HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/07/1986-RegularOctober 7, 1986
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, October 7, 1986, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City
of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following
Councilmembers: Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein,
and Stoner.
Staff Members Present: Burkett, Huisjen, Krajicek
Agenda Review: City Manager
City Manager Burkett indicated there were no changes to the agenda.
Terrence Bolton, 2300 West Horsetooth Road, request that Item
#13,
Resolution 86-167 Authorizing the City Attorney to Intervene
in the
Application of Trailways Lines, Inc. to Abandon Operations in the
City of
Fort Collins and the State of Colorado, be removed from the Consent
Agenda.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick asked that Item #10, Resolution
Authorizing the Lease of City Owned Property at Picnic Rock to the
86-156
Colorado
Division of Parks and Recreation, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Horak requested Item #6B, Second Reading of Ordinance No.
137, 1986, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between
Capital
Projects and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital
Projects
Fund, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda.
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 be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately.
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately
under Agenda Items #15, #30 and #34, Pulled Consent Items, except items
pulled by anyone in the audience or items that any member of the audience
is present to discuss that were pulled be staff or Council. These items
will be discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar.
4.
-101-
October 7, 1986
5.
7.
This ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
September 16, authorizes the transfer of $71,550 from the Timberline
and Prospect Intersection Project to the Prospect Bridge over Spring
Creek Project. These funds are necessary to cover the City share of
the cost to replace the bridge over Spring Creek on Prospect Road. A
federal grant is being used to replace this bridge, and the original
cost estimate was $450,000. The revised cost estimate after final
design is $784,000. The City share of the project has increased from
$96,400 to $167,950.
The major reason for the cost increase is an increase in the length of
the bridge due to the channel hydraulics at this location.
The new bridge will replace the existing sub -standard two lane bridge
on Prospect Road with a structure that meets arterial standards for
roadway width. A bike trail will be built under the new bridge that
will connect to the existing Spring Creek Trail.
Items Relating to Horsetooth Road Special Improvement District No 83
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 1986, Authorizing the
Issuance of City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Horsetooth Road
Special Improvement District No. 83, Special Assessment Bonds in
the Aggregate Principal Amount of $610,000; Prescribing the Form
of the Bonds; and Providing for the Payment of the Bonds and the
Interest Thereon.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 1986, Authorizing the
Transfer of Appropriations between Capital Projects and
Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund.
These ordinances were adopted on First Reading on September 16.
Ordinance No. 136, 1986 was adopted unanimously and Ordinance No. 137,
1986 was adopted 6-1. Horsetooth Road Special Improvement District
No. 83 was established on August 21, 1984, as a voluntary special
improvement district by petition of the adjacent and affected property
owners. The purpose of this Special Improvement District was the
construction of street improvements and storm drainage improvements
from the BNRR to Shields Street on Horsetooth Road.
This ordinance will appropriate $18,297 in unanticipated revenues in
the General Fund for the operation of the Senior Alternatives in
Transportation (SAINT) Program. This amount includes $12,475 in FY
1985-1986 unappropriated Community Development Block Grant dollars and
$5,822 in donations, corporate gifts, and foundation grants.
-102-
October 7, 1986
' SAINT was awarded $15,820 in CDBG Funds in October of 1985. Of that
amount, $12,475 has yet to be appropriated in the General Fund for
1986. This revenue has been tracked as a salary expense since January
1, 1986.
The remaining $5,822 is classified as unanticipated revenue and was
received during 1986 from various corporate foundations and as
individual gifts. It is presently held in the Fort Collins Foundation
SAINT Trust and will be used for general operating expenses in 1986.
Q
Lumoer.
This Ordinance will appropriate funds received from Wickes Companies
into the Street Oversizing Fund. These funds will be used to pay for
the improvements to Harmony Road and Mason Street adjacent to Wickes
Lumber. The improvements will be constructed in conjunction with
Arbor Plaza SID No. 88.
a
Chapter 88 of the City Code prescribes the manner of disposition of
certain personal property which has come into possession of the City.
The present manner of disposition of abandoned, stolen, or confiscated
property is deficient in several respects. Additionally, no provision
exists for the disposition of surplus or obsolete property. Staff is
recommending the repeal of the existing Chapter 88 and the reenactment
of the same with additional provisions.
10. Resolution 86-156 Authnri7inn thn Inacn of ri+,i n.,., e.1 0........,..+., ..+
The proposed Resolution would authorize the City Manager to negotiate
a lease with the Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation for the use
of City owned property located at Picnic Rock in the Poudre Canyon.
The Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation has submitted a request
to use the property for the purpose of constructing a roadside parking
lot adjacent to a proposed restroom facility.
In 1974, the City of Fort Collins entered into an agreement with the
Union Pacific Railroad Company, which covered an overhead power line
on railroad right of way, west of the 400 block of N. College Avenue.
The term of the original agreement has expired and must now be
-103-
October 7, 1986
extended through the Renewal Rider submitted by U.P.R.R. for Council's '
approval. The Renewal Rider extends the agreement to June 1994.
There is a preparation fee of $100 and an annual consideration of $100
in conjunction with the renewal. The Utility will underground
portions of this line as part of the overhead conversion program.
This area will not be converted until sometime after 1987. A new
underground encroachment agreement will be required prior to the
underground installation.
12. Resolution 86-155 Making Appointments to the Housing Authority.
13.
Two vacancies currently exist on the Housing Authority due to the
resignation of Geraldine Aragon and Ken Bonetti. The Council liaison
has reviewed the applications on file and conducted interviews.
In keeping with Council's policy, recommendations for these
appointments were announced at the September 23 adjourned meeting.
The appointments were tabled to October 7 to allow time for public
input. Prospective appointees are as follows:
Housing Authority - Robert Nolin, alternate
Stephanie Padilla, regular
David Frick, regular
Trailways Lines, Inc. has filed an application with the Public
Utilities Commission whereby upon granting of the application
Trailways will cease operations in the State of Colorado. Without
the service of Trailways the City of Fort Collins may not have regular
and reliable bus service. The purpose of this Resolution is to
authorize the City Attorney to file a protest with the Public
Utilities Commission making clear the need for continuing regular bus
service in Fort Collins and requesting that Trailways' application be
denied.
14. Routine Deeds and Easements.
Right -of -Way from Frank J. and Susan E. Montoya and Summit Venture
for the final parcel. of right-of-way needed for the
Lincoln -Mountain Realignment Project. The Right -of -Way is located
at the southeast corner of Lincoln and Riverside, and the
consideration to be paid is $9,070.
