Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-05/04/1993-Regular' May 4, 1993 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 May 4, 1993, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City City Hall. Roll cal was answered by the following Councilmember Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Councilmember Absent: Apt. Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy. ***CONSENT CALENDAR*** held on Tuesday, of Fort Collins s: Azari, Horak, 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 will be considered separately under Agenda Item #23, Pulled Consent Items. 7. Postpone Consideration of the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 26, 1993, Authorizing the Issuance of City of Fort Collins Sales and Use Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of $21,660,000 to May 18. In August of 1986, the City issued $30,060,000 of Sales and Use Tax Revenue Bonds. These bonds refunded prior City issues, including the August 1981, October and December 1982, and November 1984 Sales and Use Tax Bond issues, the SouthRidge Bond Anticipation notes, and the Block 31 Intergovernmental Agreement. The net effective interest rate on the 1986 Bonds was 7.36%. After First Reading on March 16, the municipal bond market rates rose to approximately 5.75% in the 2009 maturity. As the rates on the bonds rose, the savings to City declined to less than 2% net present value. Therefore, staff recommends that completion of the refunding wait until the higher saving level is achievable and recommends the Second Reading of the Ordinance be postponed to May 18. Adoption of the Consent Calendar will postpone consideration of the Second Reading of the Ordinance to May 18. 91 May 4, 1993 ' The properties were acquired by the City in satisfaction of the City's lien for special assessments levied against each property. In securing the deeds, the City also paid for appraisals, titlework, environmental audits, general taxes, property maintenance, and County fees. Section 22-97(f) of the Code authorizes the City to deduct those expenses from the proceeds of sale and credit the remainder to the special assessment fund to pay principal.and interest. A breakdown of the application of the proceeds for each sale is included in the body of this agenda item summary. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 30, 1993, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property (Single -Family Homes Development) Described as a Portion of Tract D of Fairbrooke PUD. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 40, 1993, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property (Brown Farmhouse Single -Family Residence) Described as a Portion of Tract D of Fairbrooke PUD. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 31, 1993, of the Council of the City ' of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property Described as Commercial Tract of Brittany Knolls PUD. On April 20, Council unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 30, 1993, Ordinance No. 40, 1993, and Ordinance No. 31, 1993. Under Chapter 22 of the Code, the City is authorized to sell property at the annual tax sale conducted by the Larimer County Treasurer if special assessments levied against the property have not been paid. The properties were sold at the 1988 and 1990 tax sale and tax certificates of purchase were issued to the City as there were no interested private investors. The owner of one property conveyed title to the City through a deed in lieu of foreclosure. The other parcels were deeded through the County Treasurer. Last May, the City Council adopted Resolution 92-91 establishing policies for the sale of such property. Per those policies, staff exercised the bid option and mailed the same to all local realtors and also advertised the property for sale in the Coloradoan. Council is required to approve the sales transactions by ordinance if determined to be in the best interests of the City. 1 537 1 Q 10. May 4, 1993 The owner of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Lea, are initiating this request for Local Landmark Designation for 103 N. Sherwood Street (the Baker/Harris House). A public hearing was held by the Commission on April 7, 1993, at which time the Commission voted to recommend designation of this property. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20. The Landmark Preservation Commission and City Staff are pleased to recommend the residential structure located at 103 N. Sherwood Street as a local landmark for its historical and architectural importance. The City of Fort Collins has received preliminary acceptance from the Colorado Department of Transportation to use Federal Aid Urban System funds and Surface Transportation funds on three projects. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20. ' 11. Items Pertaining to the Manion Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 35, 1993, Annexing 31.7942 Acres, Known as the Manion Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 36, 1993, Zoning 31.7942 Acres, Known as the Manion Annexation, into the RLP, Low Density Planned Residential Zoning District, with two Conditions Attached. 1) All development requests be processed as a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D:). The P.U.D. zoning condition requires that all development proposals be reviewed against the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the criteria of the Land Development Guidance System. 