HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/05/2017 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 089, 2017, AUTHORIZAgenda Item 14
Item # 14 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 5, 2017
City Council
STAFF
Tawnya Ernst, Real Estate Specialist III
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 089, 2017, Authorizing the Conveyance of an Amended Access Easement and
a Utility Easement on City-Owned Property at Gustav Swanson Natural Area to Public Service Company of
Colorado in Exchange for the Dedication of Land for Trail Purposes.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to authorize conveyance of a utility easement and an amended access easement to
Public Service Company on Gustav Swanson Natural Area. Public Service Company provides natural gas
service to a large portion of Fort Collins residents from a downtown regulator station along the Poudre River.
The City has asked Public Service to realign its access easement to the regulator station and formalize its
utility easements as part of the pending Whitewater Park project. Public Service is also dedicating almost
2,000 square feet of land for trail purposes.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Parks and Real Estate Services staff has been engaged in acquiring fee title and easement interests along
East Vine Drive for the Whitewater Park during the past three years. As part of the whitewater park project, the
City asked Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo), an Xcel Energy company, to realign an existing
access easement, formalize two utility easements that cross Gustav Swanson Natural Area and dedicate land
for trail purposes.
PSCo owns an inholding, a regulator station, in the midst of the area slated for the Whitewater Park. (Note: this
portion of the planned park is currently part of Gustav Swanson Natural Area.) PSCo holds an existing 15 foot-
wide access easement across a gravel road from East Vine Drive to its regulator station (Book 825 Page 530,
warranty deed recorded November 25, 1946). PSCo also owns an aboveground electric line and underground
gas line that service the regulator station and run parallel to the access road.
As designs for the Whitewater Park came together, Parks staff recognized a need to acquire a strip of the
regulator station for the extension of the Poudre River trail on the River’s north bank. Staff also wants to realign
the current access road to accommodate proposed emergency and public access from Vine Drive. The access
road will be rerouted around a wetland and expanded from 15 feet to 20 feet to accommodate PSCo’s use, as
well as public pedestrian and bicycle use and emergency services.
Staff discovered during the Whitewater Park platting process that no formal recorded document exists
specifically for either the electric line or gas line. However, the utility lines have been referenced in documents
dating back to the 1940s.
Discussions with PSCo have proven successful. PSCo is willing to dedicate the 1,929 square feet (0.044 acre)
of land for the trail and is willing to relocate its access. In order to establish easements of record for the utility
Agenda Item 14
Item # 14 Page 2
lines, staff has proposed (and PSCo has been amenable to) conveyance of an easement that will document
the utilities’ precise locations and uses. PSCo has been supportive of the Whitewater Park project and staff
believes it is in the City’s best interests to proceed with the easements.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Given PSCo’s willingness to convey the 1,929 square feet of land for the Whitewater Park and the existence of
the access and utility lines for many decades, the access easement amendment and utility easement
formalization will be granted to PSCo at no cost.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its June 14, 2017 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted to recommend City Council
authorize the access easement amendment and utility easements for PSCo across Gustav Swanson Natural
Area.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Location Map (PDF)
2. Easement Location Map (PDF)
3. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board minutes (excerpt), June 14, 2017 (draft) (PDF)
³I
³I
ÕZYXW
ÕZYXW
E Vine Dr
N College Ave
E Vine Dr
N College Ave
±
Project Location Map
Natural Areas Property
Public Service Company regulator station
City properties—whitewater park
Attachment 1
Gustav Swanson Natural Area
Attachment 2
Whitewater park area PSCo property to be dedicated
PSCo property Existing access/utility easement location
Proposed re-alignment of access easement
Land Conservation 7 Stewardship Board Meeting
June 14, 2017 - Meeting
Minutes Excerpt
Easement Amendment and Easement Formalization for Public Service
Tawnya Ernst, Real Estate Specialist requested the Board recommend that City Council
approve an access easement re-alignment and formalization of two utility easements held by
Public Service Company for the Poudre River Downtown Whitewater Park project on Gustav
Swanson Natural Area.
Discussion
Tawnya – I’ve been working with the Parks Department over the last two years to help them
acquire some of the properties along Vine for the white water park and I’ve also been tasked
with helping obtain some easements. Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) is willing to
dedicate a strip of land that’s part of their regulator station so Parks can construct a trail along
the north bank. While talking to PSCo about this dedication, we realized a couple of other things
we needed to collaborate on. It was discovered during the white water park platting process that
no formal recorded document exists specifically for the electric line and gas line to the regulator
station. However, the utility lines have been referenced in documents dating back to the 1940s.
Through our title searches we haven’t been able to find any recorded easements so we would like
to formalize an electric and gas line easement. Also Parks wants to realign the existing access
road easement. The access road will also be used for emergency services and public pedestrian
and bicycle use.
