HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-08/05/1975-Regular42.
August 5, 1975
COUNCIL OF 'ITIE CI'P" OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 5:30 P.M.
A Regular. Meeting of the Council of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday,
August 5, 1975 at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber in the City of Fort
Collins City Hall.." Mayor Russell called the r:,eeting to order.
Present: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and
Wilkinson.
Absent: Councilwoman Gray.
Staff,members present: Brunton, DiTullio, Bingrran, Kaplan, Cain and Lewis.
Also: City Attorney March.
Minutes of Regular meeting of July 15,
1975 approved
Cowicilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman. Bloom, to approve
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 15. 1975 as published. Yeas:
Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson, Nays:
None.
Ordinance tabled on second reading relating
to the vacation of an Alley in Block 123
City Manager Brunton stated the developers for the Sheraton Inn had scheduled
a ntect.i.]:g with the Building Board of Appeals to try and solve some tech-
nical problems regarding this development. 'tile Administration recommends
that the second reading of this ordinance be tabled until the developers
secure a building permit.
Council an Bowling made a motion, seconded by Cotmcilman Bloom, to table the
second reading of Ordinance No. 34, 1975 to August 19, 1975 Yeas: Council.
members Bloom, Bawling, Reeves, Russell, Suiain and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Ordinance adopted on second reading
providing L flood hazard area _re ulations
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves; to adopt
Ordinance No. 40, 1975 on second reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Shinn and. Wilkinson, Pays: None.
f'
42
43
ORDINANCT A'0. 40 1975
BEING AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING rLOOD
HAZARD AREA REGULATIONS
r '
Section I. Statement of Purpose.
It is the purpose of this ordinance to promote public health,
safety and general welfare and to minimize flood losses by provi-
sions designed to:
A. Protect human life 'and health;
B. Minimize public and private property damage;
C. Lessen public expenditures for flood relief and
flood control projects;
D. Control flood plain uses which acting alone or
in.combir_ation with other uses will cause damaging flood heights
' and velocities or obstruct flows;
E. Control development which will, when acting alone
or in combination with similar development, cause flood losses
if public streets, sewer, water and other utilities must be
extended below the flood level to serve the development;
F. Protect the natural areas required to convey flood
flows and retain slow flow characteristics.
This ordinance is a remedial ordinance and its provisions
shall be liberally construed to effectuate the foregoing'purposes.
Section 2:. Definitions.
For the purposes of this ordinance the following words or
phrases shall have the meanings and be defined as hereinafter
�a
43
44
set forth:
A. CHANNEL.' A natural or.artificial water course
or drainway with perceptibly defined beds and banks to confine
and conduct, continuously or periodically, a flow of water.
$. CHANNEL FLOW. That water which is flowing within
the limits of a defined channel.
C. •DRAINWAY or DRAINAGEWAY. A natural or artificial
land surface depression with or without perceptibly defined beds
and banks to which surface run-off gravitates and collectively
forms a flow of water continuously or intermittently in a `
definite direction.
D. FILL. A deposit of materials of any kind placed
b7 artificial means.
Y F. FLOOD FRINGE. That portion of the flood plain
..between the floodway district boundary and the upper limits
of the intermediate regional flood. The flood fringe is the
Tow hazard portion of a drainway channel or water course outside
of the floodway portion.
I'. FLOODWAY. The unobstructed portion of the flood
plain consisting of the stream channel and overbank areas capable
of conveying the flood discharge and keeping it within designated..
heighrs and velocities: The floodway is the high hazard portion
..of a drainway channel or water course which is reasonably.
required to carry and discharge the intermediate regional flood.
G. FLOOD. Temporary rise of water in a natural drainway
1
44
45
or -water course which results in inundation of adjoining lands
' not ordinarily covered by water.
H. FLOOD PROFILE. A graph or longitudinal profile
showing the relationship of the water surface elevation of a
flood event to location along a stream or river.
I. FLOODPROOFING. A combination of structural provi-
sions, changes or adjustments to properties and structures subject
:rJ
;r
c,] to flooding, primarily for the reduction or elimination of flood
=i+ damages to properties, water and sanitary facilities, structures
and contents.of buildings in a.flood hazard area.
J. INTERMEDIATE REGIONAL FLOOD. A flood flow, the
magnitude of which is expected to occur on the average of a
' 100-year frequency or has a 1% chance of being equally or
exceeded during any one year.
K. OBSTRUCTION. Any dam, wall, wharf, embankment,
levy, dike, pile, abutment, projection, excavation, channel
rectification, bridge, conduit, culvert, building, wire, fence,
rock, gravel, refuse, fill, structure or matter in, along,
across or projecting into a drainway, channel or water course
which may impede, retard or change the direction of the flow
of water either in itself or by catching or collecting debris
carried by such water or that is placed where the flow of water
might carry the same downstream to the damage of liafe and property.
L. OFFICIAL FLOOD PLAIN MAP. The map adopted by this
ordinance which indicates flood hazard areas within the City
' of Fort Collins and as amended.
• 45.
46
0
M. REGULATORY FLOOD PROTECTION ELEVATION. An elevation '
of not less than one foot -six inches above the water surface
elevation associated with the intermediate regional flood.
N. STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed,
any production or piece of work or edifice artificially built up :
or composed of parts adjoined together in some definite manner.
A structure shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
Any building or parts of buildings, including foundations, piers
and the like; fences of any type; utility lines, poles and the.
like; and any other type of constructive improvements, but not
including dirt fill.
Section 3: Official Flood Plain ice.
A. Establishment of Official Flood Plain Map. The '
official flood plain map, together with all explanatory matter
thereon, which is attached hereto, is hereby adopted by reference
and declared to be a part of this ordinance. A copy of the
official flood plain map, as amended from time to time, shall
be on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Fort.
Collins.
B. Lands to Which Ordinance Applies. The official
flood plain map delineates areas designated as the floodway
district and the flood fringe district. The floodway district
is that A ea which constitutes the floodway of.a drainway,
channel or water course. The flood fringe district is that
area which constitutes the flood fringe of a drainway channel '
or water course. This ordinance sets forth regulations governing
46
47
1
.r+
7t
� J
M
j
:a..i
1
the use of areas within the designated floodway district and
flood fringe district.
C. Uses Within District Boundaries. In addition to
any restrictions placed upon any lands within the City by virtue
of the zoning ordinance of the City, all lands within the floodway
district or the flood fringe district, as defined by this ordinance,
shall conform to and meet all requirements for such districts
as hereinafter set forth.
D. Amendment of Official Flood Plain Map. The City
Council may from time to time amend the official flood plain
map established by this ordinance upon ,petition of the owner
of any property within a floodway districtor flood fringe
district or upon the initiative of the City Council. Before
making any amendments to the official flood plain map, the
City Council shall review all pertinent engineering data
submitted to it relating to flood hazards in the area affected
and amendments shall be made consistent with the purposes of
this ordinance.
B. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree
of flood protection required by this ordinance is considered
reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based upon engineering
and scientific methods of study
Floods of greater magnitude
than the intermediate regional flood may occur on rare occasions
or flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes
such as ice jams and bridge openings restricted by debris.
D
47
wee
This ordinance does not,imply that areas outside of the flood
plain districts, or land uses permitted within such districts, '
will be free from flooding or flood damages. This ordinance
shall not create liability on the part of the.City of Fort
Collins or any officer or•employee thereof for any flood
damages that result from reliance on this ordinance or any
administrative decision lawfully made thereunder.
Section 4. Floodway District.
No land located within the floodway district as designated
herein shall be used for any purpose other than those listed
herein and only to the extent such uses are permitted uses under
the zoning ordinance of the City of Fort Collins and are not
prohibited by any other ordinance of the City. Except as per-
•mitted under Part B hereof, no structure, fill or storage of
materials or equipment shall occur on any land within the flood -
way district in connection with any permitted use.
A. Uses Not Requiring Special Reveiw.. Subject to
the limitations of the zoning ordinance or other ordinances
of the City, the following uses shall be permitted.
1. Private and public recreational uses such as
golf courses, driving ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds,
swimming areas, Parks, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms,
fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, target ranges, trap and
skeet ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking and horseback
riding trails. '
' 2. Agricultural uses.
3. Uses which are accessory to residential uses,
such as lawns, gardens, parking areas and play areas.
B. .Special Review Uses. The following uses which
involve structures (temporary or permanent) or storage of
materials or equipment may be permitted after special review
' M
and approval by the City Council and upon compliance with all
of the requirements of Section 6 of this ordinance.
.1. Uses permitted under Part A of this section
but utilizing structures, fill or storage of materials or
equipment.
2. Temporary roadside stands, signs for
identification.
3. Extraction of sand, gravel and other materials.
4. Railroads, streets, bridges, utility trans-
mission lines and pipelines.
5. Other uses similar in nature to the uses above
set forth.
C.. Standards for Floodway Special Review Uses. 1n
-determining whether to grant a permit for.any special review use
the City Council and any administrative officer of the City
making recommendations to the City Council on a proposed use
-shall be governed by the followings
' 1. All Uses. No structure (temporary or permanent),
deposit, obstruction, storage or materials of equipment, or any.
49
50 other use shall be allowed as a. special permit use which acting
alone or in combination with existing or future uses unduly
affects -the capacity of the floodway or unduly increases flood
heights. Consideration of any request for a special review use
shall be based upon the cumulative effects from an equal degree '
of encroachment extending for a significant reach on both sides
of the stream.
2. Structures.
a. No structure in this district shall be
utilized for human habitation.
b. All structures in this district shall
have.a low flood -damage potential.
c. Any structure permitted in .this district
shall be constructed and placed on the building site so as to
offer the minimum obstruction to the flow of flood waters.
d. All structures constructed in this district '
shall be firmly anchored to prevent flotation which may result
in damage to other structures, restrictions of bridge openings
and restrictions of other narrow sections of the stream or river.
e. All service facilities to structures in
this district, such as electrical and heating equipment, shall
be constructed at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation
for that area or shall be floodproofed.
