016 discussion, Economic Health Office (EHO) staff discussed a number of opportunities to collaborate. At that time, FVC asked the City to consider executing a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Fort Collins, demonstrating mutual interests in expanding venture capital in our region. EHO staff recommends a ‘Statement of Collaboration’ (the “Statement”) as a more appropriate approach to document the partnership between the City and FVC (individually “Party” and jointly the “Parties”). The statement does not include any direct commitments or transfer of funds/resources between the parties. The Statement has been reviewed and approved by the Communications and Public Involvement Office and the City Attorney’s Office. EHO staff supports documenting this partnership with the Statement, which is Exhibit A to the Resolution. The 2015 Economic Health Strategic Plan (the EHS Plan) clearly identifies “Growing Our Own” as a theme of the City’s economic health approach. In addition, the EHS Plan calls for leveraging partnerships, including with private entities, to achieve the goals of the plan. The Statement recognizes: Both Parties have a mutual interest in contributing to local economic development through the execution of agreements that facilitate knowledge transfer, technology transfer, entrepreneurship, and, investment in Fort Collins, Colorado. The City’s EHS Plan encourages the development of new and enhanced capital access tools for entrepreneurs and cutting-edge companies to retain, develop, and recruit innovative startups and small businesses. The scope of the document includes: 10 Packet Pg. 158 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 2 o To the extent agreed by the Parties, they will seek opportunities for collaborative activities. o To the extent requested by the City and accepted by FVC, FVC will seek opportunities to assist the City’s entrepreneurial, commercialization and other related activities such as those expressed in the City’s EHS Plan. o To the extent requested by FVC and accepted by the City, the City will seek opportunities to assist FVC in its operations. o Neither Party is obligated to expend any funds or other resources in implementation of projects or activities in connection with this collaboration. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS No financial impact. 10 Packet Pg. 159 -1- RESOLUTION 2016-079 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SUPPORTING AND APPROVING THE STATEMENT OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND FUTURE VENTURE CAPITAL CO. LTD. (FVC) WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution 2015-059, approving and adopting the City’s Economic Health Strategic Plan (the “2015 EHS Plan”); and WHEREAS, the 2015 EHS Plan identifies support for the innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems that build new and creative industries, along with collaboration with economic health partners, as strategic priorities; and WHEREAS, the 2015 EHS Plan encourages the development of new and enhanced capital access tools for entrepreneurs and cutting-edge companies to retain, develop, and recruit innovative startups and businesses; and WHEREAS, the City and Future Venture Capital Co. Ltd. (“FVC”) recognize the mutual business, educational and other interests they have related to the City’s 2015 EHS Plan and FVC’s mission; and WHEREAS, the City and FVC have expressed an interest to voluntarily interact and cooperate for their mutual benefit and the entities they represent; and WHEREAS, the City and FVC have mutual interests in supporting this opportunity to promote and educate students, faculty, researchers, investors, and entrepreneurs in Colorado, Japan, and beyond; and WHEREAS, the City and FVC also have mutual interest in contributing to economic development through the execution of a statement of collaboration to facilitate knowledge transfer, technology transfer, entrepreneurship, and, investment in Fort Collins, Colorado, Japan, and other places. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby supports and approves the Statement of Collaboration between the City and Future Venture Capital (FVC) attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and the Mayor is authorized to sign it on behalf of the City. Packet Pg. 160 -2- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of October, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 161 EXHIBIT A 1 Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Exhibit A (4866 : FVC Statement of Collaboration RESO) 1 Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Exhibit A (4866 : FVC Statement of Collaboration RESO) 30 "United States Census, 1920," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MXLM-K23 : 14 December 2015), H W Shroeder, Fort Collins Ward 4, Larimer, Colorado, United States. 31 "United States Census, 1930", database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X748-W83 : 8 December 2015), Herman W Schroeder, 1930; "United States Census, 1940," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VR6N-ZDT : accessed 23 August 2016), Herman Schroeder in household of Emma Schroeder, Ward D, Fort Collins, Fort Collins City, Larimer, Colorado, United States. 32 Warranty Deed no. 523040, September 21, 1942. 33 1950 Fort Collins City Directory, 290; 1952 Fort Collins City Directory, 294; 1954 Fort Collins City Directory, 253; 1956 Fort Collins City Directory, 260; 1957 Fort Collins City Directory, 327; 1959 Fort Collins City Directory, 415; 1960 Fort Collins City Directory, 391; 1962 Fort Collins City Directory, 373; 1963 Fort Collins City Directory, 456; 1964 Fort Collins City Directory, 511; 1966 Fort Collins City Directory, 644. 34 1968 Fort Collins City Directory, 269; 1969 Fort Collins City Directory, 390; 1970 Fort Collins City Directory, 436. 35 Warranty Deed, January 3, 1975, Book 1630, page 284. 36 Warranty Deed, August 11, 1977, Book 1790, page 168. 6.2 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) 17 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, September 30, 1908. 18 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 25, 1909. 19 Ibid. 20 Fort Collins History Connection, “Establishing the City: Old Town and new Town. 1866-1877.” 21 "United States Census, 1900," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MQMD-17B : 25 January 2015), Herm W Schroeder, Precinct 8-12 Fort Collins, Timnath Fort Collins city Ward 1-4, Larimer, Colorado, United States. 22 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, March 23, 1899. 6.2 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) 3, 1895, 5; Fort Collins Weekly Courier, January 5, 1899, 5. 9 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, December 7, 1899. 10 Ibid. 11 Fort Collins Weekly Courier, November 21, 1901. 6.2 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Landmark Designation application, with photos (4839 : 419 Mathews-Landmark) O R C O L O R A D O L I C E N S E D 0' SCALE IN FEET 25' 50' 1 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Exhibit A (4849 : Water Quality Pond Easement to Colorado State ORD) E R L I N G P R O F E S S I O N A L L A N D S U R V E Y O R C O L O R A D O L I C E N S E D 1 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Exhibit A (4849 : Water Quality Pond Easement to Colorado State ORD)