City Council Regular Meeting - City of Durango

The City of Durango encourages the participation of all its citizens in its public meetings. If an accommodation is needed, please contact: ADA Coordinator (970) 375-5005 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL, 949 EAST 2ND AVENUE, SMITH CHAMBERS 01/02/2018 6:30 PM MAYOR Dick White MAYOR PRO-TEM Anita (Sweetie) Marbury COUNCIL Chris Bettin Dean Brookie Melissa Youssef CITY MANAGER Ron LeBlanc ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER Amber Blake ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Kevin Hall CITY ATTORNEY Dirk Nelson ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Amy Phillips, Director/City Clerk AVIATION Tony Vicari, Director CITY OPERATIONS Levi Lloyd, Director COMMUNICATIONS Phil Campbell, Director FINANCE Julie Brown, Director HUMAN RESOURCES Crystal Twedt, Director LIBRARY SERVICES Sandy Irwin, Director PARKS AND RECREATION Cathy Metz, Director POLICE Kamran Afzal, Police Chief UTILITIES Levi Lloyd, Acting Director

1

CITY OF DURANGO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL, 949 EAST 2ND AVENUE, SMITH CHAMBERS 01/02/2018 6:30 PM

1.

CALL TO ORDER

2.

CITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL

3.

PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATION 3.1.

4.

No Items

REVIEW OF THE CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the City Council by a single motion to approve matters that are considered routine or noncontroversial. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member or citizen requests an item be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be considered under Agenda Item 6. 4.1.

Approval of Minutes, Regular Meeting, December 19, 2017

4.2.

Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Requirements of the City to Comply with the State Sunshine Act

4.3.

A Request for a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Durango Housing Plan (January 16, 2018)

5.

APPROVED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

6.

REMOVED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

7.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (This section of the agenda is set aside for questions or comments by the public regarding items that do not otherwise appear on this agenda. Please limit comments to a five-minute period. Any audio-visual materials must be provided to the City Clerk by noon on the meeting day.)

8.

COUNCIL REPORTS/ACTIONS (Each Council member is provided an opportunity to report on meetings recently attended and to discuss topics not otherwise appearing on the agenda.)

9.

PUBLIC HEARINGS (By previous act of the City Council and publication, the following proposed ordinances or topics have been set for public hearing at this meeting. Public hearings are an opportunity for citizens to provide formal input into the City Council’s decision-making process. The format for public hearings is organized to ensure fairness to all parties involved. The public hearing portion of this meeting will end at 9:30 P.M., unless otherwise extended by motion, and, if necessary, will be continued to either a special meeting or the next regularly scheduled meeting. The City Council is pleased to welcome all public testimony, but does ask that it be relevant to the issue at hand.) 9.1.

Legislative and Policy-related Hearings: 9.1.1.

9.2.

Quasi-judicial Hearings: 9.2.1.

10.

No Items

CITY ATTORNEY, Dirk Nelson 10.1.

11.

No Items

No Items

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES

2

11.1. 12.

ADMINISTRATIVE 12.1.

13.

No Items

ADDENDUM ITEMS 13.1.

14.

No Items

No Items

ADJOURNMENT

City Manager Ronald P. LeBlanc

3

Approval of Minutes, Regular Meeting, December 19, 2017

DURANGO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES CITY HALL 949 EAST 2ND AVENUE TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2017 6:30 PM CALL TO ORDER Mayor White called the meeting to order at 6.33 p.m. ROLL CALL Answering to roll call were, Councilor Chris Bettin, Councilor Dean Brookie, Council Melissa Youssef, Mayor Pro Tem Sweetie Marbury, and Mayor Dick White. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS There were no proclamations or presentations. REVIEW OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 4.1. Approval of Minutes, Regular Meeting, December 5, 2017 4.2.

Discussion and Possible Action Regarding the Creation of a Project in the Sewer Capital Projects Fund

4.3.

Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Resolution R-2017-41 Changing the Dates of Three (3) Future City Council Meetings

4.4.

Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Resolution AR-2017-42 Adopting a Schedule for Permit Fees for the International Codes (I-Codes) for the City of Durango

4.5.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-19 Granting an Easement to La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) for Underground Utilities Over City-Owned Land Located at the Durango Santa Rita Water Reclamation Facility Located at 105 South Camino del Rio

4.6.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-20 Confirming the Current Organizational Structure for the City of Durango, and Declaring an Effective Date

4.7.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-21 Amending Chapter 25, Article III, Sec. 25-114 in the Code Ordinances of the City of Durango For Purposes of Modifying Sewer Rates for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Users of the Wastewater System, and Declaring an Effective Date

4.8.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-22 Granting of an Easement to La Plata Electric Association, Inc., an Easement located on City Owned Property to Accommodate Powerline Improvements and Electric Loads for the Goeglein Gulch Area, and Declaring an Effective Date

4.9.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-23 Providing for the Regulation and Control of the Design, Construction, Quality of Materials, Erection, Installation, Alteration, Repair, Location, Relocation, Replacement, Addition to, Use or Maintenance of One and Two- Family Dwellings and Townhomes Within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Residential Code for One- And Two-Family Dwellings," Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.10.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-24 for the Provision of Minimum Standards to Safeguard Life, Health, Property and Public Welfare by the Regulation and Control of the Design, Construction, Quality of Materials, Use and Occupancy, Location and Maintenance of All Buildings and Structures

Page 1 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 4 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 1 of 20

Within the City of Durango and Certain Equipment Specifically Regulated Herein, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Building Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date 4.11.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-25 for the Regulation and Control of the Erection, Installation, Alteration, Addition, Repair, Relocation, Replacement, Maintenance or Use of Any Plumbing System Within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Plumbing Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.12.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-26 for the Regulation and Control of the Design, Construction, Installation, Quality of Materials, Location, Operation and Maintenance of Heating, Ventilation, Cooling and Refrigeration Systems, Incinerators, and Other Miscellaneous Heat Appliances Within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Mechanical Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.13.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-27 Providing for the Regulation and Governing of Fuel Gas Systems and Gas-Fired Appliances Within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Fuel Gas Code" Published by the International Fuel Gas Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.14.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-28 Adopting a Fire Code Regulating and Governing the Safeguarding of Life and Property from Fire and Explosion Hazards Arising from the Storage, Handling and Use of Hazardous Substances, Materials and Devices, and From Conditions Hazardous to Life or Property in the Occupancy of Buildings and Premises in the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Fire Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.15.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-29 for the Establishment of Minimum Prescriptive and Performance-Related Regulations for the Design of Energy-Efficient Buildings and Structures within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Energy Conservation Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date

4.16.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-30 Appropriating Sums of Money to the Various Funds and Spending Agencies, in the Amounts and for the Purpose as Set Forth Below, for the City of Durango, Colorado for the 2018 Budget Year

City Clerk Amy Phillips read the Consent Agenda as published. A member of the audience requested removal of Item 4.7. Councilor Bettin requested removal of Items 4.3 and 4.15. APPROVED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Pro Tem Marbury moved to approve the Consent Agenda, minus Item 4.3, 4.7, and 4.15. Councilor Bettin seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 REMOVED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 4.3. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Resolution R-2017-42 Changing the Dates of Three (3) Future City Council Meetings

Page 2 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 5 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 2 of 20