2) The property known as the Manion Annexation be placed in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District and be subject to all limitations and requirements of the district as defined in Sections 29-593 and 29-593.1 of the City Code. On April 20, Council unanimously adopted Ordinance 35, 1993 and Ordinance No. 36, 1993, which annex and zone 31.7942 acres located south of West Drake Road approximately 2,150 feet west of South Taft Hill Road. The requested zoning is the RLP, Low Density Planned Residential District (with a P.U.D. condition) and the Planning and Zoning Board is AL 12. 13. May 4, 1993 recommending that this property be placed in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. The property is undeveloped and the primary use of the land is agricultural. The property is currently zoned FA-1, Farming in the County. This is a voluntary annexation. Staff proposes that the City acceptance of deeds of dedication for streets and easements related to planning items be delegated to the Planning and Zoning Board. At the present time when a development project is approved by the Planning and Zoning Board, the Board approves and accepts the dedication of streets and easements shown on the plat for that development. However, the Board is not authorized to approve and accept dedications of streets and easements by deeds. Often street and easement dedications by' deed are necessary when no plat is required for the development and when dedications are located off -site, outside the boundary of the development plat. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20 and authorizes the Planning and Zoning Board to approve and accept dedications ' by deed to streamline the development approval process by having as many official documents as possible approved by one reviewing body at the same time and, thereby, allowing all documents to be filed with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder at the same time. Presently, dedications made by deed must wait two, and sometimes four, weeks after Planning and Zoning Board approval for acceptance by City Council under Routine Deeds and Easements. This can cause delays for projects being started and it adds one more process that staff is required to initiate. The Park South P.U.D. was originally platted as a County subdivision approved by the Larimer County Planning Commission and by the Larimer County Board of Commissioners in 1978. The Park South P.U.D. was subsequently annexed into the City and has since been replatted in part as the "Park South 2nd Filing PUD," the "Park South P.U.D. First Replat", and the "Park South P.U.D. Second Replat", receiving final approval by the Planning and Zoning Board on November 21, 1983, March 27, 1992 and July 27, 1992, respectively. Council unanimously adopted this Ordinance on First Reading on April 20. 539 u 14. May 4, 1993 Funds for right-of-way acquisition and construction of the Prospect/Shields Intersection are budgeted in 1994. Since Prospect Road west of Shields is being built this summer, staff is recommending that the right-of-way be acquired in 1993, and the west leg of the intersection and the storm sewer improvements for the intersection be built this summer with Prospect Road. To accomplish this, $213,000 of the $288,000 which was to be appropriated in 1994 must be appropriated in 1993. The east leg of the intersection will be built in 1994 with the Shields - Prospect to Laurel project using the remaining 1994 appropriation of $75,000. The construction of Prospect/College Intersection which was scheduled for 1993 however, staff recommends postponing this project until 1994. Funds for this construction have been appropriated in 1993, but will not be expended until 1994. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, transfers $213,000 in appropriations which will not be needed for Prospect/College in 1993 to the Prospect Shields project, where they are needed. Appropriations for both projects will be adjusted in the 1994 budget so that total appropriations for each project are consistent with the amounts originally established in the Choices 95 program. These transfers are illustrated in the accompanying graphic. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1993, Appropriating Funds for Three Choices 95 Projects in the Capital Projects Fund. Staff opened the two bids received for the Prospect Road projects, which were bid along with a sewer line project and three storm drainage projects, on April 7. The $1,760,300 bid for the Prospect Road projects was over the engineer's estimate by $276,300 (18 percent), and exceeds the current budget by $242,000. Staff has reduced the cost of the project by $132,000 by negotiating with the Contractor to reduce some costs and by deleting some items that would not hurt the scope of the project. At this point $110,000 is unfunded. Ordinance No. 42, 1993 was adopted on First Reading on April 20. To keep the project within current deleting the splash strip, the Prospect/Shields, and the sidewalk These items would change the scope recommended for cost reductions. 1 540 budget, $110,000 could be saved by east bound right turn lane at along the south side of Prospect. of the project, therefore are not 16. 