Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/12/1972-Regular- 73 0 c tober_1.2., _19 7.2 MINUTES OF MEETING October 12, 1972 The City Council of the City of Fort Collins met in regular session at 1:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building on Thursday, October 12, 1972. Present: Also present: DISPENSING OF MINUTES Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Robert Brunton, City Manager Michael DiTullio, Assistant City Manager. Arthur March, Jr., Assistant City Attorney Charles Liquin, Director of Public Works Rick Cisar, Acting Planning Director Charlie Cain, Director of Finance Verna Lewis, City Clerk Bill Kane and Dave Golick from the Planning Department. Motion was made by Councilman Lopez to dispense with the reading of the minutes of the October 5, 1972 meeting, seconded by Councilman Preble and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA 2A PRESENTATION OF CHARTER TO FORT COLLINS POLICE DEPARTMENT Mr. Bob Webster, representing the Exploring Division of the Boy Scouts of America, presented the Charter to Police Chief Ralph Smith, and explained the purpose of the program in which the Exploring Division works with the Fort Collins Police Department. Chief Smith accepted the Charter on behalf of the Police Department and stated David Feldman, Juvenile Officer for the Department, had been delegated the coordinator of this program. Mayor Carson pledged the support of the Council and the Administration toward making this program a continuing success. (This Charter to found in Police Department) AGENDA ITEM 3A Mayor Carson declared the Council sitting as a Liquor Licensing Authority. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF PACKAGE LIQUOR STORE LICENSE FOR ACE LIQUORS, 200 RAST MOUNTAIN TO GUSTOV MIKLOS Assistant City Attorney Arthur March, Jr., advised the Council the application was in order and that the Council could hold a hearing forthwith. REPORT: October 10, 1972 TO: Mr. Robert Brunton, City Manager FROM: Jerrold J. Haals, Detective, Vice and Intelligence Bureau SUBJECT: Application for a Retail Liquor Store License — Gustav Miklos, DBA, Ace Liquors, 200 Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Sir: On September 29, 1972, the above subject made applica— tion for a Retail Liquor Store License. On October 3, 1972, this officer received the application for investigation. The following is the result of that investigation: BACKGROUND: Mr. Miklos has come to Fort Collins from Dayton, Ohio. He managed the Paradise Inn in Dayton from 1962 to 1964 at which time he purchased same and owned it from 1964 to 1969. From 1970 to 1972, he owned the Riverdale Nite Club in Dayton. This officer contacted Miss Lehman of the Dayton Police Department and she stated Mr. Miklos had no record and they had had no prob— lems with either business. Mr. Miklos has been married to his wife Margaret for the past 21 years and they have two sons, Peter, age 20, and Gustoav, age 18. Mr. Miklos was fingerprinted and photographed by this department. ' 1-74 October 12. 1972 RECOMMENDATION: This officer can find no reason to recommend denial at this time. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Jerrold J. Haals, Detective Vice and Intelligence Bureau Ralph M. Smith Chief of Police The applicant, Mr. Gustav Miklos, responded to Council questions on his knowledge of the operation of a Package Liquor Store. Motion was made by Councilman Peterson to grant the transfer of ownership, seconded by Councilman Fead and adopted. Ayes: Councilman Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 3B APPLICATION FOR HOTEL RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE BY PRYNTHIA JonES, DBA SPORTSMAN'a BAR, 210 WALNUT STREET. Assistant City Attorney March, Jr. advised the Council the application was in order and it would be proper to set a date for hearing. Preliminary hearing date November 2, final hearing November 9, 1972. No objections was voiced by the applicant. Motion was made by Councilman Fead,'to set the preliminary hearing on November 2, 1972, and final hearing on November 9, 1972, seconded by .Councilman Preble, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. Mayor Carson declared the Liquor Licensing Authority closed. AGENDA ITEM 4A SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 58, 1972 - PINE TREE PARK ANNEXATION At the request of the petitioner, motion was made by Councilman Peterson, to table the second reading of this ordinance until the hearing - Ordinance No. 68, 1972 - on the zoning of this annexation was held, seconded by Councilman Preble and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 'B SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 63, 1972 - ESTABLISHING SALARY FOR CITY MANAGER Due to difficulties in the publication of this ordinance, this ordinance was re -heard on first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 63, 1972 BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-15 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, 