Easement agreements for the Fairbrooke Pond Stormwater Outfall
Project:
F
-104-
October 7, 1986
' 1. Easement agreement with Sanford and Wynona Thayer for a 5,423
square foot permanent easement. Consideration: $3,500.
2. Easement agreement with Kent and Mary Jo Andrews for a 553
square foot permanent easement. Consideration: $180.
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #5.
Nro.iect.
Item #6. A.
IN
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item V . Hearina and First Reading of Orriinanra Nn 17u 1QAr
Item #8.
Item #9.
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar.
Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-105-
October 7, 1986
Resolution 86-167 Authorizing the ,
City Attorney to Intervene in the
Application of Trailways Lines, Inc. to
Abandon Operations in the City of Fort
Collins and the State of Colorado Adopted
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
Trailways Lines, Inc. has filed an application with the Public Utilities
Commission whereby upon granting of the application Trailways will cease
operations in the State of Colorado. Without the service of Trailways the
City of Fort Collins may not have regular and reliable bus service. The
purpose of this Resolution is to authorize the City Attorney to file a
protest with the Public Utilities Commission making clear the need for
continuing regular bus service in Fort Collins and requesting that
Trailways' application be denied.
Background
On September 16, 1986, the City received a notice from the Public Utilities
Commission of an application filed by Trailways Lines, Inc. that Trailways
is seeking authorization to abandon all of its scheduled operations in the
State of Colorado. Apparently, Trailways does not seek to abandon its
charter operations. Trailways, being a common carrier, is subject to '
regulation by the Public Utilities Commission. Common carriers of
passengers for hire in the State of Colorado are defined as "public
utilities" and are, by the definition of the General Assembly, declared by
law to be "affected with a public interest." For this reason, public
utilities enjoy a regulated monopoly status and are authorized to charge
rates and fares as approved by the Public Utilities Commission sufficient
to insure that they will be able to provide a viable and satisfactory
service to the public. Statutes further provide that rates, fares and
services rendered shall be just and reasonable, and prohibit any motor
vehicle carrier from operating without having first obtained the permission
of the Public Utilities Commission by showing to the Commission that there
exists a public necessity for the operation. Presumably, the theory behind
public regulation of such an enterprise is that the enterprise is so
closely connected to the public generally that it is necessary to ensure
that the enterprise is capable of maintaining a reasonable profit in order
to ensure reliable and safe transportation.for the public.
The Trailways service to the City of Fort Collins is a regular service
while Greyhound service is provided only on a seasonal basis, and without
the same frequency of bus service as is provided by Trailways.
Accordingly, in the absence of Trailways' service, Fort Collins will be
without regular and reliable bus service, if it has to rely on the present
Greyhound scheduling.
It should be noted that even if the Colorado Public Utilities Commission I
should deny Trailways' application for abandonment, Trailways may appeal
-106-
October 7, 1986
' that denial, pursuant to the Federal Bus Act of 1982, to the U.S.
Interstate Commerce Commission. The best information we have been able to
receive is that the Commerce Commission tends regularly to grant such
applications."
City Attorney Huisjen explained the current situation involving Trailways'
request to abandon their Colorado bus routes.
Terrence Bolton, operator of Greyhound bus depot, spoke of the Greyhound
operation and the service provided to Fort Collins. He objected to an
article which appeared in the Coloradoan about Greyhound's operation. He
requested that statements made by the City Attorney in the article be
retracted.
City Attorney Huisjen stated that the information provided to the
Coloradoan was based on erroneous information given to the City by the
Public Utilities Commission.
Councilmember Rutstein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Liebler, to
adopt Resolution 86-167.
Councilmember Rutstein stated she felt it was important to have all the
public transportation possible in the area and urged Council to adopt the
Resolution.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick expressed concerns about the use of staff time to
oppose Trailways' actions, noting that Fort Collins is being served by the
Greyhound bus line.
Councilmember Liebler stated she felt it important to file a protest in
order to preserve the right to comment on the issue.
The vote on Councilmember Rutstein's motion to adopt Resolution 86-167 was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Liebler, Ohlson,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Kirkpatrick.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 86-158 Appointing a Councilmember to
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"This Resolution appoints a Councilmember to,the Council Subcommittee on
Legislative Lobbying. This appointment was overlooked when other
assignments and appointments were made due to the resignation of John
Knezovich.
The purpose of the Subcommittee is to keep the Council informed on issues
' facing the Legislature and the Congress that might have some effect on the
citizens of Fort Collins. They report to Council periodically and are
-107-
October 7, 1986
responsible for corresponding with state and federal representatives '
regarding the Council's position on upcoming legislation. Other members of
the Subcommittee are Councilmembers Estrada and Horak."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to adopt Resolution 86-158 inserting the name of Barbara Liebler. Yeas:
Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Foothills Area
Urban Growth Area Boundary Amendment
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 1986, Amending Chapter 118 (the
Zoning Ordinance), Creating a New R-F, Foothills Residential, Zoning
District, With a Standard Maximum Density of 1 Unit Per 2.29 Acres but
Including a Cluster Development Plan Option Which Could Allow an
Increase in Density to 1 Unit Per Acre.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 1986, Amending Chapter '
118, Making Amendments to the Present R-E, Estate Residential, Zoning
District, Increasing the Minimum Lot Size from 9,000 Square Feet to
100,000 Square Feet (Approximately 2.29 Acre Minimum Lot Size),
Increasing the Minimum Lot Width, Increasing the Minimum Lot Depth,
Increasing the Minimum Rear Yard Depth, Increasing the Minimum Side
Yard, and Eliminating the Planned Unit Development Option Within the
Zone.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 1986, Amending Chapter
99 (the Subdivision Ordinance), Establishing a "Rural" Street Design
Standard for Internal Local Streets of Developments with Minimum Lot
Sizes of One Acre or Larger.
Background
At the August 19, 1986, City Council meeting, the'Council reviewed several
items related to an Urban Growth Area' -boundary amendment in the foothills
area. The items included: a resolution approving a specific boundary
amendment; a resolution approving amendments to the UGA Agreement; an
ordinance creating a new City zoning district for the foothills area; an
ordinance making revisions to the existing R-E zoning district; and an
ordinance establishing rural street standards. The changes proposed are
designed to allow the 'Foothills Area' to be designated as a special "rural
character" area within the Fort Collins UGA. All policies, agreements, and
requirements of the UGA, including the annexation Phasing Criteria which '
requires properties adjacent to the city limits to annex into the city,
alum
October 7, 1986
'
would be in effect for
the 'Foothills Area'
except: density would be
limited to 1 unit per 5
acres (1 unit per 2.29
acres in a County planned
unit development) for proposals
outside of the city limits; and urban
street design standards
could be reduced to a
rural street standard for
large lot residential
development proposals
if safety, economical
maintenance, and storm water
drainage provisions
are not compromised.