3. Storage of Material and Equipment.
a. Within this district the storage or processing
of materials or equipment that are buoyant, flammable, explosive
or for other reasons could be injurious to human, animal or
f plant life, shall be prohibited. '
so
51
b. Within this district the only materials
' or equipment which shall be stored shall be those which are not
subject to major damage by floods and all such -materials or
equipment shall be firmly anchored to prevent flotation.
4. Water Supply and Sanitary Sewer Systems.
Within this district water supply systems and sanitary sewage
r' systems shall be designed in such way as to, minimize or eliminate
n infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges
'y
from the systems into the floodwaters. On -site waste disposal
systems shall be located so as to avoid impairment of the same
or contamination from them during flooding.
Section 5: Flood Fringe District.
A. Permitted Uses. Any use permitted by the'zoning
ordinance of the City and not prohibited by any other ordinance
j of the City shall be permitted within this district, subject to
the restrictions hereinafter set forth.
B. Structures. Any structure erected within this
district shall be placed on fill so that the lowest floor of
the structure is above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
The fill shall be a point no lower than the regulatory flood
1protection elevation for the particular area and shall extend
at such elevation at least fifteen feet beyond the limits of
.any structure or building erected thereon.
C. Public Improvements. Notwithstanding any other
' provision contained in this ordinance,within this district
51
52
�.
streets, bridges and utility lines may be constructed and
installed below the regulatory flood protection elevation
provided that.the same are reviewed and approved by the City
Manager or his designated representative. In the event the City
Manager refuses a permit for any such installation, the person
requesting the same may apply to the City Council for a permit
to install the proposed improvement as a special review use.
D: Special Review Uses. In cases where existing
streets or utils.ties are at elevations which make compliance
.with the requirements of Section 4B above impractical, or in
any other case where because of the particular conditions of
any site, a hardship would be imposed on the property owner to
require compliance with the provisions of Part B above, the owner '
of property within this district may apply to the City Council
for permission to erect the structure below the regulatory flood
protection elevation. Such application shall be made and processed
in accordance Tsa.th the provisions of Section 6 of this ordinance.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no case shall any portion of a
residence designed to be occupied by humans be located below the
regulatory flood protection elevation.
Section 6. Special Review
No special review permit shall be granted by the City Council
except in accordance with and upon compliance with the require-
ments of this section.
A. Application for a special review permit shall be '
F
made to the Director of Engineering Services upon a form supplied
52
53
by such office. The Director of Engineering Services may require
' such information regarding the application as he deems necessary
to process the same. Such information may include, but is not,
limited to, the following:
1. Up to five (5),copies of the plans for the
proposed project drawn to scale showing the nature, location,
d' dimensions and elevation of the lot, existing or proposed
r
structures, existing or proposed fill, information regarding
z storage of materials, information regarding any proposed flood -
proofing measures, and the relationship of the above to location
of.the channel, floodway and flood protection elevation.
2. A typical valley cross-section showing the
' channel of the stream, the elevation of land areas adjoining
each side of the channel, cross -sectional areas to be occupied
by the proposed development, and high water information.
3. Plans (surface view) showing two foot contours
of the ground; pertinent structure, fill or storage elevations;
size, location and spatial arrangement of all proposed and
existing structures on the site; location and elevation of
streets, water supplies, sanitary facilities, photographs
showing existing land uses and vegetation upstream and down-
stream, soil types and other pertinent information.
4. A profile showing the. slope of the bottom of
the channel or flowline of thr_ stream.
' 5. Specificatio:. for building,• construction
53
54.
0
and materials, floodproofing, filling, dredging, grading,
channel improvement, storage of materials, water supply and '
sanitary facilities..
C. The Director of Engineering Services shallreview
the applidation and shall forward the same to the City Council,
together with a report setting forth his recommendation on the
application, including the reasons for such recommendation and
any conditions which he recommends be imposed in approving the
application.
D. Upon receipt of the application and the report of
the Director of Engineering_ Services, the City Council shall
schedule a hearing on the application and shall give the
applicant written notice of the date and time of such hearing
at least two days before the date of the same. '
L. After the hearing the City Council shall act upon
the application and shall either grant the'same, grant the same
with additional conditions, or deny the same.
F. The Director of Engineering Services in making
recommendations on applications,. and the City Council in passing
or. such applications, shall consider all relevant factors set
forth in this ordinance and all other pertinent matters bearing
on the application, including, but not limited to, the following:
1. The danger to life and property due to increased
flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments.
2. The danger that materials may be swept on to.
54 -
55
0
1
1
other lands or downstream to the injury to others.
.3. The proposed water supply and sanitation systems
and the ability of these systems to prevent the -spread of.disease,
contamination and unsanitary conditions
4. The susceptibility of the proposed facility
and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage
on the owners of such facility.
5. The requirementsof the facility for a location
in the'area applied for.
6. The availability of alternate locations for
the proposed use, not subject to flood hazards or subject to •.
lesser flood hazards.
7. The compatibility of the proposed use with
existing development and development anticipated in the fore=
seeable future in compliance with the ordinances and plans
of the City.
8. The relationship of the proposed use to the
comprehensive plan of the City and to the Flood Plain Management
Program for the area.
9. The safety of access to the property in times
of flood by ordinary and emergency vehicles.
10. The expected heights, velocity, duration,
rate of rise and sediment transport of flood waters expected
at the site
G. In acting upon an application, the City Engineer.
55
56
may recommend conditions to the approval of the application
and the City Council may adopt such conditions. Such conditions,
by way of illustration but not limitation, may include the
following: .
1. Modification of waste disposal and water
supply facilities.
2. Limitations on periods of use and operation
3. Imposition of operational controls.
4. Requirements for construction of channel
modifications, dikes, levies and other protective measures.
5. Protection from erosion in areas that have
been filled.
6. Special design and construction of bridges
so as to allow the passage of flood waters over the structure
.or so as to give way and disintegrate in the path of the flood.
7. Flood proofing measures designed consistent
with the flood protection elevation for the particular area
.and consistent with anticipated flood velocities, durations,
rate of rise, hydrostatic and hydronamic forces and other
factors anticipated with the regulatory flood. Such flood -
proofing measures, by way of illustration but not limitation,
may include the following:
a. Anchorage to resist flotation and lateral
movement.
b. Installation of water -tight doors, bulk
6`
i�
1
56
1
1
0
ri
heads and shutters or similar methods of construction.
pressures.
c. Reinforcement of walls to resist water
d. Use of paints, membranes or mortars to
reduce seepage of water through walls.
e. Addition of mass or weight to structures
to resist flotation.
in structures
f. Installation of pumps to lower water level
g. Construction of water supply and waste
treatment systems so as to prevent the entrance of flood waters.
h. Installation of pumping facilities or
-comparable practices for subsurface drainage systems for buildings
to relieve external foundation, wall and basement flood pressures.
i. Construction to resist rupture or.collapse
.caused by water pressure or floating debris.
j. Installation of valves or controls on .sani-
tary and storm drains which will permit the drains to be closed
to prevent back up of sewage and "storm waters into the buildings
or structures. Gravity draining of basements may be eliminated
by mechanical devices.
k. Location of all electrical equipment,
circuits and installed electrical appliances in a manner which.
they
will assure that/are not subject to flooding and so as to provide
protection from inundation by the regulatory flood.
I
57
1. Location of any structural storage facilities
for chemicals, explosives, buoyant materials, flammable liquids,
or other toxic materials which could be hazardous to public
health, safety and welfare in a manner which will assure that
the facilities are situated at elevations above the heights
associated with the regulatory flood protection elevation or
are adequately flood -proofed to prevent flotation of storage
containers which could result in the escape of toxic materials
into flood. waters.
The Director of Engineering Services in receiving
applications for special review uses contemplating such flood -
proofing measures may require that the applicant submit a '
plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer
that the floodproofing measures contemplated are consistent with
the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood
factors for the particular area.
Section 7. Building_Ins ector
The Building Inspector shall issue no permit for the
construction of any improvements on any land located in the
flood -fringe district or the floodway district not permitted
by this ordinance. In the case of any use requiring a special
review permit, he shall issue no building permit until the
special review permit has been issued by the City Council. °
Section 8. Nonconforming Uses ,
A structure or the use of a structure or premises which
J �)
59
existed and was lawful before the passage of this ordinance V
but which is not in conformity with the requirements of this
ordinance may be continued notwithstanding the provisions of
this ordinance, subject to the following conditions:
A. If such use is discontinued for twenty-four (24)
consecutive months, any future use shall conform, to the require-
►ti
"^ ments of this ordinance.
-r,
-� B. If any nonconforming structure is destroyed by
any means, including floods, to an extent of fifty percent (50%)
or more of its assessed value as shown on the latest records
of the County Assessor, such structure shall not be reconstructed
except in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance.
C. Any alteration, addition or repair to a noncon-
forming structure involving a cost of in excess of twenty-five
percent (25%). of the assessed value of the structure shall be
made only in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 9. Safety Clause
The City Council hereby declares that should any section,
paragraph, sentence, word or other portion of this ordinance
be declared invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall not
affect any other portion of the ordinance and the City Council
hereby declares that it would have passed all other portions
of this ordinance, independent of the elimination herefrom of
any such portion which may be declared invalid.
59
6®
Introduced, considered favorably upon first reading and
ordered published this 15th day of July , A.D. 1975,
and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of
August , A.D. 1975.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ayor
Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of
August A.D. 1975. i—
ATTEST: ayor
7
C3.ty G1erx
First. reading: July 15, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 5, Nays: 0)
Second reading: August 5, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: b, Nays: 0)
Dates publisher /July 20 and August 10, 1975
Attest:
City Clerk
Ordinance adopted on second reading zoning
the Canfield Anzzeaation
Councilman Bloom made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to adopt
Ordinance No. 42, 1975 on second reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Rgeves, Russell, Winn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
III
7
1
60
ORDINANCE NO. 42, 1975
BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 118 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE
PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE CANFIELD ANNEXATION TO THE
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
^y' COLLINS:
Section 1. That the Zoning District Map adopted by
Chapter 118 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, be and
the same hereby is changed and amended by including the
property known as the Canfield Annexation to the City of
Fort Collins, Colorado, in zoning districts as follows:
All that part of said annexation lying South of a line
' parallel to the South line of the NW 1/4 of said Section
10 which is N 00012' W 435.70 feet from the South line
of said NW 1/4
in the R-P, Planned Residential. District.