Councilor Bettin said he requested removal of Item 4.3 to discuss the possibility of moving the City Council meeting scheduled for November 20th to the week of November 13th to allow him to travel with his family during Thanksgiving week. There were no objections from the other Council members. Mayor White noted that Tuesday, November 6th, was Election Day and suggested moving the meeting to the day prior. Councilor Bettin moved to approve Resolution R-2017-42, with the following additions: the Council meeting regularly scheduled for Tuesday, November 6, 2018, was changed to Monday, November 5th, and the council meeting regularly scheduled for Tuesday, November 20th, was changed to Tuesday, November 13th. Councilor Brookie seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 4.7.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-21 Amending Chapter 25, Article III, Sec. 25-114 in the Code Ordinances of the City of Durango For Purposes of Modifying Sewer Rates for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Users of the Wastewater System and Declaring an Effective Date Diane Howell, a member of the public present in the audience, asked Council to look at changing the multiplier from two times the sewer rate paid by city residents to something less for outside users of the municipal sewer services. She said her current sewer bill alone is $120 a month and it is her largest utility bill. She suggested that if the rate for out-of-city users could not be reduced, that Council not increase the rate any further in the future. Mark Oliver said when he bought his home in 2009, the sewer bill was $15 a month, but now, he pays $960 annually for sewer services. He referred to the Willdan rate study conducted in 2009, which stated out-of-city rates would be twice that of in-city rates, but said the study provided no basis for doubling the rate. He said he asked Council to consider the fairness of the rate in 2016 but did not know if Council had done so. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury said Council had not held a study session on the rates but were attentive to Mr. Oliver’s concerns and would discuss changing the multiplier. Mayor White said the next rate study was likely to occur in 2019, so Council may want to review the rate policy prior to that time. He said Council was acutely aware that there had been a steep increase in the rates and said he would like the Council to review the rates in a study session. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury concurred that there should be a study session. She noted that a previous City Council during the 1960s decided to offer City services to County properties to reduce the number of septic systems and to curb the amount of pollution and contamination entering the Animas River. She said it is more expensive to provide services out in the County, but assured Mr. Oliver that Council is listening to his concerns. Mr. Oliver commented that the City of Delta has a multiplier of 1.7 and Farmington’s is 1.5. He said he could put in a septic system and recoup the cost in three years, but that was not what he wanted to do, adding that he wants to do “what’s right.” He asked Council to lower the multiplier. Steve Stahl said he had reviewed the rate study and had not found a rationale for establishing a multiplier of 2 for sewer services provided out of the city limits. He said he also owns property in Durango and is paying almost $130 more for sewer services in the County, opposed to $53 per month for the property within the city limits, for a family of five. He asked if the money being paid into the Sewer Fund, in fact, goes into improvements. Council clarified for Mr. Stahl that sewer revenue does not go into the General Fund but into the Sewer Fund. Mayor White said the Sewer Fund is an enterprise fund, which under the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, must be self-supporting, with no more than 10% of funding coming from outside the fund. He said the fees are set at an amount that would keep the Sewer Fund self-supporting over time. He said the steep rate increases were required for the City to bond the cost of building the Santa Rita Water Reclamation Facility as well as a substantial number of deferred maintenance projects.

Page 3 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 6 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 3 of 20

Mayor Pro Tem Marbury said the payback period for the $62 million bond for the reclamation facility is 20 years. She said enterprise funds, such as the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund, and the Airport Fund, all must “pay their own way.” Mayor White said 2016 was anticipated to be the last year of steep increases and there should be only cost-of-living increases going forward. He said that part of the reconsideration of the rates would be a review of the multiplier for sewer services outside city limits. Mr. Oliver asked Council to consider that Durango’s multiplier is larger than those of the surrounding municipalities. John Simpson stated that the sewer rates show 20% of the expenses are shared by all customers, regardless of the level of usage, and 80% are based on customer usage. He said the 20%/80% allocation set forth in the Willdan rate study is not supported by current financial data. He asked Council to look at the facts before making their decision, saying the allocation of costs was “totally out of step with other communities, given the debt service for the plant.” He said fulltime residents and families, especially families in the county, are not paying a fair rate. He said that, because sewer rates would not be reviewed until 2019, it would be likely that the inequities would continue through the year 2020. He encouraged Council not to wait that long before looking at the water and sewer rate structures. He said an outside consultant would not be necessary and staff could review increasing the base use fee and reducing the usage charge. Mayor White noted that the consultants at Willdan, at the time the rate study was conducted, made it very clear that the allocation between fixed and variable charges would be a policy decision to be made by Council. He said the Council at that time made the decision to keep the base rate to a minimum to relieve the burden on low-income residents. Councilor Brookie concurred that the Council decision at the time was to minimize the cost of utilities for low-income families. He said a lower base cost means more people can afford sewer and water. He said he thought it was the correct decision at the time and is still the correct decision to be made at present. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury commented that LPEA had kept its base charge at a minimum, and she was appreciative of that, because it encourages conservation. She said she would like to see the base charge stay as low as possible. There being no one else who wished to speak to Item 4.7, Mayor White closed public comment. Councilor Brookie moved to approve Ordinance O-2017-21. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 4.15.

Final Approval, Ordinance O-2017-29 for the Establishment of Minimum Prescriptive and Performance-Related Regulations for the Design of Energy-Efficient Buildings and Structures within the City of Durango, Adopting by Reference the "2015 Edition of the International Energy Conservation Code" Published by the International Code Council, Inc., and Declaring an Effective Date Councilor Bettin commented on why he requested removal of Item 4.15. He noted that Council had already had a chance to debate the energy code, and subsequently, he had spoken with the City Manager about the impacts the new energy code would have on some of the City’s projects. He asked City Manager LeBlanc to update Council on the additional costs. Mr. LeBlanc said adoption of the 2015 energy code would affect some of the City’s projects that are in process, including the Park Shop located at the cemetery, which is in the design/build process. Adoption of the 2015 energy code would increase that project’s cost by approximately 20%. Councilor Brookie was uncertain the code would cause a 20% increase. He noted that the park project is underway and questioned why a permit would not be applied for by July 1, when the new code becomes effective. Councilor Bettin said no one is completely sure about the cost impacts of the new energy code. He said the July 1st effective date was at the peak of the construction season. He said he would like to see an effective date of January 1, 2018, but if Council found that untenable, he suggested Page 4 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 7 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 4 of 20

an effective date in the fall, when most of the building permits have been pulled, which would help minimize impacts to builders and developers. Mr. LeBlanc said the Administration Building at the new sewer plant would also be affected by the new energy code, but the building permit for it would not be pulled until 2019. He said the construction design for that building has not yet been completed. Mayor White said he thinks it is even more important to have the new code in place before the Administration Building at the treatment plant, which would serve the community for 50 to 100 years, is built. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury agreed with Councilor Bettin’s suggestion to postpone the effective date and move the date into the fall. She suggested moving the effective date from July 1st to October 1st. Councilor Brookie agreed with the Mayor that it is important to move forward with implementing the code to include as many new buildings as possible under the new code requirements and to require then to be as energy-sufficient as possible. Councilor Bettin agreed that the 2015 IECC should be adopted, but thought it would be harmful to implement in the middle of Durango’s building season. He said the harm could be mitigated easily by moving the effective date, adding that July 1 is not “ideal timing.” Councilor Youssef said the suggestion is a good compromise for what had been a difficult decision and would help meet the needs of the construction community. She said she supported moving the effective date to the end of the construction season. Councilor Brookie noted that it is not the 2018 code being adopted, but the 2015 code being adopted effective 2018, and said there had been plenty of time for everyone to become familiar with its requirements. He said the 2015 code was implemented in Farmington on July 1st of 2016. Councilor Bettin moved to approve Ordinance O-2017-29, with the delay of effective implementation to October 1st of 2018. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed three to two, with Councilor Brookie and Mayor White voting against the motion. Passed: For: 3; Against: 2; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 Mayor White urged City staff to perform a lifecycle cost analysis on the upfront costs of the 2015 Code’s implementation for City buildings. Councilor Brookie said he would like to see the calculations behind the estimated 20% increase in building costs under the new energy code. He said he would like to see the actual cost estimate for the park shop. Parks and Recreation Director Cathy Metz responded to Councilor Brookie’s request regarding the park shop. She said the Moore Park Shop is in the design process, with current discussion with consultant Michelle Reott and consultants for the HVAC system. She said it was the consultants who suggested that the cost could increase by up to 20%, resulting in additional costs of $200,000 or more. She said if the permit is pulled before the July 1st deadline, she said there was concern the department would be criticized for not “leading by example.” She said there was no written report from the architect regarding the increased cost, only discussion among the team members. Councilor Brookie said an additional cost of $200,000 was unlikely. He said in the future he would like to see numbers and not have discussion based on hearsay. Mayor White noted that the park shop is a priority because the buildings where staff currently work are uninsulated. He said he would like to see lifecycle costs, noting that Council might need to make a policy change. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Brett Griffin said he was speaking on behalf of the residents of Woodland Circle regarding a boundary adjustment that, he said, had come before Council three times and before the Planning Commission once and was unanimously approved with conditions. He asked that Assistant City Page 5 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 8 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 5 of 20

