The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1982-04-05 (Regular) Meeting Agenda• • • 0 ~ity Council Meeting -Regular April 5, 1982 • • ··- • • • - CITY COUNCIL MEETING A ril 5, 1982 RESOLUTION # ~. JR', ,2<), 21 ORDINANCE # ),8, _ri, y(. J1 0 0 I . . • - r.· • fl • • • AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL APRI 5, 1982 \ tf l\t>.V , I 7 :30 P.M. Call to order, invocation by Mr . Mac Bartee, Minister of Englewood Church of Christ, 4690 South Logan Street, pledge of allegiance by Boy Scout Troops #115 and #154, and roll call. · .ri,· 1- 1. ) ! tl,'"' / ,/ 1 '-" Minutes. (a) Minutes of the 1982. (Copies (b) Minutes of the 1982. (Copies '-J ; Ji i.L I special meeting of March 8, enclosed.) regular meeting of March 15, enclosed.) I~ r i 2. Pre-Scheduled Visitors . tion to 10 minutes.) (Please limit your presenta- \ ,,/ 3. Other Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to 5 minutes.) 4. Public Hearing. Communications -No Action Recomm nd d . (a) Minutes of the Englewood Housing Authority special meeting of Sept mber 16, 1981 and annual/regular meting of F bruary 1 7, 1982. (Copies enclosed .) (b) Minutes of th Board of Adjustment nd Appea l meeting of February 10, 1982. (Copies enclos d .) (c) Minutes of the D nver Regional Council of Govern- ments meeting of February 17, 1982. (Copies enclosed .) • I • • • • • - Page 2 April 5, 1982 Agenda 5. Conmunications -No Action Recommended (Continued). (d) (e) (f) (g) Minutes of the Board of Career Service Cormnission- ers meetings of February 18, 25, and March 4, 1982. (Copies enclosed.) Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings of February 23 and March 2, 1982 . (Copies enclosed.) Minutes of the Public Library Advisory Board meeting of March 9, 1982 . (Copies enclosed .) Minutes of the Water and Sewer Board meeting of March 9, 1982. (Copies enclosed .) (h) Minutes of the Downtown Development Authority meeting of March 10, 1982 . (Copies enclosed .) (i) Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of March 11, 198 2. (Copie s enclosed .) (j) Municipal Court Activity Report for the mont h of February, 1982 . (Copies enclosed.) (k) Memorandum from the Director of Community Development concerning her attendance at the Downtown Development meeting in Baltimore. (Copies enclosed.) (1) Memorandum from Mayor Pro Tern Bradshaw and Council Members Bilo and Weist to Mayor Otis and Members of Co\lllcil concerning their attendance at the Congressional-City Conference. (C opies enclosed.) 6 . Communications -Action Recommended . (a) (b) Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning the Boring and Relining Project for South Broadway . (Copies enclosed.) Counc il Communication from Southgate Sanitation District concerning Supplement #93. (Copies enclosed .) • I • • • • • • Page 3 April 5, 1982 Agenda 6. Communications -Action Recommended . Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning a contract between the City of Englewood and the Denver Regional Council of Governments relating to the McLellan Study. (Copies enclosed.) Council Communication from the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by adding 22.4-llh Conditional Use. (Copies enclosed.) Memorandum from the Municipal Judge to Mayor Otis and Members of City Council concerning a recommendation of appointment of Ms. Geraldine Allan as Associate Municipal Judge for the City of Englewood. (Copies enclosed.) 7. City Attorney. Ordinances on Final Reading. (a) (b) (c) (d) Ordinance amending 13-4-15 (a) (6) of the Engle- wood Municipal Code of 1969 pertaining to exemption under the City use tax. (Copies enclosed.) Ordinance approving a lease of real property owned by the City of Englewood with the governing board of the multi-jurisdictional fire arms range facility. (Copies enclosed .) Ordinance approving a license agreement between the State of Colorado, Law Enforcement Training Academy, and the City of Englewood, for the use of their firing range facilities and author- izing the City Manager to execute said agreement. (Copies enclosed.) Ordinance approving an agreement with School District No. 1, Arapahoe County, Colorado, granting City of Englewood, Colorado, an easement to use school property for a storm water detention ar ~a and establish other related terms and conditions and repealing Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1982. (Copies enclosed.) • I • • n • • • - Page 4 April 5, 1 982 Agenda 7 . City Attorney (Continued). Bills for Ordinances. (e) Bill creating Paving District No . 2 8 i n t h e fl J.,?,/ City of Englewood, Colorado, ordering t he con -l~~ 1t i.G struction and installation of stree t pav in g , ~. o ~~~~· curb and gutter and sidewalk improvemen ts ~()!1v l-j} together with necessary incidentals , on c ertain ~ ~ streets and avenues ; providing for t he issuance ~, .,( of bonds in payment for said improvemen ts; and ~-3· setting forth other details i n connec tion with ~ ' the District. (Copies enclosed .) QJ'} (f) \\,I, ~'} (' Bill repealing and enacting the Englewood Sign Code. (Copies enclosed .) t.,~ .. ~ .!J Resolution. (g) (h) Jt: 14 Resolution amending standards for the elig ibil ity of persons who apply for deferral of payment o f special assessments aga i nst their proper ty occupied as their residence pursuan t to 1969 Englewood Municipal Code, Title XII, Chpater 1.5. (Cop i e s enclosed.) ~·' Resolution adopting Englewood Public Librar y Guidelines and requiring notice to City Counc i l of any change in public library policy . (Copie s enclosed .) Proclamations. (i) Proclamat i on concerning Englewood Volun teer Week . (Cop i e s enclosed .) Othe r Matters. (j) (k) (1) Memorandum regarding Hall Property/Centennial Park. (Copies enclosed.) Lovelady vs. City of Englewood. (Copies enclosed.) Water Qu ality Control Commission litigation. (Copies e n closed .) (m) Assessmen t Deferral Opin ion . (Copies enclosed.) • I • • - • • • • • Page 5 April 5, 1982 Agenda 7. City Attorney (Continued). ~/ 9 . (n) (0) (p) (q) E.C.B.F. -Donations to Malley Center Trust Fund . (Copies enclosed.) Report on animal pound agreements. Report on school crossing guards. I /•~ Attorney's Choice.-~~~~ ~~J.t.LL . -~~'1~~- City Manager. --~;(JA,ah.f_l!-~ . --/VtUa.GWL ~ rz & ,£.A-l UM, (a) (d) Council Comnunication from the Director of Public Works concerning the bus for the Farmer's Market. (Copies enclosed.) Council Comnunication from the Director of Finance concerning City banking services . enclosed.) (Copies Council Communication from the Department of Community Development concerning the Official City Seal. (Copies enclosed.) Council Communication from the Directors of Finance and Public Works concerning the award of bid for the street sweeper. (Copies enclosed.) Resolution appropriating surplus funds. (Copies enclosed.)~114 _.., ,&t..{11-,._ .li .;._..,. ulS(i,.;&rf -Ud L 1,.,,Vq tl ~.i. -t d "J_;!-"i?-'?~ • Manager's Cnof""ce .-;t:ru,i_ rJ rµ:.,_~ ~ ~~)'-/~I'..,_ 4-C q: tfo Q, fl4_ • ,~;l{ )/~;(,)) .,<(i ]I ,'C?' General Discussion . -;rn.u..l ~ C! !f C. ,flt. ~-1~-f J-a.,(: (a) Mayor's Choice. ~ "»-'" 0 .'D D f' /TYi . (b) 10 . Adjournment . <1Ji.l1lic, l Cit,IManager AM/sb • I • • • • • ( >1.(.l 1 ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H ,aaay Neal Fitznatrick We i st Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I • \ (I ,1 .a M A 1 ~ / (( 1 l ( (t 1 ~,,- .:. t' )7 ,1.., ,._./ : . / , y_,, · c,L ( (? 1/ • I . • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab s tain H1odav -Neal l.--- Fl tzoatrick l-- Weist L--- Bi lo 1.--- Bradshaw v Otis ,_ • I • • - - ROLL CAL L Moved Seconded /a__,, • H1qaav Neal i /' Fitznatrick Weist V Bi lo Bradshaw Oti s {; . j) z (l J . • • • Ayes Nay Absent Ab s tain ...- I . • -. • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Riadav Neal .__ Fltznatrick Weist v-Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • I • • • • • i . ::) / _--.,). • Moved Seconded ROLL CALL Hiadav Neal Fltznatrick Weist Ri lo Bradshaw Otis • • • Ayes Nay Absent Abstain I • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1Qdav -Neal ~ Fi tzoatrick -- Weist (..,/" Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • • I • • • • • - • - ROLL CALL Moved Seconded A yes Nay Absent Hiodav Neal Fltzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis . ,) (. t \ / j Zl (7 {{. t<-t ,y ~ b /1 · tf._ /., -' ./1} ( :'I I Jc 1 :Jt )LL )\J c.a_ l {~ "7 I ( { c c l_- )1 1 L, ,, i l 1 ,( 'j /') Jc /;_ le I l ,._ I l ( ( /.. / C .___u_/! ~u 1.l ? I ). (. {_ )l. t:1-I l l ' l • ' • • • • Abstain / -C ct{£ t , J l{ (! J I . • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab stain H1nrta y - <---Neal - Fltzoatrick Weist - I/ Bi lo - Bradshaw - Otis c/ • I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain H1qday Neal 1,,----Fl tzoatrick Weist . ---Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • I • • • • • I I _) • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain ,_ H1oday Neal J,..-Fitzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis / /t t,' ) () -~-l (_ l 1-( (' t:' f ) / /,_, f (, l'1tll.J•; • I t ..... l( 1 ' i I ·I ' l ( h. .) 1 1 r L [{.. L I• J >.... I 7. Q .) -~ /.. :I ~ ,, ~< I .. /7l..., .... ~~~'T"-~~~-A,/-,1-(~ ( J' )1 1 _:· <! .~lc ,u {·_ LI, n t1 <11.,,1,,,, _ 1 <, ( I • • l. ,t ~ ~ ~ J._, ~/ •.br.t<'./-I Jt ~: • I ( It (I(' ,,( t{_ ;< ,, ~ • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qday Neal Fitzoatrick Wei st Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I /c_ '1 ,{ • I • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain H1adav - Neal - Fltzoatrick Wei s t Bi lo Bradshaw Oti s - .{.JC l < ->,H ('1 >l ( <"(, (4..(( (l\....,, </ < p r; , 1' ~ 71' y} IA. • ( ' d ,,/) { / jo, ' r<. l ,) <, 1 I .<. t.. --' G e ~ -v _ _,, 'f-< .t}:__, /~ d<'hyf -} r < t 7' ,I '7( /{ ,u l / /1 1 L l<...., ~ (< I/ J1(.f.l I. I r ,1,. I(..,, . ( ,.., ,t_(''< lul l /l i Ct1 <..., "Jl -<I ( l 1' ~ it I . • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Ab sent Abstain J,...:- H1<1<lay Neal Fltzoatrick Wei st (/ Bi lo Bradshaw Otis (' ;:·(_ ~ nc(l ,,~ Ac. ! '1_.( L. C,1)l r'~ c / . i J i_ ;) i i '(.f..A (..L c1 /J ' () \..(/)7 1 I ' r,i, y/ C. .,0 1)1.J r~ • I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qday ,_.. Neal Fitznatrick Weist ,_ Bi lo Bradshaw - Otis 1..:.. ~ ( 21>-b _.r ~./ .._,.,:, '? 2 21.t ~ r ;> :'J Lite i... r_.u l { ~ ~ u [t1_.._. t /ft {' J' (.. (J J._ -d. '"I -<.. 1. ....., (}.A) 7 (' - a } --7-::l,..C--r ,J,. c;_ ._.,,,ll 2. c I' 11 ( >LJ ';fTi.u {. Zr ~ < .I JL" ( £( l • ,1..· ~ f. ,, ~ l • , , .) I)( I. l i}{ )' (, / h... £.) u { d.(.. C ~ n <..1.v /)Q nt..:.Di,'. ) / )( , "'! 'l· ,)-tj ( U'J ( -/l /) . l. .. h ... ' • I . • • • • • • • • ROL L CALL Move d Secon ded Ayes Nay Absent Ab s tain H1 QC1a y v Neal J,/ Fi tzoatr i c k Wei s t Bi lo Bradshaw Oti s ..., /',,t- a ))l_ h.c -.2 C _,,ts C ~1 '7. , 11 a~'L'---- r u 2...i.t.. 1. < l' 0 _.,/ --<J....l ..... {, t Y. r ?. t(-1 l ) ( d._ t I /2. > ) L I )Lt£ ).).(( • 1'A_ I a . , ( J (?=4-1 IC <. ({ ( ).1. h 111-td (A./) d !) Ii ,/ tu_, I --{ (. ")' -t.-t i ){_ .d I . t I /, \4< d...·, I 1 -1 )n 1/ / J. '."-' v N . t) . • /i,, I • • • • • ROLL CAL L Moved Secon ded Ayes Na y Abse n t Ab s t ain Hiqdav Neal Fi tzoatrick Wei st Bi lo Bradshaw Oti s I j J(J ,] 1-t' '~, :•,n" I /) l 1--l ), 1.6 ( ), -<' '. j A (? 't t.l f ,-Z{ Y. J l~ C f t Y' • 1 )() YH Clc/U 7Jt ,dr_. -n ·i . ;J3 \ , ( ;; ? (.(./ c-l ?. {l < ') 7 !? / ; .(· ( "6,· n 1 /litlt-(' u d,l,oL t c( l,2.~) .<--(-( ( '0 < j( ·, ;;, c; , 0J />lT,i :U, {, .A~(t .I I . ;7•/j ( _._, t1 ;\ "IL () A-t2 I ;1 ,\ 4 /.t<'., C /.J(. (" -,,(/ . J ~' ?") 11 '/(1 C y ( JtJ )/;) ')('l'J ) / [I f/ ) (. l?1.J ( "'J .t ..J {) ( t • • I . . • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab s tai n 1Hntfav Neal - Fi tznatrick -Weist Bi lo Bradshaw - Otis - cJ 1 l l ]~ (J J • I • • • • -• • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1 q day -Neal V Fi tzoatrick - Wei st t---Bi lo Bradshaw -Ot is - rJ1 /77 7,) 1 -Jq • I • • • • - • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hiqdav Neal Fl tzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis y ~~%~ -3;[2 ~~ St>o2 ~-~ ~ ~ oU-t" ;5 ~ • I . • • • • ROLL CALL Mov ed Seconded A yes N ay Absent Abstain H1n, av Neal Fitznatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis pn ~ J _,vvvl ,r tu._, /U"'--~ r ~-c /'C /~ A ~ cLmJ-~-~-~ • I . • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Secon de d Ayes Na y Ab s e nt Ab s tai n H1 a day ..-- Neal .__ Fl tzoatrick .__ Wei s t <---Bi lo ._ Bradshaw -Otis L- • I • • • , I r.:t • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded 1n Ayes Na y Absent Abs ta· R1oaav Neal Fi tzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis 11(-ol (J<,.Jd ~ (; ~ ~ 6-7~ j6~tJZ,/)lg'~ ,k~~.~ "-~ ~ ~ ~~ {}4--- ~tf .,_ ~-~~ ~~-~~~~ ~-~~~~~~ • I . . • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain H1qdav v--Neal - Fi tzoatrick -Weist (...---Bi lo ~ Bradshaw -Otis - • I • • • • • -• • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hicidav ___. ,,,-Neal ~ Fi tznatrick -Wei st -Bi lo ----Bradshaw Otis - I • • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayr.s Nay Absent Abstain H1<1dav -Neal V Fitzoatrick - Weist --Bi lo - Bradshaw - Otis - ~-G / 1 {) 31, <I ;;Lo ~ ~ I 1/'l?J I • • • • - • • Moved Seconded y H1qaav Neal ~ Fitzoatrick -Weist Bi lo ~ Bradshaw Otis ~ I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain t,,, H1qoav ~ Neal - Fl tzoatrick -Weist --Bi lo ~ Bradshaw -Otis - I • • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded A yes Nay Absent Abstain HI nclay Neal Fi tzoatrick Wei st Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I . • • • • ROLL CAL L Moved Secon ded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hl gda y --, Neal ...... Fl tzoatric k - Weist - "" Bi lo Bradshaw -Otis I • • • • • - ROLL CA LL Moved Seconded Ayes Htq day Neal F i tzoa tri c k We i st Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Ab sent Abstain H1ndav I--Neal Fitzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstai n H1qday .___ Neal ~ Fitzoatrick -- Weist ~ Bi lo ,_,,-- Bradshaw Otis - • I . • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Secon de d Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Htn aav --, Neal ---, I.Y° Fitzoatrick - Weist -,~ Bi lo ---, Bradshaw - Otis • I . • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded a1n Ayes Nay Absent Abst · J .,/' H1qdav Neal Fl tzoatrick Wei st V Bi lo Bradshaw Otis 6 C. I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1gday Neal - Fl tzoatrick Weist -Bi lo ~ Bradshaw - Otis - • I • • • • • • • 0~~~~1 -~~ ~ y~ ~ ROLL CALL . cf- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. Moved Seconded ~Na~ en stain t--Hint1ay I Neal I v-Fitzoatrick I Weist Rj lo I Bradshaw l Oti s - • I . • • • - • • Secon de d Ayes Na y Abs e nt Ab s ta i n H1q dav ~ Neal ~ V Fitzoatri c k -Wei s t -. Bi lo Bradshaw -Otis - • I • • • • • • • ~ . T\ CIJVl1)_ ,f ~~~OLL CALL . ~~-• J ;1 e_ n tfl.u:# r:. /\ ~ · /'fJJ 't. ~ IJ · ,~/(\#J t{)/1 ~~ ~ ~ Moved Seconded p j & Ayes Nay Absent Abstain HIQOav ---Neal - t,.---Fi tzoatrick Weist - Bi lo - Bra,;!shaw - Otis - 6 ;/· ~Ud C 11 r;r,r (X,<.. ~. 13 -~~ <r ~~ -------• • I . • • • n .. ,_ • • Moved Seconded t-- ,._ ROLL CALL H1odav Neal Fl tznatrick Weist Ri lo Bradshaw Otis • • • Ayes N ay Ab sent Abstain I • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain --HIC]day ~ t.-Neal - Fitzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw - Otis • I • • • • -• • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1Qdav -Neal --, Fl tzoatrick - Weist - Ri lo ~ Bradshaw - Otis • I • • • • -• • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1<1day Neal __.., ._--Fl tzoatrick Weist -- '7' Bi lo ~ Bradshaw - Otis - • I • • • • • -• • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain -M1adav - Neal - Fitznatrick Weist .........--Bi lo - Bradshaw - Otis -- 1 b. • I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain -ll"ioday Neal - I,/' Fl tzoat ric k - Weist Bi lo ~ Bradshaw - Otis 0 • I • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qC1ay - Neal - ,I,--Fl tzoatrick - Wei st - l/'"' Rj lo Bradshaw -Otis ~ - 0 I • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Secon ded Aye s Na y Abse n t Ab s t a i n H1odav -y---Neal Fi tznatrick - Weist -t,..-Bi lo ~ Bradshaw - Otis 0 I . . • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Nay Absent C' o ()--~ t JU'-~ l//~ (,,N,,µJ r ~,__ • Abstain I • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Htqday v-Neal -,_... Fltzoatrick -Weist Bi lo - Bradshaw - Otis - I~ J:J-11 • I • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain .......... H1qaay ~ Neal ,_ Fitzoatrick -Weist Bi lo --, Bradshaw - Otis • I • • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain H1qaay Neal Fi tzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I ~~/XA~Wlll ~ 1) £ f c;C fi ~, f} ~-'-'v 'jl. u..~ !<-+-,,___J___£,_ , . (j () 7(2 .~~~ I . • • • - • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qdav Neal Fl tzoatrick Weist Ri lo Bradshaw Otis 11fl ~~ ~c).~JUPt>tidi.6l 9~-~1./-. 'lp ~~~m~ ;auv~~r~ -Ac_~Ufo--{!~~~LL ~ ~~ --f "::J;f.-;t;v.J.,-~ ~ ~ F ~- %g ~-4--J ·i -rt • • I . • • - • • ROLL CALL I • • Moved Seconded 1 -13 .J-/'f 1 -:2. 0 1-24 ROLL CALL Hiodav Neal Fi tzMatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis ---' • • • Ayes Nay Ab sent Abstain I . . • - • • Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qday -c.-Neal --Fl tzoatrick Weist -Bi lo Brad shaw Oti s • I • • • • • • • ~~- fi\-y ROLL CALL Moved Seco d d n e Ayes Nay Absent Abstain r I T"Hi--;;,,av T T I T I Neal ~ -Fl tzoatrick -Weist Bi lo I Bradshaw I I I Otis I I I I 1 ~ ~ • I . • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Ab sent Abstain - ' H1n<1ay ~ ~-Neal ~ -.. Fitznatrick --Weist --~ Bi lo -Bradshaw --Otis -- (1,c, r lo'-cS, -If' ..3 k, .LJ ~ ~~ ~ a'S;;:-~ • I . • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hioday -~ Neal ~ Fitzoatrick Weist / -Bi lo ~ Bradshaw Otis I • • • • • - • • Hlqday Neal v--Fi tzoatrick Weist I.--' Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • I . • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1ooay ~ Neal - Fltzoatrick - Weist Bi lo - Bradshaw Otis - • I • • • • - • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes N Ab ay sent Abstain Hfnt1ay Neal Fltzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis 1/i,J ,,~~~ . . =.--;;_ ~ ~ ,-.t~~-~ ~ /. ~~ CG, 6 c:--A-1 uL.4, ~ 4 ~z.~ ~ I'~ nc.. \ V}(fQ.L ~ e~ , /kfi-.J- ~ //JL ~ · -,LL ~ r~ G ,4~ -/l'U£C° M 4 -1~-t~ 7:.Jo i'1rl -~ ,% 61~/D"' q b ~ u:f ~ /K, /3.<.. c_,,,_ -e,_,,,__,, • I . • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain .-Higday ---, Neal ~ Fitzoatrick - Wei st v-Bi lo - Bradshaw - Otis - ~'1/)1,.i-t__, .L/-l d.-//--2~ ~u-x..: ~-z..S'" PF 7 1:.:- • I . • • I • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hladay Neal Fitznatrick Weist -Bi lo Bradshaw Otis - I . • • • SPECIAL MEET ING : • • • COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO March 8, 1982 The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in special session on March 8, 1982, at 7 :30 p.m. Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order. The invocation was given by Pastor Tom Bybee, Englewood Wesleyan Church, 4609 South Fox Street. The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Otis. Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the ~oll, the following were present: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. Absent : Council Member Bradshaw. The Mayor declared a quorum present. * * * * * * Also present were : City Manager Mccown City Attorney DeWitt Director of Engineering Diede Services Deputy City Clerk Watkins * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16, 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows : Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist , Silo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. The Mayor declar d the motion carried. * * * * * * I • • • Mar ch 8 , 1982 Page 2 • • - COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO APP ROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22 , 198 2 -4 :35 P.M. Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the mot ion . Up on a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows : Ayes: Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday , Neal , Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1982 -4 :50 P.M. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll , the vote resulted as follows : Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBER FITZ PATRI CK MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PRO CLAMA - TIO N DEC LAR I NG THE WE EK OF MAR CH 15 THROUGH MARCH 20 , 198 2, AS "DEHOLAY WE EK". Council Member Neal seconded th e motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Ab sent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bra d shaw . The Mayor declared the motion carried . Mayor Otis read and presented the proclamation to the representatives who appeared on behalf of DeHolay. Mr . Mathew E. Buchner thanked Council for this recognition. * * * * * * I • • • March 8 , 1982 Page 3 • • • COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PRO- CLAMATION DECLARING THE WEEK OF MARCH 14 THROUGH MARCH 20, 1982, AS "KELLYWEEK". Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. 'nle Mayor declared the motion carried. Mayor Otis read and presented the proclamation to Ms. Donnis Brown and Ms. Sussane Doussard from Kelly Services. * * * * * * Pre-scheduled visitor Alexandra Habenight, 515 West Tufts Avenue , was present. Ms. Habenight related an incident where her daughter was almost hit by a car at a crosswalk between Tufts and Elation February 26, 1982, while walking to school. Ms. Habenight requested the following steps be taken to improve safety: 1) move mid-block signals to the intersections; 2) have volunteer crossing guards ; and 3) set up a traffic safety program with the school, city and police department. Ms. Habenight listed the agencies she has contacted in pursuit of a safer method. She stated volunteer crossing guards were prohibited because of the liability placed on the School District. Ms. Habenight stated a similar incident hap- pened six years ago and she was tired of being put off. Council Members Fitzpatrick and Bilo who are representa- tives of the Joint School-City Committee stated they would take this matter to their next meeting. Council Member Fitzpatrick requested that City Attorney DeWitt contact Richard Simon , attorney for the School Board, in answer to the question of school liability for volunteer c rossing guards. * * * * * * Mayor Otis asked if there were other visitors wishing to address Council on matters pertaining to the agenda. I • • - • March 8, 1982 Page 4 • • • Lee R. Jones, 2747 South Cherokee Street, appeared be- fore Council. Mr. Jones discussed the inclusion of South Cherokee Street from Yale to Floyd in proposed Paving District No. 28, Mr, Jones stated the street had already been in a special district back in 1935 and passed out a map as evidence. Mr. Jones stated from that time the street has been maintained as far as chuck holes are concerned, Mr. Jones stated the surface is breaking down and the street could best be served by resurfacing which would be minimal expense versus major reconstruction. Mr. Jones stated almost all of the residents are of two age groups: 1) older people of which several are widows ; and 2) new families just getting started. Mr, Jones stated the assessment costs would place a financial burden on these people. Mr. Jones suggested that Council consider the possibility of placing Cherokee Street from Dartmouth to Yale which .i s residential in the category of repairing the walks, curb and gutter, vertical curb surface and putting on al" overlay. Council Member Higday recommended citizens opposing the district to contact their respective Council Members and voice their opposition so the Council Member would ·have some under- standing of the situation prior to the public hearing. Council Member Neal requested that the deferral plan ordinance be provided to Mr. Jones; and that a transcript of Mr. Jones's comments be made available to Council before the public hearing, * * * * * * Virgil 'nlomas, 3810 South Lincoln, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. 'nlomas discussed proposed Paving District No. 28. Mr. 'nlomas stated a poll of the neighborhood (3700 -3800 South Lincoln) reflected overwhelming opposition to the district. Mr. 'nlomas stated opposition was outlined in a letter to Mr. Higday and arrangements were being made to voice opposition to Council Member Higday in a neighborhood meeting. Mr. 'nlomas withheld the letter from the record at this time. Mr. 'n\omas wanted to get more signatures of opposition. were: * * * * * * 'lllere were no other visitors at this time. * * * * * * "Communications -No Action Recommended" on the agenda (a) Minutes of the Malley Center Trust Fund - Bo rd of Trustees meetings of June 23 and Octob r 8, 1981 nd 1981 Financial Sheet, • I • • March 8, 1982 Page 5 (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) • • • Minutes of the Board of Adjustment and Ap- peals meetings of December 9, 1982 and Janu- ary 13, 1982. Minutes of the Denver Regional Council of Governments meeting of January 20, 1982. Minutes of the Board of Career Service Com- missioners meeting of January 21, 1982. Minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of January 27, 1982. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of February 2, 1982. Minutes of the Urban Renewal Authority meet- ing of February 3, 1982. Minutes of the Water and Sewer Board meeting of February 9, 1982. Minutes of the Downtown Development Authority meeting of February 10, 1982. Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commis- sion meeting of February 11, 1982. Municipal Court Activity Report for the month of January, 1982. COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO ACCEPT "COMMUNICA- TIONS -NO ACTION RECOMMENDED" AGENDA ITEMS 5A -SK. Council Mem- ber Bilo seconded the motion. Council Member Fitzpatrick noted a correction to 5(h). Mr. Fitzpatrick stated he was not ab ent from the Water and Sew r Board me ting ; only late 7 minutes. Upon a call of the roll, the voter 1ulted as follows : Ayes : Nays : Ab1 nt : Council Members Higd y, N al, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. Non • Council H mb r Brad1haw. 'n\ Mayor d cl rd th motion c rt -~. • * * * * • • I • • - March 8, 1982 Page 6 • • - City Manager Mccown presented a Council Communica- tion from the Library Advisory Board concerning a request for proposal for consulting services relating to the acquisition of an automated system to include circulation control, on-line public catalog access, management reporting and cataloging for the Library Department. COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING $7,000 -$10,000 OF EN- CUMBERED FUNDS FOR USE OF THE LIBRARY IN ADDITION TO CURRENT BUDGETED $5,000 TO HIRE A CONSULTANT TO PREPARE AN RFP FOR A COMPUTER SYSTEM FOR THE LIBRARY. Council Member Fitzpatrick secQnded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote result- ed as follows: Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. 'Ille Mayor declared the motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 13 SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 13 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD FOR THE PRO- VISION OF CENTRALIZED SERVICES FOR ENTRY LEVEL RECRUITMENT AND TESTING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER APPLICANTS. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 13, SERIES OF 1982, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ay . : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bi.lo, Otis , Nay Non. Abs nt : Counci. l Member Bradshaw. 'lb M yor d clar d th motion carried. • * * * * * • I • • March 8 , 1982 Page 7 ORDINANCE NO. 14 SERIES OF 1982 BY AUTHORITY • • - COUNCIL BILL NO. 12 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL AN ORDINANCE DEFINING FOOD AS AN EXEMPTED ITEM UNDER THE SALES TAX PROVISIONS OF THE 1969 ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE, AS AMENDED. COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 12, SERIES OF 1982, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as fol- lows: Ayes : Nays: Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. 'nl.e Mayor declared the motion carried, ORDINANCE NO. 15 SERI ES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 14 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AN EASEMENT TO USE SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR A STORM WATER DETENTION AREA AND ESTABLISHING OTHER RELATED TERMS AND CONDITIONS. COUNCIL MEMBER BILO MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 14, SERI ES OF 1982, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Fitzpatrick sec- onded the motion. Upon a c 11 of the roll, the vote resulted as follows : Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Silo, Otis. Non. Council M mb r Bradshaw. ni. Mayor d cl rd th motion carried. * * * * * * I • • • March 8, 19 82 Page 8 ORDINANCE NO. 16 SERIES OF 1982 • • - BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 6 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE EMKAY DEVELOPMENT IN RETURN FOR REAL PROPERTY IN ORDER TO SIMPLIFY THE PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN TWO PARTIES' OWNERSHIP. COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 6, SERIES OF 1982, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist , Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. 'The Mayor declared the motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 17 SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 15 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMB ER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE GRANTING $124,315 TO ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE AND DEVELOP ASSISTED PUBLIC HOUSING FROM GRANT FUNDS RE- CEIVED BY THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 15, SERIES OF 1982, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a c 11 of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bllo, Otis. Non. Council Member Bradshaw. 'Th Mayor d clar d th motion carried. * * * * * * • I • • March 8, 1982 Page 9 • • • Council Member Bradshaw entered at 8 :35 p.m. ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982~~- * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 17 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APP~OVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING ACADEMY AND THE CITY OF ENGLE- .WOOD, FOR USE OF THEIR FIRING RANGE FACILITIES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 17, SERIES OF 1982, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw , Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 13 SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * A RESOLUTION PROVIDNG FOR A PROCEDURE BY WHICH COMPLAINTS OF NON-BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES MAY BE RESOLVED BY SUPERVISORS, DEPARTMENT HEADS, OR CITY MANAGER. COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 13, SERIES OF 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the mo- tion. In r sponse to Council Member Neal's question, City Manager Mccown st ted this resolution addresses the grievance procedure for th group of employe snot in a bargaining unit but still und r th Career Service System. I • • March 8, 1982 Page 10 • • - Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw , Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * • * * * RESOLUTION NO. 14 ~ERIES OF 1982 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE COLORADO LEGISLATURE TO FUND THE COLORADO RESOURCE CENTER. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 14, SERIES OF 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the mo- tion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist , Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. Non e . The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * RESOLUTIO N NO. 15 SERIES OF 19 8 2 A RESOLUTION DECLARI G THE INTENTION OF THE CIT Y COUN CIL OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, TO CREATE A SPECIAL IMP ROV EMEN T DI STRicr IN THE CITY, TO BE DESIGNATED AS PAVI G DIST Ri cr NO. 28 , ADOPT- ING DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIO NS FOR THE PROPOSED DIST RICT, AN D ORDERI NG PU BLICATIO N AND MA ILING OF THE NO TIC E OF HEARING TO THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ASSESSED FO R I MPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT . SERIE COU NCIL MEM BER NEAL MOVED TO PASS RE SOL UT ION NO. 1 5 , OF 1 98 2 . Coun cil M mb r S i l o s co nd d t h mot ion. would b o n th din nc Ci ty At orney O Wit not d t wo pu blic haring dat e s o thls r 1olution, .g. Mar ch 29, 198 2 April 1 . 1982, or fin 1 p s s g of th or- dis rict. • I • • March 8, 1982 Page 11 • • - Gary Diede, Director of Engineering Services, came forward and discussed the following changes to the resolution : 1. On page 6, move W. Grand Ave. from E. line Lowell Blvd. to W. line Irving Street from category 3 into category 2. 2. On page 7, (c) change amount to $1,455,200. 3. On page 7, (d) change amount of $370,150. Mayor Otis declared a recess at 8:53 p.m. to allow Mr. Diede time to verify the changes with the City Attorney. Council reconvened at 9 :05 p.m. Mayor Otis asked for roll call, Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. Absent: None. 'lbe Mayor declared a quorum present, City Attorney DeWitt stated the changes have been veri- fied and repeated the changes as presented by Mr. Diede which ap- pear in this record. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL'S MOTION BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN SUBJECT RESOL U- TION: 1) ON PAGE 6, MOVE W. GRAND AVE FROM E, LINE LOWELL BLVD, TOW. LINE IRVING FROM CATEGORY 3 TO CATEGORY 2; 2) ON PAGE 7, (C) CHANGE AMOUNT OF $1,455,200 ; AND 3) ON PAGE 7, (D) CHANGE AMOUNT TO $370,150. Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the mot ion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. Non, 'lbe Mayor d cl rd th motion carried . Council Memb r l instruct d staff to include a letter xpl ining, in plain English, the City's d ferral plan with the notice to creat Paving Di trict No. 28 sent to each r sident, Upon a c 11 of th roll, th vote on the original mo- tion resulted as follows : Ayes : Council M mb re Higday, N al, Fitzpatrick, W iet, Bilo, Br dshaw, Oti , • I • • March 8, 1982 Page 12 Nays: None. • • - 'lbe Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROCLAMA- TION DECLARING APRIL 18 THROUGH APRIL 25, 1982, AS "DAYS OF RE- MEMBRANCE". Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis, None. 'lbe Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * City Attorney DeWitt transmitted a memorandum and opinion from his office concerning model rockets, Mr. DeWitt stated model rockets are permitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Fire Chief, * * * * * * City Attorney DeWitt requested settlement of $500 in the matter of Bell vs. City of Englewood. COUNCIL MEMBER BILO MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO SETTLE THE CASE OF BELL VS. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD IN THE AMOUNT OF $500. Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays: Abstain: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. 'nle Mayor declared th motion carried. * * * * * * City Attorney DeWitt transmitted a letter from Richard M. Huckeby, ttorn y for Vern Mann, to the Clerk of Court of Ap- peals withdrawing an appal in the matter of Mann vs. City of Englewood. * * * * * * • I • • • March 8, 1982 Page 13 • • - Gary Diede, Director of Engineering Services, presented a Council Communication concerning rejecting bids for repair of Sinclair Pool. Mr. Diede explained a major leak in a copper water inlet line was repaired last year at Sinclair Pool. Specifications for replacement of inlet lines, acid washing the pool walls, miscel- laneous tile repair and various repairs were submitted for bid. The lowest bidder was Wheatland Industries, Inc. in the amount of $32,110. The Parks Department budgeted $10,000 for this type of work. Mr. Diede stated since replacement of the copper inlet lines was more expensive than anticipated, Mr. Diede recommended rejecting all bids and negotiate with the three contractors to acid wash the pool, repair miscellaneous damaged tile and raise the overflow gutter. Mr. Diede further recommended re-evaluating the inlet replacement work and re-bid in early fall. Discussion ensued. Council Member Neal suggested re- evaluating the Parks budget to accumulate $32,110 to repair Sinclair Pool. Council Member Bradshaw stressed the importance of the pool to the residents of Englewood; therefore, the need to award the bid and repair the pool. Council Member Higday ~xpressed one leak maybe all the structure will experience and why spend money to replace the inlet lines at the present time. Council Member Bilo expressed his concerns of having $20,000 in excess available in the Parks budget when he felt all monies would be earmarked and not available. COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO ACCEPT THE BID FROM WHEAT- LAND INDUSTRIES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $32,110; AND THE ADDITIONA L MONIES REQUIRED BE ACCOMODATED THROUGH THE EXISTING PARKS AND RE- CREATION BUDGET. Council Member Bradshaw seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higd y, Neal, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis, Council Members Fitzpatrick, Silo. 'nle Mayor declared the motion carried , Council Member Higday noted the form ntioned motion my require djustment to the Parks & Recreation Departm nt at year end . * * * * * * • , I • • • March 8, 1982 Page 14 • • • City Manager McCown presented a Council Communication from the Director of Community Development concerning the Down- town Plan. RESOLUTION NO. 16 SERIES OF 1982 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A POLICY DOCUMENT TO GUIDE DOWNTOWN DE- VELOPMENT KNOWN AS "ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN". COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 16, SERIES OF 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. 'lbe Ma yor de clared t he motion carried. * * * * * * Council mber eal requested the shutt l e bus qu stion be placed on a 1tudy e11ion agenda. * * * * * * no furth er business to be dis cu11 d . • * * * * * COU ClL HIGD AY MOVED TO ADJOURN THE HEETl Mayor Oti1 adjourn d t he me e ting wi t hout a vote at 9 :35 p.m. I • • REGULAR MEETING : • • - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO March 15, 1982 \b The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in regular session on March 15, 1982, at 7 :30 p.m. Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order, The invocation was given by Pastor Wayne Nelson, Church of the Nazarene, 4775 South Pearl Street. The pledge of allegiance was led by Boy Scout Troop #92. Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the ro l l , the following were present: Counc il Members Higday, Neal , Fitzpatrick , Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw , Otis, Ab sent : No n e, Th e Mayor de clared a q uorum present, * * * * * * Also present were: City Man a ger Mccown City Atto rney DeWitt Depu ty City Clerk Wa t kins * * * * * * Council Member Bradsh a w note d th e fol l o wi n g corrections to the minutes of March 8 , 19 82: 1. On page 4, second paragraph, insert "have" after "would" on the third line. 2 . On pages 9 and 10, the minutes do not properly re- flect the vote results of Council Bill No. 17, Re- solution No. 13, and Resolution No. 14 in conjunc- tion with the time Ms. Bradshaw entered the meeting. She asked the Clerk to recheck the proceedings . COUNCIL ME MBER BILO MOVED TO TABLE THE MI NUTES OF THE SP ECI AL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 1982, Council Member Bradsh a w sec- on d d th motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as fo llows : Ay s : Council Memb rs Higday, Ne l, Fitzpatrick, W 1st, Bilo, Br dshaw, Otis • • ) I • • March 15, 1982 Page 2 Nays : None. • • - The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * There were no pre-scheduled vi s itors on the agenda. * * * * * * Mayor Otis asked if there were any other visitors at this time. Mrs. Lorraine McCabe, 2733 South Knoxville Way, Denver, came forward. Mrs. McCabe stated she was president of the new Englewood Women's 18-Hole Golf Association. She asked permission to use the City's logo on the association's new handbook. Council Member Bradshaw stated she had concerns about the outside use of the City's logo. She stated the question is currently being researched by City staff and a recommendation would be set forth on April 5th; and until then she was reluctant to approve the use. Council Member Higday stated he shared Council Member Bradshaw's concerns but as long as people asked permission to use the logo, Council can maintain control. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO ALLOW THE ENGLEWOOD WOMEN'S 18-HOLE GOLF ASSOCIATION TO USE THE CITY'S LOGO ON THEIR HANDBOOK. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Council Member Bilo opposed the motion on the basis that the logo was not going to be used with something connected directly with the City. Council Member Fitzpatrick opposed the motion. He pre- ferred waiting until April 5th when a policy will be recommended. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked if that was too late. Mrs. McCabe stated her deadline to the printer was this we k. Council Member Neal stated he hoped the recommended guidelines would allow uses such as Mrs. McCabe's and preferred lib r lizing the use of the logo. Upon Ay c ll of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Council Memb rs Higday, Neal, Weist, Otis. • I • • • March 15, 1982 Page 3 Nays: • • • Council Members Fitzpatrick, Bilo, Bradshaw. The Mayor declared the motion carried. were : * * * * * * There were no other visitors at this time. * * * * * * "Communications -No Action Recommended" on the agenda (a) (b ) Minutes of the Urban Renewal Authority meet- ing of February 24, 1982. Memorandum from the Fire Chief to the City Manager concerning out-of-state trips at the Nationa l Fire Academy. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO ACCEPT "COMMUNICATIONS - NO ACTION RECOMMENDED" AGENDA ITEMS S(A) -S(B). Council Member Fi tzpatrick seconded t he mot i on. Upon a call of the roll, the vo t e result e d as f o llows : Ay e s : Nays: Co un ci l Members Higday , Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bi lo , Bradshaw , Otis. None . The Mayor declared the motion carried , ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 16 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 13-4-lS(a) (6) OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969 PERTAINING TO EXEMPTION UNDE R THE CITY USE TAX . COUNCIL MEMBER BILO MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BI LL NO. 16, SERIES OF 1982, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: • , I • • • March 15, 1982 Page 4 Ayes : Nays: • • • Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried . ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 18 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE LEASE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REAL PROPERTY TO THE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FIRE ARMS SCHOOL. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 18, SERIES OF 1982, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION BY IN- SERTING IN SECTION 1. "OUT" AFTER "WITH" IN THE SEVENTH LINE, IN THE PARAGRAPH BEGINNING "THE TERM OF THE LEASE .•. ". Council Member Bradshaw seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist , Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor d cl red the motion carried. Upon a call of th roll, the vote on the original mo- tion resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays: Council Memb rs Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Wit, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor d cl red the motion carried. * * * * * * • I • • March 15, 1982 Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 17 SERIES OF 1982 • • • A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ENGLEWOOD PUBLIC LIBRARY GUIDELINES AND POLICIES. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 17, SERIES OF 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Discussion ensued concerning deleting the words "and poli- cies" in the title and in the body of the resolution. City Attorney DeWitt suggested rewriting the resolution and resubmitting it. COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO TABLE RESOLUTION NO. 17, SERIES OF 1982. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Council Members Higday, Nea l, Fitzpatr ick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. Council Member Neal stated if Council was not going to approve the policies on the use of the library facility, it would be appropriate to instruct the Library Board to notify Council when the policies change, in the form of a letter . Mr. Neal instructed the City Attorney to place such directive as part of resolution. ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982 * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 19 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. l, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AN EASEMENT TO USE SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR A STORM WATER DETENTION AREA AND ESTABLISHING OTHER RELATED TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1982 • • I • • • • • March 15, 1982 Page 6 City Attorney DeWitt noted Council Bill No. 19 corrects the error made in Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1982, so that the City's agreement is exactly the same wording as the School Dis- trict's. The specific change was on page 2 of the agreement grant- ing a non-exclusive agreement. Council Member Bradshaw stated she would be abstain- ing due to her employment with the district. COUNCIL MEMBER BILO MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 19, SERIES OF 1982, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Fitzpatrick sec- onded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Abstain : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo , Otis. None. Council Member Bradshaw. The Mayor declared the motion carried, * * * * * * City Manager Mccown presented a Council Communication from the Police Chief concerning Neighborhood Watch signs. Mr. Mccown recommended approval for the signs. COUNCIL MEMBER FITZPATRICK MOVED TO APPROVE THE IN- ST ALLATION OF SIGNS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PROGRAM. Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. City Manager Mccown stated the May issue of the Engle- wood Citizen will contain n article on the watch progr m. rom th Upon a c 11 of th roll, the vot resulted as follows : Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried . * * * * * * gr McCown pres nted a Council Communication of Financ , Public Works, and th Police Chief • i) I • • March 15, 1982 Page 7 • • - concerning police patrol car bids. Mr. Mccown recommended not participating in state bids on the Ford Fairmonts because of the problems the City has experienced with that size of car; and also, because of installation of compressed natural gas. Mr. Mccown re- commended awarding the bid to the lowest bidder Rosen- Novak for 13 1982 Ford LTD's in the amount of $101,771.93. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF 13 1982 FORD LTD'S FROM ROSEN-NOVAK FORD IN THE AMOUNT OF $101,771.93. Council Member Higday seconded the motion. Council Member Higday noted other dealers within the City limits were given the opportunity to bid. Council Member Bilo asked why Chevys and Fords were the only dealers who bid. City Manager Mccown stated these cars are the only ones that come with the police package. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatric~. Weist, Silo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried, * * * * * * Mayor Otis presented a memorandum from the City Manager concerning Council appointees to the Parks and Recreation Com- mission . COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL MOVED TO ESTABLISH THE TERM OF OFFICE OF BEVERLY BRADSHAW ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION TO FEBRU- ARY 1, 1984 AND JIM HIGDAY TO FEBRUARY 1, 1986. Council Member Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried, * * * * * • • I • • • • • • March 15, 1982 Page 8 Council Member Fitzpatrick publicly invited all the Council Members to a open session on Friday, at Bishop Elementary School, at 7 :00 p.m. on Paving District No. 28, in District I. * * * * * * Council Member Bradshaw informed Council to expect a request from the Centennial/Bi-Centennial Committee to meet with Council in the near future. Mayor Otis asked that Mr. Bradshaw apprise Council in a study session of the Centennial/Bi-Centennial Committee meeting last Wednesday. 8 :1 0 p.m . * * * * * * 'lbere was no further business discussed. * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBE R HIGDAY MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Mayor Otis adjourned the meeting without a vote at :~puty City Cle • I • • ( • • • MINUTES OF ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL MEETING September 16, 1981 5 The special meeting of the Englewood Housing Authority was called to order by Chairman Thomas J . Burns at 5:25 P.M. at the Simon Center , 3333 South Lincoln, Englewood, Colorado. Roll Call Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Thomas J . Bu rns , Chairman Betty Beier, Vice-Chairman Beverly Bradshaw Cindy Peterson Rev. Stan Fixter Frances Buck Jonas, Executive Director Susan Powers, Director of Conanunity Development Karen Smith, Interior Designer, Maxwell L. Saul & Associates Dennis Spencer, Fee Accountant Linda A. Knopinski, Associate Housing Coordinator Recording Secretary CO 48-2 Elderly Mid-Rise Furnishings Proposal Since Karen Smith, Interior Designer for Maxwell Saul & Associates, hadn't arrived yet , the Board reviewed the color scheme she proposed for the new elderly mid- rise and also discussed the color of rug and vinyl tile to be installed in the individual units. Ms. Smith arrived at the meeting. Discussion ensued regarding the vinyl asbestos tile color for the building. Mrs. Jonas stated that the Board n ds to approve asbestos floor tile in th amount of $6,800. ~ change order for th vinyl BEVERLY BRADSHAW lf)VED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE K>TION TO SWITCH THE VINYL FLOOR COVERING TO ARMSTRONG BRIGANTINE LINOLEUM PATTERN NUMBER 86380 IN LIEU OF THE CAMBRAY FOR THE KITCHEN FLOORS IN THE NEW BUILDING AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF $6 ,800 BE ADDED TO THE PROJECT. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: AYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Discussion ensu d r gardin the carpetin for the individual units in the new building. • I • • • • • MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE COLO R RUST #211 AS THE COLOR FOR THE HALLWAYS IN THE ELDERLY MID-RISE. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NAYS: NONE ABSENT: FIXTER Discussion ensued regarding carpeting for the lounge and lobby. Ms. Smith sta ted that design-wise she would keep the same color throughout the lobby and the hallway as it is on every other floor; however, the border rug would cos t approximately $155 on a change order. This cost would be to pay for seaming the border in and buying the extra piece of carpet. Ms. Smith stated that since the lobby area will be green with a rust border, it needs to be decided what color to have the carpeting in the corridors on the first floor --rust or green. Discussion ensued. MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MJTION TO AMEND THE PREVIOUS MOTION REGARDING RUST COLOR CARPETING IN THE HALLWAYS TO PERTAIN TO FLOO RS TWO THROUGH SEVEN ONLY. THE K>TION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NAYS: NONE ABSENT : FIXTER MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW l'()VED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO HAVE THE GREEN CARPETING THROUGHOUT THE HAIN LOUNGE AND GREEN CARPETING IN THE CENTER OF THE LOBBY WITH A RUST BORDER. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: BURNS, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NAYS: NONE ABSENT: FIXTER ABSTAIN: BEIER MOTION CINDY PETERSON K>VED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO HAVE GREEN CARPETING IN THE HALLWAYS ON THE HAIN FLOOR. THE K>TION CAR.RIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: BURNS, BRADSHAW, PETERSON AYS: BEIER ABSENT: FIXTER Mra. Jons st t d that two telephon polls we r don prior to thia me ting nd they ne d to be reconfirmed for the record. The first phone poll wa s on th color of th applianc s. Hrs. Jonas stated that th results of this poll w r thr e (3) Y s vot sand two (2) No votes in favor of the almond color. Dlacussion nau d r g rding the color of appliances. -2- • I • • ( • • - ~ CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION THAT THE COLOR OF THE APPLIANCES BE WHITE. THE RESULTS OF THE MOTION ARE AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BEIER, PETERSON BURNS, BRADSHAW FIXTER Ms. Bradshaw would like tha 8taff to poll Rev . Fixer regarding his preference on the color of the appliances . MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE HOUSING STAFF TO POLL REVEREND STAN FIXTER CONCERNING HIS PREFERENCE ON THE COLOR OF THE APPLIANCES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE FIFTH VOTE OF THE BOARD . THIS MOTION DIED. ~ BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO ACCEPT ALMOND APPLIANCES BASED UPON REVEREND STAN FIXTER'S PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED PREFERENCE FOR ALMOND APPLIANCES. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BRADSHAW, PETERSON BEIER FIXTER Mrs. Jonas stated that a motion needs to be passed regarding deletion of the wall and door between the office and closet in order to make more space. MOTION CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO DELETE THE DOOR AND THE WALL BETWEEN THE OFFICE AND THE STORAGE SPACE IN THE MANAGEMENT OFFI CE. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES : NAYS : ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Ms. Smith showed the color of the fabric for the furniture in the lobby and lounge. She s tated that ev n though th carpet color has been changed , she still feels that the color scheme would still remain the same, i.e., waI'lD tones of the rust and the green as an accent. Ms. Smith stated that the carpet color was changed on floo rs two through seven and there is a lounge on each floor where the carpet color has changed also; these lounges on each floor have go be furnished also. Ms. Smith stated that the fabric f o r the upholstered pieces of furniture are all nylon, scotch guarded and very durable fabrics in terms of wear. Ms. Smith st ted that some of the aame color fabric, which she displayed, will b us don th furnitur in the main lounge, lobby and loung son floors two through s v n. Discussion ensu d regarding the fabric of the furniture. -3- • i) I • • -• • - MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COLOR SCHEME FOR THE FURNITURE IN THE LOBBY ON THE MAIN FLOOR, THE MAIN LOUNGE ON THE MAIN FLOOR AND THE LOUNGES ON FLOORS TWO (2) THROUGH SEVEN (7) AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Karen Smith left the meeting. There was a short break for dinner. Fee Accountant Proposal Mr. Burns stated that Dennis Spencer of RAM Enterprises was present at the meeting. Mrs. Jonas stated that she has been talking to Fee Accountants for some time now, and the problem is that there are only two companies that handle Housing Authority fee accounting --one is out of York, Nebraska and the other is located in Aberdeen, South Dakota. Mrs. Jonas stated that Mr. Spencer's office is located in Evergreen, Colorado and he is working with the Aberdeen company which is called RAM Enterprises. Mrs. Jonas stated that the Community Development Department has been discussing the possibility of hiring a Fee Accountant to do the Housing Authority's books. Mrs. Jonas stated that the Assistant City Manager stated that he didn't see a problem with the Housing Authority hiring a Fee Accountant. She stated that there was a meeting earlier today with the Assistant Finance Director , John Lowry, the Assistant City Manager, Rich Wanush and staff members to discuss this matter. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Jonas stated that staff is trying to determine which way is best as the Housing Division has a difficult time giving HUD the information they need, such as reports to HUD, since the City accounting system is not designed to HUD's requirements. If a Fee Accountant is hired, the Housing Division will have to do more work and have more responsibilities. Mrs. Jonas stated that the Finance Department is putting together a list of what they see as issues, and then it will be discussed whether it is possible to resolve these issues by having an agreement with the City to handle such matters. Mrs. Jonas stated that RAM Enterprises has worked for 20 years with housing authorities and Mr . Spencer had work ed with HUD for 10 years as an Accounting Officer. Mr s. Jonas stated that this system from RAM Enterprises is exactly what she has been looking for pertaining to an accounting system for HUD housing programs. Mr. Spencer discuss d some of the work he would be doing as the Housing Authority's Fee Accountant. Mr. Sp ncer explained his past working experiences with HUD and RAM Enterprises . H discussed the tenant accounting system pertaining to the Section 8 Existing Program's monthly ren t payment s. Mrs. Jonas s tated that an initial set up cost would be pproximately $670 and a total price on the S ction 8 Exis ting Program, Simon Center, the new elderly mid-rise and the dupl xes would b approximately $450 per month. Mrs. Jonas asked Mr . Sp ncer to give his opinion on the City doing the Housing programs on their n w computer. Mr. Sp nc r stated that the City's computer is -4- • I • • ( ( • • • geared t oward doing f un d a ccounting s y stems and the Housing programs are not fund ac counting . Accounting for Housing programs consists of double entry accrual accoun ting . Mr . Sp e n c er stated that he has never seen an acc ounting system f or Housing programs that was on a City c omputer that really worked well. Discussion ensued . Discussion ens ue d r egarding t h e Public Housing accounting s ystem. Mr. Spe nce r l e f t the meeting . Mrs. Jona s s tated that the Board need s to approve pay ing Karen Smith, Inter ior Des i gner, f or half o f the fee for the work she has done to this point, and the final half will be paid when all the bid packages are put together and completed . Mrs . Jonas s tated that this fee for the furnishings p l an is in addition to the Inspecting Ar ch itec t's fee. Mr s . Jonas s tate d tha t this h alf f ee would be fo r the planning through the proposal stag e prio r to pu t ting toge t her the bid packages . Sh e s t a ted that this fee would come out of the $24 ,500 admin istrative mone y that was bu dg eted f o r furnishings. MOTION BEVE RLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOT I ON TO ACCEPT THE PROPO SAL THAT HA S BE EN MADE ON THE FURNISHINGS FOR THE NEW ELDERLY MID-RISE BY MAXWELL L. SAUL AND ASSOCIATES AND PAY ONE-HALF(~) OF THE FEE, $2 ,500, AT THI S TIME. THE MO TIO N CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYE S: NAYS : ABSENT: BURN S , BEI ER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FI XTER Update on Construc t ion a t New El de r l y Mid-Ri se Mrs. Jonas s t a t ed tha t con s truc tion i s go ing ve r y well on t he new building. She stat ed that it is the r es pon s ibility o f the own er , a ccor d ing t o the c ontrac t, t o c orrect i tems t h a t a r e no t being bu i l t a ccord ing to code such as the sidewalks and electr ical recepticles ; i t i s not t h e re spon sib l ity of t h e Housing Aut ho rity to correct these items. Discussion ensued . Mrs. Jonas s t ated that the annunciator panel for t he Fire Department is supposed to be ins talled on each floor. She stat ed t hat the panel on the first floor showed which floor the fi r e was on. In case of a fire, the fir e men vguld have to go to the appropriate floor to check the panel and see what unit the fir e was in. The Fire Department originally asked to have the annunciator panel on the first floor which would s how all the floors and units so they would know which unit the fir e was in. Mrs. Jonas stated that when the original plans went to the Building Departm nt and the Fire D partment, the plans w re only the a r chitectural drawings which showed wires going t o ach floor, but no details w re shown. Mrs . Jonas stated that at that tim th Fire Marshal sent N lson-Roth a letter stating that h wanted to s e th d tail d shop drawings on th a nnunciator panel before he made his decision. Afters eing the shop drawings, the Fire Marshal said it wasn't th way h want d it. Mr. Ch ndler told Mra. Jonas that the chang would cost pproximately $20,000. Mr s. Jonas s t ted that th Houaing Authority h s receiv d the estimat of th cos t of thi ch ng which ia $3,358.00. -s- • ) I • • I- • • • • Ms. Bradshaw asked if the Housing Authority could get a responsible for the problem with the annunciator panel. the EHA's attorney, Kirk Wickersham, should be asked to of the contract on who's responsible for this matter. legal opinion on who's The Board stated that give his interpretation Discussion ensued. Mrs. Jonas stated that on some of the items that there is no doubt about whether or not it is a code item, she has told Carl Fischer that the ERA is not going to pay for fixing the code items. Discussion ensued. There being nothing further to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M. • I • • • • • ( The Englewood Housing Authority Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 16, 1981 were officially approved by the Commissioners on March 24, 1982. • l'lll'iomasJ. Bur ~rmanl Englewood Housing Authority ,-:,~.:...IC::_:,.!.::..,:..L~.a..l<~~--,q~1~ ances Buck Jonas Executive Director ./ Englewood Housing Author! y • I • • ( • • • • MINUTES OF ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY ANNUAL/REGULAR MEETING February 17, 1982 The annual/regular meeting of the Englewood Housing Authority was called to order by Chairman Thomas J. Burns at 5:30 P.M. at the Simon Center, 3333 South Lincoln, Englewood, Colorado. Roll Call Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Thomas J. Burns, Chairman Betty Beier, Vice-Chairman Beverly Bradshaw Cindy Peterson Rev. Stan Fixter Frances Buck Jonas, Executive Director Susan Powers, Director of Co111111Unity Development Tom Chandler, Nelson-Roth of Colorado, Inc. Jack Buschmann, Nelson-Roth of Colorado, Inc. Ken Bieberly, Architectural Services Plus Rod Dornbusch, Project Manager, Brady Corporation Recording Secretary Reading and Approval of Minutes The minutes of the regular meeting of January 27, 1982 were considered for approval. The following changes were made: Page 4 First Motion: after 2ls%, insert "warranty reserve" K)T!ON BEVERLY BRADSHAW K)VED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE K)TION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 27, 198 2 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Public Housing Projects Cons truction Report -Mr. Dornbusch stated that the fire alarm system of Orchard Place was tested the first w ek in March. The third floor has been carpeted and cleaning is being done on the fourth floor. Mr. Dornbusch stated that three floo rs have been punched and completed and painting is proceeding with the warm wea ther. Mr. Fischer stated that all change orders have been finalized, Mr. Chandler has signed them and they will th n go to Mrs. Jonaa. Mra. Jonas stated that the tel phone poll which waa tak non February 16, 1982, needs to be reconfirmed. Thia tel phone poll co ncerned the addition of a deadbolt lock on the door to the roof in the amount of $110, and th painting of the inaide of the traah rooma for • ) I • • -• • - a total of $433. K>TION CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE }l)TION TO REAFFIRM THE TELEPHONE POLL VOTE OF FEBRUARY 16, 1982 CONCERNING PAINTING THE TRASH ROOMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $433 AND INSTALLING A DEADBOLT LOCK ON THE ROOF DOOR FOR $110. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW , PETERSON NONE FIXTER In response to Mr. Burns' question, Mr. Fischer stated that the tempered glass problem has been resolved. Mr. Fischer stated that Gary Pittman, Chief Building Inspector, agreed to accept a 2 X 8 oak rail right above the baseboard heating which would give an 18" high barrier. Closing on the Mid-Rise Mi-. Chandler stated that he would like to close on the building either March 16th or 17th as the building will be completed on March 15th. He stated that the closing process takes approximately two hours. Mr. Chandler stated that there will be some punchlist items discussed in this process, namely the landscaping which will be a holdback and the sprinkler irrigation system which will also be a holdback item. Mr. Chandler stated that depending on the weather there may be some sidewalks on the north side of the building that may be a holdback item. Mr. Chandler stated that he would like to be able to use the bids that Mr. Dornbusch has for the landscaping and sprinkler systelll8 and multiply that by I~, then agree on a price for the sidewalk and multiply by I~; this amount will be held out of the purchase price by the EHA. Mr. Chandler stated that as soon as these items are complete, individually or altogether, Nelson-Roth will ask the EHA to release the funds to them for completing the punchlist items. Mr. Chandler stated that he needs to have a resolution accepting the building passed by the EHA Board and forwarded to HUD as additional closing documents. Mr. Chandler stated that copies of the two change orders that he has signed this evening will b forwarded to HUD also. Mr. Chandler stated that as soon as the building is clos d out, th EHA will take possession of the building and will need a certificate of in urance on th building. H stated that at closing there will be one other holdout item for property taxes. Mr. Chandler stated that not knowing what the property tax will b for next year, the closing documents will tate what th t xes wer for 1st year. That figure will be multiplied by 1~ and prorated to th closin date for all of last year. ~ BEVERLY BRADSHAW K>VED AND ClNDY PETERSON SECONDED THE }l)TION TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF RESOLUTION #3, SERIES OF 1982 WHICH AUTHORIZES THE PURCHASE OF THE COMPLETED PROJECT FOR PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECT #C048-2 CONTINGENT UPON THE ACCEPTANC E OF THE PROJECT BY THE INSPECTING ARCHITECT AND HUD . THE RESOLUTION IS TO BE SI ED AND DATED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY OF THE EHA WHEN THE PROJECT IS ACCEPTED BY HUD AND THE INSPECTING ARCHITECT. THE !«>TION CARJUED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER -2- • ) I • • • • - Mr. Chandler stated that last month he asked the Board to pass a motion to cover the 2~% warranty bond. Jack Windsor at HUD stated that there would be no problem with the Board doing this. Mr. Chandler stated that there is now a problem with this and Nelson-Roth has to put up a letter of credit in the amount of 2~ of the total purchase price which will be done by the First of Denver Bank. Mr. Chandler stated that George Geiser at HUD told him that he will allow Nelson-Roth to assign their rights in the bond they have with Brady Corporation in the amount of 7~ for the lien period bond. Mr. Chandler stated that this would save purchasing an additional bond and that Nelson-Roth can assign their rights if the bonding company will allow them to do so. Mr. Chandler stated that he has not been able to reach the bonding company, but he believes they will allow Nelson-Roth to assign their rights . Mr. Chandler stated that Brady Corporation has provided Nelson-Roth with a bond to build this project; and in order to cover the 7~% lien waiver period, which is for six months if a lien is not filed, Nelson-Roth can assign their rights on this bond in the amount of 7~% of the total purchase price to the ERA which would give the ERA protection through the same bond. Discussion ensued. Mr. Chandler stated that Nelson-Roth is asking that the ERA approve Nelson-Roth's assignment of their bond in an amount equal to 7~% of the total turnkey contract price to the ERA during the lien waiver period, which is six months. This is if HUD has approved this subject to the bond being assignable. M>TION BETTY BEIER MOVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO ACCEPT ASSIGNMENT TO THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE BOND FROM INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, WHICH BONDS BRADY CORPORATION TO NELSON-ROTH OF COLORADO, INC., BASED UPON APPROVAL OF HUD AND THE BONDING COMPANY. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Mr. Dornbusch left th meeting. Family Duplexes Hr. Chandler stated that the plans for the family duplexes were deliver d to th City of Engl wood Building Inspector today, and two sets of plans and specif ications wer deliv red to Mrs. Jonas. Mr. Chandler stated that thr se ts will be delivered to HUD tomorrow. He stat d that Nelson-Roth incorpor t d the desired changes into the plans and specs so there would be no add nd • Hr. Chandler stated that as soon as the Building Inspector approves the plan and pees he will take the approval letter to the First of D nver Bank who will then forvard it to Colorado Housing Finance Authority (CHFA) along with the lett r from Carl Fischer and the EHA stating that the plane and apecificationa a r cc ptable. Mr. Chandl r stated that at the Negotiation Conference on Wednesday, F bruary 10, 1982 , N laon-Roth a red on a price of $521 ,400 for the duplex•• subject to th pproval of th plane and 1pecification1 by the City of Englewood'• Buildin D partment and by the approval of HUD and the EBA. Mr. Chandl r stat d that a, aoon aa th Turnk y Contract haa been •ian d, the EHA will purchaa the two lota that Nelson-Roth haa with th DRCOG arant, withhold what -3- • I • • • • - Nelson-Roth owes the EHA for the carrying fee (approximately $790 per month) and any taxes that might be due and normal closing costs. After this the EHA will be owners of all five (5) sites . The EHA will then deed to Nelson-Roth of Colorado, Inc. all five (5) sites for a nominal fee, and in this deed will be the restriction that the sites must be used for Public Housing Project Number CO 48-3. This restriction in the deed covers the EHA as far as Nelson-Roth being allowed to do anything else with the sites, as well as the Turnkey Contract being a specific performance contract giving the EHA the necessary protection for donating the sites to the project. Mr. Burns recommended that the EHA's attorney, Kirk Wickersham, review the transfer of the sites. Mrs. Jonas stated that the Board has to approve purchase of the sites for the family duplexes; however, she doesn't have all the figures yet as far as who will pay for certain items. MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO PURCHASE THE TWO SITES ADDRESSED IN THE LETTER FROM TOM CHANDLER OF NELSON-ROTH OF COLORADO, INC. DATED FEBRUARY 4, 1982 FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE LESS THE ADJUSTMENTS IN CLOSING. THE FIRST SITE IS KNOWN AS 3028-3030 SOUTH FOX STREET AND THE SECOND SITE IS KNOWN AS 2186-2811 WEST WARREN. THE MYrION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER The Board directed staff to draw up the appropriate resolutions for the following: 1) resolution authorizing the Chairman and the Secretary to transfer title to the lots for a nominal cost to Nelson-Roth of Colorado, Inc. for purposes of development under the Turnkey Project; and 2) to authorize the execution of the Turnkey Contract for the family duplexes. MOTION BETTY BEIER K>VED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED TIIE MOTION TO TRANSFER THE LOTS FOR THE FAMILY DUPLEXES TO NELSON-ROTII OF COLORADO, INC. FOR A NOMINAL FEE FOR PURPOSES OF DEVELOPMENT AFTER THE ENGLEWOOD ROUSING AUTHORITY ACQUIRES TITLE. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER K.>TION CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BE'ITY BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN AND THE SECRETARY TO EXECUTE THE TURNKEY CONTRACT FOR THE FAMILY DUPLEXES IC048-3 WHEN IT IS PREPARED FOR SI ATUR!S. THE K.