HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-01/18/2000-RegularJanuary 18, 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, January 18, 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: Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat.
Absent: Councilmember Bertschy.
Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Krajicek, Roy.
Annual Report to the Community
Mayor Martinez and City Manager Fischbach presented a 17-minute video giving the 1999 annual
City report to the community.
Citizen Participation
Linda Hopkins, 1809 Rangeview Drive, rental property owner, spoke regarding the proposed public
nuisance ordinance.
Dr. Duane Loetz, local dentist, opposed provisions of the public nuisance ordinance.
Yolanda C. Nicely, 517 East Trilby Road #103, spoke regarding the new millennium.
Agenda Review
City Manager Fischbach stated that item #16 Resolution 2000-14 has been revised.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
The Fort Collins Police Services Victim Services Team has been awarded a one-year grant
for the period of January 1 to December 31, 2000, by the Eighth Judicial District Victims
121
January 18, 2000
and Law Enforcement (V.A.L.E.) Board to help fund additional growth for this team.
Ordinance No. 2, 2000, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 4, 2000, and
appropriates the in -kind match in the General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services
Team.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 3, 2000, Modifying the Description of a Previously
Authorized Easement Conveyance to Charles R . Nauta and Connie L. Nauta.
In 1997, the City Council approved the execution of two drainage easements to Charles and
Connie Nauta (the "Nautas"), pursuant to a Release and Settlement Agreement (the
"Settlement Agreement") that had been entered into between the City and the Nautas. Those
deeds of easement have not yet been executed because the property to be conveyed by one
of the easements had been encumbered by a railroad right-of-way, and the City was not in
a position to convey that portion of the easement to the Nautas. The City has recently
acquired title to that railroad right-of-way and is now in a position to convey that easement
without any railroad right-of-way encumbrance. Ordinance No. 3, 2000, which was
unanimously adopted on First Reading, substitutes the new legal description of the easement
for the one approved by Ordinance No. 79, 1997.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 5, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for Gateway Mountain Park.
Gateway Mountain Park is a 400-acre site located five miles up the Poudre Canyon. The site
is owned by the City of Fort Collins and was previously the City's Water Treatment Plant.
The City Council has provided direction to make this property accessible to the public.
These lands are currently inaccessible to the public because the entry road must be improved
to provide safe access. Ordinance No. 5, 2000, which was unanimously adopted on First
Reading on January 4, 2000, appropriates $10,000 from unanticipated revenue in the Capital
Projects Fund, Gateway Mountain Park capital project, to be used for the design and
development of environmental education signage for the Park.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Railroad Consolidation Project Fund to be used for Installing Crossing Warning Devices at
the Linden Street Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks Northeast of Jefferson
Street.
On January 4, 2000, Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2000-2 authorizing the City
Manager to enter into an agreement with Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT),
and the Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR), for the installation of crossing warning
devices at the Linden Street crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks northeast of
Jefferson Street. The project consists of constructing new signals and gates to improve safety
at the crossing. Ordinance No. 6, 2000, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
122
January 18, 2000
January 4, 2000, appropriating funds from the Railroad Consolidation Project Fund needed
for completion of the project.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 7. 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Railroad Consolidation Project Fund to be used for Installing Crossing Waming Devices at
the Lincoln Avenue Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks Northeast of Jefferson
Street.
On January 4, 2000, Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2000-3 authorizing the City
Manager to enter into an agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation, and
the Union Pacific Railroad Company for installing new crossing warning devices at the
Lincoln Avenue Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks northeast of Jefferson Street.
The project consists of constructing new signals and gates to improve safety at the crossing.
Ordinance No. 7, 2000, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 4, 2000,
appropriating funds from the Railroad Consolidation Project Fund needed for completion
of the project.
12. Items Relating to the Timberline Road Bikeway Project.
A. Resolution 2000-10, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Intergovernmental
Agreement Between the City and the Colorado Department of Transportation for the
Timberline Road Bikeway Project.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 8,2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Transportation Services Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to be
Used for the Design and Construction of the Timberline Road Bikeway Project.
The contract between the City and CDOT will allow work to proceed to prepare preliminary
design plans and final engineering documents, as well as complete construction of the
Timberline Road bikeway project. The scope of this project will include design and
construction of bikelanes along Timberline Road from Willow Springs Way/County Road
36 south to Trilby.
13. Resolution 2000-11 Declaring Certain City -Acquired Property as Timberline Road Right -of -
Way,
The City completed the purchase of land for the Choices 95 Capital Improvements Project -
Timberline Road Improvement Project in January 1999. Title companies have raised title
insurance issues for adjacent property owners, because the areas located adjacent to the
roadway and the property line are not clearly delineated as part of the right-of-way for
Timberline Road. As a result, title insurance coverage for adjacent properties will not cover
access to those properties, making the property less marketable. In order to resolve this
123
January 18, 2000
problem staff has proposed that Resolution 2000-11 be approved and recorded in the real
property records of the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder.
In addition, a portion ofthe property required for Timberline Road and related improvements
was previously part of the Kingfisher Point Natural Area, and was acquired for the
Timberline Extension Project from the Natural Areas Program through the payment of
$36,980 to the 1/4 Cent Natural Areas Revenue Fund together with the transfer of one acre
of land for the Riverbend Ponds Natural Area. The property acquired for use by the Project
is part of the property declared to be right-of-way for Timberline Road and related
improvements in the Resolution.
14. Resolution 2000-12 Amending Resolution 99-105 Pertaining to the Intergovernmental
Agreement Concerning the Cache La Poudre Commission.
At its August 17, 1999 meeting, Council adopted Resolution 99-105 authorizing the Mayor
to execute an intergovernmental agreement between Larimer County, Weld County, and the
cities of Fort Collins, Loveland, and Greeley concerning the Cache la Poudre Commission.
Since Council action on August 17, Larimer County has proposed that the form of the
intergovernmental agreement be amended to exclude reference to specific commission
appointees. This modified version has already been adopted by the other agencies.
15. Resolution 2000-13 Establishing a Competitive Process for the Allocation of City Financial
Resources to Affordable Housing Programs/Projects and Other Community Development
Activities.