Manager Kevin Hall request Council to approve an ordinance with conditions relevant to the boundary adjustment, not including stipulations related to the building permit. He said a letter provided from the Woodland Circle residents to the City Council stating it would be detrimental to the neighborhood if Mr. Caldwell’s house was sold without the boundary adjustment in place. He said Mr. Caldwell has a contract on his house and it would be sold in two months and the property is integral to the boundary adjustment. He said another property in the neighborhood is also proposed for sale, which also is integral to the boundary adjustment. He presented to the City Clerk a survey plat with signatures of all parties except the City of Durango. He commented that up until April 13th of 2017, City personnel had said it would be a two-step process: the boundary adjustment, with relevant stipulations, and the building permit process, with another set of stipulations. He said on April 13th he wrote a check to the City for a simple boundary adjustment with the agreed-upon stipulations, which under State law was a “legally binding agreement” since the City cashed the payment. He asked for approval of an ordinance to allow the boundary adjustment to proceed before the properties on Woodland Circle are sold and “this whole deal falls through.” He also said his front yard had been dug up and requested the Utilities Department provide him with a scope of work, why they haven’t returned, the reason for the delay, and when it’s going to be fixed. He said there was exposed piping, and with the upcoming cold weather, there’s the potential for freezing, which could cause more damage. Christine Johnson addressed Council on behalf of the Quiet Nighthorse Lake Coalition. She said she missed the study session on Lake Nighthorse but listened to it on the City’s website. She thanked Council for its thoughtful deliberation and for concurring on the need for more input from the community. She noted that Council had been criticized earlier in the month for its focus on sustainability, clean energy, and climate change. She said Council deserved applause for their stance, saying most of their constituents “love you for being environmentally conscious” and want Council to “hold the course and stay strong.” She said she was glad to see that Council wants to manage Lake Nighthorse in an environmentally and fiscally responsible manner. She said her organization wants to see the reservoir succeed. She said the group advocated for the quiet approach and thought charging per person, rather than per vehicle, would have great results. She said, even with additional public input, there is no reason for Lake Nighthorse not to open as scheduled in April, 2018, which would still be a “slow opening,” because motorboats would not use the lake until mid-May. She said Council was wise to proceed cautiously and deliberately. She noted that a Parks Master Plan survey would go out to the public in January and would provide a scientific, unbiased read from the public at large regarding Lake Nighthorse “if the right questions are asked.” She said staff had shown a reluctance to ask “controversial” questions. She thanked Council for all the ways they served the community and said, “I hold you in great esteem.” Brian Brown read a letter that he sent to Council previously. He said he thought the City was making some missteps in its approach to motorized uses at Lake Nighthorse. He said he participated in the Lake Nighthorse scoping process for its recreational plan, and said in retrospect, “it was clearly a waste of time” because the outcome was already determined by those doing the planning. He said during the scoping process, many committees were formed for user groups and recommendations were made that never made it into the final document. He said the user group he took part in, kiteboarding, was not mentioned in the final plan. He said kiteboarders need a place to launch and land to be able to use the lake. He said the consensus at the meetings was that, if motorized boats are allowed, the use must be compatible with other user groups, commenting that powerboats that create wakes would affect many other user groups, including SUPs, canoes, flatwater kayaks, and rowing shells, which are small enough that wakes can tip them over. He said the result would be that those groups would choose not to compete with the wakes and highspeed powerboats and allowing powerboats would have the unintended consequence of reducing the number of people who use the reservoir. He noted that the City is interested in receiving revenue from recreational uses. He said the powerboat users should pay ten-fold what others pay to make up for the shortfall created by fewer users. He said either no wakes should be allowed or they should be restricted to a smaller area where wakes won’t affect other users. He asked why the powerboat users should be allowed to use a huge area of the lake, effectively excluding many of the other user groups. He suggested that there could be days or hours when no wakes are allowed, so other users could have safe use of the lake. He said it is a small lake and said he could not conceive of the effect 20 powerboats could have on other users. He asked Council to consider 30 powerboats circling the lake on a 7-mile route at 30 mph. He said the scenario does not promote multiple use. He said the only way to maximize use of the lake is to segregate uses that create wakes from uses that do not create wakes. He said he personally supports Lake Nighthorse as a no-wake lake, so all other users can use the lake at all times.

Page 6 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 9 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 6 of 20

Mayor White responded that the intent of the resolution to be considered later in the meeting was to open the lake to recreational uses, but Council wanted to engage the community in a conversation about appropriate uses. Councilor Brookie responded that Mr. Brown had made several good points in his narrative. He said when the City negotiated with the several tribes on their needs, it was possible that some of the uses, such as kiteboarding and camping, were left out or restricted. He said Mr. Brown had not wasted his time, but some uses of the lake were dictated by the tribes. He said the City was fortunate to be able to open the lake to recreational uses. Councilor Bettin, who serves as Council liaison to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, said some of uses at the lake may come later. He said opening the lake to recreational uses is in its first phase, and the City wants to have robust usage at the lake. He said Council hopes to increase the recreational opportunities, such as the addition of trails and camping, but those uses are part of a longer-term recreational plan. Mayor White commented on Mr. Griffin’s remarks. He said the Council considered the issue at length in October and there were two aspects – the property boundary adjustment and the repair of the damage done to City-owned property. He said Council endorsed the conditions recommended by staff. He said the City Attorney and the Assistant City Manager had acted in accordance with the direction given by City Council at that time. He said he communicated that information to Mr. Griffin in a message several weeks ago, and City staff had requested that communication on the matter be done through the City’s legal staff. Jerry Olivier said he was for all uses at Lake Nighthorse, including motorboats and all kinds of boats. He said to be fiscally successful, he thought use categories should include as many as possible. He said most of the boats would not create a wake larger than what is created by the wind on a normal day with a good breeze. He said the quiet use advocates are villainizing the powerboat community and added that the lake should be shared in the same way that other resources are shared. He said if powerboats become a problem, the City can ban their use. Mayor White responded that some uses are “off the table, as explained at the last study session.” He commented on the process to open the lake to recreational uses that began in 2011, noting the many entities involved in that process. There being no one else who wished to speak, Mayor White closed the Public Participation. COUNCIL REPORTS/ACTIONS Mayor Pro Tem Marbury reported that a graduation ceremony at the Durango Adult Education Center was scheduled for that night, at the same time as the Council meeting. She congratulated and acknowledged those who achieved GEDs through the program. At Mayor Pro Tem Marbury’s request, Mr. LeBlanc provided a report on sales and lodger’s tax revenue. Mr. LeBlanc reported that the local economy continued to be erratic. He said sales in the month of October 2017 were down 1.8% below October 2016, but up 1.6% year to date. He said lodger’s tax for October 2017 was down 27.4% over the same period in 2016. He explained that in 2016 two companies skipped filing taxes monthly and filed multiple months in November, which was why the 2017 revenue was down so much. He said, year to date, the lodger’s tax was up 2.6%. He said the tax revenue pattern had been unpredictable since February and several factors contributed to the unpredictability, including Internet sales, decreased enrollment at Fort Lewis College, the decline in population in San Juan County (New Mexico), and the lack of expansion in the oil and gas industry. He said he thought Council had been wise in conservatively projecting a 0% increase for the 2018 budget. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury encouraged everyone to buy locally, which increases local sales tax revenue, which is the revenue source for the City’s General Fund and provides for street maintenance and improvements and “hires police officers, for example.” She said the joint sales tax funds the Library and the Senior Center. She said enterprise funds must pay their own way. She noted that the Parks and Recreation Department budget relies on sales tax, and when revenues go down, improvements must be scaled back. She said shopping locally creates benefits for the community. Page 7 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 10 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 7 of 20

Mayor Pro Tem Marbury commented on recycling in Durango, which is single-stream. She said some loads of recycled material must be dumped because they are contaminated with prohibited items, such as plastic bags and unrinsed cans, glass and plastic containers. She said when a load is dumped due to contamination, the City loses revenue and it misses the point of recycling. Councilor Youssef thanked City staff for hosting a holiday reception for the City’s boards and commission volunteers. She thanked the commissioners and board members for their service. Councilor Youssef reported on her attendance at an “Eggs & Issues” forum on the topic of “The Diagnosis of Health Care,” which focused on health care and its impacts to the business community. She said the forum was well attended and the information was relevant and interesting. Councilors Bettin and Brookie had no report. Mayor White reported that he, Mayor Pro Tem Marbury, and Mr. LeBlanc attended the inauguration of the new chair of the Southern Ute Tribe, Christine Baker Sage. He Ms. Baker Sage was the second woman to hold that position. He said another woman, Cheryl Frost, was appointed to the tribal council, along with new councilman Cedric Chavez. Mayor White reported on his attendance at the Fort Lewis College graduation ceremonies, commenting it was one of the best commencement addresses he had ever heard. Mayor White reported on his opportunity to attend a class council meeting at Park Elementary. He said, after a class of third graders visited City Hall, they decided to elect their own council. He said the students raised $200 for their project and elected a council to decide on ways to spend the money. Mayor White said he serves as Council representative to the Southwest Colorado Council of Governments and Mr. LeBlanc serves as the City’s liaison. He said the 2018 budget was approved at a meeting held the previous week. He said the budget includes $30 to $40 million in federal funding to build out regional middle-mile regional broadband. He said CDOT is also contributing a significant amount to the project in the form of matching funds. He said rural broadband service is crucial to economic rural development. Mayor White reported on a meeting of the Youth Engagement Program participants to develop their 2018 program and to plan their annual event at Snowdown. He said the group is sensitive to the fact that Snowdown doesn’t include events for teens; it wants to fill that gap. On behalf of the Council, Mayor White wished happy holidays to the community. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.1. Legislative and Policy-related Hearings: 9.1.1. No Items 9.2.

