HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-05/02/1995-Adjourned' May 2,1995
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, May 2, 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, McCloskey, Smith
and Wanner.
Staff Members Present: Jones, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Betty Maloney, 1309 City Park Ave., suggested Council adopt a relocation ordinance as well
as policies and procedures to deal with the displacement of residents by new development.
Barb Sommermeyer, 1813 Barrington Ct., expressed concerns about the scarcity of low income
housing and about relocation of families such as those residing at the Pioneer Mobile Home
' Park.
Al Baccili, 520 Galaxy Ct., expressed concern about election spending by the Chamber of
Commerce and about the payment of Chamber dues by PRPA.
Yolanda Nicely, 300 Harmony Rd., asked the Mayor for a Proclamation expressing Fort Collins'
support to the people of Oklahoma City in light of the recent bombing tragedy.
David Roy, 1039 West Mountain Ave., asked Council to adopt a Resolution opposing SB 225,
that would take away local authority to deal with zoning tracts of land under 35 acres.
Mayo Sommermeyer, 1813 Barrington Ct., supported the Provincetown location for the
relocation of the Pioneer Mobile Home Park.
Vinnie Jack, asked Council to spend more tax monies north of Prospect.
Leonard "Yank" Banowetz, 12 Forest Hills Lane, attorney, supported the Provincetown location
for the relocation of Pioneer Mobile Home Park and offered his services as bond counsel.
Paul Miller, 224 West, expressed concern about the City's development policies and criteria.
54
May 2, 1995
Ed Robert, 1923 Lindenridge Dr., supported the Provincetown location for the relocation of the '
Pioneer Mobile Home Park and thanked staff for its work on the search for a site.
Citizen Participation Follow --Up
Councilmember Apt pointed out that Council will be considering a Resolution under Other Business
that would oppose SB 225.
Councilmember Janett stated she believed the Provincetown location is a viable option for the
relocation of the Pioneer Mobile Home Park and for affordable housing. The debt issues with the
property need to be resolved.
Agenda Review
Interim City Manager Jones stated a revised Item No. 19, Resolution 95-60 Making Findings of Fact
Regarding the Appeal of the P&Z Board Approval of the Hugh M. Woods PUD, Final, and
Upholding the Decision of the Board, is in Council's packet. The revisions clarify and reflect the
fact that the variance that was granted relates to the topography as well as the vegetation elements.
***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 #23, Public Pulled Consent Items.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 41, 1995 Vacating Portions of East Horsetooth Road and
Mitchell Drive Right -of -Way and Retaining the Same for Utility and Drainage Easement
Psposes.
The developer dedicated extra right-of-way along the Horsetooth Road frontage for a right
turn lane to Mitchell Drive. Since the need for the right turn lane is for City at large use, and
not just needed for this project, in most cases the City would have had to purchase the right-of-
way. Therefore, staff believes the dedication the City received for the right turn lane is an
acceptable trade-off for the proposed vacation being requested to solve the project's drainage
problem. In addition, the right-of-way beyond the back of the sidewalk in this location is not
necessary for street purposes. Ordinance No. 41, 1995, which was unanimously adopted on
First Reading on April 18, vacates the excess right-of-way.
55
7
May 2, 1995
I
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No 42, 1995, Amending Section 2-182 of the City Code
Relating to Membership of the Community Development Block Grant Commission
At its March 13, 1995 meeting, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Commission voted unanimously to reduce the membership of the Commission from 13
members to 11 members. Ordinance No. 42, 1995, which was unanimously adopted on First
Reading on April 18, 1995, reduces the membership of the Commission effective May 12,
1995 (10 days following final adoption of the Ordinance on second reading on May 2, 1995).
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No 43 1995 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund,
The Fort Collins Housing Authority (the "Authority") made a payment to the City from its
1994 budget in the sum of $16,894.51 as a "Payment in Lieu of Taxes" ("PILOT') for public
services and facilities. The Authority has requested that the City refund the money "...to again
fund sorely needed affordable housing related activities, to attend the low-income housing
needs of Fort Collins residents."
Resolution 92-93 reinstated the requirement by the City of the Authority to make annual
PII.OTs to the City. The purpose of the resolution was to clarify that these funds are the
property of the City and not excess HUD funds. The City may dispose of them as it deems
' appropriate in accordance with law, including remitting the funds to the Authority if the
Council determines that such remittal serves a valid public purpose. The Council remitted the
PILOT to the Authority in 1992, 1993, and 1994. Ordinance No. 43, 1995, was unanimously
adopted on First Reading on April 18, 1995.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No 50 1995 Dedicating 1.62 Acres of Land as a Public Highway
for Improvements to County Road 23 (Centennial Drivel
Latimer County's Short Range Highway Improvement Program includes plans to reconstruct
County Road 23 (Centennial Drive) along the east side of Horsetooth Reservoir. This work
will consist of some alignment changes, widening the roadway to 30 feet, installing drainage
culverts, and surfacing with an asphalt mat. Any parts of City -owned land disturbed by this
construction will be revegetated with a hydroseed mix. The work is currently scheduled to
begin in July of 1995.
The construction plans and work schedule have been checked with the Parks Department and
they have not identified any problems. The project will help to improve access to and parking
for the City's Pine Ridge Open Space.
6
May 2, 1995
11. First Reading
of
Ordinance No 51 1995
Approving the Terms of the Lease for the Mini
Library
at 132 Troutman
Place. Fort Collins.
Colorado.
I
As presented to Council in March with the lease terms approval for 405 Canyon Avenue,
Larimer County has changed the method for exempting property tax on government leased
property. The new procedure requires the City Council to approve, by ordinance, the lease
terms prior to Larimer County exempting City leased property from property tax.
Appropriatingf 2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 52. 1995, Authorizing the Sale of Certain R(,al Property an
1.1 •. ed Revenue• the Parkland
On April 18, staff submitted an agenda item summary which disposed of the south 12.5 feet
of the Rossborough Park Ditch. At that time, negotiations for the northerly 12.5 feet were
being conducted with a person who had contracted to buy the abutting property to the north
of the ditch. After the contract purchaser went through the City's conceptual review process,
they decided not to pursue the purchase. As a result, the adjacent property owners have agreed
to purchase the additional 12.5 feet.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 53, 1995. Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General
Fund.
The contract with the Convention & Visitors Bureau terminates on December 31, 1995. '
Staff is currently in the process of evaluating the rationale and methodology for the provision
of Conference, Convention & Tourism promotional services. A review of the funding
provided for these services, as well as options for capping or limiting funding, or the
purchase of services will be included. The staff is planning to conclude its review early this
summer, and will formulate options and a recommendation for discussion with Council by
mid -summer. Any action regarding a change in funding or allocation will be included in the
1996 Budget. Any Request for Proposal will be based upon Council direction and will likely
be issued by late -summer 1995. This ordinance is adjusting the 1995 amount to be paid to
the Convention and Visitors Bureau, based on 1994 actual collections.