>TION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: AYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSO NONE FIXTER Mr . Chandler stet d that it will take approximately six months for completion o[ th construction of th duplex unite once they are started. Mr. Chandler, Mr. Bieb rly and Mr. Buechmaon left th meeting at 6:20 P.K. -'•- • I • • n ( There was a short break for dinner. Mr. Fischer left the meeting. Development Program -Family Units • • • Mrs. Jonas discussed the development program budget for the family duplexes. She stated that the total price of the units will be $553.645 which includes $2,315 of the DRCOG money for site improvements. Discussion ensued regarding the development cost budget/cost statement for the duplex units. Mrs. Jonas stated that the development program portion of the budget shows the prototype cost. Discussion ensued regarding the development program. MJTION CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MJTION TO ACCEPT RESOLUTION #IO, SERIES OF 1982 WHICH AUTHORIZES AND DIRECTS SUBMISSION OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND DEVELOPMENT COST BUDGET FOR TURNKEY PUBLIC HOUSING P!lOGRAM, PROJECT NUMBER C099-P048-003. THE KYrION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER. BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Assignment of DRCOG Grant Funds Mrs. Jonas stated that at the last City Council meeting. City Council passed an ordinance granting the DRCOG funds to the ERA authorizing the EHA to administer the program according to the requirements of the federal, state and municipal law. Once this is finalized the EHA will be authorized to spend this money for the sites. Mrs. Jonas stated that the EBA will be reimbursing itself for the three (3) sites already purchased plus using the other for purchasing the two (2) remaining sites from Nelson-Roth. Discussion ensued. Preparation for Management -Elderly Housing Mrs. Jonas stated that the Board adopted the income limits at last month's Board meeting but it wasn't done with a resolution. ~ION CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #4, SERIES OF 1982 WHICH IS A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MAXIMUM INCOME LIMITS FOR THE PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECT. THE MJTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW. PETERSON NONE FIXTER Tenant Lease Agreement Discussion ensued regarding the tenant lease aareement. Mrs. Beier stated that she would like it to be included that tenants cannot mov their own refriaerators and stoves into the units. Discussion ensued raaarding this aatter. It waa d cid d to include in thia leeae aareement that no appliance, are to be r moved from the unita; h ver, the tenant .. y add any appliance of their own. -s- • I • • n • • - Discussion e nsu ed regar ding shades, awnings and window guards being installed by the t enants. The lease states that Management has to approve the installation of t hese by the tenants, and Mrs. Jonas stated that this will not be approved by Management . Mrs. J onas stated that shades in the lease refers to those being installed on balconies. Ms. Bradshaw suggested specifying these shades as "exterior" shades. ~ BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION (15 , SERIES OF 1982 APPROVING THE TENANT LEASE POR THE PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECTS. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYE S : NAYS : ABSENT: BURNS , BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Mr s. Jonas stated that the rules are Orchard Place house rules, not duplex house rul es. The lease is a public housing lease. There will be other rules for the du plex units. Resoluti on #5, Series o f 198 2 , which is a resolution setting forth policies for the c oll e c tion of rents , security deposits and other charges from the Authority's public hous ing residents , was diacussed. On page 2 o f this policy , it was decided to c hange "bad" check to "returned" check. ~ CINDY PETERSON H>VED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE K>TION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #6, SER IE S OF 1982 SETTING FORTH POLICIES POR THE COLLECTION OF RENTS, SECURITY DEPOSITS AND OTHER CHARGES FROM THE AUTHORITY'S PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS. THE MOTION CARR I ED AS FOLLOWS : AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Resolution #7, Series of 1982 establishing a Personnel Policy was discusaed. Mrs. Jonas stated that attached to this Personnel Policy were job descriptions of Housing Authority employees. Mrs. Jonaa stated that the Personnel Policy is for all Housing Authority employees, and that the main office staff are City employees and are under the City's Personnel Policies. Mrs. Jonaa stated that some of the salaries of the employees are reimbursed to the City out of the various Housing progrlllllB. Discussion ensued regarding some of these job descriptions. Hrs. Jonas ststed that on page one of the Personnel Policy , l.b., the following change should be made: in the sentence , "The Executive Director ahall be hired by the Board of Co111aissioners, change "hired" to "appointed". Diacuasion enaued regarding the Personnel Policy. ~ BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PET!JlSON SECONDED TH! K>TION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #7, SERIES OF 1982 ESTABLISHING A PERSONNEL POLICY FOil ENGLEWOOD ROUSING AUTHOllITY EMPLOYEES. THE K>TION CARRIED AS roums: -6- • I • • AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER • • - Resolution #7, Series of 1982 approving a Grievance Procedure for Public Housing was discussed. Discussion ensued regarding this grievance procedure. Mrs. Jonas stated that this grievance procedure is to be passed for public housing projects. Mrs. Jonas feels this grievance procedure should pertain to both buildings, not just Orchard Place and the Board agreed. M)TION CINDY PETERSON MJVED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 8, SERIES OF 1982 APPROVING THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE. THE MJTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Schedule of Repair and Replacement Charges Mrs. Jonas discussed this schedule of repair and replacement charges which is a typical, but not all inclusive list of items that should they need repair or replacement due to damage or loss by the resident, resident's family or guests, ) will be charged to the tenant in accordance with the Residential Lease. Mrs. Jonas stated that any repairs or replacements done that the family is responsible fo r will be done on a material plus labor cost basis. Discussion ensued. MJTION CINDY PETERSON MJVED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE M)TION TO ADOPT THE SCHEDULE OF REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT CHARGES WITH THE CHANGE THAT IT SHOULD BE INCLUDED THAT THIS LIST IS NOT ALL INCLUSIVE. THE M)TION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BRADSHAW, BEIER, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Staffing fo r Orchard Place Mrs. Jonas discussed the propos d staffing for Orchard Place and th share of their sala ry that will be paid from the Orchard Place budget. Mrs. Jonas stat d that the Management Aide will be staffing the office during the daytime and Pat Arnett, Housing Manager, will be overseeing management of all units during the daytime. The Resident Managers will be on duty five (5) nights a w k and thre (3) w ekends a month. The Assistant Managers will b on duty two (2) night w k and one (1) weekend a month. The Reaid nt Managers will r c ive th ir ap rtment free and receive $250/month aalary. The A1ai1tant Hana ra will r ceive their apartment free. Kra. Jona& stated that the Houaing Authority want• to hire a Maintenance Superviaor b ore th building is finished. She atated that the Housing ataff will be int rvi wing applicant • for a Haint nance Superviaor on Friday. Mra. Jonaa a tat d that the Houain ataff ia auggeating three maint nance po1ition1 -- -7- • I • • • • • Maintenance Supervisor, Maintenance Worker, (this position is currently filled) and ano ther Maintenance Worker position. These people will be working on the duplexes , Simon Center, Orchard Place and do inspections for the Section 8 Existing Program. Mrs. Jonas stated that there is a lady who is interested in the second Management Aide position and is willing to come to work tomorrow if the Board approves. Mrs. Jonas discussed the budget for these positions. The Management Aide who will be staffing the Orchard Place office will be hired temporarily and will be paid out of Section 8 Existing funds until the Orchard Place budget opens up and there is money coming in. Hrs. Jonas stated that she would like the Board to authorize her to hire the Maintenance Supervisor and an Orchard Place Mana gement Aide based on the budget for such. MOTION BETTY BEIER MOVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE FRANCES BUCK JONAS TO HIRE THE MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR AND AN ORCHARD PLACE MANAGEMENT AiDE BASED ON THE BUDGET SHE BAS PREPARED FOR SUCH. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON OONE ABSENT: FIXTER Rehab -Status Report Discussion ensued regarding the rehab report. Lump Sum Drawdown Agreement Mrs. Jonas stated that the City has approved the Lump Sum Drawdown Agreement and certifications but Clete Gasson f rom First Interstate Bank has not signed off on it as yet. Section 8 Existing Report Discussion nsued regarding the S ction 8 Existing Report. Simon C ntar Status R port Discuasion enaued regarding th Simon Center atatua report, 1982 Budget for Simon C nt r R solution 19, Seriea of 1982 approving the Sill0n Center Op rating Budget for Fiscal Y ar nding Dec lllber 31, 1982 wa s introduced and the Simon Cent r operatin budg t waa diacusaed, Mra. Jonaa atated that she ia requeating a budget of $355,344 'Which would leave a $34,718 reserve. Mra. Jonaa atated that th at th Siaon C nter due to alao ch ckin into r nting of ic will b aound proof th n ar future. phons coapany ia goin to inatall a multi-line ayatam th incraaaa in pareonn 1 and workload. The EHA ia a copy china for Sill0n C nter us. Th Sillon C nter d by installing carpeting and aound proofing til in -8- I • • • • • ~ BETTY BEIER MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #9 , SERIE S OF 198 2 APPROVING THE SIMON CENTER OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDI NG DECEMBER 3 1 , 198 2 . THE K>TION CARR I ED AS FOLLOWS: AYES : NAYS : ABS ENT : BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Pe r sonnel Matter s ~ CINDY PETERSON MJVED AND BEVERLY BRAD SHAW SECONDED THE MOTION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS AT THE Slll>N CENTER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE MJTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYE S : NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER ~ BETTY BEIER KJVED AND BEVERLY BRADSHAW SECONDED THE MJTION TO LEAVE EXECUTIVE SES SION. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES : NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Sta tus of Proposed Projects Mrs. J onas stated that s h e has tal ked t o Peg St oke s of Mountain United Churc h Housing (MUCH) and because of the adminis tration's bu dge t cuta , CRFA ha s no t received any fund a llocations this year; therefo re the proj e ct 's 30 -un ic fam ily Section 8 project has be en c ancelled. Mrs. Stokes has given up her option on the land. Mrs. Jonas stated that th bonds from CHFA are not sellin and changea are the Mod R hab money is being recalled also. Ma. Powera stated that the aubaidiz d portion of the Swedish project haa been halted due to the decision on industrial revenue bonds. Mra. Jonas stated that they will look at conventional financing which means they won't be able to hav the subsidized portion. Diacuaaion ensued. Commissioners' Choice Mrs. Beier stated that ahe felt Nelson-Roth should pay the $790/mon t h inter at on the loan the EHA received from the Cit y to pur chase the duplex ai tea for e very month the EHA had to pay it. Thia money came from t he reserve account of Simon Ce nter when the EHA paid it back to the City. Thia would amount to approximately $3,500. Th Board felt that the EHA should be reimbursed thia interest amount. Annual M ting -Election of Officers Mra. Beier nominat d Thomas J. Burns aa Chairman of th Englewood Housing Authority, -9- • I • • • • - MOTION BETTY BEIER MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO REAPPOINT THOMAS J. BURNS AS CHAIRMAN OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Ms. Bradshaw nominated Betty Beier as Vice-Chairman for the EHA. MOTION BEVERLY BRADSHAW MOVED AND CINDY PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO REAPPOINT BETTY BEIER AS VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE ENGLE\«)()D HOUSING AUTHORITY. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Reappointment of Executive Director Mrs. Peterson commended Mrs. Jonas for doing an excellent job as the Executive Director of the EHA. Ms. Bradshaw thanked Mrs. Jonas for clearing up several issues concerning the Housing Authority's roles, and that she appreciates her expertise in the field of Housing. ~ CINDY PETERSON MOVED AND BETTY BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION TO REAPPOINT FRANCES BUCK JONAS AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY. THE MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: BURNS, BEIER, BRADSHAW, PETERSON NONE FIXTER Discussion ensued regarding the meeting dates for 1982 for the EHA Board . The regular meeting dates are the last Wednesday of each month. It was decided to have the Novemb rand December meetings combined and held on December 8th. Mrs. Jonas will send a memo to the Board members regarding the dates of the monthly meetings. Discussion ensued regarding honorary c itizen status for Reverend Stan Fixter and th letter from the EHA's attorney, Kirk W!ckersham, regarding Reverend Fixter's requ st to b made an honorary citizen so he and his wife c an remain on the Engl wood resid nt waiting list for the senior citizen buildings. Reverend Filtter will b moving from Englewood this su11111er and wishes to remain on the waiting list s an honorary citizen of Englewood. Discussion ensued. Th r bing no furth r matters to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. -10- I • • - ... • • • The Englewood Housing Authority Minutes of the Annual/Regular Meeting of February 17, 1982 were officially approved by the Commissioners on March 24, 1982. ,)h{c(mas J. Bu~airma?' Englewood Housing Authority .ranees Buck Jonas Executive Director Englewood Housing Authority 0 I • • • • • BOAR D OF ADJ USTM ENT AND APPE ALS CITY OF ENG LEWOOD , COLORAD O FEBRUARY 10 , 1982 MINUTE S 5 The r e gular meeting of the Board of Adjustme nt and Appeals was cal l ed to o rder at 7:30 p.m . by Chairman Ch ester Ha l lagin . ME MBE RS PRE SENT : Kr eil i ng, Seymo ur, Ga ge , Br own , Daw son , Leonard , Hallagin MEMBE RS AB SENT: None ALSO PRESENT : Romans , Assistant Dire c t o r -Planning Yenglin, Planner I Conley , Re c ording Secretary * * * * * * Chairman Hallagin no ted that Howard Bro wn had be en reappo inted to the Bo ard o f Ad justment and Appeal s fo r another four (4 ) year term . * * * * * • BOARD MEMB ER SE YM OUR MOVED TO AP PROVE THE MINU TES OF THE DECE MBER 9 , 19 8 1 AND J AN UAR Y 13 , 1982 RE GULAR MEETINGS OF THE BOA RD OF ADJUSTMEN T AND APP EALS . Board Member Gage seconded the motion . Upo n a c all of the roll , a l l members voted in the affirmative. The mi nutes stand APPROVED as written. * * • * • • Chairman Hallagin noted the Board would need to consider the addendum to Case No . 1-82 , in or der to c larify an error made on the Permanent Par ce l Identification (PPI) maps , resulting in a reduction in the total square footage of the parcel . Do r o thy Romans , Assistant Dire c tor o f Community Dev elopmen , exp l ained t he e r r or to the Board. Mrs . Romans noted the PPI map in c luded the 60 foot right-of-way t wice whi c h erroneously dded an addi i o nal 30 fe t to the subject property. • I • • - • • • • -2 - Mrs. Romans indicated Assistan Ci y Attorney Thomas Holland did not see a problem with the variance , as the correct fi ures were presented by he applican ; but uggested that the Board am nd he record to show the correct figures . BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MO ED TO RECONSIDER CASE 0. 1-82 , JOSEPH STENGEL , 1735 -41 WEST HARVARD AVENUE , TO CHANGE THE S UARE FOOTAGE FIGURE FROM 49 ,650 SQUARE FEET TO 45 ,159 S UARE FEET OR 1 .036708 ACRE . Board Member Bro wn seconded the motion . All members cast their votes . The vote resulted as follows : AYES : Kreiling , Seymour , Gage , Brown , Dawson , Leonar , Hallagin NAY None hairman Hallagin stated that with seven (7) affirmative votes the mo ion was CARRIED. * * * * * * BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT IN CASE NO. 1-82, JOSEPH ST NGEL , 1735 -41 WEST HARVARD AVENUE . Board Mem er age seconded the motion . Upon a all of he oll , 11 m mbers vo din he affirma ive. Th Fin lngs of Facts nd APPROVED as wri en . * • • • * * Dl "c sslo n Pns e with the Bo r nd Mrs . Romans re arding the problems ha hav o c curr Jwhen applicants s mlt information a he Public Hea rin which rs l in con id r t1on or ma ters o f he v ariance h inclu e in he le al no ice of the hearing . • h e Boar agreed o table he mat er un 11 he nex regular meeting o n , rch 10 , 1982. * • • • * • BOARD MEMBER KREILIN MOVED TO NOMINATE ROGcR GAGE FOR CHAIRMA OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS . Bo r M mber Lon rd second d h mo ion. hr w r no fur hr om1n ion for h irman . • I • - • • • • -3- Upon a ca ll of the roll, all members voted in the affirmative. The motion was CARRIED. • • * • * * BOARD MEMBER GAGE MOVED TO NOMINATE DON SEYMOUR FOR VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS. Board Member Leonard seconded the motion. The re were no further nominations for Vice-Chairman. Upon a call of the roll, all members voted in the affirmative. The motion was CARRIED. * • * * * * There being no further business before the Board, Chairman Hallagin adjourned the February 10, 1982 regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals at 8:00 p.m. * * * * * * • ) I . • • • • MINUTES BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING s f; DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1982 Present: Vesta H. Miller, Chairwoman Fred C. Fisher, Vice-Chairman Carl Winkler, Secretary-Treasurer Robert A. Briggs, Jr. Thomas R. Eggert Harold V. Cook T. J. Hackwcrth Walter J. Tomsic Frank Weddig Linda Jourgensen William Thornton Doris Durdy Norman Smith Dennis Mahagan Beth Jenkins David Bu sby Betty Anders on Joe Bilo Ernest Sh elton Gecrge Garson Mark Ed wards Alex Ariniello Arvin Michel Samuel Harper Norbert Meier Tena Bocciarelli Peggy Shepard Rod Sheffer Ken Lewis City of Arvada Greenwood Village Douglas County Adams County Arapahoe County City & County of Denver C ity & C ounty of Denv er Jefferson County City of Aurora City of Boulder Town of Bow Mar City of Brighton City of Broomfield Town of C astle Rock Cherry Hills Vlllage C ommerc e C ity C ity of Edgewa ter C ity of Eng lewood F e d eral Hei ghts C ity of Glendale C ity of Golden City of Lafayette City of Lakewood City of Littleton City of Louisvllle City of Sheridan City of Thornton City of Westminster City of Wheat Ridge Also Present: Robert D. Farley, DRCOG Executive Director; Bill Stringfellow, Colorado Department of Highways; Robert T. Knoc k erbocker; Robert McGregcr, Federal Heights; David A. Pampu, D~OG Deputy Executive Directer; Linda Merton, City of Lakewood; Carroll Crookham, City of Sheridan; Tom Spinks, D nver Chamber of Commerce; Steve Ormiston, Town of High lands Ranch; Charles C. Gorn z, Environmental Protection Agency; Mary Jane Gomez; John Rupp, Director of Planning, City of Louisville; J. M . Lents, Colorado Department of Highways; Bob Bauer; continu d- • I • • • BOARD MINUTES February 17, 1982 Page two • • • Karen Anderson, Calkins, Kramer, Grimshaw & Harring; Gayle Quick, Regional Transportation District; Thomas Benson, DRCOG Attcrney; Shirley Heck, Executive Secretary for the Board and various members of the DRCOG staff. Chairwoman Miller called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., roll was t.aken and a quorum declared present. Chairwoman Miller welcomed Walt Tomsic and Mark Edwards, recently appointed Board representatives from Jefferson County and the City of Golden. Carroll Crookham, Linda Morton and Bob McGregor, Alternates from Sheridan, Lakewood and Federal Heights were also welcomed. Public Hearing on EmploymentlPopulaUon Projections Chairwoman Miller convened the Public Hearing noting that there were no requests to speak before the Board. Therefore, Chairwoman Mlller requested that staff proceed with the presentation regarding the assessment of the employment and pop- ulation forecast. Mr. Johnst on, DRCOG staff, explained that six sets of employ- ment/population projections have been prepared using final 1980 Census counts of regional population by age and sex. The reassessment of current DRCOG employ- ment and population long-term forecasts was completed with development of s ix sets of integrated year 2000 employment/population projections. Mr. Gebhart, DRCOG st.a ff, gave a slide presentation and explained the ba ate assumptions and distinguishing charac teristics that drive the numbers presented in the six alternative, integrated set s of population and employment projection scenarios, and responded to questions from the Board. Chairwoman Mlller noted receipt of a letter from the Colorado Department of Health which will be included with the information for consideration at the Marc h Board meeting. In response to a question from Mr. Eggert, it was noted that Board policy calls for an annual assessment of growth and development and one of the factors that is considered ts the current, adopted forecast for employment and population, its staging and allocation. Action to amend the Regional Growth and Development Plan Employment and Population Forecasts will be considered at the Board meeting March 17, 1982, Minutes of Ioou rv 20. 1982 The Board, upon motion by Mr. Winkler, supported by Mrs. J enklns, unanimously approved the Minutes of the Janu ry 20, 1982 Board meeting as ubmitted, I • - BOARD MINUTES February 17, 1982 Page three Election of Board Officers for 1982 • • • Mr. Fisher, Chairman of the Nominating Committee, noted that the recommendation of the Nominating Committee fer 1982 Board Officers was submitted to the Board at its January meeting. He further noted that officers of the Board also become members of the Executive Committee. In cases where one of the officers would otherwise qualify for membership, in acccrdance with the Articles of Association, the Board then selects a municipal representative to serve on the Executive Committee. Mr. Fisher, suppcrted by Ms. Jourgensen, nominated the following as officers of the Board: Thomas Eggert, Chairman, Ted Hackwocth, Vice- Chalrman, Doris Durdy, Secretary-Treasurer and placed the name of William Thornton in nomination for appointment by the Board to serve on the Executive Committee. Mr. Briggs, suppocted by Mr. Michel, placed the name of Ken Lewis in nomination for appointment by the Board to serve on the Executive Committee. Chairwoman Miller requested that two ballots be voted on, one for the Board Officers and that a secret ballot be cast for the Board appointment to serve on the Exec utive Committee. The Board, upon motion by Mr. Tomsic, suppocted by Mr. Winkler, cast a unanimous ballot for 1982 Board Officers as fol101N s: Thomas R. Eggert, Chairman, Ted Hackwocth, Vice -Chairman, a nd Deris Durdy, Secretary-Treasurer. Cha irwoman Mlller requested that the ballots for a Board appointment to the Executive Committee be counted by members of the Nominating Committee, with the exception of Mr. Thornton. Mr. Fisher reported that Ken Lewis, in accerdance with the ballots cast, would be the Board appointment to serve on the Executive Committee for 1982. Chairwoman Mlller expressed her appreciation and thanks for the suppcrt she received s DICOG Chairwoman fer the past two years and congratulat d the new officers. Chairman Eggert assumed the chair for the remainder of the meeting. • I • BOARD MINUTES February 17 , 1982 Page four • • • C hairman Eggert e x pr es s ed tha n k s t o those who took part in the election and for giving him a personal vote of conf i dence. He furth er noted hi s de s ir e for th e Board to carry out the idea of greater l ocal government i nv olve ment in t h e COG operation and carry that forward into the public realm t o a gre ater d egree. In a ddition, he expressed a desire to chang e the image of COG 's with the l egislature and a need to take more of a part in getting the l e gislature t o und erstand that we are 42 loca 1 governments working t ogether fo r th e benefit of a 11. Chairman Eggert tha nked Bill Thornton for his service o n t h e Executive Committee and noted that he is looking forward to working with Te d Ha c kworth and Doris Durdy, the newly elected Vi ce-C hairman and Sec retary-Tre asurer of the Board. Res olution Nominating William T, Thcrnt on to the NAR B rd The Board, upon motion b y Mr. Briggs, supported by Mr. omsic, unanimously adopted Resolution No . 2, 1982, A Resolution Nom- inating Mr, William T, Thornton, Denv e r Reg ional Council of Governments I t o the Board of Directors of the National Assoc! tion of Regional Counc ils Representing Region VIII 1 (A signed copy of Resolution No. 2 i s attached t o a nd made a part of the file copy of these minute s.) Approval of the 198 2 Re v ision t o th e St a t e Implementation Plan (SIP) Mr . Fisher repcrted that t h e Progr am Comm ittee considered r commendations m de by the C lean Air Task Force, Transportation Advisory Committee, Tran portation C ommittee and th e C h ief Adm ini stra tive Officers Adviscry Committee nd recom - mended c hanges t o t he SIP which have been i ncluded in the resolution. The Program Committee rec o mmended adoption of the resolution by the Board. Mr. Mahagan distri bu t ed a let ter from the Town of Castle Roe expr bing th o itlon of the Mayor and Board of Trust ees of the T n with r g rd to the SIP. Lengthy discussion followed concerning the six items noted in the letter which w r : 1) support for improving the Denver Metro area's air quality within re sona 1 amount o time; 2) question whether the Town of Ca stl Rock and southern Douglas County s ould be included in the non-attainment area specially cons id ring the lac of lt rnativ transit means; 3) question the advis bility of enacting mildly disruptive control m sur s when attainme nt of federal standards will still not be met; 4) non-support for gas tax sur- c harge when, with admittedly negative socio-economic impact, it only results in a 28 day earlier attainment of compliance; S) question th advisability of enacting further socially and economically disruptive control measures merely to bring the reg i on into compliance wit h federal standards three years earlier th n if nothing furth r was done; and 6) support for a DRCOG initiated policy statement to Congres seeking r vision of the Clean Air Act to permit a region a re sonable tim p ricxi to ttain compli nee if mcxieling indicates that measures already in place will r ult i n compli nc b yond th deadline. • I • • • BOARD MIN UT ES February 17 , 1982 Page five • • • Mr. Mugler, DRCOG staff , r eviewed the wcrk of th e C l ean Air Task Force noting the measures considered and their affect and socio-e conomic im pacts. In addition, he explained the comparison of cost effec tivenes s o f the various measures considered for inc lusion in the SIP. Lengthy discussion followed c onc erning the I & M program, enforcement of the current Clean Air Act, the ramifications if s a nc tions were im posed , as well as the ma ny considera tions and fa c tor s that w e r e considered in preparing the SIP. Mr. Mugler and Mr. Farley responded to questions and concer ns of the Board. Mr . Busby moved, su p ported by Mr. Michel, t hat concerns mentioned be forwarded with the Resolution to e m phasize t ha t w e have diff erent possib l e alternatives to meet standards by 1987. This motion wa s later withdrawn , Mr. Farley explained that wha t need s t o b e d one is t o c ontinue the appeal t the c ongressional delegation and other mem bers of Con ress to change the stand ards and deadlines to provide r elief t o the De nv er metropolitan area . It wa r equest ed that the Chairman and Executive Direc tor c ontinue w ith th is ap peal and pr epare appropriate corres pondenc e for s u bm i ttal as soo n as possible. The Board, upon motion by Mr. Fisher, suppcrted by Mrs . Durd y , a d opt ed Resol u tion No. 3, 1982,.A.. Resolutio n Approving the 19 82 Denver R giona l El ement of the Sta t e Air Quality I mp l em entation Plan and Com - mitment to use Bes t Efforts to Imp l ement Reasonably Ava ilabl e Contr ol Measures f oc t h e Attainment of the Natio na l Amb ient Air Qua li tv St andards in the Denver Region by t he Prescribed National Deadlines. Dissenting votes were cast by Dennis Mahagan, Carl Winkler, Ernest Shelton , and Arvin Michel. (A signed c opy of Resolution No, 3 is attached to and made a part of the file copy of these minutes.) Announcement of Plan Amendments Received Mr. Farle y reported that one proposed p lan amendm nt Wd s re c eived duri ng January f or cons i dera tion ov r th next six months with a c tion by th Board in June. The Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal Distric t No. l h s n. quested t hat th Board am nd the Cle n Wat r Pl n to reflec t the final Low e South Platt e Fac111ty Plan. Thi would reflect that th entire City of Thocnton Waste Water Service Area would b tributary to the M tro Central 'fre tm nt Pl nt. • I • • - • • BOARD MIN UT ES February 17, 1982 Pa ge six Report of Executive Director • • • Mr. Farley reported that the National Association of Regional Cou ncils Annual Conference is scheduled for May 16-19, 1982 in Louisville, Kentucky. DRCOG held a successful Economic Forecast Meeting. Mr, Thornton made the lead presentation along with the consultant. The consultant report on energy impacts on the metropolitan area will be available the end of February. The DRCOG Annual Dinner Meeting has been scheduled for March 31, 1982 at the Regency, The keynote speaker will be Dick Fleming, President of the Denver Partnership, The Calendar of Policy Issues was noted. Other Matters by Members The Articles of Association as amended December 16, 1981 were distri butea. Mr. Farley thanked Vesta Miller, Fred Fisher and Carl Winkler on behalf of the COG staff for their service, time, patience and tolerance and noted that we look forward to continuing to work with them, Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Board, Cha irman Eggert dee lared the me eu ng adjourned at 9: 15 p. m , Thomas R, Eggert, Chairman Denver Regional Council of Governments ATTEST: Robert D, Fa rley, Executive Director • I • • In - • PRESENT: ABSENT : OIHERS PRESENT : • • • BOARD OF CAREER SERVICE COMM I S S IONE RS FEBRUARY 18, 1982 MINUTES JoEllen Turner, Catherine Pokraka , Ro bert Brundage Ibnald M. Weber Janet Kerzic Benjamin Craig , Career Service Board At torne y Richard Wanush, Assistant City Manage r Tan Holland, Assistant City Attorney Mark Barber , E.E.A. President Ibn Stanton , E.P.B.A. President Randy Pickrel , F. F. A. President John Wing, Police Officer Richard Welbourne, Police Office r • • • • • • Olainran Weber called the rreet ing to order. Carrnissi one r Brundage rroved, seconded by Carrnissioner Turne r t o appro ve th January 21, 1982 minutes. AYES : Turner , Pokraka, Brundage , We ber NAYS : None . • • • • • • thr o n t h Age nda was t h Elrp loyces As soci.ations Choice. Mark Bar r , E.E.A. Pres1d nt, n Stanton, E.P.B.A . Pr sid nt, and R.'Uld y Plckr<'l, F .F.A . Pr ,;1 'Dt v. r pr nt and had no bus in s to p s nt • • • • • • Llia i 1 m W r stat xi that th Boa.rd was i n rec ipt o f a grievanc ftl ,cl b~ Puhcl' Oft icers John Win and Richard W 1 urn . Police Officer Wini• rl'ad rnto th record his gri van wh i h alleged violati ns of Art1. l IV , VI, and VIII of t h 19 2-1983 Po lice Con t r t concern i ng ov rt ilre . Q mis ton r Turne r read into the 1 2-1 3 :fulice Contract. rd Articles I V, VI, and VIII of h 5 I • • n - • • • • • Another itan for considera ion was presented by Q:mnjssioner Turn r concerning th Board's response to the Assistant City Attorney 's letter to the ard's Attorney, Benjamin Craig requesting a rooeting with the O:mni ssiooer s to discuss th Sergeants Case. Mr. Holland discussed with the Board the sequence of ev nts taking plac sine the Sergeants Unit Detennination He aring and c larified th purpose of the requested rooeting. Chai:nnan Weber restated the terns under which the Board had agreed to rooet with the City for discussion of the Sergeants case and directed that each of t he attorneys, Mr. Holland , Assistant City Attorney , Benjamin Craig , Car r Servic Board Attorney, and J ohn Criswell, Police Benefit Associatioo Attorney be given a letter stating those conditions . Chaimen Weber asked Ir . 1-blland to set up the paper \\Ork concerning this rooeting and the Board \IOuld attend. Ccmnissioner Pokral<a discussed the letter of response f ran Police Quef Holmes concerning the hiring prcx:ess of Police Officer And erson. She stated that as the City is an Affirnlative Action/Equal ~portunity Enployer the educational levels s hould be consistent when considering all applicants. Mr. Wanush agreed and stated that this was an aani.nistrative function of the City and a judganent the Cllief has to rmke in ternE of applicants qualifications, maintaining the sa,re basic standards by balancing out the aroounts of experienc v.s. certain arooun ts of education. O:mnissioner Brundage asked what furt her ordinances were to cane before the Board and an approximate time table to expect than. Richard Wanush stated that he felt the Aaninistrative Procedures \\Ou l d be in the rrore formal approval process in mid-surmer. • • • • • • • • Th re being no furth r business before the Board, Chai:nnan Weber adjourned the F bruary 18, 1 2 regular ting of th Car r Service Board at 8 :05 p.m. Val ri Chr isty, • I • • I n • • • • • O::mnissioner Pokra.ka rroved, seconded by O::mnissioner Turne r to schedule the case for hearing as it is a grievable rratter . AYES : Turner , Pokra.ka, Brundage , Weber NAYS : None O::mnissioner Turner rroved, seconded by O::mnissioner Brundage to separate t he hearings for consideration of the l,btion for Disnissal and the Grievance itself. AYES : Turner, Pokra.ka, Brundage , Weber NAYS : None Chairnrul Weber stated t hat the Board 'I\Quld schedule a bearing date of February 25, 1982 at 7 :00 p .m. in the Council Chambers to consider the City's Abtion for Dismissal . He further stated that the Board \\Ould take 'lmat ever further action necessary upon the outcare of that hearing. * * * * * * * * I tern four on the Ag nda was the City Manager's C'boice. Richard Wanush , Assistant City Manager, presented the Board with a letter fran Police Chief Holmes responding to their request for information concerning the o pen and caq:>etitiv process of hiring Police Officer Kenneth And erson. Additionally , Mr . Wanush stated that f ran tllOO to tllOO there \\Ould be iSl:,-U s o f concern staning fran rurrors and that the City \\Ould be willing to respond to the Board or any person's inquiries . H explained however , tl:).at as a result of labor n gotia~i ns,labor ma.n~nt c cxnnitt s hav n stablished to raise s uch issu s directly with th acininistrati n. Ir . Wan lli:>h ugg•sted that perhaps th Board sh uld dir t per sons with inquiries to raise their qu tions with their association to see if th association \\Ou ld want to rai -the issu with th labor management ccmnitt , hopefully to be resolved at that level. If not, than th problan could be brought before the Board and the City \\OUld willing to provide them any 1n fonmtion th y might nqu st. * * * * * * * * It fiv on the nda was th ioners Cooi 01ainnan Weber read into th record the Appeal of Robert Dra.k appealing hi t rmination with ti ity of Engl 1b Board t a h aring dat of Thursday, larch 4, 1982 at 7 :00 p.m. in t unci 1 OlantJer to consider t t nnination appeal of rt Drak . • I • • I- • • • • SPF.CIAL HEARING OOARD OF CAREER SERVICE CXlMMISSirnERS FmRIJARY 25 , 1982 IN 1HE MATI'ER OF 1HE KYI'IOO ID DISMISS 'llIE GRIEVANCE FILED BY POLICE OFFICERS J(l{N WING AND RIOIARD WEI.IOJRNE , DATED JANUARY 9 , 1982 : Ccmni.ssioner Pokraka noved , seconded by Ccmni.ssioner Brundage that the ~tioo to Dismiss be denied on the basis that r es judicata · does not apply in this rmtter in that this rmtter was not heard in 1978. AYES : Pokraka, Tu.mer, Brundage, Weber NAYS : Non I . • • • • SPECIAL HEARING OOAIID OF CAREER SERVICE CD!MISSICNERS MARDI 4, 1982 IN 'IHE MATIER OF 'lllE AWEAL OF I03mf mAKE, APPEALING TIIE TEEMINATICN OF HIS EMPIDYMENI' AS BUILDING MAINrENAOCE'tDUCER/MAUEY CEmER, CI'IY OF ENGIBWO'.I), FILED 00 FEBRUARY 11, 1982 : Ccmnissioner Pokraka nDved, seconded by Ccmnissioner Turner that the appeal of &>bert Drake, appealing the termination of his enploynent, be disnissed because of Mr. Drake's failure to appear at this hearing unless he sha.vs justification to the Board for his failure to appear within five (5) days of this meeting of March 4, 1982. AYES : Pokraka , Kerzic, Turner , Weber NAYS : Nooe I • • • • • CITY OF ENGLE\.DOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 23, 1982 The Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission met in special session with members of the Littleton Planning Connnission and members of the Littleton Department of Connnunity Development staff. Dinner was served in the Library Conference room at 6 :00 P . M. Chairman Mclrayer called the meeting to order at 6 :45 P .M. Members present : Allen, Parbre, Becker, Carson, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Mc Ir ayer Powers, Ex-officio Members absent : Pierson Engl ewood staff present : Assistant Director Dorothy A. Romans Assistant City Attorney Holland Littleton Commission members pre s ent : Orr, Smith, Robbins, Albrecht, Obermeyer, Regnvall Littleton Commission member s absent : Kasch, Clapsaddle, Ostermiller Litt leton staff present : McMinimee, Herman, Douglas Mr. Mclrayer stated that prior to commencing discussion with the Littleton Commission, he would like to announce that the Engl ewood City Council has scheduled a joint meeting with the Planning a nd Zoning Commission for March 29, 1982, at 6 :00 P.M. s Mr. Mc Ir ayer welcomed the members of the Little ton Planning Commission and Community Development staff to the meeting, and stated that it is his hope that mutual problems can be informally discussed at this meeting. The future development of Centennial Race Track was discussed. Mr. Orr stated that proposed development will include office buildings constructed around the pond in the center, with high density residential developm nt also proposed. It is suggested that South Prince Street be extended north to Belleview Avenu . Mr. McMinimee stated that a nine-hole golf course is also pro- posed on this site, and that approximately 2,400 dwelling units of different types are proposed in the development. Mr . McMinim e sated that the total site is 160 acres, the majority of which is on the east side of the river. He stated that they nticipat a D v lopm nt Plan will be filed in May, and that the Planning Commis ion could b considering it in Jun , nd the City Council wil l con id r he propos 1 in approxim tely July. Mr. McMinim e st t d th ton probl m that mu b consider dis th ch nn liza- tion of h South Pl tte Riv r; the site is within th 100-y r flood pl in . Due to a ch ng in funding sch dul s, th ch nn 1 • I • • • • - -2- through Littleton will not be built until 1983, which will affect the development schedule for the site. Mr. McMinimee stated that the plans could include a hotel, but the final determination has not yet been made. Mr. Allen asked when the race track would cease operation? Mr. McMinimee stated that the track would be open for racing through the 1983 season. Upon a question by Mr. Stoel re- garding the river front project in Littleton, Mr. McMinimee stated that the developer proposes to orient part of the pro - posed development to take advantage of the work to be done by the Corps of Engineers. The Littleton River Front Project starts to the south of this area proposed to be developed in conjunction with the race track. Mr. McMinimee stated that the development could accommodate possibly 6,000 residents, and that he felt the proposed development would complement the River Front Project proposed by Littleton. Mr. McMinimee stated that the Littleton River Front project comprises approxi- mately 25 acres. The Arapahoe County Fair Grounds was discussed. Mr. McMinime e stated that this site was annexed to the City of Littleton in approximately 1974 or 1975; it was then de-annexed from the City at the request of the Fair Board, with the agreement that at the time the land was to be developed, it would be re-annexed into the City of Littleton. Mr . McMinimee stated that the zoning of this site is agricultural or open space in the County. The South Drive-in Theatre site was then discussed. Ms. Powers stated that it was her understanding that the Home Lumber Company is interested in expanding onto this site, which is in Arapahoe County. She stated that no approach has been made to the City of Englewood for annexation of the site. Mr. McBrayer commented that it is his understanding that the Home Lumber Company is not interested in annexing to any municipality. Mr. McMinimee stated that was also his understanding. Annexation policies of the two cities were discussed, as were logical boundaries such as Belleview Avenue and/or fig Dry Creek. Mr. McMinimee noted that the sewer service boundaries for the joint Wiste Waiter Treatment plant follow the line of Rig Dry Creek; there is an agreement between the cities of Englewood and Littleton that Littleton shall not serve anything north of Big Dry Creek, and that Englewood would serve nothing south of the Creek. He felt this was a point in favor of using Big Dry Creek as a logical boundary between the two municipalities. Mr. McBrayer noted that the City of Englewood is pretty well landlocked, with very few areas remaining which could be annexed to the City . In response to a question asked by Mr. Orr, Mrs. Romans discussed two areas which, in addition to the land on the northeast corner of ~lnderm re and Belleview, would be eligible for annexation to Englewood by virtue of contiguity, those being the Brookridg r sidential area, and an area on the northeast corner of U.S . 285 nd South University Boulevard. Mr. Gilchrist enter d th meting t 7:10 P.M., and was intro- duced to those in at ndanc • I • • • • - -3 - Ms. Romans stated that there wa s also an area west of South Santa Fe Drive and north of We st Union Avenue that might be annexed to either Englewood or Sheridan. Mr. McMinimee stated that the City of Littleton is interested in pursuing annexations west to the Jefferson County Line ; to the south, they do not anticipate annexing any land south of the Arapahoe County Line ; to the east, they would accept annexa- tion petition s, but only on a voluntary basis from the petitioners; to the north, the City is interested in annexing the Fair Grounds. Pedestrian access trails along the Big Dry Creek and South Platte River were discussed. Mr. Orr stated that there is discussion about extending the Denver trail system south along the Platte River, and to eventually have a trail system connecting from Chatfield to Brighton. The cost of constructing such a trail system was briefly discussed. Mr. Douglas of the Littleton staff discussed the development of the trail system further. He noted that Littleton is completing the acquisition of their 650 acre natural park area along the River, and will tie in with the Centennial Race Track develop- me nt to the north. There is also the golf course area in Engle- wood which is developed along the river front. He noted there are o ther is olated green areas that are developed along the river front, which could be tied together by the trail system . Mr. Albrecht asked if there was a problem with public access to the river front in any area? Mr . Douglas stated that there may be problems with some of the area in Sheridan. The development of additional bicycle trails was also discussed . Mr . McBrayer noted that the bicycle t ra il system can now cross Santa Fe at Kenyon Avenue, rather than having to use the Dartmouth/Santa Fe Drive intersection. Mr. Douglas asked if the bicycle trail would go under Santa Fe Drive when it is improved? Mr. McBrayer stated that this was the intent of the sys tem. Mr. McBr ayer asked if the City of Littleton proposed trails along Big Dry Creek? Mr . McMinimee stated that the plans of the Corps of Engineers show a trail system along Big Dry Creek, and that he feels there is an opportunity to provide a trail system that would tie Progress Park and Belleview Park together, for instance. The River Front redevelopment program was discussed. Mr . Douglas gave Englewood Commission members a copy of the Urban Redevelop- ment plan adopted by the Littleton River Front Authority, and which has been ratified by the Littleton City Council. Mr . Douglas discussed the boundaries of the riverfront area, and comme nted that there may be some elements which could compete with the race track developm nt; however, the development in the river front area would be "theme" oriented. Mr. Douglas stated that the idea for the riverfront development area was d veloped about ten y ars ago, but the Plan was not approved until last September . The rol of the Littleton Planning Com- mission in the development of the plans and the zoning classifica- tions to facilitate this propos 1 was discussed. Mr. McMinimee discusse d the efforts of th City of Littleton to liminate the • I • • • • - -4- flo od plain for the Littlest Creek. He discu ss ed the Small Grants Program, which has been used in various elements of the River Front projec t. Mr. Albrecht asked if the funding schedule change from two years to three years would have an impact on the River Front project? Mr. McMinimee stated that it would have an impact ; attempts are being made to encourage dedication of right-of-way by property owners rather than re- quiring purch ase of the right-of-way. He noted that utility relocation c o s t s will use most of the allocations, and that they need to have right-of-way dedicated to facilitate the pro- ject. Development of the land east of the Target Store was then con- si dered. Mr. McMinimee stated that this property is in Englewood, zoned for high-density development, and a buts property in Little- ton which is zoned and developed for sin gle-family residence . Developers have contacted the City of Littleton on several occasions on the possibility of extending a road from the sub- ject site to South Washington Street, which is in the single- family developed area. Mr . McMinimee stated that the City of Littleton has indicated they would not permit such an extension and impose traffic from a high-density residential area on this single-family neighborhood . Mrs . Romans stated that this site was zoned for multi-family development approximately 15 years ago ; the 1969 Comprehensive Plan shows that it should be developed as a park ; however, the Englewood City Council has felt that the City could not spend money to develop a park i n that location which would serve primarily residents of Littleton and Greenwood Village and not Englewood residents . The Fire Department has indicated that they would not approve plans for a high-density development because of the poor access. The possibility of de-annexing t his area from the City has been considered; however, this would require a special election. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff still feels the mos t appropriate use would be for park purposes. She also stated that whenever a developer has come in to the office to discuss any proposed development of this site, she has notified Littleton and Greenwood Village of the potential development. Mr. McMinimee asked if there is a possibility this site could be developed for single-family use? Mr s. Roman s stated that she felt this was a possibility. Mr. Douglas stated that there is a high-tension utility easement across this parcel, nd questioned that single-family development would be realized on this site. Sign control was then considered. Mr. McBrayer stated that he is very interested in the experiences that Littleton might have had during the time they adopted their Sign Code; were there law suits, did businesses have to relocate or cease operation because of the restrictions in the Sign Code, and what is the general attitude of the citizenry toward the Sign Code now? He noted that Englewood is in th process of developing a new Sign Code which would reduce th size nd height of signs, and contains an amortization cl us guaranteeing a nonconforming sign 10-year period from th dat of inst llation. He dis- cussed th t stimony nd concerns th hav b en expressed to • I • • • • • • -5- the Commission and staff by members of the business community and by the Sign Company representatives. Mr. McMinimee stated that he was not a member of the Littleton staff when the Sign Code was adopted in 1975; this Code contained a three-year amortization provision for nonconforming signs, but also contained a provision that signs would be given a seven- year use guarantee. Mr. McMinimee stated that Gordon Neon Sign, for the Woodlawn Shopping Center, and joined by Dodge Country, sued the City on the procedure followed in the adoption of the Code. There had been an error in the publication, and the Sign Code was struck down by the Court. The City corrected the error, re-enacted the Sign Code, and there have been no further challenges. There were approximately 390 to 400 signs in the community, and approximately 98% of them were nonconforming following adoption of the Sign Code. He noted that relatively few appeals were made to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and that the Board was very strong in their support of the provisions in the Sign Code. Within three years following the adoption of the Sign Code, 90% of the signs were conforming. Mr. McMinimee stated that the last of the nonconforming signs were amortized about one year ago. Mr. McMinimee noted that in one instance an in- dividual had refused to modify his sign, because he said this particular sign was required by the "parent company". The City staff contacted the parent company, and the staff was in- formed that this sign would conform to the Sign Code within 90 days, and it did. Mrs. Becker asked if there were billboards that had to be re- moved, and if the City experienced any problems with this? Mr. McMinimee stated that there were billboards that had to be re- moved; however, their ordinance has the provision that there may be only one principal structure on a lot; if a billboard is on a "lot", it is termed to be the principal structure and the lot may not be developed with anything else. The billboards are removed to facilitate development of the lot. Mr. Orr stated that his advice would be to "hang tough." Mr. Orr stated that the support from the citizenry has been good, and cited an ordi- nance that has been enacted requiring landscaping maintenance on rental properties in Littleton which was initiated by neighborhood concern. Mr. McBrayer asked the feeling of the majority of the business- men in Littleton regarding the Sign Code today? Mr. HcMinimee stated that he feels they are pretty well satisfied at this point in time. Mr. McBrayer stated that testimony had been submitted to the Englewood Commission that businessmen would be forced out of business; he sked if Littleton had any know ledge of businesse s actually having to close because of the Sign Cod? Mr . McMinimee stat d that he knew of no instance where businesses actually clos d as a result of the Sign Code r strictions . Discussion ensued. Mr. Douglas stated that a survey was done which indicat d tha 80% of the shopp rs wer "d stination-oriented", and did not stop by a particul r buain as just b cause of the sign . • I • • -• • - -6- Mr. McMinimee pointed out that when he stated that 90% of the signs were brought into conformance within three years, this did not entail total replacement of the sign; it might have meant removal of a portion of a sign, or the lowering of the s ign. Mr. Orr connnented that today's "educated consumer" is often "turned off by gaudy signs". Mr. Albrecht stated that with today's gasoline prices, he felt the survey would indicate a higher percentage o f "destination-oriented" motorists. Mr. Holland noted that in the last year two decisions have been rendered regarding Sign Codes , which he felt would render some aspects of most sign codes unconstitutional . He noted that Englewood is attempting to be very certain that all technical aspects covered by these decisions are addressed in the proposed Sign Code. The solar system in the Littleton City Hall was discussed. Ms. Becker stated that she was very i nterested in use of solar energy , and was cur i ous as to how well the system worked in the City Hall . Mr . McMin i mee stated tha t the s y s t e m cost approximately $250 ,000 and t h e fi r s t y ear o f operat i on wa s a period to work t he bugs out of t he sys tem . A manual contro l was installed for the back-up sys tem ; this ba ck -up s y s tem wa s then turned o f f, and wasn't us ed un ti l the t hird day of t h is most recent cold spell . Mr. McMi n i me e stated t h at he felt the sys tem has worked very satis- facto r ily. He s t ated that they have n o t been able to det e rm i ne h ow much mo n ey has been saved by using the so lar sy s t em , be- cause they cannot find a comparable buildin g a nd comparab l e u s e of th a t building. He noted that the total cost has been un der $50,000 for a 56,000 sq. ft. building. He stated tha t t h e solar panels face due south with a 60° angle. Ms. Becker asked if th City had done anything about enacting a solar access o r dinance? Mr. Orr stated that Rockwel l I n te rnat ion al has done resear ch on solar access, but that n o t hin g ha s been en - acted in the City of Littleton. Mr. McMi n i mee stat ed t h at th e y do see a lot of retro-fitting taking place on single uses. Ms. Becker stated that she found the landscaping maintenance program of interest; she inquir d if irrigated landscaping was r quired. Mr. McMinim e stat d hat any plan for development oth r than single-family residential, must be submitted for review by a developm nt review committ e. It was pointed out that low-maintenance landscaping is ncourag d because of water rationing. Mr. McMinimee stated that not more than 501. of the 1 ndscaping may be "dry landscaping". Mr. McBrayer asked if the Ci y of Englewood could gt a copy of the Littleton Ordinance on landscaping for our r view. Mr. Orr stated that with the sign cod and landscaping requir m nts, it is making a difference in h qu lity of d velopm n t th is occurring. He pointed out that both Englewood nd Little on re landlocked to a degree, nd efforts must b mad to ntic d v lop rs to the area. Mr. Orr sat d tha th Commi sion has tri d to look th ir community nd d t rmin how thy w nt d th community to d v lop; b s don th f lings nd opinions of the Planning Commission, th control ordin nc , landsc ping m inten nee, nd sign cod d velop d nd nact d. • I • • • • • -7- Mr. Robbins stated that he did not feel it was the rules and regulation s that d isturb e d developers, but the "lack of up- fro n t rules", and the lack of uniformity between jurisdictions which causes concern. He stated that a developer "never knows where you stand". Mr. Allen agreed with Mr. Robbins that this causes frustration to developers. The matter of Home Occupations in residential areas was con- sidered. Ms. Powers stated that the City of Englewood prohibits home occupations in the R-1-A, Single-family District . A majority of the complaint reports investigated by the Code Enforcement Division pertain to home occupations that have been reported in the R-1-A Zone District. Ms . Powers stated that the staff feels that this matter should be considered by the Planning Commission, and was wondering whether Littleton had experienced any similar problems with home occupations ? Mr. McMinimee stated that Little- ton permits home occupations i n any residential district. Beauty shops are not permitted as a home occupation, and there are restrictions on the operation of the home occupation : no separate outside entrance, no employees, etc . The re can be no storage and sales of any products on the site. Mr. McMinimee acknowledged there is some problem with home occupat ions in Littleton, but they are trying to deal with it through the Code Enforcement Division. Discussion ensued. Mr. Robbins stated that if the home occupation was not doing any harm to anyone he saw no problem with it, and perhaps the rules and restrictions should be reviewed. Mr. McMinimee discussed the problems Littleton has experienced with regard to "roomers and boarders" in single-family districts. He stated that no one seems to object to an exchange student, which is essentially a roomer and boarder, but almost everyone objects to the establishment of separate apartments for some roomers and boarders. Mr. McMinimee stated that the City of Littleton has made amendments to the Zoning Ordinance on the definition of "family", and developed a new definition for a single-family dwelling. Not more than three unrelated people may live together as a "family" unit. There may not be separate entrances for roomers or boarders, and no separate kitchen facilities may bed veloped . Mr . Orr inquired as to th projects that are underway in Englewood . Ms . Powers discuss d h downtown redevelopment efforts, and gave th boundarie for this area that is under consideration. Th Urban Rn w 1 Authority, wh ich was formed in 1973 but was not activ, w s reactivated in October of 1981 as a tool to chieve the financing for the project. Tax Increment Bonds will be issued by th Urban Ren wal Authority for the Little Dry Cr k improv m nt proj c . Brady Enterprises is very in- tr std in pursuing rd v lopm nt in the downtown ar a, and is in er sted in purch sing proper y ast of th City Hall. West Girard Av nu is propos d as pd stri nm 11, and would be clos d to traffic b tw n Broadway and South El ti Street. Ms . Pow r stat d th t the City Council ha mad it very cl ar ht if any cond mn tion is n d d, tha it will be the responsi- bility of th City Council to do th cond mnation, and not the r ponsibili y of th Urb n Rn w 1 Authority. Th plan calls for pproximat ly $220,000,000 in privat inv stment, and Brady • I • • • • • • -8- Enterprises has indicated interest in the total project. There has been some contact from other developers who have expressed interest in the redevelopment project. Ms. Powers stated that Mr. Brady came to the City to explore the possibility of redevelop- ment in the downtown area, but realized that he could not under- take the total project on his own; a three-party agreement be- tween Brady Enterprises, the City of Englewood, and the Englewood Downtown Development Authority has resulted. The public improve- ments to be undertaken include the improvement of Little Dry Creek as the first step to eliminate the flood plain throughout the downtown area so that redevelopment can take place. The overall redevelopment plan is projected over a 10-year period. Ms. Powers stated that there are various office developments underway, one of which is on the northeast corner of U.S. 285 and South Clarkson Street. Ms. Romans stated that a condominium office development is proposed on the former Holberg Greenhouse property south of U.S. 285; this will encompass eight or nine buildings. Mr . Orr asked if anyone on the Littleton Commission had anything further they wished to add to the meeting. Mr. Albrecht asked if there was anything that could be done to improve the traffic flow on U.S. 285? Ms. Powers stated that some of the traffic lights have been removed, which did aid the situation some . Mr . Robbins suggested that perhaps the traffic lights on South Broadway could be synchronized better. He stated that it is impossible to make two green lights from Evans south to Arapahoe Road. Mr. Orr thanked the Englewood Commission on behalf of the Littleton Commission and staff for the invitation and dinner, and expressed the hope that it could be done more frequently. The meeting adjourned at 8 :50 P .M. • I • • • • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONIN G COMMISSION March 2, 1982 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Ed McBrayer at 7:00 P.M. Members present: Allen, Barbre, Carson, McBrayer, Gilchrist, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma Romans, Acting Ex-officio Members absent: Becker Also present: Senior Planner Susan King Mr. McBrayer welcomed Mr. Gilchrist to the Planning Commission. Mr. Gi l chri s t wi ll b e serving the remainder of the term vacated by Mrs. Judith B. Piers on. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Mc Braye r s tated that the Minutes of February 2, 1982, were to be c on - sidered for approval. Cars on moved: Ba rb r e s e conded: Th e Minute s of Feb ruary 2 , 1982 , be approved a s written. AY ES : Barbre , Ca r s on, Mc Brayer, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma NAYS: None ABS ENT: Becker AB STAI N: Gi lchrist, Allen The mo t ion c arrie d . III. RIVIERA PLACE Parking Layo u t CASE #4-82 Mr. Mc Brayer noted th t th st ff r port had been sent to Comm ission m mber s several days prior to th me ting for th ir review. He asked if the Com- mission had any questions regarding the staff r port ? Mr. Sto 1 sked for ex planation of the b r ak-away e mergen cy e x it discuss d i n the staff re port? Mrs. Romans stated that the a pp lican t would a ddres this m tter in h is presentation. Mr. McBrayer asked t h applicant if he wo uld like t o a ddress t he Co mm ission? Mr. Arthur Swords s t at d that he had b n workin g with Mr . Sud erman on th propos d proj ct to bed v lop don South Clarkson Stre t and U.S. 285. Mr. Swords stated tha t the Collll)reh nsiv Zon ing Ord i nance r quired approval by th Planning CoDDiaaion of any parking lot or par king atructu r which contains 50 or more off-1tre t parkin pee ,. Mr. Sword• stat d that th • I • • • • • -2- pro posed development is a professional office building, which is a permitted use i n the R-3 Zone District. Mr. Swords stated that the proposed building con f orms with the existing zone regulations, and they are not asking for app r oval of a Planned Development, nor would they be requesting a variance. Mr. Swords stated that the request before the Planning Cormnission is for the a pproval of the off-street parking plan, which will consist of tw o level s of bel ow-grade parking, and one level at-grade. Mr. Swords then displayed num e r o us a rchitectural renderings of the proposed development, as well a s a s cale mod e l of the proposed development for the viewing of the Commission. Mr. Swords stated that the proposed office building itself will be five s t o ries , with the three level parking area. Mr. Swords discussed the topo- g raphy of the site, noting there is a 22-foot drop in elevation from the no rth t o the south boundaries of the site. Mr. Swords pointed out the point s of acces s to the levels of parking, and also pointed out that the parki n g st ruc ture would be open across the front (south) on the first and s e cond leve l s . With the topography of the site, the first level of the pa rking s truc ture will have entra nce/exit access from South Clarkson Street, and t he pro posed emergenc y break-away exit would be onto U.S. 285 through a land s c a ped area. Mr. Sword s stated that they proposed to have the e l e vato r tower with s ome commercial s pace on the f i rst and second l e vels . The r e will be e ntrance /e xit a c c e s s to the second level of parking from So uth Clar kson St r ee t, also, and exi t ac cess to South Emer s on Street. Th e third l eve l of park i ng, the at-grade level, will be accessible from the existing n o rth /south alley , and will be on the same leve l a s the first level of the off i ce s tructur e. Mr. Swords d i splayed floor plans o f the proposed office building, n oting the r e would be sliding glass doors opening onto the balconies. Mr. Swo r ds also d is played e levations of the proposed de velopment. Plans with overlays i nd ica t i ng the width s of parking aisles, a ccess points, etc . were also d is- played. Mr . Sword s s tated that the parking plans for the development had origina lly i nd icated 200 off-s treet parki ng s pac e s ; revisions in the plan as a res ult o f s ugge s tions of the s taff has resulted in the eliminat ion of some s pac e s, but the y would s till have in exces s of the required 188 par king spaces. Mr. Swo rd s stated that c oncern was als o e xpressed over the wi dth of the a l ley and t he man e uv e r a b ili t y o f eme r gency e quipment i n this a l ley. As a result of t his con ce rn, th park i ng are a s wh ich abut the a l l ey on the w st hav e b n change d f r om stalls pe rpend icula r t o the alley t o s t alls whi ch a r e par allel with the alley a nd bu i ldi n g . r co mm ndat ion of the et ff, and the steps that ken by th applic ant t o c ompl y with those r commendations. He on -way c irculation pattern on levels on nd t wo will b at d by th s taff. Mr. Sword s lao pointed out th t through a ce a from South Cl rkson Str et to South Em r on Str t, Mr. Sword s tated th t whil the original proposal wa point of ingress /egr as to th leve l on parking rea, thy will a br k-awa y rgency exit through a plaza ar a onto U.S. 285 to cond point of xit from th l v l o n parkin ar a. Mr . Sword s t a t that the points of exit from parking 1 v lone will b sign d for ri ht-turn only aa au at d by the s taff. Mr. Swo r ds stat d that thy will a l s o a i nth xit onto South E raon Str t for righ t-tum-only Mr. Swords s tat d that h had previously ntion d th substituti on l parking along th allay for th p rp ndicular atall a ori in lly this uld inc r a a th width of th alley, and would allow for i c c irculation nd co• t th concern• of th Fire D part- nt. Mr. word a tat d cha h ndicapped parking ar aa hav b n provid d a ch parkina l v 1. • I • • • • • • -3- Discussion ensued. Mr. Gilchrist stated that he felt both points of access to levels one and two on South Clarkson Street should be signed for right- turn-only movements for vehicles e xiting these parking areas; otherwise, there would be conflicting movement s , and he felt this could c reate problems for traffic flow. Mr. Swords discussed the reasoning behind the Traffic Engineer's requirement of right-tum-only designation for the southernmost point of entrance/exit to parking level one. Mr. Swords questioned that there would be the volume of traffic exiting from parking level one onto South Clarkson Street at any one time to conflict with the point of in- gress/egress to parking level two. Mr. Gi lchrist noted that there are five c oniferous trees on the site at the present time; he asked if the applicant could have them moved, at the applicant's expense, to one of the Cit y Parks? Mr. Swo rds stated that he would look into the feasibility of reloca t ing the trees; he noted that they are large trees --approximately 12 inches in diameter --and that it some- times is not possible to reloca te trees of that size. He noted that when trees larger than 6" to 8" in diameter are moved, it is, of course, more e xpensive, and the risk of losing the tree is much greater. He reiterated that he would discuss this matter with their landscape architect. Mr. Gilchrist estimated that it might cost approximately $80 per tree to move them, and noted that quite large trees have been successfully relocated in the Franktown and Parker areas. In answer to a question by Mr. Gilchrist, Mr. Swords stated that he would recommend the relocation of the trees to a City Park.* Mr. Allen questioned problems that could occur with the grade on South Clarkson Street during periods of inclement weather; he asked if this had been taken into consideration when planning points of ingress and egress to the parking levels? Mr. Swords stated that the grade.of the hill does not increase until it reaches a point to the north of both points of access. Mr . Stoel i nquired about the commercial space Mr. Swords mentioned on levels one and two of the parking structure; what type of commercial us e is pro- posed, and what is the square footage? Mr. Swords s tated that they pro- pose approximately 2 ,000 square feet for each level, which would be "s upport s ervice" type uses for an office building; r staurant , coffee shops, etc. Mr. S toel asked if it wa s known at this tim who the tenants of the offic building would be? Mr. Swords stated that with the proximity to the Swedish M dical Center, they anticipate that a number of their tenants will be in the medical profession. Mr. Tanguma inquired about landscaping on th third level of th parking tru c ture --th at-grade lev 1 --on the southern boundary? Mr. Swords s tated that if ny landsc aping were to be installed along the south boundary of th third level p rking, it would elimin t parking spa s . H s ugg sted th t they would consider raising th height of the parap t wall along th south side of this parking lev 1, which would hid o f v hlcl s from on-stre t traffic. Mr. Swords st ted that ther ldnds caping propos don the third 1 v 1, but thi will b l s mor difficult to maint in. Hr. Swords t t d th t p rking , they h d propos d th r b a "b rm" which will obscure o f th p rk d cars from the Highw y; th propos d br xi , this would h v• to b xt rior finish wa propo d for th p rkin t thy r c on id ring 1th r brick or x- on or th oth r. * A• nd d March 16, 1982. • I • • • • • -4- Mr . McBrayer asked how far above grade the parapet wall on the third level parking would be? Mr. Swords stated it would be at l e ast three and one-half feet above grade. Mr. Gilchrist asked if there were sidewalks proposed on all three street sides of the site? Mr. Swords stated that sidewalks are on South Clarkson Street, U.S. 285 and South Emerson Streets at the present time; any sidewalk and/o r cu rb and guttering that is damaged during construction would be re- placed . Mr. Gilchrist stated that he felt the sidewalk should be continuous, and noted that according to the plans submitted to the Commission , it appears there is a break in the sidewalk at the corners of the site. Mr. McBrayer asked if there were further questions from the Commission re- garding the proposal? Mr. Tanguma noted that the Fire Department has requested that a sprinkler system be provided in the parking structure. He asked if this is being done? Mr. Swords stated that they are planning to install a sprinkling system in the parking structure , even though it is not required by City Ordinance . Carson moved: Gilchrist seconded: Mi:. McBi: y wh r th block this sid w lits ap ciflc tiona, and The Planning Conunission approve the off-street parking layout for Riviera Place with the following conditions: 1. Parking level 1 and 2 should be designed to allow for one-way circulation where aisle widths are less than 24 feet. The circulation pattern should be marked as such with directional signs. 2. Level 1 should also have a break-away emergency exit in the section wher the parking garage runs parallel with U.S . Highway 285 and east of the office structure. 3. When exiting from level 1 onto South Cla rkson Stree t, a right turn only should b pei:mitted, and left turn s will be restricted. 4. A change in the parking layout on Level 3 has been suggested by the staff to Mr. Swords, the architect for the propoa d d v lopment. Parking spaces which ar adjacent to th 11 y should b parallel to the alley nd against th structure instead of th 90 d gre angle which ls shown on th plan. Parallel parking would then incr s th alley width to 24 f t. Th 24-foot lley width would allow for two - w y tr ffic and accommodat fir emerg ncy equip- m nt. Tw lve parking spac s would be liminated, but p rking ratios would still be in accordanc with th st ndards in th Comprehensive Zoning Ordinan c. • parking ar a indicated hicl s ar llow d to gr I • • - • • • • • • -5- that the parking structure will b faced with brick or exposed aggregate. He felt these points should be included in the motion. Discussion ensued. Mr. Gilchrist stated that he felt the motion could include the statement that the applicant stated that the parking structure exterior would be of brick or aggregate material. These points were agreed to by the maker of the motion, and by the second. The vote was called: AYES: Carson, McBrayer, Gilchrist, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Allen, Barbre NAYS: None ABSENT: Becker The motion carried. IV. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Amendment of 122.4-llh CASE 115-82 Mr. McBrayer asked if the staff had comments to make on this proposed amend- ment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Romans stated that at the time the motorcycle repair shop at 1080 East Hampden Avenue was considered, the staff was directed to prepare an amend- ment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance which would cause motor vehicle repair shops to be considered as a Conditional Use in the B-2 Zone District. This proposed amendment would require a public hearing before the Planning Commission on any request for approval of a motor vehicle repair or laundry operation in the B-2 Zone District. Mrs. Romans reviewed the proposed amend- ments. This has been scheduled for Public Hearing before the Planning Com- mission on March 16th. Mrs. Romans stated that provisions on screening, lighting, etc., are contained in a separate section of the Comprehensive Zo ning Ordinance, and need not be refe rred to in this particular amendment. Discussion ensued. Minor changes in wording of the proposed amendment were suggested . Mr. Stoel asked what was considered in terms of size for a parking space? Mrs. Romans stated that she was considering a 9-1/2' x 19' area back of the washing bay to allow stacking space for vehicles waiting to go through the w sh process . Hr. Gilchrist asked about parking areas for vehicl s that ar bing polish dafter going through the wash process? Discus ion en ued • It was pointed out that plans for the car wash would have to be present d nd this could b considered at that time. V. PUBLIC FORUM. o on w pr sent to address th Co11111ission. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans stat d th t Dir ctor Pow rs w snot feeling w 11 this v nin , nd ask d that hr apologi b xt nd d to th Co11111ission • I • • • • • -6- Mrs . Roman s s tated that the staff is working on the Downtown Developme nt Dis trict zoning and on the B-1 Zone District; thes e proposed zone dis tric t s have been submitted to the EDDA, and a sub-committee of that body has been f ormed to consider them in greater detail. Ms. Romans discussed a meeting s he attended earlier in the day with EDDA Executive Director Haviland. Ms . Romans stated that Prowswood is working on the fifth floor of their proj ect. Remodeling in Cinderella City is progressing; Joslins is remodeling the third floor level of their building, which will house their national head- quarters. Hrs. Romans also noted ~hat the fountain area in the Blue Hall has been boarded off in preparat ,f the removal of the fountain and the i ns tallation of a food court o· _ower level • Mr s . Romans s tated that thr • c has had seve ral contac ts from individuals who want to convert apart~cnts to condominium units, most particularly in rec ent weeks the Kimberly Woods development on the northeast corne r of t he fo rmer Larwin site. The City Attorney has stated that any conve r sion of apartment units to condominium units would require the filing of a Sub- division Plat in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations. Discus sion ensued. Mr s . Romans s tated that an invitation has been extended to member s of t he Planning and Zoning Commission by the Swedish Medical Center to attend a breakfast meeting on March 31, 1982, at 7:30 A.H . VI I . COMMISSION'S CHOIC E . Mr. HcBrayer stated that he would like to have advance information on t he Ca pital Improvement Proj ects which the Commission will be cons ide r i ng lat er this year. He s tated that he would like to have a s hort statement on each r eques t expla i n i ng what the reques t encompa sses , and the j us tifi cat ion for t hat r e que s t. Hr . Mc Brayer asked fo r a r e port on the 4500 block of the South Clarkson - South Washing t on all ey . Ms . Ro man s s t a t e d th a t a n i n s pec t o r had been sent to inspect the alley , a nd at t hat t im e , t he alley was clean. It was sug- gested that this alley be periodically i n sp cted. Mr. HcBrayer st t d th ton March 29 , the City Council has invit d th Planning Commission to a eting at 6:00 P.H. to discus th Sign Cod Mr. HcBrayer stat d that h would also lik to hav pr pared a list of work projects for 1982 that the Commission wants to con sider , nd to al o r qu st the input of t he City Council on i t e ms t hey want the Co mm ission to consider. Hr . Hc Br aye r stat d t hat he wo uld r qu st t h teach Commission member com up with a list of possib le work items for 1982 , nd that th a work item l i sts b u bmitted to t h e s t aff . Hr . Hc Brayer s tat d that h would s u gges t t h a t these lists b s ubm i t ted to th 1 t aff by not lat r th n th end of the w k, nd f t er th me t i ng of March 16th, h would lik to th Co mm ission m et in sub-comm i tt to go ov r t h a suggestions. Mr. HcBr yr st t d that th staff has a pu blication frOG th APA which cov rs th 1981 Conf r nee in Bos t on, Hasaachuaetta , if Mr. Tan uma would lik to borrow that r port to aaaiat him in wri ing hia report for th City Coun 11. I • • n - • • • • -7- Mr. McBrayer asked that the staff contact the City of Littleton and request a copy of their landscaping maintenance ordinance which was discussed at the meeting of February 23rd. Ms. Romans stated that Susan King would contact the City of Littleton. Discussion ensued. Mr. Allen stated that he felt a requirement of this type might increase the construction costs in Englewood, and pointed out the cost of water taps. The APA Conference, which will be held in Dallas , Texas May 8 -12, was discussed . Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt the attendance of a Commission member at these conferences is of great value. Hr. Senti stated that he had also attended these Conferences, and found them to be of value. Hr. Allen dissented, and stated that he had attended several conferences while serving on the City Council; he stated that he did not feel things that were discussed at those conferences were of value to Englewood. Senti U1oved: Tanguma seconded: The Planning Commission designate Chairman HcBrayer to attend the APA Conference in Dallas, Texas. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Gilchrist questioned the need to expend funds to send a Co11111ission member to these conferences every year. He pointed out that if reports of the conferences are available at a later date, this information could be made available to the Conunission. Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt there was ample reason to send two individuals to the c9nferences; there are so many meetings and other information available that it is impossible for one person to cover it all, The vote was called: AYES: McBrayer, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre NAYS: Carson, Gilchrist, Allen ABSENT: Becker The motion carried. The meeting of the Englewood/Littleton Planning Commissions wa s briefly re- viewed. Mr. Barbre s tated that he felt it was a very worthwhile meeting, nd it was of assistance to learn how they are dealing with problems very similar to tho• that Englewood is having. Th etin adjourn d at 8:45 P.M. I • • - ' • • • • MINUTES ENGLEWOOD PUBLIC LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD March 9, 1982 The regular meeting of the Library Advisory Board was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by Chairman Bob Currie . PRESENT: Bob Currie, Jerry Valdes, Marietta Brown, Debbie Dix, Norm Kerswill, Joe Rathburn, Dorothy Wheelehan ABSENT: Wilma Ankrum, Kay Van Valkenburg ALSO PRESENT: Sharon Winkle, Director of Libraries Donna Gottberg, Recording Secretary Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present . Chairman Currie turned the meeting over to Sharon Winkle for the Director's Report . The Ci ty Council has approved issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for con- sulting service. The bids will be sent to approximately 30 firms, both nat ional and local, with the proposals due on April 9, 1982. Council also approved a resolution asking area legislators to support state funding of the Colorado Resource Center (C RC). Ms. Winkle and Dorothy Wheelehan attended a meeting of the Concerned Coloradoans for Libraries and Information, in February. A brief report was given on that meeting a nd a Proposal for Funding the Colorado Resource Center, received at that meeting , was distributed to the Board for their co11111ents. It was recommended that if members are in favor of this funding they should c ontact their state legi slators. It was further stated that this funding was a short-term solution (1-4 years). Regarding President Reagan's priorities on funding, it was noted that federal funding for public libraries has been zeroed out for next year. A resolution will be presented at the next Council meeting (March 15th) regarding Counci l approval of the Guidelines and Policies. Chairman's Choice Updating the Council's action regarding Board's recommendation to co nt inue service to Denver residents. After discussion by Council the recommendation p ssed. J erry Valdes h s b en appointed to be a member of the Selection Committee for the consulting service. ~Ir. V ldes will report back to the Board at futur meetings. Through Bill Murry, represent tive from Arapahoe Regional Library District, we h ve be n i nform d that Aurora Libr ry will host the next joint met i ng of Library Bo rds. It was brought to the attention of the Bo rd that the 1 te Mr . Ernie Anderson be- qu th d $2,500 to the Engl wood Public Library Donor's Fund. co ntinued .... • I • • - • ' • • • -2 - Member's Choice There wa s a brief discussion on the comments from the Suggestion Book . Mr. Rathburn suggested the Board read an article on censorship on page 66 in the March 8, 1982 issue of U.S. News and World Report. This article will be photocopied and distributed to the Board. There was a brief discussion on the Statistical report for February, with Ms. Winkle noting that circulation had decreased. Two charts were discussed, one on total circulation and one on circulation for Englewood, ARLD and CCLS. 82-5 MOTIO N: To approve the Minutes from February 2, 1982, as written. ' • Mov ed by: Joe Rathburn Seconded by: Dorothy Wheelehan Motion carried Meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m • 3-10-82 dg • I • • - • WATEk AND SEWER BOARD March 9, 1982 Regular Meeting • • • Page 1 of 4 5 G The meeting was called to order at 5:03 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Cook, Best, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Giseburt, Htgday, Otis, Lay None Stewart Fonda, Director of Utilities Tom Gibson, past Chairman of the Water & Sewer Board . I. VALLEY SANITATION MONTHLY MAINTENANCE CHARGE INCREASE. (Att . 1) Stewart Fonda reviewed the February 6, 1982 letter from Valley Sanitation District informing Englewood of a $1.00 increase per tap, per month. Valley Sanitation District's position to impose a rate increase was discussed . The Board requests Valley San i tat i on show the incr~ase i s a rational pro-rated increase, so the Board will have a basis for rec011111endatton to City Council . II . FENCING OF MCLELLAN RESERVOIR . (Att . 2) Stewart Fonda briefed the Board on the corre s pondence betwee n The Writer Corporation and the City of Englewood, (copy attached ), regard i ng the security fence along the north shore of Mcle l lan Re s ervo i r . Th e Wr iter Corporation and the City of Englewood have tentati ve ly agreed t he City of Englewood wi ll install an e i ght (8) foot hi gh, brown vi nyl coated chain link fence wi th wood posts and barbed wire . The Wr i ter Corpora tion will have the option of install i ng an e i ght (8 ) foot high pressure trea t ed wood fence from the dam crest to the west . In r e t urn , The Wr i ter Corporat ion wil l cut and f i ll for the fence and will grade a level bench app r oxim atel y t en (10) fee t wi de insi de the f en ce form i ng a s erv ice road for the Ci t y of Engle woo d. Mr . Fullerton moved; Mr . Gtseburt seconded: Ayes : Nays: Absent: Motton carried • That the Water and Sewer Board reconmend to City Council that the City of Englewood proceed building the fence in accordance with the proposed agreement contained in Mr. Riechert's letter of March 3, 1982. Cook, Best, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Giseburt, Higday, Otis, Lay None Non • I • • n - • • • • Page 2 of 4 III. SOUTHGATE SUPPLEMENT #93 -CHANG INCLUSION. (Att. 3) Mr. Fonda reviewed Southgate Sanitation District's request to annex 9.4 acres to their district. The Chang Bros. plan to build 320,000 square feet of office space located on East Caley Avenue, west of South Ulster Street. Mr . Fonda reconwnended the Board approve Supplement #93 to Southgate Sanitation District. Mr. Fullerton 110ved; Mr. Otis seconded : Ayes: Nays: Absent: Motion carried. To reconwnend to Council approval of Supplement #93 to Southgate Sanitation District . Cook, Best, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Giseburt, Higday, Otis, Lay None None IV. DISCUSSION OF THE CONTRACT FOR DITCH RIDER -BOREAS PASS. Mr. Fonda briefed the Board on the background of Boreas Pass and explained the need for a competent Ditch Rider for that area. An independent contractor was referred to the City of Englewood who is interested in submitting a bid for the maintenance functions of Boreas Pass Ditch for the City of Englewood. The Board concurred with the proposal that a Ditch Rider be selected and requested Mr. Fonda to negotiate a contract. The Board requested a "Hold Harmless" clause be inserted into the proposed agreement. No motion was made. V. METER TO FLAT RATE BILLING STATUS REVERSION . Current policy prohibits a residence reverting from a metered account to flat rate status. Stewart Fonda proposed that the Board reconnend to Council that an ordinance be prepared to make this a requirement of the City Code. Discussion followed. Mr . Fullerton moved; Mr. Higday seconded : To reconwnend City Council direct the Ci ty Attorney to prepare an ordinance to amend the City Code which would prohibit rev ersion from a metered account to flat rate s tatu s . • I • • n ( • Ayes: Nays: Absent: Motion carried. • • - Page 3 of 4 Cook, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Hi·gday, Otis, Lay Giseburt, Best None VI. TORBA COMPLAINT RESULTS. (Att. 4) The Torba investigation results were reviewed. Discussion followed. The Board concurred the Utilities Department should continue to monitor this account and write a letter to the Torbas explaining the Board's decision. Mr. Fullerton moved; Mr . Giseburt seconded : Discussi on followed. Ayes: Nays : Absent : Mot ion carried. To reject the request for change in billing status from metered account to flat rate, and the billing in question stands as due. Cook, Best, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Giseburt, Higday, Otis, Lay None None VII. BORING AND LINING PROJECT FOR SOUTH BROADWAY WATER MAIN. The project of boring and relining the 12" water main on South Broadway was discussed. The Board reconrnended that when the final plans and specs are completed, they be forwarded to Council for approval. Further questions were raised by Board members. It was suggested an engineer from Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc, along with the Water and Sewer Board attend the City Council meeting for further discussion. No motion was made. VIII. AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AND DRCOG. Stewart Fonda su11111arized DRCOG's proposed stonnwater treatment study which is part of the Clean Lakes Program. Since it would be mutually beneficial for DRCOG to use our study results as part of their proposed program, a contract wa s proposed by DRCOG that would reimburse us for engineering costs if the City of Englewood would have Black & Veatch continue with the present study . I • • n ( • Mr. Fullerton moved; Mr. Fitzpatrick seconded: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Motion carried. • • • Page 4 of 4 That the contract between City of Englewood and DRCOG, when finalized, be forwarded to Council for approval along with a contract between the City of Englewood and Black and Veatch. Cook, Best, Haviland, Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, Giseburt, Higday, Otis, Lay None None IX. ANNUAL REPORT QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION. A general discussion was held on the Annual Report . X. MCLELLAN WATER QUALITY REPORT DISCUSSION. A general discussion was held on the Mclellan Water Quality Report . It was requested that an engineer be present at a future meeting to answer further questions. XI . DISCUSSION ON SECTION OF CITY DITCH LOCATED ON NASSAU WAY BETWEEN GALAPAGO AND FOX. (Att. 5) Councilman Fitzpatrick presented a concern of citizens in his district. After the City Ditch was dredged in the above mentioned section, there remained a ten to twelve foot drop in some sections which poses a hazard for small children. Ownership and easement interests were discussed. Stewart Fonda explained Englewood's responsibility of keeping the ditch flowing. Feasible options were discussed. No motion was made. Meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. The next Water and Sewer Board Meeting will be held April 13, 1982, at 5 p.m. in Conference Room A. Respectfully sublnitted, Cathy Burrage Recording Secretary • I • • n n -• • - W::t'" I VALLEY --.,~SANITATION------------------- ( . 1DISTRICT •. 0. IIOZ., Ln'TLEIOlf, COLOIIADO .. ,. 798-0332 February 6, 1982 At a meeting held on February 2, 1982 by the Board of Directors of the.: Vc.1lluy Sanitation District it i:. .1greecl that .1 t'c.l.i.:;c .i.n ~he monthly maintenance charge be made to &l.l people outside the district. 'l'hc ri.1t<.; of 01. 00 per month, per tap, has been in effect for n years and as you know maintenance costs have risen considerably in tt1c1t period of ti-. It .i.::; tl,c:t·t:fure necessary to increase this charge to $2. OU per month, per tap, effective February 2, 1982. VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS John R. boggs Paul Coen Al Dreiling J&mea TollLlin Bill Todd ~~J>--,' llo11nie Urown, IJu1Sinoisu Hanc1u..:r "-...J )l) : l> l> • • I • • ( ( • • • SUI'PLr---::?,lfl!1' TO C<•rlNl ·:C'!'Clt I :: .~(!li l.1 <M1·:t1·1· l 1r;;_,-,1,·:··11 l~:11 ; :;l'l'~ r,;.• 1•,f •;1:f.:·.i·.1(,uj1 , l .. w1,,1·· i>.,' IJ11 : ,;1,'•,,,, ;, , .,,, ,1 .• I.,. 'l.'rf f,'.l' WHEREAS, the Yall'"y Dcvn lopmcnt Co.,1,1n,,y , c.1 .,;;-,\bout tho ;..;ng l-.woosl Se wage '.l.'r.:iatm.:nt Plant; o.nd :~lll·:liJo:I .S, :.1a1d Agr·eemcnt provlde:i that. uct 1 tlonul arv:\::i coulu IJc lnc lu<.led eo use oo.lcl 1'uc111t1cs w11.11 U1c w1•1ttcn co,,- llont c,f ti1c.: Cl I.;;; ac,d 1/W ,hc;A.S , the Vulley J)ovclo!)uK·nt Co1up..n!' ,h,l • \.hereafter all 1ta r1ght, tit.lo nil 1nwre t. ln nnct t.o oa 1<1 Au;rcc1J1cnt. unto \.ho Valle.)' i,nnl I.."\ tlc.>u 01:; i..'.i.c I., :.;cc<Jlld 'c1·t~· hcrul, ; ..nu \·l lu•.R!!:AS , the real pro rt. :·,..:ro1ruirto1• J":.iu •11.>uu 11.ia l'Occ.:n\.ly Lu1i \l:u,c.l to 1.hc.: Clt..Y u · 1'..•C cw od; a.nu 1m1mww, th1;1 Valluy !.iaul I.I\ t.1on D1:11.1·1c t. tiuc corrnc11Lvd so pu1•u1l t t.110 tor1•1 tory he1•einurtcr ao:icrlb~d tc.> U:.lo/ 1 a co lo,; I.ion lines ana tllllln tranam1ao1on aewer l1n a n chc C o~nn1 l Ac1'0u aroa tor tho purpoa of carr.v1ni 1·aw Bt111J.£,11 l'roi.1 1. nf\.cr 1. ..:110 1.ic<l to h 1. .,.nl?. ., 100<1 tr:·:· 31. •ri•va r...,~ ... , :..., , .. v ,. NO W, 'l'Hl':.REFORE , ln COIIS1ddl'll tlon or '1 PNllll lS.tO, iona t.ho mut.uC:il oovcnanta ot' the pnrt1ea here to, 1 t lo ncrcNl u tollowtJ : 1. 'l'ha t tho City dooa ho rob:, conoont t.o t.hc u11 o f tl'11. S1tconc1 iarty'a oolloc1.1on lJ.noa nnr1 1nt11n ao,1or· !'\.Ink l1nc,a for trana1a1aa1on of r u e:r,wuc fr0t l.h AN& ™'N1.n&t'ter deaor111ecl to. tc. En&lewood Sew a lJ • , ,· I • • n - ( • 2. • • • ~r:.1." uc·o an i'u.i.lu~·1..1 ; Plcaoarit View S ulJCU v1:-:1on ., ur, noN plu i:t.l·d, u.i•<· l'(:l..'.'.J !'Ul."0 J.11 t..l1t..· i_,; Leri<. J.rt<l d ,·cor<:cJ" :. c,1:r 1cc , L.ouu t.y o · h1' .... I,~l1 ()C:., ~t;.i.L.~ ::,;· Color;w1.,, 1.h,- : 'i t. !Je cond Part~y •s allocat10:1 of tap:; pur::;u=1.r,t td p .. ·,·v .tvu:., r.11.;v :..hull Lr· r·<.::ipo11:;; LJ.c fol' a l com, l.!·U.; ... o .. ~•"' u Urn; .JO L' (.,.l. 0) per· tap pe1• mont..i , :,a • .. lu \.111: Cl t..J l>h be ent1 t..lctl to rccovc:-:.io.1cl r, i. ..... , nc<. ch r.:;i: rro,,, 1.I,<: rca;Jcct1ve property o·.m .•i.; o, oo.1u t.1.1.pa. u. 'i'I t the S co:1a ['u1•1.y l!hal b., entl tl<,u o .·c""' v..: ~roµ •t..y 1 ..... Ge, and ~ h1cl, tl,v C.l .y .. 11.:., 1·_c;o c;,• .'J.~ the 1n 1vidui:.l prop rty 1:ncr, not excull l u t..,, a venty-eight (78) tapa within tho tw nty-on• (21) ill.<lfi~t. • I • • • • • 7. l'l' IS FURTH ER AGR EE D by and between the partico 1.:1a t approve 1.h e plans for cons ~rue tlon or the sewer· connection tc, the Second f'arty 'B oewer syn\.,~1n , thio ___ __§_~ day ol' __ Peb rua rL_ _______ , 1 ~63. 'rlll:: CI'l'Y Of" ENGLl!:WOOD /1.'l''J.'gS'J.': --....----- ~ . /.~~ ~----·----........ 7 • •/ALLEY SA I'N,' 'lC, ATTEST: I • • \ I'l'NE!>SBS: ( • • - ( • • • • March 3 , 1982 Mr. Larry Reichert The Writer Corporation 27 Inverness Drive East Englewood, Colo. 80110 RE: Mclellan Reservoir Fencing Dear Mr. Reichert: o..t::f 2. Tuesday March 8, 1982 at 5:00 p.m, an Englewood Water and Sew er Board meeting will be held in the Englewood City Hall Conference Roo m A. At this time the fencing along the north side of Mclellan qes ervo i r adjacent to Writer Corporation's property will be discuss ed . Th e Util i ties Department, as per our discus si on, wi 11 r eco11111e nd the fol lowing: * The cost of surveying to be equally s hared by Engl ewood and The Writer Corporation . * The grad i ng f or the fen ce i ns t a ll at i on be done by The Wr i ter Corp . and th i s work will fo nn a level ben ch approximately ten (10) f eet wide i ns i de t he fe nce fonn i ng a serv ice roa d for the City . The Wr i ter Corporat i on may grade alon g the prop ert y west of the dam crest to enab l e a un i form slope fo r the f e nce. * An Pi !)h t (8) fo o t hiq h , br own vi nyl co.itcd cha ·in 1 ink fence wi tn wo od posts an d bi.lrl>e d wire L>e ins ta 11 ed on Lhe µroper Ly line at the City's costs. * The Writer Corp. will have the or>tion to select an ciqhl (II) foot high pre!;sure treated wood fence from lhe dam crest Lo the west . The additional cost of this fence will L>e paid for the The Writer Corp. * Contract documents and drawi nqs 1~i 11 be prepared L>y the City of Englewood. * A temporary barbed wire fence wi 11 be ins ta 11 ed fonn the north - east corner of the reservoir property south t o County Line Road. * All s lopes constructed by The Writer Corporation will not exceed 4 :1 a nd will be seeded by Writer. • I • • -_ n - • • • • • The Englewood Water and Sewer Board and/or Englewood City Council reserves the right to make the final decision on the type of fencin n and cost sharing. If you have any further questions, or wish to attend the meeting, please contact me at 761-1140, extension 514. Sincerely, Stewart H. Fonda Director of Utilities City of Englewood • I • • - {J • • • ( CHE CKLIST OF REQ UI RED PROCED URES AND GUID EL I NES FOR INCLUSION o f property to :iOUT HC ATE !;AtllTATlOI'• DI STRICT l. Ownership: 2. Name of fee owner(s) Evidence of Title Property Descr i ption: Legal Descripti on Signature and seal of registered Professional Engineer 3. Acknowledgement: 4 . 5. De posi t:of $200.00 Land Use Information: Total Acreage Ex isting Zon ing Proposed Zo n ing Propose d Us e Population density (rcsidentiali Use Intensity (commercial,industrial) Open space, greenbelts, parks (acreage) Schools (acreage, academic level) 6. Construction Schedule: 7. Dote Sewer Service is required : X X X X X 9.4 MU B-1 Offices 320,000 SF 35t Surmier, 198 .:' Thos items checked bov indict inform tion curr ntly on f1l with t he District. Thes items should b verified. Th items not ch ck d huv not been rec ived by th District and must b ubmit d prior to th~ Petition receivino furth r considcra ion . • • I • • (J • • • SUPPLEMENT NO.~ TO CONNECTOR 'S AGREEMEN T THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, acting by and through its duly autho- rized Mayor and City Clerk, hereinafter referred to as "City", and SOUTHGATE SANITATION DISTRICT, Arapahoe and Douglas Counties, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "District", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on the 20th day of June, A.O . 1961, the City entered into a Connector's Agreement with the District concerning the connection of the District sewer collection facilities to the City's sewage system, which Connector's Agreement was modified and amended by agreement dated the 4th day of April, 1966; and WHEREAS, said agreement and modification thereof provided that additional service areas could be included within the liaita of the District with the written consent of the City; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants of the parties hereto, it ia agreed as follows: l. The City does hereby consent to the inclu sion of the additional area, situate in the County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado described aa follows, to-wit: Property OWner: Property Description: Chang Brothers Tract 38, Subdivision of Section 21, Township S South, Range 67 West, County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado into Southgate Sanitation District, and agrees that said additional area may be served with the sewer facilities of the Distric~, and that the City will treat the sewage dis- charged into the City's trunk line from said additional area, all in accordance with the Connector'• Agreement dated June 20, 1961, and the modification thereof dated the 4th day of April, 1966, between the City and the District • • I • • - (J £J • • • • • • Ac~ordingly, Exhibit A referred to in paragraph 1 of the Modification to the Connector's Agreement dated the 4th day o f April, 1966, is hereby amended to include the additional area as set forth hereinabove. 2. Each and every other provision of the Modifica tion to the Connecto r's Agreement dated the 4th day of Apri l , 1966, shall remain unchanged. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused their names and seals to be hereunto subscribed and affixed this day of ATTEST: CITY CLE RK (SE A L) ATTEST: (SEAL) MAYOR SOt.rrHGATE S AN I TATION DISTRICT ARAPAHOE AND DOUGLAS COUNTIES, COLO RA DO -2 - ...... I • • HILLS VILLAGE (~ 6 AVE . D VIL LA GE ORCHARO ROAD • 12 ~ a ,. ~ ~ i Iii 17 fMl'f~flHcJt • • - t; 0 I "' ::, 0 Iii ~/) • "' • 0 ,. I . • • • - MEMORANDUM TO: City of Englewood Water and Sewer Board FROM: s·,ewart Fonda, Director of Utilities DATE: March 4, 1982 RE: Torba complaint status report Enclosed is the water usage history for 3187 W. Grand Avenue since occupied by Mr. and Mrs. James Torba. The water charges have varied considerably during this period with the largest charges occuring during the s111mer months. The latest reading was taken on February 22, 1982 and the usage recorded is 68,000 gallons for three months usage. This usage is somewhat higher than the February reading of last year. Personnel from the water department checked the Torba property for leaks. When all water outlets were shut off, no water was registered through the meter. Upon flushing the conmode, the meter registered about six gallons of usage. The Torbas witnessed this experiment. The results indicate there are no leaks in the service line or in the house. It must be concluded the water measured through the meter was utilized by the Torbas. Since the City code only allows for a reduction in a water bill if leakage is found and a pl1.111ber is contacted to repair the leak within 72 hours, it is rec011111ended no reduction be made in the Torba's bill. It is very probable that an error was made in reading the Torba's meter on August 14, 1981. This resulted in a low August reading and the water which was not recorded in August was accounted for on the next reading. These mistakes occur rather frequently when reading an old dial-type meter. In cases where the metered dials are difficult to read and an apparent error is found, the department will nonnally arrange for payments to be spread out over a period of time. This has alread,y been done for the Torbas. While many of these old meters exist in the City, the homeowner is not required to bear the expense of a new meter with a digital read-out. The homeowner is responsible for the meter and may elect to install a n meter to avoid occasional inaccurate readings. At present, no homeowner has made such I change and the City continues to work with homeowners in cases such as this. The present payment schedule for the Torbas is a more lenient pa,Y111ent schedule than if the reading had b en correct and charges were due and payable when read . • I • • - (~ • • • • It has been the policy of the Water and Sewer Board and City Councils not to allow any reversion from a metered account to a flat rate acco unt . It is strongly recon111ended that no change in this pol icy be considered. s}/t v~~ Stewart H. Fonda Director of Utilities City of Englewood I . • :1 • • • • • 04045-318 / 3187 W. Grand Avenue James Torba ROG. DATE ROG. USED WTR. CHG. SWR. CHG. 11-19-79 887 42 $ 39.70 $ 4.25 2-12-80 897 10 11. 22 9.70 5-8-80 929 32 30.80 9.70 8-11-80 995 66 61.06 9. 70 11-12-80 11 16 16.56 9.70 2-12-81 48 37 35.25 9.70 5-13-81 90 42 39.70 9.70 8-14-81 101 (201) 11 ( 111) 12.11(101.11)9.70 11-19-81 328 227 (127) 204.35(115.35)9.70 2-22-82 396 68 Items in parenthesis indicate readin9s and char']es if meter would have re~islered correctly . • REMARKS FINAL READING EST. -SNOW METER TURNED OVER I . • I I ! s " I J.~ -' r-• • • • - L I I J __ • I w Vii S.5 AU S T. /.,fr.'K ~ (I N S , I 2 ' ~ ' .... .... /.,/,.. ... ·'--·. '-"""' ATT. s I I I ·~ /;ROA /J W/1 r4 t. I .A LJ l >IT ,ON __ I .;s I 4'1 I 1 43 ;.,, " 4 2 '"\J r· ,•. ' l' I ,, -. ~ I I, I • • • • - ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTIIORITY 3535 So. Sherman-Englewood, CO 80110 5 :., Wednesday, Mar c h 10, 1982 MINUTES Board Members Present: Coleman, Gasson, Holthaus, Maxwell, Neal, Owens, Pendleton, Robohm Board Members Absent: Bush, Kaufman, Mausolf Staff Present: M. Haviland, E. Haviland Guests & Visitors: Gordon Close, dba/Englewoo d; Justin Schultz, an a ssociate of Mrs. Owens in commercial real estate Board Chairman Holtha us called the regular metin g to order at 12:1 0 P .M. Mrs. Owens 1110ved that the Minutes of the r egular meeting of February 10, 1982 be approved a s distributed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pendl e - ton and was approved unanimousl y by voice vote. The bills for payment were presen ted to the Board. Mr. Haviland gave an explanation of requisition no. 11308, payment to Eleanor Haviland for marketing research, and the rationale for the decision, which was pre- viously presented to the executive board. In view of an article wh ich appeared in The Sentinel regarding the hiring, Hr. Haviland sought direction from the Board on the matter. Mr. Coleman said that necessary work had been accomplished in a very cost effective manner relative to other alternatives available. Mr. Neal said that h had not hea rd any co11111ents from other members of Council in r es ponse to the article in The Sentinel ~ After further discussion, Mr. Coleman made a 1110tion , which~- was seconded by Mrs. Owens, that Mrs. Haviland be thanked for a job well done and that the Board convey to her its hope that she might be avail- able for future projects. Th motion was ca rrie d unanimously by voice vote. Hrs. Owens then made a motion that all bills be paid aa presented . It was seconded by Mr. Pendleton and carried by voic e vo t e. Mr. Gas on pr sented the Tr easur r 's repo rt. He observ d r garding the r v nue-to-date section that th p r o perty tax is just startin to com i n and will not b received in full for a coupl of 1110nth s . Hr . Havi- land pr s nt ed Re so lution No. 2, Sri s of 1982 and explained it as a pap rwork item requ std by Hr. Lowry of the Ci ty Financ Department. Hr . Robohm moved that th r olution b approv d. Mr. eal s cond d th motion, which w a th n carried by vote vo t . Mr. Pendleton mad a IIOtion, second e d by Hr s. n s , that th Tr a ur r's r epo r t b approv d. Th motion was carri dun n i mou ly by vote vat . r I • • Page Two Regular Board Mee ting March 10, 198 2 • • Mrs. Owens reported on the work of th e zo n i n g committee which was ap - pointed at the February meeting. She said th e committee met twic and had prepared for the Board's approval a numb e r of recommendations re- garding the proposed revisions to the B-1 zo nin g district. She also told the Board that the committee did not feel it appropriate to have a separate, more restrictive list of us e s for a D-D district. Inst e a d the committee felt that the key factors that will produce an attract i ve and cohesive downtown area will be conunon design standards that will control such things as signag e, building facade, building height, e tc. and a single management structure that will regulate operations throu gh hours of pick-up and delivery, hour s of operation, maintenance, and consistent promotion and me rchandi s l.n g. Recognizing that the downt own district really i ncludes two d istinc t a r e as -t he Br oadway str i p an d the mall link between Broadwa y and Cind e r e lla Ci ty -the c ommitt ee sees a need for DD-1 (mall) a nd DD-2 (Broadway s trip) subdistrict s. Each would be subject t o the same des i gn guide line s s o that a sin gle identity would be create d, but b ecau se Br o adwa y wo uld be l ess pe d es- trian-oriented than the mall, s ome of the o pe rati ona l rule s would be d i fferent. Some concern s were ra ised abo ut whe ther a mana gement dis- trict wo u ld ha ve t he e n fo r cement powe r s necessary to ma ke such a con- cept work. Mr. Ha viland sugges t ed that since t he commi tte hadn 't had the time to r efine it s t hou ghts on th DD district t ha t h s t up a meeting betwee n t he comm it tee and t he City 's Community Development s taff to explore t he concep t fu rther. The Boa r d di r cted Mr . Hav iland to proceed alon g t hese lin s . Mr . P ndle t on rnovc-d tha t t he Board ad pt and forward to the Cit y 's De partme t of Commu n ity De ve l opme nt the committee 's recomm en ded c ha n g e s to t he pr opo s ed B-1 zo ning c l ass i fi- cation (see atta chme nt). Th e mo tion was sc-co nd cd by Hr . Ga sso n and approved by vo i c e vote . S ince EDDA's leas on i t s pr esen t Holthaus appointe d a c ommitt e c o Owns, and Hr. Col eman t o l ook a t cussion ensued on oth r op t ions. from the landlord fo r t h pr es n agre ement. Chairm n Holthaus no t d tha Gasson , nd Kaufm.-in) hav t EDDA 's Rul s, the Board u1 City Council 60 d y1 prior to th office space expir es Ma y 1 , Chairman pos d of Mr. Ga sson (c hairman ), Mr s. the a lt r na t iv s . Som bri ef d is- Hr . Hav iland wa s a s ked tor qu st pace ap r o po s d 1 a se renew 1 th Hol t haus appointed co ltt consi1tin of Hr. P ndl ton Hiss Bush, nd Mr. Clo, (dbo/En 1 od) to put tog ther a cand ido t ,. 0 Hr. Havil nd bri fly r vi w d H also di1tr i buted th had d vot d con1id •1 bl TI1 o vera l l coordinator of wi l l be responsibl to th th Board apropos d c ntra Liltl H Dry Cr ek proJ ct. not d that th T m nd re1pon1ibiliti 1 . Desi n Wor hop, which r. Havtl nd pres nt d to Workshop and th • I) I • • - • • Page Three Regular Board Meeting March 10, 1982 • • • ment Team for the coordinating role. As coordinator Design Workshop will set forth the work program and insure that the public and private portion s of the development process mesh. This role is very similar to that which Design Workshop played dur ing Lh c plann ing process for which they c oor- dinated the transportation, open spac e /pedestrian, d esign, financin g , and market analysis elements. In re s pons e to ques tions regarding cost of the contract, Mr. Haviland responded that it was proposed that the cost would be projected by Design Workshop on a quarterly basis. The decision as to the cost sharing split among the Ci ty, EDDA, and Brady Enterprises has not yet been made. Mr. Pendleton mov ed that the Board accep t the contract and authorize Mr. Havil an d to enter into it on be- half of the EDDA. The motion was second ed by Mr. Gasson and approved by a voice vote. Mr. Haviland requested Board approval for him to travel to Baltimore on March 12-13 with several members of the City staff, Brady Enter- prises, and Design Workshop to visit the Rouse Company, which is one of the foremost developers in the nation of mixed use projects. Mr. Neal made a motion, seconded by Mr . Coleman, to approve the necessary e,q,enditures for the trip. It was approved by voice vote. Mr. Haviland distributed to the Board mem be r s the final version of the Downtown Development Plan. No Board action wa s necessary since the Board had approved the final draft in the fall. Mr. Haviland reviewed the activities of the Urban Renewal Authority and their work on an Urban Renewal Plan. Also given to the Board members wer c opies of Denver Downtown Partnership, Inc., a study of a pu blic/private manage- ment structure for Denver's 16th Ave. Hall . Mr. Haviland said that the management role discussed in the study is similar to the ro le t hat has been suggested for the EODA in the post-dev lopm nt phase. The final item discuss d was the outline of roles fo r the EDDA, URA , and the City in the development process. This proposed division of responsibilities grew out of the meeting between City Cou nc il and the EDDA Board on Feb rua ry 21, 198 2. Th re wa s general agreement with th e con t ent of the outline as explained by Mr. Haviland. There being no further busines s , th meetin g wa s adjourn d at 2:00 P.H • • r I • • - • • • • ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS The Board rec0111111ends that the following change s be made in the proposed B-1 Business District zoning classification: 1. Antique stores should be defined in a less restrictive aanner. Many items considered to be of value are less than 100 years old. 2. Add a category of consignment stores. 3. Delete caterers. Catering should be allowed as an accessory use to restaurants, hotels, or grocery stores but not as a primary use. 4. Change collection and distribution station for l aundry and dry cleaning to retail laundry and dry cleanin g (excluding self-service). 5. Under apparel and accessory stores, delete qualification that not more than 20% of stock may be of second-hand ori- gin and add exclusion for non-profit second-hadd stores. Make the same change for furniture stores. 6. Delete restaurants (redundant with eating and/or drinking establishments); add to eating and/or drinking establish- ments an exclusion for drive-in types. 7. Limit printing shops to those using an 11 "xl 7" offset press. • r I • • - • • • • Engl~ Parks and Recreation O:mnissi.on Minutes of March 11, 1982 S" I TI"'le regular m:,nthly rreeting of the Englew:xxl Parks and Recreation Coornission was called to order at 5 :20 p.m. by the Chairman, Jack Poole, in the In-Service Training Roan of the Parks and Recreation office . Menbers present : Allen, Boar<ban, Bradshaw, Higday, 1-klward, Poole, Richards, Romans, ex officio Menbers absent : tble Also present : Becky Rademacher, Recreation Youth Col.ncil Jeff Weist, Recreation Youth CoUlcil Chairman Poole asked if there were any additicns or correcticns to the minutes of the imeting of February 11, 1982. There were none . A tIDti.on was made and sec- onded that the minutes be approved . The tIDti.on passed . There has been sooe discussi.on in the past concerning the Ccmnissi.on imeting time and it is felt that 5 :00 p .m. is perhaps a little inconvenient for sane Ccmni.ssion meubers due to ccoflicts with their work schedules, and therefore a time change may be in order . After 1lllCh discussion, Ccmnissioner Boarchan Clllde a m:>tion that the ueet- ing time be changed fran 5 :00 p .m . to 5 :10 p .m. on a three IID'\th trial basis . The ti.on was seccnded and passed . Concerning whether or rot the Ccmnissioners srould pay for their san,:i.,i.ches for these 5 :00 p .m. O:mnission tings. O:mnissioner Higday DBde a DDti.on . seconded by si.oner Allen, that payrrent for these sandr.rishes should and Recreati budg t . The ti.on passed . from the Parks Cooceming r rgani.zati.on of the Youth Cc,.sicll, Director Ranan reported that s everal ways to reorganize the Youth Co..llc il ar being considered. (}le would that the school principals \oQlld keel to ppoint r pr entative , another wOUld to l veth r r ti.on st.aff OUL too C per w"ho loOUld be interested and "'°uld be willing to a Youth Clll.racil. An educational .-vi orientati.on progr could started with •DT-.i.,.tativ to acquaint with the W)t'kings of City and p ti.on par toner Boammn ted • I • • • • • :i1gl~ Parks and Recreation Comnissi.on Minutes of March 11, 1982 Page -2- perhaps scxre sort of notoriety or educational credit may be awarded for their involve- ne1t in Q:mni.ssion matters . The Parks and Recreation staff will cootinue to delve into different possibilities of inwlvanent for youth in the middle and high school age group and make a report at a later date . Comnissiooer Richards entered the meeting at 5 :40 p.m. Several of the O::moi.ssion llll!Di>ers expressed an interest in viewing first hand the progress in the oonstructi.on of the golf course clubh::>use. It was decided that at the April 8, meeting, the ambers will meet at City Hall at 5 : 30 p. m. and then travel by recreation van to the clubhouse site for vie.ling and an explanati.on of the progress on oonstructi.on . Comnissiooer Bradshaw discussed the outcane of a ameting betwaal the Centernial/ Bi.Centennial FO\Riation Camd.ttee and the Malley Trust F\ni Ccmnittee that she attended . The CEr.ternial/BiCenternial FCAS\dati.on has $53,000 in bal.alce that they ..ould release if it were to go coward the purchase of the bio parcels of land that lies east of the Malley Center . The Malley Trust F\ni Ccmni.ttee would like to see the balance of $53,000 be placed in the Malley Trust F\ni to be used as City Col.llcil and the Malley Center Trust fuld Coomittee determines as the greatest need . · sioner Allen sugg ced that those people 1b>ae donat:iooa are being held be aade aware of the si ti.on, and also suggested that a political ad be tu1 in the news - pa r for the purpo of making the sit uation public . It> firm decisial was made al this c· ld 00 Parks • sioner Pool reminded the Comni.ssial uartiers of a special aeeting being ch 22, 1982, 6 :00 p .m., in the Ubrary c.onfera,ce Room, to include the R.ecr ti.al sial, the Englewood Camulity Center Ccmnittee and the City ity center . ting adjourned at 5 :55 p.m . • I . • - • TD: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: • • • l'IEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor Eugene L. Otis and Members of City Council Louis Parkinson, Municipal Judgejl? March 23, 1982 MUNICIPAL COURT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR FEBRUARY, 1982 Attached is the Municipal Court Activity Report for the month of February, 1982. The report is being transmitted to keep you fully infonned of Court activity and requires no action by City Council . /b Att. I . . - REVENUE SOURCE ttJNICIPAL COURT ACTIVITY REPORT FE BRUARY 1982 Violati on s Bureau Fines-------------------$ 4,673.00 Parking Violations Fines------------------$ 7 ,031.00 Court Cases-------------------------------$ 12 ,049.00 Court Cos ts-------------------------------$ 3,679.00 Witness Fees------------------------------$ 85.00 Jury Fees---------------------------------$ (-5.00) Bond Forfei tures--------------------------S 800.00 Driver l~ro-t School Fees------------$ 255.00 A!)peal Bond Fees--------------------------$ -0- • • • FEBRUARY 1981 5,722 .00 6,160.00 9 ,610.00 3,020.00 70.00 50.00 250.00 300.00 -0- TOTALS FOR YEAR 11,280.50 12,628.00 27,155.00 7,709.00 235.00 50.00 1,360.00 585.00 -0- TOTALS LAST YEAR 10,957.00 14,809.56 22,621.00 7,375.00 120.00 75.00 400.00 615.00 -0- Ar apahoe Coun ty (OUl 's)-------------------$ 462 .50 1 1 145.00 11 557 .SO 2 1050.00 TOTALS S 29,029.50 26,327.00 62,560.00 59,022.56 ARRAIGNMENTS------------------------------ Guilty pleas, (Incl. nolo plus)----- Not Guilty plus--------------------- Con t'd., Failed to Appear, Dlsl'l,----- TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS BUIIEAU (no Pkg.)------- Gui 1 ty pleu------------------------- Not Gui 1 ty plus--------------------- TRIALS SCHEDULED FOR P«>NTH---------------- Trhls to the Court (held)----------- Jury trials (hel d)------------------- Jurles col laps@d--------------------- Pre-trlal Conferences (J ury Trlals )------- Mlndatory and Opt iona l Pre-trlals--------- Spech 1 Hurl ngs-------------------------- Cases closed by dlsPOs It Ion (P .B. )-------- Cases cl os@d by Def . Pros/Sentence-------- Drlver Sc'-1 attendance-'"·--------------- W.rrants and Executions lssued------------ Caus pending (not Incl. part.Ing )--------- • Of CASES FILED BY CATAGORY, Traff I c v lo 1 a ti ons ------------------------ Par Ing violations----------------------·· Stiopl 1ft Ing violations------··---·-···---· Other ordinance vlolatlons--·-····---·---- MIN l ordinance vlohtlons--·--------···- COll!)lllnts (c1tfr , stlts tu, bldg.)--·· TOTALS 3~~ubll1tted BAAIIARA J. PC ~ Clerk of Munlc ~I Court (/ cc : Judge Louis Parkinson 286 135 83 68 289 160 129 48 (!!l 4f P~l l 25 Z84 81 209 11 19 53 1,462 382 1,135 23 57 11 __ o 1,608 301 145 92 64 327 245 82 179 (J!) 155 ( 19l 24 ( 0 24 25 205 46 us 5 28 64 1,679 377 1,010 29 ~ )6 __ 1 1,507 Honorable Mayor [ L. Otis and rs of City Council rs of Court Advlaory C I ttN Andy Mc , City "'"' r Rick ltt, Ci ty Attornty II rt Hol s, C l tf of Poll Gtry HI , 01 tor of Ftntnct Carol ne J. tt r, Court tnhlJ'ltor • 677 307 200 170 665 377 288 !!! (42) 105 (4ll 13 ( 1 12 66 585 156 442 15 40 1)6 844 2,347 B2 134 15 __ 2 3,424 745 335 232 178 660 495 165 465 (ll) 4il !2;l 44 46 385 107 258 9 46 164 959 2,242 53 93 55 __ 1 3,403 I • • • • - MEMORANDUM TO: Andy Mccown, City Manager FROM: Susan Powers, Community Development Director DATE: March 30, 1982 SUBJECT: REPORT ON OUT-OF-STATE TRIP TO BALTill>RE, MARYLAND On March 12 and 13 I had the opportunity to visit Baltimore , Maryland to view the downtown redevelopment program. The primary purpose was to meet with Monk Askew, the Vice President for Planning and Design of Rouse Corporation. This corporation was responsible for the redevelopment of a part of the Inner Harbor area. The Englewood Management COlmllittee felt that it would be quite helpful for EDDA, City and Brady Enterprises representatives to meet together with a corporation that has undertaken several successful redevelopment efforts. The Rouse Corporation has been involved with downtown redevelopment in Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia, New York and other communities. These projects have all been public-private ventures in one form or another. In order to gain an accurate sense of the partnership approach to the Baltimore project I felt it was important to meet with the public sector as well as the private sector. Therefore on Friday, March 12, 1982, I scheduled a series of m etings with representatives of the various public bodies that were and continue to be involved with the Baltimore redevelopment efforts. The structure of Baltimore municipal government is quite different than that of Englewood but the lessons they have learned are certainly transferable. Baltimore has two distinct redevelopment efforts proceeding simultaneously. One project is the Inner-Harbor redevelopment which is primarily new construction on vacant prop rty which was City owned for many years. This is the project in which Rouse i s involv d. Using a traditional Urban Renewal approach, the City had acquired property and invested many dollars (mostly federal) i~ public improve nts so that private investment in the area would occur. After several y rs of waiting for a dev loper willing to take a ri k, the City was able to obtain comad tment from Rouse. The coordination of the public and private investment program in this ar a was handled by the Inner-Harbor Management Corpora tion, a branch of the City which was specifically created for this pr oj ect. Th staff of this organization is hired by the City and reports to the Co mmissioner of Housing and ComaJnity Development for Baltimore. According to the staff memb r met with, the corporation was formed by the Mayor to giv specific att ntion to one project. Thia organization serves as the advocate ford v lop nt in accordance with tha adopted Urban Renewal Plan for the area. The st f!, nd the City Bouaing and CollllUDity Develop118nt Departaent handle th n otiation of all contacts with prosp ctiv developers. They also review all pl ns presented for complianc with agr ... nt and design standards. An indep nd nt archit ctural revie board coaposed of paid private architects compo an archit ctural review board and thy .. ke reco ... ndations on plans to • ) I • • • Andy McCown, City Manager March 30, 1982 Page 2. • • - the Collllllissioners of Housing and Co11DDUnity Development. The staff has developed block by block design standards and controls for private development which are part of a "prospectus" which serves as a request for proposals. Once a developer is chosen , there is a "disposition agreement" signed between the City and developer to assure that the development occurs as planned, We were able to obtain a copy of a sample of a disposition agreement which will be of great assistance to us. My general impression of this project is that it was extremely expensive from the public standpoint. While it is an exciting area to be, I would not use it as a model for other development. There is quite a bit of under-utilized property and the link between the various privately developed complexes is weak, if at all existent. The location along the harbor is wonderful as a people place and the pedestrian traffic generated is quite impressive. Economically the project is considered a success for Rouse but as a downtown project something is still lacking as a center city project, The second redevelopment effort revolves around the core of the older downtown area. This project involves new construction as well as extensive mandatory rehabilitation of existing buildings in the area. This again is an urban renewal project in which the City , using another corporation -The Market Development Corporation -acquired certain parcels and this property is now being resold to private developers. I felt that there were numerous similarities with this program and Englewood's. There is a very active businessman's organization in the older downtown area and they have played an active role in pushing for the various elements of the project. Within the center of the downtown is a farmers' market which serves the adjacent residential area and downtown workers. The City is in the process of expanding the building that houses the market and the result will be an impressive structure which uld provide a focal point for downtown activity. Adjacent to the market is a pedestrian mall (2 blocks in length) that links the market to the office development downtown. Because of th number of existing structures it wa s n c ssary for the Market Development Corporat ion to develop a strategy to address r novation of these units, There is a 111Ulti-pronged approach which is fairly "Big Brother" in nature. Ast of design guidelines was develop d and incorporated into the urban renewal plan. When the urban renewal plan was approved by th Council, thy also enacted a mand tory commercial r hab progr for businesses within ad fined area. The busin aa s w r given two y are to comply and that ti p riod expires in Kay of this y ar. Thu far many businesa own ra hav participated with the knowl dg that when th ti p riod expir a the City will impoa a $100/day fine on th prop rty Th t D v lop nt Corporation alao baa a atr t tr planting program in th which r quir s participation from the property owners or 1 ea to agr ment ia aign d with th City for the City to install the tr prop rty er agr es to maintain th tree. The main point of the Dir t or o this corporation, Bill Pacy, wa1 that nothing will occur if it ia left one voluntary baai • H aaid that Baltimore tried that for years and it did not occur and with th support of the downtown buaineaa111an, th mandatory y1 m wi ll be cceptable to th majority b cauae the reaulta are apparent very quickly. B th individu la atr aa d the ne d or a red v lop nt pro raa to ucc or atrong political and technical lead rahip d, Thia w a rep ated tiae and tillle again. • I • • - • • And y McCown March 30 , 1982 Page 3. • • • On March 13, 1982, we met with Monk Askew, the Vice President for Planning and Design for Rouse Corporation, and he discussed the overall development process and the role of marketing. This session was obviously quite different since it was the "private" sector perspective rather than the public sector view. We discussed extensively how a project is conceived and what makes it "unique". This continues to be a major question in our minds, i.e., what is our theme and why are we different from other suburban redevelopment projects. The entire visit to Baltimore was vary valuable in that it helped ua focus on the important issues that Englewood must begin to address. While we have discussed these issues throughout the preparation of the downtown plan, we have not defined policies related to such issues as mandatory controls, condemnation and the general use of eminent domain by the City and Urban Renewal Authority, among others. I hope over the next month we can find some time to discuss these issues with the Council because they are critical to our progress in downtown redevelopment. I have a stack of material from the trip that I would be glad to make available to the Council. cla • I • • - • • • • MEMORANDUM 5(L) TO: FROM: Mayor and Members of City Council Ma yor Pro Tern Bradshaw Council Member Bilo Council Member Weist DATE: March 31, 1982 SUBJECT: CONGRESSIONAL-CITY CONFERENCE The annual Congressional-City Conference sp onsored by the National League of Cities, was held in Washington, D. C., February 27 through March 2 , 1982. Attending the meet ing were Councilmembers Joe Bilo and Bob Weist and Mayor Pro Tern Bev Bradshaw. The events attended were as follows: POLICY LEADERS SEMINAR: EVERYTHING YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT LOBBYING BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK The major theme of this workshop wa s tha local officials should maintain contact with their federal officials year round. We should al so become very familiar with the different committees and commissions on which our representatives and senators sit. Once a year lobbying at the LC co ngress will not get the jo b done for issues of local conce rn. The national leader s are more concerned with the general issues of the country than special interest groups. As a council, we should keep an ongoing communica - t ion with our representatives' and sena tor s' local offices and report to these people our concerns on a regular basis. The better acquainted the local officials are with the Congress and national issue nd he more articulate the request for the local entity with the na ional issue , the better the chances are for response to h local concerns. POLICY LEADERS SEMINAR: LEVERAGI G THE ECO OMIC RECOVER TA ACT OF 1981-- Them jor theme of this s ssion benefit of er tive lo alities. need to know is how tom nipul to th cit1 ben fit. This i dminis r tion , thi progr m d fu uri i pl nning swell was that the ERTA is to the All the local official te th incentive programs not handout lie in other nds specific, concise and rri g between th priv te • , I • • • MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Page 2 March 31, 1982 • • • and publi c sectors. ERTA c an be a very valuable planning and incentive tool for the progressive city with the help of a private developer. LABOR RELATION S ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING The advisory committee participated in a question and answer period with an informal talk by each member. The major issues were: public sector strikes down 50% from 1979; Long Island Railroad vs United Transportation Union; Teal Case in Con necti c ut ; problems with "contracting out" ci ty services; combining the fire departments with police and/or public work s; and amendments to the Davis-Bacon Act. Potential labor demand s at the ne gotiation table in 1982 will be: no layoffs or RIF; comparable worth, backed mainly by AFSCME; and no contracting out by ci tie s . The main message to local officials is to direct their s taf fs to clean up contracts with employees to prevent litigation on minor issues . COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPME T POLICY co~~l ITTEE SEMI AR: "THE FUTURE OF ASSISTED HOUSING PROGRAMS" The overall theme of this session was very negative and total responsibility pointed to the Reagan administration. I really doubt that he or his cabinet members are the cau e for the problems in this area. The fact that all major programs not under construction are being pulled back to HUD and the talk of the "voucher" system wa s the main topic afte r the "finger pointing" directed tow ard Capitol Hill. The problems with th e voucher system is that he current thought is to send the money directly to the individualwhich has never been a good policy and should be discouraged. HUMA DEVELOP lE NT POLICY COMMITTEE SE MI AR: "CRIMI AL JUSTICE" The maj?r theme of thiss~ssion was that our c urrent judicial syst m 1s too bogged down to deal with any more liberal- ized laws. They cannot handle the load they h ve now ! rt i up to the i ndividual citie and local officials o address their local law issues in n innovative nd effec iv manner without putting more bodies of lessor offenses in o the justice sy tern. Local citizens s hould • I • • MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Page 3 March 31, 1982 • • - work with public officials to help develop prevention and rehabilitation programs without sentencing minor offenders. This needs to be addressed in Englewood in light of the cruising issue. Restitution or working off one's fine are viable alternatives . THE FI A CE ADMINISTRATIO AD INTER-GOVERNMENTAL RELATIO POLICY SEMI AR: Federalism-discussed by Murray L. Weidenbaum, Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors, was divided into two parts: one, to reduce the size and burden of the Federal government and two, a revenue sharing pro- gram to strengthen state and local governments. This would be accomplished through a comprehensive four point program (long term) by : 1. Monetary Policy 2. Regulatory Relief 3. Tax Cuts 4. Budget Cuts This solution would be directed toward growth restoration and the goal of reduction of Federal government size. I TER,GOVER METAL POLICY AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES: "Anti-trust" law suits discussing the recent Boulder, Colorado, anti-trust decision. The 1943 Parker/Brown case cited immunity of cities from anti-trust attacks seems to have been overturned. Under the Sherman Anti-trust Act, there are no sovereign cities -bu states are considered sover 1gn. The rights of sovereignty and choosing of local governments have to be que tion d, a s well as the granting of local autonomy. Case of nti -trust cited, involved Cable T , zoning actions, refuse, minicipal air - ports rights and ta es and prices in golf cour e pro shop Statu ory pro e tion seems to be: "tr at municipalities no diff r nt than individuals." Hom Rule seem to have been destroyed by the decision. Cities must know thoroughly: 1. Anti -trust laws and 2. Anti -trust udits. CREATl E FI ACING The topic of John Peters n, Director of th Rese rch Cent r, W shing on, D. C. Current will continue to decree eon the v r e of becau of the reality of curren • Fin ncial Fed r 1 gr nts 101 per doll r the dmrnistra ion ) I • • - • MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Page 4 March 31, 1982 • • - is making radical major public policy changes. The present plan aims to cut aid to cities from 11 billion dollars to 7 billion dollars. This will be seen in the declination of grants starting in 1982 -49.7 billion dollars 1983 -43.8 billion dollars 1984 -41.9 billion dollars 1985 -40.2 billion dollars Local ent1t1es should consider their finance of capi tal with long-term borrowing and municipal bonds. LEGISLATIVE WORKSHOP: ENVIRONMENT The reauthori z ation of the Clean Air Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery and Safe Drinking Water Acts were the key topics by State Representative, Albert Gore, Jr., of Tennessee . The issue of safe water and how the hazardous waste disposal legislation relates to Colorado mining was discussed. o "sure fire" answers were given. All was dependent upon Congress enacting legislation. These issues have yet to be addressed. Ann Gorsuch from EPA was unable to attend this workshop. (Several of the scheduled speakers backed out at the last minute.) Senator Hart of Colorado spoke on his Clean Air Act and its rela- tion to the s pecific problems of the Brown Clo ud in Colo rado. Senator Duremberger of finnesota discussed the idea of the ew Federalism. His main co n cern wa s that s tate bureaucracy would be substituted for federal bureaucracy. The high lights of thi semina r were the meetings with Senators rmstrong and Hart and a speech by Vice President Bush. Also, the meetings with Representatives Kramer and irth. Th centr 1 theme and the over riding subject of the entire conference as the ew Federalism and the impact on citi s. It is clear that there will be many cutbacks detrimental to local governments, particularly smaller itie . We thank Council for the opportunity to attend. Attached i n overview from LC which will be of interest to you. pc A chm nt I • • • • • - NLC PRIORITIES -1982 Overview The Nation's cities enter 1982 facing severe financial problems. In 1981 Federal aid to states and local governments was sharply reduced, affecting cities directly and reducing the ability of states to provide needed assistance; high interest rates raised borrowing costs for all cities, forcing many to defer going to the market altogether; the national recession, which began in the late summer of 1981 and continues today, added to unemploy- ment rolls and further reduced local revenues; and finally, these problems became more severe at a time of growing agreement that our public infrastructure of roads, bridges, transit facilities, and water and sewerage works was in rapid decline, and too much of our human capital is unprepared to enter the job market, jeopardizing the national economic revitalization effort. There area also major housing concerns throughout the nation that affect economic revitalization and that must be addressed. The President's FY 1983 budget continues the economic recovery program adopted last year; proceeds with large increases in defense spending and reductions in domestic program; and embarks upon ambitious and comprehensive efforts to reform the federal system through a sharp division of responsibilities between the national and state governments. The National League of Cities continues to support goals of economic revitalization and improving the operation and effectiveness of the federal intergovernmental system. We reaffirm our pledge to work with the Administration and the Congress to revi e the Nation's economy and to assure a balanced and healthy federal system. We believe, however, that certain policy changes are needed in 1982 if these goals are to be attained: • First , to assure the success of the economic revitaliza- tion program , action must be taken to deal with the conflict between tight money policy and expansionary fisc 1 policy; • Second, to enables ates and local governments to main- tain ess n ial public infrastructure and services to heir ci izens , adequate resources must be made available to th m; nd • Third, to assure th t we hav a strong nd healthy conomy which is competitive in international mark ts it i as nti l to have a national employm nt policy. Such policy mus include inves m nt in our human c pi al r ourc s consistent with our investment in he c pi land technologic l c ors of produc ion . • I • • • • - 2 Finally, we believe the President's federalism proposals deserve the most serious consideration. NLC is working with the Administration a nd Congress in developing the details of implementing legislation a n d p lans to review a n d c onsider alternative federalism proposals a nd develop specific reconunendations in this area at a special meeti ng of its Board of Directors in the near future. The Economy The combination of tax cuts, increases in defense spending, continued rapid growth of entitlement programs, and high interest rates is dri v i n g the federal budget deficit and the total national debt to d an g erous levels. The projected deficits for Fiscal Years 1983-1985 i nsure continuing high interest rates that will make it extremely d ifficult to attain the strong economic recovery that is the goal of current policies. What the economy requires is a gradual but firm approach that reduces the deficit to levels that will avoid he conflict between economic recovery and tight money policies. To a c hieve this goal, NLC recommends the following policies: Less Restrictive Monetary Policy. In 1981 monetary growth for the year as a whole was below the Federal Reserve Board's restrictive targets. A modest easing of monetary restraint may help to hasten the end of the current recession , aid ailing industries such as the automobile and housing industries, reduce federal borrowing costs, and provide needed help for essential local borrowings. Additional Revenues. Additional revenues in Fiscal Years 1983-1985 will help substantially to reduce the budget deficit. We believe that Congress should suspend the 10 percent tax cut scheduled for J uly 1983 and decide early next year whether and to what extent economic conditions warrant its reinstatement. Furthermore, we urge Congress to eliminate wasteful and obsolete tax loopholes i n c l ud ing the sell i ng of tax credits and the "all savers" certifi- cate . Hum a n Cap ita l I nvestment Program. A human capital investment prog r am must be e stablished which is based upon a strong national employment policy t o d e ve lop the human capital p otenti al of our nation. Such program s h o u ld in c lude employment ra i n i n g to address the remedial, job e n try , j ob retraining and dis pl a ce d worke r training needs of our peop l e . Th e pri vate sector i n c lud i ng bus i ness and labor must be direc t pa rtners in the effort. The federal government should p rovide ef f ec ti v e incentives fo r the p r i vate sector to invest in efforts o add ress these tra i ning needs. Local governments are commi tted t o f ulfilling their responsibi l ities in this partnership. S low r Growth in Defense Spending. During Fisc~' Years 1983-1985 defen s e spending is budgeted to increase by nearly 10 percent in real t e r ms , f ollo wing a substantial increase in FY 1982. Over a six- y ar period, Fiscal Years 1982-1987, three of every five new tax dollars will be needed to finance increases in defense spending. The • I • • • • - 3 sh are of the budget devoted to defense over this period will rise from about 28 percent in FY 1982 to 37 percent in FY 1987. In FY 1983 , the incre ase in defense spending will exceed cuts in domestic prog rams by about one third. LC believes that such phenomenal growth in defense spending , a principal cause of budget deficits, must be modestly restrained and thoroughly scrutinized. We recommend that the planned growth in defense spending be reduced to about 7 percent in real terms, an unprecedented rate of growth in peacetime, saving between $15 and 20 billion during the Fiscal Year 1983-05 period. Such modest reductions can be made without in any way endangering or jeopardizing the President's conunitment to modernize our defense forces. Slower Growth Instead of Cuts in Entitlement Spending. The budget proposes further reductions in entitlement programs, projecting cuts of $8.1 billion in the medicare, medicaid, food stamps, and AFDC programs . NLC believes that these additional cuts would place too heavy a burden on poor and working poor families. Programs which provide assistance to the poor, whether they are elderly, children, the disabled or the long-term unemployed should not bear a dispro- portionate share of funding reductions. Furthermore, such cuts should not create a disincentive to work, nor should they impose new fiscal burdens on local governments. Instead, we urge a temporary reduction in cost-of-living adjustments for all entitlement programs indexed to the Consumer Price Index, through legislation providing for a 75 percent of CPI adjustment for such programs during Fiscal Years 1983-1985. Adoption of all of these policies relating to the economy would restore needed confidence in our economic policies by reducing budget deficits during Fiscal Years 1983-1985, thus permitting monetary policy to support and facilitate the Nation's economic recovery . The Budget for Programs Affecting Cities Federal aid to states and localities continues to decline sharply. If the President's FY 1983 budget is approved, federal grants will decline from $105.8 billion in FY 1981 to $65.2 billion in FY 1982. A large portion of this deep cut will be in programs that direc tly benefit cities and their residents. We believe that states and localities are bearing an unfair share of the burden of restraint in fed eral spending, and call for a moratorium on further cuts in state and local programs. NLC conunends the President for proposing to fund key urban programs-- ge neral revenue sharing, community development block grants and UDAG, mass transit capital grants, and wastewater treatment construc- tion grants--at current FY 1982 levels. Despite extremely difficult budget problems, the Administration has demonstrated an understandin g of and commitment to he important services provided under these programs. I • • • • • 4 we are greatly concerned, however, over cuts proposed in other p rograms that directly affect those who can least afford reductions in services, as well as the fundamental conditions for sustained economic growth: • in housing for those of low and moderate income assisted by HUD's section 8 and public housing programs, • in mass trans it operating assistance which provides linkage between workers and jobs and consumers and services essential to the Nation's economic recovery and which provides mobility for those who cannot own or operate an automobile, • in highway assistance for cities which is critical for the development and maintenance of the infrastruc ture upon which the Nation's economic recovery depends, • in CETA employment training programs for the unemployed and underemployed who need training in basic skills and retraining for better job opportunities; at a minimum , employment training programs should be funded at current levels ($3 billion): such funds should be mandatorily allocated to units of general purpose governments by a federally-determined formula, • in low income energy assistance which helps the poor cope with extraordinary increases in heating and coo ling costs, and • in social services programs which provide a wide range of important services for the neediest in our communities. Additi onally, the statutory framework for environmental protection requi res an effective EPA to provide research and development, na tional standard-setting, and enforcement. These responsibilitie s are growing, not diminishing, and the EPA is already falling behin d on sta tutory deadlines for standard-setting. Nor do states and ci ties have the resources to take over these responsibilities. Therefore, EPA funding in the FY 1983 budget should be held level with EPA funding in FY 1982. There must be a more balanced approach to meeting the Nation's energy needs at the lowest cost to consumers and businesses. The Administration proposed to cut or eliminate program dollars and busi ness tax credits for conservation and renewable energy sources, while proposing increases or only modest reductions in program dol lars for corrunercial nuclear development and oil and gas develop- men . Since conservation and renewable energy sources repres nt cos -effective approaches to solving our energy problems, NLC urges Co n gress to continue funding for current programs in these areas. I • • n • • • 5 We urge the Congress to maintain funding for all of these important services and activities at FY 1982 levels. The New Federalism NLC believes that the President's proposal t o restru cture the f ederal system is a bold and significant initiative, the most far- r eaching alteration of federal and state relationships s ince the New Deal. It is the intent of the National League of Citi es to p articipate with the Administration and the Congress in the dra f t ing o f proposals. To facilitate these discussions, NLC urges the Ad ministration and the Congress to consider the FY 1983 budget s e p arately and apart from its consideration of the framework of t h e New Federalism. Fo r local governments, it entails both important benefits and s erious risks. These benefits include a reasonable transiti on p eriod which provides time for needed adjustments; guaranteed "p ass throughs" of funds for direct federal-local programs for a spe c ified period; and certainty of funding for major urban prog rams, such as general revenue sharing and community develop- me nt blo ck grants, again for a specified period. At the same t i me, local governments could be subject to substan tial ri sks dur i ng the latter half of the trans i tion period and beyon d . These r i sks i nvolve primar i ly the treatment of local program need s b y s t ates after the in i tial guaranteed "pass through" period. We ask the Adm i n i stration to acti vely consider the following question s which e xp r ess municipal concern s. To what exten t wi ll s t a t e s abandon loca l programs as a result of the i r own exp and i ng state r espo n si- bilitie s? An d to what extent wi ll eq ui table state-local di stri b u- tion fo rmu l a s be developed after the termination of the f ede ral programs be i n g turned back ? In addition, t he p r opos a l ra ise s many other i mpo r tan t questions: d oe s it establ ish a pro p er d i v i s i on of gove r nm e n t al r esponsibil i tie s in the area of i n come mai ntenance? s h oul d the F e deral Governmen re a in residual or s h ared respon sib ility in any of the programs being t u rned back ? if state tax effort is to be relied on t o financ c ertai n program areas, should the proposal not addre ss the proble m o f f i scal disparities among the states? should there b e a requi r e ment that states maintain a certain l evel of effort in key program areas? if , as may b e i n evitable, states wi ll tend t o deal wi th their o wn expanding responsi b ilities i n the later years o f t he transiti on pe r iod , s h ould n o t state s be require d to stre ngthe n loca l t ax and fiscal cap aci ty ? In essen c e w rise three fund ame n t 1 issues: l . con e rn that t he prop osals n ot m rely substitute th st bure ucracy for th e d r 1 bureaucr cy; 2 . q u s t ions of equity; nd • I • • -• • • 6 3. fiscal capacity of other levels of governments to sustain adequate and appropriate services. Some of these questions will be answered during the development of imp lementing legislation being prepared by the Administration; others by alternative proposals such as that recently recommended by Senator David Durenberger of Minnesota. It is clear that a full and vigorous discussion of all alternatives will be undertaken before a consensus can be reached. NLC is working with the Administration on issues of concern to citi es raised by the President's federalism proposal. After con- sideration by our policy committees, this Board will analyze the President 's proposal, review and consider alternative proposals, and develop specific recommendations in this area at a special meeting to be held this Spring. Non-Budget Priority Actions As matters of high priority, the National League of Cities urges the Congress to take the following actions during the current session: • Enact fair housing enforcement amendments. • Reauthorize EDA. • Enact an enterprise zones program. • Reauthorize surface transportation programs and fund at FY 82 levels. • Immediately reauthorize airport development assistance (ADAP) for cities of all sizes and subsequently consider incre asing aviation user fees. • Oppose federal rules and laws which preempt state and local authority over cable services, hazardous materials, truck size and we ights, and airport noise. • Provide legislative relief from recent court decisions expanuing municipal official liability and restore municipal exemption from antitrust laws. • Reauthorize the Clean Air Act, retaining its most important provisions including deadlines, sanctions, and strong emission controls. • Reauthorize nd coordinate Federal water pollution and supply programs, including the Clean Water Ac nd th Safe Drinking Wat er Act, establishing a roundw ter protec ions r egy, and enacting a Wat r Bank to prot c nd increase water supply . • I • • - • • • • • • 7 • Enact Federal employment training legislation retaining the existing prime sponsorship system rather than turning over employment and training programs to the states, increasing the involvement of the private sector, and maintaining current eligibility criteria for parti- cipants. • Extend the Voting Rights Act as passed by the House of Representatives for ten years to insure complete elimination of all governmental practices which have the effect of denying fundamental voting rights. • Support technological innovation to improve the Nation's productivity. • Oppose the reduction of benefits to refugees . • I • • n • ORDINANCE NO. SERIES of 1982 • • • BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 21 INTRODUC~ .BY COUNCIL MEMBER l"{, R It:! I AN ORDINANCE CREATING PAVING DISTRICT NO. 28 IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF STREET PAVING, CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TOGETHER WITH NECESSARY INCIDENTALS, ON CERTAIN STREETS AND AVENUES: PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS IN PAYMENT FOR SAID IMPROVEMENTS: AND SETTING FORTH OTHER DETAILS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City Council of Englewood, Colorado, pursuant to the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, and the Laws of the State of Colorado, hereby finds and determines that there exists a necessity for the creation of Paving District No. 28, in the City, and the construction and installation therein of street paving, curb and gutter and sidewalk improvements, together with necessary incidentals, on certain streets and avenues: and WHEREAS, Notice of a public hearing concerning the creation of the District and the construction and installation of the improvements therein has been published once a week for three consecutive weeks in the Englewood Sentinel, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and in addition, a notice has been mailed, postage prepaid, to each known owner of real property within the proposed District; and WHEREAS, at the time and place set forth in the notice, the City Council met in open session for the purpose of hearing anv ob j ections or protests that might be made against the proposed district or the improvements to be constructed or installed; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined . that such protests and objections should be overruled; -1 • I • • n n - • • • • • BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. Creation of the District. That a special improvement district for the construction, installation or im- provement of the improvements hereinafter described, is hereby created and established in accordance with the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, and the Laws of the State of Colorado, and shall be known and designated as •paving District No. 2a•. All proceedinc;s heretofore taken and adopted in connection with the District are hereby ratified, approved and confirmed. Section 2. Engineering Plans and Specifications. That the engineer's reports, together with all of the details, specifi- cations, estimates, maps and schedules thereto attached or ap- pended, are hereby approved and adopted. Section 3. District Boundary. The extent of the District to be assessed for the cost of the improvements and the area to be included within the boundary of the District, shall be all the real property specially benefited, and fronting or abutt- i ng on the streets and avenues between the termini described in the following Section, including the real property within one-half (1/2) block of such streets and avenues. Sect ion 4. Description of Improvements. The kind of improvements and the streets and avenues on which such improve- ments shall be constructed or i nstalled shall be as follows: a. Necessary grading and excavat i on, paving with 6• compacted gravel base course and 2• asphaltic concrete surface, (except as noted at the end of the list of streets) concrete walks, curb and gutter where not preoently adequate; together with appurte- nances and incidentals on the following streets and avenues: -2- • I • • • • • • 00 ~ 'ID s. Acoma St . N. line J e f ferson Ave. N. line Kenyon Ave. s. Acoma St. s . line Kenyon Ave. N. line Lehigh Ave. s. Acoma St . s. line Leh i gh Ave. N. line Mansfield Ave. s. Acoma St. s. line Mansf i eld Ave. N. line Nassau Ave. s . Acoma St. s . line Nassau Ave. N. line oxford Ave. S. Acoma St . s. line Stanford Ave. N. line Tufts Ave. S. Cherokee St. s. line Yale Ave. N. line Amherst Ave. S. Cherokee St. s. line Antlerst Ave. N. line Bates Ave. S. Cherokee St. s . 