This Resolution establishes a new Competitive Process for the allocation of City financial
resources to affordable housing programs/projects and other community development
activities. The proposed Competitive Process includes two Funding Cycles (one to be
conducted in the spring and one in the fall), a Schedule, new Review Criteria, and updated
Application Forms. The funding cycles would split available City financial resources with
CDBG Program funds (about $1.2 million) being allocated in the spring to affordable
housing programs/projects and other community development activities (public services,
public facilities, etc.). HOME Program and Affordable Housing funds (about $950,000)
would be allocated in the fall primarily to affordable housing programs/projects.
16. Resolution 2000-14 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Amendment to the
Intergovernmental Agreement with the Board of the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund
and a New Intergovernmental Agreement with Five Partner Entities for Phase Two of the
Poudre-Big Thompson Rivers Legacy Grant Project.
This Resolution allows the City to enter into agreements with GOCO and with the other
partners of the Poudre-Big Thompson Rivers Legacy Project for implementation of Phase
124
January 18, 2000
H of the project, which was awarded additional funding of $2,500,000 in May 1999. The
$1,510,000, representing Fort Collins' portion of the $2,500,000 grant, will be used to
purchase natural areas and to build a segment of the Poudre River Trail from Taft Hill Road
to Lyons Park.
17. Resolution 2000-15 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement
with Larimer County for the Provision of Social and Human Services During the First Half
of Calendar Year 2000.
This Resolution authorizes the Mayor to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with
Larimer County for the purpose of providing social and human services to the City of Fort
Collins for the first half of 2000. The intergovernmental agreement allocates a portion of
the funds appropriated in the 2000 budget for these purposes. Since 1981, the City has
contracted with Larimer County to allocate and administer the distribution ofhuman services
funds via the Human Resource Grant Program administered by the County.
The recommended allocation of the funds among the human service agencies participating
in the Human Resource Grant Program was developed by Larimer County's Human
Resource Committee. This was done last year and adoption of this Resolution by City
Council will reaffirm these allocations to the various service providers.
18. Resolution 2000-16 Setting Forth the Intention of the City to Assign its Year 2000 Private
Activity Bond Allocation to the Colorado Housing Finance Authority to Finance Multi -
Family Housing Revenue Bonds for the Fox Meadows Apartments Project.
In early December 1999, Mr. Lee Mendel and Mr. Rodger Hara, representatives of the Fox
Meadows Apartments Project (the "Project"), contacted staff members of the Advance
Planning and Finance Departments. They have requested the City consider assigning its
annual allocation of private activity bonds to CHFA for the purpose of acquiring property,
constructing and equipping a multi -family housing project in the southeast part Fort Collins.
The Project would qualify as a low-income rental housing project. The project is located
near the southeast corner of the intersection of Timberline and Horsetooth Road. 138
dwelling units will be included in the project. Of the total, 60% of the units will be
affordable to persons whose incomes do not exceed 60% of the Area Median Income. Five
of the units will be reserved for families whose incomes do not exceed 40% of the AMI and
five units for families at 50% of AMI. The remaining units will be leased at market rental
rates.
Adoption of this Resolution would allow CHFA to issue up to $10 million in tax-exempt
private activity bonds for the purpose of constructing the project. The issuance is contingent
on the Project using an additional allocation from the Colorado Housing Finance Authority.
The proposal is consistent with the City's adopted policies regarding the issuance of multi-
125
January 18, 2000
family rental housing bonds. The Affordable Housing Board reviewed the project at its
meeting on January 6, 2000. The Board supports the proposal.
Staff finds that the project is consistent with Council's goal of increasing the quality of
affordable housing in the City. The project proponent is in the process of preparing an
agreement to secure an additional Private Activity Bond Allocation from the Colorado
Housing Finance Authority. Based on Council's action on the Resolution, the City will
support the project proponent in its application to CHFA.
19. Resolution 2000-17 Expressing Support for the Northern Colorado Community Separator
Stndv.
In March 1999, a study of community separators in northern Colorado was completed. The
Northern Colorado Community Separator Study was prepared and funded through the joint
effort of several northern Colorado communities, including Fort Collins. The Study provides
an overview of growth in the region; documents results of a comprehensive survey that was
implemented to better understand the views of residents on a range of issues associated with
maintaining physical separation between communities; and, recommends potential separator
areas and actions that are needed to achieve the long-term goals of maintaining community
separation in northern Colorado. The Study has been presented to all of the affected
jurisdictions and various groups and interests throughout northern Colorado. There appears
to broad public support for implementation of community separators in the participating
jurisdictions.
20. Resolution 2000-18 Supporting the Preparation of a Northern Colorado Regional
Communities I-25 Corridor Plan.
Eight northern Colorado jurisdictions, consisting of Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud,
Windsor, Johnstown, Timnath, Larimer County and Weld County, have joined together in
the preparation of a Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan to be
completed by December 2001. Seven jurisdictions have agreed to fund the project based
upon population. The City's share ($137,280) has been provided for in the 1999 Budget.
The study area (the "Corridor") includes the area encompassing one (1) mile east and west
of I-25; from County Road 58, north of Fort Collins; and to a point 2 miles south of State
Highway 56, south of Berthoud. The Plan will address appearance and urban design; open
lands and natural area protection; and, future local transportation activity.
126
January 18, 2000
21. Resolution 2000-19 Makin Fg indimzs of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of a
Decision of the Building_ Review Board Relating to the Larimer County Detention Center
Expansion.
On January 4, 2000, the City Council voted unanimously to overturn the Building Review
Board's decision denying the variance request by Larimer County to apply commercial and
industrial building code standards to guardrails in the Larimer County Detention Center
Expansion Project at 2405 Midpoint Drive. The City Council should adopt a resolution
making findings of fact and conclusions to complete the record and to finalize its decision
in this case.
22. Resolution 2000-23 Expressing Support for State Growth Management Legislation.
The next session of the Colorado General Assembly has begun. A number of bills have been
introduced, or are expected to be introduced, dealing with growth management at the state
and regional levels.
The City Council has included in its adopted Legislative Agenda, support for specific
legislation "that would establish a baseline of consistent and coordinated basic land use and
transportation planning within the state's rapidly growing communities...."