14. First Readina of Ordinance No. 54, 1995. Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General • from Sublease Payments,
On March 21, 1995, Council adopted Ordinance No. 23, 1995 approving the terms of a
Lease Agreement with Claire and Madge Goddard for 405 Canyon Avenue. The users
identified for this space were Human Rights Officer, Human Resources Training and
Development,. Neighborhood Resource Manager and RSVP.
A Sublease Agreement between City and RSVP was initiated April 1, 1995. The rent
generated by the Sublease needs to be appropriated to the General Fund for use by the Right -
of -Way Division. '
57
May 2, 1995
' 15. First Readies of Ordinance No 55 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves for Engineering -
Development Review Staff.
This ordinance appropriates funds to increase the core staff in Engineering - Development
Review from two to three engineers and funds a contractual clerical/technical position. The
anticipated outputs from these positions includes the following: improve the development
engineering review plan review turn around time, decrease the number of projects per year
each engineer reviews, improve the quality of plan review by spending more time on each
project, improve communications by increasing the number of meetings and phone
conversations with development engineering applicants, help individual customers trouble-
shoot with the development engineering process, develop system improvements that impact
customers (developers and neighborhoods) of the development review process, and update
development standards and codes.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 56. 1995 Amending Section 4 of Ordinance No. 179. 1993.
for the Purpose of Continuing the Effective Date of Said Ordinance Until June 30, 1995,
Ordinance No. 179, 1993 amended the minimum lot size of the NCM, Neighborhood
Conservation Medium Density Zoning district. The amendment was for a limited time
period to preclude the development of secondary residential structures within the East Side
and West Side neighborhoods until December 31, 1994 or until design criteria supplemental
t to the neighborhood plans could be developed, whichever came first. Due to unanticipated
special projects and staff turnover, the start of the project was delayed. In December, 1994,
Council granted a five month extension to May 31, 1994. A draft of the design guidelines
was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board at their April 24, 1995 meeting. However,
due to the need for final changes to the document and legal review of the final draft, the
Board's hearing was continued and the guidelines will not be heard by Council until June.
17. Items Relating to the Highway Safety Plan Contract with the Colorado Department of
Transportation Providing Funds for the Purchase of an Unmanned Speed Monitoring
Awareness Radar Trailer (S.M.A.R.T.).
A. Resolution 95-58 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement
Between the City of Fort Collins and the State Department of Transportation
Concerning a Grant of Funds to the City under the State's Highway Safety Plan for
Fiscal Year 1995.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 57, 1995, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Fort Collins Police Services Purchase of the S.M.A.R.T. Radar
Trailer.
Police Services has been awarded a grant totaling $13,748 from the Colorado Department
' of Transportation, Office of Transportation Safety for the purchase of an unmanned portable
58
May 2, 1995
S.M.A.R.T. trailer. This non -enforcement tool will be used to monitor and display to the I
motorist the speed at which they are traveling through a specific location.
The in -kind personal services match represents the commitment of Police Services Traffic
Officers involved in this project. Traffic Unit Officers will be required to spend a minimal
amount of time moving and setting up the trailer and completing quarterly reports regarding
the speed monitoring data on each of the locations where the S.M.A.R.T. trailer is deployed.
The selection of locations will be based on the number of citizens complaints concerning
speeding, the number of speed related citations and the number of speed involved accidents
at each location. The S.M.A.R.T. trailer and the data collected will be available to other City
service areas.
18. Resolution 95 59 Authorizing the Purchase of a Vac n Dig Machine for Light and Power as
an Exception to the Competitive Bid Process
The Vac-n-Dig machine is used to dig small opening potholes to locate underground utilities,
reducing the risk of damage to those utilities. High pressure compressed air is used to break
up the soil and then a vacuum system cleans the soil from the hole. This machine allows
utility location under public streets through a small 12" by 12" opening (potholing)in the
asphalt. It will be used in conjunction with directional boring in the Utilities undergrounding
program to locate depths of existing utilities under developed streets prior to beginning the
boring operation. This is necessary for reasons of public safety and convenience. The I
digging method minimizes disruption to the pavement, much reducing street replacement
costs.
19. Resolution 95-60 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Al2peal of the Planning and Zoning
Board's Approval of the Hugh M. Woods P.U.D. - Final. and Upholding the Decision of the
Board.
On March 8, 1995, an appeal of the February 276, 1995 final decision of the Planning and
Zoning Board to, approve the Hugh M. Woods P.U.D. - Final was filed by
Councilmember/Appellant Gina C. Janett.
On April 18, 1995, City Council voted to uphold the decision of the Planning and Zoning
Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, the Council should adopt a
Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the appeal.
1. Resolution 9. h•Purchase of r. •. u of i.
Purposes. for Natural
Area
This Resolution authorizes the purchase of 8.5 acres of land for public natural area purposes.
The land will be added to the existing 17.4 acre area in the Red Fox Meadows Natural Area,
which is located in the core area of the City in the general vicinity of Prospect Road and ,
Shields Street.
W9
May 2, 1995
' 21. Resolution 95-62 Reaffirming the Community Benefits Obtained Through Ownershipof the
Fort Collins Electric Utility. a Public Power Agency.
The electric utility industry is in the process of moving from a primarily regulated monopoly
structure to a competitive market driven environment. The extent to which 'deregulation will
take place and the speed at which the deregulation will take place are not certain. However,
it is appropriate for the City to begin developing a policy framework to help guide Light and
Power in the months and years ahead. This resolution begins to establish the policy direction
for decision making by City Council and staff in order to respond to and prepare for the
deregulation of the electric utility industry.
22. Routine Deeds and Easements.
A. Powerline Easement from Gene and Sylvia M. Timmermans, 703 Colorado, needed to
install electric secondary vault to underground existing overhead services. Monetary
consideration: $10.
Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 41, 1995 Vacating Portions of East Horsetooth Road and
Mitchell Drive Right -of -Way and Retaining the Same for Utility and Drainage Easement
Purposes.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1995. Amending Section 2-182 of the City. Code
Relating to Membership of the Community Development Block Grant Commission.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 43, 1995, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund.
26. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 48. 1995 Amending Article III of Chapter 25 of the City
Code Concerning Deferred Payment of Use Tax for Large Base Industry.
Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 50, 1995. Dedicating 1.62 Acres of Land as a Public
Highway for Improvements to County Road 23 (Centennial Drive).
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 51. 1995 Approving the Terms of the Lease for the Mini
Library at 132 Troutman Place. Fort Collins. Colorado,
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 511995, Authorizing the Sale of Certain Real Property and
' Appropriating,the Unanticipated Revenue to the Parkland Fund.
60
May 2, 1995
13. First Reading of Ordinance No 53 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General I
Fund.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No 54 1995 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund from Sublease Payments. '
Engineering-
DevelopmentReview
• ••• - • •� • r" - • . • • •.- 1 ••
17. First Reading of Ordinance No 57 1995 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Fort Collins Police Services Purchase of the S M A R T Radar Trailer
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 1995 Amending Chapter 15, Article XV Regarding
Solid Waste Collection and Recycling.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 59, 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the '
Sales and Use Tax Fund for Transfer to the General Fund for Recycling Projects.
28. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 44 1995 Rezoning Approximately 140 Acres
from the T-Transition District to the R-P. Planned Residential District with a PUD
Condition. Known as the Summitview Properties Rezoning.
29. • Collins,'' Ordinance to Animals,
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt and approve
all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Apt spoke of the Resolution that was adopted on the Consent Calendar that
reaffirms the community benefits obtained through ownership of the Fort Collins Electric Utility.
IL
61
May 2, 1995
' Councilmember McCluskey spoke of the monthly PFA meeting and stated the Authority voted to
reexamine the roofing ordinance. The changes will be scheduled for a future Council meeting. The
Board believes it has improved the ordinance.
Councilmember Janett announced that Cinco de Mayo events will be taking place throughout the
community over the week -end.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 48, 1995,
Amending Article III of Chapter 25 of the City Code
Concerning Deferred Payment of Use Tax
for Large Base Industry. Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
Fort Collins Inc. has requested that the City expand its role in providing economic incentives to
attract or retain existing businesses. Elements of the request include a reduction in the
manufacturing equipment use tax and a reduction in the personal property tax on equipment.
If adopted on second reading, Ordinance No. 48, 1995 would allow the City to defer a company's
' use tax liability over a specified period of time. Currently, the City offers payment plans to
companies with tax liability that cause economic hardship. Staff negotiates terms, including the
length of the payment schedule and interest rates on unpaid liability.
During its meeting of April 18, 1995, Ordinance No. 48, 1995, was adopted 6-1 on First Reading.
Council rejected the options related to personal property tax rebates, manufacturing use tax cap,
and manufacturing use tax escrow.
The agenda materials presented to Council on April 18, 1995, are provided for further background.
This information includes a more complete discussion of Ordinance No. 48, 1995. "
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith to adopt Ordinance
No. 48, 1995, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Apt stated the deferment of taxes doesn't burden the taxpayers but does allow some
flexibility to business. He stated several Symbios Logic employees had contacted him to relate that
an EM from a Symbios division president had indicated that the decisions for the two companies
were unrelated in terms of Hyundai's chip facility and the viability of Symbios in the community.
Councilmember McCluskey stated there is a need to develop a broader policy to respond to
situations like this.
62
May 2, 1995
The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, I
Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: Councilmember Wanner.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Financial Impact
Currently, trash haulers pay an annual licensing fee of thirty-five dollars for the first vehicle and
ten dollars for each additional vehicle to be used in their collection business. If Ordinance No. 58,
1995 is adopted, the annual licensing fee will change to thirty dollars per vehicle. Projected
additional General Fund revenue for the City is $2,000 to $3,000 per year.
Ordinance No. 59, 1995 authorizes appropriations, totalling $50,000, from prior year reserves in
the Sales and Use Tax Fund. In 1986, City Council set aside the $50,000 and earmarked it as a
"Recycling Contingency". Approval of this ordinance eliminates the contingency. The
appropriations will be used for a marketing consultant and for a consultant to develop an RFP for
a composting facility.
Executive Summary I
A. Resolution 95-63 Establishing Policy Direction for the Staff Concerning Trash Collection
and Waste Stream Reduction.
Option A: Does not include provision for a Phase 1 consultant study to explore creating a
City utilityfor solid waste collection.
Option B: Does include provision for a Phase 1 consultant study to explore creating a City
utilityfor solid waste collection.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 58, 1995 Amending Chapter 15, Article XV Regarding Solid
Waste Collection and Recycling.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 59, 1995 Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Sales
and Use Tax Fund for Transfer to the General Fund for Recycling Projects.
At the November 8, 1994 Council worksession, Council provided staff direction to pursue the goals
of reducing the waste stream, increasing participation in recycling programs and decreasing the
impact of trash trucks on residential streets. The Resolution and Ordinances included with this
agenda item implement the direction given by Council. '
63
May 2, 1995
I
BACKGROUND:
Resolution 95-63 Establishing Policy Direction for the Staff Concerning Trash Collection and
Waste Strearn Reduction. Outlines specific actions for implementing the Integrated Municipal Solid
Waste Program. The intent is to ensure staff is headed in the right direction. Option A does not
include provisions for a Phase I consultant study to explore creating a City utilityfor solid waste
collection. Option B does include provisions for a Phase 1 consultant study.
Ordinance No 58 1995, Amending Chapter 15, Article XV Regarding Solid Waste Collection and
Recycling.
While continuing to focus on a private approach to trash collection and hauling, Council asked staff
to bring back the following proposed code changes:
Increase annual trash collection licensing fees from the current thirty-five dollars for the
first vehicle and ten dollars for each additional vehicle to the proposed thirty dollars per
vehicle. The additional money generated will be used to pay a portion of a City-wide
residential and commercial marketing and public information program. New fees will
become effective December 31, 1995 as current licenses expire.
• Bundle trash collection and recycling services together. In other words, if a customer
' requests trash collection service they automatically receive recycling service. Thus there is
an economic incentive for customers to participate in recycling. Proposed effective date is
October 1, 1995.
I
Require haulers to charge the same for each volume of waste collected. In other words, the
cost for collecting the first bag costs the same as the second bag, as the third bag, etc.
Proposed effective date is January 1, 1996.
Proposed administrative changes to the Code:
Prohibit haulers from operating in residential areas between 7:00 pm and 7:00 am the
following day.
Delineate more specifically the information haulers are required to submit to the City semi-
annually. The information is used by the City to measure the success of various programs.
Require frequency of collection of curbside recycling at least once weekly rather than once
monthly. Haulers, for the most part, currently pick-up recyclables weekly.
Ordinance No, 59, 1995, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for
Transfer to the General Fund for Recycling Projects.
M.
May 2, 1995
At the November 8, 1994 Council worksession, Council provided staff direction to pursue the '
opening of a composting facility for yard and wood waste and construction debris, and refocus
current recycling public education efforts from an information approach to a marketing approach.
The requested monies will be used to fund:
The development of a Request for Proposals by a consultant for the siting, operation and
maintenance of a composting facility co -located with the Lorimer County Landfill.
A consultant to develop a focused marketing plan for increasing participation in commercial
and residential recycling services.
In 1986, City Council set aside and earmarked $50,000 in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for future
recycling -related projects. Staff is requesting that the funds requested by this Ordinance come from
this pool of monies.
Attached to this Agenda Item Summary is a recommended set of goals and timelines (Attachment A)
to help with a decision of whether or not to begin a consultant study to explore the option of creating
a City utility.
Council's guidance included requiring new development projects to consolidate trash/recycling
hauling. While this is still desirable, implementing this guidance has been delayed; thus it is not
included in this package of the resolution and ordinances. Staff believes it is important to proceed I
with the remaining items.