The following described portion of said annexation:
All that part of said annexation lying North of a line
parallel to the South line of the NW 1/4 of said Section
10 which is N 00112' W 435.70 feet from the South line
of said NW 1/4
in the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential District.
Section 2. The City Engineer is hereby authorized and
directed to amend said Zoning District Map in accordance
with this ordinance.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and
e
61
62
I
ordered published this 15th day of. July A.D. 1975, and
to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of Au ust ,
A.D. 1975.
Z
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of
August , A.D. 1975.
-Mayor
ATTEST:,
_Z .cue--- k
City Clerk
First reading: July 15, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 5, Nays: 0)
Second reading: August 5, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 6, Nays: 0)
Dates published: July 20 and August .10, 1975
Attest:
Ordinance adopted on second reading
zoning the Fast Willox Lane Annexation
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to adopt
Ordinance No. 43, 1975 on second reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suiiui and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
ORDINANCE NO. 43 , 1975
BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 118 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE
PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE EAST WILLOX LANE ANNEXATION TO
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
III
1
1
62
63
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF FORT
COLLINS:
Section 1. That the Zoning District Map adopted by
Chapter 118 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, be and
the same hereby is changed and amended by including the
property known as the East Willox Lane Annexation to the
^t City of Fort Collins, Colorado, in the H-B, highway business
r
District.
.a.
y Section 2. The City Engineer is hereby authorized and
directed to amend said Zoning.District Map in accordance
with this ordinance.
Introduced, considered favorably on first. reading, and
' ordered published this 15th day of July , A.D. 1975, and to
be presented for final passage on the 5th day of August
A.D. 1975.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk i
Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of
August A.D. 1975.
> Q
� Mayor
�./
ATTEST:
—� -
City Clerk
. . 63.
64
First reading: July 1S, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 5, Nays: 0)
Second reading: August S, 1975 (Vote: Ycas: 6, Nays: 0)
Dates published: July 20 and August 10, 1975
Attest:
City Li)erk
Ordinance adopted on second reading assessing
cost of work done on trees against properties
in the City
Councilwoman- Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to
adopt Ordinance No. 44, 1975. Yeas: Council. members Bloom, Bowling,
Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
ORDINANCE NO. 44 , 1975
BEING AN ORDINANCE. ASSESSING THE COST OF WORK
DONE ON TREES AGAINST PROPERTIES IN THE CITY
OF FORT COLLINS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 109
^OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
GII-IEREAS, Chapter 109 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins
responsibility.'
assigns responsibility for certain required maintenance and
removal of trees to the property owner of the property upon
which such trees are located or which abuts public prop2;-ty
on which such trees are located; and
UHEREAS, said Chapter 109 provides that if the property
owner fail:; to perform such work on trees the City will cause
the work to be performed, and if the owner fails to pay the
cost of the same, the City will assess such cost against the
appropriate property; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 109-21 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins the Director of Finance has made a report
to the City Council as to the cost of any work done by the City
under said chapter which has not been paid by the property
owner; and
WHEREAS, appropriate notices were mailed by the Director
of Finance to the property owners concerned as provided by said
Section 109-21; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a hearing on the date
specified in said notice and has found and does hereby find
that the costs hereafter assessed are proper and should be
assessed against the appropriate properties in the City; and
r�
M
65
WHEREAS, at the hearing held on July 1, 1975, the City
Council heard and considered the protests and objections made
concerning the proposed assessments and made such adjustments
as they deemed proper.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FORT COLLINS:
Section 1. That pursuant to Section 109-21 of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins the cost of performing wort: on
trees pursuant to Chapter 109 of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins, including an additional ten percent (10%) to cover
interest, legal, advertising fees and costs of collection, it
is hereby assessed upon the property responsible for such work
in accordance with the provisions of. Section 109-21 of the Code
-yj of the City of Fort Collins, as follows:
:L Name and Address
of Property Owner
Faith Realty
1630 S. College
Fort Collins, CO
80521
Description of
Property Assessed
N 1/2 of NE 1/4,
Section 1, Twp 7N,
Range 69 West of
the 6th P.M.
Description.of Cost
Work Performed Assessed
Remove 2 diseased
elms including
stumps
tU. Welborn Be- it a point which Cut dorm Ca.ragana
416 W. Prospect bears S 89*33' E 710 hedge at school
ort Collins, CO ft from SW cor of SE crossing
21 1/4 of Section 16, Twp
7N, Range 69 West, 6th
P.M., thence S 89°33' E
110 ft, thence N 00000'30"
E 572.65 ft., thence N
89033' W 110 ft, thence
S 00000'30" W 572.65 ft
to point of beginning
$341.00
33. C1^
George Schuelke
Lot 16,
Block 2,
Prune
7 American 115.50
8200 S County Rd. 9
West Lawn Addition
Elms on
parking -
Fort Collins, CO
to the
City of Fort
clean
up old stubs-
80521
Collins
remove
deadwood, haul
brush
1.03 Investment Co.
Lot 13,
Block 103,
Prune
1 American
1308 Shamrock
City of
Fort Collins
Elm
40.70
Fort Collins, CO
0521
65
6s
Walter S. Hill E 10 ft of Lot 19 Prune 1. Elm 48.40
i 1524 W. Oak St. and iJ 40 ft of Lot
Fort Collins, CO 20, Blk 5, Scott
60521 Sherwood Addition,
City of Fort Collins
Josephine E. and W 40 ft of Lots 11 Prune 7 large 577.50
Beverly C. Guthrie and 12, Block 81, Cottonwoods
428 West Oak St. City of Fort Collins
Fort Collins, CO
80521
Name and Address Description of Description of Cost
of Property Owner Property Assessed Work Performed. Assessed
L. F. Blake. Lot 45, Stills Remove diseased Elm $207.90
1000 Pawnee Drive Resubdivision to and stump
Fort Collins, CO the Citv of Fort
80521. Collins'
L.uverne W. Fletcher Beg at pt 331.33 ft N Remove 1 diseased 148.50
1801 Falls Court of SW cor Section 36, Elm tree
Loveland, CO Twp 8 14, Range 69 W,
805_3,7 6th P.M., thence N 230.17
ft, E 232 ft, N 191.1.5 £t, '
N 84052' E 116 ft, N 850
05' E 79.54 ft, S 86000'
E 271 ft, N 14.5 ft, N 450
W 154 ft, N 46024' W 28.99
ft. N 44056' W 332.23 ft,
W 43.5 ft, S 49.31' W 297.34
ft. W 62.93 ft to the W line
of said section, N to center-
line of Lari.mer & Weld Irri-
gation Company Canal, thence
along said centerline of canal
in a northeasterly, easterly &
southeasterly direction to E
line of SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of
said sec., S along said E line
to pt 331.83 ft N or S line of
said sec., W 1320 ft M/L to pt
of beginning,. Also beginning
at pt 894 ft N of SW cor said
Sec. 36, E 568 ft, S 46024' E
28.99 ft, W 589 ft, N 20 ft to
beginning, less Book 1101, Page
442 & Book 1143, Page 185
Ken:,eth Menzer S 1/2. of Lot 3, Blk 136, Remove Elm trunk 24
(� 200 Johnson Ct. City of Fort Collins
Fort- Collins, CO
80521
M11
Section 2. All assessments herein provided for shall be
due and payable within thirty (30) days after the final publica-
tion of this ordinance without demand. If such assessments
are paid within such thirty days, an allowance of five percent
(5%) as a discount shall be made on all payments during such
period only. After such thirty days all assessments shall bear
interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum.
Section 3. The Director of Finance shall prepare the
foregoing assessment role in proper form as provided in Chapter
16 of the Code of: the City of Fort Collins and shall keep a
record of all payments made during the thirty -day period.
After the final publication of this ordinance and upon the
expiration of such thirty -day period he shall deliver said
assessment role to the County Treasurer of Larimer County
with his warrant for collection of the same, all in the manner
s" provided in Chapter 16 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
Section 4. All collections made by the County Treasurer
on said assessment role shall be accounted for and paid over
to the Director of Finance on the first day of each and every
month, with separate statements for all such collections for
each month in the same manner as general taxes are paid by
the County Treasurer to the City.
Section 5. In, case the assessments made pursuant to this
ordinance are not paid within twelve (12) months after delivery
of the assessment role to the County Treasurer, all property
'concerning which such default is suffered shall. be advertised
by the County Treasurer and sold for payment of the entire unpaid
assessment thereon at the same time or times and in the same
manner,under all of the same conditions and penalties and with
the same effect as provided by law for the sale of real estate
in default of the payment of general taxes, all as provided by
Chapter 16 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
Section 6. The owner of any divided or undivided interest
may pay his share of any assessment herein made upon producing
evidence of the extent of his interest satisfactory to the
officers having the assessment role in their charge.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and
ordered published this i5th day of July, A.D. 1975, and to be
presented for final passage on the 5th day of August, A.D. 1975.
ATTES
Mayor_
City Clerk
67
Passed and adopted on final. reading this 5th day of
August, A.D. 19.75.
ATTESTo��j �0A
City C er �� ��j L
First reading: July 15, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 5, Nays: 0)
Second reading: August 5, 1975 (Vote: Yeas: 6, Nays: 0)
Dates Published: July 20 and August 10, 1975
Attest:
City Cer '
Ordinance adopted on first reading zoning
the Griffin -West Prospect Street property
Councilman Suinn requested clarification of the staff memorandum that '
would suggest t;,v,possibilities listed below:
Recommendation:
At the July 7 Plaiming and Zoning Board meeting, the staff recommendation
was that the problems discussed above seemed to warrant the study of
alternative zones for the site and its immediate vicinity. In the
absence of such an analysis, however, approval of the petition to extend
the. B-L and C zones to the site was a clear cut approach.
