Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/30/1984-Adjourned1 1 October 30, 1984 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting - 5:30 p.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, October 30, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Coun- cilmembers: Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Staff Members Present: Arnold, Huisjen, Krajicek, Harmon, Shannon enda Review: Citv Manager City Manager Arnold noted there would be amendments to several of the bond ordinances on the agenda. He asked that Item n6, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 1984, Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Coopera- tive Agreement with Larimer County for the Construction of Spaulding Lane and Appropriating Funds Therefor, be tabled until November 20. Ordinance Relating to the Creation and Organization of Heart Special Improvement District No. 84, Adopted on Second Readinq Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "At the September 4 meeting Council adopted this Ordinance on First Reading by a 6-0 vote (Councilmember Stoner withdrawn). On September 18, the Ordinance was tabled to October 30 to allow staff to present information on the Street Oversizing Fund on September 25. The purpose of this Special Improvement District is to construct street improvements, water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage improvements on or under John F. Kennedy Parkway from Boardwalk Drive southerly approxi- mately 1,900 feet, and on or under Troutman Parkway from Boardwalk Drive westerly approximately 1,000 feet. In addition, Larimer Canal No. 2 will be improved and realigned and a bridge will be constructed over the canal at the intersection of JFK and Troutman Parkways. The estimated costs of the improvements to the the City are shown below. These estimated costs rights -of -way acquisition associated with th contingency to the construction costs. -261- e district participants and include construction and District including 10% Construction (Incl. 10% Contingency) Right -of -Way City Costs Construction (Street Oversizing, including 10% Contingency) TOTAL COST October 30, 1984 $552,200 227 ,000 $779,200 239,800 $1 ,019,000" Councilmember Stoner asked the record show he did not participate in the discussion or vote on this item. Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to adopt Ordinance No. 129, 1984 on Second Reading. Councilmember Knezovich noted that at the time of First Reading there had been concern about the City's ability to meet its street oversizing obli- gations. He stated that in the interim Council had had the opportunity to look at the street oversizing fund and is of the consensus the fund will be able to meet its future obligations. The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 129, 1984 on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, and Rutstein. Nays: None. (Councilmember Stoner withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Relating to the Creation and Organization of Special Improvement District No. 81, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "Council approved Resolution 84-44 at its March 20, 1984 meeting accepting the petition of property owners regarding the initiation of Provincetowne/ Portner Estates South Special Improvement District No. 81, and instructed the Director of Public Works to have prepared the necessary plans and agreements for the formation of the District. The Ordinance was unanimous- ly adopted on First Reading on September 18 and scheduled for Second Reading on October 30 to allow staff to present information on the status of the Street Oversizing Fund on September 25. -262- 1 1 C 1 October 30, 1984 GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS: The improvements to be constructed consist of street pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalks, street lighting (adjacent to approved subdivisions), water lines, sanitary sewer lines and storm drainage improvements on or under streets. The boundary of the District includes Provincetowne PUD, an approved master plan (which includes Somerly at Provincetowne PUD Phase I which has received final approval) located south of Trilby Road and west of Lemay Avenue containing approximately 400 acres and Portner Estates South PUD (a portion of which has received final approval) located in the northwest corner of Trilby Road and Lemay Avenue containing approximately 60 acres. The improvements shall be constructed in three phases as set forth in the engineering report. The water and sanitary sewer improvements are located within the City limits but will be dedicated and maintained by the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation District respectively. SUMMARY OF COSTS DISTRICT COSTS The total estimated cost for each of the three phases of the district is listed below: In addition to the construction, R.O.W. acquisition and engineering costs, incidental costs such as legal, project management, construction interest, advertising, printing, postage and collection fees will be added and determined prior to bonds being issued. Phase I Phase II Phase III Total Construction $1,473,302 $1,592,918 $980,398 $4,046,618 (Including 15% Cont.) Right -of -Way Acquisition 49,572 71,418 55,392 176,382 Engineering 284,472 117,952 80,190 482,614 Total Construction, ROW & Engineering Costs $1,807,346 $1,782,288 $1,115,980 $4,705,614 -263- October 30, 1984 1 This District will be followed, next spring, by a District for the con- tinued improvement from Southridge Greens P.U.D. to Windsor Road (County Road 32) The City's participation in the District is in the form of completion of the north half of Trilby Road from its present improvement in front of the Southside Service Center eastward to the west property line of Portner Estates South, P.U.D. The estimated cost for this improvement is $28,086. Funds for this expenditure are available from unused funding for the Southside Service Center Project. Oversizing for arterial and collector streets within this District will be financed by the petitioner through private sources and will be reimbursed through normal development procedures by City Code 99-6(F) and will be offset by credits against future fees where approved development exists. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This District is consistent with the City's Master Street Plan and the water and sewer distribution systems meet with the south district's ap- proval. This District is consistent in concept with other districts approved by Council. Bonding ordinances by phase will follow at a later date." Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to adopt Ordinance No. 136, 1984 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Cooperative Agreement with Larimer County for the Construction of Spaulding Lane and Appropriating Funds Therefor, Tabled to November 20 Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "ISSUE The Larimer County Engineering Staff has approached the City Staff about City participation in an Improvement District the County is trying to -264- IOctober 30, 1984 organize to reconstruct and extend Spaulding Lane. The City Staff recom- mends the City Council approve an ordinance appropriating $15,000 for participation in this project. ESSENTIAL INFORMATION Spaulding Lane is located east of College Avenue and north of Willox Lane. The County proposal is to reconstruct that existing portion of the street which is in very poor condition and to build an extension of the street to the east to serve other properties not now having public street access. The County proposes to use an Improvement District as a means of financing the work. Owners of property in the County that abut or are near enough to the proposed work to benefit from it would have their property assessed over time to pay for the improvements. Some of the property owners are voluntary participants but others would be involuntary partici- pants. There is one portion of the proposed road right-of-way that would be half inside the city limits for a distance of approximately 280 feet. Under the state statutes. which govern the County's actions for improvement districts, the County cannot use an improvement district to construct improvements within municipal boundaries, nor can the County assess pro- perties for an improvement district when those properties are inside a city. The owner of the property inside the City has no immediate plans to develop the property. He is not interested at this time in making a cash contribution to the County for that portion of the proposed road on his property, although he may be willing to donate the required right-of-way. The estimated cost of the improvements is $15,000 according to the County Engineering Staff. This estimate is reasonable in City Staff's opinion. ALTERNATIVES Null Alternative: Take no action to cooperate or participate in the solution. PRO - No cost to the City. CON - Impacts on the County's proposed project could be severe. Could require the County to shift the street to the north which puts unnecessary curves into the street. Could also cause properties in the district to bear cost that should go against property in the City. 2. City create an Improvement District for property within the City. IPRO - Cost of improvements could be assessed against the property. -265- October 30, 1984 1 CON - Administrative costs of setting up a district, particularly if the property owner objects, could equal or exceed the cost of the improvements (estimated improvement costs $15,000). - City Code limits the assessment against a particular property to a certain amount related to value of property. Undeveloped ground seldom can be assessed enough to pay for the cost of the improvements, unless the property owner agrees. 3. City front end the cost of the improvement to the County and collect repayment from the property when it develops or in some specified period through an agreement with the property owner. PRO - Simplest procedurally. - Continues to nurture cooperation with the County on projects of mutual benefit and interest. - Improvements to Spaulding Lane would benefit the City as lands are annexed for development in the northeast. CON - City must front end money for improvements and there is some risk that the money could not be collected. TAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative 3. The ordinance provides the assurance of funding that the County needs in order for them to proceed with their district. It is quite likely that some of the properties to be served by the extension of the road will annex to the city in the future in order to develop to higher densities than allowed in the county. The construction of the road supports the City's policy of encouraging growth to the north- east. The City funds for this project could come from several sources: a) Capital Projects Fund, Appropriated Contingency. b) Capital Projects Fund, Prior Year Reserves. c) Capital Projects Fund, Minor Street Capital. Staff recommends that source (a) Appropriated Contingency in the Capital Projects Fund, be used as the funding source. In the meantime, the City Staff has approached the property owner in the City to see if he is willing to voluntarily agree to repay the City for this cost at the time the property develops (this would be similar to the agreement with the Church on Horsetooth Road). -266- ill 1 October 30, 1984 The Staff believes Alternative 1 is not in the best interests of the City from the point of possibly preventing the potential development in the northeast quadrant of the City and also the potential of a poor street alignment which could be hazardous to motorists. Alternative 2 would be excessively costly both to the City and the property owner. Alternative 3 is practical and workable. It continues the cooperative spirit that is emerging with the County on projects such as Prospect Street Bridge over the Poudre River and the proposed Timberline Road reconstruc- tion. fnNn IISTi1N The County Commissioners want to proceed quickly with the creation of the district. Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. Prior to the Second Reading on November 20th, staff will work out the agreement with the property owner in the City limits and the final arrange- ments with Larimer County." Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to adopt Ordinance No. 155, 1984 on First Reading. Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to table Ordinance No. 155, 1984 to November 20. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Giving Authorization to Proceed into "Preliminary Design" for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project, Adopted Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "At the October 23, 1984 Council Work Session, City Council reviewed in detail, the Conceptual Design Report of the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project. The report outlined the current status of the pro- ject, including the scope of work, project approach, financing, project schedule, and budget summary. This Resolution authorizes the City Manager to proceed to the next phase of the project, the preliminary design phase." -267- 1 October 30, 1984 Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to adopt Resolution 84-163. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. days: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Architectural Services Agreement with Hastings and Chivetta Architects, Inc. for Design Services in Connection with the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink, Adopted Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "At the October 23, 1984 Council Work Session, City Council reviewed, in detail, the scope of services and fees for design for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project. Hastings and Chivetta Architects, Inc. was the firm selected to perform ' design services for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink project in 1979, using the City's standard selection process, when this project was first proposed. Hastings and Chivetta Architects, Inc. have assembled an excellent staff of consultants, including planning, civil, structural, mechanical, and elec- trical disciplines. This Resolution authorizes the City Manager to enter into a Fixed -Fee Architectural Services Agreement in the amount of $351, 900, which includes $331,500 for design fees and $20,400 for reimbursables. This work will cover the following: Provide a new master plan for the 19-acre site, which encompasses all off -site improvements. Planning, using the P.U.D. process; surveying; streets, including a possible bridge over Spring Creek; drainage improvements; and all utility extensions. Additional work for the facility includes a new structural system for increased seating capacity and support areas; new exterior wall system; increased on -'site improvements, which contains the parking lot and overlot grading; expansion of the total support activities for the 50-meter pool and the regulation ice rink, including - larger locker rooms, increased storage, larger seating area, classrooms, additional office space, central conces- sion area and cashier area, plus total accessibility for the handi- capped; all furnishings; all capital tools and equipment; a detailed energy analysis; a detailed analysis of current building systems; a total landscape design, including the irrigation system and land- scape plan." Ll October 30, 1984 Councilmember Rutstein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Resolution 84-164. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Construction Management Agreement with Reid Burton Construction Company for Services in Connection with the Design and Construction of the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink, Adopted Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "At the October 23, 1984 Council Work Session, City Council reviewed, in detail, the scope of services and fees for the construction manager ap- proach to building the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project. Quality construction will be necessary to assure us a facility that will perform for many years. Construction management is an apporach by which the expertise of a contractor is used during the design phase of the project, as well as the construction phase. It provides the mechanisms to "fast track" the project to meet a critical completion date. Our construction manager approach will be divided into two phases: 1. Desion Phase The construction manager will provide detailed cost estimating services to assure that we are within our project budget; will provide analysis of costs for different building systems, in- cluding architectural, structural, mechanical, and electrical, to assure us we are using the most cost-effective, low mainte- nance, and quality building systems; will develop detailed bidders' lists for all items of work; will competitively bid all items of work (the construction manager will not be allowed to bid any work); and will provide us detailed schedules of tasks and delivery dates on critical equipment, as well as pre -ordering of all "long -lead" items. 