23. Routine Easements.
A. Two drainage easements from Spring Creek Farms LLC, located on the southeast
corner of Timberline Road and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
B. Temporary grading easement from Spring Creek Farms LLC, located on the
southeast corner of Timberline Road and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
C. Two utility easements from Spring Creek Farms LLC, located on the southeast
corner of Timberline Road and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
D. Two temporary grading easements from Rigden Farm LLC, located on the southwest
corner of County Road 9 and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
E. Two flood plain easements from Rigden Farm LLC, located on the southwest corner
of County Road 9 and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
F. Three utility easements from Rigden Farm LLC, located on the southwest corner of
County Road 9 and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
127
January 18, 2000
G. Two drainage easements from Rigden Farm LLC, located on the southwest corner
of County Road 9 and Drake Road. Monetary consideration: $10.
H. Utility and drainage easement from David L. and Paula R. Edwards, located north
of Magnolia between Mason and Howes. Monetary consideration: $10.
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 3, 2000, Modifving the Description of a Previously
Authorized Easement Conveyance to Charles R . Nauta and Connie L. Nauta.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 5, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Protects Fund for Gateway Mountain Park.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Railroad Consolidation Project Fund to be used for Installing Crossing Warning Devices at
the Linden Street Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks Northeast of Jefferson
Street.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 7, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Railroad Consolidation Project Fund to be used for Installing Crossing Warning Devices at
the Lincoln Avenue Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks Northeast of Jefferson
Street.
29. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 2000, Amending the Definitions of `Building Permit"
in Sections 7.5-17 and 7.5-47 of the City Code.
30. Items Relating to the West Central Neighborhoods Plan Rezonings.
Option A
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1999, Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification of Certain Properties Located
Within the West Central Neighborhoods Plan and Known as the West Central
Neighborhoods Plan Second Subarea Rezoning.
128
January 18, 2000
32. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 1, 2000, Appropriating Use Tax Carryover Reserves in
the Sales and Use Tax Fund for a Rebate of Impact Fees to Symbios Logic, lnc.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 8, 2000, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Transportation Services Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to be Used for
the Design and Construction of the Timberline Road Bikeway Project.
Councilmember Mason made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt and
approve all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consent Calendar Follow-up
CouncilmemberByme noted that item #19 Resolution 2000-17Expressing Support for the Northern
Colorado Community Separator Study, item #20 Resolution 2000-18 Supporting the Preparation
of a Northern Colorado Regional Communities 1-25 Corridor Plan, and item #22 Resolution 2000-
23 Expressing SupportforState Growth ManagementLegislation are all growth management issues.
Staff Reports
City Manager Fischbach gave an update on library use by citizens and library upgrades.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Byrne reported on North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning
Commission needs and resources.
Councilmember Wanner reported on the Finance Committee's discussions regarding technical and
promotional work on census reporting and investing in redevelopment.
129
January 18, 2000
Consideration of the Appeal of the November 18, 1999
Determination of the Planning and Zoning Board to Deny the
Modification of Standards in Section 4.23(E)(2)(b) and
Section 4.23(E)(3)(a)2 of the Land Use Code for the Maxi -Stuff Storage,
1640 Riverside Avenue, Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board Overturned
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On November 18, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Board denied the request for Modification of
Standards in Section 4.23(E)(2)(b) and Section 4.23(E)(3)(a)2 of the Land Use Code for the Maxi -
Stuff Storage, 1640 Riverside Avenue.
Section 4.23(E)(2)(b) requires that along Riverside Avenue, being an arterial street
that directly connects to other zoning districts, the buildings shall be sited so that a
building face abuts upon the required minimum landscaped yard for at least 30% of
the building frontage.
Section 4.23(E)(3)(a)2 requires that a minimum 30' deep landscape yard be
provided on the site, commencing at the street right-of-way line for Riverside
Avenue.
The property is zoned I —Industrial (as ofthe effective date of March 28, 1997 for the new Land Use
Code . The property is located at 1640 Riverside Avenue and is on the east side ofRiverside Avenue
just north of East Prospect Road.
On December 14, 1999, a Notice of Appeal was received by the City Clerk's office regarding the
decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. In the Notice of Appeal from the Appellants Tom Smith
and Clayton Schwerin, it is alleged that:
The Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant
provisions of the Code and Charter at the Public Hearing on November 18, 1999. "
City Attorney Roy explained the appeal process and procedures.
Steve Olt, City Planner, gave a presentation regarding the nature of the appeal and the site. He
stated that the staff recommendation was for approval of the modifications.
Robert Gustafson, Wickham Gustafson Architects, representing the appellants, spoke regarding the
requested modifications that were intended to allow a mixed use development consisting of office,
warehouse and large vehicle storage facilities. He stated that the requested modifications would
130
January 18, 2000
better meet the intent of the Land Use Code than would strict compliance, that the granting of the
modifications would not be detrimental to the public good, and that the modifications do not impair
the intent or purpose of the Land Use Code. He noted that City staff supports the modification
request and spoke regarding the basis for the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. He spoke
regarding the alternative plan submitted for the site. He asked that the Planning and Zoning Board
decision be overturned.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked for a clarification regarding the rationale for the proposed
modification and the Code requirements. Olt spoke regarding the rationale for the 30-foot landscape
setback standard in the Industrial zoning district along an arterial street.
Councilmember Mason asked about the alternative plans submitted to staff by the applicant prior
to the hearing. Olt spoke regarding the submitted plans.
Councilmember Kastein asked about the Planning and Zoning Board concerns regarding the vision
for Riverside. Olt spoke regarding the variety of proposed uses.
Councilmember Wanner asked about the front elevation. Olt showed the front elevation for the
proposed building with modifications.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the nature and intent of modifications in general terms.
Greg Byrne, CPES Director, spoke regarding Code provisions allowing modifications and the intent
to provide flexibility and creativity.
Mayor Martinez asked about the approval by the Planning and Zoning Board in June of 1999 for a
similar modification at another location. Olt spoke regarding the modification approved at another
location on Riverside. Mr. Gustafson spoke regarding the use and approved setback at the other
Riverside location. Bob Blanchard, Director of Current Planning, pointed out differences in the lot
dimensions and street right-of-way for the other location and noted that the purpose of the
modification process is to address site specific circumstances.
Councilmember Mason asked if consideration of this type of mixed use proposal has been
determined in the past based on the facade use. Greg Byrne spoke regarding the intent of the Code
provisions.