After discussion, the Hoard voted unanimously to recommend approval of
the petition.
Associate Planner, Paul Deibel, stated the Planning office saw diffi-
culties with the patterns of existing zoning rather than with the petition.
Attorney David Rood, appearing for the Pat Griffin Company, the applicant,
stated that the character of the area is pretty well fixed with respect
to the property which has been developed. Further, the request for
zoning is a logical extension of the zoning which already exists and that
the Planning and Zoning Board had iwan:imously voted to approve the recom-
mendation.
Councilman Wilkinson made a !:action, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to. adopt
Ordinance No. 46, 1975 on first -reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Reeves, Russell., Sui.nn and wilkinson. Nays: None.
68
. �„
Ordinance adopted as amended on firsi
reading regulating the conduct of going -out -
of -business sales
Councilwoman Reeves expressed concern for the consumer being protected
from deceptive advertising. City :'Attorney bIirch stated this is not
covered under City ordinances, but is covered under State laws and general
laws regarding fraud and misrepresentation; there is a provision in this ordi-
nance for this particular thing.
Councilman Suinn inquired into the audit provision of the ordinance, also,
iTito the Sunday and Holiday exclusion.
City Attorney March stated the audit cost is covered in the license fee
and the Sunday and Holiday exclusion is intended to provide a uniform
base for achninistration of the ordinance.
a.,
. r
Councilman Wilkinson recommended that the 90 day provision be amended to
45 days, this would be for the benefit of those persons now engaged in a
going out of business sale. Further, he would like to see a time limit
set in which the City .administration would act on the application.
Councilman Bowling stated that in Trany cases, the 75 day time limit is:
not adequate; also, the provision is contained in the ordinance denying
the right to bring in additional goods. He felt a merchant should be
allowed to supplement the goods that are sold; perhaps this could be
accomplished by allowing a certain percentage each month.
Mr. Merle Goddard, President of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke to the
abuses being perpetrated by some of thDpresent going out of business
sales, the committee and staff input regarding the initiation of this
ordinance.
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to
amend the Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 3-C4 by changing 90 days to 45 clays; to amend Section 4,
to change the next to the last sentence to read "any license holder may
apply for two extensions of the license, not to exceed an additional
30 days each, and to amend Section 6, by inserting a section after the
first sentence to read as follows: The investigation of the City
Manager shall be completed and action taken on the application by the
City within 7 days of the filing of the application". Yeas: Council
members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays:
None.
Councilmann Suinn made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
adopt Ordinance No. 47, 1.975 as amended on first reading. Yeas: Council
members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Ordinance adopted on first readu:g
annexing tile E,:ccllart Annexation ,
This 0.4 acres is located at 900 North College Avenue. This small annexation
is made necessary by the FAcell-Art Company's desire to enlarge their
building in the rear. For a building permit to be issued, the rear
69
half of the Company's properiy mnist be u mexcd and the entire lot be made
a one -lot Subdivision. This annexation received the Unanimous approval
of the Planning and Zonin.Board and the Planning staff. The property
will be zoned C, Commercial., as is the Company's other property.
Councilman Bowling inquired if there were easements in this area for
pedestrian access. City Attorney March advised the Council that there is
a provision in the ordinance that states that the City will not enforce
the street dedication requirements in connection with Federal Highways.
Councilman Bowling requested Council review this provision before Council
discusses the North College program. City Manager Brunton stated the
administration would have a report on this item prior to final reading.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to adopt
Ordinance No. 48, 1975 on first reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Ordinance adopted on first reading
zoning the lixcellart Annexation
The Planning and Zoning Board and the Planning staff unanimously recommend
for approval of C, Commmercial District zoning.
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Suinn, to
adopt Ordinance No, 49, 1975 on first reading. Yeas: Council members
Bloom, Bot\-lung, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Ordinance adopted on first reading '
amending Section 30-2 of the Code of
the Citv Fort Collins relating to funds
Councilman Bluani:nquired into the repayment into the Water hind for the
Golf Course. City Attorney March stated the repayment is done by
virtue of a resolution which remains or. the books, the only difference
Js that it will now be accounted for within a special fund, rather than a
division of the general fund.
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to
adopt Ordinance No. 50, 1975 on first reading. Yeas: Council members
Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None."
Resolution adopted authorizing notice
of sale of bonds in connection with Street
Improvement District No. 69
City Attorney March stated Council had taken previous action on this
item; it now appears that the district will be less expensive than
anticipated.
Councilman Powling made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, to
adopt the resolution. Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves,
Russell and Suinn. Nays: None. (Councilman wilk:inson out of room).
70
71
RESOLUTION 75-46
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROVING THE FORM OF NOTICE OF SALE OF
BONDS IN STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT N0, 69
AND D.RECTING PUBLICATION OF SUCH NOTICE
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 29, 1974, finally passed and
adopted on June 27, 1974, the City Council has created Street
Improvement District No. 69, in the City of Fort Collins for
the purpose of constructing and installing street paving, curb,
gutter, sidewalk and street lighting improvements on certain
yr streets therein; and
y WHEREAS, previously on July 15, 1975, the City Council
made a determination that it was necessary to provide for the
issuance of bonds in an amount not to exceed $500,000.00 to
pay for the cost of said improvements and authorized and directed
a Notice of Sale of Bonds in the amount of $500,000.00; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Engineering Services has reported
to the City Council that the costs to be assessed against properties
' within the district will be lower than originally anticipated and
on the basis of such information the City Council now has deter-
mined that it is necessary to provide for the issuance of bonds .
in an amount not exceeding $360,000.00 to pay for the cost of
said improvements, the principal of and interest on the bonds
to be payable from special assessments to be levied against the
property within the District and specially benefited by the
improvements to be constructed and installed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is necessary
to repeal the previous Resolution No. 75-41 passed -on July 15,
1975, and to pass the within Resolution in substitution therefor;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is advisable
to advertise for the sale of said bonds in an amount not exceeding
$360,000.00.
NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FORT COLLINS:
1. That notice of: sale of bonds of the City for Street
Improvement District No. 69 in the principal amount of $360,000.00
shall be given by publication in two issues of The Fort Collins
Coloradoan, a newspaper published and of general circulation
in the City, in the editions dated August 7 and August 14, 1.975. _
2. The form of the notice of sale shall be substantially
as follows:
71
WR
4
C
NOTICE OF SALE
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 69
BID OPENING: TUESDAY, AUGUST 19, 1975
2:00 P.M.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, will receive sealed bids at the office of the Director .
of Finance at the Municipal Building, 300 LaPorte Avenue, in
Fort Collins, Colorado, 80521, until 2:00 P.M., on Tuesday,
August 19, 1.975, for the purpose o.0 Special Assessment Bonds
in the principal amount of $360,000.00, of the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado, for Street Improvement District No. 69.
The bonds will be dated July l,,1975, and due July 1, 1986,
subject to prior redemption in direct numerical order on any
interest payment date upon thirty (30) days published notice,
upon payment of par and accrued interest. The bonds shall be
in the denomination of $1,000.00 each, numbered 1 to 360,
"l.rir1usi ve.
The interest on the bonds shall be payable on July 1,_
.976, and semi-annually thereafter on January 1. and July 1
each year.
For the purpose of comparison only, bids shall be submitted
on the following, estimated dates of payment which are only an
estimate based on past experience, and are in no way guaranteed.
Amount Estimated Date of Payment
$74,000 July 1, 1976
72,000 July 1, 1977
38,000 July 1, 1978
38,000 July 1, 1.979
38.000 July 1, 1980
$20,C)00
July
20 ,000
July
20 ,0 00
July
20 ,0 00
July
20 ,0 00
July
1, 1981
1, 1982
1, 1983
1, 1984
"1, 1985
The principal and interest on said bonds shall be payable
at the office of. the Director of Finance, in Fort Collins, Colorado.
72
73
opinion of Messrs. Willson and Lamm, Attorneys at Law, Denver,''
Colorado. A certified copy of the approving opinion will be
printed upon each bond without additional cost.
This notice supersedes the Notice of Sale of Bonds in
said Street Improvement District No. 69 previously published
on July 29, 1975.
DATED at Fort Collins, Colorado, as of the 5th day of
August, 1975.
ATTEST:
/s/ Charlie D. Cain
Director ot Finance
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
/s/ Jack E. L. Russell
Mayor
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
The bonds will bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum;
each bidder should indicate the amount of premium above par
or the amount of discount below par, but not to exceed more
than 10% of the principal amount of bonds, at which price the
bidder will purchase the bonds.
Subject to the right of the City to reject any and all
bids received, the bonds will be awarded on the bid representing
the lowest net interest cost to the City based upon the estimated
dates of payment as set forth above.
The bonds will be payable from special assessments to be
levied against the property within the District specially benefited
by the construction of the improvements. The Charter of the Citv
also provides: "Whenever three -fourths (3/4) of the securities
issued for a special or local improvement district have been
paid and cancelled and for any reason the remaining assessments
are not paid in time to redeem the final securities for the
district, the City shall pay the securities when due and levy
additional ad valorem taxes necessary therefor and reimburse
itself by collecting the unpaid assessments due the district."
All bids must be unconditional and shall be accompanied by
a cashier's or certified check in the amount of $15,000.00,
payable to the City'of Fort Collins. Checks of unsuccessful
bidders will be promptly returned. The good faith deposit
will be credited to the purchaser at the time delivery of the
bonds is made; and if the successful bidder shall fail or neglect
to complete the purchase of the bonds in accordance with the
bid, the amount of the deposit shall be held by the City as
liquidated damages.
73
74
The City of Fort Collins reserves the privilege of waiving
( any defect or irregularity in any bid.