Ed –So in summary you want to realign an existing easement and add a new one.
Tawyna – Yes, essentially they’re kind of new, they were there but un-documented.
Joe – So is there going to be a pedestrian and bike trail coming down from Vine? Is that for
people to come down to the river and use it as a kayak park? Where will people park their cars?
Tawnya – Yes, that’s correct. They actually intend to put a parking area on what is now owned
by the Inverness Innovation Park Association. It will be dedicated to the City in a couple of
months. The main access to the river will actually be from the south bank, but the trail they are
planning to extend, from Gustav Swanson, east of the railroad, will cross Poudre Pet and Feed’s
property and connect to College.
Ed – Will that be another branch of the trail or relocation of the trail?
Tawnya – It will be another branch of the trail.
Joe – And it will start at College and end where?
Tawnya- There’s a little stub of a trail that ends at Gustav Swanson. There will be a pedestrian
bridge positioned across the river.
Vicky – Who owns the two properties in white?
Tawnya- They are owned by a couple of welding shops. We wanted to acquire those two
properties as well but we ran out of money.
ATTACHMENT 3
Kelly – Why do they want that extra little spur of a trail?
Tawnya – To have the ability for vehicle turnarounds, like firetrucks.
Kelly – On the bike trail?
Tawnya – Oh I’m sorry, they want to have more accessibility on the north side of the river.
They will be expecting more people and need a designated path that will run along the north
bank.
Kelly – Will the additional trail be close to the river?
Tawnya – I’m not sure, I don’t have the exact location.
Kelly – Since we always try to seize the moment to underground electric lines are we going to
here?
Tawnya – Not at this point.
Kelly – Not being argumentative, environmental impacts are expected to be limited. I don’t
know if it’s temporary, limited, or what?
Tawnya – I think they expect it to be limited, in scope; they’re doing what they can to preserve
the wetlands, west of the current access road. It won’t be a tremendous amount of impact. As
far as the actual spur trail I know that they’re going to do as best as they can designing it
sensitively through the river corridor. Mark do you know if once the water park is established
we have clarity of how this part is going to be managed? Will that be taken over by Parks?
Mark – Yes, it will be taken over by Parks. We will have a memo of understanding between
NAD and the Parks Department. We will still manage everything southeast of the railroad
tracks, related to Gustav Swanson and they’ll manage the land to the northwest. Natural Areas
did not purchase a large portion of Gustav Swanson, it was city-owned property before it ever
became a natural area. The only portion that Natural Areas monies went to was one lot along
Vine. We contributed with Stormwater to purchase one of the lots. We don’t have a lot of
money invested in that portion of Gustav Swanson and we don’t have a lot of restoration funds
invested either. We took it over and have done mostly weed control; we really don’t have much
in terms of public improvements on that portion of the site.
Ed – Mark from a natural areas perspective are you comfortable with the overall plan that’s
being described here?
Mark - Yes, although John and I were pretty apprehensive, as most of our staff were, in the
beginning about having a white water park., But if there is to be one, I think Parks has picked the
very best location for one. With the bank enhancements, public improvements, and re-vegetation
it’s going to be a significant improvement to the river corridor. I think it’s going to be heavily
used by recreationists. There will be improved landscape, mostly native vegetation. Visually it
will look a lot nicer and feel like a more natural river. We’re excited about it, that’s why a
million dollars of NAD money is going into it.
Joe – Was the Downtown Master Plan pulled from City Council as discussion item?
Daylan – Yes, the whole project was pulled. They’re not ready for prime time yet.
Kelly – Can you show me the old access road and new access road?
Tawnya – Sure
Kelly – So there’s going to be a new location for the access road, but how is it different?
Tawnya – Right now it’s a 15 ft. easement; it’s now going to be a 20 ft.
Kelly – That’s significantly different.
Mike – The area where they have been backing up trucks is already disturbed.
Joe – Is that expansion more for the bicycle trail plus the road? Is it dual purpose?
Tawnya – Yes, it will have the bike and pedestrian trail in the same location as well as the
emergency access and PSCo’s access. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
Ed – That’s a major transportation corridor.
Kelly – Historically with Park brought all kinds of trail placement issues to the Board, is this just
not significant enough? What’s the deal there?
Tawnya – The designs aren’t completely final yet.
Kelly – But it’s always good to get in when they’re not final. We like to keep those trails as far
away from the river as possible.
Tawnya – I’d be glad to bring that up.
Dave – From the inception to date, I have been totally against the water park. As soon as I read
this water park plan I had a dreadful time getting my blood pressure down. Maybe I’m being a
contrarian but I’m going to vote “no” on this thing.
Ed – Do you want to tell us why?
Dave – Because I’m deeply against anything that is helping promote building anything on the
water park.