Public Review - The actions recommended in this Agenda Item Summary are those requested by
Council during its November 8, 1994 worksession. Prior to that worksession, various affected
interests were involved throughout the process. Many of the ideas from affected interests were
incorporated into the final recommendations. The Agenda Item Summary and accompanying'
resolution and ordinances were reviewed by the Natural Resources Advisory Board. Its
recommendations are:
• Unanimously endorsed ordinance changes
• Endorsed Resolution Option "B"by 7-2 vote"
Natural Resources Director Tom Shoemaker presented the items described in the Agenda Item
Summary. He stated this item is in response to Council's goals of increasing participation in
recycling programs and decreasing the impact of trash trucks on residential streets. He stated the two
issues were looked at in concert in terms of an integrated solid waste management plan. He stated
various impacts and recommendations were considered and that staff believes the implementation
package presented achieves the policy direction discussed with Council previously.
Councilmember Smith asked about the timing and the purpose of the study to explore creating a City I
utility for solid waste collection.
65
May 2, 1995
Shoemaker stated staff has not begun any procurement process to hire a consultant and estimated the
study would take 3-4 months to complete once a contractor is selected. The purpose of the study
would be to investigate in detail the feasibility of the City taking over the solid waste services and
dividing the City into districts and then contracting the collection service back to private industry.
The study would look at the mechanics, economics and financial impacts, and the changes in City
staffing that would be needed to create a City utility both for the citizens of Fort Collins and for the
private haulers that now provide the service.
Councilmember McCluskey supported the bundling concept and asked what it does to staffs goal
of increasing participation in residential recycling.
Shoemaker stated feed -back indicates that the additional $1.75 - $3.00 fee for recycling service is
a disincentive. However, he estimated a successful curbside recycling program could achieve
upwards of 70% participation.
Councilmember Apt asked about the cost associated with multiple trucks on City streets, in terms
of damage to streets.
Shoemaker responded that the task team came up with a statistic that states that one trash truck
operating on a residential street reduces the useful life of the street by 6.5%. That does not
automatically translate into a General Fund dollar savings but does reduce wear and tear and promote
' longer life for the street.
Councilmember Apt asked if there are ways to prevent one hauler or a couple of haulers from
monopolizing the business and driving the other haulers out of business.
Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman replied there is a statute that authorizes the City to sector the City
and go out to bid for various haulers in various sectors or to engage one hauler to serve the entire
City. Sectors could be developed in the City and a limit placed on the number of districts on which
any one hauler could obtain a contract from the City. That would ensure that the haulers are assigned
to districts and that competition is preserved.
Councilmember Janett expressed concern about the marketing effort and asked if there will be any
requirement that the haulers advertise the availability of recycling to their customers and potential
customers.
Shoemaker replied there is currently a requirement that the haulers provide information about
recycling to their customers. This ordinance would remove that requirement and would provide that
the City take a more assertive role in terms of making sure that consistent information is provided
City-wide. Staff will measure the success of the marketing program and has established some targets
in terms of performance for the overall program.
May 2, 1995
Shoemaker stated there are three studies involved: I
- A marketing study, which would involve hiring market experts to develop a marketing plan
which would be carried out by staff, estimated to cost $5-10,000.
In the second, the consultant would be preparing the specifications for the composting
facility and preparing documents to be provided to private industry in the request for
proposal issued to solicit their interest in designing, constructing and operating the facility.
Staff has negotiated a scope of work with R.W. Beck, estimated to cost $45,000.
The third study is the feasibility study to look at the option of districting the City to provide
consolidated services, estimated to cost between $25-30,000.
Mayor Azari asked whether the City has the right to require haulers to charge the same for each
volume of waste collected and link the timing of this requirement to the opening of the composting
facility.
City Attorney Roy responded that this is not a prohibited form of rate regulation. Requiring haulers
to charge in a particular manner does not fall within the prohibition of the statute.
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Resolution 95-63
(Option B). '
Jeff Bridges, 725 Mathews, asked Councilmembers to consider that districting could be a
maintenance nightmare in the older, core -area neighborhoods where resident turn over is greater.
These neighborhoods also have diverse land uses; commercial, single-family, multi -family,
apartment buildings, schools all in the same neighborhoods and alleys. He stated voluntary
consolidation needs some incentive.
Ray Meyer, Ram Waste Systems employee, expressed concern about the expense of the study and
stated he believed a City utility will decrease the quality of service by reducing competition.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, urged adoption of Option A and stated Option B is not a
free enterprise proposal.
David Roy, 1039 W. Mountain, supported Option B as the most reasonable of the two options.
Bob Kulovany, 1317 Hepplewhite Ct., supported Option B and stated districting can be a win/win
situation although there is a need to be sensitive to the small haulers and the free enterprise system.
Leonard "Yank" Banowetz, 12 Forest Hills Lane, suggested the study be done "in-house" and
suggested there be penalties for yard waste removal.
67
May 2, 1995
I
John Puma, President, Ram Waste Systems, predicted bundling will result in good results. He
suggested the City's new neighborhood coordinator assist in neighborhood consolidation efforts.
Vinnie Jack, mobile home park manager, supported Option B and asked that the small independent
haulers not be forgotten.
Art Gallegos, Gallegos Sanitation, stated there is no need to spend $45,000 on a study and suggested
the dollars would be better spent on efforts to sort and separate at the landfill.
Councilmember Kneeland stated she would not support Option B and did not support a City utility.
Councilmember Apt supported Option B and stated this option preserves the City's ability to look
at the potential for districting.
Councilmember Janett stated she would support Option B. She stated the study is a way to examine
ways to reduce refuse truck traffic and find some savings for the haulers through consolidating.
Councilmember Smith offered a friendly amendment to Section 2 of Resolution 95-63, Option B to
read:
"2. Implement a Phase I consultant study to explore an array of options for achieving the
' City's solid waste management goals that would include without limitation the creation of
a City utility that would include subdividing all or any portion of the City into districts and
subcontracting with private haulers for services."
Councilmembers Janett and Apt accepted Councilmember Smith's amendment as a friendly
amendment to their original motion.
Councilmember McCluskey stated he would not support Option B. He stated there were good
elements in the Resolution but opposed hiring a consultant to do a study before all the information
is in. Information needs to be gained and evaluated before the concept moves forward.
Mayor Azari stated she would not support Option B because more efforts should be spent working
towards voluntary consolidation in the neighborhoods. A move towards a City utility will slow or
stop the voluntary efforts.
The vote on Councilmember Janett's motion to adopt Resolution 95-63 Option B as amended, was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Janett, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmembers Azari,
Kneeland and McCluskey.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
' Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Ordinance
No. 58, 1995, on First Reading.
Z!
May 2, 1995
Councilmember McCluskey asked about the responses received relating to requiring reports and data I
from the collectors to the City.
Community Planning and Environmental Services Project Manager John Ruiz stated comments were
received and based on those comments, changes were made around the issues of collecting data
based on tons and volume.
Jeff Bridges, 725 Mathews, spoke to the license fee increases and stated he would prefer that fees
be related to behaviors desired. He stated a fleet mileage fee which correlates the mileage travelled
by the refuse trucks to the fee paid would encourage consolidation. He stated relating fees to the
type of truck (recycling truck versus trash truck) will send haulers a message about the performance
standard expected.
