Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-09-20 PZC MINUTES, CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p .m. in the Community Development Conference Room of the Englewood Civic Center. Vice Chair Roth presiding. Present: Absent: Staff: Guests: Bleile, Brick, Diekmeier, Knoth , Mosteller, Roth, Welker Hunt, Krieger, Laga (Excused) Tricia Langon, Senior Planner Michael Flaherty, Assistant City Manager Nancy Reid , Assistant City Attorney Chris Peters, Andy Wittman II. APPROVAL OF TELEPHONE POLL August 2, 2005 Mr. Welker moved; Mr. Diekmeier seconded: TO APPROVE THE TELEPHONE POLL CONDUCTED ON AUGUST 2, 2005. AYES: NAYS: Bleile, Brick, Diekmeier, Knoth, Mosteller, Roth , Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Hunt, Krieger Motion carried . Ill. STUDY SESSION Case #2005-1 5 Multi-Year Capital Plan Mr. Flaherty stated he worked with department directors on recommendations and prioritization of capital projects for the upcoming year . There is a five-year capital plan that each department develops which becomes part of the 2006 budget document when it is finalized. Projects are funded on a year-to-yea r basis. His responsibility is to review the capital project requests, prioritize the requests, and make a recommendation to the City Manager who then forwards them to City Council. The Commission also has a role in the process, which is to review the requests and make recommendations . City Council will meet again regarding the budget on September 24. The budget will not be finalized until late October, so there is still time for Council to make changes to the budget. Mr. Flaherty provided a summary of the 2006 budget. The City is in a similar position to where it has been in the last two or three years. Capital funding is derived from two major sources : auto use tax which provides approximately one-half of the total capital funding, and building use tax which provides approximately 40 percent of the funding. The other 10 percent is transferred in from a variety of sources . Currently there is a 15% fund balance in the general fund which will be drawn down. The budgeted expenditures will exceed the budgeted revenues by approximately $ 700,000 - $800,000 which will come from the reserves. The reserves will reduce from 15 % to 13 .5%. There is no opportunity to transfer money from the general fund to the capital improvement fund without cutting services to the citizens . Mr. Flaherty continued; approximately $2.7 million in Public Improvement Fund {PIF ) projects have been submitted . The City also receives funds from the State of Colorado from the Conservation Trust Fund, also known as the Lottery Fund. Those funds ar e dedicated to parks, recreation , and open space only. For the second year, the City has also received funding from the Arapahoe County Open Space Fund. This was a new sales ta x which was implemented beginning January 1, 2004. The City anticipates receiving approximately $650,000 in re v enues from the open space tax. Those funds ca n be spent only on parks and open space. The definition is even more restrictive than the Conservation Trust Fund. There are $2 2 3,500 of proposed appropriations in the Conservation Trust Fund and of the $650,000 in revenues, the City is budgeting approximately $599,000 from the Arapahoe County Open Space Fund. There is another obligation in the PIF, which is approximately $280,000 in 2006 for debt service. That debt service is for capital related items; one being the acquisition of the Centennial Park property which the City acquired . The City received a Brownfields loan and will pay that off over a 10 year period with one percent interest. The City pa y s approximately $100,000 annually to retire that debt. The City also has a lease/purchase on a major financial/HR system which is approximately $1 71,000 which is paid on an annual basis ; 2006 will be the third of the seven years for that debt service. Mr. Flaherty stated the budget outcomes are also listed on the worksheets . For the first year, the City has entered into a new type of budgeting that will be incrementally installed over the next two to three years . It is entitled "Budgeting for Outcomes." There are five outcomes or goals that the City has established that details what the City believes the citizens want and desire . Mr. Flaherty reviewed each outcome. These outcomes are used for not only the capital fund but also the general and proprietary funds . Mr. Flaherty stated the majority of the projects listed in the PIF are for annual maintenance projects to maintain existing infrastructures, such as roads, bridges, buildings or technology and total approximately $2 million. The remaining $700,000 are either one-time projects or periodic projects which will make improvements to the city or city facilities. Mr. Flaherty reviewed the proposed projects listed in the Conservation Trust Fund and the Open Space Fund . Mr. Flaherty distributed a list showing all the requested capital projects in the PIF .totally $6 million. He reiterated that of the $6 million .only $2.7 million will be proposed to Council for funding, but the list also shows those projects that did not get funded. Mr. Flaherty asked for the Commission's input and questions. Mr. Diekmeier asked if both the Conservation Trust Fund and the Open Space Fund were for maintenance, improvements and acquisition. Mr. Flaherty responded that the Open Space Fund allows 10 percent for maintenance; everything else has to be utilized for acquisition or improvements. The Conservation Trust Fund is a little more lenient, but they also prefer the funds be in visible projects rather than ongoing maintenance . There are no restrictions on the PIF as long as it relates to capital projects and not direct operation costs. Mr. Brick asked how the City determines expenditures for building assets , such as roofing. Mr. Flaherty stated the building maintenance staff annually makes requests for "quick fix " repairs, such as painting, roofing, lighting, etc. When there are major maintenance jobs, such as roofing the Civic Center, bids ar e sent out and are planned for as much as possible . Mr. Welker stated in the past the Commission has recommended projects that w ere part of the Comprehensive Plan. Over the years those projects have been placed on the "ba c k burner" or have dropped