HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/11/2020 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Work Session
* Work session times are approximate and are subject to change without notice.
Jeff Hansen, Chair Virtual Meeting
Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair Zoom Webinar
Per Hogestad
David Katz
Jeff Schneider
Ted Shepard
William Whitley
Planning and Zoning Hearing will be held on Thursday, December 17, 2020, in City Hall Chambers.
Regular Work Session
December 11, 2020
Virtual Meeting
Noon – 4:15 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Board
Work Session Agenda
Participation for this remote Planning and Zoning Board work session will be available online or by phone. No one
will be allowed to attend in person.
Public Attendance (Online): Individuals who wish to attend the Planning and Zoning work session via remote
public participation can do so through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/96025295144. Individuals participating in the
Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site.
The meeting will be available to join beginning at 11:45 a.m. on December 11, 2020. Attendees should try to sign
in prior to 12:00 p.m. if possible.
In order to attend:
Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly
improve your audio).
You need to have access to the internet.
Keep yourself on muted status.
If you have any technical difficulties during the work session, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com.
Public Attendance (Phone): If you do not have access to the internet, you can call into the work session via phone.
Please dial: 1-253-215-8782 or 1-346-248-7799, with Webinar ID: 960 2529 5144.
(Continued on next page)
Packet pg. 1
City of Fort Collins Page 2
TOPICS: PROJECTED TIMES:
Consent:
1. November Hearing Draft Minutes
2. November 5 Special Hearing Draft Minutes
3. Springer-Fisher Annexation and Zoning (Wray)
4. FCLWD Golden Currant Water Line SPAR (Lindsey)
12:00 – 12:45
Discussion:
5. Land Use Code Amendments (Beals)
12:45 – 1:30
Policy and Legislation:
• Lighting Code Update (Smith)
• Housing Strategic Plan (Overton/Ex)
• Residential Metro District Policy Update (Gloss)
1:30 – 3:10
Board Topics:
• Upcoming Hearing Calendar (Sizemore)
• Board Updates (Sizemore)
• Update on City’s Pursuit of Quiet Zones (Sizemore/Buckman)
• P&Z Recommendations to Council (Cunniff)
• Transportation Board Liaison Update (York)
3:10 – 4:15
The meeting will be available beginning at 11:45 a.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 12:00 p.m., if
possible. Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during
the meeting, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com.
The December 11 Planning and Zoning Board regular meeting will be held remotely and not in-
person. Information on remotely participating in the December 11 Planning and Zoning regular meeting is
contained in the agenda for the December 11 meeting available at https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/planning-
zoning.php. Members of the public wishing to submit documents, visual presentations, or written comments for
the Board to consider regarding any item on the agenda must be emailed to kclaypool@fcgov.com or
smanno@fcgov.com at least 24 hours prior to the December 11 meeting.
As required by City Council Ordinance 079, 2020, a determination has been made by the chair after
consultation with the City staff liaison that conducting the hearing using remote technology would be
prudent.
Packet pg. 2
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
3.2.4 _– Site Lighting
(A)Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to ensure adequate lighting for the safety, security,
enjoyment and function of the proposed land use; conserve energy and resources; reduce light
trespass, glare, artificial night glow, and obtrusive light; protect the local natural ecosystem from
damaging effects of artificial lighting; and encourage quality lighting design and fixtures.
(B)General Standard. All developments except for development on single-family detached
residential lots, shall submit for approval a proposed lighting plan that meet s the requirements of
this section:
1.Provide a comprehensive plan that clearly calculates all exterior lighting being proposed.
2.Design different use areas considering nighttime safety, utility, security, enjoyment, and
commerce.
3.To the maximum extent feasible, utilize “shut off” and dimming controls such as sensors,
timers and motion detectors.
4.Reinforce and extend the style and char acter of the architecture and land use proposed
within the site.
5.Demonstrate no light spill onto designated Fort Collins landmarks or properties listed on
the National Register or State Register of Historic Places for which low ambient lighting is
important to their historic setting, Natural Areas, Open Space, Natural Habitat Buffer Zones
or other sensitive resources.
6.Ensure all lighting has a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin. Consider high color fidelity lamps relat ive to the lighting application.
7.Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source.
(C)Prohibited Lighting .
1.Site lighting that may be confused with warning, emergency or traffic signals
2.Mercury vapor lamps
3.Luminaires mounted in a way as to light only towards a property line.
(D)Lighting Context Areas. The applicable Lighting Context Area shall determine the limitations
for exterior artificial lighting and the location of the Lighting Context Areas are shown on Figure __.
The Lighting Context Areas are described as follows:
(1)LC0 – No ambient lighting. Areas where the natural environment will be adversely
impacted by lighting. Impacts include disturbing the biological cycles of flora and fauna.
Typical locations include city and regional Natural Areas, and Natural Habitat Buff Zones .
(2)LC1 – Low ambient lighting. Areas where lighting might adversely impact flora and fauna
or the character of the area. Lighting may be used for safety and convenience but may not
need to be uniform or continuous. Typical locations include low and medium density
residential areas, commercial or industrial areas with limited nightti me activity, designated
Fort Collins landmarks or properties listed on the National Register or State Register of
Historic Places for which low ambient lighting is important to their historic setting , and the
developed areas in parks.
(3)LC2 – Moderate ambient lighting . Lighting may typically be used for safety and
convenience but may not need to be uniform or continuous. Typical locations include high
density residential areas, shopping and commercial di stricts, industrial parks and districts,
City playfields, major institutional uses, and mixed-use districts.
(4)LC3 – Moderately high ambient lighting. Lighting is generally desired for safety, security,
and/or convenience and is often uniform and/or continu ous. Typical locations include
select areas in Old Town. Hospital sites are also designated under this Context Area.
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 3
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
(E) Limits to Off-Site Impacts. All luminaires shall be rated and installed according to Table
3.2.4-1, Table 3.2.4-2, and Table 3.2.4-3, which outline maximum BUG (Backlight -Uplight-Glare)
Ratings (per IES TM-15-11) for all individual luminaires installed in a given Lighting Context Areai.
Luminaires equipped with adjustable mounting devices shall not be permitted unless the total
lumen output is 150 lumens or less .
Compliance with this section need only be demonstrated for worst-case mounting conditions for
orientation (ideally oriented and not ideally oriented) of each luminaire type. To be considered
ideally oriented, the luminaire must be mounted with the backlight portion of the light output
oriented perpendicular to and towards the property line of concern.
For property lines that abut public walkways, bikeways, plazas, and parking lots, the property line
may be considered to be 5 feet beyond the actual property line for the purpose of determining
compliance with this section. For property lines that abut public roadways, the property line may
be considered to be the centerline of the public roadway for the purpose of determining
compliance with this section. NOTE: This adjustment is relative to Tables 3.2.4 -1 and 3.2.4-3 only
and shall not be used to increase the hardscape area of the site.
Table 3.2.4-1 Maximum Allowable Backlight Ratings.
Mounting Condition LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
Greater than 2 mounting heights from the
property line or not ideally oriented B1 B3 B4 B5
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 4
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
1 to less than 2 mounting heights from the
property line and ideally oriented** B1 B2 B3 B4
0.5 to less than 1 mounting heights from the
property line and ideally oriented* B0 B1 B2 B3
Less than 0.5 mounting heights from the
property line and ideally oriented B0 B0 B0 B1
Table 3.2.4-2 Maximum Allowable Uplight Ratings.
LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
Allowed Uplight Rating U0 U0 U1 U2
Allowed light emission above 90 degrees for
street or area lighting 0%
Table 3.2.4-3. Maximum Allowable Glare Ratings.
