Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES-06/06/2000-Regular
June 6, 2000 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, June 6, 2000, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Krajieck, Roy. Citizen Participation Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, asked that the City use its influence to oppose the construction of three dams that are reportedly to be built on the Poudre River and spoke regarding plant investment fees for construction of water and wastewater facilities for new development. Citizen Participation Follow-up Councilmember Mason requested a one -page memorandum regarding the City's involvement in the proposed dams on the Poudre River drainage and a one -page memorandum pertaining to the equity buy -in method for water and wastewater facilities. Agenda Review City Manager Fischbach stated that item # 16 First Reading of Ordinance No. 66, 2000, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating to Fees for Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility is being withdrawn from the Consent Calendar for discussion and that item #20 Resolution 2000-78 Approving Certain Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account is being withdrawn from the agenda. He noted that there will be two Other Business items: First Reading of Ordinance No. 72, 2000, changing the size of the Housing Authority, and adjournment of the meeting to June 19, 2000 to conduct an Executive Session. CONSENT CALENDAR Second Reading of Ordinance No. 55 2000 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Promotion of Convention and Visitor Activities and for Cultural Development and Programming Activities 338 June 6, 2000 Ordinance No. 55, 2000, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, 2000, appropriates 1999 lodging tax receipts dedicated to the Convention and Visitors Bureau, Cultural Development and Programming (CDP), Visitor Events, and Tourism Capital. In addition, it appropriates unexpended 1999 appropriations for CDP and visitor events. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 56, 2000 Authorizing the Revision of the Legal Description of That Easement Conveyed to Wyoming Interstate Company Pursuant to Ordinance No. 58, 1999, to Accommodate Minor Field Changes During Construction In May of 1999, Council adopted Ordinance No. 58, 1999 conveying an easement to Wyoming Interstate Company for pipeline construction across Meadow Springs Ranch. The "as -built" drawings show that the Wyoming Interstate Company's line of construction falls outside of the previously acquired construction easement. This minor field change was needed to accommodate a straight boring under Interstate 25. The Wyoming Interstate Company would like to resolve the issue and correct the legal description contained in the easement. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, 2000, approves the revised easement. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 2000 Amending the City Code to Increase the Community Parkland Capital Improvement Expansion Fee and the Neighborhood Parkland Fee. Ordinance No. 58, 2000, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, 2000, increases the Neighborhood and Community Parkland fees because of increased costs related to park development. The Neighborhood Parkland and Community Parkland fees were set in 1996 and reflected existing park acquisition and development costs. The fee is adjusted annuallyby the Denver - Boulder Consumer Price Index. The costs requiring the fee increase were not included in the original fees and are not covered by the Consumer Price Index adjustments. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 59, 2000 Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. Ordinance No. 59, 2000 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, 2000. There is one change between First and Second Reading. Council directed the Ordinance be amended to add a provision that the City Manager establish a citizen task force, consisting of business representatives and other community members, to review the adequacy and appropriateness of City regulations pertaining to the provision of off-street parking for office buildings in the Harmony Corridor. Such task force shall report back to Council within six 339 June 6, 2000 months of the effective date of this Ordinance (tentatively scheduled for the October 24 study session). 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 60, 2000, Authorizing the Placement of Fill Material on Certain Real Property Owned by the City Without Review of Such Activity as "Development" Within the Meaning of the 013's Land Use Code. Ordinance No. 60, 2000 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on May 16, 2000, authorizing Lagunitas Landings, Inc. to place fill material on a four -acre parcel it is purchasing from the City. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 61, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to be Used for the Crossroads Transportation Sub -Area Plan. The Crossroads sub -area straddles Interstate 25 from U. S. 34 to State Highway 392. Several major developments are planned for this area, including the new Larimer County Fairgrounds project and private projects promoted byMcWhinney Enterprises. Several public and private entities have joined together to fund a planning study to identify transportation impacts and solutions for the area. The North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council (NFRT&AQPC) is providing coordination and administration for the study. This ordinance appropriates the City of Fort Collins contribution, as well as the unanticipated revenue from the other entities, into a project managed by the NFRT&AQPC. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Police Seizure Activity. Nearly 100 years ago, Colorado law created a process for the seizure of illegal contraband used in or gained from criminal activity. The intent is to deter crime and to have criminals help defray the costs of policing. State statutes specify that the proceeds from such seizures are to be used for law enforcement purposes, and require that the governing body (City Council) of the seizing agency (Police Services) appropriate these proceeds to supplement the seizing agency's budget or forfeit the proceeds to the general fund of the State of Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court have consistently upheld the constitutionality of these statutes. [011 June 6, 2000 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 64, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Street Oversizing Fund and the Neighborhood Parkland Fund to the Capital Projects Fund for the Taft Hill Road at Overlook Project. Arterial street improvements are planned for Taft Hill at Overlook from Old Harmony Road north to W.C.R. 38E. The Fort Collins -Loveland Water District also has planned to install a 36" waterline along this portion at Taft Hill Road. Staff is working in conjunction with the FCLWD to consolidate these improvements into one construction contract. This will minimize the disruption to the traveling public and result in cost savings to the City and the District. These improvements include a 5' sidewalk, curb and gutter, a right turn lane at Brixton Road, a 36" waterline to be installed by Fort Collins/Loveland Water District, and a sidewalk connection from the Cathy Fromme Prairie to the development. The project is predominantly funded by the Street Oversizing Program, but includes the Development Local Street Portion contributed in the form of a Contribution in Aid, as well as a Fort Collins/Loveland Water District and a Park Planning portion. Staff is requesting funds to be appropriated from the Street Oversizing Fund prior year reserves and authorized for transfer, along with existing appropriations, to the Capital Projects Fund for the purpose of starting these arterial road improvements in the summer of 2000. 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 65, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Services Fund forthe Local and Regional Transportation Demand Management Programs and the Regional Vanpool Program. These dollars will be used by the Local and Regional Transportation Demand Management Programs to promote the use of alternative transportation among both city and regional residents. The dollars contributed by the 410 reserves are from efficiency savings in the 1999 VanGo program that resulted in surplus revenue. 16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 66, 2000, Amending Chanter 26 of the City Code Relating to Fees for Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility. This Ordinance will increase the cash rate charged developers for satisfaction of raw water requirements from $3,500 to $4,500 per acre foot. The cash rate, which is adjusted periodically to reflect the current price of raw water, is also the basis for a surcharge paid by nonresidential customers for water used in excess of their annual allotment. The proposed changes are to be effective August 1, 2000. 341 June 6, 2000 17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 67, 2000, Authorizing the City to Grant a Non -Exclusive Access and Drainage Easement to Dr. Larry R. Magnuson. Tract "F", Raintree PUD is located directly east of the Senior Center along Evenstar Court and South Shields Street. Dr. Larry Magnuson will be developing this property into the Raintree Animal Clinic. Access to the animal clinic from Evenstar Court is limited because of the difficulty of northbound Shields Street traffic accessing Evenstar. To address this situation, Dr. Magnuson has requested the Cityto grant him a temporary access and drainage easement along the eastern most driving lane of the Senior Center parking lot and connecting to the west end of the clinic property. The access easement is intended to be temporary with access to the clinic property being moved to the undeveloped property east of the Senior Center and south of the clinic property when that property develops. Granting this easement to Dr. Magnuson will result in the loss of three or four parking spaces at the Senior Center parking lot. As compensation for this temporary loss, and for the access easement, the easement will provide that the parking lot developed for the clinic property will be available for use by Senior Center patrons after the clinic's regular hours. Three parking spaces at the clinic will always be reserved for clinic emergencies. 18. Items Relating to the Kendall -Harmony Annexation. A. Resolution 2000-75 Setting Forth Findings ofFact and Determinations Regarding the Kendall -Harmony Annexation. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 68, 2000, Annexing Property Known as the Kendall - Harmony Annexation to The City of Fort Collins. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 69, 2000, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Kendall -Harmony Annexation. This is an annexation and zoning of approximately 2.00 acres in size of private land. The subject annexation is located south of East Harmony Road and east of Cambridge Avenue. The property has rural agricultural uses and is in the FA-1 Farming District in Larimer County. The recommended zoning is the Harmony Corridor District (HC). This is a 100% voluntary annexation. 342 June 6, 2000 APPLICANT: Lester M. Kaplan Imago Enterprises, Inc. 1060 Sailors Reef Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNERS: Nicholas and Barbara Kendall 4808 Cambridge Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 19. Items Relating to Boards and Commissions. A. Resolution 2000-76 Amending Resolution 88-78 so as to Add Certain Additional Responsibilities to the Role of Council Liaisons to City Boards and Commissions. B. Resolution 2000-77 Making an Amendment to the Boards and Commissions Manual. