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 - 06/21/2016 - 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 June 21, 2016 (amended 6/21/16) Proclamations and Presentations 5:30 p.m. A. Proclamation Declaring June as LGBTQ Pride Month. B. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Community Rating System (CRS) Class 2 Recognition of Fort Collins as tied for second best prepared city in the nation for flood awareness and protection. Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL MEETING TO ORDER ROLL CALL AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City Manager Review of Agenda City of Fort Collins Page 2 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 June 7, 2016 Regular Council Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 7, 2016 Regular Council meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 075, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 7, 2016, appropriates unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program (part of the City’s FC Moves Department). The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has awarded a $12,960 grant for implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins schools. This project requires a 20% local match ($3,240), which will be covered by the SRTS program operating budget. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 076, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Access Easement on Topminnow Natural Area to Jerome B. And Darla J. Roselle in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Access Easement. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 7, 2016, authorizes the conveyance of an access easement to Jerry and Darla Roselle in exchange for an easement from the Roselles, with the consent of the North Poudre Irrigation Company, across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road on Topminnow Natural Area and the Roselles' property. Both properties are bounded by the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch. The Natural Areas Department is in the process of acquiring 5-plus acres of land from the Roselles to add to Topminnow Natural Area. The Roselles intend to retain a small parcel of land east of the Ditch, necessitating the need for an access easement. The best physical access is across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, which is maintained by North Poudre Irrigation Company within easements it owns on the City and Roselle properties. The parties have proposed to enter into a reciprocal access easement which will formalize the access rights and obligations for each party on the ditch road. The Roselles have also agreed to vacate an existing access easement on the east side of the Natural Area. 4. First Reading of Ordinance No. 077,2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Architectural Survey of the Loomis Addition in the Westside Neighborhood. The purpose of this item is to appropriate unanticipated revenue received through a State Historical Fund grant. The State of Colorado has awarded a $35,000 grant for an architectural survey of the fifteen-block Loomis Addition in the Westside Neighborhood. 5. First Reading of Ordinance No. 078, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Sewer Line Easement and a Temporary Construction Easement on Running Deer Natural Area to Boxelder Sanitation District in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Easement. The purpose of this item is to authorize conveyance of a utility easement and a temporary construction easement to Boxelder Sanitation District on Running Deer Natural Area. Boxelder Sanitation District (BES) provides sanitary sewer service to a portion of Fort Collins residents. An aging and undersized sanitary sewer line that passes through Running Deer Natural Area needs to be replaced to provide for existing and projected residents in their service area. BES and the City have agreed to a realignment of portions of the sewer line and terms to a new easement to minimize the impact to the Natural Area’s vegetation, wildlife and visitors. 6. Resolution 2016-048 Adopting the 2016 Larimer County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The purpose of this item is to adopt an updated plan that the City will utilize in its hazard mitigation program. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, in cooperation with the State of Colorado requires plans to be updated periodically. City of Fort Collins Page 4 7. Resolution 2016-049 Making Fort Collins Appointments to a Joint Ad Hoc Committee with Other Area Water Providers Regarding Regional Water Collaboration. The purpose of this item is to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Gerry Horak, Councilmember Gino Campana, and a manager from the Water Utility to represent the City Council in a joint ad hoc committee of regional water providers. The purpose of the ad hoc committee is to discuss regionalization prospects and further collaboration among water providers. 8. Resolution 2016-050 Making Appointments to the Energy Board. The purpose of this item is to appoint Mohit Chhabra, Alan Braslau, and Lori Nitzel to the Energy Board to fill board vacancies which currently exist due to a December 31, 2015, term expiration that was never filled and the resignations of Michael Doss and Bob McDonald. 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 A. FEMA CRS Class 2 Award. (staff: Kevin Gertig, Ken Sampley; FEMA representative) B. Railroad Operations Update. (staff: Joe Olson) 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 9. Items Relating to Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements. (staff: Pete Wray, Peggy Streeter, Noah Beals; 12 minute staff presentation; 1 hour discussion) A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 079, 2016, Amending Article XIV of Chapter 15 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Outdoor Vendors. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 080, 2016, Amending Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the Land Use Code Regarding Outdoor Vendors. The purpose of this item is to amend the City Code and Land Use Code to update property owner and outdoor vendor requirements. The intent of the original 2012 Code provisions for outdoor vendor operations was to manage a mobile operation and address specific mobile vendor impacts and requirements as a temporary, accessory land use. The proposed changes clarify and distinguish between two primary outdoor vending operations, mobile and stationary, including land use locational requirements for vending on privately-owned lots. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No, 081, 2016, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for 2016 Projects Associated with the 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan as Part of the Waste Innovation Program. (staff: Lindsay Ex, Jeff Mihelich, Mike Beckstead, Kevin Gertig, Laurie Kadrich; 15 minute staff presentation; 1 hour discussion) The purpose of this item is to appropriate $85,000 accumulated during 2015 and 2016 in the Waste Innovation Fund account into the City’s General Fund account to initiate the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative outlined in the Draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan. At First Reading, staff will also update Council on the remaining two initiatives (of 7) that were discussed at the March 10, 2016 Work Sessions related to the 2020 CAP Strategic Plan. During that Work Session, staff committed to further vetting 3 of the 7 initiatives, with special consideration toward the larger financial impact of those initiatives. On these two remaining initiatives, staff will highlight a change in the funding source for solar incentives and rebates, allowing this initiative to move forward, and a recommendation to postpone consideration of the energy efficiency funding for approximately 60-90 days. The postponement of the energy efficiency funding will allow staff to evaluate the supplemental 2016 funding in the larger context of the Light and Power Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Long Term Financial Plan, and 2017-2018 Budgeting for Outcomes funding needs (August/September timeframe) to help balance and inform decisions to address both the critical Utilities infrastructure and advance CAP priorities. CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS OTHER BUSINESS A. Consideration of a motion requesting the City Manager Recommended 2017-2018 Budget include funding in the amount of $2.25 million for I-25 improvements. B. 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 City of Fort Collins Page 6 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, City Council and staff have committed to make Fort Collins an inclusive and welcoming community for all, including the LGBTQ community; and WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court ruled in June 2015 that same-sex couples can marry nationwide, establishing a new civil right in our country; and WHEREAS, all members of the Fort Collins community, including those who are LGBTQ, have the right to feel safe, not be discriminated against and not live with the threat of harassment; and WHEREAS, the City has established a Police Department LGBTQ liaison, an LGBTQ task force, has adopted equal employment partner health benefits; and is establishing an inclusive employee nondiscrimination policy; and WHEREAS, Colorado State University and Poudre School District have adopted policies of inclusion for all including the LGBTQ community as well as nondiscrimination policies; and WHEREAS, The LGBTQ community has made great strides; however, equality, inclusion and acceptance are not yet fully achieved. NOW THEREFORE, I, Wade Troxell, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, declare the month of June 2016 as LGBTQ PRIDE MONTH IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 6 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Wanda Winkelmann, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of June 7, 2016 Regular Council Meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 7, 2016 Regular Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. June 7, 2016 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 7 City of Fort Collins Page 1 June 7, 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, Campana, Cunniff, Horak ABSENT: Troxell Staff Present: Atteberry, Daggett, Winkelmann AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published agenda and noted the request to postpone Item No. 16, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 073, 2016, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Additional Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements as Part of the Prospect Road and College Avenue Intersection Improvements Project, to July 5. Natalie Schusberry pulled Item #8 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 070, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Mountain's Edge Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado from the Consent Calendar. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Aislinn Kottwitz commended the Healthcare Decision Day proclamation. Mike Pruznick discussed Poudre School District maintenance issues and expressed concern regarding jobs and tax revenue leaving Fort Collins for Timnath and other communities. Peggy Budai, Sharing the Care Campaign, commended the Healthcare Decision Day proclamation and discussed the importance of advanced directives. Carol Miller commented on processes throughout the City regarding staff presentations and transparency. She requested full budget numbers be presented. Deb (no last name given) opposed the fee for manual meter reading of the City’s Smart Meters. She requested Council consider an option for individuals to call in meter readings as has been allowed in the past. Lynn Barker commended the downtown flowers and discussed the installation of a camera between the Rescue Mission and Catholic Charities. She requested the public restroom near the area be opened. Ashley Boothe, Fort Collins Cat Rescue, thanked the City for its Adopt a Shelter Cat proclamation. Deborah James discussed homelessness and the difficulties of finding trashcans and restrooms. 1.1 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 2 Arthur Edward Coon, Pastor, discussed salaries of City employees and stated marijuana tax laws have been misleading. He witnessed a police officer sitting in his vehicle with the air conditioner running for two hours. He suggested a low-income community be built with an education center. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP Councilmember Stephens thanked Ms. Kottwitz and Ms. Budai for their work with the Sharing the Care program and commended the work of the Cat Rescue with the Community Pets Project. She stated she will call Deb regarding her utilities questions. Councilmember Overbeck agreed with Mr. Coon’s comments supporting education efforts and dealing with homeless issues. Councilmember Cunniff noted the marijuana laws mentioned by Mr. Coon are state laws and asked if Plan Fort Collins revisions are forthcoming. City Manager Atteberry replied Council has the option to approve funding for an update to City Plan in the 2017-2018 budget. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted the homelessness issue is a community issue which cannot be solely addressed by the City. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to approve and adopt all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Bob Overbeck, District 1 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Campana, Cunniff, Horak ABSENT: Troxell 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the May 3 and May 17, 2016 Regular Council Meetings, the May 10, 2016 Special Council Meeting and the May 24, 2016 Adjourned Council Meeting. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to approve minutes from the May 3 and May 17, 2016 Regular Council meetings, the May 10, 2016 Special Council meeting and the May 24, 2016 Adjourned Council meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 061, 2016 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural Areas Fund for the Purpose of Land Conservation, Public Improvements and Related Natural Areas Programming not Included in the 2016 Adopted City Budget. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, appropriates $9,598,100 in prior year reserves and unanticipated revenues in the Natural Areas Fund for the purpose of land conservation, construction of public improvements, restoration of wildlife habitat and other Natural Areas Department programs to benefit the citizens of Fort Collins. 1.1 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 3 3. Items Relating to the Completion of the 2016 Spring Cycle of the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing and Community Development Activities Utilizing Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Federal HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program the City’s Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) and the City’s Human Services Program (HSP). (Adopted) A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 062, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 063, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the HOME Investments Partnerships Fund. These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May, 17, 2016, approve funding recommendations of the 2016 spring cycle of the Competitive Process and appropriate federal dollars. Ordinance No. 062, 2016 appropriates the City’s FY2016 CDBG Entitlement Grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and CDBG unprogrammed funds and Program Income from FY2015 and FY2014. Ordinance No. 063, 2016, appropriates the City’s FY2016 HOME Participating Jurisdiction (PJ) Grant from HUD and HOME Program Income from FY 2015 and FY 2014. 4. Items Relating to Updating the Code of the City of Fort Collins Pertaining to Unclaimed and Abandoned Intangible Personal Property. (Adopted) A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 064, 2016, Amending Section 23-130 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Adding a Division 4 to Article IV in City Code Chapter 23 to Provide New Procedures for the City’s Disposition of Unclaimed and Abandoned Intangible Personal Property. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 065, 2016, Codifying the Utilities Payment Assistance Program and Amending Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Authorize Expenditure of Amounts Donated to the Program and Forfeited Unclaimed and Abandoned Intangible Personal Property Held by the Utilities Pursuant to Division 4, Article IV of Chapter 23 of the Code. These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, update City Code for the processing of unclaimed and abandoned intangible personal property owned by others that is in the City’s possession for various reasons. State law authorizes local governments to have formal procedures in place in order to assume ownership of unclaimed and abandoned intangible personal property. Alternatively, the City would have to turn the property over to the State of Colorado. Existing City Code Section 23-130 has provided these formal procedures but needs updating. On April 18, 2016, the Council Finance Committee reviewed the proposed changes and recommended that this item be presented to the City Council for consideration. However, since the Committee reviewed these changes as found in Ordinance No. 064, 2016, this Ordinance has been revised to clarify how intangible property coming into the City’s possession through law enforcement activities or as lost and found property will be disposed of under the Ordinance. Proposed changes to Chapter 26-Utilities are also included to recognize how unclaimed funds from the utility enterprises will be managed once they are declared forfeited under Chapter 23. Ordinance No. 065, 2016, amending Chapter 26 provides that such unclaimed and forfeited utilities funds are directed to the Payment Assistance Program. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 066, 2016, Repealing the Electric Service Rules and Regulations, Amending and Codifying Certain Provisions Formerly in the Electric Service Rules and Regulations, Amending and Renaming the Electric Construction Policies Practices and Procedures as the Electric Service Standards, and Making Certain Clarifying Amendments in Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and the Electric Service Standards. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, clarifies and consolidates policy and construction standards applicable to development of the City’s electric network. 1.1 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 4 6. Items Relating to Amendment of the Airport Intergovernmental Agreement Recommended by the Northern Colorado Regional Airport Commission. (Adopted) A. Second Reading of Ordinance No.067, 2016, Approving the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement for the Joint Operation of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport, to be Known Henceforth as the Northern Colorado Regional Airport, and Ratification of Previous Actions. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 068, 2016, Amending Various Sections of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Delegation of Authority to the Northern Colorado Regional Airport Commission and Change of the Name of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport to the Northern Colorado Regional Airport. These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, amend the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for the joint operation of the Northern Colorado Regional Airport. Ordinance No. 067, 2016, ratifies and reaffirms the approval of the IGA and creation of the Commission under the IGA by Resolution 2015-003 to comply with Article IV, Section 1 of the City Charter and actions taken by the Commission, its officers and members with respect to operation and management of the Airport pursuant to and within the scope of the IGA. Ordinance No.068, 2016, amends the City Code to address the impact the First Amendment has on the delegated authority with respect to Airport leases, grants, and expenditures. In addition, the change of the Airport name necessitates amendments to other provisions of the City Code to reflect that change. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 069, 2016, Annexing the Property Known as the Mountain’s Edge Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. (Adopted) This Ordinance unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016 annexes 18.52 acres located at 2430 South Overland Trail at the northeast corner South Overland Trail and West Drake Road. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented as the next item on the agenda. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 071, 2016, Annexing the Property Known as the East Prospect at Boxelder Creek Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. (Adopted) This Ordinance, adopted unanimously on First Reading on May 17, 2016, annexes a segment of East Prospect Road right-of-way. The request is related to a City Utilities and Engineering project to improve the Boxelder Creek crossing of the road for flood management purposes. The segment is located east of Summitview Drive, west of the Interstate 25 frontage road and is approximately 1,000 feet in length. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 072, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the East Prospect at Boxelder Creek Annexation to the City of Fort Collins. (Adopted) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, zones the property included in the East Prospect at Boxelder Creek Annexation as a mix of Urban Estate (UE) and Employment (E). 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 075, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is appropriate unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program (part of the City’s FC Moves Department). The 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. 1.1 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 5 Department of Transportation (CDOT) has awarded a $12,960 grant for implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins schools. This project requires a 20% local match ($3,240), which will be covered by the SRTS program operating budget. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 076, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Access Easement on Topminnow Natural Area to Jerome B. And Darla J. Roselle in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Access Easement. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to authorize conveyance of an access easement to Jerry and Darla Roselle (“Roselles”) in exchange for an easement from the Roselles, with the consent of the North Poudre Irrigation Company, across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road on Topminnow Natural Area and the Roselles' property. Both properties are bounded by the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch. The Natural Areas Department is in the process of acquiring 5-plus acres of land from the Roselles to add to Topminnow Natural Area. The Roselles intend to retain a small parcel of land east of the Ditch necessitating the need for an access easement. The best physical access is across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, which is maintained by North Poudre Irrigation Company within easements it owns on the City and Roselle properties. The parties have proposed to enter into a reciprocal access easement which will formalize the access rights and obligations for each party on the ditch road. The Roselles have also agreed to vacate an existing access easement on the east side of the natural area. 12. Resolution 2016-046 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Majestic Place Annexation. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is initiate annexation proceedings for the Majestic Place property. The applicant, Suburban Land Reserve Inc. c/o Mr.Kenneth Merritt, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of 19.93 acres located at 2150 Rock Castle Lane (southeast of Timberline Road and Trilby Road) which is presently vacant. The requested zoning for this annexation is Urban Estate, U-E. In accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area with Larimer County, the City of Fort Collins agrees to annex land that meets the minimum contiguity requirement, and based on a voluntary petition to annex for the purpose of redeveloping the subject parcel. 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. 13. Resolution 2016-047 Appointing Nancy Luttropp to the Senior Advisory Board. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to appoint Nancy Luttropp to the Senior Advisory Board to fill a board vacancy created through the resignation of Lawrence Bontempo. END CONSENT STAFF REPORTS Jan Sawyer, Special Events Coordinator, discussed the history of the City’s special event permitting process and the need for a single point of contact as the number and size of events has increased. For 2016, staff is working on issues regarding amplified sound, monitoring and regulation of events, and enhanced communication. Councilmember Martinez asked when special events permit applications will be available online. Sawyer stated the City is hoping to have an online program in place for the 2017 special events season. 1.1 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 6 Mike Trombley, Deputy Police Chief, provided an overview of fireworks outreach and enforcement, acknowledging that enforcement is only one component of addressing problems; education and outreach are also significant components. Kevin Cronin, Police Lieutenant, discussed fireworks protocol enforcement week efforts by Police Services and PFA and detailed changes this year which involve a social media campaign, magnetic signs on government vehicles, and other significant outreach throughout the city. Councilmember Cunniff supported the efforts detailed by Cronin. Councilmember Stephens asked about fireworks sales in the County. Cronin replied specific locations are not regulated; as long as vendors find a location within the County, the City cannot stop those sales. In the County, the only legal fireworks are those allowed by the State of Colorado. Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested additional information about the problem. Trombley replied the problem revolves around the number of complaints and quality of life issues. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Councilmember Martinez requested a report on railroad crossing repairs. Rick Richter, Infrastructure Services Director, stated the City has been working with the railroad regarding the Lemay and Riverside crossing to get a contract approved in order to schedule the work. It is likely the repairs will occur in mid-July; however, the repairs will require a full intersection closure for three days. A full outreach plan will occur once the railroad commits to a date. Councilmember Overbeck reported on the Poudre River Fest and announced the 2016 National ADA conference in Denver, encouraging members of the Human Relations Commission and Commission on Disability to look at the topics. Councilmember Stephens reported on the Child Safe Walk and a tour of Crossroads Safe House. She commended the work of non-profits in the community. Councilmember Martinez reported on a tour of the jail and commented on its overcrowding issues. He reported on a ladybug release at Jessup Farm. Councilmember Campana reported on the Open Streets event on Corbett Drive, commending the work of staff. Mayor Pro Tem Horak reported on the ribbon cutting for the new climbing lane on I-25 near Berthoud. He discussed the resignation of the Platte River Power Authority General Manager and the process for replacing that position, noting the process was not supported by himself or the Mayor. He reported on the regional Water Collaboration Workshop. Councilmember Cunniff commented on the Platte River Power Authority appointment process. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted the Authority did not break any of its rules or charters; however, the process was deemed inappropriate by Fort Collins representatives. 1.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 7 Councilmember Martinez agreed the process could be improved. DISCUSSION ITEMS 14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 055, 2016, Amending the City of Fort Collins District- Precinct Map. (Adopted on Second Reading) This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on May 3, 2016, by a vote of 6-1 (Nays: Overbeck) amends the City of Fort Collins District-Precinct Map to (1) align the City precinct boundaries with the County precinct boundaries, which were amended in May 2015; and (2) adjust Council district boundaries to achieve a required population deviation between the most populous district and the least populous district. The district boundaries were last adjusted in August 2012. City Clerk Wanda Winkelmann stated Larimer County has revised its precinct boundaries and the population deviation between Council districts is now greater than 20%, which is not consistent with the Charter and City Code. To comply, the boundaries between Council districts need to be amended. City Attorney Daggett reviewed the Charter provision describing particular characteristics necessary for the city’s Council districts. Marcus Bodig, GIS Department, described the process used to determine the City’s population and goals for changing districts to meet the necessary deviation. Mike Pruznick expressed concern regarding the changes resulting in his inability to run for office or vote in the next election and expressed concern regarding the deviation not going below 6%. Preserving the right to vote for residents should be the top priority. Eric Sutherland commented on his race for County Commissioner and stated the City does not handle elections well. He opposed the redistricting option approved on First Reading. Councilmember Cunniff commented on the option that would move some precincts now and some after the election and asked about the deviation using that option. Bodig replied that option results in approximately a 30% deviation. Councilmember Cunniff noted the Charter will not allow such a deviation and stated the 30% deviation is not reasonable. Councilmember Stephens asked how this information will be communicated to citizens. Chief Deputy City Clerk Rita Knoll replied anyone in an affected precinct will be notified by letter. Councilmember Martinez made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunniff, to adopt Ordinance No. 055, 2016, Option 1, on Second Reading as amended with an effective date of June 17, 2016. Councilmember Overbeck stated he supported Option 4 as it moved the fewest number of precincts. 1.1 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 8 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 055, 2016, ADOPTED ON SECOND READING [5 TO 1] MOVER: Ray Martinez, District 2 SECONDER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Campana, Cunniff, Horak NAYS: Overbeck ABSENT: Troxell 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 073, 2016, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Additional Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements as Part of the Prospect Road and College Avenue Intersection Improvements Project. (Postponed to July 5, 2016) Staff requests postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 073, 2016, to July 5, 2016, to allow staff time to review a suggested amendment to the design approved on First Reading. This Ordinance obtains authorization from City Council to use eminent domain, if necessary, to acquire property interests needed to construct improvements to the intersection of Prospect Road and College Avenue. This authorization is for the two residential properties at the east end of the project. The Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016 by a vote of 5-2 (Nays: Overbeck, Cunniff). Eric Sutherland stated a process needs to be in place regarding erroneous statements by staff and discussed ownership records for City-owned properties. Kevin Harper discussed the dramatic impact this has had on the lives of his family and thanked Council for considering an alternative plan for the intersection. Carol Miller thanked Councilmember Cunniff for his development of an alternative plan but opposed the construction happening on Prospect Road as no large-scale plan exists for the corridor and the fact that old 3-foot sidewalks are being replaced with new 3-foot sidewalks, which do not meet ADA standards. Councilmember Overbeck requested follow-up regarding Ms. Miller’s comments. Rick Richter, Infrastructure Services Director, replied some street maintenance work and storm sewer installation is being completed along Prospect. In terms of the sidewalk, some damaged curb and gutter sections are being replaced. The future widening of the sidewalk is not precluded by this project. Councilmember Cunniff asked if there is any Council interest in directing staff to develop a workable plan that includes some or all of the components outlined in his alternative plan. The specific changes would be to eliminate the left turn at Remington, to change all but the curb- most lane widths on westbound Prospect to be ten feet instead of eleven, and to adjust the sidewalk width next to the 1535 Remington property. These changes may require a lower design speed; however, staff has expressed the desire to keep the 35 mile per hour design speed. Councilmember Campana stated he cannot support an alternative plan which compromises safety and/or standards and specifically opposed a plan which would eliminate the left turn lane. Councilmember Cunniff replied a lower speed design standard would not compromise safety. Councilmember Overbeck supported looking at an alternative proposal. 1.1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 9 Councilmember Campana stated he is willing to support the postponement recommendation in order to allow additional time for evaluation. City Manager Atteberry expressed concern regarding the timeline and proposed alternative plan. He stated it will be examined; however, at this point, it is not a design that can be supported by staff. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to postpone consideration of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 073, 2016, to the July 5, 2016 regular Council meeting. RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 073, 2016, POSTPONED TO JULY 5, 2016 [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Bob Overbeck, District 1 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Campana, Cunniff, Horak ABSENT: Troxell (Secretary’s Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 074, 2016, Modifying the April 7, 2016, Planning and Zoning Board Decision Approving the Major Amendment to The Centre For Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center #MJA 150006 Pertaining To The Gardens On Spring Creek With Conditions. (Adopted as Amended on Second R) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, amends the Planning and Zoning Board decision regarding the Gardens on Spring Creek Master Plan Amendment. The final Council-adopted modification regarding Council review and possible revision to the limit on the number of events at the new facilities has been revised to clarify that Council approval of such an increase, if any, would be by resolution. Staff is also proposing alternative sound wall configurations for Council consideration. Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager, discussed the various options relating to sound walls and the noise ordinance and introduced a new hybrid option which combines options B and C. It would eliminate the west wall and extend the southwest wall. Staff is recommending option B, which would shorten the west wall and extend the interior southwest wall. Eric Sutherland expressed concern the City is making promises that it will not keep and suggested parameters regarding property use should be codified. Barbara Albert requested the removal of the language regarding an increase in the number of concerts and questioned how parking for 1,500 concertgoers will be accommodated. She stated her neighborhood has no recourse if the City breaks its own rules and noted option D was not on the website. Cory Albert supported the Gardens and supported option B as the best option to mitigate noise from the concert venue. Councilmember Campana stated he is responsible for option D which was intended to be a compromise between what the neighborhood was requesting and the operation of the Gardens. 1.1 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 10 Councilmember Cunniff noted the Ordinance currently directs staff to continue to look at sound wall options. City Attorney Daggett stated the Ordinance as adopted on First Reading, did not select an option for the walls. City Attorney Daggett discussed the language of the Ordinance. Councilmember Campana made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Martinez, to adopt Ordinance No. 074, 2016, on Second Reading, including the proposed changes and changing the language that would allow Council to adjust the number of events per year to be completed by Ordinance rather than Resolution. Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested a description of the changes as proposed. Councilmember Campana replied neighbors would prefer option B and this language would approve that option; however, if evaluation over the next 120 days results in the willingness of Council to grant a decibel level variance, the wall would not be installed. Councilmember Cunniff stated he could not support the motion as the City should abide by its own ordinances. Councilmember Campana noted noise variances are granted on projects throughout the city and supported the option as a good compromise. Councilmember Cunniff replied this is a City project on City-owned property and the City should be held to a higher standard and abide by its own ordinances. Councilmember Campana requested information regarding noise level variances on other projects. Jan Sawyer, Special Events Coordinator, replied all permitted outdoor events with amplified sound are required to submit a noise variance application. Councilmember Overbeck stated he would not support option D given the lack of public process; however, he appreciated the efforts at compromise. Gloss stated option D will involve a lesser impact to concert-goers by lowering the height and size of walls internal to the site and will also reduce the sound level to the west. Option B, as recommended by staff, does include the sound wall to meet the noise ordinance while also providing a positive experience for concert-goers. Mayor Pro Tem Horak asked what additional analysis will be completed by staff in the next 120 days. Gloss replied additional modeling permutations could occur and retrofitting could occur if necessary based on the performance of the venue over time. 1.1 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 11 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 074, 2016, ADOPTED AS AMENDED ON SECOND READING [4 TO 2] MOVER: Gino Campana, District 3 SECONDER: Ray Martinez, District 2 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Campana, Horak NAYS: Overbeck, Cunniff ABSENT: Troxell 17. Consideration of a motion to waive the City Council's attorney-client privilege for the public disclosure of the May 6, 2016, confidential memorandum from the Boulder City Attorney's Office reporting the results of its investigation concerning the Greeley Municipal Court Judge presiding over a Fort Collins Municipal Court case under an intergovernmental agreement between the Cities of Fort Collins and Greeley that provided for the exchange of judicial services in conflict-of-interest circumstances. City Manager Atteberry and City Attorney Daggett left the dais and did not participate in this discussion. John Duvall, Deputy City Attorney, discussed the background of this issue stating a Fort Collins Police Officer was involved in a traffic accident while on duty in early 2015. A careless driving citation was issued and Judge Lane determined she had a conflict of interest with the case as it involved a Fort Collins officer. Under a 1994 intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Fort Collins and Greeley, Judge Lane requested the Greeley Municipal Judge to preside over the case. The officer was convicted in an August 2015 trial and appealed the case to the Larimer County District court which upheld the conviction in February 2016. On March 1, 2016, Eric Sutherland reported to Fort Collins Police Services that he believed the Fort Collins City Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge allegedly committed misdemeanor violations under the City Charter as a result of the Greely Municipal Judge presiding over the original trial without Council appointing him to hear the case. Under a 1997 intergovernmental agreement with the City of Boulder for the exchange of legal services, Duvall stated the Boulder City Attorney accepted the responsibility to investigate Mr. Sutherland’s claims. The report issued by the Boulder City Attorney’s Office was provided to Council as a confidential memo in May and Council needed to waive its attorney-client privilege in order to release the memo to the public. Eric Sutherland stated he would not read the Boulder report. He went to Police Services originally because Council did not do its job appropriately. The sentence of the police officer should have been vacated because it was issued by someone who had not been appointed by Council. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, that Council waive its attorney-client privilege regarding the May 6, 2016 confidential memorandum received from the Boulder City Attorney’s Office reporting the results of its investigation of alleged Charter violations arising from the Greeley Municipal Judge presiding over a Fort Collins Municipal Court case under an intergovernmental agreement between Greeley and Fort Collins providing for the exchange of judicial services. 1.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 12 RESULT: MOTION ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Ross Cunniff, District 5 SECONDER: Bob Overbeck, District 1 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Campana, Cunniff, Horak ABSENT: Troxell City Manager Atteberry and City Attorney Daggett returned to the dais. CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 070, 2016, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Mountain's Edge Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. (Adopted on Second Reading) This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 17, 2016, zones the property included in the Mountain’s Edge Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood zone district. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner, stated this is Second Reading of Ordinance No. 070, 2016, which zones the property known as Mountain’s Edge, located south of the Holiday Twin Drive-in at the corner of Drake and Overland Trail, as LMN in accordance with the City Structure Plan map. Natalie Schussberry expressed concern regarding the proposed density for the project at the site. Councilmember Campana noted Council could not hear issues specific to a proposed project. Councilmember Cunniff asked about the notification radius for rezonings. Shepard replied the standard is 800 feet; however, the area is usually expanded. Councilmember Cunniff expressed concern he may be within the notification area and requested a map to ensure he does not have a conflict. It was determined he was out of the notification area by one lot. Ms. Schussberry expressed concern about the proposed zoning and requested the option of RL zoning be considered. Stephanie Webb expressed concern regarding stormwater and drainage on the property and stated the security and quality of life in her neighborhood will be negatively impacted by the proposed density. She requested Council consider the option of RL zoning. Jeff Mark supported the LMN zoning and stated he is sympathetic to drainage issues on the property. He noted any proposed project would be required to meet all applicable standards. Councilmember Cunniff asked what guided the choice of zoning for the property. Shepard replied the guidance comes from City Plan, noting LMN zoning has been on the Structure Plan Map since City Plan was first developed. He noted the RL zone is not a part of City Plan and 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. 1.1 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 13 does not support the City Plan vision for growth and development in the growth management area. Councilmember Cunniff asked about the zoning of the adjacent neighborhood. Shepard replied the Brown Farm subdivision, platted in 1977, is zoned RL. Councilmember Cunniff asked about the difference in density between LMN and RL. Shepard replied that is difficult to predict as the LMN zone offers a variety of density from 3 to 9 units per acre and a variety of housing types. The RL zone has a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, a strict lot width minimum of 60 feet, and does not allow even a duplex. Councilmember Overbeck asked if the City has looked at the area regarding stormwater issues. Shepard replied the two drainage basins have associated master plans and are mapped, which is why they have the controlled release rate. The conceptual review comments for this project indicated that the release rate would have to be at the two-year historic rate. A range of complexity associated with stormwater management exists on the site regardless of the zoning and those issues would not cause a change in the zoning recommendation. Councilmember Stephens asked if there is a zoning classification with less density than LMN if RL is no longer used. Shepard replied Urban Estate, Residential Foothills and Rural Land zoning have lower density. Councilmember Stephens asked if this zoning would allow for apartments. Shepard replied the zoning does allow for multi-family buildings; however it cannot exceed 12 units per building, the building cannot exceed 14,000 square feet in size, and the project cannot exceed 9 units per acre. Councilmember Campana discussed the desire for a mix of housing types and density in the LMN zone. Councilmember Cunniff asked what compatibility standards exist with LMN zoning. Shepard replied the compatibility standards are in the general development standards and apply citywide. Additionally, those standards are not formulaic or prescriptive and are meant to be adapted on a case-by-case basis. There are a variety of possibilities for what a plan could look like. Councilmember Martinez made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to adopt Ordinance No. 070, 2016, on Second Reading. Councilmember Cunniff expressed concern regarding this area being adjacent to existing open space. Councilmember Campana stated the zoning seems appropriate given the Structure Plan and encouraged compatibility discussion at the time a development proposal comes forward. City Attorney Daggett requested a correction to a Land Use Code section in the Ordinance. Councilmembers Martinez and Overbeck accepted the change. 1.1 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) June 7, 2016 City of Fort Collins Page 14 RESULT: ORDINANCE NO. 070, 2016, ADOPTED AS AMENDED ON SECOND READING [5 TO 1] MOVER: Ray Martinez, District 2 SECONDER: Bob Overbeck, District 1 AYES: Martinez, Stephens, Overbeck, Campana, Horak NAYS: Cunniff ABSENT: Troxell OTHER BUSINESS Councilmember Cunniff received Council support to clarify the direction regarding Council expectations prior to Second Reading of the Prospect Road eminent domain item. He would like staff to develop an option that lessens impacts to the property at 1535 Remington by removing the left turn land from eastbound Prospect to northbound Remington. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:05 PM. ______________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk 1.1 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: June 7, 2016 (4552 : minutes-6/7) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Nancy Nichols, Safe Routes to School Coordinator SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 075, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 7, 2016, appropriates unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program (part of the City’s FC Moves Department). The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has awarded a $12,960 grant for implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins schools. This project requires a 20% local match ($3,240), which will be covered by the SRTS program operating budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 075, 2016 (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 22 Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 7, 2016 City Council STAFF Nancy Nichols, Safe Routes to School Coordinator SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 075, 2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is appropriate unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program (part of the City’s FC Moves Department). The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has awarded a $12,960 grant for implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins schools. This project requires a 20% local match ($3,240), which will be covered by the SRTS program operating budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a nationwide effort to get more children biking and walking to school for their health, academic achievement and the environment. SRTS focuses on the Five E’s of transportation services: Education, Encouragement, Engineering, Enforcement and Evaluation. The City’s SRTS program emphasizes education, encouragement and evaluation activities, while collaborating with other City departments to address engineering and enforcement issues. In 2015, the SRTS program reached a total of 15,700 local residents with bike-pedestrian education and encouragement programming, including 13,500 K-12 students and 2,200 parents and other adults. Of the 13,500 students, 7,700 received personal instruction on bike-pedestrian safety from an SRTS instructor during PE class or at another school or community event. The success of the program is based on collaborations with local partners, including Poudre School District (PSD), Bike Fort Collins, Bicycle and Pedestrian Education Coalition, Safe Kids Larimer County, BaseCamp, various City departments (Traffic Operations, Police, Engineering, Recreation, Parks, Streets), local businesses, individual schools and parents. This grant supports the following City of Fort Collins plans: City Plan: Policy SW 2.3 - Support Active Transportation Support means of physically active transportation (e.g., bicycling, walking, wheelchairs, etc.) by continuing bike and pedestrian safety education and encouragement programs, providing law enforcement, and maintaining bike lanes, sidewalks, trails, lighting, and facilities for easy and safe use, as outlined in the Pedestrian Plan and Bicycle Plan. Transportation Master Plan: Policy T 8.1 - Support Active Transportation Support physically active transportation (e.g., bicycling, walking, wheelchairs, etc.) by continuing bike ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (4546 : SR 075 Safe Routes) Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 2 and pedestrian safety education and encouragement programs, providing law enforcement, and maintaining bike lanes, sidewalks, trails, lighting, and facilities for easy and safe use. 2014 Bicycle Plan: Recommendation 2.7 - Expand Safe Routes to School Programming With the assistance of local advocacy organizations and community partners, the SRTS program will educate at least 8,000 K-12 students annually by 2020. This grant funding will support existing bike field trips at two schools (Olander Elementary and Traut Elementary) and will create new after-school and summer biking and walking camps/clubs at Summer BaseCamp and regular BaseCamps at Irish, Laurel, Linton, O’Dea, Putnam and Werner elementary schools. It will also support a new after-school bike club at Lincoln Middle School. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This is the latest of several grants received by the City’s Safe Routes to School program since 2007, totaling $803,981. CDOT is providing 80% ($12,960) of the full program cost ($16,200), with the City’s SRTS program covering 20% ($3,240) in required matching funds. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Transportation Board and its Bicycle Advisory Committee receive periodic updates from the SRTS program. Both groups have shown strong support for the program’s goals as well as for grant funding to support the program. The PSD SRTS Steering Committee also supports the scope of this grant. PUBLIC OUTREACH SRTS public outreach occurs on an ongoing basis through presentations to school PTOs/PTAs, school wellness teams and community groups. Public outreach is also accomplished through an SRTS annual summary, media coverage and information posted on the SRTS website, Safe Routes to School. 2.1 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (4546 : SR 075 Safe Routes) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 075, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND FOR THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Safe Routes to School Program established by the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) is designed to promote the safety of students traveling to and from school and to encourage more students to choose walking or bicycling to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins Safe Routes to School Program has received a grant through CDOT in the amount of $12,960; and WHEREAS, this grant requires a minimum 20% local match which will be paid for by existing appropriations in the Safe Routes to School operating budget in FC Moves in the amount of $3,240; and WHEREAS, the grant and matching funds will be used for implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins schools; and WHEREAS, the City’s grant application defines the scope of the grant and the City is awaiting a CDOT letter to proceed and invoice before conducting activities pursuant to the grant; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of the grant funds as described herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Transportation Services Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS 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 there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated revenue in the Transportation Services Fund the sum of TWELVE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIXTY DOLLARS ($12,960) for the Safe Routes to School Program implementation of new bicycling and walking camps, clubs and field trips at Fort Collins 2.2 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Ordinance No. 075, 2016 (4546 : SR 075 Safe Routes) -2- schools. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7th day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 2.2 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Ordinance No. 075, 2016 (4546 : SR 075 Safe Routes) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Tawnya Ernst, Real Estate Specialist III SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 076, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Access Easement on Topminnow Natural Area to Jerome B. And Darla J. Roselle in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Access Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 7, 2016, authorizes the conveyance of an access easement to Jerry and Darla Roselle in exchange for an easement from the Roselles, with the consent of the North Poudre Irrigation Company, across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road on Topminnow Natural Area and the Roselles' property. Both properties are bounded by the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch. The Natural Areas Department is in the process of acquiring 5-plus acres of land from the Roselles to add to Topminnow Natural Area. The Roselles intend to retain a small parcel of land east of the Ditch, necessitating the need for an access easement. The best physical access is across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, which is maintained by North Poudre Irrigation Company within easements it owns on the City and Roselle properties. The parties have proposed to enter into a reciprocal access easement which will formalize the access rights and obligations for each party on the ditch road. The Roselles have also agreed to vacate an existing access easement on the east side of the Natural Area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 27 Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 7, 2016 City Council STAFF Tawnya Ernst, Real Estate Specialist III SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 076, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Access Easement on Topminnow Natural Area to Jerome B. And Darla J. Roselle in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Access Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize conveyance of an access easement to Jerry and Darla Roselle (“Roselles”) in exchange for an easement from the Roselles, with the consent of the North Poudre Irrigation Company, across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road on Topminnow Natural Area and the Roselles' property. Both properties are bounded by the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch. The Natural Areas Department is in the process of acquiring 5-plus acres of land from the Roselles to add to Topminnow Natural Area. The Roselles intend to retain a small parcel of land east of the Ditch necessitating the need for an access easement. The best physical access is across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, which is maintained by North Poudre Irrigation Company within easements it owns on the City and Roselle properties. The parties have proposed to enter into a reciprocal access easement which will formalize the access rights and obligations for each party on the ditch road. The Roselles have also agreed to vacate an existing access easement on the east side of the natural area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City property, ("Topminnow Natural Area"), identified as Lot 2 of the Amended Roselle-Shields MLD and by Parcel Number 87332-30-902, was acquired in 2014 by the Natural Areas Department for public natural area purposes. The Roselles own an 11-acre parcel (Lot 1 of the Amended Roselle-Shields MLD) which is immediately south of Topminnow Natural Area. The Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch, which is within easements acquired from prior landowners, forms the western boundary of Topminnow and bisects the Roselle's property. Natural Areas is in the process of acquiring 5+ acres of the Roselle's property east of the ditch in order to expand Topminnow and to enhance grassland wildlife habitat adjacent to the wetland created at Topminnow. The Roselles will retain a 0.5 acre piece of land east of the ditch. Currently, the Roselles have an access easement to their property on the east side of Topminnow. However, Natural Areas would like to realign that access easement to the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, which would have a lesser impact on the Department's restoration efforts on Topminnow and provide direct access to the parcel the Roselles intend to retain. The Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road is an existing two-track which is operated and maintained by the North Poudre Irrigation Company. During negotiations, the Roselles agreed to grant an easement to the City across the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road on their retained parcel. The easement will provide the Roselles' access to their retained parcel east of the ditch and will also provide secondary access for the Natural Areas Department. ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (w/o attachments) (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 2 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Given the existence of the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch Road, the fact that this easement will replace an existing access easement owned by the Roselles, and the mutual benefit of the access easement, the easement would be granted to the Roselles at no cost. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its September 2015 regular meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board unanimously voted to recommend adoption of the Ordinance on a Reciprocal Access Easement to provide maintenance and emergency access to Topminnow Natural Area and to the Roselles. (Attachment 2) ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map (PDF) 2. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, September 9, 2015 (PDF) 3.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, June 7, 2016 (w/o attachments) (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 076, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF AN ACCESS EASEMENT ON TOPMINNOW NATURAL AREA TO JEROME B. AND DARLA J. ROSELLE IN EXCHANGE FOR THE VACATION OF AN EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT WHEREAS, the City is the owner of a parcel of property in Larimer County, Colorado known as Topminnow Natural Area, and more particularly described as Lot 2, Amended Plat of Roselle-Shields Minor Land Division No. 99-S1466 (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, Jerome B. and Darla J. Roselle (the “Roselles”) own a parcel of land adjacent to and south of the City Property described as Lot 1, Amended Plat of Roselle-Shields Minor Land Division No. 99-S1466 (the “Roselle Property”); and WHEREAS, the Roselles have agreed to sell to the City a portion of the Roselle Property totaling approximately five acres (the “Purchase Parcel”) that, through another amendment to the plat of the Roselle-Shields Minor Land Division, would become part of the City Property; and WHEREAS, the City Property and the Purchase Parcel are both bounded on the west by the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch (the “Ditch”), which is owned, maintained and operated by North Poudre Irrigation Company (“NPIC”) within non-exclusive easements that NPIC acquired from predecessors in interest of the City and the Roselles (the “Ditch Easements”); and WHEREAS, the Roselle Property is bisected by the Ditch, and the Roselles currently have access to the portion of their property that is on the east side of the Ditch via an existing thirty-foot wide easement on the east side of the City Property (the “Existing Easement”); and WHEREAS, the Roselles wish to retain access to the portion of their property that is on the east side of the Ditch, and Natural Areas staff would prefer that such access be along the existing NPIC ditch road (the “Ditch Road”) so that the Roselles’ existing access easement could be vacated; and WHEREAS, Natural Areas would like an easement across the remaining portion of the Roselle Property that is on the east side of the Ditch as an alternative access route to the City Property; and WHEREAS, the City, the Roselles and NPIC have negotiated a reciprocal access easement agreement whereby, upon closing on the Purchase Parcel, the City would grant the Roselles an access easement over that portion of the Ditch Road that is located on the City Property and the Purchase Parcel, and the Roselles would grant the City an access easement over the portion of the Ditch Road that is located on the remaining Roselle Property; and WHEREAS, the new easement would take the place of the Existing Easement, which the Roselles would terminate; and 3.2 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) -2- WHEREAS, the location of the proposed shared access easement is indicated on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Access Easement”); and WHEREAS, NPIC has consented to the conveyance of the Access Easement and the parties’ use of the Ditch Road so long as it does not interfere with NPIC’s use of the Ditch Easements or Ditch Road; and WHEREAS, as additional consideration for NPIC’s consent to this use of the Ditch Road the City is agreeing to assume responsibility for weed control within the portion of the Access Easement located on the City Property; and WHEREAS, a draft of the proposed Reciprocal Access Easement Deed and Agreement is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B” (the “Easement Agreement”); and WHEREAS, because the Access Easement will replace the Existing Easement the Roselles own on the City Property, the Access Easement is within the existing Ditch Easements and will use existing improvements, and in consideration of the mutual purpose and benefit of the Access Easement, City staff is recommending that the City not charge the Roselles any additional consideration for the Access Easement; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on September 9, 2015, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted to recommend approval of the conveyance of the Access 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: 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 Access Easement to the Roselles as provided herein is in the best interests of the City. Section 3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Easement Agreement in substantially the form attached as Exhibit “B”, in exchange for vacation of the Existing Easement and otherwise consistent with the terms of 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 Access Easement provided that such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the interests to be conveyed. 3.2 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7th day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk 3.2 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) LOT 2 54.032 ACRES LOT 1 5.766 ACRES LEGEND KING SURVEYORS 650 E. Garden Drive | Windsor, Colorado 80550 phone: (970) 686-5011 | email: info@KingSurveyors.com 2 O:\2015958\DWG\2015958MLD.dwg, 3/31/2016 7:20:10 AM 3URSRVHGVKDUHG DFFHVVHDVHPHQW ([LVWLQJ ZLGH DFFHVVHDVHPHQW 3URSRV DFFHVV ZLGH HPHQW (;+,%,7$ EXHIBIT A 3.2 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 1 RECIPROCAL ACCESS EASEMENT DEED AND AGREEMENT THIS RECIPROCAL ACCESS EASEMENT DEED AND AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ________ day of ______________, 2016 (the “Effective Date”), by and between THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation, (“City”), whose address is P.O. Box 580, Fort Collins, Colorado 80522, JEROME B. ROSELLE AND DARLA J. ROSELLE (the “Roselles”) whose address is 3314 Grand Canyon Court, Fort Collins, CO 80525 and the NORTH POUDRE IRRIGATION COMPANY (“NPIC”), whose address is 3729 Cleveland Ave, Wellington, CO 80549 . 1. City’s Property. City is the owner of that certain parcel of real property located in Larimer County, Colorado, which is legally described on Exhibit A, consisting of one (1) page, attached to and made a part of this Agreement (“City Property”). 2. Roselles’ Property. The Roselles are the owners of that certain parcel of real property located in Larimer County, Colorado, which is legally described on Exhibit B, consisting of one (1) page, attached to and made a part of this Agreement (“Roselles’ Property”). 