Quasi-judicial Hearings: 9.2.1. A Public Hearing to Consider the Island Cove Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Community Development Planner Savannah Jameson presented the staff report. She said her presentation would include both Items 9.2.1 and 9.2.2, but the items would require separate motions. She noted that the request was for Island Cove Mobile Home Park, located on Riverview Drive and Florida River and adjacent to the Animas River. She said the property consists of two parcels. She said one of the applications is for a lot line amendment to move the current lot line between the two parcels a little further to the north. She presented a map and an aerial photograph of the property. Ms. Jameson said the other application is for a Future Land Use Map Amendment to change the future land use designation of the upper bench of the Island Cove Mobile Home Park from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density and the lower portion of the property from Residential Medium Density to Residential High Density. She presented a drawing of the Future Land Use Map depicting the existing zoning for the properties and a representation of the map after the proposed changes. She noted that the zoning of the mobile home park would not change.

Page 8 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 11 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 8 of 20

Ms. Jameson presented a conceptual design for the lot on the upper bench of the Island Cove property. She noted, however, that the applicant is not proposing any development on the property at this time. The conceptual drawing showed three townhome lots that could potentially be developed on the upper bench under the proposed zoning. She noted that any future development would be required to go through the review process. Ms. Jameson said a neighborhood meeting was held on November 6, 2017, and there was significant comment from residents of the mobile home park concerning how the development would affect the park. She said the request went before the Planning Commission on December 4th, where many of the residents along Animas Place stated their preference that the upper bench remain open and not be developed. Ms. Jameson said, after its review, staff was recommending approval of the requested amendment. She said the requested amendment conforms to the Land Use Development Code and the proposal is consistent with land uses on adjacent properties. She reviewed the five criteria for review of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map as outlined in the LUDC Sec. 6-3-12-5 and noted how the property meets the criteria. She said, after testimony and discussion, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval, based on the findings and conditions as stated in the staff report. She said the boundary adjustment had also been reviewed by staff and was found to meet applicable regulations and requirements; thus, staff was also recommending approval of the boundary adjustment with conditions. She reviewed staff’s proposed conditions, as presented in the staff report and included in the agenda documentation. She reiterated that the two items required separate motions. In response to a question from Councilor Bettin, Ms. Jameson said the requests would not affect the mobile home park and homes that currently exist. She said any development is proposed for the upper bench and access would be taken off Riverview Drive; it would not share access with the mobile park. Councilor Brookie commented on rezoning the property from, effectively, residential Low to Residential Medium. He said Residential Low would be a single-family lot. He said development of three townhomes would be predicated on the driveway easement. He asked about the status of the easement and its wording to ensure access to more than one lot. Ms. Jameson said it was her understanding the easement did not differentiate between one or more units. Councilor Brookie said it is important to know the intent behind the easement. He cautioned against a zoning change on the upper bench if it does not have legal access. He said the lot line amendment would essentially change the designation on the upper bench from single-family to a multiple-user lot and it is important to know if the existing easement would allow multiple users. Councilor Youssef referred to the agenda documentation and information from the Planning Commission meeting. She said one of the Planning Commissioners raised the same concern regarding legal easement, and the applicant suggested a 30-foot easement would allow development to meet driveway requirements, noting that the applicant had also met with the Fire District regarding the sufficiency of the easement. Councilor White opened the hearing to Public Testimony and invited the applicant’s representative to speak first. Cynthia Roebuck spoke as a representative of the applicant and the owners of Island Cove. She said all the property is currently zoned Residential High. She said the purpose of the request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment was because staff presented that as a condition for the boundary adjustment. She said going from Residential Low to Residential Medium would allow three townhomes on the site versus one single-family residence. She said the applicant had looked at both possibilities. She said the townhome concept would be a better use of the land and would be more consistent with the desires of Council and the Planning Department to create more residential units through infill development. Ms. Roebuck said the applicant and the owner agreed with the conditions, with one correction, as they were presented to the Planning Commission. She said, however, the one thing not agreed to was something that had arisen in the past few days, which was the requirement to complete an archeology report before Site Plan approval, which she had not anticipated being addressed under the current request. She said the owners and applicant have not agreed to that and are performing Page 9 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 12 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 9 of 20

more research. She asked that the archeology report be stricken from the list of conditions. She said the condition was not included in the conditions of the staff report. In response to Councilor Brookie’s concerns about the legal status of the easement, Ms. Roebuck said a copy of the deeded easement was included in the documentation. She said she had represented the property since 2003. She noted that it was recently sold to Mr. Smith, who, as a condition of sale, required an easement to be obtained across the Christ the King church property. She said that easement was recorded in 2016 and was acceptable to the buyer’s attorney, the seller’s attorneys, and the title company. She said it is a 30-foot easement, with a 20-foot driveway requirement. She said the easement is for access and utilities for the benefit of all the Island Cove property due to the legal configuration of the land. She said the upper bench was zoned as Residential High in 2014. She said the entire property is currently zoned as Residential High. She said the Comprehensive Plan Map has different designations, which conflict with the zoning. Councilor Brookie thanked her for the clarification that the request was to change the property designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map from Residential High to Residential Medium to be consistent with the code. He said his only concern was that the City would not be held liable for rezoning the property without adequate legal easement. There being no more questions for the applicant, Mayor White invited members of the public who wished to speak to the podium. Michael Pittenger said he was there to voice his and some of his neighbors’ opposition to the proposed reconfiguration and density increase for the upper bench, which were currently shown on the map as low density. He said a single-family dwelling would be consistent with adjoining properties along its upper boundary. He said the lot is more a part of the Riverview neighborhood than it is of Island Cove. He said the lot would affect Riverview Drive and is closer to single-family homes along the edge of Animas Place. He said he supports planned infill development and the rights of property owners, but allowing three households where only one is currently allowed would be inappropriate and would be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood, which, he said, had been an integral part of the City since the 1950s. He said he attended previous meetings on the requests and thought the Planning Commissioners and staff saw the request as a “done deal, despite the objections of homeowners.” He asked Council to retain the current boundaries and the land use designation for the parcel on the bench. Carl Watson said his property is adjacent to the easement in question. He said he was confused about the zoning, with the current applicant saying the property is currently zoned Residential High, when it’s purported to change it from Residential Low to Residential Medium. Mayor White responded there’s a distinction between the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the current zoning. Mr. Watson acknowledged that there were inconsistencies, but said the Comprehensive Plan called for a single-family residence. He agreed with Mr. Pittenger that the parcel is a part of the Riverview neighborhood. He said a higher density would disrupt the “family nature of the Riverview neighborhood,” which is a single-family residence neighborhood. He said if density can be changed to allow more units, than “there’s no use in zoning” and it “goes against the integrity of the zoning process and what was intended when I was on the Planning Commission.” He said the zone that was put in place was meant to protect the single-family nature of the neighborhood. He said the real buffer between the Residential Low and Residential High zoning is the topography of the property, with a substantial difference between the trailer park and the upper bench. He said he had not seen anything in the documentation referencing the City’s recreational easement for access down to the river, which, he said, gets heavy use year-round, particularly in summer, with a lot of foot traffic. He referred to his presentation to the Planning Commission where he said each unit on the upper bench would generate 10 trips per day, which is 30 trips a day on the City’s recreational easement, in addition to all kinds of foot traffic. He said he thought a singlefamily residence on the property would be beneficial because the property has been an attractive nuisance over the years. In response to a question from Mayor Pro Tem Marbury, Mr. Watson said it was his understanding the City holds a recreational easement that goes to the river, noting that the easement was presented in the documentation for the Planning Commission. There being no one else from the public who wished to speak, Mayor White asked staff to return to the podium to address some of Council’s concerns and questions. Page 10 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 13 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 10 of 20

