HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-03/04/2008-RegularMarch 4, 2008
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, March 4, 2008,
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: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy, and Troxell.
Councilmembers Absent: Brown
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw to adopt Resolution
2009-025 Expressing Appreciation and Gratitude Posthumously to Walter P. Peeples, 111 For His
Contributions to the Community as a Member of the Parks and Recreation Board.
Mayor Hutchinson read Resolution 2008-025 in its entirety and presented the Resolution to Mr.
Peeples' family. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Citizen Participation
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, urged Council to examine the value of the renewable energy
credits Platte River Power Authority is making on behalf of rate payers.
Joe Kissell, 913 West Oak, thanked Council for adopting a resolution opposing uranium mining in
Northern Colorado and for seeking better solutions to transportation issues. He urged Council to
adopt a resolution calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq.
Cheryl Distaso,135 South Sunset, asked Council to adopt a resolution calling for the withdrawal of
U.S. troops from the war in Iraq. She expressed her concerns about the proposed Property Exterior
Maintenance Code and how the changes would be implemented. The cost of compliance will be too
great for many lower income families.
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive, stated a local company should have been chosen to design
the new City logo and perform the new branding. She did not approve of the new logo.
159
March 4, 2008
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Mayor Hutchinson stated Platte River Power Authority is revising its electric policy and other efforts
are underway to address the issue meeting the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions for the
City. A future work session will include a discussion of renewable energy credits. He stated much
misinformation was circulated concerning the new City logo. City Manager Atteber y stated the
branding effort was an item included in the 2006-2007 budget and was included under the Outcome
of "Economic Health" in the budget. The allegation that the new logo cost $80,000 is false as the
entire branding project cost $76,000 and only $2500 was spent on logo design. Selection of the
consultant was done through a competitive process. The decision to change the logo was not made
by Council, but was an administrative decision made by the City Manager. The process was a
collaboration with the Chamber of Commerce, Convention and Visitor's Bureau, Downtown
Business Association, Downtown Development Authority, Arts Alive, Cultural Resources Board and
others. This was not a "city -only" branding effort but was intended to be a community collaboration.
Kelly DiMartino, Communications/Public Involvement Director, stated a request for proposals for
the branding effort was issued and four proposals were received. A standard review process by the
partners in the branding effort was used to evaluate the proposals, including a written review and an
oral interview. Northstar was the company chosen based on the budget available and the level of
expertise of the company. Northstar performed research, data collection and development of the
community messaging. The Brand is a variety of elements and is away for the community to present
itself. It is composed of many tools, including the new logo. Many designs were reviewed by the
partners and the new logo was chosen, primarily because the focus of the logo is on the name of the
city.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the logo was a minor footnote in the entire branding process. The branding
process was supported by previous Councils and was part of the economic health plan. It was a
marketing effort done to enable the City to promote Fort Collins.
Councilmember Manvel asked if information concerning the branding effort was available to the
public on the City's website. DiMartino stated a summary of the research collected as well as the
creative materials is available on the City's website.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for a summary on the issue of renewable energy credits and other
climate concerns expressed by Mr. Sutherland. He stated Council had expressed strong support for
providing financial help to low-income families who would have difficulties in complying with the
proposed Exterior Property Maintenance Code. He expressed concern about the process of
implementing the new logo and stated more effort should be given to informing the public about the
entire branding effort and to counter the misinformation given to the public.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated Item #25, First Reading of Ordinance No. 031, 2008, Amending
Chapter 23, Article III of the City Code for the Purpose of Adding a Division Regarding
Encroachment Permits for Newsracks, has a revised Figure "A" within the Ordinance.
ICStI
March 4, 2008
CONSENT CALENDAR
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011. 2008, Calling a Special Municipal Election on June
10, 2008 for the Pinose of Submitting to the Registered Electors a Citizen -Initiated Charter
Amendment That Would Authorize Collective Baz ag ining and Binding Arbitration for City
Employees.
On January 22, 2008, the City Clerk's Office received an initiative petition to amend the City
Charter relating to collective bargaining. The Clerk's Office completed its review of the
petition and determined that the petition contained an insufficient number of signatures to
place the initiated measure on a special election ballot. The petition circulators withdrew the
petition and filed an amended petition on February 21, 2008. The Clerk's Office has
completed its review of the amended petition and has determined that it now contains a
sufficient number of signatures to require Council to place the issue on a special election
ballot. Ordinance No. 011, 2008 calls a special election on June 10, 2008.
Because the examination of the amended petition was not completed until Wednesday
afternoon (February 27), and this agenda was printed that same day, this meeting needs to
be adjourned to Tuesday, March 11, to allow Council to consider a resolution submitting the
citizen -initiated Charter amendment to the voters at the June 10, 2008 special election.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 015.2008, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund - Building on Basics - Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals
vital Project for the Design and Construction of Improvements to the Harmony Road and
College Avenue Intersection.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2008, appropriates
state and federal funds that are designated for the design, right-of-way acquisition and
construction of improvements for the Harmony Road and College Avenue intersection.
8. Items Relating to the Thorland No. 1 Annexation and Zoning,
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2008, Annexing Property Known as the
Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 017, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2008, annex and
zone 1.66 acres located on the north side of Kechter Road approximately 800 feet east of
South Timberline Road. It is the northerly portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in
Larimer County. The other portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the south
of the property. The Stetson Creek residential development is adjacent to the north of the
161
March 4, 2008
property. The property is undeveloped and is in the FAl - Farming District in Latimer
County. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE - Urban Estate.
9. Items Relating to the Thorland No. 2 Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 018, 2008, Annexing Property Known as the
Thorland No. 2 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 019, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Thorland No. 2 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2009, annex and
zone 5,18 acres located on the north side of Kechter Road approximately 800 feet east of
South Timberline Road. It is the southerly portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in
Larimer County. The otherportion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the north
of the property. The property is partially developed (with one single-family residence and
outbuildings) and is in the FAl - Farming District in Larimer County. The requested zoning
for this annexation is UE - Urban Estate.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 020, 2008, Amending the Zoning District Map of the Citv
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Prolerty Included in Phase Two of
the Southwest Enclave Annexation to the City of Fort Collins. Colorado.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2008, assigns zoning
district classifications to Phase Two of the Southwest Enclave Annexation and includes the
area in the Residential Sign District. The Southwest Enclave Annexation Phase Two Map
was recorded on December 27, 2007, consistent with the phasing schedule approved by City
Council under Ordinance No. 137, 2006. The Phase Two area includes the Fairway Estates
and Pitner Estates Subdivisions which are being zoned consistent with City Plan Structure
Plan Map designations.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 021, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of City -owned Property
at 208 North Howes Street and 230 LaPorte Avenue for up to Five Years.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2008, authorizes a
lease of city -owned property located at 230 LaPorte Avenue and 208 North Howes Street.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 022, 2008, Authorizing the Issuance and Sale by the City
of Fort Collins, Colorado of Variable Rate Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series
2008a (Custom Blending, Inc. Project) and of Taxable Variable Rate Economic Development
Revenue Bonds, Series 2008b (Custom Blending. Inc. Project) in the Combined Aggregate
PrinciVaal Amount Not to Exceed $5,000,000 for the Purpose of Financing the Acquisition.
Construction and E ui ping of a Manufacturing Facility in the City of Fort Collins.
Colorado, and to Pa Certain Costs of Such Bond Issue, Approving and Authorizing
162
March 4, 2008
Execution of a Trust Indenture, Loan Agreement, Promissory Note and Bond Purchase
Agreement with Respect to the Bonds: Making Findings and Determinations with Respectto
the Proiect and the Bonds: Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of Related Documents:
and Repealing All Action Heretofore Taken in Conflict Herewith.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 19, 2008, authorizes the
issuance of an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 of economic development revenue bonds
for the Custom Blending, Inc. project (a small manufacturing company) from the annual
statewide allocation the City receives. This is not the receipt of dollars, but the right to issue
tax exempt bonds for purposes prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code by the federal
government. Economic development revenue bonds are one type of bond that can be issued
for private activity purposes. For fiscal year 2008, the City of Fort Collins received a private
activity bond allocation of $5,504,218. These bonds are not an obligation of the City of
Fort Collins.
Custom Blending, Inc. relocation and expansion on a site within the City limits will result
in additional property taxes for the City as well as use tax on construction materials and
equipment purchases. The prospect of additional manufacturing jobs also provides economic
benefit.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2008, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves.
City Council authorized expenditures in 2007 for various purposes. The authorized
expenditures were not spent or could not be encumbered in 2007 because:
• There was not sufficient time to complete bidding in 2007 and therefore,
there was no known vendor or binding contract as required to expend or
encumber the monies.
• The project for which the dollars were originally appropriated by Council
could not be completed during 2007 and reappropriation of those dollars is
necessary for completion of the project in 2008.
• To carry on programs, services, and facility improvements in 2008 with
unspent dollars previously appropriated in 2007.
In the above circumstances, the unexpended and/or unencumbered monies lapsed into
individual fund balances at the end of 2007 and reflect no change in Council policies.