17. In May 4, 1993 This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on April 20, requires the City to set up an escrow account for the payment of the Refunded bonds into which most of the 1993 Refunding Bond proceeds will be deposited. The Refunded Bonds will be called prior to their respective maturity dates according to the redemption terms of the 1986 issue. In August of 1986, the City issued $3,845,000 of General Obligation Park Refunding Bonds. These bonds refunded the 1981 issue which was done to construct improvements at the Rolland Moore Park. The net effective interest rate on the 1986 bonds was 7.33%. In March of 1993, the rates on municipal bonds dipped to a twenty year low. At the lowest level, the Ci.ty would have been able to refund the outstanding bonds at a rate less than 5%. The current market is again approaching the favorable levels; however staff recommends postponing the Second Reading of this Ordinance to May 18 to take advantage of a more favorable bond market. Adoption of the Consent Calendar will postpone the Second Reading of this Ordinance to May 18. The building was acquired by the City when the Streets Department bought the land for the new Streets Department facility. The building now sits on the area designated for truck parking. There were three bids to pay the City for the removal of the building in the amounts of $501, $1,003.50, and $2,008.88 and one bid for the City to pay $6,000 for its removal. This ordinance will authorize the sale of the building to the highest bidder, John Glass. Mr. Glass intends to dismantle the building and reassemble it due to the large amount of reusable material. Staff believes that Mr. Glass has the resources to fulfill the contract. The property owner at 514 Wood Street has requested that the City vacate an alley right-of-way originally dedicated with the plat of Griffin's Subdivision of Block 295. The attached map shows the alley proposed for vacation, as well as the properties adjacent to the alley right-of-way. The alley right-of-way is not surfaced or maintained as an alley for vehicular access. All properties adjacent to the alley proposed for vacation have direct access to public streets and do not use the alley for 541 1 I May 4, 1993 access. Letters in favor of the proposed alley vacation from all adjacent property owners are attached. 19. All public and private utilities, the Poudre Fire Authority, and the City Streets Department reviewed the vacation request and have no objections to vacating the alley area as a public right-of-way. However, at the request of the utility agencies, the area will be retained as a drainage and utility easement to accommodate existing drainage patterns and to provide access for the maintenance of existing utilities and for the installation of possible future utility lines. The prospective owner of the property, Brad Pace, is initiating this request for Local Landmark Designation for 2513 West Prospect Road known as the Brown Farmhouse. A public hearing was held by the Commission on August 21, 1993, at which time the Commission voted to recommend designation of this property. The Landmark Preservation Commission and City Staff are pleased to ' recommend the building located at 2513 West Prospect Road as a local landmark, for its historical and architectural importance. 20. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 48, 1993, Amending Ordinance No. 135, 1987, the Blue Spruce Farm Annexation. 21. This is a request to amend the Blue Spruce Farm Annexation Ordinance (which was adopted by Council in 1987) to apply annexation terms, conditions, and limitations, which were initially applied to the portion of the Blue Spruce Farm Annexation owned by the State Board of Agriculture, to a 1.71 acre area to be traded to the State Board of Agriculture by Timberline Partners, Ltd., a Colorado Limited Partnership, by G. B. Ventures, a Colorado General Partnership, General Partner, William W. Reynolds, Managing Partner. The property is presently undeveloped and is currently zoned R-P, Planned Residential. This Resolution formally endorses the nomination of Mayor Azari to the Colorado Municipal League Board of Directors. City Council has expressed its strong support in nominating Mayor Azari to the Board of Directors of the Colorado Municipal League. The attached ' Resolution formalizes the endorsement of that nomination. 542 May 4, 1993 22. Routine Deeds and Easements. A. Powerline Easement from Mildred Stevens Trust, 323 W. Mulberry, needed to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $10. B. Powerline Easement from Clara N. Anderson, 321 W. Mulberry, needed to underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $10. C. Powerline Easement from Robert Batteron, 517 Cowan, needed to install a pad mount transformer and underground existing overhead electric services. Monetary consideration: $154. Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek. 8. Items Authorizing the Sale of Several Special Improvement Di A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 30, 1993, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property (Single -Family Homes Development) Described as a Portion of Tract D of Fairbrooke PUD. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 40, 1993, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property (Brown Farmhouse Single -Family Residence) Described as a Portion of Tract D of Fairbrooke PUD. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 31, 1993, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Sale of Real Property Described as Commercial Tract of Brittany Knolls PUD. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 33, 1993, Designating 103 N. Sherwood Street as a Historic Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 11. Items Pertaining to the Manion Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 35, 1993, Annexing 31.7942 Acres, Known as the Manion Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 36, 1993, Zoning 31.7942 Acres, Known as the Manion Annexation, into the RLP, Low Density Planned Residential Zoning District, with two Conditions Attached. 543 May 4, 1993 12. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 38, 1993, Vacating the Streets and Easements as Dedicated on the Park South P.U.D. 14. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 42, 1993, Appropriating Funds for Three Choices 95 Projects in the Capital Projects Fund. Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek. 17. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 44, 1993, Authorizing the Sale of Real Property Described as Metal Building at 725 East Vine. ' 19. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 47, 1993, Designating 2513 West Prospect Road as a Historic Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 4111 Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion was as follows: Yeas:, Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Nays: None. Ii:I�uGfiCPtill:l:41��� Councilmember Reports Councilmember McCluskey participated in the Arbor Day celebration on April 23rd and received two awards presented to the City. He presented the Tree City USA and the National Arbor Day Foundation plaques to Mayor Azari. Councilmember Janett stated the City of Fort Collins was awarded a plaque for the Partner Award from the Clean Air Colorado and Corporate Alliance for Better Air. 544 May 4, 1993 Councilmember Horak stated he attended the City Park Neighborhood Association meeting that addressed issues such as bikeways and cruising in the City Park Area. Councilmember Winokur stated he attended the Larimer County Fair Board meeting where Boardmembers asked for greater involvement and participation from the citizens of Fort Collins. Mayor Azari stated at the Council retreat the formality and decorum of the City Council meetings were discussed. She stated that Council believed the meetings should be conducted under a relaxed formality. She stated that she had lunch with Al Yates, President of CSU, and discussed a partnership between the City and CSU in regards to the housing projects and citizen participation on those issues. She stated that the cruising issue in the City Park area should be reviewed and discussed with the citizens. She believed it was helpful for Councilmembers to share their experiences throughout the week and encouraged Council report time as an opportunity to discuss various issues. Consideration of the Two Appeals of the March 22, 1993, Decision of the Planning and Zoning Board, Approving, With Conditions, a Development Project Known as Impala Village, Preliminary P.U.D. ' Planning and Zoning Board's Decision Overturned. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 22, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board approved, with conditions, Impala Village Preliminary P.U.D, #6-93. This P.U.D. consisted of 56 multi- family units, with an office and maintenance building, on 8.42 acres located north of Mulberry Street and east of Impala Circle. The P.U.D. included a day care facility as an alternative use to the office. On May 5, 1993, two appeals were received by the City Clerks's office regarding the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. The first appeal, which was filed by Sharon Winfree, Patrick Mahoney, and Cynthia Combs, alleges that: The P & Z Board failed to hold a fair hearing by considering substantially false or grossly misleading evidence. The P & Z Board abused its discretion in making an arbitrary decision without the support of competent evidence in the record. The second appeal, which was filed by Rosemary and Robert Colbert, alleges only that the P & Z Board failed to hold a fair hearing by considering substantially False and grossly misleading evidence." ' 545 ' May 4, 1993 City Attorney Roy provided an explanation of the process and procedures that need to be followed in regards to the appeal process. Sharon Winfree, 2208 Woodford Court, stated her concerns in regard to the time constraints that were placed on the appeal. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to hear merits of the consolidated appeal since the grounds conform to the Code. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Sherry Albertson -Clark, Chief Planner, gave a brief presentation of the proposed land use, staff analysis, and the Planning and Zoning Board's discussion and decision. She stated staff reviewed the proposal against the Land Development Guidance System and the residential component received a 140 percent against the required criteria. That percentage supported the proposed density of the project. She stated the office/maintenance facility was evaluated as a Business Service Use and received a 68 percent on the point chart. Sharon Winfree, 2208 Woodford Court - Appellant, stated the purpose of the appeal is not to deny the need for affordable and assisted housing in Fort Collins, but to point out that the Planning and Zoning Board was not aware of the extreme poor planning of the project. She stated the finished architectural design of the buildings is not compatible with any of the surrounding residential structures; nor is it comparable to any of the existing units of the Fort Collins Housing Authority. She stated residents of the area voiced concerns throughout the whole process and believed those concerns were not adequately addressed by the Planning and Zoning Board. She stated tenants of low-income housing should not be forced to live in dwellings which are equated with inadequate, substandard or ugly housing. She believed that low-income housing should not be interjected into a neighborhood in such a way as to incur the rejection of the neighbors who believe they have been left powerless in the decision making process. Pat Mahoney, 2208 Woodford Court - Appellant, stated the neighborhood does not oppose low-income housing. He stated that most of the low-income housing in the City of Fort Collins is concentrated in the northwest region of the City. He believed the structures are incompatible with the existing neighborhood. He stated the Land Development Guidance System is in direct conflict with the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and must be brought into compliance if the City of Fort Collins is to be called a community. He urged Council to overturn the preliminary decision made by the Planning and Zoning Board. 