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 70, 2000, Extending the Terms of All Members of Boards and Commissions of the City Through December 31. At the January 25, 2000 study session, Council met to consider issues related to boards and commissions of the City. Council considered various recommendations of the City staff relating to the composition, work plans, roles of Council liaisons, and the periodic review of boards and commissions. After review of the role of the Council liaison, Council has identified that additional responsibilities should be identified. Resolution 2000-76 amends Resolution 88-78 by adding the following responsibilities to the role of the Council liaison: to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the annual work plan, to identify and help resolve any problems that may exist with respect to the functioning of the board or commission, and to facilitate the training of new board and commission members by providing suggestions and relevant information to the staff members responsible for providing such training. The second Resolution would amend the Board and Commission Manual previously adopted by the Council so as to clear up an ambiguity relating recurring absences of board and commission members. The Manual presently provides that three consecutive absences (not approved by the chairperson) from regularly scheduled meetings of the board "may automatically" cause a member's appointment to be terminated, as can four unexcused absences in any calendar year. The Resolution would amend the manual so as to clarify that the requisite number of absences will automatically create a vacancy on the board or commission to which the member belongs. 343 June 6, 2000 20. Resolution 2000-78 Approving Certain Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account. Section 23-303 of the Code, which was added to the Code in 1995, established the Art in Public Places Reserve Account, and designated it for the acquisition or leasing of works of art, maintenance, repair or display of works of art and for administrative expenses related to the Art in Public Places Program, in accordance with the Art in Public Places Guidelines adopted by the Council via Ordinance No. 47, 1998. The Council permanently adopted the Art in Public Places Program, and reenacted City Code Chapter 23, Article IX, with certain modifications in 1998. In connection with the Water Cycle Wall project, staff and the Art in Public Places (APP) Board have proposed to use $23,000 to commission the artist Janet Austin to collaborate on a community project that is intended to artistically and scientifically show the interaction between water and the many other cycles of nature. 21. Resolution 2000-79 Authorizing the Execution of an Assignment Agreement with the City of Loveland and Acceptance of an Assignment of Allocation. This Resolution allows the City of Fort Collins to receive an assignment of private activity bond allocation from the City of Loveland. Fort Collins would use the $1,178,750 of allocation from Loveland to supplement the private activity bond allocation received from Larimer County and the State of Colorado. The combination of the allocations from Loveland, Latimer County, and the State would provide a total of $3.6 million of allocation. The proponents of the Residence at Oakridge Project would finance the remainder of the project through private taxable financing. The Resolution also authorizes the City to enter into an agreement with Loveland regarding the assignment and states the intent of the City to provide an assignment of Fort Collins' future private activity bond allocation. 22. Routine Deeds and Easements. A. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from Collins Campus West, LLC, located at 1220 West Elizabeth, to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $5,989.44. B. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from St. Paul's Episcopal Church, located at 1208 West Elizabeth, to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $11,290.56. 344 June 6, 2000 C. Easement for construction and maintenance ofpublic utilities from James and Donna Reidhead, located at 707 West Mountain, to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $10. D. Deed of Dedication for right-of-way from Harmony Ridge Estates, LLC and Overlook Development Company, LLC, located at Harmony Road and Seneca Street. Monetary consideration: $10. Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 55, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Promotion of Convention and Visitor Activities and for Cultural Development and Programming Activities. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 56, 2000, Authorizing the Revision of the Legal Description of That Easement Conveyed to Wig Interstate Company Pursuant to Ordinance No. 58, 1999, to Accommodate Minor Field Changes During Construction 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 2000, Amending the City Code to Increase the Community Parkland Capital Improvement Expansion Fee and the Neighborhood Parkland Fee. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 59, 2000 Making Various Amendments to the City ofFort Collins Land Use Code. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 60, 2000, Authorizing the Placement of Fill Material on Certain Real Property Owned by the City Without Review of Such Activity as "Development" Within the Meaning of the City's Land Use Code. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 61, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Transportation Services Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to be Used for the Crossroads Transportation Sub -Area Plan. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 62, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Police Seizure Activity. 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 64, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Street 345 June 6, 2000 Oversizing Fund and the Neighborhood Parkland Fund to the Capital Projects Fund for the Taft Hill Road at Overlook Project. 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 65 2000 Aproropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Services Fund forthe Local and Regional Transportation Demand Management Programs and the Regional Vanpool Program 16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 66, 2000, Amending Chanter 26 of the City Code Relating to Fees for Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility. 17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 67, 2000, Authorizing. the City to Grant a Non -Exclusive Access and Drainage Easement to Dr. Lam R. Magnuson. 18. Items Relating to the Kendall -Harmony Annexation. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 68, 2000, Annexing Property Known as the Kendall - Harmony Annexation to The City of Fort Collins. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 69, 2000, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Kendall -Harmony Annexation. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 70, 2000, Extending the Terms of All Members of Boards and Commissions of the City Through December 31. 27. First Reading of Ordinance No. 71, 2000 Amending Chapter 10 of the City Code Concerning Standards for Development in the Poudre River Floodplain 28. First Reading of Ordinance No. 63, 2000, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund and in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for Transfer to the Capital Projects Fund to be Used for the City's Pavement Management Program. 30. First Reading of Ordinance No. 72, 2000 Amending Section 2-247 of the City Code Pertaining to the Composition of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Housing Authority. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to adopt and approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. 346 THE MOTION CARRIED Consent Calendar Follow-up June 6, 2000 Councilmember Bertschy noted that Ordinance No. 70, 2000 extends the terms of Boards and Commissions members until the end of the calendar year to allow the time for the annual Boards and Commissions selection process to be moved to fall. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Byme reported on North Front Range Air Quality and Transportation Planning Council discussions regarding SmartTrips. Councilmember Wanner reported on Finance Committee discussions relating to options for funding for pavement management, the 1999 audit, and the sharing with Loveland of private activity bond allocations for affordable housing for the Oakridge Senior Center. Resolution 2000-80 Accepting the Advisory Opinion and Recommendation No. 2000-1 of the Ethics Review Board Adopted The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary Section 2-569(e) of the City Code provides that all opinions and recommendations of the Council Ethics Review Board be submitted to the full Council for review and approval. The Ethics Review Board met on May 23, 2000, to render an opinion on whether Mayor Pro Tem Chuck Wanner has a conflict of interest in participating in City Council's consideration of proposed floodplain regulations for the Poudre River by reason ofhis employment as Executive Director of The Friends of the Poudre or as a member of the Board of Directors of the Friends of the Poudre. That meeting resulted in the issuance of Opinion No. 2000-1 (Exhibit "A" to the Resolution), which will be provided to Council in the June 1, 2000, packet. Pursuant to the requirements of the Code, this opinion is being presented to the Council for its review and possible approval. " Councilmember Wanner withdrew from discussion and voting on this agenda item due to a perceived conflict of interest. ("Secretary's Note: Councilmember Wanner left the meeting at this point.) 347 June 6, 2000 City Attorney Roy explained the establishment and purpose of the Ethics Review Board and reviewed its findings and recommendations regarding this agenda item. Councilmember Weitkunat, Ethics Review Board chairperson, reported on the Ethics Review Board deliberations and stated that after reviewing the factual information presented and consulting with the City Attorney the Board concluded that Mayor Pro Tern Wanner does not have a conflict of interest in participating in the City Council's deliberations and vote regarding the proposed floodplain regulations. She outlined the reasons for the Board's opinion: (1) there is no indication that any decision made regarding the proposed floodplain regulations will financially benefit either the Friends of the Poudre or Mr. Wanner; (2) there is no indication that Mr. Warner's position of employment or the amount of his compensation would be affected by his vote or Council's decision regarding the proposed floodplain regulations; and (3) there would consequently be no direct or substantial benefit or detriment to Mr. Wanner as a result of the Council decision. She stated that under the Charter's standards for ethical conduct the evidence does not indicate that the Mayor Pro Tern has a conflict of interest. Mayor Martinez made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Bertschy, to waive the attomey-client privilege regarding the City Attorney's legal opinion regarding the question of whether Mayor Pro Tern Wanner has a conflict of interest in Council's consideration of the floodplain regulation and to authorize and direct the City Attorney to publicly state his opinion regarding the question. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason and Weitkunat. Nays: None. (Councilmember Wanner withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED City Attorney Roy stated that he agrees with the conclusions of the Ethics Review Board regarding the matter. He provided historical perspective regarding the voter -approved Charter rules regarding financial and personal conflicts of interest. Chris Martin,1637 Remington Street, requested that Councilmember Wanner step aside with regard to the deliberations and vote on the floodplain regulations in order to remove the appearance of a conflict of interest. Councilmember Kastein stated that he concurs with the analysis of the Ethics Review Board. Councilmember Byrne spoke regarding the presumption of integrity by public servants and noted that this issue was brought up long before it became a public issue. Councilmember Mason made a motion, seconded be Councilmember Kastein, to adopt Resolution 2000-80. ME June 6, 2000 Mayor Martinez spoke in support of the motion but asked that Councilmember Wanner not vote on the floodplain regulations because his participation has been questioned by the public. Councilmember Mason spoke regarding the ethics review process and stated that it is important not to set a bad precedent regarding participation in non-profit groups. Councilmember Weitkunat spoke regarding the ethics guidelines and stated that the ultimate decision concerning participation rests with the Councilmember who requested the ethics review. Councilmember Bertschy stated that he would support the motion and noted that Councilmember Wanner has followed the guidelines in bringing the matter before the Ethics Review Board. Mayor Martinez reiterated that he will be supporting the motion and spoke regarding the right of the public to raise these kinds of questions. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason and Weitkunat. Nays: None. (Councilmember Wanner withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED ("Secretary's Note: Councilmember Wanner returned to the meeting at this point.) Items Relating to Standards for Development in the Poudre River Floodplain Adopted The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Financial Impact The financial impact of the floodplain regulations to the City will be the amount needed to acquire properties in the floodplain. The program to acquire floodplain properties with structures will be considered on an as needed basis and City Council will consider each acquisition individually and appropriate funds from the Storm Drainage Fund, as they are needed. Executive Summary A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 71, 2000, Amending Chapter 10 of the City Code Concerning Standards for Development in the Poudre River Floodplain. B. Resolution 2000-81 Directing the City Manager to Pursue the Acquisition of Certain Properties within the Poudre River Floodway, Product Corridor and Floodplain. 349 June 6, 2000 C. Resolution 2000-82 Directing the City Manager to Develop Additional Floodplain Regulations for All Storm Drainage Basins of the City and to Tailor Such Regulations to the Unique Characteristics of Each Such Basin. There are three actions being considered under this item. One action is an ordinance that will make certain changes to the City Code in regard to foodplain regulations. The second action is a resolution clarifying the City's acquisition program for properties along the Poudre River Floodplain. The third item considered in this agenda item is a resolution directing the City Manager to develop additional foodplain regulations for other storm drainage basins in the City based upon the unique characteristics of each basin. Proposed Poudre River Floodplain Regulation Changes These revisions relate to the new proposed regulations that are being considered for the Poudre River. After the food of 1997 numerous questions were raised concerning the adequacy of the foodplain regulations in Fort Collins. A study was initiated to review the foodplain regulations for the Poudre River and to make recommendations as to whether those regulations should be revised. The recommended option is a modified Option B-1 and includes the following regulations: Floodway or Product Corridor Regulations (0.1 foot rise f oodway and Product Corridor of 6 or larger) • Floodway and Product Corridor cannot be modified to allow development. • Public capital projects are allowed to protect existing properties. • Mobile home parks are not allowed. • Residential development is not allowed. • Commercial (retail and industrial) development is not allowed. • Public infrastructure, recreation, and natural resource facilities are allowed. • Remodel of existing residential and commercial structures is allowed. • Additions to existing residential and commercial structures are not allowed. • Redevelopment of existing residential and commercial structures is not allowed. • Fill is not allowed. • The purchase of existing residential and commercial structures is encouraged. • Floatable materials on commercial property are not allowed. Floodplain (outside the foodway and product corridor) Regulations • Capital projects are allowed to protect existing properties. June 6, 2000 • Lowest floor elevation must be 24 inches above 100 year water surface elevation. • Dry access to structure during flooding. • Mobile home parks are not allowed. • Residential development or mixed use with residential is not allowed. • Commercial (retail and industrial) development is allowed. • Remodel of existing residential and commercial structures are allowed. • Additions to commercial structures are allowed. • Additions to residential structures are not allowed. • Redevelopment of existing structures for residential uses is allowed. • Redevelopment of existing structures for commercial uses is allowed. • Public infrastructure, recreation, and natural resourcefacilities are allowed. • Properties can be removed from theFoodplain in certain circumstances and no longer have to meetFoodplain regulations. • The purchase of existing residential structures is encouraged. • Floatable materials on commercial property are not allowed. 500-Year Floodplain • The critical facilities definition is expanded to include day care, school, and cemetery facilities. Resolution 2000-81 Poudre River Floodplain Acquisition Program The second item considered in this agenda item is a resolution for the acquisition ofproperties along the Poudre River Floodplain. Therecommended "Modified OptionB-1 "includes thepurchasefrom willing sellers of property with structures in the floodway or product corridor or residential properties with structures in theFoodplain. This resolution would clarify the City's position the acquisition of properties would be a willing seller/willing buyer program and properties with the highest risk would receive the highest priorityfor acquisition. There are about 14 structures located in the vicinity of the College Avenue and Vine Drive intersection that would be eligible for acquisition under this program. There is one additional structure west of this area at the end of Hemlock Street. Resolution 2000-82 Development of Other Floodplain Regulations The third item considered in this agenda item is a resolution directing the CityManager to develop additionalFoodplain regulations for other storm drainage basins in the City based upon the unique characteristics of each basin. Concern has been expressed that theFoodplain regulations for the Poudre River maybe more restrictive than would be necessary in other storm drainage basins. Staff agrees with this assessment, because the Poudre River Basin is unique in several respects. Therefore, this resolution clarifies that the regulations that will be imposed in other basins in the 351 June 6, 2000 City will likely be different from the regulations proposed for the Poudre River Basin. Each basin will need to be reviewed with an eye toward its own unique characteristics. Floodplain Regulation Changes - Cleanup and Clarification These floodplain code changes involve "clean-up "and clarifications that are needed to the existing regulations. There are sections of the code where the language was either contradictory or confusing and therefore needed clarification. There are also sections of the code that are in need of "clean-up" to bring the code into compliance with Federal Emergency Management Agency minimum standards. The City of Fort Collins must adhere, at a minimum, to these regulations. These changes would apply to all floodplain in the City. BACKGROUND: Introduction After the flood of 1997 numerous questions were raised concerning the adequacy of the floodplain regulations in Fort Collins. A study was initiated to review the floodplain regulations for the Poudre River and to make recommendations as to whether those regulations should be revised. Purpose of Floodplain Regulations There are many purposes to floodplain regulations. The main purposes are: • Promote public health, safety and general welfare. • Reduce public and private losses. • Reduce emergency response demands. • Minimize pollution. • Preserve the natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain. • Prevent erosion The goal of floodplain management is to look toward the future and to be proactive instead of reactive. This helps prevent future problems and reduces damages. By having a proactive floodplain management program you will have a more disaster resistant community. 352 June 6, 2000 History of Floods on the Poudre River There have been three floods (1864, 1891, and 1904) that were greater than the 100 year discharge of 13,300 cfs. The flood of 1864 resulted in the relocation of Camp Collins from LaPorte, CO to present day Fort Collins. The flood of 1904 was greater than the 500 year discharge of 24,100 cfs. There has been one (1) death due to flooding on the river, Robert Strauss, during the 1904 flood. Proposed Poudre River Flood plain Code Changes 100-Year Foodplain and Floodwav Options With the assistance ofa citizen taskforce made up ofvarious interests related to the Poudre River, several criteria in regard to the floodplain regulations were developed. These criteria are assembled into four different options for changing the floodplain regulations. These criteria are assembled into a matrix from the least restrictive to the most restrictive option. The floodplain regulation options include various floodway widths and regulation criteria as defined in the matrix. Thefloodway options include the 0.5 foot rise floodway (existing regulations —Option A), the 0.1 foot rise floodway (Option B and B-1), and the option that the floodway equals the floodplain (Option Q. In some instances due to the topography, the floodway options coincide. The 500 year product corridor is combined with a 0.1 foot rise floodway to create regulation Option B- 1. Each regulation option has criteria that deal with new development, fill, additions, remodels, critical facilities, elevation requirements, etc. Recommended Option - Modified Option B-1 Description The recommended option is a modified Option B-1 and includes the following regulations: Floodway or Product Corridor Regulations (0.1 foot rise floodway and Product Corridor of 6 or larger) • Floodway and Product Corridor cannot be modified to allow development. • Public capital projects are allowed to protect existing properties. • Mobile home parks are not allowed. • Residential development is not allowed. • Commercial (retail and industrial) development is not allowed. • Public infrastructure, recreation, and natural resource facilities are allowed. • Remodel of existing residential and commercial structures is allowed. • Additions to existing residential and commercial structures are not allowed. • Redevelopment of existing residential and commercial structures is not allowed. 