1958, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE SALARY TO BE.PAID THE CITY MANAGER Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, to adopt Ordinance No. 63, 1963, on first reading, seconded by Councilman Peterson and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM SA FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 68, 1972 BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, 1958, AS AMENDED, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE PINE TREE PARK ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Planning Associate Rick Cisar, reviewed for the Council the amount of land for various types of zoning (HB, IL, RP and RLP) to be considered -in this annexation. The recommendations are as follows: , -175 October 12_, 1972 October 12, 1972 Amount of land for various types of zoning (HB, IL, RP F, RLP) in Pine Tree (in acres) Different Recommendations Types of Zoning HB IL RP RLP Developer 19.379 67.890 119.810 0 Planning $ Zoning Board 19,379 0 67,890 119.810 Staff 8.000 0 79.200 . 119.879 City Manager Robert Brunton stated the Planning and Zoning Board and the staff had agreed on how the annexation should be zoned, but were not in agreement on the amount, he therefore suggested the petitioner might have some other data he might wish to present. Mr. Lyle Carpenter, petitioner for the annexation, spoke to the question at some length, restating his belief that the proposed zoning requested would be compatible with that existing in the area; his belief that the north end of town could support a grocery store, Beauty shop, Barber shop, Laundromat and various shops; his concern for the traffic on North College Avenue; and the fact that meetings had been held with people on North College and no opposition had been voiced to the proposed annexation. Mr. Carpenter next submitted an artists rending of the development of the annexation and spoke of covenants included in proposals for the IL Limited Industrial zone. He also spoke of the same concept already developed in Denver at Montbello. Mayor Carson expressed concern as regards to covenants. Public Works Director Charles Liquin and Assistant City Attorney March, Jr., spoke to the question, stating covenants could be recorded with the property, and restricted by deed, but to a degree they would be generally be uninforcible if a new owner desired to make changes. Councilman Preble questioned if the Montbello development had encouraged new industries. She was.advised by the petitioner that it had. The question was then raised as to the amount of land already zoned IL. Planning Associate Dave Golick, identified the areas on the map, stating the major function of the Planning Staff was to look at zoning of the entire community and pointed out the suggested IL zone assessible to rail service, road service and air service located south on Route 14, west boundary I 25, north of the railroad tracks, east County Road #13, excluding area around Andersonville and the recommendation of the Urban Land Institute Speaking in favor of the proposed annexation and requested zoning were the following: Dick Betzing, 120 Gregory Road; John Smidt, North College Mobile Home Plaza; Peggy Harden, Developer northeast of Fort Collins; Fred Frantz, Excell Art Corporation; Howard Jones, 2516 Terry Lake Road; William Bartran of Bartran Homes, Inc.; Eve Benson. Mrs. Nona Thayer, resident of the area, asked what percentage of the industrial area of the City is Limited Business. Discussion on covenants and State Statutes, and implied contract zoning followed. Motion was made by Councilman Lopez to approve Ordinance No. 68, 1972, with 19.379 acres in the HB, Highway Business zone, 67.890 acres in IL, Limited Industrial zone, and 119.810 acres in the RP zone, Planned Residential seconded by Councilman Peterson and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: Councilman Preble. (AGENDA ITEM 4A) SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 58, 1972 - PINE TREE PARK ANNEXATION Tabled to November 2, 1972, to coincide with the second reading of Ordinance No. 68, 1972, Pine Tree Park Annexation Zoning. AGENDA ITEM 6A Consider the Fourth Foothills Annexation petition involving 30.5 acres with RM zoning Foothills -West Development Corporation - Alvin Miller, President $ United Bank, Trustee, Donald Johnson. Tabled from October S, 1972. Mayor Carson moved this item up on the agenda to allow Water Board Chairman, Ward Fischer, an opportunity to present his report and be dismissed. Planning Associate, Rick Cisar, reviewed for the Council the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation that the annexation be denied, due to the fact that the.density allowed in RM, Medium Density Residential zoning would be too intense and create a precedent for properties in the same situation for other areas is inconsistent with known conditions relating to v 176 October 12 1972 air pollution. The zone which permits higher density in a conventional development