1 ine Bates Ave. s. line Cornell Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Cornell Ave. N. line DartnDuth Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line oartnouth Ave. N. line Eastman Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Eastman Ave. N. line Floyd Ave. s. Lincoln St. s. line Kenyon Ave. N. line Lehigh Ave. s. Lincoln St. s. line Lehigh Ave. N. line Mansfield Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Yale Ave. s. line Amherst Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Amherst Ave. s . line Bates Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Bates Ave. s. line Cornell Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Cornell Ave. N. line DartnDuth Ave. w. Union Ave. E. line Decatur St. w. line of Clay Street The improvements constructed on So. Logan St. will consist of an a• compacted gravel base course and 3• asphaltic concrete surface; So. Logan Street is classified asan arterial street, and accordingly, the City will pay the difference in costs which exceed the cost for 6• base course and 2" asphalt surface, and the extra width cost. The improvements on West Union Avenue will also consist of an a• compacted gravel base course and 3" asphaltic concrete surface:-and because this portion of West Union Avenue is located in an industrial area, the amount to be assessed wi ll not exceed the costs for 6• base course and 2• asphalt surf ac e cost s . cess ary prepa r ation of prese nt surface, overl of same · asphaltic concre wa l k s , curbs, gu ere not a d e q uate ; app u rten~a~ni'e'1!'8"-.1uuL incid ent f o llow i ng streets 'ID Radcliff Drive w. line of 3170, 3173 w. W. line Federal Blvd . Radcliff Dr. Chenango Ave . E. line ID,,,ell Blvd. w. line Irvillg St. Stanford Ave . E. line I rvi ng St . W. line Federal Bl vd . Grand Ave. E. line Lowell Blvd. w. line Irving St. ,,,.sx Necessary replacement of walks, c u rbs , , gutters ~-where not present l y ad e qu ate; toge the r with appurte- nances and ot h er incid ental work o n t h e following streets and avenues: -3- I • • In • • - s. Acana St. s. line Quincy Ave. N. line Radcliff Ave. w. Bellewood Dr. E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Chenango Ave. E. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. Grand Ave. E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Layton Ave. E. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. l't:lnm:>uth Ave. E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Pimlico Ave. E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Saratoga Ave. E. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. Stanford .Dr. s. line Stanford Ave. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Tanforan Dr. E. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. Tufts Ave. E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. Unioo Ave. E. line Federal Blvd. E. line Decatur Section s. Imerovements Authorized. The construction or installation of the street paving, curb and gutter and sidewalk improvements, together with necessary incidentals, in and for the Distr i ct, as shown by the plans, specifications and .maps thereof, approved by the City Council of the City, is hereby authorized and ordered, the material to be used in the construction of said improvements to be in accordance with such maps, plans and speci- fi cations. Section 6. Assessment of Costs. The probable total cost of the improvements to be constructed or installed is sl.lJI, t/llJ ; it is proposed that the City of Englewood will pay approximately sJ.,,.~,,. the remainder of the cost will be assessed against the property within the district and specially benefited by the construction and installation of the improvements. The a p p roximate share of t he total cost to be as se ssed per front foot a gainst any lot o r tract of land front i ng o r abuttir.g on sa i d improvements will be as more particular ly set forth in the resolu- t i on passed and adopted on March 8, 1982, and which is incor- porated herein by specific reference. Section 7. Payment of Assessments. The assessments wi ll be due and payable without de mand within thirty ( 30) days f rom and after the f i nal publication of the Ordinance assessing the whole cost of said improveme n ts against the real property in the District. In the event an y o wner of real estate shall -4- , I • • • • • • fail to pay the whole of such assessment against his or her property within said thirty (30) days, then the whole cost of the improvements so assessed against such property shall be payable in ten ( 10) equal annual installments of principal. The first of such installments of principal shall be due and payable at such time as will be determined in the assessing ordinance and the -c:emainder of said installments shall be due and payable succes- sively on the same day in each year thereafter, until all are paid in full. The maximum rate of interest to be paid on unpaid and deferred installments shall not exceed 181 per annum, and will be established by· ordinance to be adopted by the City Council at a later date. Section 8. Special Improvement Bonds. By virtue of and pursu~nt to said laws and the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, local improvement bonds of the City shall be issued for the purpose of paying for the local improvements described in this Ordinance, in an amount not to exceed the cost and expenses of s aid i mprovements, including engineering, legal and inc i dental expenses, as provided by law. The bonds shall be issued based upon estimates approved by the City Council, and as authorized by an Ordinance to be passed by the City Council at a later date. The maximum rate of interest on special improvement bonds for Pav i ng Di strict No. 28, shall not exceed eighteen ( 18) per cent per annum. The bonds and the i nt e rest thereon shall be payable o u t of s pec ial asse s sments t o b e l e v i ed aga i nst the real property included wi th i n th e Dist r let and sp ec iall y be ne fi ted by the improvements to be constructed or install e d. Section 9. General Benefits. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the improvements proposed to be ·con- s tructed and installed will confer a special benefit upon the property within the District and a general benefit upon the City as a whole . Section 10 . Severability. That if any one or more sections or parts of this Ordinance shall be ·adjudged unenforce- able or invalid , such j u dgment shall not affect, impair or inval- idate the remaining provisions of this Ordinance, it being the intention that the various provisions hereof are severable. -s- I • • - • • • • Section 11. Hearing. In accordance with Section 40 of the City Charter, the City Council shall hold a . public hearin~ on this ordinance, before final passage, at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, April J:8,,2.1,1982. Section 12. Publication and Effective Date. This Ordinance, after its final passage, shall be numbered and record- ed, and the adoption and publication shall be authenticated by the signature of the Mayor and the Director of Finance, ex-officio City Clerk-Treasurer, and by the Certificate of Publication. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after publica- tion following final passage. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 7th day of April, Attest: Eugene L. Otis, Mayor ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood , Colorado, hereby certify that the above and fore- going is a true, accurate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -6- I • • I n - • ORDINANCE NO. SERIES of 1982 • • • BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR 7 f COUNCIL BILL NO. 21 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER IL' <,,,£ AN ORDINANCE CREATING PAVING DISTRICT NO. 28 IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF STREET PAVING, CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TOGETHER WITH NECESSARY INCIDENTALS, ON CERTAIN STREETS AND AVENUES: PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS IN PAYMENT FOR SAID IMPROVEMENTS; AND SETTING FORTH OTHER DETAILS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City Council of Englewood, Colorado, pursuant to the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, and the Laws of the State of Colorado, hereby finds and determ i nes that there exists a necessity for the creation of Paving District No. 28, in the City, and the construction and installation therein of street paving, curb and gutter and sidewalk improvements, together with necessary incidentals, on certain streets and avenues: and WHEREAS, Notice of a public hearing concerning the creation of the District and the construct ion and install at ion o f th e improvements therein has been published once a week for three consec utive weeks in the Englewood Sentinel, a ne wspaper of general circulation in the City , and i n addition, a notice has been mailed , postage prepaid, to each known owner of real property within the proposed District: and WHEREAS, at the time and place set forth in the notice, the City Council met in open session for the purpose of hearing anv objections or protests that might be made against the proposed dis rict or the improvements to be constructed or installed; and WHEREAS, the Council has determi n d that such protests and objections should b overruled; -1 I • • • • • • BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. Creation of the District. That a special improvement district for the construction, installation or im- provement of the improvements hereinafter described, is hereby created and established in accordance wi th the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, and the Laws of the State of Colorado, and shall be known and designated as •Paving District No. 2a•. All proceedings heretofore taken and adopted in connection with the District are hereby ratified, approved and confirmed. Sect ion 2. Engineering Plans and Specifications. That the engineer's reports, together with all of the details, specifi- cations, estimates, maps and schedules thereto attached or ap- pended, are hereby approved and adopted. Section 3. District Boundary. The extent of the District to be assessed for the cost of the improvements and the area to be included within the boundary of the Distr ict , shall be all the real property specially benef ited, and fronting or abutt- ing on the streets and avenues between the termini described in the following Section, including the real property within one-half (1/2 ) block of such streets and avenues. Sect ion 4. Descript ion of Improvements. The k i nd of improvements and the streets and avenues on which such improve- ments shall be constructed or installed shall be as follows: a. Necessary grading and excavation, paving with 6" compacted gravel base course and 2" asphaltic concrete surface, (except as noted at the end of the list of streets) concrete wa lks, curb and gutter where not preaently adequate; together with appurte- nances and incidentals on the following streets and avenues: -2-I • • • • • 00 FKlM 'ID s. Acana St. N. line Jefferson Ave. N. line Kenyon Ave. s. Accma St. s. line Kenyon Ave. N. line Lehigh Ave. s. Acana St. s. line Lehigh Ave. N. line Mansfield Ave. s. Acana St. s. line Mansfield Ave. N. line Nassau Ave. s. Acana St. s. line Nassau Ave. N. line Oxford Ave. s. 1>.ccma St. s. line Stanford Ave. N. line 'l\Jfts Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Yale Ave. N. line Amherst Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Amherst Ave. N. line Bates Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Bates Ave. s. line Cornell Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Cornell Ave. N. line Dart:nouth Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Dart:nouth Ave. N. line Eastman Ave. s. Cherokee St. s. line Eastman Ave. N. line Floyd Ave. s. Lincoln St. s. line Kenyon Ave. N. line Lehigh Ave. s. Lincoln St. s. line Lehigh Ave. N. line Mansfield Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Yale Ave. s. line Amherst Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Armerst Ave. s. line Bates Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Bates Ave. s. line Cornell Ave. s. Logan St. s. line Cornell Ave. N. line Dart:nouth Ave. w. Union Ave. E. line Decatur St. w. line of Clay Street The improvements constructed on So. Logan St. will consist of an 8" compacted gravel base course and 3" asphaltic concrete surface; So. Logan Street is classified as an arterial street, and accordingly, the City will pay the difference in costs which exceed the cost for 6" base course and 2" asphalt surface, and the extra width cost. The improvements on West Union Avenue will also consist of an 8" compacted gravel base course and 3" asphaltic concrete surface~and because this portion of West Union Avenue is located in an industrial area, the amount to be assessed will not exceed the costs for 6" base course and 2" asphalt surface costs. j b. Necessary preparation of present surface, overlaying of same with 2-inch asphaltic concrete, and concrete walks, curbs, and gutters, where not presently ad e quate; together with appurtenances and other inc i dental work o n the following streets and ave- nue s : 'ID W. Rad c l i ff Drive w. line of 3170 & 3173 W. W. line Federal Blvd. -'' t; w. Chenango Ave. w. Stanford Ave. w. Grand Ave . c. Radcliff Dr. E. line Lowell Blvd. w. line Irving St. -,, E. line Irving St. w. line Federal Blvd. ,. E. lin e Lo w 11 Blvd . W. lin e Irvin g St. Necessary replacement of walks, curbs, & gutters where not presently adequate; together with appurte- nances and other i ncidental work on the following streets and avenues: -3- • ' , "\ I • • • S. Acana St. W. Bell-xx! Dr • w. Chenango Ave. w. Grand Ave. w. Layton Ave. W. l'bnouth Ave. w. Pimlico Ave. w. Saratoga Ave. w. Stanford ·or. w. Tanforan Dr. w. Tufts Ave. w. Union Ave. • • • S. line Quincy Ave. E. line Irving St. E. line Federal Blvd. E. line Irving St. E. line Federal Blvd. E. line Irving St. E. line Irving St. E. line Federal Blvd. S. line Stanford Ave. E. line Federal Blvd. E. line Irving St. E. line Federal Blvd. N. line Radcliff Ave. w. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. line Federal Blvd. w. line Federal Blvd. w. line Decatur St. w. line Federal Blvd. W. line Decatur St. w. line Federal Blvd. E. line Decatur Section 5. Improvements Authorized. The construction or installation of the street paving, curb and gutter and sidewalk improvements, together with necessary incidentals, in and for the District, as shown by the plans, specifications and maps thereof, approved by the City Council of the City, is hereby authorized and ordered, the material to be used in the construction of said improvements to be in accordance with such maps, plans and speci- fications. Section 6. Assessment of Costs. The probable total cost of the improvements to be constructed or installed is J(.31,</2.P $ ' : it is proposed that the City of Englewood will pay • .,,)c l', o co approximately$ ; the remainder of the cost will be assessed aqainst the property with in the district and specially benefited by the construction and installation of the improvements. The approximate share of the total cost to be assessed per front foot aqainst any lot or tract of land fronting or abutting on said improve ments will be as more particularly set forth in the resolu- tion passed and adopted on March 8, 1982, and which is incor- porated herein by specific reference. Section 7. Payment of Assessments. The assessments will be due and payable without demand within thirty (30) days from and after the final publication of the Ordinance assessing the whole cost of said improvements against the real property in the District. In the event any owner of real estate shall -4- • I • • - • • • • fail to pay the whole of such assessment against his or her property within said thirty (30) days, then the whole cost of the improvements so assessed against such property shall be payable in ten ( 10) equal annual installments of principal. The first of such installments of principal shal 1 be due and payable at such time as will be determined in the assessing ordinance and the i;:emainder of said installments shall be due and payable succes- sively on the same day in each year thereafter, until all are paid in full. The maximum rate of interest to be paid on unpaid and deferred installments shall not exceed 181 per annum, and will be established by ordinance to be adopted by the City Council at a later date. Section 8. Special Improvement Bonds. By virtue of and pursuant to said laws and the Charter and the Municipal Code of the City, local improvement bonds of the City shall be issued for the purpose of paying for the local improvements described in this Ordinance, in an amount not to exceed the cost and expenses of said improvements, including engineering, legal and incidental expenses, as provided by law. The bonds shall be issued based upon estimates approved by the C ity Council, and as authorized by an Ordinance to be passed by the Ci ty Council at a later date. The maximum rate of interest on special improvement bonds for Paving Distr i ct No. 28, shall not exceed eighteen ( 18) per cent per annum. The bonds and the interest thereon shall be payable out of special assessments to be levied aga inst the real property included within the District and specially benefited by the improvements to be constructed or installed. Section 9. General Benefits. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the i mprovemen s proposed to be con- structed and installed will confer a special benefit upon the property within the District and a general benefit upon the City as a whole. Section 10. Severability. That if any one or more sections or parts of this Ordinance shall be adjudged unenforce- able or inv lid, such judgm nt shall not aff ct, impair or inval - idate the r maining provisions of this Ordinance , it being the intention that the various proviaiona her of are severable. -5- • I • • - • • • • • Section 11. Hearing. In acco r dance with Section 40 of the City Charter, the City Council shall hold a public he a ri nq on this ordinance, before final passage, at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, April 19, 1982. Section 12. Publication and Effective Date. This Ordinance, after its final passage, shall be numbered and record- ed, and the adoption and publication shall be authenticated by the signature of the Mayor and the Director of Finance, ex-officio City Clerk-Treasurer, and by the Certificate of Publication. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after publica- tion following final passage. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis , Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and fore- going is a true, accurate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, i ntroduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbe • I • • MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: • • - Mayor Otis and Members of Council Robert B. Weist, Council Member March 30, 1982 PAVING DISTRICT NO. 28 I'll be out of town on April 5th, so I wanted to let you know some of my thoughts on the currently proposed paving district. I know that the Council previously considered having the City absorb some or all of the costs above the actual construction costs. For this district, the City ought not charge back to the property owners anything above actual construction cos ts except where it is absolutely necessary in Council's opinion. The increase in construction cost has significantly outpaced the rise in personal income, it seems to me. Paving distr icts were fine in times of long or moderate i nflation with relatively low materials cost. Times have changed so significantly that we are asking property owners to pay a larger and larger portion of their income for paving and concrete. If anything i nfur i ates property owners more than propo sing to reconstruct or overlay a street, i t is to tear out co n c ret e that is cracked but present s no tripping hazard. I would be absolu tely opposed to i n cluding any c oncrete work where the sidewalk is cracked, chipped or flaked but is still level within the section and with th e adjoining section. It seems to me that people are saying that heavy vehicles use some streets and not others and that traffic patterns vary in the residential areas. Lee Jones points out that the 3100 and 3200 blocks of South Cherokee carry heavy truck traffic and therefore have deteriorated more rapidly. Property owners in thee blocks might see their streets included for reconstruction where other streets are left out because deterioration isles rapid due to restriction of heavy truck traffic. This is another reason for making some cost concession. At present I would tend to favor leaving certain streets out of the paving district. This is based solely on my own visual inspection and my own perception that these streets would require relatively less future maintenance. The City Engineer might totally disagree. I would leave out the following: 2700 through 300 South Cherokee 3700 and 3800 South Lincoln. I • • - • • • MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Page 2 March 30, 1982 • • • I would favor reconstruction the 4500 block of South Acoma but charging for only 36 feet. I would absolutely favor leaving 2700 through 3000 South Logan in. One of the property owners on South Acoma said,"If it isn't broken, don't fix it." The 3600 through 4000 blocks of South Acoma are definitely "broken" in my opinion and in need of reconstruction. I would tend to oppose tions are not granted. another mailing on the applications. Lastly, Engineering Department concrete work they are RBW/pc the entire district if some cost reduc- Also, I think the City ought to make assessment deferral program to encourage I would like to be assured that the is being as liberal as possible on what proposing. • I • • • - I P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, volunteerism has always been an essential part of the spirit and traditions of this Country so that today one out of every two Americans is making a gift of time and talent to some kind of volunteer service; and WHEREAS , volunteerism directly reflects the democratic principle of this Nation in that everyone, regardless of circwn- stance or station, or factor s of race, age, sex, color, or creed, can volunteer and thus reap the rich rewards that come from doing for o thers; and WHEREAS, volunteerism is increasingly recognized as a central partner with gover nment and industry in doing the work of the Nation; and WHEREAS, it is fitting that a period of time be set aside each year to honor and to thank th dedicated citizens of Englewood who give so fr ly o th ir valu 1 time, energy, arid abilities as volunteers. NOW, THEREF ORE, I EUGE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood, Colorado, doh r by proclaim the week of April 18 thru April 24, 1982 as E GLE~OOD VOLUNTEER WEEK in the City of Engl wood nd urg all citizens to help renew and s ustain th spiri nd vi li y of this grea Nation by conunitting a portion of th ir tim, how v r small, to addressing the needs of o ur communi y through voluntary action. GIVEN und r my hand nd s 1 this 5th day of April, 1982. • I • • - C O U N C I L DATE March 25, 1982 • • • C O M M U N I C A T I O N SUBJECT Boring and Relining Project For South Broadway AG~t\JTEM 1-----------......&.--------"------------------· IN I TIA TED BY -------'W""a""t-er;.....;;a"""nd"'--"S-ew""'e:.:.r-=Bo~a:.:.r ... d ____________ _ ACTION PROPOSED ___ ....... A_p~p-ro_v_e_s-o~u_t_h_B~r-oa_dw ...... ay ...... b~or-l~n_g~f-O-d_re....._l~in~i~n_g~p=r_o_je=c~t~w=h~e=n final plans and soecs are comoJete4, INTRODUCTION: The water line in South Broadway from Belleview to Quincy is constructed of cast iron pipe. Over the years the inside of the pipe has corroded substantially, reducing the carrying capacity of the pipe. This section will have thirteen (13) openings, and is approximately 5,300 feet (one mile) in length. This transmission line is a major line which feeds property along South Broadway and the blocks adjacent. Camp, Dresser and McKee has been retained to prepare plans and specs for boring and relining the section between Belleview and Quincy. They indicate that this line can be bored out and relined to restore it to original capacity and increase flow by about 50%. FINANCIAL DETAILS: The cost of installing a new water line within any street is very costly since asphalt has to be removed and replaced, as wel l as the inconvenience to bus inesses and property owners along with the interuption of traffic on South Broadway. The cost of replacing the line is estimated at approximately $500,000.00, whereas the cost of boring and relining will be approximately $180,000.00. There is presently $300,000.00 budgeted for a replacement and/or relining the water lines. REC0"1E NDATION : Since relining causes less disturbance than a new installation, and funds are available, the recornnendation is to cornnence advertisement for receiving bids for this project of relining the 12" main on South Broadway between Belleview and Quincy. • I . - • • C O U N C I L DATE March 25, 1982 • • • C O M M U N I C A T I O N SUBJECT Supplement #93 Southgate San. District INITIATED BY ~~~~--=S~o~ut~h~g~a~te.......,.S~an~iut~a~tiuo~n~D~i~s~tr~iuc~t~~~~~~~~~~ ACTION PROPOSED~~~--=A~p~p~ro~vuea...:..:an~n~e~xa~tui~on~o~f~a~d~d~it~i~o~n~o~f__,_,la~n~d_i~nut~o~~~~~ Southgate sanitation District service area, INTRODUCTION : A request was made by the Southgate Sanitation District representing the r:hlners/ developer for annexation to the Southgate service area. Inclusion of this land does not increase the tap allocation to the Southgate Sanitation District. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: a. Supplement #93 is for an area of approximately 9.4 acres and is zoned B-1. The developer plans to construct a 320,000 square foot office building, with 35% open space. Sewer service is requested for the s1.11111er of 1982. b. LEGAL: Tract 38, Subdivision of Section 21, Tr:hlnship 5 South, Range 67 West, County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado. The site is located on East Caley Avenue, west of South Ulster Street. c. OWNER: Chang Brothers d. FINANCIAL DETAILS : None RECO fltlENDATION : That the City Council approve the annexation of the property described in Supplement #93 to the Southgate Sanitation District • • I . • • - • • HILLS VILLAGE 6 AVE . 12 0 VILLAGE ORCHARD ROAD ~ a ~ > u .J * .J 0 w % ~ g 17 0 g /HUI I' f1;./tJ I? ~{> • I 0 ti • • .J .. w ~ .. I Cl: w g • 0 8 > i i • • C O U N C I L DATE Ma rch 25, 1982 • • • C O M M U N I C A T I O N AGENDA ITEM eo~ SUBJECT Reversion from meter to flat rate billing status. I NIT IA TED BY ~~~~W_a_te_r~an_d~S~ewe_r_B_o_a_rd~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ACTION PROPOSED,~~~D_i_re_c_t~C1_·t~y_A_t_t_o_rn_e~y_t_o'-'-p_re~p_a_re'---a_n_O_r_d_in_a_n~ce.;.....;t~o_a_me..c.....nd~t_he-'- Ci ty Code which would prohibit reversion from a metered account to flat rate status. I NTRODUCTION : The Ut ili ties De partment has rece i ved several requests for reversion from metered to flat rate billing status. Flat rate does not promote water conservation and does not allow an equ i table charging structure for customers charged in this manner . It has been the policy of previous Water and Sewer Boards and City Councils to not allow reversion. FINANCIAL DETAILS : A meter ed accou nt is bi lled s trictly by the amount of water used . Flat rate is ini t i al l y ba s ed on s quare footage , number of baths, cars, etc ., all of wh ich are subject t o cha nge. REC0"'1ENDATION: The Water and Sewer Board reconmends that City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance to amend the City Code which would prohibit reversion rom a metered account to flat rate status. I . . n - • C O U N C I L DATE March 25, 1982 • • • C O M M U N I C A T I O N AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT <.c, d_ Fencing of Mclellan Reservoir (See Att. 1) INITIATED BY _____ W_a_t_er_a_nd_S_ewe_r_Bo_a_r_d_a--n....;.d_T __ h..;;e_W""r....;i....;.t..;;..er;.......;.C ... or...,p __ o_ra_t-i"""o_n __ _ ACTION PROPOSED. ____ T_h_e_Ci_t~y_o_f_E~ng_l_ew_o_o_d~pro_c_ee_d_bu_,_l_d_in_g~th_e_fe_n_c_e_i_n_~ accordance with the proposed agreement contained in Mr. Riechert's letter of March 3 1982. INTRODUCTION : The Writer Corporation and the City of Englewood have been concerned about the fencing of the north shore of Mclellan Reservoir. The Writer Corporation requires security for its development and Englewood wants to maintain Mclellan's water quality since the reservoir is a public dr inki ng water supply and is a no trespassing area. It has been proposed (see attached letter) that the City of Englewood will install an eight (8) foot high, brown vinyl coated chain link fence with wood posts and barbed wire. The Writer Corporation will have the option of installing an eight (8) foot high pressure treated wood fence from the dam crest to the west. In return, The Writer Corporation will cut and fill for the fen ce and will grade a level bench approximately fifteen (15) feet wide inside the fence fonning a service road for the City of Englewood. FINANCIAL DETAILS: This item has been included in the 1982 budget. The proposed amount in the budge t is $80,000.00. RECO ,.,..ENDATION : That the City Council rec011111end that the City of Englewood proceed building the fence in accordance with the proposed agreement contained in Mr . Reichert's letter of March 3, 1982 and that bids for the work be obtained for sllllbittal to the City Council. • I . • - • • • - March 3, 1982 Mr. Larry Reichert The Writer Corporation 2'l Inverness Drive £ust Englewood. Colo. 80110 RE : Mclellan Reservoir Fcncin9 Dear Mr. Reichert: Q;t;f I Tuesday March 8, 1982 at 5:00 p.m, an Englewood Water and Sewer Board meeting will be held in the Englewood City Hall Conference Room A. At this time the fencing along the north side of Mclellan qeservoir adjacent to Writer Corporation's property will be discussed. The Utilities Oepartment, as per our discussion, will reco11111cnd the follow i nu : * The cost of surveying to be equally shared by Englewood and The Writer Corporation . * The grading for the fence installation be done by The Writer Corp . and this work wil 1 form a level bench approxima t ely ten (10) feet wide inside the fence forming a service road for the City. The Wr i ter Corporation may grade along the property west of the da m crest to enable a uniform slope for the fence. * An <'i(J ht (8) fo o t hiq h, hrown vi nyl cou lc<.J cha in lrnk fcnc:c w i tn woo <.J po~ L~ .an<.J uuruc u wi r e !J c 10~ Lil 11 e<.J on the 11ruµerty 1 i ne at the Ci ty • s cos ts . • The WriLcr Corp. w11l have the opt1on to select .i11 c111ht (II) fool hi9h pre~sure trea t ed wood fence from the dam crest Lo the west. The additional cost of th1s fence will be paid for the The Writer Corp. * Contract documents and draw1 nqs ,~i 11 be 1>re1,ilre<.1 liy the City of Englewood. * A tem pora ry barbed wire fence will be i ns t allc<.1 fonu the north - east corne r of t he r csu rv oi r property !'>outh t.o County Line l!outl, * All s lope s con s tructed by The Wr i ter Corporat i on will not exceed 4:1 and will be s eeded by Wr i ter . I • • - • • • • • The Englewood Water and Sewer Ooard and/or Englewood City Council reserves the right to make the final decision on the type of fencing and cost sharing. If you have any further questions, or wish to attend the meeting, please contact me at 761-1140, extension 514. Sincerely, St~,wart H. Fonda Director of Utilities Cicy of Englewood • I • • - • • • • ,{ C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE March 31, 1982 AGENDA ITEM U1 A.- SUBJECT Contract between DRCOG and City of Englewood -Mclellan INITIATED BY Water and Sewer Board and DRCOG ACT I ON PROPOSED ___ C_i_,ty...._C_o_un_c_i_l _a~p,_p_ro_v_e_t_h_e_co_n_t_ra_c_t_be_t_we_e_n---'-t_he.........;.C..;...i t...,.y_..;...of __ _ Englewood and DRCOG for Englewood to be reimbursed for art of Mclellan stud . See Att. 1 INTRODUCTION: DRCOG proposed that the City of Englewood contract with them to complete a study that would be a part of the Clean Lakes Progra~. The City of Englewood would have Black and Veatch expand the present study, and be reimbursed in accordance with the attached contract. FINANCIAL DETAILS : See attached contract (Att. 1). DRCOG will reimburse the City $10,000.00. The City will pay Black and Veatch $10,000.00 to do the work in accordance with the contract with Black and Veatch (Att. 2). REC0"'4ENDATION: That City Council approve the contract between the City of Englewood and DRCOG to have Black and Veatch continue with the present study and be reimbursed by DRCOG for the engineering costs. • fl I . • - • • BLACK & VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS Englewood, Colorado HcLellan Reservo ir Water Study Mr. Stewart H. Fonda Director of Utilities City of Englewood 3400 South Elati Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Stu: • • - rEL 303/371 -1120 ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGIONAL OFFICE 12075 EAST 45TH AVE SUITE AOO D&Nvu,. COLOIIIADO ao2>• B&V Project 9864 B&V File -Contract March 30, 1982 Enclosed for your review are two copies of our revised Second Supplenaental Agreement for the HcLellan Reaervoir Water Study. If this aeets with the City's approval, please sign and date both copies; keep one copy for your files and return the other copy to our office. I spoke with Gary Mast concerning the fact that our evaluation of the treat- nient alternatives will only be for the fully developed condition, and he is in agreement. I think it would be appropriate to 1110dify DRCOG's contract so this point ia very clear. I have enclosed a copy of Sheet 3 of DRCOG's contract with our proposed modifications. If there are any questions, please call. pj r En c losures Very truly yours, 81..ACK & VEATCH >:,. ( ( Willia• R. Jones I • • • • • • Task l.O. Stamw~ter Treatment (April 1982 -June 30, 1982). _ Ja/J =#ie(l/hA,111k ~e. r The Contracta wlll study methoda to treat s water which may be discharged into McLellan Reservoir as a result of runoff fro ~• .. •• 111id11111Je&119 development within the basin. The methods to be evaluated include a wet.lands system, infiltra- tion pits, a mechanical system such as a wastewater package plant, a series of detention ponds, and an innovative treatment method such as the flow balancing tanks with a treatment system. Each method wW be ewluated ln terms of cost for tnstallistton and maintainance and the feesibiltty of each syste'.ft fa application to McLellan Reservoir. In completing the evaluation of each treatment system, the consultant wlll consider the following conditions: l. The drainage aree for McLellan Reaervotr should be calculated, and the different types of land use at full development should be expressed as percentages, including the percent impervtoua areas. 2. Calculations of the anticipated stormwater runoff quantity and quallty (l /11/IN ,,it<: /.,x /r;,11 •··1/should be determined by ustng the DRCOG'a Second Year Progress Report on the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Procp'am. 3. Pollutants of major concern are sediment, dissolved solids, nitrogen, and phosphorous. The proposed treatment systems should be designed for 80 -90" removal of these pollutants. 4. Each treatment system should be evaluated in terms of costs, (both short term and long term), and adaptability to the McLellan Reservoir situation. ' /,,.,,,,//( I • I -3- • I • • • • • • SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT MODIFYING CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVlCES DATED JULY 8, 1981 This Second Supplemental Agreement modifies the contract between the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereinafter called the City, and Black & Veatch, Cousulting Engineers . hereiuafter called the Engineer. executed on the 8th day of July 1981 and modified on the 3rd day of August 1981; aaid contract is hereby further modified on the~~~ day of • 19~-as follows: 1. 2. Section.!! -COMPENSATION, Delete Ite .. A and C and add the following : "A. For the aervicea outlined in Appendix A, Phaae I (Items A through D). the City agrees to pay the Engineer a fee equa l to the salary coats incurred by the Engineer in providing auch se rvices times 2.5. directly related coats at coat plu1 $0.25 per aile for all iailaage required in connection vith this work payable a>nthly. The maximum billed for the1e services s hall not exceed Thirty-Six Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($36,000.00) without further authorization from the City." "C. For supplemental service&, as outlined in Appendix A, Item C, the City agrees to pay the Engineer salary coats incurred by the Engineer in providing auch services times 2.5, directly related costs at cost plus $0.25 per ~ile for all mileage required in connection with this work payable monthly. For addition of these supplemental services, the top billing limit shall be increased by Ten Thousand and no /100 Dollars ($1 0,000.00). The aaxi1DUm a1DOunt billed for the services outlined in Appendix A, Phase I (Iteaa A through D) and Supplemental Services (Item C), shall not exceed Forty-Six n1ous~od and oo /1 00 Dollars ($46,000.00) without further authorization from the City." Append ix A -DESCkI P'rION .Q!:. ~ .Qf. SE kV ICES, ~ l• Item B. PROJECT HcLELLAN RESERVOIR WATER QUALITY. Add Item 2 as follows: "2. Saap le McLellan Reservoir!!!.!!!.!_. To resolve inconsisten- cies in existing data on water quality in McLellan Reser v ~r. complete a one-tilll8 sampling effort. Collect two water samples from two different locations in KcLellan ieservoir and have the samples analyzed by an independen t testins laboratory." • I • • • • • • Second Supplemental Agreement Modifying Contract for Engineering Services Dated July 8, 1981 page 2 3. Item C. REPORTS. Delete Item 1 aod add the following: "l. Prepare Report. A self-contained report will be prepared and submitted to the City after completion of Items A and B. This report will su11111arize the existing water quality, tWe loadings, and the projected water quality in HcLellan Reservoir. It will include a description of the methodology and approach used in estimating the quantity aod quality of urban runoff and determining the existing and projected water quality of KcLellan Reservoir and will indicate any potential water quality problems that may result from the proposed urban developaent and resulting runoff. It will also include an esti ... te of what percentage of runoff, if any, the reservoir can accept without having a detrimental affect on the pro- jected water quality and address whether or not the reservoir sampling program should be completed to confirm the OECD 1DOdel results." Item D. MEETING ATTENDANCE. Delete Item land add the following: "l. ~ Meetings. During the course of Phase I of the study, Black & Veatch will attend up to six (6) meetings with the City Council, developers, or public as requested by the City." Appendix~ -SUPPLEMF.NTAL SERVICES. Add the following Item C: "C. Evaluate~~ Treatment Atlernatives. Evaluate treatment alternatives for urban runoff from the proposed ultimate development of the McLellan Reservoir drainage area. Treatment alternatives to be evaluated will include a wetlands system, infiltration pita, wastewater package plant, and detention ponds. A cursory review will also be made of a Swedish treat .. nt aethod th~t includes flow balanc- ing tanks and a treatment syatem. The evaluation of the treatment alternatives will include the following: 1. Determine the HcLellan Reservoir drainaae area. 2. Determine, by percentaaes, the different types of land use at full develop .. nt, includin1 the per cent of impervious areas . I • • • • • Second Supplemental Agreement Modifying Contract for Engineering Services Dated July 8, 1981 page 3 3. Project the atorm water runoff quantity and quality at proposed full development of the drainage area. Pro- jections will be made using DRCOG's Second Year Progress Report on the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program. 4. Conceptualize and size the treatment alternatives based on the projected storm water runoff quantity and quality determined by Item 3 above and on 80-90 per cent removal of sediment, diasolved solids, nitrogen, and phosphorous. 5. Evaluate the treatment alternatives in terms of their estimated capital and operation and maintenance costs, and their adaptability to the KcLellan Reservoir situation. 6. Su111111&rize the finidings of the treatment alternative evaluation in a brief supplement to the Report on Mc Le l lan Reservoir Water Quality." lt is mututally understood and agreed: A. That every effort will be made to utili&e the information and data generated for the Report on McLellan Reservoir Water Quality. B. That the City shall have the ri&ht to terminate the services of the Engineers at any time. In case the aervices of the Eng ineer are terminated by the City , the Engineer shall be paid a sum equal to the salary cost incurred by the Engineer times 2.5 plua directly related coats to the date of termination, less the amount of any payments made to date of termination. C. That the City and DRCOG have entered into an agreement concerning the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program and that the Engineer has been hired to complete Task 1.0, Storm Water Treatment, as de- acribed in Exhibit A, SCOPE OF SERVICES, of the attached contract between the the Den-;-er Regio;;l Council of Governments and the City of Englewood. D. That if ORCOC fails to enter into an agreement with the City f ~r the Scope of Work described in Appendix A -Supplemental S rvices, Item C, the top billing limit tor this Contract shall be increaaed by Six Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($6,000.00) to 'nlirty-S1x Thousand and no/100 Dollars (136,000.00) without further authori- zation from the City. • I • • - • • • Second Supplemental Agreement Modifying Contract for Engineerin& Services Dated July 8, 1981 • • • page 4 All other prov1aiona of the contract ahall reaain the aa ... IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement on the date first above written. CITY or ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO ,BLACK & VEATCH, Consulting Engineers 11) ,1 1 By . ( · L / ll 11:.l,,. L K '-;,ifz.u, _ _) • I • • -• • - DENVER REGIONAL COU~CIL OF GOVERNMENTS CONTRACT AGREEMENT BElWEEN THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERN- MENTS AND THE CIT'i OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES BY THE CITY TO THE COUNCIL 11'<1 THE EXECUTION OF THE DENVER REGIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM. Project lllo. 23907 Contract No. 82 /033 THIS CONTRACT, effective on the 1st day of April _, 1982 by and between the Denver Regional Council of Governments (hereinafter referred to as the "Council") and the City of Englewood, Colorado (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor"), WITNESSETH THAT: WlfEREAS, the Council desires to engaqe the Contractor to render certain services hereinafter described In connection with an undertaking which Is being financed by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protect ton Agency . NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows : A. Employment of Contractor. The Council hereby agrees to engage the Contractor and the Contractor hereby agrees to perfo!"m the services hereinafter set forth In connection wtth the Project of the Council under Section 208 of the U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended. (33USC466 et. seq.) This Contract ts funded In pert by a qrant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agen cy. This Contract ts subject to regulations contained tn 40 CFR 35.937 and 35.939. Neither the United States nor the U.S. Environmental Protection Aqency Is a party :o this Contract. B. Area Cov r d. The Contractor shall perform all necessary s rvt c s provided under this Contract In connection with and respecting the following area or areas, hereinafter call d the "Planning Ar a": City of Englewood, Colorodo C. Scope of S rvlces. Th Col'\tractor shall do, perform, and carry o ut, In a satisfactory mann r, as determined by the Council, all work described tn Exhibit A, Scope of S rvtcea, of this Contract attached hereto and made a part her of. D. Ttme of P rformanc~. The aervtcu of the ContTact shall comm nee Ol'I April 1, 1982 and shall be undertaken In soch sequence as to a11ure completion of all aervtcu required hereund r by June 30, 1982 • • I • • • • • E. Compenption . The Counc il agrees to reimburse the Contracter fer all eligible project costs up to but not exceeding the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10 1 000.00), tn accordance w it h Exh i bit A, Sc ope of Services, provided, however, that should the United States Environmental Protection Agency disapprove this Contract, or refuse or fail to make the grant to the Council as contemplated by this Contract, then this Contract shall be null and votd and shall not be binding upon any parties of the Contract. Unearned payments under thts Contract may be suspended er termina ted tn the event the Contractor refuses to accept additional terms or conditions to this Contract that may be imposed by the Un i ted Sta te s Environmental Protection Agency after the effec tive date of this Con tract. F. Method of Payment. Th e Counc il s ha ll make pa ym ent to the Contractor u pon re c e ipt of requtstttons for payme nt fr om the Contractor certifying that he has performed the work under this agreement , tn conformance wtth the ter ms of this a greement, and tn acc or dance wtth auth orized work as defi n ed In Ex hibit A, Se ction C. Th e Contractor wil l s u bm it r eq utstttons no later than the fi f teenth d ay o f each month throughout the term of this agreement; the Council w ill ma ke pa ym e n t to t he C ontractor w ttht n t hirty day s after r e ceipt o f such requisitions, e x cept w h en r ece i p t of grant funds ts d e la y e d by EPA, beyond the control of the Council. It t s expre ssly understood and agreed that tn no event wtll the tota l comp en- sation and reimbursement to be paid hereunder exceed the amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10 1 000 .00) for all services required. The Council w ill r eimburse the Contractor for the actual cost of services rendered w tthtn this amount, tn accordance with Costs and Schedules contained tn Exhibi t A, Section F. C. Contractor's Project Manas.fil. The performance of the services required of the Contractor hereunder wlll be under the direct supervision of Stewart Fonda, w ho ts hereby designa ted (I s t he "Project Manager" of this work progra m, who meets the qualtftcatto'"ls as required by the Council. If, at any time, the Project Manager ts not assigned to this project, the Contractor shall Immediately nottfy the Council, and work shall be suspended on the project until a Project Manager has been so a sstgned who ts acceptable to the Council. H. Reporting. The Contractor shall submit reports to the Council as described tn Exhibit A, Scope of S rvlc s, of this Contract atta ched hereto and made a part hereof. l. £valuation. The Contractor understands that the Council ts requtred to conduct periodic evaluations of the activities conducted under this Grant and to monitor on an ongoing blssta the performance of the Contractcr to Insure that th funds made available by th Grant Contract are expended tn keeping wtth the pur- poses for which they were awarded, and the Contractor accordingly covenants to coop rate fully with the Council In the conduct of such evaluation and monttortno, -2- I • • • • • • J. Terms and Condlttons . The parties agree that thts aoreement ts subject to the provtstons set forth tn Exhtbtt B of this Contract, Terms and Condlttons, attached hereto and incorporated herein as fully set forth and whlch are apectftcally made a part of thts Contract. K. Asslqnabtlttv. The Contract shall not aaal,;in any interest ln thta Contract and shall not transfer any lnterest ln the same, whether by asstgnment or novatton, wtthout the prtor wrttten consent of the Council thereto, provtded, however, that clatms for money due or to become due to the Contract.or from the Council under thts Contract may be a sstgned to a bank, trust company, or other ftnanctal tnstttutton wtthout auch approval. Notice of any such aaatgnment or transfer shall be furntsh ed promptly to the Councll. L. Chan!l!!.J. Any changes tncludtnc;i any lncrease tn the amount of the Con- tractor's compenaatton, whtch are mutually aoreed upon by and between the Council and the Contractor, ahall be Incorporated ln wrttten amendments to thta Contract. IN WIT.NESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed thts agree- ment and contract the date and year ftrst above wrttten. ATTEST : J • W. Belmear Admtntstra ttve Offtcer Gary R. Hlc;ibee Clty Clerk DENVER REGIO.NAL COU.NCIL OF GOVERNMENTS "Council" By : __________________ _ Robert D. Farley Executive Dtrector CITY OF ENGLEWOOD "Contract.or" By: _________________ _ Andy McCowen C ity Ma na g r -3- • I • • • • • • DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS CONTRACT BETWEEN THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, PROVIDING FOR CIT'i SERVICES TO THE COUNCIL'S DENVER REGIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM. Project No. 23907 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Contract No. 82/033 The Contractor shall do, perform , and carry out ln a satisfac tory and pr oper manner, the servtces described herein In accordance w i th the considerations , deft nttton of responslbUltles, and proc edures outlined h ere i n . A. General Constderattons The U.S. Environmen t al Protectio n Agency Is c onduc ting a Nationwide Ur ban Runoff Proc;i r am (h ereinafter referred t o as "NURP") with the ultimate objec tive of conducting an assessment of urban runoff on a nationwide scale and pre- senting th e ftndln gs In a report to Congres s In 1983. The r e por t to C ongress w il l desc ribe: o the na ture of ur ba n runoff pr oblems w here s ign ificant problems ha ve been Identif i e d. o the causes of these problems, o the severity of these problems, o opportunities for controlling urban runoff problems, Including descriptions of control measures, their effectiveness, costs, and strategies for broad-scale Implementation. The Council has rec eived a NURP grant to conduct the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program (heretnafter referred to as the "Program"). The basic objective s of the Program are to comprehenslv ly evaluate the nature, causes, severity, and opportunltl s for control of urban runoff problems In the Denv• region. Concurrent wtth the Program, and as pe rt of the conttnulng Clean Water pla nning effort (Section 208 PL 95-217), the Cou ncil ta pursuing th e loca l g eneral p1.rpoae government Involvement to eveluate the problems and costs a uoclated with lmplementtng nonpolnt source conlJ'ola recommended by the adopted 208 Plan • • I • • • • • • To test the feaslblllty of lmplementtng the control measW"e requirements at the local government level and to develop specific procedures for controlling treating stormwater runoff, the Council sought a local govern- ment to partlclpate ln a model lmplementatlon project as a part of the pr09ram. The Contractor, a major general purpose government ln the DRCOG 208 planning area, has agreed to partlclpate as a prototype for the Beat Management Practice Model tmplementatlon Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). B. Counc!l Support Responalblllty for the performance of the aervtces desatbed herein reats wlth the Contractor. The Council wlll provide asalstance to the Contractor in the performance of these services by making available Information as desalbed tn Section C of thts Exhtblt. c. Contractor servtces The following task defines the scope, sequence, and general schedule of work to be performed. Pr09ress on and completion of the uiak by the Contractor to the satlafactton of the Council wlll be prerequlslte to the contlnuatlon of thla Contract. If the Contractor fails to satisfactorily complete the task on schedule as described herein, the Contractor and the Counctl wlll renegotiate this Contract as appropriate and In such a manner as to meet the objectives of the Pr09ram to the satisfaction of the Council. -2- • I • • - • • • • Task 1.0. Stamwater Treatment (April 1982 -June 30, 1982). The Contractor will study methods to treat atormwater which may be discharged into McLellan Reservoir as a result of runoff from areas undervotng development wtthtn the basln. The methods to be evaluoted include a wetlands system, tnflltra- tlon plts, a mechanical system such as a wastewater package plant, a series of detention ponds, and an tnnovattve treatment method such aa the flow balancing tanks wtth a treatment system. Each method wlll be evaluated In terms of cost for lnstallatlon and malntalnance and the feaslblllty of each system foe appllcatlon to McLellan Reservoir. In completlng the evaluation of each treatment system, the consultant wlll consider the following condtttons: l. The drainage area for McLellan Reservoir should be calculated, and the different types of land use at full development should be expressed as percentages, tncludtng the percent lmpsvtous areas. 2. Calculations of the anticipated stocmwater runoff quantity and quality should be determined by ustng the DRCOG's Second Year Progress Report on the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program. 3. Pollutants of major concern are sediment, dissolved aoltds, nitrogen, and phosphorous. The proposed treatment systems should be designed for 80 -90% removal of these pollutants. 4. Each treatment system should be evaluated ln terms of costs, (both short t e rm and long term). and adaptability to th e McLellan Reservoir situation. -3- • I • • - • • • • • D. Deliverable Items 1. Monthly Progress Reports. A letter style pr09?"8SS repat w111 be submitted by the Contractor to the Councll by the seventeenth ( 17) day of each project month. 2. Ftnal Report. E. Pertod of Performance The Contractor wlll perform all work within a period of three (3) months. F • Costs and Schedule 1. ~-The Contractor's services described in this Exhibit wlll be performed at a total cost of about $30,000 made up of salaries, fringe, administration, overhead, travel, and other associated costs. Of this, $10,000 wlll be reimbursable by the Councll wtth the remainder belnq borne by the Contractor. The remainlnq approximately $20,000 wlll be ln the form of services provided by the Contractor ln tasks associated with the support of the obJectlves of this Contract. None of this $20,000 of in-kind services provided by the Contractor wlll be reimbur- sable by the Councll. 2. Schedule. The task as described in Section C of this Exhibit will be submitted as a final report by June 30, 1982 • -4- • I • • In • • - DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS CONTRACT BETWEEN THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, PROVIDING FOR CITY SERVICES TO THE COUNCIL'S DENVER REGIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM. Project No. 23907 Contract No. 82/033 EXHIBIT B TERMS AND CONDITIONS The following supplemental terms and conditions apply to the herein Contract and take precedence over any confllctlnCjj languaCjje wtthtn the Contract. 1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement: a. The term "Council" means the Denver Regional Council of Governments. b. The term "Contractor" means the Ctty of Englewood, Colorado. c. The term "EPA" means the United States Environmental Protection ACjjency, or tts authorized representative. 2. General a. The Council and the Contractor aCjjr e that the following provistons shall apply to the work to be performed under this Contract and that such provisions shall supersede any conflictlnCjj provlslor.a of this Contract. b. This Contract Is funded, In part, by a grant from the EPA, Neither the United States nor any of Its departments, ac;ienctes, or employees h; a party to thts Contract. Thts Contract ts subject to rec;iulattons contatned in 40 CFR, Part 33, in ffect on the dete of execution of this Contract. c. The rights and remedi s of the Council, provtded for In these clauses, are In addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Contract. • I • • 3. 4. • • - Personnel. •· 'l'he Contractor re~resents that he has, CII' will secure et his own expense, ell personnel Nllulred 1n perfonning the services under this Contract. Such personnel shall not be employees of, or have any contractual relaUonah.tp with, the Council. b. All of the services required hereunder w1ll be perfonned by the Contractor or under h11 supervision, and all personnel enge;ed in the work ahell be fully queliUed and where required by state 01 local lew, she 11 be duly licensed to perfonn such aervJcu. c. None of the work or services covered by this Contract shall be subcontracted without the prior writte n approval of the Council . Sµbcontrects. •. Any subcontractors end outside associates or consultants, required by the Contractor in coMecUon with the services covered by th.ta Agreement, wUJ be limited to such individuals or finns as were spec1!1C6lly identified end agreed to durin:i ne;ot1et1ons , or es ere apec1Ucelly euthori&ed by the Council dur in g the performance of this Agreement. Any 1ubst1tut1on, 1n, or add1tJon, to , such 1ubcontnctou, associates 01 cons Jianu wm be subject to the prior approve! of the Council. b. 'l'he Contractor NY not subcontnct Hrvic.1 1n axc.u of thirty percent (or fifty percent , JI the Council and the Contractor hereby agree ) of the Contract price to subcontractors or consultant, w ithout prior writte n approval of the Council. s. Iq I l tmployment Opportwnux. ln e cccrd a nce With tPA policy. u expraued 1n 4 0 CFR 30 .420-S, the Contractor 1;reu that be will not d11c r1m1 nate against any employee or 1pp1Jcant for employ1n nt beca uae of nee, nUg Jon, color , aex , a;e or na Uonal or1;1n. ,. UtJlil tlon of Smell end MlnorStv 8u1Jneu . ln accordance w ith EPA policy, H axprH ud 1n 4 0 CFA 33 .130, the Contractor •VT••• that Qua11!1e d anU bu11neu and 111.Snonty bu11.ne11 entersrlaas 1hall haw the aaXlmurn practical opporturuty to partJcipate 1n the parfonnanee of EPA trant -.uaated contra eta and sMbcontr1et1 . ·2- • ) I • -• • 7. Jnterut of H•mbftt of Cowncu and Qt hers. No officer , me mber, or employee of the Councll, and no members of !ts governing body, and no other publJc offtcllll of the governing body of the locality or loca lities 1n which the project S1 11tuated er being carried out wno exMciHt any functions er responsibUJtlu in the review or epprovel of the undertaking or carrying out of this project 1he 11 perticJpete in any decision relating to thJs Contract which a ffect • his personal interest or the interest of any corporation , pertnerahip, or 11 1ociatJon in which he 11 directly or indirectly interuted or have any peraone 1 er pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in thJs Contra ct or the proceeds thereof. e. Covenent Against Contingent Tees/Interest of Contre ctor . The Contnictor warrants that no person or aelUng agency has been employed or retained to 1ol1cit or Hcure this Contract upon an agrHment or understandlr.• for a commJssJon, percentage, brokerege, er contingent fee, excepting bona f1de employees. For breach or vJolaUon of thil warranty , the Council shell hsv e the right to a nnul this Cont:rect without Uab111ty or in its discretion t o deduct from the Contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover the f ull amount of 1uch commJuJon, percentage, brokerege , or contingent fee. 9. Contrec:tor Rupon sibJlitv. The Contractor enumu full lJ a tlUty and responsib111ty for taxes, fees and assessments incWTe d by hJm res ulting from the respons1b il1Ues, duties or compensation under this Ag reement a nd agrees to indemnify a nd aave hannlus the Council from any llab111ty therefor . 10. Compl11nc:e with Lews and Qrd i nences . The Contractor 1 h a ll comply with e ll federal, 1tete end city law1 end ord inances eppU ca ble to the Scope of Services . The Contractor sha ll edd1Ucinelly comply w ith e ll 1ppUc11tle reg u la tions Juued p ursua nt t o Section 306 of the Clean Water Act, a nd Secuon 308 of the Federa l Wa t er Pollution Con trol Act . 11. Acee ss to rte cords/Aydu s e . The Contre ctor Iha 11 maintain boolta, record,, docume nts a nd other evtdenoe directly pertinent to performance o n EPA ;rant work Wider t h1 1 Contrect in a ccordance with generally a ccepted a ccounung prlnctplu e nd pncUces cons11tently a pplied end 40 CFA 30.60S, and 3 0.I OS. The Contrecter 1hall alao aa1nte1n the f.&nancial infonnaUon and data uHd by the Ccnt:rector 1n the preparetion or auppcrt of the coat 1ubm111 1on Nquu.d under 4 0 CFA U.Sl0·3 1n effect on the dete of extc\lt.lon of th11 Contnct and a copy of the cost awnmary aubmlU•d to the CoWICU . TM United State• EnvlroNDantal trotecuon A;e ncy, the Controller General of the United ltatH , the United Statu ~pertinent of Labor, the CoW\cU (and the State, where applicable) ar any of thalr duly authorUed _,_ • ) I • --... I • • - npreaentat1vea, 1hall have access to auch books, records, documents end other eVSdence for the purpose of inspection, audit and copying. The Contractor will provide proper facllitlu fN 1uct- ecceu end 1nspe~Uon. b. The Contractor e;reu to include pera;raphs (e) end (b) of this clauH in all h11 contracts and all Uer 1ubcontncts directly related to proJect perfonnence which ere in excess of $10,000. 12. TermJneuon of controct tor Ceµse. u, through any ceuse, the Contractor shell fail to fulf1ll, ln timely end proper manner, h11 obU;auons unde r W1 Contract, or 1f the Contractor 1hall violate any of the covenants, agree- ments. or sUpulatJons of this Contract, the Counc11 shell thereupon have the right to terminate this Contract by giving written notice to the Contractor of 1ueh terrnJnatJon and specifying the date thereof, et leut ten (10) days before the effective date of sueh tarmlnatlon. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photograph,, and reports or other ll'laterlal prepared by the Contractor under thll Contract shall, at the option of the Council, ~come lts property, and the Contractor shall be entitled to receive Just and equitable compensation for any 11Usfactory work completed on such documents and other snaterla ls. 13. TermJnotJon for Convenience of Council. The CouncU may terminate thfs Contract at any time by giving written notice to the Contractor of auch terminatJon and 1pec1fyin; the effective date thereof, at least fifteen {1S) days ~fore the effective date of such tennlnaUon. In that event, all finished or unfinished document, and other snater!als II described 1n pera;ra~h 12 above she 11, at the option of the CouncU, become lts property. If the Contra et 11 tennlnatad by the CounU II provided herein, the Contractor wlll ~ paid an amount which bears the aeme rauo to the total compenaetion a, the servtces actually performed bear to the total Hrvioe1 of the Contractor covered by this Contract, less payments of compen11Uon prevlou1ly made. Provided , however . that 1f less than 11)cty percent of the Hrvicea covered by thls Contract have been perfonned upon the effective date of auch tarmineUon , the Contractor 1ha ll be nlmbw-sed Un addition to the above pay1Mnt) fct that portion of the a cut.a l out-of-poeket expenses (not otherwise relmbw-Hd under thll Contract) 1ncWTe d by the Contractor. If the Cont.net 11 terminated due to the fa ult of the Contnctor, paragraph 12 hereof nlatlw to tarm!naUon shall apply. 