353 June 6, 2000 Fill is not allowed. The purchase of existing residential and commercial structures is encouraged. Floatable materials on commercial property are not allowed. Floodplain (outside the,lloodway and product corridor) Regulations • Capital projects are allowed to protect existing properties. • Lowest floor elevation must be 24 inches above 100 year water surface elevation. • Dry access to structure during flooding. • Mobile home parks are not allowed. • Residential development or mixed use with residential is not allowed. • Commercial (retail and industrial) development is allowed. • Remodel of existing residential and commercial structures are allowed. • Additions to commercial structures are allowed. • Additions to residential structures are not allowed. • Redevelopment of existing structures for residential uses is allowed. • Redevelopment of existing structures for commercial uses is allowed. • Public infrastructure, recreation, and natural resourcefacilities are allowed. • Properties can be removedfrom the floodplain in certain circumstances and no longer have to meet floodplain regulations. • The purchase of existing residential structures is encouraged. • Floatable materials on commercial property are not allowed. 500-Year Floodplain • The critical facilities definition is expanded to include day care, school, and cemetery facilities. Mans Included is a map showing public and private properties in the product corridor and floodway separated by City and County jurisdictions. A second map shows the same information for the area in the floodplain outside of the product corridor and the floodway. 354 June 6, 2000 500-Year Product Number Corridor A rule of thumb is that the when the product of the depth of flow times the velocity is greater than or equal to 6 (depth x velocity > 6) it will equal unsafe flow characteristics. The 500 year product corridor is based on a discharge of 24,100 cfs. Poudre River Floodplain Code Changes Several new definitions have been added to section 10-16 that only pertain to regulations for the Poudre River Floodplain: • Dryland access • Floatable materials • Floodway modification • Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) • Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR-Fill) • Permitted Use • Product Corridor • Public Infrastructure • Recreational Facilities Two definitions have been modified in Section 10-16 for requirements that are different for the Poudre River Floodplain: • Floodway - this changes the regulations such that the floodway is based on a 0.1 foot rise for the Poudre River Floodplain. • Regulatory flood protection elevation - This changes the elevation or floodproofing elevation to be 24 inches above the 100 year watersurface elevation for structures in the Poudre River Floodplain. Code Changes: • Section 10-60 adopts the Poudre River Floodplain Study, designates the boundaries of the Poudre River Floodplain, and gives the Director the ability to modify such boundaries in certain circumstances. Section 10-61 sets forth most of the regulations that are specific to the Poudre River Floodplain. Other regulations that apply to the Poudre River Floodplain, as well as other basins, are found in other sections of the Code. Table 1 relates the criteria of Option B-1 as shown in the Matrix to the section of the Ordinance where these criteria are added to the Code. Section 10-62 describes the circumstances when a property can be removed from the Foodplain and no longer have to comply with theFoodplain regulations. Section 10-63 describes allowed uses in theFoodplain,Foodway, and product corridor. 355 June 6, 2000 • Section 10-64 sets out the takings determination process. Table I Proposed Poudre River Floodplain Regulations Criteria Original Wording Complies City Code Regulation of Option B-1 with B-1 FLOODWAY WIDTH 0.1- foot rise. X See Section 10-16 definition for " oodwa ' FLOODWAY Cannot alter to allow X See Section 10-16 definition for MODIFICATION development. `;floodwaymodifcation"and Section 10-61(8). FLOOD Allowed to protect X See Section 10-16 for definition PROTECTION existing structures of 'public infrastructure". See PROJECTS when identified in Section 10-61(5) and 10-61(8), Master Drainage Plan. and 10-62. PROPERTY Purchase rom willing X See Resolution PURCHASE sellers in the foodway and ood lain. NOTIFICATION Noti owners/renters X No code revision made that property is in a See Note I (however, see Section 10-53(3)d floodplain. and 10-61(3)e4 regarding foodproofing notices). FILL Not allowed in the X See Section 10-61(5). foodway or product corridor, allowed in the remainder of floodplain PROPERTY Can be removed with Does not See Section 10-62. REMOVAL FROM the placement offill, comply with FLOODPLAIN except in the foodway Option B-1 or product corridor, See Note 2 but still has to meet floodplain regulations. 356 June 6, 2000 Criteria Original Wording Complies City Code Regulation of Option B-1 with B-1 NEW Not allowed in the X See Section 10-63 for allowed DEVELOPMENT floodway or product uses. See Section 10-61(2) for corridor except public requirements for residential infrastructure, structures. See Section 10-61(3) recreation and natural for requirements for resources facilities, but nonresidential and mixed -use allowed in the structures. remainder of the ood lain MOBILE HOME Not allowed in X See Section 10-61(4). PARKS floodway, floodplain or product corridor RESIDENTIAL/ Residential not allowed X See Section 10-61(2) for in the floodway, COMMERCIAL residential development DEVELOPMENT floodplain or product requirements. See Section 10-67 corridor; commercial (3) for nonresidential and not allowed in the mixed -use development floodway or product requirements. corridor but in the remainder of the floodplain. REMODELS/ Allowed to existing Does not Section 10-63 says that remodels REHABILITATION structures in the comply with are allowed in the floodplain, floodway or floodplain. Option B-1. floodway, and product corridor, (50% cumulative See Note 3 subject to substantial substantial improvement requirements. improvement.) Not allowed in the product corridor. ADDITIONS Not allowed to existing X See Section 10-61(2)b for structures in the requirements for residential floodway or product structures. See Section 10- corridor, or residential 61(3)bl for requirements for structures in the nonresidential structures. See floodplain. Section 10-61(3)b2 for requirements for mixed -use structures. 357 June 6, 2000 Criteria Original Wording Complies City Code Regulation of Option B-1 with B-1 REDEVELOPMENT Not allowed in existing X See Section 10-61(2)c and 10- developed areas in the 61(2)d for residential floodway or product requirements. See Section 10- corridor, but allowed 61(3)c and 10-61(3)d for in the remainder of the nonresidential and mixed -use floodplain. requirements. CRITICAL FACILITIES Expand the definition to include day care, Does not comply with See Section 10-16 definition for "critical facilities" and Section schools. cemeteries. Option B-1. 10-53(4). and retail facilities that See Note 4 have hazardous materials on site. RIPARIANAREAS Protect through City X NA and Army Corps of Engineers processes, i.e. buffer limits, Section 404. DRYLAND ACCESS Required. X See Section 10-16 definition for "dryland access" and Section 10-61(7). FLOATABLE MATERIALS Not allowed in the floodwayorfloodplain. X See Section 10-16 definition for `floatablematerials "and Section 10-61(6). VARIANCES Allowed or special X See Section 10-39(l circumstances except in the 500 year Product Corridor. LOWEST FLOOR OR 24 inches above 100- X See Section 10-16 definition for FLOODPROOFING year water surface "regulatory flood protection elevation for properties elevation ". See Section 10- in the 100 year 61(2)e for residential floodplain. Applicable requirements. See Section 10- to substantial 61(3)e for nonresidential and improvement remodels, mixed -use requirements. new development, redevelopment, and additions. 358 June 6, 2000 Note 1: City will continue to notify owners and renters through mailings as it has been doing in the past. Note 2: The proposed Code revisions do allow property to be removed from the floodplain in certain circumstances, and as a result would not have to comply with most floodplain regulations. This was changed to allow individual property owners to mitigate the flood hazard. Note 3: The proposed Code revisions do not restrict remodels in the product corridor because of the hardship that this would place on property owners who would not be allowed to do required maintenance on their structure. Note 4: The proposed Code revision does not include retail facilities in the critical facilities definition because of the minimal hazard potential at these facilities. Outreach Activities During the course of the study since the summer of 1998 a number of different outreach activities were used. A task force was formed made up of sixteen (16) different interests along the Poudre River. Membership on the task force included representatives from the Water Board, Planning and Zoning Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, Chamber of Commerce, citizens, property owners, Poudre River Trust, Poudre Fire Authority, Sierra Club, consulting engineering firm, real estate, Poudre Paddlers, Friends of the Poudre, Citizen Planners, Downtown Development Authority, and Downtown Business Association. This task force met about once every month since December of 1998 to discuss the matter and provide comments and feedback to staff. Meetings were held with a number of City boards and commissions, including the Water Board, the Natural Resources Advisory Board, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Parks and Recreation Board, the Affordable Housing Board, and the Landmark Preservation Commission. Organizations outside of the city that were met with included the Downtown Development Authority, the Downtown Business Association, the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, the Chamber Local Legislative Affairs Committee, the Chamber River Corridor Committee, Friends of the Poudre, the River Corridor Property Owners Association, various property owners, the Sierra Club, the Buckingham neighborhood, Lorimer County, the Home Builders Association of Northern Colorado, the Poudre River Trust, Northeast Business Association, and the Northern Colorado Environmental Alliances Group. News media included the Phil Walker Talk Show, the Northern Colorado Business Report, the Fort Collins Coloradoan, the Fort Collins Coloradoan Editorial Board, and the Fort Collins Forum. The City Planning and Zoning Board held a pubic hearing on the item in April of 2000. City Council has discussed this item at various committee meetings and at study sessions in December of 1999 and in February, Marchand April of 2000. Open houses were held in May and June of 1999 and in April of2000. For the April 2000 open house approximately 1, 400 notices were mailed to owners and renters ofproperty in either the 100 year or 500 year Poudre river floodplain in the urban growth area. In total about 240 people attended these open houses. A few 359 June 6, 2000 organizations felt it was not necessary to meet with staffsince they received information they needed through other means. Buckingham and East ofLemay Avenue Flood plains A breakout offlows from the main stem ofthe Poudre River between Linden and Lincoln Streets over tops the east bank ofthe channel and flows easterly along the north side ofLincoln Avenue through the Buckingham development and commercial properties fronting onto Lincoln Avenue. This 100- year floodplain encompasses approximately 63 residential and 13 commercial structures. Also, flows leave the river corridor north of East Mulberry Street over topping Lemay Avenue and flowing easterly along the north side ofEast Mulberry Street through the residential and commercial properties in the Airpark area in Lorimer County. This 