fashion is inconsistent with soils and geological use of the area. The petitioner denied the recom- mendation of RLP, Low Density Planned residential zoning for this area, so the Board had no alternative but to deny the petition. Ward Fischer, Chairman of the Water and Sewer Board presented the following report: is hereby declared to be the policy of the City of ort Collins, Colorado, that water and sewer service be furnished outside the corporate city 'Limits upon the following conditions: (1) That all federal or state laws relative to the use and distribution of water for human consumption are complied with. (2) Owners of the area served agree to join in a peti- tion for annexation when requested by the City and to cooperate in appropriate proceedings in connection therewith. (3) All construction of the user's system complies with standard city requirements as to materials, location, depths, valves, fire hydrants, meters, fittings or any special require- ments --all as determined by the City. (4) Water will be furnished only during periods that said water is surplus to the needs of the City. (51 The cost of all construction, including connection to the city system, will be borne by the user; provided that upon reco;amendation of the Water Board, the City Council may agree t:.za the City shall share the cost of construction upon its deternl- iration that it is in the best interests of the City to do so. (e) The City is held harmless from any claim or liability arising out of failure of user to comply with any existing laws or from other action regarding the construction or operation of the user's system. (7) Payment for water is in accordance with applicable ordinances. (^o) The user agrees not to directly or indirectly par- %iclpll ate ithie forivation or enlargement of any municipal or c'QZsi-muni cipal corporation, without the consent of Citv Council. (�) The user agrees that all real property to be ser- vice: by water shall not be conveyed unless conveyance is subject to applicable provisions of this ordinance. (10) Noncompliance with this ordinance or failure to pay S.�n;iCc^ bills shall permit City, at its option, to terminate and suspend water and sewer service until such conditions are recti- i�ed. Ali unpaid sums to auto7aatically constitute a lien against all real property and improvements thereon of the user. (11) The user agreements are nonassignable to other property unless approved by the City. (12) Before connection is permitted, user is to furnish tee City seater rights or payment in lieu thereof as set forth is ordi.ia races of the City. �:•--.:i (13) Utility service shall be extended outside the city li_:Llcs oniv in connection with uses allowed under the Zoning �:.C.ension Plan adopted by. City Planning and Zoning Board and U proved i;y -he City Counc-1. In the event any property out- side the city receiving uiility service is put to a use not i:�=---- -! by sllCh 'c', C'.l lllg ��Y.t ^clisl0:1 Plan, the permit f0T' �... OL City/ utlilities shall automa'_ically he revo]ted and silo- —Y service will oe disconnected. Until the Zo ni n(� E__tcnsion __,11 is adopted by til' City Council, any applicant for city it service tilat is outside the city limits shall obtain c'r.e a_JJrovai of the proposed use for 'Cite property to be servc—d _rom City.'3-Fnnin9 Director; provided that the applicant Snell .. .aVe file right t0 appeal to ule City Council for such approval -177 October 12, 1972 i= not satisfied wit:: the declslon of the Planning Director. 3z-ore connecting to a city uziii-v, the user shall coR,pl'J with i.•:e sllbdivislon regulations Of the City of Fort Collins. (14 -he user Of water under the provisions Of t1ais O�C.1na::CO oa Ei :�. not constitute Or be deemed to be a relinouish- i�.�.:L Of anv wa_-c or �Dater right by the City, and the City reserves t:.c f,:ll rig.it to determine all matters in connection FII. the Control and use Of said water, and the City retains doi :Ln'on and control Of such waters. The user shall comply with -he building— codes of the Ccu;:'cy Of i ariMer and Of the City of ,Fort Collins; and, if the cones are different, the user will comply with the highest stand- ard s0 iriposed. The City will inspect for cDmpliance. with its cedes only as to those -requirements for which the County has no substantially ecuivalent code; and the costs of such inspection Drill be borne by the user. jlater service will not be extended unless sewer service is likewise extended; and sewer service will not be e.:cended u;.less water service is likewise extended. Provided: .-:az upon --iie recoi=.endation of the Water Board, the City Counci'_ elect io extend one service only if it is deemed to be in the ;pest interests of -he City to do so. (17; l�:e user wlll agree that upon annexation t0 the City, he will na" for the cost Of converting t0 city electrical ser- vice, _:,c.;.d:"ng, but not iiiihited to, the cost of obtaining under- ground ac: ice; and that such costs will constitute a lien on the property. NO"IE Some admir.is-cration officials urge 'chat no ..'cer or sewer service will be provided unless ele.'riCai service is also provided. The electric utility suggests the following additional policy: "Utilities shall not be extended to property OU-:;4(.e "Cne city unless such pro"oerty received all avc.