Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/19/1982-RegularI October 19, 1982 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 5:30 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, October 19, 1982, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Council members: Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth. Absent: None Staff Members Present: Meitl, Krajicek, Huisjen, Denton, Lewis, Bob Lee, Hays, Griep, Osborne Agenda Review: City Manager Deputy City Manager Meitl asked that Item # 18, Resolution Authorizing the ' Conveyance of a Portion of the Chaffee Ditch to Thomas E. Nix and Alice Marie Nix, be withdrawn from the agenda because of staff concerns and noted staff would like to discuss Item #31, Resolutions and Ordinances Establish- ing and Awarding Contracts for Special Improvement District No. 77 - Boardwalk and Landings Drive, prior to taking any action on that item. Councilmember Wilmarth requested Item #19, Resolution Making Findings Concerning the Amendment to Fairview PUD, Phase II; and Item #20, Resolu- tion Amending the PUD Building Height Benchmark District Map; be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Knezovich asked that Item #15, Items Relating to the UMTA Section 8 Grant for Transfort, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. Barbara Helm, 1806 Valley Forge, requested Item #7, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 1982, Amending Chapter 112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and Sewer Service; Item #8, Adoption of Drainage Master Plans and Establishment of Storm Drainage Fees for 1983; and Item #11, Ordinances Establishing New Funds for the Implementation of the 1983 Annual City Budget; be removed from the Consent Calendar. Consent Calendar ' This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends UJI -M October 19, 1982 approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Agenda Item #32, Pulled Consent Items, except items pulled by anyone in the audience or items that any member of the audience is present to discuss that were pulled by staff or Council. These items will be dis- cussed immediately following the Consent Calendar. 5. 6. Consider Approving the Minutes of the regular meeting of October Second Readin This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5. Based on City Council direction regarding the 1983 Budget, funds currently appropriated for the Mason/Howes One Way Couplet project in the amount of $250,000 and the Contingency for the Pool in the amount of $100,000 will be transferred to Capital Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund in order to be used for 1983 Capital projects. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 1982, Relating to Retail Electric Rates for Service. This Ordinance which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 is presented to implement rates in conjunction with the 1983 Light and Power Utility Budget. The rate tariffs incorporated in this Ordinance are designed to increase revenues from all rate classes by 4.0% across the board, producing additional electric sales revenue of $983,864. MONTHLY IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED JA14UARY 1, 1983 RATE ADJUSTMENT ON THE AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER Present Proposed Difference Gas Heat $29.88 $31.10 $1.22 (450 kwh) Electric Heat $63.60 $66.13 $2.53 (1,200 kwh and 11.2 kw demand) -481- IOctober 19, 1982 The proposed Ordinance will become effective on all billings rendered on or after February 11, 1983, relating to services provided during the month of January, 1983, and thereafter. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 1982, Amending Chapter 112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and Sewer Service. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5. The 1983 Water Fund and Sewer Fund Budget, as presented to City Council, will require that the existing water service fees be in- creased 11-1/2 percent and the existing sewer service fees be in- creased 14 percent. During 1983, for an average single family residence, the proposed service fee charges will result in an increase in the monthly service charges of $1.58 for water and $1.23 for sewer. The total monthly service charge, for the same average single family residence, would be $13.80 for water and $10.01 for sewer. 8. Adoption of Drainage Master Plans and Establishment of Storm Drainage Fees for 1983. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 1982, Adopting Final Master Drainage Plans for the Dry Creek, Evergreen Park, Greenbriar, West Vine, Canal Importation, and Spring Creek Basins. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 1982, Amending Chapter 93 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Storm Drainage Fees These ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and take the following actions: (1) adopt drainage basin master plans in the Dry Creek, Evergreen Park, Greenbriar, West Vine, Canal Importation, and Spring Creek basins; (2) establish new monthly capital and basin (plant investment) fees for these six basins; (3) set the 1983 rates for the monthly capital utility fees in the three basins which already have capital fees; and (4) set the 1983 rate for the monthly, city-wide operations and maintenance utility fee. 1 -482- W 10 Ordin Relating t eal of Contractor Occu Registration Fees. October 19, 1982 tion Taxes and These four ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5. Ordinance No. 120, 1982 repeals the occupational tax imposed on all electric, plumbing, mechanical, and heating and air conditioning contractors. The other 3 ordinances establish a $50 license/registration fee on the above trades. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 1982, Repealing Occupational Taxes Levied Upon Electrical Contractors, Plumbing or Mechanical Contractors and Heating and Air Conditioning Contractors. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 1982, Increasing Annual Registration Fee for Electrical Contractors. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 1982, Increasing Annual License Fee of Master Sheet Metal Workers and Repealing Annual License Fees for Journeymen Sheet Metal Workers and Apprentice Sheet Metal Workers. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 1982, Increasing the Annual Registration Fee of Master Plumbers and Repealing Annual Regis- tration Fees of Journeymen Plumbers and Apprentice Plumbers. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 1982, Amending Section 105-1 of the City Code Providinq for a Tax on Telephone Uti ities of S.70 per Account per Month. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and increases the telephone utility tax from $.65 to $.70 in con- junction with the 1983 budget. Increased revenue of $18,036 is pro- jected based upon this adjustment. 11. Ordinances Establishi New Funds for the Impl ion of the 1983 These four ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and create funds that more clearly identify the revenue and expenditures relating to each special fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No cations Fund. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No Services and Facilities Fund. Im 125, 1982, Creating a Communi- 126, 1982, Creating a Cultural I ' October 19, 1982 C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 1982, Creating a Recreation Fund. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 1982, Creating a Transpor- tation Fund. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 1982, Setting the Mill Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for 1983. The Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on Octobers and sets the 1983 mill levy for the Downtown Development Authority at 5 mills. This remains the same as the levy determined for 1982. 13. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 1982, Relating to Municipa E ections. A regular ;municipal election will be held on March 8, 1983. At that time, three at -large. Council members will be elected to serve on the City Council. - This ordinance adopts a new District -Precinct Map and also sets the polling places for the 60 precincts. The Council District boun- daries remain the same on this map as they were for the 1981 Council District election, since the 1983 election is for at -large Council seats. 14. Items Relatinq to UMTA Section 3 and Section 5 Grants for Transfort. Resolutions 82-94 and 82-95 authorized the filing of applications for UMTA Section 3 Grant amendments #1 and #2. and a Section 5 Capital Assistance Grant. Both Section 3 amendment contracts and the Section 5 Grant contract have been signed and approved by UMTA. At this time, the following City Council action is required: A) Resolution Authorizing the execution of the contracts for Section 3 amendments #1 and #2. B) Resolution Authorizing the execution of the Section 5 Capital Assistance Grant contract. C) Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 1982 appro- priating the federal share of the Section 3 Amendment #1 and the Section 5 Grant in the Capital Projects Fund. 15. Items Relating to the UMTA Section 8 Grant for Transfort. ' Resolution 82-97 authorized the filing of an application to amend the existing UMTA Section 8 Technical Studies Grant to provide additional October 19, 1982 ' federal funds for Transfort related studies totalling $40,748. (The City's match of $10,137 will be in -kind services.) The contract amendment has been signed and approved by UMTA. At this time, the following City Council action is required: A) Resolution Authorizing the execution of the Section 8 Grant Amendment Contract. B) Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1982, Appro- priating the additional $40,748 in the UMTA Section 8 Grant Fund. 16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 1982, Appropriati Money in the EDA and General Funds. An EDA Fund was established to account for a federal grant from the Economic Development Administration. The grant has terminated but interest earnings of $7,259 remain in fund balance and are available to be appropriated. The sum of $7,941 was appropriated from fund balance as part of the 1982 budget. This totals $15,200 which is available to be used for General Fund Facilities projects in 1982. I Expenditure of these funds in 1982 would also allow the EDA Fund to be closed out at the end of the year. The Facilities projects to be funded by this transfer include: Painting ceiling in C.I.C., Council Chambers, $ 3,500 and Council Office Retrofit New City Hall sprinklers 7,000+ Repair roof at the Museum 1,000 Install fire dampers - New City Hall 3,500 $15,000+ This Ordinance appropriates the $7,259 interest earnings in the EDA Fund and transfers the total $15,200 EDA appropriation to the General Fund for expenditure on Facilities projects in 1982. 17. Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into an Inter -Governmental Agreement with ove an and the U.S.D.O.E., Western Area Power Admin- istration. In February of 1982, the cities of Loveland and Fort Collins, together with other individuals and entities, entered into an Agreement with the United States, Department of Energy, Western Area Power Adminis- tration (WAPA) whereby WAPA would construct a water pump station for -485- IOctober 19, 1982 the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District on the western side of the Airport property and, because of the benefits to the Airport property, the cities would reimburse to WAPA a portion of the costs for the pump station. That cost, $55,000 as the cities' share, was to be paid to WAPA ten years after the execution of the Agreement. An addendum to the original February, 1982, Agreement has been pre- pared reflecting the terms of the deposit of the U.S. Government obligation by the cities. 