Mounting Condition* LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
Greater than 2 mounting heights from the
property line
G0 G0 G1 G2
2 or less mounting heights from the property
line and ideally oriented**
1 to less than 2 mounting heights from the
property line and not ideally oriented** G0 G0 G1 G1
0.5 to less than 1 mounting heights from the
property line and not ideally oriented** G0 G0 G0 G1
Less than 0.5 mounting heights from the
property line and not ideally oriented** G0 G0 G0 G0
Light trespass limitations. The illuminance levels provided in Table 3.2.4-4 shall be used for
enforcement, should concerns of obtrusive lighting or question of c ompliance arise. This provision
shall apply to all exterior lighting . The illuminance values provided in Table 3.2.4-4 shall be
measured at the lot line at ground level unless said lot line abuts a public street or alley, in which
case the illuminance values shall be measured at the centerline of the public street or alley.
Lighting plans shall show horizontal illuminance along all lot lines or centerline of public street with
calculation points spaced no further than 10 -ft apart.
Table 3.2.4-4 Light Trespass Limitations
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 5
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
Lighting
Context Area
Maximum Horizontal Illuminance,
Pre-Curfew (fc)*
Maximum Horizontal Illuminance,
Post-Curfew (fc)*
LC0 0.0 0.0
LC1 0.1 0.1
LC2 0.3 0.1
LC3 0.8 0.2
*Curfew is defined in section (H) below.
(F) Site lumen limit. The total installed initial luminaire lumens of all outdoor lighting shall not
exceed the total site lumen limit. The total site lumen shall be determined using either the Parking
Space Method (Table 3.2.4-5) or the Hardscape Area Method (Table 3.2.4-6). Only one method
shall be used per permit application . For sites with existing lighting, existing lighting shall be
included in the calculation of total installed lumens. The total insta lled initial luminaire lumens are
calculated as the sum of the initial luminaire lumens for all luminaires.
Table 3.2.4-5. Allowed Total Initial Luminaire Lumens per Site for Non -Residential Outdoor
Lighting, per Parking Space Method.
May only be applied to properties up to ten parking spaces (including handicapped accessible spaces).
LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
350 lumens per space 490 lumens per space 630 lumens per space 840 lumens per space
Table 3.2.4-6. Allowed Total Initial Lumens per Site for Non-Residential Outdoor Lighting,
Hardscape Area Method.
May be used for any project. When lighting intersections of site drives and public streets or roads, a
total of 600 square feet for each intersection may be added to the actual site hardscape area to provide
for intersection lighting. Parking garages and adjacent alleyways are not included as Hardscape Areas
in this method. Luminaires used to illuminate parking garages and alleyways are not included in total
lumen calculations, but must comply with (F) Limits to Off-Site Impacts.
LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
Base Allowance 0.5 lumens
per square
foot of
hardscape
1.25
lumens per
square
foot of
hardscape
2.5 lumens
per square
foot of
hardscape
5 lumens
per square
foot of
hardscape
Additional allowances for sales and service facilities. No more than two additional allowances per site.
Allowance may only be used to light the specific sales or service area selected and may not be used to
light other areas of the site.
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 6
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
Building Façades. This allowance is lumen per
unit area of building façade that are illuminated.
To use this allowance, luminaires must be aimed
at the façade.
0
8 lumens
per square
foot
16 lumens
per square
foot
Outdoor Sales Lots. This allowance is lumens
per square foot of uncovered sales lots used
exclusively for the display of vehicles or other
merchandise for sale, and may not include
driveways, parking or other non-sales areas. To
use this allowance, luminaires must be within 0.5
mounting heights of the sales lot area.
0
4 lumens
per square
foot
8 lumens
per square
foot
16 lumens
per square
foot
Outdoor Dining. This allowance is lumen per
unit area for the total illuminated hardscape of
outdoor dining. In order to use this all owance,
luminaires must be within 0.5 mounting heights
of the hardscape area of outdoor dining.
0
5 lumens
per square
foot
10 lumens
per square
foot
Vehicle Service Station. This allowance is
lumens per installed fuel pump. Each side of a
two-sided pump qualifies for an allowance.
0
4,000
lumens per
pump
8,000
lumens per
pump
8,000
lumens per
pump
(G) Required Lighting Controls. Lighting systems for non-residential properties shall be shut-off
or reduced by 50% beginning at curfew and continuous until dawn or start of business, whichever
is earlier. The reduction shall be determined as an overall average for the site. When possible, the
lighting system shall be turned off en tirely.
(1) Curfew. Curfew shall be as follows:
(i) LC0: 8:00 PM or one hour after Close of Business, whichever is later.
(ii) LC1: 8:00 PM or one hour after Close of Business, whichever is later.
(iii) LC2: 10:00 PM or 90 minutes after Close of Business, whichever is later.
(iv) LC3: Midnight or 90 minutes after Close of Business, whichever is later.
(v) For Sports Events, lighting shall be extinguished no later than one hour after the
event ends.
(2) Landscape lighting shall be completely extinguished at Curfew or one hour after the site
is closed, whichever is later.
(3) Exceptions to Curfew are as follows:
(i) When there is only one luminaire for the site, provided that the luminaire is
conforming.
(ii) Code required lighting for steps, stairs, walkways, and building entrances.
(H) Alternative Compliance. Upon request by an applicant, the Director may approve an
alternative lighting plan that may be substituted in whole or in part for a plan meeting the
standards of this Section.
(1) Procedure. Alternative compliance lighting plans shall be pre pared and submitted in
accordance with submittal requirements for lighting plans as set forth in this Section. The
plan shall clearly identify and discuss the modifications and alternatives proposed and the
ways in which the plan will better accomplish the purpose of this Section than would a plan
which complies with the standards of this Section.
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 7
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
(2) Review Criteria. To approve an alternative plan, the Director must first find that the
proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of this Section equally well or better
than would a lighting plan which complies with the standards of this Section.
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the Director shall consider the extent to which the
proposed design protects natural areas from light intrusion, enhan ces neighborhood continuity and
connectivity, fosters nonvehicular access, and demonstrates in novative design and use of fixtu res
or other elements.
(Ord. No. 90, 1998, 5/19/98; Ord. No. 165, 1999 §17, 11/16/99; Ord. No. 204, 2001 §§12, 13,
12/18/01; Ord. No. 173, 2003 §9, 12/16/03; Ord. No. 198, 2004 §5, 12/21/04; Ord. No. 015, 2005
§1, 2/15/05; Ord. No. 161, 2005 §6, 12/20/05; Ord. No. 192, 2006 §5, 12/19/06; Ord. No. 092,
2013 §9, 7/16/13)
Definitions.ii,iii
BUG (Backlight, Uplight, Glare) Rating – The quantity of light per IES TM-15-11 within various
beam angles.
Backlight – the percent lamp lumens (non-LED luminaires) or the luminaire initial lumens (LED
luminaires) distributed behind a luminaire between zero degrees vertical (nadir ) and 90
degrees vertical.
Uplight – the percent lamp lumens (non-LED luminaires) or the luminaire initial lumens (LED
luminaires) distributed above a luminaire between 90 and 180 degrees vertical.
Glare – the percent lamp lumens (non-LED luminaires) or the luminaire initial lumens
distributed 60 and 90 degrees vertical.
Candela (see luminous intensity), (cd) – The unit of luminous intensity.
Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) – The absolute temperature of a blackbody whose
chromaticity most nearly resembles that of the light source.
Footcandle (fc) – A unit of illuminance. One footcandle is one lumen per square foot (lm/ft 2).
Glare – The sensation produced by luminances within the visual field that are su fficiently greater
than the luminance to which the eyes are adapted to cause annoyance, discomfort, or loss in
visual performance or visibility.
Hardscape - The purpose of this ordinance, "hardscape" is defined as any non -living horizontal
site element, including but not limited to patios, decks, walkways, sidewalks, driveways, and steps.
