Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 05/17/2016 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 073, 2016, AUTHORIZAgenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 17, 2016 City Council STAFF Dean Klingner, Engineer & Capital Project Manager SUBJECT First 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. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to obtain 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. Ordinance No. 043, 2016 was adopted on Second Reading on April 19, 2016, allowing City staff to begin the property acquisition process for the preferred alternative on the six commercial properties at this intersection. Staff delayed the residential properties approximately six weeks to allow additional design work and discussions with the property owners. The following work has been done recently in regards to the residential properties:  Council Work Session presentation and discussion on April 12, 2016, resulting in: o Majority support for dual westbound left turn lanes o Request to provide follow-up on additional design questions  Meeting with Mayor Pro Tem Horak, City Manager, City staff and affected property owners to discuss property owners requested design (April 25, 2016).  Memo to Council providing detailed analysis of the impacts and benefits of moving the roadway south to avoid wall impacts.  Support from Transportation Board and Bicycle Advisory Committee on staff’s preferred alternative. Timely acquisition of the property is necessary to meet the anticipated construction schedule. Staff will negotiate in good faith with the affected owners and is optimistic that all property negotiations can be completed prior to the start of the Project. Staff is requesting authorization of eminent domain for all property acquisitions for the Project only if such action is necessary in order to keep the project on schedule. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION City Council approved the second reading of Ordinance No. 043, 2016 on April 19, 2016, allowing staff to being the property acquisition process on the six affected commercial properties at this intersection. In order to construct the preferred alternative for the Project, the City needs to acquire property from the two residential properties on the east end of the Project as well. Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 2 The Prospect and College intersection has some of the highest traffic volumes in the entire City in addition to high numbers of crashes, significant congestion in peak travel times, substandard bicycle and pedestrian facilities and insufficient turn lanes. Turn lane improvements and improved signal timing will be implemented to reduce congestion, while re-designed medians and bicycle and pedestrian facilities will update the look, feel and functionality of the intersection for all modes of transportation Multiple planning efforts and projects over the last several years help inform and set the stage for the proposed improvements at Prospect and College. These are summarized as follows:  2011 Master Street Plan and Transportation Master Plan designated Prospect from Mason Street to I- 25 as an Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) and as a Gateway Intersection.  The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) (Appendix D to the 2011 Transportation Master Plan) lists intersection improvements to Prospect and College as a High priority project. Roadway improvements to Prospect Avenue from College to Lemay are listed as a Medium priority project.  The 2011 Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study identified Prospect and College as a top priority for congestion and safety improvements  The West Central Plan (adopted in 2015) eastern limit is College Avenue. However, improvements to Prospect and College are sited as a Short-Term project (0-10 years) and the location is noted as “High crash location, high vehicle delays, and review for multi-modal improvements.” ETC’s are identified as the most desired area of focus for the Transportation Master Plan and future transportation investments. ETC’s are designated as routes that provide connections between major activity centers such as downtown, CSU, Midtown, employment centers, shopping destinations and neighborhoods. Enhanced Travel Corridors are defined as uniquely designed corridors that are planned to incorporate high frequency transit, bicycling, and walking as part of the corridor. Key elements of gateway intersections include extensive landscaping and urban design to highlight entryways into the city. This vision would include:  A safe and comfortable corridor for all modes of travel;  Safe crossing;  An attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown; and  A seamless connection to transit, including MAX. The Project is recognized as being in a constrained area where proposed improvements may have property impacts to adjacent businesses and residents. Designing in this area requires a context sensitive approach with potentially narrower roadway elements than are typically required, while still meeting minimum safety and operational considerations. City staff presented a preferred alternative for the intersection improvements at the April 12, 2016 City Council Work Session. Staff provided background information on the current design of the improvements. The preferred design concept is included as an attachment. After the April 25 meeting with Mayor Pro Tem Horak, the City Manager and affected property owners, City staff prepared an alternative that would move the road sufficiently south to avoid impacts to the wall in front of 1535 Remington and maintain the westbound dual left turn lanes. This alternative is discussed in detail in the attached Memo to Council. In summary, the alternative is not recommended for the following reasons:  Impacts are shifted to multiple properties  Most substantially, this requires a full purchase of 1601 Remington, demolition of the house and garage structures and restoration of the property (filling the basement, restoring the landscaping, etc.)  