Community Development Assistant Director Nicol Killian addressed the issue of the Comprehensive Plan versus zoning. She said the property is currently zoned Residential High, and a developer could build under Residential High zoning on the upper bench but could not sell it. She said, to sell the property, a boundary adjustment would be necessary to create the desired parcel, and once the parcel was separated, it would go through the Comprehensive Plan process to designate the land use. She said any boundary adjustment must be consistent with the zoning and with the Comprehensive Plan. She said multifamily housing could be built on the bench now, but the parcel could not be sold. She said if the owner did not want a boundary adjustment, or if they didn’t want to sell the property, they could still build multifamily housing under current zoning. She said a boundary adjustment is considered a land use change. She noted that the easement already serves both Residential Low and Residential High zoning, and the applicant has requested the entire parcel be Residential Medium zoning. She said the archeological report requirement is part of the City’s Site Plan review process. She said it should not be a condition of approval for the request under consideration but is something staff is requesting from the applicant. Ms. Jameson commented on the City’s recreational easement for the Rhea Open Space, which would be maintained, adding that any future site development review would also ensure it would be maintained. Assistant City Manager Kevin Hall said the City does have clear administrative access across the parcel, but there should be more clarity about the extent of the access. He said the trail access has been under consideration for almost 10 years and the current access agreement has been “working well.” He said with a 30-foot easement and a 20-foot driveway requirement, there would be plenty of room for everyone. He said there were conversations “early on about this issue” to ensure safety. He said the trail is an important connection to Chapman Hill and the Rec Center. Ms. Jameson pointed out the access easement on the site aerial. There being no more questions for staff, Mayor White closed the hearing to further testimony and invited Council discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury said she read all the documentation and thought the request met all the requirements. She said she supports infill development, noting that the property has access and the Fire District had no objections to the proposal. She noted that the City has control of its recreational easement and it would be maintained under the proposal. Councilor Brookie commented on the value of having more quality units within the city. He said his concern was that the church provided the easement based on the Residential Low zoning. He said if the boundary adjustment resulted in greater use of the easement, it was possible there could be a legal challenge. He cited another property in town where the legal easement was challenged in a similar situation. Mayor White allowed Ms. Roebuck to clarify some of the confusion regarding easement. She referred to the utility plan and the plat included in the agenda documentation. She said when the City acquired the Rhea property, and for a very long time, a 12-foot recorded easement has existed from Riverview Drive, across the church property, to the Rhea property. She said the easement was for the benefit of the Rhea property for a single family as driveway access. She said that is the access the City now uses for public access. She said there would be ongoing discussions regarding the trail with the City as the property develops. She said when Mr. Smith purchased the property in 2016, he realized the easement was for the benefit of the Rhea property, so he went back to the Church and received a 30-foot utility easement, which, she said, was not an exclusive easement but served as a benefit for the entire Island Cove property. She said there are two separate easements and they overlap. Councilor Brookie said her point was good, because it was an historic easement that the City acquired with the Rhea property and the 12-foot wide easement was intended to serve one unit on the Rhea property. He noted that there are two benches on the property, one along the upper property line and one about 10 feet below that. Ms. Roebuck said the height restriction in the Land Use Development Code is 35 feet and the applicant has agreed that the height would be measured from the lower portion of the bench, not the upper edge. She said the applicant had further agreed not to build more than three units, even though four could be allowed under Residential Medium zoning. She said the bench is .47 acres.

Page 11 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 14 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 11 of 20

Councilor Youssef commented that the trail to the river is highly trafficked. Mayor White noted Mr. Hall’s comment that there is sufficient room for safe separation of the pedestrian trail from the driveway access, which, he said, is an important point. He said the goal of the boundary adjustment makes “total sense.” He said leaving the property with Residential High zoning could potentially create more problems for the neighborhood in the future. He said the vertical separation also makes a difference and would reduce the visual intrusion of development on the bench. He commented that infill is one of Council’s goals. He said, “If you don’t own the land, you don’t own the view shed.” He said his impression is that the owners are “trying to be mindful about what they do.” Councilor Youssef agreed that the proposed Residential Medium zoning is a nice bridge between the mobile home park below and the single-family residences above. She felt the proposal is a good compromise and met Council goals. Ms. Jameson said the offer of limiting the development to three townhomes was not documented, but was the intent of the applicant. She said it could be stated as a condition. Mayor White said the applicant’s representative stated the intention to develop three units or less in a public hearing and representations of the applicant are considered part of the conditions of approval. Ms. Jameson said there are other constraints on the lot that would limit the number of units. Councilor Youssef moved to approve the Island Cove Upper Bench Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken and passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 9.2.2. A Public Hearing to Consider the Island Cove Minor Subdivision Discussion for Item 9.2.2 was included in the discussion for Item 9.2.1. Mayor White said the staff presentation addressed both items and he saw no reason for another staff report. Mayor White opened the hearing to Public Testimony and invited the applicant to make additional remarks. Ms. Roebuck requested that the actual conditions of approval be read into the record. Ms. Jameson read the staff recommendation and approval conditions into the record, as follows Staff finds the proposal meets the applicable criteria of the Land Use and Development Code and recommends approval of Upper Bench Boundary Adjustment Plat, subject to the stated findings and conditions:     

All public improvements, including curb and gutter, utility work, and all other requirements of subdivision, shall be completed or appropriately secured prior to Site Plan approval. Include all plat language, plat notes, and easement dedications determined appropriate by City Staff on the final plat. All future development beyond the proposed subdivision will be subject to future reviews and approvals in accordance with the requirements of the Land Use and Development Code. All City Utility and Engineering Comments will be addressed. All written, verbal, and graphic representations of the applicant shall be deemed conditions of approval.

Councilor Youssef moved to approve the Island Cove Mobile Home Park Minor Subdivision, subject to findings and conditions read into the record by staff and as addressed in the December 4, 2017, Planning Commission staff report. Councilor Brookie seconded the motion. Mayor White officially closed the public hearing and asked Councilor Youssef to restate her motion. Councilor Youssef restated her motion to approve the Island Cove Mobile Home Park Minor Subdivision, subject to findings and conditions as read into the record by staff and as addressed in Page 12 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 15 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 12 of 20

the December 4, 2017, Planning Commission staff report. Councilor Brookie seconded the motion. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 Mayor Pro Tem Marbury thanked the neighbors for participating in the hearing. Councilor Youssef noted that she had failed to also move that the Mayor sign the mylars. Counsel Nelson said he thought the direction was implied in the motion and a second motion would not be required. A Public Hearing to Consider the Mercury Village Lot 4 Conceptual Development Plan Planner Savannah Jameson provided the staff report as follows: She said the Conceptual Development Plan was part of the Mercury Village Planned Development. She pointed out Lot 4 on a Context Map, noting that it is along the Animas River. She said the streets for the development were put in when the Mercury building was constructed and a spur for the bike path runs through the middle of the property. She said the property is in the PD (Planned Development) zone district and completely covered by the river corridor overlay. She explained that Lot 4 was coming before Council for conceptual approval because the Mercury Village Plan Development Agreement allows other uses than office and retail, such as schools, hotels, day care centers, but Council approval of a new conceptual plan is required. 9.2.3.