3. NPIC’s Property. NPIC is the owner of that certain ditch known as the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch, (the “Ditch”) depicted on Exhibit C. The Ditch runs along the western boundary of the City property and bisects the Roselles’ Property. NPIC is also the owner of two non-exclusive easements appurtenant to the Ditch, one recorded at Book 166, Page 342 dated March 29, 1902; and one recorded at Reception Number 20070056665 dated May 23, 2007, both of which are recorded in the records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. (“NPIC Easements”) Said easements owned by NPIC are for the use, operation, maintenance and various other related purposes attendant to the operation of the Ditch and also provide access to the Ditch for said purposes along an existing two-track road referred to as the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch road (the “Ditch Road”). The Ditch Road is currently used and maintained by NPIC for access to the Ditch for the purpose of operating, repairing and maintaining the Ditch. Such use includes, but is not limited to, mowing, removal of obstructions, cleaning the Ditch and Ditch banks, grading, and maintaining road base, and construction, operation and maintenance of ditch structures and facilities. NPIC’s use of the NPIC Easements and Ditch Road shall not be affected, impeded or restricted by this Agreement, and all use of the Easement granted in Paragraph 4 herein between the City and Roselles as set forth in Exhibit “D” is subject to the NPIC Easements and Ditch Road. 4. Grant of Easement – Consideration. For and in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein set forth, the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which the parties acknowledge, the City and Roselles each hereby grant, sell and convey to each other and their respective successors, heirs and assigns, and NPIC hereby consents to the use of, a 20-foot-wide perpetual, non-exclusive shared access easement (the “Easement”) on, over, under and across their respective Properties in the locations shown and described more fully on Exhibit D, consisting of two (2) pages, attached to and made a part of this Agreement (the “Easement Area”), subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth below. EXHIBIT B 3.2 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 2 5. Purpose and Uses of Easement. (a) The parties acknowledge that the Easement overlies the Ditch Road, which has been in place for many decades. The City and Roselles may use the Easement solely for occasional vehicular access to maintain and inspect their respective undeveloped properties, on, over, and across the Easement Area, in a manner so as not to interfere with NPIC’s use of the NPIC Easements and Ditch Road. The Easement may not be used for public access or recreational purposes. Use of the Easement shall be restricted to the parties hereto, their employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns. (b) City and Roselles agree not to install any structures, fences, gates, or improvements, or plant or place trees, shrubs, or landscaping within or over the Easement Area. (c) The City and the Roselles acknowledge that NPIC’s use, operation, maintenance and related activities on and within the Easement may inconvenience the Roselles and the City and may temporarily interfere with any rights they otherwise have to use the Easement. (d) The City and the Roselles acknowledge that NPIC’s maintenance of the Ditch, the Ditch Road and ancillary elements attendant to each may, at times, temporarily preclude the City’s and Roselles’ use of the Easement. In the event NPIC plans any routine maintenance activities which it knows in advance will preclude the City’s and Roselle’s use of the Easement for any period in excess of twenty-four (24) hours, NPIC shall provide the City and Roselles with as much advance notice as practicable under the circumstances. (e) The City and Roselles further understand and acknowledge that NPIC’s operations, use and maintenance of the Ditch and Ditch Road may cause or result in damage to the Easement and any improvements on the Easement. NPIC shall not be responsible for any damage to improvements, if any, made upon the Easement by City or Roselles. 6. Rights in Easement as between City and Roselles. (a) City and Roselles each shall have the right to use the Easement Area for purposes that will not interfere with the other party’s full enjoyment of the rights granted herein, including but not limited to each party’s right to operate or allow others to operate utility improvements on its own property within the Easement Area. (c) City and Roselles shall not deposit or permit their employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns to deposit, earth, rubbish, debris, or any 3.2 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 3 other substance or material, whether combustible or noncombustible, on the Easement Area, other than vegetation acceptable to all parties. 7. Obligations Regarding Easement Area as between City and Roselles. (a) All activities by the City and Roselles on the Easement Area, including access across the Easement Area, must be carried out in a manner reasonably expected to minimize disturbance to the natural features of each party’s respective property, any improvements thereon, and such party’s intended purposes therefor. (b) The City and Roselles acknowledge that the Easement granted herein pursuant to Paragraph 4, above, is subject to all prior liens, encumbrances, easements, restrictions, reservations and rights of way affecting the City’s and Roselle’s respective properties. 8. Maintenance (a) The City and the Roselles understand that NPIC has no duty or obligation to maintain the Ditch Road but that NPIC may maintain the Ditch Road at its sole discretion for its own needs and purposes. Although they benefit from NPIC’s maintenance of the Ditch Road, the City and Roselles shall have no right to make any claim or demand of or against NPIC regarding maintenance, repairs, upkeep, funding or reimbursement of any type regarding the Ditch Road, except as expressly provided for herein. (b) As consideration for NPIC’s consent to this Easement, the City agrees to assume responsibility for weed control within the portion of the Easement Area located on the City Property. The City will manage and control weeds in that portion of the Easement Area in the same manner and to the same extent as it does on the City Property, or as otherwise reasonably necessary to permit the City, Roselles and NPIC to access, use, operate and maintain the Ditch Road. (c) Should either the Roselles or the City desire to perform any maintenance or repair upon the Ditch Road other than the weed control described in subsection (b) above, they shall have the rights to do so, provided that NPIC first approves the work. NPIC shall be provided written notification of the proposed maintenance or repairs at least fourteen (14) days prior to commencement of any proposed maintenance or repair, including the proposed cost and plan of the proposed maintenance or repair, a time schedule for performance, the name address and phone number for any contractor retained for performance; and the current name, address and phone number of the party proposing the maintenance or repair. Should NPIC fail to respond in writing to the proposal within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the notice, NPIC shall be deemed to have approved the proposed work. The party performing the maintenance or repair work shall provide the other parties a copy of the paid invoice for approved work within thirty (30) days 3.2 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 4 of completion of such maintenance and repair. However, should NPIC object to the proposed work, the Roselles and the City agree to waive all rights to defend against any Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, or other temporary relief that NPIC may seek to enjoin any maintenance, improvements, or time schedule that proceeds without NPIC’s approval. (d) Except as otherwise provided herein, in the event one party’s use of or activities over or within the Easement Area, causes damage to another party’s property or the Easement Area, the responsible party shall make such repairs or take such other action as may be necessary to restore the Easement Area or other property to a condition comparable to its prior condition, including but not limited to the reseeding and replanting of any disturbed areas in a manner reasonably satisfactory to the other party, and shall provide ongoing maintenance of any seeded or planted areas, correction of any subsidence, and restoration of any other affected improvements or conditions until such time as any such repair and restoration is fully established and stabilized. Neither NPIC nor the Roselles shall undertake any repair or restoration work on the City Property without the City’s prior review and approval of the plans for such work. Should City fail to respond to a request for approval of such plans within fourteen (14) days of submittal, City shall be deemed to have approved the plans (e) The City and the Roselles agree to retain the existing gate along Horsetooth Road and the existing fence that runs along the eastern bank of the Ditch Road. NPIC is responsible for the maintenance of said fence and gate, will allow the City and Roselles access through the gate, and will allow the City to add a lock to the gate. 9. Representations of the Parties. The City and Roselles each represent to the other that they are the lawful owners in fee simple of their respective properties, and that each has good and lawful right and authority to grant, sell and convey its portion of the Easement Area to the other party. 10. Recordation. The City will record this Agreement in the records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and furnish evidence of such recording to the Roselles and NPIC. This Agreement will not be valid until it is recorded. 11. Liability. (a) By virtue of entering into this Agreement, NPIC assumes no liability for use, operation, or existence of the Roselles’ and City’s future or additional activities in the Easement Area. (b) Each party is responsible for its own negligence and that of its officers, agents, employees, guests, invitees, licensees, tenants, and representatives in its use of the Easement Area or other activities on the other party’s property, including but not limited to the construction, installation, operation, repair, and maintenance of improvements within the Easement Area, and for any actions or omissions in 3.2 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 5 violation of this Agreement. The City does not assume any responsibility or liability for the actions of Roselles, and Roselles do not assume any responsibility or liability for the actions of the City. (c) The Roselles agree to release and indemnify the City and NPIC from any claims, demands, damages or causes of action the Roselles, their agents, employees, guests, invitees, licensees, tenants, or representatives, may have for injury or damage to persons or property arising out of their (or their agents’, employees’, guests’, invitees’, licensees’, tenants’ or representatives’) use or occupancy of or activities within the Easement Area pursuant to this Agreement, unless caused by the gross negligence or intentionally wrongful acts of any other party. (d) The City shall provide NPIC with a certificate of general liability insurance naming NPIC as an additional insured for claims, demands, damages or causes of action arising out of the City’s use or occupancy of or activities within the Easement Area pursuant to this Agreement, unless caused by the gross negligence or intentionally wrongful acts of any other party. (e) To the extent provided for by law, should City’s or Roselle’s use of the Easement Area impede or interrupt NPIC’s water supply or delivery in the Ditch for any reason, the party causing such interruption shall be liable to pay to NPIC as liquidated damages Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) per day for any day that NPIC has a request for water and cannot deliver water as a result of such party’s activity within or use of the Easement Area. 12. Notices. Any notice or other communication relating to this Agreement must be given by one party to the other at its respective address or facsimile number as set forth below by facsimile, hand delivery, commercial carrier; or U.S. mail. The notice or other communication will be effective on the date it is delivered or on the third business day after being sent, whichever comes first. If to the Roselles: If to City: 3314 Grand Canyon Ct. Real Estate Services Manager Fort Collins, CO 80525 City of Fort Collins Fax: Mailing Address: P.O. Box 580 If to NPIC: Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 North Poudre Irrigation Company Hand Delivery: Attn: Scott Hummer 117 North Mason St. Mailing Address: Fort Collins, CO 80524 P.O. Box 100 Fax: Wellington, CO 80549 Hand Delivery: With a copy to: 3729 Cleveland Ave City Attorney’s Office Wellington, CO 80549 City of Fort Collins Fax: (970) 221-4569 3.2 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 6 Mailing Address: With a copy to: P.O. Box 580 Chrysten Hinze, Esq. Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 c/o Lind, Ottenhoff & Root, LLP Hand Delivery: 355 Eastman Park Dr. #200 300 LaPorte Avenue Windsor, CO 80550 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Fax: (970) 675-9535 Fax: 13. Default and Litigation Expenses. If a party to this Agreement is in default in performance of its respective obligations hereunder, the other party has the right to an action for specific performance or damages or both. Prior to proceeding with any such action, the party not in default must first send written notice to the defaulting party specifying the default and affording such party a reasonable period to cure the default. In the event a party defaults in any of its covenants or obligations and the party not in default commences and prevails in any legal or equitable action against the defaulting party, the defaulting party expressly agrees to pay all reasonable expenses of the litigation, including a reasonable sum for attorneys' fees or similar costs of legal representation. 14. Assignment. The Easement shall be appurtenant to and run with the City Property and the Roselle Property. Neither the City nor Roselles may assign their rights in this Easement to a third party without the prior consent of the other parties to this Agreement, which shall not be unreasonably delayed or withheld. 15. Obligations Subject to Appropriation. Obligations of the City under this Agreement to be performed in subsequent fiscal years are subject to the annual appropriation of funds sufficient and intended for such purpose by the Fort Collins City Council in its sole discretion. 16. Additional Terms and Conditions. (a) The parties acknowledge that the circumstances underlying this Agreement are unique, and neither this Agreement nor its underlying negotiations shall be deemed a precedent for any future expansion of this Agreement or other property owners encumbered by an easement owned by NPIC. (b) Whenever used herein, the singular number includes the plural, the plural the singular; and the use of any gender is applicable to all genders. (c) All of the covenants herein contained are binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their personal representatives, successors and assigns. (d) The parties intend and agree that this Agreement is to be construed and enforced according to the laws of Colorado, that venue in any proceeding related to the subject matter of this Agreement will be in Larimer County, Colorado, and that this Agreement is binding upon the parties hereto, their trustees, heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. 3.2 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 7 (e) The waiver by any party to this Agreement of a breach or any term or provision of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach or claim by any party. (f) This Agreement may be executed separately by each Party and counterparts or copies, and when each Party has executed a copy thereof, such copies taken together shall be deemed to the full and complete contract between the Parties. (g) All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are, by reference, incorporated in this Agreement for all purposes. (h) This Agreement and the Exhibits hereto constitute the final and complete expression of the Parties’ agreements with respect to this Agreement. Each Party agrees that it has not relied upon or regarded as binding any prior agreements, negotiations, representations or understandings, whether oral or written, except as expressly set forth herein. This Agreement and the Exhibits hereto shall not be modified except by written agreement of the parties. (i) If any clause or provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Roselles and NPIC have hereunder set their hands and seals the day and year first above written; and the City has caused this Easement Deed and Agreement to be executed by its Mayor, attested to by its City Clerk, and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed, all pursuant to Ordinance No. xxxxxx, 2016, passed on final reading by the City Council of the City of Fort Collins on the xxxxx day of xxxxxxxxxx, 2016. 3.2 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 8 CITY: THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO a Municipal Corporation Date: ______________________ By: ______________________________________ Wade O. Troxell, Mayor 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 Wade O. Troxell as Mayor and ____________________as City Clerk of the City of Fort Collins. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: ______________ ________________________________ Notary Public 3.2 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 9 THE ROSELLES: Date: ______________________ By: ___________________________________ Jerome B. Roselle Date: ______________________ By: ____________________________________ Darla J. Roselle STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of __________________ 2016, by Jerome B. Roselle and Darla J. Roselle. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: ______________ ______________________________________ Notary Public 3.2 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 10 NPIC: North Poudre Irrigation Company Date: _________________________ By: __________________________________ Name: Scott Hummer Title: General Manager STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __________ day of __________________ 2016, by Scott Hummer as General Manager for the North Poudre Irrigation Company. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: _______________ __________________________________________ Notary Public 3.2 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 11 EXHIBIT A Description of City Property Parcel Numbers: Legal Description: 3.2 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 12 EXHIBIT B Description of the Roselles’ Property Parcel Number: Legal Description: 3.2 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 13 EXHIBIT C Depiction of the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch 3.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) DRAFT 6-7-16 14 EXHIBIT D The Easement Area 3.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Ordinance No. 076, 2016 (4547 : SR 076 Topminnow NA Easement Conveyance) Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 077,2016, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Architectural Survey of the Loomis Addition in the Westside Neighborhood. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate unanticipated revenue received through a State Historical Fund grant. The State of Colorado has awarded a $35,000 grant for an architectural survey of the fifteen-block Loomis Addition in the Westside Neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This project builds upon a 2014 Certified Local Government grant from the State of Colorado for a historic context of the Loomis Addition. Containing many of the oldest residential buildings in Fort Collins, the Loomis Addition has seen a rapid increase in development pressure. In the last 10 years, permits for over 70 alterations and 25 demolitions have been issued in this 15-block area. The results of this architectural survey will be used to promote awareness and pride within the neighborhood and will provide the City with the tools to make informed planning decisions. The grant agreement between the State and the City was executed by the City Manager in December 2015. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This State Historical Fund grant provides the City with $35,000, which is being matched with an equal amount of City money through Keeping Fort Collins Great funds allocated for this purpose. Staff involvement is confined to managing the grant project which is being accomplished with current staffing levels. The grant period is December 3, 2015, through December 3, 2017. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 48 Maple St Scott Ave W alnut St Sycamore St Cherry St Meridian Ave Moby Dr Wayne St Gordon St Old Main Dr Linden St Akin Ave Aster St Elm Ct West St S Grant Ave S Mack St N Mack St Birch St N Washington Ave J u niper Ct Col umbi n e Ct B ungalo w Ct Pine St Jamith Pl W Oak St S Whitcomb St M on t e V ista Av e Sunset Ave Pearl St Bluebell St Mantz Pl Ma s -1- ORDINANCE NO. 077, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF THE LOOMIS ADDITION IN THE WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEREAS, the City has been awarded a grant in the amount of $35,000 (the “Grant”) by the State Historical Fund for an architectural survey; and WHEREAS, matching funds for the Grant have been appropriated in 2016 from the Keep Fort Collins Great Fund; and WHEREAS, this project builds upon a 2014 Certified Local Government grant from the State of Colorado for a historic context of the Loomis Addition; and WHEREAS, the Loomis Addition has seen a rapid increase in development pressure; in the last 10 years, permits for over 70 alterations and 25 demolitions have been issued in this 15- block area; and WHEREAS, the results of this architectural survey will be used to promote awareness and pride within the neighborhood, and will provide the City with the tools to make informed planning decisions; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of the Grant to support the Loomis Addition architectural survey will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS 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 there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated grant revenue in the General Fund the sum of THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($35,000) for expenditure in the General Fund for the Loomis Addition architectural survey. Packet Pg. 50 -2- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 51 Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Tawnya Ernst, Real Estate Specialist III SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 078, 2016, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Sewer Line Easement and a Temporary Construction Easement on Running Deer Natural Area to Boxelder Sanitation District in Exchange for the Vacation of an Existing Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize conveyance of a utility easement and a temporary construction easement to Boxelder Sanitation District on Running Deer Natural Area. Boxelder Sanitation District (BES) provides sanitary sewer service to a portion of Fort Collins residents. An aging and undersized sanitary sewer line that passes through Running Deer Natural Area needs to be replaced to provide for existing and projected residents in their service area. BES and the City have agreed to a realignment of portions of the sewer line and terms to a new easement to minimize the impact to the Natural Area’s vegetation, wildlife and visitors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Boxelder Sanitation District (BES) provides sanitary sewer services for a portion of citizens within the City of Fort Collins. BES’s wastewater treatment facility is located immediately south of the Running Deer Natural Area, managed by the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department (NAD) (Attachment 1). Due to the location of the treatment facility a number of existing sanitary sewer lines exist within Running Deer NA and were in place at the time of acquisition of the property by the City. As with any utility line, regular maintenance and periodic replacement is required for these lines. This project replaces an aging and undersized line with a new line that will serve existing customers and projected additional customers over the life of the line. The estimated timeline for construction of the project is from May-July 2016. Alignment In initial discussions, BES proposed to replace the existing line within its current alignment. However, the current alignment is directly adjacent to and within riparian habitat along Boxelder Creek. NAD staff was concerned with impacts to the riparian area associated with the replacement of the pipeline and future maintenance of the line. To minimize impacts, NAD staff worked with BES to relocate the new sewer line slightly to the west of the current alignment to place the new sewer line under an existing two-track access road on the eastern border of the former Resource Recovery Pit (Attachment 2). BES worked with NAD to survey the new alignment and conduct needed soil boring assessments to ensure the line could be constructed in the new location. While the initial construction will be more expensive as the sewer line will need to be deeper in its new alignment, it will be the least impactful to the Natural Area and will avoid the sensitive habitat areas. The existing line will be abandoned in place after being properly drained, flushed and sealed. 5 Packet Pg. 52 Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 2 Wildlife Resource Protection Portions of the construction site are within the ¼ mile and ½ mile protection buffers for an existing bald eagle nest. BES will provide documentation to NAD that they have consulted with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Colorado Parks and Wildlife to acquire any permits required by the respective agencies necessary to conduct the construction activities on the Site during the duration of the project. Additionally, BES will ensure that all applicable permits will be secured related to ground-nesting or neo- tropical birds, wetlands, or other important natural resources as identified within the City’s General Resource Protection Standards and by other regulatory bodies. Coordination with other City projects A City stormwater improvement project is scheduled to begin in the spring/early summer of 2016. A box culvert will be replaced under Prospect Road during July, necessitating the closure of the road for a period of time. BES is coordinating with the City Stormwater Utility to also install its sanitary sewer line beneath Prospect Road during this timeframe to avoid additional road closures. The City has an active stormwater permit with the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety on a portion of the area that the BES line will be installed. BES and the City will work together to ensure compliance of the terms of the permit on the site. Easements BES currently holds easements for the existing sewer line that allow for maintenance and replacement of the existing sewer line. Due to the new alignment being proposed to minimize impacts to the riparian area a new easement is necessary. The new easement will provide a 20-foot wide non-exclusive permanent easement with temporary construction easements that will expire after construction is completed. The new easement will include the latest current City utility easement language such as the Resource Protection Standards and language related to liability and notification to the City. The existing easements that are no longer needed will be vacated. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Since BES has worked cooperatively with NAD to realign the sewer line to minimize impacts to Running Deer and the new easement will allow the City to have more favorable terms in the agreement, NAD has chosen to waive the administrative fees associated with utility easement requests. No ecosystem services impact fees will be assessed due to the fact that the alignment will be within already impacted areas and will not significantly impact the natural systems in the Natural Area with this project. Since BES already has an easement for its sewer line, there will be no charge for the realigned easement which minimizes impacts to the site and is smaller in size. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 20, 2016 regular meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board unanimously voted to recommend adoption of the ordinance for a permanent non-exclusive easement and temporary construction easement for the installation of an underground sanitary sewer pipeline by Boxelder Sanitation District on portions of Running Deer Natural Area. (Attachment 3) 5 Packet Pg. 53 Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Proposed Sewer Line Alignment Map (PDF) 3. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, April 20, 2016 (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 54 Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Running Deer Natural Area Location Map Created by City of Fort Collins Natural Areas - 2016 ¹ RUNNING DEER NATURAL AREA City of Ft. Collins Natural Areas Larimer County DNR 0123 0.5 Miles ATTACHMENT 1 5.1 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Location Map (4413 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance) 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 Proposed Boxelder Sanitation Line Replacement Alignment City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department Project Area Larimer County 0 250 500 1,000 Feet BES Sanitary Sewer Line Alignment City of Ft. Collins Natural Areas CSU ² Date Created: 4/6/2016 8:53:49 AM RUNNING DEER NATURAL AREA ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING CENTER COTTONWOOD HOLLOW NATURAL AREA PROSPECT PONDS NATURAL AREA Proposed BES Sewer Line Alignmnet ATTACHMENT 2 BES Water Treatment Facility ATTACHMENT 2 5.2 Attachment: Proposed Sewer Line Alignment Map (4413 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance) Land Conservation & Stewardship Board April 20, 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 ACTION ITEMS Running Deer - Boxelder Sanitary Sewer Line Mark Sears, Natural Areas Manager made a presentation regarding Boxelder Sanitation District's request for modifying its easements across Running Deer Natural Area as they anticipate replacing existing sewer lines. Mark explained that staff has worked with Box elder to create a Win-Win alignment for the sewer line replacement that would minimize the impacts. The board asked a few clarifying questions and had a brief discussion before approving the motion. Raymond Watts made a motion that City Council approve a permanent 11011-exc/usive easement and temporary constructio11 easements for the iltstallation of an tmdergrormd sa11itary sewer pipeline by Boxelder Sanitation District 011 portions of Rmming Deer Natural Area. Vicky McLa11e seconded the motion. Motion was Ullallimously approved. 2016 Natural Areas Appropriation Ordinance Mark Sears, Natural Areas Manager made a brief presentation regarding the appropriation of unspent 2015 funds and unanticipated 2015 revenues. The board asked a few clarifying questions and had a brief discussion prior to approving the motion. Kelly 0/rlson made a motio11 that City Cou11cil approve an Ordillallce appropriati11g $9,598,100 i11 prior year reserves a11d rmallticipated revenues i11 the Natural Areas FUitd for the purpose of providing Natural Areas programming not i11cluded ill the 2016 adopted City Budget. David Tweedale seco11ded the motion. The motion was rmanimously approved Land Conservation and Stewardship Board 5.3 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes, April 20, 2016 (4413 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 078, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A SEWER LINE EASEMENT AND A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON RUNNING DEER NATURAL AREA TO BOXELDER SANITATION DISTRICT IN EXCHANGE FOR THE VACATION OF AN EXISTING EASEMENT WHEREAS, the City is the owner of several parcels of land located south of Prospect Road and west of Interstate 25 in Larimer County, Colorado, collectively known as Running Deer Natural Area (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, Boxelder Sanitation District (“Boxelder”) owns an existing easement for a sanitary sewer line across the City Property (the “Existing Easement”); and WHEREAS, Boxelder wishes to replace the aging, undersized line located in the Existing Easement, and has agreed to put its new line in a slightly different location that will have fewer impacts on riparian areas located on the City Property; and WHEREAS the proposed location of the new sewer line easement is described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, Boxelder is also requesting a temporary construction easement for up to one year, as more particularly described on Exhibit “B”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “TCE”); and WHEREAS, once the new sewer line is completed, the old line will be abandoned in place after being properly drained, flushed and sealed, and the Existing Easement will be vacated; and WHEREAS, because the Easement will replace the Existing Easement and the relocation of the sewer line to the new Easement will benefit the City Property, City staff is recommending that Boxelder not be charged for the Easement and TCE, provided the Existing Easement is vacated upon removal of the old sewer line; and WHEREAS, Boxelder has also agreed to coordinate its construction project with the City’s improvement project on East Prospect Road to avoid additional road closures; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on April 20, 2016, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted to recommend approval of the conveyance of the Easement and the TCE to Boxelder; 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. Packet Pg. 58 -2- 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 City Council hereby finds that the City’s conveyance of the Easement and TCE to Boxelder in exchange for the vacation of the Existing Easement 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 and TCE to Boxelder 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 or TCE, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the interests to be conveyed. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 59 EXHIBIT A 1 Attachment: Exhibit A (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) EXHIBIT A (CONT.) 1 Attachment: Exhibit A (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 1 Attachment: Exhibit A (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 1 Attachment: Exhibit A (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 1 Attachment: Exhibit A (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) EXHIBIT B 2 Attachment: Exhibit B (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) EXHIBIT B (CONT.) 2 Attachment: Exhibit B (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 2 Attachment: Exhibit B (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 2 Attachment: Exhibit B (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) 2 Attachment: Exhibit B (4426 : Boxelder Sanitation District Conveyance ORD) Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Mike Gavin, PFA Battalion Chief SUBJECT Resolution 2016-048 Adopting the 2016 Larimer County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to adopt an updated plan that the City will utilize in its hazard mitigation program. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, in cooperation with the State of Colorado requires plans to be updated periodically. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Hazard mitigation is “any action taken to reduce or eliminate the risk and impact to human life, property and environment from natural, technological or human caused hazards”. Larimer County created its previous Mitigation Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Stafford Act, the National Flood Insurance Act, and 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The Northern Colorado Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan was approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on July 26, 2010. This Plan must be updated and approved by FEMA every five years; the current Plan expired on July 26, 2015. Due to the damaging floods in the fall of 2013, Larimer County was granted an “Extraordinary Circumstances” timeline by FEMA, which allows the County until August 2016 to have a new Hazard Mitigation Plan approved by FEMA. A Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been developed by the Mitigation Planning Committee, including personnel from twenty-seven different jurisdictions (including Poudre Fire Authority) within Larimer County, and partner organizations. Larimer County expects to have the Plan approved by August 2016. The Fort Collins Office of Emergency Management will be administering and monitoring the Larimer Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, in collaboration with all community partners, and will provide revisions and updates to the Fort Collins City Council as needed to remain current. Fort Collins will benefit from this project by: Ensuring eligibility for all sources of hazard mitigation funds made available through FEMA. Increasing public awareness and understanding of vulnerabilities as well as support for specific actions to reduce losses from future natural disaster. Ensuring community policies, programs, and goals are compatible with reducing vulnerability to all hazards and identifying those that are incompatible. Building partnerships with diverse stakeholders increasing opportunities to leverage data and resources in reducing workloads as well as achieving shared community objectives. Expanding the understanding of potential risk reduction measures to include: local plans and regulations; structure and infrastructure projects; natural systems protection; education and awareness programs; and other tools. 6 Packet Pg. 70 Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 2 Informing the development, prioritization, and implementation of mitigation projects. Benefits accrue over the life of the project as losses are avoided from each subsequent hazard event. The Hazard Mitigation Plan is over 900 pages, and therefore has not been attached; however the Plan is available at http://www.larimer.org/emergency/pdfs/LarimerHMP-Final.pdf, and is on file in the Office of the City Clerk for public review. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Without adoption of this hazard mitigation plan, the City could lose its eligibility to receive millions of dollars in pre and post disaster mitigation funds as established in the Stafford Act. This would include the flood mitigation program and reimbursements for events such as the floods of 2013 and High Park Fire. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its March 17, 2016 meeting, the Water Board unanimously voted to recommend adoption of the Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan. PUBLIC OUTREACH Public meetings were held on July 27, 2015 and December 2, 2015 to present draft planning documents and to solicit input during the development of the plan. The draft plan was made available for public comment from December 10, 2015 through January 10, 2016 to solicit questions and comments and to present the plan and the proposed mitigation actions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Water Board recommendation, June 6 ,2016 (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 71 Utilities electric · stormwater · wastewater · water 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6700 970.221.6619 – fax 970.224.6003 – TDD utilities@fcgov.com fcgov.com/utilities M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 6, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and Councilmembers FROM: Brett Bovee, Water Board Vice Chairperson THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Kevin R. Gertig, Utilities Executive Director RE: 2016 Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan Approval Recommendation At the City of Fort Collins Water Board meeting on March 17, 2016, the Board voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the 2016 Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan. The City of Fort Collins in coordination with other Northern Colorado jurisdictions undertook the plan update to help reduce long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their effects. The Water Board fully supports this effort and encourages City Council to adopt the 2016 Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Sincerely, ________________________________ Brett Bovee, Water Board Vice Chairperson DocuSign Envelope ID: 9E7A74CF-EDEF-4ED1-86E1-2257594BB247 ATTACHMENT 1 6.1 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Water Board recommendation, June 6 ,2016 (4486 : Hazard Mitigation Plan) -1- RESOLUTION 2016-048 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING THE 2016 LARIMER COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City has experienced flooding, wildfires and other natural and human- caused hazard events that pose risks to public health and safety and may cause serious property damage; and WHEREAS, on June 1, 2010, the City adopted the Northern Colorado Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan; and WHEREAS, a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (“Mitigation Plan”) has been developed as an update to the 2010 Northern Colorado Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan by the Mitigation Planning Committee, including personnel from twenty-seven different jurisdictions within Larimer County and partner organizations; and WHEREAS, the Mitigation Plan recommends several mitigation actions that will help minimize and reduce safety threats and damage to private and public property; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City that the Mitigation Plan be adopted. 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 Mitigation Plan, dated June 21, 2016, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, and available for public inspection, is hereby approved and adopted, thereby replacing and superseding the Northern Colorado Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 73 Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Carol Webb, Water Resources/Treatmnt Opns Mgr SUBJECT Resolution 2016-049 Making Fort Collins Appointments to a Joint Ad Hoc Committee with Other Area Water Providers Regarding Regional Water Collaboration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Gerry Horak, Councilmember Gino Campana, and a manager from the Water Utility to represent the City Council in a joint ad hoc committee of regional water providers. The purpose of the ad hoc committee is to discuss regionalization prospects and further collaboration among water providers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION A Regional Water Collaboration Workshop was held on May 31, 2016, to discuss regionalization prospects and further collaboration among water providers serving citizens residing within and near Fort Collins’ Growth Management Area. The workshop was attended by representatives from the Fort Collins City Council, East Larimer County Water District, Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, and North Weld County Water District. Representatives included members of governing boards and staff from each entity. Workshop attendees discussed opportunities and barriers to regional water collaboration. The participants agreed that, in order to further such discussions, an ad hoc committee consisting of two representatives from each governing board and a water manager from each entity should be formed. The committee was directed to develop a charter to address opportunities/barriers identified in discussion and to provide such a charter to all governing boards for approval. The ad hoc committee is also charged with identifying costs of further collaboration. Staff expects that, following appointment of representatives from each board, the first meeting will be scheduled within approximately 30 days. PUBLIC OUTREACH The May 31 Regional Water Collaboration Workshop was open to the public and two press releases were issued informing the public of the meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (PDF) 7 Packet Pg. 74 Utilities electric · stormwater · wastewater · water 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221-6700 970.221.6619 fax V/TDD: 711 utilities@fcgov.com fcgov.com/utilities Meeting Notes REGIONAL WATER COLLABORATION WORKSHOP TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2016 4:00 p.m. Canyon West Room, Lincoln Center 417 W Magnolia Street, Fort Collins, Colorado EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Workshop Purpose The purpose of the workshop was to gain commitment from elected representatives regarding what actionable steps can be taken in the near term to develop a more collaborative framework to address this region’s water future. Discussion Highlights Workshop attendees discussed opportunities and barriers for collaboration. Key themes included: Opportunities: 1. Address inefficiencies in the current system by taking advantage of economies of scale 2. Provide consistent water services and value to the community and to customers 3. More opportunities for innovation and sharing best practices 4. Sharing water supply – maximizing the use of our limited water resources 5. Shared planning to address community’s future water needs 6. Strengthen our ability to address common threats (e.g. climate change, extreme drought, fire, flood, exportation of water supply from our basin) Barriers: 1. Trust and loss of control – dilute voices of elected officials 2. Having winners/losers in collaboration 3. Lack of alignment on values, policies, priorities, and politics 4. Differences in culture 5. Cost of collaboration for some providers ATTACHMENT 1 7.1 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Path Forward All participants agreed that collaboration was worth pursuing. An ad hoc Steering Committee consisting of: Two officials from each water district board Two officials from City Council Water manager designee from each water provider Charge of the Steering Committee: 1. Develop a charter to address opportunities/barriers identified in discussion. 2. Provide charter to plenary group for approval (all boards present) – timeline approximately 30 days 3. Identify costs of further exploring collaboration 4. Identify and invite in reps from public sector, private sector, research/university (as deemed appropriate) TASKS AND TIMEFRAME FOR ADDRESSING QUESTIONS Who Does What Next? Focusing on raw water, water treatment, and draft charter Innovation, looking to the future Charge of the group QUESTIONS FOR STAFF Suggestion: City staff draft what they think task is, one page memo to Council within one week WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Fort Collins Mayor Wade Troxell welcomed invited attendees (see attached list) and 43 members of the public. He thanked City of Fort Collins Councilmembers and water district general managers and board members for participating in this discussion about water supply in the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA), and ways in which they can collaborate. He said he hoped everyone would feel comfortable expressing their thoughts and ideas. Attendees introduced themselves to the group. The facilitator was Todd Bryan, Ph.D, Senior Program Manager of Collaborative Decision Resources. He has lived in Colorado for 26 years. 7.1 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) PURPOSE OF MEETING AND GROUND RULES Water Resources and Treatment Operations Manager Carol Webb of Fort Collins Utilities summarized the reason for the meeting: because we all serve customers and residents in the City of Fort Collins Growth Management Area, and there are opportunities to leverage our strengths, identify common goals, and collaborate on challenges. Theme: Is there enough common ground within this group to move forward with a collaborative structure, such as a water authority, and discuss opportunities and barriers? Ground Rules Get to the point Stay on point Offer alternatives instead of criticisms Show respect for people and their ideas OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS Carol Webb, Water Resources and Treatment Operations Manager (see PowerPoint presentation) “I hope everyone realizes we do have existing partnerships, and we want to leverage those collaborations.” Rising Water Prices: 250% increase in the past few years; $7,000 per share for Colorado- Big Thompson Canyon today. Aging Infrastructure requires capital planning, budget requests, discussions on how to maintain and replace aging infrastructure. Shared Environment Common Challenges Common Goals Existing Partnerships ADVANTAGES OF COLLABORATION What challenges does collaboration hope to address? What opportunities does collaboration hope to offer? Who wins with a collaborative governance structure? Consistency Redundant infrastructure Interconnectedness Economy of scale in treatment facilities o Efficiency o Selling water to districts, take it to the next level Trust is Needed 7.1 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) o Building trust among the districts and trust among City Council, bury hatchets, build trust among Council and staff so that we can then get the work done Build on Past Cooperation We’ve been able to work together on Pleasant Valley Pipeline, it’s a win-win situation for all; we couldn’t have done it ourselves. Tangible outcome of meeting Hope that we can walk away from this with some kind of agreement, and come up with a target goal that’s specific, attainable, and measureable; a tangible outcome of the meeting. Common sense o Rick Pickard, North Weld County Water District: Our need to be here is to speak on the sharing of water treatment plants, namely Soldier Canyon Filter Plant. We went through a process 1.5 years ago to consider a water authority; it was met with disapproval by NWCWD. We’re not in favor of our plant becoming a peaking plant. We provide water at the cheapest anywhere in Colorado that we’re aware of. Any discussion of the filter plant will definitely get our attention. Redundancy o We do have redundancy right now, because we have duplication of efforts; collaboration eliminates redundancy. Innovation and Scale o There’s been confusion about water conservation programs. We all have opportunities for innovation as we think about our land use and building code. Sharing best practices. Thinking of it from a systems perspective. Agree that it’s a common sense view. We have a responsibility to collaborate because it makes so much sense. We have to do it going forward. Redundancy Innovation and Scale o Land Use o Building Codes o Best Practices Costs-Efficiency Natural environment, quality of life, water quality o We can talk about enhancing all three o We have lots of capacity between those two plants and we’re not using it to its full advantage. o General public is upset with government at all levels, frustration that they’re charging too much. Without the details about what we’re collaborating on, it’s difficult to make a decision. We all want to protect the natural environment, protect the quality of life for the people who are living here, and water quality. Sharing best practices; synergy 7.1 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Consistent among all districts: pride in the services they provide; working at the highest level possible; treat and deliver at the most efficient level possible Combining storage. City of Fort Collins has substantial amount of water rights that were bought early, but don’t have enough water storage; How important long-range planning is to our community. It took years to develop these systems to move water. Collaboration is essential for public servants. Environmental help and climate change, consistent rebate policies, more robust comprehensive Benefits of long-range planning - Shared Common challenges o Climate Change o Common/consistent message to citizens o Enough supply Discussion with Council grew from question do we have enough water supply to accommodate the growth we expect to see in the GMA. o Maximize limited resource Figure out how to maximize use of existing resource; we’ll be in a real pinch if a water district runs out of water Jon Haukaas: The purpose of our collaboration is for the customer. What is the customer getting? Every one of us could be considered “best in class” and the concern is we’re doing it all separately. We have interconnections, we have those fail-safes in place, but the day to day what the customer gets is the goal for collaboration. There is potential here today. How can we expand those programs the City offers to their residents to others in the GMA, plus additional programs: toilets, etc. as we look to manage this very limited resource in the future? o Serving customer base o Expand programs o Idea of resiliency o Drought and emergency protection o High level of trust at staff level CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS o What are the greatest concerns with a collaborative approach? o What are the key obstacles to a more collaborative structure? o Are there losers with a collaborative structure? Who’s getting the benefits and who’s paying the costs? Concern about losing some of the benefits Loss of control 7.1 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Who pays? Dilute voice of elected officials May artificially encourage growth Need enduring alignment Postponing needed work o Paralysis by analysis because we have so many participants Jumping to conclusions too quickly Don’t lose sight of customer o High quality, low cost Need a process to propel us forward to next steps Carol Webb: At City of Fort Collins, we have high level of service, we have 7 key priorities that we pay attention to, per City Council, where we have shared values, then you can collaborate Policies may not be consistent o Values may be consistent or not Differences in culture o Residential vs agricultural Closing Soldier Canyon More $/1000 gals for some Makes sense to collaborate on common goals, but needs to be an allowance, respect for differences of opinion Difference in values, policies, culture, politics - Need respect Difference in growth potential in different districts How do we assess those assets and bring in a potential authority Costs are distributed unevenly. Investments in capital Firm yield – dramatic drought. o Essential that we plan for future o Federal action o Future – permitting process Common threats o Loss of the resource o Drought, flood, fire Mike DiTullio: Fort Collins has a better portfolio than the rest of us. We’re relying on Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) water now. There will be a loss of control. Delivery of water. Enduring alignment is important for long-term outcomes. Ag/Urban Cooperation o Legislation o Innovation – new tools o Water Quality Water districts – lack storage, senior water rights Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP): we’re at odds on NISP before we get started on some topics 7.1 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Are there potential losers with a collaborative structure? Citizens if elected officials diminish authority – influence Job loss o One of the deal-breakers was around redundant staffing. Some people would lose out. Let’s set this up so we don’t have losers. Let’s find common ground and start small. o Consistency, drought-planning Fairness for ratepayers o Who pays? Who wins? Will it cost some districts more than others? Who subsidizes? Trust – is it a barrier among the entities around the table? o High level of trust at staff level o Varying levels of trust for district boards o District boards stay in place for a long time o City Council changes quickly People exiting workforce Hiring, maintaining, growing workforce How to be more competitive Growth distribution o Growth is east of I-25, east of the fairgrounds, south of Harmony Road to 57 th St, Timnath growing rapidly (Costco, Super Walmart) It’s in our best interest to work together as elected officials Trust Give thought to why outlying water districts were formed, and their contribution o Need tact o Areas outside GMA Difference in tap fees – how to resolve o Fairness? o Cost of raw water, $19,000 difference City of Fort Collins Utilities staff: we’ll have some extra cost today to benefit the future, what’s going to happen to water providers not just in the next five years but next 50 years and beyond. How do we show benefits of increased costs to citizens? Are costs and benefits distributed Complexity Scott Baker: Growth neutral What are the market forces? o Value difference? Question to City: is it right to sell water at cost way below the market? How do districts accommodate non-district paradigms? Average cost model vs marginal cost model Sincerity? 7.1 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Is it fair to charge less than market? When? Is it fair for utility to charge more than they need to? NISP o Different positions by City and districts Different management philosophies Trust o 1962 districts formed because City wouldn’t provide service outside GMA PATH FORWARD – OPTIONS FOR A MORE COLLABORATIVE STRUCTURE Brainstorming session - What does a collaborative framework look like? Which issues might it address? Options How much GMA can Fort Collins cover with existing water rights? How were new rate payers dealt with in the past relative to the new service area? Identify small projects that benefit customers and present opportunities Look at past projects involving collaboration Joint project to lower water rates, i.e. infrastructure o Within existing customer base Joint project to bring excess capacity to customers Joint staff effort o Work together o City staff and water district managers meet every two months. o Need direction Joint project to examine “what if” scenario planning Study of treatment authority might be expanded to include raw water. Dealing with greater constituency. Continue discussion. Are electric utilities a good model of collaboration? o Well-defined service areas Treatment is good model for collaboration. City could consider long-term leasing capacity Start with water treatment, then scale up Structure Moving Forward Is a collaborative effort worth pursuing? If so, what are next steps? o Yes (All but two raised hands because they want specificity, details. They later joined in unanimous support for collaboration.) Structure o Suggestion for ad hoc Steering Committee. Each board nominate: Two people from water districts Two from City Council Colorado State University 7.1 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) Triple-helix approach: Public sector, private sector, research/university Strong intersections to move forward Expand across university: representatives of environmental, social to integrate all that are valuable to people in this room o Designee in charge of water will be part of this committee o Need numbers/finance people in the group because numbers have stopped collaboration efforts in the past Water Solutions Institute Innovation Plenary group duties o How often? o This group What the group’s charge? Plenary group, not work group. o Explore possible topics o Informal structure to periodically review this framework TASKS AND TIMEFRAME FOR ADDRESSING QUESTIONS Who Does What Next? Focusing on raw water, water treatment, and draft charter Innovation, looking to the future Charge of the group Form group Make charter draft Bring to plenary Identify costs Create timeline for forming group Within 30 days, ad hoc group presents draft charter to present to boards Include costs Collaborative process QUESTIONS FOR STAFF Suggestion: City staff draft what they think task is, one page memo to Council within one week APPRECIATION City Manager Darin Atteberry o Acknowledge good work o Optimistic about conversations tonight o Thank you to Fort Collins Utilities Staff: Executive Director Kevin Gertig, Water Resources and Treatment Operations Manager Carol Webb, and Water Resources Manager Donnie Dustin 7.1 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) o Round of applause for Mike DiTullio, who recently retired from Fort Collins- Loveland Water District as general manager Mayor Wade Troxell o Thanks to water district boards for frank discussion; build on that going forward, water districts all serve customers so well ADJOURN 7.1 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Regional Water Collaboration Workshop Notes (4554 : Water Collaboration Commitee Appointments) -1- RESOLUTION 2016-049 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING FORT COLLINS APPOINTMENTS TO A JOINT AD HOC COMMITTEE WITH OTHER AREA WATER PROVIDERS REGARDING REGIONAL WATER COLLABORATION WHEREAS, Fort Collins and surrounding region are served by various water providers, including, the City’s Fort Collins Utilities, the East Larimer County Water District, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, and the North Weld County Water District; and WHEREAS, the City has historically collaborated with these other regional water providers on various water-related matters; and WHEREAS, the City has sought to explore further collaboration with these other regional water providers; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2015, the City Council unanimously adopted a motion designating Mayor Pro Tem Gerry Horak and Councilmember Gino Campana to represent the Council in discussions regarding regionalization prospects and cooperation among water providers; and WHEREAS, in follow up to informal discussions among water providers in the region, a Regional Water Collaboration Workshop was held on Tuesday, May 31, 2016, during which collaboration among the various regional water providers was discussed; and WHEREAS, the regional water providers discussed the formation of a joint ad hoc committee to discuss further collaboration among the various regional water providers; and WHEREAS, said committee will include the water managers and one or two of the members of the governing boards of the various regional water providers; and WHEREAS, Councilmembers Gino Campana and Gerry Horak have certain experience in water-related matters and have expressed interest in sitting on said committee. 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 Manager is hereby authorized and directed to appoint an appropriate manager from the Water Utility to serve on said committee. Section 3. Mayor Pro Tem Gerry Horak and Councilmember Gino Campana are hereby appointed to said committee. Packet Pg. 85 -2- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 86 Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Christine Macrina, Boards and Commissions Coordinator SUBJECT Resolution 2016-050 Making Appointments to the Energy Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appoint Mohit Chhabra, Alan Braslau, and Lori Nitzel to the Energy Board to fill board vacancies which currently exist due to a December 31, 2015, term expiration that was never filled and the resignations of Michael Doss and Bob McDonald. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. 8 Packet Pg. 87 -1- RESOLUTION 2016-050 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE ENERGY BOARD WHEREAS, three vacancies currently exist on the Energy Board due to resignations and a December 31, 2015, term expiration; and WHEREAS, Councilmembers interviewed applicants for these vacancies on June 1 and June 15, 2016; and WHEREAS, from the pool of applicants for these Boards, Lori Nitzel, Alan Braslau, and Mohit Chhabra have been recommended to fill these vacancies on the Energy Board; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make appointments to fill the vacancies on the Energy Board. 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 following named persons are hereby appointed to fill current vacant positions on the Energy Board with a term to commence immediately and with terms to expire as set forth after each name: Expiration of Term Lori Nitzel December 31, 2017 Alan Braslau December 31, 2018 Mohit Chhabra December 31, 2019 Packet Pg. 88 -2- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 89 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Pete Wray, Senior City Planner Peggy Streeter, Senior Sales Tax Auditor Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning SUBJECT Items Relating to Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 079, 2016, Amending Article XIV of Chapter 15 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Outdoor Vendors. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 080, 2016, Amending Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the Land Use Code Regarding Outdoor Vendors. The purpose of this item is to amend the City Code and Land Use Code to update property owner and outdoor vendor requirements. The intent of the original 2012 Code provisions for outdoor vendor operations was to manage a mobile operation and address specific mobile vendor impacts and requirements as a temporary, accessory land use. The proposed changes clarify and distinguish between two primary outdoor vending operations, mobile and stationary, including land use locational requirements for vending on privately-owned lots. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading. Staff recommends Council consider allowing a six (6) month amortization period be implemented to delay enacting new Code requirements, until approximately January 15, 2017. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2012, the City of Fort Collins implemented new regulations to better manage and support outdoor vendors operating in the City. In 2014, in response to evolving vendor needs, the City implemented additional allowances for the number of vendors operating on private lots and food truck rallies. Now that these operations have been active for a few years, the City is re-evaluating the overall operations of outdoor vendors in response to recent concerns over the level of mobility and length of time certain vendors are remaining on the same locations. While initially focusing on food truck vendors, staff has identified other vendor types and operation conditions that need to be assessed as part of this update. Most outdoor vendors with vehicles move around the City regularly and, as a result, are “mobile.” However, over the past few years some outdoor vendors, including food truck and trailer operators, have set up semi- permanent locations for vending on private lots, reflecting a less-mobile operation. The intent of the Code for outdoor vendor operations using vehicles was to ensure a mobile operation and it addressed the specific impacts and requirements of a mobile operation. Such impacts and requirements of a mobile operation are different when the mobile operation becomes more stationary in the same location for extended periods of 9 Packet Pg. 90 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 2 time. Non-mobile vendors become more akin to a brick and mortar restaurant business without accounting for the impacts associated with a brick and mortar business such as improving private and public infrastructure, providing additional parking, paying building permit fees, and providing access to public restrooms. The recent examples mentioned above of outdoor vendors operating on the same privately owned lot on a continuous basis are not meeting the underlying intent of being temporary or mobile. Outdoor food vendors are required by the State and County to work out of, and return to, an approved commissary kitchen each day they vend. These stationary vendors need to comply with the same health requirements for their food truck and associated commissary kitchen as other mobile food truck vendors, and as brick and mortar restaurants do for their fixed location restaurants. Staff has also observed other vendor types that sell non-food items out of a vehicle operating on a stationary basis in the same locations. Regulatory Options-Other Cities When considering the land use regulatory options available, staff reviewed 25 land use codes from across the country that indicated a wide range of ways in which communities regulate mobile food vending from a zoning and licensing standpoint on both public and private property (Attachment 5). The primary elements evaluated included requirements for site location, duration of stay, hours of operation, and the permitting system used. Location Fort Collins, like most communities and aside from neighborhood vending, allows mobile outdoor vending within commercial, industrial, employment and other non-residential zone districts. Some communities make a distinction between vending on public property, which often requires a license but is not regulated by zoning, and private property, which sometimes requires a separate land use permit and is regulated by the land use code. When permitted on private property, land use standards almost universally require evidence of property owner approval for the mobile vendor to operate. Duration The length of time food trucks are permitted to stay in one place varies widely by community, and often is related to where outdoor vending is permitted. Some communities allow outdoor vending on public property but prohibit overnight parking. In contrast, some communities allow outdoor vending on private property for up to 30 days or more at one location. For example, Grand Rapids, MI, allows concession sales for up to 200 consecutive days over 12 calendar months. Hours of Operation Limitations to hours of operation vary greatly. Some communities limit hours of operation to lunchtime and others allow sales from early in the morning to late in the evening. Some communities place no time limits on these operations in their zoning regulations. Licenses and Permits Most communities require permits or licenses regardless of whether the trucks operate on public or private property. It is also common for the community to reference compliance with other codes, particularly State or County health codes. While all of the communities surveyed require a sales/use tax license or permit, separate land use permits are less common. Some examples of communities that require a separate land use permit include: 9 Packet Pg. 91 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 3 City of Denver - Zoning Permit required if on private property City of Georgetown, TX - Temporary Use Permit, including a site plan and property owner consent, and evaluated by City staff and referral agencies City of Raleigh, NC - Zoning Permit, including site plan and property owner consent. City of San Francisco, CA - Allows both permanent and mobile uses. Permanent use requires compliance with all standards of a bricks-and-mortar restaurant/Temporary use-requires Temporary Use Authorization Staff identified four categories for potential Land Use Code, City Code, and administrative process changes for addressing issues associated with outdoor vending: 1. Management of mobile outdoor vending operations, citywide; 2. Addressing the recent trend of vendors operating on a semi-permanent and stationary basis on same private location; 3. Consider an appropriate land use and zoning review process for managing outdoor vending operations by location and associated compliance, in addition to existing Outdoor Vendor Licensing requirements; and 4. Assess support for a new separation requirement for outdoor food vendors operating near existing fixed- location restaurants. 