The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1982-04-19 (Regular) Meeting Agenda• - • • • 0 _ City Council Meeting -Regular _ April 19, 1982 • • • • - CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 19, 19 2 RESOLUTION# 21, 22 , 23 , 24, 25 , 26 ORDINANCE# 22, 23, 24 , 25, 26 , 27 , 28 0 I • • J Ii • • • AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL APRIL 19, 1982 --c lfj I 7 :30 P .M. Call to order , invocation by Reverend Vance Willett, First Baptist Church, 3170 South Broadway, pledge of allegiance by Boy Scout Troop #115 and #154, and roll call . \ tg '1.. ,u {,.- 1. Minutes . (a) Minutes of the special meeting of March 29, ~{~ 1982. (Copies enclosed .) l j ' 2 . Pre-Scheduled Visitors . (Please limit your presen- tation to 10 minutes .) ( -- 3. 4 . (a) Ms . Maida Navis , Di rector, Inter-Faith Task Fo r ce, and De Land Pe t erson , Grand Marsh a l l of "In t er -Faith Walk" will be present t o a cc ep t a pro clamation proclaiming April 25 , 198 2 a s "In t er -Faith Walk Day ." (Copie s en closed .) (b) Mr. John S. Cy b o rn , 2 906 West Union Av enu e, will be pre s ent to d iscus s 2700 and 290 0 blocks of West Union Avenue . (Cop i e s enclosed.) Other Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to 5 minutes.) Public Hearing. ~ 5. r/ Communications -No Action R comm nded . (a) Hinut s of the Planning and Zoning Commission m ting of March 16, 1982 . (Copies enclos d .) • (b) Hinut s of t h e Liquor Liens Authority m ting of April 7, 1982. (Copie enclosed.) (c) Minut s of the P rks nd R er ation Commission m ting of April 8, 1982 . (Copi s nclosed .) I • • • • - Page 2 April 19, 1982 Agenda l rU-Ui I 5. Communications -No Action Recommended (Continued). (d) Memorandum from the Director of Employee Relations to the City Manager concerning his attendance at the NPELRA Conference in Clearwater Beach, Florida. (Copies enclosed.) 6 . Communications -Action Recommended. (a) Council Communication from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of April 6, 1982 concerning an amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Section 22.4-10 and 22.4-11. (Copies enclosed.) (b) Council Communication from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of April 6, 1982 concerning the findings of fact of the Com- prehensive Zoning Ordinance, Section 22.4-10 and 22.4-11. (Copies enclosed.) 7. City Attorney. , , [ Bills for Ordinances. (a) Bill prohibiting meter customers from reverting to flat rate accounts. (Copies enclosed.) (b) j. ~ (c) Bill approving a contract between the City of Englewood, Colorado, and the Denver Regional Council of Governments for the provision of services by the City in the execution of the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program and for reimbursement by the Council of Governments to the City of eligible project costs not exceeding ~10,000 . (Copies enclosed.) Bill m nding S ction 7 of Chapter 1 .5 of Title XII, of the Assessment Deferral Ordinance of th Englewood Municipal Code of 1969 as amended limiting payment of interest to a ten-ye r p riod of tim. (Copies enclosed.) Bill m nding Section 7 of Chapter 1.5 of Titl XII, of th Assessm nt Deferral Ordinance of th Engl wood Municipal Code of 1969 as m nd d providing th t no interest shall b p id on ad f rr d 888 88m nt. (Copi 8 nclos d .) I • • I r_ • • • Page 3 April 19, 1982 Agenda 7. City Attorney (Continued). (e) ~,1t :J... lo P. .. l,,. (f) ')J.,fi-'1 '-p -J l • Bill amending Section 7 of Chapter 1.5 of Title XII, of the Assessment Deferral Ordinance of the En~lewood Municipal Code o f 1969 as amended limiting payment of interest to an amount equal to the assessment deferred . (Copies enclosed .) Bill approving an agreement with various cities of the County of Arapahoe and Brown, Bortz and Coddington relating to Denver /Arapahoe County's Fiscal Flow Study. (Copies enclosed.) Other Matters. / t <.&~ 1 ' ·l l < 't.+' I c-/ l ,, u (h) Opinion and Ruling -Soon Ye Scott d/b /a New Tokoyo Massage vs. City of Englewood . (Copies enclosed.) 8. City Manager. (a) h l}-1, (>. (b) I # (c) Council Communication from the Director of Public Works concerning the bus for the Farmer's Marke t. (Copies enclosed.) Council Communication from the Director of Finance concerning the 1981 General Fund Budget and the 1981 Golf Course Fund Budget. (Copies enclosed.) Manager's Choice. 9. General Discussion . D (a) Mayor's Choice. -(!..1) l. A ( ( I (b) Council Member's " 10 . Adjournm nt. /))" (2~~µ:~ I t. ) (( A.ND't MC CO Ci Man r I • • • - • • \.. . u. ( t. ; ) ' / I " -I t- r" 3 { J ,11-\. ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abst ' a,n H1nnay Neal Fltzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I ~(' lU T ' ful<.__.; 11<..€.U '.l " ~ 'ctf- ~' ~' .__,; vJy r 4 tH /-7~ ~ i-)}l ((l{i,../ I . . • • • ·-i • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qdav V Neal 1-- Fltznatrick L--- Wei st l--- Rilo 1- Bradshaw £- Otis v • I • • • • - • • Moved Seconded v [7 (~ CJ n 2 11 I ROLL CALL H1Qaav Neal Fl tzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis • • • Ayes Nay Absent Abstain I I I 1 7 1 I • • I r-1 Moved V ' ./ l,l ' c · .:.) • • • ROLL CALL Seconded Ayes Nay Absent H1<1dav I ..-Neal I Fl tzoatrick Wei st I Ai lo l Brad shaw I Otis ( c_lD J21 1 0 J 7> ,, 1 !J.1 / n ' tr' /oJ._ ./ I Abstain ({ I t 1 r;;l ') ft,i ),. t< )) ~ . I ~~ ,I '-( IA -----I<-• J J l t, c.,C~~ I I & )/ ) )J • ~ < ti ;,· / j Ir. , ;. UJ-l ...-.l-, ,e• t { 17 , 1/ -. ... I ..__. I • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qday { --- Neal ' Fi tzoatrick l--- Wei st v Bi lo Bradshaw v Otis v I • • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1gdav Neal Fi tzoat rick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis I ) / /1 , ;} Cj (' : Z, l { )U t k >1_.lL,,_. ( I -I:_ ( ':/)J-t1.. (' L t u ~l t.. J ( ,. ~l' .., <) Ct, > (. I ( ) ~j 1 1 .J I~ I I \, f ' ( V ~/)L C It (( .J ., /, I I (~ / . t) l , __ I ,, •• t ( ( • l'J 21 14' ) /(" {) ....-:::: c, ..J /., d I • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1a<lav Neal Fitzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis .f I [ • I • • • - • ,· • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain V Hindav I ---;-_;;;; Neal ( Fl tzoatrick -Weist l Ai lo ( Bradshaw I Otis l / (I < ' J,0 I • I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Absent Abstain H1oday I Neal I Fltzoatrick -- Weist I Bi lo I ..........-Bradshaw I Otis I I C (. • I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1qday I ...... Neal I Fl tzoatrick Weist I t/ Bi lo 1 Bradshaw l Otis I t · I • • • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab st ai n V' HIQClaV Neal Fi tznatrick Weist -Bi lo Bradshaw Otis ( j 4 t r :J I) '-"" ) ,, 'lU V t ' u J I QI ~ J / t;~,-/ ' u I I --;) I' ( c.~J /" ~ ./'-" ,. .,,.. ; . ,. ... __, .> )1-,; ., L l" l<A. ,r, ; 'J,I 7 - I . • • • • - • • ROLL CALL ved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H igday - Neal -Fi tzoat rick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw - Otis - I • • • • - • • ~ )c; I I J" , , , f ) ROLL CA LL /J I " / 0 /'' I lj ,, 'i / -/ ,,:C 1 Moved Seconded Ayes Na y Abse n t Abstain H1 qday -- Neal Fl tzoatrick - Wei st -y Bi lo -Bradshaw Ot is 7b • I • • • - • • u r, I 'l ROLL CALL ,j I I ·' 50 Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Absta i n H1oday Neal Fl tznatrick Weist Bi lo ~ Bradshaw Otis 7c c_ I I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1oe1av -Neal - Fitzoatrick Wei st - V Bi lo - V Bradshaw - Otis - • I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain -H1 m av Neal - Fl tzoatrick Weist y Bi lo -Bradshaw - Otis - -- I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1oday v Neal ..-- Fl tzoatrick - Weist Bi lo V Brads haw -Oti s - • I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain 111 nciav Neal Fltzoatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis -7~ I t< } l J )) < -/ J / v .,, '1 ..__/ 0 1 l "'\ J I ) ( I I I (") J L r.t ~ " I • • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain ~,aaav -- Neal - Fl tznatrick - Wei st v Ri lo V' Bradshaw - Otis - I • • • • - • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconde d Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1 qda y Neal Fl tzoat r i c k Wei s t Bi lo Bradshaw Otis /;) ,1 ,21l<-j \_,_/ ) A;' I\.. ,. ) I / {; -f / -1 l / J-I ~ -I • , ~ -~ ~ y Ct l 2 / c J 0 l I J_, I . . • • • - • • ROLL CALL l'loved Secon ded Aye s Na y Ab s e nt Ab st a in V' H1 g day i ,---Neal 1 Fi tzoat rick - Wei s t Bi lo Bradshaw Ot is I • • • • - • - ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain H1gday - Neal - Fltzoatrick - Weist ---.. V Bi lo 7 ,_.,,. Bradshaw ( Otis 1 ) /Lt \JC /f _;L I I • • • - . -- I I I • • • • ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay H1n<1av Neal Fi tznatrick Weist Bi lo Bradshaw Otis a_ -GI} l..< {,/ ) C..-' I 4' ., I -I '-.Y-~ 1 /1 I l t. l r ,/ .,., I J • Absent Abstain 1 l 1)1 /' ) , G L6 ··- '-" 'J ~ I' I I . • SPECIAL MEETING: • • - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO March 29, 1982 I I).__ The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in special session on March 29, 1982, at 7 :3 0 p.m. Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order. The invocation was given by Council Member Thomas Fitzpatrick. The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Otis. Mayor Otis called for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. Absent : None. The Mayor declared a quorum present. * * * * * * Also present were : City Manager Mccown City Attorney DeWitt Director of Public Works Waggoner Director of Engineering Services Diede Deputy City Clerk Watkins * * * * * * COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEAR- ING TO CONSIDER A SPECIAL I~PROVEMENT DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD TO BE DESIGNATED AS PAVING DISTRICT NO. 28. Council Me mb r Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, th vot result d as follows : Ayes : Nays : Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Weist, Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis. Non • The Mayor declar d the motion carried. City Hang r HcCown gave introductory r marks regarding t h history nd philo ophy of formulating paving districts, nd the proc dur s by which a district is created. Hr. Mccown stated the th ory under which th City h s operat d ia th district stands • I • • March 29, 1982 ,Page 2 • • • alone and is not supported by any general fund tax monies. Tile City will sell bonds to borrow the money to pay for the district. Tile City provides certain guarantees in the work. The final assess- ments are usually computed after the work is done. Tile property owner will have an opportunity to appear at a hearing about a year f rom now to register objections or protests on the amount of actual a ssessment. Following the hearing Council will determine the final a ss es sment for each property. Mr. Mccown then explained how pay- ment could be made. Mr. Mccown stated the schedule of improvements is coordinated with utility companies to endeavor to have other re- pairs completed before the street is repaired. Mr. Mccown stated individuals may have a private contractor of their own choosing do the cement work. Tile work must be done in a period of time as specified so the City can determine whether or not to include the work in the general bid. Mr. McCown stated an assessment deferral program was available for certain people meeting certain income levels . Mr. McCown stated the income rates will be amended at the Council meeting of April 5th to be more liberal than the present rates . Mr. McCown stated the program allows the deferral of assess- ment payment until the property is sold. Gary Diede, Director of Engineering Services, presented the technical aspects of the proposed paving district including the methods of assessment. Mr. Diede discussed the costs for which the City is responsible and those for which the resident is responsihl e. Mr. Diede pointed out 851 of the streets have been in a paving dis- trict . The goal is to place all streets in a district to bring them all up to standard. Mr. Diede stated the City pays for extra width nd xtr thickness required for improvements. Tile City pays for in tersections, tree removal and replacement, and storm drainage. Mr . Diede stated the policy regarding tree removals was if there are trees lifting out concrete, the trees can be left in, but the prope r ty owner must sign a waiver not holding the City re- sponsible if the tree should die after the improvements. In the event the tree dies, then the property owner would have to take out the tre • Mr. Diede stated anyone could hire a licensed, bonded contractor to do the concrete work ; and this is encouraged if the work can be done cheaper . If the property owner resides t th property, he can do the work himself but will have to meet the City's standards. The property owner must secure a permit to do the work from the Engineering Department. Mr. Diede stated the permit must be taken out by June 1st and work must be com- pleted by June 23rd. Mayor Otis explained the purpose of the hearing and the format that would be followed. Mayor Otis stated general questions would be answered at this hearing and specific ones would be answered at a later date. • I • • March 29, 1982 ,Page 3 • • - Mayor Otis opened the floor for comments concerning the paving district and commenced with the 2700 block of South Cherokee. Lee R. Jones, 2740 South Cherokee, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Jones stated he was spokesman for those residents of the 2700, 2800, 2900, 3000, 3100, and 3200 blocks of South Cherokee. Mr. Jones stated the area was in an improvement district in 1936 and finished in 1941. Mr. Jones stated the street does not need upgrading to present standards unless the weight limit of the traffic is increased. Mr. Jones stated the stop signs control the traffic to a certain extent. Mr. Jones stated the street has not been maintained, surface-wise, for several years. Mr. Jones stated the timing for the district was poor in conjunc- tion with the general economic conditions existing in the coun- try today. A financial burden would be placed on the elderly (mostly widows) and new families now moving into the neighbor- hood. Mr. Jones stated with the exception of two residents, most of the neighborhood would have to use the deferral program. Mr. Jones stated the property owners are faced with property re- eval uation and the state legislature has not decided whether it will be on the assessed value. Mr. Jones stated the residents are also faced with a possible increase in school levy. Mr. Jones submitted a petition of 143 signatures r,rotesting the district. Mr. Jones noted two people marked 'yes" in favor of the district because they felt there was nothing they could do to stop it. There were no other comments on the 2700 block of South Cherokee. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2800 block of South Cherokee. Ron Atkinson, 2806 South Cherokee, appeared before Council . Mr. Atkinson why property taxes re not used to pay for paving districts. City Manager Mccown tated when a Council passed an or- dinance back in the '50s that t up special assessment programs to pay off street itoprovements, the theory was that the prop rty owner that abutts that particular street, alley or sidewalk would pay th full cost of the improvem nts to that particular stre•t. There would be no subsidizing of taxpayer money going to the im- provements of that particular ar • There is no portion of th City's mlll levy or sales tax or any other tax that th City levies that ls put ln to subsldiz th paving districts with th only exception bing for thos portions that the City p ys its lf wh ich are th inters er.Lons nd any portion that abutts City property. • I • • - March 29, 1982 Page 4 • • • There no other comments on the 2800 block of South Cherokee. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2900 block of South Cherokee. Jim Blair, 2981 S,)uth Cherokee, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Blair stated he wa9 against the proposed discrict based on the high unemployment and the poor economy. Mr. Blair why re- pair the street when utility companies will only come in and tear it up for their repairs. Nancy Sitsler, 2925 South Cherokee, appeared before Council. Ms. Sitsler stated she lived with and helped support her parents. Her parents could not afford to pay the assess- ments because her mother is in poor health and her father is disabled, both out of work. Dorothy Sitsler, 2925 South Cherokee, appeared with her daughter. Mrs. Sitsler stated she has been unable to find work. Most of her neighbors were either disabled or on low income, and they probably would not be able to pay the assessment. Mrs. Martin, 2936 South Cherokee, appeared before Coun- cil. Mrs. Martin asked why property taxes could not be used to pay the cost of improvements. City Manager Mccown explained the City's property tax was used for a variety of services, i.e. police, fire, community development, public works, parks and recreation, etc. The City streets are maintained on the policy that all City streets that have been in a paving district are fully maintained by the City. The City's mill levy, sales tax, etc, is used for the various services that the City provides including street maintenance. Mrs. Martin needed was n overlay signs help control th much d m g • stated she felt the only repair the street if any repair at all. She at ted the stop traffic so the stre t has not suffer d th t Hrs. fore Counc i 1. Dodrill not d oth r tr s w H rvin Dodrill, 2900 South Ch rok pp rd be- Mr . Dodrill asked if trees would b r pl c d. Hrs. was not marked with rd pint but Lwo Mr. Did stated the City will and R er ation D~partm nt has chosen tr with roots that grow downward so th new concret h v 1 din futur y ars. Hr. Did stated appar snot mark db caus it was not d train d proj ct. • tr s. Th P rk11 rtain sp clea will not b up- ntly th corn r to b d t rr nt I • • March 29, 1982 Page 5 • • • Mrs. Dodrill asked if a walkway on her property was goi ng to be replaced. Mr. Diede stated if the service walk was marked with red paint then it will be repaired and assessed back to the pro- perty owner. Council Member Higday asked Mr. Diede to recheck Mrs. Dodrill 's property. Mrs. Dodrill asked how soon payment for the assessments would be required. City Manger McCown stated the work would be done this year and next year when the actual full costs of the district are known, every person that had work done would be sent a letter noti- fying them of the costs of improvements and Council would hold an- othe r hearing in order to hear any protests to the particular costs. The costs would not be assessed back to the property owner until the year 1984. There were no other comments on the 2900 block of South Cherokee. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of South Cherokee. Nerita Hathaway, 3095 South Cherokee, appeared before Council . Mrs. Ha thaway asked if this area was technically neve r in a paving district why was it sealcoated seven to eight years a go . Mr . Died stated he would hav to check the records i n o rder to answer the question. Normally, the City does not put a chip-seal coat on a street. Mrs. Hathaway stated the stre t w in good shape until the City stopped s e lco ting it and bus traffic st rted. Mr s . Hath b c use m ny people log c ut back and it pact hr ability to th City pay for th way questioned p ving district at thi time re being cut back on work hours. Sh is be - will impact her monthly income wh ich will im- pay th assessment. Mrs. Hathaway suggesteJ improvem nts. Ther w r no other co~m ~t on the 3000 block of South Ch rok e . Mayor 0 on t h 3100 South d if th r w a nyon wishing to sp ak ·1 I • • March 29, 1982 Page 6 • - Chuck Cooper, 3136 South Cherokee, appeared before Council . Mr. Cooper stated he was in the paving business for five years. Mr. Cooper stated when Public Service Company work- ed on the street last summer he noted the patch work was 2" as- phalt and 4" base. Mr. Diede stated the sample cross-sections reflected 1/2" asphalt and 3" base. Mr. Diede stated patch work done by utility companies is excluded because the patch work is incon- sistent and not indicative of the condition of the street. Larry Dickinson, 3171 South Cherokee, appeared before Council. Mr. Dickinson stated he was power of attorney for his aunt who lives at 3171 South Cherokee. Mr. Dickinson stated the representation of people at this meeting should be significant enough to show the opposition to the paving district. Mr. Dick- inson stated people in this block were assessed two years ago for improvements on Eastman. He stated the street was a bus route and queried upgrading it to residential standards when the street appears to be used commercially. Mr. Dickinson argued the deferral program was not good in that r.he interest expense was still being placed on the taxpayer. Mr. Dickinson wanted guarantees that the block would not be widened later on to handle the increased traffic flow in conjunction with the downtown improvements. Council Member Neal stated there could not be guarantees that this street would not have to be widened later on. Mr. Neal stated once the street is upgraded it will be maintained and might be widened for arterial usage. Mayor Otis stated a written reply would be mailed to Mr. Dickinson in regard to his (Mr. Dickinson's) comments. Council Member Bilo asked City Attorney DeWitt if buses have the choice of what street they want to travel on. City Attorney DeWitt responded if a particular street i th shortest route for a bus, it could travel on it. Gary Christopher, 3109 South Cherokee, appeareJ before Council. Mr. Christopher stated he was a businessman and had a degree in geology. He stated the street was in good condition. Mr. Christopher told of a manhole cover that he thought was i10- properly placed and the observations h had made as crews re- paired it. Mr. Christopher alleged th deterioration of the tre t as being caused by City crews. Council Member Fitzpatrick gav rebuttal. 'lbere were no oth r COIDtll nta on th 3100 block of South Ch rokee . I • • • • • • March 29, 1982 Page 7 Lee R. Jones, 2740 South Cherokee, appeared again be- fore Council. Mr. Jones noted Bannock has never been in a dis- trict even though heavily traveled. selected. Council Member Higday explained the streets are randomly Council Member Neal noted some streets have been in proposed districts, taken out, and are now in bad shape. * * * * * * Mayor Otis declared a recess at 9:05 p.m. Council re- convened at 9:20 p.m . Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Higday, Neal, Fitzpatrick, Bradshaw, Otis. Absent : Council Members Weist, Bilo. The Mayor declared a quorum present. Council Members Weist and Bilo entered the meeting shortly after roll call. * * * * * * Council Member Neal asked City Manager McCown to explain the deferral program once again. City Manager McCown stated the program was initiated when Paving District No. 27 was formed. Eligibility depends on income limitations exclusive of property. The program defers payment of assessments until the property changes owners. The City places a lien on the property and pays the assessments until such time when the property changes hands, and then the 1Doney is paid back to the City. The limitations are the same as those u~cJ by the federal government for the Department of Housing. The De- partment of Housing has changed its guidelines and in accordance Council will be amending the deferral program guidelines at its meeting on April 5th, Mr. McCown stated inquiries for the de- ferral program should be directed to the Community Departmt!nt at City Hall. Mr. McCown stated a letter explaining the new guid - lines would be mailed out. Mayor Otis continued the hearing by asking if there wa s anyone wishing to speak on the 3600 block of South Acom I • • March 29, 1982 Page 8 • • • Gene Ward, 3602 South Acoma, appeared before Council. Mr. Ward read a petition containing 10 signatures of residents on the block opposing the district. Mr. Ward asked what specifi- cally was wrong with the block. Mr. Ward questioned whether or not asphalt prices would inflate if the district was delayed on the basis that no one knows what the price of any commodity would be in the future. Mr. Ward stated the staff has pointed out that 85% of the town has been in a paving district and stated the City should not, because of the economic times, require the remaining 15% to be handled in the same manner. Mr. Ward suggested elimi- nating the paving district and developing a new type of property tax assessment whereby everybody in town would pay a paving assess- ment through property taxes. Council Member Higday stated if that alternative were taken then people who have been in a district would be subsidiz- ing those who have not b een in a district and discussed the un- fairness . Mr. Ward stated he was not asking for one group to subsi- dize another but to spread out the load. Mr. Ward suggested ear- marking certain monies for paving district improvements . Council Memb er Higday stated he recognized the economic times were difficult and different, and not everyone was prepared to pay for the assessments. Mr. Higday asked Mr. Ward to reco gnize in return that the Council had to operate on a phjlosophy set by a Council back in 1956. Mr. Ward asked for the findings of South Acoma. Mr. Diede stated three test samples were taken. They were f ound to have l" asphalt and no base. Mr. Diede stated the s a mple s were indicative of the 3600 -4000 blocks of South Acoma. Mr. Diede stated an overlay would not be sufficient repair for this are • Ther e were no oth r comments on th 3600 block of South Acoma . Mayor Otis ask e d if there was anyone wishing t o speak on th 3 700 block of South Acoma. John Foster, 3706 South Acoma, app ared before Council. Mr . Fo st e r stated he had com to Council nine y ars go to ask th t ny alley behind his hous be taken out of a paving district on th e basis of financial hardship to pay th assessments. It was r mo ved. Mr. Foster r quested this block b tak n out of thi s propos d district for th sam reason, financial hardship. Hr. Foat r stated moat of th other peopl on the block ar lderly • I • • • Ma rch 29 , 1982 Page 9 • • • and it would a financial burden on them to pay the assessments. He asked that Council listen to the citizens on this block who want it removed. Raleigh Shipman 3717 South Acoma, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Shipman stated the assessment would be a financial hard- ship because he was on fixed income. Mr. Shipman asked for clarifi- cation of the deferral program as to when the actual payment would be due and if interest is paid on the amount due. Council Memb e r Fitzpatrick stated H a person applies for a deferral payment plan, no money is paid until the house is sold. Mr. Shipman admitted South Acoma was rough and blamed the Public Service Company and City water crews. City Manag e r McCown expla i ned the participants of the as sessment deferral program can have their assessment costs de- fe rred until whatever time the property changes ownership. 'lb e asse ssment is due and payable with no i nt e rest when the proper t y change t ransact i on takes place. 'lbere were no other c omments on the 3700 block of South Acoma . Mayor Otis asked if there was a nyone wishing to speak on the 3800 block of South Acoma. Di ck Simon , spokesman f or the Engle wood Methodist Chur ch , app ear e d before Council. Mr. Simon pre sented a petition from r e - si d e n ts of t he 3800 block protesting t he paving d i strict on th e basis t h a t it do e s not offer a s pec if i c b e nefit to them. Mr. Simon stated t h i s wa s an i nopportune t ime fo r th e district since mo st of the reside n ts are e lderly, in par tic ula r wi dows, a nd c ould no t pay the assessments. Mr . Simon s tated the stree t was ad equ ate and would only need repair from time to time . He stated the church was still paying for the assessment for the work done on Mansfield. Mr . Simon stated traffic on South Acoma was very light. Chuck Egloff, 3837 $outh Acom , He sugg sted r surfacing South Acom rath He asked if he could confirm the findings himself . ppeared before Council. r th n reconstructin~ it, by digging up the stre~t Director W ggoner stat d he could get a p rmit and do it himself or he could asked th staff to come back and recheck it . Counc 1 Hemb r Higday oppoa d llowing taff to rech ck the str t for unlimit d a mplings. Mr. Higday stat d t sts w re m d nd th r sults should st nd as La • • I • • -• • • March 29, 1982 Page 10 David Pierson, 3807 South Acoma, appeared before Coun- cil . Mr. Pierson argued the standards set for street upgrading may not be guided by the street's function for traffic. Mr. Pier- son stated "if a street works, don't tear it up". Mr. Pierson stated his sidewalk was marked for a hairline crack and he did not think repair was warranted. Council Member Fitzpatrick suggested that Mr. Pierson get several neighbors together and do the work themselves. There were no other comments on the 3800 block of South Acoma. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3900 block of South Acoma. David Fraier, 3945 South Acoma, appeared before Council. He asked if the street would be brought back to standard if utility companies dug it up. Director Di ede stated he tried to coordinate any major work done by utility companies prior to the paving district work. Mr. Fraier asked for the findings of his block. Mr. Diede stated there was no base at all in this block and did not recomm e nded repa ir of the street by the property owner. Mr. Fraier asked if he could get another engineering opinion . Mr. Diede stated that was against Council policy . Mr . Fraier asked if petitions could still be submitted and what impact would they have. Mayor Otis stated Council would consider the petition and the deadline for submission was April 19. Mr. Frier sked if ther w re r cords of stre t main- tenance co ts. Mr. Waggoner stated there were none. Ancel Fowler, 3987 South Acoma, ppeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Fowler tated the street was old when he moved in 22 years ago and suggested it probably would last many more years. Mr. Fowl r asked that Council find noth r w y to pay for th improvements. I • • • March 29, 1982 Page 11 • • • There were no other comments on the 3900 block of South Acoma. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 4000 block of South Acoma. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 4500 block of South Acoma. Bob Craig, 4556 South Acoma, appeared before Council. Mr. Craig stated he has been a resident for 32 years and was living here when the county paved the street. Mr. Craig stated a few years back the block was taken out of a district, and the street is in no worse condition now then it was then. He stated he had called 11 homes out of 24 and only one had mixed feelings on the district. He stated many of the people are either retired or close to retirement. Mr. Craig stated the street is used by fire trucks, A & A Trading Post delivery trucks, and Fireside Floor Covering trucks. Mr. Craig stated the street may not meet the standards but it was not in bad shape. Mr. Craig noted .the street was wide and asked what the costs woulJ be. Mr. Diede stated if the existing street was wider than normal, the City assesses whatever is existing out in the roadway. If the City widens it then the City pays the additior,al width and thickness. Mr. Diede stated he would recalculate Mr. Craig's assess- ment and telephone him of the amount, Dave Clayton, 4509 South Acoma, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Clayton asked the question if it was City policy to pick up the difference over 36 feet. Mr. Diede stated only if the City is widening the street because it is arterial . Mr. Diede stated the street has been checked and this block is 41 feet wide and wider than some other blocks. Mr. Diede stated the assessment would be $40/per front foot, Mr. Clayton stated traffic patterns may increase and asked that the paving district be re-evaluated. Hr. Clayton asked for the upgrading of streets where traffic may increase, to be paid for out of the budget. * * * * * * City Attorney DeWitt asked permission to research the question on whether interest is paid in the deferral program. Mr. DeWitt stated he would submit a written opinion and have it avail- able t th April 19th Council meeting, * * * * * * I • • n March 29, 1982 Page 12 • • • Mr. Clayton stated he has paid for paving districts before so he und ers tood the need for good streets. There were no other comments on the 4500 block of South Acoma . Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3700 block of South Lincoln. Basil Higgins, 3797 South Lincoln, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Higgins stated he had contacted 95~ of the residents who oppose the district on the basis that the street is not a through street, there are no chuck holes, it is in good condition, and the assessments would cause a financial hardship for them. Mr. Higgins stated Council Member Higday had a petition of protest from the residents. Mr. Higgins asked for the sample findings for this street. Mr. Diede stated the findings in the 3700 block of South Lincoln l" asphalt-1" base; l" asphalt-1/2" base; and l" asphalt- l"base. In the 3800 block of South Lincoln, the findings were l" asphalt-1" base; 1 1/2" asphalt-1 1/2" base; 1/2" asphalt-1 1/2" base . Council Member Higday stated these two blocks exemplify a dead end. The street was in a paving district a few years ago and ta~en out. Mr. Higday stated the residents feel the street has held up. Donna Weitzel, 3775 South Lincoln, appeared before Coun- cil. Ms. Weitzel stated she was a widow and could not pay for the assessments. She stated her parents, Ray and Ruby Proctor at 3926 South Acoma, could not pay their assessment either. There were no other comments on th 3700 block of South Lincoln. Mayor Otis asked if there was nyon wishing to speak on the 3800 block of South Lincoln. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyon wishing to speak on the 2700 block of South Logan. John McKelvey, 2791 South Log n, ppe red befor Coun- cil. Mr. McKelvey stated the assessments would b a financial hardship on himself and his neighbors. Mr. McK lvey asked what keeps th City from placing him in anoth r di trict n xt year for the paving of the alley behind his hou e. Council Member N al st ted all ys r not pl c din a district unl ss petition d do so by th r id nt • • I • • • March 29, 1982 Page 13 • • • John Hartman, 2757 South Logan, appeared before Coun- ci l. Mr. Hartman stated he did not receive a letter of notifi- cation and heard about the proposed district from his neighbors. Mr. Hartman asked how many Council votes it took to take the street out of the district and if Council would still accept a petition of protest. Council Member Higday stated it would be four votes fro,n Council . Mr. Hir,day stated a pe tition had to be submitted b efo r e April 19th . Mr . Hartman asked for a letter stating reasons why the street needed repair . He also asked if th e street was posted for weight limit. Mr. Waggoner stated Logan was a truck route and governed by the model traffic code. Mr. Diede stated the street needed repair because of a high crown ; and if that was the determination then no tests are taken . Mr. Waggoner stated e ven though Logan was a truck route, the residents would be assessed only for residential costs. Coun cil Member Higday asked that staff test Lo gan Street. Bill Humes, 2727 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mr. Humes asked for explanation of the condition of Logan. Mr. Diede stated the crown is a problem for cross traffic. It can be a problem in the win ter time with cars sliding down to the side of the street . Mr. Humes stated he has never seen any accidents on Logan. He stated the street was in good condition. 'nle improvements would be of no benefit to the property owner. Council Member Fitzpatrick pointed out good streets helped the property v lue. Chuck Warren, 2756 South Logan, appeared b fore Coun- cil. Mr. Warren asked about using a device used by D nv r to s have down Lh • crown and resur(dc' it. Hr. Diede st ted the crown was so high, it could not be shaved down to the point of still having asphalt for resur- facing . 'nlere were no other comm nts on th 2700 block of South Log n . I • • March 29, 1982 Page 14 • • - Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2800 block of South Logan . Donn Malley, 2730 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mr. Malley opposed the district on the basis of it creating a fi- nancial burd en for him . Velma Homer, 2831 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mrs. Homer asked if the parkway would be removed. Mr. Diede stated the City was proposing to move it back. Ther e were no other comments on the 2800 block of South Logan . Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2900 block of South Logan. Pam English, 2934 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mrs. English stated the crown problem was only on a small section of the street and suggested the City pay for the reµair. Mrs. English argued the property owner would not benefit from the im- provements and to leave the potholes in the street to keep the traffic down. Mrs. English stated widening Logan would create a wors e funnel effect than what there is now . The widening would also create a parking problem because more people would use the park thus more cars would be parking on the street. Mrs. English stated she could not afford to pay the assessments and other neigh- bors would have a more difficult time. Mrs. English stated the asses~~ents seemed high anyway. There were no other comments on the 2900 block of South Logan . Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of South Logan. Clark McKay, 3096 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mr. McK y st t d he had never seen a crown on Logan and did not think there was nything wrong with the street. Mr. McKay stated most of th re id nts were retiree on fixed incomes. Mr. McKay suggested placing a traffic p trolman on this block to stop speeders. Mr. McKay asked for proof that the street was in bad condition. Mr. Di de stated streets w r not normally tested if crowns were d•t rmin d to b too high, Mr. McK y st ted th str t did not need to be widened. p ople hav garag s in which to park their cars. Mr. McKay stated the str t should not be rep ired until th economy improves • • I • • March 29, 1982 Page 15 • • • Mr. Norton, 3087 South Logan, appeared before Council. Mr. Norton stat e d widening the street would not improv e t h e pro- perty, it would take away. 'lllere were no other comments on the 3000 block of South Log a n. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2200 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2300 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2400 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2500 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to sp eak on the 2 600 block of Wes t Union Avenu e . Ross Clinger, 2600 West Union Avenue, appeared before Council. Mr. Clinger stated he was self-employed. He knew the need for bette r st reets. Mr. Clinger stated he thought it wa s unfair to combine residential streets and commercial streets in a district, being unfair to residents. He stated his estimate was approximately $16,700 and then provided information to con- strue the job co uld be done fo r l ess money. Mr. Clinger recom- mended concrete streets over asphalt, one r ea son being the less elect ricity it takes to light the streets. Council Member Bradshaw thanked Mr. Clinger for his information and suggested that he take further recommendations of this nature to Director of Public Works Waggoner. There were no other comments on the 2600 block of West Union Avenue. Mayor Otis asked if there was nyon wishing to speak on the 2700 West Union Avenue. Engrid Blomberg, 2706 West Union Avenue, appeared be- for Council. Mr. Blomberg stated the assessments were high in comparison to his estimations . Mr. Blomberg suggested increasing th tax base to help pay for assessments. Mr. Blomberg stated he was going to do the work himself . 'Ill r were no other comments on the 2700 block of West Union Avenu. I • • In n - • March 29, 1982 Page 16 • • • Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Radcliff Drive. Mike Wirth, 3136 West Radcliff Drive, appeared before Council. Mr. Wirth stated during recess a Mr. Don Head of 3134 West Radcliff Drive informed him this area was taken in by the City in the 60's. The residents were promised the street would be treated as if it had already been in a district. Mr. Wirth stated proof being that the street had been sealed and chipped twice since 1960. Mr. Wirth submitted a petition of protest. Mr. Wirth stated the district would be a financial burden but would support it if the City increased its portion of the costs. Mr. Wirth stated a five year guarantee on the asphalt is not good . He had contacted an expert on paving streets who stated 1 1/2" asphalt overlay was enough. Donald Head, 3154 West Radcliff Drive, appeared before Council. Mr. Head recalled during discussions of annexation the streets were to be maintained by the City and excluded from paving districts. The reason the street has deteriorated was due to lack of maintenance by the City . 1bere were no other comments on the 3000 block of West Radcliff Drive. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Stanford Avenue. Darrel Highberg, 3008 West Stanford Avenue, appeared be- fore Council, Mr. Highberg stated the street did not need repair and asked that it be rechecked. There were no other comments on the 3000 block of West St nford Avenue. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3100 block of West Stanford Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3200 block of West Stanford Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3300 block of West Chenango Avenue. William Hilborn, 3304 West Chenango Avenue, appeared before Council. Mr. Hilborn stated when this area was annexed to the City, it also was to be maintained by the City and not placed in a paving district. There were no other comments on the 3300 block of West Chenango Avenue • I • • ·I • March 29, 1982 Page 17 Mayor Otis on the 3400 block of Mayor Otis on the 3500 block of Mayor Otis on the 3300 block of • • • asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Chenango Avenue. No one responded. asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Chenango Avenue. No one responded. asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Grand Avenue. Charley Scott, 3351 West Grand Avenue, appeared before Council. Mr. Scott stated he had the impression the City was going to overlay the street after the storm sewers were installed. Mr. Scott stated the street needs to be rolled with top coat. Mr. Scott was fearful that high interest rates on the sell of bonds would push up the cost of assessments and urged postponing the district to see if the interest rates go down. Tilere were no other comments on the 3300 block of West Grand Avenue. May or Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3400 block of West Grand Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3500 block of West GranJ Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 4300 block of South Acoma Street. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Bellwood Drive. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3100 block of West Bellwood Drive. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3200 block of West Bellwood Drive. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2800 block of West Chenango Avenu. No on responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2900 block of West Chenango Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was nyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Grand Avenue. Rex Horn , 3002 West Grand Avenue, appeared before Coun- cil. Mr. Horne stated his sidewalk was damaged by heavy equipment 'i I' I • • March 29, 1982 Page 18 • • • when the storm sewers were installed and not from normal wear and t ea r. Mr. Horne s tated he did not know he was responsibl e for r e - pairs of this nature. There were no other comments on the 3000 block of West Grand Av e nue. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3100 block of West Grand Avenue. No one responded . Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3200 block of West Grand Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2800 block of West Layton Avenue. Mae Wade , 2903 West Layton Avenue, appeared before Coun- cil . Ms. Wade asked for clarification of what work was going to be done at her property. Mr. Di ede ex pl ai n ed her street had b een in a paving district before and was in a district now for repair of curb and gutter. Futur e maintenance of the street was the expense of the City, but curb and gutter was her expense this time. There were no other comments on the 2800 block of West Layton Avenue. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to sp ak on the 2900 block of West Layton Av e nue . No one responded. Mayor Ot is asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Monmouth Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3100 block of West MoninouLh Avenu •. No one r e sponJcJ . Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to peak on the 3200 block of West Monmouth Avenue. No one re ponded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Pimlico Drive. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was nyone wishing to 'pe k on the 3100 block of West Pimlico Drive. No oner spond d. Mayor Otis asked if th re was on the 3200 block of West Pimlico Drive. nyon wishing to speak No on responded, I • • March 29 , 982 ,Page 19 Mayor Otis on th e 2800 block of Mayor Otis on the 2900 block of Mayor Otis on the 3000 block of Mayor Otis on the 2800 block of • • • asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Saratoga Avenue. No on e responded. asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Saratoga Avenue. No one responded. asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Stanford Avenue. No one responded. asked if there was anyone wishing to speak West Tanforan Drive. Kent Absher, 2998 West Tanforan Drive, appeared before Council. Mr. Absher questioned the code and the street standards. Mr. Absher stated his sidewalk was marked for a hairline crack which he found out was caused by a previous construction worker. The crack was not noticeable and he would not be benefited by the re- pair. Mr. Absher stated most of the residents of the neighborhood who have their sidewalks marked for repair are retired, unemployed, or disabled. Mr. Absher stated the timing was poor to do this work. Mr. Absh er stated he appreciated a hearing such as this to talk things over with Council and that the invocation helped. There were no other comments on th e 2800 block of West Ta n foran Drive. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 2 900 block of West Tanforan Drive. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3000 block of West Tufts Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on the 3100 block of West Tufts Avenue. No one responded . Ma y o r Ot i s ask d if t h e r e wa s a nyon e w ishins Lu s peak o n th e 3200 block of West Tufts Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wishing to speak o n th e 2800 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone wish i ng to speak on the 2900 block of West Union Avenue. No one responded. Mayor Otis stated that concluded the list of streets i n th district and asked if anyone wanted tom k ddi t ion 1 comments. Ross Clinger, 2600 West Union Avenue, ppear d before Council. Mr . Clinger stated he was in favor of the improvem nta • • I • • March 29, 1982 ,Page 20 • • • Deputy City Clerk Watkins read into the record the follow- letters of prot est rece ive d by the City: Letter no date from Lida M. Shuster, 4542 South Acoma Lett e r dated March 23, 1982 containing 29 signatures of residents protesting improvements on the 3700 and 3800 block of South Lincoln . Letter dated March 25, 1982 from Guy and Rella Graham, 3173 West Radcliff Drive. Letter dated March 21, 1982 from Mr. and Mrs. Edward C. Burch, 3762 South Lincoln. Petition no date from Arthur D. Metherd, 3155 West Radcliff Drive. Letter dated March 18, 1982 from Arthur and Alice Van Puymbrouck, 3337 West Grand Avenue. Letter dated March 19, 1982 from Esther Schomberg, 3102 West Radcliff Drive . Letter dated March 15, 1982 from Verna S . Tatum, 3708 South Lincoln Letter dated March 26, 1982 from J. C. Mingee, 2870 South Logan 'lllere were no further comments on the proposed district. COUNCIL MEMBt::R BRADSHAW MOVED TO CLOSE THI:: PU BLI C Ht::AR- ING . Counci l 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 . 'Ille M yor d clared the motion carried and adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.m . ,.) , 1 : I • • - P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, Interfaith Task Force has been a significant force in meeting the needs of the less fortunate of the cOll'ftlunity; and WHEREAS, annually Interfaith Task Force sponsors its Interfaith Walk for the raising of Sl.11\S to continue its programs; and WHEREAS, Mr. Deland Petersen, an Engle\o/Ood High School student , has been selected as Grand Marshal of the walk to lead in the raising of funds for the lo/Ork of Interfaith Task Force. ~. THEREFORE, I , Etx;ENE L. arrs, Mayor of the City of EnglelolOod, Colorado , hereby proclaim Sunday , April 25, 1982, as INTERFAITH WALK t:».'i in the Ci ty of EnglelolOod, and I urge all our citizens to generously support this 1o10rthy cause . GIVEN under my hand and seal this 19th day of April, 1982. Mayor • I . - P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, Interfaith Task Force has been a significant force in meeting the needs of the less fortunate of the CO!lltlunity; and WHEREAS, annually Interfaith Task Force sponsors its Interfaith Walk for the raising of Slll\S to continue its programs; and WHEREAS, Mr . Deland Petersen, an Englewood High School student, has been selected as Grand Marshal of the walk to lead in the raising of funds for the work of Interfaith Task Force. NGI, THEREFORE, I, E!X;ENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood , Colorado, hereby proclaim Sunday , April 25, 1982, as INTERFAITH WALK Ct\Y i n t he City of Englewood, and I urge all our citizens to generously SUP[ r t thi s worthy CilUS GIVEN und r my hand and seal this 19th day of April, 1982. Mayor I • • • April 5, 1982 Honorable fayor Eugene Otis Members of Fnglewood Ci ty Council 3400 South Flati St r eet Englewoo d, Colo ra do 80110 Re: 2700 West Union Avenue and 2900 West Union Av enue Dear Ma yo r Otis and Counci l Members: This l e tt e r is bei n g submitted to focus you r attention on th e lon g st andin g p roblems expe r ienced on West Union Avenue. Th is two bl ock distance, 2700 West Union ve- nue and 2900 West Union Ave nu e is bordered on the one side by houses and on the oth e r side hy Centennial Pa r k. The West Union st r eet is used by all types of heavy equi pment an d truc ks , endan ge r i n g the lives of childr en trying to cro ss to the park an d in gene r al c r eating a ha zza rd for those livi n g in thi s a r ea . The heavy equipment /t ru ck traffic passing through this two block residential area consists of but is not limi- ted to Rockwell Sand, Grave l and Concrete, Douglas Coun- ty Co n c r ete, C.D.I. Trash (now an expanded ope r ation), Van ll aus e Excavating, Evan s Paving, r apahoe Coun ty heavy equipment, etc. Santa Fe is an available adjacent a r tery constructed fo r heavy comme r cial vehicles and those vehicles utili- zed for h eavy i nd ust r ial use in the r ecen tly expanding indust r ial site near the Platte River along West Union Avenue could just as well be di r ected onto Santa Fe dissolvinp the problems created by this t r affic throu gh a pa r k and resid en tial st r eet . The usage of this two bl o ck resid entia l st r eet for com- mercial traffic is c r ea ting an ever widening burden for the homeowner and endange ring lives of those ~ishing to use the park facilities. I lu-1 O-Vrr-...;,J {(AV ,,t/J f/ 1 _ ~.b o-r..,, 9 ard~ A t·1t'1 It.<. ik/J ;(,<) ('",v,U~ v-Jj /h.4-< 'IA {.) //U1 -, • I • • - • • • • We, therefore; respectfully request that Mayor Otis and the Membe rs of City Council revi ew usage of West Union Avenue between Decatur and Federal and consider th e following measures for action. I. All commercial traffic be dive r ted onto San ta Fe . II. Weight limits for heavy equipment be es- tablished and enforced. III. The post ed 25 1.P.11. (CHILDRE PLAYI G) be enfo rc ed . 1:!3 tta n .. .u .,1 ,1c-t/ -<./7 J 2 s ~-> ( /'(? {/ 1./7 ·2 Ji' _,,~~ };7 r;~ ?(Th_ rL.U ; ::2.P/c ~~ (~ Ve"/.., , ~ v "''! 7 & > I ;~ ~~ r;. ? ,. W (.).I ~ CUU1, s '/1 I cf-/c:i, ,0 :2 ?'?7.I ·// /' ( '11.f ' { /I l/1.. -2- r I • • • • • • Ap r il S, 1982 Hon orable Mayor Eugene Otis Membe rs of Englewood City Council 3400 South Elati Street Eng lewood, Colorado 80110 Re: 2700 West Union Avenue and 2900 West Union Avenue Dear Mayor Otis and Council Members: This letter is being submitted to focus your attention on the lon g standing problems experienced on West Union Avenue, This two block distance, 2700 West Union Ave- nue and 2900 West Union Avenue is bordered on the one side by houses and on the other side by Centennial Park. The West Union street is used by all types of heavy equipment and trucks, endangering the lives of children trying to cross to the park and in general creating a hazzard for those living in this area. The heavy equipment /truck traffic passing through this two block residential area consists of but is not limi- ted to Rockwell Sand, Gravel and Concrete, Douglas Coun- ty Conc rete, C.D.I. Trash (now an expanded operation), Van Hause Exc avating, Evans Paving, Arapahoe County heavy equipment , etc. Santa Fe is an available adjacent artery constructed for heavy comme rcial vehicles and those vehicles utili- z ed for heavy indust rial use in the recently expan<ling i ndustrial site near the Platte River along West Union Avenue could just as well be directed onto Santa Fe d i s s olving the problems created by this traffic through a park and residential street. Th e usage of this two block residential street for com - me rcial traffic is creating an over widening bur<lon fur th e homeowner and endangering lives of those wishing to us e the park facilities. -1 - I . • • • - We, therefore; respectfully request that Mayor Otis and the Members of City Council review usage of West Union Avenue between Decatur and Federal and consider the following measures for action. I. All commercial traffic be diverted onto Santa Fe. II. Weight limits for heavy equipment be es- tablished and enforced. ' III. The posted 25 M.P.H. (CHILDREN PLAYING) be enforced. • I . • -• • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNIN G AND ZONING COMMISSION March 16, 1982 l. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission wa s called to order at 7:05 P.M. by Chairman Ed McBrayer. Members present: Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre, Becker, Carson Ro111B.I1s, Acting Ex-officio Members absent: Allen 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES . Chairman McBrayer stated that the Minutes of February 23, 1982, were to be considered for approval. Tanguma moved: Carson seconded: The Minutes of February 23, 1982, be approved as written. AYES: McBrayer, Sent i , Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre , Becker, Carson, Gilchrist NAY S: None ABSENT : Allen The motion carried . Chairman McBrayer stated that the Minutes of March 2, 1982, were to be considered for approval. Barbr moved: Carson second d: The Minutes of March 2, 1982, be approved as writt n . A Mr. Gilchrist tated that he felt Page 3, 2, hould be amended to refl ct that in answer to a question posed by hims lf, Mr. Swords indicated h would "recommend" th relocation of th coniferou tree to a City Park at th d veloper's cost. Discussion ensued. Kr. Barbre and Hr. Carson cc pt d the ndm nt to the Hinut s. Th vote on the motion to approv th Minutes, as am nd d: AYES: Senti, Sto 1, Tanguma, Barbr , Carson, Gilchrist, McBra y r NAYS: Non ABSTAIN: Be ck r ABSENT: All n Th motion carri d. CAS 15-2 III. UHi IIOV d: 1 cond d: Th Publlc Hiring on Cai 15-82 b op n d. I • • - • • • • -2- AYES: Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre, Becker, Ca rson, Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti NAY S: Non e ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Mr. McBrayer stated that copies of the proposed amendment had been sub- mitted to the members several days prior to the meeting . He asked if they had any questions of the staff regarding the staff report relative to the following amendment: §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) An y 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 Ve hicle Laundry or Polishing business, which shall comply with the following conditions: 1) A minimum of three (3) parking spaces shall be provided on the site for each washing stall; 2) The site shall b paved to the specifications of the Department of Engineering Services; 3) All waste water shall be discharged into the s anitsry sewer line after hsving been run through a s and trap; 4) All lights used to illuminate the area shall b dir c ted away from adjacent r sidential prop rties . Ms. B ck r a s ked if the term "motor vehicle" encompas s ed "motor cycle"? Mr s . Romans s tated that a motor cycle is a motor vehicle. Mr. Hc Bray r ask d if th staff h d anything they wished to bring up at th ia tim 7 Hrs. Roman s asked that th record r fleet th t public notice o f th public baring did app ar in th Englewood H rald S ntin 1 on F bruary 24, 1982, and th t the staff r port be made a part of th record o f the H ar i n • Mr. HcBray r ask d that th t o s p ak for or a aina t th record reflect th r wa s no on propoa d amend nta . • in attendanc I • • - • • • • -3- Carson moved: Tanguma seconded: The Public Hearing on Case 115-82 be closed. AYES: Tanguma, Barbre, Be c ker, Carson, Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti, Stoel NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Mr. McBrayer asked if the Commission wished to discuss the matter? Mr, Gilchrist stated that he understood this was brought about because of a motorcycle shop at 1008 East Hampden Avenue. Re asked if this was at present an office building? Mrs. Romans stated that 1008 East Hampden Avenue was an old converted house; there are other motor vehicle uses in the immediate area. Mr. Gilchrist asked what the experience with those motor vehicle uses in this area has been? Mrs. Romans stated that she felt the experience has been reasonably good for those that have been approved by the Planning Commission; she stated, however, that she did not feel some of these same uses would be approved by this Commission were they to apply for approval today. Mrs. Romans noted that when some of those uses were approved by the Planning Commission, conditions were placed on the approvals. Discussion ensued , Carson moved: Barbre seconded: The Planning Commission approve the proposed amendment to §22.4-11 h of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and recoanend the amendment to the City Council. Mr, Stoel asked if this was the proposed amendmen t that Assistant City Attorney Holland felt should be enacted in lieu of considering the requests under "Uses Not Mentioned." Mrs. Romans stated that this is correct. Tile vat was called: AYES: Barbr , B cker, Carson, Gilchrist, McBray r, Senti, Sta 1, Tanguma NAYS: Non ABSENT: Allen Th motion carri d. IV. PUBLIC FORUM, Til r wa no on present to ddr ss th Commission. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mr Rom a •tated that ah had nothing n w tor port on th Downtown Develop- nt Plan, Th Prow wood proj ct i pro r ••ing. M •· City offic Qll8na diacusa d th hopping C nt r. Til apac , and will b r mod lin that ia going on in th Cinder lla third floor of Joalina ia bing conv rted to ua d for th national h adquart ra of Joslina . • I • • - • • • -4- A demolition permit has been issued for the removal of the fountain in the Blue Mall, and there will be escalators outs ide of Penneys to get to the proposed food court on the lower level. A new fire sprinkling system will be installed in the entire shopping center. Improvements have already been made to the Rose and Shamrock Malls, and while it will not be poss ible to accomplish the same type of improvements in the Gold Mall and Cinder Alley, there will be some improvements made. The Broadway Store will be go i ng in to the former Neusteter Store. The third floor of The Denver has been converted to office space; Martin-Marietta was to have been the tenant for this space, but will not be moving into this space, so another tenant will have to be located. The Joslins remodeling will add 49,000 square feet of office space, and the Broadway Store will add 150,000 square feet of building area. Mr s . Becker discussed some of the problelDS she has seen wi th the r emod e l ing i n the Rose and Shamrock Malls, where persons on the Rose Mall toss things through the openings into the Shamrock Mall; she s tated that thi s could be a problem, and persons could be injured if hit by s omething that i s thrown fr om the upper level. Mr. Barbre asked for further information on the food court ? Mr s. Roman s stated that she understood it would be similar to the Yum Yum Tree, with a v ar i ety of food outlets. Mr s. Roman s s tated that the DRCOG annual banque t is propo s e d for Ma r ch 31, 198 2 , at the Re gen c y Inn. The reception is scheduled fo r 6:00 P.M., and the di nner i s scheduled to begin at 7:00 P.M. Mr. Richard Fleming, Pre sident of th e Denv e r Partnership, is the featured speaker for the evening. Mr s . Roman s stated tha t it is the prac tice of the Ci ty to pay for the at tendance o f the Commi ss ion member s i f they wish to attend ; if they wi s h t o take a guest , howe v e r, t he cost of t he gue s t 's atte ndance is the r es pon s ibi lity o f the Commi ssion memb e r . Sh e noted that the cos t of the dinne r me eti n g this y ar is $16 pr person. Reservation s must be mad e no later than March 24th. Mrs . B ck r s tat d th ts wou ld plan to attend. Mr. Stoel and Mr. Barbr stated that thy wo uld not b att nding. Mr. Senti, Mr. Gilchrist, Mr. Carson , Mr. Tanguma, and Mr. cBray r indic ated th t they uld possibly attend, but would hav o confina thi s ta later date. Mr. McBra yer atat notification of a tin asked that thi s be discu of the Commis ion wish d members had receiv din their p cket Bonds, sch duled for April 17th; h next eting to d termin if any m mber Mrs. Romans ral memb rs of th Commission hav int rest in of the City faciliti s, such as water tr at nt plant, etc. Sh suggest d possibly a tour could b sch dul d for April 17th or April 24th. Mr. McBrayer sugg at d that April 24th would be a bett r dat • Mrs. tat d that this is normally a four-hour tour, and a u at d that b in going on th tour tat th CiLy H 11 at 8:00 A.M . would att mpt tog t the 19-paaa n r bu for th tour. that she h a "Class S" lie ns , nd would b lad Mr s . oman av scapin r quir menta th information pertainln to 1 nd - d from Aurora, Littleton, nd I • • • • • -5- Lakewood, along with a memorandum reporting on a survey of neighbori n g j urisdictions. Mr. McBrayer s tated that he would like a n opportunity t o r e view this information and discuss it at the next meeting. Mrs. Roman s s tated that it would be placed on the agenda for the next meeting, and asked that members bring the information to the meeting with the m. Mr. Stoel asked if the City of Englewood had any requirements on landscaping at the present time. Mrs. Romans stated that there are minimum landscapin g requirements in the R-2, R-2-C, and R-3 Zone Districts, but nothing in the commercial or industrial districts. Mrs. Romans pointed out that some of the cities surveyed by the staff have a Development Review Comm i ttee and work with developers on the landscaping for the specific project. Mr s . Romans stated that the Englewood staff at the present time tries to work with developers to "encourage" provision of landscaping. Mr. McBrayer asked that the R-2 and R-3 r e gulations be available at the next meeting, als o . Mr. Stoel a s ked Mr. McBrayer where he hoped to go with the proposed l ands c aping regulati ons; what is he looking for? Mr. McBrayer stated that he was tired of seeing deve lopments with 100% asphalt; he noted that other c ommunities have the same establis hment s , but have required them to pro- vide some gree nery and lands caping around the development, and they are mu c h more attractive . Mr. Stoel asked if the Commission wanted to create an e ntire new s et of rules for developers t o contend wi th; i s it felt that the landscaping provisions are nee ded? Mrs. Romans stated that she f e els s ome landscaping requirements and gu i delines are neede d. Mr s . Romans stat e d that the need for landscaping prov isions wa s discussed a t the t i me the Com- pre hen s ive P l an wa s considered. Some bu sin ess peop le stat e d that they were not willing to pay $10 per s quare f oot f o r c ommer c ial l and, and p l ant t r ees . Mr s . Romans s tated that she felt Swedis h Medi c al Ce nte r, fo r in s tanc e, had been very coope rative in providing landsc ap i ng i n th eir p a rking lots e ven though th e r e are n o r e quirements wr i tte n d own . Hr . Sent i d iscu s sed s ome de v e lopments on U.S . 28 5 t ha t h ave pr ov i d e d some l and sca ping a nd contras t e d the m wi th othe r short-orde r outle t s that have n o t p r o v i de d landscaping. He s t a t e d th a t he fel t th e r e is a n eed f o r landsc aping r e quirement s . Hr s . Beck e r s t ated t h at s h e fel t l and scap i n g se t s a deve lopment off . Sh e f e lt that some standards s h ould be set that wo uld ma ke for at t ractive develop- ment and would like to se an ordinan ce se tt i n g for th landscaping r equire- ments dev lop d. She cknowledged that t h e r equ i r eme n ts must b reason a b le , but there should be some stan dards a nd /or r e q uiremen ts es t ablished. Hr . Gilchrist asked if any of the insti t ution s i n Englewood, such as the banks, give away trees or landscaping? Hrs . Roman s stated th t sh wa not ware of any such program; the City h sin th past p r ovided som tr s nd pl ntings, but sh did not know if this woul d be don again. Hr. Barbr noted that Lakewood's provisions et forth a list of r co nd d tr es nd shrubs for plantings. He felt this was a good idea and should be in- corporated in any standards or requir m nts that the City may d vis • Mr. Stoel noted that ind vising landscaping standards and r quir m nts, we must keep in mind the matter of w ter availability. Ms. Romans st t d that Hr. Gilchrist, Mr. Stoel, Hr. McBray r, meet at 7:30 A.M. on March 27th at th Village Inn to discuss th Sh st ted th t ny m mb rs who wish ed to join th m w r w lcom VI. COHHlSSION 'S CHOICE. nd sh Sign to do will Cod o. Ms. B ck r not d th t t th joint m mi 1ion, th r was di1cu sion o th ting with th Litt! ton Planning Com- m tt r of "bo rd r1" in sin l -f ily • I • • -• • • -6- homes. Ms. Becker referred to an article recently writte n by Sylvia Porter in which Ms. Porter points out that elderly individuals are not going to be able to maintain their single-family homes with today's financial picture unless they do take in a roomer or boarder. Ms. Becker stated that Ms. Porter's point is that single-family zoning laws may need to be changed to permit the lodging of roomers and boarders in single-family homes. Ms. Becker stated that she found the article of interest and very pertinent in light of the recent discussion between the Englewood/Littleton Planning Collllllissions. Mr. Tanguma stated that he has been attending the Urban Design Symposium, which is a four-week program, meeting each Tuesday afternoon. He stated that he has found this to be a very interesting symposium, and hopes to be able to present a complete report on this symposium to the Collllllission. Mr. McBrayer stated that he felt the Commission needed to consider in- formally the matters they want to present to the City Council at their joint meeting on March 29th. Mr. McBrayer noted that the time of this joint meeting has been moved up to 5:00 P.M., and it is his understanding now that the City Council wants to devote this meeting to discussion of the Sign Code. Mr. McBrayer stated that he would still like to give City Council some idea of what the Planning and Zoning Commission wants to accomplish this year. He suggested that perhaps the Commis sion could meet informally at his house on Thursday evening or Monday evening. Ms. Becker stated that she felt the consensus should be reached in a more formal manner. If the presentation to the City Council is to be a consensus of the Commission, the entire Co111D.ission should be involved. Ms. Becker sug- gested that a work session on March 23rd might be the bes t way to accomplish this. Discussion e nsued . Mr. Stoel stated that he would like to s e the issue of landscaping pre ented as a 1982 project for the Planning ColllDission. r. Ta ngum a stat d that he felt the Commission should set goals, and out- lin th st ps n s ary to achieve the goals. Discussion en ued. Mr. t other m mb rs of the Commission felt was th Commis ion from City Council 7 Mr. Tanguma t t d an advisory body to the City Council. The C proj cts and make recomm ndationa to City Council. lt th C iaaion should pr & nt id aa on what thy w nt to s in th City s far s land us and d velop nt. Hr. Cilchr at k d about holding n ighborhood tings in sch councilmanic district? Mr. T nu d that thi ha n don in th past, with a poor r d th t th northw at Engl ood ar sh s tat d that th staff and so m mb rs etin in this area once month for pproxi- that a tour of o th r ar as of th City is ci tiz n1 who ar participatin in th s r 11 mb r th er ativ nd n n w Commiaaion mus hould also b felt the Co aaion 1hould look at any- qu lity o life • • I • • - • • • • • -7- Mr. McBrayer stated that his original intent for the meeting with City Council was to exchange ideas. He stated that it appeared the meeting on March 29th would be devoted to discussion of the Sign Code, and suggested that perhaps at the very end of the meeting, the list of ideas from the Commission could be presented. Further discussion ensued. Ms. Becker questioned the possibility of requesting a second joint meeting with the City Council to discuss the work program and exchange ideas. She stated that she felt discussion of the Sign Code will dominate the meeting of March 29th. Mr. McBrayer stated that he would support the idea of a work ses sion on March 23rd to discuss ideas the CODllission members have on work projects for the ensuing year, and to consider the possibility of a future meeting wi th the Council to discuss these projects. He suggested that the work s e s sion begin at 7:00 P.H. Mr. McBrayer stated that he would like members of the Commission to l ook over the agenda for the APA meeting to be held in Dallas, and indica te meetings they felt might be of interest that they would like him to attend . The meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.H • • 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 RECOMME NDATION: Carson moved: Barbre seconded: The Planning Coaaission approve the proposed amendment to §22.4-11 h of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and recoDIDlend the amendment to the City Council. §2 2 .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 s ubject 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 comply "'1th the following conditions: 1) A iainiiaum of three (3) parking spaces shall be provided on th site for each washing stall; 2) The site shall be paved to the sp cifications of the Department of Engineering Services; 3) All waste water sh 11 be discharged into the sanitary sewer line aft r having been run through a sand trap; 4) All lights used to illuminate the area shall be directed away from adjacent residential properties. AYES: Barbr, B cker, Carson, Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti, Stoel, TangU1Da NAYS: Non ABSENT: Allen Th 1110tion carried. By Or der of th Planning & Zoning Co1111ieaion. • I • • - • • • • • LIQUOR LICENSE AUTHORITY MINUTES April 7, 1982 5 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Donald Stye s . MEMBERS PRESENT: Donald Styes, Lloyd Bryan, Ronald Lunders, Ronal d Blanchard MEMBERS ABSENT: Frances Cosby ALSO PRESENT : Eric Johannisson, Revenue Chief Brenda Castle. Recording Secretary • • * MR . BRYAN MOVED , AND MR. LUNDERS SECONDED, TO APPRO VE THE MINUTE S OF THE PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 3, 1982 . AYES : Donald Styes. Lloyd Bryan, Ronald Lunders . Rona ld Blanchard NAYS : None Th e mot i on carried . * * * The Author i ty received from Showbiz Pi zza Place, 1001 W. Hampden, Eng lewood, Colorado, a request for change in corporate structure . Spe cifically, Michael R. Phenix has replaced Andrew J. Whelan as corporate Treasurer and Thomas P. Powe ll, Jr. and Harry J . Radford have been elected to the Board of Directors in lieu of Mr. Whelan and Rolfe E. Kennard . MR. BRYAN MOVED, AND MR . LU~DERS SECONDED, TO AP PROVE THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN THE CORPORATE STR~CTURE OF SHOWBIZ PIZZA PLACE . AYES: Donald Styes, Lloyd Bryan, Ron a ld Lunder s , Rona ld Blanchard NAYS: None The motion carried. • * * MR. BRYAN MOVED, AND MR. LUNDERS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWI NG RENEWALS: Shogun Oriental Restaurant 3495 S. Broa dw ay Beer and Wine expires 6/18/82 7-Eleven Store 3900 S. Broa dw ay 3.2 Beer -off premises expir s 6/18/82 7-Eleven Store 2705 S. Broadway 3.2 Bee r -of f premises expires 5/23/82 Paul's Restaurant and Pizzer1a 35 42 S. Fox St reet Hotel and Restaurant expires 5/1 4/82 • I • • • Liq ~or License Authority Apri 1 7, 1982 page 2 - AYES : NAYS: The motion carried. • • • Donald Styes, Lloyd Bryan, Ronald Lunders, Ronald Blanchard None * * * There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ~~~~-BREN0AJ.CASTLE Recording Secretary /be • • I • • -• • • Engl a..ood Parks and Recreat ion Ccmniss ion Minutes of April 8 . 1982 5 c The regular m:nthly meeting o f the Englew::>od Parks and Recreat ion c.amri.ssion was called to order at 5 :30 p .m. by the Chairman , Jack Poole , in the In-s ervice Training Room of the Parks and Recreation office . Merrbers present : Bradshaw , Boarc.knan , Poole, Howard , Rl:mns , ex offi cio Merrbers absent : Allen , Richards, Higday Also present : Ik>ug Foe. Assist.ant Director of Parks and Recreation laxl Kuln, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation Jeff Weist. Recreation Youth Coln:il Coleen Stowell , City Forester The Ccmni.ssion ned:>ers and guests traveled by van to the construction sit e of the new Englew::>od G:>lf Course clubhouse for a first-hand view and explanation of the progress of the construct ion o f the f acility . Returning to City Hall , the neeting was again called to order by Chairtmn Poole . He asked if there were any additions or correct ions t o the minut es o f the rreet ing o f March 11, 1982. 1here were non e. A 1TOtion wa s made and s econded t hat the minutes be approved . The DDtion pass ed . Assistant Director Kuln introduced the new City Forester, Coleen Stowell . Coleen gave her educat ional backgrculd, experience in the field , and talked about sane possible plans for too City in the future . Recreation Youth Col.IlCil representative Jeff \Je ist presented a mE!IO which he drafted to Chairman Poole. In his IIBID, Jeff listed sane ccncerns involving youth recreatic.n programs in Englew::>od and suggested ways of obtaining a response fran the youth. After discussicn, Carmi.ssioner Bradshaw entered a 1TOtion that Jeff's idea of a questionnaire Lo be returned to the teacoors t school be approved and that Jeff receive recreation s taff support . The rotion was econded by c.amri.ssic.ner Boarc.knan and passed. Assistant Director Foe r ported to the c:oamission c.n the progress of the reorgan- ization of the Youth Col.KlCil. He distributed a flier/survey to the Ccmni.ssion mmbers for their r view that had heal distributed to the middle schoolo and high scrool. Also, ticl weared in the Engl newspaper in 1-opes of generating int r st I • • • Englew:>od Parks and Recreation Ccmnissicn Minut es of April 8, 1982 Page -2- • • • anong the youth. Foe intends to approach each of the middle schools and the high scrool in an attaq>t t o obtain two students fran each of the three schools to serve oo a yout h council. He also plans to call a neeting of tmse responding to the survey . Concerning repairs en the Sinclair pool, Assistant Director Foe reported that the repairs have been C001>leted by ~tland Industries and that a walk-t hrough has been scheduled for Friday, April 9, to review the wrk CCJll)leted . He believes i..he.atl.and has done a fine job, end they are roping to start filling en Saturday . Assistant Director Foe also discussed a process called Fibre/Crete for pool surface refinishing which takes the place of plastering. He explained that Sinclair, for sever- al years , has been having probltmi with plaster crud:>ling and cracking, and in order to resurf ace the pool with Fibercrete , all existing plaster wuld have to be rEIIDVed . There is a 10 year guarantee oo the Fibre/Crete process . It was a lso r eported that Gary Mandarich of the Engineering Department is studying the problem of 1'8ter p ressure aroU'ld Sinclair pool due to the wa t e r table. This problern may be t he cause o f the plaster not adhering to the pool bottan and walls in c ertain areas. Director Ranans reported oo the City Cool.rlcil/Recreati.on Ccmnission meeting of March 22, 1982 t hat was called by City Council to discuss ccmrunity center sites . The nurber one site cmsen by the City Cotneil is Cll.shing Park, with the possibility of acquiring the Rouse property west of the park , which has been appraised at $450,000. It is tnderstood by several of the Ccmnissi.on nemers that it is the intent of the Highi,,iay Department to purchase sooe part of the Rouse property for a future interchange . Corrrnissiooer Bradshaw wlmteered to get trore infonretion concerning the interchange . 'lhc <lcdic.ttion o( the En1:lc..oocl t-ulicipal Golf Course ;and clubhouse h:1s been scL for July 25, 1982 . Director Rcmans reported that plans are \rider way to include dedicatioo ceremnies, golf tournaments, souvenirs, and refreal'ualts, etc. The declication is scheduled for 11 :00 a.m. to 12 :00 noon. Director Ianans informed th Camli.ssi.on of the det rioratioo of the restroan 1o11lls at Rcm:m.s Park . Assistant Director Kuhn cootinued the discussi.on with the aid of diagra:ns • I • • • Engle.x:xxi Parks and Recreation Coumi.ssion Minutes of April 8, 1982 Page -3- • • • and explained the reasoos for the walls rotting and also explained that it is desired to reconstruct the facility walls to alleviate the danger factor. Ccmnissioner Boarcman made a rrotion, seconded by Ccmnissioner lk:Mard, that a recomrendation be sul:mitted to City Council for the purpose of 1lllk:ing funds available for repairs to the restroans at Romans Park . The rrotion passed . Due to recurring problems with the sprinkler system at Belleview Park, Director Ranans reported that Belleview Park was constructed in stages and it has three separate sprinkler systems. Gary Manda.rich of the l:ilgineering Department has reccmnended an im- proverent plan to alleviate the problems of malfa-lcti.on that has been experienced in the past several years at Belleview Park. This plan includes the use of three pllll>S and a concrete vault, which will accomoodate watering of all of Belleview Park . Ccmnissioner Howard made a UDtion , seconded by Coumi.ssi.oner BoarckJBn , that a rec- oomendation be sut:mitted to City Coo.ncil recamelding that fulds be made available for building iJJt>rovEll8lts of the Belleview Park sprinkler system. The UDti.on passed. Director Ranans was imst pleased to 81'100\n:e to the Coumi.ssicn that City Manager M:CcM'I da'lated a sun of $150 to the newly fonned Parks and Recreation FO\I'ldation Trust li\.nd, nnds he received as cash awards fran D.R.C .O.G. The Ccmnissi.on asked Chai.nmn Poole to send a letter of appreciation to the City Manager for the donation . Ccmnissioner Bradshaw voiced C<XlCern on the manner in which our Golf Pro canrun- icates with the golf course patrons. After sane discussion, a suggestion was made that this be added to the agenda in Mly, and Jerry King, Golf Pro, be invited to attend the ting. Coomissioner 1-loward brought before the Coomissi.on for approval the Orgpniwtion and Procedures of the Senior CitizEns Advisory Ccmnittee. Copies were handed to the Ccmnission menvers for review. After sane discussion, Ccmnissioner Bradshaw made a UDtion, seconded by Coomissioner Boaranan, to approve the Organization and Procedures of the Senior Citizens Advisory Conmittee. 1be rroti.on passed. Ccmnissioner lbward lso r ported that there is a balance of $6,027 in the lley Center Trust F\ni . • I • • • - • • fugl~d Parks and Recreation Ccmnission Minutes of April 8, 1982 · Page -4- The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Wilks, Recor~ Secretary I . . • • n - • • • • M:M)RANDI.M TO : EN<lllroD CITY' OOlNCIL REGARDm:; RECXM£Nll!\TIOO OF TIIE PARKS AND RECREATION CXM1ISSIOO Ilt\TE : April 13, 1982 SUBJECT : REQl.EST WAT FlNOO BE MAIE AVAIL\BI.E FOR REPAIRS ON RG1ANS PARK RESTRO'.M3 RECXIHlID\TICN : That nx:nies be appropriated for the purpose of repairing deterior- ating restrocm facility -walls at Fomans Park. By request of the Englewood Parks and Recreation Carmi.ssion ~ u)c~ w1G, Reco~ Secretary • I . . ,, • • • • TO : ENGI»lX)D CIT'i CX)l.H:IL REGARDING RECXMEN!l!\TIOO OF 'llIB PARKS AND RECREATIOO CX>M1ISSIOO lY\TE : April 13 , 1982 SUBJECT : REQUESl' WAT FrnOO BE MAIE AVAIL\BIB FOR REPAIRS TO BEI1EVIEW PARK SPRIN<lER SYSTEM . RECXM£N[Y\Tl00 : That uvnies be appropriated for the purpose of repairing the Belleview Park sprinkler system to alleviate recurring ma lftnctions . ~ ~ Secretacy I . . • • - MEM ORANDUM ---------- 10 : Andy t.k!Cown, City Manager FFO,I : DATE : Mel BeVirt, Dtployee Relations Director April 7 , 1982 REllORI' OF ATIENDANCE AT NPELRA CXffiEREOCE Please receive this as my report of attendance at the annual National Pub lic l:ilployer Labor Relations Association (NPELRA) Conference held March 14-19 in Clearwater Beach, Florida. The conference was well organi2ed with neny infonred and experienced speakers and participants . Unlike prior (NPEIBA) conferences, the prinary focus this year was in the area of the New Federali.sn and recent judicial decisions and its :inpact on public arployee relations . Sessions that were particularly infomative were those that addressed the controversial subjects of Ccrrparable Worth, Privacy Rights v.s. Freedan of Information and Discrimination Ccrrplaints and a city's liability under section 1983 (Federal Civil Rights Ac ts). Kara Sna.11, Deputy Assistant to President Reagan and Director of Media Relations and Planning, addressed the NPELRA rrent>ers concerning the "New FederaliBll". M.s. Sna.11 stated that the President has rmde econanic recovery his m.l!i:>er one goal and to reduce burdensane federal regulations by one third. She stated that President Reagan's proposed budget allots 2~ for defense spending and over ~ for social rvice programs. Sna.11 stated that the new federalisn is "A reordering of the relationship be citiz.ells and th maz.e of government bureaucracy". By 1984, she explained that the Federal gov nunen t ~uld assure all medical costs and th states and local government would take over food stanps and aid to famili s with dependent children. Sna.11 also stated that according to recent polls, that citizens by a two-t~e n:e.rgain trust state and local govermnents to :inplarent prograns over th Fed ral gov rnment. I • • - • • • • • Janes Baird, NPEl1lA General Cbuncil , infonned the usrbership of recent judicial decisions affecting ait>loyee relations. Mr . Baird stated that the U.S. Suprane Chlrt this past year did not decide IIBllY cases of l!ajor illportance except the Washington Cbunty v. Gunther Case. In that case which involved issues of equal pay for equal work , Baird felt that the Unions bad won a l!Bjor victory since the high court, with their ruling , opened the door for rore wage suits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. He also stated that the dessent opinion of the court was that the court l!ajori ty ruled fran its heart not its bead and that if the legislators wanted O:nparable Worth , let tbE!n pass it . Baird said that sane illportant cases will be decided by the Cburt yet this year involving illportant issues such as : Whether the Age Discrimination in Ellployroont Act can be applied to state and local govemeits and whether the discriminatory ccnponent of part of a prarotion test discredits the entire examination process. And, whether a gove:rmnent agency can pennit an individual errployee to express himself publicly rut refuse the sane opportunity to a representative of an ait>loyee association . Calsiderable infonna.tion was DB.de available at these sessions, which rmy be of value to the City of Englewood should the City be faced with any of a growing nurber of ait>loyer liability cases . I atterrpted to collect as nuch of this infonration as was available and will forward copies to the City Attorney's Office for their consideration. I appreciate the opportunity to attend this year 's conference and as a result, feel better info:med and prepared to deal with a m.nt>er of special aspects of EflPloyee relations. /vc 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 Amenirmen t of §22.4-10, B-1 Business , and April 14, 1982 {p a... §22.4-11, B-2 Business , Zone Districts. INITI ATED BY City Planning and Zonin g Commission. ACTION PROPOSED That the Comprehensive Zoninl\ Ordinance, §22.4-10 and §22.4-11 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The Department of Community Development has received several inquiries regarding the establishment of electronic or video game arcades, and is also aware of concerns that have been expressed by members of the business communit y regarding th is type of opera- tion. The following amendments were considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a Public Hearing on April 6, 1982: 1. Repeal §22.4-10 b (3): Any use intended to provide amusement or entertainm nt on payment of a fee or admission charge. 2. Add to §22.4-10 h, Conditional Use, §§2: Amus m nt establishments including, but not limited to: billiard halls, bowling alleys, coin-operated games, dance halls, electronic or vid o gsm s , night clubs, outdoor comm rcial recr ational faciliti pool hall , or skating rinks. 3. Add to §22.4-11 h, Conditional Use, §§4: REC0l1MENDATI0 : Amus ment tablish nts including but not liait d to: billiard halls, bowlin alleys, coin-op rat d g s, danc halls, el ctronic or vid o &, ni ht clubs, outdoor commercial r er ational faciliti 1, pool halls or 1katin rinks. ntat the Public H dring to ap akin support of th propo d no on spoke in opposition to the propo dam ndmenta. The Pl ning Comaisaion r commend to th En lewood City Council that the Compr h naiv Zonin rdinanc , f22,4-10 d §22.4-11, b nd d •• pr vioualy outlin d, I • • n • • • • MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: April 6, 1982 SUBJECT: Amendment of Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 122.4-10, B-1, and §22 .4-11, B-2. RECOMMENDATION: Carson moved: Stoel seconded: The Planning Coamission reco11111end to City Co uncil that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.4-10 and §22.4-11 be amended as follows: 1. Repeal 122.4-10 b (3): Any use intended to provide amusement or entertainment on payment of a fee or ad- mission charge. 2. Add to 122.4-10 h, Conditional Use, §§2: Amusement establishments in- cluding, but not limited to: billiard halls, bowling alleys, coin-operated games, dance halls, electronic or video games, night clubs, outdoor coaaercial recreational facil- ities, pool halls, or skating rinks. 3. Add to 122.4-11 h, Conditional Use, 114: Amusement establishments in- cluding but not limited to: billiard halls, bowling alleys, coin-operated games, dance halls, electronic ot vld~o games, night clubs, outdoor coaaercial recr ational focil- iti s, pool halls or skating rinks. Th staff report for C se 17-82 is included as a part of the recoaaendation froa the Planning Co .. ission. AYES: HcBray r, S nti, Stoel, Barbre , Carson NAYS: Tanguma, Gilchrist ABSENT: All n, B cker Th motion carried • ) I • • STAFF REPORT Pae -1- STAFF REPORT RE: • • - COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE CASE C7-82 Proposed amendment to the Comprehen sive Zoning Ordinance, §22.4-10, B-1 Business District, and §22 .4-11, Ge neral Business District. INITIATED BY: The Planning Division. INTRODUCTION: Because of the special nature of certain businesses intended to provide amusement or entertainment, it is quite conunon to consider the re- quests to establish such businesses on an individual basis. Typically these types of uses attract large numbers of customers at the same time, so adequate off-street parking is necessary. If the business is patronized largely by youths, storage for bicycles off of the public walkwa ys is essential. With the advent of electronic and video games, noise has be- come a factor that can be annoying to persons in adjacent buildings or within the sam building, as has been e xperienced with this type of busin ss in Cinderell City. Th has received numerous inquiries about th permitted locations amusement facilities from businessmen, property owners and persons w nting to establish s uch businesses in Englewood. The present provisions in the B-1, Business District regulations, and by inclusion in th B-2, Busin ss District regulations, a re minimal, sketchy, a nd difficult to interpr t. for this reason, the Planning Conunission has been asked to consid ran am ndment to th Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance in r lation to thes typ of u es. RECOMMF. DATlO Th Pl Division st ff r commends th t m n s to th C mpr h n iv Zoning Ordln nc b approv th City Council or it• consid ration: City or th following m nd- d and r f rr d to I • • • STAFF REPORT Page -2- • • • COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Case 117 -82 1. Repeal §22.4-10 b (3): Any use intended to provide amusement or entertainment on payment of a fee or admission charge. 2. Add to §22.4-10 h, Conditional Use, §§2: Amusement establishments including, but not limited to: billiard halls, bowling alleys, coin-operated games, dance halls, electronic or video games, night clubs, outdoor commercial recre- ational facilities, pool halls or skating rinks. 3. Add to §22.4-11 h, Conditional Use, §§4: Amusem nt es tablishments including , but not limited to: billiard halls, bowling alleys, coin-operated games, dance halls, elec tronic or video gam s , night clubs , o utdoor commercial rec r - ational facilities , pool halls or ska ting rinks. This action is r ecomm nded for th following reasons: 1. By r eviewing applications for p rmits for businesses which provide amusements or ent rtainment under th Conditional Use regulations, the e ffect of the specific us at asp cific location in relation to such matters as noise, adequ t off-sere t parkin , sto rage facilities for bicycl s , lighting, s c o r ag of wa s t e mat rials and screening can be evaluated and controlled. 2. As a Conditional Use , th specif i c businesses at a specific location, c ould b t o its complianc with the Goals of the Comprehensiv Plan. 3. Article VIII, Part 11 , §58 of the Engl wood Hom Rul Charter charge th City Pl nning and Zoning Comm issi n t o "pr pare and th City Council, compr hensive zoning o rd i nan c or propos d m revisions th r to, with such provision s as th e Commission h 11 d ry or d sir bl for th promotion of th health, fety, morals, and inh bit nts of the City ." Th propo e d m ndm nt with that ch rg. • I • • - \· I • • l • • • ,, • C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT April 14, 1982 (i,b Findings of Fact -Case #5-82 INITIATED BY Plenn1na & Zon1na Crnmn1es1on ACT I ON PROPOSED The City Council accept the Findings of Fact on Case #5-82 as adopted by the Planning and Zoning C<>11111ission. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The Englewood Planning and Zoning Colllllission held a public hearing on the p.roposed amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance on March 16, 1982, which proposed amendment would 11ake Motor Vehicle Repair Businesses, not including body or fender work, dis11&ntling or collision repair, and Motor Vehicle Laundry or Polishing Businesses conditional uses in the B-2 Business Zone District. There waa no opposition expressed at the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission to the proposed aaendaents. The Findings of Fact were prepared by the staff, and considered by the Planning Com- mission at their regular aeeting of April 6, 1982. It was the decision of the Com- mission that these Findings of Fact be accepted and referred to the City Council. RECOMMENDATIOJ!: That the City Council accept the Findings of Fact on Case #5-82 as adopted by the Planning Commission • • I • • • • • • • MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DATE: April 6, 1982 SUBJECT: Findings of Fact -Case HS-82 RECOHEMNDATION: Tanguma moved: Carson seconded: The Planning Commission accept the Findings of Fact and refer them to City Council. AYES: Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre, Carson, Gilchrist, HcBrayer NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen, Becker The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning & Zoning Colllllission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary • I • • • • • CITY PLANNIN G AND ZON I NG COMMISSI ON EN GLEW OO D, COL ORAD O IN THE MATTER OF CASE NO. 5-82, ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS, ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO ) AMENDMENTS TO §22.4-11 h OF THE ) COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE, ) ORDINANCE NO. 26, SERIES OF 1963, ) CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO; WHICH ) AMENDMENTS RELATE TO MOTOR VEHICLE ) REPAIR BUSINESSES AND MOTOR VEHI-) CLE LAUNDRY OR POLISHIN G BUSINESS ES, ) ESTABLISHING THOSE BUSINESSES AS ) CONDITIONAL USES IN THE B-2 , ) BUSINESS, ZONE DISTRI CT . ) A Publ ic Hear i n g was he ld on Mar ch 16, 198 2 , i n c onn ect ion with Case No. 5-82 i n the Cit y Council Chamber s in t he Engle wood City Hall. The follow i ng me mb e r s of the Ci t y Planning and Zoning Commission were present: Mr . Ba r b r e , Mr s . Becker, Mr. Car s on, Mr. Gi lchrist , Mr. McBrayer, Mr. Sent i , Mr. St oel, and Mr. Tanguma. The fo llowi n g membe r wa s absent: Mr. Al len. FINDINGS OF FACT Upon review of t he eviden ce t a ke n i n th e fo r m of t es t imony , pr esent a t ions, r eports and filed docume nts , the Ci t y Plann i n g an d Zoning Co mm ission ma kes t he followi n g Findings of Fact . 1. That proper notice of t he Public Hearing was given . 2. That upon the reconnnendation of th City Planning and Zoning Commission, th City Council adopt d a Compr h nsive Plan for th City of Englewood by Resolution No. 49, S ries of 1979, on D c mber 3, 197 , nd th t 113 Engl wood citiz ns, property own rs, and busines peopl p rticipat din th dev lopm nt of that Compreh nsiv Plan. 3. City Council th Compreh n- of th cltiz ns nd 1upport th vitality and th t bliah d bu in sa xi tin To provld th climat for ttr• tin n w buain 11, thus incr aain our t x baa I • • • • • • -2- To upgrade marginal uses and to replace or rehabilitate deteriorating structures; To create a balance of commercial uses to reflect the character of the neighborhood in which the corridor is located; To improve the visual aspects of businesses along these commercial strips. To this end, attention must be given to sign control, landscaping of parking lots and public areas, and other amenities; To encourage major redevelopment and a variety of uses by providing more flexibility through amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. This would necessitate adjusting the types of uses permitted in specific loca- tions ..••• 4. That motor vehicle repair businesses and motor vehicle laundry or polishing businesses are not permitted as Principal Permitted Use in §22.4-11, B-2 Business District. 5. That since 1963, persons wanting to establish and operate a motor veh icle repair business in the B-2 Zone District have applied to the City Planning and Zoning Connnission for th approval of such use at a specific location, under the provisions of §22.4-11 b (16) of the Com- prehensive Zoning Ordinance, which s tates: "Any similar lawful use which in the opinion of th Commission, is not objectionable ton arby property by reason of odor , dust, smoke , fumes , gas, hat, glare, radiation or vibration, or is not hazardous to the health and property of the surrounding area through danger of fire or xplosion." 6. That in several instances, motor vehicle laundry or poli hing businesses hav b en operated in the B-2, Busin ss District, ven though such uses are not listed as a Permitte d Principal Us in the B-2, Business District. 7. Th t absent requirem nts for such f ctor s: laundri • and th citiz n p rking spaces for ca r s w iting to b rvic d; ad quat sc reening to shield such us from adj c nt r sidenti 1 area d quat tor g of mt rials in a mann r to k ep th m from bl wing off of orbing carri d frOIII th prop rty onto adj cent public or privat oth r imilar prot ctions to th r a; Th t motor v hicl polishing busin •• of Engl wood. • s to nd molor v hicl erv th n d• I • • • • • -3- 9. That i f s uc h bus inesses are well-maintain d and st blish d i n a manner to mi nimize a n y n egative i mp ac t on adjac nt prop rt , by pro- viding such effect s as: adequate on-s ite pa rki ng; screening at the locations on th e sit e which are adjacent to residential neighborho od s ; proper storage of mat e rials; lighting which does not creat e a glare on neighboring residential properties and similar precaution s ; they can be a necessary addition to our b usine ss c onununit y . 10. That because of the negative impac t suc h uses may have on an area if not located with tho ught a s t o adjacent de v e lopme nt, moto r vehicle repair businesses and motor vehicle laundry and po lis h i n g busi- nesses should be considered on a s i te-specifi c basis . 11. That the Comprehen s ive Zoning Ordinanc e p r ov ides fo r such site-specific consideration through the process ident i f ied a s a Co nd itional Us e , whi c h proce dure wa s established b y Ordinan ce No . 5, Se r ies of 1978 . 1 2 . That no pe r s on s a pp e are d a t the Public He ari n g wh o i n dicat ed a desi r e to addr es s the Commis s ion ei the r in f avo r o f o r i n opposition to the pro po sed am ndm e nt t o §22 .4-11 h o f t he Compr e he n siv e Zoning Ordinance . CON CLUS IONS 1 . That p r oper no t ice of the Public H a r i n g was given in complian ce with §22.3.4 of t he Co mp r ehen sive Zo n i ng Or dinan ce . 2 . Tha t n o p rsons present wishe d t o a dd r ess th Commission i n regard to this ma tter. 3 . Tha t th Goals for the lon g-r a n ge plann i n g fo r th de ir d dev elopm nt of the City of En glewood, Co l o r a do , we r e approv d by th City Council in Resolution No. 49, Seri s of 1979 , upon the recomm ndation of the City Pl nning nd Zoning Commission and recorded in the offic of th Ar pahoe County Clerk nd Recorder. 4. Th t Artl cl 11, §58 of the Ho of th City o Engl wood, Color do, ts forth th duti of th Planning nd Zoning Commi sion, st ting th t "it sh 11 prepar m nd to th City Council, a compr h nsiv zoning ordinanc or propo nd nt or r visions th r to , with such provi ions th sh 11 d • ry or d sirabl for th promo ion of h h g 1 w lfar of th inh bit nt of th City." 5. Th t th following of Engl wood 8 S t t d in th C mpr h n lv Pl n ar g 0th h nd: To n our lity nd th xi Lin v ri ty of b. t for ttractin n w bu in ur t X ba • I • • - • • • • -4- c. To upgrade marginal uses and to replace or rehabilitate deteriorating structures; d. To create a balance of commercial uses to reflect the character of the neighborhood in which the corridor is located; e. To improve the visual aspects of businesses along these commercial strips. To this end, attention must be given to sign control, landscaping of parking lots and public areas, and other amenities; f. To encourage major redevelopment and a variety of uses by providing more flexibility through amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. This would necessitate adjusting the types of uses permitted in specific loca- tions. 6. That motor vehicle repair businesses and motor vehicle laundries or polishing businesses are dissimilar from uses now listed as Permitted Principal Uses in the B-2 Business Zone District; yet they provide a necessary service to Englewood citizens. 7. That if properly planned, such uses can be integrated into the B-2, Business, Zone District and such proper planning can be provided by permitting such uses as a Conditional Use. RECOMMENDATION Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council, that the Compreh na ive Zoning Ordinance, Ordin nee No. 26 , S ries of 1963, as mended, be amend d by adding §22.4-11 h 2 nd §22.4-11 h 3, which am ndment s would p rmit motor vehicle repair businesses and motor vehicl laundry or polishing bu sinesses s a Conditional Use in the B-2, Business, Zone District. Upon th vot on motion mad at th m ting of the City Planning and Zoning Commiasion on March 16, 1982. Tho mb rs votin in favor of th motion: Mr. Barbr , Hr a . B ck r, Mr. Cr on, Mr. Gi lchrist, Mr. McBray r, Mr. S nti, Mr. Sto 1 nd Mr. Tanguma. Thoe m mb r abs nt: Mr. All n. By Ord r o th City Pl nning nd Zoning Commiaaion. • I • • ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982-- BY AUTHORITY A Bil..L FOR • • • COUNCil.. BILL 22 INTRODUCED BY / { 'b d c/ AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING METER CUSTOMERS FROM REVERTING TO A FLAT RATE ACCOUNT. WHEREAS, the City desires to promote water conservation and equitable billing of water cor&1mers; and WHEREAS, reversion from metered service to a flat rate system of billing for water LSe is contrary to those goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCil.. OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section l. That Section 15-3-16(f) of the Englewood Municipal Code of 1969 be added as follows: 15-3-16: METER REQUIREMENTS (f) ONCE METERS ARE INSTALLED, NO WATER CONSUMER SHALL HA VE THE OPTION OF REVERTING FROM A METERED ACCOUNT TO A FLAT RATE ACCOUNT. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st day of April, 1982. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor A ttest: ex officio d ty Clerk-Treasurer r. G ry R. Hig , ex officio City Clerk-Tr asurer of the City o f Englewood, Colot'ado, her by cettify that the above is a true, cot'r ect, nd co m copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, r d in full, nd on first r ading on the 19th day of April, l 82. 7 A I • • - • • ORDINANCE NO. BY AU'lliORITY SERIES OF 1982 ___ _ A all.L FOR • • • COUNCIL BILL 23 INTRODUCED BY 1'1vJ 7 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AND THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES BY THE CITY IN THE EXECUTION OF THE DENVER REGIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT BY THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TO THE CITY OF EUGIBLE PROJECT COSTS NOT EXCEEDING $10,000. WHEREAS, the Denver Regional Council of Governments has received a Nationwide Urban Runoff Program grant to conduct the Denver Regional Runoff Program; and WHEREAS, the City has agreed to participate in a model imple- mentation project as part of that program in exchange for reimburse- ment by the Denver Regional Council of Governments of project costs up to $10,000; and WHEREAS, the City has contracted with Black and Veatch CollSJl.ting Engineers to perform the additional services in connec- tion with its participation in said plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. That City Council approves an agreement providing for a McLellan Reservoir water study that will review land use, storm water runoff, pollutants, necessary treatment and consider alternatives, as found on Exhibit 1 consisting of 10 typewritten pages titled "Contract Agreement Between the Denver Regional Council of Governments and the City of Englewood, Colorado, for the Provision of Services by the City to the Council in the Execution of the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program .• Section 2. That City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby approves the contract w n the City of Englewood and the Denver Regional Council of Gov mments and tha the City Manager be uthorlzed to sign id contract on behalf of the City. • I • - • • • • • Introduced, read in full, and pag;ed on first reading on the 19th day of Apdl, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st 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 o f Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above is a true, correct. and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introdoced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 19th day of Apdl, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • - • • • • DDIVER REGIOOAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMml'S CCNl'RACT AGREEM.ENI' BE'IWEEN 'lllE DENVER REGIOOAL COUNCIL OF GOVE!Uo\ENTS AND 'lllE CITY OF EN,L™X>D, COLORAOO, FOR 'lllE PROVISIOO OF SERVICES BY '1llE CITY TO 'lllE COUNCIL IN 'lllE EXECUTIOO OF 'lllE DENVER REGIOOAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM. Project No. 23907 Contract No. 82/033 THIS CONTRACT, effective on the day of·-~-~~---· 1982 by and between the DENVER COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (hereinafter referred to as the •council•) and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, (hereinafter referred to as the •contractor-), WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Council desires to engage the Contractor to render certain services hereinafter described in connection with an under- taking which is being financed by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: A. Employment of Co ntractor. The Council hereby agrees to engage the Contractor and the Contractor hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth in connection with the Project of the Council under Section 208 of the U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended. (33 USC 466 et seq.) 'l'1is Co ntract is funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 'l'1is Co ntract Is subject to regulations contained in 40 CFR 35.937 and 35.939. Ne ither the United States nor the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Is a party to this Contract. 8. Area Cov red. Th Contractor shall perform all neces;;ary rvic provided ll'ld r this Contract in connection with and respecting the following rea or are hereinafter called the •p1ann1ng Area•: City of Eng1 wood, Colorado C. Seo of rvic The Contractor shall do, perform, and c rry out, in a tlsf ctory mann r determined by th Council, all work described in Exhibit A, Seo of Services, o this Contract ttached her to and made part hereof. • I • • • • • D. Time of Performance. The services of the Contract shall commence upon apprnval of all parties and shall be undertaken in such sequence as to assure completion of all services required hereunder within 90 days of said approval. E. Compensation. The Council agrees to reimburse Contractor for all eligible pcoj!ct costs up to but not exceeding the 9.Jm of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000), in accordance with Exhibit A, Scope 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 Co ntract shall be null and void and shall not be binding upon any parties of the Contract. Unearned payments Lnd r this Contract may be suspended or terminated in the event the Contractor refuses to accept additional terms or conditio to tlus Contract that may be imposed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency after the effective date of this Contract. F. Method of Payment. The Council shall make payment to the Contractor upon receipt of requisitions for payment from Contractor certifying that it has performed the work under this agreement. in conformance with the terms of this agreement, and in accordance with authorized work as defined in Exhibit A, Section C. Contractor will submit requlsitions no later than the fifteenth day of each month throughout the term of this agreement; the Council will make payment to the Contractor within thirty days after receipt of such requisitions, except when receipt of grant funds is delayed by EPA beyond the control of the Council. It is expcessly understood and agreed that in no event will the total compensation and reimbursement to be paid hereunder exceed the amount of Ten Thousand dollars ($10,000) for all services required. The Council will reim Contractor for the actual cost of servic rendered within this amount, in accordance with Costs and Schedules contained in Exhib ' A, Section F. H. Co uncil contr -2- , of this • I • • • • • • L Evaluation. The Contractor understands that the Council is required to conduct periodic evaluations of the activities conducted under this grant and to monitor on an ongoing basis the performance of the Contractor to insure that the funds made available by the Grant Contract are expended in keeping with the purposes for which they were awarded, and the Contractor accordingly covenants to cooperate fully with the Council in the conduct of such evaluation and monitoring. J. Terms and conditions. The parties agree that this agreement is subject to the provisions set forth in Exhibit B of this Contract, Terms and Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth and which are specifically made a part of this Contract. K. A$1gnability. The Contract shall not assign any interest in this contract and shall not transfer any interest in the same, whether by assignment or novation, without the prior written consent of the Council thereto, provided, however, that claims for money due or to become due to the Contractor from the Co uncil under this Contract may be assigned to a bank, trust company, or other financial institution without such approval. Notice of any such assignment or transfer shall be furnished promptly to the Council. l-Changes. Any changes including any increase in the amount of the Contractor's compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the Council and the Co ntractor, shall be incorporated in written amendments to this Contract. IN WITNESS WtlEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this agreement and contract the date and year first above written. ATTEST: DENVER REGIONAL COU NC!t. OF GOVERNMENTS •council• BY-=-...,....~-=--=--,.-~~~~~~~~~~ Robert D. Farley -=--e-,""-=--:----------------=Executive Director J. w. Belmear Administrativ Offic r ATTEST: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO •contractor9 -3- • I • • • • • - 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 A §COPE OF §ERYJCES The Contractor shall do, perfocm, and carry out ln a satlafactory and proper manner, the services described herein in accordance with the considerations, definition of reaponslblltttes, and procedures outlined herein. A. General Conatderattons The U.S. Envtronmental Protection Agency ls conducting a Nattonwide Urban Runoff Pr09ram (hereinafter referred to as "NURP") wlth the ultimate objective of conducttn9 an assessment of urban runoff on a nattonwtde scale and pre- senting the flndtn9s In a report to Con9res:. In 1983. The report to Congress will describe : o th nature of urban runoff problems w here slgnlflcant problems have been identified. 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 tmplementatlon. The Council has receiv d a NURP grant to conduct the Denver Roglonal Urb.ln Runoff Program (hereinafter referred to as the "PrOt;Jram•). The basic objecttve i. of th Pr09ram are to comprehensively ewluat the nature, causes, severtty, and opportunttles for control of urban runoff problems tn the Denver reg ton. Concurrent wtth the Program, and as part of the contlnutng Cl•n Water plannln'J effort (Section 208 PL 95-217), the Council ta purautng lhe looal general pwpo111.1 government Involvement to eveluate the problems and cost• associated with tmpl mentlng nonpolnt source controls recommended by the adopted 208 Plan • • I • • - • • • • To test the feaalblllty of Implementing the control measure requirements at the local government level and to develop specific procedures for controlling treating atormwater runoff, the Council sought a local govern- ment to participate In a model Implementation project aa a part of the program. The Contractor, a major gen•al purpoae government In the DRCOG 208 planning area, haa agreed to participate aa a prototype for the Beat Management Practice Model Implementation Project (hereinafter referred to aa the "Project"). B. Council Support Responalblllty for the performance of the aervtce& desa-ibed herein rests with the Contractor. Th• Council will provide aulatance to the Contractor tn the performance of theae aervlc•1 by making available Information as desa-tbed In Section C of tht1 Exhibit. c. contractq servtctt The following ta1k defines the acope, sequence, and general achedule of work to be performed. Proc;iresa on and completion of the w1k by the Contractor to the aattafactlon of the Council will be prerequisite to the continuation of thl1 Contract. If the Contractor fails to aatlafactorlly complete the task on schedule•• described herein, the Contractor and the Council wlll renegotiate this Contract as appropriate and tn auch a manner as to meet the objectives of th• Program to the aattafactlon of the Council. • I . • • • • • DENVER REGI00AL 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 followinc;i supplemental terms and condlttona apply to the herein Contract and take precedence over any confllctlnc;i lanc;iuac;ie within the Contract. 1. Definitions. As used In this Ac;ireement: a. The term "Council" means the Denver Rec;ilonal Council of Governments. b. The term "Contractor" means the Ctty of Enc;ilewood, Colorado. c. The term "EPA" means the United States Environmental Protection Ac;iency, or lts authorized representati ve . 2. Generol a. The Council and the Contractor-ac;iree that the followlnc;i provhilon shall apply to the work to be performed under this Contract and that such provisions shall supersede any confllctlnc;i provtslor.• of this Contract. b. This Contract ts funded, ln part, by a c;irant from the EPA, Nelther the United States nor any of tts departments, ac;iencles, or employees h; a party to thls Contract. Thia Contract ls subject to rec;iulattons contained In 40 CFR, Part 33, tn effect on the date of executlon of thla Contract. c. The rlc;ihts and r medles of the Council, provided foe ln th i.e clausos, are In addition to any other rlc;ihta and remedies provided by l•w or under this Contract. I • • 3. 4. • • • Personnel . a. The Contrectcr re~ruents tbet he bu, or wW HCure at hJ1 own expenae, all personnel NClu1red 1n performing the aervices under this Contract. &uch peraonnel ahall not be employeH of, er have any contractual re1-Uonah1p with, the CouncU. b. All of the aervi~H required hereunder wlll be performed by the Contractor or under h11 aupervlaion, and ell personnel enge;ed in the work ahell be fully qualified and where required by stet• or local i.w, aha 11 be duly Ucenaed to perfann auch Hrvlcea. ' c. None of the work or aervicea covered by this Contract ahell be 1ubcontr1cted without the prior written approval of the Council. · fubcons,1cts. •. Any subcontractors e nd outside auocletes or consultants , required by the Contractor 1n connection with the services covered by th11 Agreement, will be Um!ted to auch individuals or f1r11'11 u were apeclfically &dentlfied and agreed to durlnQ ne;ot1auon1, or as are 1pec:1fically authorl&ed by the Counc:U during the performance of ttus Ag re ement. Any 1ub1Utut1on1 1n, er eddiUons to, such 1ubcontractor1, auoclatu or consultents w1ll be subJect to the prior approva l of the CoWK:11. b . The Contractor N Y not subcontract aervicea 1n uous of thirty percent (or f11ty percent , Uthe CouncU and the Contractor hereby agree) of the Contract price to 1ubcontrector1 or conawtant1 without prior writte n approval of the Couxil. 5. Igwt l tmplOYment Opporturusx. 1n a cccrdence with EPA policy, u exi,r ued 1n 4 0 CFR 30.420·5, the Contractor agrees that he wm not discrim!nete a gainst any e mployH or applicant for employment becauso of nee, religion, color, aex, age ar aaUonal arigln. ,. UUllnt!on of Sm1U tnd Minority lysJnHf • In ·~•nee With IPA ,ollcy, as axprHHd 1n 4 0 CFl U, uo, the Contractor a91'N1 tbat flUAUfi •~ a111all bua&.Mu and asnonty bu1£neu eaterpriHa 1ball Mw tlle IUJClaum ,racUcaJ oppcrtian1ty to partadpate £n the perfonunc. of EPA grant .. u&atod contncta a nd 11.1bcontre ci1. -2- • I . • • 7 • Jnterut of Htmbera of Coync11 •nd Others. No officer, member, or employee of the Council, and no members of 1U governing body, and no other pubUc official of the goverD.1ng body of the locality or localities 1n which the project SI 11tuated or being aamed out wno ex11rc1Ht any fu.nctJona or n1ponaJbn1ue1 Sn the review or approval of the underialcJng or carrying out of thla project ahlll participate 1n any decision nlaUng to this Contract which affects h11 ,.raonal 1nterHt or the 1ntereat of any oorporaUon, partnership, or auocSaUon Sn which he 11 directly or Indirectly Sntereatad or have any personal or pecunlary 1ntereat, direct or indirect, 1n this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 8. Covenant A qafnst ConUngent ftn/JnterHt of Contrp ctor. The Contractor warrants that no person or Hll1ng agency hu been employed or retained to 1ol1clt or Hcure this Contract upon an agreement or understandir.; for • commiuion, percentage, llrokera;e, or conUn;ent fee, excepting bone fide employees. For breach er violation of th11 warranty, the CouncJl she 11 hll'V e the right to annul this Contract without U.billty er 1n 1t1 discretion to deduct from the Contract 11tice er consJdareUon, or otherwiH ncover the full amount of such commi111on, percenta;e, brokerage, or conUngent fee. 9. Contra etor Rr,ponaibJUtv. The Contractor assumes full Hal:Hity and ruponl1b111ty for texe1, feea end e11e11111ents incurred by him resultJn; from the responlibilJUes, duties or compensaUon under this Agreement and agrees to 1ndemn1fy and Hve bermleu the CouncU from any U.bU.lty therefor . 10. Compllanee wJth J,w1 and Ordio,ncu, The Contractor shall comply with ell federal, 1tete end cJty laws end ordinances applicable to the Scope of Services. The Contractor a hall edd1Uonally comply with all epplical:;le reguleUons issued PW'Suant to SecUon 306 of the Clean Weter Act, end Section 308 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 11. Access to Record1/AydJts •. The Contractor 1hlll Mintain book•, Nccrda, docusne nts end other evidence directly perunent to performance on EPA ;rant work under this Contract Sn accordance with generally accepted accounUng 11tinciple, and sncUces consistently applied and ,o CFR 10.,os, and ID.BOS. The Contractor 1hall alao .. 1nta1n the UnencJal SnfonnaUon and data uaed by the Contractor Sn the llf•Pl"Uon or 1uppcrt ol the coat 1\lbmtuton r.q~d under ,o CFR u.uo-1 Sn affect on tbe date of aucuuon of tbls Contract and • oo~ of tbe coat l\laaary ellbmltted to the CoucU. TM VDi...S ltete1 lnviroaaea&al lrolectlon Agency, tt.e Controller Ge•ral ol 1M UDiled ltata1, the Unit.ad llatH l)epertaent of Labor, the Council (and the State, wlaere appUoable) or PJ of tbalr dub authorucd -1- I . ._...., /, • • • npreaentauvea, ahall have acoeu to auch booka. ncorda, document• end other aVSdence fo, the purpoH of SnapectJon. audit end copySn;. The Contncto, will lll'OVJde lll'GPe' faciUUea f~ aucti acceu and wpe"'1Jon. t,. The Contrecto, a"'"s to Snchad• paragraphs (a) and Cb) of W1 clauH Sn ell baa oontrecu and ell tier 1ubcontnct1 directly related to lll'OJect perfcnunce whJch are 1n uceu of $10,000. 12 • Iurnanauon of CpnS£tiJ for CtyH. u. through any C.UH. the Contractor shall faJl to ful(Ul, an Umely and lll'Oper •nner, h11 oblJgatJons under thJ1 Contract, or 1f the Contract« 1ball ,rJolete any of the covenenu, agree- 111ent1, o, aUpuleUona of Wa Contract, the Council 1ball '~hereupon have the rJ;ht to tennJnate thJ1 Contract by 11v1ng written notice to the Contractor of such termJn1Uon end 1pecifyJn1 tha date thereof. at le11t ten (10) claya before the effectJve date of such termJnatSon. Jn that event, all flnl1hed o, unUn11hed document a, data, 1tud1H, 1urwy1, drawings, .. pa, aodel1, photographs, and reports or other •terial prepared by the Contnctcr under W1 Contrect 1h1ll. et the opUon of the Council, become 1t1 lll'DPerty. and tlae Contractor 1hlll be e ntitled to receive just and equitable. companHUon fo, any HUsfactory work c om pleted on such documents end other Ntldals. n. t1anaD1M2o for c,onol•os• pf counc11. Th• councu may term inate thJ1 Contrect et any Um• by gJvSng wrJtten notice to the Contractor o f such termJneUon end 1pac1fyln; the effecUve date thereof. et le11t fifteen (1 5 ) clay a before the effecUve date of 1uch tanuneUon. Jn U.t event, 111 f1 n1 1hed or unf1n11hed docu1nent1 and other Nterills H dHcr!bed an para;ra;:h 12 above 1hlll , at the option of the Counc:11, become Sta lll'openy. If the Contract 11 termJnated by the Collnil H ,rovtded bare1n, tbe Coatnctor wm be paid an a mo unt whJch bears tbe Naae .. uo to tbe total ooapeuaUon H the Hl"YSCH actually performed beer to the toaal HrvJ011 of tbe Contractor covared by Ws Contra ct. leu paymenu of compeueuon ,revJoualy .. de. Provided. bowever, t he t 1f 1811 than 11Xty percent of tbe 1emoe1 oovered by th1a Contract have been perfonned upon the effecUw .. te of 1ucb teralMUon, the Contractor 1hall be re1mbur aed Un add1Uon to tbe above ,., .. rat> ,_ &Mt ,arUon of the ecutal out-of-pocke t upanaea (not otherw1H reilllburHd wader W1 Contract) lncU1Tc d by the Contra ctor. Uthe Contract 11 teraSnated •• to the fault of the Contra ctor, ,.ra,n ph 12 .. ,.of .. i.uw to termJMUon 1baU appl y . 14 . •. Except H .. , M GIMIWSle ,rowJded an w, AgreeMnt, all claia1 , ooun .. r-cla1••• '11Pllle• end otller •tten Sn caue1Uon ._twNn tbe CouncJl and tbe C•nctor ara,an, out of • NlaUne to 1111• a,,. ... nt • the a.rea ch thereof, will M dec:aded bJ arbitreUoD If ta. -4- I . • - • • • • .. rt1H berelo autua Uy a.-•, ar In a court of competent jurisdiction wilhin the lute wbich the Councill• located. b. lecoftl'Y or HtU.ment •Y S11elud• damagH, sanctions er penalUH as •Y be appropriate. 15. IDWt 6atttrn•DS. tb11 A1ree•nt and the Exbibits thereto, constitute the entire and Integrated Agreement between the Contnctar and the Council and auperNdH all prior regulaUon1, nprHen11uona or agreement•, either wr1tten or oral. THIS CONCLUDES the provl1lon of theH 1tandard terms and cond1Uons. ..... • r I . • - • • BY AU'lliORIT'i ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982 ___ _ A BILL FOR • • • COUNCIL BILL 23 INTRODUCED BY AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AND THE DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES BY THE CITY IN THE EXECUTION OF THE DENVER REGIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT BY THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TO THE CITY OF EUGIBLE PROJECT COSTS NOT EXCEEDING $10,000. WHEREAS, the Denver Regional Council of Governments has received a Nationwide Urban Runoff Program grant to conduct the Denver Regional Runoff Program; and WHEREAS, the City has agreed to participate in a model imple- mentation project as part of that program in exchange for reimburse- ment by the Denver Regional Council of Governments of project costs up to $10,000; and WHEREAS, the City has contracted with Black and Veatch Col'lS.lltl.ng Engineers to perform the additional services in connec- tion with its participation in said plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORAD O: Section 1. That City Co uncil approves an agreement providing for a Mc Lellan Reservoir water study that will review land use, storm water runoff, pollutants, necessary treat men t and consider alternatives, as found on Ex hibit 1 consisting of 10 typewritten pages titled •contract Ag r eement Between the Denv er Reg ional Council of Governments and the City of Engle wood, Colorado , for the Provision of Services by the City to the Council in the Execution of the Denver Regional Urban Runoff Program.