The residential density limitation for the specified 'Foothills Area' would
be consistent with the density presently allowed in the Rural Non -Farm
classification for development proposals outside of the city limits. For
properties which annex into the city, the new R-F zone would be applied.
The R-F zone restricts development to 1 unit per 2.29 acres, but allows a
Cluster Development Plan option which could increase density up to 1 unit
per acre. The Cluster Development Plan option is designed to encourage
annexation. Only after annexation and zoning of property into the R-F zone
could a Cluster Development Plan be proposed in an attempt to increase
residential density to 1 unit per acre (increased density being the only
incentive for annexation). This approach would put decision making
authority for 1 unit per acre development solely at the discretion of the
City.
At the August 19, 1986, meeting the City Council passed Resolutions 86-140
and 86-141 approving the UGA boundary amendment and the revisions to the
UGA Agreement. The Council also passed, on first reading, Ordinance No.
123, 1986, creating a new R-F Zoning District. The Council tabled
' Ordinance No. 124, 1986, dealing with changes to the R-E zone and Ordinance
No. 125, 1986, dealing with rural street standards. The density of
development allowed in a cluster development plan within the R-F zone and
the amount of open space being preserved were the major points of
discussion which led to the tabling of the ordinances. Staff has revised
the ordinances creating the R-F zone, redefining the density of a cluster,
and establishing larger minimum lot sizes in the R-E zone as explained
below.
The major goals of the R-F, Foothills Residential Zoning District are:
I. To allow the development of private properties along the
western edge of the City of Fort Collins to occur within the
city limits;
2. To restrict residential densities on those properties to a
level deemed appropriate given the fringe locational nature
of the properties and the area's environmental concerns; and
3. To encourage the clustering of development in order to
preserve as much open space in the area as possible.
In order for the R-F zone to apply, properties would have to be annexed
into the city. Properties within the UGA which are adjacent to the city
limits must annex into the city if a development proposal (i.e., rezoning,
' subdivision, or planned unit development) is submitted to the County on
that property. The UGA Agreement prohibits the County from approving
-109-
October 7, 1986
development proposals on properties which are eligible for voluntary
annexation into the city.
In order to encourage voluntary annexation of properties, the R-F zone
allows residential development at a density greater than what would
normally be allowed under the County's MASTER LAND USE PLAN designation for
the foothills area. In order to achieve this higher density, a Cluster
Development Plan must be approved by the City. The Cluster Development
Plan allows the trade-off of relatively higher density for the preservation
of• additional open space and the addressing of other public environmental
concerns of the foothills area. While the Cluster Development Plan would
allow for relatively higher residential densities no multi -family uses
would be allowed. Residential development would be limited to detached
single-family dwellings.
The specific provisions of the R-F zone are presented below. The zone does
NOT allow a planned unit development approach, via the LAND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDANCE SYSTEM, to development. Thus, the only uses allowed on properties
zoned R-F would be those listed under Section A. Uses permitted. The
development of any other use would require a rezoning of property to
another City zoning district.
R-F Foothills Residential District
This district designation is for low density residential areas, located
near the foothills.
A. Uses permitted.
(1) One -family dwellings.
(2) Public and private schools for elementary and high school
education.
(3) Public and non-profit quasi -public recreational uses as a
principal use.
(4) Churches.
(5) Essential public utility and public service installations and
facilities for the protection and welfare of the surrounding
area, provided business offices and repair and storage
facilities are not included.
(6) Group homes, subject to approval by•special review.
(7) Accessory buildings and uses, except home occupations.
B. Minimum area of lot. Minimum lot area shall not be less than
100,000 square feet.
110-
October 7, 1986
' C. Minimum width of lot. Minimum lot width shall be two hundred (200)
feet.
D. Minimum front yard. Minimum depth of the front yard shall be sixty
(60) feet.
E. Minimum rear yard. Minimum depth of the rear yard shall be fifty
(50) feet.
F. Minimum side yard. Minimum side yard width shall be fifty (50)
feet.
G. Maximum topographic limitation of development. No first floor
elevation of any building built on a lot zoned R-F shall extend
above 5200 feet mean sea level.
H. Farm animals. Notwithstanding any provision of the city's Animal
Control Ordinance, it shall be permissible for farm animals to be
kept on any R-F zoned property as an accessory use.. Farm animals
shall include, but not be limited to, the following: chickens,
pigs, sheep, goats, horses and cattle.
I. Cluster Development Plan. Areas which are located on a cluster
development plan, subject to approval by special review of the
Planning and Zoning Board may vary the requirements of this section,
providing the following basic regulations are enforced:
(1) Only the uses listed in Section A. Uses permitted, are allowed.
(2) The overall gross density of residential units on the Cluster
Development Plan is not greater than one (1) unit per acre, the
units are clustered together in the portion of the property
designated on the plan for residential use at a density of three
(3) to five (5) units per acre, and the remainder of the
property is permanently preserved as open space by dedication of
fee ownership (or an appropriate easement) to the City with such
restrictive provisions and future interests as may be necessary
to ensure the continuation of the open space use intended.
(3) Building envelopes are identified on the Cluster Development
Plan; the minimum area of lot, minimum width of lot, minimum
front yard, minimum rear yard, and minimum side yard, conform to
the requirements established;in the R-L, Low Density Residential
District; and the subdivisidn•plat meets all the requirements of
Chapter 99, Subdivision of Land, of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins.
(4) The layout of lots on the Cluster Development Plan are designed
to conform to terrain and located so that grading and filling
' are kept to a minimum. Natural features such as drainage
swales, rock outcroppings and slopes are retained. ,
-111-
October 7, 1986
(5) Adequate utility services can be provided to the property.
(6) The Cluster Development Plan is designed to minimize the
aesthetic impact upon the view of the foothills as well as the
view from the foothills.
(7) The Cluster Development Plan takes into account the unique
micro -climate of the foothills so that building envelopes are
selected and individual structures will be built for protection
from high winds and to function with maximum conservation of
energy.
(8) The Cluster Development Plan shows consideration for wildlife
habitats by leaving open large single blocks of land.
(9) The Cluster Development Plan addresses compatibility with
existing and planned uses on adjacent public and private
property. Buffering of incompatible uses will be required
through landscaping and/or site design and public access through
the cluster development plan must be provided to public
recreational areas.