1. Mobile Outdoor Vendors The issue of mobility is not limited to food truck vendors. In reviewing outdoor vendor categories, some vendor types were not evaluated such as Christmas tree lots, car washes, pumpkin patch sales, and transportation related vendors. Outdoor vendors using vehicles, including trucks, trailers and push carts, were assessed together for consistency in considering changes to operational requirements. While most of these outdoor vendors serve food, some are vending non-food items on a more stationary basis in the same location. In April, 2016, an online questionnaire was posted asking for feedback on maximum length of time a vendor is allowed to stay on a private lot per day. Approximately 66% of respondents did not support new restrictions, 13% for on-site limits for up to 12 hours, and 5% supporting on-site limits for 8-10 hours. As mentioned previously, some vendors are operating on a semi-permanent basis on the same private lot. In order to determine an appropriate strategy for responding to this semi-permanent operation, staff first needed to better define a mobile outdoor vending operation and location requirements. Staff met with vendors to assess minimum operating needs on a daily and weekly basis and locations for vending. Generally, vendors operate between 4-9 hours per day and 2-3 days per week at the same location. Food vendors also need to meet Larimer County health requirements. This information was used to determine an appropriate regulatory framework for vending operations and locational requirements. Staff has identified additional City Code and Land Use Code requirements to ensure that outdoor mobile vendors operating on a daily basis move vehicles after vending based on new operation and location requirements reflective of a mobile operation. Staff believes the proposed changes are reasonable while continuing to support these small businesses and not overregulate their operations. Outdoor vendors are still categorized as a temporary and accessory use. Highlight of proposed new Code requirements for mobile outdoor vending: New definitions for approved vending location, type of vendor, and clarification for outdoor mobile vendor operations No more than three days at same approved vending location per week - no other vending allowed at that location during the remaining days of week, unless property owner obtains a minor amendment No more than ten hours of active vending operations on the same location per day Vehicle not allowed to be left unattended at the approved vending location for more than short breaks, or overnight In discussing potential changes with the vending community, these new provisions were generally supported to ensure more mobility while not being overly restrictive for normal mobile vending operations. Most outdoor 9 Packet Pg. 92 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 4 vendors operate consistent with these proposed standards on a daily basis. A majority of participants taking the online questionnaires did not support any new requirements (Attachments 1-3). 2. Stationary Vendors Recent examples of outdoor vendors operating on the same privately owned lot on a continuous and semi- permanent basis are not meeting the underlying intent of being temporary or mobile. Staff has identified this type of vending operation as “stationary.” Outdoor food vendors are required by the State and County to work out of and return to an approved commissary kitchen each day they vend. These stationary vendors need to comply with the same health requirements for their food truck and associated commissary kitchen, as brick and mortar restaurants do for their fixed location. Consequently, County Health officials have been contacted to help address this issue. The number of outdoor vendors operating on a semi-permanent and stationary basis is limited to approximately 5 out of 25 currently licensed outdoor vendors. Staff has also observed a few of these stationary vendors leaving their vehicle unattended between vending operations and overnight. While staff initially focused on mobile operations, this type of stationary operation needs to be addressed as well. These vendors need to comply with not only County health requirements and move off-site daily, but also City Code requirements for this type of operation. Staff has also observed other vendor types that sell non-food items out of a vehicle operating on a stationary basis in the same locations. Other mobile food truck vendors operating in Fort Collins are concerned of unequal treatment by the City between mobile and stationary operations, including leaving vehicles unattended, and length of time at same location. The online questionnaire results (87% of respondents) strongly support allowing these stationary vendors to operate in the City. Staff researched other communities and found most implement more restrictive requirements for outdoor vendor operations than existing Fort Collins regulations, particularly in downtown areas (Attachment 5). As a result, staff has developed a new option for stationary vending, including an additional administrative process and Code requirements to permit these outdoor vendors to operate in the same location on a continuous basis, except in the downtown area. In the Downtown Zone, staff supports only allowing mobile vending operations to minimize impacts. Compared to other non-residential zones in the City, the downtown is unique, reflecting a high density commercial core, vibrant streetscape environment, and significant pedestrian circulation and activity. Staff is proposing to not allow stationary vendors to operate in the downtown zone for the following reasons: The street sidewalk and plaza space is limited in area and pedestrian circulation should not be impeded by potential use of large vending trucks and trailers. To minimize conflicts between principal business operations and needs and access and outdoor vehicle vending needs and access on same location by potential use of large vending trucks and trailers. Address safety concerns associated with stationary and, at times, unattended vehicles left for extended periods of time on active public spaces Address aesthetic impacts of semi-permanent and stationary vehicles in the same location for extended periods of time at prominent locations (in some cases poorly maintained vehicles), potentially diminishing the attractiveness of this highly valued community destination. The existing City and Downtown Development Authority Concession Agreements for vendors are separate from and excluded from these proposed stationary vending requirements in the downtown area. Outside of the downtown area, opportunities exist for stationary vendors to pursue this type of operation with permission by the property owner through a Minor Amendment process. Staff considered enactment of a land use permit process in addition to the existing Outdoor Vendor Licensing Permit for stationary vending, but did not bring an option forward as a separate permit would be burdensome given the low impact and temporary nature of the food vending use. Unlike the communities cited above, Fort 9 Packet Pg. 93 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 5 Collins does not have a Temporary Use Permit nor a Zoning Permit within its regulatory structure; virtually all uses are essentially treated as “permanent” (the exception being temporary construction trailers). Further, the information gathered through the existing sales and use tax licensing process requires essentially the same elements, i.e., a site plan and property owner consent as would a land use approval, so a permit process for a mobile vending use would be redundant. Stationary vending is still categorized as an accessory use and temporary since vehicles continue to move daily. Staff assessed the spectrum from a truly temporary mobile operation to a permanent, fixed location business. A permanent use has a significantly higher level of required improvements and costs than a temporary use. Other communities that allow stationary vending include, in some cases, a lengthy review process and considerably higher fees. This new stationary vending type, while reflecting closer resemblance to a fixed-location business, is still being considered a temporary and accessory use. Staff supports this new vending type, with a review process and fee structure that places more responsibility on the business or lot owner. Highlight of proposed key new code requirements for stationary vending New definition for stationary vending (more than three days per week at same private lot location) Minor Amendment initiated by owner and approved by zoning staff No more than ten hours of active vending operations on the same location per day Vehicles are not allowed to be left unattended for more than short breaks, or overnight, unless owned by principal business Not permitted in the Downtown Zone In most cases, outdoor vendors will need to store their vehicles at a different location than the approved vending location each night. 3. Administrative Compliance Review The Sales Tax Office administers outdoor vendor licensing as part of the Finance Department. Consistent with current practice, Code compliance is currently monitored in response to complaints received by staff and the public. Outdoor vendor operation violations are investigated, communicated, and may result in suspension or revocation of license for non-compliance. The Finance Department does not have the necessary resources in place to provide a more active compliance management role. Compliance is expected to remain on a complaint basis. Vendors are aware that if they violate license requirements, they run the risk of losing their business operations for that applicable license term. The zoning staff administers land use and zoning for outdoor vendor locational requirements. Staff will have access to Outdoor Vendor License Applications to review applicable zoning and locational requirements and field verify as needed. Land Use Code compliance is currently monitored in response to violations observed by staff and complaints received from the public. Including zoning review provides additional oversight and management along with the Sales Tax Office. Zoning staff will provide compliance review on a complaint basis and coordinate with Sales Tax staff to ensure License requirements are being met. The proposed zoning review and compliance for mobile outdoor vendors will not result in any new fees to the outdoor vendor. Stationary vending will require a Minor Amendment process which is typically processed administratively. The Minor Amendment will review the original approved plan for that property to add an accessory use with the existing Principal Use at the same location on a stationary basis. The request for a Minor Amendment will be submitted by the property owner or representative; this review will also verify appropriate zoning, vending location, and operation requirements. With a Minor Amendment approval, the Outdoor Vendor Licensing application can be completed. With approval of the Minor Amendment, any future stationary vendor can operate at this location with approval by the owner. The Minor Amendment process will result in an administrative review fee of $350 (existing fee), reflecting a one-time action by the owner. 9 Packet Pg. 94 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 6 The Building Inspection Office will continue to assess compliance of outdoor vendors for health and safety issues as needed. 4. New separation requirement between food truck vendor operations and existing brick and mortar restaurants Staff has explored requirements for a new separation requirement between outdoor food vendors operating near existing brick and mortar restaurants to warrant a potential Code amendment. An online questionnaire was available starting in March, 2016, and open until April 29 (Attachment 2). The total number of people taking the questionnaire was 1,009. Of those participants, 58 were business owners and 26 owned or operate an existing brick and mortar restaurant in the City. When asked if they are concerned with food truck vendors operating within close proximity to existing restaurants (572 participants), 12 responded yes, and 507 responded no. The next question asked which separation requirement is supported, ranging from no requirement to separation greater than 500 feet. Of the total number of respondents, 78% supported no separation requirement (660 out of 850 respondents). Of the total number of respondents taking the questionnaire, very few (less than 20) restaurant owners or managers participated. In an attempt to get more feedback, staff initiated a separate mailing to 317 restaurant owners or managers in the City to encourage them to take this questionnaire (Attachment 3). The results of this focused outreach included 8 participants, with only 5 responding that they are concerned with vendors operating within close proximity to existing restaurants and they also supported a 500 foot separation requirement. A single respondent supported a separation requirement greater than 500 feet. In 2012 this topic was discussed at length, including extensive public outreach. An online questionnaire included 583 respondents, with approximately an equal number of respondents supporting some separation between vendors and existing restaurants and no buffer requirements. Staff provided a recommendation to City Council to support a 200 foot separation (one-half of a downtown City block) between food truck vendors and existing restaurants; City Council did not support this requirement. To date there are no separation requirements between two restaurants selling similar food products, and no separation requirement between food vendors operating Downtown as part of Concession Agreements managed by both the City and Downtown Development Authority and nearby restaurants. Staff has researched other communities having a separation requirement and the results range across the board, from no requirements to as much as 1,500 feet. Typical separation requirements are between 200-400 feet. The online questionnaire included the following separation distances: Which of the following separation requirements do you support - between existing brick and mortar restaurants (front entrance) and food truck vendor operations in the City? No new separation requirements 50 foot separation 100 foot separation 200 foot separation 300 foot separation 400 foot separation 500 foot separation Greater than 500 feet Based on public feedback to date, there is not sufficient public support for implementing a new separation requirement between food vendors and existing restaurants. Only a few restaurant owners have expressed concerns through either the questionnaire or other forms of public engagement. Since 2012 the situation has been driven by the market and free trade practices. Based on analysis and feedback, staff is not recommending the proposed Ordinances include a separation requirement. 9 Packet Pg. 95 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 7 Process and Regulatory Recommendations Staff recommends the proposed changes to Chapter 15, Article XIV of the City Code related to outdoor vending license requirements to manage mobile vending operations. Staff recommends the proposed changes to the Land Use Code related to outdoor vending for land use, zoning and locational requirements. The proposed changes address the identified issues to a certain extent, while balancing the need to not overregulate these small outdoor vending businesses and associated property owners. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The proposed Minor Amendment for stationary vending will result in a new fee of $350.00 by the private lot owner with stationary outdoor vending on that lot. This proposed fee reflects the same standard fee for all Minor Amendment applications. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On June 9, 2016, the Planning and Zoning Board voted (7 – 0) to recommend that City Council approve an ordinance with limited revisions and additions to Articles Three, Four and Five of the Land Use Code for new outdoor vendor requirements, specifically that 1) Mobile vending and stationary vending be defined; and that 2) A minor amendment process be required for stationary vendors on private property. (Attachment 6) PUBLIC OUTREACH The proposed update for outdoor vendor requirements included a public outreach process for a portion of 2015 and extending to May, 2016. Three online questionnaires were used to gain additional feedback and feedback was summarized in separate reports (Attachments 1-3). Community engagement opportunities included meetings with the general public, vendors, and businesses (Attachment 4). Project information was available on the City’s website with regular updates including proposed ideas, schedule and meeting dates. Outreach Activities Public Meetings (October 22, 2015, and March 3, 2016) Vendor Meetings (September 24 and November 9, 2015; and April 20, May 9, and June 2, 2016) Online Questionnaires (September - October, 2015; March - May, 2016; April - May, 2016 for restaurants) ATTACHMENTS 1. Online Questionnaire #1 Results (PDF) 2. Online Questionnaire #2 Results (PDF) 3. Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (PDF) 4. Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (PDF) 5. Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (PDF) 6. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, June 9, 2016 (draft) (PDF) 7. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 96 2 & % )!$ & " 3 % % ' & 4! ! $ .! $ $5 1 2 & )!$ & 3 % 9.1 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 6 " ( " ' 4 $ $ 75 1 6 ( 9.1 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 8 % $$ % # $ # !9 6 ( " % ' & ; , $ , ! $$! . $ 1< = 6 (" & 9.1 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor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acket Pg. 127 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) +",% '%$ - &%$$'( % "## & ' ! $ % % "## & ! $, & - . ! " / 0 - . ! - . 1 2 ### & -) . % & & - . 1 2 7 4 & A& 3% & 3 3 / / 0/ 6 - & % ' $ ' ' 9.3 Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 1 Planning, Development and Transportation Services Planning Services 281 North College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/currentplanning Proposed 2015 Mobile Food Truck Vendor Changes Summary of Outreach Meetings 1. Outdoor Vendor Meetings – September 24 and November 9, 2015 Vendor Meeting #1 - September 24, 2015 (281 N. College Ave) A meeting was held by the City for Outdoor Vendors on September 24, 2015 at 281 North College Avenue with 23 vendors attending. The following comments were recorded during the meeting discussion with staff. What is the problem the City is trying to solve? Need further clarification on the issues with requiring more mobility from vendors Vendors are required by County Health to return daily to approved commissary so we are mobile Why are the few vendors that have set up a semi-permanent operation not required to move off-site daily to commissary? There is unanimous opposition form the vendors for any new requirements or further restrictions on us – again what is the problem here? Who has complained about vendors operating in Downtown area? This is our livelihood and we need to work regularly. Please do not further restrict our work Will you distinguish between food trucks that vend only for on-site principal use customers and vendors serving to general public? Of the proposed range of options for vendors to operate on-site in the same location, staff should offer more options for duration vending and time away from these locations ATTACHMENT 4 9.4 Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 Is the issue unfair competition between vendors and existing brick and mortar restaurants, safety, health requirements, or what? The City needs to identify a consistent, fair and predictable approach for all vendors for new requirements How can we be involved and what is the schedule for bringing these changes forward to Council? Vendor Meeting #2 - November 9, 2015 (215 N. Mason) A meeting was held by the City for Outdoor Vendors on November 9, 2015 at 215 North Mason Street with 6 vendors attending. The following comments were recorded during the meeting discussion with staff. We really appreciate being involved in this process As part of the staff recommendation, we prefer to see 160 hours in any calendar month vs. 80 Food truck vendors typically operate for 10 hours a day at any location, the 8 hours per day mentioned is not consistent with our situation For those vendors who operate more than one truck per day, the recommended hours per week or month are not reasonable – we need more time The online questionnaire responses clearly did not see an issue or problem with vendors operating in the same location and that no further restrictions should be made for duration vendors operate on a private lot, or how long to remain away form same location What are you trying to solve? Why pose additional restrictions on all food truck vendors, just because a few are causing an issue? How will new changes be enforced? Are the new changes for food trucks and pushcart operators? What are next steps in process and will we see proposed changes before the Planning and Zoning Board meeting? 9.4 Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 3 2. Public Open House Meeting – October 22, 2015 A public open house meeting was held by the City on October 22, 2015 at 215 North Mason with 7 meeting participants. The following comments were recorded during the meeting discussion with staff. For new potential vendors, what is the process and how can I get more information? The online survey clearly shows support for the no-action option – we do not need more restrictions Is the online survey still available? What is the problem the City is trying to solve? Who will be making the decision on potential changes? Vendors are required to be mobile based on County health standards and return to commissary each day Has the County inspected the vendors operating at the same locations semi- permanently? What is the definition of being “more mobile”? Do the vendors that are operating extensively from the same location using a commissary on the same lot? Of the 7 meeting participants, all selected the no new restrictions options on the wall, vs. supporting any of the range of operation times identified. Staff shared a middle option of a 3-week operation on-site, and 3-day off-site requirement for potential consideration, but this was not supported by any of the meeting attendees. 9.4 Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4/20/2016 Update to Food Truck Vendor Requirements April 20, 2016 Meeting Summary – Proposed Food Truck Vendor Changes Purpose The purpose of the April 20, 2016 meeting was to hold an open discussion about potential changes to the Land Use Code and City Code. The meeting was well attended with about 20 participants and structured around the discussion of three main land use code changes. Below is a summary of the discussion with “C” representing the summarized comments from the city staff, and “P” representing the summarized comments from the public. Summary of Presentation Introduction Online questionnaire has been available since March and it’s open until the end of the month. Status Report – 972 respondents took the current survey. 2012 – Came up with new framework for licensing provisions Food trucks are an accessory use to the existing principal use No restrictions for duration vending on and off site Most operate on a mobile basis (not everyone) What changes for more mobility 2014 allowed 4 vendors per site, 8 for special event and food truck rallies 2015/2016 we are considering a potential update if it is warranted Recommendations that came forward which did not make it past the zoning and planning board All commercial areas are permitted areas for food trucks and anything residential is not permitted (shows map from 2012 study) (Presents a list of regulatory options from other cities) 2012 Council didn’t support a separation buffer between food truck vendors and restaurants City Staff identified 3 main categories for changes in relation to how food truck vendors operate. • Potential Land Use Code changes: o Mobile Food Truck Vendor operations o Stationary food truck vendor o Separation requirement between vendors and existing restaurants 9.4 Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4/20/2016 Update to Food Truck Vendor Requirements Mobile Vendors Discussion Summary Given by City Staff For mobile vending operations would include “on a temporary and transitory basis” to the existing municipal definition. Some key question that the city would like to ask is: C‐ Should food trucks be restricted to vend for a maximum number of hours in the same location (4,8, or 10 )? C ‐ Should food trucks be allowed to stay in the same location they vend overnight? C ‐ Restroom Availability? Comments P ‐ Typically most restrictions are due to parking street side and proximity between restaurants. Disagree with the 4 hour vending limitations, feels that it’s more of a parking issue P ‐ Not even worth going to a vending location for a 4 hour block because the operating window would be too short for what we do C ‐ What type of time blocks do you guys run? P ‐ Our shift happens to be 4 hours 11‐3 P ‐ It is not typical for someone to move locations after a vending block is done (it’s too difficult to break down and set back up) P ‐ The more efficient we can be the better… It’s better to be in one location one day, because you need to break down and set back up, which takes time. There is more risk for accidents to happen inside the truck such as spills if you move multiple locations in a single day. P – City sidewalk will not allow vending past 6pm P – If are restricted to 4 or 6 hours and then we calculate in an hour of labor before and after each shift the amount of time not selling would hurt our business greatly P – We feel like the market will tell us the hours that are needed, we don’t want to be there outside a time that no one has a need for food P – I feel like any brick and mortar restaurant doesn’t get told when and when it can and can’t sell, why should it be different for a food truck? P – If the market can support the food service then it will. C – The normal shift may be 7‐9 hours. Would 10 hours of active vending support the business? P – Yes we feel like 10 hours could be a good number (a vote yielded 0 in favor of 4 hour limit and 0 in favor of a 6 hour limit. 9.4 Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4/20/2016 Update to Food Truck Vendor Requirements P ‐ New Belgium asked a food vendor to be there for 12 hours, although it was out of the ordinary we liked having the option to be able to stay and serve our customers if we felt we were needed. P ‐ On a typical Sunday I’m there at 10 and leave at 8 P – What is the motive of the hour regulation? C – We are just taking a broad look at what all of our options are and if it’s appropriate or needed. P – Is it safety base? Is it… P – Honestly we vend 12 hours or more. I think the hour timeline would be too restrictive. P – how many special events permits does the city want be making? I feel like it would be a waste of time for the city to process special event permits for trucks. P ‐ We float and adapt to needs. We can’t agree to numbers because it restricts the foundation of our business model P – New Belgium can hold events and not have a special event permit; it would hinder the food truck business to not have flexibility to accommodate customer needs P ‐ 2 trucks can operate at one property without a special event permit P – We have a license and we are not required to move as long as we have an offsite commissary per the health department P – Larimer county provides flexibility so that food trucks don’t necessarily move as long as they can shuffle containers back and forth to take care of dirty dishes and gray water. P‐ To unplug would be more risk for a refrigerator to maintain temps and keep ingredients fresh. c‐ How many stay static? P – about 4 people raise their hand P‐ Even though we are not moving the food truck we are still moving all the waste gray water waste by other means. C – We are not trying to get in the way of the county health department P‐ More work and more risk could become a factor if overnight regulations come in place. It’s challenging to keep the right temps when moving and less chance of other issues. C ‐ Provide restroom availability? P – Technically through a health department we can’t serve to tables. P ‐ We are also required to have a hand washing station 9.4 Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4/20/2016 Update to Food Truck Vendor Requirements P – Health department says that if you offer 15 seats there needs to be a public restroom C – We don’t allow tables around the truck P – We’d love to provide comforts for people to enjoy our food we are trying to No one vends on the street because there is a 2 hour limit, takes almost an hour to set up. Leeway would be a great change to the code P‐ There has to be an audience, foot traffic C‐ here Is a snapshot of the questionnaire How long should food trucks be required to stay offsite? Clearly shows no restrictions Stationary Vendors Discussion Summary Presented by City Staff Staff is proposing a new definition to describe this new food truck situation of being stationary in the same location for extended periods of time. Comments C ‐ Do we do anything for semi‐permanent vending operations? There are maybe 5 right now that are considered semi‐permanent. (Shows results from survey that shows almost no support restrictions) C – Polling shows an overwhelming response for no additional requirements to semi‐permanent vending operations on private lots. (shows two of the questionnaire results to audience) Separation Requirement Discussion Summary Presented by City Staff Option C asks you to consider the possibility of separation requirements between vendors and existing restaurants. Options include a range of separation between 50 and 400+ feet. Comments C ‐ Most of the other adjoining communities have separation requirements. In 2012 we forwarded a 200ft recommendation and it was denied by council P – we are all competitors and the more we cooperate the more we come together the better we can all do. The more we operate it can extrapolate to others who can benefit C – When we look at this issue again in 2014 there was a stronger request for more food trucks 9.4 Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4/20/2016 Update to Food Truck Vendor Requirements P ‐ We do invite food trucks to our brick and mortar locations, even in some ways if it’s a competing item I think that P ‐ I think It would be a great solution to give restaurants the ability to allow or deny a food trucks in certain proximities. C – Where should it happen? Downtown? P – It would be the hardest place to do it. We really can’t be downtown anyways C ‐ We discussed a couple public lots where vendors may be able to set up lots. Do you have any suggestions for gathering areas in the downtown? C – (Lays out map) P – Please look at public lots for us to use. P – What about parking lot where they have the farmers market? Harmony and Lemay, in front of Ace P‐ It has to be approved by the business owners, and you have to be part of the farmers market, strip malls have a no compete privilege. C – (Went over next steps in the planning process) P – I heard about a meeting that happened when I was in Mexico where tensions were high. I’d like to apologize for all of us about our reaction P‐ I appreciate that you’re hearing us out and making us feel like our voices are heard. 