-lable utility service from the city; provided :bon recommenda"Cion of the Water Board, the City COL: _iCll ?Tray waive this requirement with regard t0 req.`.-ring water and/or sewer service, and; provided, f'C;r�her, that electrical Service shall not be re-' qui'--ed frola t:le City if the City electric utility ex-_o essly consents to the omission of such service'." Thi; is outside of the field of expertise of the S'dater BOa:d, which therefore :;sakes no reco„snendatlon except as contained in paragraphs (16) and (17). (.-ui Ti?E user WO:hld petition for inclusion within the Coiora�l.o Kunicipal Subd_"strict. (_�. ") (lei=��C'1tf. e' A�atEi; ::Or sewage service shall be extended to t:.e LOest Of the following described line: Sc:a:;,e.ici::g at chc Gast cuarter corner of Section 25; G.1e�:Ce Sou'_n along .:he Gast line of Sec%ions 25 .and 30 0 :i':e Southwest corner 0= S Cti O'.i 3i; thence ..v:",:n ..long th c- NOr'C line oI SCC ti On 6 t0 the �:Ortll- _Ls� corner thereof; thence Sou-h t0 the Southeast cor.:cr t.:creo; thence East along the North line of :c _-_-:_on 3 to the N orthwas C corner of Northeast Olt .-_.-d section; the_:ce South "Co Northwest corner Of 1/4 Of Sec Lion 17; thence East to 1,.ortheaSt of Section 17; thence South to Gast 1/4 corner Scct_on 20; thence East "CO center of Section 21; South to center of Sec" ---On 28; thence i:as-�- 10 cei,"Cer Of SEctio-n 27; thence Sou'-:: t0 North 1/4 Co'i.ier o- Section 3; thence- East to Northeast corner thereof; tne..c Son"'": to 'Northeast corner of Section 10; thence .,as-C 'Co Northeast Cori?er OL Section li; thence South the appropriate townships and ranges) and includ- i:.x lands now serviceable in lst and 2nd filings of Westgate Subdivision in Section 20; r October 12, 1972 dor North of the following line: i.GI1_:,e i.clig at Last 1/� corner Of Section 25; thence C,as L" LG center o2 Sect -ion 28; thence North to .iortzh- easu- corner of said section; thence East ,(in the appropriate townships and ranges). E:ica,pt -.:at, upon the recomriaendation of the Water Board, the City Council "_-,ay agree to extend service beyond such line if it is dee-_,ed to be in the best interests of 'erne City to do so. `"::e it Oi is f. _lnc is- basically Life Con- -_c.Ctua1" 1J0i:u:Qa::v between ""I L.i ty c."i1d West :Ort Cu .'_ins 'dater District. Tile west boundary is as Ca!ly `ne area ti18t can be served by gravity _o::, City systems. "owever,, -he -Water Board is of strong opinion that development should be sup- 'J_essed beyond tree west line froin tine standpoint of Via) aesthetics, (b) pollutlo:l, and (c) ground 4n s".abllity. The allowed exceptions would be granted only to control inevitable growth and never for ;Here economic advantage to the developer. Mr. Fischer stated the Board in no way was making its recommendation in response to a particular annexation. Mr. Alvin Miller, petitioner for the Annexation, read from a prepared statement, stating this annexation was part of the overall plan that was approved in 1970, which was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board members as well as City Council members, stating also the dates of approval for other developments in this area. Mr. Miller further stated tests had been made on the 30 acres requesting annexation by Mr. Neil Schrader, who had advised him that there was no problem there; but that there might be a problem on the adjoining 20 acres. lie stated again lie did not want the RLP zone since many small contractors (list recorded in Central Files) could not afford to build under this requirement, that the City controlled the only sewer in the area, and that it was not economically feasible to buy water through a meter for watering lawns, etc. He supported the Extension Policy program. When asked if he was sure that no geological problems existed in the area, Mr. Miller responded "no". Planning Associate, William Kane, gave a slide presentation of the area in question and explained the geological problems ge616gical terms, and again stated the RLP zoning recommenta- tion in light of the environmental qualities of the area. City Manager Robert Brunton, stated Council and the Administration have an obligation to consider all aspects of this request; serving sewer and not water; traffic and pollution, as well as soils and geology, before a recommendation could be made. Mayor Carson, City Manager Brunton and Councilman Fead spoke to the question, stating work sessions would be held and public meetings held on a policy for the general development of the Foothills. Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, that the Administration be directed to gather data to use for a total Foothills Development Policy; meet with the County Commissioners, then set a public hearing where the decision would made, with effort on the part of the City to provide equity to all sides, seconded by Councilman Fead, and adopted. Ayes: Councilman Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM SB ORDINANCE NO. 69, 1972 - Warren Shores Second Annexation BEING AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF FORT COL Planning Associate Rick Cisar pointed out the annexation. Motion was made by Councilman Preble, to adopt Ordinance No. 69, 1972, on first reading, seconded by Councilman Lopez and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. The RESOLUTION - ZONING WARREN SHORES SECOND ANNEXATION 72-101 -179 October 12, 1972 OF THE. COUNC.11. OI' THE CITY OF FORT C.OI,I.INS GIVING NO'P1CIi CON(:Ek'NI?:(; A PR0PO51!U AMENDING CHAPTF.: 19 OF THE CODE OF OItDLNXN;.r:S OF 'I'llh: CITY OF FOI;T Cnl.1.INS, COLORADO, 1958, AS AMENnED, COMMONLY KNOT , AS ' HF. XONLNG ORDINANCE, IN ORDER TO CLASSIFY FOR ZONING PURPOSES CERTAIN PROPERTY BEING AXnVXVD TO "IV CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, heretofore the City Council of the City of Fort Collins initiated annesati.on procedures for certain property known as the Warren Shores Second Annexation to the City of Fort Collins more particularly described in the "Notice of. Public Hearing" attached hereto, and WHEREAS, the owners of said property have petitioned that said property be included in the R-P, Planned Residential Zoning District and the RA, Low Density Residential District. WHEREAS, the PJnnning and Zoning Board has made a study of said zoning request and has held a hearing and has made a report and recommendation thereon, all in accordance with Section 19-46 of. the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort. Collins, Colorado, 1958, as amended, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to hold a hearing on said zoning request as required by said Section 19-46 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that November 2, 1972 at 1:30 P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing, in the Council Chambers in the City Hall of the City of Fort Collins, is hereby set as the time and place for a public hearing on said zoning request; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to publish a notice of said hearing as provided in Section 1.9-66 of the Code of Ordinances of the Ci_Ly of Fort Collins, Colorado, 1958, as amended, in the form attached hereto. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 12th day of October, A.D. 1972. /s/ Karl E: Carson ATTEST: Mayor /s/ Verna Lewis City Clerk Motion was made by Councilman Fead to adopt the resolution, seconded by Councilman Peterson, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 6B KENNEDY'S WEST LAPorte AVENUE ANNEXATION -.310 Acres with "C" Commercial Zoning Tabled from October S, 1972. Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Peterson, to remove from the table. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. City Manager stated that after discussing this with the City Attorney, he felt it would be �1 go October 12,, 1972 i i better to follow through and proceed with the annexation and it was his opinion that there was no subterfuge about this matter. Motion was made by Councilman Fead, to refer this to the City Attorney to prepare the necessary papers, seconded by Councilman Peterson and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 6C Consider the Village Square Annexation petition RP, BL, and RLP Zoning. Tabled from October 5, 1972. Motion was made by Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Fead, that this be removed from the table, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes; None. Assistant City Attorney March, Jr., advised the Council that there was a new petition filed, that the description covers all the area and the Council could act on this petition without referring it back to the Planning and Zoning Board, that the zoning will have to go to the Planning and Zoning Board on two parcels. The Council requested some guidance on this. The following letter was presented: RE: Dr. Clifford J. Wetzler, Jr, and Village Square Annexation Dear Councilmen: I just received a call this afternoon, October 10, 1972, from City Attorney, Art March, Jr., advising me that the above annexa- tion had again appeared before the City Council with land owned by three members of the Wetzler family omitted from the annexa- tion and that the Council had expressed displeasure with this omission. Therefore, I think that it is essential that the Council understand the position of my client, Clifford J. Wetzler, Jr.' You will recall that Dr. Wetzler and I appeared at the council meeting of September 21, 1972, and I entered my appearance in the record in his behalf at that time in order to oppose the Vil- lage Square Annexation. You will recall that I did not enter any appearance in behalf of other members of the Wetzler family and, in