Illuminance (footcandle, fc) - The incident light falling on a surface. Total illuminance at a point is a
combination of all light sources that contribute.
Light Loss Factor (LLF) - A depreciation factor that describes the drop in light output over the life
of the system. The total LLF is determined by a combination of factors, such as lumen depreciation
and luminaire dirt depreciation. Light Loss Factors = 1.0 for Ordinance compliance.
Lumen (lm) – The luminous flux emitted within a unit solid angle by a point source (one steradian)
having a uniform luminous intensity of one candela (cd). See luminous flux.
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 8
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND
REVISION
Luminaire - A complete lighting device consisting of the light source, lens, reflector, refractor,
driver, housing and such support as is integral with the housing. If the driver is located within the
housing, it is considered Integral and therefore part of the luminaire. The pole, posts, and bracket
or mast arm are not considered to be part of the luminaire.
Luminance (candelas per square meter, cd/m 2 or nits) - The luminous intensity of any surface in a
given direction per unit of projected area of the surface as viewed from that direction; i.e., the
apparent brightness of a surface.
Luminous Flux (lumen, lm) - A unit of measure of the quantity of light. One lumen is the amount of
light that falls on an area of one square meter, every point of which is one meter from a source of
one candela. A light source of on e candela emits a total of 12.57 lumens. Light sources are rated
in terms of luminous flux. Initial lumens are used for Ordinance compliance.
Luminous Intensity (candela, cd) - The candela is the basic unit of light quantity. The candela is
historically related to the light emitted by a candle flame and was once known as candlepower.
The candela can be thought of as the number of photons per second emitted by the light source.
(A photon is a subatomic particle with zero mass that carries the energy of light and all other forms
of electromagnetic energy.)
Mounting Height (MH) – the vertical distance between the finish grade and the center of the
apparent light source of the luminaire.
Vehicle Service Station - Any facility that sells and pumps fuel for motori zed vehicles. Also referred
to as a filling station.
Visibility – The quality or state of being perceivable by the eye. Visibility may be defined in terms of
the distance at which an object can be just perceived by the eye or it may be defined in terms of
the contrast or size of a standard test object, observed under standardized view -conditions, having
the same threshold as the given object.
i BUG Ratings are determined in accordance with IES Technical Memoranda TM-15-11 Luminaire
Classification System for Outdoor Luminaires . The Illuminating Engineering Society, New York, 2011.
ii The IES Lighting Handbook, Tenth Edition, The Illuminating Engineering Society, New York, 2011 .
iii IES Recommended Practice 33 -11 Lighting for Exterior Environments . The Illuminating Engineering
Society, New York, 2011.
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 9
SCOLLEGEAVEW HORSETOOTH RD
W MULBERRY ST
S SHIELDS STLAPORTE AVE
S TIMBERLINE RDSTATE HIGHWAY 392
NUS
HIG
H
W
A
Y
2
8
7
SLEMAY AVESTRAUSSCABINRDZIEGLERRDRIVERSID
E
AVE
S OVERLAND TRLN HOWESST9TH STW LAUREL ST
E
MOUNTAIN A V E
W DRAKE RD
E PROSPECT RD
W WILLOX LN
S TAFT HILL RDW VINE DR
COUNTRY CLUB RD
E VINE DR
RICHARDS LAKE RD
REMINGTONSTW MOUNTAIN
AVE TURNBERRYRDE WILLOX LN
E TRILBY RDLANDINGSDRW PROSPECT RD
E COUNTY ROAD 38
E MULBERRY ST
JEFFE
R
S
O
N
ST
E DOUGLAS RD
COUNTY ROAD 54G
NCOLLEGEAVEW ELIZABETH ST NLEMAYAVEWCOUNTYROAD38EE COUNTY ROAD 50MOUNTAINVISTADR
E HARMONY RDN TIMBERLINE RDBOAR
D
WALKD
RTERRYLAKERDG
R
E
G
O
R
Y
R
D
E HORSETOOTH RD
KECHTER RDN SHIELDS STS COUNTY ROAD 5W HARMONY RD S HOWES STW DOUGLAS RD
NOVERLANDTRLE COUNTY
ROAD 36S MASON STMAIN STW TRILBY RD
E DRAKE RD
E SUNIGARD
ELINCOLNAVE
CARPENTER RD
E TRO U T M A N
P K W YJOHNFKENNEDYPKWY
E COUNTY ROAD 30S US HIGHWAY 287S COUNTY ROAD 13E COUNTY ROAD 52
S COUNTY ROAD 11S
S
U
MMIT
VIE
W
D
R
S COUNTYROAD 7N COUNTY ROAD 17E COUNTY ROAD 48N COUNTYROAD 19N COUNTY ROAD 5NTAFTHILLRDE COUNTY ROAD 54
S COUNTY ROAD 19GIDDINGS RDN COUNTY ROAD 9S COUNTY ROAD 9Lighting Ordinance Planning - Draft
Printed: November 02, 2020
Lighting Ordinance Context Areas - Draft
City Limits - Outline Growth Management Area
LC0
LC1
LC2
LC3
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 10
1
1
Exterior Lighting Code Update
Kelly Smith
December 2020
Engagement
• Case Studies Report and Tours: February
• Draft Released: November 1
st
• Public Meetings: November 12
th & 18th
• Staff Training: November 17
th
• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): November 20th & December 7
th
• Presentations: to boards, City departments, the Chamber of
Commerce, PD, and other organizations.
2
1
2
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 11
2
Proposed Code
3
Proposed Code
• Modeled after code jointly developed by IES/IDA
• Budgets for:
• Lumens
• Backlight
• Uplight
•Glare
4
3
4
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 12
3
Proposed Code
Two lighting budget approaches:
1. Per Parking Space (up to 10) or
2. Hardscape Area
Multiplier for lumens based on approach and Lighting Context (zone)
5
PROPOSED CODE
6
Do Lighting Levels Match the Use and Context?
5
6
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 13
4
PROPOSED CODE
7
Lighting Context Areas
Brightness hierarchy
• LC0 - No Ambient Lighting
• LC1 - Low Ambient Lighting
• LC2 - Moderate Ambient Lighting
• LC3 - Moderately High Ambient Lighting
Survey Questions
Rate Statements Strongly Disagree …….……Neutral..…….……Strongly Agree Don’t Know
1 It would be safe to walk here, alone, during daylight hours.01234DK
2 It would be safe to walk here, alone, during darkness hours.01234DK
3 The lighting is comfortable.01234DK
4 There is too much light in this area.01234DK
5 There is not enough light in the area.01234DK
6 The light is uneven (patchy).01234DK
7 The light sources are glaring.01234DK
8 The lighting enables me to recognize faces.01234DK
9 I like the color of the light. 01234DK
10 Colors are easy to distinguish. 01234DK
11 The lighting is poorly matched to the neighborhood. 01234DK
12 I would like this style lighting in similar locations in the city.01234DK
bit.ly/fclightsurvey3
7
8
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 14
5
Apex Apartments
9
Results:
Failed Existing and Proposed Code
• Evaluated under LC1
• Proposed in LC2
• 44% over under LC2
• Would have a larger lumen budget
• Backlight – Parking
• Glare – All fixtures
• Color Temp (4000K)
Apex Apartments
10
Cost
• Existing: $87,500
• Proposed: $66,300
• Different luminaires
• Decrease pole height
Survey Results
• Way too much light
• Too much glare
• Terrible glare from wall packs
• Wow! It is bright!
• Pedestrian lights too bright
• Overall light too bright for context
• Feels safe during the day and night
9
10
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 15
6
Eye Center of Northern Colorado
11
Results:
Pass Existing, Failed Proposed
• Evaluated under LC1
• Located in LC2
• Under lumen budget by 26%
• Backlight – Parking
• Glare – All fixtures
Eye Center of Northern Colorado
12
Cost:
• Existing: $118,800
• Proposed: $103,700
• Reduce lumens of all fixtures
• Reduce quantity of façade luminaires
• Add lighting control system
Survey
• Entrance and indoor lighting too much
• Poorly matched to neighborhood
• Not a lot of foot traffic; why so much light?