Additional property acquisition from the fueling station and convenience store on the SW corner of Prospect and College to the extent that damages to the business operation are expected.  Extension of the project limits to the east of Remington to include two right of way acquisitions that to this point have not been included in any discussions. Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 3  Additional construction costs associated with the extended project limits, reconfiguration of the Remington and Prospect intersection, and full reconstruction of the roadway where an asphalt overlay is no longer feasible.  These impacts in total are estimated to add at least $1.3M in additional costs to the project above and beyond the cost savings from 1535 Remington. This “Southern Shift” alternative does not provide any additional operational or safety benefits compared to the preferred alternative. It does provide the opportunity to build a detached wide sidewalk along 1601 Remington after the house is removed. The “Southern Shift” has the following key design differences:  All the lanes on the west side of the intersection would be 10’ wide. This is a design that City staff does not support in this context for safety reasons.  The “Southern Shift” would fail to improve the existing condition of a 6-foot sidewalk adjacent to a narrow lane along the 1535 Remington property.  Medians would be narrower than the minimum necessary to plant trees.  The “Southern Shift” alternative would preserve 3 mature trees on the north side of the road, but would require the removal of 3 mature trees on the south side. Both alternatives impact the same number of trees -- 15 trees in total. Based on a thorough evaluation of all possible design alternatives, the City recommends proceeding with the preferred design alternative as presented in the April 12 Work Session. This design provides the following benefits:  Dual left turn lanes westbound, extended right turn lanes, landscaped medians, porkchop islands and sidewalks to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians  20-25% reduction in overall delay and congestion at the intersection  Multimodal improvements with safety and operational benefits for all modes  Urban design and landscaping for this Gateway Intersection This alternative does require relocation of the retaining wall and removal of the tree at 1535 Remington Street. The City has met with the property owner numerous times and looked at all alternatives that leave the existing wall in place. This wall will need to be relocated as part of the preferred design alternative. The City Forester has evaluated the affected tree to be in “Fair” condition. The Forester has also noted that moving the wall at all, even a few feet, would require removal of the tree. Through negotiations the City will propose to mitigate and restore the wall and landscape areas on the property. Staff’s preferred design alternative was presented to both the Bicycle Advisory Committee and the Transportation Board. Both groups supported staff’s preferred design alternative. The necessary property interests include right-of-way and permanent and temporary easements. Given the construction schedule for the Project, timely acquisition of the property interests is necessary. Staff has begun meeting with the affected property owners to discuss the project design and the potential impacts to their property. Staff will continue to work with property owners prior to the acquisition to address individual site considerations while still achieving the improvements goals of the Project. At our meetings, the property owners were notified that City staff would be requesting authorization to use eminent domain to acquire necessary property interests, if needed. Staff fully intends to negotiate in good faith with all affected owners; however, if an agreement cannot be reached with the owners, and in order to ensure that the Project can proceed in an efficient and timely manner, the City may consider the use of eminent domain. The affected property owners were notified by certified mail of this request to Council for authorization of eminent domain prior to First Reading of this Ordinance. Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 4 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The Project is funded with local funds. Council appropriated $2,700,000 through a mid-budget offer in 2015 for the design, right-of-way and construction of this Project. City of Fort Collins Utilities is planning significant stormwater improvements as a part of the Project. Colorado State University has financial responsibility for coordinated improvements generally related to the NW corner of the intersection. The purchase of this right- of-way will allow staff to move forward with final design and construction. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The project was presented and discussed at the April 20, 2016 Transportation Board Meeting. Letter of Support from the Transportation Board is attached. The project was presented and discussed at the March 28, 2016 Bicycle Advisory Committee. PUBLIC OUTREACH This project has been included as a part of the Prospect Corridor Outreach Plan. The project team has held over 20 individual meetings with the eight adjacent property owners. . ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Sustainability Assessment Summary (PDF) 3. Proposed ROW Exhibit (PDF) 4. Preferred Alternative Design Concept (PDF) 5. Memo to Council May 3, 2016 (PDF) 6. Transportation Board Letter of Support (PDF) 7. Staff Presentation (PDF) S College Ave BNSF Railroad ³I E Prospect Rd W Prospect Rd Remington St College Project and Location Prospect Map ³ 0 200 400 600 80F0eet Legend Railroad Lines Project Limits ATTACHMENT 1 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY DATE: March 1, 2015 SUBJECT: Sustainability Assessment (SA) Summary for the Prospect Road and Timberline Road Intersection Improvements Project Key issues identified: • Negative temporary construction impacts to local businesses, commuters, bicycles, pedestrians, and the environment. Suggested mitigation actions: • Detours, pedestrian and bicycle access, and other construction best practices will be used to maintain connectivity and access to local businesses. Economic , 1.0 Social , 2.0 Environmental 0 Rating Average, 1.0 1 2 0 1.0 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Sustainability Rating Rating without mitigation Rating with mitigation Rating Legend 3 Very positive 2 Moderately positive 1 Slightly positive 0 Not relevant or neutral -1 Slightly negative -2 Moderately negative, impact likely -3 Very negative, impact expected ATTACHMENT 2 *The Fort Collins SAT was developed by modifying the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Tool developed by Eugene, Oregon, July 2009. 1 City of Fort Collins SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL (SAT) (November 2014) Creating a sustainable community Plan Fort Collins is an expression of the community’s resolve to act sustainably: to systemically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend. How to use the tool The Sustainability Assessment Tool (SAT) is designed to inform a deeper understanding of how policy and program choices affect the social equity, environmental health and economic health of the community. The City of Fort Collins has developed a Sustainability Assessment Framework that describes the purpose, objectives, and guidelines to assist City Program/Project Managers to determine: • The process for cross-department collaboration in using the SAT • Timing for applying a SAT • When to apply a SAT • How to document the results of the SAT and present at City Council Work Sessions and Regular Council Meetings Further detailed guidance is available at: http://citynet.fcgov.com/sustainability/sustainabilityassessments.php The SAT does not dictate a particular course of action; rather, the analysis provides policy makers and staff with a greater awareness of some of the trade-offs, benefits and consequences associated with a proposal, leading to more mindful decision-making. Brief description of proposal Please provide a brief description of your proposal – 100 words or less This Council action item will authorize the use of eminent domain for Prospect Road and College Avenue Intersection Improvements Project. Staff lead(s): Please note staff name, position/division and phone number Dan Woodward, Civil Engineer, 970-416-4203 Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist, 970-221-6275 ATTACHMENT 2 2 Social Equity Described: Placing priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal human rights, including those pertaining to civil, political, social, economic, and cultural concerns. Providing adequate access to employment, food, housing, clothing, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Eliminating systemic barriers to equitable treatment and inclusion, and accommodating the differences among people. Emphasizing justice, impartiality, and equal opportunity for all. Goal/Outcome: It is our priority to support an equitable and adequate social system that ensures access to employment, food, housing, clothing, education, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Additionally, we support equal access to services and seek to avoid negative impact for all people regardless of age, economic status, ability, immigration or citizenship status, race/ethnicity, gender, relationship status, religion, or sexual orientation. Equal opportunities for all people are sought. A community in which basic human rights are addressed, basic human needs are met, and all people have access to tools and resources to develop their capacity. This tool will help identify how the proposal affects community members and if there is a difference in how the decisions affect one or more social groups. Areas of consideration in creating a vibrant socially equitable Fort Collins are: basic needs, inclusion, community safety, culture, neighborhoods, and advancing social equity. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis.  Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? Proposal Description This Council action item will authorize the use of eminent domain for right-of- way acquisition at the College and Prospect Intersection Improvements project. 1. Meeting Basic Human Needs • How does the proposal impact access to food, shelter, employment, health care, educational and recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy living environment or social services? • Does this proposal affect the physical or mental health of individuals, or the status of public health in our community? • How does this proposal contribute to helping people achieve and maintain an adequate standard of living, including housing, or food affordability, employment opportunities, healthy families, or other resiliency factors? Analysis/Discussion At the project location, gaps in pedestrian and bicycle connectivity currently exist. This project will eliminate existing gaps by constructing sidewalks and multi-use paths. All pedestrian improvements will comply with ADA requirements. This project will result in more efficient traffic flow due in large part to the installation of an additional westbound left turn lane and lengthening the east bound right turn lane. Less vehicle congestion will likely result in reduced frustration for commuters. There will be temporary negative impacts to local residents, businesses and the traveling public as a result of construction activities. 