(10) If farm animals are intended to be allowed within the area, the
Cluster Development Plan must indicate the portions of the area
reserved for the keeping of farm animals and the mitigation
efforts used to buffer these areas from surrounding uses.
Revisions in Ordinance No. 123 1986
The following revisions were made in Ordinance 123, 1986, since its initial
review by the City Council on August 19, 1986:
Section G. Maximum topographic limitation of development, has been amended
to allow the development of properties to the 5200 foot elevation line.
From: No portion of any building built on a lot zoned R-F shall extend
above 5200 feet mean sea level.
To: No first floor elevation of any building built on a lot zoned R-F
shall extend above 520O.feet mean sea level.
Section I. Cluster'.` Development Plan (2), has been expanded to require
greater clustering of residential units to a density of between three and
five dwelling units per acre and thereby increasing the amount of open
space being preserved. The section also requires that the open space area
be permanently preserved in a manner acceptable to the City.
From: The overall gross density of residential units on the cluster
development plan is not greater than one (1) unit per acre.
-112-
October 7, 1986
To: The overall gross density of residential units on the Cluster
Development Plan is not greater than one (1) unit per acre, the
units are clustered together in the portion of the property
designated on the plan for residential use at a density of three (3)
to five (5) units per acre, and the remainder of the property is
permanently preserved as open space by dedication of ownership (or
an appropriate easement) to the City with such restrictive
provisions and future interests as may be necessary to ensure the
continuation of the open space use intended.
Section I. Cluster Development Plan (3) has been changed to require minimum
lot sizes and building set -backs to conform to the provisions of the R-L,
Low Density Residential, Zoning District, instead of the R-E, Estate
Residential, Zoning District.
Section I. Cluster Development Plan (5) has been changed.
From: All elements of building structures will be located below the 5200
foot elevation contour.
To: Adequate utility services can be provided to the property.
The R-E, Estate Residential, Zoning District, is a designation for low
density residential developments usually located in outlying areas. The
minimum lot size is presently 9,000 square feet. Staff recommends the
minimum lot size be increased from 9,000 to 100,000 square feet (about 2.29
acres minimum lot size).
There are several reasons for the recommended increase in minimum lot size.
Staff anticipates the R-E zone to be applied, as it has been in recent
times, to existing large lot county subdivisions when they annex into the
city. Staff feels it is important that a "rural" life style be provided
for within the city limits rather than having increased pressure for such
development beyond the UGA boundary. This rural life style includes the
keeping of farm animals, particularly horses, on residential properties.
Most of the existing county large lot subdivisions have minimum lot sizes
equal to or greater than 2.29 acres.
In addition to increasing the minimum lot size, staff is also recommending
increasing the minimum lot width from 75 feet'to 200 feet, increasing the
minimum depth of the front yard from 30 feet to 60 feet, increasing the
minimum depth of the rear yard from 15 feet to 50 feet, and increasing the
minimum side yard from 10 feet to 50 feet.
The final amendment to the existing R-E zone recommended by staff is the
elimination of the planned unit development option from the zone. The only
uses allowed in the R-E zone would be those uses which are listed within
the zone as 'Uses Permitted'. This would assure that the properties zoned
R-E would remain large lot single family residential areas which would
' maintain a "rural" atmosphere and life style. Any other use for properties
-113-
October 7, 1986
zoned R-E would first have to receive approval of a rezoning to another
zoning district before submitting a development plan.
Revisions in Ordinance No. 124 1986
The table below summarizes the lot size and set -back changes being made in
the R-E zone:
Present
Initial
Revised
R-E Zone
Proposal
Proposal
Minimum
area of lot.
9,000 sq. ft.
30,000 sq. ft.
100,000 sq. ft.
Minimum
lot width.
75'
135'
200'
Minimum
front yard.
30'
30'
60'
Minimum
rear yard.
15'
15'
50'
Minimum
side yard.
10,
10,
50'
One of the more important perceptional components of a "rural" setting is
the design of the street system. Normally, rural streets do not have
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. The full requirement of "urban" street
design standards for low density residential developments for the
'Foothills Area' needs to make sense from an economic perspective. City
staff held several discussions on establishing a "rural" street design
standard which centered on the issues of public safety, economical
maintenance, and storm water drainage. There were also discussions as to
where the "rural" standard would be in effect or could be used.
Staff investigated several design options which eliminated curbs, gutters,
and sidewalks. Storm water drainage became a major concern and the use of
borrow ditches and valley pans were reviewed. The use of borrow ditches
for drainage creates several problems. Foremost is general maintenance.
The City presently has no equipment to maintain borrow ditch drainage
systems and given the expected limited use of the "rural" street design
standard capital investments in such maintenance equipment cannot be
justified. A flatter slope, i.e., from 1:1 to 4:1, to allow maintenance by
mowers creates a need for excessive amounts of right-of-way. For example,
the present "urban" local street design calls for 36 feet of pavement
within 54 feet of right-of-way. To build a "rural" local street of 36 feet
with 4:1 slope borrow ditches for drainage would require 74 feet of
right-of-way (a 37% increase)_. Flat sloped streets are almost impossible
to build in moderately rolling terrain, such as may be found in several
areas near the foothills, and still solve storm drainage problems with
borrow ditches. In some alternatives investigated' by staff, the cost
figures for a "rural" street, including maintenance costs over a 20 year
period, were actually more expensive than an "urban" street.
The "rural" street standard recommended by staff is for 28 feet of pavement
on a 46 foot right-of-way with roll-over curb to carry storm drainage (see
-114-
October 7, 1986
' attached drawing). Staff believes this street design should be limited to
internal local streets of developments where minimum lot sizes are one acre
(43,560 square feet) or larger. The rural street standard could NOT be used
in the Cluster Development Plan option in the R-F zone since under the
option development occurs at urban densities between three and five units
per acre. Also, any street located in a development where lot sizes are one
acre or larger which functions as a collector street or a local street
which has the opportunity to connect through the development into another
development must be built to current city "urban" design standards.
Staff is specifically recommending the following Council actions:
1. Approval of a new R-F, Foothills Residential, Zoning District which
would be applied to properties within the 'Foothills Area' at the time
of annexation limiting development to one unit per 2.29 acres, but
allowing a Cluster Development Plan option which could increase density
to one unit per acre.
2. Approval of amendments to the existing R-E, Estate Residential, Zoning
District which increase the minimum lot size from 9,000 square feet to
100,000 square feet, increase the minimum lot width from 75 feet to 200
feet, increase the minimum depth of the front yard from 30 feet to 60
feet, increase the minimum depth of the rear yard from 15 feet to 50
feet, increase the minimum side yard from 10 feet to 50 feet, and
' eliminate the planned unit development option within the zone.