2. Construction Phase The construction manager will enter into subcontracts with the successful bidders on all items of work. The construction manager will manage the entire construction project and assure us of quality construction by providing a full time "clerk-of-the- -269- 1 October 30, 1984 works" during construction. He will be responsible for total scheduling of subcontractors to assure the project will be completed on time; will assist us in "start up" of all systems; and will provide training for our staff prior to acceptance by the City. Reid Burton Construction Company was the firm selected to be the construc- tion manager for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink project in 1979, using the City's standard selection process, when this project was first proposed. For- tunately, the same personnel are with the firm today. Staff is again recommending that Reid Burton Construction Company perform the construction manager services because of their many years of excellent local experience in the construction industry. This Resolution authorizes the City Manager to enter into a Construction Management Agreement with Reid Burton Construction Company. Compensation to Reid Burton Construction Company for work performed during the design and construction phases will be as follows: - A "not -to -exceed" fee of $50,400 for the design phases. - A "fixed -price" for the construction phase which will be determined prior to the start of that phase. That amount will be determined after all items of work have been bid and all general conditions (on-the-job costs) have been negotiated. The "fixed -price" will include a fee for the management of the entire project. The "fixed -price" is now estimated at $5,674,000 but the actual amount will be determined at a later date, as described above." Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to adopt Resolution 84-165. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Authorizing Advance Funding of $500,000 for Design Work for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project, Adopted on First Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "At the October 23, 1984 Council Work Session, City Council reviewed, in detail, the advance funding requirement to start design work immediately for the Indoor Pool/Ice Rink Capital Project. -270- 1 October 30, 1984 This advance funding of $500,000 is required to meet the projected expen- ditures until the total financing has been completed. Sale of the bonds for financing is scheduled to be completed in the spring of 1985. ;winds are available from Prior Year Reserves and the appropriated Capital Re- serves in the Capital Projects Fund. When the bonds for this project are issued, this advance would be repaid to the funding source. The advance funding will be used as follows: I. Design Services (Hastings and Chivetta) 2. Construction Manager Services (Reid Bur- ton Construction Company) 3. Traffic Study 4. Soils Investigations 5. Administrative Expenses 6. Contingency $351 ,900 50,400 10,000 10,000 15,000 62 ,700 $500 , 000 " Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, tc adopt Ordinance No. 156, 1984 on First Reading. Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, asked if the 1/4t sales tax specified for the pool/rink project would be placed in a special account rather than the General Fund. Mayor Horak replied in the affirmative and noted it would draw interest in that account. The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 156, 1984 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Municipal Borrowings Associated with the Master Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins and Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: -271- 1 October 30, 1984 "There are three municipal borrowings related to the Piaster Agreement for the Council's consideration this evening. They are: A. !fearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 1984, Authorizing the Issuance of Sales and Use Tax Revenue Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Anount of $11,750,000. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 1984, Authorizing the Issuance of Sewer Revenue Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of $11,000,000. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 1984, Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligation Water Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of $7,750,000. Included in each of the bond issues is an amount for capitalized interest for the first three years of the bond issue. The bonds are structured on a 25-year maturity with serial retirements in the years 1988 through 1996 and with term bonds in 2004 and 2009. There is also a three year extraordinary call if A-B does not proceed with the brewery. The structure was arrived at through discussions with the two financial consultants involved in the transaction; Boettcher & Company, Inc. and Dillon Read & Company Inc. All of the bonds are being offered for sale using the mechanism of an adver- tised public sale. The bids will be received at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday morning, October 30, prior to the City Council's consideration of the bond issues. The bids will be opened and evaluated with the staff recom- mending either the lowest bid based on a bond year calculation or that the Council not accept any of the bids due to high interest rates. We do not anticipate having to reject any of the bids. The following is a description of each of the bond issues' purpose and the use of proceeds. A. The Sales & Use Tax Revenue Bonds in