Councilmember Mason asked about specific setback requirements for the Employment or
Commercial zone. Blanchard stated that the requirement is less than the Industrial zone
requirement.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the buildings located adjacent to the site. Olt stated that the
buildings in questions are existing self -storage. Mr. Gustafson noted that the appeal packet includes
a site plan without modifications.
131
January 18, 2000
Councilmember Byrne made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to overturn the
Planning and Zoning Board decision and grant the modification requested.
Councilmember Kastein offered a friendly amendment to stipulate that the plans and drawings
submitted be substantially followed, including the commercial facade use and the use of substantial
landscaping to buffer the building up front.
The motion maker and second accepted the friendly amendment
City Attorney Roy stated that if a modification is to be granted that the Council should make
supplemental findings and state the reasons for the findings i.e. for example that the modification
should be granted based upon the fact that the alternative plan equally advances the interests of
CityPlan and does so for the reasons stated in the staff report.
Councilmember Mason suggested directing the decision maker to consider the proposed facade to
avoid a lose/lose solution.
City Manager noted that the adoption of a motion including the language suggested by the City
Attorney would be for approval of a specific project.
Councilmember Weitkunat noted that the modification process is intended to foster creativity and
flexibility.
Councilmember Mason reflected on the Planning and Zoning Board's concerns regarding the long
term vision for the Riverside arterial and future redevelopment of the area.
The vote on the motion to overturn the Planning and Zoning Board decision and grant the
modification requested and to stipulate that the plans and drawings submitted be substantially
followed with the inclusion of the commercial facade and substantial buffering landscaping was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays:
Councilmember Mason.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
132
January 18, 2000
Resolution 2000-21
Requesting the State of Colorado Department of Transportation
to Approve the Modern Roundabout Design Alternative for the
Intersection of State Highway 14 (Mulberry Street) and Lemay Avenue, Adopted
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"Financial Impact
In the fall of 1999, the City of Fort Collins received a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grant
in the amount of $1, 375, 721($1, 090, 000 are federal funds) $285, 721 are local funds for the purpose
Of making improvements at the intersection of Mulberry and Lemay. The first phase of the project
evaluated a four -lane and six -lane Mulberry cross-section as well as a modern roundabout design.
The evaluation used level of service, air quality, cost -benefit, safety, and environmental and social
impacts. Based upon the evaluation, staff is recommending that the modern roundabout as the best
alternative to pursue. The Colorado Department of Transportation is the last step in the decision
makingprocessforthisproject. The Transportation Board and the Planning and Zoning Board also
support the modern roundabout alternative.
Executive Summary
The City of Fort Collins successfully applied for Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
funds for an alternative analysis of intersection improvements and the construction of those
determined improvements at the intersection of SH14 and Lemay Avenue. The intersection is
currently experiencing both delay and accident problems.
A technical/engineering group has been put together to conduct this evaluation process. Stafffrom
Traffic Engineering, Engineering, Transportation Planning, Police Services, CDOT, and the
WalMart Engineering consultants were included in the group. An open house was held and the
Coloradoan newspaper coverage of the process has been good.
The City selected Balloffet & Associates along with Mr. Barry Crown of the United Kingdom to
assist staff in this endeavor. Barry Crown is a renowned expert in modern roundabout design and
has assisted in the nuances of the roundabout analysis. The summary of the analysis is presented
in the following table.
133
January 18, 2000
Conventional Conventional Modem Roundabout Modem RoundaboL
Intersedion Irdersectian (At Grade Pedestrian (Grade separated
Wprouemerts Improvements and Elcyde Pedestrian and
(4 Lane Mulbeny) (6 Lane Mulberry) Uasdrgs) Bicyde CrossirKA
Parierrra
Le✓ddS.vicd\#dleDdar
..
- +
+
f xWe at Mobility
+
0 +
+ +
BigjdeMability
0 0
+
Acd&ntsrs#ety
- +
+
Erragarj\k ideRspcnse
..
+
+
cod
Toth Qxt9nr<tion Q)ds
+
_ _ +
o
Arvxrd MartterwwQ>bt
0
0 +
o
Qst per redroedseoortdsd
ddaj compared to no bold
FrrArorrnerttal l moads
AirEri55arxs
++
++
RoodRaninpa3s
+
+ +
0
Rcod WaV Inpais
o
0
0
Etda-9)Edes
0
0 0
0
Sadal broads
Q-Tarucionlnpeds
I+
_ _ +
03nnrityAoo0atoe
I +
legend — o + ++
very poor very good
As can be seen from this summary table, the modern roundabout was the best alternative from a
performance, cost, and environmental impact perspective. From a social impact perspective, the
modern roundabout did not fare as well. It is anticipated that it will take the community a short
period of time to accept the roundabout. At the November 23 City Council Study Session, staff
explained that in cities where roundabouts have been constructed, over 60% of the community was
against the roundabout. Within a period of three months, the communityfavored the roundabout
by 90%.
134
January 18, 2000
The four and six lane traditional intersections were generally not accepted for the following
reasons:
• The four -lane alternative would only maintain acceptable levels of service for
approximately a seven-year period and then the six -lane alternative would need to
be considered.
• The cost for the six -lane alternative is prohibitive due to the bridge replacement
Mulberry.
• The bridge replacement on Mulberry would have significant impacts on the Poudre
River.
• Pedestrians generally do not feel comfortable crossing six lane roadways, especially
when auxiliary lanes are included (i.e. add double left turn and right turn lanes).
The modern roundabout design considered two types of pedestrian bike crossings; at -grade and
grade -separated. There are advantages and disadvantages to both of these alternatives and staff
is not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. The grade -separated proposal is preferred
from the bike and pedestrian planners. However, the grade -separated option has issues from a
safety perspective, the cost is approximately $1,000,000 more than the budget, and there is a
potential for food waters from the Poudre River backing up into the Mulberry-Lemay Crossing
project. City staff will discuss the ped/bike crossing options at the Council meeting on the 18th of
January. It is not critical to decide the type ofped/bike crossing at this time. That decision can be
made during the final design phase of the project.
If the City Council decides to endorse the modern roundabout design, the next step in the process
will be to ask the Colorado Department of Transportation to approve the design. Staff is also
working with the trucking industry, through the Colorado Motor Carriers Association, to address
its concerns. "
City Manager Fischbach presented a brief introduction to the item.