3. Approval of a "rural" street design standard for use on internal local
streets within developments where minimum lot sizes are one acre or
larger.
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation•
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the components of the Foothills
Urban Growth Area Boundary Amendment request at their regular monthly
meetings of July 1985, and May and June of 1986. The Board has voted to
recommend approval of all components to the City Council. Copies of the
Board's minutes are attached. The Board also reviewed the revisions to the
R-F and R-E zones at their worksession on September 19, 1986. No
additional comments were made."
City Manager Burkett stated this was a continuation of previous discussions
Council had on expansion of the Urban Growth Area boundary in the Foothills
Area. He pointed out staff had developed some additional options since the
agenda was prepared.
Chief Planner Ken Waido outlined the major goals of the R-F Foothills
Residential Zoning District, explained the revisions to Ordinance No. 123
on Second Reading, and provided Council with additional alternatives for
elevation restrictions.
-115-
October 7, 1986
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to I
adopt Ordinance No. 123, 1986 on Second Reading.
Chief Planner Waido answered questions from Council about Ordinance No.
123, 1986.
Jim Martell, attorney representing Mrs. Burns and Kim Stuart, discussed how
the limitations proposed in Ordinance No. 123, 1986 would affect his
clients. He presented a topographical map of the Burns' property. He also
presented a study done by Resource Consultants which indicates that water
service can be provided at 5230 feet. Mr. Martell discussed the density
concerns for the Stuart property and pointed out the differences between
this property and others in the foothills area. He encouraged a maximum
limitation of 5230 feet for the Burns' property and a maximum density of
three units per acre for the Stuart property (which is the minimum under
the Land Development Guidance System).
Norman Munn, P.O. Box 1040, agreed with Mr. Martell's comments, stating he
felt there should be a 100-foot flexibility.
Chief Planner Waido responded to Mr. Martell's comments and answered
additional questions from Council.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
amend Section G of Ordinance No. 123, 1986 to read as follows: '
G. Maximum topographic limitation of development. No elevation
of any building built on a lot zoned R-F shall extend above
5250 feet mean sea level.
Councilmember Estrada suggested using the language "between 5200 and 5250
feet" which would build in some flexibility.
Councilmember Horak stated he felt the current planning review process and
the water service restrictions build in that flexibility.
Councilmember Liebler stated although she did not mind the amendment
suggested by Councilmember Horak, she preferred paragraph G as proposed by
staff.
Director of Water Utilities Mike' Smith addressed the ramifications for
water delivery and utility service up to a height of 5250 feet.
Mr. Martell supported the amendment suggested by Councilmember Horak,
noting that the amendment would be satisfactory to both his clients.
Mr. Munn suggested that the Ordinance be amended to require the developer
to provide a pumping system to facilitate utility service above 5150 feet.
-116-
October 7, 1986
' Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she felt the proposed amendment addresses
the difficulty faced by the property owners to the south and would
therefore support the amendment.
The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to amend Section G of Ordinance
No. 123, 1986 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Liebler.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ken Waido responded to questions from Council about zoning districts and
annexations. He also presented a staff recommended amendment to Section I,
paragraph 2 of Ordinance No. 123, 1986 as follows:
(2) The overall gross density of residential units on the
cluster development plan is not greater than one (1) unit
per acre, the units are clustered together in the portion of
the property designated on the plan for residential use at a
density of three (3) to five (5) units per acre, and the
remainder of the property is permanently preserved as open
space through dedication of ownership, if acceptable to the
City, or placement of an appropriate easement to the City
with such restrictive provisions and future interests as may
be necessary to ensure the continuation of the open space
' use intended. As a condition of approval of the cluster
development plan, the City may require the property owners
to maintain the dedicated open space to City standards
through a maintenance agreement.
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada to
amend Section I, paragraph 2 of Ordinance No. 123, 1986 as presented by
staff.
Councilmember Horak stated he did not support the proposed amendment,
noting he thought the language was too specific.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to amend Section I, paragraph 2
of Ordinance No. 123, 1986 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada,
Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember
Horak.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 123, 1986
as amended on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
1
-117-
October 7, 1986
(Secretary's Note: The remaining ordinances to be considered under this '
item were postponed until after the Citizen Participation portion of the
agenda.)
a.
Citizen Participation
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein,
to adopt Resolution 86-168 Expressing Gratitude and Appreciation to
John B. Knezovich for his Contributions to the Community as
Councilmember and Mayor.
Mayor Ohlson read Resolution 86-168 into the record.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Resolution 86-168
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick,
Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
John, Jana, and Jeffrey Knezovich accepted an appreciation plaque
presented by Mayor Ohlson. '
John Knezovich commented briefly on the upcoming election and urged
defeat of Amendment No. 4.
b. Proclamation Naming October as Head Iniury Awareness Month was accepted
by Kurt Christiansen and Robin Caster, members of the Head Injury
Support group.
c. Nroclamation Naming October as International Training in Communication
Month was accepted by Sharon Matsuda, President of the Columbine
Chapter of International Training in Communication.
d. Proclamation Naming October 4-11 as Mental Illness Awareness Week was
accepted by Craig Jump, President of the Larimer County Alliance for
the Mentally III, and Kevin Ferrare, a recovered patient.
e. Proclamation Naming October 5-12 as Fire Prevention Week was accepted
by Warren Jones of the Poudre Fire Authority.
f. Proclamation Naming October 16 as World Food Day was accepted by Robert
Zimdahl, representing a CSU group which organized the program in
observance of World -Food Day.
g. Proclamation Naming October as Handicapped Parking Awareness Month was
accepted by Bill Way, member of Fort Collins Chapter #5 of the Disabled '
American Veterans.
-118-
October 7, 1986
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, thanked Council for recognizing John
Knezovich. She spoke on the Robinson-Piersal issue on the November 4
ballot and asked citizens to take careful consideration of the issue before
voting.
Jo Carney, 618 Warren Landing, representing Progressive Living Structures,
Inc., addressed possible problems with the new sales and use tax ordinance.
Mayor Ohlson stated staff was working to resolve the problems that have
been brought to light and that staff would be contacting affected parties
to see if improvements can be made in the process.
Items Relating to the Foothills Area Urban
Growth Area Boundary Amendment Discussion Continued
Chief Planner Waido summarized the provisions of Ordinance No. 124, 1986.
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 124, 1986 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
' Ken Waido outlined the changes made to Ordinance No. 125, 1986 since
Council originally reviewed it.