the amount of $11,750,000 will be used to retire the Bond Anticipation Notes outstanding with Morgan Guaranty and to provide the construction proceeds for the perimeter roads and frontage road required in the Master Agreement. The Bond Anticipation Note proceeds were utilized to finance the City's share of the I-25 Interchange at County Road 50. In addition to the supplemental user fee and base formula computations in the Master Agreement, these bonds will also be retired via the Intergovernmental Agreement with Larimer County concerning the Interchange. The use of proceeds on this bond issue is as follows: -272- 1 1 Net Proceeds Available for Construction (including the retirement of Bond Anticipation Notes) Reserve Fund Capitalized Interest Cost of Issuance Maximum Underwriter's Discount Total Principal Amount of the Bonds October 30, 1984 $7,000,000 1,380,000 2,976,250 100,000 293 ,750 $11 ,750 ,000 The Sewer Revenue Bonds in the amount of $11,000,000 will be used for improvements at Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2 South and for increased sludge handling capabilities to deal with both pre-treated and normal treatment sludge. The use of proceeds on this bond issue is as follows: Net Proceeds Available for Construction $ 6,500,000 Reserve Fund 1,250,000 Capitalized Interest 2,875,000 Cost of Issuance 100,000 Maximum Underwriter's Discount 275,000 Total Principal Amount of the Bonds $11,000,000 The General Obligation Water Bonds in the amount of $7,750,000 will be used to construct a 30 inch water line from Water Treatment Plant No. 2 to the brewery site on the Anheuser-Busch property. The only item to be financed by municipal debt that is not included in these bond issues is the amount for water rights, and that amount will be bonded at a future date. In addition to the 30 inch diameter on the water line, the City will oversize the line from the Water Treatment Plant on toward the east, decreasing the size of the line as we move off the northern side of the City. This oversizing cost will be borne by the Water Fund from its capital appropri- ations. The use of proceeds on this bond issue is as follows: Net Proceeds Available for Construction $5,500,000 Capitalized Interest 1,956,250 Cost of Issuance 100,000 -273- October 30, 1984 Maximum Underwriter's Discount 193,750 Total Principal Amount of the Bonds $7,750,000 In accordance with the Master Agreement, the City has been given the Notice to Proceed on the preparation of these financings and, additionally, the Notice to Proceed on all engineering work connected with public improve- ments aN der the Master Agreement. The Master Agreement provides that if A-B does't proceed with the brewery they still have the responsibility to pay the Supplemental User Fee if the City has bonds outstanding related to the Agreement." Finance Director Jim Harmon gave a summary of the bids on the three bond issues and noted the low bid on sales and use tax bonds and the sewer revenue bonds had been submitted by Boettcher and Company and the low bid on the general obligation water bonds had been submitted by Northern Trust. Loring Harkness, bond counsel, detailed the modifications to the sales and use tax ordinance including the interest rates and several housekeeping changes. Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 157, 1984 as modified by bond counsel, Loring Harkness. Councilmember Knezovich asked if the issuance of these bonds had a signifi- cant impact on the City's ability to incur further bonded indebtedness. Mr. Harkness replied that the bond rating agencies had been impressed with the extraordinary degree of coverage the City has to support its existing debt and the proposed debt on this agenda. The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 157, 1984 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Harkness again detailed the modifications to the sewer revenue ordi- nance. Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to adopt Ordinance No. 158, 1984 on First Reading as modified by Mr. Harkness. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -274- October 30, 1984 f1r. Harkness detailed the modifications to the general obligation water bond ordinance. COUncilmember Ohl son made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to adopt Ordinance No. 159, 1984 on First Reading as modified by Mr. Harkness. Yeas: Council members Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE POTION CARRIED. Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "The Council has before them this evening six Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for their consideration. All of these bonds have been induced by the Council prior to this meeting and represent the last Indus- trial Development Revenue Bonds that will be considered by the Council., during 1984. The issues are: A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1984, Directing the Issuance of Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (Anheuser-Busch Companies Project) in the aggregate principal amount of $35,000,000. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1984, Relating to the Issuance of IDRB's (The Dixon Associates Project) in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $1,400,000. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1984, Relating to the Issuance of IDRB's (The Comridge Project) in the principal amount of $3,500,000. D. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1984, Relating to the Issuance of IDRB's (The Syngene Corporation Project) in the prin- cipal amount of $2,000,000. E. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 164, 1984, Relating to the Issuance of IDRB's (The Empire Laboratories, Inc. Project) in the principal amount of $700,000. F. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 165, 1984, Relating to the Issuance of IDRB's (The Opera House Block Building Project) in the principal amount of $3,200,000. A. The Anheuser-Busch Companies Project of $35,000,000 is connected with process -implemented improvements including a pipeline from the Brewery -275- October 30, 1984 to a pre-treatment facility to be constructed with the bond proceeds near the City Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2 and the construction of lines to the Company's land application site. B. The Dixon Associates project of $1,400,000 is for the remodeling of the Classic Building at the corner of College and Oak in downtown Fort Collins. C. The Comridge Project in an amount of $3,500,000 is for the construction of an industrial building at Oakridge which is located at the southeast corner of Harmony and Lemay. D. The Syngene Corporation Project in the amount of $2,000,000 is the construction of an industrial, office building at Valley Air Park. E. The Empire Laboratories, Inc. Project of $700,000 is for the construc- tion of an office, lab facility at the Northwest corner of Howes and Maple in downtown Fort Collins. F. The Opera House Block Building Project in the amount of $3,200,000 is for the renovation and addition to the Opera House located between Mountain and Laporte on College in downtown Fort Collins. The Council passed the Opera House Inducement Resolution for $2,650,000. The size of the issue has been increased at the request of the banks involved in the transaction. The City's Bond Counsel's opinion is that the increase does not present a legal problem. All of these Industrial Development Revenue Bonds will be paying the City an issuance fee as well as any out-of-pocket costs associated with them." Finance Director Jim Harmon gave a brief review of the process used on Items A through F. Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 160, 1984 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE iMOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Knezovich asked the record to show he did not participate in the discussion or vote on the next item. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 161, 1984 on First Reading. Dave Dwyer, representing the applicants on were not changes to any of those ordinances. ably considered. -276- Items B through E, noted there He asked that they be favor- 1 II 1 October 30, 1984 The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 161, 1984 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: done. (Councilmember Knezo- vich withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 162, 1984 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 163, 1984 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: done. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to adopt Ordinance No. 164, 1984 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: `one. THE MOTION CARRIED. Lyle Stewart, bond counsel, detailed the modifications to Ordinance No. 165, 1984 issuing IDRB's for the Opera House Building project. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 165, 1984 on First Reading as modified by Mr. Stewart. Councilmember Knezovich asked why the original inducement Resolution had specified an amount of $2.65 million and this ordinance proposed to issue $3.2 million in bonds. Mr. Stewart replied that this was the same project induced several weeks ago. The reason for the increased dollar amount was that in the initial concept the applicants had hoped to raise equity money at the same time the bonds were issued so that the'total construction cost would be paid both from bond monies and equity funds to be put up by limited partners. It became obvious that the marketing could not take place in 1984 and that the bond issue needed to be raised this year. The underwriters and the letter of credit bank felt the bonds should be sufficient to cover the construc- tion costs and that was the reason for the increase. -277- October 30, 1984 Galt Brown, the applicant, addressed the use of retail office and theater space in the Opera House project. Councilmember Knezovich urged a "no" vote on the ordinance stating he felt this was not the same project presented at the time of inducement. He felt there were numerous unanswered questions and felt the ordinance did not substantially comply with the inducement resolution. The vote on Councilmember Elliott's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 165, 1984 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak and Knezovich. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Ohlson asked staff to investigate options for the scheduling of trash collection in the City. He pointed out four separate carriers pick up on different days in his neighborhood and noted the wear and tear on City streets, noise, etc., this causes. He also asked about the time table for compliance on double axle vehicles since there still appear to be a number of single axle vehicles on the street. City Manager Arnold noted the City could do some regulatory control over the garbage collecting trucks and noted he would check into what type of control was possible. With regard to the axle question, he noted several years ago there had been a gentleman's agreement that whenever new trucks were purchased they would be tandem axle trucks. He noted he would talk to the haulers to see if there was any way to obtain voluntary compliance on either item. Adjournment Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adjourn the meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. 404 ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk -278-