• Section 2. That City Council of the City of Engle wood, Colorado, h reby approves the contract t w n the City of Engle wood and th Denver Regional Council of Govemmen and that the City Manager be uthorized to sign said contr on behalf of th City • • I • • - • • • • • Introduced, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st 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 is a true, correct, and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • I n n • • • - DENVER REGICW>.L COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS <XNI'RACT AGREEMml' BE'IWEEN fflE DENVER REGICW>.L COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITY OF D(;LD«X>D, COLORADO, FOO THE PROVISIOI OF SERVICES BY THE CITY TO THE COUNCIL IN THE EXECUTIOI OF THE DENVER REGICW>.L URBAN RUNOFF PRCGRAM. Project No. 23907 Contract No. 82/033 THIS CONTRACT, effective on the day of--~-~---' 1982 by and between the DENVER COUNCil.. OF GOVERNMENTS (hereinafter referred to as the •council•) and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, (hereinafter referred to as the •contractor"}, WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Council desires to engage the Contractor to render certain services hereinafter described in connection with an under- taking which is being financed by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection 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 perform the services hereinafter set forth in coMection with the Project of the Council under Section 208 of the U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended. (33 use 466 et seq.) This Contract is funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This Contract is subject to regulations contained in 40 CFR 35.937 and 35.939. Neither the United States nor the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is a party to this Contract. B. Area Covered. The Contractor shall perform all necessary rvices provided under this Contract in connection with and respecting the following area or areas, hereinafter called the •p1anning Area•: City of Englewood, Colorado C. Scope of Services. The Contractor shall do, perform, and carry out, in a tisfactory manner determined by the Council, all work described in Exhib A, Scope of Services, of this Contract attached h reto and mad a part hereof. • I • • • • • D. Time of Performance. The services of the Contract shall commence upon approval of all parties and shall be undertaken in such sequence as to assure completion of all services required hereunder within 90 days of said approval. E. Compensation. nie Council agrees to reimburse Contractor for all eligible project costs up to but not exceeding the sum of Ten niousand Dollars ($10,000), in accordance with Exhibit A, Scope of Services, provided, however, that should the United States Environmental Protection Agency disapprove this Co ntract, or refuse or fail to make the grant to the Council as contemplated by this Contract, then this Contract shall be null and void and shall not be binding upon any parties of the Contract. Unearned payments under this Contract may be suspended or terminated in the event the Contractor refuses to accept additional terms or conditions to this Contract that may be imposed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency after the effective date of this Contract. F. Method of Payment. nie Council shall make payment to the Contractor upon receipt of requisitions for payment from Contractor certifying that it has performed the work under this agreement, in conformance with the terms of this agreement, and in accordance with authorized work as defined in Exhibit A, Section C. Contractor will submit requisitions no later than the fifteenth day of each month throughout the term of this agreement; the Council will make payment to the Contractor within thirty days after receipt of such requisitions, except when receipt of grant funds is delayed by EPA beyond the control of the Council. It is expressly understood and agreed that in no event will the total compensation and reimbursement to be paid hereunder exceed the amount of Ten Thousand dollars ($10,000) for all services required. The Council will reimburse Contractor for the actual cost of services rendered within this amount, in accordance with Costs and Schedules contained in Exhibit A, Section F. G. Contractor's Pr · Manager. nie performance of the rvices required of Contractor hereunder will be under the direct supervision of Ste wart Fonda, who is hereby designated the •pr · t M nager" of this work program, who meets the qualifications as required by the Council. If, a any tim , th Pr · Manager is not assigned to this pr · t, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Council nd work all be 9.J.S?ended on th project until a Project Manager cc pt.able to the Council has been s:> assigned. H. Reporting. ni Contractor all submi r ports to the Co uncil described in Exhibit A., Scope of Servic , of this contract attached hereto d made a part h reof. -2- • I • • - • • • • L Evaluation. 'Ille Contractor understands that the Council is required to conduct periodic evaluations of the activities conducted under this grant and to monitor on an ongoing basis the performance of the Contractor to insure that the funds made available by the Grant Contract are expended in keeping with the purposes for which they were awarded, and the Contractor accordingly covenants to c ooperate fully with the Council in the conduct of such evaluation and monitoring. J. Terms and conditions. 'Ille parties agree that this agreement is subject to the provisions set forth in Exhibit B of this Contract, Terms and Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth and which are specifically made a part of this Contract. K. Assignability. 'Ille Contract shall not a!Eign any interest in this contract and shall not transfer any interest in the same, whether by ;e;ignment or novation, without the prior written c onsent of the Council thereto, provided, however, that claims for money due or to become due to the Contractor from the Council under this Contract may be ;e;igned to a bank, trust co mpany, or other financial institution without such approval. Notic e of any suc h a!Eignment or transfer shall be furnished promptly to the Council. L. Changes. Any changes including any increase in the amount of the Contractor:'s co mpensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the Counc il and the Contractor, shall be incorporated in written amendments to this Contract. IN WITNES S WHER EO F, the parties hereto have made and executed this agree ment and contract the date and year first above written. ATTEST: DE NVE R REGION AL COU NCIL OF GO VERNM ENTS •council• By-=-...,........,..-=--=:--:,-----------~ Robert D. Farley __________________ E_xecutive Director J. W. Belmear Administrative Officer ATTEST: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORAD O •contractor- By--------~---------~ Andy Mcco wn, City Manag r "G'::'.ary~"R-. -.H=C"::":e::-,-:c;;:lr.:ty:-:--:C;;ilr::e::;rk:------ -3- I • • • • • • 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 EXHIBIT A SCOPE or SERVICES Contract No. 82/033 the Contractor shall do, perform, and carry out ln a satisfactory and proper manner, the services described herein in accordance with the considerations, definttton of responstbUittes, and procedures outlined herein. A. General Constderpuons the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ts conducting a Nattonwtde Urban Runoff Pr~ram (hereinafter referred to as "NURP") wlth the ulttmate obJecttve of conducting an assessment of urban runoff on a nattonwtde scale and pre- senting the ftndtngs In a report to Congress In 1983. "the rep<>rt to Congross will descrtbe: o the nature of urban runoff problems where slgntflcant problems have been tdentlfled. o the causes of these problems, o the severtty of these problems, o opportuntttes for controlling urban runoff problems, including descriptions of control measures, thetr effectiveness, costs, and strategies for l:roed-scale implementation. The Council has recetved a NURP grant to conduct the Denver R<igtonal Urb.ln Runoff Program (heretnafter referred to as the "Program•). The baste obJecttvet. of the Program are to comprehenstvely evaluate the nature, causes, severity, and opportuntues for co~rol of urban runoff problem• tn the Denver reg ton. Concw-rent with the PrOQram, and as pert of th• conttnutnQ Cl•n Water planning effort (Sectton 208 PL 95-217), the Council ts pw-sutng the local general pl.S'poS<1 government tnvolv m nt to evaluate the problems and costs auoctated wtth implementtno nonpolnt source controls recommended by the adopted 208 Plan • • I • • • • • • To teat the feaalblllty of Implementing the control measure requirements at the local govwnment level and to develop apectftc procedures for controlling treating at«mwater runoff, the Council sought a local govern- ment to participate in a model implementation project aa a pert of the program. The Contractor, a major gen .. 1 prpoae government In the DRCOG 208 planning area, baa agreed to participate aa a prototype for the Best Management Practice Model Implementation Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). B. Council Support Reaponalblllty for the performance of the aervtces desaibed herein rests with the Contractor. Th• Council wUl provide assistance to the Contractor In the performance of the" aervtcea by making available Information as deaaibed tn Section C of thia Exhibit. c. Contractor SerytcH The following teak defines the scope, sequence, and Qeneral schedule of work to be performed. Progress on and completion of the wsk by the Contractor to the aatlafactton of the Council will be prerequisite to the conttnuatton of thla Contract. If the Contractor fails to aatlafactorlly complete the task on schedule aa described herein, the Contractor and the Counctl wlll renegotiate thla Contract as appropriate and In such a manner as to meet the obJecttvea of the Program to the aatlafactlon of the Council. -2 - I • • - • • • • 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 followinq supplemental terms and conditions apply to the herein Contract and take precedence over any confltcttnq lanquaqe within the Contract. 1. Deftnttlona. Aa used tn this Aqreement: a. The term "Council" means the Denver Reqtonal Council of Governments. b. The term "Contractor" means the City of Enqlewood, Colorado. c. The term ·EPA· means the United States Environmental Protection Aqency, or tts authorized representative. 2. Generol a. The Council and the Contractor agree that the following provil,lons shall apply to the work lo be performed under this Contract and that such provisions shell supersede any conflicting provtator.a of thla Contract. b. This Contract ls funded, In part, by a 9rant from the EPA. Neither the Untted States nor any of lts departments, agenctes, or employees ti; a party to thts Contract. Thts Contract ts subject to requlattons contained In 40 CFR, Port 33, tn effect on the date of execution of th ta Contract. c. The rtqhts and remedies of the Council, provided for tn th £. clausos, are tn addition to any other rlqhta end remedies provtded by law or under this Contract. • I • • 3. • • - Personnel. a. The Contract« nfruents that he bis, or will Hcure at his own expense. all personnel rec,iulred 1n performing the Hrv1ces under this Contract. &uch personnel shall not be employees of, cir have any contractual relaUonahJp with, the Council. b. All of the serv1!=H requlred hereunder wlll be performed by the Contractor cir under his auperv1s1on. and all personnel enge;ed 1n the work shall be fully qualified end where required by stet• or local law, shall be duly JJcenatd to perform such Hrv1cH, ' c. None of the work or Hrv1ces covered by this Contract shall be subcontracted without the prior written approval of the Council. · 4. §ubcons,1cts, a, Any subcontractors and outside associates or consultants, requlred by the Contractor 1n coMecUon wlth the services covered by this AgrHment, wlll be limited to such 1ndJv1duell or firms II were 1pec1f1caUy SdenUfied and agreed to dur1na ne;oUaUons. or as are apec1Ucelly authori&td by the Council during the performance of thls Agreement. Any 1ub1UtuUon1 1n, er add1Uons to, auch subcontrac\ora. 111oc.1Ates or consultents will be subject to the prior approval of the Council. b. The Con1ractcr NY not aubcontract Hrv1cea 1n excess of th1.rty percent (or fifty percent. Uthe Council and the Contractor hereby agree) of the Contract price to aubcontractora or consultants without prior written approval of the Cou:\Cll, S. Iqup l [mplOY1T1tn\ Qpporturµty. In accordance wuh EPA policy. as expressed 1n 40 CFR 30 .420-5, the Contractor agrees that he wJll not dlscdminate against any employee or applicant for employanent becauso of nee, nUgJon, color. HX, aee or naUonal or1,1n . ,. yuuuuon of Smpll tnd Minority 111110,u, In acc.ordance with EPA poUcy, as expreued 1n 4 0 CFR 13. UO, the Contractor agreea U..t qua111J•~ atnall bu11M11 and ainonty bustneu ea&arpr1N11bell ,.w tile aaaxsaum ,nctJcal oppc:rtunJty to partJdpate bl tbt parform•nce of EPA grant .. 11&1tod contra eta and I ubc:ontracta . •J• • I . • - 7 • Jnterut of Membfrs of Coyncu and Others. No officer, memb er , or employee of the Councll, and no members of its govemlng body, end no other pubUc official of the governing body of the locality or localities 1n which the project S1 situated or N1ng earned out wno ex.-.rciler any funcUon1 or naponaJ1>1UtJu 1n the rev1ew or approval of the undertaking or carrying out of this project ahell participate in eny dec11Jon relaUng to this Contract which affects hJ1 personel interut or the 1ntereat of any oorporatJon, partnership, or auociatJon Sn which he 11 directly or Indirectly interested or have any peraol"llll or pecuniary 1nterut, d.lrect or indirect, 1n this Contract or the proceeds thereof. e. Coverwnt Apatnst ConUngent FtuOnterut of contrpctor. The Contractor warT"anta that no person or selling agency has ~en employed or retained to 1011c1t or 1ecure th11 Contract upon an agreement or understandir.;i for a commiuion, percentage, llrokerage, er cont!n;ent fee, excepting bone fide employees. For breach or violation of thJs warranty, the CouneJl sholl have the right to annul this Contract without liabUity or in its discretion to deduct from the Contract ..-,ce or consideration, or otherwiae recover the full amount of such comm1uion, percenta;e, brokerage, or contingent !ee. 9. Contractor Rf1pon1ibJUty. The Contractor auumes full Hatility and rupona1bU1ty for texu, fees and 11H11111ent1 SncllrT'ed by him resulUn; from the reapons1bilJUes, duties or compensation under this Agreement and a;rees to lndernnlfy and save barmlea1 the Council from any liability therefor. 10. Compllance wJth Laws and Qrdlo,nees. The Contractor shall comply with ell federal, atate and city laws and ordinancu applicable to the Scope of Serv1cea. The Contractor shall edd1Uonally cornply with all appllcatle regulations 111ued pw-auant to SecUon 306 of the Clean Water Act, and Section 308 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 11 . Access to fiecords/Aydus •. The Contractor shall .. 1ntain book,, records, docu1nents and other evidence directly perUnent to perfannance on EPA ;rant work under W• Conlract Sn accordance with venerally accepted eccounun; pr1nc1plea and ,...cuces conslatently applied and 40 CFA JO.IDS , and JO .ID S. The Contractor ahaU alto .. tntain tbe Unancial WonnaUon and data ued by tbe Contractor In the preparaUon or aupport of the oo,t 1\lblu111on requwd under 40 CFR U.UO-S Sn effect on tbe date of uecuUon of tb11 Contract and a OOP)' of tbe coat auaaary 1uba1'ted to the Cowac11 . te. VDl\*5 ltata1 hviroaaeMal trotacUon .Agency. tbe Conlroller GeMral of tM Vll&ted ltatH, tbe UnU•d ltatea Departaut ol l.ebor, 1M Council (and the State, where appUoable) or an, of U..Jr d"IY autharu.od -•- • I . ; ,.,-, I I • • • npreHntatives, •hall bave access to auch books, ncords, documenta 1nd other eVSdenc• for the purpoH of SnspecUon, audit and copying. Th• Contnctor w!ll provide proper facUJUea fN' auc1' access and Snspe"-Uon. b. The Contractor a.,.., to Include paragraphs Cl) and Cb) of this clauH an all bis contracts and all Uer aubcontnct1 directly related to project perfonnance which are In UCHI of $10,000. 12. turn&nauon pf Contract (pr CtYlf· U, tbrou;h any cauae. the Contractor 1hall fall to fulfill, In UmeJy and proper •nner, b11 oblJ;1Uons under th.11 Contnct, or Jf the Contnctor aball •Jolate any of the covenants, a;ree- anent1, or aUpulatJon1 of w, Connet, th• Council 1ba1J ·~hereupon have the right to terminate this Contract by giving written notice to the Conu.ctor of such term1n1Uon and apeclfyJn; the date thereof, at le11t tan (10) daya before the effec:Uve date of auch tarmJnaUon. In that event, all finished or unfJn11he::S documents, data, 1tudle1, 1urwy1, drawings, .. ,, , aodell, photo;ra phs, an::S reports or other NterJaJ prepered by the Contnctor under th!s Contract 1h1ll, at the option of th• Council, become Jt1 property, and tbl Contractor aha 11 be entitled to receive Ju1t and equltabl~ compenHUon fc, any aat11f1ctory work completed on 1uch documents 1nd other materi1l1. 13. Tennlnatlon for CtDYIDJIDFI pf C9Vncll. The CouncU may terminate thJs Contract at any Ume by ;Jvin; written notice to the Contractor of 1uch terminaUon 1nd apacifyin; the effective date thereof, at leut flftHn (15) days before the effective date of auch tarainaUon. In that event, 111 f1nJ1hed or unf1n11hed document, and other NterJal1 11 deacrJbed in para;raph 12 above ahall, et the option of the Counc:U, become Us property. Uthe Contract 11 tennlnated by the Count) 11 ,rovlded blreln, tbe Coetnctor wm be peJd an amount which bears the NIH rauo to lbe total ooapeuaUon as lbe HrvSces actually performed bear to the total Hrvloea of lbe Contractor covered by th.is Contract, leas payments of co111peu1Uon ,revJoualy .. de. Provided, however, thlt Jf leu than 11Xty ,.,cent of thl HMOII DOVWld by tb1I Contract hive been perfonned upon the effect,,,. ate of auch tal'IUIIIUon, the Contnctor aha ll be nlmburHd (Sn edd1Uon to thl at.ave ,., .. nt> for I.bit portion of the 1cuta l out-of-poc:ltet expen111 (not otherwue relal>lll'Md ...S.r this Contract) Jnc:WTcd by the Conu.ctor. lf the Contract II teraSMted •• to the fault of the Contnctor, ,.ragnph 12 lllereof NJaU,,. to taralnlUon ahaU apply . 14. B,mfd&lf · a . Except H .. , M tll&Mn,,11 ,rcmded Sn tbl1 Agrea .. nt, au olata1, oouatar-claJ••• •11pu1e1 and IIIMr .. tters an que1Uon Mtwean thl c.uno&I and thl C•tractor ars,1n, out of• Nlet1at to W• A1ree .. nt • thl liN'each thereof. will M dedded br arbitraUOD If tbe • I . • - • .. . .. • 15. • • • .. rUe, hereto autually • .,.., or an• court of competent jud1dict1on w!lhin the State which \he Council SI looated. b. lecoftl')' or Httle .. nt •Y 111elud1 damage•, aancUou or peMlU.1 •• .. , be appropdall. JDSU• 6aC1tmtDS. Thi• A1rN•nt and the Exhlblu thereto, conaUtutl the entire and lldegrated Agreement between the Contractor and the Counc:11 and 1u,erMdes all prlor re;ulaUou, NpreHn•Uona or agrea .. nt1, either wr1tten or oral. THIS CO~CL~ES the provlalon of tMH 1tandard llfml and cond1Uons • ... • r I . . I n - • • BY Al.mlORITY ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982~~~ A BILL FOR • • • COUNCIL BILL 24 INTRODgCED BY '1 • .J • •. ? C AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7, CHAPl'ER 1..5, OF 'lT1'LE XII. OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL ORDINANCE OF ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969, AS AMENDED, UMITING PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO A 10-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1981, City Council approved an assessment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY 'ntE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII. of the EMC '69, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: 12-1.5-7: DETERMINATION OF EI.JGIBILITY The Director of Finance, in cooperation with the Director for Community Development, shall determine whether each property owner who applies for asee!Bment deferral is eligible. Upon determination that the property owner is eligible and wishes said assessment deferred, the pr-operty owner shall execute a promis9ory note and lien to the City for the 11!118Ement amoWlt, plus necessary recording fees. The promis9ory note and lien shall bear interest at the same rate as the bonds which finance the ~ ment district FOR A 10-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. 'ntEREAFTER, NO INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE. The Director of Finance shall record said lien and note with the County Clerk and Recorder for Arapahoe CoWlty. Eligibility for aseessment deferment shall be redetermined by the City AT LEAST biannually. Introduced, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st day of April. 1982 • Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Attest: easurer I • • - • • • • • :r. Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, a ccurate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full. and pas;ed on first reading on the 19th day of A~ 1982. Gary R. Higbee • I • • - • BY A\ffllORITY ORDINANCE NO. SE RIES OF 1982~~~ A BILL FOR • • • f .. 1)0 ~ ~~· COUNCIL BILL 24 INZDUCED BY \.~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7, CHAPTER 1.5, OF 'ITl'LE XII, OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL ORDINANCE OF ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969, AS AMENDED, UMITING PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO A 10-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1981, City Council approved an assessment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII, of the EMC '69, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: 12-1.5-7: DETERMINATION OF EUGIBILITY '111e Director of Finance, in cooperation with the Director for Community Development, shall determine whether each property owner who applies for assessment deferral is eligible. Upon determination that the property owner is eligible and wishes said assessment deferred, the property owner shall execute a promissory note and lien to the City for the assessment amount, plus necessary recording fees. '111e promissory note and lien shall bear interest at the same rate as the bonds which finance the asseee- ment district FOR A 10-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. THEREAFTER, NO INTE REST SHALL ACC RUE. The Director of Finance shall record said lien and note wi th the County Clerk. and Recorder for Arapahoe County. Eligibility for assessment deferment shall be redetermined by the City AT LE AST biannually. tntroduced, read ln full. and passed on first reading on the 19th d y of April 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinanc on the 21st day of April, 1982. Eug ene L. Otis, Mayor r • • I • • - • • • • I. Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Engle wood, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, acc urate and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in f ull, and passed on fiist reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee • I • • • ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982-- • • • BY AlmlORITY A BD..L FOR A.JJ~ '1 [ lf1 -COUNCIL BILL NO. 26 INTRODUCEDB)'.; COUNCIL MEMBER ,fj_,e c AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7, CHAPI'ER 1.5, TITLE XII, OF THE ASSESS- MENT DEFERRAL ORDINANCE OF ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969, AS AMENDED, LIMITING PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRED. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1981, City Council approved an assessment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII, of the EMC '69, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: 12-1.5-7: DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY The Director of Finance, in cooperation with the director for Co mmunity Development, shall determine whether each property owner who applies for as,essment deferral 1s eligible. Upon determina- tion that the property owner 1s eligible and wishes said assessment deferred, the property owner shall execute a prom:lsaory note and lien to the City for the assessment amount, pl1S necessary recording fees. 1'le prom:lsaory note and lien shall bear interest at the same rate as the bonds which finance the assessment district. INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE UNTIL INTEREST EQUALS THE AM OU NT OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRED. THEREAFTER, NO FURTHER INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE. 1'le Director of Finance shall record said lien and note with t:.'1e County Clerk and Recorder for Arapahoe ColUlty. Eligibility for ment deferment shall be redetermined by the City AT LEAST bi-annually. Introduced, read in full, nd pa9Sed on first reading on the 19th day of April. 1982. 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st day of Aprll., MaYor • I • • - • • • • • • Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-'l'reasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the 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 19th day of Apdl. 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • • • • BY AU'mOR ITY ORDINANCE NO. SE RIES OF 1 982-- A BILL FOR 1L J~ '1 [ IP1couNCTL BilL NO. 26 INTRODUCEfa BY CO UN CIL MEMBER Jblt eo AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SE CTION 7, CHAPl'ER 1.5, 'lTl'LE XII, OF THE ASSESS - MENT DEFERRAL ORDINAN CE OF EN GLE WOOD MUNICIPAL CO DE OF 196 9, AS AM ENDED , UMITING PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO AN AMOUN T EQUAL TO THE ASSESS MENT DEFERRED. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1 981, City Council approv ed an a6Be8Sment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOW S: Section 1. That section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII, of the EMC '69, as amended, is hereby am ended to read as follows: 12-1.5-7: DETER MINATION OF ELIGIBILITY The Director of Finance, in cooperation with the director for Community Dev elop ment, shall determine whether each property owner who applies for assessment deferral 1s eligible. Upon determina- tion that the prope rty o wner is eligible and wishes said assessment deferred, the property owner shall execute a promissory note and lien to the City for the asse9Bment amount, plus necessary recording fees. 1'le promissory note and lien shall ar inter at the same rate the bonds which finance the men district. INTEREST SHALL ACC RUE UNTIL INTEREST EQUALS THE AM OUNT OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFE RRED . THEREAFTER, NO FURTHER INTEREST SHALL ACC RUE. 1'le Director of Finance shall record said lien and note with the Co1»1ty Clerk and Reco rd r for Arapahoe Co unty. Eligibility for ment f rmen the City AT LEAST bi-annually. Introduc , read in full. and day o f April. 1982. be redeter mined by on f1tst reading on the 19th a Blll for Ordinance on 21st d a y of April, 1 82. M yor • I • • ~- • • • • • 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 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 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • - • • • • • 7JJ ORDINANCE NO. __ _ SERIES OF 1982 COUNCIL BILL NO. 25 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ---------A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7, CHAPI'ER 1.5, OF 'ITI'LE XII, OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL ORDINANCE OF ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969, AS AMENDED , PROVIDING THAT NO INTEREST SHALL BE PAID ON A DEFERRED ASSESSMENT. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 41. Series of 1981, City Council approved an assessment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII, of the EMC '69, as amended is hereby amended to read as follows: 12-1.S-7: DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY The Director of Finance, in cooperation with the Director for Community Development, shall determine whether each property owner who applies for assessment deferral is eligible. Upon determination that the property owner 1s eligible and wishes said assessment deferred, the property owner shall execute a prnmissory note and lien to the City for the a915e$ment amol.K'lt, plus necessary recording fees. The promissory note and lien shall NOT bear interest. at ~ sa111e Ht& tll!I iM b&MS whien EiMJ'lee ~ _.ent llla.riet.. The director of Finance shall record said lien and note with the County Clerk and Recorder for Arapahoe County. Eligibility for asses;ment deferment shall be redetermined by the City AT LEAST bi-annually. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 19th day of Apdl. 1982. Published 1982. Attest: a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st day of Apdl. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor I • • In - • • • • • I. Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby cettify that the foregoing is a true, accurate, and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and pas;ed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • I - • • • • 7JJ ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1982 __ _ COUNCIL BILL NO. 25 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ---------A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7, CHAPTER 1.5, OF 'lffl.E XII, OF THE ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL ORDINANCE OF ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE OF 1969, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING THAT NO INTEREST SHAU. BE PAID ON A DEFERRED ASSESSMENT. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 4l. Series of 1981, City Council approved an assessment deferral plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section l. That Section 7, Chapter 1.5, Title XII, of the EMC '69, as amended is hereby amended to read as follows: 12-1.5-7: DETERMINATION OF EUGIBILITY The Director of Finance, in cooperation with the Director for Community Development, shall determine whether each prnperty owner who applies for assessment deferral is eligible. Upon determination that the property owner is eligible and wishes said asses;;ment deferred, the property owner shall execute a promissory note and lien to the City for the assessment amount, plus necessary recording fees. The promissory note and lien shall NOT bear interest. at ~ sa111e Fat.