The award of the bonds will be made by the City Council at
the regular meeting on August 19, 1975, at 5:30 P.M., or at an
adjournment of the regular Council meeting of that date.
Delivery of the Bonds will be made at any bank or trust
company in either Fort Collins or Denver, Colorado, or elsewhere
at the request and expense of tl:e purchaser.
Additional information concerning this issue and the
District may be obtained from Mr. Charlie D. Cain, P. 0. Box
580, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80521, or from Boettcher and
Company, 828-17th Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202, the financial
consultant to the City.
The City of Fort Collins will furnish the printed bonds,
a certified transcript of legal proceedings and the approving
3. In addition to the publication of the notice of sale,
the Director of Finance and the Financial Consultant are
authorized to forward a copy of the prospectus and notice
of sale, to those investment banking firms, banks and others
who might be i.nteresLed in bidding on bonds of the City.
4. That if any one or more sections or parts of this '
Resolution shall be adjudged valid, such
ed unenforceable or in
judgment shall not affect, impair or. invalidate the remaining
provisions of this Resolution, it being the intention that the
various provisions hereof are severable.
5. The Resolution No. 75-41 adopted by the City Council
on .July 15, 1975, is hereby repealed and this resolution is
substituted therefor.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
held this 5th day of August, A.D. 1975.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
1
74
75
Ordinance adopted on first reading
authorizing issuance of bonds to pay
cost of construction of improvements
in Street Improvement District No. 69
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Suinn, to adopt
Ordinance No. 57, 1975 on first reading. Yeas: Council members Bloom,
Bowling, Reeves, Russell and Suinn. Nays: None. (Councilman Wilkinson
out of room).
Ordinance adopted as amended on first
reading amending Chapter 118 of the Code
relating to limited indoor recreation use
The City staff has received suggestions and recommendations to allow billiard
lzr parlors and game rooms in the 13-L zone. The definition of limited indoor
r
recreation use is fairly comprehensive. This matter was discussed at
,Ij the July 7, 1975, Planning and Zoning Board meeting and received unanimous
approval.
City Attorney March requested an amendment to the ordinance in Section 1,
to change.the last sentence to read: "This definition is intended to
restrict the type of recreational use allowed to 'small scale' facilities
that would be compatible with typical buildings and uses in the limited
Business Zoning District in which this use is allowed".
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, to amend
the ordinance as above. Peas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves,
Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, to adopt
Ordinance No. 52, 1975 as amended on first reading. Yeas: Council members
Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and lVi.lkinson. Nays: None.
Final Plat of the Brew Subdivision
First Filing approved
This 1-!z acres zoned H-.B, highway business, is located on the west side of.
North College Avenue between Willox LarR and Hickory street. In lieu
of a cul-de-sac running west from North College, there is now a street
called Ilibdon Court that will eventually connect with other property in
this area. The first filing is for two lots of an eventual 5-lot sub-
division.
Both the Planning and Zoning Board and the Planning staff recommend
approval of this subdivision.
Councilman Suiiui made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to approve
the plat of the Brew Subdivison First Filing. Yeas: Council members
Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None. (Councilman
Russell out of room).
75
76
Replat of Willow Lane P.U.D. Subdivision,
Lots 5-21 and Tracts B, -C, 1), E, and F
approved
This 20-ucro site :is zoned R-P, Planned Residential District, on the east
side of Overland Trail one-half mile south of West Prospect Street. This
replat is a technical change to provide individual lots for each of the
townhouse units. This is required by the Federal National Mortgage
Association for permanent :Loans. The various conditions with regards
to bike -path easements have been taken care of. Both the Planning and
Zoning Board and the Planning staff recommends approval of this replat.
Councilman Blown made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
approve the replat of Willow Lane P.U.D. Subdivision, Lots 5-21 and Tracts
F, C, D, E and F. Peas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves,
Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None. . (Councilman Russell out of room)
Request to amend the zoning ordinance
with regards to Children's Centers denied
At the June 17, 1975 meeting the City Council was requested to consider a child
care facility in the R-I, zone. Our City Planning staff did extensive review
' and study on this project. There is a growing trend to have children's centers
closer to the user area.
C
A short time ago the City amended LIM zoning ordinance to be more liberal in its'
interpretation of allowing day care centers in R-M, Medium Density Resident
District. These arendments included reducing the requirements in frontage and
square -foot requirements. We have not had much time to review or analyze the
effects of this on the city. Perhaps we should have more R-M zoning in the
south part of the city rather than allowing a children's center in R-L zone..
In either case, we Feel we should get more historical data before making a
final decision on this matter. `
This matter was referred to the Planning and Zoning Board. By a four to one
vote the Board recommends that the requirements frr children's centers in
R-L districts he denied. They fee]: that a full-scale day care center might
be an intrusion in all types of low density residential areas.
Councilman Bowling stated he was opposed to Day Care Centers being allowed
in the R-L zone. Councilwoman Reeves stated schools are allowed in the
zone and , on the whole, she felt Day Care Centers would not create as
much traffic, further,that Centers need to be available for children hear
residences. Councilman Wilkinson stated he was opposed to a profit making
business in an R-L zone.
Councilman howling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to deny
the request. Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Russell, Suinn and
Wilkinson. Nays: Councilwoman Reeves.
76
L I
77
Citizen Participation
1. John Zisman, 524 Stover Street, presented petitions in support of
a requested proclamation which would endorse the practice of Transcen-
dental Meditation.
'
2. Herb Brauer, 421 South Howes Street, spoke to the Affirmative Action
Plan adopted by the City and the City Council's reevaluation of the
City Manager. Mr. Brauer stated any future review should be open to
the public.
3. Lee McDavid, Co -Chairperson of the National Organization for Women
in Port Collins, spoke to the Affirmative Action program. Ms, NtDavid
further
requested a written statement on Council's policy toward
citizen participation.
-"Z
4. Andy Anderson, 1421 Skyline Drive, spoke to the review of the Citv
Manager and referred to an advertisement which appeared in the Colo-
radoan Newspaper on April 7, 1975 which was endorsed by six of the old
Council members and four of the present members urging a "yes" vote to
keep Bob Brunton as the City Manager.
S. City Manager Brunton made the following announcements:
(a) Notification of retirement from Fire Chief Ed Yonker (Letter read
into the record).
'
(b) Official Ground Breaking ceremony for Library established for
.August 20, 1975 at 10:30 A.M.
(c) Announcement of Downtown Redevelopment Commission meeting scheduled for
August 8, 1975 at 5:00 P.M. in City Council Chamber. City
Planner, Les Kaplan, gave an oral report on the candidates which
have been interviewed for the preliminary phase of the DowntoI,;i
Redevelopment Program.
Raw Water Policy adopted
City INIanager Brunton stated the policy had been adopted by the Water Board
on July 28 at its special meeting. On August 15, 1975 the Water Board will
be holding a meeting with the consultants, McCall -Ellingson on the Joe Wright
Reservoir project, Council members are invited and encouraged to attend,
Councilman Bloom stated lie would like to see the policy reviewed. City
Manager Brunton stated the Plant Investment fees are reviewed annually and
the Water Policy could be decided at that time. Mayor Russell stated those
people offering water for sale should be notified what the status or
policy is. City Attorney March stated this is the intent of the first
item of the policy.
The Policy is as follows:
77
WAR
tr, RAW WATER POLICY
1. For the time being, and pending the receipt of further information as
to aliowable'size and use of Joe Wright Reservoir, and pending the
completion of other studies concerning raw water and its use, the
City will not, ordinarily, pursue the purchase of raw water absent
unusual circumstances or outstanding value.
2. The City of Fort Collins will continue to accept the waters of the
Southside Ditches in compliance with the City's requirement for the
purpose of obtaining City water service. The City will accept the
shares of stock upon the previously establisher) following basis:
Arthur Ditch as yielding 2.1.45 acre feet.
Larimer County #2 as yielding 27.21 acre feet.
New Mercer as yielding 18.465 acre feet.
North.Poudre as yielding 5.0 acre feet.
Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal as yielding 55.55 acre feet.*
Warren Lake as yielding 10,0 acre feet,
The City will also accept Horsetooth on the basis of one
acre foot per unit.
*Subject to modification by separate and subsequent'recommendation.
3. The City of Fort Collins will riot consider the purchase of Josh Ames ,
Certificates, but will continue to accept certificates which will entitle
the owner, upon annexation of property to the City or at the time of
original water service, to fulfill any present or future requirements
imposed by the City of Fort Collins for the furnishing of water service
to newly annexed land in the ratio of one -eighth acre of land for each
certificate surrendered to the City.
4. Tile City +of Port Collins will continue to work with the agricultural'
interests in the Poudre Valley through the Cache .La Poudre Water Users'
Association or others and participate in such studies and legal proceedings
which are beneficial to all parties.
5. The City of Fort Col_l.ins will cont:imre to cooperate with the legally
consri.tutod water di::tricts in the Fort CoLl.i.ns area for the mutual
uonufi.t of the Citizenry ul. Fort Collin:. anci tine Fort Collins,area.
6. The City of Fort Collins will (a) immediately and aggressively pursue the
cons truction;en.largement_ of Joe Wright Reservoir based on the assumption
of the optimum reservoir; (b) maintain the conditional storage decrees
of Joe Wright Reservoir; (c) maize investigative studies as to the advisability
and feasibility of obtaining a court decree authorizing the storage of
other water or water rights owned by the City in Joe Wright Reservoir.
Ai
78
79
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
adopt the Raw Water Policy as recorrenended by the Water Board. Yeas:
Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson.
' Nays: None.
Proposed P.U.D. Ordinance set for Hearing
The following is the memorandum on this subject from the City Manager to
the Council:
We have been considering a PUD ordinance for some time, and there have been
several public hearings on this matter before. the Planning and Zoning Board.