546 May 4, 1993 1 Cynthia Combs, 312 Briarwood - Appellant, stated several neighbors expressed concerns with the increase in traffic flow that this project would create. She stated the children of the low-income housing units are expected to play either at Rogers Park or at Poudre High School. She stated Rogers Park is 4/10ths of a mile from the site and crosses Mulberry, which is a four lane arterial street. The neighbors believe those children are at great risk. She stated the grounds at Poudre High School are not equipped with playground equipment for young children. She stated the need for low-income housing is great, but such needs should not override quality of life, safety, and good planning. Rosemary Colbert, 224 Briarwood Court - Appellant, stated the Planning and Zoning Board was grossly mislead by the Housing Authority's presentation. She stated the Housing Authority did not give a true representation of the structural condition and quality of the modular units to be used in the proposed Impala Village. She stated one of the objectives in the All Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System states that it would protect the character of new and existing neighborhoods against intrusive and disruptive development. The neighbors contend the proposed project does not meet all of the Land Development Guidance Systems criteria for neighborhood compatibility. Bob Colbert, 224 Briarwood Court - Appellant, believed the neighborhood was not adequately informed about this project. He stated the slide presentation he was prepared to introduce to Council is new evidence; therefore, he relinquished his ' opportunity to speak on this item. Rita Wright, 2213 Magnolia Court - Appellant, stated she resents the taxpayers money being spent on buildings in such poor condition. She stated the buildings are not compatible with the existing neighborhood and decreases the values of the existing homes. Delores Williams, 1520 Hillside Drive, asked Council to reconsider viewing the neighborhoods' slide presentation. She believed the slides adequately depict the structural condition of the housing units. Sara Rowley, 428 S. Impala Drive, believed the Planning and Zoning Board did not receive a true representation of the project. She stated traffic in the area is extensive and was concerned with the safety throughout the neighborhood. Kathy Corwin, 2542 Myrtle Court, stated she was in support of a low-income housing project; however, these units create overcrowding in the area. She stated Poudre High School is going to expand in the future and with that expansion more traffic will be brought to the area. She stated traffic flow around the high school is inadequate and presents a danger to the students who have to cross Impala Drive to get to the school building. She stated she supports the Housing Authority's policy to spread low-income housing throughout Fort Collins, but these units are in terrible condition and do not suit the families who would reside in them. 547 I May 4, 1993 Klaus Hoffmann, 601 Louise Lane, stated it is elitist to concentrate public housing in one area of the City because the surrounding homes are less expensive then other homes in the City. Dale Langholf, 317 Briarwood Road, stated the quality of life for all the people in the area has been overlooked. He stated poor planning took.place when this project was put together. Cardell Webster, 401 Briarwood Road, stated the structures that are planned for that site are not suitable for the neighborhood. He stated the City of Fort Collins is referenced as the "Choice City"; however, this project does not fit that description. Mary Schultz stated the traffic flow on Mulberry is tremendous and constructing a project of this sort will create an even more hazardous situation. She stated there are no plans for placing a traffic signal on the corner of Mulberry and Impala Drive. She believed that not having a traffic signal in place causes a safety factor for the residents of the area. Mrs. William Young stated the structures proposed for that site are in terrible condition and are not suitable for anything or anybody to reside in them. Greg Connaughton, 308 Briarwood, stated .the Planning and Zoning Board received misleading information from the Housing Authority on this project. Christine Clements stated the safety of the children with the increased traffic flow is a major concern. She believed the quality of education will drop with the tremendous increase of children to the area schools. Lindy Jones stated the project does not provide an adequate amount of space for the people who would reside in those structures. She believed a better plan could be created to provide public housing for that site. Anita Wright stated the buildings do not meet the City's Building Code. She stated the safety of the occupants should be taken into consideration. The neighborhood does not object to public housing to that site, but the people who would reside in those structures deserve much more than those hazardous buildings. John Schnittker, 2204 W. Olive Court, stated the Housing Authority responded to the neighborhood's concerns in an unprofessional manner. He stated the project was misrepresented to the neighborhood as well as to the Planning and Zoning Board. 