& as~ e&ftds .-hieh &laMe the -et'lt ~ The director of Finance shall record said lien and note with the County Clerk and Recorder for Arapahoe County. Eligibility for assessment deferment shall be redetermined by the City AT LEAST bi-annually. Introduced, read in full. and passed on first r ading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Published 1982. A a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st day of April. , Mayor asurer • I • • - • • • • I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, accurate, and complete copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and pa$ed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2- • I • • n - r • • • • BY AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. SE RIES OF 1982 __ _ A BILL FOR COUNCil. Bil.L NO. 27 INTRODUCED BY COUNCil. MEMBER ----''------- AN ORDIN ANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMEN T WITH VARIOUS CITIES OF THE COUNTY OF ARAPAHOE AND BROWN, BORTZ AND CODDINGTON RELATING TO DENVER /ARAPAHOE COUNTIES FISCAL FLOW STUDY. WHEREAS, an analysis of income and expenditures between the cities of Arapahoe County and the County of Arapahoe with City and County of Denver is necessary in order to properly assess charges for services in inter- governmental relation.ships; and WHEREAS, Brown, Bortz and Coddington has the expertise and ability to conduct such a study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY CO UNCil. OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An agreement titled "Professional Services Agreement City of Aurora, Aurora, Colorado, and Brown, Bortz and Coddington, 100-82-100-020, Denver/Arapahoe Counties Fiscal Flow Study• is hereby approved. Said agreement provides that Brown, Bortz and Coddington shall provide professional services as a consultant to determine what benefits Arapahoe County residents receive from public goods and services provided by the City and County of Denver and the pro portionate share of taxes that the Arapahoe County residents pay. Further, whether County residents are adequately compensating Denver for library and cultural facilities. The method of study shall involve initial research, review a revenue and expenditure base, estimate key economic variables, analyze revenues of each local j.Jrisdiction tracing back appropriate portions of these revenues to residents of other j.Jrisdiction.s, analyze the e xpe nditures of each j.lrls- diction, examine flows from one j.Jrisdiction to another, and integrate results and estimate fis:al flows. Shopping patterns shall be reviewed, irx:omes analyzed, and local revenues, including property, taxes, sales and taxes, cigarette taxes, among oth rs, shall be examined. Local expenditures for th j.Jrisdiction.s shall be investig ted, transfers through intermediaries, including th State, Regional Transportation District, Metropolitan Sewer District, and other districts, all be considered. A report shall be mad concerning each factor of study. A copy of said agreement is attached hereto and marked Exhibit A. Section 2. Th Mayor o th City of Englewood and th Director of Finance, ex officio City Clerk-Tr rer, r hereby vely authorized to sign and t said clocum n for nd on half of city Council and th City of Englewood • • I • • - • • • • • Introduced, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 21st 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, introducec, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 19th day of April, 1982. Gary R. Higbee -2-I • • I n - • CA-1 J C (3/80} • • • PROFESS IONAL SERVICES AGREEME NT CITY OF AURORA AUR ORA, COLORADO AND BROWN, BORTZ AN D CODD INGTON 100 SO UTH MA DI SON DENVER, COLORADO 80209 PRO JECT NO . 100-82-100-020 DE ER /ARAPAHOE COU JES FIS CAL FLOWS STUDY Marc 1 82 I . • - Section I Section 11 Section Ill Section IV Section V Se c tion VI Section \'Il Se ction VIII Section IX • CA 143 C (3/ 0) • • • • TAJILE OF CONTENTS Basic Services of the Consultant The City's Responsibilities Mutual Obligations of the City and the Consultant Payment and Fee Schedule Charter, Laws and Ordinances Termination of Contract Change Orders or Extensi ons Equal Emplo}"'lllent Opp o rtunit y Special Conditions • I • • • • • - AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMEN T made as of the ___ J_O_t_h ___ o.ay of_....:..M:.::a.:..r;.c.:..:h ____ _ in the year Nineteen Hund red and Eighty-Two by and between the City of Aurora, Colorado hereinafter called the CITY, and Brow ne, Bortz _&_c_o_d_d_i_n~g~t_o_n _______ ----!hereinafter called the CONSULTANT, WITNE SSETH , that whereas the CITY intends that the CONSULTANT, upon written au thor iza tion as hereinafter specified, shall perform services as hereinafter provided : wh ich are in a ccordance with the project scope and any addenda thereto , which scope o f services by this CONS ULTANT together with addenda, if any , shall become a part of thi s agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY a nd the CONSULTANT f o r the consideration hereinafter set f orth agree a s f ollows. SECTI ON I -Responsibilities a nd Basic Services of the Consultant A. The CONSULTANT a grees to perfo rm pro fe ssional services in conRe ction with proj e cts as hereinafter stated. Refer to Special Co nditions where a pplicable (as 11 a s map~ and /o r drawing s where a pplicable.) B. The CONSULTA!ZT shall serve a s t he Ci ty's professional consultant in phases a s specified, and shall give con sultation a nd advice t o the Ci t y during the performance of t .is services . C. Al l work to be performed by the CONSULTANT shall be authori zed in writing by the Contract Ad inistrator subject t o Council authorization a s provided by Ordinance. Said a uthorization shall set forth all special cond1t1ons and requirements not otherw ise provided for in this Agreeme n . o. Time of performance. Th services to be performed by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be commenced immediately upon notice in wr iting from the City and shall be completed 140 consecutive calendar days unless extended by the City in wr iting. E. The CONSULTANT shall inform the City in wr iting of all sub- consultants it intends to h1r to perform work in connection with his proJect and shall ke p the City inform don a ny changes or addition s to this information. Th City will a pprove a ll sub- consultants prior to commencemen of work on this pr oject. Th CONSULTANT shall b rupons1 le for the performance of th sub- consul ants. No hing contain d herein shall c r est any contractual relat1onsh1 between an y sub-consultant and the City. CA-143 C (3/80) I • • - • • • • • F. Where applicable, the CONSULTANT shall furnish the City a set of reproducible record prints of drawing showing those changes made during the construction process based on the marked up prints, drawings and other data furnished by the Contractor and/or the field inspector to the CONSULTANT. The furnishing of such reprodu- cible "as-built" 111aterial shall be a requirement of the CONS ULTAN T whenever services under this Agreeme nt involve a structure or im- provement unless specifically waived in writing by the City and final payment for the services provided hereunder shall be withheld until such is fur nished. G. Scope : The scope of services is detailed in the atta chments to this contract, which are herein incorporated by reference as follows : CA-143 C (3/80) Attachment I -Proposal fro m Browne, Bortz & Coddington dated January 29, 198 2 . Attachment II -Supplementa l proposal from Browne, Bortz & Coddingto n da t ed Feb ru a ry 17 , 198 2. I • • • - H. The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for any injury to persons or damage to property from negligent acts or errors and omissions of the CONS ULTA.~T . its agents and employees. The CONSULTANT shall provide the City with a certificate of liability coverage as follows : (1) The CONSULTANT shall carry a Comprehensive General Liability Insurance policy including Broad Form Property Damage , Completed Operations and Contractual Liability for limits not less than $4 00 ,000 .00 each occurrence for damages of Bodily Injury or Death to two (2) or l!\Ore persons subject to $15 0,000.00 for damages of Bodily Injury or Death t o one person and $100,000.00 each occurrence for damage to or destructi on of property and (2) The CONSULTANT shall carry a Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance policy including coverage for all owned motor vehi cles and hired a nd non-owned motor vehicles for limits not le ss than $3 00,000.00 each accident for all damages of Bodily Injury or Death t o tw o or more persor.s s ject t o Sl 00 ,000 .00 for dar-,ages of &o~ily In Jury or Death to one person and $50,000.00 each occurrence for all damage to or destruction of property. (3) Insurance Coverage Special Hazards : Special Hazards coverage such a s, but not limited t o , property damage as a result of Explosion hazard, Collapse hazard, Underground Property damag e hazard, col!l'1o~ly known as XCU, shall be required if specified in Section IX, Special Conditions. (4) Workmen's Compensation Ins ranct: Worlcnen's Co~rensatio Insurance shall cover t h obliqations of the CONSULT.J.l-T 1n accordance with the provisions of the orkmen's Compensa ion Act, as aJ11endad, of the State o! Colorado. (5) Sub-Contra ctor's Insurance : lt shall b the responsibility of th CONS ULT AN T to see that his sub-con rectors are properly insured to met the Above r quirem n s b fore he permits them to comrnen c operation of th proJ ct. (6) CA-143 C (J/80) The CO!.SULTlllT agree s to aave and hold the and all claims, causes of a c tion, su sad I • • • • • • liabilities which ar ise in connection with the CONSULTANT'S negl igent perfo nnance hereunder. The CONS ULTANT will maintain such insuranc e against errors and om issions a s will protect hi.In from claims resulting from the performance of his work under this Agreement . Said coverage shall be in an am ount not less than .:..s_s_o..:,.,o_o_o_. ___ _ This indemnification shall not apply to claims or demands arising ou t of circumstances involving professional liability, except those caused by neg ligent acts of the CONSULTANT in performance of the services hereunder. If t he deductible provisions of the CONSULTANT'S coverage are questionable , the City may then request '"P r oof of Assets.'" SECT!ON II --THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES The City shall: A. Provide full information including detailed scope as t o its requiremen ~ for the pro jects. B. Assi st the CONSULTANT by placing at his disposal all available information pertinent to the si es of the proJects including previous reports a nd any other data rela tive o design or con~tructio~ of the pro jects. C. Give prompt notice to the CONS~LTANT whenever the City observes or other,,ise become s aware of any defect in the projects. o. Obtain approval of all gov rl'll!lental authorities having jurisdiction over the projects and such approvals and consents fro~ such other individual s or bodies as may be necessary for completion of the pro j ects. E. Furnish, or direct the CO SULT ANT to provide at th City's expense, necessary add itional services. SECTI ON III --TUAL OBLIGAT O S OF TH CITY Atm THE CONSULTANT A. This Agreement does no guarantee to th co.:srl.TA!:T any work excep as authorized in a ccordance 1th Section J above, o r create an exclusive Consulting contract. B. All of the I rvices cone~ la ed under t 11 A shall no be a11igned, I le or tra sferred of the City. nt are personal and out th written censer. C. The C SULTANT and any and all of 1 ti penonn l ut 1Z d b)' th City I • • -• • • under the terms of this Agreement s hall rema in the agents and em Floyees of the CONSULTANT and are not , nor shall be construed to be , a ge ts or employees of the City. D. All plans and specifications prepared b y the CO SCLTANT are the produc of his training, experience a nd professional skill; a ccordingly, the y remain his property, and he s h a ll maintain them in their bid condition f or future reference. The City shall rece ive a reproducible copy f o r use solely in connection with this projee An y re-use will be only with the CONSULTANT'S wr itten permission. E. Whenever possible the period of perfo rma nce of a ny speci f ic p r oject undertaken by the CONS ULTANT shall be mutually determined b y t he City a nd the CONS ULTANT prior to the tiJne that notice to proceed on such work is given by the City . SE CTION IV -PAYMENT AND FEE SCHE DULE It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto, that t he City shall pay the CONSULTANT for servi ces furni shed, and the CONS ULTANT shall accept as full payment for such servi ces, amou n ts of mo ney computed as f ollows: A . The CONS ULTANT shall maintain hourly rec ords of time worked b y its personnel to support any audits the City may requ i re, and s hall bill the City monthly for costs ac crued during the prec e ding month . Bil lings shall be separated as necessary to show direct charges to specifi c project or jobs. Upon submission o f such billings to the City, and app r oval b y de signa ted City personnel, payment shall be issued. It is understood a nd agreed that the City ma y require a maximum of twenty-one (21) da ys t o process paymen after receiving i ll ing in proper f o rm on forms provided by the City. B. Total Compensatio ; The Ci y agrees t o pay and the CONS ULTANT agrees t o a ccept for the technical a nd professional services contained in Section I contracted herein a s:ll", not t o exceed 60,000. ~~~~dollar s. This fe e shall include all service s rendered by t he CONSULTANT under this Ag ree~ent including all travel, living and overhead expenses incurred by the CONSULTANT in connection with performing the services herein except for special servi ces author ized in writing by the City. The sur, abov stipulated shall be considered a "Not to Exceed" cost to the City. SECTIO' V --CKARTE:R, LAWS AN!> ORDINA!lCES The CONSULTANT, at all t s, a grees to observe all Federal a nd State Law s, Ordinances, a nd Char er Provisions of the City of Aurora, a nd a ll rules and regtila ions issued purauan thereto, which in a ny manner affect or gov rn the planning and construction of rk contempl ated under this Agre nt. It, any cause, a nd ro r ann r its o shall viola• a ny of tract, h Cly shall CA-1 J C (J/ 0) VI --TFRMlNATl or C t,;TRAC'T SULTA?lT shall tail to fulfill 1 • f the lSl"LTAt;T 10n of this Con- hU Con ract I • • - • • • • • by giving written notice to the CONS ULTANT of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least five (5) days before the effective date of termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, computer programs, data, studies, surveys , drawing s, maps, models, photographs, and reports or Q.ther material prepared by the CONSULTANT under this Contract shall, at the option of the City, become its property, and the CONSULTANT.shall be enti tled to receive just, equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials . Notwithstanding the above, the CONSULTANT shall not be relieved of liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of the Contract by the CONSULTANT, and the City ma y withhold any payments to the CONSULTANT for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the CONSULTANT is determined. TER.~INATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF CITY The City ma y terminate this Contract at a ny time by giving written notice to the CONS ULTANT of such term ination and specifying the effective date thereof, at lea st fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all fin ished or unfinished documents, computer programs, da ta, studies, surveys, drawings, maps,model s, photo- gra phs , and reports or other material prepared by the CONSULTANT under this Contract shall , at the option of the City, become its property. If the Contract is term inated by the City a s provided herein, t he CONSULTANT will be paid an am ount whi ch bears the same rat io to the total compensation as the services a ctually performed bear to the total services of the CONSL'LTA.~~ covered by this Contract, less payt!'ents of compensation previously made. If this Contract is terminated du~ to the fault o f t he CONSULTANT, termination of Contract for cause, relative to termination, shall apply. SECTION vn --CHANGE ORDERS OR EXTENSIONS The City, may from time to time, require changes in the scope of the services of the CONS ULTANT to be performed herein. Such changes, in- cluding any increase or decrease in the amount of the CONSULTANT'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the City and the CON S~LTANT, shall be incorporated in written Change Orders or Extensions to this Contract . CA-143 C (3/80) I • • In - • • • - SE CTION VIII --EQUAL EMPLOYME NT OPPORTUNITY A. The CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for em ployment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall adher to acceptable affirmative action guidelines in sel- ecting employees and shall ensure that employees are treated d uring emplo y- ment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layo ff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection f o r tra i ning, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT agree s t o post in conspicuous places, available to employ ees and appli c ants for employment, notices to be provid ed by the Local Publi c Agency setting forth the provis ions of this nondiscrimina tion clause. B. The CONSUl.TA~'T wil l, in all solicitations or advertisements for employ e es placed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, state that a ll qualified applicants wi ll receive consideration for empl oyment without regard t o race, color , religion, sex or na tional origin. C. The CONSULTANT will c au se the foregoing provisions t o be inserted in al l subcontrac ts for any work covered by this contra ct s o that such provisi ons wi ll be binding up on each subcontractor, provid ed tha t the foreg oing pro- v isions sha ll not app ly t o contracts or subcontracts for standard commercial su ppli e s or raw materials. D. The CONSl'LTANT shall keep such re cords a nd submit such reports concerning the racial an d ethnic or igin of a pplicants for em ployment and em ploy e es a s the City of Au r o ra, State and Federal Ag~ncies may req uire. E. The CONSULTANT agr ees t o comply with such ru les , re gulations of guidelines a s the City of Aur o ra, State or Fe der a l Agen ci e s ma y issue t o impleme nt t hese requirements. A. SE CTIOS IX --SPECIAL CO ITIOSS Wherever the words "Ci ty o Aurora " or "Ci ty ' appear in this Agreement, th~y shall be taken to mean the collective qroup o governmental ent i ies w.1ch are co~tract1ng for this service, towit : City of Aurora, City of L~ttlet?n , City? Greenwood Vill age, City of Glendale, City of Cherry H1lls .V1llage, C1 y of Bow Ma r , City of Englewood, and Arapahoe County. The_C1ty ?f Aurora shall serve as the agency responsible for contract ad- m1n1strat1on . Separate letters from these entities have been received ~Y the City of Aurora which state the intent of each entity to participate 1n the cost of th is project, a s follows: Cit o Aurora City of Cherry Hills Vil lag City of Englewood $26,400 1,200 6,000 • I • • - • • City of Greenwood Village City of Glendale City of Littleton City of Bow Mar Arapahoe County Total • • - S 1,200 600 6,000 $00 ;:H/- 18 ~00 ""''-$60, 00 B. Invoices should be submitted to the City of Aurora, Office of Contract Administration, Room 712, 1470 South Havana Street, Aurora, Colorado 80 012 . With reference to Section IV, Payment and Fee Schedule, Subsectio~ A, the Ci t y shall make every reasonable effort to process pa yment within the stipulated twenty-one (21) day period . However, beca us e of the number of parties to this contract whose ap proval may be necessary prior to payment, this time period may of nece ssity not be met . Therefore, the CONSULTANT un derstands and agrees that payment within forty-five (45 ) da ys is acceptable . • I • • - • • • • • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed th i s Agreement as of the day and year first above wr itten. Approved as to fonn: Assistant City Attorney, Aurora Colorado Attest: Deputy Ci t y Clerk, Aurora, Colorado Attest : Attest: Attest: Atte s t : At es At est: Attest: CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO B : Title: CITY OF CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE B : Ti tle : CITY OF ENGLEWO OD B : Title: CITY OF GREE WOO ILLAGE B : Title: CITY OF GLENDALE B : Title: CI Y OF LITLE 0 B : Title : CI Y OF BO . R B : Title :~~~~~~~~~~ ARAPAH OE CC U· Y BJ..:..:---------- Tit l • I . • • - • • CONSULTANT Browne, Bortz and Coddington B : Title : Date: • I • • • • - • [ I I j I l r • " • • • • DENVER-ARAPAHOE COUNTY FISCAL FLO WS STUDY -Prepared for - Arapahoe County Mayors and Managers Arapahoe County, Co 1 or ado -Prepared by - Browne, Bortz & Coddington 155 South Mad ison Street Denver, Colorado 80209 (303) 321-2547 29 January 1982 Attachment I Page 2 of 19 I n I . • [ I ., . I • Browne Bortz & Codd i ngton ,5:; Sou·~ "l a~15,on De " .e· Co :-·ado 80 209 ,3v3 32 -254 .... .... Ms. Christine E. MacMillan Contract Coordinator Office of Contract Admin i stration City of Aurora 1470 South Havana Street, Room 712 Aurora, Colorado 80012 Dear Christine : • • - Attach ment I Pagel of 19 29 January 1982 Browne, Bortz & Coddington (BB C) is pleased to respond to your invitation to submit a proposal for professional consulting services. A reconmended study approach and information about the general background of our fir m, experience of spec ific team members and examp l es of past projects are includ ed. As an economic, financ ial , market and po licy analys i s consulting f irm act ive in the Denver Metropolitan Area for the past decade, BBC is uniquely qua lifi ed for the proposed study. The f irm br ings to the pr oject consider able local experience an d fa il i ar i t y wi th Denver and Arapahoe County f iscal systems. BBC has an extens iv e local data base, pract ic al understanding of intr a-jurisdic tional flows in the Denver Metropo litan Area and past wo rking relationships with most Arapahoe County conmuni- ties. For this study, the BBC project team will be joined by Dr. Thomas Mu ller , Director of Conmunity Impact Studies at The Urban Institute. Dr. Mu ller is a nationally recognized expert in urban fiscal ana lysis, and is respon- sible for develop ing the most conmonly appl i ed methodology in the country for evaluating fiscal flow s among metropol itan area jurisdictions. H1s work in the Richmond, Virginia area played a significant role in a U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning intra-metropolitan fiscal flows. If we can prov i de any additional inform at ion regarding our prop osed approach, qualifications ore perience, please contact e loo or- wa rd to wor ing with many of the Arapahoe County jurisdictions aga in on this challenging project. Enclosures hf • Sincerely, ~b~ eith D, or Senior Partn r I • • t I r I ' I • • • SECTION I. INTRODUCTION Attachment I Page 3 of 19 This proposal is for a project involving the measurement of fiscal flows between the City and County of Denver and the jurisdictions in Arapa hoe County, Colorado. The impact of non-residents on municipal revenues and expend i - tures i s of particular concern. Th i s section of the proposa 1 out 1 i nes key background issues, descr i be s the general approach to fiscal flows analys is an d sulTl!larizes firm qua lifications. Overv i ew Ana lysis of the fiscal interactions between Denver and Arapahoe Coun ty jurisdictions is timely and potentially ve ry import ant. A comprehensive analy - sis of fiscal flows--including revenue effects an d the imp act of funds transfers through the Stat e--w ill provide a more valid and defens ible basis for drawing conclusions than the pi ecemeal analyses of individual serv ic es (such as cultural fac ili ties and hospitals ) which have been conducted thus far by the City and County of Denver. It may also suggest an entirely different picture as to wh o is benefitting and who is be i ng subsidized. Background. Cons i derable ana ly s is has been accomp 1 i shed to analyze the costs assoc i ated with non-resident use of Denver 's publ ic facilit i es and ser ic es. o date, very i t l ee ort has been extended toward evaluat ing the other s i de of the i ssue, namely the p~s i t i ve f i scal impacts on Denver from non- res 1dents and the costs borne by suburban co11111unities serving Denver res idents. Arapahoe County May ors and Managers are concerned about the flow of benef i ts and revenues between Arapahoe County jurisdictions and the City and County of Denver. Ins i g t is needed to determine the extent to wh i ch Arapahoe Coun ty residents contribute re enues to the City and County of Denver in supp ort of Dever services an d fac1l i ties and, conversely, the extent to wh ich Den er residents utilize Arapa oe County ser ic es and fac iliti es and correspond ingly contrib t reven e to Arapaho County jurisdict ion s . A caref l analysis of t he sources of de and placed on publ icl y pr ovided services , plus, t horough study of th revenue structure of all re l ated juris- dictions is n cessary to achieve an und ers tand i ng of these unicipal f iscal relationships. Translating the complex interrelat ionshi ps that ex ist a ong reg ·on al jurisdic ions in t o easily understood statistical measures is the under- lying a1m of th is study. ey i ss s. Th not i on that the City and County of Denver is sub- sidi z i ng ne ighboring suburban areas by provid i ng unre im bursed services to con- u ers , shoppers and users of cul t ural nd med ic al fac i lit i es is a longstand ing po itical Issue. The issu has gro n wi th the C ty and County's su ccess in gaining leg isl at ive att ntion to the issu s, and wi th i ts recent dtc is,on o r strict library services nd impos charg s for non-residents. Th re is e ery r ason o b 11 ve that th ,ssu will cont,n e to grow. Ongo ng D nver C y Counc·1 discussions of po ent 1at Denver at r Board ac ions , i nclud ing cur a 1l- 1ng agr nts to ser n w suburban areas and Iner asing suburban ar ea char; ar bu one e •~pl . h av rag :>en r o r or pol ic ~a er appe rs ob 11 • I • • - L I . • • - Attacnment i Page 4 of 19 un equ iv oca ll y that Denver is being exploited. The response has been both to seek counterva i1 i ng payments from the state or the suburban juri sd i ct ions an d to create class distinctions between central city and suburban users of se rvices. All of this has occurred without the benefit of an objective, compre- hens iv e analys is of what the fiscal flows really are. A comprehensive analy sis will determ in e the value of those services which Denver provides to Arapahoe County residents (and for wh i ch it is not already reimbursed) aga in st (1) those unreimbursed services which Arapahoe County jurisdictions provide to Denver residents, (2) the net contributions which Arapahoe County residents make to Denver's revenue base through sales taxes, property taxes, the head tax and other sources, and (3) the net flow of funds from Arapahoe County to Denver through the state (primarily via income, sales and excise taxes). It is important that this analysis be objective, rigorous, and defens- ible. Should the study find that the fiscal flows are in favor of Arapahoe County, it will be reviewed closely and critically by Denver's Planning Depart- ment, Office of Policy Analysis and other Colorado pol icy makers. Our exper ience is that, if done we ll, the analysis can also provide useful insights abo ut existing revenue structures and the ir responsiveness to growth or decline for those jurisdictions being studied. Objectives. The principal objective of the study is to determ in e whethe r the benefits Arapahoe County res i dents receive fro pub 1 ic goods and serv ic es ptov id ed by the City and County of Denver are proportionate wi th the revenues pa id to Denver. There is some concern that a di sproport i onate rela- t ions hi p might ex ist between use of services and revenue flows between the tw o entities. Arapahoe County jurisdictions are specifica ll y in terested in deter in- ing whether County res i dents are adequately compensat in g Denver for the l ibr ary and cultural fac ili ty benef its prov ided by the centra l city. Addit ionally, a var iety of direct and i nd irec t revenue gen erat i ng i nstru ents ava i lable to the two ent ities will be exa in ed for comparison wi th serv ic e and facility use by residents and non-residents. It is intended tha straig t-forward, mean ingful easures of f isc al relat1onsh1ps will be de eloped. In add ition to th use of secondary indica ors o fiscal 1nteract1on, pr i ary research (sur eys and persona interviews) will b applied to assess t e full scope o jur sdlc onal interdependence. Results of the proposed research w 11 prov ide a 11 docu ented yet easily understood descri pt ,on of the econo . ,c re 1 at 1onship betwee n Denver and Arapahoe Cou ties. Fiscal Flo ws Me hodology After more t han a decade of trial, errnr an d application , the general hodology for conducting fiscal flows analysis is no well established. he r co nded BBC approach reflec s the successes an d ailur s of pas researc "or ally int rested 1n the topic bee use o plo,ted, res archers soon found a ory. Using s condary source da!a on a late 1950's and arly l960's, Jul us • I • • L I 1 I I J • • - Attachment I Page 5 of 19 3 Ma r golis found that "It is clear that the greater the outs ide population relative to the size of the central city, the greater will be the central city's loca l public expenditures." However, "the argument that central cities are exploited by suburbs is not well establ ish ed. If anyth i ng, central cities may be rela- tively better off."(1) Similarly, Harvey Brazier found that "conceivably the suburban ·te, through his contacts with the city, contributed as much or more to the latter's tax bases as it required to finance the additional expenditures he imposes upon it."(2) In one of the first analyses within a specific city, R.F. Smith found that in 1967, corm,uters to San Francisco contributed some 18 to 50 percent more in revenues than the city required to attract and to service them. To be certain, not all ea rly results were in favor of the suburbs. However, those which found most dec isi vely for the central city included inappropri ate or highly controversial methodologies. Samue l Book's study of New York City co rm,uters was faulted for its failure to include many relevant revenue categories, including sales taxes.(4 ) William Neenan's study of se l ected ser- vice categories in Detro it introduced a cont rovers i a 1 argument that, because suburban residents had higher incomes, the value of central city services to them should be calculated at a higher rate.(5 ) Recent methodology. Confronted with a maze of partial, often biased analyses and realizing that a more balanced, comprehensive approach was requ ir ed to answer fiscal flows questions, The Urban Institute began a mult i -year project in the ear ly 1970 's to develop and apply appropriate techniques. The f i rst project, app li ed in the Washington metropolitan area, found that when the bene- f its of services to northern Virginia and eastern Maryland residents were calcu- lated based on the costs of providing services, Washington, D.C. rece iv ed a ne f isca benefit fro i s neig boring suburban counties.(6) When eenan's approach for attributing a higher rate of benefits to higher income residents ( the "wi 11 i ngess to pay" argume nt) was app 1 ied to the Urb an Instit ut e ' s Wash ington data, the results turned around to show ad erse effects on the central city. This approach has been rejected by bot the Urban Institute an d BBC as overly academ i c and internally inconsistent. For example, it could show Greenwood Village receiving more in benef its from a Denver service that i t would cost to replicate the service in Greenw ood Village. The "willingness to pay argument • has also been ignored by t e courts (s ee below ). Since the Washington study, The Urban Institute's comprehensive ethodology has been refined and strea lined. It has been app lied in Fairfax County, Virginia and in the Richmond, irginia Metropolitan Area. The Richmond analysis, wh ich found that the central city benefitted fro its fiscal interactions with surrounding counties, has been reviewed in detail by the judicial process and has served as a major basis for an annexa ion decision.(7) It has been reviewed and cited by the U.S. Supre Co rt.(8) Project approach. Many of the elements of this refined, st~ea lined me hodology are closely related to those wh ich have been employed in f iscal impac analysis and forecasting, noteably on de ense establish nts by the Urba Ins it e and on energy proJects by the University of Denver Research Ins itu e I • • • • - Pa ge 6 of 19 (DR!) an d Br owne, Bortz & Codd i ngton (BBC ).(9 ) A large nu mber of proj ect s of this t ype ha ve been con ducted by BB C beg i nn i ng i n 19 74 wi th a deta il ed analysis of pr oj ect ed f i scal flows in Sweetwater County, Wyom in g and continuin g t o t he prese nt t i me . The genera 1 methodo log i ca 1 structure used for t hi s pro j ect wi 11 be essent i ally the same as that employed in Fairfax County and Ri ch mon d, Virgi ni a . C The data collection and analytical approach wi ll closely follow proce dur es develope d by BBC in previous Colorado work on fiscal flows. I . • ' L • Qual i f i cations As out l ined i n this proposal, BBC is un i quely qua li f i ed for the Den ver - Arapahoe County Fi sca l Flows Study: • The f i r m br i ngs to the project cons i de r able l ocal expe ri - en ce an d fam ili ar i ty wi th Denver and Ara pahoe Count y f i s- ca l systems . In the last year alone, ove r a doze n stud i es have been completed in the area, focus i ng on f i scal i mpa ct s , growth management and econo mic fea si bi l i ty . Recent projects have been comp l eted i n Aurora, Li ttleton, Englewo od, Cherry Hi lls Vill age, Greenwoo d Vil lage and un i nc orporated Arapahoe Count y . • As a Denver area firm wi t h over 10 ye ar s of expe ri en ce , BB C ha s an e xtens i ve data base on the area , and a pra c- t ic al un de rst andi ng of comm unity in te rrela t ion s hi ps in t he metro poli tan ar ea. • Wo r in pro gr es s, including a st udy of t he im pa ct of energy developm ent on t he economy of t he Denv er Area f or t he DRCDG and an ana lysi s of t he f isc al im pa ct s of de velopm ent f or the Ci t y of Au ror a, will provi de a uni que and valu ab le pe rs pec tiv e for t his ef fo r t. Additional examples are includ ed in the Qualific at ions section. • BBC has a long-standing credibility in the area of finan- cial analysis and a proven ability to work effectively in polit ic ally sensitive situat i ons. Examples are prov i ded in our qualifications statement. We have a strong vested interest in ma in ta ining this trac record. • BBC i s a recognized author i ty on regional econom ic and public f i nance modeling, having completed numerous fiscal impact assessments and similar evaluations throughout the Roe y Mountain Reg ion and elsewhere across the country. Expert test imon y has been prov id ed before a var i ety of plann i ng organizations, polit ic al assemblies and courts of law. Past research efforts have 1 nc 1 uded growt h management plann i ng, soc io econ omic im pa ct assessmen development feas ibili ty stud ies and ana lyses of new revenue generation potential . • I • • - I I [ r l ' l • • • • Atta chm ent I 5 Page 7 of 19 Evaluations of future public cost and revenue streams attributab l e to alternat i ve development proposals have been prepared for a large number of publ i c and private agencies. BBC has assisted various local governments wi th the projection of fiscal impacts. Projects have ranged in size from multi-m i ll i on dollar industrial developments to small residential subdivisions. BBC has developed various computer-assisted fiscal impact assessments. A comprehensive evaluation of alternative modeling procedures was accomplished in a recent project designed to evaluate the state-of-the-art in computer- assisted fiscal impact assessment. The ability of the firm to produce timely and thorough analyses of municipal financial characteristics through computer- assisted analytical techniques has been amply demonstrated, and the distingu i sh- ing feature in every instance has been the clarity and usefulness of the result- ing statistics. Project Team BB C br i ngs to the project a profess i onal team wi t h cons id era bl e exper i ence in the De nver Metropolitan Area . The team i s we ll -sui ted to provide an exc e ll ent prod uc t and to defend its conclus i ons. he projec teai also includes To Muller, Director o Conr,..1 lty I pact Studies at th Urban Institute. He is a nationally r cog i zed expert in urban fiscal analysis, especially interjurisdict onal fisca l flows ea a i on. Or. M ller is respons ible for developing t he most widely used met odology int e country for analyz ing fiscal flo ws between jurisdictions. His war has been sited by var ious congressional COlll'!l ittee s and by t he U.S. Supre e Court. • I • • - L I t I I I • (1) (2) • • • SECTION I. REFERENCES Attachment I Page 8 of 19 Julius Margolis, "Metropolitan Finance Problems: Terr i to ri es, Fun ctions , and Growth," in James M. Buchanan (ed.), Public Finances: Needs Sources, and Utilization (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, !966), pp. 258-259. Harvey E. Braz i er, City Expenditures in the United States (New York: Nat io nal Burea u of Econom ic Research, 1959), p. 58. 6 (3) R.F. Smith, "Are Nonresidents Contributing their Share to Core City Revenues," land Econom i cs, 1972, p. 242. ( 4 ) Samuel H. Book, "Costs of Co11111uter to the Centra 1 City as a Bas is for Comm uter Taxat i on," (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1970). This criticism of Boo k's work is cited in Kenneth V. Greene , Nee nan, William 8., and Scott, Claudia D. (The Urban Inst i tute ), Fiscal Interactions in a Me tropoli tan Area (Lexington, MA : Lexington Books , 1974), p. 19. (5) Neenan, Willi am B., Political Economy of Urban Areas, (Chicago: Mankham Publ ishin g Company, 1972). (6) Green, Neenan, and Scott, ibid. (7) City of Richmond vs. U.S., 376F. Supp/344(8.D.C. 1974). (8) City of Richmond vs. u.s., 95 s.ct. 2296 (1975 ). (9) For example, see Thomas Muller, et. al., "The Fiscal Impact of Trident on State and Local Government" (Wash in gton: The Urban Institute, 1978 ); Keith D. Moore, et.al., Socioeconomic Im acts of Western Ener Oevelo - ment, (Washing to n: President's Counci on nvironmenta Qua i y, ; GTTmore, John S., Moore, Keith D., Ha11111ond, Diane M., and Codd i ngton, Dean C., Analysis of Financing Problems in Coal and Oil Shale Boo owns (Wash- ington, Federal Energy Ad 1nistration, 1976). I . • L • • • - SECTION II. METHODOLOGY Attachment I Page 9 of 19 This section outlines the proposed research approach, including pre- liminary i nd ic ations of data sources. The general process is described and specif ic tasks detailed for the Denver-Arapahoe County Fiscal Flows Study. Proposed Approach The proposed methodology reflects the approach taken in prev ious analyses conducted by Browne, Bortz & Coddington, and The Urban Institute. General process. The general flow of the analysis is to (1) develop a consistent revenue and expenditure base across the jurisdictions being analyzed, (2) estimate the key economic variables (such as conmuting patterns and shopp ing patterns) which are required throughout the analysis, (3) analyze the revenues of each local jurisdiction, tracing back appropriate portions of these revenues to residents of other jurisdictions, (4) analyze the expenditures of each jurisdic- tion, tracing back portions to residents of other jurisdictions, (5) analyze net flows from one jurisdiction to another thorugh intermediaries (such as the state and metropolitan service districts), and (6) integrate results and estimate net fiscal flows. Analysis detail. There is a fundamental, strategic choice wh ich must be made at the outset. There are three log i cal levels of detail at wh ich the ana lysis can be conducted: (1 ) A manager i al analys is --providing an effic i ent answer to the question with in reasonable confidence lim i ts. This level enta ils structur i ng the problem, investigating key variables in deta il and evaluating less crit ic al va ri ab l es in a more sunmary fashion with lim i ted use of primary data collection. (2) Detailed county-to-county fiscal flows analysis-- prov1ding a we ll-documented analys is of t he flows bet wee n t he tw o counties wh ich can be readily defended aga inst expert criticism and is suitab l e for use in legislative or judici a l proceed in gs . This will in volve some primary data gathering, as well as deta il ed do cu- mentation. In some in stances, more than one techn ique will be us ed to est ima te key variables and report the sens i tivity of the res ul ts to the choice of methodology. (3) Individual jurisdict io nal analys is--prov iding a we ll- documented defens ible study of the flows among major 1ndividual taxing jurisdictions as we ll as between the two counties as a whole. Ob iously cost 1s a factor in deter i ng the appropriate level. Section V of he proposal brea s project tas s and costs into three phases which rough ly cor- respond to the three levels of possible analys is deta iled in this sec ion . • 7 , I • • l ' r l • • • Atta chment I ~ Page 10 of 19 Phase I: Ma nageme nt Ana l ys i s of Fi sca l Flows Ph ase I t as ks are des i gned to pro vi de close co1T1T1unic ation dur i ng the format i ve s tages of the proj ect and to give a reasonable est i mate of the di rec - tion of fisc a l fl ows as qu i ckly as poss i ble. As the Phas e i s out lined here, some tasks are initi ated which wil l not be completed unt il Phase II. Should the deci s i on be made to proceed wi th Phase I on l y, the approa ch co uld be adjus ted to provi de an i ndependent analysis for roughly the same budget and a li t tl e more t i me . I.1. Wor k plan development. An initial meet i ng with the manageme nt group will be held to (1) ga i n a better understanding of expectat i ons for th e proj ect, (2) i dent i f y suggest i ons for improving the proposed procedures, (3) id e nt ify l eads for other potent i al ly useful data sources and (4 ) i dent i f y coor- di na tion poi nts wi t h agency staff. Following th i s meet i ng, a deta i led wo rk pl an will be de velo ped an d sub!n i ted for approval. I.2. Budge t ana l ys i s and cost standard i zat i on . Budgets from al 1 taxing jurisdicti ons i n the tw o count i es wi ll be obta i ned and a co1T1T1 on f ormat established for the purpose of th i s ana l ys is. Reve nu e s and expend itures will be allocated to those categories f or wh i ch pr oc edur e s ar e be i ng de ve lo pe d to deter- mine fiscal f lows. Table 1 illustr ates an i niti a l list of c at e gori e s. More categories are often added as t he ana lysis proc ee ds in or de r t o de velop more easily est i mated fiscal flows eq ua t ions. Ot her steps in t he standard i zat ion process include: • Am or tiz in g capital costs and a l locat in g them to the appropr i ate categories. • Alloc at ing ot her costs (such as retirement funds, contin- gen ci e s and pl anned cash accumulation ). Table 2 indica es the budgets currently ant i cipated to be included in the ana ysis. Others ay s bsequently be added to the list. All jurisdictions will not be co pleted during Phase I. For Phase I, two or three representat i ve loca ions w t hin Arapahoe Coun ty will be selected and a combination of jurisdic- t io s (coun y, m ic1 pa l, school dis tr ict, and major special dis tr ic ts ) whic h apply tot ose locations analyzed. I .3. Underlyin g econo ic var i ables. Several key factors wh ich are required by the cost/revenue flows ana lysis will be ana lyzed in t his task: • Co 1T1T1 uting patterns--As wi th many tasks, th is will req uire reconciling severa l data sources. Data on net flows of emp lo yees and earnings between the two counties will be der i ve d from the U.S. Department of Corrmerce, Bureau of Economic Analys is (BEA) Small Area Income Statistics series. The latest data ava il able are for 1978 and 1979; these will be updated based on overall emp lo yment leve ls in the two counties as der i ve d from Color ad o Depa r ment of Labor and Employment statistics. C()ITl!lu ter flow s will b es imated from these data and from unpub 1 i shed SEA statistics. The resulting estima es of corrmuting from Denver will be chec ed aga inst the results of th survey • I • • ~- [ I ( J I l • • • • Attach ment I 9 Page 11 of 19 TABLE 1. STANDARD LOCAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE CATEGOR I ES Revenues Expenditures Property tax Res i dential Comerc i al Industrial Local sales and use tax Households Bus i ness-con,nercial Ci garette tax Li censes and permits Other bus i nesses taxes Intergo vernmental transfers User changes Mi see 11 aneous General administration Public safety Fire protection Courts and corrections Libraries and cultural facilities Parks and recreation Health care and hosp i tals Hous i ng and urban redevelopment Soc i al services Water services Sewer and flood control Educat i on I • • - • • [ r I I • • • • Attachment I 10 Page 12 of 19 TABLE 2. TAXING JURISDICTIONS AND SERVICE UNITS INCLUDE D IN DENVER-ARAPAHOE COUNTY FISCAL FLOW ANALYSIS Arapahoe County Arapahoe County Aurora Cherry Hills Village Englewood Glendale Greenwood Village Littleton Sheridan Arapahoe County Law Enforcement Authority Arapahoe Regional Library District Castlewood Fire District Cherry Hills Fire District Cunningham Fire District Littleton Fire District South Arapahoe Sanitation District Southeast Englewood Water District South Englewood Sanitation District #1 Southgate Water District South Suburban Metropolitan Recreation and Park District Englewood School District Cherry Creek School District Littleton School District Adams-Arapahoe (Aurora ) School District Denver Denver (City and County) Denver School District Denver Water Department • I . • C I 1 , l • • - Attachm ent I 11 Pa ge 13 of 19 of Denver res i dents conducted by the Denver Off i ce of Pol i cy Analysis in 1978.(1 ) Should place-of-wo r k da t a from the 1980 Census become available during the co urse of the study, an unreliable possibility, they wi 11 be i ncorporated. • Shopp i ng ~atterns--Initial estimates will be der i ved us i ng the 977 Census of Retail Trade. BBC has developed an updating procedure using current sales tax receipts and income data on the two counties. These estimates wi 11 be cross-checked with metropolitan area s ho pp i n~/conme rci al area f i les (including check cas hing s urve ys ) de ve l ope d and ma i ntained by BBC for its re al estate and f i nanc i al i nst i tut i ons work. They will al s o be cross-checked for reasonableness against est i mates of dollars spe nd on taxab l e purchases, derived by co mbining i ncome data with consumer behavior data from t he U.S. Depart ment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statist i cs (BLS) Survey of Co ns um er Expe ndi tures. • Incomes--The BEA Re gion al Economics Informat i on Sys t em dat a wi 11 be upd at ed based on Co 1 or ad o Depart ment of Employment Securi ty data. The estimates will also be ch ecked for consis tency wi th BB C's latest Co l orado i nc ome t ax ret urns sa pl e (se e task I.6. Transfers thr ough intermedi ari e s ) and wi t h th e 1980 Co lorad o Ene r gy utility survey data base.(2) I.4. Loc a 1 r eve nu es ana 1 sis. Reve nue s in eac h category w, 11 be alloca t ed etwe en Denve r an d rapahoe ount i es : • Propert1 taxes from r esi dent i al , conrne rci a l and indus- trial c as ses will be analyze d separate ly. Re sidential taxes will be alloc ate d base d on j ur i sd ic t i on of ow ner- ship. Cormierci al and i nd us t ri al pr ope r t y will be allocated based on a combin ation of em ployment and owner- ship data. For the key jurisdictions, BBC will develop ownership data from a random sample of assessor's re.:ords. The extent to which property taxes are ult i- mate ly paid by business owners, shared by all factors of production including e ployees or paid by consumers has been studied in detail. During Phase II, BBC will use more than one technique for this part of the analysis. t Sales and use taxes will be allocated based in part on the shopping patterns analysis described previously. Busi- ness purchases will be estimated and then allocated ccording to the bus i ness ownership data obta i ned from the assessor's records sample. • Cigarette taxes will be allocated based on est im ates of cigarette expenditures by jurisdictions. These will b d r1 ed by combining i ncome estimates with Survey of Con- s r Exp nditures estimates of the propor io n of i nco~ • I • • [ I. I ., • • • - Attachment I Page 14 of 19 spent on tobacco, reconciled against cigarette tax receipts. • Licenses and perm its wi 11 be al located based on act ual receipts, assumed to be entirely from res i dents with in the jurisdiction, or assumed to be from businesses within the jurisdiction and allocated based on business owner- ship, depending on the type of license or permit. • Other business taxes will be based on business ownership within the Jurisdiction, unless there is reason to sus- pect substant i al taxes pa i d by bus i nesses outside the jur isdiction. • Intergovernmental transfers consist primarily of trans- fers through the state . They are addressed in a later sect i on. • Use fees will be allocated based on actual receipts or assume d to come entirely from within the tax ing jurisdic- tion, depend ing on the nature of the service. • Miscell aneous revenues include Denver's head tax, which will be apport ion ed based on comnuting patterns. 12 I.5. Local expend itures anal ysis. In i tial approaches for all oc ating expend i tures are su1m1arized: • Genera l ad i ni strat i on expend i tures wil 1 be allocated based on t ime spent in t~e jurisdiction by res id ents and non-residents, which will be est im ated based on the com- mut ing and sh opp ing patterns ana lyses. • Publ ic safety expenditures wi ll be allocated on the same bas is as general adm i n istr at ion. • Fire pr otect ion expend i tures will be allocated on the basis of property ownersh i p by residents and non-res i - dents. • Courts and corrections will be distributed according to a comb ,nation of time spent in the jurisdict ion and property ownership. • Libraries and cultural fac ili ties will be allocated based on surveys of actual use. • Parks and recreation will be a llocated , wher e poss ible , based on previous surveys of actual use. • Health care and hospitals will be based on selected sur- vey s of actual use . • I • • t ( r I. • • • • Attachment I 13 Page 15 of 19 • Housing and urban redevelopment expenditures wi 11 be assumed for Phase I to benefit the residents of the jurisdiction making the expend i ture. Other phases include more detailed analyses. • Social services wi 11 be assumed for Phase I to benefit only the residents of the jurisdiction making the expen- diture. • Water, sewer and flood control will be assumed to benefit only the residents of the jurisdiction making the expen- diture. • Education services will be assumed for Phase I to benef it only the residents of the jurisdiction making the expen- di ture. I.6. Transfers through intermediaries. The largest categor y of transfers is through the state. Earmarked revenues, such as hig hway user funds, and general revenues, as state income and sales taxes, generated in each cou nty will be est im ated. For determining state income tax receipts, BBC will use the firm's state i ncome tax sample. BBC has prepared a comprehensive inco me tax analysis bi annually for the Colorado State Legislature. State transfers t o the two count i es and direct state outlays with in the counties based on these revenues will be s imil arly est i mated. Other intermediaries wh i ch wil l be ana lyzed in th i s manner i nclude the Reg i onal Transportat i on Di str ic t, the Metropolitan Sewer District and the Urban Dra i nage an d Flood Control District. 1.7. Net fiscal flows. Reven ue and expend i ture flows will be comb in ed to arrive at a net flows analys i s between the two count i es. Where nece ssary , such as due to lags i n data ava il ab ili ty, simplifying assu mptions wi ll be made. Nevertheless, the proposed analys is will identify the major f i ndings at t hi s po int. 1.8. Report. A rep or t i nd ic at i ng methodology, res ults and limitations will be prepared at the conclusion of the analys is. Phase II: Detailed Analys i s of Fi scal Fl ows These tasks are designed to bu ild on Phase I in order to arr ive at a more thoroug and better documented analys is . II.l. Underl y in g economic variables. BB C will ana lyze business- related revenue and expend i ture flows between the two counties in more detail. This will lead to refined estimates of property tax, sa l es use tax, bus iness i ncome tax data, as well as ref i ned allocations of seve ral expen diture cate- gories, such as fire protection. 11.2. Local revenues analysis. BBC will calculate property tax flows based on three different assumptions: (1) that taxes are passed on to consumers, (2) that taxes are borne by property owners and (3) that a port ion of the burden is borne by employees . Previously described primary data collection and cross- chec s bet ween thodology approaches will be completed . • I • • - • fi I r ' l. • • • Attachment I 14 Page 16 of 19 II.3. Local ex enditures anal sis. Primary data analyses on act ual use of faci i ties wi e compete • ene ,ts that most economists argue sho ul d be spaced over all residents, such as public housing costs, will be estimated.(3) Secondary benefits as the insurance value of having a fire department of a certain rating nearby, will also be estimated. Further, implications of marg i nal vs. average costs for new facilities and services will be addressed. 11.4. Transfers through intermediaries. The state income tax analysis and other ongoing analyses will be completed. 11.5 Net fiscal flows. The preliminary results will be re-calculated in this Phase 11 analysis. Where alternative sets of assumptions have been developed, the effect of choosing one methodology over the other will be reported. 11.6. Report. Results, policy implications and research documentat i on will be reported. Additionally, an executive surnnary explaining the project findings in straightforward language will be prepared. ~ Phase Ill: Individual Jurisdiction Analysis of Fiscal Flows_ With the Phase 111 analysis, the underlying variables and revenue/expenditure factors will be analyzed and reported separately for e i ght indiv i dual portions of the county: !" .. . I ' I • (1) Aurora (2 ) Cherry Hills Village (3) Englewood (4 ) Glendale (5 ) Greenwood Village (6 ) Littleton (7) Sher i dan (8) Unincorporated, urban Arapa~oe County • I • • - r i • • • • SECTION II. REFERENCES Attachment I Page 17 of 19 15 (1 ) Denver Office of Policy Analysis. Demographic and Socio-econo mic Charac- teristics of Denver Residents (Denver: Office of Policy Analys is, 1979 ). (2) Colorado Energy Research Institute, "Colorado Residential Energy Consump- tion Data Base." unpublished. (3) These are often called "quasi-collective" and "redistributive" benef its; see for example, Denver Urban Observatory, "Proposal: A Fiscal Flows Analysis of the Denver Metropolitan Area," (Denver: Denve r Urb an Observa- tory, 1976) pp. 54-64 . I • • [ I t I. • , l • • • SECTION V. MA NAGEMEN T PLAN Atta chment I Page 18 of 19 39 This sect ion of the proposal details management and adm i ni str ative prov i sions relating to project schedule. budget. coordination and cont r act ual concerns. Project Coordination Because of the potent i ally controversial nature of the study, th e re l ati vely sho r t pe r formance per i od and the necessity for a hi gh deg r ee of involvement from the .local agency staffs. it is important to exped i t i ous ly estab- l i sh communicat i on between all affected individuals and ident i fy areas of respons i bili ty. Work Pr ogram. As i nd i cated i n the methodolog y sect i on, a deta il ed work pro gram wi ll be pr epa r ed f or approval by the designated Proje ct Mon i to r f or the Ar apahoe Count y May ors and Ma nagers. The wor k program wil l deta il spe ci f ic tas s t o be acc ompl i shed, def in e respons i bi l i t i es and set fort h schedu l es. Pr oject Control. In orde r t o i nsure proper cofllll uni cat ion and subse- quent eff e cti ve implem entat i on of the st udy res ults, BBC ant ici pates main t aining a clo se rep or t i ng r e l at i onsh i p wi th the Pr oject Mo ni tor. I n ad di t i on t o ongoing cont act , bri ef progr ess r ep orts wil l be pr epare d deta ili ng wor k acc omplished on each design at ed study tas k. Month l y i nv oi ce s will al s o be pr ovi ded which outline services accomplished by pe r sonnel and task. A simple. yet ef fect i ve rep or t i ng r e l at i onsh i p i s s uggeste d . The BBC Project Director will be respons i bl e fo r the accompli shment of all study tas s under the direction of the Pr oj ect Mo rii to r . Be cause of t he complexity and sensitivity of the projec t, an Assis tant Proj ect Dir ector ha s al so been desig- nated to insure more compl e te coo rdination . This arr ange men t ha s been satis- factory on numerous other occasions in which BBC has work ed with local govern- mental agencies on projects of this type. O,rgan i zat ion al Meetings. Meetings wi 11 be organized and conducted during various stages of the project to comnunicate the planned study wor progra and in ter im study results to affected individuals and agencies and to allow for input in to the study process. The meetings will be structured to solicit c ent on the project and identify goals and expectations for the study. Wh il e BBC will organize and conduct meetings throughout the study, responsibili- ties for the content and intended purposes will be coordinated with the Pro ject Monitor. Schedule and Deliverables A proposed study schedule is shown in Table 3. Approximate delivery dates for project reports are indicated on the schedule. Work on the project wn l be initiated following approval to proceed. Assuming a start-up date of F bruary 15, Phases 1 and 11, including the detailed project report. will be completed within the requested 120 day schedule. The Phase Ill analy sis of individual jurisdic ions would require an additional month • • I • • n t I ( I. ' t • !\ ' I I • • • Attachment I Page 19 of 19 41 Budget ary cost estimates for the proposed scope of work are provide d by major study task and category in Tables 4 and 5. Each of the three prop osed phases wo uld require approximately the same resources. As indicated in Table 5, a relatively high degree of senior staff member involvement is included in the project. Administrative Provisions Subcontracts. BBC agrees not to assign or sublet the whole or an y part of the contract without the prior written consent of the Arapahoe Mayor s and Managers. Contract change orders. BBC agrees that any change of scope in the work to be performed after the original contract has been signed shall be docu- mented as a wr i tten change order. be accepted by all parties, and be made a part of the or i ginal contract by addendum. Equal opport uni ty. BBC agrees not to refuse to hire, discharge, pro- mote, demote, or to discriminate in matters of compensation aga in st any pe rson otherwise qual ifi ed, solely because of race, creed, sex, color, nat ional orig i n or ancestry; and further agrees to i nsert the foregoing i n any subcontracts. • I • • • Browne , Bortz & Codd ington 155 South Mad ison De ns er Co lor ad o 80209 (303 1 321 ·2547 I •• . ,. Mr. Forrest w. Cason, Planner Ill Planning Department City of Aurora 1470 South Havana Street, Room 712 Aurora, CO 80012 Dear Forrest: • • - February 17, 1982 A ta chrnent I I Pa ge l of 3 Based on your feedback on our proposal and presentation, this letter presents suggested revisions to the scope of wo rk and budget for the Denver-Arapahoe County Fiscal Flows study. We wo uld be happy to make further changes based on your suggestions. As we have indicated, there are several levels on wh ich this proj~ct can be conducted. We will work with you in arriving at a work prograrr. which reflects your priorities. Overv i ew of Suggested Revisions Based on our discussions, the purpose of the suggested revisions is t o define a research program which: (1) is more rigorous (and, therefo re , more defendable under outside review ) than the •managerial" analys is; (2) includes as much analjs is as possi ble of individual jurisdictions wi t i Arap ah oe County; but (3) ach i eves cost red uc t ions by, for example, li i t- ing the num~er of jurisdictions to be analyzed and avo i ding collect ing new data where possible. Our app ro ach in suggesting revisions has been to start wi t h the mos rigorous, deta il ed and expe nsive scope of wo rk identified in our prop osal (Level Ill) and then to make strateg ic reduct ions in that level of effort. th e areas of suggested change are as follows : 1. Jurisdiction covera e. We will analyze reve nues an costs or a relevant serv ices (including t hose pr ovided by school, par s and recreation, fire or library districts) for e ight locat ions i thin th county : Aurora, Cherry Hills Village, Engle wood , Glendale, Greenwo od Vill ag e , Littleto • Sheridan and an unincorporated port ion of t h County. In all, ant icipate analyz ing app roxi- ately 18 t o 20 Artpahoe County tax ing ent i t ies • I • • -• • • Attachment II Page 2 of 3 2. Coverage of enterprise funds an d other pote ntial transfers through intermed iaries. We will only analyze those services and taxing entities wh ich appear to have a significant effect on overall fis- cal flows. Where enterprise funds are financed primarily through user fees we wi 11 usually not include them in the analysis. Our analysis would not be complete, however, if we did not include enterprise funds which have differential rate structures (e.g., the Denver Water Board). While we will not conduct a detailed analysis of indi- vidual water districts, the study will include a section which treats water districts as an interme- diary through which transfers occur (similar to the state). We also hope to simplify or perhaps elim- inate analysis of the Regional Transportation Dis- trict, however, we will not make a final determin- at ion on this until part way through Phase 1. 