• Lighting obtrusive
• Lighting feels excessive
• Levels too high, but entry extreme
• Like lighting style
11
12
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 16
7
The Grove
13
Results:
Failed Existing and Proposed Code
• Evaluated under LC1
• Didn’t Meet Min Light Levels Of Existing Code
• Below proposed lumen budget
• Glare – Pole Lights
The Grove
14
Cost:
• Existing: $128,500
• Proposed: $140,700
• Different luminaires
• Improved optics
• Lower BUG
Survey:
• Lights on buildings shine in eyes
• Wall mounted fixtures lots of glare
• Feels patchy
• Wall packs are awful
• Lighting is comfortable
13
14
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 17
8
Maverik Convenience Store
15
Results:
• Evaluated under LC2
• Pass Existing,
• Failed Proposed – 20% over lumen limit
Too much glare.
Maverik Convenience Store
16
Survey
• Lighting on buildings is well done
• High light poles create too much glare
• Too much light
• Light is uneven
• A lot of glare
• Poor color rendering
15
16
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 18
9
The Elizabeth Hotel
17
www.4240architecture.com/the-elizabeth-hotel-2
Results:
• Evaluated under LC3
• Pass Existing and Proposed Code
• Under lumen limit by 38%, analysis
included parking lot
The Elizabeth Hotel
18
www.4240architecture.com/the-elizabeth-hotel-2
Survey:
• Generally pleasant
• Streetlights glary for pedestrians
• Wall-packs at exits were good except
east emergency exit
17
18
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 19
10
Feedback
19
1. Be explicit on exemptions and intent
2. Clarify language related to historic landmarks
3. Clarify language related to property boundaries & ensure they allow lighting of
sidewalks downtown
4. Concern over curfews in downtown and other areas
5. Neighborhood centers: consider higher lighting levels for those
6. Extending downtown boundary based on Street Frontage Type
7. Desire for amortization by some, whereas none by business community
Exemptions and Intent
20
19
20
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 20
11
Historic Landmarks
21
Low Light Levels
22
21
22
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 21
12
Low Light Levels
23
Better Define Property Boundary
24
23
24
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 22
13
Better Define Property
Boundary
25
Better Define Property Boundary
26
25
26
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 23
14
Downtown Boundary
27
Mid Block Extensions
28
Incorporate:
• Neighborhood Centers
• Areas w/Higher Commercial
Activity
27
28
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 24
15
Next Steps
• December: Release Revised Draft
• January: Public Review of Revised Draft
• February: Planning and Zoning Recommendation
• February/March: Council Adoption
• Post adoption: Align various codes to reduce conflicts
29
Feedback
30
1. Be explicit on exemptions and intent
2. Clarify language related to historic landmarks
3. Clarify language related to property boundaries & ensure they allow lighting of
sidewalks downtown
4. Concern over curfews in downtown and other areas
5. Neighborhood centers: consider higher lighting levels for those
6. Extending downtown boundary based on Street Frontage Type
7. Desire for amortization by some, whereas none by business community
29
30
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 25
16
QUESTIONS?
https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/lighting-regulations
Kelly Smith, Senior Environmental Planner
ksmith@fcgov.com
Arlo Schumann, Senior Zoning Inspector
aschumann@fcgov.com
31
Backup Slides
32
31
32
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 26
17
The Case Study Tours &
Cost Analysis
• 4 tours = 50 attendees.
• Fort Collins Staff (5 departments)
• Police Department
• Downtown Development Authority
• 5 City boards
• Residents
• Designers/contractors
• Understand how the new code could change lighting requirements
for future projects.
Backlight
34
Property Line
2X MH
1X MH
Property Line
Ideally Oriented:
• Mounted with backlight perpendicular and oriented to property line of concern
33
34
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 27
18
Uplight and Glare
35
Property Line
2X MH
1X MH
Property Line
Allowances
36
35
36
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 28
19
Lumen Budget
37
Submittal Reqs
38
• Photometric
• CCT
• Cutsheets
• BUG Rating
• Lumens
• SF hardscape
• Mounting Height of fixtures
• Distance from property line
• Note of Controls
37
38
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 29
20
SUBMITTALS
39
Better Define Property Boundary
40
39
40
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 30
21
Low Light Levels
41
Project Purpose
42
• Promote nighttime safety, security and commerce;
• Protect areas from artificial lighting with low nighttime activity, such as residential
neighborhoods, while allowing more lighting and flexibility in areas with moderate
and high nighttime activity, such as Downtown and commercial corridors;
• Minimize glare, obtrusive light, sky glow, and light trespass onto adjacent
properties
• Protect the local natural ecosystem and human health from the damaging effects
of artificial night lighting; and
• Promote energy conservation by capitalizing on technological advancements in
the lighting field.
41
42
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 31
22
Trespass
43
Curfews
44
43
44
LIGHTING CODE UPDATE
Packet pg. 32
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6376
970.224.6134 - fax
Planning, Development &
Transportation
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 2, 2020
TO: Planning and Zoning Board
FROM: Lindsay Ex, Interim Housing Manager
Meaghan Overton, Senior City Planner
RE: December P&Z Work Session Materials
Bottom Line: Attached are two documents - Draft List of Strategies and Draft Evaluation Criteria -
to facilitate discussion and brainstorming about strategies to include in the draft Housing Strategic
Plan. Getting feedback from the P&Z Board on the strategies and criteria will be the focus of our
time at the December work session.
Specific Questions for Discussion:
What feedback do Board Members have on:
•Strategies Identified?
•Draft Evaluation Criteria?
Housing Strategic Plan Background:
The City developed its first Affordable Housing Strategic Plan in 1999 to stimulate housing
production for the City’s low-wage earners (under 80% of the area median income, or AMI). The
current update to the Housing Strategic Plan has expanded this scope to include the entire housing
spectrum, recognizing the gap between peoples’ incomes and the cost of housing continues to
widen, and that current resources are insufficient to meet our adopted goals for affordable housing
production. Staff expects to share the plan with Council for consideration of adoption on February
16, 2021.
Housing Strategic Plan Progress to Date:
The graphic below outlines the progression of the Housing Strategic Plan process:
At City Council’s December 8 Work Session, staff will briefly revisit Step 1 (Vision) and outline
actions to date on Steps 2-4 (Greatest Challenges, Community Engagement, Strategy
Identification and Draft Criteria for Strategy Evaluation). At the January 26, 2021 Work Session,
staff will share the outcome of the Strategy Evaluation (Step 5), discuss strategy prioritization (Step
6), and share the draft Plan, including indicators and metrics to evaluate plan success as well as
guiding principles for adaptive implementation.
Attachments:
1.Draft List of Strategies
2.Draft Evaluation Criteria
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
Packet pg. 33
1
MEMORANDUM
To: Fort Collins HSP Team
From: Mollie Fitzpatrick, Root Policy Research
Re: Preliminary Strategy Review
Date: November 19, 2020; Revised November 23, 2020
This memo describes the structure of preliminary strategies recommended for
consideration as part of Fort Collins’ plan to address the full spectrum of housing needs.
Strategies will continue to be refined through December and January in staff
workshops, City Council feedback, and community engagement.
Strategy toolkit. The following toolkit of strategies reflects preliminary
recommendations for consideration as part of the Fort Collins Housing Strategic Plan.
Preliminary strategies are based on findings and recommendations in previous City
reports,1 best practices in peer and leading communities, stakeholder and resident
outreach, as well as the research and expertise of city staff. Additional details regarding
implementation (specific action steps, beneficiaries, financial resources, responsible
parties, etc.) will be incorporated after initial evaluation of each strategy.