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 125, 1986 on First Reading.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick thanked Ken Waido and staff for their work on
this issue.
The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 125, 1986
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 86-159 Adopting Financial
and Management Policies Relating
to the 1987 Budget Adooted
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The 1986 Financial and Management Policies were used in developing the 1987
Budget. For 1987, these Policies have been revised. Some significant
-119-
October 7, 1986
changes have been made which reflect Council direction on a number of
issues. The revisions also highlight the City's changing philosophy in the
area of financial management.
Background
Several changes have been made to the Financial and Management Policies.
Many of the changes reflect the direction of City Council, while others
involve the City's changing focus in the area of financial management.
Other changes regarding the format and structure of the Policies should be
self-evident. Several sections have been edited and rearranged to
facilitate the development of a simplified set of policies which cover the
basics of the City's financial management objectives. Staff believes these
revised Policies are more cohesive and easily readable. The changes to the
Financial and Management Policies fall into three general categories, as
highlighted below:
1. DELETIONS FROM THE FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Several sections have been deleted from the 1986 Financial and Management
Policies. Sections have been deleted because:
o they reference the City Charter and do not constitute a
financial management policy;
o they no longer apply, or; '
o they are unrelated to financial management objectives.
The following sections appeared in the 1986 Financial and Management
Policies and have been deleted for 1987:
I.I. - Form of Government
I.2. - City Council
I.3. - City Manager
III.2. - Affordable Housing
III.3. - Art in Public Places
III.6. - Improvement Districts
III.9. - Open Space & Trails - Acquisition + Development
III.15. - Transfort
2. ADDITIONS TO THE FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
The Financial and Management Policies for 1987 have been structured to
offer a more comprehensive and concise view of the City's financial
management objectives. In order to bring the Policies together to reflect
the City's changing philosophy and objectives, the following sections have
been added:
1.2. - Budget Process and Philosophy
4.1. - General Fund '
4.3. - Internal Service Funds
120-
October 7, 1986
' 4.4. Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds
5.5. Funds Included in Capital Improvement Program
6.1. Reserves Policy Statement
6.2. - Types of Reserves
6.3. - Reserves Incorporated Into 1987 Budget
7.1. - Investment Program Objectives
7.2. - Types of Investments
7.3. - Administration of Investment Program
3. CHANGES TO EXISTING POLICIES
Based on Council direction, several Financial and Management Policies have
undergone revision. Significant among these are the Sales & Use Tax
Distribution Formula (Section 2.2.), Reserve Policy (Section 6), and
Investment Policy (Section 7). Changes to these Policies are highlighted
below:
Sales & Use Tax Distribution - the Sales & Use Tax is the largest source of
revenue into the General Fund. In order to protect the General Fund from
fluctuations in the local and regional economy the distribution formula has
been changed to dedicate 80% of total Sales & Use Tax receipts to the
General Fund. The remaining 20% will then be divided among Debt Service
payments and Capital Projects.
Reserve Policy - in response to Council concerns that the City maintain
greater fiscal stability, the General Fund Revenue Reserve has been
increased to 7.5% of the next year's revenue. This change should protect
the City from any unforeseen reductions in revenue or any uncontrollable
expenditure increases. Two new reserves have been incorporated into the
1987 Budget. A Reserve for Buildings and Improvements has been included to
provide for maintenance and repair work on City buildings and facilities.
A Reserve for Equipment Replacement has been included to provide for
adequate fleet and equipment replacement.
Investment Policy - the City's
provide more information on the
Also included is a statement o
the City's investment program
designed to provide for a great
investment portfolio and to prc
investment program.
Investment Policy has been rewritten to
types of investments which the City makes.
objectives and information regarding how
is administered. This policy change is
r degree of accountability for the City's
note a better understanding of the City's
This Resolution formally adopts the City's Financial and Management
Policies relating to the 1987 Budget."
City Manager Burkett spoke about the budget process in general and thanked
Council and staff for the work done over the last several months.
Councilmember Rutstein made a motion; seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Resolution 86-159.
-121-
October 7, 1986
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, commented on excess retained
earnings in the Light & Power Fund. He suggested rates be reduced rather
than using excess earnings in the Light & Power Capital Fund.
Norman Munn, P.O. Box 1040, complimented staff and Council on the
preparation of the 1987 Budget.
Councilmember Rutstein stated that the excess retained earnings in the
Light & Power Fund are used for undergrounding utilities and also serve as
a cushion against future rate increases.
The vote on Councilmember Rutstein's motion to adopt Resolution 86-159 was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Budget Consent Items
Items 23-29 are being presented together in the Consent Calendar format.
These items have been reviewed and discussed at budget work sessions and
are being presented in this manner to expedite their adoption. As with the
regular Consent Calendar, any item may be withdrawn for discussion by any
member of the council, staff or public and will be considered after the
balance of the Budget Consent is adopted.
Councilmember Stoner requested Item #24, Hearing and First Reading of
Ordinance No. 142, 1986, Adjusting the Street Oversizing Fee for the 1987
Budget, be removed from the Budget Consent Calendar.
23.
24.
Approval of this Ordinance will set the Storm Drainage fees for 1987.
There are no increases proposed for the 0&M fee.
The average monthly capital fee increase is 6.3%, or $0.06 per month
for a typical 6,000 sq. ft. single family residential lot.
New development fees are proposed to increase an average 5.6%, or $201
per acre.
This ordinance will increase the Street Oversizing Fees for the 1987
Budget. The Residential, Commercial, and Industrial fees are
increased according to the projections reviewed and approved by
fUFAN
October 7, 1986
MI
26
27.
WE
29.
Council during the effective term of the 1986 Street Oversizing
Ordinance.
To satisfy cost recovery policies, an approximate 4.9 percent increase
in operational revenues has been budgeted for 1987 in the Golf Fund.
The Golf Board and staff are recommending an increase of 50 cents for
nine holes of golf; and increases of $10 for adult annual passes and
$5 each for students, juniors, and seniors and spouses annual passes.
Green fees for 18 holes of golf will remain at 1986 rates and fees for
golf cart rentals and all other golf related services will also remain
the same as 1986 rates.
Resolution 86-161 Adopting 1987 Recreation Division Fees and Charges
The 1987 Recreation Division fees and charges schedule remains
consistent with the fees and charges policy originally adopted by City
Council in 1980. Fees and charges for 1987 have been adjusted to
project a 55.3 percent recovery of total expenses in the Recreation
Fund, including the first year of operation of the Edora Pool Ice
Center.