Kelly – I agree with you completely on the water park, my main objection is mainly using the
natural areas funds. Since the ship sailed
Ed – Just to be clear there’s no NAD funds involved in this easement at all, is that correct?
Tawnya – No
Kelly – I would like some clarity from Mark, because you kind of surprised me, because you and
John, to your credit, were not exactly embracing the concept early on of the water park. How do
you now, how do you think $1M, the term “habitat” and not “landscaping” versus while,
knowing the history of the ballot measures, citizen initiated ballot measures, how does $1M seem
appropriate.
Mark – I just think the word “landscaping” is probably more closely in line as opposed to
habitat or wildlife creation or true river bank restoration. That site, aesthetically, is not very
pleasing and the river banks are concrete walls right now, so I think it’s going to very much
enhance the natural performance of the river and allow the river to overflow its banks and it’s
going to allow the riparian area to be expanded. I don’t think we’re going to have great habitat
there like we’ve created at McMurry or Homestead, primarily because of the level of use there.
Do I think we’re going to get our million dollar’s worth? Yes I think it’s going to be an
incredible enhancement to the river.
Joe – Just to jump in, aquatic habitat-wise, they are going to make a lot of improvements
compared to what it is now.
Kelly - I did want to clarify that, along with other things on the Board, I guess, it used to be
effective; I’m not saying it won’t look better. The thing that I’ve tried to impress upon to other
individuals on the Board is that you have to look where the monies are coming from. A lot of
the projects the City does, I think are going to look five times better than it does now; my point is
was it appropriate to use Natural Areas funds. You can’t just focus on is it going to look better
or be better than it was before the appropriate use of dollars and different funds is what most of
the discussion in city interim is about. Is it legal, is it moral, is it ethical, is it appropriate to spend
those particular funds on that issue. I’m just saying, in this case, and I know that battle has been
fought and lost, from my perspective, but in the future, it’s not enough to just say “it will look
nicer”. That’s not really the point. Forget the project overall, I think it’s going to be, forget the
project overall, its’ just aesthetically on the north side and it’s going to look a lot nicer. That’s
not the issue for me. I was very poor at trying to get that point across.
Marcia – One last question. We talked about this being access where one could expect a
firetruck or ambulance access on the north side. Is there going to be vehicle access from the
power plant on the southside or are they looking at that as the key safety access?
Tawnya – That’s the key safety access.
Joe Piesman made a motion that the Land Conservation & Stewardship Board recommend
that City Council authorize the access easement amendment and utility easements for PSCo
across Gustav Swanson Natural Area.
Andrea Elson seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-2
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 089, 2017
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF AN AMENDED ACCESS EASEMENT AND
A UTILITY EASEMENT ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT GUSTAV SWANSON
NATURAL AREA TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO IN EXCHANGE
FOR THE DEDICATION OF LAND FOR TRAIL PURPOSES
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of property located along East Vine Drive on the north
side of the Poudre River known as Gustav Swanson Natural Area (the “City Property”); and
WHEREAS, Public Service Company of Colorado (“PSCo”) owns a regulator station on
a parcel of land surrounded by the City Property (the “PSCo Property”); and
WHEREAS, former owners of the City Property conveyed the PSCo Property to PSCo in
1946 along with a fifteen-foot access easement across the City Property; and
WHEREAS, PSCo also owns gas and electric lines that cross the City Property to serve
the PSCo property, but no easement of record has been located for either utility line; and
WHEREAS, the City is planning to construct a whitewater park on the north bank of the
Poudre River, and the plans for the whitewater park call for creating a new twenty-foot access
road for both public and emergency access that could also be used as access to the PSCo
Property; and
WHEREAS, City staff would also like to have a formal easement with PSCo for its utility
lines; and
WHEREAS, PSCo has agreed to amend its existing access easement to be along the new
access road, and accept a new 50-foot utility easement for its utility lines; and
WHEREAS, the proposed realigned access easement is more particularly described on
Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Access Easement”); and
WHEREAS, the location and width of the proposed utility easement is shown on Exhibit
“B”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Utility Easement”), and a legal
description will be prepared prior to conveyance of the Utility Easement; and
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that the City not charge PSCo for either of the
Easements because PSCo has agreed to dedicate to the City almost 2,000 square feet of the PSCo
Property to be used for trail purposes as part of the whitewater park project; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on June 14, 2017, the Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board voted to recommend granting the Easements to PSCo; and
-2-
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 and Utility Easement to PSCo 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 Easements to PSCo 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 Easements, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the
character of the interest to be conveyed.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of
July, A.D. 2017, and to be presented for final passage on the 18th day of July, A.D. 2017.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
-3-
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 18th day of July, A.D. 2017.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
EXHIBIT %
650 E. Garden Drive | Windsor, Colorado 80550
phone: (970) 686-5011 | fax: (970) 686-5821
KING SURVEYORS
email: contact@KingSurveyors.com