Strategy “buckets.” Housing policy is first and foremost a community issue and
as such, the city’s strategies are organized around community participants in the
housing system: builders/developers, landlords, homeowners associations, special
districts and government entities, financial institutions, manufactured housing
neighborhoods, homeowners, renters, people experiencing homelessness, residents
vulnerable to displacement, historically disadvantaged populations, and other
community partners. This identification metric fosters broad access to the plan by
allowing all participants, businesses, and residents to see where they “fit” in the city’s
approach to housing.
A secondary categorization is also used to describe the type of strategy being used:
education/information, revenue generation, financing, direct assistance, or policy
(preservation, new construction, incentives, accessibility, housing diversity).
Figure 1 (beginning on the following page) shows the organizational structure, along
with the preliminary strategies proposed for evaluation.
.
1 2020 Land Use Code Audit, 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Homeward 2020
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
Packet pg. 34
2 Figure 1. Preliminary Strategy Recommendations Impacted Players in the Housing System Proposed Strategy HOAs Landlords Builders/ Developers Finc. Institutions Special Districts & Gov’t Entities Manufactured Housing Nhbds Home-owners Renters People Experiencing Home-lessness Residents vulnerable to dis-placement Historically dis-advantaged populations Other Partners Education, Communication, and Information 1 Refine local affordable housing goal. The City has already adopted a broad goal of 10% affordable at 80% AMI. Consider formal adoption of subgoals (e.g., 10% of rental units affordable to 60% AMI; 5% of owner units deed restricted and affordable to 100% AMI) to help set expectations for developers as they negotiate agreements with the city and establish more specific targets for the city to monitor progress. X X X X X X X X X X X X 2 Improve resident access to housing information and resources. Language access plan; tenant rights/responsibilities; fair housing rights and complaint process; affordable housing goal/policy tracker; housing equity; resource/program information; affordable housing database and/or search engine; partner agencies housing services. X X X X X X X X X X X X 3 Promote inclusivity, housing diversity, and affordability as community values. PR campaign and/or communications related to density, structural racism, need for affordable housing, myths about affordable housing, etc. Could also use "tactical urbanism" strategies as part of this effort. X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and access to resident rights information. X X X X X X X 5 Assess displacement and gentrification risk. City staff can use the work other communities do in this space as a guide for building our own index for displacement and gentrification risk using readily available data (Census, American Community Survey, etc.). This information can be used to help promote and target anti-displacement resources/programs, pair such resources with major capital investments, and guide community partnerships. X X X 6 Conduct a condition review and ownership survey of existing, aging multi-family housing stock. Identify building rehab needs, rental trends, which buildings have opportunities to leverage historic property funding, etc. X X X 7 Conduct economic productivity analysis of selective case study neighborhoods based on date of development (e.g. Old Town North with Harvest Park and an example from the lower end of LMN density spectrum) X Community Partnerships, Governance, Equity-Centered Implementation 8 Regularly assess existing housing policies and programs to ensure they are effective, equitable, and aligned with vision. Begin with a comprehensive review of current programs/policies using the Government Alliance on Race & Equity Racial Equity Toolkit. All strategies proposed in this Housing Strategic Plan will also be evaluated through an equity and efficacy lens. X X X X X X X X X X X X 9 Consider extending the city’s affordability term. The City’s current affordability term for projects receiving City funding or incentives is 20 years but many cities use longer terms, commonly 30 up to 60 years. (Affordability term refers to the period over which affordable housing is income restricted, after which its deed restriction expires and it can convert to market-rate). X X X X HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 35
3 10Conduct a formal Disparity Study to evaluate the prevalence of inequities in the housing system in Fort Collins. In collaboration with the City Attorney’s Office, this study could research current and historic documents, e.g., deeds, subdivision plats, policies and programs, to understand the root causes of inequities and disparities in Fort Collins. X X X X X X X X X X X X 11Provide staff and those involved in the housing process with unconscious bias training to ensure all community members are treated equally in processes. X X 12Create an anti-displacement committee, which would review opportunities to pair anti-displacement strategies with major public investments to mitigate the unintended consequences of such investments on residential displacement. X X X X 13Improve access to interpreters/translators and City programs, especially in Spanish and consider other languages X X X X X X 14Embed partnerships and associated funding into all housing strategies to adequately compensate for expertise X 15Identify opportunities for communities to be decision makers, e.g., participatory budgeting X X X X X Dedicated Revenue Stream(s) for Affordable Housing 16Extend sales tax dedicated to Affordable Housing Capital Fund (due to sunset in 2025). X X X X X X X X 17Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the Affordable Housing Fund. Trust funds have grown immensely in popularity with reductions in federal funding for housing coupled with rising needs across communities. Local funds can support a variety of affordable housing activities, have fewer restrictions and are easier to deploy than federal or state dollars. Revenue sources are varied and include: X X X X X X X X X X X X 17a Linkage fees (commercial and/or residential) or impact fees (paid by new development). A linkage fee policy was reviewed by City Council in 2020 and was suggested to move forward in the next fee review and update (est. 2021). X 17b General Obligation Bonds X X 17c Cash in Lieu fees from inclusionary housing buyouts (if implement IH) X 17d Dedicated property or sales tax X X X X 17eDemolition tax X X 18Consider affordable housing requirements/funding as part of metro districts. The city is already working on a specific recommendation for this strategy. X X 19Consider affordable housing requirements/funding as part of TIF districts in Urban Renewal Areas. X X 20Explore funding options through linked, but non-traditional sources, such as health agencies/foundations and/or social impact bonds. These innovative financing strategies are becoming more common and aim to leverage the savings created by stable, affordable housing but realized in other sectors (lower medical, social service, and justice costs). X Financing for New Construction and Preservation 21Partner with local Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) to offer gap financing and low cost loan pool for affordable housing development. X 22Continue to pursue public-private partnerships and consider a dedicated staff member who would focus on cultivating such opportunities. X X X X HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 36
4 23Work with developers to better understand the financing barriers to missing middle projects and consider partnerships with financial institutions (CDFI, credit unions, and banks) to address such barriers. X X 24Consider formation or partnership opportunities for a socially conscious Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) to fund projects aligned with the city's housing vision and goals. X X Technical/Direct Assistance 25Increase funding for financial literacy, credit building, and homebuyer education for residents. Some CDBG funding is allocated to supporting nonprofits that are providing this service but additional funding would increase capacity. Opportunities should be available in both English and Spanish and should be affirmatively marketed to historically disadvantaged populations and demographic groups with disproportionately low rates of homeownership. X X X X X X X 26Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal representation. Housing Counseling generally takes the form of providing assistance with mortgage debt restructuring and mortgage and/or utilities payments to avoid foreclosure; short-term emergency rent and utilities assistance for renters. Cities often partner with local nonprofits experienced in foreclosure counseling. Landlord-tenant mediation is similar but generally conducted by local Legal Aid for more involved disputes between the landlord and tenant. CARES Act funding is currently dedicated to a legal defense fund for renters but additional resources are necessary to carry this strategy beyond the duration that CARES resources allow. X X X X X X X 27Home rehabilitation. Grants or loans to assist low income homeowners and (less common) multifamily property owners with needed repairs. Can be emergency repairs or maintenance needed to preserve homes. X X 28Consider a mandated rental license program for long-term rentals and pair with best practice rental regulations. Having a rental registration or license program (a program in which landlords are required to obtain a license from the city) makes it easier to implement and enforce a variety of renter protections, promote best practices to landlords, and identify problem landlords. Specific efforts promoted through such programs include landlord education (fair housing or other), standardized lease agreements in English and Spanish, application fee reasonableness requirements, "just cause" evictions, source of income protection enforcement, housing quality standards, etc. Can include a modest fee to cover program cost, e.g., recent research suggests these fees range from approximately $0 to $110/unit, though fee frequency, determination, etc. varies by jurisdiction. X X X X X X Policies Preserve Existing Affordable Housing and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing 29Public Sector Right of First Refusal for Affordable Developments. Typically requires owners of affordable housing notify the public sector of intent to sell or redevelop property and allow period of potential purchase by public sector or non-profit partner. X X X X HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 37