fact, I have not to this day received any communication from any other membe:_s of the Wetzler family. You will probably also recall that at that council meeting the City Attorney and acting City Manager Mike DiTullio mentioned having scheduled a meeting with us for Monday, September 25, 1972. Clifford and I met with Art March, Jr., Mike DiTullio and Don Reynolds in the offices of the City Manager on September 25 and everyone readily agreed upon the terms under which Clifford Wetzler would be excluded from the pending (?) annexation. I then prepared a written agreement setting forth the terms of our verbal agreement and submitted it to Art March, Jr. by letter on September 27, 1972. Apparently some confusion has been created before the Council as to exactly what my client owns in the area and what his motives are. Dr. Clifford J. Wetzler, Jr. owns approximately one (1) acre of land at 2737 South Shields on which he has erected a building to house his small animal veterinary clinic, which he has been operating for about six (6) years. Clifford and his family do not live at this location. Clifford purchased this acre from ET9 father and I believe that his father sold the balance of his land to the developers and only retained a life estate in his residence which is also located on South Shields south of Clifford's clinic. Clifford's brother also lives on South Shields, but I do not know how he acquired title to his land. I do not know if Clifford's brother and father desire to be annexed to the City at this time, if they are indifferent, or if they are opposed to the annexation. I was advised by Bruce Keenan of M & I, Inc., on about October 5, 1972, that M & I had unilaterally decided to leave all three of the parcels of land occupied by the three Wetzlers out of the new annexation without talking to the Wetzlers. As a matter of fact, I think that Bruce Kee.ian was under the impression before our conversation that Clifford owned more than one of these properties. Another plat or petition had already been submitted to the City with these omissions by the time Bruce called me. "181 I lope that this explanation will persuade you not to require Clifford Wetzler to be annexed to the City at this time. As we have previously explained to the City Administration, forcing Clifford to annex to the City at this time as a non -conforming use could force him out of business in about three years. If Clifford has chosen, we could have permitted the first annexa- tion to proceed to its conclusion and then filed suit within the statutory time period and probably had the annexation set aside, because as you know the petition upon which it was all based was inaccurate. However, Clifford and I agreed with Art March, Jr. that we would appear before the City Administartion and the City Council at the earliest opportunity to explain his situation ar.d try to avoid inconve;.tiencing everyone at the City by coming in at a late date and objecting to the annexation. Now, I would hate to see Clifford suffer by his decision and cooperation because of misunderstandings or errors by other people. Clifford does not have any control over how the surrounding landowners handle their petitions and we would still like to execute Clifford's agreement with the City as soon as possible. As you can see from the enclosed photographs, Clifford's practice has always been carried on in a building without any outside pens or runways and one of the terms of his contract with the City is that he would continue to conduct his practice completely indoors. Other provisions of the contract provide for the City to receive necessary rights of way for widening South Shields, etc., as re- quested by the City Administration. Sincerely yours, /s/ H. T. Schmidt, Jr. Attorney for Clifford J. Wetzler, Jr., D.V.M. Assistant City Attorney March, Jr., stated that Dr. Wetzler is buying this land for a Veterinarian Clinic and will expand this as if grows and he recommended that this property be excluded from the annexatiop, stating that Dr. Wetzler agrees to annex in three years. Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Peterson, that this matter be referred to the City Attorney to prepare thee necessary ordinance, excluding _the property of Dr. Wetzler from the annexation, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 6D Engineer's Report on Downtown Sidewalk Repairs. This matter was delayed for one week when the City Engineer could be at Council to discuss it. AGENDA ITEM 6E PARK WEST PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND WOOD LAND SUBDIVISION Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Peterson, that this subdivision be approved. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None AGENDA ITEM 6F Delayed for one week. AGENDA ITEM 6G REPORT - 30,000' UG 600 V. TRIPLEX CABLE Mr. Tim M. Sagen, Electrical Engineer has evaluated the bids. The recommendation is that the award be made to Alcan Cable in the amount of $6,456.00. This bid is being recommended over the first and second low bid due to our stock condition of the material. The third lowest bid as entered by Alcan Cable offers a one week delivery clause. Respectfully submitted, /s/ E. M. Kuppinger Purchasing Agent Motion was made by Councilman Peterson, 5ecnnded.by Councilman Lopez, that the recommendation of the Purchasing be approved and adopted. ` 182 October_12.,_1972_ Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble,and Peterson. Nayes: Councilman Fead. AGENDA ITEM 6H BIDS - RIVERSIDE CURB AND GUTTER TO: Ed Kuppinger, Purchasing Agent THRU: Charles Liquin, Director of Public Works FROM: Roy A. Bingman, City Engineer RE: Curb & Gutter - Riverside Avenue From Magnolia to Oak Bids were received on October 10, 1972, for the above described project. A tabulation of the bidders and the bids is as follows: Bidder Total F. & F. Concrete Construction Co. $5,520.00 Concrete Construction & Placing, Inc. $5,692.00 Kiefer Concrete, Inc. $5,800.00 City Engineer's Estimate 0 200.00 These bids have been checked and evaluated and it is our recommendation that the contract be awarded to the low bidder, F. & F. Concrete Construction Co. Respectfully submitted,. RVY)Bingman City Engineer Motion was made by Councilman Preble, seconded by Councilman Lopez, that the recommendation of the City Engineer be approved and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM 6I CONSIDER PETITIONS FOR BUCKINGHAM STREET PAVING DISTRICT TO: Robert Brunton, City Manager THRU: Charles Liquin, Director of Public Works FROM: Roy A. Bingman, City Engineer RE: Petitions for Buckingham Paving This week the City has received petitions requesting that a street improvement district be formed in the Buckingham area. These petitions result from a series of meetings held during the past summer with the residents of the Buckingham area. The petitions have been checked for ownership and we find that the signatures of property owners in the proposed district represent 35.0 percent of the assessable frontage. The improve- ment district ordinances specify a minimum of one-third (1/3) for the initiation of a street improvement district by petition. I recommend that the Council accept the petitions and direct the City Engineer to prepare a report for a proposed district for their further consideration. Respectfully submitted, c GSA"" i Roy ingman Ci L'v '',vi necr I `"1.83 October 12, 1972 Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Peterson, that the Administration " be authorized to proceed with the Buckingham Paving District. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. AGENDA ITEM, 6J CONSIDER TERMINATION OF PRESENT POWER AGREEMENT WITH CSU AND PROCEED WITH NEW AGREEMENT City Manager Robert Brunton stated this agreement was a formality and directed the City Attorney to draw up a new agreement, Motion was made by Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Lopez, that this be approved and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. Due to lack of clarification on the terms of appointment of the members of the Coordinating. Commission for Senior Citizens, motion was made by Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Lopez, that this matter be referred to the City Attorney to prepare a resoluvion changing the by-laws clarifying their appointment, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopex, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None COINLMUNICATION TO: `lavors., Councilmen and 'I':u r-_cs, Managers and Clerks FROM: J.dward Touber, President, Colorado Municipal League SUBJECT: Communicating Municipal Needs to Legislative and County Commissioner Candidates DATE: October 11, 1972 On November 7 Colorado citizens wil'._ elect 65 representatives and 13 senators to serve in the Colorado General Assembly, and candidates for county commissioner and other offices. The fate of municipal government and the well-being o4 cone 75 percent of the state's population residing within cities and towns depends to a substantial degree upon the quality, informed status, and concern of these officials for urban needs and problems. In some areas of the state criticism has arisen over failure of certain county commis- sioners to represent and serve incorporated as well as unincorporated areas. Municipal officials in such areas m.::• share part of the blame since the urban vote is often crucial to election of commissioner candidates. As leaders of municipal government in your communities, we urge y6ur involvement in communicating municipal needs to these legislative and county commissioner candidates. This is an opportune time to achieve official interest and commitment to municipal problems, since these candidates are looking for your vote., that of your constitutents, and for campaign issues and solutions. Information to share with these individuals might include: the following: 1. Review your budget with candidates and show them what you are trying to .accomplish for your community's well-being and the .financial limitations within which you must work. Tell them about steps your community is taking to provide better services at less cost. Expose them to the complexities, red tape, costs and restrictions involved in preparing federal and state grant-in-aid programs. 