14. a . Except 11 .. Y lae otherwiH P'Ovided 1n thl1 Agreement, ell cl.alma, counter-clal1u, dl1putu and other aattara 1n quesUon between the Council and the Contnctor ar111ng out of or rel.attn; to th11 Agreement ar the ~ach thereof, •111 be decided by arbitration Uthe -4- • ) I . • - • 15. • • • .. rt1H hereto 111utua lly •an•, or 1n a court of competent jurisdiction within the Stete which the CouncU 11 located. b. lleco .. ry or aetUernent •Y include damages , aanctions or penalUea as •Y be appropriate. Entire A;rum•nt. This AtrHment and the Exh1bit1 thereto, constitute the entire and integrated Agreement between the Contractor and the Council and 1upersedes all prior regulations, repreHnt11Uon1 or agreemenu , either written or oni l. THIS CONCLUDES the provision of theH standard terms and conditions. -•- • I • • I n • • - C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE AGENDA ITEM March 30, 1982 ~ SUBJECT : Amendment to the Compre- hensive Zoning Ordinance by adding 22.4 -llh Conditional Use. INITIATED BY City Planning and Zoning Commission ACTION PROPOSED~__;;Re=.,q~u~e~st.;;.....;C~i~t~y~A~tt~o~rn=.::e~y~to::.....1p~r~e~p~a~re;:...;a~n:.....::O~r~d~in=a~n~c~e~.~~~~~~- INTRODUCTI ON AND BACKGROUND: The B-2 , Business Zone District does not list either motor v ehicle repair business es or car washes as a Permitted principal use. At least since 1963 , any requests for such businesses have been referred to the City Planning and Zoning Co mmission for its consideration under Sec ion 22.4 -llb(l6) whi ch states: Any similar lawful use whi ch in the opinion of the Com- mission , is not objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor , dust, smoke, fumes, gas , heat, glare, radiation or vibration , or is not hazardous to he heal h and property of the surround ing area through danger of fire or explosion. By using this procedure, the Commission has been able to consi er a spec- ific use at a specific location and the members have placed conditions on heir approval ranging from the removal of a house to landscaping. The present City A torney 's staff does not feel comfortable wi h this proc edure and recommended that these uses be designated as Conditional Uses . By doing so , the Commission will continue to consider the reques s on an individual basis; only they will be able o do so with the benefi o a public hearing. This provision would apply only in those instances in whi ch th PRINCIPAL use is to be he mo or vehicle repair business or motor v hicle laundry or polishing business. A new or used motor vehi cle sales business or filling station which washes or repairs motors as an ACCESSORY use, woul not have to follow this procedure. It should be noted tha he Commlss1on has never approv d a requ s for a mo or vehicle r pair fac111ty or car wash 1n h B-1 Bu 1n ss Dis ric This 1s he zonin in he central business d1stric , and h Commission has been of he opinion tha hese types of uses are not compatible ... • I • • • • • -2- even though at the present time, new car sales is a permitted use in the B-1 District. The Commission has also approved a policy that body work should be in the industrial districts rather than in a business district and have consist ently held to that policy. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March .16, 1982. There were no persons present who wished to address the Commission, either in favor of or in opposition to the amendment. RECOMMENDATION: The City Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be amended by adding thereto, the following provisions: §22.4-11 h 2 Motor Vehicle Repair businesses, not including body or fender work, dismantling or collision repair, and pro- vided that: 1) Motor vehicles being serviced or stored while waiting to be serviced or called for are not parked on streets, alleys, public sidewalks or parking strips; 2) All work is performed within an enclosed structure; 3) No materials or parts are deposited or stored on the premises outside of an enclosed structure; 4) Any area subject to wheeled traffic or storage is screened from adjacent or adjoining residential dis- tricts by a closed-face wood, block or brick wa ll . §22.4-11 h 3 Motor Vehicle Laundry or Polishing business, whi ch shall comply with the following conditions: • 1) A minimum or three (3) parking spaces shall be provided on the site for each washing stall; 2) The site shall be paved to the specifications of the Department of Engineering Services; 3) All waste water shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer line after having been run through a sand trap; 4) All lights used to illuminate the area shall be dire c t- ed away from adjacent residential properties. • I • • • • - -8- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: March 16, 1982 SUBJECT: Amendment of Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Carson moved: Barbre seconded: The Planning Coaaission approve the proposed amendment to 122.4-11 h of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and recounend the amendment to the City Council. 122.4-11 h 2 Motor Vehicle Repair businesses, not including body or fender work, dismantling or collision repair, and pro- vided that: 1) Motor vehicles being serviced or stored wh i le waiting to be serviced or called for are not parked on streets, alleys, public sidewalks or parking strips; 2) All work is performed within an enclosed structure; 3) No materials or part s are deposited or stored on the premises outside of an enclosed structure ; 4) Any area subject to wheeled traffi c or storage is screened froa ad jacent or adjoining resi dential dis- tricts by a closed-face wood, block or brick wa ll. 122.4-11 h 3 Motor V hicle Laund ry or Polishin& business, which shall comply with the following conditions: AYES: Barbra, NAYS: Non ABSENT: All n 1) A miniaum of thr (3) parkin apses shall b provid d on th site for each wash ing stall; 2) The sit hall be pav d to th sp 1f1cat n of th Depart nt of Engin ring S rvices; 3) All wast water shall discharg d into th itary w r line after havin& b n run throu ha nd trap; 4) All lights used to illuminat the ar hall dir ct d way from adjacent resid ntial properties. cker, Carson , Gilchrist, McBrey r, S ti, St 1, Tang1.11111 Th aocion c rri d. By Ord r of th City sion. rtrud C. W lty, • ) I • • - • • • • MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Members of the City Planning and Zoning Coaaission D.~~s, Aaaiatant Director -Planning March 12, 1982 SUBJECT: Aaendaents to the Coaprebeoaive Zoning Ordinance. The Public Hearing on the proposed aaendaents to the Coaprehensive Zoning Ordinance which would aake aotor vehicle repair businesses and aotor vehicle laundries (car waahes) a Conditional Use in the B-2, Business Zone District, will be held Tuesday at 7:00 P.M. We diacusaed this briefly at the laat .. eting and the changes you suggested have been incorporated. Rellellber that neither aotor vehicle repair nor car washes are peraitted in the B-l, Business District, the downtown area; so it was not necesaary to aaend the B-1 aection. A copy of the proposed ... ndaenta and the Conditional Use Ordinance is enclosed . • I • • - • • • • PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE §22.4-11, B-2 ZONE DISTRICT. §22.4-11 h. Conditional Uses. §22.4-11 h 2 Motor Vehicle Repair businesses, not including body or fender work, dismantling or collision repair, and provided that: 1) Motor vehicles being serviced or stored while waiting to be serviced or called for are not parked on streets, alleys, public sidewalks or parking strips; 2) All work is performed within an enclosed structure; 3) No aaterials or parts are deposited or stored on the premises outside of an er.closed structure; 4) Any area subject to wheeled traffic or storage is screened from adjacent or adjoining residential dis- tricts by a closed-face wood, block or brick wall. §22.4-11 h 3 Motor Vehicle Laundry or Polishing business, which shall cOlllply with the following conditions: 1) A ainiaua of three (3) parking spaces shall be provided on the site for each wash ing stall; 2) 1be site shall be paved to the specifications of the Department of Engineering Services; 3) All waste water shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer line after having been run through a sand trap; 4) All lights used to illuminate the area shall be directed away from adjacent residential properties. • , I • • •( • • • INTRODUCED AS A BILL BY COUNCILMAN SMITH. BY AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. 5 , SERIES OF 1978. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 22.5-21, ENTITLED, "CONDITIONAL USE", AND AMENDING SECTION 22.8, ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS", OF THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE (ORD. 126, SERIES 1963, AS AMENDED) BY AUTHORIZING THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USES AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS THEREFOR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, aa follows: Section 1. That Section 22.5-21 of the City Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Ord. 126, Series 1963, as amended) ia, hereby repealed and re-enacted to read as follows: S22.5-21 Conditional Use a. Legislative Purpose and Intent. It is recognized that there are some uses which, subject to certain conditions and safeguards, cara conform to the general character of the neighborhood to wh ich the proposed use will apply. A Conditional Use permits the inclusion of use• into the zoning patt~rn which are considered to be essentially desirable to the com- munity as a whole or to a specific area, but where the nature of the use or con- dir.ions which it may create, s uch as traffic congestion, density, noise, etc., influence against its location in a specific zone district without restric- tions or conditions tailored to fit the special problems which the use may present. The authority is granted to the City Planning and Zoning Commission to approve • I • • ,' • • • • Conditional Uses in specific cases after public notice and hearing. The granting of such use shall be subject to appropri- ate conditions and safeguards as set forth in this section if it is determined that the authorization of the use will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance. b. Application Procedure. c. (1) An applicant must demonstrate to the City Planning and Zoning Commission that the Conditional Use application meets all of the requirements of the '69 Englewood Municipal Code, as amended, and prior to final approval of the Conditional Use, all require- ments of the '69 E.M.C. must be met. (2) The applicant mu•t be an owner or lessee or demonstrate a substantial, continuing interest in the property designated for the Conditional Use. Information To Be Submitted. (1) Written Statement. A written state- ment must be submitted with the Conditional Use application and shall contain the following minimum information: (a) A statement of the present owner- ship and a legal description of the land. If the applicant is not the owner of the land, the re- lationship of the applicant to the request must be stated. (b) An explanation of the object ives to b4' achieved by th propos <1 uso, including a description of th nwaber and type of major us r of the facility. · (c) If either new construction or remodeling is involved, a dov lop- ment schedule indicating the approximate date when the con- struction or reJIIOdelin9 can b -2- • , I • -• • • expected to begin, the stages of construction, and the time of completion shall be given. (d) Copies of any special agreements, conveyances, restrictions, or covenants which will govern the use, maintenance and protection of the development and public areas. (e) Other information or exhibits the applicant deems pertinent to the evaluation of the proposed Conditional Use. (f) A boundary survey. d. Site Plan. The applicant must submit a preliminary plan showing the naajor details of the site on which the proposed Conditional Use ia to be located. Thia site plan is to be put on a scale of not , less than 1• • 20' and in sufficient detail to evaluate the land planning, building design, and other features of the proposed development. The preliminary plans must contain, insofar as is applicable, the following minimum in- formation. (1) The location of the property with names of adjoining streets and other public ways. (2) The existing zoning of the land. (3) The proposed land uses. (4~ The existing topographic character of the land. (5) The location of all existing and pro- posed buildings, structures and improve - ments, including typical elevations and showing the maximum height. (6) The major points of access to public rights-of-way, the internal traffic and circulation systems, off-street -3- • I • • e. • • - parking areas, service areas, and loading areas. (7) The location, height and size of proposed signs, fences, lighting and advertising devices, including ·typical elevations. (8) Areas within the 100-year flood plain. (9) A general landscape plan with major types of materials designated as to purpose. Requirements and Findings of Fact. Before approving a Conditional Use, the City Planning and Zoning Conunission shall make written findings that the Conditional Use will implement the purposes of this Ordinance and will, in addition, meet the following requirements. (1) Uses Permitted. The use must be permitted as a Conditional Use in the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located. (2) The Conditional Use must be consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the policies therein. (3) The relationship of the Conditional Use to its surrounding area shall be considered in order to minimize adverse effects to both the existing and future develop- ment indicated by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, by traffic circulation, building height of bulk, lack of s c reening, or intrusions of privacy, noise, light, impact on housing, schools, public utilities, governmental services. (4) The number of off-street parking spaces shall not be less than the requirements of Chapter 22.5-5 of this Ordinance. (5) The Conditional Use shall meet all other applicable ordinance provisions of the '69 E.M.C. -4- • I • • r r • • • - (6) Other factors which in the opinion of the Corrunission will protect and promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. f. Applicatio~ Processing. (1) Upon .receipt of the application, the Department of Conununity Devl.!lopment shall be responsible for coordinating the review of the application by the various City departments and appropriate public agencies, culminating in the submission of an advisory report and recommendation to the City Planning and Zoning Co11V11ission. A copy of advisory report and reconunendations shall be furnished .to the applicant. (2) The Commission,· after proper pubiic notice, shall hold a public hearing on the application. (3) The City Planning and Zoning Conunission shall make written findings either approving, conditionally approving, or disapproving the Conditional Use. (a) The City Planning and Zoning Commission shall be the approving agency for any Conditional Use. (b) A copy of the decision or recom- mendation of the Planning Conunission shal l be provided to the applicant. (c) All approved plans for the Conditional Use, including all modifications or conditions thereto, shall bo endorsed by the Chairman of the City Planning and Zoning Conunission and shall be recorded in the office of the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder. (d) Any person or persona jointly or severally aggrieved by th• decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission may appeal the decision by th• appropriate legal action to a Court of Record having jurisdic- tion thereof. -s- • I • • • • • (e) Any person applying to a Court of Record for a review of any decision made under the terms of this section shall apply for a review within 'thirty days (30) after the date of decision and ·shall be required to pay the cost of preparing a transcript of proceedings and the application for review shall be in the nature of certiorari under Rule 106 (a) (4) of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. Section 2. That Section 22.8 of the City Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, (Ord. f26, Series 1963, as amended) is hereby amended by adding a new definition for •conditional Use• to read as follows: Conditional Use. A use which may be permitted in a zone district through the granting of a special exception by the City Planning and Zoning Commission ·upon a finding that it meets specified conditions. Introduced, read in full and passed on First Reading on the _l 6th day of January, 1978. ~ublished as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 18th day of January, 1978. ~~- day of Read by title and passed on final reading on the February , 1978. 27th Published by title as Ordinance No. 5 , Series of 1978, on the lat day of ~~-Ha_r_c_h~~~~~~~' 1978. ATTEST: y~lerk-Treasu=;;r · I, William o. Jamea, do hereby certify that the above ~nd foregoing is a true, accurate and co1115>lete copy of the Ordinanco, passed on final reading and published by title,•• Ordinance No.~5~~~' Series of 1978. -6- • I • • • TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: • • - MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor Eugene L. Otis and Members of City Council Louis Parkinson, Municipal Judge March 18, 1982 RECOl"1ENDATION OF APPOINTMENT OF MS. GERAkDINE ALLAN, 4951 S. CLARKSON STREET, ENGLEWOOD, COLOR DO, AS ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGE FOR THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD The Court recorrmends the appointment of the above as an Associate Judge for the City of Englewood. Ms. Allan is a qualified elector of the City of Englewood, has been duly authorized and licensed to practice law before all courts of the State and is, therefore, fully qualified under the Englewood Municipal Charter. Ms. Allan has had experience as a prosecutor in a municipal court. She also served as an Associate Judge for the City of Englewood for a brief period fn 1980 and proved to be a valuable addition to the Englewood Municipal Judiciary. I would be willing to answer any questions related to this request. The Court respectfully requests your action at the earliest possible d~(?;:_ LOUIS PARKHISON Muni ci pa 1 Judge /b cc: Ms. Geraldine Allan • I • • ORDINANCE NO. / <{ SERIES OF 198~ • • • BY AUTHORITY 7/l COUNCIL BILL NO. 16 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL PERSON--=B~I~L~O:;__~~~~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 13-4-lS(a) (6) OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNI CI PAL CODE OF 1969 PERTAINING TO EXEMPTION UNDER THE CITY USE TAX. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood desires to further define the processing exemption under the City Use Tax Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. That 13-4-lS(a) (6) be amended as follows: 13-4-15 (a) (6) The storage , use or consumption of tangible personal property by a person engaged in the business of manufacturing, compounding for sale, profit or use, any article, substance or commodity, whi ch tangible personal property enters into t.he preeessiftg e£ er eeee111es &ft ingreaient er eefflpenent part e£ the preattet er serviee whieh is fflafttt£aetttres 7 eempettnses er £~rnishea ans the eentainer7 iaeei er the i~rnishea shippin~ ease theree£ MEETS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. IS ACTUALLY AND FACTUALLY TRANSFORMED BY THE PROCESS OF MANUFACTURE: 2. BECOMES BY THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS A NECESSARY AND RECOGNIZABLE INGREDIENT, COM- PONENT OR CONSTITUENT PART OF THE FINISHED PRODUCT, AND 3. ITS PHYSICAL PRESENCE IN THE FINISHED PRODUCT IS ESSENTIAL TO THE USE THEREOF IN THE HANDS OF THE ULTIMATE CONSUMER. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 15th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 17th day of March, 1982. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. • I • • - • • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No.~~~' Series of 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. Attest: Eugene L. Otis, Mayor ex officio city Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, complete and accurate copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. , Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • • ORDINANCE NO. ,~ SERIES OF 198~ • • • BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 18 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE LEASE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REAL PROPERTY TO THE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FIRE ARMS SCHOOL. WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City of Englewood t o tr ain its police officers in fire arms use; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood, along with other juris- d i ctions, has created an entity known as the "Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms School"; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has surplus property suitable for use by the Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms School to train police officers. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. An agreement titled "Lease of Real Property" between and among the City of Englewood and the Governing Board of the Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms Range Fac i lity , organized under the laws of the State of Colorado, consisting of 21 pages, generally p rovides as f ollo ws: The term o f the lease sha l l be fo r a fi ve-y ear period of t i me terminating May 7, 1987, sub j e c t t o ren e wa l to May 7, 1992. T he rent for s aid p r operty sha l l b t h e s um of One Do llar ($1) per yea r. The use of the rea l p roper t y shall b e fo r a multi -j urisd i c- tional fire arms sc hool and waste and nuisance are specifica lly prohibited. The lessee shall not encumber the p roper t y , s h all not sublet or assign withou approval of the City of Enqlewood. Taxes and assessments, if any, shall be paid by the lessee subject to allowing lesse to contest taxes if any may be imposed . The lesse may construct those improvem nts necessary to carry out t h e uses aforedescrib d and shall maintain the same. Utilities shall b paid by lessee. It shall b lessee's duty to k eep the premises free of liens and shall con t est any lien s if the same be imposed. L ssee shall indemnify lessor for any activi t y ri s i n g from lessee's ctions. Th e less e shall ma intain insuran ce o n the property and shall pay all premiums thereon . Should t h e prop er t y b e tak en by eminent domain , the lease s hal l be con sidered terminated. Upon ermination of t h e lease , t h e City of En glewood s h all become the owner of a n y buildin g or improvements on the prop rty. The City of Englewood may terminate t h e leas at any im after May 7 upon paym nt of specified sums to the Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms Range Facility. Those sums a re bas d upon construction cost o $130 ,00 0 a n d shall b amortiz dover h 1st fiv ye rs of he lease. T h Multi-Jurisdiction 1 Fir Arms R ng Facility • I • • • • • • shall receive approval of Douglas County officials and conunence use of the facility within one year of the effective date of the lease. That property subject to the foregoing agreement is legally described as follows: A parcel in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Section 4, Township 6 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Douglas County, Colorado, described as: BEGINNING at a point where the West line of a right of way and easement described in Book 123 at page 227, Douglas County records, intersects the South line of Lot 44, Plum Valley Subdivision, Douglas County, now vacated; sa i d point also being on the northerly right of way o f the Highline Canal; thence Northerly along the West line of above mentioned Book and Page 70 feet to the true point of beginning; thence Westerly and parallel t o the South line of said Lot 44 and the Northerly line of the Highline Canal 250.0 feet; thence on an angle t o the right of 64°45' 130.3 feet more or less; thence o n an angle to the right of 22•34• a distance o f 1 00.0 f eet more or less to the South right of way o f Colorado Highway 1470; thence Easterly along said ri g ht of way 300.3 feet more o r less to a point on the extended West line of right of way and easement described in Book 123 at Page 227 ; thence Southerly and parallel with the West line o f th i s parcel and along the West line o f said Book and Pag e 224.1 feet more or l e ss to the point of beginn i n g, said parcel containing 1.46 acres more o r less, Douglas County, State o f Colorado. Se c tion 2. Tha t the City Council of the City of Eng lewood hereby authorizes the Ma y or to sign fo r and i n behalf of the City o f Eng l ewood and the ex offi cio City Clerk-Treasurer to a ttest the s ame. Section 3. That a copy of the foregoing Lease of Real P roperty is o n file in the City offices located at 3 4 00 South Elati Street, Englewood, Colorado. Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 15th day of March, 19 8 2 . Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 17th day of March, 1982. -2-I • • - - • • • • Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Published by title as Ordinance No·~~~' Series of 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the city of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. , Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -3- • • .... n ORDINANCE NO. /q SERIES OF 198~ • • - BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 18 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE LEASE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REAL PROPERTY TO THE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FIRE ARMS SCHOOL. WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City of Englewood t o train its police officers in fire arms use; and WHEREAS , the City of Englewood, along with o ther juris- dictions, has created an entity known as the "Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms School"; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has surplus property suitable for use by the Multi-Jurisd ictional Fire Arms School to train police officers . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. An agreement titled "Lease of Real Property" between and among the City of Englewood and the Governing Board of the Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms Range Faci lity, org anized under the laws of the State of Colorado, consisting of 21 pages, generally provides as follows: The term of the lease shall be for a five-year period of time terminating May 7, 1987, subject to renewal to May 7, 1992. The ren t for said property shall be the sum of One Dollar ($1) per year . The use of the real property shall be for a multi-jurisdic- tional fire arms school and waste and nuisance are specifically prohibited. The lessee shall not encumber the p roperty, shall not sublet or assign without approval of the City of Enqlewood. Taxes and assessments, if any, shall be paid by the lessee subject to allowing lessee to contest taxes if any may be imposed. The lessee may construct those improvements necessary to carry out the uses aforedoscribed and shall maintain the same. Utilities shall be paid by lessee. It shall be lessee's duty to keep the premises free of liens and shall contest any liens if the same be imposed. Lessee shall indemnify lessor for any activity arising from lessee's actions . The lessee shall maintain insurance on th property and shall pay all premiums thereon. Should the property be taken by eminent domain, the lease shall be considered terminated. Upon termination of the lease, the City of Englewood shall become th own r of any building or improvements on the property. The City of Englewood may terminate the lease at any time after May 7 upon paym nt of specifi d sums to the Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms Range Facili y. Those sums are based upon a construction cost of $130,000 and sh 11 be amortiz dover the last five years of the lase. The Multi-Jurisdictional Fire Arms Rang Facility I • • - • • • • shall receive approval of Douglas County officials and commence use of the facility within one year of the effective date of the lease. That property subject to the foregoing agreement is legally described as follows: A parcel in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Section 4, Township 6 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Douglas County, Colorado, described as: BEGINNING at a point where the West line of a right of way and easement described in Book 123 at page 227, Douglas County records, intersects the South line of Lot 44, Plum Valley Subdivision, Douglas County, now vacated; said point also being on the northerly right of way of the Highline Canal; thence Northerly along the West line of above mentioned Book and Page 70 feet to the true point of beginning; thence Westerly and parallel to the South line of said Lot 44 and the Northerly line of the Highline Canal 250.0 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 64°45' 130.3 feet more or less; thence on an angle to the right of 22°34' a distance of 100.0 feet more or less to the South right of way of Colorado Highway 1470; thence Easterly along said right of way 300.3 feet more or less to a point on the extended West line of right of way and easement described in Book 123 at Page 227; thence Southerly and parallel with the West line of this parcel and along the West line of said Book and Page 224.1 feet more or less to the point of beginning, said parcel containing 1.46 acres more or less, Douglas County, State of Colorado. Section 2. That the Ci ty Council of the City of Englewood hereby authorizes the Mayor to sign for and in behalf of the City of Englewood and the ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer to attest the same. Section 3. That a copy of the foregoing ~ease of Real Property is on file in the City offices located at 3400 South Elati Street, Englewood, Colorado. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 15th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 17th day of M rch, 1982. -2- • I • • • • • - Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Published by title as Ordinance No·~~~' Series of 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. , Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -3- I • • - • ORDINANCE NO. }lJ SE RIES OF 1982 • • • BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 17 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING ACADEMY AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FOR USE OF THEIR FIRING RANGE FACILITIES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the Colorado Law Enforcement Train i ng Academy has a fi rearms range and has offered the City the opportunity to continue using the range; and WHEREAS, i t is in the best inter est of the City of En g lewood t o provi de for continued firearms profici ency of its law enforce- me nt personne l. NOW, THERE F ORE, BE I T ORDA INED BY T HE CITY CO UN CIL OF THE CI TY OF ENGLEWOO D , COLORADO : Section 1. Th ere is hereby approved a con t ract e nt itle d "L i cense Agreeme nt Be tween Th e State Of Colorado, Colorado Law En fo r cement Train i n g Acad emy , Division Of The Department Of Local Affairs," cons ist i n g of t wo typewritten pages , attached hereto as Ex h ibit A. Section 2 . The City will abide by the terms and con dition s set out i n said License Agreement relating to use of t h e Colorado Law En forceme n t Training Academy Firearms Range . Section 3 . The Mayor of the City of Englewood a n d the ex officio c ity Clerk-Treasurer are here by authorized to sign and attest said document o n behalf of the City Co unci l and the City of Englewood, Colorado . Introduced, rad in full, and passed on first reading on th 8th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinanc on the 10th day of M rch, 1982 . Read by title and pass don final reading on h e 5th day of April, 1982 . I • • - • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No.~~~~' Series of 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: ex officio city Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- I • • • • • • LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEU THE STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO LAW EUFOP.CEHENT TRAIUING ACADEMY, DIVISION OF THE OEPARTMEtlT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS ANO Through a license agreerr.ent with the United States of America, the State of Colorado, through the Department of local Affairs, hereby grants to for the use of the _,.....,-...------------------------a license for a period of months, beginning to use a firearms range on United States Property in Section 36, Township 35, Range 70W, Jefferson County, Colorado, including access across the premises for purposes of said use. This license Is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. At the time of execution of this license, the Colorado Law Enforce- ment Training Academy (CLETA) and------~--~~----- have not agreed u~on a schedule for the uscage of the firearms range. The parties recognize that further negotiations are required between representatives, hereinafter referred to as "the 1 lcensee" and the CLETA officer having immediate Jurisdiction over the prorerty, herein- after referred to as "said officer", shal 1 be conducted upon the following premises: a. The use and operation of the firearms range shall be without cost or expense to the United States or the State of Colorado; b. The use and operation of the firearms range shall not interfere ...i.i.._ ~ba. ur.e of subject property by the United States, lts contrac- • • ~ , ___ ..,_ sn..l ch,.11 not • I • • LICEIISE AGREEMENT BETWEEII THE STATE OF COLORADO • COLORADO LAW rnFOP.CEMENT TRAUIING ACADEMY, DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMEtlT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS AND THE _______ _._ _______________ _ Through a license agreement with the United States of America, the State of Colorado, through the Department of Local Affairs , hereby grants to for tt-.e use o f the ___ -:------------------------a 1 icense for a period of months, beginning to use a firear ms ran ge on United States Property in Section 36, Township 35, Range 70w, Jefferson County, Colorado, including access across the premises for purposes of said use. This license is granted subject to the following conditions : 1. At the time of execution of this license, the Colorado law Enforce- ment Training Academy (CLETA) and have not agreed U?On a schedule for the useage of the firearms range. The parties recognize that further negotiations are required between representatives, hereinafter referred to as "the licensee " and the CLETA officer having i mmedi ate jurisdiction over the prorerty, herein- after referred to as "said officer", shall be conducted upon the following pre~ises : a. The use and operation of the firearms range shall be witho u t cost or expense to the United States or the State of Colorado; b. The use and operation of the firearms range shall not inter fer e with the use of subject property by the Un i ted States, lts co nt rac- tors and su bcont rac tors, or the State ~f Colorado, and shall not Impose a threat to the safe ty of those using or upon said property and the use of the firearms range may be suspended due to safety or construction related considerations upon oral notification to the licensee by said officer or his authorized representat i ve; e. Cooperation and continuing c omm unication will be ma intained during the term of this license to maximiz e safety, max imize range useage and to assure no I nterference with construction act ivi ties. 2. That any property of the United States or the State of Colora do, damaged by the licensee incident to the exercise of the privileges herein granted shall be promptly repaired or replaced by the licensee to th e satisfaction of said officer, or in lieu of such repair or replacement the licensee shall, if so required by the said officer, pay to the United States or State of Colorado, money in an amount sufficient to compensate for the los s sustained by the United States or State of Colorad~ hy reason of damage to or de struction of Government property. 3. That the United State~ or the State of Colorado shall not be responslbl<.' for damages to property or Injuries to persons which m,,y arise f,-om or be Incident to the construction, mi'lintenance, and U!;e of the fir<.'.1rms range. It. Th.'.ll It is to !le l'nderstood that this license Is effectiv<.' only Insofar as the rights grnnted the Stnte of Colorado by the United States in the property involved .'.Ire concerned, ond th'lt the licensee :;h.:111 olotoin such · perm ission as m<1 y be 111.:ce!.!;ury on .:iccount of .:iny other cxistinr rights . • -:----=.._ _________ _ • I • • • 6. 1. 8. • That the United States or the State of Colorado shall not be responsi~lc for da::-.ages to pro:,erty or injuries to persons which ~.:,y arise from or be incident to the exercise of the privileges herein granted, or for da~ages to the property of the licensee or for injuries to the person •of the licensee, or for damages to the property or injuries to the persons of the licensee's officers, agents, servants, or employees or others who may be on s.:iid premises at their invitation or the invita- tion of any one of them, arising fro~ government.:,! activities on the said pre~ises. The licensee shall provide ~er~onal and proper:y lia- bility insurance coverage which shall to the extent of C.R.S. 1973, 24-10-104, as a~ended, and under the limits of C.R.S. 1973, 24-10-109 and 114, as a~ended, ·insure the State and the United States from any and all claims for personal injury"-or pro:,erty dP.rr.age which may arise from the licensee's exercise of rlqhts under this license. That this license is revocable at the will of said officer upon 10 days notice to the licensee. That, on or before the date of expiration of this license or its relin- quish.-:ent by the I icensee, the I icensee shal I vacate the said Go•,er,rr.~:,t premises, re:..o·,e all property of the licensee therefrom, and r~store trie premises to a condition satisfactory to the said officer, fair t,ear and tear exce;:,ted. If, however, this license is revoked, tit-: licensee shall vacate the premises, remove said property therefro~. ar~ restore the premises as aforesaid within such time as the said officer may designate. That the licensee agrees to co~:,ly with any directions or regulations prescribed by said officer. These regulations initially include but may not be linited to: a. b. e. d. e. f. An Insurance certificate which shows proof of compl lance with paragraph 5 of this license. A course outline describing, at least, firing positions, numbers of officers on the firing line, rounds fired by each officer and safety precautions taken by the range officers/instructors, and the number of certified range officers/instructors who·will be present per officer firing and the method of certification of those range officers (i.e., FOi, NRA, State). The range will not be used unless at least one certified range officer/instructor ls present. Only certified or certifiable Colorado pence officers will be , al lowed to use the range. No a:munition other than .]8 caliber wadcutters wlll be fired on the range and then only in il northerly direction. These wadcutters must be of 148 gr/loaded to 2.1, grs . bul lseyc po1~der maxi mur:i. This license does not include use of the Decision Shooting Course. 1H \.!ITl!E SS \..'HEREOF", I have he re unto set my hand this 1982. day of ... · COLO f:1100 L/,W EIIFORCU:UIT TP.,\I tlll lG AC,,i.:tt:'I' The a~ove instrument, toge ther with all t he conditions th<'reof, ls hcrd,y accc:,tcd t his day of • 1902. • I • • • ORDINANCE NO . ...f} [' SERIES OF 1982 • • • BY AUTHORITY COUNCI L BILL NO. 17 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING ACADEMY AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORAD O, FOR USE OF THEIR FIRING RANGE FACILITIES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the Colorado Law Enforcement Training Academy has a firearms range and has offered the City the opportunity to continue using the range; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Englewood to provide for continued firearms proficiency of its law enforce- ment personnel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. There is hereby approved a contract entitled "License Agreement Between The State Of Colorado, Colorado Law Enforcement Training Academy, Division Of The Department Of Local Affairs," consisting of two typewritten pages, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2. The City will abide by the terms and conditions set out in said License Agreement relating to use of the Colorado Law Enforcement Training Academy Firearms Range. Section 3. The Mayor of the City of Englewood and the ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer are hereby authorized to sign and attest said docume nt on behalf of the City Council and the City of Englewood, Colorado . Introduced, reaJ in full, and passed on first reading on the 8th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 10th day of March, 1982. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day of April, 1982 . • I • • - .. • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No. -1 L , Series of 1982, o n the 7th day of April, 1982. Attest: Eugene L. Otis, Mayor ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • n LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF COLORADO • COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAl!JING ACADEMY, DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS AND Th r ough a license agreement with the United States of America, the State of Colorado, through the Department of Local Affairs, hereby grants to for t ~e u s e o f t he_,.---,--;-------,------,--------------a 1 ic e nse for a per i od of mont h s, begi nn i ng to use a fi rearn-.s r ang e on Un i ted States Pro perty in Section 36, TO\•inship 35, Range 70 W, Jefferson County, Colorado, including access across the premises for purpo s es of said use. This license is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. At the time of execution of this license, the Colorado Law Enforce- ment Training Academy (CLETA) and~------~-------~ have not agreed upon a schedule for the useage of the firearms range. The parties recognize that further negot i ations are required between representat i ves, hereinafter r efe rred to as "the 1 icensee " .:ind the CLETA of f icer having i mm ediate j ur is d ic tion over the pro~erty , herein- after referred to as "sa i d off i cer ", shall be conducted upon the following pre"'ises : a. The use and operation of the firearms range shall be withou t cost or expense to the Uni ted Sta t es or the State of Colorado; b. The use and operation of the f i rearms range shall not interfe r e with the use of subj ec t pro perty by the United Stat es, lt s co n trac- tors and subcontr.:ictor s , or the State ~f Colorado, and shall no t Impose a threat to the safety of those using or upo n sa id p ro pert y and the use of the firear ms ra nge may be suspended d ue to safety or construct i on related consider.:i tions upon oral notification to the licensee by said officer or his authorized representative; c. Cooperation and· continuing communicat i on will be maintaine d dur ing the term of this license to maxi mi ze safety, maximize rang e u s ea ge ond to assure no I nterfe r ence with construction activit i es. 2. That any property of the United States or the State of Colorado, da mage d by the licensee inc i de n t to the e xercise of the priv i leges herein g r ante~ shall be promptly rep aire d or r ep l a ce d by the license e to the satis fac tion of sa i d o ffic e r , o r i n li e u of s uc h rep ai r or replacement th e lice nsee sha ll, if so r e quired by the said o ffi c er, pay to the Un it ed Sta tes o r St ate of Co l orado, money In an amount sufficient to compe nsa te for the l oss sustained by the Uni ted States or State of Colo r ad~ hy r easo n of damage t o or destruction of Government proper t y. J. That the United Stat e s or th e St a t e of Colorado s h.:i ll not be responslbl~ f or d amages t o property or Injur i es to persons ~,h lch m,,y aris.? from or be incident t o the construction, mainten.:i ncc, .:ind use of the firc~rms r ange. 4. Th.:i t I t is to ~e ~nd e rstood t hat this l icense ls ef(ec t lv~ only Ins o far a s t he riqh t s qr~ntcd the State of Color.:ido by t he Unit e d St ates in t he p rope rty invc.ol~·e d .:ir e c o ncerned, a nd th -'l t t he licensee :.hall ol,tain suc h permission .:is ma y be ncccss~ry on .:i ccount of .:iny other c xistin~ ri ghts . ~-------~----·· ) • I • • • •.• That the United States or the State of Colorado shall not be responsible for c!a::-.ages to property or Injuries to persons ~,hich r...'.ly arise from or be incident to the exercise of the privilcses herein granted, or for da~ages to the property of the licensee or for injuries to the person •of the licensee, or for damages to the property or injuries to the persons of the licensee's officers, agents, servants, or enployees or others who may be on said premises at their invitation or the invita- tion of any one of them, arising fro~ government~! activities on the said pre~ises. The licensee shall provide ~er~onal and proper:y lia- bility insurance coverage which shall to the extent of C.R.S. 1973, 24-10-104, as a"'ended, and under the limits of C.R.S. 1973, 24-10-109 and 114, as a~ended, ·insure the State an<! the United States from any and al I clairss for personal injur9"-or property di'!rr.age which may arise from the licensee's exercise of rlqhts under this license. 6. That this license is revocable at the will of said officer upon 10 days notice to the licensee. 7. That, on or before the date of eY.piration of this license or its relin- quis h~en t by the licensee, the licensee shall vacate the said Gover,~e~t prer.iises, re .. .o·,e al I pro;ierty of the I icensee therefrom, and r~store :iie prer.iises to a condition satisfactory to the said officer, fair ttear and tear exce;ited. If, however, this license is revoked, tli'? licensee shall vacate the premises, remo ve said property therefro"', ar~ restore the premises as aforesaid within such time as the said officer may designate. 8. That the licensee agrees to co~ply with any directions or regulations prescribed by said officer. These regulations initially include but may not be linited to: a. b. c. d. e. f. An insura nce certificate which shows proof of compliance with paragraph 5 of this license. A course outl ine describing, at least, firing positions, nu"'bers of officers on the firing line, rounds fired by each offic~r and safety precautions taken by the ranse officers/instructors, and the nu"'ber of certified range officers/instructors who·will be present per officer firing and the method of certification of those rans e officers (i.e., FBI, NRA, State). The range will not be used unless at least one certified range officer/instructor is present. Only certified or certifiable Colorado peace officers will be a1101·ted to use the range. No a:miunltion other than ,38 caliber ~,adcutters will be fired on the range and then only in a northerly direction. These wadcutters must be of 148 gr/loaded to 2.4 grs. bullseye po,.,.der rnaximur.i. This license does not include use of the Decision Shooting Course. 1H \.!ITl:ESS \!HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 1982. day of • .. · COLOf:IIDO Lt.\.J E.llfO P.C lML:IT T P.,\ lfll llG l\C:,.:u : l' The a!:>ove Instrument, together with all the conditions thC'reof, is hcr,•1,y accepted this day of , 1982 . •' I • • • • - ? I BY AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO.~, SERIES OF 1982 COUNCIL BILL NO. 19 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AN EASEMENT TO USE SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR A STORM WATER DETENTION AREA AND ESTABLISHING OTHER RELATED TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1982. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has embarked upon a program of limiting Little Dry Creek to the confines of its channel in the City of Englewood; and WHEREAS, the goal is to prevent loss of public and priv ate property t o flood damage; and WHEREAS, School District No. 1, Arapahoe County, Colorado, Englewood Schools, desires to assist in controlling flood waters in the City of En g lewood to protect, among other things, the school tax base; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood desires to cooperate with and protec t the School Board. NOW , T HEREFORE , BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Sec t io n 1. T h ere i s hereby approved an agreement titled "Agreement Storm Water Dete nt ion Ar e a " between the City of Englewood, Co l o rado , and School Dis t rict No . 1 , Arapahoe County, Colorado, as attached hereto a n d incorporated by reference as Exhibit A. Section 2. follows: The aforedescribed Agreem nt gen era lly provid es as 1) School's use for educational purpose is paramount use. 2) A non xclusiv sem nt is granted by t h e School Distric t t o he City of Englewood for s orm water detention over prop rty owned by th School District and used for athle t ic pur- poses . 3) The School District shall r view and a p p r ove fi n al plans for cons rue ion o the storm wa t r det e ntio n are a . 4) The C ity shall sav e a n d h old h armle ss th Sc h ool Di tric and is Bo rd of Direc t o r s ag i n st a ny and al l c lai ms ri ing from h Ci y's u of the d t e n tion are a. I • • • • • - 5) City shall not use the property in a manner that creates a nuisance; construction and maintenance shall be coordinated with the School Board and shall be at City's expense; City recognizes the need for open space and shall attempt to pro- vide for the same along historic Little Dry Creek; City shall not make alterations unless approved by the School Board; City shall cause no liens to attach to the property; School's use shall not hinder capacity of the storm water holding area. 6) City shall properly insure the property. Section 3. There is hereby repealed Ordinance No. 15, Series o f 1982. Section 4. The Mayor of the City of Englewood, Colorado, is hereby authorized to affix his signature to the aforedescribed Agreement for and in behalf of the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, and the ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer is authorized to attest the same. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 15th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 24th day of March, 1982. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day o f April, 1982. Published by title as Ordinance No. ____ ~• Series of 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor At t est: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, e x officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of En glewood , Color ado, her eby certify that the above and foregoi n g is a true , accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed o n fi n al read ing a nd pub lished by title as Ordinance No. _____ , Series of 19 8 2 . Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • - • • • • EXHl:BIT A AGREBMENT STORM WATER DETENTION AREA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of ~~~~~~~~~-' 1982, by and between SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, by and through its Board of Education, hereinafter referred to as "District~, and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the School District is the owner of certain real property located in the County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, which is adjacent to Little Ory Creeki and WHEREAS, the City desires to construct a storm water deten- tion area as part of a public drainage project to provide for "100-year flood" protection from Little Dry Creek, adjoining the aforesaid property; and WHEREAS, the aforesaid property is suitable for the construc- tion of the needed storm water detention area which is in the best interests of the citizens of the District and the City by eliminat- ing risk of damage to lives and property from Little Dry Creek flooding; and WHEREAS, the District can continue the uae of the aforesaid property for its general purpoaea following the reconstruction I • • • • • thereof to be used concurrently aa a storm water detention area; and WHEREAS, the City is a public body pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32-11-1 01 et seq., and is a subdivision of the State pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 22-32-101; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to acquire an easement in certain property of the District in connection with the construction of the storm water detention pond as part of the drainage project; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable consideration, hereinafter appearing, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 • GRANT OF EASEMENT. The District hereby grants and conveys to the City a non- exclusive easement for the purpose of construction, use, and maintenance of a storm water detention pond upon the District property described as follows: Beginning at a point on the West line of Lot lO, Block 5, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from which the NW corner of said Lot 30 bears North a uiH- tance of 5.57 feet; thence South along tho WoRt line of Lots 30 to 25 (inclusive) said Dlock 5 a distance of 174.73 feet to the North line u( that parcel described in Book 1063, P4qo 26 4 , Arapahoe County Records; thence South Glonq a line 180 feet East of and parallel to the WoAt line of the SE 1/4 of ~B l/4 said Section 3 11 distance of 515 feet, thence Bast along 11 lino 515 feet South of and parallel to the North lino of the SB l/4 of NE 1/4 said Section 3 11 dhtnnco of 440 feet; thence deflecting right 67• a diA- tance of 75 feet; thence deflecting loft 49• a distance of 200 f .. t to the South line of thnt parcel described in Book 927, page 29, l\rapahuo County Records; thence East along said South -2- I • • - • • • • line a distance of 140 feet to the SW corner of that parcel described in Book 855, page 542, Arapahoe County Records; thence East 155.1 feet and North 125 feet along the South and East lines, respectively, of said parcel described in Book 855, page 5421 thence North a distance of 127.32 feet along the East line of that parcel described in Book 1403, page 41, Arapahoe County Records, to the South line of that parcel described in Book 1282, page 579, Arapahoe County Records; thence Southeasterly along aaid South line a distance of 13.52 feet; thence North along the East line of said parcel described in Book 1282, page 579, a distance of 196 feet; thence Northwesterly along the North line of Lota 1, 2, and 3, SANDRA'S SUBDIVISION, a distance of 183.2 feet to the NW corner of Lot 1, SANDRA'S SUBDIVISION; thence Northwesterly along the South line of that parcel described in Book 452 , page 592, Arapahoe County Records, a distance of 327.2 feet to a point; thence Northwesterly to a point on the South line of Lot 25, Block 6, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from which the SW corner of aaid Lot 25 bears West 70.92 feet; thence Northveaterly along the North line of that parcel deacribed in Book 1124, page 104, Arapahoe County Records, a distance of 75.2 feet to the NW corner of aaid Lot 25; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Eaat line of Lot 23 of said Block 6, from which the SE corner of said Lot 23 bears South a distance of 2 feet; thence Northweaterly along the North line of that parcel described in Book 1094, page 600, Arapahoe Co unty Records a distance of 132.85 feet to a point on the West line of Lot 22 of said Block 6 from which the NW corner of said Lot 22 bears North a distance of 3 feet; thence Northwesterly to a point on the East line of Lot 28, Block 5, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from which the NE corner of said Lot 28 bears North a distance of 5.72 feet, thence Northwesterly along th South lin of that parcel described in Book 1124, page 103, Arapahoe County Records a distance of 145.09 feet to the Point of Beginning, Arapahoe County, Colorado • Storm water det ntion ar a, as uaed in thia Agre nt, hall be a -3- • I • • • • • • constructed proportioned reduction in the existing elevation of the aforesaid property by approximately six (6) to eighteen (18) feet,in order to form the bottom and sides of the detention area, along with other necessary excavation and construction generally in accordance with the attached sketch, designated Exhibit A, prepared by Sellards & Griggs Consulting Engineers. It is under- stood and agreed that final plans for this water detention area must be approved by the Board of Education of the District. Said water detention area shall be designed in accordance with Sellards & Griggs Report No. 75019-44, dated February 1978 (Exhibit B). 2. DURATION OF EASEMENT AND REVERSION OF INTEREST. The duration of the aforesaid easement shall be perpetual, subject to written modifications upon the mutual consent of both the District and the City, or their successors, or the termination by the City of the aforesaid easement in said property. The duration of the occupancy of the water detention area by flood waters is understood to be temporary and intermittent, dependent on weather conditions. The City agrees to promptly clean up any debris and deposits remaining after storm water has been returned to Little Dry Creek from the storm water detention area and pay the costs thereof. 3. CONSIDERATION. The City shall pay as consideration to the District the sum of On Dollar ($1) per year, th receipt of wtl ic~ is hereby confessed nd acknowledged, and other good and valuable considera- tion as a for th in this Agreement, -4- I • • - • • • • 4. HOLD HARMLESS. The City agrees fully to aave harmless and defend the District and the District's Board of Directors personally from all suits, actions, demanda, or claims in law or in equity, arising out of the execution of this Agreement, or the use, con- struction, and maintenance of the real property herein described. The City shall be responsible for any liability resulting from any litigation and shall pay the costs of suit, attorneys' fees, appellate costs, and any other costs or expenses which may be assessed against the District and the District's Board of Directors personally as a result of any suit, demand, or claim filed concerning this Agreement. 5. OBLIGATIONS OF CITY. a. Purpoae. The premiaes shall be used solely for the facility and purpose described in paragraph 1 above or for auch other purposes as the District may approve. The City will not carry on or permit upon the premises any offensive, noisy, or dangerous activity or any nuiaance to the public or to the adjoining neighbors. The City will pay, upon deaand, any damages to the premises caused by the misuse of same by it or its agent• or its employees. The City shall not exercise any control over the routine use of the facilities by the District. The City ahall not use the facility to detain water except when in it• beat judgment said use i• necessitated by virtue of atora or other emergency conditiona. b. Construction and Maintenance. -s- I • • • • • • The storm water detention area described above shall be constructed by the City at its sole cost and expense according to approved plans a n d specifications. The City shall maintain said detention pond and facilities and be responsible for costs neces- sary for use and maintenance of property as a storm water detention a rea. The District shal l maintai n all porti ons not related to storm water detenti on area purposes as the Di stri ct determines necessary so long as the capacity of the storm water detention area is not dimin i shed or infringed upon. It i s ant i cipated that const r u ction shal l take one (1) year to comple t e from l etting of bids for construc t i on and r eturn i n g facilit ies to a cond ition usa ble by the Di strict. City agrees t o take whatever steps a re necessary to return fac ilities to a condition u s a b le by District as near as practicable as that curren tly on the property and i ns tall permanent underground sprinkling syst e m, all at City cost. The City shall provide District with City park facilities necessary for District's use to include those functions found on Exhibit Cat the locations designated therein, for the period during the construction and in the future at such times as thew tr detention area is filled with storm water and not returned to a usable condition for District functions within five (5) days of its t mporary and intermittent use by storm water. Th City's obligation to provide the District with City park facilities during temporary and intermittent u e of the area by storm w ters shall continu until the City has removed -6- I • • • • • any debris and deposits remaining after storm water has been returned to Little Dry Creek from the area. The City agrees to pay all transportation costs using District's transportation facili- ties based on actual cost of transporting students and faculty to and from school located adjacent to site of storm water detention area to the appropriate City facilities designated in Exhibit_g__, said actual cost based on District's normal unit operating expenses for transportation facilities, on a per pupil, per mile basis, plus additional equipment and hiring of additional drivers neces- sary to carry out said purposes, the intent being for the District to recover not less than the exact costs of such transportation. District shall approve the construction schedule and City shall require sufficient security from the contractor to insure prompt execution of the work . Both parties understand that construction ma y t ake l o nger than o ne year but City shall in s ure that contract or , i n no e v ent , aha ll take more than one and one- half years to c om ple te con struct ion of the detention pond facil i ties . c. Little Dry Creek Imp rovements . The City agrees to construct imp r o vemen ts g e n e rally in con formance to Sellards & Grigg Report No. 7501 9-44 dated February, 1978, excluding the options to construct upstream dama. {Exhibit B). The City recognizes the n eed and desirability of providing open space and a p edestrian and bicycle link betw en the District's property a nd the So u th Platte River. Th e City i n ten ds to develop appropri a te routes in t h vicinity of Hiatoric Little Ory Creek for such a link. Furth r , City recognize• the n ed to improve t he genera l appearance of down town Engl wood a nd intends to develop a sth tic standa rds that ar people ori nted -7- I • • - 1 ,, . . . ' • • • • with landscaping and open spaces applicable to both public and private development in the City and consider ordinance changes to accomplish this goal. d. Alterations. With the exception of the interim facilities and i nitial completed construction of the storm water detention area, the City will not make or permit any alterations or additions to the premises or place any additional structures, facilities or equipment on the premises without the District's prior written approval. The City shall submit plans for minor remodeling to the Board of Education for approval. No major remodeling will be permitted that would preclude the District's use of the real property for its general purpose s prior to this Agreement. Upon termination by City of the above-described easement in said property, City shall restore or replace any portion of the premises damaged or otherwise affected by such alterations, additions, structures, facili is, or equipment, unless such restoration repair was waived by the District at the time approval was given for such addition or alteration. Th District shall approve construction sch dules and the City shall require sufficient security from contractor to insure prompt execution of work . e. Facility Expenses. Th City shall pay (1) all license, us , or other fee ; (2) 11 w r, el ctricity, a wer, or other utility or service charg s; and (3) all oth roper ting nd construction xpens s n conn c ion with th construction, us nd maint nanc of that portion o d t nt on area. h afor said prop rty us d as a storm w ter -8- • I • • • • • • f. Compliance with Law. The City will comply with all applicable federal, s tate, county, municipal and other laws, ordinances, rules and regulations relating to all or any part of the following: (i ) the premises; (ii) the operation of the facility conducted thereon; (iii) t he maintenance of the premises; and the City shall refrain from using the premises in any way in violation of such law, ordinance, rule or regulation. g. Liens. The City will keep the premises free of all liens and/ o r claims to be placed on the premises, for whatever reason, to be removed within 30 days after the City has knowledge of such lien; and the City agrees to release, indemnify and hold the District harmless from and against such l iens and/or c laims. h. Surrender of Premises . The Ci ty will , upon termination o f i ts easement i n s aid proper ty , surrender the premises t o the Di strict, in a good order and cond ition, and wh e n app licabl e , i n c ompl i anc e wi th t he provi s ions of paragraph S(d ). 6. COMPATIBLE USE BY DISTRICT. The District may make improvements and unde r take construc- tion on the above-described property so long a s such i mprovemen ts and construction do not r e duce the capacity of the sit e for storm water dete ntion or reduce its hyd rological efficiency for said purpos e. The District s ha ll reque s t of the City its a pproval and the Ci ty shall not withh old app roval provided the proposed construc- tion a nd improvement satisfy the storm water detention requirements herein. The District's use of t h e property for its pres nt pur- -9- I • • - • • • • pos e s as athletic field and for subsequent compatible uses approve d by the City shall be deemed dominant and accommodated by the Ci ty i f possible. 7. INSURANCE. The District shall continue its insurance coverage on the real property described herein during its use of the property for i ts general purposes. The City shall, in addition, include the a b ove-described real property in its insurance coverage for loss resulting from the use of said property as a storm water detention a r ea for l i ability in excess of the c overage maintained by the District, a t the Ci ty's expense. Said excess cov erage shall be obtained and kept i n for c e dur i ng the term o f this Easement Agreement and shall i n c lude, i n ter a lia, a c o mprehensive pub lic l i abi lity ins u rance covera g e, in surin g the Di s trict and the City a g a i nst any l iability a ri s i n g out of the use, occupancy a nd main t ena n ce , and a l l a r eas appurtenant t h ereto b y the City i n excess of coverage provided b y the District . The Ci t y s h all deliver to the Dis t r i c t, prior to right of entry, copie s of policies of insurance required herein, or certificates evidencing the existence of such i n surance with a loss payable clause satisfactory to the District. No policy shall be cancellable or subject to reduction of coverage. 8 . BINDING ON SUCCESSORS AND AS S IGNS. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on t h e successors and assigns of both parties hereof. -10- • I • • - • • • • • 9. REMEDIES UPON BREACH. In the event of breach of the terms and condi t o ns her e of b y e i ther party the other party shall be entitled to spec ific performance of this Agreement or, in the alternative, the n o n- breaching party shall be entitled to damages suffered as a result of the breach. The District may not revoke or cancel this Agreement in the event of the City's breach but must resort to the remedies herein provided. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District has caused these presents to be executed by the President of its Board of Education and attested by the Secretary thereof, and the City has caused these presents to be executed by the Mayor and attested by the Director of Finance ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer. ATTEST: Secretary ATTEST: SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, Arapahoe County, Colorado President of i ts Board of Ed u cation CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO a Colora do Municipa l Corpora tion By~=-~~--,~-.....,..,-~-.,.,~~~~~~~-Eugen e L. Ot is , Mayor Gary R. Higbee, Dire c t or of Finance ex officio City Clerk-Trea aurer -11- I • ORDINANCE NO._';)_ I SERIES OF 1982 • • • BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 19 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AN EASEMENT TO USE SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR A STORM WATER DETENTION AREA AND ESTABLISHING OTHER RELATED TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1982. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has embarked upon a program of limiting Little Dry Creek to the confines of its channel in the Ci ty of Englewood; and WHEREAS, the goal is to prevent loss of public and private property to flood damage; and WHEREAS, School District No. 1, Arapahoe County, Colorado, Englewood Schools, desires to assist in controlling flood waters in the City of En glewood to protect, among other things, the school tax base; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood desires to cooperate with and pro tect the School Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO : Section 1. There is hereby approved an agreement titled "A greement Storm Water Detention Area" between the City of Englewood, Colorado , and School District No. 1, Arapahoe County, Colorado , as attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit A. Section 2. follows: The aforedescribed Agreement generally provides as 1) School's use for educational purpose is paramount use. 2) A nonexclusive easement is granted by the School Dis trict to the City of Englewood for storm water detention over property owned by the School District and used for athletic pur- poses. 3) The School District shall review and approve final plans for construction of the storm water detention area. 4) The City shall save and hold harmless the School District and its Board of Directors against a n y and all claims arising from the City 's use of the detention area. • I • • • • • 5) Ci ty shall not use the property in a manner that crea tes a nuisance; construction and maintenance shall be coordi nated with the School Board and shall be at City's expense; City recognize s the need for open space and shall attempt to pro- vide for the same along historic Little Dry Creek; City shall not make alterations unless approved by the School Board; City shall cause no liens to attach to the property; School's use shal l not hinder capaci ty of the storm water holding area. 6) City shall properly insure the property. Section 3. There is hereby repealed Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1982. Sec tion 4. The Mayor of the City of Englewood, Colorado, is hereby authorized to affix his signature to the aforedescribed Agreement for and in behalf of the City Council of the City of En glewood, Colorado, and the ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer is authori zed to attest the same. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 15 th day of March, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 24th day of March, 1982. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 5th day of April , 19 82. Published by title as Ordinance No. , Series o f 1982, on the 7th day of April, 1982. ~~~ Attest: Eugene L. Otis, Mayor ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee , ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No.