Monies reappropriated for each City fund by this Ordinance are as follows:
General Fund $ 1,451,454
Cultural Services and Facilities Fund $ 140,746
Light and Power Fund $ 370,000
Storm Drainage Fund $ 189,317
163
Wastewater Fund
Water Fund
Recreation Fund
Transportation Services Fund
March 4, 2008
$ 110,460
$ 25,000
$ 51,000
$ 447,749
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 024, 2008, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural
Areas Fund for the Purpose of Providing Natural Areas Programming Not Included in the
2008 Adopted City Budget.
The purpose of the previously appropriated funds remains the same: land conservation,
construction of public improvements, fences and trails, restoration of wildlife habitat and
other natural areas program needs to benefit the citizens of Fort Collins.
15. First Reading of OrdinanceNo.025.2008,Authorizinathe TransferofExisting Management
Information Services Appropriations from the General Fund to the Data and
Communications Fund.
This Ordinance authorizes the transfer of funds budgeted in the General Fund to the Data and
Communications Fund to support operation of the 2008 Management Information Services
(MIS) Program.
One change in the City's operation business model that is being implemented in 2008
includes moving all of the City's central information technology functions out of the General
Fund to an existing internal service fund — the Data and Communications Fund.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 026, 2008, Amending Chanters 8 and 23 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins to Update Miscellaneous Provisions of Purchasing and Contracting.
Chapter 8, Article IV Section 8 of the City Code, relating to purchasing and contracting was
last updated in 1996. The changes to the Code include housekeeping changes, increases to
dollar limits and changes to improve speed, flexibility, service, and accountability.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 027, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of Natural Area Property
at 1425 Overland Trail.
The Andrijeski Farm was purchased on September 1, 2004 as part of the City's Land
Conservation and Stewardship Master Plan. The farm is located within the City's Growth
Management Area at 1425 North Overland Trail. In 2007, this property was incorporated
into the Reservoir Ridge Natural Area. Since its acquisition, this parcel has been leased for
agricultural production. It is the recommendation of Natural Areas staff to again lease the
property to Roger and Keith Amey for agricultural purposes for one year, with the option of
up to four annual renewals at the mutual agreement of both parties.
March 4, 2008
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 028, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of a Portion of a Building
Located at Gateway Natural Area.
The City of Fort Collins owns two houses at Gateway Natural Area. One house is occupied
and leased by the Gateway Natural Area Ranger, a full-time employee. The other house is
used as the Ranger's office and maintenance shop. The office/house is a three bedroom bi-
level including a master bedroom with a full bathroom, kitchen, living room, dining room,
and an additional bedroom/office and bathroom on the upper level. The maintenance shop,
storage, and garage are on the lower level. A Seasonal Maintenance Assistant would lease
a portion of the residential building containing the office and maintenance shop but have
exclusive use of only the master bedroom and attached bathroom. The remaining rooms and
garage would remain fully functional and continue to be used by City employees for Gateway
operations and maintenance and other Natural Areas purposes.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 029, 2008, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Trail Improvements
In assembling property interests for the south-west segment of the Fossil Creek Trail, the
City has encountered a property with a significantly complicated and ambiguous ownership.
Due to the degree of complication and the property's keystone importance, staff proposes
condemnation as the most cost effective and efficient approach to acquire the City's desired
purchase of 1,064 square feet. The City has contacted the personal representative of the only
surviving original owner, and the representative was agreeable to the condemnation
approach.
20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 030, 2008, Authorizing the Dedication to the County of
Certain City -Owned Property as Tilden Street Road Right -of -Way.
The City owns a parcel of land at 2313 Kechter Road as part of the City's Land Bank
Program. The developer of the adjacent property, located at 2309 Kechter Road, has
proposed the City dedicate a strip of right-of-way on the City's property for use as part of
the Kechter Crossing Development. The developer, Savant Homes, Incorporated, has agreed
to cover all costs associated with the construction of the road and processing of the road
dedication. The constructed road will then be available to be used as part of the future
development on the City's property.
21. Resolution 2008-027 Ratifying the Reappointment of John Knezovich to the Fort Collins
Regional Library Board of Trustees.
Council ratified the initial appointments to the Library Board of Trustees on March 6, 2007
by Resolution 2007-026. Seven Trustees were appointed to the Board with initial terms
ranging from 1 to 5 years. The initial term of Trustee John Knezovich is concluding and he
needs to be reappointed to the Board or replaced. The Library Trustee Selection Committee,
comprised of Council members Manvel and Poppaw and Commissioners Rennels and
Eubanks, unanimously recommends the reappointment of John Knezovich to the Library
165
March 4, 2008
Board of Trustees. Pursuant to the Board's by-laws, the reappointment is for a four year
term.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2008, Calling a Special Municipal Election on June
10, 2008 for the Purpose of Submitting to the Registered Electors a Citizen -Initiated Charter
Amendment That Would Authorize Collective Bargaining and Binding Arbitration for City
Employees.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 015, 2008, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund - Building on Basics - Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals
Capital Project for the Design and Construction of Improvements to the Harmony Road and
College Avenue Intersection.
Items Relating to the Thorland No. 1 Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2008, Annexing Property Known as the
Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 017, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
9. Items Relating to the Thorland No. 2 Annexation and Zoning.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 018, 2008, Annexing Property Known as the
Thorland No. 2 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 019, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the
Thorland No. 2 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 020, 2008, Amending the Zoning District Map of the City
of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in Phase Two of
the Southwest Enclave Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 021, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of City -owned Property
at 208 North Howes Street and 230 LaPorte Avenue for up to Five Years.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 022, 2008, Authorizing the Issuance and Sale by the City
of Fort Collins, Colorado of Variable Rate Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series
2008a (Custom Blending, Inc. Project) and of Taxable Variable Rate Economic Development
Revenue Bonds, Series 2008b (Custom Blending, Inc. Project) in the Combined Aggregate
166
March 4, 2008
Principal Amount Not to Exceed $5,000,000 for the Purpose of Financing the Acquisition,
Construction and Equipping of a Manufacturing Facility in the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, and to Pay Certain Costs of Such Bond Issue; Approving and Authorizing
Execution of a Trust Indenture, Loan Agreement, Promissory Note and Bond Purchase
Agreement with Respect to the Bonds; Making Findings and Determinations with Respectto
the Project and the Bonds; Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of Related Documents;
and Repealing All Action Heretofore Taken in Conflict Herewith.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2008, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 024, 2008, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Natural
Areas Fund for the Purpose of Providing Natural Areas Programming Not Included in the
2008 Adopted City Budget.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 025, 2008, Authorizing the Transfer of Existing Management
Information Services Appropriations from the General Fund to the Data and
Communications Fund.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 026, 2008, Amending Chapters 8 and 23 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins to Update Miscellaneous Provisions of Purchasing and Contracting.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 027, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of Natural Area Property
at 1425 Overland Trail.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 028, 2008, Authorizing the Lease of a Portion of a Building
Located at Gateway Natural Area.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 029, 2008, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Trail Improvements.
20, First Reading of Ordinance No. 030, 2008, Authorizing the Dedication to the County of
Certain City -Owned Property as Tilden Street Road Right -of -Way.
25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 031, 2008, Amending Chapter 23, Article III of the City
Code for the Purpose of Adding a Division Regarding Encroachment Permits for Newsracks
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt all items on
the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
167
March 4, 2008
Consent Calendar Follow-up
City Manager Atteberry stated Item #6 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2008, Calling a
Special Municipal Election on June 10, 2008 for the Purpose of Submitting to the Registered
Electors a Citizen -Initiated Charter Amendment That Would Authorize Collective Bargaining and
BindingArbitrationfor City Employees calls for a special election on June 10, 2008 and he requested
Council later adjourn the meeting to March 11, 2008 to consider a resolution submitting the citizen -
initiated Charter amendment to the voters at the June 10, 2008 special election, and setting the ballot
title and submission clause for the measure.
Councilmember Troxell requested staff prepare a resolution for the March 18, 2008 meeting,
expressing Council's opposition to the citizen -initiated Charter amendment.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked Mr. Knezovich for his willingness to serve again on the Library
Board of Trustees.
Councilmember Manvel thanked Mr. Knezovich for his service and willingness to share his financial
expertise with the Library Board of Trustees.
Councilmember Ohlson stated Item #16 First Reading of Ordinance No. 026, 2008, Amending
Chapters 8 and 23 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Update Miscellaneous Provisions of
Purchasing and Contracting was an important improvement to the purchasing process. He asked
if the purchasing process could be reviewed on a regular basis. City Attorney Roy stated the
administrative policy for administering the procurement provisions of the City Code would include
a statement that the policy will be reviewed on a regular basis.
Councilmember Ohlson asked and for an explanation about why Fort Collins now has the highest
bid threshold of any governmental agencies in Colorado. City Manager Atteberry stated that
information would be provided to Council between first and second reading.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Manvel stated he and the Mayor met with Municipal Judge Lane for a periodic
review of court operations. The workload of the municipal court is increasing. The number of
camera and red-light tickets has increased and pays for itself. The waiting room will be expanded
this year as the area is too small to accommodate the number of people waiting for court
appearances.