5 30Tenant right of first refusal for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing community. Laws that give tenants the right to purchase a rental unit or complex (including a manufactured housing community) before the owner puts it on the market or accepts an offer from another potential buyer. Laws typically allow residents to assign their “right of first refusal” to other entities, such as nonprofit partners that help the residents form a limited equity cooperative, or affordable housing providers that agree to maintain the property as affordable rental housing for a set period of time. Note that this provision already exists for manufactured housing communities under the Colorado Mobile Home Park Residents Opportunity to Purchase (HB20-1201 passed in June 2020). X X X 31Acquisition/ rehabilitation of naturally occurring affordable housing. In this strategy nonprofits or for-profit affordable housing developers purchase privately-owned but low-priced housing options, or subsidized units with affordability periods ending (“at risk” affordable housing). Owners make needed improvements and institute long- term affordability. At-risk housing stock may include private rentals with rising rents, manufactured housing parks, or lower-cost single- family homes and real estate owned (REO) properties. Rental properties can be maintained as rental or convert to cooperative ownership. Ownership properties can be resold to lower-income families or leased as affordable rentals. City role in this strategy could include acquisition, capital to subsidize non-profit purchase, or rehabilitation loans. X X X X X 32Small landlord incentives. Public sector incentives that encourage small landlords to keep units affordable for a period of time in exchange for subsidized rehabilitation or tax or fee waivers. Requires identification of properties through rental registration. Could also be applied to current vacation rentals for conversion to longer term permanent rentals. X X X Support New Construction of Affordable Housing 33Bolster city land bank activity by allocating additional funding to the program (contingent on adopting additional revenue stream policy). Begin with inventory and feasibility of publicly owned land in city limits and growth management area. Also consider underutilized commercial properties that could be used for affordable housing. Continue effective disposition of existing parcels to affordable housing developers and land trust partners. X 34Inclusionary Housing. Policies that require or incentivize the creation of affordable housing when new development occurs, either within same the development or off-site. Some inclusionary housing ordinances allow the developer to pay fees "in lieu" of developing the affordable units. Colorado state law currently prohibits Inclusionary Housing for rental but it is an option for owner-occupied developments; and the state will be considering repealing the prohibition on inclusionary rental ordinances in the 2021 session. X 35Evaluate opportunities for affordable housing components in Capital Improvement Projects. Could be achieved through land donations, development agreements, and/or partnerships with affordable housing developers. If adopt an anti-displacement committee (see #10 above), involve that committee in this process. X X X Incentivize Private Development to Create Affordable Housing and Other Community Benefits 36Community Benefit Agreements. Agreements negotiated among community groups, a municipality and a developer that require specific terms in exchange for local support and/or planning approvals. CBAs aim to mitigate impacts of the X X X X X HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 38
6 project through local benefits like workforce training, local hiring targets and affordable housing investment. 37Incentivize energy efficiency, water conservation, and other green building practices in alignment with Our Climate Future Big and Next Moves Incentives can include fee waivers, variances, density bonuses, etc. X 38Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current market conditions (existing incentives include fee waivers, fee deferral, height bonus, density bonus, reduced landscaping, priority processing). Conduct a detailed review of the current financial benefit of existing incentives relative to their requirements and evaluate applicability by income level and geography. Based on that analysis, recommend changes to incentive structure and applicability to increase efficacy. X 39Create additional development incentives for affordable housing. Development incentives are tied to a commitment to produce an agreed-upon share of affordable units (can be rental or owner). Most policies mandate set asides of between 10 and 30 percent, depending on the market, and set affordability periods between 15 and 99 years. Incentives can take many forms; see below: X 39a Expand density bonus program to apply in other zone districts (currently limited to LMN zone). Program would need to be calibrated for a variety of zones. X 39b Annexation approval tied to development of affordable housing. X 39c Building variances (can apply to setbacks, lot coverage, parking requirements, design standards, open space dedication, etc.) X Increase Supply of Accessible Housing 40Buydown of ADA/accessible units. Provide subsidies to persons with disabilities who cannot afford market-rate accessible rentals, most of which are in multifamily developments built after 1990 (post Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA). X X 41Visitability policy. Require or incentive developers to make a portion of developments "visitable," meeting design standards that allow easy visitation by mobility impaired residents (one zero step entrance, 32-inch doorways, and bathroom on the main floor that is wheelchair accessible). Visitable design has been shown to add no additional cost to developers; it can be incentivized using a variety of incentives similar to affordability incentives (e.g., fee waivers/deferrals, priority processing, density bonuses, variances, etc.). X Allow the market to respond to a variety of housing preferences 42Remove barriers to the development of Accessory Dwelling Units. Allow by right in all residential zone districts (in process per the 2020 LUC audit); reduced (or waived) tap fees and other development fees; consider development of a grant program for low and moderate income owners; evaluate feasibility of ADUs by lot to determine if there are overly burdensome standards related to lot coverage, setbacks, alley access, etc. and address those barriers as necessary. X 43Revise occupancy limits and family definitions. Occupancy limits and narrow family definitions often create unintended constraints on housing choice and options, including cooperative housing opportunities for seniors and people with disabilities desiring to live with unrelated adults in a single family home setting. Occupancy limits can also pose fair housing liabilities to the extent that they have a disparate impact on people with disabilities. Current best practices are to allow up to 8 unrelated or to base occupancy on building code requirements instead of family definitions. X X X X X HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 39
7 44Calibrate tap fees and other development fees to encourage product diversity and the production of smaller footprint homes (which are more likely to carry market-rate affordability). Per unit and per tap fees incentivize large and/or luxury development so that developers can recover fee costs through higher market prices. Fees can be scaled in tiers and/or by square footage, making it easier for developers to recover the cost of the lower fees of smaller homes with lower market prices. The city currently scales fees by bedroom and lot size and consideration of additional granularity is currently in process. X 45Remove barriers to allowed densities through code revisions. As noted in the 2020 LUC Audit, barriers to fully realizing allowed densities include multifamily unit number maximums, square footage thresholds for secondary or non-residential buildings, and height limitations that restrict the ability to maximize compact sites using tuck-under parking. Such requirements should be recalibrated or removed entirely. X 46Assess how metering and tap requirements may impact housing type diversity. Reasonableness considerations for ADUs, missing middle, manufactured housing communities, etc. X X X 47Increase awareness & opportunities for collaboration across water districts and other regional partners around the challenges with water costs and housing. X X Continue the City's ongoing efforts to implement recommendations from current housing-related studies and other City efforts: 482020 Land Use Code Audit Recommendations. Create more opportunities for a range of housing choices2. Define a range of options between two-family and multi-family housing3. Clarify definition of and opportunities for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)4. Remove barriers to allowed densities5. Incentivize affordable housing projects6. Clarify and simplify development standards7. Consolidate like standards and definitions and make them more broadly applicable8. Increase flexibility9. Recalibrate incentives to reflect current market conditions10. Align Design Manual with updated development standards X X X 492020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice Action Steps 1. Strengthen fair housing information, educational and training opportunities. 2. Improve the housing environment for people with disabilities 3. Support efforts to improve residents’ establishment and building of credit. 4. Support programs, projects, and organizations that improve housing access and affordability. 5. Continue to pursue infrastructure and public amenity equity. 6. Pursue public engagement activities to inform Land Use Code and policy updates through Home 2 Health. X X X 50Homeward 2020 (TBD upon release of report, intent is to align the strategies from the 10-year Homeward 2020 effort within the Housing Strategic Plan) X X X 51Continue to align housing work with other departmental plans and programs to leverage more funding resources and achieve citywide goals. X X Source: City of Fort Collins and Root Policy Research. HOUSING STRATEGIC PLANPacket pg. 40
MEMORANDUM
To: Fort Collins HSP Team
From: Mollie Fitzpatrick, Root Policy Research
Re: Preliminary Strategy Review
Date: November 19, 2020; Revised November 23, 2020
This memo describes the evaluation framework of preliminary strategies recommended
for consideration as part of Fort Collins’ plan to address the full spectrum of housing
needs.