The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari,
Apt, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance No.
59, 1995, on First Reading.
Natural Resources Director Tom Shoemaker stated staff has been through the procurement process '
and did not specify a projected budget. The projections are based on issuing a RFP that describes
the services the City is requiring from bidders and receiving the RFPs and reviewing them terms of
the estimated costs for the services.
Jeff Bridges, 725 Mathews, spoke of the benefits of composting and stated the composting facility
should not be located at the landfill but should be located either at the resource recovery farm or near
new development.
Councilmember Janett suggested reference to the location of the facility be eliminated when the
ordinance is considered on Second Reading.
The vote on Councilmember Apt's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 59, 1995, was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Azari, Apt, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
May 2, 1995
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1995,
Rezoning Approximately 140 Acres from the T-Transition District
to the R-P, Planned Residential District
with a PUD Condition, Known as the
Summitview Properties Rezoning Adopted as Amended
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
This is a request to rezone approximately 140.0 acres located north of East Vine Drive and west of
Summitview Road from the T, Transition, District to R-P, Planned Residential, District with a PUD
condition. The applicant anticipates the property will be developed with a mixing of residential
uses, including a mobile home park, and commercial uses. Even though the proposed use of the
property includes mobile homes, this rezoning does not approve, or in any way commit, the City to
approving a mobile home park on the property. The proposed PUD condition would require any
development proposal to be reviewed against the criteria of the Land Development Guidance
System. Essentially then, the rezoning requested by the applicant and recommended by staff
establishes no uses for the property and only determines that the PUD process be utilized for any
development proposals.
OWNER and APPLICANT: Summitview Properties, a Colorado General Partnership
P.O. Box 153
Fort Collins, CO 80522
BACKGROUND:
The original applicant, Summitview Co., a Colorado LLC, on behalf of the owner, Summitview
Properties, a Colorado General Partnership, submitted a written petition requesting rezoning of
approximately 140.0 acres located north of East Vine Drive and west of Summitview Road from the
T, Transition, District to R-P, Planned Residential, District with a PUD condition. This Petition
was subsequently ratified and affirmed by the Owner, Summitview Properties.
The applicant anticipates the property will be developed with a mixing of residential uses, including
a mobile home park, and commercial uses. Even though the proposed use of the property includes
mobile homes, this rezoning does not approve, or in any way commit, the City to approving a mobile
home park on the property. The proposed PUD condition would require any development proposal
to be reviewed against the criteria of the Land Development Guidance System (LOGS).
As indicated, the current zoning of the property is the T, Transition, District. The property was
placed into the T Zone at the time of its annexation into the City in August, 1983. The T Zone is for
properties which are in a transitional stage with regard to ultimate development. No development
' is allowed to occur in the T Zone. The only uses permitted on properties in the T Zone are those
uses that existed on the date the property was placed into the district. According to Section 29-423
70
May 2, 1995
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the City Council must change the zoning of a property in the '
T Zone to another zoning district within 60 days from the date the matter is considered by the
Planning and Zoning Board. This means the property must be rezoned by the City before the end
of May 1995.
The current zoning and existing land uses of surrounding properties are as follows:
N.- B-P, Planned Business, undeveloped
R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential, undeveloped
E: FA-1, Farming (County), undeveloped
S: I, Industrial (County), industrial uses, railroad yard
O, Open (County), mobile home park
W.• FA-1, Farming (County), undeveloped
The requested zoning is the R-P, Planned Residential, District. The R-P District designation is for
areas planned as a unit to provide a variation in use and building placement. The property will
probably eventually develop with a mix of residential uses, including single-family, multi family, and
possibly mobile homes. The site may also include some neighborhood scale commercial uses. The
R-P zone is in conformance with a number of policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan,
including policies which provide for a mixing of residential uses in neighborhoods and encouraging
growth to the "north. " Some examples from the City's Comprehensive Plan are as follows:
From the Goals and Objectives document: I
Encourage the diversity of housing types which allows a mixture of income levels in all
neighborhoods.
Promote increased development in the north and northeastern areas of the City.
Encourage increased residential development of the northeastern area in order to support
and direct the redevelopment of the area.
The above themes are repeated in the following policies from the Land Use Policies Plan:
#41 The City should encourage residential development in the northeast, particularly
giving special consideration to the undeveloped industrially zoned land in the area
adjacent to the existing residential neighborhoods.
#75 Residential areas should provide for a mix of housing types.
The Land Use Policies Plan also contains the following policy for low density residential uses:
71
May 2, 1995
' #79 Low density residential uses should locate in areas:
a. Which have easy access to existing or planned neighborhood and
regional/community shopping centers;
b. Which have easy access to major employment centers;
C. Within walking distance to an existing or planned elementary school;
d. Within walking distance to an existing or planned neighborhood park and
within easy access to a community park; and
e. In which a collector street affords the primary.
The subject property addresses some, but not all, of the locational items of the above policy. An item
by item discussion follows:
a. Related to neighborhood shopping, the applicant is anticipating proposing
neighborhood scale commercial uses on the property. These uses could eventually
contain convenience shopping, day care, and other similar types of neighborhood
oriented businesses. There is also a 15-20 acre B-P, Planned Business, zoned piece
of property located about one-half mile north of the subject property. The property
owner of that site expects to develop a grocery store based neighborhood shopping
center, of between 120,000 and 150,000 square feet, in the future. The closest
community/regional shopping center is Central Business District (CBD),
approximately three miles to the west.
b. Concerning major employment centers, the Valley Air Park (2, 750 jobs) is within two
miles, the CBD (8,550 jobs) is, as indicated above, within three miles, Poudre Valley
Hospital (3,750 jobs) is within three miles, and Colorado State University (CSU)
with 6,000 jobs) is within four miles.
C. Tavelli Elementary is the closest school to the subject property. The school is
approximately two miles away (as the crow flies) and three miles away using the
current street system. Both distances are beyond a walking radius. However, the
school district has indicated, because Tavelli is near capacity, that children would
be bussed from the site to schools with excess capacity, such as Rii fenburgh and
O'Dea. Evidently bussing would be required for any type of residential development
on the property.
d. Regarding a neighborhood park, the Parks Department indicates a neighborhood
park will eventually be developed within the square mile of the subject property and
' could even include a part of the subject property. No site has yet been acquired as
site selection will be a function of development plans submitted for the area. The wet
72
May 2, 1995
land on the property offers an opportunity to combine a natural area within a park
setting. The closest community park is Lee Martinez Park about two and one-half
miles to the west.
e. The Transportation Department indicates collector streets will provide the required
access into the property. Collector streets will also connect any development within
the property to adjacent properties and developments.