The City Staff has been working extensively with Art March, Jr., City Attorney,
on various revisions to this proposed ordinance. Most of the items covered
in the PUD ordinance are already in our existing ordinance or administrative
procedures. Our staff will have a report available at the Council meeting
on the present PUD requirements as compared to the new ordinance. Also,
�. when this ordinance is passed, we will prepare a simplified flow chart to
y assist developers through the PUD process.
Since there have been some changes made by the staff and because there is
a need for full input, we propose delaying the passage of this ordinance on
first reading until September 2, 1975. In the meantime copies of the
ordinance will be made available to interested developers, planners and
others for additional input.
Recommendation: The Administration recommends that the City Council receive
' the PPUll oTJ nance and authorize the City Manager to send copies to developers,
planners, and other interested parties for their input. We would be
pleased to have this item at a work session if the Council desires. We
further recommend that the Council authorize the Administration to bring
this ordinance back for consideration on first reading at the Council Meet-
ing of September 2, 1975.
Council comments were aired regarding high and long densities, the conceptual
and preliminary plans, commercial uses, and the desire of Council to receive
input from the contractors and developers to the ordinance.
Councilman Suinn made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to set
this item for hearing and first reading on September 2, 1.975. Yeas:
Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell., Su unn and Wilkinson.
Nays: None.
Council consensus at this time was to set a work session on this item on
Tuesday, August 26, 1975.
Report from Designing Tomorrow Today
on Auditoriuun1)o j ect accepted
Li.11a Morgan presented Council with a copy of a Louis Harris survey on the
importance 6f the Arts conducted in 1974; she then introduced the following
' members of the DT2 Committee who gave portions of the report:
70
80
a. Prank Johnson
(� b. Bob Clark
Its. Morgan, in closing, stated they had anticipated that Stearns Rogers
would be present with the drawings and plans; they had been informed,
however, that they would be unable to attend.
Mayor Russell inquired of Mrs. Morgan if she was "saying No. 1 the
Performing Art Theater, is that of high priority, that No. 2 the Art
galleryin conjunction with the performing arts is of second priority, and
then if there is a third reconunendation". Mrs. Morgan responded "yes" to
the first question and "yes" to the second, but clarified that it was a
Steering Committee recommendation. Its. Morgan stated the repair of the
present structure was considered a fixed expense.
Mayor Russell next requested citizen input.
1. Andy Anderson, 1421 Skyline Drive, stated he felt 2 million dollars
was an excessive amount for the auditorium at this time. He also
listed five questions on the capital improvements financing.
2. Robert Tuet.ing, 916 Cheyenne Drive, stated he opposed the funding for
the auditoriiun based on the great demands on the funds from the
taxpayers for other services.
3. Bruce Preestone, 224 Second Street, stated he felt there iaus a
definite need for this facility. He did not, however, feel the
facility would be adequate for theater groups.
4. Preston Davis, Chairman of the DT2 Steering Committee, stated he
was disappointed that Stearns Rogers could not attend to present the
detail sketches on the auditorium facility.
S. Karl. Carson inquired if Council had established a date at which it
is goring to crake a decision on the project. Mayor Russell stated
that this i,*as being discussed.
6. Tom Bennett, 1513 Lakeside Avenue, urged the Council to move ahead
boldly on this project.
7. Louise Thornton, 4 Steeple Chase Drive, stated she is a member of the
ConDunity Theater and had viewed the plans of Stearns Rogers and felt
the building is unadaptable to theatrical usage.
8. ;Villiam Swartz, conductor of the local Synmhony, spoke at length to
the needs of the symphony and the needs of the theater.
9. Shelton Stanfill, Director of Cultural Programs at CSU, spoke to the
need for a fine arts center in the community.
n
F
m
81
10. Bob Dunn, President of the United Bank, stated he felt it was time
to make a decision on this project.
' Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to receive
the report of the auditorium Sub-Cumnittee and direct Stearns Rogers to
have the plans in the City of Fort Collins by the 19th of August, to give the
auditorium co.nmittee a week to go over than and that a Special Council Meet-
ing be set for August 26, 1975 at 1:00 P.M. to made a decision on the audi-
torium. Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Shinn and
Wilkinson. Nays: None.
(Note: This action was later rescinded).
+ Report on status of Capital Improvements
program
r -
yCity Manager Brunton gave an overview of the 7 year Capital, #rpvement _Program,
then revenue in the sales tax and Parkland Fees, and then the recommendations.
Following are portions of the report:
AN OViRVIEW OF THE 7 N7ifuR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
The Capital Improvements Program was really set up as "something for every-
body," with segments supported by a series of advocacy groups each capgpaignbig
for a specific improvement with eery little thought to the operating costs
' of the total program once it might be accomplished.
At the same tine the problem the City Council faces was that the people
did'nt realize we were changing emphasis from the basics provided by City
Government -- utilities„ streets, police and fire protection, and tradi
tional `. forms of recreational prograrmning. The newer concerns of the
Fort Collins City Government had become of necessity, and with encouragement
by the federal government through revenue sharing programs -growth management,
inflation, huanan resources and cultural resources. And though the emphases
had undergone such change, it went without saying that basic services and
protections would continue in the newer context.
Looking at the positive side of the Capital Improvements Program, Fort
Collins is a great City. Everything in the Capital Improvements Program
could present many intangible benefits to the varied citizen population --
its retail, commercial, educational and recreational communities. To
its regional leadership in these areas could be added its ability to
become a cultural center for Northern Colorado, with spillage from a
broadly -drawn constituancy comingling to benefit the existing vitality
of the other areas of activity;
There are many pluses to the Capital Improvements Program, but its imple-
mentation is happening too fast. Believing that the people should have
what they want and what they can afford, we face the problems of changes in
' projected City revenues. Looking back, the biggest mistake was made in
placing dates on the Improvements Program, since priorities in terms of
AM
82
first projects to be accomplished put us in the position of accomplishing
things first which would add appreciably to operations and maintenance costs.
Others (if we u-inted to lower operations and maintenance costs) were street
Riprovanents: and storm set•;ers, with the high maintenance projects being the '
new Library, the projected new Au4itorium and Art Museum.
We're faced now with accomplishing a fracured program with too many
variables: old buildings and their potentials, problems in ]mowing how to
relate to the County, and too many opposing views.
When the 7 Year Capital Improvements Program was established, everything
seemed optimistic about the economy, in terms of grotiath, revenue, population
and historic trends.
Wo felt that this program, put together by a citizens' group, represented a
mandate by the people. Seeing it as such, we plied vital vnportance in
attempting to follow the priorities established (See DT2 priorities list
as initially established, Attachment A).
In order to accomplish our goals in this context, it was necessary for us to
go into substantial detail in investigating the specifics involved in all
of the recommended prograuns -- utilizing hundreds of hours of staff time
and staff expertise -- to evaluate and make recommendations regarding the
effects of each decision within those components on the other components
as well as the CIP in its entirety.
At the same time we were waiting for predictable trends to show how Fort '
Collins was doing. A lot of work: has been going on in this regard, with
an independent study being made to establish new 5-year revenue projects.
An though those projections are not yet available, we now feel Ire have seen
enough of the trends to make preliminary predictions.
It is now time for Lis to present our first hard look at the Capital
improvement Program and make recommendations to the City Council. To do
this necessitates a look at three major decisions only recently made by
the City'Council.
A. The decision to use Lincoln Junior High School as a Cultural Center
(implications:
1. The building previously planned for use as a community center was
no longer available. 'Phis triggered purchase of the Coloradoan
building.
2. This action added a potential operating and maintenance cost to
the General. Fund not previously planned for,
3. The original cost of the Lincoln Junior High Cultural Center was
to have been $1,070,000 in Niay, 1974. . This was later revised
to $1,200,000. The amcunt was increased to $2,000,000 during the
April 29, 1975 City Council Meeting.)
B. The decision to put the Library at Lincoln Park
(Implications:
4'E• 1. Required demolition and relocation of the Pioneer Museum '
2. Triggered subsequent decision
old library building). to locate the Pioneer Museum in the
M
AM
C. The decision to move on construction of City Hall as soon as possible.
The current situation is surrounded by problems as yet to be solved:
1. The original concept of the Capital Improvements Program as a
"pay as you go" program, based on a 151 per year increase in
revenues, has been lost sight of.
2. Our current revenue increase has been established at 5%, giving us
not only a 10% decrease yearly, but a decrease based on a lower
increase than projected for the previous year.
3. There have been many diverse viewpoints which has created a sub-
stantia7, number of variables.
4. There is a need for additional interrelationships with other
public bodies -- larimer County, Poudre R-1 School District, etc.
S. The cost of doing City business has gone up. This is a result of
inflation, City growth and the impacts of Human and Cultural
j resources programs.
-y 6. Our various outside studies have not as yet given us the answers
we need.
F. Priorities Established by DT2
With the inception of the 7 Year Capital Improvements Program, certain
priorities were recommended by DT2. These were:
Priority 1
1. Comprehensive Long Range Master Plan
2. livery House and historic Facilities
3. Downtoiln Redevelopment
4. Sewer to Andersonville and Alta Vista
5. Transportation Planning and Start -Up
Priority II
1. Community Resources and Cultural Center
Priority III
1. Community Auditorium
2. Fire Station Number 4
3. Outdoor Swimming Pool
Priority IV
1. Lincoln Junior High School Recreation and Cultural Center
2. Municipal Service Building
Priority V
1. Department of Recreation Complex
' Priority VI
1. Indoor Ice Skating Rink
83
84
Continuous Projects
1. Open Space Land Acquisition
2. Park Program '
3. Storm Drainage
4. Transportation System
S. Street Improvements
PARKLAND - RIXI] U ,
1. It was fortunate that the City showed the foresight to increase the
Park Land fee just before the major increase in residential unit housing
started.
2. We are projecting only 400 additional residential units each year
through 1980. This is based on several factors:
a. An overbuild or surplus .in the multi -family dwelling'unit areas.
b. Inflation, interest rates, gas problems.