~~-' Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • • • • • EXHIBIT A AGREEMENT STORM WATER DETENTION AREA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this~~~~-day of ~~~~~~~~~~-' 1982, by and between SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. l, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, by and through its Board of Education, hereinafter referred to as "District", and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the School District is the owner of certain real property located in the County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, which is adjacent to Little Dry Creek; and WHEREAS, the City desires to construct a storm water deten- tion area as part of a public drainage project to provide for "100-year flood" protection from Little Dry Creek, adjoining the aforesaid property; and WHEREAS, the aforesaid property is suitable for the construc- tion of the needed storm water detention area which is in the best interests of the citizens of the District and the City by eliminat- ing risk of damage to lives and property from Little Dry Creek flooding; and WHEREAS, the District can continue the use of the aforesaid property for its general purposes following the reconstruction • I • • • - thereof to be used concurrently as a storm water detention area; and WHEREAS, the City is a public body pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32 -11-101 et seq., and is a subdivision of the State pursuant t o C .R .S. 1 973, 22-32-101; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to acquire an easement i n c ertain property of the District in connection with the c onstruction of the storm water detention pond as part of the drainage project; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other g ood and valuable consideration, hereinafter appearing, the parties her eto agree as follows: 1 . GRANT OF EASEMENT. The District hereby grants and conveys to the City a non- exclusive easement for the purpose of construction, use, and mai ntenance of a storm water detention pond upon the District property described as follows: Beginning at a point on the West line of Lot JO, Block 5, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from whjch the NW corner of said Lot 30 bears North a <li H- tance of 5.57 feet; thence South along the West l i ne of Lots 30 to 25 (inclusive) said Dloc k ~ a distance of 174.73 feet to the North l i n e of that parcel described in Book 1063, paqc 264, Ar apahoe County Records; thence south alonc1 a line 180 feet East of and parallel to the WcR t l i ne of the SE 1/4 of ~E 1/4 said Section 3 a distance of 515 feet; thence East along a linn 5 1 5 feet South of and parallel to the North lino of the SE 1/4 of NE 1/4 said Section 3 a dis t an c.:o of 440 feet; thence deflecting right 67° a <liR- tance of 75 feet; thence deflecting left 49° ., distance of 200 feet to the South lino of that parcel described in Book 927, page 29, /\rapahuo Co unty Records; thence East along said South -2- • I • - • • • • line a distance of 140 feet to the SW corner of that parcel described in Book 855, page 542, Arapahoe County Records; thence East 155.1 feet and North 125 feet along the South and East lines, respectively, of said parcel described in Book 855, page 542; thence North a distance of 127.32 feet along the East line of that parcel described in Book 1403, page 4 1 , Arapahoe County Records, to the South line of that parcel described in Book 1282, page 579 , Arapahoe County Records; thence Southeasterly along said South line a distance of 13.52 feet; thence North along the East line of said parcel described in Book 1282, page 579, a distance of 196 feet; thence Northwesterly along the North line of Lots 1, 2, and 3, SANDRA'S SUBDIVISION, a distance of 183.2 feet to the NW corner of Lot 1, SANDRA'S SUBDIVISION; thence Northwesterly along the South line of that parcel described in Book 452, page 592, Arapahoe County Records, a distance of 327.2 feet to a point; thence Northwesterly to a point on the South line of Lot 25, Block 6, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from which the SW corner of said Lot 25 bears West 70.92 feet; thence Northwesterly along the North line of that parcel described in Book 1124, page 104, Arapahoe County Records, a distance of 75.2 feet to the NW corner of said Lot 25; thence Northwesterly to a point on the East line of Lot 23 of said Block 6, from which the SE corner of said Lot 23 bears South a distance of 2 feet; thence Northwesterly along the North line of that parcel described in Book 1094, page 600, Arapahoe County Records a distance of 132.85 feet to a point on the West line of Lot 22 of said Block 6 from which the NW corner of said Lot 22 bears North a distance of 3 feet; thence Northwesterly to a point on the East line of Lot 28, Block 5, HIGGINS ENGLEWOOD GARDENS, from which the NE corner of said Lot 28 bears North a distance of 5.72 feet; thence Northwesterly along the South line of that parcel described in Book 1124, page 103, Arapahoe County Records a distance of 145.09 feet to the Point of Beginning, Arapahoe County, Colorado. Storm water detention area, as used in this Agreement, shall be a -3- • I • • • • • • • constructed proportioned reduction in the existing elevation of the aforesaid property by approximately six (6) to eighteen (18) feet,in order to form the bottom and sides of the detention area, along with other necessary excavation and construction generally in accordance with the attached sketch, designated Exhibit A, prepared by Sellards & Griggs Consulting Engineers. It is under- stood and agreed that final plans for this water detention area must be approved by the Board of Education of th~ District. Said water detention area shall be designed in accordance with Sellards & Griggs Report No. 75019-44, dated February 1978 (Exhibit B). 2. DURATION OF EASEMENT AND REVERSION OF INTEREST. The duration of the aforesaid easement shall be perpetual, subject to written modifications upon the mutual consent of both the District and the City, or their successors, or the termination by the City of the aforesaid easement in said property. The duration of the occupancy of the water detention area by flood waters is understood to be temporary and intermittent, dependent on weather conditions. The City agrees to promptly clean up any debris and deposits remaining after storm water has been returned to Little Dry Creek from the storm water detention rea and pay the costs thereof. 3. CONSIDERATION. The City shall pay as consideration to the District the sum of One Dollar ($1) per year, the receipt of w ich is h reby confessed nd acknowledged, and other good and valuable consid ra- tion asst fo rth in this Agr em nt. -4 - • I • • - • • • • 4. HOLD HARMLESS. The City agrees fully to save harmless and defend the District and the District's Board of Directors personally from all suits, actions, demands, or claims in law or in equity, arising out of the execution of this Agreement, or the use, con- struction, and maintenance of the real property herein described. The City shall be responsible for any liability resulting from any litigation and shall pay the costs of suit, attorneys' fees, appellate costs, and any other costs or expenses which may be assessed against the District and the District's Board of Directors personally as a result of any suit, demand, or claim filed concerning this Agreement. 5. OBLIGATIONS OF CITY. a. Purpose. The premises shall be used solely for the facility and purpose described in paragraph 1 above or for such other purposes as the District may approve. The City will not carry on or permit upon the premises any offensive, noisy, or dangerous activity or any nuisance to the public or to the adjoining neighbors. The City will pay, upon de111&nd, any damages to the p remises caused by the misuse of same by it or its agents or its e mployees . The City shall not exercise any control over the routine use of the facilities by the District. The City shall not use the facility to detain water except when in its best judgment said use is necessitated by virtue of storm or other mergency conditions. b. construction and Maintenance. -s- I • • I r.""'.'l • • • • The storm water detention area described above shall be constructed by the City at its sole cost and expense according to approved plans and specifications. The City shall maintain said detention pond and facilities and be responsible for costs neces- sary for use and maintenance of property as a storm water detention area. The District shall maintain all portions not related to storm water detention area purposes as the District determines necessary so long as the capacity of the storm water detention area is not diminished or infringed upon. It is anticipated that construction shall take one (1) year to complete from letting of bids for construction and returning facilities to a condition usable by the District. City ag~ees to take whatever steps are necessary to return facilities to a condition usable by District as near as practicable as that currently on the property and install permanent underground sprinkling system, all at City cost. The Ci ty shall provide District with City p a rk f acilities necessa ry for District 's use to include those functio ns found on Exhi bit Cat the locations designated therein , for the period during the construction and in the future at such times as the water detention area is filled with storm water and not returned to a usable condition for District functions within five (5) days of its temporary and intermittent u e by storm waters. The City's obligation to provide the District with City park facilities during tempo rary and intermittent use of th area by storm waters shall continue until the City has remov d -6- I • • • • • • any debris and deposits remaining after storm water has been returned to Little Dry Creek from the area. The City agrees to pay all transportation costs using District 's transportation facili- ties based on actual cost of transporting students and faculty to and from school located adjacent to site of storm water detention area to the appropriate City facilities designated in Exhibit.s:_, said actual cost based on District's normal unit operating expenses for transportation facilities, on a per pupil, per mile basis, plus additional equipment and hiring of additional drivers neces- sary to carry out said purposes, the intent being for the District to recover not less than the exact costs of such transportation. District shall approve the construction schedule and City shall require sufficient security from the contractor to insure prompt execution of the work. Both parties understand that c onstruction may take longer than one year but City shall i nsure that contractor, in no event, shall take more than one and one- half years to complete construction of the detention pond facilities . c. Little Dry Creek Improvements. The City agrees to construct improvements generally in conformance to Sellards & Grigg Report No . 75019-44 dated February, 1978 , excluding the options to construct upstream dams. (Exhibit B). The City recognizes the need and desirability of providing open space a nd a pedestrian and bicycle link between the District's property and the South Platte River. The City int nds to develop appropriate routes in the vicinity of Historic Little Dry Cre k for such a link . Further, City r cognizes the need to improve th gen ral appearance of downtown Englewood nd intends to develop aesthetic standard that re peopl ori nt d -7- • I • • (, ' • • • • with landscaping and open spaces appli cable to both public and private development in the City and consider ordinance changes to accomplish this goal. d. Alterations. With the exception of the interim facilities and initial completed construction of the storm water detention area, the Ci ty will not make or permit any alterations or additions to the premises or place any additional structures, facilities or equipment on the premises without the District's prior written approval. The City shall submit plans for minor remodeling to the Board of Education for approval. No major remodeling will be permitted that would preclude the District's use of the real property for its general purposes prior to this Agreement. Upon termination by Ci ty of the above-described easement in said property, City shall restore or replace any portion of the premises damaged or otherwi se affected by such alterations, additi ons, structures, facilities, or equipment, unless such restoration repair was waived by the District at the time approval was given for such addition or alteration. The District shall approve construction schedules nd the City shall require sufficient s curity from contractor to insure prompt execution of work. e. F cility Expenses. The City shall pay (1) all license, us , or other f es: (2) all wat r, electricity, s wer, or oth r utility or s rvic charg s; and (3) all other op r ting nd cons ruction exp ns sin connection with th construe ion, us o that portion of the a ors id prop r y us d s d t n ion ar -8- • nd maint n nc storm wat r I • • - • • • • f. Compliance with Law. The City will comply with all applicable federal, state, county, municipal and other laws, ordinances, rules and regulations relating to all or any part of the following: (i) the premises; (ii) the operation of the facility conducted thereon; (iii) the maintenance of the premises; and the City shall refrain from using the premises in any way in violation of such law, ordinance, rule or regulation. g. Liens. The City will keep the premises free of all liens and/ or claims to be placed on the premises, for whatever reason, to be removed within 30 days after the City has knowledge of such lien; and the City agrees to release, indemnify and hold the District harmless from and against such liens and/or claims. h. Surrender of Premises. The City will, upon termina tion of its easement in said property, surrender the premises to the District, in a good order and condition, and when applicable, in compliance with the provisions of paragraph S(d). 6. COMPATIBLE USE BY DISTRICT. The District may make improvements and undertake construc- tion on the above-described property so long as such improvements and construction do not reduce the capacity of the site for storm wat r detention or reduc its hydrological efficiency for said purpose. The District shall request of the City its approval and th City shall not withhold approval prov ided the proposed construc- tion nd improvem nt satisfy th storm water d tention requirem nts her in. Th District's use of th prop rty for its pr s nt pur- -9- • I • • • • • • poses as athletic field and for subsequent compatible uses approved by the City shall be deemed dominant and acccmunodated by the City if possible. 7. INSURANCE. The District shall continue its insurance coverage on the real property described herein during its use of the property for its general purposes. The City shall, in addition, include the above-described real property in its insurance coverage for loss resulting from the use of said property as a storm water detention area for liability in excess of the coverage maintained by the District, at the City's expense. Said excess coverage shall be obtained and kept in force during the term of this Easement Agreement and sha ll include, inter alia, a comprehensive public liability i nsurance coverage, insuring the District and the City against any liability arising out of the use, occupancy and maintenance, and all areas appurtenant thereto by the City in excess of coverage provided by the District. The City shall deliver to the District, prior to right of entry, copies of policies of insurance required herein, or certificates evidencing the existence of such insurance with a loss payable clause satisfactory to the District. No policy shall b cancellable or subject to reduction of coverage. 8. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of both parties hereof. -10- • I • • - • • • • • 9. REMEDIES UPON BREACH. In the event of breach of the terms and conditons hereof by either party the other party shall be entitled to spe cif i c performance of this Agreement or, in the alternative, the non- breaching party shall be entitled to damages suffered as a r esult of the breach. The District may not revoke or cancel th i s Agreement in the event of the City's breach but must resort to the remedies herein provided . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District has caused these presents to be executed by the President of its Board o f Education and a ttested by the Secretary thereof, and the City has caused these p resents to be executed by the Mayor and attested by the Director o f Finance ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer. ATTEST: Secretary ATTE ST: SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, Arapahoe County, Co lorado Pres i dent of its Boar d of Educat ion CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO a Colorado Municipal Corporation Gary R. Higbee , Dire c t or of F i nance ex officio City Clerk -Trea s u rer -11- • I • • - ORD INANCE NO. SER IES OF 19Bi--- • • • BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO . 22 INTRODUC~ BY , OUNCIL MEMBER~~~-"""=:.~~~~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD BY REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING §22.7 THEREOF TO REVISE THE SIGN CODE CONTAINED THEREIN. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood adopted its first Comprehensive Sign Code in 1974, regulating the signage of the City;and the condi- tions within the City of Englewood relevant to signage have changed substantially since that time; and WHEREAS, the Sign Code of 1974 had no prov isions for bring- ing into compliance with the Code those signs which did not meet that Code's requirements and that has resulted in unsightly and i nappropriate signage remaining in existence; and WHEREAS, the character of the City of Englewood is as a regional retail shopping center to people in the metropolitan ar ea , which activity serves to generate significant revenues for neces sary City services; the City of Englewood has made a commitment to revital- ize and maintain Englewood as a vital retail center for the area by approving a Comprehensive Plan, approving a Downtown Development Plan, activating the Urban Renewal Authority and has taken steps to implement and complete these City goals , and Sign Code revision is a necessary adjunct t o these goals; and WHEREAS, the correla tive c haracte r of the City of Englewood is as a family residential area , and it is important to con trol signage t o be consis t ent wi th the values and goals of the important family resident ial character of the City of Englewood; and WHEREAS, business leaders in th City of En qlewood have expressed support for a Sign Code revision to complement updating and modernization of the City 's commercial activities; and citizens of Englewood have expressed desires to promote, through zoning and signage control, a community which is beautiful, h althy, clean, well-bal need and safe; and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission has w 11 perform d its Charter function by proposing a revised Sign Code t o City Council aft r numerous public hearings and m etings with s u h Commission , citizens , and in t erested party participation and has submitted to the City Council proposed legislative findings of fact wh ich support h enactment of the proposed Sign Code ; and City Council adopts those proposed findings of fact . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: S ction 1. That Sec ion 22 .7 of the Compr hensiv City of Englewood be and hr by is am nd d • Zonin Ordin n c or d: I • • -• • • This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "City of Englewood Sign Code." §22.7 SIGN CODE §22.7-1 General Statement. The City Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council recognize that signs are a necessary means of visual conmunication for the convenience of the public and that it is the right of those concerned to identify their businesses, services or other activities by the use of signs. However, the Conmission and Council are also aware that citizens of Englewood are concerned about adopting and enforcing sound environmental practices, in- cluding the strict control of signs, and limiting signs to those which are accessary and incidental to the use on the premises where such signs are located. It is to this end that the following goals are set forth and the regulations in this section are deemed necessary: a. To protect the public from hazardous conditions that result f rom signs which are structurally unsafe, obscure the vision of motorists, and/or compete or conflict with necessary traffic signals or other traffic regula- tory devices. b. To encourage signs which are well-designed, legible, and appropriate to the uses permitted as well as compatible with their surroundings and with the buildings to which they are appurtenant. c. To provide a reasonable balance between the right of an individual to identify his business and the right of the public to be protected against the visual discord resulting from the unrestricted proliferation of signs and s imilar devic es. d. To require that sign s whic h advertise or identify a us or a business no longer in operation be removed within a reasonable tim. e. To require that s i gns wh ich do not comply with the requirements of this Ordinance be terminated wi thin a reasonable period of tim. 122.7-2 Scope nd Application of this Section. Th se r ulations shall govern and control the display, construction, er ction, alt ration, remodeling, enlarging, moving or maintenance of all signs p rmitted within all zone districts established by this Zoning Ordinance nd any a nd nts th reto. Thia sign code shall be adlldniatered by th Dir ctor of th ment of Co11111unity D v lopment who shall have the pow rs nd duti s a and those n cesaarily impli d to dminiater and enforce this cod : th may issue appropriate proc dur a and forms. D part- t forth Director Upon application to and iaauanc by th D partm nt of a permit th r - fora, a aign may b e rected, alter d and maintain d only for a Peraitt d Use • I • • • • - -2- in the District in which the signs are located; signs shall be located on the same lot as the Permitted Use; provided, however, that no sign of any type shall be erected or maintained for or by a single-family, two-family or three-family residential use, except Home Occupation signs and certain signs fo r which no permit is required. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of the provisions of any other ordinance or regulation applicable to signs. Signs located in areas governed by several ordinances and/or applicable regulations shall comply with all such ordinances and regulations. If there is a conflict between the regula- tions in this Section and any other ordinance or regulations, the more stringent regulation shall apply. §22.7-3 Permits. a. Permit required. It shall be unlawful to display, erect, construct, relocate or alter (except for copy changes), any sign without first filing with the Department an application in writing, paying applicable fees, and obtaining a sign permit, except as provided in §22.7-5 and §22.7-7 of this ordinance. When a sign permit has been issued by the Department, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter or o therwise deviate f rom the terms or conditions of said permit without prior approva l of the Department. A written record of such approval shall be entered upon the original permit application and maintained in the files of the Department. b. Application for Permit. Appli c ation for sign permit s hall be made by the owner or tenants of the property on which the sign is to be located, his authorized agent, or a sign contractor licensed by the City of Englewood. Such afplications shall be made in writ ing on forms furnished by the Plan- o ng Division, and shall be signed by the applicant. The Depa rtment shall, within five (5) working days of the date of the applica t ion , either approv or deny the application or refer the application back to the applicant in any instance wh ere insufficient information has been furnished. If the Departm nt finds that work under any permit issued is not in accordance with th information supplied in the permit application and/or is in violation of this or any other pertinent ordinance, or should it b found that there has b n any misrepresentation in conn ction with the application for the permit, (including non-sufficient fund checks), th sign owner or lessee or er ctor shall be notified of such findings and that the violation must be corrected within five (5) working days of notice. If such correction is not made, the permit shall be revoked and written notice thereof shall b served upon the sign owner or erector. No person shall proceed with any part of such work aft r such notice is received. The owner or lesse of the sin or the owner of th property on wh ich the sign ia located sh 11 hav th right to appeal the d ciaion of the Department in th mann r provid d for in §22.2-6b of this Ordinance. If actual work either on or off-aite is not comm need und r any aign permit i sud within aixty (60) days from th dat of auch permit, the p rmit hall automatically b com null nd void. D lays which re not a result 0£ willful acta or n 1 t of th contractor , own r or p raon obtaining th • I • • n - • • • • -3- permit may be excused and the Director may grant an extension of time in which to start or resume operations. All requests for extensions and approval thereof shall be in writing. When any permit has been revoked under the terms of this section, permit fees shall not be refunded. c. Plans, Specifications and Other Data Requested. The application for a sign permit shall be accompanied by the following plans and other information. The name, address and telephone number of the owner or persons entitled to possession of the sign and of the sign contractor or erector; the location by street address of the proposed sign structure; complete information as required on application forms provided by the Department, including a site plan and elevation drawings of the proposed sign drawn to scale, caption of the proposed sign and such other data as is pertinent to the application; plans indicating the scope and structural detail of the work to be done, including details of all connections, guy lines, supports and footings, and materials to be used; application for an electrical permit for all electrical signs, and the required information for such application; and a statement of value or cost of the sign. d. Permit Fees. A permit fee shall be paid to the City for each sign permit issued under this section. The permit fee shall be in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City Council. e. Identification and Marking of Electrical Signs. Each electrical sign hereafter erected or remodeled shall bear thereon a clearly legible identifica- tion platP. not exceeding fifteen (15) square inches in area, stating the name of the person, firm or corporation responsible for its construction and erection, with installation date and permit number and shall be marked with input amperes at full load input. f. Licensing and Insurance Requirements. 1. Any person, firm or corporation engaged in the business of installing, recting, moving or maintaining signs in the City of Englewood shall be duly licensed by the City. A person not engaged in the sign erecting business may be allowed to install, erect, move or maintain his own sign upon demonstration to the Department that he possesses sufficient knowled~and skill and is appropri- ately insured for public protection. The Director may issue a temporary liens . 2. Befor any p rmit is issued for a sign which is located over public property or whi h may r quire any work over publi c property, the erector shal l furnish to the Cit y a ce rtificate of insurance from a firm with corporat surety, and uthorized to do business in the State of Colorado, for public liability and property dam e in amounts established by the Department of not less than th followin , and covering the liability of the sign erector with respect to all work performed by him or his agents or employees: For death or injury to any one person •.•••.•.• $100,000 Total liability in ny one accident •••..•••••• 300,000 Prop rty dS111age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . • • • . . . • . . • . • . SO, 000 • I • • • • • • -4- §22.7-4 Permit for Group Signs. Persons submitting a plan f or a group of signs which are designed as an integral part o f a new Planned Development or a new single development occupying no less than 24,000 s quare feet of l o t area , may be granted a 25% increase in number of signs or maximum square f oo t area s ubject to the approval of the Director of the Department. §22.7-5 Signs Not Subject to Permits. The following signs displayed for non-commercial purposes, may be erected and maintained in all Zone Districts without a permit. Such signs shall be in addition to all other signs per- mitted in any Zone District providing such signs do not require direct electri- cal wiring, and conform to setbacks and other physical characteristic require- ments of the designated zone districts. Even though permits are not required fo r the following signs, wall signs shall be l ocated only in the signab l e a rea, and window signs shall be counted toward the 25 % maxi.mum c overage . This res tric- tion shall not apply to holiday decorations, or to short term advertis i ng as provided in §22.7-10 e 6. No permit shall be required fo r copy c han ges or ma intena nce to a con f orming sign if no structural changes are made. a . Bulletin Boards . Bull etin bo ard s f or pub l i c , ch a rita b l e or r eligi ous inst itutions, which are not over twelve (12) s quare feet in area, and wh ich a re l ocated on the premises of said institutions. b . Elec tion Signs. Election signs shall not b e posted more than fo rty-f ive (45) calendar days prior t o the election to which the s ign r elates , and s ha ll be removed within fifteen (15) c alendar day s following the elec tion to wh ich the sign relates. Su ch s igns are l imited to wall, window and ground sins , and shall n ot be a banner of paper or cloth. In resident i a l zon e districts , there s hall be no mo r e t han t wo (2) election signs per each lo t; they s hs ll n ot exceed twelve (12) s qu a re f eet of total sign area , a nd shall be no mo r e than six (6) fee t in height abov e gr a de. In Commer- c ial and Industrial Zone Di s t ric t s, there s hall be n o mo r e t han t wo (2) per ach street frontage; they s h all no t e x c eed t wenty-four (24) square f et of total sign a r ea. c. Flags. Flags of nations or an organization of nations, tates and citi s. d. Holiday D cor tions . Sin in th nature of d orations, clearly incid ntal and commonly ssociat d with any national, loc 1 or religious holiday; provided that such signs shall be display d for a p riod of not mor than sixty (60) consecutive cal nd r days. Such si na may b of any typ , numb r, rea, hight, location, illumination, or animation, and shall b located so as not to conflict with traffic r gulatory d vices. e. Ideological Signe. Id olo ical aigna not more than tw lv (12 quare fe tin total sign ar a. Such aigna are limit d to not aore than two (2) pr lot. f. Illuminated Providing no aiana, a)'llbola, lett ra, figur a, t c ., id ntifying an rvice , or product , occur on th buildin or th part of th building which ia ill inat d. i• Inaid Signs. Sina within buildin a that ar not viaibl fr the ro dway and are more than 12 inch a frOIII th wind I • • -• • • -5- h. Memorial Signs. Memorial signs or tablets, giving the name of building and date of erection, when cut into any masonry surface or inlaid so as to be part of the building. i. Private Parking or Traffic Direction Signs. Signs giving parking or traffic directions or restrictions which do not require direct electrical wiring, provided that such signs are limited to: wall and ground signs, not more than two (2) signs per curb cut on the lot and not more than six (6) square feet per face in area, and not more than six (6) feet in height above grade. Not more than one (1) directional sign may be displayed at each curb cut. Such signs may be illuminated from a concealed light source whi ch does not flash, blink, or fluctuate, and shall not be animated. j. Public Signs. Signs required or specifically authorized for a public prupose by any law, statute or ordinance. k. Scoreboards. Scoreboards located on athletic fields. 1. Symbols. Symbols or crests of national, state, religious, fraternal, professional and civic organizations. m. Vehicle Consumer Information Signs. Signs on cars, trucks, o r o ther vehicles displayed in commercial lots which give information as to price, emissions or mileage as required by state or federal law of such vehicles. These s igns are limited to 25% coverage of window area . n. Works of Art. Works of art which in no way identify a product. §22.7-6 Signs Sub j ect t o Temporary Permit. The following signs may be displayed in th e designated zon districts under the conditions described, upon gran ting a temp orary permit. a. Spe cial Event Signs. In r esidential zone districts, special ev nt signs are permitted in addition to all other signs allowed for a Permitted Use. Such signs shall be limited to one (1) wal l or one (1) ground sin, subject to limitations described in this section and in §22. 7-8a; no more than twelve (12) feet in height, and shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet in area, and shall not be displayed for more than thirty (30) calendar days. In comm r cial and induatrial zon districts, on ap cial ev ot ai n may be p rmitt din addition to all other igns. Such sign shall be limited t o wall, window or ground ai ns, subject to limitations d scrib din 122.7-lOc 1, 5, nd 6. Such sign hall not be more than twenty-four (24) squar fe tin area and shall not be displayed for more than thirty (30) cal ndar days. b. Stre t Bann rs. Bann ra across public thorou hfar a announcin v nts sponsored by the City, Englewood Sc hool Diatrict , Arap ho CounLy, or charitable or anizations may b authorized by t mporary p rmit by th Director. Such Str t Banners ahall be install d, re1110v d and maintain d by th sponsor. • I • • • • • -6- §22.7-7 Signs Subject to Yearly Registration. The following signs are additionally permitted in all zone dis- tricts and shall be registered by the owner or lessor, with the Department sixty (60) calendar days after the effective date of this ordinance. This registration must be renewed on an annual basis thereafter and subject to the following conditions: a. Contractor Signs. A sign not more than twelve (12) square feet per face in ares and not more than twenty-four (24) square feet in total sign area, which names the contractors or sponsors engaged in c onstruction on the property where the sign is located. b. Real Estate Signs. Signs which advertise the sale, rental or lease of the premises upon which said signs are located. Such signs shall not extend outside the property line and shall not be more than six (6) square feet per face in area. §22.7-8 Signs Prohibited in All Zone Districts. The following signs are prohibited in all zone distric ts and are declared a nuisance by the Department. a. Any ground sign within a triangular area of thirty (30) feet along two (2) sides of an intersection of curbs of two (2) streets, a railroad right-of-way and a street, a driveway and a street, or an alley and a street, which does not have a clear area of seven (7) feet between the grade level and the bottom of the sign unless approved by the City Traffic Engineer. b. Animated signs. c. Banners, pennants, valances, and wind-powered devices. d. Billboard s. e. Flashing or blinking signs, except for scoreboards and time and temperature devices. f. Portable s ign s. g . Outdoor display of merchandise on public right-of-way. h. Roof signs. i. Search lighta. j. Signe paint don fences. k. Strin s of 11 ht bulbs ua din conn ction with coDDDercial premiss for co ercial purposes, other than traditional holiday decorations. 1. m. licena d Third-party aigns. Wheel d adv rtiaing devic a, vehicl 1. xcept for p rman nt signs on I • • - • • • • -7- §22.7-9 Signs Permitted in Resident ial Zon ing Districts: R-1-A, R-1-B, R-1-C, R-2, R-2-C, R-3 and R-4. a. Permitted Maximum Number . 1. Residential uses shall be permitted one (1) sign in addition to those permitted in §22. 7-Sb, c , d, and e. 2. Nonresidential uses shall b e permitted two (2) s igns in addition to those permitted in §22.7-5 . b. Permitted Maximum Sign Area. 1. Single-family, Two-Family and Three-Family Residences . One (1) square foot in addition to the area of those permitted in §22 .7-Sb, c , d, and e. 2. Religious and Educational Institutions, Public Buildings and Residential Uses with Between Four (4) and Thirty-Nine (39 ) Dwelling Units. Twenty (20) square feet or two (2) square fe et of sign area for each one-thousand (1 ,000 ) square fe et of lot area; no t, however, to exceed sixty (60) s quare f eet of to ta l sign area and provided t ha t no one sign fa ce shall exceed twenty (20) square feet in area. 3. Hospital, Clinics, Professional Offices, or Residential Uses Having Forty (40) or More Dwelling Units. Twenty (20) square fe e t or two (2) square feet of sign area for each thousand (1,000) square f eet o f lot area; not, however, to e x c e e d ninety-six (96 ) s quare fee t o f t o tal sign area for each lot provid ed that no one s i gn fa c e s ha ll e xceed t h ir ty-tw o (3 2) square feet. 4 . Other Lawful Non-Residential Uses . Twenty (20 ) squa r e feet of sign area for each u se , provided tha t no one sign face shall exceed ten (10) square feet. c. Permitted Sign Ty pes. 1. Ground Signs. Ground signs are permitted only for religious a nd du c ationa l institutions, public buildings, hospitals, clinics, pro- fess i on l o ffic e s , or forty (40) or mor residential units. Su c h signs s ha l l b n o mo re than fifteen (1 5) feet in height and shall be s et back ten (10) f et from th property line and ar subjec t to the limitations des- c r i bed i n f 22.7-Sa . 2. Marquees, Canopy or Awning Signs. All signs shall be par llel t o the face of the marquee, canopy or awn ing upon which such sign are dis - played and shall not project above or below th face of the marquee, canopy or wning, and shall only iden tify th business by nam and/or address. 3. Projecting Signe. Maximum area of th sign shall b t w nty - five (25) s quare f et per face and the maximum height s h all be t w nty (20) fe t. Such aigns shall b locat d in th "signable ar a" of th facade of th building, and must not obscure major architectural details or extend • I • • • • • • -8- above the roo f line. Such signs s ha ll have a clearance of ten (10) f e et f r om grade level to the bottom of the sign. Maximum pro ject ion shall be thirty (30) i nches from the building to whic h it is attached. If a sign projec t s more than thirty (30) inches over the public right-of-way, an encro achment agreement must be obtained from the City. Where a projecting s i gn has two (2) or more display face s , all faces shall be included in determinin g t he a rea of the sign. 4. Suspended Signs. Suspended signs shall not exceed four (4 ) square feet per face in area; shall be separated by a distance of fifteen (15) feet and shall have a minimum clearance of seven (7) feet above grade level to the bottom of the sign. Such signs shall be limited in content to identification or address of the business. 5 . Wall Signs. Wall signs shall be no greater than twent y (20) feet in height, shall not project more than twelve (12) inches from the face of the building to which it is attached and shall not extend above the r oof line or the parapet wall. 6. Window Signs. Window signs shall not o c cupy more than 25% of the window in which they are displayed and shall not be displ ay ed in wi n- dows above the first floor level . d. Permitted Illumination. Al l s igns des c ribed above except home occu- pation signs may be illuminated, bu t only from a c onc e aled ligh t sourc e . Signs shall not remain illuminated between the hours o f 11:00 p .m. and 7:00 a.m., exc ept signs permitted for medic al s ervic es and public s ervic es s u ch as police a nd fire, which are provided on a twen t y-four hour basis . e . Partic ular Signs Allowed. 1. Rome Occupa tion Sign. Rome occupa t ion sign no t mo r e t han one (1) square foot in area , wh ich i s affix ed t o the buil ding, and wh ich is unligh ted and unanima t ed. 2. Hi gh -Ris Bu ilding Identi f i ca tion Wa l l Signs. For multi- storied buildings in excess of t he max i mum heigh t permitted in the R-3 Zone District, additional wall sign area shall be permitted for huilding identification purposes in conformanc~ with the schedule set forth blow. Sign area shall b based upon a squ re foot ge f ctor multipli d by hori- zontal linear footage of th buildin lacade at the levation of the facad where the sign is placed. a) For signs located from sixty (60) feet to on hundred (100) feet in height, th factor shall be five (5) square feet. b) For signs located from one hundr done (101 to one hund r ed fifty (150) feet in height , the factor shall be six (6) square feet. c) For aigna locat don hundr d fifty-one (151) feet to two hundr d (200) feet in hight , the factor shall b s v n (7) squar f et. Multi-atori d buildin a may be permitt d identification wall aigna of t h aize prov id d by aubpara rapha 1 throu h 3 for each building I • • • • • • -9- fac ade visible from a public right-of-way. Wa l l sign areas permitted by this subsection for one facade may not be used for any facade other than the facade for which suc h allowance is granted and shall be exempt from §22 .7-11 a 3. Such signs shall not count against maximum s ign area, or maximum number of signs . §22.7-10 Signs Permitted in Commercial and Industrial Zone Distric t s : a. signs if signs if five (5) greater. B-1 and B-2, 1-1 and I-2. Permitted Maximum Number. Each permitted use may have three (3) the linear foot of the street frontage is 150 feet or less ; fo ur (4) the linear foot of the street frontage is 151 feet to 300 feet; signs if the linear foot of the street fronta ge is 30 1 feet o r b. Permitted Maximum Sign Area. 1. For All Permitted Uses : a) For a Lot Having One Permitted Use . Fo r the Permitted Use, the maximum sign area shall be eighty (80) square feet or as c alc ulated f rom the table herein: Street Frontage 1 foot to 100 feet 101 feet to 250 feet 251 feet+ Sign Area/Foot o f Street Frontage 1.5 sq. ft./1 foot 1.0 sq. ft./1 foot 0.4 s q . ft ./1 fo o t No s ingle sign fac e shall exceed one hundred (100) s quare feet in a rea , except as provided in s ubsection 3 hereof, nor s hall the t o tal sign area of any use exceed s i x hundred (600) s qu a r e f eet . b) Fo r a Lo t Hav ing Two or More Pe rmitted Uses . Fo r each Permitted Use the maximum sign area shall b e eigh ty (80 ) square feet or as calculated from the table herein: Building Front 1 foot to 100 feet 101 f et+ Sign Area/Foot of Building Front 1.5 sq. ft./1 foot 1.0 sq. ft./1 foot No single sign face shall exceed one hu ndr d (100) squar f et in area except a provided in 1 22.7-10 e 2 and 7 nor ahall the total sign area of any use exc ed six hundred (600) square f t. c. 1. Ground Signe. The maximWII height of a ground sign shall b tw nty (20) fee . Th distance b tv n a1 na on adjac nt lots shall b not I • • -• • • -10- less than the height of the taller sign. If there i s more than one business in a building or if a group of buildings are assoc iated by ownership, no g round signs are permitted except Joint Identification Sign s . Wh e re a ground sign has two (2) or more display faces, all faces shall be included in deter- mining the area of the sign. 2. Marquees, Canopy or Awning Signs. Al l signs shall be pa ra llel to the face of the marquee, canopy or awning upon which such signs are dis- played and shall not project above or below the face of the marquee, canopy or awning, and shall only identify the business by name and/or address. 3. Projecting Signs. Maximum area of the sign shall be twenty-five (25) square feet per face and the maximum height shall be twenty (20) feet. Such signs shall be located in the "signable area" of the facade of the building, as described in §22.7-lla 3, and must not obscure major architectur- al details or extend above the roof line. Such signs shall have a clearance of ten (10) feet from grade level to the bottom of the sign. Maximum projec- tion shall be thirty (30) inches from the building to which it is attached. If a sign projects more than thirty (30) inches over the public right-of-way, an encroachment agreement must be obtained from the City. Where a projecting sign has two (2) or more display faces, all faces shall be included in deter- mining the area of the sign. 4. Suspended Signs. Shall not exceed four (4) square feet per face in area; shall be separated by a distance of fifteen (15) feet and shall have a minimum clearan ce of seven (7) feet above grade level to the bottom of the sign. Such signs shall be limited in content to identifica- tion or address of the business. 5. Wall Signs. Wall signs shall be placed only in "signable areas" of a building facade except s specified in §22. 7-10 e 7. "Signabl Area" of the building means any area of the facade of the building up to th e roof line whic h is free of windows and doors or major architectural d tail. The area of the wall sign must no t exc d 40 % of the identified "signabl area". Wall signs may not project mor than eighteen (18) inches from t he supporting wal l . Wall signs ma y not ext nd above th roof line or parap t wall. 6. Window Signs. Window signs shall not occupy more t h an 25% of th t o tal ar a of the window in which they are display d. Thia 25% maximum cov rag sh 11 include all sins exc pt short term adv rtising sins re ardl as of wheth r it i counted for sign area 11 d or not. Sin dis- play d tw lv (12) inches or 1 sa fro the interior of wind s hall b d bited a ainst th square foot area and numb r of ai n allow d a penaitt d us . Wind sign ar not p rmitt din wind s abov th first floor. d. Permitted Illumination. Signs in Comm rcial and Indus tri 1 Zona may b illuminated, but all d irect illumination shall not exc d tw nty- fiv (25) watts pr bulb. e. Signs Additionally Allow d. Th oll ing si na r alao all ed in co rcial nd induatri 1 zon a subject to the condition, 1tat d. I • • • • • • -11- 1. Drive Thru Identification Signs. Each Permitted Use with a sheltered drive thru facility may have one (1) identification sign attached to the shelter structure subject to the limitations of §22.7-lla 3. Maximum sign area shall be ten (10) square feet for each lane of the drive thru facility. Such signs shall not count against maximum sign area or number. 2. High Rise Building Identification Wall Signs. For multi- storied buildings in excess of the maximum height permitted in the B-1, B-2, 1-1 or 1-2 Zone Districts, additional wall sign area shall b permitted for building identification purposes in conformance with the scnedule set forth below. Sign area shall be based upon a square footage factor multi- plied by horizontal linear footage of the building facade at the elevation of the facade where the sign is placed: (a) For signs located from sixty (60) feet to one hundred (100) feet in height, the factor shall be five (5) square feet; (b) For signs located from one hundred one (101) feet to one hundred fifty (150) feet in height, the factor shall be six (6) square feet; (c) For signs located one hundred fifty-one (151) feet to two hundred (200) feet in height, the factor shall be seven (7) square feet. Multi-storied buildings may be permitted identification wall signs for each building facade visible from a public right-of-way. Wall sign areas permitted by this subsection for one facade may not be used for any facade other than the facade for which such allowance is granted and shall be exempt from §22. 7-ll a 3. Such signs shall not count against maximum sign area and number. 3. Identification Signs. Signs limited to name of occupant, address of premises, and no more than four (4) square feet per sign in area. Such signs are limited to no more than one (1) per street front, and may be illuminated only from a concealed light source. 4. Joint Identification Signs. Joint Identification Signs are permitted for two or more Permitted Uses on the same lot as the sign. If two or more businesses occupy the same building, or a group of buildings are associated by ownership, no ground signs are permitted except Joint Identification Signs. Each individual identification within the Joint Identification Sign shall be uniform in size, type and style except for the name of the development. The following Joint Identification Signs are in ddition to all other signs in terms of maximum sign area nd numb r . ) Permitted Area of Joint Identification Signs. One (1) square foot of sign area for ach two (2) linear feet of str et front g provided, howev r, that no single sign shall exceed one hundred (100) square feet per fac , and that the total area of the Joint Identification sign shall not exce d two hundred (200) square feet. b) Permitted Maximum Number of Joint Identification S gns. On (1) sign for each street frontage. 5. S condary Signs. On th r ar of the building, ach busin ss or use may hav on (1) sign id ntifying name of th busin as, th products old, manufa tured ors rvices off rd, which shall not be count d toward the maximum sign area or numb r. Su c h secondary sign shall not exce d • I • • • • • • -12- one-half (1/2) square foot of sign area for each linear foot of the front lot line, or one (1) square foot of sign area for each linear foot of build- ing front for a lot having two (2) or more Permitted Uses. 6. Short Term Advertising Signs. In addition to other signs allowed in a Permitted Use, each business or designated use may be permitted short term advertising signs, provided such signs are limited to window or wall signs. Window signs shall not cover more than 20% of the window area above that specified in 522.7-Dc 6. Wall signs shall not be greater than fifty (SO) square feet in area and subject to the limitations of §22.7-lDc S. All such signs shall be limited to a two (2) week period after which a permit will be required. Such signs shall show the date of installation or display. 7. Signs Set Back from Public Right-of-Way. For buildings with building frontage of fifty (SO) feet or less: The permitted area of only one sign face may be increased at the rate of one- third of one percent (.0033) for each additional foot of distance beyond the first one hundred (100) feet of building setback and based on the great- er of eighty (80) square feet or as calculated in §22.7-lOb 1 (b), but in no case greater than one hundred (100) square feet. In no case may the increase be more than one hundred (100) percent of the maximum permitted sign face area and the additional sign area calculated herein shall not count against the maximum sign area and may exceed forty (40) percent of the signable area. The increase in sign face area will be granted for a sign face which shall be placed at the setback distance as used in the calculation herein. For buildings with building frontage of fifty-one (51) feet or more : The permitted area of only one sign face may be increased at the rate of one-third of one percent (.0033) for each foot of distance beyond the first one hundred (100) feet of building setback and based on the greater of eighty (80) square feet or as calculated in §22.7-lOb 1 (b), but in no case greater than one hundred (100) square feet. In no one case may the increase b mo re than one hundred (100) percent of the maximum permitted sign fac area and the additional sign area calculated herein shall not count against the maximum sign area. This increase in sign face area shall be ranted for a sign which shall be placed at the setback dist nee as used in the calculation herein. 522.7-11 Sign Area Measurement. a. Area to be H asur d. The r a of a sign sh 11 be measured in conformance with the regulations as herein st forth, provided that th structure or bracing of a sign shall be omitted from measurement, unless such structure or br cing is made part of th message or face of the sign. Where a sign has two or more display faces, the area of all faces shall be included in det rmining th area of the sign. 1. Sign with Backing. The area of signs enclosed by a box or outlin shall be measured by determining th area of e ch rectangle whi ch creates the mallest singl continuous p rimeter nclosing the extrem limits of the display surface or f ce of the sign; including all fram. s, backing, fac plates, non-structural trim or other coapon nt parts not otherwise us d for support • • I • • _n • • • - -13- 2. Signs Without Backing. The area of signs consisting of indi- vidual letters or symbols shall be measured by determining the sum of the area of the smallest single continuous rectangle enclosing the extreme limits of each message, including all frames, face plates, non-structural trim or other component parts not otherwise used for support. 3. "Signable Area". Signable wall area is a continuous portion of a building facade unbroken by doors or windows or major architec tural features. It is calculated by selecting a continuous surface, then drawing an imaginary rectangle within specified height limitations and computing the square foot area of this rectangle. Persons displaying signs attached to a building may determine the "signable area" to be used by choosing any such area on the building facade for the display of signs. Signs may not cover more than 40% of this area. If, because of the design of the building, a signable area cannot be identified, the Department and the applicant will determine a suitable area for signage. 4. Irregular Outline. In the case of an irregularly shaped sign or a sign with letters and/or symbols directly affixed to or painted on the wall of a building, the area of the sign shall be the entire area within a single-continuous rectilinear perimeter of not more than eight (8) straight lines enclosing the extreme limits of writing, representation, emblem or any figure of similar character. b. Number of Signs. Each continuously enclosed area of a sign face, either by outline or by an imaginary line, shall be considered one sign. Signs which have more than one sign structure attached to a common support or wall may be counted as a single sign, or as several signs; however, if counted as one sign, the total surface area of such multiple unit signs shall include vertical and horizontal spacing between signs. 122.7-12 Maintenance. Every sign, including those specifically exempt f rom this section in respect to permits and permit fees, shall be maintained in good condition at all times. All signs shall be kept neatly painted, including all metal parts and supports thereof that are not galvanized or of r ust-resistant metals. The Director or his or hr designee, shall inspect and shall have the authority to ord r the painting, repair, lteration, or removal of a sign which is not in conformance with this ordinance by rea on of safety, health, or public welfare, or by reason of in dequate maintenance, dilapida- tion, or obsole1cence. 122.7-13 Nonconforming Signs. Any sign which wa a lawful ly erected and maintain d prior to th eff ctiv date of this Ordinance , but which doe1 not conform to th limita- tion, e1tsblished by this Ordinance , except those 1igns prohibited, bszsrd- ous or abandoned, shall b non-conforaing signs and subj ct to th followin conditions: a. .;;.;.;;a;;;,;:;...;;;.;;.;c.;;.;c.;;.;;;....;;..;;....;~.;;....~~~;.;.;;;;.;;;a..s~i~g~n--•. All non-conformin sign• the Department. If a valid perait Depart nt wil l COllplete th • I • • - • • • • -14- registrati on and notify the owner or l essee o f the s ign o r the owner of t he propert y on whic h the sign i s located r e questing v e rific ation of the r egis- tration i n formation. If no valid permit exists for the non-conforming s ign or if insuffic ient information in ava ilable , t he own e r or lesse e of the s i gn or t he owner of the property on which the s ign i s located will be notified and mu s t register the non-conforming sign or provide th e neces s ary informa- tion wi thi n thirty (30) calendar days of rec eipt o f the no tific a t i on. b. Termination of Non-conforming Signs. An y non-con f orm ing sign shall be brought into conformance or shall terminate and c ease t o exist wi thin ten (10) years from the date a permit was issued. If seven (7 ) yea rs or more has passed from the date a permit was issued to the effec tive date of t he Code , then the sign must be brought into conformance or terminate and c e ase to exist within three (3) years from the effec tive date of the Cod e. Any non- conforming sign without a valid permit must be brought into con fo rma nce or terminate and cease to exist within three (3) years from the ef f e c tive date of the Code. In addition, a non-conforming s ign must be brought into conform- ance or terminate and cease to exist if any one of the followin g conditions occur: 1. Whenever the s ign is damaged more than 50% of its t o t al replace- ment value, o r destroyed f rom any cause whatsoever, o r become s obsolete or sub s tandard under any app licab l e ordinance of the munic ipal ity , t o the extent that the sign bec omes a hazard o r a da nger . 2 . Whenever the own ership of the pr op erty changes on wh ich the non- conf o rming sign is located. 3 . Whenever there i s a c hange i n the lessee , own e r s hip of the business or u se to which the s ign pertains . 4. Whenever t here is a r equest made for a permi t to change the sign. 5. Whe neve r there i s a r equest for a permit to make improvem nts to the facade of the build ing on which the non-conforming sign is locat d. c. Non-conforming Signs in New ly Annexed Areas. Any own r or op rator of a non-confo rming sign in a n ew ly annex d area s h all terminate such non- conforming sign in accordance with the requirements of this section, with th effective date of the annexation ordinanc being the start of the tim limit - tion. d. Appeals. Th owner or lessee of a aign, or the owner of th property on which s sign is locat d who haa been notified by the D partment that such sign is non-conforming may appeal that decision to the Dir ctor or designee, within twenty (20) days of th receipt of such notice. Th appal shall contain the appellant' nm and address, the decision ppealed, and a brief explanation why th ppellant should not b d to comply with th document appal d. The director or design inform lly with the app llant to exchan en cessary infot'1B8tion nd iasue a decision in writin to the appellant at his address stat din th app al. If the d cision of the Director of design is not satis actory to said owner or leas , within thirty ( 0) days of th Director's d iaion, h may apply for a variance froa th ard of Adjuatm nt and App ala a pro- • I • • • • - -15- vided for in §22.2-6 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. §22.7-14 Prohibited, Hazardous and Abandoned Signs -Enforcement Proce- dures. a. Notification of Unlawful Signs. No prohibited ·, abandoned, or hazardous sign shall be displayed, constructed, erected, altered, remodeled, enlarged, moved or maintained within the City. Notice shall be given by certified mail or personal service to the owner or lessee of any sign pro- hibited in all Zone Districts as described in §22.7-8, and to the owner of the property on which it is located. The notice shall state that such a prohibited sign, shall be altered to conform with this Ordinance or be re- moved within one hundred eighty (180) days after the notice has been received. Signs prohibited in §22.7-8 d, j, and 1, shall be removed within three (3) years from the date the notice is received. Hazardous signs are those which by reason of inadequate mainten- ance, dilapidati:>n, or obsolescence, create an imminent hazard to public health, safety, or welfare, as declared by the Department; those signs are further declared a nuisance and shall not be displayed or erected within the City. The notice shall require hazardous sign removal within ten (10) days. Signs abandoned for a period of thirty (30) days shall be declared abandoned signs and a nuisance by the Department; abandoned signs shall not be displayed or maintained within the City. The notice shall require abandoned removal within thirty (30) days. b. Appeals. The owner or less e of a sign or the owner of the property on which a sign is located wh o has been notified by the Department that such sign is prohibited, abandon d or hazardous may appeal that decision to the Director or designee within twenty (20) days of the receipt of such notice, except for hazardous signs ppeal must be within five (5) days . The appeal shall contain the appeallant's name and address, the decision being appealed, and a brief explanation why the appeallant should not b required to comply with the document appealed. The director or designee may meet informally with the appeallant to exchange necessary information and shall issue a decision in writing to the appellant at his address stated in the appeal. to said from th Compr h th Dir If the decision of the Director or designee is not satisfactory own r or less e, within fifteen (15) days may apply for a variance Board of Adjustm nt nd App 1 as provided in 122.2-6 of the naive Zoning Ordinanc , exc pt for hazardous signs in which c ase ctor'a decision is final. c . Failure to Comply with otic a. If the own r or 1 sse of pro - hibited,abandon d or hazardou1 sin or th owner of th prop rty on which such ai n i1 locat d fails to comply with notic giv n purauant to thi s c n within the tim sp ci(ied, th City Mana er or hia d sign ia uthoriz d to cause th ction r quir d by ordinance. All coats inc urr d by th City plus an dministrativ coat of fife n pre nt (15%) of th dir c t coats 1hall b d a ainat th r 1 prop rty and its ra. d. by this otice of Coats. ction, a state lf th City incurs coats t kin ction r quir d nt ah 11 b prepar d for th entir coat plus sign I • • • • • • -16- fifteen percent (15%) administrative costs, and be mailed by c ertified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner of the property on which the sign is located with instructions that said statement will be paid in full plus costs within thirty (30) days of said mailing date. The notice shall also inform the property owner that the failure to pay the statement for costs for sign removal within sixty (60) days shall result in an assessment being made against the property which shall constitute a lien pursuant to §22.7 of t h e Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Englewood. e.· Assessment. If the full amount of the statement relating to sign removal from realty is not paid within sixty (60) days, the City Manager shall direct the Director of Finance to assess the entire amount of the statement plus an additional twenty-five percent (25%) penalty against the specified realty. After assessment by the Director of Finance, a copy shall be sent to each owner of record of the assessed realty. The assessment shall contain a legal description of the premises, the expenses and costs incurred, and the date of sign removal, and a notice that the City claims a lien for this amount. The Director of Finance shall certify such assessment to the County Treasurer who shall collect such assessment in the same manner as ad valorem taxes are collected. f. Assessments: From the date of the assessing statement, all assess- ments shall constitute a perpetual lien against the specified realty and shall have priority over all liens excepting general t ax liens and prio r special assessments. No delays, mistakes, errors or irregularities in any act or proceeding authorized herein shall prejudice or invalidate any final assess- ment; but the same may be remedied by the Director of Finance, as the case may require, upon application made by the property owner or other interested person. When so remedied, the same shall take effect as of the date of the original assessment by the Director of Finance. g. Other Remedies. Any unpaid charge plus all costs and penalties shall constitute a debt due the City. The City Attorney shall, at the dir- ection of the City Manager, institute civil suit in the name of th City to recover such charges, cost and penalties. The City may prevent by injunction and require removal of any sign erected without a permit. Thes remedies shall be cumulative with all other remedies, including prosecution in Municipal Court for each violation of this chapter pursuant to the provisions and penalties established by Title I, Chapter 2, of the '69 E.M.C. §22.7-15 Sev rability. Th provisions of this code are severable. If any part of this code is declared unconstitutional by a final judgment of a court of compet- ent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect any portion of the cod which remains, but th r mainder shall b in full force and effect as if the portion declar d unconstitutional had never been a part of th cod • 122.7-16 Definitions. Animat d Sign. Any sign or part of ign which changes position by movem nt or rotation orgies the illusion of such chan e of position. Awnings. A ah lt r supported entirely from the ext rior wall of a • I • • • • • -17- building and of a type which can be retracted, folded o r collapsed against the face of the supported building. Canopy. A roof-like structure which is attached to a wa ll or wal ls of a building and may be provided with ground supports. Us ua lly of a lighter material than a marquee. Concealed Light Source. An artificial light intended to illuminate the face of a sign, which light is shielded from public view and f r om ad- joining properties. Department. The Department of Community Development. Director . Director of the Department of Co 11111unity Development. Display Surface or Face. The area made available by the sign st ructur e for the purpose of displaying a message. Distance of Sign Projection. The distance f r om the exterior wa ll sur- face of the building, or from the furthest point on a mansard r oof , to the display face of a wall sign. Drive Thru Identifica tion Sign. A sign which identi fies a drive thru facility and the business to which it belongs. Election Sign. A sign providing information regarding elections , candi- dates, or issues concerning such elections. Exterior Wal l Surface. The most exterior part of a wall , sun screen , or any screening or material c overing a building. Ground Sign. A sign supported by poles , uprights or braces extended from the ground or an object on the ground; but not attac hed to any pa rt of any building. Ideological Sign . A sign whic h expresses a religi ous, political, social or other philosophical stance. Illuminated Sign . A sign lighted by or exposed to artificial lightin either by lights on the sign, within the sign, or directed towards the ai n. Individu 1 L tter Sign. Letters or figur s individually f shion d from metal or other materials and attached to th w 11 of a buildin or oth r surface; but not including a sign painted on a wal l or oth r surfac Joint Identification Sign. A ign which s rve s a co11111on or collect- ive identification for two or more buein es or industri 1 us• on th s m lot. Such sign may contain a directory to said us• as an int gral purt thereof, or may serve as n ral id ntification only for such d velopm nts as shopping centers , indu trial parka and the lik Major Architectural D tail. Diatinguiahabl d sign featur s of th facade of the buildin such as windows, doors, balconies, columns, or pattern, or designs form d at the tim of conatruction by the buildin material • • I • • r_ • • • • -1 - Mansard Roof. An architectural f atur hich is a steep roof structure which is a portion of a roof structur or is attach d to the wa ll of a building. Mansard Roof Sign. A sign attached to th sid of a Mansard roof. Marquee. A rigid, roof-like structure, usually of glass, metal or wood construction, attached to a wa ll or walls of a building or structure and supported by the building or s truc tu re which may or may not have ground supports. Marquee Sign. A sign attached to, painted on, or erected against the face of the marquee. Non-conforming Sign. Any sign lawful when erected but whic h, on the effective date of this Ordinanc e, does not conform to the limitations estab- lished by this Ordinance. Parapet Wall. That part of any wall which extends entirely above the roof line. Portable Sign. Any sign whi ch is not permanently affixed to a building, structure, or the ground, except signs painted on or magnetically attached to any licensed vehicle. Projecting Sign. A sign other than a wall sign which projects from and is supported by a wall . Roof Line. The highest point on any building where an exterior wall encloses usable floor area including roof area provided for housing mechanical equipment. Roof Sign. Roof sign shall mean a sign erected upon or above the roof line or parapet of the building or structure, except that signs located on a mansard roof shall be considered a wall sign. Short Term Advertising Signs. Signs which advertise the sale of pro- ducts or services on a short term basis. Sign. Any object, d vie or part thereof, situat d ou td oors or indoors, which is used to advertise, identify, display, dir ct or ttr ct the attn- tion to an object, person, institution, organization, business, product, service, event or location, by any man including word s , letters, figur s , design, symbols, fixtures, colors, motion, illumination or projected image If for any reason, it c nnot b re dily determin d wh ther or not an obj ct is a sign or a particular category of sign, th Department shall m ke such determination based on th c riteri of th sign code. Sign With 8 eking. Any sign that is displ yd upon, against, or through any material or color surfac or backin th t forms an int gral part of such display and differ ntiat s th total display fro th back round again t which it is plac d • • I • • - • • • • • -19- Sign Without Backing. Any word, letter, emblem, insign!a, figure of• similar character or group thereof, that is neither backed by, incorporated in or otherwise made part of any longer display. Signable Area. The signable area shall mean that area of a building facade up to the roof line which is free of windows and doors or major architectural detail and may be enclosed by an imaginary rectangle. If, because of the design of the building, a signable area cannot be identified, the Department and the applicant will determine a suitable area for signage. Special Event Sign. A sign which announces an event sponsored by a public, civic or charitable group. Suspended Sign. A sign suspended from the ceiling of an arcade or marquee. Third-Party Sign. A sign relating to products or services not on the same lot. Wall Sign. A sign attached to, painted on, or erected against a wall of a building, the display surface of which is parallel to the face of the building to which the sign is attached. A mansard roof may be considered a wall if the top edge of a sign attached to it extends no more than twenty-four (24) inches froa the mansard roof surface. Wind Sign. Any sign aet in motion by wind or breeze, such as banners, flags, pennants or other objects or material. Flags of nations, states or municipalities shall not be classified as Wind Signs. Window Area. The area of all windows on the first floor of a building which faces or are visible fr0111 one public right-of-way. Window Sign. A sign which is applied or attached to, or located within twelve (12) inches of the interior surface of a window; which sign can be seen through the window from the exterior of the structure • • I • • n - • • • • • Introduced, read in full, and passed on fir st reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 7th day of April, 1982 . Eugene L. Otis, Mayo r Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Gary R . Higbee I • • • • - ORDINANCE NO. SERI ES OF 198~ BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO . 22 INTRODUCED BY COU NCI L AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINAN CE OF TH E CITY OF ENGLEWOOD BY REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING §22.7 THEREOF TO REVISE THE SIGN CODE CONTAINED THEREIN. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood adopted its first Comprehe ns ive Sign Code in 1974, regulating the signage of the City;and the con di - t ions within the City of Englewood relevant to signage have c h a n ged substantially since that time; and WHEREAS, the Sign Code of 1974 had no provisions f or b ri n g- ing into compliance with the Code those signs which did n o t me et that Code's requirements and that has resulted in unsi g htly and i nappropriate signage remaining in existe nce ; and WHEREAS, the character of the Ci ty of Englewood i s a s a regional retail shopping center to p e opl e i n the me tropo l i tan area , which activity serves to generate sig n i fi c ant revenu e s f o r n eces s ary Ci t y services; the City of Eng lewo od has made a commitme nt t o r evi t al- i ze and maintain Englewood as a v i ta l r e tai l c enter for the are a by approving a Comprehensive Plan, approving a Downtown Development ) Plan, acti vating the Urban Renewal Authority and has taken s t eps to i mplement and complete these City goals, and Sig n Code rev i s ion is a nece ssary ad j unc t t o these goals; and WHEREA S , t h e corre lative c harac te r o f the City of En glewood is as a family resident ial area, a nd i t is important t o control sign age t o b con sis t e nt wi th the values and g oals of the i mpor ant family residential charac t er of the City o f Eng lewood ; a n d WHEREAS, business leaders in t h e City of Englewood have expressed support for a Sign Code revision to complement updating and mod rnization of the City 's commercial activities; a n d citizens of Englewood have expressed desires to promote , through zoning and signag control, a community which is beautiful, healthy, clean, well-balanced and safe; and WHEREAS, the City Planning nd Zoning Commission has w 11 performed its Charter function by proposing a revised Sign Code o Ci y Council after numerous public hearings nd m tings with s1 ~h Comm ission, citiz ns , and interested party par icipation and hab submitted to th City Council propos d 1 gislative findings of fac which suppor the enactment of the propo ed Sign Code; and City Council dop s those proposed findings of fact. CITY S C of NOW, T HEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: ion l . That S ction 22.7 of th he City of Englewood b nd hr THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE • naiv n d d Zoni n g Ordin n c ore d: I • • • • • This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "City of Englewood Sign Code ." §2 2 .7 SIG N CODE §22.7-1 General Statement. The City Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council recognize that signs are a necessary means of visual co11m1unication for the convenience of the public and that it is the right of those concerned to identify their businesses, services or other activities by the use of signs. However, the COlllllission and Council are also aware that citizens of Englewood are concerned about adopting and enforcing sound environmental practices, in- cluding the strict control of signs, and limiting signs to those which are accessary and incidental to the use on the premises where such signs are located. It is to this end that the following goals are set forth and the regulations in this section are deemed necessary: a . To protect the public from hazardous conditions that result from signs which are structurally unsafe, obscure the vision of motorists, and/or compete or con flict with necessary traffic signals or other traffic regula- tory devices. b. To encourage signs which are well-designed, legible, and appropriate to the uses permitted as well as compatible with their surroundings and with the buildings to which they are appurtenant. c. To provide a reasonable balance between the right of an individual to identify his bu iness and the right of the public to be protected against the visual discord resulting from the unrestricted proliferation of s igns and similar d vices. d. To requir that signs which advertise or identify au e o r a business no longer in operation be removed within a reasonabl tiln. e. To requir that signs whi ch do not comply with the requirements of this Ordinance be terminated within a reasonable period of tilne . 122.7-2 Scop and Application of this Sec tion. Th se regulations ahall overn and control th displ y, construction, er ction, alt ration, remodeling, nlarging, moving or maintenance of all aign penaitted within all zon districts establish d by thia Zoning Ordinance and any am ndmenta ther to. Thia ai n code ahall b adminiater d by the Dir ctor of the Depart- nt o Co11111unity Dev lop nt who ahall have the powera and duti sat forth and those n ceaaarily impli d to administer and enforce thia code; the Director may iaau appropriate procedurea and forms. Upon application to and iasuance by th D part• nt of a permit th r - for, s 11 .. y b er cted, altered and maintain d only for a Permitted Ua I • • ...... • • • -2- in the District in which the signs are located; signs shall be located on the same lot as the Permitted Use; provided, however, that no sign of any t ype shall be erected or maintained for or by a single-family, two-family or three-family residential use, except Home Occupation signs and certain signs for which no permit is required. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of the provisions of any other ordinance or regulation applicable to signs. Signs located in areas governed by several ordinances and/or applicable regulations shall comply with all such ordinances and regulations. If there is a conflict between the regula- tions in this Section and any other ordinance or regulations, the more stringent regulation shall apply. 122.7-3 Permits. a. Permit required. It shall be unlawful to display, erect, construct, relocate or alter (except for copy changes), any sign without first filing with the Department an application in writing, paying applicable fees, and obtaining a sign permit, except as provided in 122.7-5 and 122.7-7 of this ordinance. When a sign permit has been issued by the Department, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter or otherwise deviate from the terms or conditions of said permit without prior approval of the Department. A written record of such approval shall be entered upon the original permit application and maintained in the files of the Department. b. Application for Permit. Application for sign permit shall be made by the owner or tenants of the property on which the sign is to be located, his authorized agent, or a sign contractor licensed by the City of Englewood. Such afplications shall be made in writing on forms furnished by the Plan- n ng Division, and shall be signed by the applicant. Th Departm nt shall, within five (5) working days of the date of the application, ither approve or deny the application or refer the application back to the applicant in any instance wher e insufficient information has been furnish d. If the Department finds that work under any permit issued is not in accordance with the information supplied in the permit application and/or is in violation of this or any oth r pertinent ordinance, or should it b found that there has b n any miar pr s ntation in connection with th application for the p rmit, (including non-suffici nt fund c h c ka), the sign own r or lesse or er ctor shall be notifi d of such findings and that the violation must be corrected within fiv (5) workin days of notice. If such corr clion is not m d , the permit shall be revoked and written notice th reof shall b served upon the sign owner or erector. Nop rson shall proceed with any par t of uch work aft r 1uch notice 11 receiv d. The owner or lease of th 1ign or the owner of th property on which th 1ign 11 locat d 1hall h v th ri ht to appal the d ci1ion of th Depart• nt in the mann r provid d for in f22.2-6b of thi1 Ordinance. If actu l work either on or off-1ite i1 not o nc d und r any 11 p rmit i11u d within 1ixty (60) day, from th date of 1uch p rmit, th p rmit 1hall automat ically becom null and void. D lay1 whi ch are not a re1ult of willful acts or n l l of th contra tor, owner or p r1on obtainin th • I • • • • • -3- permit may be excused and the Director may grant an extension of time in whic h to start or resume operations. All requests for extensions and approval thereof shall be in writing. When any permit has been revoked under the terms of this section, permit fees shall not be refunded. c. Plans, Specifications and Other Data Requested. The application for a sign permit shall be accompanied by the following plans and other informat ion. The name, address and telephone number of the owner or persons entitled to possession of the sign and of the sign contractor or erector; the location by street address of the proposed sign structure; complete information as required on application forms provided by the Department, including a site plan and elevation drawings of the proposed sign drawn to scale, caption of the proposed sign and such other data as is pertinent to the application; plans indicating the scope and structural detail of the work to be done, including details of al l connections, guy lines, supports and footings, and materials to b e used; application for an electrical permit for all electrical signs, and the required information for such application; and a statement o f value or cost of the sign. d. Permit Fees. A permit fee shall be paid to the City for each sign permit issued under this section. The permit fee shall be in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City Council. e. Identification and Marking of Electrical Signs. Each electrical sign hereafter erected or remodeled shall bear thereon a clearly legible identifica- tion plate not exceeding f ifteen (15) s quare inches in area, stating the name of the person, firm or corporation responsible for its construction and erection, with installation date and permit number and shall be marked with input amp res at full load input. f. Licensing and Insurance Requirements. 1. Any person, fi rm or corporation engaged in the business of installing, erecting, moving or maintaining signs in the City of Englewood shall be duly licensed by the City. A person not engaged in the sign erecting business ma y be allowed to install, erect, move or maintain his own sign upon demonstration to the Department that he possesses sufficient knowledi,and skill and is appropri- ately insured for public protection. The Director may issue a temporary license. 2, Befor any permit is issu d for ign which is located ov r public prop rty or which may r quir ny work over public property, th erector hall furn! h to the City a c rtificate of insuranc from a firm with corporate ur ty, and authoriz d to do business in the State of Colorado, for public 11 bility and prop rty d mage in ounts established by th D partm nt of not 1 aa than the followin , and covering the liability of th sign er ctor with rap ct to all rk perform d by him or his ag nta or loy s: For death or injury to any one person .••••••.• $100,000 Total liability in any one accident ••••••.•••• 300,000 Prop rty d .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. • .. .... 50,000 • I • • • • - -4- §22.7-4 Permit for Group Signs. Persons submitting a plan for a group of signs which are designed as an integral part of a new Planned Development or a new single development occupying no less than 24,000 square feet of lot area, may be granted a 25% increase in number of signs or maximum square foot area s ubject to the approval of the Director of the Department. §22.7-5 Signs Not Subject to Permits. The following signs displayed fo r non-co111111ercial purposes, may be erected and maintained in all Zone Distric t s without a permit. Such signs shall be in addition to all other signs per- mitted in any Zone District providing such signs do not require direct electri- cal wiring, and conform to setbacks and other physical characteristic require- ments of the designated zone districts. Even though permits are not required for the following signs, wall signs shall be located only in the signa ble area , and window signs shall be counted toward the 25% maximum coverage. This restric- tion shall not apply to holiday decorations, or to short term advertis ing as provided in §22.7-10 e 6. No permit shall be required for copy changes or maintenance t o a c onforming sign if no structural changes are made. a. Bulletin Boards. Bulletin boards for public , charitable or rel igious institutions, which are not over twelve (12) square feet in area, and which are located on the premises of said i nstitutions . b. Election Signs. Election signs shall not be posted more than forty-five (45) calendar days prior t o the elec tion to which the sign rel ates , and shall be removed within fifteen (15) calendar days following the elec tion to which the sign relates . Su ch signs are limited to wall, window and gr ound s igns, and shall n ot be a banner o f paper or c lo th. In residential z one d istric t s , t here s hall be no more than two (2) ele ction signs per each l o t ; they shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet o f t o t a l sign area, and shall be no more than s ix (6) feet in height above grade. I n Comm er- c ial and Industria l Zone Di s tric t s , there shall be no more than two (2) per each s treet frontage ; they s h all no t e xc eed twenty-four (24) s quare f eet of t o t a l sign area. c. Flags . Flags of nat i ons or an organ i zation of n at i ons , states and cities. d. Holiday D corationa. Signs in the nature of decorations, cl arly incidental and commonly associat d with any national , local or religious holiday; p r ovided that auch signs h all be displayed for a p r iod of not more than aixty (60) consecutive calendar days. Suc h sign s may be of any type, number, area, height, location, illumin tion , or animation, and shall be located so aa not to conflict with traffic regu la t ory dev ices . e. Ideological Signa. Ideologic 1 sign • no t mo re t han t welve (12) square f et in total aign ar a. Such sign• are l i mited t o not more than t wo (2) per lot, f. Illuminat ed Buildinga. Providin no aigns , aym bola , letters, figur tc,, identifyin a n11111 , servi ce , or pr oduct , occur on the buildin or th part of th building which ia illumina t d. Inside Siana. Si na within buildin • that are not viaibl from the ro dvay and are more than 12 inch• from tha window . • I • • • • - -5- h. Memorial Signs. Memorial signs or tablets, giving the name of building and date of erection, when cut into any masonry surface or inlaid so as to be part of the building. i. Private Parking or Traffic Direction Signs. Signs giving parking or traffic directions or restrictions which do not require direct electrical wiring, provided that such signs are limited to: wall and ground signs, not more than two (2) signs per curb cut on the lot and not more than six (6) square feet per face in area, and not more than six (6) feet in height above grade. Not more than one (1) directional sign may be displayed at each curb cut. Such signs may be illuminated from a concealed light source which does not flash, blink, or fluctuate, and shall not be animated. j. Public Signs. Signs required or specifically authorized for a public prupose by any law, statute or ordinance. k. Scoreboards. Scoreboards located on athletic fields. 1. Symbols. Symbols or crests of national, state, religious, fraternal, professional and civic organizations. m. Vehicle Consumer Information Signs. Signs on cars, trucks, or other vehicles displayed in coDDDercial lots which give information as to price, emissions or mileage as required by state or federal law of such vehicles. These signs are limited to 25% coverage of window area. n. Works of Art. Works of art which in no way identify a product. §22.7-6 Signs Subject to Temporary Permit. The following signs may be displayed in the designated zone districts under the conditions described, upon granting s temporary permit. a. Special Event Signs. In residential zone districts, special event signs are permitted in addition to all other signs allowed for a Permitted Use. Such signs shall be limited to one (1) wall or one (1) ground sign, subject to limitations described in this section and in §22.7-Sa; no mor than twelve (12) feet in height, and shall not exceed twelve (12) squar feet in area, and shall not b di play d for more than thirty (30) cal nd r day . In co111111 rcial and industrial zon diatricta, one p cial may be permitt din addition to all other si na. Such ai n hall b limit d t o wall, window or round sins, subject to limitations described in 12 .7-10 1 , 5, and 6. Such sign shall not be more than twenty-four (24) square f tin area and shall not be displayed for more than thirty (30) calendar days. b. Street Banners. Banners across public thorou hfar a announcin events sponsored by th City, Englewood School District, Arapaho County, or ch ritable organizations may be authoriz d by t mporary permit by th Director. Such Str et Banners shall be install d, removed and maint ined by the sponsor. I • • In • • - -6- §22.7-7 Signs Subject to Yearly Registration. The following signs are additionally permitted in all zone dis- tricts and shall be registered by the owner or lessor, with the Department sixty (60) calendar days after the effective date of this ordinance. This registration must be renewed on an annual basis thereafter and subject to the following conditions: a. Contractor Signs. A sign not more than twelve (12) square feet per face in area and not more than twenty-four (24) square feet in total sign area, which names the contractors or sponsors engaged in construction on the property where the sign is located. b. Real Estate Signs. Signs which advertise the sale, rental or lease of the premises upon which said signs are located. Such signs shall not extend outside the property line and shall not be more than six (6) square feet per face in area. §22.7-8 Signs Prohibited in All Zone Districts. The following signs are prohibited in all zone districts and are declared a nuisance by the Department. a. Any ground sign within a triangular area of thirty (30) feet along two (2) sides of an intersection of curbs of two (2) streets, a railroad right-of-way and a street, a driveway and a street, or an alley and a street, which does not have a clear area of seven (7) feet between the grade level and the bottom of the sign unless approved by the City Traffic Engineer. b. Animated signs. c. Banners, pennants, valances, and wind -powered devices. d. Billboards. e. Flashing or blinking signs, except for scoreboards and time and temperature devices. f. g. h. i. j. k. for C 1. Portable signs. Ou tdoor display of merchandis on public right-of -way. Roof signs. Search ligh ta. Signs painted on fences. Strin s of light bulba ua din conn ction with co rcial pr mise rcial purposes, other than traditional holiday decorations. Third-party 1ign1. m. Whe led adv rtiaing device,, xcapt {or p rman nt 1ign1 on licanaad vehicles. I • • • • • -7- §22.7-9 Signs Permitted in Residential Zoning Districts: R-1-A, R-1-B, R-1-C, R-2, R-2-C, R-3 and R-4. a. Permitted Maximum Number. 1. Residential uses shall be permitted one (1) sign in addition to those permitted in §22. 7-5 b, c, d, and e. 2. Nonresidential uses shall be permitted two (2) signs in addition to those permitted in §22.7-5. b. Permitted Maximum Sign Area. 1. Single-family, Two-Family and Three-Family Residences . One (1) square foot in addition to the area of those permitted in §22.7-Sb, c, d, and e. 2 . Religious and Educational Institutions, Public Buildings and Residential Uses with Between Four (4) and Thirty-Nine (39) Dwelling Units. Twenty (20) s quare feet or two (2) square f e et of sign area for each one-thousand (1 ,000 ) square feet of l o t area ; not , however, t o exceed s ixty (60) square fe et of total sign area and prov ided tha t no one sign f a ce shall exc eed twenty (20) square feet in area. 3 . Hospital , Clinic s, Pro f essional Offices, or Residential Us es Having Forty (40) or More Dwel l ing Units. Twent y (20) squa r e f e e t o r tw o (2) square feet of s ign area for each thousand (1,000) squa r e fee t of lot a r e a; no t, however, to ex c eed n i ne ty -six (96) square feet of total a ign area for e a c h lo t prov i ded t ha t no one sign fa ce s hall exceed t hirty-tw o (32) squar e f t. 4. _.;;O"""t "'h __ r _Law;;;;.;..._f-'u-'l ____ a_i-d_e-n-'t'""i"'"a"""l.....;;.U.c..•.;..;;..•. Twenty (20 ) squ r fe t of aign area for ach u e, sign face shall exceed ten (10) aquar fe t. c. Peraitt d Sign Typ a. 1. Ground Signs. Ground aigna are peraitt d only for religious and edu ational inatitutiona, public buildings, hoapitala, clinics, pro- fe aional offices, or forty ( 0) or aor residential units. Such aigna ah 11 b no aor th n fift n (15) fe tin heiaht and shall b aet back t 11 (10) fe t froa the property lin and are aubj ct to th limitations d a- crib d in 122. 7-8a. 2. All ai n shall b parall l auch aigna are dia- th urqu , c nopy or and/or ddr aa. 3. Pro Hall t w nty - Uv (25) 1quue nd th ty (20) f t, uch Ii n1 1cade of th buildi nd Xt nd I • • • • - -8- above the roof line. Such signs shall have a clearance of ten (10) feet from grade level to the bottom of the sign. Maximum projection shall be thirty (30) inches from the building to which it is attached, If a sign projects more than thirty (30) inches over the public right-of-way, an encroachment agreement must be obtained from the City. Where a projecting sign has two (2) or more display faces, all faces shall be included in determining the area of the sign. 4. Suspended Signs. Suspended signs shall not exceed four (4) square feet per face in area; shall be separated by a distance of fifteen (15) feet and shall have a minimum clearance of seven (7) feet above grade level to the bottom of the sign. Such signs shall be limited in content to identification or address of the business. 5, Wall Signs. Wall signs shall be no greater than twenty (20) feet in height, shall not project more than twelve (12) inches from the face of the building to which it is attached and shall not extend above the roof line or the parapet wall. 6. Window Signs. Window signs shall not occupy more than 25% of the window in which they are displayed and shall not be displayed in win- dows above the first floor level. d. Permitted Illumination. All signs described above except home occu- pation signs may be illuminated, but only from a concealed light source. Signs shall not remain illuminated between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., except signs permitted for medical services and public services such as polic and fire, which are provided on a twenty-four hour basis, e. Particular Signs Allowed. 1. Home Occupation Sign. Home occupation sign not aor than on (1) square foot in area, which is affixed to the building, and whi ch is unlighted and unanimated. 2. High-Rise Building Identification Wall Signs. For multi- storied buildings in excess of the maximum height permitted in th R-3 Zone District, additional wall sign area sh 11 be permitted for buildin identification purposes in conformance with the schedule at forth blow. Sign area shall b baa d upon a aqu re foota e factor multipli d by hori- zontal linear foot ge of the building cade at the 1 vation of th fac de wh re the sign is placed. a) For signs located from sixty (60) feet to one hundr d (100) f et in hight, the factor shall be five (5) aquar f t . b) For signs located from one hundr done (101) to one hundred fifty (150) feet in height, the factor shall be six (6) square feet, c) For signs located one hundred fifty-on (151) et to two hundr d (200) feet in hei ht, the factor shall b sev n (7) square f Hulti-stori d buildinas 118Y b penaitted id nti ication wall 1ign1 of th eiz provided by eubparagraphs l throu h 3 for ah building • et. I • • -• • • -9- facade visible from a public right-of-way. Wall sign areas permitted by this subsection for one facade may not be used for any facade other than the facade for which such allowance is granted and shall be exempt from §22.7-11 a 3, Such signs shall not count against maximum sign area, or maximum number of signs. §22.7-10 Signs Permitted in Conanercial and Industrial Zone Districts: a. signs if signs if five (5) greater. B-1 and B-2, I-1 and I-2. Permitted Maximum Number. Each permitted use may have three (3) the linear foot of the street frontage is 150 feet or less; four (4) the linear foot of the street frontage is 151 feet to 300 feet; signs if the linear foot of the street frontage is 301 feet or b. Permitted Maximum Sign Area. 1, For All Permitted Uses: a) For a Lot Having One Permitted Use. For the Permitted Use, the maximum sign area shall be eighty (80) square feet or ss calculated from the table herein: Street Frontage 1 foot to 100 feet 101 feet to 250 feet 251 feet+ Sign Area/Foot of Street Frontage 1.5 sq. ft,/1 foot 1.0 sq. ft./1 foot 0.4 aq. ft./1 foot No single sign face shall exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area, except aa provided in subsection 3 hereof, nor shall the total sign area of any uae exc d six hundred (600) square feet. b) For a Lot Raving Two or More Permitted Usea. For each P raitted Us the ll&J[imum sign area shall be eighty (80) square feet or as calcula t d froa th table herein: Building Front 1 foot to 100 feet 101 f t + Sign Area/Foot of Building Front 1,5 aq. ft,/1 foot 1.0 aq. ft./1 foot No aingle aign face ahall exce done hundred (100) aquare f et in area except aa provided in 122.7-10 e 2 and 7 nor ~hall the total aign ar a of any ua a.xc d ai.x hundred (600) aquare fe t. c. 1. tw nty (20) f Ground Signa. ni aaxiaum heiaht of a ground ai n ah 11 b t. The diatance b tw n aigna on adjacent lota ahall b not • I • • -• • - -10- less than the height of the taller sign . If there is more than one business in a building or if a group of buildings are associated by ownership, no ground signs are permitted except Joint Identification Signs . Where a ground sign has two (2) or more display faces, all faces shall be included in deter- mining the area of the sign. 2. Marquees, Canopy or Awning Signs. All signs s hal l be parallel to the face of the marquee, canopy or awning upon which such signs are dis- played and shall not project above or below the face of the marquee, canopy or awning, and shall only identify the business by name and/or address. 3. Projecting Signs. Maximum area of the sign shall be twenty-five (25) square feet per face and the maximum height shall be twenty (20) feet. Such signs shall be located in the "signable area" of the facade of the building, as described in 122.7-lla 3, and must not obscure major architectur- al details or extend above the roof line. Such signs shall have a clearance of ten (10) feet from grade level to the bottom of the sign. Maximum projec- tion shall be thirty (30) inches from the building to which it is attached. If a sign projects more than thirty (30) inches over the public right-of-way, an encroachment agreement must be obtained from the City. Where a projecting sign has two (2) or more display faces, all faces shall be included in deter- mining the area of the sign. 4. Suspended Signs. Shall not exceed four (4) square feet per face in area; shall be separated by a distance of fifteen (15) feet and shall have a mini.mum clearance of seven (7) feet above grade level to the bottom of th sign. Such signs shall be limited in content t o identifica- tion or address of the business. 5. Wall Signs. Wall signs shall b placed only in "signable areas" of a building facade except as specified in 122. 7-10 e 7. "Signsbl Ar a" of the building means any area of the facad of the buildin up to th roof line which ia free of windows and doors or 111ajor architectural d tail. The area of the wall sign must not exceed 40% of the identified "aignabl area". Wall ai na aay not project more than eighteen (18) inch a fr<>11 th supportin wall. Wall signs may not extend above the roof lin or parap l wall. 6. Wind a. Window aigna ahall not occupy aore than 25% of the total area of the window in which they ar diaplay d. Thia 25% maxi.a cov ra ahall include all sign, exc pt abort teni adv rti1in 1 1 , re ardle11 of wh ther it 11 coun t d for 11 n area 11 d or not. Si n1 di - played t lv (12) inch a or leis froa the interior of wind 1 ,hall b d bited a ain1t th 1quare foot area and number of 1igna all ed a peraitt d u1a. Wind are not peraitt din window, above th first floor. d. p naittad Illumination. Sign, in Co1111111rcial and Indu1trial Zone, may b illuminated, but all direct illuaination 1hall not exceed tv nty- fiv (25) watts pr bulb. e. Siana Addition lly Allow Th oll ing ai n, are alao all d in co ... rctal and indu1trial ion a 1ubject to th condition, stat d • • I • : • • - -11- 1. Drive Thru Identification Signs. Each Permitted Us e with a s he ltered drive thru facility may have one (1) identification sign at tached to the shelter structure subject to the limitations of 122.7-lla 3 . Maximum sign area shall be ten (10) square feet for each lane o f t h e drive thru facility . Such signs shall not count against maximum sign area or number. 2. High Rise Building Identific ation Wall Signs. For mu lt i- storied buildings in excess of the maximum height permitted in the B-1 , B-2, 1-1 or 1-2 Zone Districts, additional wall sign area shall be pe rm i tte d for building identification purposes in conformance with the schedule set forth below. Sign area shall be based upon a square footage fact or mult i- p lied by horizontal linear footage o f the building facade at the eleva t ion of the facade where the sign i s placed: (a) For signs located f r om sixty (60) feet to one hundred (100) feet in height, the factor s ha ll be five (5) s quare feet; (b) For signs located from one hundr ed one (101) fee t to one hundred fifty (150) feet in height, the f a c tor shall be six (6) square feet; (c ) For signs located one hundred f i f ty-one (151) feet t o tw o hundred (200) f eet in height, the fa c tor s hall be s even (7) s quare feet. Multi-storied buil din gs ma y be permit ted i dent ifi cation wall signs f or each build i ng f a cade visible from a pu blic right -of-way. Wall sign areas permitte d by t h is s ub section for one facade may n ot be used for any f a c ade o ther than the facade for which s uch allowance is granted and shall be exempt fr om 1 22.7-lla 3. Such signs sha ll no t co un t against maximum s ign a rea a nd number . 3. I denti f i c ation Signs. Si gns l im ited to name of occupant, a ddress of premises , and no mo re t han four (4) square f e et per sign in a r e a. Such signs a re limited to no more than one (1) per str eet front, and may be illuminat ed on ly f r om a cone aled light source. 4. Joint Ident ification Signs. Joint Identification Signs r permitted for two or mo r e Pe rm itted Uses on the same lo t as t h e sign. If t wo or more busin es occupy the same building, or a gr oup of buildings ar as ociated by ownership, no ground signs ar p nutted except Joint Identification Signs. Each individual identification within the Joint Id ntification Sign shall b unifona in siz , typ and styl except for th nam of the d v lop nt. Th following Joint Id ntification Signs are in ddition to all other aigna in terma of maximum aign area and num r. a) P naitt d Are. of aquare foot of sign area for ach two (2) lin provid d, h ver, that no aingle ai n ahall f t pr face, and th t th total ar a of th ah 11 not e.xc d two hundr d (200) quare t b) One (1) aign for or ua Signa. n kh (1) Joint Id ntiCicati n Signa. 0 th ai n id rvic area or nwab r. condary ai buain produ t t rd d I • • • • -12- one-half (1/2) square foot of sign area for each linear foot of the front lot line, or one (1) square foot of sign area for each linear foot of bui l d- ing front for a lot having two (2) or more Permitted Uses. 6. Short Term Advertising Signs. In addition to other signs al lowed in a Permitted Use, each business or designated use may be permitted short term advertising signs, provided such signs are limited to window or wall signs. Window signs shall not cover more than 20% of the window area above that specified in 122.7-Dc 6. Wall signs shall not be greater than fifty (50) square feet in area and subject to the limitations of 522.7-lOc 5. Al l such signs shall be limited to a two (2) week period after which a permit will be required. Such signs shall show the date of installation or displ a y. 7. Signs Set Back from Public Right-of-Way. For buildings with building frontage of fifty (50) feet or less : The permitted area of only one sign face may be increased at the rate of one- third of one percent (.0033) for each additional foot of distance beyond the first one hundred (100) feet of building setback and based on the great- er of eighty (80) square feet or as calculated in 122.7-Xlb 1 (b ), b ut in no case greater than one hundred (100) square feet. In no c ase may the inc rease be more than one hundred (100) percent of the maximum permitted sign f a ce area and the additional sign area c alc ulated herein shall n o t count a ga inst the maximum s ign area and may exceed f orty (40 ) perc ent of the s ignable area. The increase in sign face area will be granted f or s sign fac e whic h shall be placed at the setback distance as used in the calculation herein . For buildings with building frontage of fifty-one (51) feet or mor e: The permi.tted area of only one sign fac e may be increased at the rate of one-third of one percent (.0033) for e a ch foot of distanc e beyond the first one hundred (100) f e t o f buil ding s etbac k and based on the greater of e ighty (80) s quare feet o r a s c alc ulated i n 122.7-l Ob 1 (b), but in no c a e greater than one hundred (100 ) square f eet. I n no one c ase may the i nc r eas b mo r e t h an one hund r d (1 00) percen t of the ma x imum permitted s i gn face a r a a nd the additional sign area calculated here in s hall no t c ount aga i nst th max imum aign a r a. Th i s incr ease in s i gn face a r a s hall be gr anted for a sign which ahall be placed at th setback distance as used in the calculation h rein. 122.7-11 Sign Area Measurement. a. Ar a to be H aaur d. The ar a of a sin shall b conforaance with the r ulations as herein set forth, provid structure or brscin of a si shall b Ollitt d froa aea ur nt, unles1 such structure or bracing is made part of the mess e o face of the sin. Where a sign has two or more display faces, th area of all faces shall b includ din d tarainin th area of th si sur , non-structural port. •• • I • • • • • -13- 2. Signs Without Backing. The area of signs consisting of indi- vidual letters or symbols shall be measured by determining the sum of the area of the smallest single continuous rectangle enclosing the extreme limits of each message, including all frames, face plates, non-structural trim or other component parts not otherwise used for support. 3. "Signable Area". Signable wall area is a continuous portion of a building facade unbroken by doors or windows or major architectural features. It is calculated by selecting a continuous surface, then drawing an imaginary rectangle within specified height limitations and computing the square foot area of this rectangle. Persons displaying signs attached to a building may determine the "signable area" to be used by choosing any such area on the building facade for the display of signs. Signs may not cover more than 40% of this area. If, because of the design of the building, a signable area cannot be identified, the Department and the applicant will determine a suitable area for signage. 4. Irregular Outline. In the case of an irregularly shaped sign or a sign with letters and/or symbols directly affixed to or painted on the wall of a building, the area of the sign shall be the entire area within a single-continuous rectilinear perimeter of not more than eight (8) straight lines enclosing the extreme limits of writing, representation, emblem or any figure of similar character. b. Number of Signs. Each continuously enclosed area of a sign fac e, either by outline or by an imaginary line, shall be considered one sign. Signs which have more than one sign structure attached to a common suppor t or wall may be counted as a single sign, or as several signs; however, if counted as one sign, the total surface area of such multiple unit signs shall include vertical and horizontal spacing between signs. 122.7-12 Maintenance. Every s ign, including those specifically 6Xempt from this section in respect t o permits and permit fe s, shall be maintained in good condition at all times. All signs shall be kept neatly paint d, including all m tal parts and supports thereof that are not galvanized or of ruat-reaiat nt metals. The Director or his or herd sign , shall inspect and shall hav the authority to order the painting, repair, alteration, or r aoval of a sign which ia not in confonaanc with this ordinance by reason of aaf ty, health, or public w lfare, or by reason of in dequate aaintenanc , dilapida- tion, or obaoleac nca. 122.7-13 Nonconforming Signs. Any ai n whi ch was lawfully er ctad and maintained prior to t h eff ctive date of his Ordin nc , but which do• not conform to th limita- tions established by this Ordinance, xcapt those aigna prohibited, hazard- ous or abandon d, shall be non-conforming ai na and subject to the oll in condition s: a. R aiatration of Non-conforming igna. All non-con ormin ai na ah 11 b r quir d to b register d with th Department. IC a valid pe1"11it xiata for th non-con orain a i n, th O partaent will complete th • I • • • • • -14- registration and notify the owner or lessee of the sign or the owner of the p roperty on which the sign is located requesting verification of the regis- t r a tion information. If no valid permit exists for the non-conforming sign or if insufficient information in available, the owner or lessee of the s i gn or the owner of the property on which the sign is located will be n o tified and must register the non-conforming sign or provide the necessary inform a- tion within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the notification. b. Termi~ation of Non-conforming Signs. An y non-conforming sign s h all be brought into conformance or shall terminate and cease to exist within ten (10) years from the date a permit was issued. If seven (7) years or more ha s passed from the date a permit was issued to the effective date of the Code, then the sign must be brought into conformance or terminate and cease to exist within three (3) years from the effective date of the Code. Any non- conforming sign without a valid permit must be brought into conformance or terminate and cease to exist within three (3) years from the effective date of the Code. In addition, a non-conforming sign must be brought into c on fo rm - ance or terminate and cease to exist if any one of the following condition s occur: 1. Whenever the sign is damaged more than 50 % of its total replace- ment value, or destroyed from any cause whatsoever, or becomes ob s olete o r substandard under any applicable ordinance o f the muni c ipality, to the extent that the sign becomes a hazard or a danger. 2. Whenever the ownership of the property changes on whic h the non- c onforming sign is located. 3. Whenever there is a change in the l essee, ownership of the business or use to which the sign pertains. 4. Whenever there is a reques t mad e fo r a permit t o c han ge the s i gn. 5 . Whenever there is a reques t f or a permi t t o mak e improv ments to the fac ade of t he b uilding on whic h the no n -conformi n g s i gn is located. c. No n-con fo rming Signs in New ly Ann ex d Ar a • An y owner or op rato r of a non -conforming sign in a newly annexed area shall terminate such non- conforming sign in accordance with the requirements of this section, with the effective date of the annexation ordinanc being the star t of th tim limita- tion. d. App eals. The own er or lease of a sign, or the own er of the property on which a sign is locat d who has been notified by th D partm nt that such sign is non-conforming may appeal that decision to th Director or designee, within twe n t y (20) days of the receip t of s uch no tice. Th appal s hall c ontain th appellant's nam a nd address , the d cision bin a p peal d, a nd a brief exp lana tion wh y th a p pellan t s h ould not b r equir d to ~o mp ly wi th t he doc um n t app a l e d. Th e direc tor or des i n e may m t inforaa l l y wi th the a pp ellant to exchange n ecessary inform tion a nd s hall iaau a d ecision in wri t ing to the app llant a t his address stated in the appeal. If the decision of the Dir c t o r of design ia nut a tiafactory to said er or lessee , with i n thirty (30) days o th Director's d iaion, h aay apply for a variance f r om th Board of Adjuatm nt and App ala•• pr - • I • • • • - -15- vided for in §22.2-6 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. §22.7-14 Prohibited, Hazardous and Abandoned Signs -Enforcement Proce- ~· a. Notification of Unlawful Signs. No prohibited •, abandoned, or hazardous sign shall be displayed, constructed, erected, altered, remodeled, enlarged, moved or maintained within the City. Notice shall be given by certified mail or personal service to the owner or lessee of any sign pro- hibited in all Zone Districts as described in §22.7-8, and to the owner of the property on which it is located. The notic e shall state that suc h a prohibited sign, shall be altered to conform with this Ordinance or be re- moved within one hundred eighty (180) days after the notice has been received. Signs prohibited in §22.7-8 d, j, and 1, shall be removed within three (3) years from the date the notice is received. Hazardous signs are those which by reason of inadequate mainten- ance, dilapidatbn, or obsolescence, create an iuuninent hazard to public health, safety, or welfare, as declared by the Department; those signs are further declared a nuisance and shall not be displayed or erected within the City. The notice shall require hazardous sign removal within ten (10) days. Signs abandoned for a period of thirty (30) days shall be declared abandoned signs and a nuisance by the Department; abandoned signs shall not be displayed or maintained within the City. The notice shall require abandoned removal within thirty (30) days. b. Appeals. The owner or lessee of a sign or the owner of the property on which a sign is located who has been notified by the Departm nt that such sign is prohibited, abandoned or hazardous may appeal that decision to the Director or d sign within twenty (20) days of the receipt of uch notice, except for hazardous signs ppeal must be within five (5) days. The appeal shall contain the appeallant's nam and address, the decision bing appealed, and a brief explanation why th appeallant should not b required to comply with the document appealed. The director or designe may met informally with the appeallant to exchange necessary information and shall issue a decision in writing to the appellant at his address stat din th spp al. If th d c iaion of the Director or d sign is not s atisf ctory to aaid o r or 1 sa , within fifte n (15) days may apply for a vari nee from the Board o Adjustm nt and App al aa provid din 122.2-6 of th Compr henaiv Zonin Ordinance, except for hazardous signs in whi ch ca th Director'• d iaion is final. c. Fallur to Com ply with Notic a. If th owner or 1 se of pro- hibit d,abandon d or hazardous sign or th own r of th property on which auch ai n ia located fail• to comply with notic giv n pursuant to thi a a ctbn within the tim ap cifi d, th City Manager or hia de in i i authoriz d to c uae th action required by ordin nc • All coat• incurr d by tha City plua an adminiatrative coat of fift n pre n (15%) of th dir t coat• ahall b charg d a ainat th r al prop rty and it• ra. d. by thie oti e o Coata. If th City incur• coata ction, a atat m nt ah 11 b • ction r quir d coat plua sign I • • n • • - -16- fifteen percent (15%) administrative costs, and be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner of the property on which the sign is located with instructions that said statement will be paid in full plus costs within thirty (30) days of said mailing date. The notice shall also inform the property owner that the failure to pay the statement for costs for sign removal within sixty (60) days shall result in an assessment being made against the property which shall constitute a lien pursuant to §22.7 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Englewood. e. Assessment. If the full amount of the statement relating to sign removal from realty is not paid within sixty (60) days, the City Manager shall direct the Director of Finance to assess the entire amount of the statement plus an additional twenty-five percent (25%) penalty against the specified realty. After assessment by the Director of Finance, a copy shall be sent to each owner of record of the assessed realty. The assessment shall contain a legal description of the premises, the expenses and costs incurred, and the date of sign removal, and a notice that the City claims a lien for this amount, The Director of Finance shall certify such assessment to the County Treasurer who shall collect such assessment in the same manner as ad valorem taxes are collected. f, Assessments: From the date of the assessing statement, all assess- ments shall constitute a perpetual lien against the specified realty and shall have priority over all liens excepting general tax liens and prior special assessments, No delays, mistakes, errors or irregularities in any act or proceeding authorized herein shall prejudice or invalidate any final assess- ment; but the same may be remedied by the Director of Finance, as the case may require, upon application made by the property owner or other interested person. When so remedied, the same shall take effect as of the date of th original assessment by the Director of Finance. g. dies. Any unpaid charge plus 11 costs and penalties shall constitut ad bt due the City. The City Attorney shall, at th dir- ection of the City Mana r, in titut civil suit in the name of th City to recover such char ea, coat and p n lti a. Th City my pr vent by injun tion and requirer moval of any sign erected without a p rmit. Thea rem di shall be cumulative with all oth r rm dies, including prosecution in Municipal Court fore ch violatio of this chapt r pursuant to the provisions nd p naltiaa atabliah d by Title 1, Ch pter 2, o( th '69 E.M.C. 122,7 -15 S verability. Th proviaiona o thia cod are a verabl . lf any part of thi cod ii d clared unconatitutional by a final jud nt of a cour t of COIIIP t- nt juriadiction, that d ciaion ahall not a f ct any portion of the cod which r aaina, but th r ind r shall b in full force and eff ct aa if th portion d cl rd un onatitutional had n v r b n a part of th cod • 122.7 -16 1n1tiona. Any 11 nor part o a ai n whi ch chan • poaition by or i th illueion of auch ch n of poaition. • A I t r • ort d ntirely fro• th xterior wall o • • I • • • • • -17- building and of a type which can be retracted, folded o r col lapsed agains t the face of the supported building. Canopy. A roof-like structure which is attached to a wall or walls of a building and may be provided with ground supports. Usually of a lighter material than a marquee. Concealed Light Source. An artificial light intended to illuminate the face of a sign, which light is shielded from public view and from ad- joining properties. Department. The Department of Conmrunity Development. Director. Director of the Department of Co11m1unity Development. Display Surface or Face. The area made available by the sign s tructure for the purpose of displaying a message. Distance of Sign Projection. The distance from the exterio r wa ll sur- face of the building, o r from the furthest point on a mansard r oof , to the display face of a wa ll sign. Drive Thru Identification Sign. A sign which identifie s a drive thru facil ity and the business to which it belongs. Election Sign. A sign p r oviding information regarding elections, candi- dates, or issues concerning such elections. Exterior Wa ll Surface. Th most ext rio r part of a wall, sun sere n, or any screening or material covering a building. Ground Sign. A sign supported by poles, uprights or braces extended from the ground or an object on the ground; but not attached t o any part of any building. Ideological Sign. A sign wh ich expresses a religious, politic 1, social or other philosophical stanc . Illuminated Sign. either by light on th A sign light d by or exposed to artificial lightin sign, within th sign, or directed toward th ign. Individual L tt r Sign. L tters or figur individu lly f ahion d fro metal or other materials and att ched to th w 11 of a building or oth r surface; but not includin a sign pint don a wal l or other urface. Joint Id ntification Sign. A sin which s rves as a co111Don or coll r- ive identification for t wo or more buain as or indu trial u son th run lot. Such sign may contain a dir ctory to said us• as n int ral p tt ther of, or may aerv as n ral id ntification only for such d v lop nta as ahoppin c nt ra, industrial parka and the lik Major Architectural D tail. Diatinguiahabl d ai n f atur • of lh facade of the buildin au has window , doors , balconi •, column , or patterns ordain form d a th tim of conatru tion by th buildin mat rial. • I • • • • • • -18- Mansard Roof. An architectural feature which is a steep roof struc ture which is a portion of a roof structure or is attac hed to the wall of a building. Mansard Roof Sign. A sign attached to the side of a Mansard roof. Marquee. A rigid, roof-like structure, usually of glass, metal or wood construction, attached to a wall or walls of a building or structure and supported by the building or structure which may or may not have ground supports. Marquee Sign. A sign attached to, painted on, or erected against the face of the marquee. Non-conforming Sign. Any sign lawful when erected but which, on the effective date of this Ordinance, does not conform to the l imitations estab- lished by this Ordinance. Parapet Wall. That part of any wall which extends entirely above the roof line. Portable Sign. Any sign which is not permanently affixed to a building, structure, or the ground, except signs painted on or magnetically attached to any licensed vehicle. Projecting Sign. A sign other than a wall sign whi c h projects from and is supported by a wall. Roof Line. The highest point on any bu i lding wher e an exterior wal l encloses usable floor area including roof a rea provided for housing mechanical equipment. Roof Sign. Roof sign shall mean a sign erected upon or a bov e the roof line or parapet of the building or structure, except that signs located on a mansard roof s ha ll b co n s idered a wall sign. Sho rt Term Advertising Signs. Signs wh ich dvertise the sale of pro- duct• or services on a short term basis. Sin. Any object, d vice or part ther of, situated outdoors or indoors, which is used to advertis , id ntify, display, dir ct or altr ct the attn- tion to an obj ct, p rson, institution, organization, business, product, servic , event or location, by ny means including word , 1 tter , figur s, d sign, symbola, fixtures, colors, motion, illumination or proj cted !mag s . If for any raaaon, it cannot b readily d l rmin d wh th r or no t an obj ct ia a ai or a particular cat gory of ai n , th D partm nt shall mak auch determination baa d on the criteria of th ai n cod • Sign With Sa cking. Any sign th t ia display d upon, against, or throu h any material or color aurface or backin that forms an int ral parL of auch diaplay and differ ntiatea th total diaplay Crom th background a ainst which it ia plac d • I • • - • • • • • -19- Sign Without Backing. Any word, letter, emblem, insignia, figure of' similar character or group thereof, that is neither backed by, incorporated in or otherwise made part of any longer display. Signable Area. The signable area shall mean that area of a building facade up to the roof line which is free of windows and doors or major architectural detail and may be enclosed by an imaginary rectangle. If, because of the design of the building, a signable area cannot be identified, the Department and the applicant will determine a suitable area f or signage. Special Event Sign. A sign which announces an event sponsored by a public, civic or charitable group. Suspended Sign. A sign suspended from the ceiling of an arcade or marquee. Third-Party Sign. A sign relating to products or services not on the same lot. Wall Sign. A sign attached to, painted on, or erected against a wall of a building, the display surface of which is parallel to the face of the building to which the sign is attached. A mansard roof may be considered a wall if the top edge of a sign attached to it extends no more than twenty-four (24) inches from the mansard roof surface. Wind Sign. Any sign set in motion by wind or breeze, such as banners, flags, pennants or other objects or material. Flags of nations, states or municipalities shall not be classified as Wind Signs. Window Area. The area of all vindows on the first floor of a building which faces or are visible from one public right-of-way. Window Sign. A sign which is applied or attached to, or located within twelve (12) inches of the interior surface of a window; which sign can be seen through the window from the exterior of the structure . • I • • - • • • • Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 7th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 5th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee • I • • r- • • RESOLUTION NO. SERIES OF 1982 • • • ? A RESOLUTION AMENDING STANDARDS FOR THE ELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS WHO APPLY FOR DEFERRAL OF PAYMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST THEIR PROPERTY OCCUPIED AS THEIR RESIDENCE PURSUANT TO '69 ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE XII, CHAPTER 1.5. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has recognized that some of its citizens have limited property and fixed incomes and as a result are unable to pay assessments established by special assessment districts without creating difficult burden upon those citizens; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has enacted an Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1981, to permit eligible persons to defer pay- ment of special assessments against their property occupied as their residence until a later, more appropriate time; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said Ordinance codified at Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., the City Council is required to establish eligibility criteria for persons participating in the Englewood assessment deferral program; and WHEREAS, City Council desires to bring current eligibility criteria; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: 1. That the income eligibility limitation for applicants who are senior persons, handicapped persons or disabled persons, or low income persons, for assessment deferral pursuant to Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., are: Number of Persons Income Limitations in Household (Yearly) l S 9,900 2 11,300 3 12,750 4 14,150 5 15,300 6 16,400 7 17,550 8 or more 18,700 • I • • - • • • • • 2. That the asset limitation for eligibility of senior persons for assessment deferral pursuant to Title XII, Chapter 1 .5, of the '69 E.M.C., is $10,000 of nonexempt personal and real property per household. 3. That the asset limitation for eligibility of disabled persons, handicapped persons, and low income persons for assess- ment deferral pursuant to Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., is $5,000 of nonexempt personal and real property per household. 4. That in the event a person's or household's assets exceed the allowable asset limitation but do not exceed the income limita- tion established for said eligible person's household, the person or household may be eligible for the assessment deferral program if 50% of the value of nonexempt assets over said asset limitation added to the yearly income of said person or household results in said person or household being within the applicable income limitations. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS~~-day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoi ng is a true, accurate and complete copy of Resolution No. , Series of 1982 . Gary R. Higbee • I • • - • RESO LUTION NO. SERIES OF 1982 18 • • • A RESOLUTIO N AMENDING STANDARDS FOR THE ELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS WHO APPLY FOR DEFERRAL OF PAYMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST THEIR PROPERTY OCCUPIED AS THEIR RESIDENCE PURSUANT TO '69 ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE XII, CHAPTER 1.5. WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has recognized that some of its citizens have limited property and fixed incomes and as a result are unable to pay assessments established by special assessment districts without creating difficult burden upon those citizens; and WHEREAS , the City of Englewood has enacted an Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1981, to permit eligible persons to defer pay- ment of special assessments against their property occupied as their residence until a later, more appropriate time; and WHEREAS , pursuant to said Ordinance codified at Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., the City Council is required to e stablish eligibility criteria for persons participating in the Englewood assessment deferral program; and WHEREAS, City Council desires to bring current eligibility criteria ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: 1. That the income eligibility limitation for applicants who arc senior person s , handicapped persons or disabled persons, or low income persons, for assessment deferral pursuant to Title XII , Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., are: Number of Persons Income Limitations in Household (Yearly) l $ 9,900 2 11 ,300 3 12,750 4 14,150 5 15,300 6 16,400 7 17,550 8 or mo re 18 ,700 I • • n n - • • • • • 2. That the asset limitation for eligibility of senior p e rsons f or assessment deferral pursuant to Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., is $10,000 of nonexempt personal and r e al property per household. 3. That the asset limitation for eligibility of disabled persons, handicapped persons, and low income persons for assess- ment deferral pursuant to Title XII, Chapter 1.5, of the '69 E.M.C., is $5,000 of nonexempt personal and real property per household. 4. That in the event a person's or household 's assets exceed the allowable asset limitation but do not exceed the income limita- tion established for said eligible person's household, the person or household may be eligible for the assessment deferral program if 50% of the value of nonexempt assets over said ass~t limitation a dded to the yearly income of said person or household results in said person or household being within the applicable income l imitations. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th day of April, 1982. >allllJ)IMWI.XlXX~ ll c•v <'rl y llra<IHhnw, Mnyor l'ro 'l'P m /\ttes t: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I , Gary R. Hig bee , ex of f icio City Clerk-Treasurer of the Ci.Ly of En g l e wood , Color ado, here by c er t ify that the abov e a n d foregoi n g is a t ru e , accurate and comple t copy o f Reso l ut 1.o n No . ~. S eries of 198 2. Gary R. Higb e • I • • In - • RESOLUTION NO. /q SERIES OF 1982~~'--~ • • • 7 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ENGLEWOOD PUBLIC LIBRARY GUIDELINES AND REQUIRING NOTICE TO CITY COUNCIL OF ANY CHANGE IN PUBLIC LIBRARY POLICY. WHEREAS, the Public Library Board is charged, pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Englewood, to reconunend to the City Council the adoption of the rules and regulations for use of the Englewood Public Library; and WHEREAS, the Public Library Board has made an extensive study of those guidelines and policies it believes necessary for the proper operation of the Englewood Municipal Library; and WHEREAS, the Public Library Board has made a recommendation to the City Council to adopt "Englewood Public Library Guidelines"; and WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council has reviewed said guide- lines and the policies for the use of the Englewood Public Library. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. City Council of the City of Englewood hereby adopts as the rules and regulations of the Englewood Public Library that document titled "Englewood Public Library Guidelines" approved by the Public Library Board September 8, 1981. Section 2. The Public Library Board shall forward to City Council, as soon as practicable, any change in Library policy that may be approved by the Board. Section 3. At no ti.me shall the foregoing rules and regulations adopted by the Englewood City Council be construed to violate or a u thori z e violation of any municipal ordinance, home rule charter, s t t e • atu e, Colorado Constitution, federal law or the United s es Co nstitution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED the 5th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Att st: x officio City Cl aaurer • I • • - • • • • I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the ~ity of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of Resolution No.~~~- Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee • I . • • - P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, volunteerism has always been an essential part of the spirit and traditions of this Country so that today one out of every two Americans is making a gift of time and talent to some kind of volunteer service; and WHEREAS, volunteerism directly reflects the democratic principle of this Nation in that everyone, regardless of circum- stance or station, or factors of race, age , sex , color, or creed, can volunteer and thus reap the rich rewards that come from doing for others; and WHEREAS, volunteerism is increasingly recognized as a centra l partner with government and industry in doing the work of the Nation; and WHEREAS, it is fitting that a period of time be set aside each year to honor and to thank the dedicated citizens of Englewood who gi ve so freely of their valuable time , energy, and abilities as volunteers. NOW, THEREFORE, I EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood , Colorado, do hereby proclaim the week of April 18 thru April 24, 1982 as ENGLEWOOD VOLUNTEER WEEK in the City of Englewood and urge all citizens to help renew and sustain the spirit and vitality of this great Nation by committing a portion of their tim, however small, to addressing the needs of our community through voluntary action . GIVEN under my hand ands al this 5th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor • I • • • • P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, volunteerism ha s always been an essential part of the spirit and traditions of this Country so that today o ne out of every two Americans is making a gif t of time and talent to some kind of volunteer service; and WHEREAS, volunteerism directly reflects the democratic pri n ciple of this Nation in that everyone , regardless of circum- stan ce or station, or factors of race, age, sex, color, or creed, can vol unteer and thus reap the rich rewards that come from doing for others; and WHEREAS, volunteerism i s increasingly recognized as a ce nt ral partner with g overnment and industry in doing the work of the Nation; and WHEREAS, it is fitting that a period of time be set aside each ye ar to honor and to thank the dedicated citizens of Englewood who give so freely o f their valuable time, energy, and abilities as volun teers. NOW, THEREFORE, I EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood, Colorado , do here by proclaim the week of April 18 thru April 2 4, 1982 as ENGLEWOOD VOLUNTEER WEEK in the City of Englewood and urg all citi zens to help renew and sustain he spiri nd vitality of this great Nation by committing portion of th ir tim, how v r small, to addressing the needs of our community through volunt ry action. GIVEN und r my hand ands al this 5th day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis , Mayor • I • • • • • MEMO TO : Mayor Otis and Members o f City Council FROM: Rick DeWitt, City Attorney DATE : March 29, 1982 RE: Hall Property/Centennial Park ? ,} f When Council approved the Resolution of Intent, I advised that Council would have further opportunity to review this matter. I am enclosing the Receipt and Option Contract signed by the Halls concerning the above property. The provisions are, for the most pa r t, standard with the exception of provisions relating to clos- i n g and escrow. These provisions will be found in the first un- numbered paragraph and in paragraph 9. The purpose for this escrow p r ovision is to ensure that the donation of $10,000 is made to the C ity. I tru st that you find this to be in satisfacto ry form. I will proceed with the doc ument unless there i s an ob j ection from City Co unc i l. submitted, bb Enclosure cc: Andy Mccown, City Manager P cky Romans, Director of Parks and Recreation • I • • • • • RECEIPT AND OPTION CONTRACT RECEIVED FROM CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, Purchaser, the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) in the form of Warrant of City of Englewood to be held by RICHARD D. DITTEMORE, Attorney, in his escrow or trustee account, as earnest money and part pay- ment for the following described real estate situate in the County of Arapahoe, Colorado, to wit: See attached description of approximately 5.17 acre- tract. Also see attached plat referring to this property as "Tract D") with all easements and rights of way appurtenant thereto, which property purchaser agrees to buy upon the following terms and conditions for the purchase price of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000), payable as follows: $1,000 hereby receipted for, $49,000 by warrant of City of Englewood, Colorado, to be held in escrow by the title company and delivered to sellers upon written instructions by the City of Englewood, upon all conditions of sale being met. 1. An abstract of title to said property, certified to date, or a current commitment for title insurance policy in an amount equal to the purchase price, at sellers' option and expense, shall be furnished the purchaser on or before March_ll__, 1982. If sellers elect to furnish said title insurance commitment, sellers will deliver the title insurance policy to purchaser after closing and pay the premium thereon. 2. Title shall be merchantable in the sellers, except as stated in this paragraph and in paragraph 8. Subject to payment or tend r as above provided and compliance with the other terms and conditions hereunder by purchaser, sellers shall execute and d liver a good and sufficient Warranty Deed to said purchaser on )0(tQ(Jcl{ May 5, 1982, or, by mutual agreem nt, at an earlier date, conv ying said prop rty fr e and clear of all taxes, except the g neral taxes for 1981, payabl January 1, 1982; free and clear of all liens for sp cial improv ments now installed, wheth r assess d or not; fre and clear of all liens and encumbrances xc pt: road , ditches, utility rights of way and ea ements, if any, and subject to building and zoning regulations and the follow- i ng rs rictiv cov n nts: Non 3 . G ner l x • or th ye r of closing sh 11 be pportion d to d te of d liv ry of d d bas don th moat rec nt levy and the mos r c nt ass m nt. 4. Th hour nd plac of closing shall be as design t d by Ci y A orney for City of Engl wood. S. Poss ssion of pr m •ash 11 b d liv rd to purchas r clos ng, subj ct to th following leases or t nanci s: Non • I • • • • • - 6. In the event the premises are substantially damaged by fir e, flood or other casualty between the date of this agreement and the date of possession or the date of delivery of deed, which- ever shall be earlier, this agreement may, at the option of the purchaser herein, be declared null and void and any deposit herein shall be immediately returned to purchaser. 7. Time is of the essence hereof, and if any payment or any other condition hereof is not made, tendered or performed as herein provided, there shall be the following remedies. In the event a payment or any other condition hereof is not made, tendered or performed by the purchaser, then this contract shall be null and vo id and of no effect, and both parties hereto released from all obligations hereunder, and all payments made hereon shall be retained on behalf of the sellers as liquidated damages. In the event that sellers fail to perform any condition hereof as provided herein, then purchaser may, at its election, treat the contract as termin- ated, and all payments made hereunder shall be returned to the purchaser; provided, however, that the purchaser may, at its elec- tion, treat this contract as being in full force and effect with the right to an action for specific performance and damages. 8. Except as stated in paragraph 2, if title is not merchant- able and wr itten notice of defect (s) is given by the purchaser or purchaser's agent to sellers or sellers' agent within the time herein provided for delivery of deed and shall not be rendered merc hantable within 20 days after such written notice, then this contract, at purchaser's option, shall be void and of no effect and each party her eto shall be released from all obligations h ere- under and the payments made hereunder shall be returned forthwith to purchaser upon return of the abstract, if any, to seller ; pro- vided , however, that in lieu of correcting such defect(&), sellers may, within said 30 days, obtain a commitment for owner's title insurance policy in the amount of the purchase p rice reflecting title insurance protection in regard to such defect(s), and the purchaser shall have the option of accepting the then existing in sured title in lieu of such merchantable title. The sellers s hall pay the ful ~ premium for such owner 's title insurance policy, a nd the abstrac t, if any, shall be returned by purchaser. 9. This c ontract may be terminated and declared null and void by the City of Englewood t ny time up to ninety days after clos i ng; should it be declared void, all moneys held in escrow wi ll be returned to the City of Englewood. The City will pay the scrow fees incurr d. 10. If this propos o n or before A r i l 30, a contract between se benefit of th h irs, ubject to provisions 1 is ace pt d by the sellers in writing , 1982, this instrument shall becom an purchaser and shall inure to the ssora and assigns of s uch parties, bove. -2- R c ipt and Option Contr ct I • • - • • Purchaser: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO a municipal corporation • • • Attest: Sellers accept the above and foregoing proposal this~~~day of ~~~~~~~~~~' 1982. Address: c/o Richard D. Dittemore, Esq., 3333 s. Bannock, Suite 560, Englewood, CO 80110. -3- Receipt and Option Contract • I • • - :: :l9e S"=11v.-. Lake ' .~ I ,I , / SE Corner NW 114 NE 114 Section B T. 5 S ., R.68W. • • • / I i I I i .::..... / I ---..,..---"'-...!.....'--1/ / / / w;'J. s/ Corne, ·TC•.c: i I ssc· ,-------~~~~;;t.:=;..---;:-::--:::--=:----!...'/ 110 o' 1 I 6Cv.O' / ----.:.~.:::.._ __ _ S 89• ~ lO" f · .... ..!.!.,; i / I ----/ N\V Gurner' SE :/4 NE 114 Section B .~ T. 5 S., R.68 w. r t-··/ i \ ' ' TR ACT 5,1646 ,-, /0 ,, ti / / / 0 ------- :i ,, l:-,1c-t ')f l,ln<l in th<' SF. l/4 :-.r. l/'1 of ~t.it'IO 8. 'lh,m~hi1J ~. F,,,.,1..;,, 11,,a••· r.;i ·:rc;t of ~ (;th P.M., 1,.f,ic:l, trtJCl lt; nnn: J"'lrtir:ul,,rl~· ,~w·r,IHI ,·,,; fi,• ,;• .. · ,: l~·u1nr.i.n\1 nt the Norlhwr'·ist <.''Urfll"r o{ i-.iicl SE l/4 1,11 ,: 1/4: t•"'1o1-.;, };,,,.,,, i1!1' ~,k ' 111 " 1 ,::1/:t .J9.4 feet (ncridfon oo~ o,, !-Olar <ui;c.•rv.>l.ion IY.',,r U,i>-J,,o:,,.,,y) t,, ti,· 'I 1'nY..• Pofot or 8c(liMin9: t.)l(•llC'(.• CX>nllnuinu South WP 511' l()" l~;·H. (.!,t,.(1 {, •• , II .ilo:'19 the ~rth line of AuHl SE 1/4 NE l/4 too 1nint1 fn ~" 1,,i,wt, 1 ,11,t \t,• I II 1 rthoast comer or sa1d si:: 1/4 NE 1/4 ~an !-nulh 8!1 ~u··•o• r..,:tl t.';~. ·1 , ... ,: ,, 1 ,/ lhcnc from tho lHl saiil poinl South 00 24•10• ht.•al 4 '/';,0 fC".'L; Llr ·,or.v r .. ,n1, 71°30'00" l• t 340.9 fC'Ot; thence continui~ M::>TUI 7JO)fl'f10• .JIit :nJ,J (C'l•I Ill 1..oinl \'lllch hc:-lU'a N...lrlh 00022•so· 1:.·u;t 10!;,I) focl frnn ll wa, .. ::-..t. n,,·,~r: , UlCTlC'<' frCt'II 1 st Mid 1.oint thrth 0<>°22·~0· f.llst 27S.O fret t.o the ';'J"UI.: To\>>nl of J\'::-:i1n,una .. • • I • • - • • • • MEMO TO: Mayor Otis and Members of City Council FROM: Rick DeWitt, City Attorney DATE: March 29, 1982 RE: Hall Property/Centennial Park When Council approved the Resolution of Intent, I advised that Council would have further opportunity to review this matter. I am enclosing the Receipt and Option Contract signed by the Halls concerning the above property. The provisions are, for the most part, standard with the exception of provisions relating to clos- ing and escrow. These provisions will be found in the first un- numbered paragraph and in paragraph 9. The purpose for this escrow provision is to ensure that the donation of $10,000 is made to the City. I trust that you find this to be in satisfactory form. I will proceed with the document unless there is an objection from City Council. submitted, bb Enclosure cc: Andy Mccown, City Manager Pack y Romans , Dir ctor of Parks n d R creation • I • • • • • RECEIPT AND OPTION CONTRACT RECEIVED FROM CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, Purchaser, the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) in the form of Warrant of Ci ty of Englewood to be held by RICHARD D. DITTEMORE, Attorney, i n his escrow or trustee account, as earnest money and part pay- ment for the following described real estate situate in the County of Arapahoe, Colorado, to wit: See attached description of approximately 5.17 acre- tract. Also see attached plat referring to thi s property as "Tract D") wi th all easements and rights of way appurtenant thereto, which property purchaser agrees to buy upon the following terms and conditions for the purchase price of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($5 0,000), payable as follows: $1,000 hereby receipted for, $49,000 by warrant of City of Englewood, Colorado, to be held i n escrow by the title company and delivered to sellers upon writte n instruc tions by the City of Englewood, upon all conditions of sale being me t . 