The PUD requirement would require that all development proposals on the property be reviewed
against the criteria contained in the LDGS. The most immediate development plans for the property
include the development of a mobile home park which would provide relocation sites for residents
of the Pioneer Mobile Home Park on Harmony Road. Residential proposals would be required to
satisfy the requirements of Activity Chart H of the LDGS. Chart H is designed to implement Land
Use Policy #79 presented above. The LDGS requires residential projects to achieve a minimum
score of 60%. Higher scores are required for densities above 6.0 units per acre. Credit is received
for proximity to shopping, parks, transit, day care, employment, contiguity, and "north" Fort
Collins. Bonus credit can be received for property size, open space dedication, and providing
affordable housing. Staff has not completed Chart H in relationship to the rezoning request because
the type of information needed to complete the chart is not available at the time of a rezoning.
The Northeast Area Transportation Study revised the City's MASTER STREETS PLAN for many
streets in the northeast area. The most major revision was the elimination of the Fort Collins '
Expressway (By -Pass) from the plan. All other section line roads, including County Roads 11, 50,
and 52, have been downgraded to Minor Arterials (two travel lanes and a continuous center left turn
lane). Adjacent streets are classified as follows:
East Vine Drive Primary Arterial (four travel lanes plus a designs for limited left turn
movements)
Summitview Road Primary Arterial
Findines
The subject property was placed into the T Zone at the time of its annexation into the City
in August of 1983. According to Section 29-423 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the
City Council must change the zoning of a property in the T Zone to another zoning district
within 60 days from the date the matter is considered by the Planning and Zoning Board.
This means the property must be rezoned by the City before the end of May, 1995.
2. The requested R-P, Planned Residential, District is in general conformance with the policies
of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
73
May 2, 1995
' PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Board conducted two public hearings on the rezoning request, one on
February 27, and the other on March 27. At the March meeting the Board voted 7-0 to recommend
the subject property be placed into the I-L. Limited Industrial, District with a PUD condition. The
Board also recommended that the Council consider the noise impacts of the Fort Collins Airpark
on the development of the property. A copy of the minutes from the March 27 meeting is attached.
As the March minutes indicate, there was considerable discussion concerning the adjacent railroad
tracks and flight patterns and noise generated from aircraft utilizing the Valley Air Park. The Board
noted that the Land Use Conflicts Chart contained within the LDGS (copy attached) indicated that
there are no presumed conflicts between industrial uses and airports and flight patterns. Low
density residential uses are presumed to have noise, aesthetic, access, and safety issues with airports
and flight patterns. This discussion, essentially, led to Board to making recommendation of I-L
zoning with a PUD condition even though the Board understood that a residential development
could be still be proposed on the property as a PUD.
While the Conflict Chart is designed to identify the kinds of conflicts that are presumed to exist
between different land uses, the chart is not one of the criteria which must be used to make a final
development decision. The chart is used for informational purposes to identify conflicts and possible
design measures to be incorporated into a development plan to mitigate the conflicts. Design
measures may include open space setbacks and buffers, landscaping, building orientation, and other
architectural treatment.
There are primarily two policies from the Land Use Policies Plan regarding the location of
industrial uses. They are as follows:
#59 Industrial uses should locate near transportation facilities which offer the required
access to the industry but will not be allowed to create demands which exceed the
capacity of the existing and future transportation network of the City.
#60 Industrial development should locate within the City or consistent with the phasing
plan for the urban growth area, where the proper sizing of facilities such as water,
sewer and transportation has occurred or is planned.
As indicated above, the subject property is planned to be served by two primary arterial streets (Vine
Drive and Summitview). Thus, industrial zoning for the property would conform to policies #59 and
#60.
The policy changes made to the Master Streets Plan, i.e., elimination of the expressway and down
grading of most county roads in the area appears to have changed property -owners expectations
regarding the future development possibilities of their land. For example, the City should consider
that the Waterglen property located one mile to the east, was zoned I-L with a PUD condition at the
. time of its annexation into the City. The Waterglen property has the same basic locational attributes
74
May 2, 1995
as the subject property for industrial development as well as the additional attribute of having '
frontage on 1-25. The Waterglen property -owner chose to request residential development which
was subsequently approved by the City. The current property -owner of the subject property also
does not desire to have an industrial zoning district applied to the property. And, the current
development plans do not include industrial uses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommended approval of the requested rezoning to the Planning and Zoning Board. Staff
also recommended that a PUD condition be attached to the R-P Zone for the property which would
require all redevelopment proposals for the property to be reviewed against the criteria of the
LDGS. Even though the proposed use of the property includes mobile homes, this rezoning does not
approve, or in any way commit the City to approving, a mobile home park on the property.
Essentially then, the rezoning requested by the applicant and recommended by staff establishes no
uses for the property and only determines that the PUD process be utilized for any development
proposals.
The City Council may place zoning conditions on the subject property. According to Section 29-45
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the City may "impose reasonable conditions relating to use
for the purpose of preserving and promoting the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants
of the city and the public generally, and to encourage and facilitate the orderly development of the
city. " Listed below are the two basic types of zoning conditions the Council could consider in
addition to the PUD condition recommended by staff .
(1) Land use restrictions.
A condition limiting the uses allowed on the property is possible. NOTE:
Manufactured housing (mobile homes and modular homes) which meet the Uniform
Building Code (UBC) requirements and are placed on a permanent foundation are
considered single-family housing in Fort Collins.
(2) Density restrictions.
A condition limiting the residential density (units per acre or total number of units)
on the property is also possible. The Council could place a density restriction on the
property limiting residential development to no more than "X" units per acre.
Any zoning condition should have a policy basis in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Other than the above two basic types of conditions, additional stipulations relating to the site design
of future development are, perhaps, more appropriately handled through the PUD review process. "
75
May 2, 1995
' Mayor Azari withdrew from consideration and vote on this item and asked that the Ethics Review
Board be convened to determine whether she has a conflict of interest on this issue. Mayor Pro Tern
Janett chaired this portion of the meeting.
Ken Waido, Senior Planner, provided a staff overview of the item and framed the issue.
The following persons spoke in opposition to this rezoning:
Gil Wilson, 1733 Elim Ct., Adriel Hills;
Vinnie Jack, Manager Collinsaire Mobile Home Park;
Tim Dow, attorney, recommended I-L zoning with a PUD condition;
Bill Joplin, Director of Governmental Affairs, Burlington -Northern Railroad;
Marta Christensen, resident of northeast Fort Collins;
Claire McMillen, 1614 Adriel Circle;
Don Horak, 745 S. Summitview Dr.;
Mayo Sommermeyer, 1813 Barrington Ct.;
Rick Laven, 1223 Lindenwood Dr.;
The following persons supported this rezoning:
Ira Paul, consultant representing the applicant;
Mike Nicely, Pioneer Mobile Home Park;
Betty Maloney, 1309 City Park Ave.;
Alan Nicely, Pioneer Mobile Home Park;
Louise Stitzel, 521 E. Laurel;
Yolanda Nicely, Pioneer Mobile Home Park;
Sandra Lacey, Pioneer Mobile Home Park;
Sr. Mary Alice Murphy, 1712 Erin Ct.;
Senior Planner Ken Waido pointed out that although it is believed that zoning dictates the ultimate
use of property, it is really a private sector decision. If the zoning is inappropriate and the economies
are not there, the property remains vacant. The PUD process was designed to allow proposed land
uses stand on their merits.