3. Eventually there will be an increase in residential units due to
pressure from growth at CSLI and programs related to CSU:
a. CSi1 is highly talented and capable in areas where pressure will,
be exerted for additional groA%rth (weather, solar energy, radiation,
engineering research).
b. Because of pre -medical, pre -veterinarian and veteran capatlilities,
there will be more pressure to expand services.
PARK'L.A'B _ LTEVITURES
I. The limited money we will be taking should be used to consolidate and
improve the effici;-:ncy and effectiveness of our existing parks.
2. It does not appear that Rolland 1v, Moore Memorial. Park can be started
for at least five years, (It '�%Zll take $300,000+ to get.this area
started with an eventual master plan budget of over $1-million.)
SALES TAX RIiVENUE
I. The sales tax revenue :for the Capital Improvement Program was projected
on the basis of an amival increase of 15%.
2. We are now projecting our increases as follows:
1975 - 5.4%
1976 - 6%
1977 - 8%
1978 -1.0%
1979 -10%
1980 -10%
0
3. Therefore, our sales tax revenue shows a decline of $1,003,433 for the
period. We will be picking up a little revenue from interest earned,
etc. This will mean that some projects will have to be reduced in scope,
eliminated, or deferred. '
84
4. Of equal importance is that the same trends affect the one -cent sales tax
that is used for operating purposes in the General Fund, Therefore, those
programs that add to the operation and maintenance costs in the General
Fund should be deferred or eliminated,
- yj
5. Table 1 gives a summary of the revenue for the Capital. Improvoment Program,
We will have $797,113 less revenue than projected in the 7 year period.
SALES TAX - EXPENDLTURES
1. Table 2 gives a summary of the 1.973, 1976, and the first six months of 1975
actual expenditures and the estimated total of 1975 expenditures.
2.. Tablc 3 presents the original allocations and administrative recommended
changes in allocation (based on present assumptions and cost figures). Listed below is a summary of. the projected deficit in the Capital Improve-
ment Program g (excluding Park Land Fund):
y Revenue - $13,867,762
Proposed allocations - 16,607,561
Deficit ($ 2,739,799)
RECO, FNDATTONS ,
If our present revenue projects and recommended revised allocations are approved,
we must either:
1. Extend capital improvement time period, or
2. Eliminate projects
The three projects that we recommend to be eliminated or deferred are as follows:
I. Auditorium $2,000,000
2. Swimming pool 300,000
3. Ice rink 550,000
$2,850,000
The reason these projects were selected is because they are relatively high -
operating -cost items.
Because of major cNsh-flow probl,•ms, thure will. have to be several projects that
will have to be delayed past 1977. 'These inclutltthe following:
1. Both fire stations and the drill tower
2. Any additional major expenditures for storm sewers
3. Any major purchase in space o en
P ((obtain land by agreement, option, contract,_)
etc., with long pay -back schedule)
fM
86
Also, because of the cash -flow problems, if we want to proceed with the Downtown
Rcodevclopment Program and the Municipal Building, we will have to do some short-
term borrowing. Table 4 presents our projected revenue and expenditures; ily month
for 1976 and 1977.
i
To complete our active and conunitted projects and the Plunicipal Building and
downtown project, we will have a cash operating deficit starting in April,
1976, and extending at least through December, 1977. This deficit as of
December, 1976, is $1,402,795. It is estimated that this will cost us an
estimated $75,000 to $100,000 in interest.
SPECIFIC RECOMMEBDATIONS
1. That we transfer the custody of the Avery House to the Poudre Landmark
Foundation or some other responsible foundation. The City would have to
underwrite minimum costs including water, light, insurance, etc., estimated
not to exceed $2,000 per year. The contractural arrangement between the
City and the Foundation would provide for the public using the facility
to its intended use and also provide for the normal termination and
reversion clauses.
2.
3.
Although the Ol.d Fort Project is not specifically part of the Capital Improve-
ment Program, we feel this issue should be addressed under the Historic
Facilities category. The study being prepared is important to the decision
on this project. Although this is a worthy project with a great deal of
public support and enthusiam, we recommend that no work start on the
project until tlhe City is assured that it will not in a direct or indirec ,
way be a drain on the City revenue in the Capital Program or for ?he
operation and maintenance. An agreement should be signed between the citti
and the Heritage Committee of the Centennial. -Bicentennial Commission.
We personally feel. that the Downtown Redevelopment Program is essential to
the long-range economic well being of the community. The downtown provides
a substantial part of property and sales tax base for the City. It: also
provides an image for the city. If the dot-ratown deteriorates, we would lose
Part of our property and sales tax base and a positive image, and at the
same time have higher operating costs. A total of $500,000 is proposed for
this project. Care should be taken that we do'not provide more for this
project at a disadvantage to other segments of the business community. Tile
downtown business community (including property owners) must be supportive
of and willing to pay for whatever project is recommended. A new budget for
the downtown project should be prepared and no additional major expenditures
made until they have boon reviewed and recommended by the Downtown Develop-
ment Commission and approved by the City Council.
4. 1'h, fund itn- 110 Library prt+j,•el ha; bet•n approved. We rovi it it; oc::cntial that an off-street: parlci.nit lot be provided in conjunction with this project.
We reconmiend that we be aul:horized to proceed with the acquisition and
development of tite facility estimated to cost $150,000 total.
5. The Pioneer Museum is scheduled to be relocated to the existing.T.throry
building with renovation schedulp<I to start l;tte in 1976 or early 1917.
It is important that we have a master plan for the development and use of
this facility. We would be wastir;• money if we did not have a greater
M.
.87
utilization of this building than at present, The Pioneer Museum should be
an extension of the education system and also be something uniquely differ-
ent. When completed, a full-time curator and staff will be. required.
I
6. It is with a great deal of reluctance that we found it necessary to either
eliminate or defer the auditorium. We feel that a great deal of progress
has been made towards providing a multi purpose facility. Accordingly,
we recommend the following:
a. That tite ol.d classroom part of the Lincoln Junior High School be
demolished.
i
b.. That a new heating system be provided in the new auditorium -gymnasium -
library section so that these facilities may be used.
c. That minimal alternations and maintenance be done on the building.
d. If. the City Council. decides to defer the Auditorium, we should
final.i.ze our preliminary schematics with Stearns -Roger for future
reference.
7. Because, of the cash -flow problems, we are recommending that the fire
stations and training tower construction be delayed. However, we recommend
that the .land for the two stations be acquired.
8. We are losing a substantial sum of money at our two swimming pools,
especially the indoor pool. It is our feeling that we cannot absorb nny
' more financial operating expenses in this area and also do not have eno•gh
capital revenue. Therefore, we recommend that the additional swimming poo,
be deferred or eliminated.
9. Due to the shortage in revenue and high costs of operation, we are recommend-
ing the deferral or deletion of the ice rink as a City investment. There
appears to be substantial interest of the private sector in constructing
the ice rink. If the private sector can provide the facility, we can see
no justification for City involvement.
10. Our present City Hall is woefully inadequate. We have fragmentation of
City operations and overcrowding in our present building. We concur that
this is affecting our efficiency and effectiveness. This must be.a
priority item. Because of other cash -flow problems, we would have to
provide some short-term financing. We recommend that we proceed on the
new City Ilan or a City Hall addition (either one on the present site) and
as rapidly as possible.
11. Alihougi) our OIv•n Space•. I'rn;•rnm appc�:n's t:o br n slowed du�m from aacrluisi-
Cion viewpoint, t:,• hnv• I k"rcn malcin); imlijilativo advancos ill this aria. I;y
contract, a};recmeut and option, we will continue to acquire property.
Specifically, wo recommend chat we reject the offer to buy the two'and one-
half acres at Spring Creel: because of its extremely high price in relation-
ship to our present and future acquisitions and total program.
12. The sewer to Andersonville and Alta Vista will be completed by ]ate fall. of
this year. There. will be'a drop m;inhola directly south of And.rsonville.
This manhole could be used and pumped if necessary for immediate use of the
M
88
facility. It is recommended that the City Council authorize the sugpesrion
of. the Sewer Ut..iIity to consCritct a main at its expense from this tocat.ion
to the main sewer trunk line of highway 14.
13. we are not proceeding on our storm drainnge program as rapidly as we woulc
take. The $2-million proposed :s only a small parL of the total acedcd.
We need to find other source:: of revenue to finance these most needed
improvements.
14. There is a need to analyze whether the City should he in the mass transporta-
tion. business. The present and projected value of the services should be
studied and evaluated during the next year. Ccrta:inLy we are providing a
service to the elderly, low income, children, e,tc. The question is, how
much is this worth? Besides studying our system, we should cooperate with
the Larimer-h'eld COS Transportation project and evaluate our service in
relation to Care -A -Van and other services.
15. We have made spectacular improvements in our street program. There are still.
many million dollars worth of new programs that could be completed. our
remaining street revenue has to be reserved to match urban system funds or
Pay our share of the street projects. Therefore, it will be necessary for
us to devise imaginative ways of financing additional projects.
At the end of the presentation, Mayor Russell again called for audience
` participation on the report.
1. Preston Davis staged he felt that 17P2 and the Steering Cornnittee
felt just. as Ccuncil did, that this is something new and ir1-11 have '
to be i,,eighed.
12. Tom Bennett stated lie was alarmed at the priorities, he did not
agree with: City Hall hating top priority. He hoped Council would
not over -react.
3. Karl. Carson stated he did not feel the auditorium could be cut
from the Capital Improvements Program.
4. Bob DUMM complir.:ented the City Manager for the way the report had
been put together but cautioned Council not to over -react.
5. Lilla Morgan stated she agreed with previous comments and added
"I've been married to a statitician for 42 years and an extremely -
honorable man, and I can tell you he slants it the way he sees it
at the moment".
6. Andy viderson stated that he felt, before any changes in the
Capital Improvements were made, that it "go back to the voters".
7. Luther Hickman stated he felt the City has to be run as a business
and stay in the black.
No further action taken on this item.