18. Resolution Authorizing the Conveyance of a Portion of the Chaffee Ditch to Thomas E. Nix and Alice Marie Nix. The Chaffee Ditch exits the Poudre River just below the Lemay Avenue Bridge and follows a somewhat narrow meandering course to a point of termination at Spring Creek at the approximate location of Bath landscape on Prospect Street. Although portions of this ditch right- of-way are useful to the City for storm drainage purposes, other portions are not anticipated to be of any future value to the City. Mr. Tom Nix is desirous of obtaining the conveyance by the City of one such unneeded portion of the ditch in order that he may put that land ' to some agricultural use. The right-of-way is approximately 560 feet in length and varies from 18 to 35 feet in width and Mr. Nix owns the property on both sides of the right-of-way. This right-of-way of approximately .29 acres lies entirely within the designated floodplain of the Cache La Poudre River. Since the City has no interest in ownership of that right-of-way, it seems appropriate to make the conveyance to Mr. Nix. 19. Resolution Making Findings Concerning the Amendment to Fairview PUD, Phase II. On October 5 Council heard an appeal, submitted by the owner and operator of Wendy's Restaurant on West Elizabeth, on the Planning and Zoning Board decision approving the application of Taco Bell to amend the Fairview P.U.D.. Phase Two. At that meeting Council upheld the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board on a 4-3 vote. This Resolution sets forth Council's findings concerning the approval of the amendment to Phase II of the Fairview P.U.D. 20. Resolution Amending The PUB Building Height Benchmark District Ma ' Staff recommends an amendment to the PUB Building Height Benchmark District Map to eliminate Height District 2 and designate those areas am October 19, 1982 as Height District 1. The administrative PUD Building Benchmark District Map will be amended to reflect this change and include all annexations since 1979. This recommendation is based on the fol- lowing: 1. The purpose and objectives of the height policy are still appro- priate and have become an integral component of the LOGS. 2. The intent of the LOGS specifies that each application be reviewed as to its own merit without any predetermined guarantees. 3. All requests for building heights over 40-foot benchmark should be reviewed against the height criteria on a consistent basis. 4. The proposed amendment does not change the discretionary review of building heights, it only expands the scope of the application of that review to include all requests over 40-feet in height. 21. Consider Waiving the 1/6th Contiguity Requirement for Devel Within the Urban Growth Area Known as the Creekside East Contiguity Waiver). This is a request to waive the 1/6th contiguity requirement for development in the Urban Growth Area for 11.5-ac, located on the north side of Highway 14, 1/2-mile east of I-25. The site is zoned C-Com- mercial and FA-1 Farming, with a request to rezone the FA-1 parcel to C-Commercial. 22. Routine Easement. a) Easement from Ivan B. and Elsie B. Coleman, located between Horsetooth and Harmony west of Shields. This easement allows the City to continue the Warren Trunk Sewer Line west of Shields through Section 34. As additional easements are obtained, the line will -be extended to serve western developments such as Stockbridge and Rossborough. Consideration: Permanent easement: 60% of fee value $ 4,806 Temporary easement: 150 Crop loss: 750 Total consideration $ 5,706 Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. -487- October 19, 1982 Item #,5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 1982, Transferring $250,000 from the Mason Howes One Way Couplet Project and $100,000 from the Contingency for the Pool to Capital Reserves in the Capital Projects Fund. Item #6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 1982, Relating to Retail ectric ates orService. Item P . Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 1982, Amending Chapter 112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and Sewer Service. Item #8A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 1982, Adopting Final Master Drainage Plans for the Dry Creek, Evergreen Park, Greenbriar, West Vine, Canal Importation, and Spring Creek Basins. Item #86. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 1982, Amending Chapter 93 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Storm Drainage Fees. ' Item #9A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 1982, Repealing Occupa- tional Taxes Levied Upon Electrical Contractors, Plumbing or Mechanical Contractors and Heating and Air Conditioning Con- trArtnrc Item #91B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 1982, Increasing Annual Registration Fee for Electrical Contractors. Item #9C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 1982, Increasing Annual License Fee of Master Sheet Metal Workers and Re Baling Annual License Fees for Journeymen Sheet metal Workers an A Prentice Sheet Metal Wor ers. Item #9D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 1982, Increasing the Annual Registration Fee of Master Plumbers and Repealing Annual Re tration Fees o_ Journeymen P umbers and Apprentice P umbers. Item #10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 1982, Amending Section 105-1 of the City Code Providing for a Tax on Telephone Utili- ties of $.70 per Account per Month. Item #11A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 1982, Creating a Communi- cations un a. Item 1111. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 1982, Creating a Cultural Services and Facilities Fund. am October 19, 1982 ' Item #11C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 1982, Creating a Recreation Fund. Item #11D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 1982, Creating a Transpor- tation Fund. Item #12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 1982, Setti for the Downtown Development Authority for 1983. the Mill Lev Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #13. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 1982, Relating to Municipal Elections. Item #14C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 1982 appropri- ating the federal share of the Section 3 Amendment #1 and the Section 5 Grant in the Capital Projects Fund. Item #15B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Ho. 133, 1982, Appro- priating the additional $40,748 in the UMTA Section 8 Grant Fund. ' Item #16. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 1982, Appro- priating Monev in the EDA and General Funds. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wi1marth. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinances Relating to Licensed Occupations, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 1982, Amending the Code Relating to Trash Haulers Licenses. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 1982, Amending the Code Relating to Miscellaneous and Amusement Licenses. The ordinances were adopted on First Reading on October 5 and amend the I fees for these licenses as follows: I October 19, 1982 1982 1983 FEE FEE Bowling Alley $ 50/Year $ 55/Year Dance Hall $ 75/Year $ 80/Year Motion Picture Theatre $100/Year $110/Year Drive -In Theatre $ 75/Year $ 80/Year Game Machine (per machine every 6 months) Foosball, Air & Electric $ 35 $ 37.50 Pinball $ 50 $ 53 Pool Tables $ 7.50 $ 8 Pawn Broker $ 50/Year $ 55/Year Carnival $ 75/Day $ 80/Day Trash Hauler II $ -- $ 30/Year/1st Truck $ 10/year/Additional Truck" Councilmember Wilmarth asked the record show he did not participate in the discussion of these two items. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich,. to adopt Ordinance No. 118, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers ' Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, and Reeves. Nays: None. (Wilmarth withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 119, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, and Reeves. Nays: None. (Wilmarth withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance Providing for the Imposition of An Additional seventy-five hundredths percent (.75%) Retail Sales and Use Tax to be effective December 1, 1982, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "This ordinance was adopted on First Reading on October 5 by a 6-1 vote and implements the addition of the .75 of a I� sales tax to our existing tax, making a total of 3%, effective December 1, 1982." ' Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 113, 1982 on Second Reading. -490- October 19, 1982 ' Elizabeth Cline, 2813 Sumac, expressed her opposition to the proposed sales and use tax. Bruce Brown, 425 North Whitcomb, opposed the proposed 3/4� increase in the sales tax and asked Council to reconsider the tax. Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, suggested the proposed tax be put to a vote of the people. Councilmember Horak noted he supported the views of some of the people who had just spoken and suggested Council review the effect some of the new taxes would have on people of low and moderate income. The vote on Councilmember Reeves' motion to adopt Ordinance No. 113, 1982 on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmember Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmembers' Reports Councilmember Wilmarth reported on the Colorado Municipal League District II dinner held October 14th at the Lincoln Center. ' Councilmember Elliott reminded Council of the Poudre Fire Authority meeting to be held on October 26th. Councilmember Horak stated he would be attending the CML Policy Committee meeting on October 22nd and asked for Council's comments on any of the issues to be discussed. Councilmember Knezovich reported on the community convention facility in Peoria, Illinois, that he recently had the opportunity to visit. Councilmember Clarke reported on the CSU/Transfort election taking place this week. Mayor Cassell read a letter from ASCSU thanking the Council for passing a Resolution offering to fund a portion of the CSU election Councilmember Clarke had referred to. Resolutions and Ordinances Establishing Financing and Awarding Contracts for Special Improvement District No. 77 - Boardwalk and Landings Drive, Tabled to November 9th Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: ' -491- October 19, 1982 "At the September Council meetings, the Council established Special Im- provement District No. 77 to construct the street and utilities on Board- walk Drive and Landings Drive in the South College Properties area. In order to begin construction the Council is requested to take the following actions in the order listed. A. Resolution Directing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Osprey Homes, Inc. for the City to Receive Financial Guarantee for all Costs Incurred until Bonds have been Sold. B. Resolution Awarding the Construction Contract to , the Lowest Qualified Bidder. C. Hearing and Final Reading of Emergency Ordinance No. , 1982 Providing for Appropriation of Anticipated Proceeds from th�ale of Bonds in the Capital Projects Fund. SUMMARY OF COSTS TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $579,659 (including 10% Contingency) OTHER PROJECT COSTS a) Administation and legal 5,098 b) Engineering (design & construction services) 71,140 c) Repay of ROW costs to Osprey and Petersen 86,560 d) Interest during construction 67,184 e) Collection and certification 10,196 $240,178 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $819,837 CITY DIRECT COSTS Water line oversizing $ 18,876 Engineering (from Street Oversizing Fund) 13,949 $ 32,825 CITY INDIRECT COSTS Street Oversizing $ 86,163 10o Contingency 8,616 $ 94,779 ' TOTAL CITY COSTS 3T2'7;6'bT -492- October 19, 1982 ' Guarantee of Funds Due to the short time remaining in the construction season in 1982, the property owners want to begin construction as soon as possible after a contractor is selected. With normal procedures for appropriations, con- struction could not begin until the end of November after the sale of the bonds. In order to start construction in October, Osprey has offered a letter of credit for the guarantee of payment for all costs incurred until any bonds issued for the financing of the District are sold. Appropriation of Anticipated Bond Proceeds It is requested that the Appropriation Ordinance be heard as an Emergency Ordinance due to approaching winter weather conditions and the subsequent reduction of available construction time; and because an appropriation must be in existence before the City may incur a liability for construction costs. According to the City Charter, Council may appropriate funds based on anticipated bond proceeds. Staff believes this request is justified due to the potential added costs to the contractor or the district property owners if early winter conditions delay