9.4 Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Outdoor Vendor Meetings Summary (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language Boulder, CO Permits x No requirements Hours of Operation x Cannot operate on public or private property before 7 a.m. or after 9 p.m. x Maximum of 4 hours at any one approved location Mobility x No requirements 1. (3.) Operating Requirements: No person who operates any mobile food vehicle on public property or private property shall: a. (E) Operate before 7 a.m. or after 9 p.m. and for more than a maximum of four hours at any one approved location; b. (J) Fail to have the vehicle attended at all times Denver, CO Permits x Permits shall be valid for twelve consecutive months x Permits must be renewed annually Hours of Operation x Maximum of 4 consecutive hours each day at each zone lot Mobility x No Requirements 1. (1) In all Mixed Use Commercial Zone Districts; I-A, -B Zone Districts; and OS-B Zone District, where permitted with limitations, mobile retail food establishments are permitted subject to compliance with the following standards: a. (A) Permits shall be valid for 12 consecutive months and shall be renewed annually. b. (B) Permits shall be valid for 4 consecutive hours for each day at each zone lot. c. (C) No more than 1 retail food establishment, mobile shall be permitted to operate per day at each zone lot. d. (D) Hours of operation shall be between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Greeley, CO Permits x A Temporary Vendor license. Food trucks can use either. x Peddler's license is required Hours of Operation x Maximum of 4 hours outside of Downtown Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language renewed annually Hours of Operation x No requirements Mobility x Must be readily moveable. Loveland, CO Permits x License is only valid for one year (all expire on December 31) x Written consent from businesses in direct competition if located within 100 feet of primary location Hours of Operation x Must operate on specified times and days which is required on the application. Mobility x No Regulations 1. (B) Each license shall be valid for one year beginning January 1 or the date of issuance, whichever is later and ending December 31 of the same year. 2. (H) No licensee shall operate within one hundred feet of any business with which such licensee is in direct competition unless the licensee receives prior written approval from such business. 3. (N) Each license, when issued, shall specify the days of the week and the hours during the day the licensee shall operate as stated in the application. The licensee shall generally operate during such hours on all of such days. Failure to operate for a period of fourteen consecutive days for which the license is issued may be deemed to be an abandonment of the licensed location, and such location shall be open for assignment to another vendor. National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language Atlanta, GA Permits x No regulations Hours of Operation x Restricted to 5:00am- 2:00am Mobility x Can't be left unattended or stored on the vending site 1. (c) Vending structures shall not be left unattended or stored at any time on the open vending site when vending is not taking place or during restricted hours of operation. Austin, TX National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language on private property for 3 hours or less between the hours of 6a.m. and 10:00p.m. Permits x Must be licensed with the health authority x Only Permitted in Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts Hours of Operation x May not operated between the hours of 3:00a.m. and 6:00a.m. Mobility x Units must maintain a state of mobile readiness at all times x The health authority may prohibit alteration, removal, attachments, placement or change in, under, or upon the mobile food establishment that would prevent or otherwise reduce ready mobility Proximity x Cannot be located within 20ft of a restaurant x Cannot be located within 50ft of a residential/commercial building or general office (GO) zoning district; c. (3) may not be located within 50 feet of a lot with a building that contains both a residential and commercial use; d. (4) may not operate between the hours of 3:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.; and e. (5) May not be located within 20 feet of a restaurant (general) or restaurant (limited) use. 2. (Q) This ordinance does not apply to a mobile food establishment that is located on private property for three hours or less between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Charlotte, NC Permits x Required to obtain a zoning use permit x Maximum permit is 30 days at one location x Permits are renewable twice for a total of 90 National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language Hours of Operation x No regulations Mobility x No regulations Chicago, IL Permits x Written consent is required on private property and must be carried by the vendor when on the property Hours of Operation x 2 hour per-stop maximum Mobility x Cannot be operated at a fixed location Proximity x Cannot be located within 200ft to a restaurant’s principle entrance (does not apply between the hours of 12a.m. and 2a.m. 1. (b) Stops shall be made only to service customers and shall not exceed a total of two hours 2. (f) No operator of a mobile food vehicle shall park or stand such vehicle within 200 feet of any principal customer entrance to a restaurant which is located on the street level; provided, however, the restriction in this subsection shall not apply between 12 a.m. and 2 a.m. 3. (k(1)) No operation of a mobile food vehicle is allowed on any private property unless all of the following requirements are met: a. (i) The mobile food vendor has obtained the express written consent of the owner or lessee of such property and such written consent is kept in the mobile food vehicle at all times when the vehicle is on the property; b. (ii) The mobile food vendor is in compliance with all applicable requirements of the Chicago Zoning Ordinance; and c. (iii) The mobile food vendor is in compliance with subsection (b)(i) and, except for the private property that allows the operation of the mobile food vehicle, subsection (f) of this section. Hillsboro, OR Permits x No regulations Hours of Operation x Limited to 2 hours on a single property (unless otherwise approved by the city) x May not exceed 6 hours National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language Houston, TX Permits x No regulations Hours of Operation x No regulations Mobility x Mobile food units must be taken to a commissary daily to be serviced Other x Units operating for more than 1 hour must have restroom access and permission from property owner 1. ((c)(4))Operation on private property. Prior to the issuance of a medallion or renewal, the operator of a mobile food unit that will be operated on private property for more than one hour in a single day shall submit to the department proof of ownership of the property or a signed and notarized written statement from the owner or owner's agent. a. (e)Servicing of mobile food units by commissaries; servicing records. 2. (1) Servicing by commissaries. Mobile food units, other than restricted service mobile food units, shall operate from a commissary approved by the health officer and shall report to such location for supplies, cleaning, and servicing operations as follows: a. (a) Fixed location mobile food units shall return to the commissary at least once per day of operation for the performance of all servicing operations. Las Vegas, NV Permits x No regulations Hours of Operation x Limited to 4 hours in a single location in a 24- hour period Mobility x No regulations 1. (6.55.090) Unlawful operations. It is unlawful for any mobile food vendor to: a. (K) Vend on any one parcel, lot or commercial subdivision for more than four hours within any twenty-four hour period Napa, CA Permits x Any vendor operating on private property will require a permit (other than at non-profit special events) Hours of Operation x No regulations Mobility National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language Phoenix, AZ Permits x No regulations Hours of Operation x Food vendor shall not operate between the hours of 2a.m. and 6a.m. Mobility x Must be removed from the site when not in operation, daily, by 2:30am at the latest 1. (B.) Mobile vending and mobile food vending on private property shall be subject to the following operational restrictions: 2. (1.) Any mobile vending unit or mobile food vending unit shall be removed from the site during the hours of non-operation. Any semi-permanent structure used and/or associated with the mobile vending or mobile food vending operation shall also be removed from the site during hours of non-operation. This means that any mobile vending unit shall be removed from the site no later than 10:30 p.m. Any mobile food vending unit shall be removed from the site no later than 2:30 a.m. 3. (2.) A mobile vendor shall not operate between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. A mobile food vendor shall not operate between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The mobile vending unit or mobile food vending unit shall be removed from the site in accordance with subsection (B)(1) above. Salem, OR Permits x License good for one year Hours of Operation x No Regulations Mobility x Must be movable but are not required to relocate at any particular interval x Must provide screening for utilities and storage tanks 1. (a) A mobile food unit license shall be valid for a period of one year from the effective date of the license, and may be renewed pursuant to SRC 30.055. 2. (c) All mobile food units which are parked in a stationary location for a period of 24 hours or longer shall provide screening for all conduit, tanks, and storage areas from all public areas and streets by sight- obscuring fencing and/or temporary landscaping and skirting shall be provided along the perimeter of the mobile food unit. 3. (d) Mobile food units are not permanent structures and must remain capable of being moved San Jose, CA National Outdoor Vendor Regulations City Summary of Regulations Code Language site business is closed Seattle, WA Permits x 1 year use permit if no more than 2 days per week and doesn’t require the erection of a permanent structure Hours of Operation x No regulations Mobility x Can establish mobile food vending as a permanent use with a construction permit to establish use process. 1. (A.1.) A Master Use Permit for a time period of up to one year may be authorized for any use that occurs no more than two days per week and does not involve the erection of a permanent structure, provided that: a. (a) The use is not materially detrimental to the public welfare; and b. (b) The use does not result in substantial injury to the property in the vicinity; and c. (c) The use is being consistent with the spirit and purpose of the Land Use Code. 9.5 Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Planning & Zoning Board June 9, 2016 Page 2 Planning Director Gloss reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas for the audience, noting that 2 items have been postponed to the July hearing (Oakridge Crossing Project Development Plan, PDP160009, and the Harmony 23 Modification of Standard). Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda: None noted. Consent Agenda: 1. Draft Minutes from May 12, 2016, P&Z Hearing 2. Arrowhead Cottages 3. Majestic Place Annexation and Zoning 4. CSU Whitcomb Streetscape Improvements Site Plan Advisory Review – SPA 160001 Public Input on Consent Agenda: None noted. A citizen requested that the Majestic Place Annexation and Zoning project be pulled from the Consent agenda and a full presentation be made. Chair Kirkpatrick agreed, stating that this item would be moved to the last item on the Discussion agenda. Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the June 9, 2016, Consent agenda, with the exception of the Majestic Place Annexation and Zoning project. Member Heinz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0. Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board continue the Oakridge Crossing PDP 160009 and the Harmony 23 Modification of Standard to the July 14, 2016, hearing. Member Hansen seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0. Discussion Agenda: 5. Oakridge Crossing Project Development Plan, PDP160009 - continued to the July 14, 2016, hearing 6. Harmony 23 Modification of Standard – continued to the July 14, 2016, hearing 7. Revisions and Additions to the Land Use Code for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Project: Revisions and Additions to the Land Use Code for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Project Description: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding an update to the City Land Use Code for outdoor vendor requirements. The project includes proposed changes for outdoor vendor mobility options, land use review process for types of vending operations, and potential separation requirement between vendors operating near existing restaurants. Note the project also includes revisions to Chapter 15 of the City Code for reference. ATTACHMENT 6 9.6 Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Planning and Zoning Board minutes, June 9, 2016 (draft) (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Planning & Zoning Board June 9, 2016 Page 3 Recommendation: Approval Staff and Applicant Presentations Senior Planner Wray gave an overview of this project, including the changes since the last hearing, regulations in place at other communities throughout the United States, and the community outreach that has continued. He reviewed the proposed code amendments, including length of daily parking and vending times and locations, and he reviewed the recommendations that will be presented to City Council. He reviewed the use requirements involved (principal vs. accessory use) and their responsibility for site improvements with these designations. He also discussed the Land Use Code (LUC) requirements for stationary vendors within specific areas of the Downtown zoning area in order to minimize the impacts of stationary vendors on these high-volume areas. He reviewed the ongoing zoning process for outdoor vendors, including a new minor amendment, and the licensing requirements for vendors. Finally, he clarified that additional site improvements may not be required for stationary vending , but will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Public Input Taylor Smith, 324 N. Impala, is a Fort Collins mobile food vendor. He is concerned with future parking in the Downtown area, especially in light of these new regulations that might prevent vendors from obtaining prime locations. He stated that Fort Collins has a reputation for being an entrepreneurial city and is concerned about separating mobile vendors from brick-and-mortar restaurants. He also explained that a Food Truck Pod is a gathering of 5-6 food trucks in a central location. Tim Meador, 1106 Petersen, is a Fort Collins mobile food vendor. He has several concerns, specifically with trucks operating on private property and their main business plan and schedules, and the relationships that have been established with breweries requiring food trucks to be present for an extended period of time. He doesn’t feel that there should be restrictions on food trucks that do not also exist for permanent structures. Sara Gilman, 825 Grouse Circle, is a Fort Collins mobile food vendor. She is concerned that this ordinance will make it harder for food trucks to find good parking locations and that that some locations may become “bottle-necks”. She is not in favor of the three-day limit and feels this regulation will hurt the food truck culture in general. Natalie Santelli, 1112 Cherry Street, is a Fort Collins mobile food vendor. She is concerned because of the lower sales taxes and time limit regulations, saying these restrictions could jeopardize relationships. She questioned the costs for food trucks versus brick-and-mortar restaurants. She challenged the minor amendment process, because it could result in food truck vendors having to pay fees to the breweries. Justin Brown, 1447 S. Emerson Street in Denver, is the owner of Waffle Lab. He has operated for many years and has certain locations that he prefers for vending. He encouraged the City of Fort Collins (COFC) to research operations at other communities that allow their food trucks to park in a semi- permanent manner. Regarding health department regulations, he stated that maintaining compliance can be more challenging for food trucks than in brick-and-mortar restaurants. John Ray, 6850 Silver Mist Lane, supports food truck vendors and encouraged City Council to accommodate them in any way. 9.6 Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Planning and Zoning Board minutes, June 9, 2016 (draft) (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Planning & Zoning Board June 9, 2016 Page 4 Board Questions and Staff Response Senior Planner Wray responded to the main points brought up by citizens, saying that he feels the current proposal could still be adjusted. Chair Kirkpatrick asked about the flexibility of operating more than 10 hours per day under certain circumstances. Senior Planner Beals responded that a variance request could be obtained for such incidents. When describing mobile sites, the location is defined as either private lots or on-street parking. Member Heinz asked why the Downtown zone would be restricted, and Senior Planner Wray responded that the main concerns were to minimize impacts and conflicts with larger trucks and trailers in these high pedestrian areas, versus smaller concessionaire push cart vehicles. There is a potential that a principal business could own a vehicle that they may want to park overnight leaving these vehicles unattended for an extended period of time. He also discussed some of the heavily-vended sites in Fort Collins, which includes private parking lots that have space for additional vehicles (i.e. breweries). Stationary vendors acquired by such establishments through the minor amendment process will not be allowed to operate in the Downtown District. Senior Planner Wray plans to recommend a delay on enacting new rules (until January 2017) to provide enough time for property owners and vendors to prepare and initiate any minor amendments that may be necessary prior to renewal of licenses. Member Schneider stated there would be fewer incentives for Downtown businesses with these new regulations. Member Hansen inquired whether conditions could be placed on a minor amendment for specific locations; Senior Planner Wray responded that the intent of the minor amendment process is to allow stationary vending as a use and ensure that vendors do not exceed a time threshold that would result in being more of a permanent use. There is also a need to further define mobile operations. Chair Kirkpatrick asked about separating survey respondents that are business owners versus food truck owners. Senior Planner Wray confirmed that, out of 1,009 participants in the April survey, 20 were business owners. The survey was then sent out to 340 existing business owners, and only a small number responded (8). The aesthetics of the food trucks may not always be acceptable, and some may actually be considered unsightly (but this is not a key criterion). Senior Planner Wray stated that he has sent out notices to private/principal business owners to clarify changes necessary. Member Heinz asked what the value would be for using the minor amendment process; Senior Planner Wray responded that the minor amendment process will provide consistency for zoning and would ensure that existing owners are responsible for managing vending on their lot. He added that the 10-hour time limit was determined to be reasonable, since most vendors said that 7-9 hours is minimal; therefore, 10 hours would accommodate most vendors. Senior Planner Wray confirmed that a “week” is defined as a calendar week. The Board members continued to seek more information as to what issues were primarily responsible for the proposed changes. There was more discussion around the differences and similarities in regulations for mobile vendors versus stationary restaurants. Board Deliberation Member Carpenter expressed her difficulty with supporting this proposal. Member Heinz agreed, stating that she doesn’t support the Downtown regulation. Vice Chair Hart commended the staff with putting together a regulation with minimal effects; however, he is not convinced that these regulations are needed. Member Hobbs feels there is a need for a clear definition between mobile and stationary vendors and that semi-permanent vendors abide by the minor amendment process; however, he does not agree with the proposed restrictions on mobile vendors. Member Hansen does not feel there is a clear problem, saying that mobile vending is an important part of the FC community. He does support having a minor amendment review process for semi-permanent vendors and a higher standard of review 9.6 Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Planning and Zoning Board minutes, June 9, 2016 (draft) (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Planning & Zoning Board June 9, 2016 Page 5 on stationary vendors. Member Schneider agrees that Downtown district should not be restricted; he supports standards for public facilities and attention to conformance with code. Chair Kirkpatrick agreed that the minor amendment process is important; however, she does agree that the Downtown district should be restricted and doesn’t feel she can support this proposal. There was some discussion as to the best way to give positive feedback to the City Council. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe recommended that the P&Z Board make a motion with specific recommendations to be adopted by Council. Overall, the Board is in favor of requiring a property owner that wants to have a stationary vending operation as an accessory use to their property to go through the minor amendment process, regardless of the district or location. They also support the development of a definition of “mobile vending” versus “stationary vending”. There was more discussion about the best way to convey the sections of the proposal that they are in favor of; there was also discussion regarding the next steps after this hearing is complete. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council that they do not approve this ordinance, and that they would support the establishment of a definition between “mobile” and “stationary” vendors and the requirement for landowners to apply for minor modifications to house “stationary” vendors. Member Carpenter added an amendment to recommend “only approve”. Member Carpenter seconded. Vote: 7:0. Chair Kirkpatrick and several other Board members commended Staff on their diligence in researching the issues and preparing a comprehensive proposal for the Board’s review. At 7:38pm, the Board took a short break; they reconvened at 7:44pm. Project: Majestic Place Annexation and Zoning Project Description: The purpose of this item is to annex and zone the Majestic Place property. The applicant, Suburban Land Reserve Inc. c/o Mr. Kenneth Merritt, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of 19.93 acres located at 2150 Rock Castle Lane (southeast of Timberline Road and Trilby Road) which is presently vacant. The requested zoning for this annexation is Urban Estate, U- E. In accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area with Larimer County, the City of Fort Collins agrees to annex land that meets the minimum contiguity requirement, and based on a voluntary petition to annex for the purpose of redeveloping the subject parcel. Recommendation: Approval Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Lorson provided an overview of the project, which is a 100% voluntary annexation into Fort Collins. He discussed the zoning and the association with existing municipal boundaries of Fort Collins. It is planned to be annexed on August 16th with City Council. Ken Merritt, with JR Engineering representing the applicant, Suburban Land Reserve, gave an overview of the project as well, illustrating the project with maps and showing the land boundaries and surrounding areas with respect to the City’s City and Structure Plan. 9.6 Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Planning and Zoning Board minutes, June 9, 2016 (draft) (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 1 City Council Hearing – June 21, 2016 Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements ATTACHMENT 7 9.7 Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2016 - Update to Outdoor Vendor Requirements 2 Items Relating to Updating the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Land Use Code Pertaining to Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 079, 2016, Amending the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Include New Clarifications and Additions for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Contained in Chapter 15, Article 24, Outdoor Vendors, of the City Code. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 080, 2016, Amending the Land Use Code to Include New Clarifications and Additions for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Contained in Articles Three, Four, and Five. 9.7 Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Background 2012 - Outdoor Vendor Ordinances § New operation framework implemented 2014 City Code Amendments § Additional vending opportunities included 2016 – New update § Addressing stationary and mobile vending 3 9.7 Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Update to Outdoor Vendor Requirements Staff addressing primary issue: Outdoor vendors operating on a semi-permanent basis in same location: § Not just food truck vendors § Outdoor vendors that vend out of a vehicle including truck, trailer or push cart serving food and non-food items 4 9.7 Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Staff also addressing related issues: § Clarifying intent for mobile outdoor vending operations § Assess potential separation requirement for vending near existing restaurants § Identify new changes that are reasonable and not over-regulate these small businesses 5 Update to Outdoor Vendor Requirements 9.7 Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Peer Cities Review 6 Regulatory Options – Other Cities: § Location – Most common accessory/temporary use in all non- residential zones (public and private) § Hours of Operation – varies widely from a few hours to no limitation § Separation between Vendors/Ex. Restaurants – varies widely, none to (100-1500 feet) § Licenses and Permits – Sales/use tax license common, separate land use permit less common 9.7 Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Peer Cities Review 7 Community/State Use Type Operational Requirements Other Requirements Seattle, WA Temporary/Interim 4-hour blocks 2-days per week Napa, CA Temporary No time restrictions San Jose, CA Temporary Fixed-Bus. hours only Not after 10:00 p.m. Austin, TX Temporary Limits for 3-hours + Commissary/day Chicago, IL Temporary 2-hour per block No fixed-location Las Vegas, NV Temporary 4-hours per location Boulder, CO Temporary 4-hours per location Denver, CO Temporary 4-hours per lot 8:00 a.m.-9:00 p.m. Greeley, CO Temporary 4-hours per location 8-hours in DT Longmont, CO Temporary Move each day Fort Collins, CO Accessory/mobile Not vend between 3:00 a.m.-7:00 a.m. Compliance with CO/County Health Requirements 9.7 Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Public Process (2015-2016) § Project internet page - http://www.fcgov.com/salestax/outdoorvendors.php § Press releases and local articles § Online questionnaires (10/2015; 4/2016; 5/6/16) § Outdoor vendor meetings (9/24/15, 11/9/15, 4/20/16, 5/9/16, 6/2/16) § Public open house meeting (10/22/15, 3/3/16) § Planning and Zoning Board updates 8 9.7 Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) April, 2016 Questionnaire – Feedback 9 Respondent Type: Citizen – 86% Outdoor Vendor/Employee – 3% Business owner – 7% Restaurant owner/Manager – 2% Other – 1% Number of responses: Completed Questionnaire: 854 Partially completed: 155__ Total: 1,009 9.7 Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Comparison of Outdoor Vending Types 10 Mobile Vending Temporary/Accessory Use Permanent/Principal Use § Mobile business § Lower start-up/operational costs ($$) § Exempt from site improvements § Fixed-location business § Higher start-up/operational costs ($$$$) § Site improvements required Brick and Mortar Restaurant Stationary Vending 9.7 Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Code Amendments to Consider 11 Code Categories Existing Requirement Mobile Vending Stationary Vending Zoning Use: Accessory Outdoor Vendor Outdoor Vendor - Mobile Outdoor Vendor - Stationary Zoning Districts Allowed All non-residential All non-residential All non-residential, except Downtown Review Process Basic Development Review (BDR) BDR Minor Amendment Hours Per Day (Same Location) 20 (7:00 a.m.-3:00 a.m.) 10 10 Days Per Week (Same Location) None No more than 3 More than 3 Vehicle Storage – Unattended (Same Vending Location) None Not permitted Not permitted, unless owned by Principal Business 9.7 Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Stationary Vending 12 Stationary vending not permitted in Downtown Zone: § Mobile vending allowed up to 3 days at same location § Sidewalk/plaza space is limited - Minimize conflicts/impacts of large trucks/trailers located for extended periods of time § Safety and aesthetic concerns of potential unattended vehicles Downtown Zone 9.7 Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Downtown Zoning Area 13 Private Lots with Parking – Potential for Stationary Vending 9.7 Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 14 Potential new separation requirement between food truck vendors and existing restaurants? § Discussed extensively in 2012 § On-going peer city review on topic § 2016 Online questionnaire results Code Amendments to Consider 9.7 Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 15 Potential new separation requirement between food vendors and existing restaurants? § Extensively discussed in 2012 § Public not supporting new separation requirement § Small number of restaurant owners responding with mixed opinions on question § No existing separation for sidewalk concession vendors or for like restaurants § Market free trade practices in place § Staff recommendation for no new requirement Code Amendments to Consider 9.7 Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 16 Outdoor Vendor License Compliance Options Sales Tax Office: § Current Status – compliance monitored on complaint basis (non-active enforcement) § Coordination with other Service Areas for monitoring outdoor vendor operations Zoning/Building Departments: § Administrative zoning review for outdoor vendor License applications and zoning compliance monitored on a complaint basis § Building Department compliance for health and safety issues 9.7 Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Planning and Zoning Board Hearing – June 9, 2016 17 Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation: § Approve an ordinance with limited revisions and additions to the Land Use Code for new outdoor vendor requirements § That mobile and stationary vending be defined § A minor amendment process be required for stationary vendors 9.7 Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements 18 Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading. Staff recommends Council consider allowing a six (6) month amortization period be implemented to delay enacting new Code requirements, until approximately January 15, 2017. 9.7 Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2016 - Update to Outdoor Vendor Requirements 19 Items Relating to Updating the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Land Use Code Pertaining to Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 079, 2016, Amending the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Include New Clarifications and Additions for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Contained in Chapter 15, Article 24, Outdoor Vendors, of the City Code. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 080, 2016, Amending the Land Use Code to Include New Clarifications and Additions for Outdoor Vendor Requirements Contained in Articles Three, Four, and Five. 9.7 Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 20 City Council Hearing – June 21, 2016 Proposed Outdoor Vendor Requirements 9.7 Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 079, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 15 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS REGARDING OUTDOOR VENDORS WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 058, 2012, making various amendments to Article XIV of Chapter 15 of the City Code to update and expand the licensing of outdoor vendors in Fort Collins and to establish related requirements; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the City Council concurrently adopted Ordinance No. 057, 2012, making various amendments to Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the City’s Land Use Code to define and regulate outdoor vendors in zones throughout the City; and WHEREAS, these 2012 City Code and Land Use Code amendments were adopted to address the growing trend and demand in Fort Collins for mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors, and such amendments addressed the specific impacts on the community and requirements of mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors; and WHEREAS, instances of mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi- permanently or permanently at a fixed location on private property have been observed, essentially becoming “stationary vendors”; and WHEREAS, mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi-permanently or permanently at a fixed location create different impacts and have different requirements than those originally contemplated under the City Code and Land Use Code amendments made in 2012; and WHEREAS, the current City Code does not distinguish between semi-permanent or permanent outdoor vendors from more mobile outdoor vendors resulting in equal treatment of potentially unequal impacts; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it reasonable to further amend Article XIV of Chapter 15 of the City Code to address the different impacts and requirements created by mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi-permanently or permanently at a fixed location; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that the adoption of these Code amendments is necessary for the public’s health, safety and welfare. 