548 May 4, 1993 Rochelle Stephens, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority, stated the project meets all requirements enforced by the City Planning Department. She stated the Housing Authority is trying to attend to the desperate crisis in affordable housing in the City of Fort Collins. She stated there is a waiting list of 2,000 families that desperately need housing. She listed all of the renovations that would be taking place to the structures and the property. She stated the current units are in a raw material state and will be completely renovated to suit the residents' needs. She stated the Housing Authority staff has ongoing neighborhood meetings to stress the importance of the project and to reassure the neighborhood about the renovation to the structures. She believed the Housing Authority has met all guidelines and requirements to accomplish this project. She stated the Housing Authority plans to continue working with the surrounding neighborhood on compatibility issues. She presented the funding resources available for the units and stated that the units have passed the State of Colorado inspection of the units. Winfree voiced an objection against the units passing the State of Colorado inspection of the units as new information. She believed Ms. Stephens was presenting information to the Council that took place after the Planning and Zoning Board's decision. Stephens stated the Housing Authority is committed to the quality of life to all the community's residents. She stated the Impala Village development is a ' current opportunity to solve the community's housing crisis. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to disregard information on the condition of the units. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Michelle and Jason Durgo stated their family lives in public housing and believes the Impala Project is needed housing for this community. She stated she is attending school, so that one day she can provide a better life for her family and the Housing Authority offers people a chance to improve their quality of life. Winfree voiced an objection against Ms. Durgo statements because she is not a party -in -interest. City Attorney Roy stated Ms. Durgo is not considered a party -in -interest. He stated she could not address Council further on the issue; however, anyone can attend and voice concerns at the Planning and Zoning Board hearings. 549 1 May 4, 1993 Mayor Azari advised the Council to disregard Ms. Durgo's statement. She also stated testimony should not be heard from Christina Ayala due to her not being a party -in -interest to this appeal. Candace Crist, Case Manager for Project Self Sufficiency, stated she is in complete support of the Impala Project. She stated traffic is a concern of hers, but feels there is workable solution. She believed the Housing Authority could completely renovate the buildings to be compatible to the neighborhood. She believed the concerns of the neighbors could be addressed. Mayor Azari stated that Diane Duset, Neighbor -to -Neighbor, could not present testimony due to not being a party -in -interest. Sister Mary Alice Murphy, 1712 Erin Court #A, stated the rents in the City of Fort Collins have increased 22 percent, which makes it extremely difficult for low-income families to seek housing. She believed the Housing Authority and the surrounding residents could work together to provide low-income housing in that neighborhood to the community. John Kefalas, Housing Authority Board, believed the Housing Authority is committed to working with the neighborhood to try and make the project work. He stated the units could be restored to be aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding neighborhoods. Sharon Winfree, Appellant, stated the appellants never intended to minimize or deny the need for low-income housing. She believed the testimony presented by the Housing Authority consisted of inaccurate figures and information. She stated the Housing Authority has repeatedly informed the neighbors that the funds were not available to do the improvements the neighborhood requested. Rosemary Colbert, Appellant, stated the neighborhood is not opposed to low-income housing, but is opposed to the quality and quantity of the proposed project. She believed the density is too high and the quality of the units are poor. Pat Mahoney, Appellant, stated the Housing Authority presented new information to Council regarding the project which should be disregarded. He stated the Housing Authority has not been fair in working with the surrounding neighborhood. He believed if the Housing Authority was more responsive to the needs and concerns of the neighborhood that this project might not have been appealed. Rita Wright, Appellant, stated the residents have provided the Housing Authority with constructive criticism regarding Impala Village. She stated the residents have acted in the best interest of the neighborhood and any potential tenants of the structures. 3-fli May 4, 1993 Rochelle Stephens, Director of the Housing Authority, stated the Housing Authority fulfilled the preliminary requirements the Planning Department placed on the project. She stated the waiting list of clients changes every day and the Housing Authority responds to those changing needs. Councilmember McCluskey asked what the finished product of the structures would look like. Jim Kline, Staff Construction Manager for the Housing Authority, stated the units are of the same nature as the Mountain Park Homes. He stated the units would be restored completely. He stated the paint would be stripped, the rotted wood would be removed, and the windows and roofing would be replaced. Councilmember Janett asked for clarification on the density of the site. Albertson -Clark replied that gross density is the land area that is included in residential development. Gross density consists of street rights -of -way and open spaces. She stated staff perceived the office use as an accessory use to the site; therefore, the acreage was not removed from the overall density calculation. She stated if the office density was removed there would be seven units an acre as opposed to the six units an acre. She stated the project would still meet the density requirements if the office density was removed. Councilmember