2. Explain state -mandated requirements for police and fire pension benefits, solid waste disposal operations, air and waver pollution controls, and so forth. 3_ Describe vour long-range development plans and :;how what your community hopes to accomplish. 4. Schedule a tour of municipal facilities to famiLiarize•them with the range of municipal services. 5. Demonstrate yo.ir willingness to be.forthright and,coonerative in helping them to gain full understanding of your municipality. As'c them for their suggestions and commitments for improving your community. , .,.,,'f ,; r I ,m;r. ` 184 October 12, 1972 Reapportionment offers to municipal government the op.port.inity and challenge of a greater voice in the state and county decision -making process, Whether this opportunity is realized or lost depends to a significant degree upon your involvement now, following the election. and during essiors of the General Assembly. One item of major interest which is certain to be before the legislature next year is revision of distribution of highway user and related funds, Based upon a study just completed by the consulting engineering firm of Wilbur Smith and Associaties, municipalities should be receiving a considerably increased share of highway user funds. This would bs a particularly timely topic to discuss with prospective legislators. Again, we urge you to make a conscious effort to discuss :municipal needs with candidates Ibefor-e the NQvember. ellee47'.roTb With thin-1 •ah, qr.el-.cLed. Motion was made by Councilman Fead, seconded by Councilman Preble, that the City Attorney be authorized to draft a resolution. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. Since Consolidated Street Paving and Street Lighting District No. 64, failed to get published, it was necessary to set a new date of publication. The following notice was presented: TO 771E PROPERTY OWNERS IN CONSOLIDATED STREET PAVING and STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. AND TO ALL PERSONS INTERESTED GENERALLY OF TILE COi1PLETION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE IMPROVE?TENTS IN SAID DISTRICT, THE TOTAL COST THEREOF, TriE ASSESSMENTS TO BE MADE ON PROPERTY WITHIN SAID DISTRICT TO PAY THE COST OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE DATE OF HEARING OF ANY OBJECTIONS THAT MAY BE MADE IN WRITING BY THE OWNERS OF SUCH PROPERTY, ALL IN ACCORD- ANCE WITH TIIE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 15 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, 1958, AS AMENDED Notice is hereby given to the owners of property to be assessed within the limits of Consolidated Street Paving and Street Lighting District No. 64 and to all persons interested generally that the improvements in said District have been com- pleted and accepted. Notice is further given that the whole cost of said improvements, including the cost of collection, legal, advertising, engineering, financing and other incidentals is $71,51S.8S ; that the portion of said cost to be paid by the City of Fort Collins is $16,124.31, that the assessment roll showing the share apportioned to each lot or tract of land in the District is on file in the City Clerk's office and can be seen and examined at any time during normal business hours; and that any complaints or objections which may be made in writing by the owner or owners of property in the District to the Council and filed in the office of the City Clerk within thirty (30) days from the publication of this notice will be heard and determined by the Council before the passage on any ordinance assess- ing the cost of such improvements; and that on Wednesday, November 22, 1972 , at the hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, City of Fort Collins, Colo- rado, the City Council will hear such complaints and objections and determine the same and act upon the ordinance assessing the cost of such improvements. Dated at Fort Collins, Colorado, this 12th day of Octobep A.D. 1972. /s/ Verna Lewis City Clerk Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Peterson, that November 22, 1972, be set as the hearing date of this district, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Noyes: None. I City Manager Robert Brunton, advised the Council that he would be in Denver Friday,October l� 13th on revenue sharing matter and on Monday evening he had a meeting with the people unhappy with the cemetery. Councilman Peterson reported.that there was no one present at the talk session Wednesday Night. f+ Y6 October 12, 1972 ADJ OURN;NiENT \ Motion was made by Councilman Lopez, seconded by Councilman Fead, that the Council adjourn, and adopted. Ayes: Councilmen Carson, Lopez, Preble, Peterson and Fead. Nayes: None. Mayor ATTEST: ity I