Mayor Pro Tem Janett asked about noise from the air traffic at the Downtown Air Park.
Waido pointed out the runway location in relation to the subject property. He stated aircraft are an
approximate altitude between 800 and 1000 feet as they cross the property. He spoke of the other
properties in the area that are subject to noise either equal to or greater than noise impacts at the
Summitview site.
Mayor Pro Tern, Janett asked about future plans for the railroad switching yard near the site and
' asked how safety arms are obtained for the grade crossings.
76
May 2, 1995
Bill Joplin, BNRR, responded that the switching yard could expand if there is more traffic on this '
corridor. He spoke of the work done with the state and the Department of Transportation on crossing
improvements. He stated the process begins with the agency that has jurisdiction over a particular
road. The agency makes application with the PUC and the DOT for the improvements.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt Ordinance
No. 44, 1995, on First Reading, and amend the zoning classification to I-L, Limited Industrial with
a PUD condition.
Councilmember McCluskey stated there does not appear to be much difference in the two zoning
classifications. He stated he believed it is more appropriate to have the I-L zoning classification with
a PUD condition.
Councilmember Apt stated the PUD condition gives the flexibility for residential development and
there is nothing compelling to overturn the P&Z recommendation.
Mayor Pro Tem Janett stated the size of the site could facilitate the use of mixed use concepts and
allow buffering of uses that may not be compatible.
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Janett,
Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith. Nays: Councilmember Wanner.
THE MOTION CARRIED. '
Ordinance No. 60, 1995, Amending Chapter 4
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins
Pertaining to Animals Adopted as Amended on First Reading_
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
For the past several months, a Task Team, consisting of City employees and Humane Society staff,
has reviewed proposed changes to Chapter 4 of the City Code, dealing with animal control. As a
result of this review, and fallowing opportunities for public input, extensive revisions to the Code
have been recommended.
BACKGROUND:
Due to a steady increase in population and a significant growth in natural areas, contacts between
the citizens of Fort Collins and animals (both domestic and wild) are becoming more frequent and
pose potential threats to the health and safety of our community. The Code of the City of Fort
Collins regulates a number of animal and insect issues. Over the last few years, City staff and the '
public have recognized that the Code needs to be revised to reflect current community needs.
77
May 2, 1995
' A core team of City employees and Humane Society staff formed a task team to review Chapter 4
of the existing Code and recommend changes to City Council. Since August 1993, the Team has
solicited public feedback and provided opportunities for individuals in the community, the Division
of Wildlife, CSU Extension, Larimer County Health Department and other affected interests to
discuss specific issues and concerns. To assist with communityfeedback and needs assessment, the
team sponsored an open house on May 26, 1994. From this feedback, as well as individual meetings
and presentations, a draft document was developed. Each Open House participant and other
identified parties in interest received this draft for further review. Based on citizen feedback several
appropriate changes were included in the proposal. These include adding cats to licensing
requirements and requiring the removal of animal waste.
Additionally, the Team has received support and approval of the changes from the following citizen
boards: The Natural Resources Advisory Board and the Parks and Recreation Board. .
At the December 20, 1994, City Council meeting, Councilmembers asked that the packet of animal
ordinances be revised considering Council input and additional feedback from affected interests.
To facilitate the feedback effort, the task team met with two additional concentrated interests: Mr.
Ron Davis regarding selected bird issues, and Dr. Larry Johnston who advocates more lenient
methods of trapping and pest control. Additional, Councilmember Wanner met with the task team
to offer information and guidance.
Based on the feedback, several key Code changes include:
ARTICLE L DEFINITIONS.
Animal - The definition now accurately defines animal: "Animal shall mean any non-
human living organism, except plants or bacterium. "
Abandon - The definition has been deleted in this section. It is covered under the
"Improper care and treatment prohibited"section.
Shelter - The definition has been modified to be less restrictive: "Shelter shall mean
a structure or environment, adequate to species of pet animal, which provides
protection from adverse weather conditions. "
ARTICLE H. ANIMALS,
Dog and cat licenses -
Cats were added to the license requirements.
* Rabies control -
' Defined what rabies confinement means.
78
May 2, 1995
Limitation on possession and feeding of wild or exotic animals - '
Wild ducks and geese were added to address concerns regarding their
nutritional requirements and botulism outbreak in the parks and other water
sources resulting from large bird populations attracted by unhealthy food
sources.
Animals at large prohibited - Language was added to exempt birds from the
restraint requirement.
Section (b) was added to specifically address control of pet birds and
accommodate legitimate organized public displays or exhibitions.
Section (c) was added from the Colorado Municipal League Model Animal
Ordinances regarding female animals in heat to address issue of both pet and
human safety.
Section (d) was added to exempt from this Division doves and pigeons kept as
pets.
Disturbance of peace and quiet -
"Yowling and squawking" was added to address species other than dogs as I
a source of noise complaints.
Quantity of pet animals -
The language identifying a specific number of pet animals was deleted. "In no
event shall any person keep at his or her premises more pet animals than can
be properly maintained in a healthy condition, provided that such pet animals
are not a heal or safety hazard to the owners, keeper or others and do not
constitute a nuisance to the occupants of neighboring properties "
Use of poison -
Language was made more specific with the addition of the fumigant only
restriction for burrowing rodents to insure efficiency of kill and to protect non -
target animals.
Trapping restrictions -
The American Veterinary Medical Association considers steel jaw leghold
traps to be inhumane and federal and state wildlife agencies have restricted '
the use of snares for predator control.
79
May 2, 1995
' This issue remains controversial with a concentrated interest group that does
not want to see certain methods of trapping banned. The task team
recommends, as a compromise, language from the draft emergency City
ordinance considered in 1993. Language has been added which addresses the
handling of wild or domestic animals which create an imminent threat of
injury to persons or serious damage to property.
Reclamation of certain animals restricted or prohibited and reclaiming fees -
Revisions reflect the proposed changes regarding licensing of cats.
Killing or capturing wild birds restricted -
Language was added requiring the Chief of Police to grant or deny a permit
for the killing, capturing, or molestation of nuisance birds within 5 working
days of the date the request is made.
Farm Animals Prohibited -
Language was added to Chapter 4 to coordinate with Chapter 29, Zoning
Annexation, and the Development of Land the prohibition of certain farm
' animals within the city.
"Horse, mules, donkeys or ponies may be kept within the City, provided that
at least one-half (lh) acre of pasture area is available for each such horse,
mule, donkey or pony. Unless specifically authorized under Chapter 29, the
keeping or raising of other farm animals is prohibited with the City. For the
purposes of this Section, "other farm animals" shall include any domestic
animal that is customarily raised or kept, other than in a dwelling, for
personal use, consumption or profit, including, without limitation, cattle,
sheep, hogs, goats, llamas or poultry."