off the list due to lack of funding. One of the proj ects still on the list that is receiving funding is the South Broadway Action Plan . Discussion ensued. Mr. Flaherty stated this year a fair amount of funds were set aside for open space projects for grant applications, and the City was successful in receiving two grants which Community Development submitted. The first project is the companion trail to the South Platte River bike trail and construction should begin soon. The second project also relates to trail amenities and that grant should be awarded to the City sometime later in the year. Mr. Flaherty stated Bates Station is perhaps one of the most costly projects that has b ee n discussed by the Commission. The City's match for the new light rail station is $1 .7 million . The other two-thirds would be contributed by RTD and the future developer. The City is in discussions with potential developers, and RTD has the funds available in their FasTracks program. The overall cost of the station is approximately $5.1 million. Discussion ensued. Ms. Mosteller asked how the general budget was funded. Mr. Flaherty responded that 70 % is funded through sales tax; the remaining funding is from fees and charge s and intergovernmental funds. Ms. Mosteller asked if the City has done an y for ecasting on th e impact of the Sheridan Urban Renewal might have on the City's general fund revenues. Mr. Flaherty stated it has not; if the Sheridan project moves forward, it will mean approximately $4 million for the City. There has not been any discussion on how those funds would be allocated or for what purposes they would be used, whether general fund - or capital fund. An area that is being looked at closely is the Mclellan Reservoir area where the City owns 165 acres which is becoming more desirable for development. The Cit y's first responsibility at that site is to protect the water supply; however 70% of that property can be developed sensibly. Ms. Mosteller asked what role the Comprehensive Plan had in determining the budget outcomes. Mr . Flaherty responded that the budget outcomes were tied to the Comprehensive Plan. Harold Stitt did a great job of laying out how they related to one another. Ms. Mosteller asked if the City has exhausted all other funding sources such as grants, low- interest loans, etc. Mr. Flaherty stated the City has exhausted a number of them and is continuing to appl y for grants . The City is in the process of doing a fleet study and has identified $350,000 worth of savings. The City has also identified 25 % savings in copiers and printers . Ms. Mosteller stated she is disappointed to see there is no funding in the Bates Station. She believes that is the type of project that would a ssist the City economicall y in th e futur e. Ms . Reid stated the Commission 's role is to make a recommendation to City Council regarding the projects in the PIF. The y can either send it forward "as is " or move projects up in priority. The Commission can also recommend that projects be funded , such as the Bates Station , and/or remove projects that are currently on the list for funding . Ms. Mosteller clarified that the Bates Station did not have to be funded all at once . Mr. Flaherty stated it did not at this point in time. Ms . Mosteller moved ; Mr . Welker seconded : TO RECOMMEND FUNDING THE BATES LIGHT RAIL STATION IN THE 2006 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS . Mr. Bleile stated the Bates Station is less than a mile from the Englewood Station; he asked Ms. Mosteller why she felt another station was needed . Ms . Mosteller responded that it is another opportunity for redevelopment, to improve the neighborhood, and to increase the sales tax base in the City . Discussion ensued regarding alternative funding options for the station and the General Iron Works redevelopment. Mr. Flaherty clarified that the amount listed for the Bates Station on the deferred list is half the amount needed for the City's match, and there is currently no money in reserve. Ms . Mosteller stated RTD has the money set aside for the project and if a developer came in and wanted to move quickly , the Cit y needs to have some money set aside for the project; otherwise nothing will happen because the City will not be able to come up with $1 . 7 million in a year . - There being no further discussion, Vice Chair Roth asked the secretary to call the roll. AYES: Mosteller, Welker NAYS: Bleile, Diekmeier, Knoth, Roth ABSTAIN: Brick ABSENT: Hunt, Krieger Motion failed 2-4. Mr. Bleile moved; Mr. Knoth seconded: TO RECOMMEND THE PROPOSED 2006 CAPITAL PROJECTS BE FORWARDED TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. AYES: Bleile, Brick, Diekmeier, Knoth, Roth, Welker NAYS: Mosteller ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Hunt, Krieger Motion passed 6-1. IV. PUBLIC FORUM No one was present to address the Commission. V. STAFF'S CHOICE Ms. Langon stated the next scheduled meeting is October 4; she recommended canceling that meeting since there were no matters for the Commission's attention. She stated she is working on a training session for the October 20 meeting. VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid suggested staff provide the new Commissioners copies of the Master Bike Plan , South Platte River Open Space Plan , and the Broadway Plan. Ms. Fenton stated she would provide them with copies in their next packet. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Regarding the project update included in the packet, Mr. Brick asked who he would contact if he where interested in one of the projects. Ms. Langon responded that he could contact her. Mr. Bleile stated there is a woman who runs everyday down the middle of the street on South Clarkson, between Belleview and Hampden, between noon and 3 p.m. She will not move, will actually stop running and wait until cars move around her. Mr. Bleile stated he - has spoken to her and asked her to run on the sidewalk, but she ignores everyone . Ms . Langon recommended that he call dispatch when he sees her running in the street. Ms . Reid stated she would also call dispatch and ask them to put it on the roll call and to ke e p an eye out for her. Mr . Roth stated there are a number of signs in the bulb-out at Amherst and Broadway . The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.