Ms. Jameson commented on the proposed plan to construct a 10,000 to 12,000-square-foot food hall, using a combination of both recycled shipping containers and new materials. She said similar projects have been successfully developed around Colorado and the goal is to provide more places to eat in the Bodo Park area and south Durango. She said the plan would use 40% of the entire site for the building and parking, and the project would be built around and incorporate the existing bike pathway. She said the two-story building would have a community room on the second floor that would be available for rent. She provided conceptual renderings of the proposed plan, noting that the intent is to “engage the river” in the concept, which includes open decks and a lot of glass and transparency. She said the developer would “soften the building” with landscaping. Ms. Jameson said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed conceptual plan and recommended approval at its December 4th meeting. She said the conceptual plan was also reviewed by the Design Review Board, which had some suggestions. She said she anticipated the project would come to Council for preliminary review in February. She said staff recommended approval, with the finding that the conceptual plan meets the Land Use and Development Code and the Mercury Village Planned Development Agreement. Councilor Bettin commented on the amount of parking and suggested less parking would emphasize the design and not detract from the landscape. Ms. Jameson said the Design Review Board said the site cannot be overparked more than 5%. She said the applicant does not plan to provide more parking than is required and would reduce the parking as much as possible. In response to a question from Mayor White, Ms. Jameson said it was possible the parking could serve trail users who are not using the building. Mayor White said parking for trail users would open access to the far end of the Animas Trail. Ms. Jameson said the intent is to “embrace the bike path,” with a special entrance and plenty of bicycle parking. Councilor Brookie said the parking as presented in the conceptual plan would be expensive to build, due to grade. He said he liked the land use and the concept. He commented on the potential to create a second Horse Gulch Trailhead and was not sure how many shared uses would occur. Mayor White said he was unsure if there was river access at the site. Ms. Jameson said the access is to the Animas River Trail, not to the river. Mayor White noted that the bicycle bridge is at the extreme south end of the property. Page 13 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 16 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 13 of 20

Mayor White opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak first. Ed Colleene said he represents the partnership proposing the project. He noted that the design plan presented in the packet was outdated in that the developers had already begun to incorporate comments and suggestions from the review bodies into the design. He said the parking was designed to meet the Land Use and Development Code. He said it was a 3½-acre site and the development would be on approximately 1½ acres of it. He said the intent was to keep the lower areas at natural grade, but the plan was to over-excavate, then cut and balance the fill to bring the parking lot down as much as possible. He described the plans to break up the mass of the parking and to provide a view from the river trail looking up. He said a fair amount of landscaping was also planned. He noted he had received a letter of support from Vantiv, which he forwarded to the Planning Staff. He said he had also met with La Quinta’s general manager, who expressed support for the project. He said he had been contacted by several operators who would like to participate in the development. He said there is a need for food establishments on the south end of town. He said he and his wife own a downtown food establishment, Grassburger, and commented that people near Bodo Park, Three Springs, and Mercy don’t come into town for lunch. He said he had the most recent conceptual rendering with him and would provide it if Council desired. Mayor White said Council could wait to see the updated conceptual design until preliminary review but had some comments on the conceptual design he would like to be considered. He said the conceptual design had a lot of flat rooftop, which “begs for solar.” Mr. Colleene said the deck coming off the south end of the building, shown in the conceptual plan, is the southern exposure. He said solar is possible, but he wasn’t sure it is feasible. Mayor White referred to the citizen petition presented to Council several months’ prior that requested Council to commit to 100% renewable energy. He said, at the very least, the developer should be mindful of the energy loads. He added that, as a retired astronomer, he supports “dark skies,” noting the amount of glass in the conceptual design and the potential for reflection. He urged the developer to consult with La Plata Electric Association about color temperatures for both indoor and outdoor lighting and to consider light spillage in the design. Councilor Marbury commented on childcare facilities as a use in the new development. She said a childcare facility would be a “guaranteed moneymaker.” There being no more questions for the applicant from Council, Mayor White opened the hearing to further public testimony. There being no one in the public who wished to speak to the project, he closed the hearing to public testimony and invited Council discussion and comment. Council Bettin said he was excited about the project, particularly the idea of engaging the river and creating an amenity along the river corridor where business, shopping, entertainment, and recreational opportunities already exist. He said he was looking forward to seeing the rest of the plan. He noted the approval of the Planning Commission and saw no reason not to move the project forward. Councilor Brookie concurred and moved to approve the approve the Mercury Village Lot 4 Conceptual Development Plan, with detailed review to occur during Preliminary Site Plan process. Councilor Bettin seconded the motion. There were no comments or objections from Mayor Pro Tem Marbury. Councilor Youssef said she likes the idea of using different vendors. Mayor White supported more food outlets in south Durango, especially near the Animas River Trail. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 ADMINISTRATIVE 12.1. City Attorney, Dirk Nelson

Page 14 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 17 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 14 of 20

12.1.1. Discussion and Possible Action on Approving the First Amendment to Agreement for Fire Protection and Emergency Services between the City and the Durango Fire Protection District (DFPD) Counsel Nelson provided the staff report as follows: he said the amendment was a simple contract amendment, reflecting the additional ad valorem tax and mill levy passed by voters on November 7, 2017, for fire and emergency services. He said it was his understanding the Fire District board had already approved the amendment. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury thanked the voters for approving the additional mill levy. Mayor White said approval of the mill levy was an important step forward for the Fire District, would be better than operating at a deficit, and would fulfill existing needs, such as equipment and training of personnel. Councilor Brookie said the amendment was just “a formalization of the vote of the public.” Councilor Brookie moved to approve the first amendment to the agreement for fire protection and emergency services between the Durango Fire Protection District and the City of Durango. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 12.1.2. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Resolution R-2017-43 Regarding Lake Nighthorse Recreation City Manager LeBlanc provided a short PowerPoint presentation, titled “Lake Nighthorse: Where Do We Go From Here,” to introduce the staff report. The presentation started with three points for consideration: Is the project functionally, financially, and politically feasible? He noted the lengthy public process for developing recreational opportunities at the reservoir and the number of studies conducted since 2000. He noted that the process involved not only the public and the City, but also the Federal Government, Native American Tribal Governments, County Government, State Government, and many local and regional entities. Mr. LeBlanc reviewed what made the recreational management at Lake Nighthorse financially feasible for the City, including grants, user fees, as well as expenses (paving, courtesy docks, a breakwater, and staffing). He said he would discuss Fund Balance issues later in his presentation. He said the hope was to balance the expenses with revenue. He said the City has an agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation to split any losses equally. He commented on the grants, including the Motorboat Colorado Grant for $3 million obtained in 2009 to install a boat ramp, access roads, parking, and restrooms. He also commented on the Economic Study conducted by a local firm (RPI) in 2010, that projected revenues of almost $13 million annually. He noted a grant of $285,000 from Colorado Parks and Wildlife for more recreational development. He said all the improvements must be in place by the date of opening and noted the construction of overflow parking, the breakwater, and the courtesy docks, all of which have been approved by the Federal Government. Mr. LeBlanc commented on the effect of expenses for managing the lake on the City’s General Fund Balance. He noted that in the 2018 budget only $153,964 was unassigned and unappropriated funds. He commented on two other unassigned projects that have come forward since Council considered and approved the 2018 budget: $250,000 for Highway 550/160 relocation and $33,000 for a Homeless Coordinator. Mr. LeBlanc commented on Durango’s recent financial rating published by Moody’s, noting the City’s high credit rating, which is a little stronger than the national median, but also noting the City’s cash balance, which is notably weaker than the national median and significantly decreased between 2002 and 2016. He said in 2002 the City’s sales tax was increasing at approximately 5% to 6% annually. That trend ended with the 2009 recession, he said, and the City made changes, downsizing City staff and making structural changes to accommodate the loss in revenue. He said at one time the City had funds set aside for contingencies, but the contingency fund was eliminated in 2009. He said staff has anticipated a decrease in sales tax in 2018 and based the 2018 budget on a 0% increase in sales tax revenue. Mr. LeBlanc commented on the anticipated revenue and operating expenses for motorized and nonmotorized recreation use at Lake Nighthorse. He said with phased introduction of uses, whatever use is restricted at the gate lowers potential revenue for the City. He said the City’s 50% contribution to any deficit would have to come out of the $153,964 unassigned funds in the GenPage 15 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 18 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 15 of 20