The various changes to these Sections of the Code are explained in more detail in the annotated copy
of the Ordinance which is included in the agenda materials. "
Police Services Commander Bud Reed gave history and background information on this ordinance.
He spoke of the public outreach efforts and spoke of the major modifications. He stated the definition
of shelter has been modified to be less restrictive; cats have been added to licensing requirements;
rabies confinement has been defined; nutritional requirements for wild ducks and geese have been
addressed; language was added to exempt birds from the restraint requirement; doves and pigeons
were exempted as pets; language was added to include species of animals other than dogs as a source
of noise complaints; language identifying a specific number of pet animals was deleted; language
' relating to the use of poison was made more specific; language was added to address the handling of
wild or domestic animals which create an imminent threat of injury to persons or serious property
M.
May 2, 1995
damage; language was added requiring the Police Chief to grant or deny a permit for the killing, '
capturing or molestation of nuisance birds; and language was added to prohibit certain farm animals
within the city.
Councilmember Apt asked if the ordinance requiring the restraint of cats is currently in the Code and
asked why the feeding of geese and ducks is being prohibited.
Reed responded the ordinance currently reads that animals will be restrained and cats are included in
the definition of animals.
Karen Manci, Environmental Planner and Wildlife Ecologist, stated the prohibition on the feeding of
geese and ducks was included because of concerns about concentrating the waterfowl population
which invites disease outbreaks. She stated botulism, avian cholera and duck plague are much more
prevalent in areas where waterfowl are concentrated. Feeding compounds the waterfowl over
population, droppings are unsightly and add to the nutrient loading and to the algae build-up in the
area lakes and ponds, and feeding attracts rodents.
Councilmember McCluskey asked about procedures to control the waterfowl over population through
relocation efforts rather than prohibiting feeding.
Manci responded that the Division of Wildlife has done some relocation efforts but on lakes where
waterfowl are being fed, the problems and concentration are compounded. '
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt
Ordinance No. 60, 1995, on First Reading.
Councilmember Janett asked about the penalties for violating this ordinance.
Assistant City Attorney Dan Martin gave municipal court fine schedule information. He noted the
fines are generally $25 for the first offense but would depend on the nature of the offense. There is
a fixed fine schedule set by the court. Warning tickets are discretionary.
Reed stated the current ordinance is enforced on a complaint basis and there is not an active
enforcement program. He stated animal complaints have been used as a harassment tool between
neighbors. He stated those situations are readily identifiable and the Humane Society has started a
mediation effort between neighbors.
Councilmember McCluskey asked how the provision will be implemented and enforced relating to
an owner having in his/her possession a means to remove animal feces.
Reed stated the visible means of removal can be a plastic bag that can be easily carried and used to
clean up after the pet.
The following persons commented on the ordinance: '
81
May 2, 1995
' Cara Neth, 226 Peterson, supported most of the changes but objected to including cats in the
prohibition of at -large animals.
Judy Nichols, 1437 Patterson Place, supported the ordinance.
Ron Davis, Front Range Avian Society President, supported the ordinance changes and complimented
the task force in coming to an equitable and reasonable solution to the pet problem.
Roy Vratil, 1401 Shamrock, opposed the ban on feeding ducks and geese.
Bret Boddicker, Rocky Mountain Wildlife Service, a private pest control company, expressed concern
that the ordinance cuts out the private pest control operator. He suggested changes to the sections on
poisoning and trapping.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Rd., opposed restraint provisions for cats.
Katie Kinney, Division of Wildlife, responded to questions about legal traps. She spoke of the
specifications for traps for certain species of animals.
Councilmember Apt suggested amending the Section 4-3 ](a) of the ordinance to give people 14 days
to obtain licenses rather than 5 days as proposed. In Section 4-73(b)(8), he suggested language be
. drafted prior to Second Reading, that states warnings will be issued and the ordinance will not be
enforced unless there are flagrant violations and evidence of potential disease.
Councilmembers McCluskey and Kneeland accepted the amendments as a friendly amendment to their
original motion.
Councilmember McCluskey suggested that in Section 4-93(c), the language should be "all female
animals in heat shall be kept in a secured environment". In Section 4-71(2), he suggested deleting the
provision that requires owners to have in his/her possession a means to remove and dispose of feces.
Councilmember McCluskey's suggestions relative to Section 4-93(c) were incorporated into his
original motion.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to amend Section 4-71
to read as follows:
"Sec. 4-71. Removal of animal waste required.
The owner or keeper of any animal shall be responsible for the removal of any feces deposited
by such animal on streets, sidewalks, parks and recreation areas, public or private property."
' The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt,
McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Janett and Kneeland.
EE
May 2, 1995
THE MOTION CARRIED. I
The vote on Councilmember McCluskey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 60, 1995, as amended on
First Reading was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith
and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Various Council Liaison Assignments
and Committee Appointments. Adopted
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
A. Resolution 95-54 Making Board and Commission Liaison Assignments and Committee
Appointments.
B. Resolution 95-55 Nominating a New Representative from the City to the Larimer Emergency
Telephone Authority.
C. Resolution 95-56 Approving and Endorsing the Appointment of a Councilmember to the I
Lorimer County Fair Board.
Following the Council reorganization meeting in April of odd -numbered years, Councilmembers
decide which of the various board and commission liaison assignments and committee appointments
are of interest to them as individuals. A Resolution has been prepared so that the names of individual
Councilmembers can be inserted in the blank spaces.
A Resolution has also been prepared regarding approval and endorsement of a Council representative
on the Larimer County Fair Board. Following adoption of the Resolution, a copy will be forwarded
to the Larimer County Commissioners for their consideration and action.
Council also holds a seat on the Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority. A Resolution has been
prepared which nominates Police Chief Fred Rainguet for the governing board.
A grid reflecting current assignments, as well as a blank grid, are attached as planning tools for
Council's use in determining assignments each Councilmember may be interested in assuming. "
After discussion, Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to
adopt Resolution 95-54 inserting the names of the Councilmembers agreeing to serve as liaisons. The
vote was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and
Wanner. Nays: None. '
83
May 2, 1995
I
THE MOTION CARRIED
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to adopt
Resolution 95-55, inserting the name of Police Chief Fred Rainguet. The vote was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt Resolution
95-56, inserting the name of Councilmember McCluskey. The vote was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt Resolution 95-
65, opposing SB 225.
Councilmember Apt stated SB 225 removes local control and allows the creation of small clusters of
cities without any County review of roads, water, sewer, etc. which would undermine land use
planning efforts state-wide.
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.
Councilmember Janett requested a two -page memo on the Provincetown affordable housing project
issue and requested a two -page memo on how an ordinance relating to the relocation of persons
displaced by development might work.
EV
May 2, 1995
Adjournment
Councilmember Janett made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adjourn the meeting
to 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 9, to consider adjourning into Executive Session to consider personnel
matters relating to the City Manager executive search process. The vote was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting adjoumed at 12:35 a.m.
ATTEST:
ClerkCity 1
85
i
ayor
1