Councilmember Manvel attended a subcommittee meeting of the Metropolitan Planning
Organization that considered the problem of finding funding alternatives for transportation. He
attended "Bridges out of Poverty," which was a presentation by Beet Street designed to stimulate
different agencies to develop ways to combat poverty.
168
March 4, 2008
Councilmember Ohlson requested a refiguring of the dog park at Spring Canyon Community Park
as he has received complaints from citizens that it is difficult to walk small dogs through the large
dog section of the park in order to get to the small dog section.
Ordinance No. 031, 2008,
Amending Chapter 23, Article III of the City Code for the
Purpose of Adding a Division Regarding Encroachment Permits
for Newsracks. Option 1 Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
This Ordinance will have a limited f nancial impact on the City of Fort Collins. The Downtown
Development Authority has authorized $100,000, and the City of Fort Collins has designated
$25, 000, for the purchase and installation of condominiums in the downtown area. These f nds are
sufficient to purchase replacement parts and for limited expansion. Following this initial
investment, Ordinance No. 031, 2008, Option 1 will reduce the amount of staff time required to
maintain newsracks and sidewalks in the downtown area.
Funds have not been identified for the purchase and installation of the corrals that are
recommended in Ordinance No. 031, 2008, Option 2. This option would not change the
maintenance burden currently incurred by the Parks Department.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City's currentpermit system for encroachments into thepublic right-of-way does not adequately
address the unique circumstances and challenges related to the regulation of newsracks. In
addition, the downtown community is seeking City assistance in addressing problems with the
maintenance and proliferation of newsracks in the downtown area. At a work session on January
8, 2008, City Council directed staff to bringforward two options for Council consideration. Option
1 has been developed and is recommended by City staff, as well as the Downtown Development
Authority and the Downtown Business Association. Option 2 was developed and supported by a
coalition of local publishers.
While both options include similar requirements for the placement and maintenance of newsracks
outside the downtown area, there are significant differences in how the two options would affect
downtown. Option 1 requires publications to be housed in modular newsracks, commonly referred
to as news "condominums, " within a designated downtown area. Condominiums will be provided
in no less than 9 designated locations within that boundary. Option 2 maintains individual
newsracks with the option of placing them in news corrals and seeks to expand the number of
existing locations. Locations within the news corrals would be managed by the publishers. In the
event an agreement could not be reached, the decision would come back to the City Manager.
Despite good faith efforts amongst all parties, attempts to find a compromise solution have been
unsuccessful. Staff recommends that Council adopt Option 1 of Ordinance No, 031, 2008 as it
appropriately balances the constitutional issue of free speech, provides ample opportunity to
169
March 4, 2008
distribute publications both downtown and throughout the community, addresses the concerns of
Downtown business, and protects the interests of the entire community.
BACKGROUND
MSY11A
In May 2006, the Downtown Business Association (DBA) requested assistance from the City of Fort
Collins in addressing concerns about the appearance and frequent maintenance neglect of the
newsracks in downtown (Attachment 1). Newsracks include boxes which sell newspapers
(Coloradoan, Denver Post, Northern Colorado Business Report, etc), as well as boxes which
distribute free publications (Thrifty Nickel, Scene, Homes and Land, etc.).
City staffperiodically also receives complaintsfrom residents and businesses outside the downtown
area about the growing number ofnewsracks thatare appearing along sidewalks and in other public
rights -of -way.
The existing City Code does not specifically address issues unique to newsracks such as:
• Securing methods — the need to safely anchor the newsracks without tethering to trees, bike
racks or other stationary objects
• Safe offset distances — the need to maintain appropriate clearance for pedestrians and
motorists
• Reasonable spacing — the need to establish reasonable distance requirements between
identical publications
• Conditions of maintenance — the need for objective criteria to define appropriate levels of
maintenance (i.e., reasonably free of rust and corrosion, unbroken, free from trash and
graffiti, etc)
Currently, the only regulations are that, like any encroachment, newsracks must not constitute a
nuisance or destroy or impair the use of the property by the public or constitute a traffic hazard.
Current Enforcement
Current City Code states that newsracks must receive an annual encroachmentpermitfrom the City.
However, the requirement for an annual permit has not been enforced. Publications have
historically been able to take out one permit for multiple locations that remains in effect in
perpetuity. As a result, many of the existing newsracks, both in and outside of the downtown area,
are not properly permitted or properly located.
To better manage the permitting process, Engineering and GIS have developed a new database that
will track information in a much more efficient manner. In January, 2008, Engineering staff
conducted a City-wide audit of newsracks and entered this information into the new database. As
of February 1, 2008, the number of newsracks in the City was asfollows:
170
March 4, 2008
• Citywide, there are 437 newsracks representing 39 different publications in more than 80
locations.
• The core downtown area (between Mason and Remington, Magnolia and Jefferson,
including Walnut) currently has 175 racks in 16 different locations.
• The greater downtown area, including the area near the Library, Post Office, Safeway, etc.
has more than 200 individual boxes.
• Based on existing records, only 60% of existing newsracks are permitted
Due to limited resources, Engineering staff responds to complaints about violations of the existing
ordinance, but has not proactively enforced the permit system. On a temporary basis, staff will
devote additional resources to transition into a new permitting system. The new system will
significantly improve staff's ability to enforce the annual permittingprocess. However, no ongoing
resources are available to maintain a higher level of enforcement on an ongoing basis.
History
In 2000, the City worked on a news rack ordinance, but in the face of strong opposition from the
publishers, the issue was dropped. Later that year, Gannett offered to install condo -style newsracks
in the downtown area in exchange for control over otherpublications'placement in the racks. This
option was strongly opposed by other publishers and was also dropped.
Since that time, there has been a rapid and uncontrolled increase in the number of newsracks in
public rights -of -way in the downtown area. In 2001, there were 40 newsracks along College Avenue
between Olive and LaPorte. Today, there are nearly 200 newsracks in the downtown area. The
uncontrolled placement of these newsracks detracts from the appearance of the downtown area,
making them a liabilityfor the business and retail community. This situation also makes it difficult
to clean sidewalks, and can be hazardous to the health, safety and welfare of downtown residents,
employees and customers.
The Process
City staff, the Downtown Business Association and the Downtown Development Authority invited
representatives from all publications to attend stakeholder meetings in March and August 2007. At
those meetings, we presented a proposal to place news condominiums in the downtown area, and
to limit the number of boxes that could be clustered together in all areas outside of downtown. At
the August meeting, there was general agreement from the publishers in attendance that changes
need to occur in Downtown Fort Collins. People were seekingfurther clarification on maintenance
of the condos and the system that would be used to designate spaces within the condominiums, but,
with one exception, people appeared willing to accept the condominiums in downtown. There was
strong opposition to having a limited number ofboxes per cluster outside ofthe downtown area, and
as a result, that provision was removed from the ordinance being developed by staff.
The proposed ordinance was scheduled to come before Council on September 18, 2007. In early
September, Coloradoan publisher Christine Chin, with support from The Loveland Daily Reporter-
171
March 4, 2008
Herald and USA Today, requested that consideration of the proposed news rack ordinance be
postponed in order for them to develop an alternate proposal for news rack management. The City
Manager removed this item from the September 18 agenda and the publishers were granted
additional time. They developed a proposal which calls for publishers to place their newsracks in
"corrals" under a Voluntary Agreement.
The two options were discussed at a work session on January 8, 2008. At that time, City Council
directed staff to bring forward both the proposed ordinance and an ordinance based on the
publishers' voluntary agreement concept.
• City Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance is designed to address both the uncontrolled placement and maintenance
of newsracks. It is based on similar ordinances in other communities, including Denver and
Boulder.
Following are the key components of the proposed ordinance:
Newspapers and publications will be allowed only in designated news condominiums in the
downtown area between Mason and Remington, Magnolia and Jefferson, including Walnut.
There will be no less than nine condominium locations within that boundary. Condominiums
may be placed on opposite corners at the intersections of Olive and College, Oak and
College, Mountain and College, and LaPorte/Pine and College, as well as one at the
intersection of Walnut and Linden. Exact locations will be identified following adoption of
the Ordinance.
2. The condominiums will be purchased by the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and
the City of Fort Collins. The DDA has authorized $100, 000 toward the purchase of the
condominiums, contingent upon a $25, 000 contribution from the City.
3. Condominium units will have space to accommodate all existing publications, plus limited
room for expansion.
4. Maintenance for the exterior ofthe condominiums will be covered by the City of Fort Collins
as part of the existing contract with Parks Maintenance. Publishers will be responsible for
maintaining the interior of their space, as well as covering costs for labeling of the
publication spaces and securing pay mechanisms (as needed).
5. Based on feedback from the publishers, spaces in the condominiums will be designated
through a lottery system. Ifspace is available, a publication may have more than one spot
at an intersection. Once additional applications are submitted, apublication with more than
one spot will be required to release such spot.
172
March 4, 2008
6. Fees for permits will be $10 per spot in the condominium per year. The fee has been kept
at a minimal cost so as to not create an undue hardship on the publishers or discourage
distribution in multiple locations.
The Ordinance also makes changes to improve the maintenance and regulation ofnewsracks outside
the downtown area. These changes are in the areas of permitting and placement of newsracks.
Currently, publications take out one permit for an unlimited number of locations, and although
existing Code states that the permits should be renewed annually, this has not been past practice.
Instead, permits have remained in place since the initial purchase, unless revoked due to
maintenance, safety or some other hazard. The new system will require publications to obtain a
permit for each location and renew it annually. Fees for permits will be $10 per location per year.
This applies to all locations, not just the downtown condominiums. This is consistent with other
encroachmentpermits, in whichpermits are required to be taken outper location, notper applicant.
The $10 per location fee does not cover the cost of staff time to process the permit, visit the
requested location, or other administrative costs, but it will provide a more consistent fee structure
to that of other encroachment permits. In addition, an annual permit process will provide better
information so that the Engineering Department can respond more appropriately when complaints
are issued.
The proposed ordinance includes several regulations and safety criteria specific to the placement,
appearance and maintenance of newsracks outside the downtown area. For example, newsracks
cannot be placed:
• within two feet of the edge of a roadway,
• within three feet of any marked pedestrian crosswalk traffic control cabinet or bicycle
parking rack.
• within f ve feet of any f re hydrant or any emergency facility,
on any portion of a pedestrian access ramp for disabled persons.
The proposed ordinance also requires that newsracks be secured either by weight or other approved
securing mechanisms.
Publishers' Proposed Ordinance
Publishers who distribute their publications through newsracks in downtown Fort Collins have
jointly developed an ordinance that incorporates several of the placement and maintenance
regulations as they apply city-wide, and preserves the ability to place individual newsracks in a
greater number of downtown locations. The details of this ordinance are outlined in 5 through
which have been provided by the publishers.
The City Attorney's Office has worked closely with the publishers' legal counsel to ensure that
Option 2 is legally acceptable from the City's perspective and is consistent with other applicable
laws and regulations. Due to the timeline for the agenda process, there are afew changes in Option
173
March 4, 2008
2 that are still under review by the publishers at the time of this printing. Most notable is the
reference to the "sight triangle, " which was recently included in both options to comply with the
Lorimer County Urban Area Street Standards. All changes not yet approved by the publishers are
redlined in the Option 2 provided by the City Attorney's Office. The most recent version of Option
2 as approved by the publishers is included as Attachment 7.
The following summary of Option 2 was provided by the publishers group:
• Preserves the principle that readers, not the government, will decide where newsracks
should be located in Fort Collins.
• Avoids the likelihood that newsracks will be banned entirely from Old Town by virtue of the
lack of any newsrack condos in place at the time the ordinance goes into effect.
• Avoids the significantly higher cost of newsrack "condos" versus newsrack "corrals. "
• Avoids the significant reduction in the number of locations for newsracks in the Old Town
area created by the City Staffs condos ordinance.
• Allows publishers to continue to use individually branded, identifiable newsracks in the Old
Town area.
• Establishes a procedure by which the City may use newsrack corrals in the Old Town area,
if and when funding becomes available, to better organize and present the newsracks at a
particular location.
• Protects the City and the public by maintaining neutral, workable standards for newsrack
locations, both within Old Town and throughout the city.
• Eliminates the unnecessary city-wide provision in the City Staffs condos proposal requiring
that newsracks may not be used to promote anything other than the publication in the
newsrack.
• Ensures that newsrack owners are responsible for the maintenance of their newsracks, as
opposed to overworked Parks and Recreation staff.
Conclusion
The problem which needs to be addressed in the downtown area relates to both the maintenance and
the proliferation of individual newsracks. Ordinance No. 031, 2008, Option 1, addresses both and
funding is in place to support this option.
City staff, the Downtown Business Association and the Downtown Development A uthority, strongly
support the original proposed ordinance. A resolution from the DBA and a survey ofDBA members
are attached "
Kelly DiMartino, Communications/Public Involvement Director, stated two issues are addressed
regarding newsracks. There have been concerns raised about the lack of maintenance of newsracks
in the Downtown area as well as the growing number of newracks. The existing City Code does not
contain enough guidelines to address the specific issues related to newsracks. City Code states (1)
the newsrack cannot constitute a nuisance; (2) it cannot destroy or impair the use of property by the
public; and (3) it cannot constitute a traffic hazard. More guidelines are needed to address the issue.
Currently, there are approximately 430 newsracks located throughout the city and about 60% have
174
March 4, 2008
permits. More than 170 of those newracks are located in the Downtown area. Since 2001, the
number of newsracks in the Downtown area has grown from 40 to 177. Changes to the City Code
are needed to address specifics such as securing methods, safe offset distances, regulations of
reasonable spacing to determine how close newsrack clusters can be to one another, maximum height
and width, and conditions of maintenance.
Council has two options to consider. Both options include parameters dealing with placement and
maintenance issues. Option 1 requires publications be placed in news condominiums within a
designated Downtown boundary. The City and the Downtown Development Authority (DDA)
would provide condominiums in a minimum of nine locations with the Downtown boundary and the
spaces within the condominiums would be allocated through a random selection process. Staff
would continue to work with the publishers to determine how many spaces were needed at each
location. The condominiums provide flexibility of use. They are clusters of four and can be
designed in a variety of different formats to accommodate different publications. Option 2 would
allow newsracks to be placed within corrals so publications would keep individual newsracks.
Construction of the corrals would be the responsibility of the City and, if the corrals were not
constructed, then the newsracks would be allowed to continue to be free standing. Option 2
identifies 18 locations for placement of corrals. Space would be allocated through the publishers'
group. If unanimous agreement was not reached, then the City Manager would use the process of
allocation listed in Option 1.
Option 1 contains height standards that match the Larimer County Urban Area Standards. A spacing
required of 300 hundred feet between newsracks is included in Option 1. Option 2 has a spacing
distance of 100 feet. Securing methods are addressed in Option 1 regarding City property. Those
racks located on public right-of-way cannot be chained to adjacent private property. The only
advertisement that would be allowed on the condominium would be advertising for the publication
inside that box. Option 2 does not address advertising issues. Option 1 would not allow newsracks
to be placed on decorative sidewalks.
Option 1 is supported by the Downtown Business Association (DBA) and the DDA, which has
authorized funding of $100,000, with a $25,000 City contribution, for the purchase and maintenance
of the condominiums in the Downtown area.
The following citizens spoke in favor of Option 1:
Lee Swanson, owner of Ben and Jerry's, 1 Old Town Square
Jim Clark, Fort Collins Convention and Visitor's Center President
Greg Dawson, Dawson Jewelry Store owner
J. J. Hannah, Tula's Contemporary Women's Clothing owner
Amanda Miller, Downtown Business Association, Membership and Events Director
Shannon Wilson, Pendleton Store Manager and DBA member
Patty Spencer, DDA member
Tom Watrous, DBA Boardmember
Ed Stoner, Old Town Properties President
George Brelig, DDA Boardmember
175
March 4, 2008
The following citizens spoke in favor of Option 2:
Joshua Johnson, Rocky Mountain Chronicle associate publisher/associate editor
Jeff Kopeck, USA Today, Denver
Ken Amundson, Loveland Daily Reporter -Herald Editor and General Manager
Kathy Jack -Romero, Coloradoan Consumer and Business Development Director
Joe Litmers, Northern Colorado Communications Circulation Director
Sadie Moore, Rocky Mountain Chronicle, owner and publisher
John Gilbreth, Thrifty Nickel/American Classifieds publisher
Ryan Green, CSU student
Vivian Armendariz, Fort Collins resident
David Short, Downtown Business Association Executive Director, stated it has not been possible
to create a compromise between the downtown businesses and the newspaper publishers as the
publishers want to add more newsrack locations with individual boxes and the businesses want fewer
newsracks and the use of condos. The condos look nicer and are easier to maintain. The corral
concept does not require the use of well -maintained newsracks. The maintenance and cleanliness
of the current newsracks is inconsistent; they are dirty and collect trash. Routine maintenance will
occur with the condos as they easier to clean or to remove snow. Local businesses are asking the
City to intervene in this issue. When businesses use public property, it is reasonable for government
to intervene. Along with the nine locations for the condos there are 40 businesses in the downtown
area that distribute various publications so there will be plenty of distribution points provided for the
publications.
Jack Wolf, Downtown Development Authority chairperson, stated the DDA supports Option 1. It
is a reasonable compromise and will clean up the look of downtown. The DDA has authorized funds
to purchase the condos. The City will work with the publishers to identify proper locations for the
condos. He encouraged the Council to adopt Option 1.
Steve Taylor, DDA and DBA member, stated the condo solution does represent compromise and is
a good solution for the newsrack issue. He asked Council to adopt Option 1 to support downtown
businesses.
Chris Beall, Levine, Sullivan, Koch and Schultz, attorney for the coalition of publishers, stated part
of the "brand" of Fort Collins is the beauty of downtown. Visitors see the beauty of downtown with
the newsracks located there. The publishers have worked diligently to find a compromise that would
meet the perceived and actual needs of all parties in this issue. A variety of options have been
offered by the publishers that have been rejected by the other parties. More condominiums have not
been offered to address the issue of location and the fact that many publications are impulse
purchases. Another option offered was a mix of condominiums and newsracks and that option was
also rejected. Option 2 eliminates a long line of newsracks from the sidewalk and moves them into
a corral. This option would require a setback of two feet from the curb, an offset from sidewalk
facilities and prohibit the placement of racks that impede pedestrian access. It prohibits abandoned
newsracks and empowers the City to take possession of abandoned newsracks. Both options agree
176
March 4, 2008
on limitations of newsrack locations which will solve much of the clutter that is currently seen. The
publishers believe the requirement to use condos at locations chosen by the City is not the
appropriate way to go. The appropriate solution allows publishers to choose distribution locations
for their publications and, once a certain number of newsracks appear at any one location, would
direct the City to place a condo at that location, instead of the newsracks. This would not dictate to
the publishers where the condos would go. The City could decide the threshold number of
newsracks that would trigger the placement of a condo in any one location.
Christine Chinn, Coloradoan publisher, stated at the January work session Council had asked the
two groups to determine if they were at an impasse or if a compromise was possible. A meeting was
held between representatives of the DDA, DBA, City and the coalition of publishers for each group
to share its point of view. At the end of the meeting, it was uncertain if there could be any
compromise. The DDA and DBA would like to improve aesthetics which would be clean and tidy
boxes and a lessening of the proliferation of newsracks. The City wants a solution that allows for
easier maintenance of sidewalks and snow removal around the newsracks. The publishers would like
as many locations and maintain a unique identity as part of the marketplace of ideas and let the
readers determine which publications will survive. Option 1 addresses all the goals of the DDA,
DBA and City, but not the publishers' goals. Option 2 addresses all the goals of the publishers and
only a tiny portion of the aesthetic needs for the DDA, DBA and the City. Corrals would keep
newsracks from being tipped over. Cleanliness would be addressed by a voluntary group of
publishers. In a compromise, all parties give up something and get something. The publishers
suggest setting a threshold in terms of the number of racks at a location. When that number is met
at a location, then the location becomes a condominium location. Other locations would contain
either a corral or free-standing racks. This solution addresses the issue of maintenance, proliferation
and freedom of location choice and gives all parties some aspect of what they want.
Chip Steiner, DDA Director, stated using the condominiums as outlined in Option 1 would allow
for expansion if more room was needed for publications. A mix of condos and corrals does not solve
the problem as it does not change the appearance of newsracks. The publishers' option is a voluntary
approach which does not obligate them to uphold the standards of cleanliness. Some newspapers
have as many as 50 locations on public property and they currently pay one $10 permit fee for all
locations. The newsracks are located on public property and it should be the public's obligation and
right to maintain and control the boxes.
(* *Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Councilmember Roy asked if newspaper distribution in public rights -of -way constitutes free speech.
City Attorney Roy stated the right to distribute newspapers is protected by the First Amendment.
It is a question of whether the regulations go too far. The courts have established various tests to
determine whether a particular regulation constitutes a valid time, place or manner regulation. Staff
has examined those issues closely and believes the ordinance does pass the constitutional test.
Councilmember Roy noted comments had been made stating newsracks were in the public right-of-
way so freedom of speech does not apply to them. City Attorney Roy stated that idea was incorrect.
177
March 4, 2008
The First Amendment does not just protect content but it also applies the distribution of newspapers,
even in the public forum and that is when the courts examine whether it is a reasonable way in which
to regulate the method of distribution. This ordinance is a content -neutral regulation as it does not
base regulation upon the content of newspapers. The courts have held that aesthetics and safety
constitute a significant government interest and regulation can be narrowly tailored to those aspects.
This ordinance addresses those issues and allows for other avenues of distribution to be available
for the publications both within the region subject to the condominium regulation and citywide.
Within constitutional boundaries the Council can make a determination as to how to regulate
newsracks and how to balance the competing interests of newspaper distribution in the way the
publishers would feel is most effective and the interests in aesthetics, economic development and
safety that staff believes would be advanced by the adoption of Option 1. Both options provided to
Council are constitutionally defensible.
Councilmember Roy asked for the number of claims brought by private citizens against the City or
publishers because of accidents or harm that has occurred due to newsrack placement. DiMartino
stated staff was not aware of any claims that have been made.
Councilmember Manvel asked for information about problems caused by the difficulty of snow
removal around the racks. DiMartino stated many concerns had been expressed by downtown
business owners and the City's maintenance staff about the difficulty in clearing sidewalks and the
ice that develops around the racks when the snow cannot be removed.
Councilmember Poppaw asked how many complaints had been received about newsracks and for
a definition of "sight triangle," a term listed in the ordinance. Tracy Dyer, Chief Construction
Inspector, stated an average of two to three complaints a month are received, primarily about
newsracks that have been tipped over. A sight triangle is a geometric layout of an intersection that
evaluates the visual perspective of a driver or pedestrian and examines obstructions to that view.
It evaluates "blind spots" and tries to eliminate those caused by obstacles such as newsrack
placement.
Councilmember Manvel asked if there will be an intermediate time when newsracks would not be
allowed but condos were not yet in place. City Attorney Roy stated language will be added to the
ordinance between First and Second Reading to address that issue either with a transition period or
indicates these standards would be enforced once the condos are in place.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the condos would be placed outside of the "sight triangle" to avoid
the height limitation of 42 inches. Dyer stated that was staff s goal when overseeing the installation
of condos.
Councilmember Troxell asked why only 60% of the current newsracks had permits and if the lack
of enforcement has allowed the proliferation of the racks. Dyer stated the newsrack permit has been
enforced only on a reactive basis. If a publisher applied for an encroachment permit, it has been.
granted but a newsrack placed without a permit would only become an issue if staff received a
complaint. Enforcement has been done only on a reactive level as there is no dedicated staff to
178
March 4, 2008
manage the permit program. DiMartino stated currently City Code contains only three very broad
definitions used to determine permit issuance. The Code needs to be revised to include more specific
parameters, such as distance from curbs and distance from fire hydrants.
Councilmember Troxell asked if consideration was given by staff to more effectively enforce City
Code and to revising the Code to set more specific parameters. City Manager Atteberry stated
newsracks have been an issue for downtown businesses and staff for many years. Previous Councils
did not choose to make changes.
Councilmember Troxell asked for other examples of permits allowing sidewalk encroachments.
Dyer stated downtown outdoor patio eating areas need an encroachment permit which requires the
patio to meet certain criteria. Sandwich signs used to advertise businesses are not allowed but
discussions are underway to revise the Code to allow those signs. City Attorney Roy noted the
encroachment ordinance contains additional criteria relating to outdoor eating areas.
Councilmember Troxell asked for cost estimates for operation and maintenance of the condos.
DiMartino stated the City would be responsible for the exterior cleaning which would be
incorporated into existing services provided by the Parks and Recreation Department. Staff
estimates less maintenance time would be needed than for the existing situation. Steve Lukowski,
Parks Crew Chief, stated since the condos are on a pedestal it would streamline operations and make
maintenance and snow removal easier. The condos would eliminate some ofthe work currently done
such as picking up boxes and newspapers. DiMartino stated the location of publications within the
condos would be determined by a random selection during the permitting process. The maintenance
of coin slots would be the responsibility of the individual publication. The Downtown Development
Authority has developed a budget to cover the cost of damage to the condos.
Councilmember Troxell stated his concerns that the City has not budgeted for the added cost of staff
to maintain the condos and direct the permitting process.
Councilmember Manvel asked if staff costs would be similar if the City were to develop a
responsible permitting system along with using corrals for newsracks. DiMartino stated the costs
would be similar.
Councilmember Roy asked how adoption of the ordinance would enable economic development.
City Manager Atteberry stated a cleaner downtown that can be better maintained would improve
productivity for downtown. City Attorney Roy stated while economic development can be used as
a significant government interest, it has not been included in the justification for this ordinance.
Councilmember Manvel stated recently the number of newsracks has decreased and he asked for an
explanation. Chris Beall, attorney for the publishers' coalition, stated the decreasing number of
newsracks was a national trend as the newspaper industry changes to online delivery at a much
greater rate than distributing in print.
179
March 4, 2008
Councilmember Troxell asked if the proposed revisions to City Code would limit advertising on
newsracks located outside of the downtown area. DiMartino answered in the affirmative. The
banners located on the outside of newsracks that promote general events and are not tied to the
publication the would not be allowed.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the "sticky note" ads placed on the front of newspapers that would
show in the window of the newsracks or condos would be considered advertising which was not
allowed. DiMartino stated the Ordinance does not prohibit advertising that appears on the front page
of a publication itself. The regulations pertain only to the exterior of the box and not to the interior.
City Attorney Roy noted the newsrack is not intended to be used as an advertising device to hold
signs placed on the outside of the newsrack that advertise anything other than the publication itself.
Councilmember Troxell asked if any other public/private partnerships were investigated to provide
an alternative solution. DiMartino stated the stakeholders that staff has been working with through
this process have the publishers and the downtown community. No other public/private partnerships
have been investigated.
Councilmember Troxell asked for staff s opinion of the compromise proposed by the publishers
which seemed to be a hybrid of both options. DiMartino stated staff had just learned of the
publisher's proposed compromise option and has not yet evaluated the proposal.
Mayor Hutchinson noted Option 1 contained a minimum number of nine locations for the condos.
and he asked if any limit on number of locations had been established.. DiMartino stated there are
funding realities that will limit the number of condos purchased. The downtown community is
seeking to reduce the number of locations to have a more uniform, visually appealing look. The
publishers were willing to compromise if they could have an unlimited number of locations and
individual boxes. The proposed revisions with the setback requirements will limit the number of
boxes at any one location, whether the boxes are condos or newsracks.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt Ordinance
No. 031, 2008, Option 1, on First Reading.
Councilmember Manvel stated there was a conflict in the downtown area as the newsracks do block
sidewalks and fire hydrants and are cluttered -looking, but many people want these publications to
be made available. Option 1 allows for a minimum of nine locations which means there could be
more locations provided, at the discretion of the City Manager. Many businesses in the downtown
area allot space inside their stores for publication distribution so having fewer newsrack locations
does not seem to greatly limit the general availability of the various publications. The appearance
of downtown is very important and the condos would allow for easier maintenance by City staff.
The voluntary system proposed by the publishers does not mean the issue of the appearance of
newsracks will be resolved permanently since there is no enforcement tool to be used to force the
publishers to continue to maintain the newsracks. The publishers' compromise seems to encourage
many small clusters of newsracks around downtown and does not resolve the issue of appearance
and maintenance. Option 1 does provide a solution to the issue of newsracks.
180
March 4, 2008
Councilmember Roy stated Fort Collins became the "Number One Place to Live" with the current
newsracks located downtown. There have been no accident claims against the City or the publishers
regarding newsracks. The newsracks are not aesthetically pleasing but limiting the number of
newsracks curtails freedom of speech and he did not support either option.
Councilmember Troxell stated the City should not enter into the business of newspaper distribution
nor should the City impede publications from conducting their business. The City could harm a
publication business by not responding quickly to repair any damage done to a condo. The
publications have an incentive to keep their newsracks functioning properly since they want their
newspapers accessible to the public. The City may not choose to replace condos as they become
worn. The DBA should provide the ongoing funding to maintain the condos, not the City.
Councilmember Ohlson noted the distribution of information should not be impeded and he did not
want to negatively impact the distribution of newspapers. City government, along with the business
community, has played a major role in helping to create a vibrant downtown and it did not happen
by accident. Design and aesthetics are an important component of the downtown and the proposed
Code revisions will help the area. Condos will be used only in a very small portion of the City.
Councilmember Poppaw stated downtown businesses had requested that Council consider the issue
of newsrack aesthetics and clutter. Huge investments have been made in the downtown area to make
it a vibrant and attractive area. Appearance is important and Council needs to act to protect the
investments made in downtown.
Mayor Hutchinson stated special attention has been given to this issue as it is important to the
business community. The condos would only be placed in the downtown area; newsracks in other
parts of the city would still be allowed. The newsracks are placed on sidewalks, which are public
rights -of -way and it is Council's responsibility to regulate those areas. The publishers have been
allowed to draft their own version of the ordinance that contains their ideas on regulating newsracks.
Outside versions of ordinances are rarely considered by Council. Council has received much public
input, carefully considered all points of view and even allowed extra time in the process to allow all
parties an opportunity to reach a compromise. Consideration must be given to the balance safety,
appearance, maintenance, responsibilities and minimum restriction on distribution of newspapers.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, and Poppaw. Nays:
Roy and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Northeast Corner East Prospect Road
and I-25 Rezoning, Postponed to April 1, 2008
Mayor Hutchinson noted the applicant has submitted a written request to postpone consideration of
this item to give him extended time to examine new information that impacts the rezoning.
181
March 4, 2008
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to postpone Item
#26, Items Relating to the Northeast Corner East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning, to April 1,
2008. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2008-030
Approving Two Agreements Related to the Possible Improvement
of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange, Adopted as Amended
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Resolution includes two Intergovernmental Agreements with associated cost sharing
commitments for the City's contribution as follows:
Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and
Developer (Metro Acquisitions, LLC) for a cost sharing agreement to f le a Justification for
Separate Action (RSA) with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and
Federal Highway Works Administration (FHWA). The cost sharing agreement confirms the
Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins will contribute twenty five percent each, and
Metro Acquisitions, LLC will contribute fifty percent of the costs for the RSA and 1601
Study. The total cost for the RSA is $15, 010. The City share is $3, 753 (25%). If the RSA
is approved, the three parties ofthis agreement will apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA
for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process and
agree to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated
by the 1601 process, total cost is $138,551. The City's share of this amount is $34,638
(25016). As such, the total cost for the City contribution for these two actions is $38, 391. In
addition, the Town and City agree to equally share in the reimbursement of the Developer
for Developer's contribution towards the costs for preparingandf:lingfor a Justification for
Separate Action and approval of the Interchange Improvements pursuant to the 1601
Approval Process ifthe Proposed Development does not proceed, up to a maximum amount
of $76, 782. Town and City will each contribute 50% to any such Developer reimbursement
under this provision. In such event, any engineering or other documents prepared for the
Interchange Improvements will become the property of Town and City.
2. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins to
reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies,
and other documents filed by the Town and City as part of the Justification for Separate
Action and 1601 Process. The estimated cost for this review is $33, 563. The City's share
(50%) is $16, 782.
182
March 4, 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
With new growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins in recent years, the permanence of the
existing I-251392 interchange has been significantly impacted. The interchange is an integral, yet
poorlyfunetioningpart ofthe transportation network. In January 2006, the City of Fort Collins and
the Town of Windsor entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to develop a plan for the
improvement of the interchange, including implementation strategies. A Plan has been prepared
and presented to both the City and Town, and affected interests.
The next step is to apply to CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for a
determination that Separate Action from the North Colorado I-25 Corridor Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is justif ed and to undertake CDOT's 1601 Interchange Approval Process. This will
include a public private partnership of the City, Town and Metro Acquisitions LLC (Metro has
ownership interest in large tracts of land on both sides of the interchange).
As described in the Resolution, approval ofthe two IGA's does not commit the City to help fund the
construction ofthe Interchange Improvements; the IGA's will facilitate additional planning, public
outreach, and design approval within an accelerated time frame and will expedite the possible
construction of the improvements, assuming the City, Town and CDOT can reach agreement as to
how to fund the improvements.
The resolution approves two intergovernmental agreements regarding cost sharing of preparing,
filing, and processing the Separate Action and 1601 Process materials, as follows:
Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and
Developer (Metro Acquisitions, LLC) for a cost sharing agreement to file a Justification for
Separate Action (RSA) with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and
Federal Highway Works Administration (FHWA) and upon its approval, will apply to
CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWAfor approval ofthe Interchange Improvements in accordance
with the 1601 Process, and whereby the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have
also agreed to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs
generated by the 1601 Process..
2. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins to
reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies,
and other documents filed by the Town and City as part of the Justification for Separate
Action and 1601 Process.
BACKGROUND
With new growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins in recent years, the permanence of the
existing I-251392 interchange has been significantly impacted. The interchange is an integral, yet
poorly functioning part of the transportation network. The Interchange has both design and
operational problems. In January 2006, the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Windsor entered
183
March 4, 2008
into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to develop a plan for the interchange area, including
action strategies to implement improvements to the interchange. A Plan has been prepared and
presented to the City and Town.
The City Council has previously discussed at a work session and hearing meeting, the issues of
improving the I-251SH392 interchange. On December 4, 2007, the Fort Collins City Council tabled
taking action on these items, allowing additional time to discuss the I-25 Corridor vision. Staff
received direction at the February 12, 2008 Work Session to proceed with scheduling the pending
application at the March 4, 2008 Hearing. The Windsor Town Board approved acceptance of the
Plan and approved the two IGA's on November 26, 2007.
Next Steps in Improving the Interchange
There are two options to receive approval for interchange improvements as follows:
Waitfor the current North 1-25 EISprocess being conducted by CDOT to be completed. The
final EIS and Record of Decision (ROD) are tentatively scheduled to be completed at the end
of2009. According to the EIS Program, even with the completion ofthe ROD, a 1601 Study
and design is still required, along with having financing in place. The earliest construction
could begin in late 2011—early 2012.
2. Pursue a parallel process by submitting to CDOT a Justification for Separate Action, if
approved, this would allow the submittal of a CDOT 1601 Policy Directive, estimated to
allow construction to begin potentially in late 2009 — 2010, saving critical time.
Based on a request by Metro Acquisitions, LLC (Metro ownership/development interest on
properties on both the east and west sides of the Interchange), Windsor and City staff has
determined it is more advantageous to pursue the second option. The three parties identified in the
first IGA will request a justification for separate action from CDOT and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) later in March (see attached Schedule). The cost for this request will be
shared between the Town, City and developer. Ifapproved, the three parties can then proceed with
an accelerated 1601 Process using a similar cost sharing arrangement.
Justification for Separate Action
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that any `federal action" must undergo
a process to assess the environmental impacts of such action. Since the Interchange is on an
interstate highway, and because there are currently federal funds being considered for use in this
effort, the improvements are considered a federal action.
Further complicating the matter is the fact that CDOT and the FHWA are currently performing a
comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of the 1-25 Corridor from Denver to north
of Fort Collins. The EIS is evaluating a broad range oftransportation issues and options, including
the need to replace or upgrade the interchange. NEPA technical procedures require that if an
IM,
March 4, 2008
element of the comprehensive solution is to be broken out or completed in advance of the final
"record of decision", then it must be "separated" from the EIS. The separate action would then
have its own planning and environmental process that is essentially what CDOT does for all of the
projects in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The process to separate involves a
formal request to FHWA and a presentation regarding several policy points that insures that an
adequate planning and public involvement process occurs along with the appropriate level of
environmental analysis.
The I-25 EIS has been ongoing for approximately four years. Although CDOT is currently
projecting late 2009 for issuance of a Final EIS (FEIS), and Record of Decision (ROD), observers
predict that these will occur in 2010 at the earliest. The process has already been partly conducted
for this Interchange, and much of the information previously provided is still relevant. Thus the
Justification for Separate Action could take as little as 45-60 days. The Town of Windsor has
initiated a contract with the consulting firm of DMJM - Harris to prepare the Justification for
Separate Action.
CDOT 1601 Study
The 1601 Process is the Colorado Department of Transportation's policy to evaluate new
interchanges or major improvements to existing interchanges along interstates and major highways.
Since CDOT has earmarked 2 million dollars for the improvement of the 1251SH 3921nterchange,
representing a shared funding proposal, the 1601 Process will follow a Type I (Local Agency
Initiated Interchange Proposal) approval process, with the Transportation Commission as the
approving authority. This process focuses on three issues: environmental clearance (if the project
has not already been cleared through a NEPA process); technical feasibility, relates to operational
acceptability — FHWA process is the Interstate Access Request (IAR); and identification offunding
for the project. More specifically, the 1601 Process will initiate a feasibility study for the I-251SH
392 Interchange and will include the following steps:
1. Operation and capacity
2. Identify all reasonable and feasible interchange access alternatives
3. Screen all of the alternatives (identify pros and cons)
4. Review environmental conditions in area
5. Work toward a single best alternative
6. Develop a funding plan
The 1601 Process serves as a framework for all of the steps involved in moving an interchange
improvementfrom concept to construction. The purpose ofthe policy is that it represents a roadmap
for local entities and that it will streamline the administrative procedures that must be followed. In
this case, since the interchange already exists, and it is known to be functionally obsolete, the
approval should be a relatively routine process as compared to developing anew interchange. Most
of the discussion will relate to the environmental process and with the proposed public private
funding partnership which has yet to be fully defined.
185
March 4, 2008
The City/Town will submit its application for the 1601 Process based upon the recommendation of
the North 1-25 EIS identifying the 1-251SH 3921nterehange for a "Tight Diamond" configuration
as a proposedfinal sol utionfor reconstruction, avoiding impacts on adjacent aquatic and biological
resources. This future conceptual design includes a 4-lane bridge (with turn lanes), ramps and
frontage road alignments (See Attachment 1).
Additional environmental analysis may be necessary which will most likely include an
Environmental Assessment (EA). Both the 1601 and the EA will utilize the data currently being
collected as part of the EIS and SH 392 EOS, and contained in the Improvement Plan. The 1601
Process would be completed and approved prior to final design of the interchange improvements.
It is anticipated that the Justification for Separate Action and CDOT 1601 Process will take
approximately six months. Again, ifthe Justification for a Separate Action is denied, the alternative
would be to wait for the North I-25 EIS to be completed in 200912010.
At the conclusion of the 1601 Process, the local jurisdictions review the results and
recommendations of the consultants, based on the data, public input, and input from the local
jurisdictions, and approve, refine, or reject the final report. When the local jurisdictions have
approved the final report, it is presented to the CDOT Transportation Commission as part ofa Type
I approval process. The Commission reviews and approves the report at a public hearing and then
the final report is reviewed/approved by the Transportation Commission.
As described in the Resolution, approval ofthe two IGA's does not commit the City to help fund the
construction of the Interchange Improvements.
Staffwill schedule work sessions with City Council to review the information developed in the 1601
Process report including designfeasibility, environmental analysis andfunding. The Windsor Town
Board and City Council will hold hearings to approve of the findings of the 1601 Process report
prior to approval by CDOT and FHWA.
Additional actions needed over the next two years include development of interchange preliminary
design, completion ofthe North 1-25 EIS and other environmental compliance actions by CDOT, and
securing funding. Once all of this is completed and in place, reconstruction ofthe interchange can
begin.
Plan Public Process
Throughout each facet ofthe development ofthe Plan, the process included public involvement and
input from the key stakeholders including residents, property owners and businesses in the area.
Two municipal websitesprovidedthe community with up-to-date information. Theplanningprocess
was guided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of 29 members, including
representatives from the City of Fort Collins, Town of Windsor, Larimer County, Colorado
Department ofTransportation (CDOT), Northern Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization
(NFRMPO), and consultants. In addition to the stakeholders meetings, the consulting team and
representatives ofthe TA also facilitated 2 public open houses to receive additional information,
186
March 4, 2008
comments and feedbackfrom the public. City staffpresented updates and progress to the Planning
and Zoning Board, Transportation Board and Land Conservation and Stewardship Board.
A similar public participation effort is expected to be undertaken for the 1601 Process. "
Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, stated the proposed resolution is the first step with implementing
the reconstruction of the I-25/SH 392 Interchange. In 2006, the City of Fort Collins and Town of
Windsor entered into an intergovernmental agreement to jointly develop a plan with the primary
purpose of reconstructing the interchange. This plan establishes a framework for implementation.
Last November, the Windsor Town Board approved the Acceptance of the Interchange Improvement
Plan and the two IGAs that are part of the resolution. City staff has determined that the Interchange
Improvement Plan has served its purpose and will continue to be used as a guideline for ongoing
implementation. The proposed resolution contains the same two IGAs that were approved by the
Windsor Town Board in November.
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has been working on a Northern Colorado
environmental impact statement (EIS) for several years that examines the I-25 corridor from North
Denver to north of Wellington. Windsor staff and City staff have been closely coordinating with this
EIS process with the development of the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan. CDOT is
moving forward with a "tight diamond" configuration as a key element to the EIS for this
interchange,. The improvements will include widening SH 392 through the intersection and new
ramps and frontage road alignments. The proposed resolution contains the first steps in the
reconstruction process.
There are two options to improve the interchange. One is to wait for the EIS process to be completed
and, hopefully, identify funding. The soonest construction could begin, provided funding was
identified, would be 2011 or 2012. Without funding, it could be a long period of time before
reconstruction would occur. The other option, recommended by staff, is to seek approval of a CDOT
1601 Policy Directive Process, separate from the EIS. This option would gain critical time to
complete the project.
Bob Garcia, CDOT Region IV Director, stated the EIS process is a huge planning process currently
underway. Parallel to that process is the 1601 Process. The 1601 Policy is CDOT's internal
procedure that provides the overarching set of guidelines used to manage access to the interstate.
Since this is an existing interchange, the 1601 Policy becomes a smaller subset of steps that must
occur. The 1601 Policy is intended to streamline the effort for the applicant to ensure the monies
spent are used most efficiently. The EIS is a very exhaustive analysis that is required as a part of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The 1601 Process asks the Federal Highway
Administration (FHwA) to pull out a portion of the EIS study to move forward before the entire
study is completed. FHwA is very clear it must be demonstrated that removing a portion from the
EIS process is an appropriate decision, no environmental principles are violated, there is an adequate
funding plan available to move forward, and this is a good decision that stands alone. A significant
technical study must be done as part of the process, involving traffic analyses, environmental
187
March 4, 2008
analysis and the financial plan that is developed. Much of the EIS has been done and can be used
in this process.
The initial IGA contained in the proposed resolution includes the cost to CDOT to administer the
study. After the technical analysis is completed, CDOT will go to the Transportation Commission
of Colorado who will examine the joint funding package developed that contains local, CDOT and
federal funds. The Commission's approval is contingent upon the subsequent regulatory approvals
from the NEPA and FHwA and the final financial plan. The final IGA will include the final
financial plan that specifies how funding will be provide to execute this process. Council will have
a considerable amount of time to work out the details of the funding. When the Commission first
examines the plan, it will see a preliminary financial plan that will not be a binding plan. The final
IGA will be binding.
Wray stated other work sessions are scheduled for Council to examine the findings of the study and
discuss preliminary funding. The Windsor Town Board will also be holding similar discussions at
the same time. The proposed resolution before Council contains an agreement between Windsor,
Fort Collins and Metro Acquisitions to identify a cost -sharing agreement to fund the hiring of a
consultant to help facilitate the next two steps, which are (1) the request for a separate action, gaining
approval for that action and (2) the 1601 Study. The resolution also contains an agreement between
Windsor and Fort Collins to reimburse CDOT for review during this process. In the cost -sharing
agreement, Windsor has agreed to pay 25% of the consultant fees. Fort Collins would provide 25%
of the consultant fees and Metro Acquisitions would pay 50%. The City's cost for the initial request
for separate action is approximately $3,000. The 1601 Study Process will cost $34,000 and the
reimbursement for CDOT is $16,000. The total commitment of City funds for the first two steps is
$55,000. The most recent cost estimate of reconstruction of the interchange is $22 million and does
not include right-of-way acquisition.
Mayor Hutchinson noted Council will consider three options of the resolution.
City Attorney Roy stated a revision to Option C has been proposed in reference to Section 3, which
states "that the City Council's approval of the foregoing agreements is based on its understanding
that transit elements outlined in the Transfort Strategic Plan update of 2008-09 may be included as
part of the Interchange Improvements if such elements are determined to be appropriate." The
concern is that CDOT and the other participants may prefer that the transit elements be determined
by the ongoing I-25 corridor EIS rather than the City's Transfort Strategic Plan.
Gary Thomas, 757 Cherokee Drive, supported the ongoing study of the 392 Interchange with the
transit option that is contained in Option C of the resolution. Transportation has always been a key
part of economic development and transit -oriented development needs to be part of the interchange
improvements.
Shane Miller, 4325 Mill Creek, stated alternative transportation should be part of the development
of the interchange. He was concerned about the cost of the City accepting the responsibility to build
interchanges as the interchange is a federal and state responsibility.
188
March 4, 2008
Carilynne White, attorney representing Metro Acquisitions, stated all parties agree that transit should
be part of the process. She proposed a revision to Option C of the resolution that more precisely
states the manner in which transit would be incorporated into this process. The EIS currently
underway contains two alternatives concerning transit. One alternative is for Bus Rapid Transit
(BRT) and another is for commuter rail. The request for separate action must demonstrate to FHwA
that studying this interchange separately from the EIS will not preclude any of the alternatives being
considered, particularly transit options. The proposed study will examine a tight -diamond
configuration of the interchange compatible with either BRT or commuter rail, as is currently being
studied in the EIS. The 1601 Study Process would not change the design or transit options in any
way. The process will not succeed in pursuing a justification for separate action if changes are
proposed. She suggested the language in the Resolution be amended to read "the improvements
being studied will be designed to accommodate and be compatible with whichever mass transit
option for the entire I-25 corridor currently being studied in the EIS, is ultimately selected by
CDOT." The actual transit facility would not be constructed until a later date, but the interchange
would be designed to allow the future construction of that facility when CDOT has the funds to do
so. Over the course of the 1601 Process, Metro Acquisitions hopes to partner with the City,
Windsor, CDOT. the MPO and Larimer County to develop a proposed funding plan to finance the
reconstruction.
Mayor Hutchinson stated funding issues are not before the Council at this time and will be examined
very carefully at the appropriate time. He asked if the only option for transit was the EIS alternative.
Mr. Garcia stated the transit proposal matches the one contained in the EIS. An element of transit
will be included in the EIS and the proposed design is consistent with that alternative whether it be
a BRT and express toll lane or a connection to a commuter rail facility.
City Attorney Roy stated if Council wishes to address the transit element in this resolution, the
language proposed by Ms. White would be preferable, so that the EIS process is not compromised
by suggesting a different option than is presently in the works. As another alternative, if the EIS
process takes a good look at transit and a transit element is part of the final design, it may not be
necessary for Council to speak to the issue with a new Section 3 in the resolution. He recommended
either Ms. White's version of Section 3 or not including Section 3 at all in the resolution. Council
must decide how strongly it feels about speaking to the transit element in the resolution. If Council
is confident transit will be addressed in the EIS process, it does not need to include language now
in the resolution.
Councilmember Roy asked if the bus rapid transit option in the EIS relates to north -south
connections. Mr. Garcia stated that was correct as the EIS is intended to address mobility between
Northern Colorado and the Denver metro area.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the design of the interchange could begin before the 1601 Process
was completed. Mr. Garcia stated CDOT will not authorize the expenditure of the earmarked
federal funds until the Transportation Commission approves or disapproves the separate action.
Preliminary design is allowed early in the process to get to a level to assess the environmental
189
March 4, 2008
impacts but the design process cannot move forward until approval is received. Local funds would
be used for any design until the Commission makes its determination.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if speeding the process will allow for the same environmental scrutiny
as would be received in the full EIS process. Mr. Garcia stated the EIS process is covering a 40 mile
corridor which takes a long time. The same categories must be cleared to receive approval for the
project, whether the categories are studied in an EIS or in a 1601 Study Process. The level of
analysis will be the same. Mark Jackson, Transportation Director, noted the advantage gained by
going through the 1601 Study Process and getting the environmental clearance, is that much of the
work has already been done starting with the SH392 Environmental Overview Study, done in 2005,
and the work already completed on the EIS.
City Manager Atteberry asked what happens to the 1601 Study if funding at the end of the process
is not available or if another interchange along I-25 wants to move forward at the same time as this
project is moving forward. Mr. Garcia stated the 1601 Study would expire in three years or longer,
if there is progress in the design. This is an existing interchange and is contained in the EIS so
CDOT would keep the project moving. This proposal is coming to CDOT as a locally funded
opportunity in partnership with CDOT to use earmarked funds. If another proposal should occur,
it would not necessarily be competing with this project but it would come forward with its own
funding proposal. There will be a specific prioritization of interchange improvements in the EIS and
competition will occur to determine which improvement should occur first. Removing the
interchange from the EIS process marks it as a "no action" network which means that regardless of
what the EIS says, this interchange needs to be built. Prioritization would place future funding with
the "no action" network first and then with the EIS.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if proceeding with this action would limit future funds received from
CDOT. Mr. Garcia stated this action would not limit future funds.
Councilmember Ohlson asked why the cost estimates did not include right-of-way acquisition.
Jackson stated the right-of-way costs would be included with the finance plan that will be developed
as part of the 1601 Process.
Councilmember Ohlson noted Council was not approving the long-term financial package at this
point but was moving the process forward at an accelerated rate. Land use and funding alternative
discussions will occur at a later date. He approved including the language proposed by Attorney
White in the resolution that addressed transit. Mr. Garcia stated he had read the new language and
he noted CDOT would not prevail upon any decision made by Council. CDOT is working within
the EIS process and advocates the concept of not predetermining an outcome. It is Council's
prerogative to have an opinion as to what it wants.
Councilmember Roy asked if the 1601 Process would allow for transit to be developed at the same
time. Mr. Garcia stated the separate action does have some hard guidelines drawn within the
physical footprints of the interchange that relate to the environmental impacts. As long as the transit
design fits in the footprint of the interchange there is flexibility. Jackson stated the update to the
VQQ
March 4, 2008
Transfort Strategic Plan is occurring at the same time this process is moving forward. The entire
system will be examined to decide the best location for more investments. Transit should not be
precluded from the interchange, if it is appropriate. The local transit plan needs to fit into the I-25
Corridor EIS recommendation for transit.
Councilmember Roy asked if financing for transit could be examined at the same time that funding
for the interchange improvements is examined. Jackson stated transit funding could be considered
at the time the preliminary finance plan is developed. City Manager Atteber y stated the question
of paying for additional transit service and paying for the interchange are future discussions. If
interchange improvements will not be funded through private development, they will need to be
funded publicly but that would not be done through the current stream of revenue. Parallel to the
1601 Process and the Transfort Strategic Plan will be a discussion of the "price of government"
which includes police, fire, parks maintenance, pavement management and transportation issues.
Councilmember Manvel asked how mass transit could be designed if the preliminary design is be
finished by the end of 2008 and the EIS transit alternative will not be determined for some time. Mr.
Garcia stated preliminary design is a preliminary footprint and allows CDOT to assess the physical
impacts of the interchange. A significant amount of detail will be determined in the final design.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Resolution
2008-030 with the addition of Section 3 that states "that the City Council's approval of the foregoing
agreements is based on its understanding that the interchange improvements will be designed to
accommodate and be compatible with whichever mass transit option for the I-25 Corridor currently
being studied in the I-25 Corridor EIS, is selected."
Councilmember Troxell noted the collaboration of Windsor, Fort Collins and the developer is a win -
win situation.
Councilmember Poppaw stated inclusion of transit in the resolution is an important part of the
planning process.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adjourn the meeting
to March 11, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
191
March 4, 2008
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
A
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk N.
192