eral Fund. He suggested as many people as possible should experience Lake Nighthorse, because they would enjoy it and return. He said higher fees mean some people can’t use the lake as often. Mr. LeBlanc commented on the 2010 Market Assessment, which projected use as follows: 32% powerboating; 33% non-powerboating, and 45% fishing, with 78% participating in multisport outings and with market share user days projected to be 18% powerboating, 12% non-powerboating, and 23% fishing. He asked to Council to consider all the community when making decisions about allowed uses. Mayor White observed that the percentage of users adds up 110% and the market share user days only comes to 53%. Mr. LeBlanc said staff would take questions at the end of the presentation. Mr. LeBlanc commented on political feasibility, including annexation, a phased approach, timing, and political will – all of which are discretionary and up to the City Council to decide. He noted that once the property is annexed, the City would have responsibility for law enforcement and only $100,000 of law enforcement was budgeted in the 2018 budget to cover the land (436 acres) and the water (1,490 acres). He said the budgeted amount could be more than the City needs or could be insufficient. He said annexation is in process, but the process may need to be delayed for the City to meet its objectives. Mr. LeBlanc said the Lake Nighthorse project is very different from other City Parks and Recreation projects, because the City must answer to a body of controlling boards, including the Animas - La Plata Operation and Maintenance Association, which has a Recreation Committee that the Parks and Recreation Director must negotiation with. She said the committee includes representatives from three tribes, northern New Mexico, and the water association that owns the water and operates the facility. He said the City had to take some of its proposed uses off the table, such as trails and camping, because they were unacceptable. Mr. LeBlanc commented on the risks of placing Lake Nighthorse on the ballot and the wisdom in trying to bring people together in consensus. He noted the time and expense of getting to this point and said 2018 would see the launch of an intensive citizen engagement process to review the City’s financial stability and determine priorities, including any measures that should be placed on the November ballot. Parks and Recreation Director Cathy Metz came to the podium to address Council questions. She said the RPI report assumed users would come to Lake Nighthorse from within a radius of 100 miles of Durango. She said the important thing to note was that 78% of all the users would participate in more than one recreational activity, which is why the percentages didn’t add up to 100%. She said, of the total estimated number of potential users within a 100-mile radius, it was projected that 18% of the powerboat users, 12% of the non-powerboat users, and 28% of the fishing users would come to the lake. She noted that the RPI study was conducted in 2010, and uses such as paddle boarding and SUPs have only recently exploded in popularity. She said in recent years the state parks have seen a greater number of paddleboarders, but the use has not greatly affected the percentages in terms of the number of users on lakes. She said the City has not requested an update to the 2010 study, due to cost, but used the base information to project how many people would come through the gate at Lake Nighthorse and to estimate revenue. Councilor Brookie said he thought the number of users would be more accurately determined by the number of available parking spaces. Ms. Metz responded there would be parking for about 100 cars and much of that would depend on how users were getting to the lake. She said the City’s transit services would be expanded to include Lake Nighthorse and staff was working on better trail connectivity. She said the City also has the right to work with concessionaires and has worked with paddling and sailing concessionaires already, floating the idea that users could ride to the lake and then rent a paddleboard. She said she had already met with six people interested in that idea, which she found exciting. She said the City would get a portion of their revenue. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury commented on the need to open County Road 209 to provide access for approximately 1,200 people who want “quiet water.” She said it would require a gatekeeper and a parking area, but was not satisfied that Council did not know when the road would be opened. She said those users also represent revenue. She said she thought everyone who uses the lake should be charged, just as they are at the Rec Center. She said the charge should be nominal, but Page 16 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 19 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 16 of 20

each user should be charged. She said she would spend a lot more money going to the movies and buying popcorn. She said Council needed to have further discussion about entrance fees and opening County Road 209. She said, because she does believe in compromise, the lake should be open to both motorized and nonmotorized boating and there should be hours of restriction for some uses. She referred to an email received by Council on hours of operation. She said she loved the idea of limiting use in April and May to nonmotorized sports and opening to motorized use from May 15 through November 15. She said she believes the lake should be opened to recreation on April 1st of 2018 with no delays and was prepared to suggest language for the ordinance itself. She reiterated that the lake should accommodate both motorized and nonmotorized activities. Mr. LeBlanc said Council sets policy and staff is looking for direction. He said Council does not make decisions at study sessions. He said the City has an agreement, with a whole list of features, that has been approved by the Bureau of Reclamation. He said, if there are changes, the agreement must be amended and submitted again for approval. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury said Council was told at the study session that the City was the managing partner and could make some decisions regarding management. Mr. LeBlanc agreed, but said the recreation plan would still have to be amended. Ms. Metz said she had found in her communications with the Bureau of Reclamation that the City Manager was correct in his statement. She said the lease agreement signed in February said the City would follow the conceptual recreation plan, which was based on the public process. She said if there were significant changes to the lease agreement, it would have to go back through the review process with all the partners and be re-approved, and if it did go back for renewed approval, the lake would probably not open in 2018. She said the Bureau’s attorney in Washington, D.C. “takes a long time to get back to us.” There was discussion on what would constitute “significant changes” to the lease agreement. Councilor Bettin said his understanding was that the recreation plan was “a work in process,” and the City would start with an approved plan, with other revenue sources and uses incorporated in the future, such as camping and trails. Ms. Metz said another big revenue generator would be a swim beach, and there had been a lot of community interest in that use. Councilor Bettin said the community had voiced its desires and wishes but questioned what would happen in the future if the diverse uses were found to be in conflict. He asked if the recreational plan could be amended to include some of Councilor Marbury’s suggestions. He said April 1st is coming up quickly, and if the public process must be redone, there would be a good chance that the lake would not open by that date. Ms. Metz said if the City wanted to adjust the hours of use to accommodate “quiet time” users, she recommended seeing “what the patterns are and adjust if you see that there’s a problem.” She said that was what was done at the Rec Center. She said the City could do the same at Lake Nighthorse. She said, however, if the types of crafts that are allowed change or the types of activities that were previously approved were not allowed, that would be considered a significant change. Councilor Bettin noted that at the Rec Center, the real uses and patterns of uses were determined after it opened. He said he considered financial feasibility to be the Council’s primary responsibility. He said if the plan is to be amended and a new public process implemented, he did not believe the lake would open on April 1st and Council should “be honest about it.” He said, perhaps, the City “shouldn’t open the lake to recreation because we can’t afford to do it.” He said he appreciated Mayor Pro Tem Marbury’s suggestion for individual user fees, but other lakes in the region charge per car. He said there was no contingency and very little unappropriated funds to work with. Councilor Brookie agreed that the City’s responsibility is to look more at the financial aspects than the user aspects, commenting that there is a lot to lose on the Nighthorse project. He said 100 cars is the limit regardless of the recreational use. He said Council’s barometer is the number of parking spaces. He said the 2018 budget shows the projected revenue but does not provide the basis for the projection.

Page 17 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 20 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 17 of 20

Ms. Metz said the Parks and Recreation Department has a “pretty proven track record of our projections for expenses and hitting our target.” Councilor Brookie agreed but said Council needs to understand the numbers. He added that he thought Mayor Pro Tem Marbury’s suggestion to open County Road 209 in 2018 was not feasible but was a possibility in the future. He said if staff’s numbers are valid, he felt Council could move ahead. He said the City had already spent a lot of money on the project, and if the lake didn’t open, there would be nothing to show. He said the issue is how Council can optimize the revenue opportunity. Councilor Bettin said he recommended opening the lake based on the conceptual recreation plan, recognizing that the recreation plan was fluid and could change, rather than postponing or delaying opening the lake indefinitely. Councilor Youssef said she thought two issues must be addressed, one being financial feasibility. She said she felt confident everyone on Council wanted to see the lake open on April 1st. She said it’s been a long time in coming and everyone is anxious that the asset open to public use, noting the tremendous amount of emails coming in from the community. She said she had great respect for all the budgeting performed by City staff, but Council had not seen the assumptions behind the budget and she did not feel sufficiently informed. She suggested that, by including all users, some users may be excluded. She said she did not think Council wanted to see significant changes to the lease. She said the lease agreement between the City and the Bureau of Reclamation was intended to allow motorized boating. She said the question was how Council could meet the varying needs of the community and best compromise, so everyone could play. She commented on the extent of the public process but added that Council had seen a recent surge in communication. She said now that the community had communicated its desires to Council, it was Council’s job is to listen and respond. She suggested a slow opening. Councilor Bettin suggested a “slow opening” would cause the City to lose money. He said opening a “quiet lake” would put the City in a “strait jacket.” Councilor Youssef disagreed, saying since the 2010 study, sports had changed “dramatically.” She said if financial feasibility is the big issue, then Council should be discussing fees at a study session. She said an entire family could get into the lake for less than one person can get into the Rec Center. She said she would like to see what the numbers would look like if the lake fee was increased to $7 instead of $5. She said she would like to know the implications of increasing an annual pass by $2. She said those numbers would help her make a prudent decision. She said she didn’t want the City to lose money, but she did want to have “all the information and make informed decisions.” She said she didn’t want a new, lengthy public process, but did want a study session to bring Council up to speed on the budget, possibly directing staff to make changes so the City is less at risk. Councilor Bettin countered that every element of the project could not be predicted. In response to a question from Councilor Bettin regarding parking spaces, Ms. Metz said RPI was aware of the number of parking spaces when the study was performed in 2010. She said RPI estimated that at opening there would be approximately 15,000 user days the first year, which was about 50 boats per day and it wasn’t anticipated that all 50 boats would be on the water all day. Mr. LeBlanc said, regarding the agreement the City has with the Bureau of Reclamation, “they are the controlling party.” He said if the Bureau thinks it is going to have to spend more money to subsidize the operation, they are less likely to accept any changes the City would like to see, because they will owe one-half of whatever shortfall may occur. Councilor Brookie said the Bureau also needs a tenant, commenting that the government had failed to open the lake and the City was the “vendor of last resort.” He said if the City’s constituency mandates different uses, “what option do they have?” Mayor White said the most telling statistic for him was the data that went into the RPI study, which showed the usage between motorized and non-motorized usage was about 50-50, with motorized usage only slightly higher. He said the data implied that roughly half the users were local and represented only half of the potential users of the lake. He said he personally would prefer a quiet lake but had friends who were motorheads. He said he personally preferred nonmotorized trails when he is out in the wilderness. He said the goal is to have all the users included. He said the essence of the Resolution was to direct staff to plan to open on April 1st. He noted the Animas Page 18 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 21 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 18 of 20