Winokur asked in what part of the PUD process neighborhood I compatibility and structural compatibility occurs. Albertson -Clark stated the PUD process requires preliminary elevations to be submitted and to provide a level of detail that provides staff information on what the architectural intent of the finished product will be. She stated the final stage requires final elevations and mylars of reproducible units. She stated when a building permit is requested, staff compares the permit plans and the elevations to the approved PUD from the Planning and Zoning Board. Follow through in the field is done by the Building Inspection Team and the Project Planner. Councilmember Janett asked if there was a traffic report completed. Eric Bracke, Transportation Planner, stated that at the time the Planning and Zoning Board met a traffic study had not been done. Councilmember Janett asked how the decision was reached by the Planning and Zoning Board that there was sufficient evidence to make a decision on traffic flow. Bracke stated staff had presented traffic studies with similar characteristics to the proposed project. 551 May 4, 1993 Councilmember Janett asked if a traffic light would be needed on the corner of Mulberry and Impala. Bracke stated the information shows it is unlikely that a traffic signal would be warranted in the near future. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to overturn the Planning and Zoning Board's decision. Councilmember Horak stated the basis for the motion was not to remand the project back to the Planning and Zoning Board. He stated the motion was to uphold both appeals and determine that the Planning and Zoning Board did not conduct a fair hearing of the project. He stated the project does not meet all the criteria in the Land Development Guidance System. He stated the project completely overlooks the neighborhood compatibility criteria, the social compatibility, and the land use conflicts. He believed the density of the project is too great for that particular site. Councilmember Winokur stated the project is a land use issue and not an affordable housing issue. He believed the proposal does not adequately address All Development Criteria in the Land Development Guidance System. He believed affordable housing should not be segregated but integrated in the community.. He ' stated the traffic flow issues have not been adequately addressed. Councilmember Kneeland stated she would not support the motion, but would like to see the project remanded to the Planning and Zoning Board. She stated inadequate information was provided to the Planning and Zoning Board. She believed the information on the quality of the structures was inadequate. Councilmember McCluskey believed the Planning and Zoning Board could review and work with the appellants and the applicants on this project to make it compatible for that area. Councilmember Janett was concerned with the density and scale of the project. She believed the neighborhood compatibility issue was not adequately addressed. She stated affordable housing is an issue in the community, but this specific project is a land use issue. She stated the funding needs to come from the entire community and not just from grants. Councilmember Winokur stated the overturning of the Planning and Zoning Board's decision does not mean the project is dead, but that the Housing Authority can go back with a new plan to be reviewed. He believed the Housing Authority could make a project work for that site by addressing the concerns and issues from the neighborhood. He believed funding needs to come from the community as well as from the government. 552 Councilmember Horak believed starting with is better for the neighborhood. He stated for starting over with a clean slate. May 4, 1993 a new plan rather than a remanded plan denying this project approval provides Mayor Azari stated she would support the motion because she believed the Planning and Zoning Board did not conduct a fair hearing. She stated the project did not meet all the absolute criteria listed in the Land Development Guidance System. She stated it is very important that projects meet all the neighborhood compatibility requirements and, can be welcomed by all the surrounding residents. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Kneeland and McCluskey. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 93-62 Endorsing the Proposed Amendments to the Articles of Association of the North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council and Providing Direction to the Mayor Pro Tem to Vote in Favor of the Amendments. Adopted 6-0. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The new transportation legislation, Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act (ISTEA), requires a cooperative regional transportation planning process to determine regional transportation priorities. The North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council has for the past six years, been designated as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and as such, is the responsible agency to ensure the regional transportation planning effort. With the changes in Federal legislation brought about by ISTEA, there is a need for all governmental agencies in this region to have opportunities to participate in the North Front Range Council's activity. The North Front Range Council was originally structured so that the cities of Fort Collins and Greeley could perform the required planning requirements to directly receive Federal transportation funds. The ISTEA legislation has changed the process for the distribution of Federal funds. These Federal funds are now distributed to the region, not to individual cities or counties, and as such there needs to be a broader regional perspective when determining the most reasonable expenditure of these Federal funds. 