3. Primar data atherin for individual urisd i c- tions . We wi make some reductions in our co ec- tion of new data for the analysis of specific jur- isdiction flows to Denver. While th is will still provide a good idea of the flows from each Arapahoe County mun i cipal i ty to Denver, not every category will rece i ve the same level of deta i led analys is as we wi ll provide for the overall Denver -Arapa hoe County analysis. 4. Phasin g. We wi ll achieve some econo i es by red uc - ing the project from three to two phases. We be 1 i eve that the p'"oject wi 11 benef i t fro reta inin g a separate Phase 1, however, we will shorten our report. We will co bine Pase s 11 and 11 I. Project Structure The follow in g is a re ised outline of project tasks : Phase 1: Management Analysis of Fiscal Flows 1.1 Work plan development 1.2 Budget analysis and cost standardization 1,3 Underlying econ omic va ri ables J.4 Local revenues ana lysis 1.5 Local expenditures ana lysis 1.6 Transfers through intermediaries J.7 Net fiscal flows 1.8 Progress repor I • • - • • • • • 11 .1 Underlying economic variables 11.2 Local revenues analysis 11.3 Local expenditures analysis 11.4 Transfers through intermediaries 11.5 Net fiscal flows 11.6 Final report Attachment II Page 3 of 3 and Phase 1 is essentially the same as in our initial proposal, with a gr eater effort devoted to work plan development (to make tradeoffs in select i ng jurisdictions, enterpr i se funds, etc .) and less emphas i s on the progress report. Phase 11 is des i gned to produce the overall report and the ind i vidual j uri sd icti on analyses at the same time. Budget, Schedule and Contracting Issues The budget for th is revised wo rk scope is $6 0,000 ($30,000 fo r each phase). The schedule is essentially t he same as before. We wou ld sugge st a cost of services contract with a "not to exceed " cla use for $6 0 ,00 0 and a provis i on giving you the option of term i nating the contract and the end of Phase 1, We are excited about the project, and we look forward to work ing wi th yo u, the mayors and managers, an d other key staff wi th in the County. Please call if you wo uld like to discuss these issues. I z Sincerely, ~~~ Keith O. Moore Sen i or Partner • I • • • DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF ARAPAHOE STATE OF COLORADO • • • Case No. 81CV1079 SOON YE SCOTT, dba NEW TOKYO MASSAGE, vs. CITY OF ENG~EWOOD, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, OPINION AND RULI NG THIS MATTER came on for consideration of an appeal under Rule 106 (a)(4), C.R.C.P. to review a denial of plaintiff's application for issuance of .a massage parlor license , the plaintif f represented by Larry D. Harvey, Esq . and Steven E . McBride , Esq ., the defendant represented by Thomas V. Holland, Assistant City Attorney. The Court has considered the record certified to this Co urt, the briefs of the parties and the oral arguments of counsel and , being fully advised in the premises, sub~its the following : OPINION Plaintiff submitted to the City of Englewood, as the loca l licensing authority, her application for the issuance of a health therapy license to operate a massage parlor at 2801 S. Broadway, Englewood, Colorado , The 'Council of the City of Englewood , acting as a quasi - j udicial body, conducted a public hearing to consider the applica- tion of plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Massage Parlor Code, 12-48.5-101, !£_ !!.9.·• C .R.S . 1973 , Following the public hearing, the Council denied plaintiff's application . Plaintiff then cotnmenced this proceeding for judicial review of the denial of plaintiff's application . -1- • I • • • • • • 1. Plaintiff argues that the City Council acted upon un- reliable and incompetent evidence in considering the application of plaintiff. In its denial of plaintiff's application, the Council con- cluded that an existing massage parlor located in the neighborhood of _plaintiff's application, served the reasonable requirement s of the neighborhood and the desires of the inhabitants of the neighb or- hood . At the public hearing, the Council considered the res~lts of a survey that had been conducted by an independent survey firm hired by the defendant to canvass the neighborhood of plaintiff's application. Petition circulators contacted 831 residences within the neighborhood that had been defined by the defendant. No person was contacted at 330 residences. 105 persons who were contacted were either not qualified to sign a petition or had previously signed a petition concerning plaintiff's application. 113 persons that were contacted declined to sign a petition for various expressed reasons . The Council considered petitions that contained the signature s of 228 persons ~~c opposed the issuance of a license to plaintiff and 55 persons who favored the issuance of the license. Plaintiff argues that the survey of the independent f i rm hired by the defendant was tainted by a prior canvass of the ne ighbo r - hood conducted by persons who opposed plaintiff's application . The Council concluded that the survey of the independen t firm had taken into account those persons who may have been biased concerning the survey and further concluded that the survey had been done in an impartial and unbiased manner . -2- • I • • • • • • Those conclusions of the Council are supported in the record (T. pp. 7-22, 102-105 , City's Exhibit M) and may not be disturbed on review, Bauer v . Wheatridge, 182 Colo. 324 (1973), Ford Leasing Development Co. v. County Conunissioners, 186 Colo . 418 (1974). 2. Plaintiff contends that the public hearing before the Council, at which the plaintiff's application was considered, was not fair and impartial and denied to her due process of law . At the inception of the public hearing, one councilman abstained from the hearing, noting as his reasons : ''Mr. Mayor, when this application was first received and there was all the discussion with the ordinances and this hearing and one thing or another, I received many phone calls in regard to the pet itioning ·process and this and that and the other thing and became in- volved to some extent with that petitioning process so I am going to abstain from this hearing and give up my seat for the purposes of this hearing . . . " (T. p . 3). During the uublic hearing, the same councilman question- ed a witness that plaintiff called to testify (T . p. 33, 34). The same councilman testified at the hearing as follows : " ... I got involved personally in helping to coordina e petitions and one thing or another . And I, myself, have to admit that l went beyond the bounds of what i ~robably proper if l were to consider in an impartial nanner as you are considering this issue tonight. So I felt that it was my duty and obligation to withdraw as a councilman in the proceedings inasmuch as l do have personal feelings in regard to this and I have been active in opposing the actual license." (T. p. 77). The councilman then proceeded to present to the Council 32 petitions containing 568 names of persons who opposed plaintiff's application (T. p. 78, 79). The councilman had taken th petitions to a print shop to be printed (T . p , 83) and he paid for the printing (T. 98). -3- • I • • • • - During the hearing, the same councilnan stated as foll ows : "I did sit back in the crowd and I wanted to make a po i nt of order that the City --or, that the attorney here wa s answering questions which I did'nt feel were proper and was going to request back then that he be sworn in and I think that's proper ... I would like to see him sworn in as a witness ... " (T. p. 96). Quasi-judicial proceedings that are conducted to con side r the grant or denial of a license must comport with procedural du e process, The Hide-A-Way Massage Parlor, Inc. v. The Board of County Comnissioners,198 Colo. 175, 177 (1979), Elizondo v. State , De p art . of Revenue, 194 Colo . 113 (1977). The essence of procedural due process is fundamental fa ir- ness, Mountain States T&T v. Dept. of Labor , 184 Colo . 3 34 , 33 8 (1974). A biased decisionmaker is ~onstitutionally unaccep table and our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the proba- bility of unfairness, Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S . 35 , 95 S . Ct. 1456, 1464, 43 L . Ed . 2d 712 (1975). A requirement of procedura l r e gularity at lea st render s a rbitra ry a ct i on mo re difficult . Moreover , proper pro cedures will sure ly el im inate s ome of the arb i trarine ss that resu:c s, n ot f rom mali ce , but f rom innoc en t error, Eli zondo v . Stat e , Depart . of Reve nue, s upra , 119. Th e mere fact that a council member has learnec facts or xpressed an opinion, is not sufficient in itself to demonstrate that a hearing is unfair, Johnson v. City Council, 42 Colo . App . 188, 192 (1979), Hortonville Joint School District v . Hortonville Educa- tion Assoc ., 426 U.S. 482, 96 S. Ct . 2308, 49 L . Ed . 2d 1 (1 976 ). The actions of th councilman at the public h aring, i.e ., questioning a witness of plaintiff, raising a point of order concern- ing plaintiff's counsel, testifying against issuance of th liens , and presenting to the Council petitions in opposition to h lien after he had advised the mayor that he was going o abs ain from h -4- • I • • - • • • • hearing, cast, with little doubt, a pall of unfairness o v e r the public hearing . A court may determine from the special facts and circum - stances present in the case before it that the risk of unfa i rne s s is intolerably high , Withrow v . Larkin, supra . 'nte record of the public hearing demonstrates to the Cou r t that the decision of the Council to deny plaintiff's appl i cat ion for a license was probably infected by the actions of the c o un cil- man at the public hearing and denied to pla i ntiff procedura l du e process of law. RULING 'nte denial .by the Council of the Ci ty of Englewood , of plain- tiff's applicat i on for the issuance of a health therapy lic e nse to operate a massage parlor at 2801 S . Broadway , Eng l ewood , Colorado, is reversed . 'ntis matter is rere anded t o t he Co uncil o f the City of Englewoo d with dire c t i on that the Coun cil con duct at new public hearing on the a pplication of plaintiff cons ona n t wi th the vi ews expre ssed herein and in accordance with the provision s of the Colorado Massage Parlor Code . Done this /a,d; day of April, 1982. BY THE COURT : ~ on ate y ~-- -5- • I • • -• • • . .--· , • DI ST RI CT CO URT COUN TY OF ARAPAHOE STATE OF COLORADO Ca•e No . 81CV1079 SOON YE SCOTT, dba NEW TOKYO MASSAGE, v•. CITY OF ENG~EWOOD, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, :j \ \ -....... Plr nhl:ff,....-.1 It· -· ,,,, ('' '1 ' ,> ' 11 ,·' •· \; 'I -.. -I .. ' . -~-... ~ -. r·. ... -~ .. , . , -: .. J \ ... . 'J. j ,r.:- De .e~&n·~: .. \~1 1 ,.--~. ' , ',/_J::rr .--,-..-··· '.,,_ .• ,,., ~~-- THIS MATTER came on for consideration of an appeal un der Rule 106 (a)(4), C.R.C.P. to review a denial of plaintiff's application for issuance of .a massage parlor license, the pla i n tiff represented by Larry D. Harvey, Esq. and Steven E . McBride , Es q., the defendant represented by Thomas V. Holland, Assistant Ci t y Attorney . The Court has considered the record certified to this Co urt, the briefs of the parties and the oral arguments of counse l and , be i n g f ully advised in the premises, suboits the following : OPINION Plain tiff subm itted to t he Ci t y of Englewood, as th e local licensing authorit y, her a p plication fo r t he i ssuanc e of a health therapy license to operate a massage parlor at 2801 S . Broadway, Englewood, Colorado , The "Council of the City of Englewood, acting as a quasi- judicial body , conducted a public hearing to consider the applica- tion of plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Massage Parlor Code, 12-48 .5-101, ~ !!S.·, C.R.S . 1973. Following the public hearing, the Council denied plaintiff's application . Plaintiff then col1'111enced this proceeding for judicial review of the denial of plaintiff's application. -1- • I . • • • • • 1 . Plaintiff argues that the City Council acted u pon un- reliable and incompetent evidence in considering the app lication of plaintiff. In its denial of plaintiff's application, the Counc il con- cluded that an existing massage parlor located in the neighb orhood of _plaintiff's application , served the reasonable requi r em e nts of the neighborhood and the desires of the inhabitants of the ne ighbor- hood. At the public hearing, the Council cons i dered t h e results of a survey that had been conducted by an independent survey fiTin hired by the defendant to canvass the neighborhood of pla i n tiff 's application. Petition circulators contacted 831 residences within the neighborhood that had been defined by the defendant. No per son was contacted at 330 residences. 105 persons who were conta cted were either not qualified to sign a petition or had previous ly sig ne d a petition concern i ng plaintiff's application . 113 persons t hat were contac ted dec lined t o sign a pet i t i on for v a r i ous expressed reasons. Til e Council considered p e t it i ons that cont a i n ed the s i gnatu res of 22S persons ~~c opposed the i s suance of a licen s e to plaintiff and 55 persons who favored the issuance of the license. Plaintiff argues that the survey of the independent firm hired ?Y the defendant was tainted by a prior canvass of the neighbor - hood conducted by persons who opposed plaintiff's application . Tile Council concluded that the survey of the inde~endent firm had taken into account those person s who may have been biased concerning the survey and further concluded that the survey had been done in an impartial and unbiased manner. -2- I • • -• • • Those conclusions of the Council are supported in the record (T. pp. 7-22, 102-105 , City's Exhibit M) and may not be disturbed on review, Bauer v. Wheatridge, 182 Colo. 324 (1973), Ford Leasing Developm ent Co. v. County Cotmnissioners, 186 Colo . 418 (1974). 2. Plaintiff contends that the public hearing before the Council, at which the plaintiff's application was considered , was not fair and impartial and denied to her due process of law. At the inception of the public hearing, one councilman abstained from the hearing, noting as his reasons: ''Mr. Mayor, when this application was first received and there was all the discussion with the ordinances and thi s hearing and one thing or another, I received many phone calls in regard to the pe titioning process and this and that and the other thing and became in- volved to some extent with that petitioning process so I am going to abstain from this hear ing and give up my seat for the purposes of this hearing ... " (1'. p. 3). During the oublic hearing, the same councilman question- ed a witness that plaintiff called to testify (T. p. 33, 34). The same councilman testified at the hearing as follows : " ... I got involved personally in helping to coordinate petitions and one thing or another. And I, myself, have to admit that I went beyond the bounds of what is ?~obab y proper if I were to consider in an impartial manner as you are considering this issue tonight. So I felt that it was my ·duty and obligation to withdraw as a councilman in the proceedings inasmuch as I do have personal feelings in regard to this and I have been active in opposing the actual license." (T. p. 77). The councilman then proceeded to present to the Council 32 petitions containing 568 names of persons who oppos d plaintiff's application (T. p. 78, 79). The councilman had taken the petitions to a print shop to be printed (T. p. 83) and he paid for the printing (T. 98). -3- I • • - • • • • During the hearing, the sar.ie counciloan stated as foll ows : "I did sit back in the crowd and I wanted to make a poin t of order that the City --or , that the attorne y here was answering questions which I did'nt feel were proper and waa going to request back then that he be sworn i n an d I think that's proper ... I would like to see him sworn in as a witness ... " (T. p . 96). Quasi-judicial proceedings that are conducted to c ons ider the grant or denial of a license must comport with procedura l due process, The Hide-A-Way Massage Parlor, Inc. v . The Board o f Coun y Commissioners,198 Colo. 175, 177 (1979), Elizondo v. State , De part . of Revenue, 194 Colo . 113 (1977). The essence of procedural due process is fundamental f air- ness , Mountain States T&T v ." Dept . of Labor, 184 Colo . 334, 3 3 8 (1974). A biased decisionmaker is ~onstitutionally unaccept able and our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the prob a- bility of unfairness, Withrow v . Larkin, 4 21 U.S . 35 , 95 S . Ct . 1456, 1464, 43 L . Ed . 2d 712 (1975). A requirement of procedura l re gularity at lea st renders arbitrary action more difficul t . Moreover , proper proce dures will surely eliminate some of the arbitrarine s s that resu:ts , not f r om ma lice , bu t from i nno cent error , Elizondo v. Sta te, Depart . of Revenue , supra , 119 . The mere fact that a council me mber has learnec facts or expressed an opinion'.is not sufficient in itself to demonstrate that a hearing is unfair, John son v . City Council, 42 Colo . App . 188, 192 (1979), Hortonville Joint School District v. Hortonville Educa- tion Assoc., 426 U.S . 482, 9 6 S . Ct . 2308, 49 L. Ed. 2d l (1976 ). The actions of th councilman at t he public haring, i .. , questioning a witness of plaintiff, raising a p oint of order concern - ing plaintiff's counsel, testifying against issuance of the liens , and presenting to the Council p titions in opposition to the liens , after h h d dvised h mayor that he was going to abstain from th -4- • I • • • • • • hearing, cas t, with little doubt , a pall of unfairness over the public hearing. A court may determine from the special facts and circum- stances present in the case before it that the risk of unfairness is intolerably high, Withrow v. Larkin, supra. The record of the public hearing demonstrates to the Court that the decision of the Council to deny plaintiff's applic ation for a license was probably infected by the actions of the council- man at the public hearing and denied to plaintiff procedural due process of law. RULING The denial .by the Council of the City of Englewood, of plain- tiff's application for the issuance of a health therapy license to operate a massage parlor at 2801 S . Broadway , Englewood, Colorado , is reversed . This matter is re~anded to the Council of the City of Englewood with direction that the Council conduct at new public hearing on the application of plaintiff consonant with the views expressed herein and in accordance with the provisions of the Colorado Massaie Pa rlor Code . Done this /a-d_; day of April, 1982 . BY THE COURT : -5- I • • 1 ' I • • • • ~ C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I Q N DATE March 19 . 1982 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT BUS FOR FARMERS' MARKET iA INITIATED BY _......,Ke..,JuJ ... s-1Nua~g1¥go,..n ... e .. r ... ,-1Pw.1ur ... e~ct.,.p..,r-ot ....... P ... y..,b)._.i..,,c~Wo""r .. k .... s-#~~ .. .,"") _____ _ ACTION PROPOSED Approval pf Expenditure Background: At t he Counci l budget retreat. Council requested tha t we review the possibility of providing bus service for residents of the co11111unity to and from the Farmers' Market . The Farmers' Market usually begins the f i rst Tuesday in July and ends the second Tuesday in October. The market is open from 1:00 p.m. until sellout. but no later than 7:00 p.m . Sellout would usually occur about 5:30 p.m .; therefore. any bus ser- vice prov i ded shou l d be scheduled to operate from 12 :30 p .m. to 6:30 p .m. Cost to op era te t he buse s would be : Conclusions: Dr i ve r Fuel Ma i ntenance Attached are maps of routes listed as: $10 .65 per hour .50 pe r 11f1 e 5. 70 per ho ur Route No. 1, which serves the northwest area of the City, requires 23 minutes to travel the 6.6 miles with normal stops. Route No. 2, which serves the northeast area. requires 17 minutes to travel the 4.4 miles. Route No. 3. which serves the south and southwest areas, r equires 41 minutes to travel the 10.6 miles. It would take one bus to cover Route No . 1 and Route No. 2. The bus would lea ve the Farmers ' Market every hour on the hour to travel Route N~. 1, would return to Farmers' Market at approxi1111tely 30 minutes after the hour, and proceed on to Route No. 2. I t uld take one bus to cover Route No . 3. Te bus would leave the Farmer's Market every hour on the hour. • I . • - • • • • • -2- Costs for this service for 15 Tuesdays would be: Labor (2 drivers) (6 hrs.) ('$10.65) (15 days) Fuel (6.6 + 4.4 + 10.6 Mf .) (6 trips) ($.50) (15 da.) Mtce. (2 buses) (6 hrs.) ($5.70) (15 days) Total Reconnendation: $1 , 917 972 ...l.i..!ru. $3,915 Since the Street Division already pays for the above listed labor and 111intenance on the buses, there would be no additional outlay of aoney except for the fuel. It is reconnended, however, that a part-tiae person be hfred for the three suaner months to offset the loss during the Fanaers' Market. A part-tf11e person would cost approxf1111tely $2,600. The total outlay, not budgeted, would be $2,600 plus $972 for fuel, or approxf111ately $3,572. Hopefully, we could cover thfs fn our exfstfng budget. Att"achs . I • • • Wt*1 l-l ---lr- Bolie,·~r-1 City of µ,glewood Hot-d.......-i~ -Colle',le ._ ... ~~~~; • • • ROUTE NO. I - 6.6 milea--23 minutes I . • I r _ I • l • • • ROUTE NO. 2 · 4.4 I . • • • • ROUTE NO. 3 I 0.6 milea--4 ·1 minutes i I . . • • I - • • • • • C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE April 14, 1982 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT 1981 General Fund Budget 5? t) 1981 Golf Course Fund Budget Gary R. Higbee, Director of Finance ( t?'1 ~~~~ INITIATED BY _ _::'..'.:.:___:_:~~:::~~~~~~~~::.=-~~'Jd.~ ./~:::::::__ Approve resolution amending the 1981 General Fund and ACTION PROPOSED,_.:__ __________ ..;:_ __________ _ 1981 Golf Course Fund Budget BACKGROUND: As reflected in the 1982 budget document, the City of Englewood operates a 18-hole golf course, and in 1981 the second nine holes were used under restricted play only. Due to the restricted play on the second nine holes in 1981, the estimated subsidy required for the golf course from the general operating fund was revised to $96,430 from an original budget esti- mate of $38,000. Upon closing the books on the golf course fund in 1981 budget year, the actual general fund subsidy to the golf course is required to be $100,434. GENERAL FUND TRANSFER TO GOLF COURSE FUND 1981 Budget Actual Transfer Transfer Difference Adopted budget $ 38,000 $100,434 $ 62,434 Revised (not adopted) 96,430 100,434 4,004 I • • - • • • • • -2- As illustrated on the schedule listed below, the total authorized expenditure level for the golf course fund for 1981 was $297,900. Actual expenditures were $316,505 or $18,605 over the budget. Also, please note the 1982 budget reflected an estimated 1981 golf course expenditure to be $315,290 or $1,215 below actual 1981 golf course expenditure. Budget Actual RECOMMENDATION : Expenditure Budget $297,900 316,505 $18,605 Budget Estimate $315,290 316,505 $ 1,215 Recommend passage of the resolution appropriating $62,434 from the 1981 general fund to the 1981 golf course fund and appropriating an additional $18,605 to the golf course fund for the purposes of com- modities and contractual services for the 1981 budget year, I • • In • RESOLUTION NO . SE RIES OF 1 982 • • • A RES OLUT I ON AMENDING THE 1981 GENERAL FUND AND THE 1981 GOLF COURSE FUND BUDG ET . WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood , Colorado, has provided subsidy funding of the Englewood Golf Course Fund until such time as said fund becomes self-sufficient; and WHEREAS, operating coats exceeded the 1981 budget; and NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the Cit y of Englewood, Colorado : Se c tion 1. 'nle following appropriation is hereby aade in the General Fund: Source of Funds Fund Balance App lication o f Funds Go l f Cours e Subs i dy Section 2. $ 62,434 $ 62,434 'nle following appropriation is hereby aade in the Golf Cours e Fund: Source o f Funds Fund Balance $18,605 Application of Fund s eo ... od itie1 a nd Con tra ctual Service• $ 1 8,605 Section 3 . 'nle City Manager and Director of Fina nce ar her eby authorized to make the above changea to the 1981 budget of the City of Englewood. ADOPTED ANO APPROVED thh ----day of ----------• 1982, Mayor ATTEST: ex officio City Clerk-Trea1urer I, Gary R, Higbee, ex officio Cit y Clerk-Trea 1 urer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, do hereby certify t hat t h e a bove and f ore going ia a true, accurate and coaplete copy of ll.e1olution No, __ , Series of 1982, Cary I, Higbee • I • • n Memberships Green Fees Golf Cart Rental Conce11ion1 Operating Subsidy Miacellaneoua Bond Proceed• P raonal Servicea Commodltlea & Contractual Servicu Capital Outlay lnte.reat Depreciation • • • • MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE F1JND STATDIENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES -BUDGET AND ACTUAL FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECD1BER 31, 1981 ~ Actual Revenues & Other Financing Budget ~ Sand Proceeds ~ (Aa Revised) $ 21,594 $ $ 21,594 $ 13,800 165,045 165,045 201,450 38,430 38,430 35,000 8,885 8,885 10,000 100,434 100,434 38,000 630 $ 46S:OOO 465 ,000 $334,388 000 $799,388 $298 ,880 EXP DID I TU lES Encum-Depreci-Encua- brance:1 Capital ation & brancea Expenaea 12/31/81 Outlay Debt Serv, 12/31/80 ~ $108,453 $ $ $ $ $108,453 186,521 5,287 (2,275) 189,533 18,519 18,519 17,973 (17,973) _ll,,lli $334 ,388 $5 ,287 $18,519 fil..ill.) $.ill&!!) $(2,275) $3 16,505 • 0 Actual Over(Under) Budget $ 7,794 (36,405) 3,430 (1,115) 62,434 (630) 465,000 $500,508 Ac tual Budget Over(Un d r) (Aa Reviaed) Bud et $116,070 $(7,617) 181,735 7 ,798 18,700 (181) ~ $ 0 • - • • • • C O U N C I L C O M M U N I C A T I O N DATE April 14, 1982 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT 1981 General Fund Budget ~ t) 1981 Golf Course Fund Budget Gary R. Higbee, Director of Finance ( ~ 'l"'//~L IN IT I A TED BY _ _:.:::.::.:__:::__::~=:_::..:_::_::.::=..::._..:::_:__:~=:_::.:_~yt:::......!_ IL!/#'~ A!.~~=-- Approve resolution amending the 1981 General Fund and ACTION PROPOSED,_.:_:_ __________ -=------------ 1981 Golf Course Fund Budget BACKGROUND: As reflected in the 1982 budget document, the City of Englewood operates a 18-hole golf course, and in 1981 the second nine holes were used under restricted play only. Due to the restricted play on the second nine holes in 1981, the estimated subsidy required for the golf course from the general operating fund was revised to $96,430 from an original budget esti- mate of $38,000. Upon closing the books on the golf course fund in 1981 budget year, the actual general fund subsidy to the golf course is required to be $100,434. GENERAL FUND TRANSFER TO GOLF COURSE FUND 1981 Budget Actual Transfer Transfer Difference Adopted budget $ 38,000 $100,434 $ 62,434 Revised (not adopted) 96,430 100,434 4,004 • I • • -• • • -2- As illustrated on the schedule listed below, the total authorized expenditure level for the golf course fund for 1981 was $297,900. Actual expenditures were $316,505 or $18,605 over the budget. Also, please note the 1982 budget reflected an estimated 1981 golf course expenditure to be $315,290 or $1,215 below actual 1981 golf course expenditure. Budget Actual RECOMMENDATION : Expenditure Budget $297,900 316,505 $18,605 Budget Estimate $315,290 316,505 $ l, 215 Recommend passage of the resolution appropriating $62,434 from the 1981 general fund to the 1981 golf course fund and appropriating an additional $18,605 to the golf course fund for the purposes of com- modities and contractual services for the 1981 budget year. I • • • RE SOLUT ION NO.~ SERIES OF 1982 • • • A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1981 GENERAL FUND AND THE 1981 GOLF COURSE FUND BUDGET. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, has provided subsidy funding of the Englewood Golf Course Fund until such time as said fund becomes self-sufficient; and WHEREAS, operating costs exceeded the 1981 budget; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado: Section 1. 'nle following appropriation is hereby aade in the General Fund: Source of Funds Fund Balance Application of Funds Golf Course Subsidy Section 2. $ 62,434 $ 62,434 'nl.e following appropriation is hereby aade in the Golf Course Fund: Source of Funds Fund Balance $18,605 Application of Funds Comaoditiea and Contractual Services $18,605 Sect t on 3. llle City Manager and Director of Finance are hereby authori~ed to make the a bove changes to the 1981 budget of the City of Englewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED thia ----day of ----------• 1982, Mayor ATTEST: x officio City Clerk-Treaaurer I , Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Trea1ur1r of the City of Engl wood, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ii a tru , acc urate and c o111>l1t1 copy of lleaolution No. __ , Serie• of 1982. Gary a. Kigbee • I • • n - l lemberahipa Green Pr-ea Golf Cart Rental Conce11iona Operating Subaidy Miacellaneoua l!ond Proceed• Paraonal Servicu eo-.dltiu & Contractual Service.a pital Outlay lntaraat Deprec iation - • • • • MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FUND STATEIIENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES -BU DGET AND ACTUAL FOR TIIE YEAJ!. ENDED DECOIBER JI, 1981 ~ Actual Re:venuea ' Other Financing Budget Revenue• Bond Proceeds Source• (Aa Reviaed) $ 21,594 $ $ 21,594 $ 13,800 165,045 16S ,045 201,450 )8,430 38,430 35,000 8,885 8,88S 10,000 100,434 100,434 38,000 630 $46S:OOO 465,000 $334,388 000 $799,388 $298,880 !XPl!IID ITIJ US Encua-Deprec i -Encua- branc•• Capital ation & brancea l!:xpanaea ~ Outlay Debt Se rv . 12/31/80 ~ $108,4S3 $ $ $ $ $108,4S3 186,S21 S,287 (2 ,27S) 189,S33 18,S19 18,S19 17 ,973 (17,973) -1l.a..lli $S 1 2 7 f1 8,Sl9 ill.a.lli.> $(2 1 27S) $316,SOS $334 ,38 8 Sfil..!.W • 0 Actual Ove r (Under) Budget $ 7 ,794 (36,405) 3 ,430 (I, 115) 62,434 (630) 46S 1000 $500,508 Ac tual Bud&l!t Over(Undu) (Aa Rev1aed2 Bud t $116,070 $(7,617) 18 1 ,735 7 ,798 18,700 (181) $316,505 $ 0 •