- La Plata Operation and Maintenance Association also has a lot to say about uses at the lake, in addition to Friends of Lake Nighthorse. He said not everyone would be satisfied with the City’s decisions. He said there is a risk in opening and finding some uses are not doable. He said the expanded nonmotorized area at the east end of the lake would have a big impact, noting that the east end of the Lake Nighthorse is equivalent to the Haviland Lake north of Durango. He said the City wants to open the lake and doesn’t want anyone to feel unwelcome. He said members of the public who were avidly writing to Council did not understand all the constraints. He said he would like to see comparable representatives from the major user groups, including fishing users, nonmotorized and motorized boaters, the many institutional partners, and a wildlife expert, to work together over the next few months to come up with recommendations. He noted that there had been significant public comment about the risk of introducing mussels at the lake. He said the premise of allowing boating was that there had to be an inspection station and it must be effective, because once infected by invasive mussels, a body of water cannot be “un-infested” and the City is planning a new water plant, with the additional consideration of downstream users to consider. He said the assumption was that the City would “open as is” but would be open to recommendations from the institutional partners and the user constituency. He said he didn’t see any other way forward. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury referred to the proposed Resolution, noting that it did not specify a date for opening. She said she would like to add the date of April 1st. Councilor Youssef said Mayor White’s suggestion to bring together a key group of stakeholders to make recommendations could be added to the Resolution. Ms. Metz said the City had already begun its outreach to Friends of Lake Nighthorse and those who organized the petition presented to the City. She said there are others who are interested in contributing. She said staff would like to see engagement with key stakeholders begin in January and would come to Council in March with their recommendations. She said she and the City Manager thought it would be helpful to have a facilitator for the meetings. Councilors Brookie and Youssef thought this was a good plan. Ms. Metz commented on the makeup of the stakeholders group, which would also include representatives from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Natural Lands Advisory Board. She said she would like to see a larger group to ensure everyone is represented and no one feels excluded. Mr. LeBlanc commented on Council’s goal to be a regional leader and noted that Lake Nighthorse is a regional issue that is not totally under Council’s control. He said, consequently, the decision was difficult. Councilor Brookie said he appreciated Mr. LeBlanc’s perspective. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury said she would still like to see the lake opened to recreation on April 1st. Mayor White said he would like to hear what a “balanced user group” could offer to Council in terms of recommendations. He said Council had received over 600 emails and in his tenure, he had not seen another issue come close to that much response from the public. He stated he appreciated the intense community engagement. He approved of Ms. Metz’s suggestion of meeting with the key stakeholders and having a facilitator for intensive discussion over the next few months, with the intent of opening on April 1st. In response to a question from Mayor Pro Tem Marbury, Ms. Metz said any budget shortfall would come out of the General Fund because operating funds for the Parks and Recreation Department come out of the General Fund. She said funds from the dedicated ½-cent tax have been transferred over to the General Fund since 2010, but the Lake Nighthorse project is different because it is a grant-funded split with the Bureau of Reclamation. Councilor Bettin asked for clarification on what Council would be approving with its motion. Ms. Metz noted that the Friends of Lake Nighthorse could only make recommendations on appropriate management policies, because they are not a decision-making body. Mayor White said the Resolution language refers to the Friends of Lake Nighthorse as making recommendations to both the City and the Bureau of Reclamation. He said the City and the BuPage 19 of 20 ~ City Council Regular 22 Meeting Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 19 of 20

reau may differ on what should be done at the lake. He said he was happy to add the date of April 1st to the resolution. Councilor Brookie moved to approve Resolution R-2017-43, in support of recreation management by the City of Durango at Lake Nighthorse, as presented in the agenda documentation and amended to include an opening date of April 1, 2018. Mayor Pro Tem Marbury seconded the motion. Mayor White asked that the language in the motion specify that recommendations would be made to the City and the Bureau of Reclamation regarding recreational uses at the lake prior to opening the lake to public recreation on April 1, 2018. Councilor Brookie and Mayor Pro Tem Marbury accepted the amendment to the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Passed: For: 5; Against: 0; Abstain: 0; Absent: 0 Mayor White and Mayor Pro Tem Marbury thanked Ms. Metz for her hard work on the Lake Nighthorse Project. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem Marbury moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilor Brookie seconded the motion. The motion passed by acclimation. Mayor White adjourned the meeting at 10:41 p.m. APPROVE:

ATTEST:

Richard E. White, Mayor

Amy Phillips, City Clerk

Page 20 of 20 ~ City Council Regular Meeting 23 Minutes ~ December 19, 2017

Page 20 of 20

Discussion and Possible Action Concerning...

AGENDA DOCUMENTATION Item 4.2. Meeting Date: January 2, 2018

TO: DURANGO CITY COUNCIL

FROM:

AMY PHILLIPS, CMC DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE SUNSHINE ACT

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND On June 1, 1991, the applicability of the State Sunshine Act of 1972 was extended to local governments by action of the State Legislature. The amended legislation specifically provides that notice of any meetings shall be posted in a designated public place within the boundaries of the local public body no less than twenty-four hours prior to the holding of the meeting and requires that the public place or places for posting such notice shall be designated annually at the local public body's first regular meeting of each year. As Council is aware, two locations have previously been designated as the City's official places for the posting of such notices. One such place is a bulletin board in the lobby of the City Hall and the second is a glass-enclosed bulletin board located outside the front entrance to the City Hall. In addition to these two locations, all meeting notices are posted on the City of Durango’s website; www.durangogov.org. It is therefore appropriate that all of the above places be re-designated as the places for the posting of official notices of the City government.

FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

APPLICABILITY TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/GOALS RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council, by motion, designate the two bulletin boards located in the lobby and outside of the front entrance of the Durango City Hall, 949 East Second Avenue, Durango, Colorado, 81301, as the places for the posting of official notices required by State law

City Manager Ronald P. LeBlanc

24

Page 1 of 1

A Request for a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of...

AGENDA DOCUMENTATION Item 4.3. Meeting Date: January 2, 2018

TO: DURANGO CITY COUNCIL

FROM:

MARK WILLIAMS, PLANNER II COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

SUBJECT: A REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE DURANGO HOUSING PLAN (JANUARY 16, 2018) PURPOSE/BACKGROUND This is a request for a public hearing to consider adoption of the Durango Housing Plan. This item will be heard by the Planning Commission at a special meeting on January 8, 2018. The Housing Plan is to be adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has been working on the plan since 2015 in conjunction with the Housing Policy Advisory Committee and Council, and has met with the Regional Housing Alliance/La Plata Homes Fund, the Homebuilders Association of Southwest Colorado, and has held public meetings and received numerous comments from these meetings and online. Staff has created a final plan that is ready for presentation to Council, and for adoption of the Plan. FISCAL IMPACT To be addressed in the hearing documentation. APPLICABILITY TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/GOALS To be addressed in the hearing documentation. RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council, by motion, set a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Durango Housing Plan on January 16, 2018.

City Manager Ronald P. LeBlanc

25

Page 1 of 1