553 1 May 4, 1993 In 1993, the North Front Range Council received approximately $740,000 of Federal Surface Transportation Program funds for distribution in this region. There was an additional $3.1 million in transit funds to be used for the Fort Collins and Greeley transit systems, and we are currently competing for $800,000 in Federal transportation funds in what is called the Transportation Enhancement Program. The North Front Range Council has been working on changes to the Articles of Association over the last few months with a specific emphasis on developing a new voting structure that will provide an opportunity for all governmental agencies to have a voice in the regional transportation planning process. The tri-cities meeting in February provided a briefing for the Council members of Loveland, Greeley, and Fort Collins on these Articles of Association changes. On April 1, 1993, the North Front Range Council recommended to each governmental agency the Articles of Association that are attached to the Resolution. The major addition to the Articles is a change in the voting structure so that each entity has one vote. There is also an opportunity for any member of the Council to call for a weighted vote (based on population) if one of those governments feels the process is not meeting its needs. Also attached to this report for background information are the various voting structure options the MPO considered. It should also be noted at this time that two additional members, Weld County and Windsor, are anticipated to become members of the North Front Range Council following the approval of the Articles." Rick Ensdorff, Transportation Director, gave a brief presentation of the project. He stated the changes to the Articles are intended to make the North Front Range Council more pro -active in regional transportation planning. Councilmember Janett asked if the funding is going to be used only for projects of a regional nature and how the various entities will compete for money. Ensdorff replied the Articles of Association are the governing rules on how the governments vote together on funding questions and other transportation policies. He stated there will be opportunities to decide on a regional basis to do local projects. He stated it does not need to be all regional planning, but needs the regional approach to decide on the priorities of spending money. He stated the process on how the decisions are made is yet to be determined. Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to approve Resolution 93-62. . Councilmember Horak believed the voting structure is very important to the North Front Range Council and provides the smaller communities a sense of significance in the voting process. 554 May 4, 1993 , Councilmember Kneeland stated the collaborative effort between the communities is outstanding. She stated that all the entities involved in the North Front Range Council need to have the sense of importance in the voting process on critical issues. Mayor Azari commended Councilmember Horak for his work and effort put forth'on the North Front Range Council. The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 93-63 Endorsing the Establishment of Three Regional Intergovernmental Planning Working Groups and Appointing Councilmembers to Serve as City Representative Thereto, Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ' On February 23, 1993, the elected officials of Fort Collins, Loveland, and Larimer County met at the Fort Collins -Loveland Airport and appointed a committee to explore issues of common concern. That committee met March 15, 1993 at Transfort office and recommended establishing three working groups focusing on broad areas of common concern: transportation; growth management and land use; and, County Road 32/Corridor. The 'committee recommendations were reviewed at a joint meeting of elected officials of the three jurisdictions on April 15, 1993. Consensus of those discussions was to present a resolution to each jurisdiction requesting that each entity appoint two of its elected officials to serve on each of the three working groups, with staff support provided as shown: ISSUE STAFF SUPPORT 1. Transportation Fort Collins 2. Growth Management and Loveland Land Use 3. County Road 32/Corridor Larimer County I May 4, 1993 The working groups will prepare 18- to 24-month work plans incorporating issues of common concern, and report back to the elected bodies when appropriate. Each group will set its own meeting schedule." City Manager Burkett gave a brief presentation on the establishing the structure of the three working groups to focus on the broad areas of common concern. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluskey, to approve Resolution 93-63, appointing Councilmembers Apt and McCluskey to the Growth Management Group; Councilmembers Horak and Janett to the Transportation Group; and Councilmembers Azari and Kneeland to the County Road 32 Corridor Group. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Horak, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Horak requested that staff provide Council with an updating memo on the cruising issue. He stated he would like to refer the cruising issue to the Health and Safety Committee for review and recommendations. Councilmember Winokur stated he would not be present at the June 15 Council meeting and requested the 93-95 Policy Agenda and the Financial Policies issues be brought before Council when all members are present. He requested the item on the Platte River Power Authority Board membership be brought before Council at the June 1 meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. ekyor ATTEST: tAi City Clerk 7 556