2. Addressing Inequities and being Inclusive • Are there any inequities to specific population subsets in this proposal? If so, how will they be addressed? • Does this proposal meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act? • How does this proposal support the participation, growth Providing improved bicycle and pedestrian connectivity will likely result in improved quality of life, as well as access opportunities, for seniors, youth, people with disabilities, etc. The improved pedestrian infrastructure will result in better access to local businesses and public transportation including transit and MAX. This project will provide pedestrian refuge islands that don’t currently exist. The ATTACHMENT 2 3 and healthy development of our youth? Does it include Developmental Assets? • If the proposal affects a vulnerable section of our community (i.e. youth, persons with disabilities, etc.) islands and wider walks will result in a more comfortable crossing for many pedestrians, as well as a likely safer crossing. This project will improve the access to the Remington Greenway and MAX, promoting bicycle use as well as pedestrian. 3. Ensuring Community Safety • How does this proposal address the specific safety and personal security needs of groups within the community, including women, people with disabilities, seniors, minorities, religious groups, children, immigrants, workers and others? Providing improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure will likely result in a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. The shorter crossing distance provided by this project will likely result in safer crossing conditions for pedestrians. 4. Culture • Is this proposal culturally appropriate and how does it affirm or deny the cultures of diverse communities? • How does this proposal create opportunities for artistic and cultural expression? This project includes culturally-rich components, such as Art in Public Places, urban design elements, and landscaped medians/parkways. The design elements in this project match the brand and spirit of Fort Collins, provide a sense of place at the intersection, and will enhance the aesthetics of this gateway intersection. 5. Addressing the Needs of Neighborhoods • How does this proposal impact specific Fort Collins neighborhoods? • How are community members, stakeholders and interested parties provided with opportunities for meaningful participation in the decision making process of this proposal? • How does this proposal enhance neighborhoods and stakeholders’ sense of commitment and stewardship to our community? This project will have a positive impact on the access of local residents to nearby businesses, trails, and other destinations. With this intersection being a gateway to CSU, many of the local residents may not have access to vehicles and may rely heavily on walking or bicycling. Community outreach, open houses and other opportunities for public input are planned as part of the design phase of this project. During construction there will be negative impacts to the neighborhoods as well as right-of-way purchases to some residential properties. 6. Building Capacity to Advance Social Equity • What plans have been made to communicate about and share the activities and impacts of this proposal within the City organization and/or the community? • How does this proposal strengthen collaboration and cooperation between the City organization and community members? The project team will engage in property owner outreach through direct contact, open houses, and other outreach activities. Cooperation between various City departments (Engineering, Parks, Utilities, etc.) has and will be a key element in the development and execution of this project. Social Equity Summary Key issues: Positive impact on vehicular commuters, pedestrians, and bicyclists through improved infrastructure. 4 Develop a strong sense of place, community and culture through infrastructure and design elements. Temporary negative construction impacts. Potential mitigation strategies: Detour routes and other construction mitigation strategies for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. Overall, the effect of this proposal on social equity would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus X Rating represents group average +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected X Environmental Health Described: Healthy, resilient ecosystems, clean air, water, and land. Decreased pollution and waste, lower carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, lower fossil fuel use, decreased or no toxic product use. Prevent pollution, reduce use, promote reuse, and recycle natural resources. Goal/Outcome: Protect, preserve, and restore the natural environment to ensure long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions necessary for support of future generations of all species. Avoid or eliminate adverse environmental impacts of all activities, continually review all activities to identify and implement strategies to prevent pollution; reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency; conserve water; reduce consumption and waste of natural resources; reuse, recycle and purchase recycled content products; reduce reliance on non-renewable resources. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis. • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Environmental Impact • Does this proposal affect ecosystem functions or processes related to land, water, air, or plant or animal communities? • Will this proposal generate data or knowledge related to the use of resources? • Will this proposal promote or support education in prevention of pollution, and effective practices for reducing, reusing, and recycling of natural resources? Analysis/Discussion It is anticipated that construction activities and roadway widening will have negative impacts on the local ecosystems. Landscaped areas and trees will be added to the project location. 5 • Does this proposal require or promote the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of the City organization or community? • Will this proposal affect the visual/landscape or aesthetic elements of the community? to relocation to a landfill. Stormwater master plan improvements will be done as part of this project which will improve water quality and flooding issues associated with rainfall runoff events. 2. Climate Change • Does this proposal directly generate or require the generation of greenhouse gases (such as through electricity consumption or transportation)? • How does this proposal align with the carbon reduction goals for 2020 goal adopted by the City Council? • Will this proposal, or ongoing operations result in an increase or decrease in greenhouse gas emissions? • How does this proposal affect the community’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise mitigate adverse climate change activities? Project improvements will support bicycle and pedestrian travel through infrastructure and safety improvements. As a result, it is anticipated that total vehicle miles traveled may reduce. Reduced idle time and improved traffic flow will likely reduce carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. Construction activities will temporarily increase emissions. 3. Protect, Preserve, Restore • Does this proposal result in the development or modification of land resources or ecosystem functions? • Does this proposal align itself with policies and procedures related to the preservation or restoration of natural habitat, greenways, protected wetlands, migratory pathways, or the urban growth boundary • How does this proposal serve to protect, preserve, or restore important ecological functions or processes? Not Applicable 4. Pollution Prevention • Does this proposal generate, or cause to be generated, waste products that can contaminate the environment? • Does this proposal require or promote pollution prevention through choice of materials, chemicals, operational practices and/or engineering controls? • Does this proposal require or promote prevention of pollution from toxic substances or other pollutants regulated by the state or federal government? • Will this proposal create significant amounts of waste or pollution? It is anticipated that a large portion of the construction materials generated as part of this project will be recycled at Hoffman Mill, diverting these materials from a landfill. ATTACHMENT 2 6 5. Rethink, Replace, Reduce, Reuse, Recirculate/Recycle • Does this proposal prioritize the rethinking of the materials or goods needed, reduction of resource or materials use, reuse of current natural resources or materials or energy products, or result in byproducts that are recyclable or can be re-circulated? It is anticipated that, as with other roadway improvement projects, the asphalt and concrete waste generated will be recycled. 6. Emphasize Local • Does this proposal emphasize use of local materials, vendors, and or services to reduce resources and environmental impact of producing and transporting proposed goods and materials? • Will the proposal cause adverse environmental effects somewhere other than the place where the action will take place? The construction of this project will be awarded as part of a competitive bidding process. It is common for local contractors to bid on and be awarded similar construction contracts. Material for similar construction projects is generally locally sourced, and it is anticipated that this project will likely be locally sourced as well. Environmental Health Summary Key issues: Negative impacts on air quality as part of construction activities. Negative impacts on local ecosystems as part of construction activities and roadway widening. Positive impact on air quality as part of increased traffic efficiency and promotion of multi-modal transportation. Reuse and recycling of materials within the City. Potential mitigation strategies: Best practice measures will be taken during construction to mitigate environmental impacts. Trees and vegetation will be added to the project location to mitigate those removed as well as additional trees and vegetation. Overall, the effect of this proposal on environmental health would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus X Rating represents group average +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected X Economic Health Described: Support of healthy local economy with new jobs, businesses, and economic opportunities; focus on development of a diverse economy, enhanced sustainable practices for existing businesses, green and clean technology jobs, creation or retention of family waged jobs. ATTACHMENT 2 7 Goal/Outcome: A stable, diverse and equitable economy; support of business development opportunities. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Infrastructure and Government • How will this proposal benefit the local economy? • If this proposal is an investment in infrastructure is it designed and will it be managed to optimize the use of resources including operating in a fossil fuel constrained society? • Can the proposal be funded partially or fully by grants, user fees or charges, staged development, or partnering with another agency? • How will the proposal impact business growth or operations (ability to complete desired project or remain in operation), such as access to needed permits, infrastructure and capital? Analysis/Discussion Providing improved connectivity for bicycles and pedestrians will likely benefit the local businesses. It is anticipated that there will be economic benefits as a result of improved transportation infrastructure and improved commuting times. Project improvements will support the general attractiveness and appeal of the City, as well as specifically support the bicycle and pedestrian culture found in the City. Infrastructure improvements will directly improve access to local employers and businesses including CSU. There will be temporary negative impacts to local business access during construction. 2. Employment and Training • What are the impacts of this proposal on job creation within Larimer County? • Are apprenticeships, volunteer or intern opportunities available? • How will this proposal enhance the skills of the local workforce? It is likely that there will be temporary work for local construction contractors during construction. 3. Diversified and Innovative Economy • How does this proposal support innovative or entrepreneurial activity? • Will “clean technology” or “green” jobs be created in this proposal? • How will the proposal impact start-up or existing businesses or development projects? Project improvements will have direct positive impacts for businesses in the area as a result of reduced congestion and delays. Temporary negative impacts to local businesses as a result of construction are likely. 4. Support or Develop Sustainable Businesses • What percentage of this proposal budget relies on local services or products? Identify purchases from Larimer County and the State of Colorado. It is typical for construction contractors and material suppliers to be local for this type of project. Many of the construction materials used in roadway projects are comprised of ATTACHMENT 2 8 • Will this proposal enhance the tools available to businesses to incorporate more sustainable practices in operations and products? • Are there opportunities to profile sustainable and socially responsible leadership of local businesses or educate businesses on triple bottom line practices? locally-sourced components. 5. Relevance to Local Economic Development Strategy Economic Prosperity Summary Key issues: Long-term benefits to local business access and connectivity. Improved aesthetics promotes general appeal of the City. Improvements to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure promote the culture of the City. Construction activities will likely have a temporary negative impact on local businesses. Potential mitigation strategies: Connectivity to local businesses will be maintained for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles during construction. Overall, the effect of this proposal on economic prosperity will be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus X Rating represents group average +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected X ATTACHMENT 2 3' UTIL. ESMT. PER REC. NO. 95028202 PROPOSED ROW TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED PROPOSED ROW TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED 10 ' 10 ' 23 . 05 ' 9 ' 5 ' MH 10004 4991.12 MH MH 10003 4991.70 MH MH 10002 4993.18 MH COLLEGE PROSPECT REMINGTON 0' 30' 60' 120' REC. NO. 94052938 MARJORIE LEWAN 1608 S. COLLEGE BRADLEY'S ADDITION AND 2, BLK. 1, I. C. PORTION OF LOTS 1 REC. NO. 20080020376 DOWNTOWN FIREHOUSE LLC & ADJM LLC 1601 REMINGTON REC. NO. 20060062682 KEVIN HARPER ANNE M. CLEARY & 1535 REMINGTON L. C. MOORES SECOND ADDITION LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 6, PORTION OF LOT 13, BLK. 1, I. C. BRADLEY'S ADDN. C I T Y R . O . W PREFERRED DESIGN CONCEPT 5/3/2016 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 5 ATTACHMENT 5 SOUTHERN SHIFT ALTERNATIVE ATTACHMENT 5 Eric Shenk, Chair Annabelle Berklund, Vice Chair Transportation Board DATE: April 27, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers FROM: Eric Shenk, Transportation Board Chair, on behalf of the Transportation Board RE: College and Prospect Intersection Design The Transportation Board reviewed the College and Prospect Intersection Design presented by Dan Woodward and Dean Klingner at our April 20, 2016 meeting. Two options presented in the Alternative Analysis Report included dual eastbound and westbound left turn lanes off of Prospect Road vs dual eastbound left turn lanes and a single extended westbound left turn lane off of Prospect Road. The dual eastbound and westbound turn lanes are the preferred alternative in terms of congestion relief. The Transportation Board unanimously voted to support College and Prospect Intersection Design that includes dual eastbound and westbound left turn lanes off Prospect Road. Respectfully submitted, C. Eric Shenk, Transportation Board Chair ATTACHMENT 6 1 College and Prospect – Proposed Intersection Improvements 5-17-16 Tonight’s Proposed Council Action: • Authorizes eminent domain, if necessary, on portions of two residential properties • Requires ~10 months of good faith negotiation prior to any court action • Based on the Recommended Concept (dual westbound left turn lanes) 2 Context • Authorization for 6 commercial properties passed on 1st and 2nd readings in April, 2016 • Additional work on residential properties • April 12th, 2106 Work Session • Support