This Resolution would increase the cemetery user fees by an average of
10 percent as of January 1, 1987. This recommended increase in fees
and charges is consistent with the 1987 recommended budget document.
Proposed rates for 1987 reflect a different rental structure for the
Center. We have attempted to minimize the increase for non-profit
groups and to have our commercial rates remain comparable with other
facilities.
The Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Fort Collins and
the Poudre Valley Fire Protection District specifies that the Poudre
Fire Authority Board shall submit the budget to the respective
governing bodies. The budget becomes the Authority Budget only after
approval of the appropriations by the respective governing bodies and
final approval by the Poudre Fire Authority Board of Directors.
Adoption of the Resolution would approve the' Poudre Fire Authority
Budget.
-123-
October 7, 1986
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #23.
Item #24.
Councilmember Liebler made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar.
Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 142, 1986, Adjusting
the Street Oversizing Fee for the
1987 Budget. Adopted on First Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
This ordinance will increase the Street Oversizing Fees for the 1987
Budget. The Residential, Commercial, and Industrial fees are increased
according to the projections reviewed and approved by Council during the
effective term of the 1986 Street Oversizing Ordinance.
Background
During the effective term of the 1986 Street Oversizing Ordinance, staff
presented projections of the City's Street Oversizing costs for the next
five years. From this estimate, various fee structures were developed.
The option chosen by Council in July (Ordinance No. 88, 1986) included a
Residential Street standard until 1988 and a Collector Standard beyond that
time if a city-wide funding program is not in place. The fee structure
based on this option is shown in the table below:
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Residential $ 575
$ 598'-
$ 649
E 675
E 702
Industrial 6900
7176
7788
8100
8424
Commercial 13800
14352
15575
16198
16846
The fees reflect a 4% increase from 1986 to 1987 for inflation and to limit
the amount of City borrowing on unfunded obligations. Within the next 30
days we will need approximately $1 million from the line of credit to pay
street oversizing costs to date.
-124-
A
October 7, 1986
I
This increase follows the reviewed and approved fee schedule. Staff
recommends adoption of the ordinance."
Acting Development Services Director Gary Diede answered questions from
Council about this item.
Councilmember Stoner stated he was opposed to the 4% inflation factor
because he thought Council had agreed that future development should not
pay for past problems with fee collection.
City Manager Burkett pointed out that the 4% increase was a compromise that
the Council reached after considering several proposals. He stated the 4%
increase is modest given the $3.5 million unfunded liability.
Councilmember Estrada stated his recollection was that this was a temporary
stop -gap measure until some long-term solutions can be found.
Councilmember Liebler made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to
adopt Ordinance No. 142, 1986 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, and Rutstein. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada,
Horak, and Stoner.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 86-165 Adopting the
1987 Budget for the City of Fort
Collins and Fixing the Mill Levy, Adopted
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
This resolution adopts the 1987 Budget for the City of Fort Collins and
sets the mill levy as follows:
General Fund 0 & M........................... 2.401 mills
Parks 0 & M.................................. 1.100 mills
Poudre Fire Authority Contribution........... 6.674 mills
Fire Pension Fund
Unfunded Liability - General Fund .267
PFA Employer Contribution .294. .561 mills
Parks Debt Service ........................... 2.124 mills
TOTAL 12.860 mills
Background
Differences from the 1987 Recommended Budget presented to Council are as
follows:
-125-
October 7, 1986
1. General Fund '
Appropriations have been increased $65,788 over the Recommended Budget.
The major increases are $62,692 added for the Economic Opportunities
program, $40,000 for library books and $11,699 for an increase in
insurance premium expenses. Revenue in the amount of $20,000 will be
added to projections based on the library's proposal for funding
library materials. Unfunded liability contributions to the Fire and
Police pension funds were reduced $87,000 based on recent actuarial
reports.
2. Water & Sewer Funds
Appropriations have been increased a total of $1,326,584 to correct
bond principal and interest payments. The revised amounts are due to
the 1986 restructuring of existing bond issues. Anheuser-Busch will
reimburse the City for their portion of the bond payments.
3. Transportation Fund
Appropriations have been increased $475,058. This represents the use
of Highway User's Tax receipts, generated by the new 6 cent gas tax,
and a correction to the Recommended Budget financial statement.
4. Capital Protects Fund
Appropriations have been increased by $12,000 for the Indoor Pool I
Renovation project.
5. Parkland Fund
Appropriations have been increased $210,000 for the following project
changes:
New Park Site Acquisitions $ (300,000) deleted in 1987
Rossborough Park (380,000) delayed until 1988
Overland Park 390,000 added
Troutman Park 500,000 added increased funding
Total $ 210,000
City Manager Burkett noted that this and the following item formally
adopted the 1987 Budget.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember
Rutstein, to adopt Resolution 86-165.
Acting Finance Director Alan Krcmarik answered questions from Council about
the 1987 Budget and Mill Levy.
Michael Hurd, 1012 Wakerobin Lane, questioned the delay of Rossborough and I
Parkwood East parks in order to complete Troutman and Overland parks.
-126-
4
October 7, 1986
' Councilmember Horak stated there is a parkland development policy used to
determine priorities in developing parks and that a change in funding has
made it impossible to develop all the parks which were planned for
development at this time.
Councilmember Rutstein complimented staff and the City Manager on the
preparation of the 1987 Budget.
Councilmember Horak stated he was pleased that the Budget was prepared
using true conservative numbers.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she felt the 1987 Budget provides
realistic projections and expectations. She noted the change in sales and
use tax distribution will require careful planning of capital projects in
the near future.
Mayor Ohlson stated he thought the 1987 Budget was the best budget prepared
during his time on Council.
The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Resolution 86-165
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick,
Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
' Ordinance No. 143, 1986, Appropriating Annual
Expenditures for the City of Fort Collins
in 1987 and Setting the Mill Levy
for Said Fiscal Year. Adopted on First Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"This Ordinance appropriates the 1987 Annual Budget and sets the mill levy.
Changes from the financial statements included in the 1987 Recommended
Budgets are outlined in the previous agenda item."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Liebler, to
adopt Ordinance No. 143, 1986 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the 1987
Downtown Development Authority Budget
I
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
-127-
October 7, 1986
"A. Resolution 86-166 Approving the 1987 Downtown Development Authority
Budget.
The proposed 1987 DDA Budget of $158,312, approved by the DDA Board of
Directors at the regular meeting of October 2, would maintain the
present staffing level. No capital expenditures are anticipated. The
Board has placed the budgeted year end excess in contingency.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 1986, Setting the Mill
Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for 1987 and Appropriating
the Annual Expenditures for 1987.