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. Packet Pg. 180 -2- Section 2. That the definition of “Outdoor vendor” contained in Section 15-381 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Outdoor vendor or vendor shall mean any person, whether as owner, agent, consignee or employee, who sells or attempts to sell, or who offers to the public free of charge, any services, goods, wares or merchandise, including, but not limited to, food or beverage, from any outdoor location, except that outdoor vendor shall not include a person who: Section 3. That the definition of “Private” contained in Section 15-381 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Private shall mean relating or belonging to an individual or non-governmental entity as opposed to the public or governmentany location that is not a public right-of-way or public street, alley or sidewalk. Section 4. That Section 15-381 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of four new definitions, “calendar week”, “stationary vending”, “stationary vendor”, and “vehicle” which read in their entirety as follows: Calendar week shall mean a week beginning with Sunday and ending with Saturday. Stationary vending shall mean an outdoor vendor vending from the same private parcel of land or lot for more than three (3) consecutive calendar days, or for more than three (3) calendar days within a single calendar week from a mobile food truck, pushcart or any other vehicle. Stationary vendor shall mean an outdoor vendor who engages in stationary vending. Vehicle shall mean a device capable of moving itself, or being moved, from place to place upon wheels or endless tracks. Section 5. That Section 15-384 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-384. - Contents of application. (a) The application shall contain the following information: . . . (6) An address or legal description for Eeach location on private property and an address or other description acceptable to the Financial Officer for each public right-of-way location and any other location for which the application is made; (7) Written consent of the property owner if the location for which the application is made is on private property that is not public right-of-way; Packet Pg. 181 -3- (8) Proof of liability insurance as required by Subsection 15-387(c) of this Article; (9) A plan of each (not every) location on private property for which the application is made, showing the location of existing and proposed structures, access, equipment and parking; (10) Documentation of a sales and use tax license in good standing issued by the Colorado Department of Revenue, the County and the City; and (11) For the vending of food, documentation of regulatory approval as a retail food establishment by the County.; and (12) For an application to engage in stationary vending, documentation that the owner of the private property from which the stationary vending is proposed to be conducted has received under the Land Use Code all approvals required for such vending on that property. Section 6. That Section 15-386 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-386. - Requirements for issuance. . . . (b) In addition to the licensee's name, address and telephone number, the license shall contain the following: (1) The type or types of vendor operation the licensee will conduct (i.e., mobile truck vendor, stationary vendor, pushcart vendor, etc.); (2) The period of time for which the license was issued; (3) The hours and days of operation; (4) The designated location or locations, including specified types of public rights-of-way, as applicable; (5) A brief description of any vehicle, cart, kiosk, table, chair, stand, box, container or other structure or display device to be utilized by the licensee; (6) Any special terms and conditions of issuance; (7) A statement that the license is personal and is not transferable in any manner; Packet Pg. 182 -4- (8) A statement that the license is valid only when used at the location or locations designated on the license; and (9) A statement that the license is subject to the provisions of this Article. Section 7. That Section 15-387 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 15-387. - Restrictions and operation. (a) No licensee may use, for the purpose of on-site storage, display or sale, any vehicle, cart, kiosk, table, chair, stand, box, container or other structure or display device not described on the face ofin the license. (b) No suchThe vehicles, structures, devices and other similar items described in the license for any outdoor vendor shall not referred to in Subsection (a) above shall be located by the vendor in any of the following manners or places: (1) In any on-street parking space that is not parallel to the adjacent street; (2) In any public parking space in a manner that does not comply with applicable parking regulations or a properly issued parking permit for the use of said parking space; (3) Upon a public sidewalk within the extended boundaries of a crosswalk; (4) Within ten (10) feet of the extension of any building entranceway, doorway or driveway; (5) Upon a public sidewalk within the Downtown Zone District, as defined and established in Article 4 of the Land Use Code (except as a concessionaire of the City); (6) Upon a public right-of-way, or public street, alley or sidewalk within a City park or other City facility (except as a concessionaire or pursuant to a permit issued for operation in a park or recreation area or on a trail pursuant to Subsection 23-203(d) of this Code, or for operation at another City facility pursuant to a facility-specific permit issued by the City); or (7) In any location in which the vehicle, structure or device may impede or interfere with or visually obstruct: a. the safe movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic; b. parking lot circulation; or Packet Pg. 183 -5- c. access to any public street, alley or sidewalk; or (8) Left the mobile food truck, pushcart or other vehicles from which the vendor vends outdoors overnight (3:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m.) at any location authorized in the vendor’s license, unless the vendor is a stationary vendor and is the owner of the licensed location or of the principal business on the licensed location. (c) No licensee shall operate during the hours of 3:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. (d) Each licensee who, during the course of its licensed activities, operates within or enters upon a public right-of-way or publicly owned property shall maintain liability insurance in an amount to be determined by the Financial Officer according to administrative regulation with proof of the same to be presented at the time of submission of the application. Any licensee who fails to provide proof of such insurance shall be prohibited from operating within or entering upon such property. (e) Each licensee shall pick up and dispose of any paper, cardboard, wood or plastic containers, wrappers or any litter which is deposited within twenty-five (25) feet of the designated location or within twenty-five (25) feet of the point of any sale or transaction made by the licensee if the radius of the designated location exceeds twenty-five (25) feet. The licensee shall carry a suitable container for the placement of such litter by customers or other persons. (f) Each licensee shall maintain in safe condition any vehicle, structure, or device or any other similar item as described in the licensein Subsection (a) above, so as not to create an unreasonable risk of harm to the person or property of others, and shall use flashing lights and other similar warning and safety indicators when stopped to vend services in any location in a street right-of-way. (g) No licensee shall leave unattended for more than fifteen (15) minutes at any one time while vending any vehicle, structure, ordevice or any other similar item as described in the licensein Subsection (a) above, on a public right-of-way or at any licensed location, or place on public sidewalks or in public streets or alleys any structures, canopies, tables, chairs or other furniture or equipment. (h) Each licensee shall prominently display the license issued hereunder in a location readily visible to the public on each vehicle, structure, ordevice and any other similar item asdescribed in the licensein Subsection (a) above. (i) Each licensee operating in an on-street location must serve the public only from the sidewalk and not from the street or adjacent parking spaces. (j) Each licensee shall comply with the provisions of all applicable ordinances of the City as well as the requirements of all state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, City noise restrictions, sign regulations, limitations on discharge of liquid waste, sales Packet Pg. 184 -6- and use tax requirements and food safety and other related requirements established by State or County regulation. (k) No more than two (2) outdoor vendors of any specified type may be licensed to operate concurrently on any lot, tract or parcel of land, except that this limitation shall not apply to special vending licenses and licenses for special events as described in § 15-382 of this Article. (l) Each licensee shall have an affirmative and independent duty to determine the safety and suitability of any particular stopping point or location of operation, both in general and at any particular time and to operate in a manner reasonably calculated to avoid and prevent harm to others in the vicinity of the licensee's operations, including, but not limited to, potential and actual customers, pedestrians and other vendors or vehicles. (m) No licensee shall operate from a location that is not authorized in the licensee’s license. (n) Licensees that vend from mobile food trucks, pushcarts or any other vehicles shall not operate from a location approved in the licensee’s license for more than three (3) consecutive calendar days, or for more than three (3) calendar days within a single calendar week, unless the licensee is authorized in the license to operate as a stationary vendor at that location. (o) No licensee shall vend for more than ten (10) hours per calendar day from any one (1) location approved in the licensee’s license. (mp) The following additional requirements shall apply to particular types of outdoor vendor licensees, as specified: (1) Mobile food truck vendors shall: a. Vend only on lots in non-neighborhood zone districts or on streets in locations in non-neighborhood zone districts where parallel parking is allowed; b. Not stop to vend within two hundred (200) feet of the property boundary of any public or private school for students within the grade range of kindergarten through twelfth (12th) grade; c. Vend only food and nonalcoholic beverages; and d. Permanently affix or paint any signage on the mobile food truck, with no signs/banners in or alongside street right-of-way or across roadways. Packet Pg. 185 -7- (2) Pushcart vendors shall: a. Vend only on lots in non-neighborhood zone districts or on streets in locations in non-neighborhood zone districts where parallel parking is allowed; b. Not stop to vend within two hundred (200) feet of the property boundary of any public or private school for students within the grade range of kindergarten through twelfth (12th) grade; c. Vend only food and nonalcoholic beverages; and d. Stop to vend only in locations that are no more than twelve (12) inches from a curb or edge of travel lane. (3) Neighborhood mobile food vendors shall: a. Vend only on streets in locations in neighborhood zone districts where parallel parking is allowed; b. Not stop to vend within two hundred (200) feet of the property boundary of any public or private school for students within the grade range of kindergarten through twelfth (12th) grade; c. Vend only during the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.; d. Vend only food and nonalcoholic beverages; e. Stop to vend only in locations that are no more than twelve (12) inches from a curb or edge of travel lane; and f. Not stop to vend for more than fifteen (15) minutes in any particular cul-de-sac, or on any particular block face. (4) Outdoor vendors of miscellaneous goods and services shall operate only on lots in nonresidential zone districts. (5) Outdoor vendors of transportation services shall: a. Operate in accordance with all vehicular traffic laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, equipment requirements such as front and back lights and side reflectors; b. Limit stopping and standing in street rights-of-way or alleys so as to avoid delay or obstruction of traffic; Packet Pg. 186 -8- c. Stop to vend services only in locations that are no more than twelve (12) inches from a curb or edge of travel lane; and d. Operate so as to avoid obstruction of pedestrian traffic and not on sidewalks. (6) Stationary vendors shall only vend on private parcels of land or lots within non-neighborhood zone districts, but they shall not vend from a private parcel or lot within the Downtown Zone District, as defined and established in Article 4 of the Land Use Code, and they shall not vend from a private parcel or lot within any neighborhood zone district. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 187 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 080, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING ARTICLES 3, 4 AND 5 OF THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING OUTDOOR VENDORS WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 057, 2012, making various amendments to Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the Land Use Code to define and regulate outdoor vendors in zones throughout the City; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2012, the City Council concurrently adopted Ordinance No. 058, 2012, making various amendments to Article XIV of Chapter 15 of the City Code to update and expand the licensing of outdoor vendors in Fort Collins and to establish related requirements; and WHEREAS, the 2012 Land Use Code and City Code amendments were adopted to address the growing trend and demand in Fort Collins for mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors, and such amendments addressed the specific impacts on the community and requirements of mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors; and WHEREAS, instances of mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi- permanently at a fixed location on private property have been observed; and WHEREAS, mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi-permanently at a fixed location create different impacts and have different requirements than those originally contemplated under the Land Use Code and City Code amendments made in 2012; and WHEREAS, the current Land Use Code does not distinguish between semi-permanent outdoor vendors from more mobile outdoor vendors resulting in equal treatment of potentially unequal impacts; and WHEREAS, the Fort Collins downtown is a highly valued and aesthetically unique community destination; and WHEREAS, stationary vending is not being allowed on private parcels or lots in core downtown areas to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of the long term presence of vehicles associated with stationary vending at the same location; and WHEREAS, stationary vending is not being allowed on private parcels or lots in core downtown areas to avoid impeding pedestrian circulation and access to businesses and public spaces that may be caused by the presence of vehicles associated with stationary vending; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it reasonable to further amend Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the Land Use Code to address the different impacts and requirements created by mobile food trucks and other outdoor vendors located semi-permanently at a fixed location; and Packet Pg. 188 -2- WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that the adoption of these Land Use Code amendments is necessary for the public’s health, safety and welfare. 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 Section 3.8.29 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.8.29 - Outdoor Vendor Regulations (A) Outdoor vendors shall be prohibited on undeveloped lots. (B) Outdoor vendors shall be considered as accessory uses in the zone districts in which they are permitted, provided they are on lots that contain a principal building wherein active operations are being conducted. Outdoor vendors that qualify as accessory uses shall not be subject to change-of-use regulations which would otherwise require the properties on which they are located to be brought into compliance with the standards of this Code. (C) Outdoor vendors located on lots wherein active operations in the principal building have ceased shall be considered principal uses and shall be subject to change-of-use regulations requiring that the properties upon which they are located be brought into compliance with the applicable standards of this Code. (D) Signage for outdoor vendors shall be limited to signs placed directly onto the vehicle or cart used in connection with the business. (E) Outdoor vendors shall comply with all outdoor vendor regulations and standards contained in Chapter 15 of the City Code. (F) An outdoor vendor shall be situated on a lot in such a manner that no aspect of its operation shall impede vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle circulation. (G) The owner of a private parcel or lot, or owner of the principal business thereon, upon which an outdoor vendor, or outdoor vendors, vend from mobile food trucks, pushcarts, or any other vehicles, as such terms are defined in Section15- 381 of the City Code, shall not allow such outdoor vendor, or outdoor vendors, to operate on such private parcel or lot for more than three (3) consecutive calendar days, or for more than three (3) total calendar days within any calendar week, defined for purposes of this Section 3.8.29 as Sunday through Saturday, unless stationary vending is an approved use thereon. Packet Pg. 189 -3- (H) The owner of a private parcel or lot upon which stationary vending will occur shall comply with the following additional requirements: (1) Obtain an approved minor amendment to allow stationary vending on the private parcel or lot as an accessory use. (a) A property owner may apply for a minor amendment to allow stationary vending only for private parcels or lots within non- neighborhood zone districts. Non-neighborhood zone districts solely for purposes of eligible stationary vendor locations shall be defined as: RDR, CC, CCN, CCR, CG, NC, CL, HC, E, and I. (b) Stationary vending shall not be permitted on parcels or lots within the Downtown Zone District or within any neighborhood zone district. Neighborhood zone districts solely for purposes of non- eligible stationaryvendor locations shall be defined as: RUL, UE, RF, RL, LMN, MMN, NCL, NCM, NCB, HMN; (2) Stationary vending shall not be allowed to occur for more than ten (10) hours per calendar day on the private parcel or lot for which a minor amendment has been granted to allow such use; and (3) After the completion of each period of vending operations, a stationary vendor shall not be allowed to leave outdoors overnight (3:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m.) on any private parcel or lot where stationary vending is allowed any food truck, push cart, or vehicle, as such terms are defined in Section 15- 381 of the City Code, from which the vendor vends unless the stationary vendor is the owner of such private parcel or lot or owner of the principal business thereon. Section 3. That Section 4.17(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.17 - River Downtown Redevelopment District (R-D-R) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: Packet Pg. 190 -4- 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 4. That Section 4.18(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.18 - Community Commercial District (C-C) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 5. That Section 4.19(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.19 - Community Commercial - North College District (C-C-N) . . . Packet Pg. 191 -5- (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 6. That Section 4.20(B)(1) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.20 - Community Commercial - Poudre River District (C-C-R) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. Packet Pg. 192 -6- . . . Section 7. That the table contained in Section 4.21(B)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (B) Permitted Uses. . . . (2) The following uses are permitted in subdistricts of the C-G District, subject to Basic Development Review (BDR), Minor Amendment (MA), Administrative (Type 1) Review or Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Review as specifically identified on the chart below: Land Use I-25/SH 392 (CAC) General Commercial District (C-G) . . . E. ACCESSORY - MISC. Wireless telecommunication equipment (not freestanding monopoles) Type 2 Type 1 Wireless telecommunication facilities Not permitted Type 1 Satellite dish antennas greater than 39" in diameter Not permitted Type 1 Accessory buildings BDR BDR Accessory uses BDR BDR Outdoor vendor (excluding stationary vendors) BDR BDR Packet Pg. 193 -7- Land Use I-25/SH 392 (CAC) General Commercial District (C-G) Stationary vendor MA MA Section 8. That Section 4.22(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.22 - Service Commercial District (C-S) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 9. That Section 4.23(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.23 - Neighborhood Commercial District (N-C) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are Packet Pg. 194 -8- part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 10. That the table contained in Section 4.24(B)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (B) Permitted Uses. . . . (2) The following uses are permitted in subdistricts of the C-L District, subject to Basic Development Review (BDR), Minor Amendment (MA), Administrative (Type 1) Review or Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Review as specifically identified on the chart below: Land Use Riverside Area All Other Areas . . . E. ACCESSORY - MISC. Wireless telecommunication equipment Type 1 Type 1 Wireless telecommunication facilities Type 1 Type 1 Packet Pg. 195 -9- Land Use Riverside Area All Other Areas Satellite dish antennas greater than thirty-nine (39) inches in diameter BDR BDR Outdoor vendor (excluding stationary vendors) BDR BDR Stationary vendor MA MA Accessory uses BDR BDR Accessory buildings BDR BDR Section 11. That Section 4.26 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.26 - Harmony Corridor District (H-C) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Packet Pg. 196 -10- Section 12. That Section 4.27(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.27 - Employment District (E) (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 13. That Section 4.28(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Division 4.28 - Industrial District (I) . . . (B) Permitted Uses. (1) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to basic development review provided that such uses are located on lots that are part of an approved site-specific development plan, except that a stationary vendor use must be approved as a minor amendment: (a) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Accessory buildings. 2. Accessory uses. 3. Outdoor vendor. Packet Pg. 197 -11- 4. Stationary vendor. 45. Urban agriculture. . . . Section 14. That Section 5.1 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of two new definitions, “Stationary vendor” and “Stationary vending”, which read in their entirety as follows: Stationary vendor shall mean an outdoor vendor who is licensed under Article XIV, Chapter 15 of the City Code to engage in stationary vending. Stationary vending shall mean one (1) or more outdoor vendors vending on the same private parcel of land or lot for more than three (3) consecutive calendar days, or for more than three (3) calendar days within any calendar week, defined for purposes of this definition as Sunday through Saturday, and when vending, do so from a mobile food truck, pushcart, or any other vehicle as such terms are defined in Section 15-381 of the City Code. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 198 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2016 City Council STAFF Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer Kevin Gertig, Utilities Executive Director Laurie Kadrich, Director of PDT Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainabillity Officer Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No, 081, 2016, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for 2016 Projects Associated with the 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan as Part of the Waste Innovation Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate $85,000 accumulated during 2015 and 2016 in the Waste Innovation Fund account into the City’s General Fund account to initiate the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative outlined in the Draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan. At First Reading, staff will also update Council on the remaining two initiatives (of 7) that were discussed at the March 10, 2016 Work Sessions related to the 2020 CAP Strategic Plan. During that Work Session, staff committed to further vetting 3 of the 7 initiatives, with special consideration toward the larger financial impact of those initiatives. On these two remaining initiatives, staff will highlight a change in the funding source for solar incentives and rebates, allowing this initiative to move forward, and a recommendation to postpone consideration of the energy efficiency funding for approximately 60-90 days. The postponement of the energy efficiency funding will allow staff to evaluate the supplemental 2016 funding in the larger context of the Light and Power Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Long Term Financial Plan, and 2017-2018 Budgeting for Outcomes funding needs (August/September timeframe) to help balance and inform decisions to address both the critical Utilities infrastructure and advance CAP priorities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2015, City Council adopted updated the community greenhouse gas reduction goals: 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, 80% below 2005 by 2030, and Carbon neutrality by the year 2050 In order to reach these goals, staff has developed an implementation plan to include an internal CAP Executive Team, Core Team, and Strategic Initiative Teams, as well as an external Community Advisory Committee, based on the accelerated goals of the CAP. During the March 10, 2016, Work Session, staff identified seven 10 Packet Pg. 199 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 2 initiatives that could be invested in immediately. At the April 19, 2016, City Council meeting, Council adopted Ordinance 046, 2016, investing in four of these seven initiatives. This item addresses two of the three remaining initiatives (Municipal Green Waste/Composting Site and the Solar Incentives and Rebates) and outlines the next steps proposed for the remaining initiative (Energy Efficiency) - see the table and additional information outlined below. Item Initiative 2016 Funding Funding Recommendation Waste Innovation Fund Light and Power Total 1 Energy Efficiency N/A 0 Postpone funding decision for 60-90 days 2 Solar Incentives and Rebates N/A 0 No new appropriation needed in 2016 3 Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites $85,000 - $85,000 $85,000 from Waste Innovation Fund Reserves Totals $85,000 $85,000 Below is a summary of the three initiatives that were highlighted at the March 10, 2016 Work Session with City Council (see Attachment 2 for full project descriptions on the Solar Incentives and Rebates and the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites, as those initiatives are proposed to move forward with this item): 1. Energy Efficiency: up to $1,460K 2020 Impact: 230,000 CO2e Tons (46%) Energy efficiency programs provide approximately half of the projected energy savings to reach the 2020 target. Of this efficiency component, over 90% is from continued and enhanced Utilities efficiency programs. These programs, many under the Efficiency Works shared brand, provide incentives and technical assistance for all customer segments and most technology end uses-engaging residents and businesses in meeting the community CAP goals.100% of supplemental City funding would support customer efficiency improvements, of which every City dollar is leveraged 3 to 5 times by customer investment. Utilities has seen extraordinarily high participation in business efficiency programs year to date. This uptake is good news - it shows an expanded pace for efficiency savings and community engagement in the CAP goals. If continued at this current pace, the programs are well positioned to achieve the energy efficiency portion of the 2020 CAP goals (230,000 tons of carbon, 46% of the 2020 goal). However, as a result of this increased uptake in efficiency programs by the business community and ongoing activity for residents, the City has committed all funding for energy efficiency incentives and rebates for 2016. Utilities and Platte River are implementing a wait list process for projects as applications are received (see Attachment 4 for the communication materials sent to customers regarding this process). The estimated gap in program funding through the end of 2016 is up to $1,460,300, based on forecasted activity in business programs and continuation of the Efficiency Works Neighborhood pilot in the 4th quarter. Staff is excited to implement the energy efficiency programs at a greater scale and accelerated pace to meet CAP goals and respond to community demand. During the additional vetting of energy efficiency funding, new information became available (since the March 10 Work Session) regarding the limited Light & Power (L&P) funding. The CAP Executive Team recommends that Council consider postponing the decision to recommend supplemental 2016 energy efficiency funding until the 10 Packet Pg. 200 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 3 August/September timeframe. This is because, in the next 60-90 days, the L&P Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Utilities Long Term Financial Plan, and the BFO funding needs will be better understood, and this understanding will help balance and inform decisions around both addressing critical Utilities infrastructure and advancing CAP priorities. Three key analyses have informed this recommendation: 1. Currently, the L&P CIP indicates Utilities may have long-term reserve funding shortfalls to meet priority infrastructure needs. 2. Initial BFO estimates of revenue and spending within L&P indicate a significant shortfall (up to $10M short fall each year between revenue and ongoing offers plus required capital, outside of the proposed enhancements). 3. The updated unassigned and available fund balance in L&P decreased from $18.4M to $16.4M. Providing partial funding for this interim period would provide for additional savings in 2016, extend the ability of the programs to meet customer interest and keep efficiency service providers engaged locally. However, the transition to a wait list status for business programs would simply occur later in the year. In addition to the three analyses mentioned above, staff is working to quantifying the benefits/costs of investing in CAP projects to allow a comparison and selection based on this impact during the BFO process. At the same time, efficiency measures have consistently been analyzed as providing high cost-effectiveness for carbon reduction in prior Fort Collins analyses and in independent analyses conducted elsewhere. More details associated with this recommendation are provided in the attached memo (see Attachment 3). 2. Solar Incentives and Rebates: up to $350K 2020 Impact: 9,000 CO2e Tons (1.8%) The current 2016 budget for solar incentives is $250,000 for residential and $125,000 for small commercial solar projects. This budget supports approximately 170 home and 12 business rebates. Current program uptake for the first five months of the year totals 125 residential and 2 commercial projects with rebate funds committed to them. This represents 74% and 16% of budgeted capacity for home and business rebates, respectively. In order to respond to additional rebate requests beyond the initially authorized funding, staff expects to be able to shift uncommitted 2016 solar funds from the Solar Power Purchase Program and the Community Solar program for a total of approximately $300,000 in additional funds. This shifting of funds will help the program meet potential interest for additional solar incentives in 2016. Funding from the Solar Power Purchase Programs is available because all of the program’s projects are complete and Power Purchase Agreements made are less than what was budgeted for 2016. The Community Solar program funds are available due to a shift in the timeline for the next project to 2017. Unless directed otherwise by Council, Utilities will inform customers and vendors of the additional funding for 2016. Upon the full commitment of existing solar rebate funds, the additional funding would be transferred from the two referenced solar programs to the Solar Rebates program. 3. Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites: $85K 2020 Impact: 9,000 CO2e Tons (1.9% of the Municipal Pathway to reach the 2020 Goals) This initiative will enable municipal composting for organic landscape debris through a small-scale (100 tons/year) composting facility at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility. The proposal includes site grading at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, purchase of compost-turning equipment, and ongoing composting operations and management by the Streets Department. Capital costs of $85,000 are associated with developing a City-only composting facility. Funds are available to appropriate from prior year reserves in the General Fund that were collected for the Waste Innovation Program. Composting capability will increase landfill waste diversion by departments, including Parks, Streets, Forestry, Natural Areas, Stormwater, and Light & Power, that generate 10 Packet Pg. 201 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 4 organic debris from municipal maintenance activities. As primary manager of the site, Streets will not charge departments for in-bound material bought to Hoffman Mill Road for composting, but will charge for out-bound compost products to allow them to recover operational costs for composting. Other departments’ purchase of finished compost from Streets will be offset by savings from normal purchases of commercially manufactured compost for use in landscaping projects. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Investing in these initiatives has a bottom line impact of $85,000 in 2016, with no ongoing commitment to the City budget. Waste Innovation Fund The $85,000 for the Municipal Green Waste Site is funded through the Waste Innovation Fund, and ongoing costs will be covered by the sale of compost products to City departments. The City Manager created a fund in 2010 to pay for projects that improve our organizational ability to divert waste generated by municipal activities from being disposed in the Larimer County landfill. Discarded material and trash that City crews self-haul to the landfill is charged only 28 cents/cubic yard by Larimer County Solid Waste Department, which is passed through in payment to the state for landfill regulatory management and monitoring programs. The balance of the regular “tipping fee” at the landfill, $5.27 per cubic yard, is placed in the City’s Waste Innovation Program (WIP) fund. WIP revenues are received from 15 City departments that self-haul various types of waste to the landfill in truckloads. A cross-departmental team accepts and reviews proposals that support the City’s goal to reduce landfill disposal. An application was developed by the Streets Department to purchase composting equipment in February, 2016. The WIP team voted unanimously to recommend this funding request. Approval of the request to use $85,000 from Reserves will save costs of sending material to the landfill that can otherwise be composted, including fall leaves swept from streets. The compost-turning equipment makes up $51,000 of the total; other expenses include a creeper gear for an existing tractor, staff training, and supplies. Light and Power Fund Staff has identified existing programs from which funds can be made available in 2016 to provide supplemental funding to the residential and small commercial solar rebates. The funds are available from two programs: (1) the Solar Power Purchase Program (SP3) for which all contracts are complete and the ongoing cost is lower than originally forecasted, and (2) Community Shared Solar for which the Platte River led project is now on schedule for 2017. These funds (approximately $350k) can be utilized to support the Solar Incentives and Rebates Program. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Staff will present this information to the Energy Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting in July for discussion and feedback. In addition to specific outreach with the Energy Board, staff has also reached out to the following boards on the Climate Action Plan more generally: Energy Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, and the Air Quality Advisory Board. However, the status of these off-cycle funding decisions has not been discussed. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff has reviewed all of the initiatives and BFO Offers associated with the 2020 CAP Strategic Plan with the Climate Action Plan’s Community Advisory Committee. Staff is beginning to schedule public outreach events, including an Open House with former governor Bill Ritter to gather community feedback on the Climate Action Plan; however, the status of these off-cycle funding decisions has not been discussed. 10 Packet Pg. 202 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 5 ATTACHMENTS 1. Work Session Summary, March 10, 2016 (PDF) 2. Initiative and Project Descriptions (PDF) 3. Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (PDF) 4. Notice to Customers regarding Energy Efficiency Rebate Availability (PDF) 5. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 10 Packet Pg. 203 ATTACHMENT 1 10.1 Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Work Session Summary, March 10, 2016 (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 10.1 Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Work Session Summary, March 10, 2016 (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 2016 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN INITIATIVES Title: Solar Incentives and Rebates 2020 Impact: 9,000 CO2e Tons (1.8%) Fund: N/A Total Amount (2016): N/A Total Amount (Ongoing ): N/A Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: John Phelan Norm Weaver FTE Requested: N/A Description: The current 2016 budget for solar incentives is $250,000 for residential and $125,000 for small commercial solar projects. This budget supports approximately 170 home and 12 business rebates. Current program uptake for the first five months of the year totals 125 residential and 2 commercial projects with rebate funds committed to them. This represents 74% and 16% of budgeted capacity for home and business rebates, respectively. In order to respond to additional rebate requests beyond the initially authorized funding, staff expects to be able to shift uncommitted 2016 solar funds from the Solar Power Purchase Program and the Community Solar program for a total of approximately $350,000 in additional funds. This shifting of funds will help the program meet demands for additional solar incentives in 2016. Funding from the Solar Power Purchase Programs is available because all of the program’s projects are complete and Power Purchase Agreements made are less than what was budgeted in 2014 and 2016. The Community Solar program funds are available due to a shift in the timeline for the next project to 2017. Upon the full commitment of existing Solar Incentives and Rebate funds, the additional funding would be transferred from the two solar programs to the Solar Incentives rebates. Utilities would then inform customers and vendors of the available funds upon direction from Council. ATTACHMENT 2 1 10.2 Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Initiative and Project Descriptions (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 2016 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN INITIATIVES Title: Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site 2020 Impact: 100 CO2e Tons (1.9% of the Municipal Pathway to reach the 2020 Goals) Fund: 100 – General Fund Total Amount (2016): $85,000 Total Amount (Ongoing): $0 Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: Susan Gordon FTE Requested: N/A Description: The Road to Zero Waste represents approximately 25% of the projected savings to reach the 2020 target. While this initiative represents only 0.01% of the overall roadmap to 2020, it demonstrates the City as a leader in addressing its waste (representing 1.9% of the municipal reductions needed by 2020), The City is committed to reducing the amount of waste it generates and has set a goal to reduce its own “industrial” waste by 10% each year. Money paid by City departments for use of the Larimer County landfill ($5.85/yard) is deposited in the Waste Innovation Program (WIP) fund. An interdepartmental Waste Stream Team evaluates applications related to municipal operations that can serve to achieve the 80% diversion rate. This project has been selected for funding from the WIP fund (which has a balance of $179,024) for three reasons: (1) This initiative reestablishes a best practice of composting municipal waste; the City used to compost its municipal waste – organic material such as fall leaves and park landscape trimmings - until a state law prohibited municipal composting, without significant permitting. An exemption to a State regulation will be going into effect this year to allow government agencies to compost organic waste (up to 100 tons per site); (2) The City currently sends approximately 1500 cubic yards (439 tons) of green waste annually to the landfill. Funding this initiative will help divert 100 tons of the City’s operation’s waste from landfilling and will reduce 100 metric tons of carbon from the atmosphere. The compost will be used in City-owned landscape and garden applications, which help avoid using chemically based fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, as well as conserving on irrigation water usage. (3) The initiative allows the City to lead by example on waste diversion that benefits climate – establishing a composting site for municipal operations will provide a valuable composting product back to City operations at a competitive price. The indirect benefits of this operation is a reduced cost to haul waste material to the landfill and also to reduce the amount of tipping fees paid to Larimer County. This initiative will enable municipal composting for organic landscape debris through a small-scale (100 tons/year) composting facility at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility. The proposal includes site grading at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, purchase of compost-turning equipment, and ongoing composting operations and management by the Streets Department. Capital costs of $85,000 are associated with developing a City-only composting facility. Funds are available to appropriate from prior year reserves in the General Fund that were collected for the Waste Innovation Program. Composting capability will increase landfill waste diversion by departments, including Parks, Streets, Forestry, Natural Areas, Stormwater, and Light & Power, that generate organic debris from municipal maintenance activities. As primary manager of the site, Streets will not charge departments for in-bound material bought to Hoffman Mill Road for composting, but will charge for out- bound compost products to allow them to recover operational costs for composting. Other departments’ purchase of finished compost from Streets will be offset by savings from normal purchases of commercially manufactured compost for use in landscaping projects. 10.2 Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Initiative and Project Descriptions (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) ATTACHMENT 3 10.3 Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (4543 : CAP Appropriation 10.3 Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (4543 : CAP Appropriation 10.3 Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (4543 : CAP Appropriation 10.3 Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (4543 : CAP Appropriation 10.3 Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Memo to City Council, June 7 re: The Status of the Remaining CAP Initiatives for Immediate Investment (4543 : CAP Appropriation Utilities electric · stormwater · wastewater · water 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221-6700 970.221.6619 fax • V/TDD: 711 utilities@fcgov.com fcgov.com/utilities June 2016 Notice to customers and contractors working on commercial efficiency projects in Fort Collins Due to increased participation, funds for Efficiency Works’ electric efficiency rebates will be depleted in the very near future. Rebates for water projects remain available. Applications will continue to be pre-approved on a first-come first-served basis until funding is no longer available. When all funding is committed, new project submittals will be placed on a wait list. It is anticipated that additional funding will not be available in 2016, unless previously approved projects are canceled. When 2017 funding becomes available in January, rebates for efficiency projects will be considered from the wait list first, followed by projects submitted for 2017. Thank you for making this program a success and for supporting our community energy savings and climate protection goals. Visit efficiencyworks.co or contact Kelley Gonzales at 970-221-6857, kgonzales@fcgov.com or V/TDD 711 for more information. ATTACHMENT 4 10.4 Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Notice to Customers regarding Energy Efficiency Rebate Availability (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 1 CAP – Appropriation for Immediate Actions Jeff Mihelich, Kevin Gertig, Jackie Kozak Thiel, Mike Beckstead, Lucinda Smith, Lindsay Ex June 21, 2016 ATTACHMENT 5 10.5 Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Ordinance First Reading 2 • Current Progress § April - Four initiatives approved for funding § Summer – vetting of initiatives and development of messaging § Q4 – Council Work Session to review 2020 Plan • Tonight – update on two remaining initiatives and one appropriation § Energy Efficiency § Solar Incentives and Rebates § Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites 10.5 Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Draft Roadmap to 2020 *Reductions are estimates and rounded to the nearest thousand 3 10.5 Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 CAP Journey: Progress 4 20% Reduction 80% Reduction Carbon Neutral Inventory Results Forecast 2015 Inventory: Emissions Goal 9% below 2005 CO2 Tons 10.5 Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Energy Efficiency 5 Up to $1.46M Needed 2020 Impact: 230,000 CO2e Tons (46%) • Good news –Business energy efficiency incentives are nearly fully committed for 2016 § Implications – customer projects will be waitlisted for the remainder of 2016 • Funding Needs: § 1.46M (forecasted) – up to $1.37M for business rebates & $0.09M ($90,000) for Efficiency Works Neighborhoods Pilot in Q4 10.5 Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Energy Efficiency 6 • New Information: § Light and Power Fund – May have long-term reserve funding shortfalls § 2017/2018 Budget – Significant shortfalls from ongoing & capital offers § Year-end fund balance – Decrease from $18.4 à $16.4M 10.5 Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Energy Efficiency 7 $118.1 ($56.9) $3.1 $2.1 $123.1 $3.1 $2.2 $136.8 $6.9 $8.2 $139.9 $9.7 $7.1 ($100.0) ($50.0) $0.0 $50.0 $100.0 $150.0 $ Millions 501 L&P 2017-18 Budget 10.5 Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Energy Efficiency 8 Alternatives Explored § Future rate increase or use reserves § Partial funding § Redirect solar funding to energy efficiency § Postpone decision to evaluate comprehensive funding needs 10.5 Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Energy Efficiency 9 Staff Recommendation § Postpone immediate funding decision • Pros: Allows consideration of L&P needs in broader context • Cons: • Slows implementation of efficiency investment and program momentum, • Loss of immediate efficiency gains, and • Uncertain business planning environment for customers and efficiency service providers. 10.5 Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Solar Incentives and Rebates 10 Up to $350K 2020 Impact: 9,000 CO2e Tons (1.8%) • Good news – Existing program funds can be used in 2016 to support this program • Funding Needs: § No new appropriations needed § Will shift uncommitted funds in the Solar Power Purchase Program and Community Solar Program to meet these needs 10.5 Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site 11 $85,000 (One-Time) 2020 Impact: 100 CO2e Tons (1.9% of Municipal Pathway) • Good news – Through vetting, costs have decreased from ~$185K and one site will be installed • Funding Needs: § $85,000- One-time funding for capital equipment, staff training, and site preparation 10.5 Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site 12 Why this project? • Lead by Example • Restores former City operation • Diverts waste from the landfill and saves City dollars • Utilizes existing funding source: Waste Innovation Fund 10.5 Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Initiatives Summary & 2016 Appropriation Request 13 Item Initiative Funding Recommendation 1 Energy Efficiency Postpone funding decision for 60-90 days 2 Solar Incentives and Rebates No new appropriation needed in 2016 3 Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site $85,000 from Waste Innovation Fund Reserves* Total Request $85,000 *Current Balance of Waste Innovation Fund - ~$180K 10.5 Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Next Steps 14 • Energy Board • 2nd Reading – July 5 • Review of the CAP Model (June 23) • Evaluate offers for the 2017-18 Budget Process • Continue to engage the public • Refine messaging 10.5 Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Ordinance First Reading 15 • Current Progress § April - Four initiatives approved for funding § Summer – vetting of initiatives and development of messaging § Q4– Council Work Session to review 2020 Plan • Tonight – update on two remaining initiatives and one appropriation § Energy Efficiency § Solar Incentives and Rebates § Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites 10.5 Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) 16 CAP – Appropriation for Immediate Actions Jeff Mihelich, Kevin Gertig, Jackie Kozak Thiel, Mike Beckstead, Lucinda Smith, Lindsay Ex June 21, 2016 10.5 Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Light & Power Fund CIP 17 $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 $18,000,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Annual Capital Investment 501 - Light & Power Fund Operational Technology & Fiber Annexations New Capacity Substation Improvements Distribution System Improvements 2015 Operating Revenue not used for Purchased Power expense was $27.1M 10.5 Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Capital Investment from Operating Revenues 18 33% 46% 35% 19% 19% 11% 10% 15% 9% 11% 7% 5% 7% 12% 13% 27% 6% 5% 6% 16% 10% 15% 30% 34% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Light & Power * Water Wastewater Stormwater 2015 Expenses as % of Operating Revenues Operating Revenues Available for Capital Energy Services PILOTs Debt Service Other Transfers CS&A Operations * Purchased Power expenses, PILOTs associated with it and the necessary operating revenue for this expense have been removed for this table. 10.5 Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Revenue Forecast – Light & Power 19 Assumes 3.2% Rate Increase 2017 and 2018 10.5 Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) Light & Power 2017-18 Round 1 20 $118.1 ($56.9) $3.1 $2.1 $123.1 $3.1 $2.2 $136.8 $6.9 $8.2 $139.9 $9.7 $7.1 ($100.0) ($50.0) $0.0 $50.0 $100.0 $150.0 $ Millions 501 L&P 2017-18 Budget 10.5 Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) CAP Journey: Investments & Savings 21 • Short-term investments yield significant long-term savings • Paybacks vary – short to long • Overall benefit/cost = 2.5 § For every $1 invested, the community saves $2.50 LED LIGHT BULB: Investment: $6 Annual Savings: $5 Impact: 58 kWh 0.05 tons SOLAR PANELS: Investment: $8400 Annual Savings: $500 Impact: 5500 kWh 4.47 tons 10.5 Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4543 : CAP Appropriation Two) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 081, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR 2016 PROJECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2020 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) STRATEGIC PLAN AS PART OF THE WASTE INNOVATION PROGRAM WHEREAS, on March 3, 2015, City Council adopted Resolution 2015-030, updating community greenhouse gas goals and targets to be achieved by 2020, 2030, and 2050; and WHEREAS, staff has developed an implementation plan based on the accelerated goals of the Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) and has identified several initiatives for immediate action and investment based on guidance provided by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 046, 2016, appropriating funds toward four projects identified for immediate action and investment (1) Building energy Disclosure and Scoring, (2) CAP Program Support, (3) CAP Pilot Project/Innovation Fund, and (4) Biomass Burner Feasibility Study; and WHEREAS, two additional projects have been identified for immediate action and investment: (1) Solar Incentives and Rebates, and (2) Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites; and WHEREAS, appropriated, but unexpended and unencumbered, funds are available in 2016 from the Solar Purchase Power Program (SP3) and the Community Shared Solar program in the Light and Power fund to support the Solar Incentives and Rebates Program; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting $85,000 for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative, including compost-turning equipment of $51,000 and other expenses, outlined in the Draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan, from funds accumulated during 2015 and prior years in the Waste Innovation Program account in the City’s General Fund; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site will enable municipal composting for organic landscape debris through a small-scale (100 tons/year) composting facility at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, including site grading at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, purchase of compost-turning equipment, and ongoing composting operations and management by the Streets Department; and WHEREAS, composting capability will increase landfill waste diversion by City departments that generate organic debris from municipal maintenance activities, including Parks, Streets, Forestry, Natural Areas, Stormwater, and Light and Power; and WHEREAS, in 2010, the City created the Waste Innovation Program (the “WIP”) fund where revenues collected for the program are held in a reserve account in the General Fund; and Packet Pg. 235 -2- WHEREAS, the WIP funds are used to administer grants that allow City departments to initiate new waste diversion and recycling projects with special attention to departments that have larger quantities of waste that is self-hauled to the Larimer County Landfill; and WHEREAS, a team of interdepartmental employees (the “WIP Team”) acts as a liaison for incorporating waste reduction, promoting recycling strategies, and awarding WIP funds when requests are received from participating City departments; and WHEREAS, the WIP Team voted unanimously to recommend the funding request for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and 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 there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND ($85,000) for expenditure in the General Fund for the City of Fort Collins for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative as part of the Waste Innovation Program. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 236 -3- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 237 Permits x Hours of Operation x Outdoor vendors can only operate during hours that the "fixed- base business" operates, and not during the hours of 10pm-6am Mobility x Vending facility must be removed from site or stored indoors when 1. (20.80.890) Conditions of issuance. All outdoor vending facilities must comply with the following conditions: 2. (H) The hours of operation of a vending facility shall be limited to the hours of operation of the fixed-base businesses on the fixed-base host site; however no vending facility shall operate during the hours from 10:00 p.m. through 6:00 a.m. During hours in which the fixed-base host site businesses are closed, the vending facility shall be removed from the parcel or lot on which it operates, or shall be stored indoors. 9.5 Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) x No regulations 1. (H.1.)Peddlers and vendors wishing to sell goods anywhere in the city shall comply with NMC Chapter 5.40. 2. (H.3.) Any peddler or vendor operating on private property (other than at non-profit special events) requires a use permit. 9.5 Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) on a single property (7 total including set up and break down) Mobility x No regulations 1. (H.) No mobile or temporary business may conduct operations at a fixed location for more than two hours at one time unless the location is approved by the city as part of the permit. 2. (B.) Mobile business operations may not exceed six consecutive hours on a single property except an additional hour is allowed for set-up and take-down for a maximum time of seven hours total. 9.5 Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) days in a calendar year 1. (2) Any operator of a mobile food vending service must receive a zoning use permit and display placard from Neighborhood Development. The maximum duration of a mobile food vending service permit is for thirty (30) days at one location, renewable up to two (2) additional times, for a total period of ninety (90) days per calendar year at that one location. 9.5 Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) Exemptions x Regulations do not apply to mobile establishments located 1. (C.) A mobile food establishment: a. (1) must be licensed by the health authority; b. (2) is permitted in all commercial and industrial zoning districts, except in a neighborhood office (NO), limited office (LO), 9.5 Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) x Maximum of 8 hours inside Downtown Mobility x No Requirements 1. (d.1) Any person operating a peddler's wagon or truck on the streets of the City shall not keep such wagon or truck, or any other conveyance used in such peddling, in one (1) place more than four (4) hours at a time. 2. (d.2) A new location, in the meaning of this Subsection, shall be at least three hundred (300) feet from the previous location. 3. (e.3) The downtown vendors permit will allow the peddler to park his or her wagon or approved conveyance in any of the designated vendor areas of the downtown area for a maximum of eight (8) hours in any one (1) designated area, notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection (d) of this Section. 4. (f) The licensee shall not leave unattended any such vehicle, structure or device on a public right-of-way or at the designated location. Longmont, CO Permits x Permit valid for one year x Permit must be 1. Mobile retail food establishments and pushcarts must be removed from any site at the end of each business day (unless otherwise approved). ATTACHMENT 5 9.5 Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Peer City Review - Regional Outdoor Vendor Regulations (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 7 %$ 6& ' ' !"0* ! '$ $ ' - & 8 $ -&$ !"0* ! 4 / " * + & A&-% 9 > ?&: "0* 1 3% & $- ++"+* 3 !"0* ! 3 ++"+* !1" '$ - '$ $ %& & & - ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 !"0* ! 3 !"0* ! 3 / " * + >$#7 !"0* ! !+"#$ $ $' % - - '% (. $ '" 9.3 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! 3 , , $ * , $ 3 !"0* ! >-&$ @ ""6 ' "0* 1 ' !"0* ! ! " ' - & - ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 3 !"0* ! > $ !"0* ! >$ !"0* ! ?$ 1$ !"0* ! >$#7 ++"+* !!",%&$ - 8 &- & & ' $', $ &$ '( 9.3 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) '% ! " * ! "#$$$%& $ 6&$ - % ' - 9- ' -- & :( 9.3 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) "## + ! / +"+* / ; $ / !"0* ! <"7 % - 6& 8$ $ =$ %% 8'% ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 +"+* / 3 !"0* ! "#$$$%& '%6& 9 : - $'( 9.3 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 ! " * 0"7' % 6& 8 ' %$ - &%$6' 6& ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) " ()$ * 4 ' " * 1 5-'$$ " * ! " '% 6& ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 +"+* / 3 !"0* ! /",% '$ $ - ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! "## $ ! .%$ +"+* / ' !"0* ! 1", -'-$ $ - ( 9.3 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) !" "#$$$%& '( %) & ! " * ATTACHMENT 3 9.3 Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2A Results - Restaurants (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 0 + &% @' ) () "/. ! )% % ) 2 ' ( % 2'% "!. 0# > )%7 ". > (7 "-. !- ' D'2& 8 6 1'9 !"/. =& ' %2 " . 00 = "-. # = " . # 6%7$+ #"!. # " )% 2 )% (% &' ' ' 2 * 9.2 Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 0 < -". /00 = "0. = " . 0 6%7$+ #"/. #0 1 0"$% % %) & 2 7 ( 2 )7& *; % )" 9.2 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! ! < - - &' ( ) 2 / 0 = -" . / #% "0. 0- % #". # -% #"!. # 62'%7 -C ""@ ) "-. - # ) "#. 6%7$+ #". # 1 .6 9.2 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 0 = -". - 67 #% 0"0. # 67 % "#. 67% "0. 67-% "/. 67% "#. 1% % ". = 0" . #- 6%7$+ " . 0 1 2 9.2 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) .6 7 . # 2- &' ( ) * +, / 0 && ) #0"!. !# )& #" . # # = #"0. ## 6%7$+8 9 ##"/. 0 1 !2 "$%%%&' % @'% 2 & ) 2 82 ( ) 22 ' 9* 9.2 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) + 2! -! ! - ! ! - .! ! - ! ! ! 2! ! -- = ' 2! ! -. &' ( ) . / 0 =& //"-. -- -". /" . - # "#. 0 "#. ". 0 " . ! A % "0. 6%7$+ 0". #! 1 2! 9.2 Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) < ( ) 6. / 0 < #" . # = "-. / @ 7$+ !"0. 0 1 2 "$%%%&' )7(&@'( 8 9 2 %)* 9.2 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ; ! 6 / 0 < 0" . #- = !"!. 6%7$+ " . ! = ( "!. 1 2- /"+) & @'( ) &% 2 '&%@) @' * 9.2 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) -66 ' ' -6 & ' . & #9 -- : ' #9 - / 0 > ) !"!. -- 32)%% !". -# 6 % 0-"-. 0 - 6 & " . ?% & -" . 1 . -" )& @'( * 9.2 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) * 5 6 7 - 7 ! - / 0 < !"#. 0/ = "-. = " . 1 2 ":& )% % 2 * 9.2 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 2 / 0 0":& )&% 2 '&%%)* 3 4#' 2 / . / 0 "-. 0! ;&% -"/. ) 0"/. 00 1 2. 9.2 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! " #"$%%%&'( ()* ! " # # $ % &' ( ) * +, -. / 0 + , -". /0- 1 2 #"/. #0 1 2 ATTACHMENT 2 9.2 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #2 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 9!$>$ $ . . + #$! ? $ >$ , >$ $ . .$. ! ,, 75 $ 9 $!< ?#.$ $ 9 ?!$ . . 9!$ , , $ , : 9 , $ 9 . $ .$ $ '$ ! $! $ $ $= 4; ! $ ? $.$4; ? ? 9$ $ ! , $ '$ D 9$ , . .. $:= 9$ . # !!75 7! ! , E E$ 75 $ 9$ $ $$! .$ $ , ,!$ $ !$ E E$ $ ,,D $ , G, 9L .A 9 ? .! $,. ! ! 9$ 9) $?B8 .!$> : ! ,$ $ $ ! 9, 9$ 9 $ ) . > , + , 9 . ? ! ++$ 6?< 9 , , 3? ! . , 3 .?L D $' ) ? : ' " 9.1 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor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acket Pg. 113 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor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acket Pg. 112 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) . $ . $ .$ . @$?>9!$ . ! ?, 9C .. ? $ ? G ! >$ $?, $ ! $ $? , ?$ , -$ $% ! $ > $ 9?, ! $$ '$ 9 , $ !$ , .$ 9 9$ $ >, $ !$ '$ = $ . $ $ # $ = ! .$ = 8 ? ?$ , ! ! . $ $ .$ '$ ! $ $ . ! $ , $ , $ $ 75 $ $ 7 5 , '$ $ $ , $ ! '$ $ !$$ >$ 9 9 ' . $ > 9 .$ .$ 9 ! $ 49 )$ /$9 $ 0 . . -! , : +) $ .$ ! ! $$ -! 9 . ! $ ! $$ , 9 . >$ , $$ , , ! $$ $ . 7 9, . + , . ?,.? , ++!$ . $? $A ; $ $ ,. . .1 & 9.1 Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) #+ !9?$ %"$ #+ !9?$ %"$ % % & #+ !9?$ %"$ & #+ ?$ .$ " #+ ?$ .$ & ' % " ! ?!$ $ , $ . + , 1 #+ !9?$ ( %"$ #+ !9?$ %"$% % #+ !9?$ %"$ & #+ ?$ .$ #+ ?$ .$& % 9.1 Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) !9 %"$ %$& # .$ ( " !9 & %"$ %$ & # .$ " ' & ) %& 8 . ); : = %" 9.1 Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) #+ !9 #+ !9 & % #+ !9 #+ & #+ % & ' -$ $$ ! . $ = .$ ! / 01 ( " #+ $ & #+ $% #+ $ #+ !9 #+ !9 & #+ !9 #+ & #+ % 9.1 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) .$ ! . . G G 9, . ?, . ! 9.1 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor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acket Pg. 106 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) $ ?, . ?$ $ , 99! .!$$ 9 . ,?,!!$ $ !$ $ .1 >, $7' 9$ .$ = , '$ -$ 9 . . .., $$., 1 $ 9$$ . . E E > $ $D > , $ .$, $ $ 9!!$ $ 9 !$A 9 ! $ $ ! 9!!$. 8 $ $ .$.$ . . !, , $ ? ? 9 .? .$,$ ? . ! -$ $ .$ ! $$$ D 1 > .$9!!$$ > ? , $$ , $ > $ ! ! ,$?$ $ , !,$ . $ ! 9 $$ $ $ . > > , > ! !G. $ > +, . !$$> $ $ $ > ?$$ , , ,9 . ,!$ $! , 5 4 $; C . ?$! .$ . , $, ? !$ $ $ $ , $ ?$, , ?,>$ !$ $ '$ > '$5 $ 9 , , , . .!$$ . $?$ ? $ 9!$ $ , $ $ ! $, !!$ $ $ $ $, $ >$ 9 $ '$, ! ! > ?!$ ! 1 9.1 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor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acket Pg. 104 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) 4! 9 C . $ > !. $ 1 *. , ? $ ! . < D$ 5 $ , . '$ .$ , 8 . . .?$ $ ! .$ $ ?$$ $ , 9 . $ 9 . ?$ < $ = ! $ $ $ ) $ E$E!$$ C , $ .$ .? $ . ! $ $ ! $$? $9$ !$ $ $ ! 9$ $ $ ! $ !$ 9 . $ + # '!?: !? ,5 ' $ ,! +$ .$$ , $ !$ $, . ? $ !! , $ !$ $ , $ 9 $ 9 , ?, ! , 3 9 , , !! $ , $ , F .$, ! . , . ' 9A:, A'$ ;#(>'$ $ , 9 AAA 9.1 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! ? , ! .$, ! . ! $$ ! , ! 9!!$ $ ! 9 $ 9?,9!!$$ > ?$! $ ! $ $ !> $ > $ $ ! ,=+ $ $ ! 9 9, $ , , 3 . $ , 5 9 ,$ ,!$ $ ! @ $$ $ .A : ,> .$ .?,> !$ ! , , (8 ( ( ( 5 9.1 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) " :$ !9 " ' " % 4! $ $ 1 8 $$ % # $ # !9 :$ !9" % 9.1 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) ! " #$ % & ' (!) * +# ,& -$ $$ ! ., , / $ $ 01 " % ! #$ & & & ATTACHMENT 1 9.1 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Online Questionnaire #1 Results (4544 : Outdoor Vendor) o n Ct Beech St Rembrandt Dr E Coy Dr W Plum St S Sherwood St Armstr o ng Ave Hawkins St Wagner Dr Del Norte P l W ill o w S t Canyon Ave Hanna St P io n e e r A ve Ov a l D r W Coy Dr S Washington Ave Wood St W Magnolia St Park St E Magnolia St E Olive St E Oak St E Laurel St E Myrtle St E Plum St NLoomisAve Elm St N Whitcomb St W Olive St W Myrtle St N Sherwood St S Meldrum St N Meldrum St S Loomis Ave N Grant Ave W Oak St W Magnolia St S Shields St Laporte Ave S College Ave N Howes St W Laurel St E Mountain Ave E Mulberry St S Mason St W Mountain Ave Jefferson St W Mulberry St N Mason St N Co l lege Ave S Howes St Remington St N Shields St Loomis Addition Survey Vicinity Map CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: June 14, 2016 Loomis Addition Boundary 0 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 Miles Scale000 1:10, © Path: K:\ArcMapProjects\Historic_Preservation\LoomisAdition\LoomisAdditionCouncilPacketMap.mxd ATTACHMENT 1 4.1 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Vicinity Map (4503 : Loomis Addition Survey)