for westbound dual left turn lanes • Request to continue discussions with property owners • Follow-up meeting with property owners (April 25th) • Design Memo detailing option to shift the road south 3 Project Background, Process, History 4 Communication & Public Involvement • Proposed Project is an implementation of approved standards, plans, goals and visions. • Consistent with approved policies and many recent plans, master plans and corridor studies and community feedback • Is a localized project, not a corridor plan or long-range plan • Opportunity to fund based on leverage with CSU • Over last 5 months: • Dozens of property owner meetings • 2 Council Meetings and a Design Work Session • Prospect Corridor Communication Plan, Transportation Board, Bike Advisory Committee 5 Other Options Considered • Single Westbound Left Turn Lane • Response to property owner concerns • Presented at April 12th Work Session • Not Recommended due to operational concerns • Southern Roadway Shift – requested at April 25th meeting • Not Recommended • Shifts impacts to multiple other properties • Adds significant cost ($1.3M) to project • Jeopardizes 2017 construction schedule • Leaves narrow sidewalk/wall condition; removes trees from median 6 7 8 Existing conditions Narrow lane + Narrow attached sidewalk + Inadequate setback to wall 9 Draft Recommended Concept Key Project Benefits: • Congestion Relief (~25%) • Improved Safety • Upgraded infrastructure (utilities, sidewalks, etc.) • Improved bike/pedestrian connections and crossings • Gateway Amenities 10 11 Summary • This action initiates negotiation on the residential properties • Does not include any full property acquisitions • Based on the Recommended Concept • Result of exhaustive alternative analysis • Constrained corridor requires compromise • Next steps will initiate negotiation & mitigation • Best achieves project goals while minimizing impacts 12 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 073, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS 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 WHEREAS, the City is scheduled to begin construction on the Prospect Road and College Avenue Intersection Improvements Project (the “City Project”) in 2017; and WHEREAS, the City Project will construct needed road and intersection improvements, multimodal transportation enhancements, utility improvements, and access control improvements; and WHEREAS, Colorado State University is also required to build certain improvements at the same intersection in conjunction with the construction of its new medical center (the “Medical Center Project”); and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to acquire certain property interests for the City Project in a timely manner in order to coordinate construction of the City Project with the Medical Center Project; and WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 043, 2016, authorizing the acquisition of certain lands necessary for construction of the City Project; and WHEREAS, the City has identified certain additional real property interests needed for the City Project, as described on Exhibits “A” through “D”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property Interests”); and WHEREAS, the Property Interests include real property to be acquired either in fee simple for right-of-way or for temporary construction easements; and WHEREAS, the City will negotiate in good faith for the acquisition of the Property Interests from the owners thereof; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Property Interests is desirable and necessary for the construction of the City Project, is in the City’s best interest, and enhances public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized under Article XX, §1 of the Colorado Constitution and Article V, §14 of the City Charter to use the power of eminent domain to acquire real property as reasonably necessary for public improvements such as the City Project; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Property Interests may, by law, be accomplished through eminent domain. -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 and determines that is necessary in the public interest to acquire the Property Interests described herein for the purpose of constructing the City Project. Section 3. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Attorney and other appropriate officials of the City to acquire the Property Interests for the City by eminent domain proceedings. Section 4. The City Council further finds that, in the event acquisition by eminent domain of any of the Property Interests, or any portion of them, is commenced, immediate possession of the same is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 17th day of May, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 7th day of June, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 7th day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" EXHIBIT "D" . P E R R E C . NO . 95028201 D R NG . & D ETE N T I ON E S M T . R . O . W . P E R P L A T O F T A C O B ELL P . U . D . S T A TE H I GH W AY R . O . W . C I T Y REC. NO. 92051920 TACO BELL CORP. 1530 S. COLLEGE H W AY R . O . W . 5 ' X 5 ' U T I L . E S M T . 10 ' X 20 ' U T I L . E S M T . 94098302 , AND 95045489 R . O . W . P E R R E C . NO S . 85033326 , 05/04/2016 PROPOSED MAXIMUM ROW COLLEGE AND PROSPECT LEGEND PROPOSED ROW EASEMENT PROPOSED TEMPORARY ATTACHMENT 3 There will be existing trees that are taken down as part of this project that will be mitigated. The improvement of traffic flow will likely result in reduced air pollution. Staff anticipates recycling of construction materials at Hoffman Mill as opposed ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2