the contract award. Staff believes the letter of credit from Osprey adequately secures the City's liability to the contractor awarded the work. The amount to be appropriated will be based upon the lowest bid received for construction. ' Award of Construction Contract Bids for this work will be received on October 15. Since this is an im- provement district, the City Council must award the bid formally. There is not enough time between October 15 and the scheduled City Council meeting on October 19 to review the bids and prepare a recommendation for publica- tion and inclusion in the regular Council information package. For this reason, staff will prepare the needed information and distribute it to Council on October 19 immediately prior to the meeting. A revised resolu- tion incorporating the low bidder and the proposed contract amount will be included. If no errors or irregularities are found during the staff review of the bids, the staff will recommend that the bid be awarded to the low bidder. If irregularities are found, staff will pull the item from the agenda and resubmit this item when difficulties have been resolved. The engineer's estimate for this portion of the construction phase is $581,218. The total construction phase budget is $579,659. This amount is intended to cover construction of the street improvements, storm drains, bridges, railroad crossings and relocation of utilities. The construction budget will be re-evaluated once bids are received and may need to be amended. We will not know this until October 15, and do not recommend a I change at this time." -493- October 19, 1982 Deputy City Manager Meitl noted staff was recommending no action be taken on the items relating to the Boardwalk Special Improvement District No. 77 and that these items be tabled to November 9th. City Engineer Tom Hays explained the sequence of Council actions that would be required before the contract could be awarded for construction on the project. He stated staff felt the funds needed to be in hand before the contract could be awarded. One method discussed with the developer, staff and some of the property owners was a method of having a guarantee that any funds that were expended prior to the issuance of the bonds would be guaranteed by the major property owner in the district. That entity is un- able or unwilling to furnish the letter of credit backing up the contract. The developer feels there are Charter provisions that make the letter of credit unnecessary. Staff would still like some assurances before awarding a contract that might obligate the City for nearly $600,000. He proposed tabling the items to November 9th in order to speed the start of construc- tion as much as possible and still work out the problems mentioned. Controller Jim Harmon noted that in the past bids have been awarded on special improvement districts and then staff has waited until the amount of the bonds has reached a sufficient size to be marketable before issuing them. He stated on November 9th a bond ordinance is scheduled that con- tains three improvement districts including Boardwalk. In the past the City has not required any letter of credit from the developers. With the current economic conditions, staff feels the City does not care to take on that much exposure and had asked the developer for the letter of credit. Since they now are unable or unwilling to furnish the letter of credit, the items need to be tabled to November 9th. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to table the items relating to Boardwalk Special Improvement District No. 77 to the November 9th meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Citizen Participation A. Proclamation Naming October 30 as Atmospheric Science Day will be delivered to the appropriate persons. B. Proclamation Naming October 29 and 30 as Green and Gold Weekend was accepted by Don Wise and Lyle Aspegren, members of the Ram Booster Club. October 19, 1982 C. Proclamation Naming October 17-23 as Venture Week was accepted by Sue Yaden, President of the Venture Club. Proclamation Naming October 17-23 as Industry Awareness Week was accepted by Ron Walling, Chairman of the Existing Industries Council of the Chamber's Economic Development program, and Jeannie Sprague, President of the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce. Ordinance Amending Chapter 112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and Sewer Service, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5. The 1983 Water Fund and Sewer Fund Budget, as presented to City Council, will require that the existing water service fees be increased 11-1/2 percent and the existing sewer service fees be increased 14 percent. During 1983, for an average single family residence, the proposed service ' fee charges will result in an increase in the monthly service charges of $1.58 for water and $1.23 for sewer. The total monthly service charge, for the same average single family residence, would be $13.80 for water and $10.01 for sewer." Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt Ordinance No. 115, 1982 on Second Reading. Barbara Helm, 1806 Valley Forge Avenue, asked why water rates needed to increase when Council is proposing a 3/44 increase in the sales tax. Budget Director Phyllis 6riep gave a breakdown on the use of the proceeds of the 3/44 tax in response to Ms. Helm's question. She noted the tax would not be used for utilities since the primary purpose of the tax will be community parks development, increased contributions to social service agencies, additional street oversizing expenses and general City capital improvements including streets, facilities and southside service center development. The vote on Councilmember Elliott's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 115, 1982, on Second Reading as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -495- Adoption of Drainage Master Plans October 19, 1982 and Establishment of Storm Drainage Fees for 1983 Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 1982, Adopting Final Master Drainage Plans for the Dry Creek, Evergreen Park, Greenbriar, West Vine, Canal Importation, and Spring Creek Basins. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 1982, Amending Chapter 93 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Storm Drainage Fees These ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and take the following actions: (1) adopt drainage basin master plans in the Dry Creek, Evergreen Park, Greenbriar, West Vine, Canal Importation, and Spring Creek basins; (2) establish new monthly capital and basin (plant investment) fees for these six basins; ' (3) set the 1983 rates for the monthly capital utility fees in the three basins which already have capital fees; and (4) set the 1983 rate for the monthly, city-wide operations and maintenance utility fee." Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 116, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt Ordinance No. 117, 1982 on Second Reading. Councilmember Wilmarth noted he did not mind master planning for storm drainage but in these hard economic times he felt the storm drainage fees could be deferred. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 117, 1982, on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, and Reeves. Nays: Councilmember Wilmarth. I THE MOTION CARRIED. -496- October 19, 1982 1 Ordinances Establishing New Funds for the Implementation of the 1983 Annual City Budget, Adopted Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "These four ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and create funds that more clearly identify the revenue and expenditures relating to each special fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 1982, Creating a Communications Fund. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 1982, Creating a Cultural Services and Facilities Fund. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 1982, Creating a Recreation .Fund. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 1982, Creating a Transportation ' Fund." Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 125, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 126, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott,.Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt Ordinance No. 127, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, ' to adopt Ordinance No. 128, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers -497- I October 19, 1982 Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to the UMTA Section 8 Grant for Transfort, Adopted Following is the staff s memorandum on this item: "In accordance with Resolution 82-97, 1982, City Council authorized the filing of an application to amend the existing UMTA Section 8 Technical Studies Grant to provide additional federal funds for Transfort related studies totalling $40,748. (The City's match of $10,187 will be in -kind services.) The contract amendment has been signed and approved by UMTA. The attached chart summarizes the total Section 8 Grant funding and tasks. At this time, the following City Council action is required: A) Resolution Authorizing the execution of the Section 8 Grant Amendment Contract. t B) Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1982, Appro- priating the additional $40,748 in the UMTA Section 8 Grant Fund. These studies are being used as an extension of the City staff for the purpose of providing a vehicle preventative maintenance and quality control program, a marketing plan for Transfort, a building preventative mainte- nance program and an implementation plan for the new Transfort facility. Partial appropriations have been made for the vehicle preventative mainte- nance and Quality Control program which is being administered and full appropriation for the future Transit Financial program and Route Structure Analysis has been made and is currently underway." Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to adopt the Resolution. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmember Knezovich. Councilmember Knezovich noted he felt the City could do these programs without the interference of the federal government, probably a lot more economically. He suggested the City send the UMTA monies back to the federal government. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt the Resolution was as I follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmember Knezovich. sm THE MOTION CARRIED. October 19, 1982 ' Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt Ordinance No. 133, 1982 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: Council - member Knezovich. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Making Findings Concerning the Amendment to Fairview PUD, Phase II, Adopted Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "On October 5 Council heard an appeal, submitted by the owner and operator of Wendy's Restaurant on West Elizabeth, on the Planning and Zoning Board decision approving the application of Taco Bell to amend the Fairview P.U.D., Phase Two. - At that meeting Council upheld the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board on a 4-3 vote. This Resolution sets forth Council's findings concerning the approval of I the amendment to Phase II of the Fairview P.U.D." Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt the Resolution. Carolyn Haase, 2307 Sheffield Drive, noted her opposition to the Fairview PUD, Phase II in light of the new commercial development directly across from Fairview. She noted she felt there would be serious traffic and safety problems associated with this development. Development Center Director Mauri Rupel noted the development was not new but was changing in use. He added the traffic engineer's review determined there would not be a significant increase in traffic impact. The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt the Resolution was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Knezovich, and Wilmarth. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution Amending The PUD Building Height Benchmark District Map, Denied Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: ' -499- October 19, 1982 "Staff Recommendation Staff recommends an amendment to the PUD Building Height Benchmark District Map to eliminate Height District 2 and designate those areas as Height District 1. The administrative PUD Building Benchmark District Map will be amended to reflect this change and include all annexations since 1979. This recommendation is based on the following: 1. The purpose and objectives of the height policy are still appropriate and have become an integral component of the LOGS. The intent of the LOGS specifies that each application be reviewed as to its own merit without any predetermined guarantees. All requests for building heights over 40-foot benchmark should be reviewed against the height criteria on a consistent basis. 4. The proposed amendment does not change the discretionary review of building heights, it only expands the scope of the application of that review to include all requests over 40-feet in height. ' The approval of mid -rise development to reinforce appropriate high -density residential, commercial, and industrial activity centers at the Master Plan stage has already been used by the Planning and Zoning Board. The Master Plans of Oak Ridge, Southridge Greens, and the Holiday Inn PUD of Superblock No. 1 of the South College Properties area, all contain pro- jected mid -rise development. Specific building proposals will be analyzed against the height criteria at the time of preliminary plan review. The staff recommendation is consistent with this recent approach by the Plan- ning and Zoning Board which allows the private market to propose activity centers in accordance with adopted City policies and to propose reinforce- ment of the activity centers with mid -rise development. Staff feels this approach is superior to the mapping approach where the public sector attempts to predetermine where activity centers should be located. The City Council adopted the Building Height Review Criteria on October 2, 1979 after review of several different approaches (a copy is attached to this memo). Accompanying the adoption of the Height Ordinance was the PUD Building Height Benchmark District Map as an administrative guideline outlining the areas of the three benchmark districts. Since the time of adoption, there have been numerous annexations to the City which are not reflected on the PUD Building Height Benchmark Map, but are covered by the Height Ordinance. In March 1981, the City Council adopted the Land Devel- opment Guidance System (LDGS) as the City's new PUD ordinance. This amendment proposes to update the map plus bring both the map and Height ' Ordinance into alignment with the LOGS. -500- October 19, 1982 Issues A. The original purpose and objectives of the height policy were reviewed. The following objectives are still valid and have been integrated into the LOGS through the Neighborhood Compatibility section. 1. To preserve the character and stability of existing residential neighborhoods by precluding the development of buildings which, by their height, are intrusive to the established character of the neighborhood. Some of the external costs imposed by intrusive height include visual incompatibility due to differences in building scale, loss of views, loss of sunlight on adjacent prop- erty, and loss of privacy in adjacent yards. 2. To define and reinforce the downtown area as the high intensity focal point in the community while preserving the historic char- acter of the "Old Town" area. 3. To allow for mid -rise development in major high density residen- tial, commercial and employment activity centers. Mid -rise develop- ment would allow maximum utilization of these activity centers without substantially altering the urban form of the city through building heights which conflict with the general scale of develop- ment. The use of mid -rise development would not be a vested right, but rather, general guidelines. 4. To generally protect access to air and sunlight for active and passive utilization of solar energy. 5. To provide conscious direction to the development of the urban form of the City through placement of high-rise buildings. This direction would generally allow high-rise development in the downtown area as per Objective "2" above, discourage high-rise, development in or adjacent to low- and medium -density neighbor- hoods as per Objective "1" above, and expect no more than mid -rise development elsewhere as per Objective 11 3." 6. To allow for variation of these general expectations where justi- fied through the discretionary review of planned unit development proposals. The present Height Ordinance is supported by a PUD Benchmark District Map which is divided into three districts: District 1 has a 40-foot benchmark which covers most of the City's residential areas. Forty -feet is considered the dividing line between 2-1/2-to-3 story structures and other types of structures in terms of Building Code requirements. -501- 1 October 19, 1982 District 2 has a 55-foot benchmark and covers some of the University area, some of the commercial area along South College Avenue and outlying cluster areas of industriallly and some commercially zoned properties. It is the approximate height of mature natural vegetation in the City. Also, it is the breakpoint in the Buiding and Fire Codes between types of structures. District 3 has no specific benchmark and is an area limited to the downtown portion of the City. Benchmark District 2 is unnecessary. The common perception of District 2 is that it awards extra height to some specific property owners by not having to justify height by review of the height criteria. This is not the case; a PUD is presently required of all structures over 40-feet, and review by the height criteria. By deleting Benchmark District 2, no property or vested rights would be lost. Any proposal over 40-feet would be required to submit impact information concerning views, light and shadow, privacy, and scale analysis. C. The District 2, 55-foot benchmark, would be replaced with the use of mid -rise development in activity centers identified at the time of Master Plan approval. The use of mid -rise buildings could better reinforce the activity centers developing around Fort Collins. Also, the urban design objectives of the Height Ordinance would be better achieved. D. The assumptions of the LDGS are: (1) "that any land use likely to occur in Fort Collins can, in most cases, be made compatible with any neighboring land use through careful design and buffering;" and (2) "site design, use, and in many cases, architectural design review are critical for all development." These assumptions conflict with the present PUD Building Height Benchmark District map since it creates expectations of height which may or may not be appropriate in District 2. E. The unlimited Height District 3 is still an appropriate policy in the downtown area when reviewed against the purpose and objectives of the Height Ordinance and the current policy for downtown redevelop- ment. Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed this item at their regular monthly meeting of September 27, 1982, and voted 5-2 to recommend approval to the City Council. (A copy of the Board's minutes are attached to this ' memo ) -502- The dissenting votes of the Board Fort Collins from a low -profile city adopted policies offered sufficient mid -rise development." October 19, 1982 were concerned with the changing of and questioned whether or not present conscious direction to the location of Councilmember Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to adopt the Resolution. Councilmember Wilmarth noted he felt this item involved a major policy decision and deserved more public input and consideration with regard to higher densities, including high rise units and height policies. Chief Planner Ken Waido reviewed the existing height ordinance and noted every high rise building over 40 feet would have to go through the review criteria. Councilmember Knezovich asked why the height districts were needed when the LOGS controls. Waido responded that he felt the current public policies are not strong enough to reinforce the downtown. He recommended this as an interim step until a core area plan in adopted. Once that is done the map could pro- bably be eliminated. He added the elimination of the map was an option for Council right now but that developers would have a problem justifying extra height because of the policy void. Carolyn Haase, 2307 Sheffield Drive, asked staff if the Holiday Inn PUB Master Plan had triggered this issue and if staff had met with representa- tives of the development community for their comments. Waido replied that no one project had triggered this amendment. It was something that should have been done all along. Due to changes in philo- sophy staff had debated which route to take. He noted staff had met with a few architect/planners to discuss the concept of urban form. It was reviewed at a Planning & Zoning Board meeting and received no public input. Dennis Acott, 4145 West Horsetooth Road, stated he felt if the map was used, more consideration should be given to the exact boundaries shown. He added he felt strongly the map should be abolished as it serves no purpose and may help impute a value of a property. Ed Stoner, 701 Cherokee, Planning & Zoning Board member, suggested the map be abolished or to have a map which delineates where height is anticipated. Just one zone where the City can anticipate a height being established. The developer can then mitigate the problems with the surrounding area. -503- 1 1 October 19; 1982 The vote on Councilmember Reeves' motion to adopt the Resolution was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Cassell, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, and Wilmarth. THE MOTION FAILED. Mayor Cassell asked that another Resolution be prepared for the November 16th meeting that would eliminate or abolish the PUD Building Height Benchmark District Map, not the building height review criteria. The Planning & Zoning Board recommendation should accompany the Resolution. Ordinance Appropriating the Annual Expenditures for the City of Fort Collins in 1983 and Setting the Mill Levy for Said Fiscal Year, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 5 and appropriates the 1983 Annual Budget of $106,303,658 and sets the mill levy at 10.7 mills." Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to adopt Ordinance No. 130, 1982 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to adopt Resolution 82-154 concerning a mutual nuclear weapons moratorium between the United States and the Soviet Union. Councilmember Horak noted he had provided Council with this Resolution and that he had worked with the City Attorney to make sure the measure is in proper legal form. He stated three questions: 1. Is the Resolution in proper legal form? 2. Does the Council wish to place the proposed Resolution on a ballot? ' 3. Do the voters wish to support this Resolution? -504- October 19, 1982 He stated he felt the first question has been answered in the positive and that the supporters and opponents of the issue have shown sufficient municipal interest in the measure so that Council's answer to question 2 should be in the affirmative. The third question would be answered at the time of an election. The following persons spoke in favor of placing this issue on the March General City election ballot: 1. Helen Day, 124 North Whitcomb 2. Ken Bonetti, 627 Whedbee, Poudre Nuclear Freeze Campaign 3. David Hartley, 511 West Oak Street 4. John Kafalas, 346 North Loomis 5. Sigrid Pfieffer, 2400 Farghay Court 6. Joe Stern, 1221 LaPorte 7. Ann Pryor, 2420 West Mulberry 8. Bob Sorantino, 325 Garfield, CoPIRG representative 9. Paul Bates, 609 Duke Lane 10. Cindy Bonetti, 627 Whedbee 11. Jasmine Corey, 436 East Drake 12. Skip Teeple, 275 Ellis Hall 13. Mary Lyons, 2608 Killdeer 14. Jo Shuman, 628 LaPorte 15. Diane Cooper, 513 West Oak 16. Dan Feldman, 628 LaPorte ' The following persons spoke in opposition to placing this issue on the March City election ballot: 1. Richard E. Kutz, P.O. Box 1972 2. Mimi Sue Souders, 518 South Bryan, Peace through Strength 3. Sterling Morrison, 760 Oxford Lane 4. Steve Cluff, 901 Sailors Reef The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt the Resolution was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Horak and Reeves. Nays: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Knezovich, and Wilmarth. THE MOTION FAILED. Adjournment Mayor Cassell declared the meeting adjourn i m. ATTEST: Mayo cityCerk QS, -505-