M3
Meg
Engineering report on cost for Water
Main Improvement District No. 6
Referred to City Attorney
The report of the City Engineer was included for the Council in the agenda
package. This District is primarily on Riverside with a small portion
on Lemay. The total. proposed assessment to be collected is $51,382.23.
Director of Engineering Services, Roy Bingman, stated this item should
be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of an ordinance regard-
ing the financing.
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
refer this item to the City Attorney for Ordinance preparation. Yeas:
Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson.
V; Nays: None.
J
-�. Selection of Everett/Zeigel Associates
=L as consultants for selection of furniture
and equipment for new library
When the contract with .Everett/Zeigel was awarded, they listed a $7,000
item to act as the consultants regarding the selection of the equipment
and furniture for the Library. When Roh1f and Gibson were hired as
consultants to prepare the Library project report, they also wanted to
to this murk at a fee of $16,000. There are »bury advantages to having
the same firm designing the building do the furniture and equipment work.
' Recommendation: The Administration recommends that the City Council
authorize rize the exercising of their option to have lverett/Zeigel Asso-
ciates act as consultants for the selection of furniture and equipment
for.the new Library at a fee of $7,000.
Councilman Suinn stated that given that: the Library staff is available,
why should an outside consultant be urovided funds for this service.
Librarian, Larry Webber, stated it primarily is because of the time and
effort that is needed, specifically for writing specifications for bid
purposes.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, to
authorize Everett/Zeigel Associates to act as consultants for the
selection of furniture and equipment for the new Library at a fee of
$7,000. Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell and
Wilkinson. Nays: Councilman Suinn.
Kruchten and Magnuson authorized to
prepare the 1975 Audit
Councilman Bloom inquired (1) according to the letter that Kruchten and
Magnuson Prepared, has the internal auditor been reassigned, and is he
pursuing the outline per the letter. Finance Director, Charlie Cain,
responded that the letter has been discussed with -the internal auditor
and the Staff of Kruchten and Magnuson and those things discussed will
be done.
0
89
�90
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilmen Bowling, to
authorize the firm of Kruchten and Magnuson to prepare the 1975 audit.
Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Shinn and
Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Representation on Six City Subcommittee
Suggested to be Platte River Power
Authority
City Attorney March stated the City had a representative on the Six City
Committee because of the City's involvement in it; the City is no longer
involved since we transferred our rights to Platte River.
Recommendation: The Administration recommends that the City Council auth-
orize the Administration to write a letter to the Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District requesting that the City of Fort Collins no longer
be directly represented on the Six City Subcommittee, and that our repre-
sentation be transferred to the Platte River Power Authority.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
approve the recommendation of the Administration. Yeas: Council
members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays:
None.
Various easements and dedication
deeds for Street Improvement District
No. 69 accepted '
RE: Consider Accepting Various Easements and Dedication Deeds.
Listed below is a summary of easements or deeds for Street Improvement District
No. 69 on LeMay,•Prospect and Riverside:
(A) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -Way from Steven Allen.
1619 Lemay Street
,.is is for the purchase of a right-of-way across the Steven Allen prop-
erty for a public road, the installation of a pedestrian sidewalk and for
the installation, reinstallation, servicing and maintenance of utilities
over and across the above named property. The cost of this right-of-
way is $780.00. _
(B) Road Right-of-h*ay- from the Colorado and Southern Railway Company.
Prospect Street
This is a Brant of easement and right to widen and maintain grade crossing
in connectior with the ,widening of Prospect Street at the crossing of the
Railway Company's Greeley Branch southeasterly of Fort Collins. As a
public relations vesture, there will be no consideration for this easement.
(C) Public Road, Sid --!;walk and Utilities Right -of -Way from D & E Invest-
ment Co. 810 LeMay Street
This is for the purchase of a right-of-way across the D & E Investment.
Co. property for a public road, the installation of a pedestrian sidewalk
aad for the installation, reinstallation, servicing and maintenance of
utilities over a:d across the above named property. The cost of this right-
of-way is $1,125.00
90
91
1
TT
1
(D) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -flay from D $ E Invest-
ment Company. 810 Lemay Street
This is for the purchase of a right-of-way across the D 8 F. Investment
Company property for a public road, the installation of a pedestrian
sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, servicing and main-
tenanec of utilities over and across the D w E Investment Company property.
n.e cost of this right-of-way is $2,331.13.
(E) Public Road, Side'.:alk and Utilities Right -of -Way from Clifton
Davison et ux. 807 Lemay
This is for the purchase of a right-of-way across the Clifton Davison prop-
erty for a public road, the installation of a pedestrian sidewalk and for
the installation, reinstallation, servicing and maintenance of utilities
over and across the above named property. The cost of this right-of-way
is $4,855.05.
(F) Installation of buried drainage pipe line and maintenance of installation
from'Deines Homes, Inc. Prospect Street
This is a grant deed for the installation of a drainage pipe line and
maintenance of installation river the Deines Homes Inc. property without
consideration.
(G) Public Poad, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -Way from Deines Homes
Inc. Prospect Street
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installation
of a pedestrian sidc::all, and for the installation, reinstallation, servicing
and mallttppa;t: ";!hies I'vpr and across the 14'ilws IIOr.Frs, Inc. prop-
H. public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -Way from Glenn Eggleston,
827 Lemay
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installation
of a pedestrian sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, servic-
ing and maintenance of utilities over and across the Glenn Eggleston
property without consideration.
(I) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right- of-R'ay from Martin J.
Goble. Prospect Street
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installation
of a pedestrian sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, servicing
and :maintenance of utilities over and across the Martin J. Goble property
without consideration.
(J) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -Way from International
Investments and i�"attage=aent Curporation. (two deeds) Lemay Street
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installation
of a pedestrian sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, servicing
and maintenance of utilities over and across the International Investments
and Management Corporation property without consideration.
R
9j
(I:) Public K—ad, Side'+:M and Uti Mus Right-of-Itay frog, ;rank II. .lesser.
f- 910 Lemay Street
t. This is for the purchas_• of a ,gilt -of -war
Froparty for a publ._ 3notal_an,
for the installat5n, rcinsza.0tinn, servi
ever and across the above n.,ned property.
$1,n7S.00
yonv th, Prank H. dcssQr
.. of s Kestr_a n sidw alk and
clog and main unanco of wrilitics
Inc cost of this right-of-way is III
(L) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right of Way from Duane Johnson
et ux. 1623 Lemay
This is for the purchase of a right-of-way across the Duane Johnson prop-
erty for a pub-ic road, the installation of a pedestrian sidewalk and for
the installation, reinstallation, servicing and maintenance of utilities
over and across the Duane Johnson property. The cost of this right-of-way
is $1,570.00
M Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -hay from David Laufer
et ux. 1607 Lemay
Ibis is for the purchase of a right-of-wov across the David Laufer
property for a public road, tho installation of a pedestrian sidewalk apd
for the installation, reinstallation, servicing and mair,tonanco of utilities
over and across the above named property. the cost of this tight -of -way
is $1,200.00
(\) Public MA, Sidcualk and Utilities Right -of -Pay from Lemay Ltd.
Lemay Strc.t
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installaiio:,
of a pedestrian sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, ser`:Ving
and maintenance of utilities over and across the Lemay Ltd. property with-
out consideration.
(0) R_K ht-of-Way for widening of Lemay Avenue and installaO on of curb
and „utter from Gertrude Rindleman. 1090 cast Eliza6e.rh
This is the right-o;-way for widening of Lemay Avenue and installation of
curb and gutter. The cost of this right-of-way is $280.00
(P) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right--of-Way from Rhoades Inc.
for 0083 acres. Riverside Street
This is a right-of-way to be used for a public road, for the installation
of a pedestrian sidewalk and for the installation, reinstallation, servicin,
and maintenance of utilities over and across the Rhoades Inc, property with-
out consideration.
(Q) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -hay from Rhoades Inc.
for 0.3217 "cres. Riverside Street
III
92
9 3;
This is :1 1,i i;ll i•Ji-li:l 1' to ;. �. ". C.'• .Gr a 1)111)1ic road, for thu � ns t:: l l at. 101;
Of a lledestriau .id.ha: c:nd Iur tine installation, reinstallation, scrvic;:.,;
and maintenance of utilities over and across the Rhoades Inc. property lith-
out consideration.
(R) Public Road, Sidewalk and Utilities Right -of -Way from Vernon Stephens,
et us. 1637 Lemay Street
This is for the purchase of a right-of-way a_ros!7 the Vernon Stephens
property- for a public road, the installation of a pecestrian sidewalk and
for the installation, reinstallation, servicing and nainte^.ance of utilities
over and across the Vernon Stephens property.. The cost of this right-of-
way is $877.00.
Motion was nade by Councilman Wilkinson, seconded by Councilman Bloom,
47
to accept the various easements and dedication deeds. Yeas: Council -
members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
:L
Sole Source Purchase of air break
switch for Electrical Utility
Department approved
City Manager Brunton stated this is a sole source purchase of Air Break
Switch from Morgan Power Apparatus at a total cost of $14,690.
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to approve
the Sole Source purchase from Morgan Power Apparatus at a total cost of
$14,690. Yeas: Council members Bloom , Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn
and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
Resolution tabled commending David
Watrous for services to the City
Museum and Library programs
Mayor Russell stated that since this item has not been introduced, he
wished to table this until a suitable plaque can be presented to Mr.
Watrous.
Report on Status of Court Action
on City Manager Referendum tabled
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bloom, to table
this item to the next regular Council meeting. Yeas: Council members
Bloom, Bowling, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: Councilwoman Reeves.
Other Business
Action on Special Meeting
Rescinded
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Suinn, to rescind
the previous action of the Council calling a Special meeting of the Council
for August 26, 1975, and that it be a work session instead. Yeas: Council
members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell, Suinn and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
ON
N
Adjournment
Councilman Bloom made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, that the
Council adjourn. Yeas: Council members Bloom, Bowling, Reeves, Russell,
Suinn, and Wilkinson. Nays: None.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
94
Mayor
1
1