Mayor Martinez noted that there is some concern regarding CDOT's approval of a future roundabout
and that this is simply a request to CDOT.
Eric Bracke, Traffic Engineer, stated that if Council approves the Resolution, staff would be
working closely with CDOT and its consultants to finalize the design of the roundabout. He
presented slides showing the existing intersection and discussed the constraints imposed by the
Poudre River. He stated that the project scope is to conduct alternative analyses for the intersection
to accommodate existing and future traffic demands, and to prepare engineering and construction
plans for the preferred alternative and for a pedestrian and bicycle bridge across the river. He
outlined traffic congestion and accident problems experienced at the intersection and described the
proposed improvements. He spoke regarding long term planning for the intersection. He described
135
January 18, 2000
work done regarding the roundabout design and presented visual information showing the proposed
roundabout and bike/pedestrian facility designs.
Ray Moe, Balloffet and Associates, spoke regarding the issues surrounding the use of modern
roundabouts compared with nonconforming traffic circles. He spoke regarding the construction of
roundabouts in other communities and outlined the benefits of such designs. He outlined the
outreach efforts that have been done regarding the roundabout idea and the input received from
various groups.
Bracke spoke regarding the community dialogue and technical analysis done on the roundabout
issue. He stated that the construction cost for the roundabout and the four -lane alternative would
be approximately the same. He presented a comparison for various factors regarding the four
alternatives. He stated that the Transportation Board found that there is significant merit to the
roundabout at Mulberry and Lemay and has recommended that the Council further consider the
option because of air quality enhancement, safety issues, and long term viability and cost, and
further recommends discontinuation ofconsideration of a four -lane alternative based upon longterm
viability and safety issues. He noted that the Planning and Zoning Board also recommends approval
of the roundabout design, that the Chamber of Commerce has recommended moving forward with
the roundabout, and that the Poudre Fire Authority is supportive. He stated that staff is
recommending approval of the Resolution. He noted that four issues still need to be resolved: 1)
CDOT needs to make a decision; 2) the design may need to be modified slightly for trucks; 3)
discussion needs to continue regarding the grade separated versus at grade crossing; and 4) inclusion
of civic features.
Bruce Henderson, 2620 Powell Place, Transportation Board member, spoke about the proj ect in the
context of a better return on investment compared with the other alternatives.
Tim Johnson, 1337 Stonehenge Drive, Transportation Board member, spoke regarding safety, traffic
handling capacity, cost, and physical constraints. He encouraged looking further at the grade
separation idea.
Dan Gould, 623 West Mountain Avenue, Transportation Board member, emphasized the 75%
reduction in emissions and high quality pedestrian facilities that would be achieved.
Carl Maxey, 2807 East County Road 58, spoke regarding the work that has been done to resolve
concerns regarding the roundabout project. He supported continuing to work on the project to
determine its feasibility.
Janice Coil, 705 Collingswood Drive, expressed safety concerns regarding the roundabout project
and asked who would be paying for the project.
136
January 18, 2000
Yolanda C. Nicely, 517 East Trilby Road #103, spoke regarding drawbacks of traffic circles,
thanked the City for outreach to the trucking industry, expressed concerns regarding truck safety,
and tentatively supported the roundabout.
John Meleski, 2619 Featherstar Way, asked about the traffic carried on, roundabouts and
specifications for, roundabouts in other communities, the testing process, and the projected impact
of peak traffic conditions. He also asked if the roundabout will delay the Wal-Mart project.
Sally Craig, 1409 South Summitview, Planning and Zoning Board member, spoke in support of the
Resolution and the roundabout concept.
Mary Warring, 309 Orilla Del Lago, Transportation Board member, supported the Resolution.
Councilmember Weitkunat complimented staff regarding the work done to make the project
understandable and asked why a pedestrian/bicycle crossing is needed at the intersection. Bracke
stated that the City policy is to accommodate all modes of transportation at intersections.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the size of the center circle is a variable. Bracke stated that the
size varies depending on the nature and volume of traffic.
Mayor Martinez asked if the configuration at the Loveland factory outlets is a roundabout and what
kinds of problems have been experienced at that location. Bracke stated that it is a roundabout and
that the opinion of the City staff is that the roundabout has been working well and some slight
changes have been made to improve the situation.
Mayor Martinez asked if staff has been working with the Police Department on the roundabout.
Bracke stated that the Police Department's main issue pertained to security issues relating to the
grade separation.
Mayor Martinez asked about the impact of traffic backups or icy roads on the roundabout. Bracke
spoke regarding methods to control traffic flow and deicing systems.
Mayor Martinez asked if staff has checked with insurance companies regarding accidents on
roundabouts in other communities. Bracke stated that staff checked with traffic engineers in other
communities and that in all cases accident rates and severity of accidents decreased.
Mayor Martinez asked how long it would take to build the roundabout once all approvals have been
obtained. Bracke stated that construction time would be less than for a traditional intersection.
Councilmember Kastein asked if the simulations shown are for actual volumes. Bracke stated that
the simulations show projected peak hour volumes for 2020.
137
January 18, 2000
Councilmember Kastein asked about the Transportation Research Board and noted the significance
of the data obtained from this board. Bracke stated that this is a federal board.
Councilmember Kastein asked how many Colorado cities were surveyed and if the proposed
roundabout is comparable to roundabouts in other communities. Ray Moe spoke regarding the cities
surveyed. Bracke stated that this roundabout would be the largest in the western U.S. with a design
capacity of 7,000 vehicles per hour.
Councilmember Kastein asked if there is any data to show whether larger roundabouts are more
dangerous. Bracke stated that larger roundabouts are safer.
Councilmember Kastein asked about phasing of the roundabout. Bracke described the phasing
process.
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Byrne, to adopt Resolution
2000-21. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Martinez,
Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 4, 2000,
Amending the Definitions of "Building Permit" in
Sections 7.5-17 and 7.5-47 of the City Code. Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
Ordinance No. 4, 2000, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 4, 2000,
makes certain amendments to the City Code, clarifying that the installation of mobile homes on
previously vacant space would require a one-time payment of CIE, school fees and neighborhood
parkland fees. These amendments also "grandfather" mobile home lots on which existing mobile
homes are or were installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance by exempting them from
such impact fees. "
City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item.