100 year floodplain encompasses approximately 59 residential and 76 commercial structures. Both flow splits at Buckingham and Lemay Avenue are proposed to be addressed in the draft drainage,way masterplanfor the Poudre River by building a levee at each site. This would eliminate the 100 year floodplain in these areas and thus the structures would no longer be in the 100 year floodplain. At the May 16, 2000 City Council meeting, City Council authorized the initiation ofthe project for the improvements to address the Buckingham floodplain. It is anticipated the Poudre River Master Drainageway Plan will be presented to City Council for adoption late this fall. Poudre River Flood nlain Property Acquisition Program This item is a resolution for the acquisition ofproperties along the Poudre River floodplain. The recommended "Modified Option B-1 " includes the purchase from willing sellers of property with structures in the floodway or product corridor or residential properties with structures in the floodplain. This resolution would clarify the city's position that the acquisition ofproperties would be a willing seller/willing buyer program and properties with the highest risk would receive the highest priorityfor acquisition. There are about 14 structures located in the vicinity ofthe College Avenue and Vine Drive intersection that would be eligible for acquisition under this program. The acquisition of properties would be considered by City Council on an individual basis and the appropriation of funds would be from the Storm Drainage Fund, as they are needed. Development of Other Flood nlain Regulations This item is a resolution directing the City Manager to develop additional floodplain regulations for other storm drainage basins in the City based upon the unique characteristics of each basin. Concern has been expressed that the floodplain regulations for the Poudre River may be more restrictive than would be necessary in other storm drainage basins. Staff agrees with this assessment, because the Poudre River Basin is unique in several respects, including the following: 360 June 6, 2000 • The Poudre River is the largest river in Fort Collins, and it has the highest flow rates, so the flooding in that basin could result in more catastrophic damages than would occur in other basins; • The depth of flow and velocities in the Poudre River Basin are much higher than in other basins; • The Poudre River Basin has unique riparian characteristics; • The Poudre River Basin has the potential for major sustained erosion of banks and streambed; • The Poudre River has great potential to migrate and impact private and public properties; • In a major event in the Poudre River Basin there will be an extreme demand on emergency response personnel because of the large flow rates. • Outreach for the master drainageway plan for the Poudre River clearly did not support the channelization of the river floodway, whereas such channelization may be appropriate in other basins. Therefore, the resolution clarifies that the regulations that will be imposed in other basins in the City will likely be different from the proposed regulations for the Poudre River Basin. Each basin will need to be reviewed with an eye toward its unique characteristics, and the regulations developed for those basins will not necessarily be patterned after the regulations for the Poudre River Basin. Floodplain Code Revisions - Cleanup and Clarification These sections of the Code are being recommended for revision due to language being either contradictory or confusing and therefore needing clarification. There are also sections of the Code that are in need of "clean-up" to bring the Code into compliance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) minimum standards. The City of Fort Collins must comply with these criteria at a minimum. These Code changes would apply to all floodplains in the City. Several definitions have been modified in Section 10-16 to create consistency and clarify terminology: 361 June 6, 2000 • Area of shallow flooding — clarifies that the definition includes areas that are mapped as shallow flooding in City designated floodplain. This is done to be consistent with FEMA's definitions and terminology. • Base flood or one -hundred year flood - the term "one -hundred year flood" had not been specifically defined. • Basement or crawlspace - FEMA has made a recent interpretation which considers a basement and crawlspace to be the same for elevation requirements; therefore this change is needed to comply with the FEMA regulations. • Critical facilities — the existing definition has been clarified to specifically identify certain uses that are currently not allowed in the floodway under Section 10-55(4), such as group homes, residential care facilities, congregate care facilities, schools and daycare, these being facilities occupied by people at risk who may not be able to easily evacuate during a flood. The Code has also been changed to clarify that retail facilities are not included in the critical facilities definition because the risk of contamination is very small. Another new facility that is being added to the definition is cemeteries. Cemeteries are a concern and are included in the critical facilities definition because of the health hazard related to bodies being exhumed during a flood. • Floodproofing or floodproofed — clarifying that floodproofing is the same as floodproofed. • Lowest floor - see discussion of "basement" above; clarifying that the lowest floor shall mean either the basement or crawlspace. • Manufactured home or mobile home — clarifying that manufactured home shall also mean mobile home. • Nonresidential structure - clarifying that a nonresidential structure is a structure that has no use in part or whole related to residential uses. Several new definitions have been added to Section 10-1 6for clarification purposes: • FEMA • Five -hundred year flood • Five -hundred year floodplain • Mixed -use structure — mixed -use structures (non-residential uses on the lower levels and residential uses on the upper levels) have not been specifically addressed in the past. The definition is needed to clarify that the floodplain regulations apply to mixed -use structures as well. • Recreational vehicle 362 June 6, 2000 Code Changes: • 10-19(b) - Clarifying that City Council has the ability to adopt additional foodplain studies. • 10-23 — Clarifying that use of a structure also qualifies as a trigger for compliance with the Code. • 10-36 (10) - Clarifying that even though a foodplain map has not been adopted for an area that is known to have flooded in the past or has the potential to food that the floodplain regulations still apply to the property. • 10-37(c)(3) —Clarifying thatfloodplain information is required to be submitted with a floodplain use permit. • 10-39 (b) - This change allows locally designated historical structures as well as federal and state designated structures to be eligible for a variance. • 10-39 © and (d) - These new Code sections give the Water Board more flexibility in dealing with variances from criteria that are more restrictive than FEMA's criteria when the property is in a City -designated floodplain, such as Old Town. This is done by removing the "hardship" requirement, which is extremely difficult to meet. • 10-39 (h)(3) — Clarifying that the granting of a variance would not result in any negative impacts to adjacent public or private property or any threats to public safety. • 10-53 (2) a. - Clarifying that additions also have to meet elevation requirements. Clarifies that it is the "special flood hazard area " that this requirement pertains to. • 10-53 (2) b. — Another clarification that additions also have to meet elevation requirements. Also, clarifies that this requirement applies to City designated "shallow flooding areas ". • 10-53 (2) c. — Clarifying that this requirement applies to all "shallow flooding areas ". • 10-53 (3) - Clarifying that a mixed -use structure is treated the same as a non- residential structure. Mixed -use structures have not been specifically addressed in past regulations. • 10-53 (3) a. - Clarifying that additions also have to meet elevation requirements. Again, clarifying that this regulation applies to mixed -use structures. • 10-53 (3) b. — Clarifying that additions have to meet elevation requirements, that this regulation applies to mixed -use structures as well, and that this regulation applies to City designated "shallow flooding areas ". • 10-53 (3) c. — Clarifying that this requirement is for all "shallow flooding areas • 10-53 (3) d. - New required notification for people who occupy buildings that have been floodproofed. 363 June 6, 2000 • 10-53 (5) -Clarifying how hazardous materials are defined in order to be consistent with the City's Uniform Fire Code and clarifying that the use of an existing structure in a five -hundred year floodplain cannot be changed to be used as a critical facility. • 10-55 (4) -Clarifying language for nonconforming uses in the floodway to recognize that items previously mentioned in this paragraph are now incorporated into the new critical facilities definition. " City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item and stated that staff is recommending Option B-1 for the new floodplain regulations. Bob Smith, Stormwater Utility Manager, presented background information regarding the agenda item, outlined the purposes of floodplain regulations and the recommendations included in Option B-1 and spoke regarding public outreach efforts. He also compared the proposed regulations with the County's regulations. City Manager Fischbach stated that staff believes the recommendation is the most reasonable and protects property rights and the public's health and safety. Councilmember Wanner spoke regarding his participation in the deliberations and vote on this agenda item and stated that there is no legal reason for him to refrain from participating. Kathleen Kilkelly, Latimer County resident, spoke regarding the 1997 flood and urged the strongest regulations possible (Option Q. Joan Baes, representing the League of Women Voters, urged the adoption of Option B-1 or Option C. Dave Karan, 9828 Poudre Canyon Highway, President of Poudre Paddlers, urged the adoption of Option B-1 with modifications. Ross Cunniff, 2267 Clydesdale Drive, stated that Option B-1 does not go far enough and spoke regarding lessons learned from the 1997 flood. Tom Sanders, Water Board Chair, recommended the adoption of Option B-1 with the removal of the product corridor concept as a criteria for delineating the areas of concern. Linda Stanley, 2040 Bennington Circle, supported the adoption of Option C and hazardous materials monitoring and spoke against the taxpayer subsidy of repair of structures built in the floodplain. [IZ! June 6, 2000 Nathan Donovan, 2400 Hampshire Square, Natural Resources Advisory Board member, supported modified Option B-1. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated that the impact of these regulations will be limited because of the small number of acres involved. He spoke against the use of taxpayers dollars for bailing out those who built in the floodplain and stated that the hardship variance procedure should be clarified. He also spoke regarding the nuisance trespass issue. He spoke against the use of natural areas funds for the purchase of properties in the floodplain. Fred Shaw, floodplain resident, supported adoption of a modified Option B-1 and asked that additional properties be included in the plan area. Kenneth L. Tharpe, 601 Birky Place, spoke regarding the Spring Creek flood and asked that further building in the 100-year floodplain be prohibited to the maximum extent possible and suggested funding sources for land acquisition. Sally Craig, 1409 South Summitvicw, Planning and Zoning Board member, spoke regarding the citizen input received concerning the floodplain regulations and stated that a majority of citizens want more restrictive regulations. Chris Rickard, 2707 Claremont Drive, spoke in favor of the more restrictive regulations that were originally proposed. Glenn Colton, 625 Hinsdale Drive, Planning and Zoning Board Chair, stated that the Board recommended the initial B-1 Option and has not had an opportunity to discuss the modified B-1 Option. He spoke in favor of Option C. Ernest Garner, 808 East Elizabeth, Co -Chair of the River Corridor Property Owners Association, supported Option B-1. He noted that special interest groups dominated the attendance at public outreach sessions, and it is difficult to determine the sentiment of a majority of citizens. Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, spoke in favor of Option C and spoke regarding the impacts of development in the floodplain. Mike Hauser, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, spoke regarding redevelopment in the downtown river corridor and supported looking at engineering options rather than regulatory options. He spoke in favor of Option B rather than Option B-1 and encouraged additional work on the product corridor issue. Matt Evans, 2904 North Overland Trail, president of Mid -Town Merchants, spoke in support of the modified B-1 Option as a minimum. 365 June 6, 2000 Jana Sixx, 615 West Myrtle, representing the Siena Club, spoke in support of Option C and commented regarding the benefits of floodplains. Councilmember Mason asked for clarification that if a development goes in by filling that the water level can be raised by only one -tenth of a foot. Smith stated that regulation would remain in place and that it is a cumulative requirement. Councilmember Mason asked why the staff recommendation changed from Option C to Option B-1. City Manager Fischbach stated that the recommendation changed as the issue went through management staff and Study Session reviews. He stated that Option B-1 is a more realistic option because it balances the issues, recognizes the product corridor as a regulatory tool and allows development via fill in the floodplain. Councilmember Wanner asked about the areas available for development in the floodplain. Smith showed maps depicting these areas. Councilmember Bertschy asked if Option B-1 includes elements of Option C. Smith presented a matrix showing a comparison of the two options. Councilmember Kastein asked about the use by other cities of the product corridor as a criterion. City Manager Fischbach stated that Boulder uses a product corridor of four in a 100-year floodplain. Councilmember Kastein asked what tools are used to predict the product corridor as compared with the one -tenth foot rise. Smith spoke regarding the floodway analysis and standards followed in predicting the product corridor. Councilmember Kastein asked about the accuracy of these determinations. Smith spoke regarding the developing standards and analytical tools for the new product corridor concept. CouncilmemberKastein asked ifthe product corridor is more likelyto change than the one -tenth foot rise criteria. Smith stated that the product corridor is more like to change and stated that accurate mapping is a key. Councilmember Kastein asked why the product corridor is used in conjunction with the one -tenth foot rise criteria. Smith stated that the floodway definition must be monitored with FEMA and their criteria must be followed. Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Floodplain Administrator, stated that FEMA requires a floodway definition and the product corridor would not be a sufficient definition. Councilmember Kastein asked if staff agrees with the Water Board's recommendation against using the product corridor. Smith stated that staff recognizes that there are some limitations with the product corridor but that the concept is more understandable that the one -tenth rise criteria. 366 June 6, 2000 Councilmember Wanner asked if the Spring Creek flood resulted from constriction of flow. Smith spoke regarding the 1997 flood. Councilmember Wanner asked about hazardous materials regulations. Hilmes-Robinson spoke regarding the critical facilities definition and the retail activities that would be regulated. Councilmember Mason asked the regulation of hazardous materials for retail stores. Hilmes- Robinson spoke regarding the limited risk for such facilities. Councilmember Weitkunat asked what determines the size of the floodplain and asked how frequently the floodplain boundary changes, noting that flooding at the edges of the floodplain could be minimal. Smith spoke regarding the determination of the areas that would be flooded in a design storm based on topographic mapping. Hilmes-Robinson stated that data has been gathered over a period of 100 years. Smith spoke regarding periodic changes to the FEMA floodway maps. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about development in the Urban Growth Area and the application of City regulations at the time properties are annexed. Smith spoke regarding development of properties located in the floodplain. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the letter received from Flatiron regarding its Cottonwood property. Smith stated that the modified 13-1 Option would allow Flatiron to fill in that area, elevate the parcels and build residential development. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the removal of property from the floodplain. Smith spoke regarding the critical facilities definition and the 500-year floodplain. Councilmember Weitkunat asked how the new regulations would fit with CityPlan's buffer limits along the river. John Duval, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the more restrictive regulation would apply. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the CityPlan prohibition against using the mixed use concept in the floodplain. City Manager Fischbach stated that mixed uses would be allowed in the floodplain under the modified B-1 Option if fill is used to remove the property from the floodplain. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about how the CityPlan downtown river corridor subarea plan would fit with the new regulations. Duval confirmed that the more restrictive regulation would apply. Mayor Martinez asked about the impact of the 500-year corridor on specific businesses and residences. Smith stated that the difference in the area of the product corridor and the one -tenth 367 June 6, 2000 floodway is 18 acres of land in the Citylimits and noted that the only structures affected by the 500- year corridor are at Vine and College. Mayor Martinez asked about land acquisition under the current flood regulations and current limitations on construction in the floodplain based on health and safety issues. Smith spoke regarding the current regulations. City Attorney Roy noted that land use regulations are separate from the floodplain regulations and that some regulations are designed to protect health and safety. Mayor Martinez noted that the City is in the top two percent as far as meeting FEMA standards. Smith stated that 900 communities participate in the FEMA rating system and that the City is in the top three to four percent regarding stormwater management. Councilmember Mason asked about the current regulations relating to prohibiting negative impacts on adjacent properties. Smith stated that these regulations prohibit negative impacts to any other properties in the corridor. Councilmember Mason asked about the use ofnatural areas moneys to purchase properties with valid natural areas value. City Manager Fischbach stated that the Council would be required to appropriate any natural areas funds to be used for land acquisition. Councilmember Mason asked about the inclusion of a berm along South Lemay mentioned by a citizen. Smith stated that this improvement is currently in the draft master drainage plan and that the issue is complicated because some of the properties that would benefit are not in the City. Councilmember Mason asked about the exemption for exceptional hardship to the applicant in terms of the variance procedure. Hilmes-Robinson spoke regarding the intention to provide the Water Board with greater flexibility in making determinations. Duval spoke regarding the City's experience with variances. Councilmember Wanner asked about the possibility of changing the definition of "adjoining or adjacent properties." City Attorney Roy stated that the intent appears to be to guard against adverse against any other properties and that the language could be clarified on Second Reading of the ordinance. Mayor Martinez asked about issues relating to "floatable materials." City Attorney Roy spoke regarding recent discussions pertaining to clarifying the definition of "floatable materials." Councilmember Mason asked about remodels and rehabilitation of buildings in the floodplain. City Attorney Roy outlined the proposed regulations relating to remodels and rehabilitation. June 6, 2000 Councilmember Mason asked about the costs to taxpayers following the 1997 flood and ways to reduce costs to the taxpayer for cleanup. City Manager Fischbach noted that cleanup costs following the 1997 could not have been avoided. Councilmember Wanner asked about flood insurance costs. Smith stated that there are approximately 300 flood insurance policies in effect in Fort Collins and that cost information is not available to the City. Councilmember Kastein asked how much of the 1997 flood damage was outside of the floodplain. Smith spoke regarding flood damage outside of the floodplain. Hilmes-Robinson noted that federal assistance would probably not have been received for recovery if there had been no loss of life. Councilmember Mason asked if the City is responsible for cleaning up mud and debris following a flood. City Manager Fischbach noted that the City does not pay costs for cleaning up private property and that the mobile home park cleanup following the 1997 flood was a unique health and safety situation. Mayor Martinez asked about the impacts on commercial and residential properties. Smith spoke regarding privately owned property within the product corridor and the intent to eventually remove structures when the property owners would like to sell provided the City has funds available. Mayor Martinez asked if the affected property owners have been contacted. Smith stated that property owners have been contacted and that the plan has been well received. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the Council would consider looking at allowing residential and mixed use development in the periphery of the floodplain as part of changing the proposed regulations. City Manager Fischbach stated that the modified B-1 Option would permit residential development in the floodplain provided fill is used to take the property out of the floodplain. Hilmes-Robinson spoke regarding provisions of the ordinance that outline how property can be removed from the floodplain. Councilmember Mason made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Bertschy, to adopt Ordinance No. 71, 2000 on First Reading. Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to table the adoption of Ordinance No. 71, 2000 until Resolution 2000-82 is considered. Councilmember Kastein noted that he had requested Resolution 2000-82 because there has been concern in the community that adoption of the Poudre River floodplain regulations may give more credence to establishing regulations for other flood basins. He stated that the Resolution would 369 June 6, 2000 provide a clear statement that this is not the intent of the adoption of the Poudre River floodplain regulations. The vote on the motion to table was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mason, to adopt Resolution 2000-82. Councilmember Weitkunat spoke regarding the intent of the Resolution. Councilmember Mason noted that the intent has always been to have separate regulations for each type of drainage basin. The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 2000-82 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to remove Ordinance No. 71, 2000 from the table for consideration. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. I0980:68 11114P SKIR-11 is Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to amend Ordinance No. 71, 2000 to remove the 500-year product corridor criteria from the regulations. Councilmember Bertschy stated that he would not support the motion because the entire ordinance was crafted around the 500-year product corridor criteria and the criteria clarifies the intent. Councilmember Wanner stated that he would not support the motion because the criteria is important in communicating with the public, adds longer range perspective, deals specifically with human safety and provides another control over changes that might be caused by fill. Councilmember Kastein stated that the criteria is not exact enough to use and noted that the Water Board has raised valid issues pertaining to the product corridor. 370 June 6, 2000 Councilmember Weitkunat stated that the criteria would be an unnecessary level of regulation. Mayor Martinez noted the Water Board's recommendation for Option B rather than Option B-1 and stated that the adoption of the 500-year corridor will not have a significant effect. Councilmember Byme questioned to what the extent the product corridor creates additional burdens on citizens and how accurate the mechanism would be. Hilmes-Robinson spoke regarding the floodplain development review process. Smith spoke regarding the accuracy of the process used to determine the product corridor. Councilmember Byrne stated that he would not support the motion to amend. Councilmember Kastein noted the impact of topography on the mechanisms used to determine the product corridor. Councilmember Mason stated that he would not support the motion to amend and spoke regarding the importance of using concepts that can be understood by the citizenry to educate them about the potential for serious floods. Councilmember Bertschy noted the CSU research that was done to develop the product corridor concept for Boulder. The vote on the motion to amend Ordinance No. 71, 2000, to remove the 500-year product corridor from the regulation was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byme, Mason and Wanner. THE MOTION FAILED Councilmember Byrne noted the citizen input received regarding the floodplain regulations and stated that the proposed ordinance balances risks and benefits. He commended staff for its work on the floodplain regulations, which lay the foundation for the future. Councilmember Kastein stated that he would not support the main motion because of the citizen input received and noted that he would be more supportive of Option B rather than Option B-1. Councilmember Bertschy thanked staff for its work in developing the best possible ordinance for this point in time. He spoke regarding the need for stronger floodplain regulations and stated that he would support the main motion. 371 June 6, 2000 Councilmember Mason stated that the proposed regulations would protect lives and safety and that other mechanisms are in place to protect the riparian corridor. He stated that perceptions that the floodplain regulations are a no -growth measure are incorrect. Councilmember Weitkunat commented that the issue is how much regulation is enough and stated that there is a need to weigh the risk carefully and limit the potential impact to property owners. She noted community perceptions that the intent of the regulations is to protect the River rather than health and safety. She stated that river regulations should balance environmental protection with development and that a better approach would have been to change the existing regulations to make necessary changes. Mayor Martinez stated that floodplain regulations need to be based on fact and science rather than emotions and special interests. He questioned the need to fix regulations that are not broken. He stated that if the ordinance is adopted that he would support its implementation for health and safety purposes. The vote on the main motion to adopt Ordinance No. 71, 2000 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Mason and Wanner. Nays: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez and Weitkunat. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Mason made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to adopt Resolution 2000-81 as amended to (a) add language in the last WHEREAS clause to change the clause to read as follows: "WHEREAS, in order to more fully protect the property and lives of the residents of the City, the Council believes that it would be desirable and in the best interests of the City if the City were able to (1) acquire such nonconforming structures and remove them, and (2) acquire real property in the floodplain so as to minimize the number of new structures constructed in the floodplain;" (b) to add a new Section 2 that would read as follows: "That if appropriate funding is available the City Manager is further directed to pursue the acquisition of any real property that is situated in the floodplain and outside the floodway and product corridor;" and (c) to renumber the previous Section 2 as Section 3. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated that natural areas funds could legally be used to purchase floodplain areas and that such funds should only be used if the property to be purchased would be for a natural area, and not if the property is to be acquired for health and safety purposes. He urged caution in the purchase of properties by the City. Councilmember Kastein agreed with Mr. Ohlson regarding the need for caution in acquiring properties and questioned the wording in the Resolution that directs the City Manager to "actively pursue" acquisitions. 372 June 6, 2000 Councilmember Mason stated that he would entertain a friendly amendment to modify the language mentioned by Councilmember Kastein. Councilmember Wanner stated that there are structures in the product corridor and floodway that should not be there and that the City should pursue acquisition in these cases if the property becomes available. Councilmember Weitkunat questioned the need for the Resolution when the City already has the power to acquire property. Councilmember Wanner stated that the Resolution provides a clear statement of intent and provides direction to management. Councilmember Bertschy suggested a friendly amendment to delete the word "actively." Themotion maker and second accepted the friendly amendment. Councilmember Weitkunat stated that she would not support the motion because the City should not be in the business of pursuing the acquisition of property. The vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 2000-81 with an amendment to delete the word "actively" was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember Weitkunat. THE MOTION CARRIED Ordinance No. 63, 2000 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund and in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for Transfer to the Capital Projects Fund to be Used for the City's Pavement Management Program Adopted on First Reading The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Financial Impact This Ordinance appropriates the remaining balance of $326,000 in a previous 0.25 cent tax for Street Maintenance Capital Improvements project. The money can only be used for Street Maintenance. The tax expired at the end of 1997. This Ordinance also appropriates $1, 395, 340 in the Use Tax Carryover Reserve in the Sales and Use Tax Fund. Executive Summary 373 June 6, 2000 With the adoption of the 2000-2001 City budget, City Council directed staff to begin to search for options to fund transportation maintenance needs. Staff has been working n this for the past six months. At the April 13, 2000 Council Finance Committee meeting, the Transportation Funding Advisory Team presented a report concerning the options for closing the funding gap to the Pavement ManagementProgram (street overlays and reconstruction) as well as addressing the other transportation maintenance needs, including the traffic signal system project, that are not currently addressed. At the May 23, 2000 meeting, the Finance Committee recommended an option that will address the funding for transportation maintenance needs with the least financial impact on the General Fund, and one that, overall, would not require additional sales tax on Fort Collins' residents. The recommended funding plan will address the current funding gap and maintain full funding of the Pavement Management Program as well as addressing the traffic signal system project along with other transportation maintenance needs. The Ordinance presented with this Agenda Item is the first step of the funding plan. The requested appropriation will partially address the underfunding ofstreet maintenance over the last couple of years and fully fund the program for 2000 so that the funding gap will not continue to grow. The maintenance needs of the City's street system are initially identified using a pavement management computer program. A pavement condition rating of 75, on a scale of 1 to 100, is defined as "good. " In the last two years, the backlog due to underfunding has dropped the pavement condition rating from a 75 to a 73 rating. The lower the rating, the more costly it becomes to restore the street system to a good rating. In order to meet the contracting requirements and to complete the maintenance work during the 2000 construction season funds must be available by July 1, 2000. The source of funds necessary to fully meet the 2000 street maintenance needs and to partially fund the underfunded backlog balance have been identified as the following: • $326,000 from the expired 0.25 cent dedicated for street maintenance. The $326,000 is the remaining balance after expiration of the tax and, as originally approved by the voters, must be used for street maintenance. • $1,395, 340 from the prior year balance in the Use Tax Carryover Reserve in the Sales and Use Tar Fund. It is important to note that this does not solve the funding problems. However, it allows staff additional time to continue to work on potential solutions. Taking these funds out of reserves also impacts the capital needs (transportation as well as other facilities) that are unfunded right now. Staff is still preparing lists of these but believes that this transfer is important to accomplish so that the City does not incur additional expenses. " City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. 374 June 6, 2000 Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, presented background information regarding the agenda item. Councilmember Warmer asked why there is a need for the sixth WHEREAS clause. Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt Ordinance No. 63, 2000 on First Reading as amended to strike the sixth WHEREAS clause. Mike Hauser, Transportation Board member, stated that the Board supports the adoption of the ordinance. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Kastein thanked the staff and Finance Committee for addressing the issue. Ordinance No. 66, 2000, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating to Fees for Raw Water Requirements for the Water Utility, Adopted on First Reading The following is staff s memorandum on this item. "Financial Impact It is expected that during the second half of 2000 the Utility will have approximately 100-acre feet of raw water requirements satisfied by developers through cash payments in -lieu -of water rights. Based on this, the increase from $3, 500 to $4, 500 per acre foot would increase the amount of cash received by about $100, 000. Cash received goes into a water rights fund where it is kept in reserve for the development or purchase of additional water rights. Executive Summary This Ordinance will increase the cash rate charged developers for satisfaction of raw water requirements from $3,500 to $4, 500 per acre foot. The cash rate, which is adjusted periodically to reflect the current price of raw water, is also the customers for water used in excess of their annual effective August 1, 2000. BACKGROUND: 375 basis for a surcharge paid by nonresidential allotment. The proposed changes are to be June 6, 2000 When satisfying the City's raw water requirements, developers have the option of paying cash instead of turning over water rights. The cash rate, in-lieu-ofwater rights, is periodically adjusted to reflect the market price of water rights in this area. The last adjustment in the City's cash in -lieu - of rate was in January 2000 when it was adjusted from $2,700 to $3,500 per acre foot. Since that time water prices have increased significantly causing a need to consider another increase in the City's cash in -lieu ofprice. The price of Colorado -Big Thompson (CBT) units normally sets the trend in water prices in this area, since there is enough market activity to establish the going price. During the last couple of years, CBTprices have increased quite dramatically. In January 1998 the price was approximately $2,800 per unit (each unit delivers from .5 to 1.0 acre feet per year). In January 2000 it was approximately $8, 000per unit. Recent sales have been reported from about $12, 000 to $15, 000per unit. The rapid increase in price appears to be because of numerous CBT water purchases by many communities in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Many communities and water districts in this area have relied primarily or solely on CBT water so they have increased their cash in -lieu -of prices to keep up with CBT prices. With the large increase in prices during the last several months, the raw water costs for many area developers have increased dramatically. Many of the cities and water districts in this area presently have cash rates that exceed $10, 000per acre foot. The City's cash rate needs to be set at a level that will enable the City to purchase or develop enough water to meet the water demands of new development. Local developers that build in the City of Fort Collins Water Utility service area can turn over shares in a number of local irrigation companies to satisfy raw water requirements. Because of this, it is appropriate to focus on the cost ofacquiring local stocks or developing other local projects when adjusting the City's cash in -lieu -of rate. In recent months the City has received primarily cash and very little water stock. This is an indication that the price of local stocks is approaching or exceeding the present cash in -lieu -of rate of $3,500 per acre foot. Another consideration is the cost of developing independent water supply projects in the Poudre Basin. Although there is still considerable uncertainty regarding the cost and the yield ofsuch projects, it is believed that the cost would exceed $4, 000per acre foot offirm yield. Taking all the above factors into consideration, the staffbelieves that the cash rate should be raised from $3,500 to $4,500 per acre foot. A new typical single-family lot of 8,000 square feet in the Utility service area has a raw water requirement of.77 acre feet. Ifa developer chooses to pay cash instead ofturning in water rights to satisfy the raw water requirements, the costfor such a lot would increase from about $2,695 to $3,465. The proposed increase in the cash rate would go into effect for all permits issued on or after August 1, 2000. The City Code provides that nonresidential customers pay a surcharge on water used in excess of their annual allotment. As this charge is based on the in -lieu -of cash rate, it also needs to be O7.e June 6, 2000 increased from $1.65 to $2.12 per one thousand gallons. The proposed increase in the surcharge would go into effect for all billings issued on or after August 1, 2000. The Water Board discussed this item at its April 27, 2000 meeting and recommended that the cash in-lieu-ofrate be increased from $3, 500 to $4, 500per acre foot and the surcharge be increased from $1.65 to $2.12 per thousand gallons. " Mike Smith, Utilities Director, introduced the agenda item. Dennis Bode, Water Resources Manager, presented background information regarding the agenda item and explained the development requirement for water rights or cash in -lieu -of water rights. Councilmember Bertschy asked why a dollar amount is set instead of utilizing market value. Bode spoke regarding the difficulty of determining market value at any particular point in time. Councilmember Bertschy expressed a concern about how quickly market values change, noting a recent NCWCD newsletter article about the value of CBT water. City Manager Fischbach stated that the City's in -lieu -of requirement is not based on CBT water. Smith stated that the recommended dollar value should be stable for the next six to 12 months and that it would be difficult to implement an in -lieu -of amount based on market value. Councilmember Byrne spoke regarding the dramatic increases in price of CBT water. Smith explained that many communities use only CBT water and for a period of time the demand was higher than the supply. Councilmember Byrne asked if the cash in -lieu -of fees are placed into a fund. Smith stated that the fees are placed into the Water Fund and allocated toward future raw water development. Councilmember Mason asked if the funds are used for purchasing water and building supply. Smith stated that the funds can be used for either purpose and described the sources of water rights for the City. Councilmember Mason asked about the analysis done regarding purchase of water rights. Bode described the analysis process. Councilmember Kastein asked about how the cash in -lieu -of rate is set. Bode spoke regarding the indicators used. Smith spoke regarding the philosophy regarding setting the rate. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, expressed concerns that the cash in -lieu -of rates should be set to clearly reflect the true market value and encouraged Council discussion regarding the Halligan Reservoir project. 377 June 6, 2000 Councilmember Byrne made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance No. 66, 2000 on First Reading. Councilmember Bertschy asked about the current Loveland rates. City Manager Fischbach noted that Loveland is dependent on CBT water. Smith noted that the City can no longer purchase CBT water and that the City's market is southside ditch water or other sources. Councilmember Wanner commented regarding supply and demand for water. Councilmember Byrne commented regarding the work that has been done in Fort Collins to ensure a stable water supply. Councilmember Bertschy asked about the process that will be followed by a pending development. Smith explained the process. Councilmember Mason spoke regarding the need to set rates to reflect the cost to buy additional water and expressed a concern that the City not undercharge. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. Other Business Ordinance No. 72, 2000 Amending Section 2-247 of the City Code Pertaining to the Composition of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Housing Authority Adopted on First Reading The following is staffs memorandum on this item. "Executive Summary The proposed ordinance would increase the number of commissioners of the Fort Collins Housing Authority from five to seven. It would also eliminate the positions of community representatives. BACKGROUND: The City Code tracks the state statutes in establishing the alternative methods by which the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Housing Authority can be established. Under the first 378 June 6, 2000 alternative, the Council can appoint itself to serve as the Board of Commissioners. (This method was selected by the Council in late 1998, when the Housing Authority was in turmoil in the wake of a substantial damage award against the Authority and its Board of Commissioners) Thealternative method of selection provided in the Code is for the Council to appoint no more than five commissioners, one of whom may be a City official. The state statute dealing with this subject was amended in 1999 to allow for a board of no more than nine commissioners rather than five. The City Manager, who served as Acting Executive Director ofthe Authority in the aftermath of the litigation, as well as the current Executive Director, are recommending that the Council again appoint a Board of Commissioners other than the Council itself, now that the operations of the Housing Authority have been stabilized and re -energized. Toward that end, the Council previously appointed a committee of its members to identify candidates for appointment to a new Board of Commissioners and to make recommendations to the Council about alternatives available to the Housing Authority for continuing its operations in the most efficient and cost-effective manner, including any recommended changes to the organizational structure of the Authority. That committee has, through the selection process, identifted seven strong candidates. Additionally, the committee, the Executive Director and the City Manager believe that a seven -member Board of Commissioners would better serve the interests of the community, given the increasing complexity of the Housing Authority operations and the need for diversity and different areas of expertise on the Board. The proposed ordinance would increase the number ofcommissioners from five to seven. It would also eliminate the existingprovisions of the Code which provide for the appointment of two community representatives, since the expanded Board of Commissioners would alleviate the need for such positions, especially in view of the fact that federal law currently requires that one of the members of the Board of Commissioners must be a tenant of the Housing Authority. " City Manager Fischbach presented background information regarding this Other Business item. Councilmember Weitkunat asked why a five year term is recommended. City Manager Fischbach stated that the length of the term is based on statute. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance No. 72, 2000 on First Reading. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Other Business Councilmember Wanner requested a two -page memorandum regarding the recovery of water utility costs. 379 June 6, 2000 Mayor Martinez noted that Centennial High School volunteered to work on the trails east of Timberline on the last day of school. Councilmember Mason asked about the law that would prevent minors from buying smoking cessation aids. City Manager Fischbach stated that this is a federal law. Councilmember Mason asked for additional discussion about alcohol ads on bus shelters. City Manager Fischbach stated that there are currently no alcohol ads on bus shelters and that he is preparing a memo to be provided to the Council regarding the issue. Adjournment Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to adjourn the meeting to 4:00 p.m. on Monday, June 19, 2000 for a meeting to be held at the new Lory State Park Visitor's Center. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. sl Mayor ATTEST: lL /" 5, City Clerk - CAj«-r 380