Criteria will continue to be refined through December and January in staff
workshops, City Council feedback, and community engagement.
Evaluation framework. A number of factors are important considerations in
evaluating and prioritizing specific strategies for inclusion in the Housing Strategic Plan.
Not only should strategies be effective and financially feasible, they should also directly
contribute to progress on the city’s current affordability goal (10% of units affordable to
80% of AMI by 2040) and the city’s vision for housing, “Everyone has healthy, stable
housing they can afford.” Root will be facilitating a staff evaluation of all preliminary
strategies over a series of workshops in December and January.
First, each strategy is evaluated across a series of questions to confirm feasibility and
alignment with City vision: (response options are yes/no/maybe). Next, strategies are
rated for efficacy and relative cost to the city (on a scale of 1 to 5). Root recommends
that strategies be re-evaluated every 3 years in concert with evaluating outcomes (i.e.,
are the strategies working?).
Figure 1, on the following page, illustrates the evaluation framework.
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
Packet pg. 41
Page 2
Figure 1. Evaluation Framework
Note: Additional criteria can be added to capture city priorities as desired and/or clarified (e.g., unit quantity vs depth of
affordability, priority populations, housing balance across the spectrum vs targeted approach of city fu nds, etc.).
Source: City of Fort Collins and Root Policy Research
Evaluation Framework Ex. StrategyEx. StrategyDoes this strategy create/preserve housing affordable to 80% AMI or less (City-
adopted goal for affordability)?yes
Does this strategy enhance housing stability?maybe
Does this strategy promote healthy neighborhoods/housing?yes
Does this strategy increase equity in the following ways…
Address housing disparities?yes
Increase accessibility?no
Increase access to areas of opportunity?maybe
Promote investment in disadvantaged neighborhoods?yes
Mitigate residential displacement?yes
Does this strategy address highest priority needs (to be defined by sub-goal
development)?maybe
Does this strategy increase housing type and price-point diversity in the city?yes
Does the city have necessary resources (financial and staff capacity) to implement
administer and monitor?yes
Does this strategy have community support?yes
Can the City lead implementation of this strategy (or does it require state/regional
leadership and/or non-profit or partner action)?yes
If no, are partnerships in place to lead implementation?n/a
Does this strategy help advance other community goals (e.g., climate action, water
efficiency, etc.)?yes
How effective is this strategy in achieving the desired outcome (on a scale of 1 to 5
where 1 is not at all effective is 5 is very effective)?4
How resource intensive is this strategy (on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is no cost is 5
is very high cost)?2
Rating scales for efficacy and cost
Respond to each question with yes, maybe, or no:Vision CriteriaFeasibility CriteriaHOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
Packet pg. 42
1
December 11, 2020
Residential Metro Districts Evaluation System
Cameron Gloss
Metro District Basics
• Quasi-governmental entity with tax-exempt
bonding and taxing authority; used to finance
Public infrastructure and services
• Authorized under Colorado's Special District Act,
Colorado Revised Statutes Title 32
• Examples of infrastructure needs:
o Street infrastructure
o Non-potable water systems
o Extend utility infrastructure
o Parks/Recreation facilities
o Parking structures
o Operations and maintenance
2
1
2
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 43
2
City of Fort Collins Metro District Policy
The Policy establishes the criteria, guidelines and processes followed by
City Council and City staff in considering service plans for the
organization of metropolitan districts
The Policy encourages the formation of a District that delivers
extraordinary public benefits that align with the goals and objectives of
the City
The approval of a District Service Plan is at the sole discretion of City
Council
3
Why Metro Districts?
• Public infrastructure can be financed over time
• Public infrastructure can be financed at tax-exempt interest rates
• Property owners can deduct taxes paid to the district on their
federal income tax returns
• New infrastructure is funded by those who will benefit
(Constituents within the District) and not all City residents
• Permanent operation and maintenance of certain public
improvements that are not dedicated to the City
4
3
4
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 44
3
Our Region
5
6
Mill Levy Cap 50 Mills
Maximum O&M Levy Cap 10 Mills
Regional Improvements Levy Cap 5 Mills (in additionl ro the 50 Mills limit)
Basic Infrastructure To enable public benefit
Eminent Domain Prohibited
Debt Limitation 100% of Capacity
Minimum Debt Authorization $7 million
Debt Term Limit 40 years unless Metro District Board decides
otherwise
Citizen Control As early as possible
Multiple Districts Projected over an extended period
Dissolution
Districts shall have no more than three years from
approval of the Service Plan to secure City Council
approval by resolution
Commercial/ Residential Ratio N/A
City of Fort Collins Metro District Policy
5
6
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 45
4
Front Range Metro District Comparison
7
Appropriate Parameters
How do we define parameters for residential Metro Districts in a
way that addresses known issues?
• Transparency for buyers
• Cost burden to residents
• Fairness & community benefit
• Process and governance
-minimum thresholds (i.e. size of project, public infrastructure needs)
-timing and approval process
-developer accountability
-policy updates and changes
8
7
8
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 46
5
9
Total Cost of Ownership
Mortgage
Taxes and Fees:
County Property Tax
Metro District Property Tax
Homeowner’s Association Fees
Insurance
Utilities:
Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, Electricity, Natural Gas
Internet & Cable TV
Solid Waste/Recycling
Data: Larimer County Treasurer
Graphic: Denver Post
A Property Tax Comparison
Johnstown:
Thompson River Ranch
(metro district)
Vs.
Thompson Crossing
(no metro district)
9
10
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 47
6
Fort Collins Avg Residential Utility Bills
11
Require Extraordinary Community Benefit
Recognizing that current code does not necessarily result in
developments that meet our community aspirations, how might Metro
Districts help realize the kind of residential development that we desire
as a community as defined by adopted City policies?