1. An abstract of title to said property, certified to date, or a c urrent commitment for title insurance policy in an amount equa l to the pu r chase price, at sellers' option and expense, shall be fur nished the purchaser on or before March 31 , 1982. I f sellers elect to furn i sh said title insurance commitment, selle r s will deliver t h e t i tle i nsurance policy to purchaser after closing and pay t he p r emium thereon. 2. Title s ha ll b e merchantable in the sellers, e xcept as stated in this parag ra ph and i n p aragraph 8. Sub ject t o p a y men t or tender as above provid ed a nd c omp liance wi th the o t h er terms and conditions hereunder by purchaser, s eller s shal l execu te a nd deliver a good and sufficient Warranty Deed to said purchaser on ~ May 5, 1982, or, by mutual agreement, at a n earlier date, conveying said property free and clear of all taxes, except the general taxes for 1981, payable January 1, 1982; free and clear of all liens for special improvements n o w instal l ed, whether assessed or not; free and clear of all lien s and encumbrances xcept: roads , ditches, utility rights of wa y a n d easements, if any , and subject to building and zon i n g reg u lat i on s and t h e follow- ing restrictive cov nants: None 3 . G n r 1 taxes for the year of closi n g s h all be apportioned to dat of d liv ry of deed based o n t h e most recent levy and t h e most recent ass ssm nt. 4. Th hour and plac of closing shall be as designat d by City At orn y or City of Englewood. 5. Poa aaion of premi s shall be delivered to purchaser at clo ing, subJ c to th following leas• or tenancies: None • I • • • • • 6. In the event the premises are substantially damaged by fi re, flood or other casualty between the date of this agreement and the date of possession or the date of delivery of deed, which- ever shall be earlier, this agreement may, at the option of the purchaser herein, be declared null and void and any deposit herein s hall be immediately returned to purchaser. 7. Time is of the essence hereof, and if any payment or a ny other condition hereof is not made, tendered or performed as h e rein provided, there shall be the following remedies. In the e vent a payment or any other condition hereof is not made, tendered or performed by the purchaser, then this contract shall be null and v oid and of no effect, and both parties hereto released from all obligations hereunder, and all payments made hereon shall be reta i ned on behalf of the sellers as liquidated damages. In the event that s e llers fail to perform any condition hereof as provided herein, t hen purchaser may, at its election, treat the contract as termin- a ted, and all payments made hereunder shall be returned to the purc h a s er; provided, however, that the purchaser may, at its e lec - tion, treat this contract as being in full force and effect wi th t h e right to an action for specific performance and damages. 8 . Ex cept as stated in paragraph 2, if title is not mercha nt- able a n d written notice of defect(s) is given by the purchase r o r purcha ser 's agent to sellers or sellers' agent within the time herein p rovided for delivery of deed and shall not be rendered me r c hantable within 20 days after such written notice, then this contr act, at purchaser's option, shall be void and of no effect a nd e ach party hereto shall be released f r om all obligations h e r e - under a nd t h e payments made he r eunder shall be returned forthw i th to purc h aser upon return of the abstract, if any, to seller; pro - v i ded , h o wever, that i n lieu of correcting such defect(&), sellers may, with i n sa i d 30 days, obtain a commitment for owner's title i nsurance policy i n the amount of the pur chase price r eflecti n g ti tle insurance protection i n reg a r d to such defect(s ), and t h e p u rcha s er shall have t he option of a cceptin g the the n e x is t i n g insure d t i tle in lieu of such merchanta b le title. Th e sellers shall p a y the full premium for such owner's title insurance policy, and the abs t r a ct , i f any, shall be returned by purchaser. 9. This cont r a c t may be terminated and declared null and void by the City of Englewood at any time up to ninety days after closin g; s h o uld i t be declared void, all moneys held in escrow will b e returned to the City of Englewood. The City will pay the escrow fees i n c ur r ed. 10 . If this proposal is accepted by the sellers in writing on or b efore Ap ril 3 0, , 1 9 82, this instrument shall become a con tr a c t between sellers and purchaser and s h all i n ure to the be n efit of the heirs, successors and assigns of such parties, subj ct to p rov isions of 9 above. -2- Receipt and Option Contract I • • - • • Purchaser: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO a municipal corporation • • • Attest: Sellers accept the above and foregoing proposal this~~~day of ~~~~~~~~~~· 1982. Address: c/o Richard D. Dittemore, Esq., 3333 s. Bannock, Suite 560, Englewood, CO 80110 . -3- R c ipt and Option Contract • I • • - :: jge Sr'\:lfc,~ Lak e ' ~· / , SE Corner NW 114 NE t/4 Section 8 T. 5 S., R. 68W. • • • / I I I i i ...... / I ---,_---_""-_:_'--1/ ,' / / / "'"}/ Co'"" 1(., (.' j /597 r-------~~tt;;-;;;::-W~--~:;-:~---_!_1/ I 70 0 ' , 1 S 89• 5£, lO" E 6CC,.O' / ---..;..;::c..:::.. ___ _ · ..... ..!.~ --___ ,,,. NW Cc,r ne r ' SC: ;/4 NE 1/4 Section B I • T. 5 S., R. 68 W. • i . ' ' i \ -/ ' ' TRACT 5 ,1 646 / / I D / Acre, ------ ~ iv er h U", C"~ "r J;lncl 1n thr• ~r. )/' :,r )/A of F,,:,,-1.)r')O 8. 'l\,wn-.hi1, ~. ,-.. ... 1..., l ·.,a·•· ,.,c 1-.rc: o! I.Ir. f.th P.H ., ~-'i"1 1cJ, t r&el 11. 11nn: pi1rtfr:ul,,rl;• 11(',;,·ril1t•I :,-.. fl,•,;• .. ·,: J~-u1nr.1.n:1 ,it the Norl ·~t <..'t1rnrr n( ,-.1Hl SE J/4 1,11 : I /4: l'r1,1v • ~~"'' r, i1!, ' ~.;.' 111 " 1 .G,o:t J9. 4 fret (11erid,.:in t..l"ie'J o, ~J,1r (JUl',C.•rv.:iUor1 ,v.-:1r l!,11, lnu,ro·••Yl l•• t I,· If 1'nY.· PoJnt of • iMln'J, ll,c •ncc conunuinu South lj•f' '.:ll:l' lOM 1:.·.1. f ,!if,.f, !••·1 fl .:ilo. g the rth line of iwHl SC 1/4 NC )/4 too i,unt1 fn.,, 1,,,~111-t, ,,,11,1 ti,• / i ! r· rt.hcost comer of s >d si: 1/4 NC l/4 L<-ora Snot h 8~ ~· ·"'M ,1 :,l 1,','.'. ·, f,.,,: t.~nc !rem the last aitt point South 00°24'10" ~.· t. 4 ·1•J.O (c-,:t: LI, ,,c, · 1 .. ,rd1 ll 71°30'00" I· st 34C.9 fret: thoncc! continuH'MJ N:>rlh 7l 0 Jll'OOM w. t ~h.t • .t t, •I 1,, , .. nnl l'luc:-h I .ua N..•1 ·th 00022'!>0• 1:.,r.t JO!i.t) k'('l fro••• ""ilr,0::-,1, "•1"1,cr; t.tcncr, fran last ~id 1..oin rnrth ocf22·~0· r.nst 27S.O fC'<'t u, 11 ·:i·IA: f\»nl • of i :'II nm na . '· I • • - • • • • • llfflll,CIIICI ......... Rick DeWitt, City Attorney PllOMr Torn Holland , Assistant Ci ty Attorn ey IUIMCT1 Raymond Lo velad y v. City o f En glewood March 23, 1982 Raymond Lovelady was employed No vember, 1980 through January, 1981 as the Library Bookmobile Driver. At that time he voluntarily went on military training. His training was extended once by the service . He voluntarily extended training a second time to a total of approximately eleven months . In November, 1981 the Librarian, expecting Lovelady to be released from training, sent him a notice to report to work, or explain in writing by November 13, 1981. Lovelady did not comply, His employ- ment was terminated November 17, 1981. He later telephoned. In January, 1982, he came in requesting reemployment pursuant to his veteran's rights. The City refused to reemploy him and Lovelady filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging that the City refused to reemploy him because of his race, black. At a hear- ing before the EEOC on March 5, 1982, present for the City were myself, Sharon Winkle, and Mel BeVirt. We presented testimony and documentary evidence. The EEOC decision was that no probable cause existed to believe racial discrimination occurred in our refusal to reemploy Mr. Lo velady. ~v. Ho lland /mh I • • •~ • • • EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION O£NVER DISTRICT OFFICE Rio Gtande llullclln1--61h F1oOr 1531 Slllut ~ 0..-, Calllrado I020Z 3UIU7-Z771 Charge No. 081820971 Raymond Lovelady (Cert. !lo. P086692158) 1733 1/2 Clinton Street Aurora, Colorado 60010 Charging Party and City of Englewood (Cert. No. P086692159) 3400 South Elati En ~lewood, Colorado 80110 Respondent DETERMINATION Unoer the authOrity vested in me by the CoalDission's Proc"1Ul"al Reg ulations, I issue, on behalf of the Coalission, the following determination as to the merita of the subject char&•• All jurisdictional requirements have been •t. 'n'8 St.ate Agency haS mad e no finding relating to the subject charge. The Charging Party alleged that Respondent diacrilDinated against him by denying him reemployaslt beCauM of his race, Black. Ex•ination of the evidence indicates that there is not reasonable cauae to believe that this all81ation is true. No deteraination is ude as to any other issue raised by or which might be construed to have been raised by the subject charge. This concludes the Coaiission's processing of this char&•· Should the Charging Party wish to pursue this •tter further, the Party uy do so by filing a private action in Federal District Col.rt a«ainat t.he ResponC:ent naed ab<>ve within 90 days following receipt of this letter and by taking the other proced1ral stepa set out in the attached l:Otice of Right-to-Sue• Within one year after the date of this letter I intend to destroy the case file 1n accorcSanee with the Co111111ss on's records dis;::,os tion instructiOfl.t• ;"') // C'V 'I ;; · . 6 .:,I.. Cate Enclosures: (2) otice of Right-to-Sue Copy of the Charge cc: CCkC On behalf of the C:C-iasion: ilI.t.ti y District Director I • • • • • • 9llaOlflCI •••DI-• Rick DeWitt, City Attorney llllOMi Tom Holland, Assistant City Attorney IUMICI, Raymond Lovelady v. City of Englewood March 23, 1982 Raymond Lovelady was employed November, 1980 through January, 1981 as the Library Bookmobile Driver. At that time he voluntarily went on military training. His training was extended once by the service. He voluntarily extended training a second time to a total of approximately eleven months. In November, 1981 the Librarian, expecting Lovelady to be released from training, sent him a notice to report to work, or explain in writing by November 13, 1981. Lovelady did not comply. His employ- ment was terminated November 17, 1981. He later telephoned. In January, 1982, he came in requesting reemployment pursuant to his veteran's rights. The City refused to reemploy him and Lovelady filed a charge with the u.s. Equal Employment Opportunity Conunission alleging that the City refused to reemploy him because of his race, black. At a hear- ing before the EEOC on March 5, 1982, present for the City were myself, Sharon Winkle, and Mel BeVirt. We presented testimony and documentary evidence. The EEOC decision was that no probable cause existed to believe racial discrimination occurred in our refusal to reemploy Mr. Lovelady. ~v. Holland /mh I • • • • • • . . . ·( . .,;i · ·• .· .. ~·-. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION OENVER DISTRICT OfflCE : to; ! Rio Grande 8uildin1--61h floor · .... ~ .. l·· 1S31 Slllut S..... o.n-. Colorado eoaoa 303/137-2771 Charge No. 081820971 Ra ymond Lovelady (Cert. llo. P086692158) 1733 1/2 Clinton Street Aurora, Colorado 80010 Charging Party and City of Englewood (Cert. No. P086692159) 3400 South Elati En~lewoocl, Colorado 80110 Respondent DETERMINATION Uncier the authority vested in me by the C:C-iaaion'a Proc4ld1ral Regulations, I issue, on behalf of the Ccaaisaion, the following determination as to the aerita of the subject char&•· All jurisdictional requirements have been an. lbe St.ate Agency has made no finding relating to the subject cz~ e. The Charging Party alleged that Reapondent dlacriainat..d ... inst him by denying him reemployma,t because or hi• race, Black. Ex•ination of the evidence indicates that there is not rea.onable cause to believe that this allecation ia true. No eseteraination b ude u to any other issue raised by or which •i&ht be oonat.rued to have been raised by the subject charge. This concludes the Coamission's procesain& or this cha'ge, Should the Ch arging f'arty wish to pursue this •tter fl.rt.her, the Party .. , do so by filing a private action in Federal District Col.rt a,tainat the Respondent named above within 90 days following receipt or this etter and by taking the other procedw-al atepa aet out in the attached r;otice of Right-~. Within one year after the date or this letter I intend to destroy the case file in accordance with the Comn1ssion's records disposition instruc:tions, 3 -/J-6i Cate Enclosu res: (2) otice of R ght-to-Sue Copy or the Cha rge cc: CCkC On behalf of the Ccaliaaion: r . ~ c.-· 1 i ·r·~ · :::zl ,\ . .I ¥ fy JI.ta~ V District Director 1 I . • - • • • • 7 TO: Mayor Otis and Members of City Council DATE: March 31, 1982 RE: Water Quality Control Conunission Litigation As you know, the above hearings were concluded in January and we have been awaiting the decision of the Water Quality Control Conunission . The City has moved to withhold decision pending EPA action concerning certain EPA standards that are believed to be in the process of being amended to the favor of the City. The specific standard in question is the ammonia standard which, we unders tand, the EPA is in the process of modifying to include pH and temperature dependency. We expect that the EPA will be coming out with the amended standard in the middle of June and I wi ll keep you advised of the status of this litigation. e~ly submitted, /"\ ~;,_;;l / ~ - Ri bb I • • - • MEMO TO: DATE: RE: • • • Mayor Otis and Members of City Council March 31, 1982 Water Quality Control Commission Litigation / As you know, the above hearings were concluded in January and we have been awaiting the decision of the Water Quality Control Commission. The City has moved to withhold decision pending EPA action concerning certain EPA standards that are believed to be in the process of being amended to the favor of the City. The specific standard in question is the ammonia standard which, we understand, the EPA is in the process of modifying to include pH and temperature dependency. We expect that the EPA will be coming out with the amended standard in the middle of June and I will keep you advised of the status of this litigation. /Re·s~ly submitted, I ~-~~_:__,::>'; rl -7'""7"""""(.::-----. . Ri~ DeWitt, City-A~tornay, bb • I • • • • • 7 OPINION TO: Mayor Otis and Members of City Council DATE: March 30, 1982 RE: Assessment Deferral Ordinance f I At the March 29, 1981 Council meeting, a question arose concern- ing the above ordinance. I re-present the question and the legal opinion of this office as follows: 1. Does a deferred assessment bear interest? OPINION Yes, according to our Assessment Deferral Ordinance, an assessment does bear interest. EMC 12-1.5-7 states: "The promissory note and lien shall bear interest at the same rate as the bonds which finance the assessment district." AN ANCILLARY QUESTION: 2. For what period of time does the deferred assessment bea r interest? OPINION: The assessment bears interest until paid in full . This question is not directly address din th ordinance itself . A no e that did no bear interest throughout its term would be an anom ly in the law. I know of no case on this subject. OTHER DISCUSSION: Ther ares veral points that may be h lpful to Council in r viewing its assessmen deferral policy . The original assess- m nt d f rral file of this office rev als that Ft. Collins does not ch rg interest. Bould r dos ch rg in er st and that interes is ch rged for the entir period th th ssessment is unpiad. Ft. Collins has ass ssmen s limits that r substantially lower than the City of Engl wood now has nd ubst ntially lowe r than hos propos d for th n x m ting. For inst nee, for a amily I • • - • • • • Mayor Otis and Members of City Council Page 2 March 30, 1982 of three, Ft, Collins' limit is $6,840. Englewood's eligibility limit is $12,750 ~~ The City of ~ ~ for a family of three. The issue of assessment d t ~erral ordinances has not been tested in court. An attack on such an ordinance is remote given that most pragmatic people will not expend the resources necessary to test the question. Only for ideological reasons does it seem likely that such an attack would be made. The more attention focused on this ordinance, the more likely such an attack could be made. As I have stated, the Courts have not ruled on this question and, until they do so, the City of Englewood along with other communities are treading upon unstable ground. The Assessment Deferral Ordinance cannot be all things to all people. Council has the authority to establish policy for the City of Englewood and that policy could include a waiver of interest if council desires to do so. itted, bb I • • • • • • OPINION TO: Mayor Otis and Members of City Council DATE: March 30 , 1982 RE: Assessment Deferral Ordinance At the March 29, 1981 Council meeting, a questio n arose concern- ing the above ordinance. I re-present the question and the leg al opinion of this office as follows: 1. Does a deferred assessment bear i ntere st? OPINION Yes, according to our Assessment Deferral Ordinance, an assessment does bear interest. EMC 12-1.5-7 states: "The promissory note and lien shall bear interest at the same rate as the bonds which finance the assessment district ." AN ANCILLARY QUESTION: 2. For what period of tim does the deferred assessment bear interest? OPINION: The assessment bears interes until paid in full. This question is not directly addr ss din th ordin nee itself . A note that did not bar in erest throughout its term would b an anomaly in the l w. I know of no ca on this subjec . OTHER DISCUSSION: Th rear s v ral points that my be h lpful to Council in r viewing its ass ssment deferral policy. The original assess- ment deferral file o this offic r v ls tha F . Collins doe not charg inters . Boulder does ch rg inter st and that int rest is charg d for th n ire p riod th th ss ssment is unpiad. F. Collins has ss ssments limits tha r substantially lower th nth City o En l wood now has nd subs nti lly low r h n thos propos d h n x me inq. For instanc , for a f mily • I • • - • • • • • Mayor Otis and Members of City Council Page 2 March 30, 1982 of three, Ft, Collins' limit is $6,840. Englewood's eligibility limit is $12,750 ~~ The City of ~ ~ f or a family of three. The issue of assessment deferral ordinances has not been tested in Court. An attack on such an ordinance is remote given that most pragmatic people will not expend the resources necessary t o test the question. Only for ideological reasons does it seem likely that such an attack would be made. The more attention f ocused on this ordinance, the more likely such an attack could be made. As I have stated, the courts have not ruled on this question and, until they do so, the City of Englewood along with o ther communities are treading upon unstable ground. The Assessment Deferral Ordinance cannot be all things to all people. Council has the authority to establish policy for the Ci ty of Englewood and that policy cou l d inc lude a waiver of interest i f Counc i l des i res to do so . bb , I • • In - • • • • • OPINION TO: Mayor Otis and Members of City council DATE: March 31, 1982 RE: Englewood Centennial-Bicentennial Funds Granted to the City 7 A request for a legal opinion from this office on the following question has been made --"Does the Englewood Centennial- Bicentennial Foundation have the authority to make grants to the Malley Center Trust Fund?" Clearly, the Englewood Centennial-Bicentennial Foundation has authority to make grants to the Malley Center Trust Fund. The Malley Center Trust Fund is a special fund of the City. I want to emphasize that point --that it is a City fund that is required to be administered according to the provisions of the ordinance creating it. The ECBF has consistently made grants to the City of Englewood. To say that it cannot do so now flies in the face of the ECBF Charter and those representations that have been made to the community. For a more thorough examination of the legal principles involved I am attaching the memo of Loretta Huffine, Assistant City Attorney, for your perusal. submitted, bb Attachm nt I • • • ~ a•IOUNDUM Rick DeWitt, City Attorney • • • DA'la, March 19, 1982 Loretta Huffine, Assistant City Attorney Payment of ECBF Funds to the City sua,a::y, or to the Malley Center Trust Fund BACKGROUND T h e En g lewood Centennial -Bicentennial Foundation inco rpora t ed in 1975 as a non-profit corporation, with the following purpose : Article III of Articles of Incorporation: A. Purposes. The corporation is formed exclusive ly f o r scientific, education or charitable purposes within the meaning o f Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, which purposes shall be the receiving of contributions from the general public, and the distribution of said accumulated contributions for the exclusive purpose of designing, constructing, and erecting a senior citizens recreation center, or assist- ing the City of Englewood, Colorado, in the designing, constructing and erecting of a senior citizen recreation center wi thin the municipality of Englewood, Colorado. The Els i e Mall e y Center was bui lt with funds raised by ECBF, along wi th $500,000 from the City. The Center was completed in 1977. The ECBF contributed $100,000, but had collected funds in excess of that amount. As of April 1977, $165,642.98 had been pledged, with $11 8,22 8 .48 ac tually c ollected. There were no legal o b s t acle s t o the don a tion by the ECBF at t hat time. In D cember, 1978 Ms. Elsie Malley donated $30,000 to the ECBF. I was to b used for a museum project, or, if such a project was not undertaken, it was to be applied to the capital improvement account of the Malley Center. On September 14, 1979 the trustee of Ms . Malley's trust account, American Nation al Bank, sent a certified letter to the ECBF direct- ing that t h e $3 0,0 00 be imm diately t ran sferred t o the Ci t y . The trustee exp ressed concern th at the ECB F cont i nued to solicit funds for t h e Cent er sub sequ e n t t o its e rec t ion. Th ey were also con- cerned that Ms. Malley 's tax posture could be jeopardized since he corporate purpose had already b een served . ~----~--~~------·~------- I • • • Memorandum -Rick DeWitt March 19, 1982 Page 2 • • • The ECBF then gave Ms. Malley's $30,000 along with another $20,000 to the City, on October 11, 1979. The letter transfer - ring the checks directed that the funds be used toward capital improvements of the Malley Center. Again, no legal problems were encountered in giving that money to the City. The ECBF also gave $14,700 in the Spring of 1981 to the City for purchase of recreation equipment and a van. At the present time the ECBF still holds approximately $53,000 which it has not given to the City. The ECBF held a meeting in December 1979 at which time they decided to enlarge the ir corporate purpose so as to cover any scientific, educa tiona l , or charitable purposes of the general public, as deter- mined by the Board of Directors. I was unable to find any evidence that ECBF amended its charter with the Secretary of State, to broaden its purpose. I was to ld that ECBF's counsel at the time, Sid Overton, advised them that they could n ot leg ally change their corporate purpose and redirect the funds collected without the consent of each and every co ntributor. ISSUE, CONCLUSIONS The present issue is whether the ECBF can turn the $53,000 over to the City for the use and benefit of the Malley Center. The answer is unequivocably yes. They have done so three times in the past. There are n o obstacles now. Alternatively , the ECBF can transfer the funds to t he Malley Center Trust Fund. This fund was set up by the City in 1981 by Ordinance No. 28. The Trust Fund was established specifically for the use and benefit of the Mal ley Center . The Trust Fund is a tax-exempt organization under 170 of the IRS Code. The o nly relevant restrictions in the Articles of Incorporation of the ECBF as to whom money or assets may be distributed, are: Article III.C.ii; No part of the assets of the corporation shall be contributed to any organization whose net earnings or any part thereof inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or other i ndividual •.• I • • - • • Memorandum -Rick DeWitt March 19, 1982 Page 3 and • • • Article III.C.iv; Upon dissolution .•. the corporation's remaining assets shall be disposed of exclusively for the purposes of the corporation, or to such organization or organizations organized and operated exclusively for charit- able, educational, religious, or scientific purpose as shall at the time qualify as an exempt organization •.• under Section 501 (c) (3) of the (IRS) Code of 1954 (or the corres- ponding provision of any future IRS law.) .... Section 501(c) (3) of the IRS Code deals with non-governmental donees. The Malley Center Trust Fund is a governmental unit. ever, the restriction above which mentions l50l (c) (3) relates to dissolution of the ECBF Corporation. How- only Thus there is no reason the remaining funds may not be given either to the City or the Malley Center Trust Fund at this time. In fact, the concernsof American National Bank in 197 9 are still valid . The ECBF's holding of the remaining $53,000, and not apply- ing it to the Center either through the City or the Trust Fund, could possibly jeopardize the tax exempt status of the contributions comprising that $53,000.00. Loretta B. Huffine Assistant City Attorney /rnh .... I • • In - I • • • • ' J C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE March 19, 1982 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT BUS FOR FARMERS ' MARKET 9A I NITIAT ED BY Ke ])s Waggoner, Di rector of Pub)jc Works ,#j ACT I ON PROPOSED Approval pf Expendjture Bac kgro und : At t he Counc i l budget retreat, Cou ncil r e qu ested tha t we rev i ew the possib i lity of providi ng bus serv i ce for residents of the co11111 un i t y to and from the Farmers ' Market . Th e Farmers ' Market usually be gins the fi r st Tuesda y in Jul y and ends the second Tu es day i n October . Th e mark e t is open from 1 :00 p.m . unt il sellout, but no later tha n 7:00 p .m. Sellout would usually occur ab out 5:30 p.m.; therefore, any bus ser- vic e provi ded sh oul d be sch edul e d t o ope r ate fr om 12:30 p.m. to 6 :30 p.m . Cost t o op erate the buses would be: Conclusions: Dr iver Fuel Ma i ntenance Attached are ma ps of routes listed as: $10 .65 pe r hour .50 pe r mile 5 . 70 per hour Route No. 1, which serves the northwe s t area of the Ci t y , requires 23 minutes to trave l the 6.6 miles with norma l stops . Rout e No. 2, which serves the no r t hea s t area, requ i re s 17 minutes to trave l the 4. 4 mil es. Route No. 3, which serves the so uth an d southwest areas , requires 41 minutes to tra vel t he 10.6 miles. It would tak e one bus to co ver Rou t e No. 1 and Route No . 2 . The bus would leave the Farmers' Marke t every hou r on t he ho ur to trave l Route No . l, would return to Farmers' Market at app r oximately 30 minutes a fte r the hour, and proceed on to Route No . 2 . It would take on bus to cover Rou t No. 3. Th bu s wo uld leave the Fanner's Marke t every hour on the hour . I • • - • • • • • -2- Costs for this service for 15 Tuesdays would be: Labor (2 drivers) (6 hrs.) ($10.65) (15 days) Fuel (6.6 + 4.4 + 10.6 Mi.) (6 trips) ($.50) (15 da.) Mtce. ( 2 buses) ( 6 hrs. ) ( $5. 70) ( 15 days) Total Reco11111endation: $1,917 972 ~ $3,915 Since the Street Division already pays for the above listed labor and maintenance on the buses, there would be no additional outlay of money except for the fuel. It is reco11111ended, however, that a part-time person be hired for the three su11111er months to offset the loss during the Farmers' Market. A part-time person would cost approximately $2,600. The total outlay, not budgeted, would be $2,600 plus $972 for fuel, or approximately $3,572. Hopefully, we could cover this in our existing budget. Atfachs. • I • • • • - ROUTE NO. I . 6.6 miles--23 minutes l I . • • • • I . • • • • • I . • • • • - C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT March 30, 1982 S/ t, City Banking Services Gary R. Higbee, Director of Finance ~~ ~',',:_ INITIATED BY ~ ~ Approval of a motion for the City Manager to enter into ACTION PROPOSED ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a contract with First Interstate Bank of Englewood for providing City banking services for a 3-year period beginning May 1, 1982 BACKGROUND: On March 8, 1982, the Finance Department mailed bid request / specifications to First National Bank of Englewood, First Inter- state Bank of Englewood, Republic National Bank, Community Bank & Trust, and Centennial State Bank (See Attachment A -Bid Speci- fications). nie City's bid specifications requested the banks to bid on both a compensating balance and a fee service basis. nie City received bids from two Englewood banks -First National Bank of Englewood and First Interstate Bank of Englewood. nie First Interstate Bank's bid was the lowest bid for both the compensating balance method and the fee for service method (See Attachment Band Attachment C). In the past the City has been paying for banking services by maintaining a compensating balance with the servicing bank. Effective with the new contract with FIB, the City will be pay- ing for the services utilized. An analysis of the t wo methods showed that the City would be money ahead by paying outright for services. 'nlis determination is made by comparing the earn- ings potential at various compensating balance levels with esti- mated cost per month. nie estimated monthly fees with FIB are estimated to range from $475.00 -$635.00/per month. By com- paring these figures with potential earning credits, the City would be better off to pay for banking service and invest the money set aside for the compensating balance (S Attachment D). • I • • • • • • Bids were not received from the three other Englewood banks - Republic National Bank, Centennial State Bank, and Community Bank & Trust. The lockbox service also is proposed to be changed to FIB as they are the only bank which met the bid specifications. FEE BASIS ANALYSIS: Compensating Balance Fee for Service Method Estimated Cost Per Month FNBE $1,398.00 1,157.20 • FIB $ 775.00 / 631.54 7 I • • - • • • • ATTACHMENT A PROPOSAL FOR CITY DEPOSITORY FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING HAY l, 1982 CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY : BANK ~---~~-------~~--~ ADDRES S --- S"1giiature Suom{ t ted by rm~------------ Date • I . • • • • • I. REQ UIRED BANKING SERVICES A. Depository for Funds 1. Demand Account Statistics a. An average of 22 regular deposits are made monthly. b. Deposits aggregate approximately $2,500,000 per month ($1,500,000 low, $3,000,000 high), not including in- vestment wire transfers. Checks included in deposits will vary in number per month fro1a 4,000 to 10,000. 'n\is includes lockbox receipts for utilities and sales tax. c. Withdrawals of approximately the same amount are made monthly involving about 1,900 checks from three different series of checks (operating, payroll, and medical/den-tal insurance). 2. Demand Account Required Services 3. a. Provide normal checking account services -collecting deposited checks and clearing checks drawn on the City. b. Provide a daily bank statement to be del i vered t h e day following the statement day. To be included with the statement are all items processed for the stateme nt days which are to be returned in numerical order, and a magnetic tape of these transactions. 'n\e City uses three check series -operating, payro ll , and medical / dental. c . Sa me day telephone noti c e of d i r e ct d eposi t s re - c ei v e d fro1a the U. S. Treasury , the Federal Re- serve Bank, or invest~ent /brokerage firms . d . Pr ovid e a monthly analysis of the Ci t y account a t the en d o f each month . e. Provide da ily automatic transfer of funds between the deman d and a Repurchase Agr em nt Account (See #3 below). f. Provid for daily p ickup of deposits from City Hall between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m. If an amor d truck service is utilized, the cost will be paid by th Bank . g. Provide a tele ph oned daily status of the City account by 9 :15 a .m. R purchase Agreement Ac co unt n-. s rvicing Bank will establish an op n repurchas agr ~- m nt account for the City . 'lbe Bank will automatically • I • • • l. • • • -2- transfer at the close of business each day monies in excess of the demand account compensating balance into the Repurchase Agreement. If the demand account requires funds to meet demand account needs, the Bank will auto- matically transfer funds from the Repurchase Agreement to the demand account. The City will insure that there are adequate funds in the demand account to cover the compensating balance requirement. The interest rate on the Repurchase Agreement will be calculated at the Federal Funds rate (weekly average) less 11. Accwuu- lated interest will be credited to the demand account on the last day of each month. The City cations. with the slip. will provide all checks printed to City specifi- The Bank will provide a two part deposit slip City's name and account number imprinted on the 2. The City will be depositing Federal withholding taxes twice a month. C. Required I nvestment Services The present City portfolio is about $12,500,000 consisting of a variety of instruments which are legal investrnents under the Englewood City Charter and the Colorado State Statutes. The Finance Director (City Treasurer) or his assigned re- presentatives are authorized to buy, sell, and exchange all such lnstrwuents. The City reserves the right to invest any and all funds in excess of the required daily demand deposit in any manner which will be in the best interests of the City, The Bank is expected to promptly and faithfully execute all invest- ment and/or wire transfer instructions. The following services are required in order to facilitate the City's investment program, 1. Charges and credits to the City's demand account result- ing from investment transactions will be entered directly on the transaction date, The City will be notified of any wire transfers on the same day. 2. The Bank will provide security custodial services for c rt in government securities and corporate securities. The Bank will provide a monthly statement, r ceive in- terest paym nts, credit interest payments to the demand ccount, and redeem or sell securities aa dir cted • • I • • - • • • • • • -3- 3. Advisory services will be furnished concerning financing, money market conditions, and investments as needed. If the servicing bank provides investment services through a correspondent, disclose the name of the Bank. Also, provide information about that Bank which will verify its expertise and abilitites to perform these services • • I • • - • • • • • -4- Compensating Balance Method of Paying for Bank Services Anticipated Average"°Da"T'fy Bafance (compensatingbalance) required i n the demand account at various Federal Funds Rate levels needed to adequately compensate the servicing bank . 'n\e compensating balance will be adjusted either monthly or quarterly by mutual agreement be- tween the City and the Bank. All service charges are to be cover~d by the earnings credit afforded by the compensating balance . 'ib i s is to include all normal transaction charges, wire transfers , r eturned item fees, pick up and delivery charge including armored car serv ice, stop payment fees, purchase of deposit slips, magnetic t ape of trans- actions, security custodial and reporting services, and other charges not enumerated. Federal Funds Compensating Federal Funds Compensating Rate Balance Rate 'Balanc e 5 13 1/2 5 1 /2 14 6 14 1/2 ------- 6 1/2 15 7 15 1/2 ------··----. ·-------- 7 1/2 16 ------- 8 16 1/2 8 1 /2 17 9 17 1 /2 ------ 9 1/2 18 10 18 1/2 10 1/2 19 11 19 1/2 11 l/2 ---------20 ------ 12 Rates above 201 will be negoti- 12 1/2 ated in the unlikely event that 13 th e y occ u r. Comments: • I • • - • • • • -5- Fe e for Service Method Enumerate the fees to be charged for services provided. Credit Items Debit Items Deposit Items Account Maintenance Wire Transfer Magnetic Tape of Transactions Armored Car Service (pick up/delivery) Stop Payment Returned Items Other Fees Not Enumerated Security Custodial and Reporting -------- Fee Per Hour The account is to be a "zero balance" account. Monies not required to meet daily demand needs will be automatically transferred to the Re- purchas e Agreement at the end of each business day. Likewise, funds nee ded to meet demand needs will be automatically from the Repurchase Agreeroent at the end of each day. I • • - • • • • • • -6- II. NON-REQUIRED SERVICES 'lbe City will pay the servicing bank directly for non-required services. The servicing bank will bill the City monthly for thes e services. If you do not wish to bid on this portion, please ind ic a t e so. A bank not wishing to bid on these services will not be penali z e d in the evaluation of their bid for required services. A. Lockbox Processing of Utility Billa Receive and process utility bills at bank. Processing con- sists of picking up mail payments at the post offi~e. match- ing check with payment stub (providing photoatat of check if a discrepancy is found), running tape totals, depositing checks and returning paperwork to City Hall daily. Utility bills are mailed at the beginning of each month, with the due date set for the end of the month, Monthly activity will vary with the billing month. The average number processed would be about 5,000 per month (2,500 low month , 7,500 high month), B. Lockbox Processing of Sales Tax Receipts Receive and process sales tax forms at bank. Processing con- sists of picking up mail payments at the post office , matching check with sales tax form (forwarding check and form if a discrepancy is found), running tape totals, depositing checks and returning paperwork to City Hall daily, Sales tax forms are mailed at the first of each month with the due date set fo r the 20 th of the month. February, March , May, June , August , Septemb e r , November, and December average 800-900 receipts pro- ce ssed. Apr i l , July, and October average 1,500 -1,600 receipts proc e s s e d. Abou t 2,500 receipts would be processed in Januar y. Th e Ba n k will provide a magnetic tape of items ~rocessed. The tape will be i n t he format required by the City I Informat ion Systems Manager. Co m e n sation f o r Providill& Non-Required Services Cost p r it m pro cess d through the lockbox. $ _____________ _ Comm e nts : • I • • • • • • -7- III. OTHER SERVICES Enumerate any other bBnk or bank-related services available includ- ing charges , if any (attach separate sheets, lf necessary). Please state what services would be provided to municipal employees by the Bank if a decision was made to deposit all payroll in the proposal Bank ; thereby, giving the employees a guaranteed deposit rather than a payroll check. (Twice a month payroll of approximately $520,000). -------------------- • I • • • • • • • ATTACKMENT B Fee Basis Analysis Attached is an analysis of the bids received from FIB and FNBE. 'lbe computation for estimated monthly cost shows that FIB submitted the lowest bid • • I • • In • • • • • ATTACHMENT B F e e for Service Method Enumer ate t he fees to be charged for services provided. Credit Items Deb it Items De p os it Items Account Maintenance Wire Transfe r Magnetic Ta pe of Tr ansaction Armored Car Service (pick up/delivery) Stop Payment Returned lte1H Other Fees Not Enumerat ed Estimated Num b er of Transactions 22 1,200 7,000 8 5 20 Security Custodial and Re po rting 3 TOTAL Compensating Balance Comp ari son at 14 1/21 (cur rent level) Estimated Cost Per Month FNBE FIB 2.20 1.54 190.00 152.00 560.00 350.00 15.00 2 .0 0 4 0.00 48.0 0 No t Ca l c u-0 late d 50 ,00 20.00 50.00 37. 50 0 10 .00 250 .00 10.50 1,157 .20 631. 54 ~.398.00 775 .00 Th ccount is to be a "zero balance" account. Monies not required to meet daily demand needs will be automatically transferred to the Re- purchase A~reement at the end of each business day. Likewise, funds needed to meet demand needs will b e automatically from the Repurchase Agreement at t h e end of each day. I • • n .,.. - • • • • • ATTACHMENT B Fee for Service Method Enwnerate the fees to be charged for services provided. Credit Items Debit Items Deposit Items Account Maintenance Wire Transfer Magnetic Tape of Transactions Armored Car Service (pick up/delivery) Stop Payment Returned Items Other Fees Not Enumeraged Security Custodial and Reporting FNBE $ .10 .10 .08 15.00/mo 5.00 Cost + $5.00/ea 50.00/110 10.00 No Charge 250.00/110 FIB $ .07 .08 .05 2.00/mo 6.00 Included in above 20.00/mo 7.50 .50 3.50/Entry buy or sell The account is to be a "zero balance" account. Monies not r11quired to meet daily demand needs will be automatically transferred to the Re- purchase Agreement at the end of each business day. Likewise, funds needed to meet demand needs will be autoaatically from the Repurchase Agreement at the end of each day • • I • • - • • • • • • ATTACHMENT C Compensating Balance First Interstate Bank of Englewood submitted a co~pensating balance schedule which ls much less of a compensating balance than First Hational Bank of Englewood (copies attached) • • I • • - • ~ • • • ATTACHMENT C Compcnsatinc__t alance Method of Pl!YinB...J..or Ilank Services Anticipatetl Average Daily Balance (compensating balance) required in the demand account at various Federal Funds Rate levels needed to adequately co1opensate the servicing bank. The compensating balance will be adjusted either mont:~lly or quarterly by mutual agreement: he- twl:!en the City and t:he Bank. All service charges are to be covered by the earnings credit: afforded by the compensating balance. This is to include all normal transaction charges, wire tran&fers, returned it em fees, pick up and delivery charge including armored car service, stop payment fees, purchase of deposit slips, magnetic tape of trans- actions, security custodial and reporting services, and other charge s not enumerated. COLLECTED COLLECTED Federal Funds Compensating Federal Funds Compensating Rate ~ 1~1!£..e __ Rate 'Balance ------- 5 ~604.500 13 1/2 $126,500 5 1/2 494.600 14 120,900 6 4181600 14 1/2 115,700 6 1/2 3621700 15 111,100 7 _?}£),000 ___ 15 1/2 106,700 7 1/2 268,300 16 102,700 8 259&.!QP _____ 16 1/2 _?~!.~--- 8 1/2 236 .600 17 95,500 9 217 .600 17 1/2 92,200 9 1/2 2011500 18 89,200 10 187 ,700 18 1/2 86,300 10 1/2 175 .600 19 83,700 11 1641900 19 1/2 81,300 11 1/2 155 ,500 20 78,900 12 147,100 Rates above 20~ will be neeo ti- 12 1/2 139 ,500 ated in the unlikely event t:hut 13 132,700 they occur. FNBE: All comp neating balance, to be calculated on collected fund• without re- gard to reaerve requir ... nta, lalancea to be adjuated aonthly uaing the ave rag of th Federal }'.\Inda rate calculation, uaed for the repurchaa a re ... nt account for the prior aonth. lalance requir ... nte to change when bank begina to deliver daily or leaa frequently, .. ,natic tape (a). -5- • I • • - • ~ • • • • ATTACHMENT C Com....e.ensating_ Balance Method of P~in_g_tor Bank Services Anticipatea--Average Daily Balance (compensating balance) required in the demand account at various Federal Funds Rate levels needed to adequately compensate the servicing bank. The compensating balanc e will be adjusted either monthly or quat'terly by mutual agreement he- tween che City and the Bank. All service charges are to be covcr~d by the earnings credit afforded by the compensating balance. This is to include all normal transaction charges, wire transfers, retu rned item fees, pick up and delivery charge including armored car i;crvicc, stop payment fees, purchase of deposit slips, magnetic tape of trans- actions, security custodial and reporting services, and other charges not enumerated. Federal Funds Compensating Federal Funds Compensating Rate _!al'!_'!..':.~-Rate Balance ---------------------------- 5 lJQ.000 13 1/2 !IZ,QQQ 5 1/2 1i2.ooo 14 ~!i.QQQ 6 __ no 1 ooq__ 14 l/2 -~.QQ. __ 6 1/2 _io.9,000 15 fi~.QQQ 7 -_jlj..._Q.0:9 ___ 15 l/2 __U&Q.Q__ 7 l/2 24,QOO 16 ~l.QQQ 8 92 1 000 16 l/2 60,QOO 8 l/2 89~000 _____ l7 _ _5_9.19QQ __ ,_ 9 86 1 000 17 1/2 ~s.~QQ 9 1/2 83,000 18 58 ,QO O 10 so.ooo 18 1/2 57 .500 10 1/2 79 ,000 19 57 ,000 11 _]]_..Q..0.Q __ 19 1/2 __56.....}Q..Q._ 11 1/2 __ 7.}_..Q.0_9 __ 20 --~J .. Q.Qq --- 12 73,000 Rates above 20% will be n goti- 12 1/2 71,000 ated in the unlikely event that 13 __ 69,000 __ they occur. Comments: ----- I • • In - • • • • • ATTACHMENT D Method of Payment Attached is the compensating balance schedule submitted by First Interstate Bank. The interest earnings per month for each level of compensating balance has been computed for each level. • I • • n • • • ATTACHMENT D Compensating_ Balance Method of P_!Yin&_!.or Bank Services Anticipated Average Daf'iy Balance (compensatingoalance) required in the demand account at various Federal Funds Rate levels needed to adequately co1opensate the servicing bank. 'nle compensating balance will be adjusted either monthly or quartt:rly by mutual agree1oent be- tween the City and the Bank. All service charges are to be covered by the earnings credit afforded by the compensating balance. 'nlis is to include all normal transaction charges, wire transfers, returned item fees, pick up and delivery charge including armored car servictl, stop payment fees, purchase of deposit slips, magnetic tape of tran:,- actions, security custodial and reporting services, and other charges not enumerated. Federal Funds Compensating Federal Funds Compensating __ Ra~--Balance Rate Balance ------------- 5 130,000 542.00 13 1/2 67,000 754.00 5 1/2 120,000 550.00 14 65,000 758.00 6 110,000 550.00 14 1/2 64,500 775.00 ------- 6 1/2 100,000 542.00 15 64,000 800.00 7 95,000 554.00 15 l/2 63,000 814.00 ----------·-------- 7 1/2 94,000 587.00 16 61,000 813.00 8 92,000 613.00 16 l/2 60,000 825 .00 -------------------·-- 8 1/2 89,000 630.00 17 59,000 836.00 9 86,000 645.00 -----17 1/2 58,500 853.00 9 l/2 83,000 657.00 18 58,000 870.00 10 80,000 667.00 18 l/2 57,500 886.00 --------------····-····- 10 1/2 79,000 691.00 19 57,000 902.00 11 77,000 706 .00 19 l/2 56,500 910.00 -------- 11 l/2 75,000 719 .00 20 55,000 917.00 12 73,QOO 730.00 B.atea abovo 20% will be nc~ocl.- 12 l/2 71,000 740.00 ated i.n the unll.kdy event that 13 69,000 747.00 th .. y occur. Comm nta: ---- • I • • • • • C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE AGENDA ITEM March 17 1982 ~C, SUBJECT Official Ci Sal INITIATED BY Department of Community Development ACT I ON PROPOSED Adopt Rules for the Use of the City Mark and a New Official Cit Seal. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: When a new Planning Director was hired in 1970, he felt that Englewood needed a logo ---something with which the people in the c ommunity co uld identify. He presented his idea to the City Manager and the design firm, Unigraphics, was retained to de- velop a logo or mark for the City. Several designs were submitted and the one selected was our present City Mark. When people asked what it meant, they were told it was an abstract tree depicting "Englewood" ---"a wooded area". The following explanation was developed: "A tree grows and blooms with branches and leaves. In much the same manner a city branches out with streets and blooms with industry and homes. The circle represents order and protection. Jus t as a city is never perfect or complete, an imp rfect and incomplete "E" is contained in the mark. 'nle color green confirms life." Unig raph ics outlined a campaign to publicize the new Mark which included the distribu- tion of mall c rds which described the Mark, metal paper weights were made which w r giv n to el ct people, new City stationery was designed, a City flag with th Englewood-gr n Mark on a white field was made, clear plastic cubes in which th Mark was embedde d were made for V.I.P.'s, and the police cars were painted gr n and white with POLICE in large black letters on each aide of the car. At least on c r was painted with the letters "PO" on one door, and when it was left open th rest of the word that was visible was quite uncomplimentary to Englewood's fin t. Th police c rs w re later repainted t the request of Chief Holmes. Sm 11, bronze-colored tac-pins w re also wid ly distributed and most of th City officials nd employ es wor them in the camp ign to let everyone know th t Englewood h d new Mark. A larg chrome artifact was also made up to display th Mark nd aft r it was used at a couple of me tings in D nv r, dis played in th First Nation 1 Bank's lobby and in the Library, it was packed aw yin th stor g ar a. No on has room for its p rman nt display, and it looks lik a jungle-gym to th kiddi s, 10 it i som wh t of an attractive nuisance . • I • • • • • - On Sep tember 7, 1971, the City Council officially adopted the City Mark and the im- pression of the Mark as the corporate seal of the City. The adopting ordinance, Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1971, the Graphic Standards Manual, the Munic i pal Code, and the Council Minutes have all been reviewed and there is no direction given as to the use of the City Mark and there are no restrictions on its use set forth. The Mark was incorporated in the logo for the Englewood Ce ntennial-Bicente nnial ce l e bration and the Diamond Jubilee and bas been used on all of the City publica- tions. It has also appeared on some issues of the Englewood Sentinel. The 1971 newspaper clippings were gone through, and the only articles that were found high- lighted the painting of the Police cars incorporating the Mark and then quoted several people including Mayor Schwab. Mayor Schwab said he "hoped the new City Mark would serve to strengthen and enhance the community's sense of pride and i dentity." The City Manager said it would be applied to all city publications, vehicles and buildings. Recently, several Englewood organizations have asked if they could use the Mark in connection with some activity. The Englewood Jay-cees wanted to use it on a bumper s ticker to urge pride in Englewood, the Englewood Soccer Association wanted to in- co rporate the Mark in the design for the arm patch on the children's uniforms, and the Englewood Women's Golf Club has asked to use it on a publication. In each case, the request was made because the people in these organizations feel the sense of pride i n and identity with the City of Englewood that Mayor Schwab referred to. As to the impression of the City Mark as the Corporate Seal for the City, i t is not effective. It is difficult to see and it cannot be reproduced on a copy to show that the document carries the Official Seal. Since the Mark was developed to give Englewood an identity --the Englewood com- munity --and it has achieved that purpose; it would seem that its authorized use by valid Englewood o rgani zations would further that intent. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Because the impression of the City Mark do es not serve as an effective City Seal, it is r commended that a new seal be c on sidered whic h incorporates the City Mark, but which also would be capab le of being reproduced . 2. That Englewood social or service organizations which are incorporated and/or op rate under ch rt r, by-laws or a federal organization, be permitted to incorporate th City Mark with the logo of th t organization only for the purpose of identifying th organization as being from Englewood. It is recom- mended that some d partm nt or person be designated to register such use or to issu asp cial permit therefore. J. That the City Mark not be used for any commercial purposes, nor as a symbol of enrlors ment of any product or activity unless expressly authoriz d by th Englewood City Council. • I • • • • City of Englewood SOMETHING LIKE TIIIS MIGHT BE THE OFFICIAL CITY SEAL. • 3400 S. Elatl Street Englewood, Colorado 8011 o Phone (303) 761-1140 I . • - City of Englewood • THIS IS THE OFFICIAL CITY SEAL . • • • • • :MOOS . Elatl Street Englewood , Colorado 80110 Phone (303) 761 -1140 I . • - • • • - BY M!l'l«llUTY ORDINIUICE NO. 27, SERXES OP l97l AN ORDINANCE REPEAL:ni;; AND REENACTING SECTION 3, CHf'PTER 3 OP TITLE I, '69 E.M.C., Etn'ITLEO, "CORPORATE SEAL", ANO PROVIOI.NG FOR TKE ADOPl'ION OP *fHE MRX.•, OR LOGO, AS THE CORPORATE SEAL OP THE CITY OF Et«itzWCX>D, COLOMDO, MO CREATING A NBW SECTION THERE- TO, ENI'ITLEO, •ctTY MARX". WHEREAS, it is cuatcaary for a city to have a c orporate seal as a representa- tion of the character of that city, and WIIEREAS, tho City Council of the City of Englewood doc,.• 1.t dca1rablc to alter and update the C1ty •e aeal. t«'.>W, THEREFORE, BE .rr ORD1'1lG.D BY THE CITY OOUNCIL OP THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO , a& follows : Section l. That Sect i on 3, Chapter 3 of Title I, 1 69 I .M.D., entitled, "Corporate Seal", i • hereby repealed and in lieu thereof the following prov ision a are c nacLcd : !.:1::1• City Huk A City mark, or logo, is hereby eata.bl1.ahed •• a graphic repreaentat ion of the history and character of the City of Englewood. •Englewood• -an• •wooded place•, and depicts a.n oasis of treos . It is , therefore. appropr i ate that the City's mark be a representation of a tree within a circle of green 1.n accordance with the following : A t ree grow• and bloe>alS wi th branches and leave•. In much the SatW aanner a city branchea out with strr.cts ond blOOffl& with 1nduRtry and home •. 1'h o circle represents order and protection. Just •• a city ia never per- fect or ca.plete, an illperfect a nd incQC1Plete •z• ia contained in the mark. The color green conf i rroa l i fe. A roanual of graphic standards. wh ich i ncorporates the m&rk and typical appl ications thereof. la to be u.inta ined in the official fil .. of the Office of the City Clerk. Sect1.on 2. That CNlpter l of Title I, 1 69 &.M.C. i• hereby n.ended by adc11n9 a new secti on to be n\albered l-J-4. wh ich HCtion reads •• follow•: ~-Corporate Seal The corporate •e•l of the City ahall be an iaprea- liOI\ of tha City -rk u hareinbefor• deacril>ed, Introduced, read in full and paaaed on firat read ing on th• 16th day of Auguot, 1971. Publi•hed •• a 8111 for an Ordinance on the 18th day of August, 1971. ~ad by title and pa••ed on final read1ng on the 7th day of September, 1971. Publuhed by title u Ordinance No. 27, SeriH of 1971 on th• 15th day of Septeaber, 1971. !;'; t-.-, ' • ;;: •.. , -I ""yor I, ltephel\ A. Lyon, do hareby certify that the above and foregoing ii a true. ccu.rate and coaplete copy of an ordinence, pa,aaed on final ••ding a.no pub- 11.•h•d L,y lLt.le •• Onhnance No. 21, Sera.•• of 1971. • I • • - • • • • 1-:\-;\ 1-:1,1 : C ITY MAI> The mapentitled "Official Map of the City of Englewood, Colorado, as pr.:i parnd by . . . . . . ..... , as Director of Public Works for the CiLy of E nglewood and dated the .... day of .. . ., 19 ...... ," shall be und is hereby adopted as the Official Map of the City. The Official Map shall be iden ti fied by the signature of the Director of Public Works attested by the City C ll'rl <, and bearing the seal of the City under the following words :"Thia is t.o ce rtify that this is the Official Map refem,d to in Section 1-3·1 of the "69 E ngl ewood Municipal Code" together with the date of most -1t certification hy th e Oiroctor of Public Works. If changes ttre made in City boundaries by a n ,icx ut ion to or disconnection from the City, such changes shall be entered on t he Official Map promptly, with an entry thereon as follows : "On (datel by oH ,cial action of the City Council (District Court if disconnection I the following c hanges were made in the Official Map : (brief description of nature of change I," which entry shall be signed by the Director of Public Works and attested by the City Clerk . The Official City Map shall be located in the office of the Director of Public Works . 1-3-2 : REPLACEMENTOFOFFICIALCITY MAP In the event the Official City Map becomes damaged, destroyed, loat, or difficult to interpret because of the nature or number of chanpe and additions, the City Council may by resolution adopt a new Official City Map which shall supersede the prior Official City Map. The new Official City Map may correct drafting or other errors or omissions in the prior Official City Map , but no such correction shall have the effect of amending the original plot of the City of Englewood on file In the office of the Secretary of State together with plota ,howing annexations to or disconnection from the City since that time. The new Official City Map shall be identified by the signature of the Direct.or of Public Works attested by the City Clerk, and bearing the seal of the City under the following words : "This is to certify that this Official City Map supenedee and r eplaces the Official City Map certified by the Director of Public Works of E nglewood on the day of . ,19 . . . " Unleea the prior Official City Map has been lost or has been totally destroyed, the prior map or uny s ignificant parts thereof remaining, shall be preserved, topUler with all ava il able records pertaining to ita certification and amendmenta. CITY MARK 1-3-3 : A City mark , or logo , is hereby established as a graphic ...-tauon of t he hi s tory and character of the City of Englewood. "E11p1wood" mNlll "wooded place ," and depictl an oa1ia of treN, It is, therefore. appropriate that the City's mark be a rep..-ntetion of a tree within a circle of p..i in ac- co, dance with t h follow ing : A tree grows and blooms with branchee and I aves . In muc h the aam manner a city branch• out with 1treeta and bloom• wiLh industrv 1111d horn . T he circle repreeenta order and protection. Juat u a city is never 0perfect or co mpl te, an imperfect and incomplet.e "E " 11 contained an Lh m rk . T h color green co nfirms life. 11 Ht · l ·1'1 THE 1969 E.M.C., AS AMENDED. • , I • • - • • • • 1-:1-4 A manual of graphic standards, which incorporat.es Lht! m:irk un<l Lypic;11 applications thereof, is to be maintained in Lhe official files of the Office of Ll,t• City Clerk. (Ord . No. 27 , Series 1971) 1-3-4 : CORPORA TE SEAL The corporate -1 of the City shall be an impression of the City Mark u hereinbefore deeaibed . (Ord . No. 27, Swiee 1971)1 12 II • I •Tl • I • • n • - THE DEi' i ................... ,_L~ • • ENGLEWOOD l'OLICE CHIEF JACK CU.HY, LIFT, AND MAYOA ELMH SCHWAS, IJGHT, VIEW CAIi Hughe, is president of Un igrophica which designed the New "City Mork" thot will be making further oppeoroncel. En:glewood Modernizes Police Car Maries ENGLJ,;WOOD-t:n;lewo<>d '• new poU ce can llave ar- rived oe the mod scene, Slallley u. Dlal, city •uacer, nW this w~k. · TIie lradllloaal wbite car willl Ille lar&e lllleld, Dial ,.Id, has' glvea way lo a lwo-loee arran1emeat la sreu ... wlille with a rtew "City Mark " promilleatly di played • Ille rear I llden. • Ron H1Agbe1 , pr sideot ol Uni1raplllc1, a Deaver cerpo,.. lion fO< vi 1Aal co mmunication , desl&aed Ille --ii, .,. explala , "A tree crows Ud bloema wl• ~ aMI leave • la m1Acll Ille aa'Dle manaer a city hrudNI •t wbla tr els ad blooms with lnd1A1try ud liom•. TIie drcle re,- r DIS order and protecUon . J11 I a a c ity la aever perlect or complete , n lmperr ct and Incomplete '.E' ii ~ la lh e ni rk . The color rr«n conlirms Iii ." r. . . --, ... ,, .. , / -(r,/; , ' E•~leweed Pellce CIIW Jack Cla.a,y aa1'1 will, Ille le- trNOK:tlea ef Ille -..rt UNl ,... lllylla&, Ille ,..e, e •parlmfft will al• nperlaeat whit dine dlffe1wu 1be1 ol a11tom•bll 1111a ya.,._.. eea,ect, Ille ialermediaie, • Ille 1&aallanl. • .. Ac,e11n1&oe r-* al •raUac NaCl UNl 'perfw-M.'e will lie kept ef aacla liN .. .....,. la _.,. .. cleterllliee wlllcll la &lie -l 1e1a1ar«I ... IMlt ~alac >be e( Clll' (er lite ......... la .. flllwe. 4 -li&II& UNl 1lrea 1y1-la ... afleedw a ...... lie alldl ... ~- Wa ...... ,.,, Clilal Oallty ..w. ... yw Sdlwa ..w Ila ...,.. ..... elt,-aan ....w -le 1&Naalllaa ... ---...... _,,,,i, ..... " prWe ud ldealky. • Dial ..W IAla -aut wlM Ila evDlllully .,.U. 1M 11U ti~)' ,.Wicll~ wWclea, .... IMliWlaca. .• I • • - • • • • C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE March 31, 1982 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT Street Sweeper Bid D INITIATED BY Kells Waggoner and Gary Higbee ACTION PROPOSED Approval of bid for street sweeper Background: The 1982 budget for the Capital Equ i pment Replacement Fund included an amount of $62,414 for a replacement street sweeper. Bi ds were received on March 12, 1982 for one (1) 1982 street sweepe r: BIDDER Booth Rouse H. w. Moore MAKE & MODEL FMC-Wayne Model 2-12 Mobil 2TE3 Faris Machinery MacDonald Equipment Power Motive Conclusions: NO BID NO BID NO BID h comparison has b n made of th with treet sw epers, i.e., fuel ing results: Gs Cost Per Year-Average MPG 1 500 miles FMC-Wayn 2,19 3,413 Mob l 1.15 ,499 d y-to-d costs and Broom Cost Per Mil .62¢ .93¢ BID EST. DELIVERY $62,309.00 20 weeks 57,422.84 30-45 days y operating costs associated broom costs,with th follow- Broom Cost Per y r-Av rag 6 1 500 Mile 5-Yr. To al 4,030 37,215 6 ,045 62,720 I • • - • • • • -2- The miles-per-gallon and broom costs per mile are actual 1981 costs associated with existing machi nes in the Street Division. The figures are based upon current prices and do not reflect any increases for inflation. Although the Mobil sweeper used in the comparison is three years older than the FMC-Wayne, the 1.15 miles per gallon is consistent with the latest data on MPG from the Mobil Sweeper Company. Both the FMC and the Mobil sweepers will do the sweeping job quite well for us, but the $25,000 difference in fuel and broom costs over the five-year period is substantial. Recommendation: We recommend that the street sweeper bid be awarded to Booth Rouse in the amount of $62,309 for an FMC-Wayne Model 2-12 • KW/lo I • • - I • • • RESOLUTION NO. 20 SERIES OF 1982 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL FUND AND THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FUND 1982 BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, desires to make certain changes within the Public Improvement Fund; and WHEREAS, surplus funds remain from the General Fund; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood wishes to use their surplus funds within the Public Improvement Fund; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood Self-Insurance Fund has a reserve for Police Professional Liability that is no longer required as adequate insurance has been placed in effect to replace requirements for this reserve; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood wishes to provide for a DenvPr-Arapahoe County Fiscal Flowq Study within the General Fund. NCM, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following appropriation of funds are hereby made in the Public Improvement Fund: Source of Funds General Fund Transfer Self-Insurance Fund Total Application of Funds Little Dry Creek Methan Gas Conversion Total Section 2. $284,622 275,000 $559,622 $717,622 (158,000) $559 z 622 Th following appropriation of funds are hereby made in the General Fund. Sourc of Funds Fund Balance Application of Funds PIF Transfer D nv r-Ar p ho Co Fiscal Flows Study Total $290,622 $284,622 6,000 $290,622 • I • • - I • • • • • Page 2 Section 3. That the City Manager and Director of Finance are hereby authorized to make the above changes to the 1982 budget of the City of Englewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this~ day of __ A_p_r_i_l ___ , 1982. Mayor ATTEST: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and co~lete copy of Resolution No.~. Series of 1982. Gary R. Higbee • I • • - 'l'O: FROM : UATE: SUBJECT: • • • AnJy McCown, Cily Manager Gary Higbee, Director ~f,...F.).\na97.-7 ~ LY-' .0 ~,-April 1, 1982 . Revenues Available To Be Appropriated/Reappropriated At Council's Discretion General Fund Listed b e low is a suUU11ary of the 1981 General Fund buJgec comparing budgeLed revenues, expenditures, and transfers to actual. Also, shown is the projected General Fund balance as of 1-1-82 in the amount of $1,864,216, ~f which City Council passed a resolution authorizing $864,216 to be transferred to the PIF. The actual audited December 31, 1981 fund balance is $290,622. Please note on a memorandum I sent to you February 11, 1982 (See Attachment A) I indicated the anticipated fund balance in the General Fund a s of December 31, 1981 to be $498,441. The ciiffcrence between the $49 8,441 and Lhc $29 0,622 tha t I au1 currently providing is as follows: a. Ccnl!r a l Fund Lransfer co the Golf Course in Lhc aUK>wH of $100,4 34 wa s not included in the February llLh weUK>randum. b . The $100,000 Council transferred from the General Fund to the ScrvlCentcr Fund for the auLomobile naLural ga s conversion kiL;; was noL included in the February 11th memorandum. Of the $290 ,606 currently un appropria ted, Council Dilly want to consider the (allowing: a. Currently the Library Dep a rtment is in the process of conducting a library compute r study and as a result Council may in the near future wish Lo appropriate funds Lo purchase computer hardware and softw r for the Library. b. If Council d sires to conduct th Denver-Arapaho County Fiscal Flow Study for approxi111ately $6,000, they y wlsh to approprlaLe an additional $6,000 of unappropriatud funds co th ir budg t. !'or the month of January and F bruary, 1982, the City has collected $121,493 in al s nd u Lax abov our proj cted budget. At thl t I would not r collllllend th s excess r v nus be appropri t din ith r th Gen ral Fund or any oth r fund as If l iL is extremely too arly in the 1982 budg t cycl • I • • - • Page 2 Andy McCown, City Manager April 1, 1982 Balance, January 1, 1981 Received Total Expenditures Transfer Total llalance, Dccembc~· 31, 1981 Transfer to PI1" Balance after PIF transfer Public Improvement Fund • • • Actual $ 1,435,687 131472 1068 14,907,755 12,131,903 621 1014 12,752,917 2,154,838 864 1216 $ 11290 1622 Budget Revised Difference $1,435,671 13 1221 1781 $250 1287 14,657,452 250,303 12,372,222 240,319 4211014 (200,000) 12,793,236 40,319 1,864,216 290,622 8641216 $ l 1000 1000 In 1981 City Council appropriated $300,000 within the Public Improvement Fund for the purposes of purchasing a methane gas scrubber unit in order to operate the Englewood vehicle fleet, Plans now are for the Bi-City Treatmen~ Plant to utilize all of its own methane gas production. At this time, $158,000 of the aforementioned $300,000 has not been ear11111rkcd for other PIF projects an<l is available (or reappropriation. Self-Insurance Fund $275,000 within the Self-Insurance Fund is available for reappropriation, For a period of time in the mid 70 1 s to late 70's, insurance carriers were not writing police professional liability insurance coverage. 'Il\creforc, the CiLy o( Englewood sel(-Cunded for this type of insurance . Starting in 1979, insurance carriers ch nged the policy and al that time, Lhe City of Englewood purchased police prof ssional liability insurance from an insurance carrier. Presently, we arc till carrying $275,000 in the self-insurance health fund. • I • • • • • r ; .. r:: . tli o 1~. A N _ o u M AT'£ACHMJ.::NT A Antly McCos,m, Ci.Ly l'iana,;cr i,.R0,11: lJA'L",•,: l'°cl.>1:uury 11, l.9U:t. 1\.t: oich,a"'nt: vl in a lc:t:ccr I rc:cuivc<l £row Nr. ,11ic:,a,!l C. Dunn \HXII l·ioor;:, J u.can an<l Co,:ip,my, lnc. o::fc~ring to sell the ruorcy,a1~c on thc l.::ngll.:wool.l 1.i.t y pi:ofHtt·t:y back co Ch1,: City. As ~ir. Duma indicutl.la on l··~·ln:uary l, 1'.H\2, thL• 1,rincip;.l b~lancc clue or par a1J10unc Jue on tllc City Hul.l. 1>L'O- uurcy wao $602,454.50. ~he note is being offcrod co the City for thc t:ocnl dollar a1:1ount of ~34G,4ll or $57.50 per $100 of loan l.talancc (uc n diucount of 42 1/2% from par). I ;.1:;kcu :1r . SC(:vc Bell with Hanifcn, l1nhoi:.E , Inc., cht! Cicy 1 ~1 bon<l ti- n;m c :u1l advisory firm, to provide the City with an opinion on th.: vuluc: t'i: t:t1i:. t:ypc! of 1:iort~ar,e inu trument. l1r. Bell indicates ·chat it Wt! wit.h u, conside,: raaking an offer on the mort&ai.;e note that $50.10 per $100 or ~.::en , 82~. 70 woul.<l pot.sibly be closer to the true 111arket value: or thi~ cyp\.! o; insL:ru.nc.mt. (!.ct! l\t:tachment 112) . 'c,:,!; .i.bl C 01) t i 011:;: -··-·-··· ·-· ·--~·-·---·- l. Du 1101.: pui:chu:;~ note -in which th<: City will µay princip:Ll ;.i11J ) u1tc11·,!:.1 L p..iy111,.i 11L :, cot:al.ina $903,370.33 over the nc.:xl.: .l:ii:L:..:"'n y,,,,c:.,. :L l'un:nutiL' 1:110 , ot•: at a necociaco.::J 1:a1:c.: :.ouic.:whcn.: lH.:twe::1.:n th<.: ~· 10 i. , OOC1 ..ind t•H' $ 3'•", 000 pn.cc: r..mr.~!. ll Lnv City 11.il L pL·opcrt:y i~ t-,arc oJ.: the 1>li1n::; foi: .. n\.! Jown- L,A1 1, uc.•v..:.Lc,,n,1..:11L proj..:cc , al: ::.01110.:: µ01.nc LL) Che i:ucur\.! W\.! w.1..ll n,~c,d to call th<: City Uall prop~rty morcg ;~c and at thac cim\.! Lnc..: morc;,,ar.c.: not:c hol<l~r most likely will w.i.nt the pnr amount: of th1i mort1~ug.: noto pluc p"nalty provioiona ior cal"'X1.·n·r.-th"c- ,tot'"'·. 2 . Ar,nll>lll.y th•! C.i.Ly pays $58,7:!0.lO vrincl.pl\l anJ inu•r,:ut (H"o.::- t11L111:1u on tlilu I Ott•. LL wo Jo not call Lill.! 11Qtt..: ovo.::L' the nl.lxt 5.1 ycnro, we.: will puy $301,029 or in 5.9 years we will pay $346 ,4ll. , ~· HI 1·t •,; t.) ( :•\lt ad !.,: . ... l. • :or p~riod of time in the mid to latt..: '10a. 1.nc~rancc cu rtiuru w~ru not writin~ police prof"osionul liub1.lity ins ur11ncc covcr:,w:. Thoroforc, t:hc City of I::n11,lcwQQd scli- (undcd ior chi~ typo of insurance. Starting in 1979, in- 1,1n-,1nc<i c, rricr:. ch nged the policy; ,rn<.l ac chat: time, t:hc • I • • -• • • Andy 1'icCown , City Nanag~r ,t,ortgag c ?l ote on City llall Property F ebruary 11, 1982 l' 111',t! 2 City of Enr.l~woocl pu\"chasecl policu pro ::i.:s:;ional L.ubility i..nu urancc covui:.i;,,c irom an irasuruncc ca n:i cr. l'rc.::.;cntly, we; ai:.·c: :.;till cal:."'rying $215,000 in tl1c :.clZ-in:;urancc health t unJ that could be used for purchasin11, the morts,•,aP,.:! nocc. Additional revenue~ between $26,000 -311,000 would bu ru- quii:c<l frolli altcl:."'nutivc source•. 2 . $300,000 availal>le from the Public lmprovc111ent 1:und that wa~ ullocat'-~d C'or .. mectu:mc ~as Hcrubber unit in 01·.Jc.:i: tu opc:ruti.: t::111 ~:i.,!woocl vchicl<: flec:c. Plans now ..iru 1:oi: th.: Ui-City 'rrc<.lt- racnt Plant to utilize all of itG own methane p.as productiun. Lb~ af:orP.mentionod $300,000 ia now available to be rcappropri- ;-1t!o<l at Council' r.; discretion. 3 . As indicated in the 1932 bud~cc, the; Ci cy proj cc C<.!ci to have: .i f un<l balance as of December 31, 1961, 01' $1,864,216 o.l: whicl1 CJ.ty Council passed a resolution authori"ing Sa64,216 to be transferred to the Public Improvement Fund. The actual un- a11cliteci l>ccember 31, 1981, fund balance is $2,36:l,657 or $l11Jll,411l mor~ than was anticipated. The $4')3,441 w.i:> uc- L·ivi.:ll by: Q) Sli'U,219 ~ru ater revenues than ancicipa tc<l. b) $320,000 l>uug ct savinB:.. c; C:lfoRAL FUND 1981 ~£._t~al Uu<.J1~ut Revis.:_£ l)l.L [. 11 :I J ,l ll C <,• • 1 /) /;ll l ,435,67l l , '• J 5 , C. 71 ,~<..: C.<.! i. v,.~d :i .,.oo .ooo 13,221 '/l:l "JU. £1 9 T<J L<, 1 vi:-u:fs:-cW'i '!---,·'~···,· 'l.'iif-;'il-<.J" ll•, 657 ,4!>2 i·:;:p1:1tcJ i. LllL"C ::; li!,052,000 12,372,222 320,000 'J'C.tll:JJ:•!C 421 OJ.Ii 4l l, 01,, "(., L:1 J 1 :t;-4·/3~·oyi; n-;t9:f;i3e;· ·.sz-o·;·ou-Cf 1' .. J t,dttCC.:, l'I./:, i. /ii] 2,3 62,657 1,364,216 4~~. 4.1. 'i'cc'.in:;~,:l' to ) if __ __!1~216 g(>/i, 2.1.6 ,,.-.\ l . . .1: t;r,c >l i•' tr,m:..i:er l ,493,441 1,000.000 ,~~J ~u dJv isu uu to how oi: if you wish co vroccu<.J on uul>jo t >~oµo~ul. • I • • - -i' !< 0 C t. ,-, :-! i, T I O .• 'ri!f!:i ~s. n :c o ,;nit1 n of t e profc!.:; on al sc r..:t ry, a ope · 1.i l ..,.ccit h,HI l>c<:n oes1 ,;n..ite .:is ·Profess1on.:il Sccrct.:ir1 s neck• ;· tu o n ,;in t or ond sponso r , Profcss1on<1l Sccrct.:ir1c s Int urn,1t l on ..1 l I nJ nlll::!U::AS, ln ;.,a:pin9 w1t h t h e best tr.:i d1 t1on of thc1r profoou ion , ec c r..:t rh:u ore cccp t1n<; v1t<1l rcspons1b1 l1 t cs a nd ore pcrforQin~ 1 0· rt nt ro cs 1n offices in ull fields of cm co11 0 ; ond hllt::IU:i>S, to re oc;nhc t doln9 thuir Jo bo cf ectivcly un th1u ;::;.,,;ntor1ou11 career , p rofcss1on.:il sccrct.:ir1es now to cncour.:iyc others to enter !,On , Tllt.:kf;i'Olt l::, I, t::UGI::?;[; L. OTI , :-1 y r o t h e C 1 t y o: En11lu , Coloro , do her b:,• pr cl.:i1m the week of Apn.l l t ;,pr 11 H, 1982 .111 in tho Ci ty of En 1 le 4nd uk thot bus1ncs , ind s tr y , yo vcrn- QCnt, cd cation , no pro t eai ne )Oln 1n 1ts rccogn1t1 n.