Greg Byrne, CPES Director, stated that the issue is the collection of impact fees when a mobile
home is installed in a newly developed mobile home park. He noted that questions have arisen
regarding the impact on affordable housing.
138
January 18, 2000
Mayor Martinez asked about the process for mobile home purchasers to apply for affordable
housing. Greg Byrne spoke regarding the requirements for qualification of mobile home units as
affordable housing and noted that it is an option for developers to apply for a variety of subsidies
for affordable housing. City Manager Fischbach stated that one of his findings was that Dry Creek
has acknowledged a willingness and obligation to pay the additional fees if the Code is amended to
clarify that such fees are due upon the installation of mobile home units.
Councilmember Wanner asked if reasonably proportionate development fees must be charged or if
the Council could decide not to charge fees in this case. City Attorney Roy spoke regard the
collection of fees to defray the cost of a particular service or facility and stated that fees can be
subsidized to achieve municipal benefit. He stated that it would be inappropriate to waive the fees
if the Council believes that some are not bearing their fair share of the cost and that it would be
preferable to find other General Fund monies to subsidize fees to address the question of affordable
housing.
Robin Eldridge, co -managing partner Dry Creek L.L.C., spoke regarding the zoning and annexation
for the property in 1996. He stated that the property was designated as an affordable housing project
and was placed on a fast track for platting. He spoke regarding the work done with City staff to
establish criteria and fees for platting, engineering, development and home placements. He stated
that the property was purchased and developed based upon information regarding fees provided by
City staff. He took exception to the additional fee that would result in an 11 % increase in the cost
of a home site, which would amount to an increase in the cost of each home site by $3,300 or an
increase in the site rent by $35-40 per month. He asked that the City and the Affordable Housing
Board investigate the true impact of the fees on Dry Creek.
David Danforth, 2242 Shawnee Court, Affordable Housing Board member, requested that the matter
be referred to the Affordable Housing Board for additional study.
Lou Stitzel, 521 East Laurel, affordable housing advocate, stated that the item is not yet ready to
consider.
Mickey Willis, 2221 Sun Rose Way, former Affordable Housing Board member, spoke regarding
the issue of impact fees as applied to affordable housing.
Larry Knight, no address given, Dry Creek management team member, urged Council not to act on
the ordinance without further study.
TerryBriggs, community manager at Dry Creek Mobile Home Park, read a letter from resident Ellen
Werner.
139
January 18, 2000
Councilmember Byme asked if these kinds of properties are typically financed. City Manager
Fischbach stated that the lots are leased and that the collection of these fees would add
approximately $35 to the lot rental.
Councilmember Kastein asked about the number of units in Dry Creek that have been completed.
Mike Gebo, Inspection Services Supervisor, stated that permits have been issued for 108 out of 242
units.
Councilmember Kastein asked if the fee structure is explained to all parties during final plan review.
Greg Byrne spoke regarding the staff discussions with the developer regarding fees.
Councilmember Byrne asked for an explanation regarding fees that have been paid. City Manager
Fischbach spoke regarding paid and unpaid fees. Greg Byrne spoke regarding the complicating
factor that this is construction of a new mobile home park.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked for clarification regarding the correction to the Code. City
Attorney Roy explained the proposed change.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked for clarification regarding affordable housing subsidies. Greg
Byme spoke regarding subsidy options.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if this change would grandfather any mobile home units. City
Attorney Roy stated that the City Manager's determination was that no fees would be collected for
those mobile homes previously installed under the existing wording of the Code.
Councilmember Wanner asked for clarification regarding the existing Code provision as applied to
manufactured housing and asked about the fees paid. Mr. Eldridge spoke regarding the fees that
have been paid for the mobile home park.
Mayor Martinez asked about the requirements for mobile homes to qualify for subsidy programs.
Greg Byme spoke regarding the City's subsidy programs. Ken Waido, Chief Planner, spoke
regarding homeowner assistance programs.
Mayor Martinez asked if Housing Authority units are exempt from fees. City Manager Fischbach
stated that Housing Authority units are exempted by State law from paying fees and taxes.
Councilmember Wanner asked about the legal basis for proportionate fees.
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mason, to adjourn into
Executive Session to discuss legal matters. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
140
January 18, 2000
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's Note: The meeting adjourned into Executive Session at 9:45 p.m. and reconvened
following the Executive Session at 10:00 p.m.)
Councilmember Byrne made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt Ordinance
No. 4, 2000 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Wanner stated that he would be supporting the motion and asked that staff
reevaluate mobile home park development requirements prior to August 1, 2000 and that any
appropriate fee adjustments be brought back for Council consideration in April subsequent to
Affordable Housing Board review. He supported looking at ways to make it easier to develop
mobile home parks.
Councilmember Byrne commented regarding the purpose of collecting impact fees and the
complicated issue of affordable housing.
Councilmember Weitkunat spoke in support of the motion and commented regarding the issues of
consistency of the Code and affordable housing.
Councilmember Kastein stated that he would support the motion to accomplish a needed
clarification to the Code.
Councilmember Mason supported the motion and spoke with regard to applying the Code fairly.
Mayor Martinez expressed concerns about changing the Code midway in the development of the
mobile home park.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Mason, Wanner
and Weitkunat. Nays: Mayor Martinez.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
141
January 18, 2000
Ordinance No.160,1999, Option A,
Relating to the West Central Neighborhoods
Plan Rezonings, Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
Option A
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1999, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification of Certain Properties Located Within the
West Central Neighborhoods Plan and Known as the West Central Neighborhoods Plan
Second Subarea Rezoning.
This option places the properties in the Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court area into the H-M-N,
High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District.
Option B
A. Resolution 2000-22 Amending the "Zoning District Plan" (Map 4) of the West Central
Neighborhoods Plan by Changing the Designation of that Certain Area Along Whitcomb
Street and Blevins Court from the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District,
to the M-M-N, Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1999, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification of Certain Properties Located Within the
West Central Neighborhoods Plan and Known as the West Central Neighborhoods Plan
Second Subarea Rezoning.
This option places the properties in the Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court area into the M-M-N,
Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District.