Relevant Plans Include:
• City Plan
• Climate Action Plan
• Housing Plan (update in progress)
• Water Efficiency Plan
• Energy Policy
• Others
12
11
12
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 48
7
Proposed Evaluation System
All projects meet minimum
requirements by category
PLUS a minimum number of
additional points are
required and achieved from
a menu of options
Exceptional circumstances
and innovation allowed as
alternative compliance
Revisit every two years
Energy Water Housing Livability Public
Infrastructure
Needs Metro District Minimum Requirements Menu Options (points)Code Code Code Code
Plan Plan Plan Plan
Energy
14
Additional Points
• Zero energy homes
• Build to Passive House standard
• Build all electric homes
• Install solar [50/75/100]% of annual use
• Smart storage and grid interactivity
• Other energy saving technologies
Required
• Enhanced efficiency measures
• Solar & Electric Vehicle ready
ENERGY Minimum Requirements Additional Points13
14
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 49
8
Water
15
Additional Points
• Deed restrictions for water friendly and plant
positive landscapes
• Additional water efficiency in common areas
• Non-potable irrigation supply
• Stormwater innovation
Required
• Use WaterSense fixtures & irrigation controllers
• Water efficient common areas
WATERMinimum Requirements Additional Points16
Housing Affordability Along
the Income Spectrum
AMI 0%
Below 80% AMI is City’s
Definition of Affordable Housing
80%
$69.7K/yr
200%100%
$87.2K/yr
120%
$105K/yr
$415K
Market Housing
$320KPurchase Price
Goal is defined by AHSP
(188-228 units/year)
Fewer attainable options are
available to Middle Income Earners
Goal is harder to define & City influence
may be outweighed by market forces
15
16
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 50
9
Affordable & Attainable Housing
17
Additional Points
• Additional affordable and/or attainable housing
• Options for Accessory Dwelling Units
Required - Example
• 5% Affordable Housing (60% AMI)
• Developer Built or Land Donation
• 20% Attainable Housing
• half at 80% AMI, half at 80-120% AMI
• Deed Restricted or Smaller Unit Sizes or Community
Land Trust
HOUSINGMinimum Requirements Additional PointsCity Plan
Report
Card
18
17
18
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 51
10
Livability
19
Point Options
1. High quality transit stop
2. Shared transportation options
3. Bike & walk friendly streets
4. Essential neighborhood
services
5. Exceptional gathering spaces
6. Community workspaces
7. Common areas food
production
8. Universal 10m walk to nature
9. Public trails connectivity
10. Enhanced pollinator habitat
11. Meet Indoor airPLUS standard
12. Universal design standards
13. 1% for arts & culture
14. Sustained educational
programming
15. Excellence in public
engagement
Required
• Achieve at least X points from above
LIVABILITYPoint OptionsPublic Infrastructure
20
Points
• Considerations made for disproportionate costs
Base Assumption
• Assumes significant public infrastructure needs and
cost
Public Infrastructure Exceptional Costs Base Assumption 19
20
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 52
11
Next Steps
• Confirm direction on Residential Metro District methodology
• Focus Group evaluation and production of refined metrics
• Review evaluation system with Boards and Commissions
21
22
Backup Slides
21
22
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 53
12
23
Fort Collins HOA Trends
Observations:
HOA fees for SFHs are typical in subdivisions constructed after 1985
Due to age of development fees are most likely in S/SE and NE Fort Collins
Average annual HOA fee: $602
Townhome and condo fees typical regardless of age of development
HOA fees 3-5x higher than single family homes but may also include
certain utilities/insurance
Average annual HOA fee (attached): $2,710
24
Units w/o HOA Fees
(Typically SFH built before 1985)
Units with HOA fees
(Typically SFH built after 1985)Townhomes & condos
(Highest observed HOA fees)Listing PriceAnnual HOA Fee
23
24
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 54
13
25
Housing Data / Comparisons
Local Data:
Colorado average housing unit size – 2,162 sf (2
nd highest in US)
Colorado average lot size – 8,076 sf (6
th smallest in US)
Fort Collins median unit size – 2,269 sf
Median of 3 bed / 2.5 baths
Persons per household – 2.56 (Colorado) , 2.46 (Fort Collins), 2.52
(National)
26
Housing Trends
New single-family and multifamily
unit sizes are decreasing slightly
after years of increase.
Fort Collins singe-family and
multifamily unit sizes are stable
Fewer households contain children
under 18 (15% in Fort Collins, 2016)
Size of New Single-Family Homes (US)
Source: National Association Home Builders
25
26
RESIDENTIAL METRO DISTRICTS POLICY UPDATE
Packet pg. 55
Summary Memo -- FRA Quiet Zone Visit
Subject: Summary Memo notes from FRA Quiet Zone site visit on 8 October 2020
Attendees: Darin Atteberry, Caryn Champine, Dean Klingner, Tyler Marr, Brad Buckman, James Payne (FRA),
Michael Long (FRA), Howard Gillespie (FRA), Steve Jankowski (FRA), Chris Noblett (FRA)
Background:
The BNSF tracks through Fort Collins run down the center of Mason Street. There are 12 crossings in just over
one mile. Trains run at an average speed of 15 mph and sound their horns 48 times in ~ 3 minutes. A Downtown
Quiet Zone study was completed in 2011; it identified $3.9 million to $5.5 million in improvements needed for a
quiet zone. In 2014, the City implemented approximately $4 million in infrastructure improvements in
conjunction with the MAX Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project on Mason. This included separating tracks from travel
lanes, consolidating crossings, constant warning track circuitry, redundant lights, etc. – everything but a 4-
quadrant gate system as it was found to not be feasible. In March of 2015 the City submitted a request to the
FRA to waive the Train Horn Rule minimum requirement for gates. The supporting documentation showed how
the risk threshold without gates would still be below the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold and therefore
qualify for a quiet zone. The FRA indicated that regardless of the Risk Threshold, no net decrease in safety would
be accepted, expressed concern due to trespass and pedestrian activity in the corridor, and noted that the
flashing lights at crossings so equipped may not be in compliance with the MUTCD.
The FRA administrator visited Fort Collins in the summer of 2016. The FRA issued a “Notice of Safety Inquiry”
regarding the Train Horn Rule in the fall of 2016 and the City along with others submitted a detailed comment
letter. Then, representatives from the FRA, Public Utilities Commission (PUC), BNSF, and the City met in
September 2017 in Fort Collins to discuss next steps. One of the outcomes from the meeting was that the City
would submit another waiver request and that in addition to the required regulatory safety calculations, we also
include other elements that address the FRA representatives’ other concerns. This waiver request occurred in
March of 2020.
March 2020 Waiver Request Summary:
Using the information, feedback, and guidance from the past several years, Fort Collins refined the approach
and submitted another Waiver Request from the Trail Horn rule minimum requirement for gates. The request
was for a waiver for a gate requirement at seven crossings where gates are infeasible due to the nature of the
corridor with the tracks down the center of Mason Street. The request included:
o The closure of three out of 12 crossings
o All remaining crossings will be fully signalized (requiring one new signal)
o Mid-block barrier to deter pedestrian trespass
8 October 2020 Meeting Summary:
At the 8 October site visit, it became clear at the outset that the FRA team would not support the March 2020
waiver request moving forward. This is due to not being able to feasibly implement the Supplemental Safety
Measure (SSM) of a 4-quadrant gate system at the seven crossings along Mason Street. However, the FRA team
suggested implementation of another SSM, the wayside horn, at these seven intersections. The wayside horn is
an FRA approved device that may be used in lieu of locomotive horns at these crossings. Additionally, some
Alternative Safety Measures (ASMs) were discussed for possible implementation. ASMs consist of improvements
that fall outside the scope of SSMs but may be proposed to FRA for consideration and approval. The ASMs
Packet pg. 56
Summary Memo -- FRA Quiet Zone Visit
discussed were the following: development of an education program for the public, and implementation of
additional cameras at the intersections. These ASMs will be further evaluated for potential implementation.
Wayside horns were also identified as possible SSMs for implementation during the 2011 Downtown Quiet Zone
study, and the estimated cost of implementation as the time ranged between $100K and $200K per crossing.
However, these costs could come down due to the constant warning track circuitry improvements made for the
MAX BRT project in 2014. City staff will explore options with a consultant for possibly re-submitting a waiver
request that would include wayside horns, as well as performing a refined cost estimate for implementation of
wayside horns at the required intersections.
Recommended Next Steps:
1. Conduct a site visit to Castle Rock to observe the wayside horn noise and any lessons learned in the
setup and implementation of the system.
2. Execute a Preliminary Engineering (PE) agreement with BNSF for consultant analysis of these crossings
prior to onsite diagnostic meeting.
3. Set up an onsite diagnostic meeting with the FRA, BNSF, and PUC to determine the way forward for a
new waiver request to include the 8 October visit findings.
4. Compile a new waiver request with the 8 October visit findings and any further onsite diagnostic visit
results and recommendations.
5. Identify opportunities in the 2021 BFO process for potential project implementation in 2022 and
beyond.
Packet pg. 57