This Ordinance sets the 1987 mill levy for the DDA at 5 mills, the
same as the levy determined for 1986 and appropriates the 1987 budget.
The total budget for 1987 is $158,312."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to
adopt Resolution 86-166. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Rutstein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Liebler, to
adopt Ordinance No. 144, 1986 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Horsetooth Road
Special Improvement District No. 83
(Secretary's Note: Item A was approved by adoption of the Consent
Calendar. Item B was removed from the Consent Calendar and was considered
as a separate item at this time.)
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:'
"A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 1986, Authorizing the Issuance of
City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Horsetooth Road Special Improvement
District No. 83, Special Assessment Bonds in the Aggregate Principal
Amount of $610,000; Prescribing the Form of the Bonds; and Providing
for the Payment of the Bonds and the Interest Thereon.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 1986, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations between Capital Projects and Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund.
These ordinances were adopted on First Reading on September 16. Ordinance
No. 136, 1986 was adopted unanimously and Ordinance No. 137, 1986 was
adopted 6-1. Horsetooth Road Special Improvement District No. 83 was
11
-128-
October 7, 1986
established on August 21, 1984, as a voluntary special improvement district
by petition of the adjacent and affected property owners. The purpose of
this Special Improvement District was the construction of street
improvements and storm drainage improvements from the BNRR to Shields
Street on Horsetooth Road."
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember
Rutstein, to adopt Ordinance No. 137, 1986 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Horak stated he felt this was an inappropriate action for
Council to take after -the -fact, and therefore could not vote in favor of
the Ordinance.
The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 137,
1986 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Kirkpatrick, Liebler,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Horak.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 86-156 Authorizing the Lease of
City Owned Property at Picnic Rock to the
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
' "Executive Services
The proposed Resolution would authorize the City Manager to negotiate a
lease with the Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation for the use of
City owned property located at Picnic Rock in the Poudre Canyon. The
Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation has submitted a request to use
the property for the purpose of constructing a roadside parking lot
adjacent to a proposed restroom facility.
Background
The Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation, in cooperation with Larimer
County, has developed a plan to construct a restroom facility and adjoining
parking lot at the Picnic Rock site along the Poudre River in the Poudre
Canyon (see the attached vicinity map).
The site for these proposed facilities is owned by the Colorado Division of
Wildlife (DOW) and the City of Fort Collins. The City's parcel, consisting
of about four acres, was acquired in 1961 for the sum of $2400 for the
purpose of securing permanent right-of-way for two water transmission
lines. With the exception of maintaining the ROW for the water lines, the
City does not have any other designated use for the property.
The Picnic Rock site, including the City's property, has historically been
' used by the public, in an uncontrolled fashion, for camping, picnicking,
and general leisure use. This has resulted in a sanitation problem along
Dell
October 7, 1986
with a general deterioration of the property due to unrestricted
the site. Responding to this problem, the Colorado Division of
parking
Parks
on
and
'
Recreation, in cooperation with Larimer County, developed
plans
to
construct a restroom facility and parking lot on the site. Part of
the
parking lot will be located on the City property which is the
reason
for
the Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation's request to
lease
the
property. The remainder of the facilities will be located on DOW
property.
Considering the potential public health and the water quality problems
associated with the presently uncontrolled use of the site, the plans
developed by the Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation seem very
beneficial. The staff is recommending that the property be leased at a
nominal fee to the State for a period not to exceed three years during
which time an effort will be made to permanently sell or trade the property
to the State. The Water Board has reviewed the State's proposal and does
not object to disposing of the City property.
The Natural Resources Advisory Board has also reviewed the State's proposal
and although they are appreciative of the public health and environmental
concerns which will be addressed by the proposal, they have concerns about
the proposed user fee. More detailed description of their concerns is
contained in the attached information from the Natural Resources Advisory
Board.
It is the staff's intention to address these concerns with the State during
the lease negotiation process." '
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to adopt Resolution 86-156.
Director of Water Utilities Mike Smith responded to questions from Council
about the property.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she pulled this item from the Consent
Calendar so that the concerns expressed by the Natural Resources Advisory
Board could be addressed.
Utility Services Director Rich Shannon stated staff would attempt to
address concerns expressed by the Natural Resources 'Advisory Board during
negotiations on the lease of property at Picnic Rock.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stressed she felt the concerns of the Natural
Resources Advisory Board should be taken into consideration.
Councilmember Horak stated he felt charging user fees made sense.
Director of Natural Resources, Streets, and Stormwater Utilities Roger
Krempel clarified the Board's position by noting that the area will be
developed primarily for the use of rafters. He stated the concern was that
individuals who previously used the area, without charge, for other types
of recreation might have a problem paying a user fee now. '
-130-
October 7, 1986
Frank Lancaster, 2313 Artic Fox Drive, a private rafter who was involved in
the group that put the proposal together, explained the mix of individuals
involved in developing the plan and the time spent in developing this plan.
The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Resolution 86-156 was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmembers' Reports
Councilmember Horak reported that the Larimer-Weld Council of Governments
appointed at their last meeting a nine -member committee to look at goals
for the future years. He reported on a meeting of the Colorado Water
Resources and Power Authority where the Poudre Study was presented. He
noted he was disappointed in the distribution of public information on the
subject. He stated he thought the Water Board should give recommendations
to Council for making a public statement on the Study. Councilmember Horak
also reported on the next Council of Governments meeting October 23 in
Windsor to discuss the railroad issue.
Councilmember Estrada reported on plans for constructing a". Veterans'';
Memorial in Fort Collins.
Mayor Ohlson encouraged everyone to register to vote prior to the October
10 deadline. He reported on the next trail building day, Saturday, October
11.
Other Business
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
reconsider Resolution 86-167 (Trailways).
Councilmember Horak stated based on information received from Terrence
Bolton and City Attorney Huisjen he felt the 5th Whereas is no longer
accurate and should be deleted.
The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to reconsider Resolution 86-167
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
delete the 5th Whereas clause from Resolution 86-167. Yeas: Councilmembers
Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
CHUM
October 7, 1986
The vote on the original motion to adopt Resolution 86-167 as amended was '
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Liebler,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Horak stated he had received several calls about the
destruction of the habitat area at Shields and Spring Creek and questioned
how this happened based on the City's sensitivity to environmental matters.
He also questioned why the new fire station was surrounded with bluegrass
rather than more environmentally acceptable landscaping. He expressed that
concern about the implementation of Council policies.
Adjournment
Councilmember Rutstein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember
Kirkpatrick, to adjourn the meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Liebler, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
may ,ATTEST:
City Clerk
-132-