On October 19, 1999, the City Council voted 5-0 to approve Ordinance No. 160, 1999, on first
reading which rezoned several properties within the West Central Neighborhoods Plan area
including properties along Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court which were placed into the H-M-N,
High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District. On November 2, 1999, the Council voted 6-0 to
table Ordinance No. 160, 1999, on second reading and asked staff to review the proposed rezoning
of the properties along Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court in light of concerns raised by several
property -owners that the required minimum density of 20 units per acre is too high.
142
January 18, 2000
Staff offers two options for Council's consideration. Option A, recommended by staff and the
Planning and Zoning Board, completes the rezoning process as initially proposed and places the
properties along Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court into the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood, District. Option B includes a Resolution which amends Map 4, the Zoning District
Plan, of the West Central Neighborhoods Plan and changes the designation of the area along
Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court from the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood,
District, to the M-M-N, Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District.
Option B also includes an amended Ordinance No. 160, 1999, which rezones the properties along
Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court into the M-M-N, Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood,
District which lowers the required minimum density to 12 units per acre.
The West Central Neighborhoods Plan was adopted by the City Council on March 16, 1999, as a
subarea (neighborhood) plan for an "L"shaped area ofapproximately three square miles located
west, southwest, and south of the Colorado State University Main Campus. On June 1, 1999, the
Council passed on second reading Ordinance 90, 1999, which rezoned most of the properties
proposed for rezoning within the Plan's boundaries as recommended in the West Central
Neighborhoods Plan. Theproperty located at 1132 West Prospect Road and the properties located
north of West Prospect Road, adjacent to Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court, were deleted from the
initial rezoning effort and temporarily retained in their existing R-L, Low Density Residential,
District to allow staffadditional time to workwith theproperty-owners to discuss and evaluate their
rezoning issues.
The property located at 1132 West Prospect Road is proposed to be rezoned into the L-M-N, Low
Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District. This owner is no longer in opposition to the proposed
rezoning.
The properties located north of West Prospect Road, adjacent to Whitcomb Street and Blevins
Court, areproposed to be rezoned into theH-M-N, High Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood, District.
The property -owners of several (about 5 of 27) properties in this area are still in opposition to the
rezoning and contend that the minimum density of the H-M-NZone at 20 dwelling units per acre is
too high.
BACKGROUND:
The West Central Neighborhoods Plan was adopted by the City Council on March 16, 1999, as a
subarea (neighborhood) plan for an "L"shaped area ofapproximately three square miles located
west, southwest, and south of the Colorado State University Main Campus. The planning area's
boundaries extend from Mulberry Street on the north to Drake Road on the south, and from the
Burlington Northern/Sante Fe Railroad tracks on the east to Taft Hill Road on the west.
The West Central Neighborhoods Plan had its beginnings in 1995, when a group of citizens began
working with City staff on the development of the "Prospect/Shields Neighborhood Plan. " The
143
January 18, 2000
scope of the project expanded to the West Central Neighborhoods Plan and include the coverage
of approximately three square miles. The development of the Plan was somewhat unique when
compared to other subarea plans in that the Citizens Advisory Committee did most of the problem
identification, research, analysis, and development of the Plan. City staffplayed a mentorship role.
Rezonings
Presented below is a summary discussion of the major issue areas of the West Central
Neighborhoods Plan as they relate to the proposed rezonings.
From a land use perspective the West Central Neighborhoods Plan divides the neighborhoods into
"Conservation, Development, and Redevelopment Areas. " Conservation areas are areas where
current land uses are considered the most appropriate uses of land. Development areas are
available undeveloped/vacant lands suitable for new development. Redevelopment areas are areas
where current land uses are not considered to be the most appropriate for the future and should
convert to more efficient uses.
Both areas proposed for rezoning are in designated "Redevelopment Areas" and are specifically
addressed on pages 2 and 3 of Chapter 3 of the West Central Neighborhoods Plan.
The "Land Use and Housing Densities Plan " of the West Central Neighborhoods Plan divides the
neighborhoods into nine land use types including residential, commercial, employment, and mixed -
use classifications. The residential areas range from an "Urban Estate Area "where the residential
density is limited to 2 dwelling units per acre, to "Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhoods"
where the minimum density is 12 dwelling units per acre, and on to a "Campus District" where
high rise structures, up to 5 stories would be encouraged. Non-residential areas range from small
neighborhood centers, to "Neighborhood Related Commercial Areas, " and the "Campus
West/Community Commercial Area" and on to an "Employment District. "
The property located at 1132 West Prospect Road is in the "Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood "designated area and is addressed on pages 4 and 5 of Chapter 3 ofthe West Central
Neighborhoods Plan. In summary, the Plan suggests that this property, along with the adjacent
properties located to the west, offer opportunities for intensification of residential densities.
The properties located north of West Prospect Road, adjacent to Whitcomb Street and Blevins
Court, are in the "Campus District" designated area and are addressed on page 7 of Chapter 3 of
the West Central Neighborhoods Plan. In summary, the Plan suggests these properties, along with
the other properties located north of West Prospect Road and east of South Shields Street, should
provide locations for residential, commercial, business, and service establishments closely related
to Colorado State University. Residential uses should be high density uses, such as larger
apartment complexes, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, etc.
144
January 18, 2000
The West Central Neighborhoods Plan contains a detailed "Zoning District Plan" (Map 4) which
is designed to implement the "Land Use and Housing Densities Plan " (Map 3) and provides the
basis for the requested rezonings.
The property located at 1132 West Prospect Road is proposed to be rezoned from its existing R-L,
Low Density Residential, District into the L-M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District.
The properties located north of West Prospect Road, adjacent to Whitcomb Street and Blevins
Court, are proposed to be rezoned from R-L into the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood, District.
Staff has discussed the proposed rezonings with the property -owners. The owner of the property
located at 1132 West Prospect Road is no longer in opposition to the proposed rezoning. This
property is proposed to be rezoned into the L-M-N, Low Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood, District.
The property -owners ofseveral (about S of27) properties in the Whitcomb Street Blevins Court area
are still in opposition to the rezoning and contend that the minimum density ofthe H-M-N Zone at
20 dwelling units per acre is too high. As a point of reference, a minimum density of 20 units per
acre would require at least a 3 plex on a typical 6, 000 square foot lot.
Rezoning Options
Staff offers two options for Council's consideration. Option A, recommended by staff and the
Planning and Zoning Board, completes the rezoning process as initially proposed and places the
properties along Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court into the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood, District.
