HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 02/23/2021 - WORK SESSION
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Wade Troxell, Mayor Remote Hearing
Ross Cunniff, District 5, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Susan Gutowsky, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Julie Pignataro, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Ken Summers, District 3 Cablecast on FCTV
Melanie Potyondy, District 4 Channel 14 on Connexion
Emily Gorgol, District 6 Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English
proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and
activities. Contact 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance
notice when possible.
A petición, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el
idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los
servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 221-6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay
Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible.
City Council Work Session
February 23, 2021
(After the Adjourned Council meeting, which begins at 6:00 p.m.)
• CALL TO ORDER.
1. Exterior Lighting Code Update. (staff: Kelly Smith, Paul Sizemore; 15 minute presentation; 45
minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to discuss changes to the Exterior Lighting Standards in the City’s Land
Use Code for new commercial and multi-family development projects. The goals of the code update
are to ensure adequate light levels for safety and commerce; update technical criteria to align with
current industry metrics; better control the various aspects of light pollution (overlighting, glare, light
trespass); and require contextually appropriate lighting plan s that result in lower lighting in areas with
lower nighttime activity (Natural Areas and residential areas), and higher lighting levels in areas with
higher nighttime activity (Downtown and commercial corridors).
2. Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business Improvement District. (staff: Cynthia Eichler; Two
10- minute presentations; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on Visit Fort Collins, COVID -19 impacts to the travel
and tourism industry, the Destination Master Plan, and to discuss the opportunity of additional
funding through the creation of a Tourism Business Improvement District.
Cynthia Eichler, Visit Fort Collins President and CEO will be presenting along with a consultant.
City of Fort Collins Page 2
• ANNOUNCEMENTS.
• ADJOURNMENT.
DATE:
STAFF:
February 23, 2021
Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner
Paul Sizemore, Interim Director, Comm. Devt. &
Neighborhood Serv.
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Exterior Lighting Code Update.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss changes to the Exterior Lighting Standards in the City’s Land Use Code for
new commercial and multi-family development projects. The goals of the code update are to ensure adequate
light levels for safety and commerce; update technical criteria to align with current industry metrics; better control
the various aspects of light pollution (overlighting, glare, light trespass); and require contextually appropriate
lighting plans that result in lower lighting in areas with lower nighttime activity (Natural Areas and residential
areas), and higher lighting levels in areas with higher nighttime activity (Downtown and commercial corridors).
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council support shifting from a “one-size fits all” regulatory approach to a context area framework?
2. Does Council have additional follow-up actions related to the proposed code?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Over the past two decades, a growing body of research has confirmed the impacts of light pollution on public
health, the environment and wildlife. The 2015 Nature in the City Strategic Plan acknowledges these findings and
calls for the City to comprehensively address the protection of the night sky through cross -departmental
collaboration and external partnerships. In 2016, a group of staff formed the Night Sky Team to spearhead
initiatives that encourage best lighting practices, reduce light pollution, raise awareness, and maintain public
safety and security. The team meets regularly, and consists of several City departments and service areas,
including Light and Power, Utilities’ Integrated Design Assistance Program, Facilities, Planning and Development,
Environmental Sustainability, Natural Areas, and Police Services.
Furthering the Night Sky Team’s objectives, Council adopted a resolution in September 2016 expressing support
for the following:
• Protect and preserve the night sky through implementation of best lighting practices at City-owned facilities
and with City-owned lighting;
• Incorporate dark sky policies and standards into Building Codes, Land Use Codes and Streetscape Standards
when applicable and appropriate;
• Educate and raise awareness publicly to encourage best lighting practices throughout the community;
• Seek to obtain dark sky certification by an independent body for Natural Areas and other locations in the
region that have high quality night skies;
• Continue to partner and monitor regional night sky measures annually; and
• Pursue night sky protection without compromising health, safety , or security.
1
Packet Pg. 3
February 23, 2021 Page 2
In support of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan and Council’s stated goals, staff has been evaluating and
updating codes for building and development projects. In 2017, amendments were adopted to the Residential
Code and Energy Code that require night-sky-friendly lighting on all residential and commercial buildings.
In 2018, staff began evaluating the Land Use Code standards for exterior lighting on commercial and multi-family
development projects. The City contracted Clanton and Associates, a lighting design and engineering firm, to
assist with an audit of the existing Land Use Code (LUC) requirements and propose code changes.
Existing City Regulations
To help ground the discussion and provide clarity, the table below illustrates how exterior lighting is regulated in
the City, and the department responsible for overseeing the regulation. (Note: The area in gray highlights the LUC
update and corresponding development projects up for Council discussion).
Project Need
The City’s existing LUC standards for exterior lighting were adopted in 1997, which predates LED technology.
Aside from periodic minor updates over the years, the code has remained unchanged. The code’s intent is to
“focus on the actual physical effects of lighting, as well as the effect that lighting may have on the surrounding
neighborhood.” To achieve the intent, the code is structured around three regu latory controls that are applied
uniformly throughout the City:
1. Light Trespass Limits: controls the amount of light entering outside the property boundary;
2. Footcandle Maximums: the maximum allowable light intensity hitting the ground surface; and
3. Full-Cutoff Light Fixtures: the percentage of light emitted above the fixture that directly contributes to skyglow.
While the code helps mitigate impacts to surrounding neighborhoods, such as light trespass and skyglow, the
regulatory controls and terminology are outdated and less effective. The term “full cutoff” is no longer used by the
industry and has been replaced with the BUG rating, a luminaire classification system that addresses light
pollution more comprehensively from all angles. ‘BUG’ stands for Backli ght, Uplight and Glare. Backlight is the
light directed behind the fixture; Uplight is light directed above the fixture; and Glare is the light perceived by the
bulb. Each fixture has a BUG rating and metrics are used to better determine how fixtures will perform in the field.
Because the code only addresses uplight through full -cutoff fixture requirements, and backlight through trespass
limitations, glare remains unaddressed. Glare is difficult to measure in the field, and therefore hard to enforce.
The BUG rating provides a pre-emptive and measurable mitigation tool to addressing glare. The code also
regulates lighting around maximum illuminance levels that are uniformly applied to every development throughout
the City. Therefore, a small business surrounded by a residential neighborhood would have the same lighting
requirements as a large commercial center on a major arterial road. Regulating lighting uniformly through
maximum allowable levels has led to projects being over -lit, especially in relation to their context.
1
Packet Pg. 4
February 23, 2021 Page 3
Proposed Exterior Lighting Code
The proposed code is based on an ordinance template known as the Model Lighting Ordinance (MLO) that was
jointly developed by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) and the International Dark Sky Associa tion (IDA).
Over the past century, the IES has been the lighting authority that sets national standards for interior and exterior
lighting designs. The IES focuses on the human experience of lighting, such as safety, mood and atmosphere,
visual comfort, human health, aesthetics, architectural form, and energy conservation. Conversely, IDA’s focus is
to protect the night sky through encouraging lighting best practices such as lighting when needed, lighting where
needed, directing lighting downward, and using enough lighting as needed.
The MLO serves as a flexible framework that can be adapted to meet the needs of individual communities. It is
structured around BUG and lumen limits, and thus aligns with current technical metrics that more
comprehensively address over-lighting and all lighting angles. BUG and lumen limits are defined by a site’s
Lighting Context Area, a zone district overlay comprised of four “brightness” categories, with LC0 being the lowest
and LC3 the highest (Attachment 2). The purpose is to better protect sensitive areas from the impacts of artificial
light, such as Natural Areas and residential neighborhoods, while allowing greater lighting levels in commercial
areas with higher nighttime activity.
The goals of the proposed code updates are to:
• Promote nighttime safety, security, productivity, enjoyment, and commerce on new development sites;
• Create a “lighting budget” approach that responds to the specific context of the site and lighting needs of the
development;
• Minimize glare, obtrusive light, artificial sky glow, excessive energy use, and impacts to adjacent properties
and neighborhoods;
• Protect Natural Areas and the local natural ecosystem from the damaging effects of electric night lighting; and
• Address recent technological advances in outdoor lighting, particularly the advent of energy efficient LED
lighting.
Other Project Studies
In November 2019, Clanton & Associates prepared a Case Studies Report (Report) that evaluated the current
code against the proposed code on five recently completed development projects in different areas throughout the
City. (Attachment 3) The purpose of the report was to understand the implications of the new code and its effects
on the ground. The report confirmed existing requirements fall short in controlling over-lighting and glare.
These findings were further reinforced after staff facilitated four nighttime tours of the development sites featured
in the report. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire about the qualitative aspe cts of lighting
installations. Questionnaire results and verbal comments mirrored findings in the Report. (Attachment 5)
Clanton & Associates also performed a cost analysis of development sites featured in the report to determine if
the new code would result in more expensive lighting installations. The report concluded the proposed code would
not result in more expensive lighting installations.
Public Engagement
Throughout the project, staff performed a range of engagement activities to educate and solic it input from
community members around perceptions of safety, under or over-lighting, and lighting best practices. In February
2020, staff facilitated four separate evening tours of development projects featured in the Case Studies Report to
help ground the technical aspects of the code. Staff used the report and input received during tours to further
refine the code.
On November 1, 2020, a draft of proposed standards was released to the public for review and comment. A
webpage dedicated to the code update was created, and hyperlinks to the webpage were provided on the City’s
1
Packet Pg. 5
February 23, 2021 Page 4
Night Sky Team webpage and the Land Use Code Updates webpage. The project was advertised in the Climate
Action Plan newsletter and the Coloradoan.
Throughout the months of November, December and January 2021, staff engaged the broader community
through a variety of virtual activities, including public open houses, presentations/discussions to a variety of
groups (Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Development Authority, Police Services, B oards, Building Services
Team, Light and Power Team, Capital Projects Team), two Technical Advisory Committee workshops, and one -
on-one discussions. Staff also facilitated a virtual training session for City Planners responsible for reviewing new
lighting plans and applying standards.
Comments received varied between stakeholder groups and highlighted different concerns and priorities.
Business owners and organizations expressed concern over the code being a Dark Sky Ordinance that is too
restrictive to adequately celebrate our rich and diverse community identity, support a vibrant Downtown, provide
safe multi-transit corridors, and address the complexities of our built environment.
Similarly, Police Services expressed concern that a Dark Sky Ordinance w ould result in underlit developments,
particularly in Lighting Context Area 1, and that the review process for adding lights for safety was too
cumbersome. Police Services also expressed concern over light restrictions within Natural Areas and natural
resource buffers because they would result in dark, unsafe places that attract unwanted behavior.
Conversely, residents and Boards expressed a desire for stronger regulations that would restrict light trespass,
apply enforceable restrictions to single-family residential properties, require existing developments to comply
through an amortization process, and create a clear mechanism to address obtrusive lighting (“glare bombs”)
immediately. Natural resource protection and low light levels in residential areas were priorities.
Below is a table highlighting key comments/concerns expressed by different stakeholders and how the
comments/concerns have been addressed.
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT
STAKEHOLDER COMMENT/CONCERN ADDRESSED
Public • Concern over light pollution
• Would like residential light fixtures to be
enforceable
• Addressed through BUG and
lumen budget
• Coordinated with Building
Services to address complaints on
non-compliant light fixtures on
residential properties
Police Services • More light needed in Neighborhood Commercial
Centers
• Better understand philosophy for Context Area
Boundaries
• Easy process for adding light for safety reasons
• Concern over low light levels in LC1 and desire to
see a lighting installation that meets new
requirements. After site visits, concern current light
levels are too low and could have a negative
impact.
• Energy code is not consistent with crime prevention
approach to draw eyes from people passing by into
developments
• Changed Neighborhood Center
Zone District from LC1 to LC2
• Provided a table in the code of
Context Areas and correlating zone
districts
• Provide an administrative approval
process for adding lighting if safety
concerns arise
• Provided an evaluation of sites in
LC1 to visit and evaluate
Downtown
Development
Authority
• Concern over trespass limitations, particularly for
zero-lot-line developments in downtown
• LC3 boundary should match Storefront Street Type
• Wanted clarity for how illuminated art pieces would
be regulated
• No low-light hours in Downtown to reflect the 20-
hour commercial activity
• Allow greater trespass levels and
flexibility for property boundaries
abutting public rights of way
• Extended LC3 boundary to closely
match Storefront Street Type
• Staff recommends a content-
neutral approach toward art as
defining art would be challenging in
the code and to administer
1
Packet Pg. 6
February 23, 2021 Page 5
STAKEHOLDER COMMENT/CONCERN ADDRESSED
• Removed low-light levels in
Downtown
Chamber of
Commerce
• Cost analysis of new lighting plans needed
• Include standards for recreation fields
• Include thresholds for Minor Amendments for retrofit
requirements
• Provided cost analysis
• Included standards for recreation
fields
• Provided a threshold for Minor
Amendments and retrofits
LCSB • Concern over how Poudre River is protected,
especially Downtown
• Support amortization approach to bring existing
development into compliance
• Supportive of the code and protection of Natural
Areas
• Included no light spill onto
landscape buffer in Downtown
River subdistrict
• Researching best practices for
amortization for future council
consideration
NRAB • Supportive of the code, particularly for protection of
Natural Areas and energy conservation
• Ensure natural resources are adequately protected
• Included no light spill onto
landscape buffer in Downtown
River subdistrict
P&Z • Support amortization approach to bring existing
development into compliance
• Include thresholds for Minor Amendments for retrofit
requirements
• Include standards for recreation fields
• Researching best practices for
amortization for future council
consideration
• Provided a thresholds for Minor
Amendments and retrofits
• Included standards for recreation
fields
NEXT STEPS
Given the tight timeframe between Work Session and First Reading, staff has prepared a range of possible
outcomes:
1. If the Work Session discussion results in no edits and Council is supportive, staff will make final refinements
prior to First Reading. Final refinements will include edits to provide greater clarity, and an administrative
mechanism for adding lighting to address safety concerns that would require Director review and approva l.
2. If the Work Session discussion results in edits to the code yet Council is still supportive, staff will provide edits
during Second Reading of the adoption ordinance.
3. If the Work Session discussion results in significant edits that would be diffic ult to address within a short
period of time, staff may reschedule the First Reading of the adoption ordinance to a later date.
Once the ordinance is adopted, staff will collaborate with the Building Services Team to align the Residential
Code and Energy Code with the Land Use Code. Additionally, staff proposes monitoring the new code for
approximately one year, and research potential amortization approaches for future Council consideration.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Updated Lighting Code (draft) (PDF)
2. Lighting Context Area Map (draft) (PDF)
3. Case Studies Report (PDF)
4. Case Study Cost Analysis (PDF)
5. Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (PDF)
6. Resolution 2016-074 (PDF)
7. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board - Memo of Support (PDF)
8. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 7
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
3.2.4 Exterior Site Lighting
(A) Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to ensure adequate exterior 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 development that includes proposed artificial outdoor lighting, except
for development on single-family detached residential lots, for which an application is submitted
after [Insert Effective Date of Ordinance], subject to below Subsection 3.2.4(D), shall submit for
review and approval a proposed lighting plan that complies with the standards in this Section 3.2.4
and meets the functional needs of the proposed land use without adversely affecting adjacent
properties or the community.
(C) Design Standards. The lighting plan shall meet the following requirements and all other
applicable requirements set forth in this Section 3.2.4:
1. Provide a comprehensive plan that clearly calculates the lumens of all exterior lighting
being proposed and demonstrates compliance with impacts to adjacent properties, as
outlined in subsections (I) and (J) below.
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 character of the architecture and land use proposed
within the site.
5. Demonstrate no light trespass onto Natural Areas, Natural Habitat Buffer Zones or River
Landscape Buffers as defined in Section 4.16(E)(5)(b)(1)(a).
6. All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin. Consider high color fidelity lamps relative to the lighting application.
7. Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source.
(D) Existing Lighting.
1. Applicants for minor amendments and changes of use pursuant to Land Use Code Section
2.2.10(A) that result in the replacement or upgrade of fifty (50) percent or more of the
existing outdoor lighting fixtures shall submit a lighting plan for the entire development site
that meets the requirements of this Section 3.2.4 and, if necessary to meet such
requirements, complete a site lighting retrofit of the entire development site.
2. Applicants for major amendments and changes of use pursuant to 2.2.10(B) shall submit a
lighting plan for the entire development site that meets the requirements of this Section
3.2.4 and, if necessary to meet such requirements, complete a site lighting retrofit for the
entire development site.
(E) Conformance with All Applicable Codes. All outdoor lighting shall be installed in
conformance with this Section 3.2.4 and applicable sections of Chapter 5 of the Code of the City of
Fort Collins.
(F) Exceptions. The following are not subject to the requirements set forth in this Section 3.2.4:
1. Temporary lighting for construction sites, special events, holidays, and other events
requiring lighting.
2. Festoon lights installed for less than thirty (30) consecutive days.
ATTACHMENT 1 1.1
Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
3. Lighting within the public right-of-way. Such lighting is regulated under the Larimer County
Urban Area Street Standards.
4. Lighting for single family residential housing and duplexes. Such lighting is regulated by
the adopted building codes and amendments.
(G) Prohibited Lighting. The following lighting is prohibited:
1. Site lighting that may be confused with warning, emergency or traffic signals.
2. Mercury vapor lamps.
(H) Lighting Context Areas. The applicable Lighting Context Area shall determine the limitations
for exterior artificial lighting. The Lighting Context Areas are described as follows:
(1) LC0 – No ambient lighting. Areas where the natural environment will be seriously and
adversely affected by lighting. Impacts include disturbing the biological cycles of flora and
fauna and/or detracting from human enjoyment and appreciation of the natural nighttime
environment. The vision of human residents and users is adapted to the darkness, and
they expect to see little or no lighting.
(2) LC1 – Low ambient lighting. The vision of human residents and users is adapted to low
light levels. Lighting may be used for safety and convenience, but it is not necessarily
uniform or continuous. Typical locations include low and medium density residential areas,
commercial or industrial areas with limited nighttime activity, and the developed areas in
parks and other natural settings.
(3) LC2 – Moderate ambient lighting. Areas of human activity where the vision of human
residents and users is adapted to moderate light levels. Lighting may typically be used for
safety and convenience, but it is not necessarily uniform or continuous. Typical locations
include high density residential areas, shopping and commercial districts, industrial parks
and districts, City playfields and 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 continuous. Typical locations include
select areas in the Downtown Zone District and 24-hour emergency medical sites.
Lighting Context Areas generally correspond to zone districts as provided in Table 3.2.4-1,
Lighting Context Areas, although the assigned Lighting Context Area may vary from Table 3.2.4-1
if necessary to accomplish the purposes and intent of this Section 3.2.4. The location of the
Lighting Context Areas are shown on the “Lighting Context Area Map” on file at the City Clerk’s
office.
Table 3.2.4-1 Lighting Context Area
Lighting
Context Area
Land Use Corresponding Zone Districts
LC0 Natural Area P-O-L (City Natural Areas)
LC1 Single Family/Multi-Family/Light
Industrial/Employment/ Portions of Harmony District
P-O-L (City Parks); R-U-L; U-E, R-F; N-C-
L; R-C; L-M-N; M-M-N; H-M-N; I; E; T
LC2 Commercial/Industrial/ Portions of Harmony
District/High Density Residential
C-N; C-C; C-C-N; C-C-R; C-G; C-L; H-C;
I, R-D-R, D, H-M-N
1.1
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
(I) Limits to Off-Site Impacts. All luminaires shall be rated and installed according to Table 3.2.4-
2, Table 3.2.4-3, and Table 3.2.4-4, which outline maximum BUG (Backlight-Uplight-Glare) ratings
(see Figure B below) for all individual luminaires installed in a given Lighting Context Area.
Luminaires equipped with adjustable mounting devices shall not be permitted unless the total
lumen output is 150 lumens or less.
For property boundaries that abut public rights-of-way, public alleys, and public and private
parking lots, the backlight rating, glare rating and illuminance values provided in Tables 3.2.4-2,
3.2.4-4 and 3.2.4-5 respectively, shall be measured 10 (ten) feet from the property boundary. For
all other property boundaries, values shall be measured at the property boundary.
For tables 3.2.4-2 and 3.2.4-4 below, 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 (see Figure A below).
Figure A. Ideally Oriented Luminaire and Mounting Conditions
LC3 Portions of Downtown, 24-Hour Emergency Medical
Sites D, M-M-N
1.1
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
Figure B. Backlight, Uplight and Glare
Table 3.2.4-2 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
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 3.2.4-3 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%
1.1
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
Table 3.2.4-4 Maximum Allowable Glare Ratings.
Mounting Condition LC0 LC1 LC2 LC3
Greater than 2 mounting heights from the
property line
G0 G1 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 compliance arise. Lighting plans
shall show horizontal illuminance along all lot lines with calculation points spaced no further than
ten (10) feet apart. This provision shall apply to all exterior lighting.
Table 3.2.4-5 Light Trespass Limitations
*Low-Light Hours is defined in Subsection (K) below
Lighting Context
Area
Maximum Horizontal
Illuminance, Pre-Low-Light
hours (fc)*
Maximum Horizontal Illuminance,
Low-Light Hours (fc)*
Natural Habitat
Buffer Zones and
River District
Landscape Buffers
0.0 0.0
LC0 0.0 0.0
LC1 0.1 0.1
LC2 0.3 0.2
LC3 0.8 0.8
(J) 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 and the applicable method shall be determined by the
applicant. For sites with existing lighting, existing lighting shall be included in the calculation of
total installed lumens. The total installed initial luminaire lumens are calculated as the sum of the
initial luminaire lumens for all luminaires. Sign lighting shall be exempt from the calculation of total
installed lumens.
1.1
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
Table 3.2.4-6 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 3.2.4-7 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. Top level, exterior parking garage decks are included as Hardscape Areas.
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.
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 allowance,
luminaires must be within 0.5 mounting heights
of the hardscape area of outdoor dining. This
allowance includes rooftop dining.
0
1 lumen
per square
foot
5 lumens
per square
foot
10 lumens
per square
foot
Gasoline Station. This allowance is lumens per
installed fuel pump. Both sides of a two-sided
pump qualify as one allowance.
0
4,000
lumens per
pump
8,000
lumens per
pump
8,000
lumens per
pump
1.1
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
(K) Required Lighting Controls. Lighting systems for non-residential properties shall be reduced
by 50% or shut-off beginning at Low-Light Hours and continuous until dawn or start of business,
whichever is earlier. The reduction shall be determined as an overall average for the site.
(1) Low-Light Hours 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 or businesses that operate on a 24 hour, 7 days a week schedule: no Low-
Light-Hours required.
(2) Exceptions to Low-Light Hours 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.
(L) Athletic and Recreational Fields. The lighting for athletic and recreational fields are
exempted from the lumen, BUG and color temperature requirements in this section and shall meet
the following requirements:
(1) Lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than 5700
Kelvin.
(2) Off-site impacts shall be limited to the maximum extent practical.
(3) Lighting controls shall provide the following functions:
a. Lighting shall be dimmable to 10% to adjust illuminance levels for relative activity
(maintenance vs active play).
b. Local or remote manual control with at least two preset illuminance levels.
c. Lights shall be automatically extinguished by one hour after the end of play
d. Field lighting aimed upward shall be controlled separately from downward-directed
field lighting.
(M) Alternative Compliance. Upon request by an applicant, the decision maker 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 prepared 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.
(2) Review Criteria. To approve an alternative plan, the decision maker 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 decision maker shall consider the extent to which
the proposed design meets the functional safety and security needs, protects natural areas from
light intrusion, enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity, fosters nonvehicular access,
and demonstrates innovative design and use of fixtures or other elements.
1.1
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
Definitions.
BUG (Backlight, Uplight, