HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-01/03/1995-RegularJanuary 3,1995
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, January 3,
1995, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was
answered by the following Councilmembers: Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith
and Wanner. Councilmember Absent: None.
Staff Members Present: Jones, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Greg Long, co-founder of Fort Collins RELEAF, expressed concerns about tree cutting before
development proposals are presented to the Planning and Zoning Board. He suggested the role
of the City Forester be more clearly identified in the development process and asked that
Council consider an ordinance that would impose a four month tree cutting moratorium within
the Urban Growth Area.
IPCitizen Participation Follow -Up
Councilmember Kneeland asked for more information on the current role and involvement of
the City Forester in the development process.
***CONSENT CALENDAR***
This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the
important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar.
Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and
considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by the Public will be
considered separately under Agenda Item #16, Public Pulled Consent Items.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No 186 1994 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in
the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund Museum Budget and Authorizing the Transfer
of Appropriated Amounts Between Operating Accounts and Projects.
8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 2. 1995 Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Enter into
a Farm Lease Agreement with Greg Walker,
1) 372
January 3, 1995
9. Items Relating to the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program. I
A. Resolution 95-1 Renewing the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 3, 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves for the
Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program.
10. Resolution 95-2 Approving the Acquisition of Services from Hoeckel's for Mail Ballot
Package Preparation and Distribution.
11. Resolution 95-3 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter Into an Intergovernmental Agreement With
Larimer County for the Provision of Social Services and Authorizing the Allocation of Funds
for Such Services in 1995.
12. Resolution 95-4 Affirming the Policy on Corporate Memberships in Outside Organizations.
13. Resolution 95-5 Authorizing the Purchase of 80 Acres of Land for Public Natural Area
Purposes.
14. Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 189, 1994 Amending Section 5-27 of the .
Code of the Citv of Fort Collins Reeardine Roof Coverine Reauirements to Febmary 7.
15. Routine Deeds and Easement
A. Powerline Easement from Thomas M. and Valerie F. Pettus, 321 Scott, needed to install
new conduit for underground streetlight installation. Monetary consideration: $10.
Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 186. 1994 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Cultural Services and Facilities Fund Museum Budget and Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriated Amounts Between Operating Accounts and Projects.
21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 187, 1994 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins
Amending the Harmony Corridor Plan and the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines.
Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
8. First Reading of Ordinance No 2 1995 Authorizingthe he City of Fort Collins to Enter into a
Farm Lease Agreement with Greg Walker.
373
a
IP
January 3, 1995
9. First Reading of Ordinance No 3 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves for the Landmark
Rehabilitation Grant Program.
20. Options Relating to Large Retail Establishments.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1995 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins
Regarding the Regulation of Large Retail Establishments (Option A); -r
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1995 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins
Extending the Temporary Suspension of the Processing of Applications for Large Retail
Establishments within the City for an Additional Period of Ninety Days (Option B)
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt and
approve all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
. Staff Reports
IP
Administrative Services Director Pete Dallow gave an update on the status of the senior center
project. He stated the contractor had informed the City in December that the substantial completion
date of the project would be the middle of February. Staff has been negotiating with the contractor
for the past few weeks and the contractor is paying penalties of $500/day for the delay. Staff
believes the best option is to continue with the current contractor, and is exploring ways to shorten
the time period and is continuing to monitor the situation on a weekly basis.
Councilmember Kneeland expressed concerns about programming at the new facility. She asked
why schedules for the new center cannot be announced.
Cultural Library and Recreation Services Director Mike Powers responded that staff will put some
information together for Council on programming at the new center.
Mayor Azari expressed a general concern about project delays since this is the second major, project
where completion dates have slipped. She stated citizens expect dates to be honored and asked the
City Manager to respond.
Interim City Manager Jones replied that staff is looking into what can be done differently to
minimize these kinds of problems in future projects.
10 374
January 3, 1995
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Janett pointed out that a resolution authorizing the purchase of 80 acres of land for
natural areas adjacent to the Cathy Fromme Prairie had been adopted on the Consent Agenda. She
stated this was a cooperative project with Larimer County and GO Colorado Trust Fund.
Councilmember Janett reminded that the City Clerk's office is accepting applications for the Citizen
Advisory Panel and briefly outlined the purpose of the Panel
Mayor Azari urged citizens to apply to serve on the Citizen Advisory Panel.
Councilmember Kneeland reported she would be hosting a meeting, January 5, regarding the
southwest community park and invited interested parties to attend.
Consideration of the Appeal of the
October 24, 1994, Decision of the Planning
and Zoning Board Approving, with Conditions, a Development
Project Known as the Waterglen P.U.D. - Final. Decision Upheld.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On October 24, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board approved, with conditions, the Waterglen
P.U.D. - Final. This project consists of 477 single family residential lots and 100 multi family
dwelling units, a neighborhood convenience shopping center, a neighborhood park, mini -storage,
and the Cooper Slough natural drainage area on 166.8 acres. The property is located at the
northwest corner of East Vine Drive and Interstate 25, is bounded by the Larimer-Weld Canal on
the north and west sides, and is zoned IL, Limited Industrial with a planned unit development
condition.
On December 14, 1994, an amended Notice of Appeal was received by the City Clerk's office
regarding the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board: .
In the Notice of Appeal from Appellants Doug Rice, Roger McConnell, and Lisa Rice, it is
alleged that:
The Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter.
375 44
IP
January 3, 1995
The Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or
grossly misleading.
The attached documents include:
* the appeal
* the Planning Department response to the appeal
* the Applications for the Waterglen P.U.D. - Preliminary and Final, certified by the
Applicant
* the Staff Reports for Waterglen P. U.D. - Preliminary and Final that were received by the
Planning and Zoning Board for the April 25, 1994 and October 24, 1994, public
hearings
* the Minutes of the October 24, 1994, Planning and Zoning Board public hearing
The procedure for hearing appeals is described in Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3 of the City
Code. "
IP
City Attorney Steve Roy briefly outlined the appeal process. He stated if both appeals were to
proceed, the Code allows the Mayor discretion in modifying the normal time limits and manner of
presentation in an attempt to avoid duplication of effort.
Doug Rice, appellant, reviewed changes to his appeal and noted he is withdrawing the objection to
the provision of utility, wording reference to utility capacity, and wording regarding vehicle,
pedestrian, bicycle transportation and emergency access.
Lucia Liley, attorney representing the owner and developer of Waterglen, stated there were no
objections to the changes or withdrawals.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to accept the changes
and withdrawals to the appeal. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey,
Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Apt reported he would be proceeding with his appeal stating the Rice Appeal did
not address many of his concerns. He spoke of specific issues which prompted filing his appeal,
noting phasing, lack of shopping, employment, and schools. He stated transportation was an issue
so 376
January 3, 1995
as well as police and fire protection and the adequacy of current roads and costs to maintain and/or
upgrade the roads.
City Attorney Steve Roy noted before addressing timeframes, it would be helpful to determine if the
parties -in -interest wished to proceed. He suggested relevant LDGS criteria be circulated to
interested members of the audience and briefly explained the term "parties -in -interest".
Doug Rice, appellant, stated he wanted to proceed with the hearing.
After a brief recess and conferring with her clients and consultants, Ms. Liley objected to Council's
hearing of the appeal stating she did not feel Mr. Apt's appeal was valid. She clarified she was not
asking for a continuance.
Roy questioned why Ms. Liley did not believe the appeal was valid.
Ms. Liley spoke of the rationale for alleging Mr. Apt's appeal not valid and stated she did not feel
the appeal was presented properly to Council, and stated the requirements had not been met
procedurally or substantively.
Roy clarified the Code states if a Councilmember files an appeal, specific grounds do not have to
be identified. He stated if the majority of Council determines additional time is needed to review
the criteria, a motion to postpone a portion of the hearing could be made.
Mayor Azari stated the appeal procedures would move ahead and briefly explained the process.
Project Planner Steve Olt presented Council with slides of the proposed development and gave a
brief presentation on this item. He spoke of the conditions the Planning and Zoning Board placed
on the development.
Councilmember Apt spoke of current and future land -uses in the area.
Doug Rice, appellant residing at 5100 East County Road 48, stated the grounds for his appeal. He
spoke of policy issues and expressed concerns regarding affordable shopping, lack of public
transportation and stated the existing land is primarily agricultural. He stated there would be an
increased traffic problem and commented the project is not located near employment or schools. He
spoke of the costs associated with increased traffic flow, costs to Poudre R-1 for bussing, and the
potential costs for future stormwater and stormdrainage problems.
Roger McConnell, 4430 East County Road 48, expressed concerns regarding the location of the
project and of his concerns for the soil, irrigation ditches, trash, pets, trespassing and liability issues.
377
11
a
Ir
January 3, 1995
He stated the area was located in a floodplain and spoke of concerns regarding the potential for
flooding in the area.
Lisa Rice, appellant 429 Princeton Road, questioned the safety of the residents, siting swift moving
irrigation ditches and its close proximately to I-25. She spoke of the disadvantages for youth stating
there is no public transportation or youth employment possibilities within walking distance of the
proposed project. She spoke of the need for an additional exit at 1-25 and Vine Drive, park
acquisition, leap frog police and fire protection, bussing and road improvements, and commented
by placing the development in its proposed location, indicates that it is not accepted in the City. She
urged that the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board be overturned.
Lucia Liley, attorney representing the developer, stated she did not feel that the appeal was presented
on a timely basis and stated the process for approval of the project was consistent with the City's
procedures in the LDGS. She stated if the project was going to be appealed, it should have been
brought up during the approval of the Overall Development Plan or at the time of the approval of
the Preliminary Plan. She clarified extensive storm drainage studies were performed evaluating
storm drainage conditions which affect both Boxelder and Cooper Slough and stated those studies
were approved by City staff. She stated she could not find anything in the allegations that suggested
the Board considered anything false and misleading.
Eldon Ward, planning consultant, stated during the planning process the Northeast Transportation
Study was considered as well as the Overall Development Plan. He believed the remoteness of the
site is a perception, not a reality, and stated the site was not in a designated floodplain. He spoke of
the benefits of the jitney bus in relation to air pollution created by single occupant vehicle trips.
Betty Maloney, 1309 City Park Avenue representing the Larimer County Affordable Housing Task
Force, spoke in support of the project and its location and supported the mix of apartments and single
family dwellings.
Rochelle Stephens, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority, spoke of the high costs
of rents and the need for affordable housing communities.
Rebuttal
Doug Rice, appellant, stated if the Planning and Zoning Board has the right to deny approval at the
final hearing, so should citizens. He spoke of his reasons for opposing the location citing possible
future expansion of I-25, dangerous swift moving canals, and density issues. He questioned why
the Planning and Zoning Board would require the daycare facility be raised 18 inches above the
current floodplain level if the proposed development did not sit on a floodplain. He stated the
project would not be served by City utilities and should be an infill subdivision and stated Council
somay be setting a precedent regarding leap frog development.
378
January 3, 1995
11
Lucia Liley, stated it was not appropriate to consider land use issues at this point, and stated the land
was excluded from the FEMA designation of a floodplain. She clarified flooding issues were taken
into consideration during the studies.
Mike Buderus, a Fort Collins resident, urged Council to support the project and spoke of the number
of people who commute to work in Fort Collins because affordable housing is not available.
Linda Norton, a Fort Collins Realtor, spoke of escalating housing costs, and stated although the
Waterglen project is not the answer to the problem, it is a step in the right direction.
Sister Mary Alice Murphy, encouraged support for developers willing to building affordable housing.
Mr. Rice stated he did not believe the Planning and Zoning Board applied the policies and provisions
set out in the Comprehensive Landuse Policy and stated he did not believed a vote against Waterglen
was a vote against affordable housing.
Olt responded to questions regarding access to I-25, noting there isn't any access to 1-25 on the west
adjacent to Waterglen.
Transportation Planner Tom Vosburg responded to Council questions and stated he was not certain
if the railroad crossings were signalized. 11 Development Engineer Manager Mike Herzig stated in the past signals have been a shared cost
between City, railroad, and developers. He commented Anheuser-Busch paid for its crossing
improvements.
Councilmember Apt suggested investigating the possibility of having the developer pay the cost for
the signalization.
Mayor Azari requested a map be shown allowing everyone to see the entire area.
Stormwater Utility Manager Bob Smith briefly explained the term "federally designated floodplain",
and stated for the daycare center to meet the floodplain regulations the structure has to be flood
proof.
City Attorney Steve Roy stated in his opinion the question of land use should remain open
throughout the process.
Councilmember Apt stated his major concerns were infrastructure,and responsibility for road
maintenance and upgrades. He questioned what legal issues would arise if the proposed jitney
bussing failed to occur.
379
14
A
January 3, 1995
Vosburg briefly outlined the traffic impact analysis, stated he felt the analysis was consistent with
excepted practices and stated it did not identify expected operational problems on either side of the
interstate or frontage road intersections.
Byrne responded to Council questions regarding the increased service costs and stated there was no
indication that the cost of service would increase.
Olt clarified extension of City utilities to the area would be available and stated the location of the
nearest firehouse meets the Poudre Fire Authority's five minute response timeframe.
Mr. Rice spoke of concerns regarding the road resurfacing project and the purchase and maintenance
of the park. He stated the police department is currently understaffed and stated the response time
could be lengthy. He commented on accessibility concerns relating to emergency service vehicles.
He questioned if future residents of the proposed development would be given a quality lifestyle
citing traffic, safety, and floodplain problems.
Ms. Liley commented on land use issues and issues vested at preliminary approval. She stated two
plans were presented for the proposed park and both plans met the 30 points as well as the road
improvement criteria. She commented that jitney bus service is tied to the 3rd phase of the project
and stated it would be offered on a one year trial basis, after that time it would be decided if it was
a needed service and then be determined who would provide the service. She stated Poudre Fire
Authority did not indicate a problem meeting the defined requirements and opposed Mr. Rice's
response regarding police service. She urged Council to uphold the decision of the Planning Zoning
Board.
Mr. Ward spoke of how the park would be funded and spoke of meetings held regarding utility
services.
Lou Stitzel, 521 E. Laurel, spoke of affordable housing concerns in the northeast area and stated the
project was the most comprehensive and complete plan for affordable housing she had seen and
urged Council to support the project.
Mr. Ward spoke of the price ranges for single detached housing and stated the majority of the
housing would fit the CHAS definition of low and moderate income housing. He clarified Phase 3
would begin approximately 2 years after the beginning of construction.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, regarding the
Rice appeal, that the evidence received by the Planning and Zoning Board was not false or
misleading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Nays: None.
380
January 3, 1995
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to uphold the
decision of the Planning and Zoning Board and find that the Planning and Zoning Board did properly
interpret and apply the relevant criteria.
Councilmember Janett supported the project but expressed concerns regarding the location of the
development.
Councilmember Apt spoke of his reasons for not supporting the Planning and Zoning Board
decision, noting the location of the project was among his reasons.
Councilmember Kneeland stated although the project did not meet all of the requirements and
policies, it did met the minimum and that is why she supported the motion.
The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember Apt.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Apt Appeal
Councilmember Apt questioned if the decision could be modified to include that railroad crossing
cost and signalization be addressed and that the developer guarantee a certain number of units as
affordable, as conditions for approval. He asked if the applicant would be willing to voluntarily
agree to a percentage of the units being affordable.
Bill Reynolds, W.W. Reynolds Company, expressed concerns regarding additional conditions being
placed on the project and how those conditions relate to the cost of the project.
City Attorney Steve Roy recommended that Councilmember Apt's request not be attached as an
additional condition.
Assistant City Attorney Paul Eckman stated the railroad signalization issue would be decided by the
Colorado Public Utilities Commission and explained how those funds would be allocated.
Councilmember Apt believed the issue was related to public safety and questioned who would be
liable.
11
7
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to uphold the decision
of the Planning and Zoning Board. 4
381
if
January 3, 1995
Councilmember Apt expressed concerns regarding developing on the fringe and leap frog
development and noted if the phasing criteria had been in place the project would have been affected.
Councilmember Smith thanked those involved in the process.
Councilmember Janett stated despite her displeasure with the location of the project, she supported
its overall concept.
Mayor Azari spoke in support of the location and the need to develop other parts of the City.
The vote on Councilmember Apt's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Options Relating to Large
Retail Establishments. Option A Adopted.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
IP"Executive Summary
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1995 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Regarding
the Regulation of Large Retail Establishments; or
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1995 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Extending
the Temporary Suspension of the Processing of Applications for Large Retail Establishments
within the Cityfor an Additional Period of Ninety Days (Option B)
On July 19, 1994, City Council enacted a six month temporary suspension on the processing of
development applications for "superstores," that is, any building, or combination of buildings
intended to be used principally for the purpose of retail sales and marketing which exceeds 80,000
square feet and for which a single certificate of occupancy was to be issued. The purpose of the
moratorium was to allow time to study the unique land use planning, transportation, infrastructure,
and aesthetic concerns associated with such stores.
Since July 19, 1994, City staff, with assistance from a citizen advisory task force and outside
consultants, has analyzed the public impacts associated with superstores. The result is the Design
Standards and Guidelines For Large Retail Establishments a supplement to the L.D.G.S. that
addresses aesthetic character, site design, locational and transportation aspects of superstores. The
new design standards and guidelines are intended to work in conjunction with the All Development
10
382
January 3, 1995
Criteria and the Community/Regional Shopping Center Point Chart (variable criteria) of the
L.D.G.S. to mitigate certain attributes and, in general, improve the character of large retail
development in a proactive manner on a city-wide basis. Option "A" would adopt these new
standards and guidelines both for PUD's and uses by right. If Council adopts Option A on First
Reading, staff will prepare for Second Reading "companion" changes to those sections of the zoning
code which define the permitted uses within the particular zoning districts that would be affected.
Option "B" would extend the moratorium for a period of 90 days, instead of adopting the proposed
new standards and guidelines. The extended moratorium would apply to all "large retail
establishments" as defined by staff and the ad hoc committee, as a result of their study of the
superstore phenomenon. Thus the extended moratorium would apply to those retail establishments
consisting of 25,000 gross square feet or more. This would be a more comprehensive moratorium
than the original moratorium which set the minimum of 80,000 square feet. At the December 13,
1994 meeting of Council's Growth Management Committee, it was requested that an Ordinance be
prepared for extension in case the superstore issues were not substantially resolved. Under Option
B, Council could schedule a work session on January 24, 1995 or on February 14, 1995 for the
purpose of refining or clarifying certain aspects of the Superstore Project.
Based on discussions with the Growth Management Committee, these remaining issues could be:
limitation on the maximum size of the superstore, or 11
limitation on the maximum size of the superstore in relation to the size of the
balance of the center, or
prescribing exact locations for future superstore development.
It should be noted that the citizen advisory committee, Planning and Zoning Board, and staff believe
that a socioeconomic impact study would be inappropriate to undertake within a 90 day extension
period.
The Planning and Zoning Board on December 19 recommended favorably (5-0) that the Superstore
Project be forwarded to City Council without a 90 day extension. "
Senior City Planner Ted Shepard outlined options A, B and C, and gave a slide presentation
reviewing the key concepts. He spoke of access and landscaping requirements and commented the
project addresses community issues and is consistent with the philosophies of the LDGS. He
responded to Council questions and stated the only instance when an expansion would trigger the
new standards and guidelines is when the expansion would exceed 50% of the building.
Transportation Planner Tom Vosburg addressed transportation and traffic concerns.
9
a
January 3, 1995
Larry Stroud, Task Force member, stated maximum size ratios were thoroughly discussed and
commented Fort Collins is a forerunner in the region regarding handling of large retailers. He spoke
of the importance of looking at each project individually.
Bob Pennock, Task Force member, commended the Planning and Zoning Board and staff for its
efforts and believed the guidelines the Task Force has implemented are a good supplement to the
LDGS. He urged Council to adopt Option A.
Jim Heaton, Task Force member, spoke in support of Option A, and recognized staff for its efforts.
Susan Meyer, Task Force member, supported Option A and commented on the diverse economic
standings of residents and the need for discount stores.
Bill Strickfadden, Task Force member, spoke the consumer demands for superstores. He believed
the guidelines set by the task force would solve several of the problems which were encountered in
the past.
Les Kaplan, Task Force member, stated the design criteria is standard driven, not performance driven
and spoke of the importance of not letting the question of size be overlooked because of design
criteria.
Ir
Gary Carnes, Planning and Zoning Board liaison to the Task Force, recommended Option A.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt Ordinance
No. 4, 1995 Option A on First Reading.
City Attorney Steve Roy suggested an amendment to the original motion inserting language on page
3, Section 29-477 under supplemental regulations after the phrase: "no addition to a building which
would create a large retail establishment' adding, "and which would increase the gross square feet
of floor area of such building by 50% or more".
Councilmembers Smith and McCluskey accepted the amendment as a friendly amendment to their
previous motion.
Ira Paul, architect, gave a brief slide presentation showing the designs of various superstore/big box
retail buildings throughout the Country.
Mike Hauser, President of the Chamber of Commerce, stated the Chamber supported Option A and
expressed concerns about keeping updates consistent.
f!
January.3, 1995
Shepard responded to Council questions and addressed window and glass requirements as it relates
to additional stores, stating the standard mitigates the mass of the large superstore.
Councilmember Smith spoke of concerns regarding sidewalk treatments and widths.
Mayor Azari stated it was a job well done and thanked everyone for their efforts.
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 187,1994
of the Council of the City of Fort Collins
Amending the Harmony Corridor Plan and the Harmony
Corridor Standards and Guidelines Adopted as Amended Option B.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"Executive .Summary
On July 5, 1994, the City Council approved a six-month moratorium on the processing of '
applications for commercial and retail developments along Harmony Road. The purpose of the
moratorium was to maintain the status quo while the City analyzed the potential impacts that
additional retail and commercial development might have in the Harmony Corridor.
For the pastfive months, City staff with the assistance of a citizen advisory committee, has discussed
and analyzed the issues facing the Corridor and has identified a series of amendments to the
Harmony Corridor Plan. The suggested amendments to the Plan are intended to strengthen the
"vision" of the Corridor that it become a major activity center in northern Colorado attracting a
variety of business and industries serving local as well as regional markets.
During the public hearing, Council asked whether the Harmony Corridor standards and guidelines
contained adequate mandatory requirements to implement the guideline in the definition of regional
shopping centers regarding streets, sidewalks, and bike paths "leading into and through" the center.
Staff believes that this concern is covered by both required standards and explanatory guidelines
in both the Harmony Corridor document and in the LDGS. No change to the Ordinance is
recommended. However, should Council decide to make these requirements more specific for local
street access, optional language has been prepared. Ordinance No. 187, 1994 was unanimously
adopted as amended on First Reading on December 20, 1994 making amendments to the Harmony
Corridor Plan and Harmony Corridor standards and guidelines." 41
385
If
January 3, 1995
Assistant Planning Director Joe Frank gave a staff presentation on this item and briefly outlined the
amendments. He gave a brief history on the zoning of Pioneer Mobile Home Park and stated the
Housing Authority is discussing options with the park
Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority Rochelle Stephens stated the Housing
Authority is committed to working with staff in an attempt to resolve the concerns of the residents
of Pioneer Mobile Home Park. She spoke of different programs and assistance that would be
available to assist in relocation.
Urban Design Specialist Clark Mapes clarified the meaning of sidewalk or bikepath access.
Councilmember Smith asked if the closure of Pioneer Mobile Home Park was a "done deal".
Frank stated he believed relocation of the mobile home park was inevitable, and clarified nothing
is currently planned for the site. He clarified there are no conditions in place requiring the developer
to address relocation issues.
Councilmember Kneeland stated it was important to offer residents a guarantee that they would have
a place to live.
IP Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services Greg Byrne spoke of the different
aspects to be considered before a plan is composed, and of the need to survey the park's population
to identify what types of problems may occur.
Mayor Azari requested staff come back with positive options for relocation of the residents of
Pioneer Mobile Home Park before January 17.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to adopt Ordinance No.
187, 1994 on Second Reading Option B adding the word "or" in the phrase "local streets, or
driveway entrances, sidewalks and bike paths" to read "local streets, or driveway entrances, or
sidewalks and bike paths".
City Attorney Steve Roy read the changes into the record.
Les Kaplan, Harmony Road Advisory Committee member, urged input from the transportation
planners regarding access concerns.
Betty Maloney, 1309 City Park Avenue, representing the Larimer County Affordable Housing Task
Force, expressed concerns regarding the displacement of the residents of Pioneer Mobile Home Park.
Lou Stitzel, 521 E. Laurel, stated any type of displacement activity by any proposed development
needs to address housing issues.
9
January 3, 1995
Angie Nicely, resident of Pioneer Mobile Home Park, spoke of housing concerns and asked for
assurance that she would have a place to live.
Yolanda C. Nicely, resident of Pioneer Mobile Home Park, stated she was concerned regarding the
future of the residents of the mobile home park and urged Council to require the developer to build
the residents another mobile home park before construction begins. She stated the needs of the
residents must be addressed first.
Michael Nicely, resident of Pioneer Mobile Home Park, spoke of the lack of available spaces for
mobile homes and asked for a guarantee that there would be a place for the trailers to be moved
within City limits.
Brian Anderson, resident of Pioneer Mobile Home Park, stated it was easy to "fall through the
cracks" and stated if relocation assistance is not offered he would become homeless.
Tom Moore, owner of Mawson Lumber Company, opposed the amendments to the Harmony
Corridor Plan stating he didn't feel there was anything wrong with the original plan. He stated the
new plan moves away from performance based development system and was a giant step backwards.
He suggested if zoning changes must be made there should be an open process with fair
representation from all concerned parties.
Ira Paul, representing the potential developer of the site, expressed concerns for the residents of the '
mobile home park and stated there would be a cooperative effort between the developer, the City and
the Housing Authority to come up with solutions for park residents.
Rochelle Stephens, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority, stated that although
some people do "fall through the cracks" she stood by her pledge to offer assistance.
Vosburg responded to questions regarding local access. He spoke of reasons for not mandating local
street connections in all centers, and stated it should be considered on a site by site basis to determine
if a street can be integrated without causing an impact on the neighborhood. He clarified the
proposed amendment would require all centers to provide a transit stop.
Stephens responded to Council questions and spoke of the use of federal and state funds for
relocation. She stated everything is in a conceptual state, emphasizing nothing has been finalized.
Mayor Azari stressed there are currently no plans to displace any residents of the mobile home park.
Frank spoke of the zoning district occupied by Mr. Moore and spoke of the difficulty in balancing
the needs of individual property owners with the overall vision of the corridor.
a
387
IP
January 3, 1995
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 95-7
Authorizing the Purchase of 277.5 Acres of
Land for Natural Area Purposes Adopted.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"Financial Impact
The acquisition cost would total $1,600,000. Long-term maintenance costs are estimated at
approximately $9,972 annually, based on an estimated cost of $36 per acre per year. Funds for
acquisition and long-term maintenance would come from proceeds of the 114 cent Natural Areas
Sales Tax. The land acquisition portion of the fund has a current balance of $2.1 million and there
is an additional appropriation of $2.7 million in the 1995 budget. If the New Note transaction is
approved by the Council, $1.860 million in acquisition funds would be currently committed through
Ir purchase and sale agreements.
Executive Summary
Resolution 95-7 authorizes the purchase of 277.5 acres of land for public natural area purposes.
The land is located in the Harmony Gateway area, in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of
Harmony Road and Interstate 25. This property has been identified as a key parcel of land to the
City because of its strategic location along the Poudre River at the southern gateway to the City.
Acquisition would further the adopted goals and objectives of the Natural Areas Policy Plan, the
Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and the Harmony Corridor Plan.
Resolution 95-7 also directs staff to further investigate and provide recommendations to Council on
two issues. Portions of Parcel A and Parcel B do not currently possess outstanding natural values
and could potentially be resold for other uses. This could offer opportunity to recoup a portion of
the purchase price while ensuring compatible use. Eight billboards are located on the property.
While new billboards would not be permitted in City natural areas, the existing billboards do
produce significant income that could be used in the natural areas program. A policy decision is
needed as to whether or not to maintain the billboards after the City acquires the land. Staff will
report back to Council on these two issues within 90 days.
BACKGROUND:
Em
January 3, 1995
Purchase Agreement. Staff has negotiated a purchase and sale agreement with the New Note
Partnership, a Colorado General Partnership, for the acquisition of approximately 277.5 acres of
land and other assets in the vicinity of the Harmony Gateway at Interstate 25 and Harmony Road.
The purchase price of $1,600,000 was established through an appraisal dated November 1, 1994
completed by Jerry More, MAL The agreement is contingent on City Council approval. If approved,
closing would occur by January 20, 1995.
Assets involved in the transaction include 277.5 acres of land, four shares of Boxelder Irrigation
Company water, and eight billboards. The land is comprised of three parcels (see map):
* Parcel A -- 38 acres at the northwest corner of County Road 7 at Harmony Road.
* Parcel B -- 204.6 acres north of Harmony Road between County Road 7 and Interstate 25
(includes 7 sign locations).
* Parcel C -- 34.9 acres east of Interstate 25 north of the Western Mobile gravel operation and
on the south bank of the Poudre River (includes 1 sign location).
Under the purchase agreement, the City will obtain immediate title to the property located west of
Interstate 25. New Note will retain title to Parcel C, east of Interstate 25, for five years and then
donate the land to the City. In the interim, New Note will lease parcel C to the Cityfor one dollar
per year, so the City will have immediate access to the property. Similarly, New Note will retain title
to the billboard on Parcel C for 10 years and then donate the billboard to the City.
Location and Land Use Designations. As shown on the attached map, the site is located in the
Harmony Gateway area at Interstate 25 and Harmony Road. The site is outside the City limits, but
primarily within the Urban Growth Area (Parcel C is outside the UGA). The land is vacant except
for the eight billboards on the property. Parcels B and C were mined for sand and gravel in the past
and include approximately 88 acres of mined -out gravel ponds. Large ponds on Parcel B have been
leased to a private group in the past for water skiing and camping. This lease will not be renewed
if the City purchases the property.
Surrounding lands are primarily a mixture of vacant agricultural land and gravel mining.
Developed areas include: a gas station and the Harris Marine store at the intersection of I-25 and
Harmony; the State Highway Rest Area across the Poudre Riverfrom the site; and rural residential
development west of parcel B.
While the site is currently undeveloped and development potential is limited by the absence of sewers
in the area, the properties are located within or near the Harmony Corridor, which is considered
a prime site for future development as an employment center. Although currently under County
zoning jurisdiction, it is envisioned that future development would be in accordance with the recently
revised Harmony Corridor Plan. This plan envisions the area as a mixture of "Green
Corridor/Open Space" and "Basic Industrial and Non -Retail Employment Activity Center"
001
Ir
January 3, 1995
A summary of existing Zoning, recommendations from the Harmony Corridor Plan, and "highest and
best use" as estimated by the appraisal is as follows:
Parcel A (38 acres) -- Zoned FA-1, Farming. Mixture of open space and basic industrial and
non -retail employment activity center in Harmony Corridor Plan. Future development
identified as highest and best use in appraisal.
Parcel B (204.6 acres) -- Zoned C, Commercial, in south and central portions and I,
Industrial, on north. Mixture of open space and basic industrial and non -retail employment
activity center in Harmony Corridor Plan. Highest and best use in appraisal includes 60
acres of gravel reserve and 55 acres of potential development land. Approximately 72 acres
is in the Poudre River Floodway and is not developable.
Parcel C (34.9 acres) -- Zoned I, Industrial. Not addressed in Harmony Corridor Plan.
Highest and best use in appraisal includes 5 acres of gravel reserves.
Policy Basis and Natural Area Values. The proposed acquisition site has been identified as a high
priority natural area acquisition site since 1992, because of (1) its high natural resource value, (2)
opportunities for human use forpassive recreation, (3) its strategic location as a scenic entryway
to the City, and (4) its importance in meeting the objectives of the Natural Areas Policy Plan, the
Ir Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and the Harmony Corridor Plan.
While the site is not pristine and has been extensively altered by past gravel mining and agriculture,
it retains a wide diversity of habitat types:
Parcel A -- 10 acres of wetland, 1 acre of pond, and 27 acres of upland grassland.
Parcel B -- 85 acres of pond, 14 acres of riparian forest, 8 acres of shrub savanna, 42 acres
of grassland, and 56 acres of agriculture.
Parcel C -- 3 acres of pond and 35.5 acres of riparian forest and bottomland.
Of these, the 27 acres of upland grassland on Parcel A and the 56 acres of agriculture on Parcel
B are not included in the City's natural areas inventory. These sites may be considered for resale
for other uses, or for restoration to enhance the existing natural values.
The diversity of habitat types found on the site are used by a wide variety offish and wildlife species.
The site contains an important day roost site used by double -crested cormorants and great blue
herons, and receives extensive use by waterfowl and other waterbirds, deer, and a variety of
migratory songbirds.
The diversity of the site also offers opportunityfor hiking, birdwatching, nature study, and a variety
of other passive recreation uses. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan envisions an extension of
390
January 3, 1995
the Poudre River Trail through the site, and the site also gives the opportunity for an underpass
beneath Interstate 25 for a future trail extension to Greeley. The Colorado Division of Wildlife has
expressed interest in cooperating with the City to develop fishing opportunities in some of the larger
ponds.
Potential Sale of Portions of Parcel A and B. As noted above, portions of Parcels A and B not
included in the City's natural areas inventory and do not currently possess outstanding natural
values. These parcels could be enhanced to improve natural values compatible with the remainder
of the property, or they could be sold for other uses. Since the parcels with development potential
possess a higher value than the remainder of the site (estimated $12, 000 per acre, compared to $500
to $4,500 per acre for the remainder), resale offers the opportunity to recoup a significant portion
of the purchase price of the site. Resolution 95-7 directs staff to further investigate the alternatives
and make recommendations to Council within 90 days.
The first parcel for further evaluation is the 27 acres of nonnative upland grassland included in
Parcel A. Staff will evaluate the potential to sell this land for other uses that would be compatible
with and protective of the wetland values on the remainder of the site.
The second parcel is 45 acres of agricultural land in the southeast portion of Parcel B, adjacent to
Interstate 25. This land is adjacent to an 8-acre site that contains the large metal building that is
currently used for retail boat sales. The State Land Board has a contingent contract to purchase
the building with the intent of remodeling it for a variety of governmental uses, possibly including
a welcome center, offices for the Colorado State Parks and Colorado Highway Patrol, and CSU's
Environmental Learning Center. In addition the Colorado Department of Transportation plans to
develop a Park and Ride facility in this area in conjunction with the figure improvement of the
Harmony Road interchange on Interstate 25. If this concept becomes reality, there is good
opportunity to work cooperatively with the SIB and other agencies to plan facilities such as parking,
landscaping, and interpretive signage for mutual benefit.
The SLB has also expressed interest in purchasing additional land (up to 35 acres) for future
development. The SIB is interested in working with the City to plan the area so that the
development and City natural area would be compatible, including identifying land uses and design
guidelines. Because this area is cornfield and does not currently possess significant natural values,
sale of the area may offer a chance to recoup a significant portion of the purchase price, while
assuring that future development is compatible with both the goals of the Natural Areas Policy Plan
and the Harmony Corridor Plan.
Staff will further investigate this possibility, as well as other alternatives such as gravel mining, or
retaining and enhancing the site. Staff will provide recommendations to Council within 90 days.
Future Billboard Leases Eight billboards are located on the property and produce income of
approximately $60,000 annually. Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the current owners
would retain ownership of the billboard on the property located east of Interstate 25 for 10 years 41
391
Ir
January 3, 1995
($24,000 annual income) and the City would assume ownership of the remaining billboards. While
new billboards would not be permitted in City natural areas, the existing billboards do produce
significant income that could be used to enhance this site or elsewhere in the natural areas program.
Staff, the Natural Resources Advisory Board, and the Parks and Recreation Board believe that a
policy decision is needed as to whether or not to maintain the billboards after the City acquires the
land. Resolution 954 directs staff to consider the issue further and provide Council with
recommendations within 90 days.
Name and Management Classi ication. The proposed name for the site is "Harmony Ponds Natural
Area". Management classifications for the site will be assigned in conjunction with the development
of a management and site access plan. It is anticipated that portions of the site will be designated
"Sensitive" and portions will be designated "Urban". Sensitive areas are managed primarily to
protect sensitive natural features and Urban areas are multiple use areas with an emphasis on
maintaining the natural character of the site.
Inspection. No physical or environmental limitations are known to be present on the site. An
environmental liability audit is in process on the site and will be completed prior to closing.
Board and Commission Review. The Parks and Recreation Board and Natural -Resources Advisory
Board both recommended unanimously that the site be acquired."
IP
Natural Resources Director Tom Shoemaker gave a brief slide presentation on this item and spoke
of the billboards on the property.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt
Resolution 95-7. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Nays: None. (Councilmember Apt absent)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 95-6
Modifying the Process for
Appointing the City Manager. Adopted
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
On December 6, 1994, the Council adopted three Resolutions establishing a process for selection
of the new City Manager. Included in that process was a provision which called for the
establishment of a committee of City staff members to participate throughout the process. After
1k discussion about that component of the process, staff is recommending that two employee
392
January 3, 1995
1
committees be involved in the process. This Resolution would modify the process as established by
Resolution 94-205, to provide for two separate employee Committees.
BACKGROUND:
Council adopted three resolutions on December 6, which established the process for selection of a
new City Manager and appointed committees to assist the Council in that selection process.
Resolution 94-205, which established the overall process, made reference in Section 4 to a
committee of City staff members which would participate in the process by: (1) providing
information in the development of the position profile; (2) participating in the interview process and
providing feedback to the City Council on the strengths and weakness of the candidates; and (3)
providing information and community tours to the candidates.
After further discussing the potential composition of this employee committee, Staff is recommending
that two separate employee committees be established. The first would consist of the Executive Lead
Team plus the Municipal Judge. The second would consist of a cross section of 11 other City
employees. That committee would be selected from the employees who express an interest in
participating in the process. This selection would be made by a panel consisting of the Interim
Deputy City Manager, the Director of Human Resources, the Personnel Operations Manager, and
two Council Members. 11
This Resolution would modify the search process as defined in Resolution 94-205 and would appoint
two Council Members to assist in the selection of the second employee committee." _
Personnel Operations Manager Ann Tumquist gave a brief presentation on this item and outlined the
composition of the committees.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Resolution
95-6 inserting the names of Ann Azari and Gina Janett. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Janett,
Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None. (Councilmember Apt absent)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Smith spoke of the City Forester's role in the development process and of instances
when the City does not seem to follow its own policies. He suggested looking at more severe
penalties for construction delays.
a
393
IP
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 2:10 a.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk Q�
Ir
January 3,1995
394