Option B, includes a Resolution which amends Map 4, the Zoning District Plan, ofthe West Central
Neighborhoods Plan and changes the designation of the area along Whitcomb Street and Blevins
Court from the H-M-N, High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District, to the M-M-N, Medium
Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District. Option B also includes a revised Ordinance No. 160,
1999, which rezones the properties along Whitcomb Street and Blevins Court into the M-M-N,
Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, District, and lowers the required minimum density to
12 units per acre.
Staffbelieves that lowering the minimum density to 12 units per acre would likely lead to small scale
investment and redevelopment of the properties (e.g., duplexes) that would make it even less likely
to see higher density redevelopment within the area in the future. Staff also considered, but
rejected, additional options including reducing the minimum density ofthe H-M-NDistrictfrom 20
units per acre to 16 units per acre for the whole zone, or just the Whitcomb/Blevins portion; and
developing yet another zoning district specifically designed for the Whitcomb/Blevins area.
145
January 18, 2000
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rezonings as presented in Option A above.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its meeting ofMarch 4, 1999, voted 4-3 to recommend approval
ofthe rezonings as presented in Option A. The three negative votes were based on the desire ofthree
Board members to retain the Hill property, located on south Shields Street, in the C-C, Community
Commercial, District. The rezoning issues regarding the Hill property were resolved and approved
by Council in the previous West Central Neighborhoods Plan rezoning action. "
Councilmember Weitkunat withdrew from discussion on this item due to a perceived conflict of
interest.
("Secretary's Note: Councilmember Weitkunat left the meeting at this point.)
Ken Waido, Chief Planner, gave a brief presentation regarding the agenda item and explained the
options and the differences in the zoning designations. He noted that a letter has been received from
CSU supporting the recommendation to rezone the property HMN.
Roy Swanstrom, 200 Blevins Court, opposed the higher density HMN zoning and supported MMN
zoning.
Robert Swanstrom, owner of property at 604 West Prospect Road, spoke in opposition to HMN
zoning and supported MMN zoning.
Eldon Jensen, 700 Blevins Court, spoke in support of a plan that would be fair to all sides.
Greg McMaster, West Central Neighborhood Advisory Committee, spoke regarding the work of the
Committee and expressed concerns regarding how the plan will be implemented.
Councilmember Mason made amotion, seconded by Councilmember Byme, to adopt Ordinance No.
160, 1999 on Second Reading (Option A).
Councilmember Mason spoke regarding the community goal for higher density residential
development adjacent to CSU.
Councilmember Byrne commented regarding community priorities and City building and the need
for higher density development near CSU.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Byrne, Kastein, Martinez, Mason,
and Wanner. Nays: None. (Councilmember Weitkunat withdrawn)
146
January 18, 2000
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's Note: Councilmember Weitkunat returned to the meeting at this point.)
Resolution 2000-20
Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding
the Appeal of a Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board
Relating to the Olde Town North Modification Request, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On November, 18, 1999, an appeal of the November 4, 1999 decision of the Planning and Zoning
Board to conditionally approve a modification of standard to Section 4.15(D)(1) of the Land Use
Code (the CCN-Community Commercial North College District) was filed by Monica Sweere. The
condition of the modification that was appealed required that a minimum of 50% of the residential
units in any proposed development plan meet the City's definition of affordable housing.
After hearing the appeal on January 11, 2000, the City Council modified the condition of approval
with a 4-2 vote. The modified condition is that 25% of the residential units in any proposed
development plan meet the City's definition of affordable housing. In order to complete the record
regarding this appeal, the Council should adopt a resolution making findings of fact and finalizing
the appeal.
BACKGROUND:
The appeal was based on Section 2-48 (b)(1) of the Municipal Code:
Failure to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter.
The hearing on the appeal was held on January 11, 2000. At the hearing, the City Council
considered testimony of City staff and the appellant with regard to the conditional approval of the
modification request. After discussion, the Council passed a motion to amend the conditional
approval ofthe Planning and ZoningBoard to change the condition ofapproval from a requirement
that 50% ofall residential units in a proposed Project Development Plan meet the City's definition
of affordable housing to a requirement that 25% of all residential units in a proposed Project
Development Plan meet the City's definition of affordable housing.
147
January 18, 2000
The City requires that no later than the next regular Council meeting, the City Council adopt a
resolution making findings of fact with regard to the appeal. This resolution would finalize the
appeal for the purposes of any judicial review of the City's decision regarding the conditional
approval of the modification request. "
City Attorney Roy explained the agenda item.
Councilmember Mason made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Resolution
2000-20. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Byrne, Martinez, Mason,
Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Kastein.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 1, 2000
Appropriating Use Tax Carryover Reserves in the
Sales and Use Tax Fund for a Rebate of Impact Fees
to Symbios Logic, Inc.. Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On February 16, 1999, Council adopted Ordinance No. 31, 1999 that terminated the Development
Impact Fee Rebate Program. However, rebates that had been previously approved for Advanced
Energy and Symbios Logic were considered to be "in process " and thus remain eligible for rebate.
Ordinance No. 1, 2000, which was adopted 5-0 (Councilmember Kastein withdrew from discussion
due to a conflict of interest) on First Reading on January 4, 2000 appropriates $339,400 from
reserves in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for Rebate to Symbios Logic. An additional $35,875 will
also be appropriated for transfer from the Sales and Use Tax Fund to the Capital Expansion Fund
to cover fees that were undercharged to Symbios. "
Councilmember Kastein withdrew from discussion on this item due to a perceived conflict of
interest.
("Secretary's Note: Councilmember Kastein left the meeting at this point.)
148
January 18, 2000
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt
Ordinance No. 1, 2000 on Second Reading. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Byrne, Martinez, Mason, Wanner and Weitkunat. Nays: None. (Councilmember
Kastein withdrawn.)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
(**Secretary's Note: Councilmember Kastein returned to the meeting at this point.)
Other Business
Mayor Martinez asked for clarification that the Planning and Zoning Board is not required to make
specific findings. City Attorney Roy explained the Code requirement regarding supplemental
findings. Mayor Martinez supported a Code change to require the Board to make specific findings
in all cases. The consensus was to have the issue reviewed by the Growth Management Committee.
The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
ATTEST:
City Clerk / fki /t 4n11�1
Adjournment
149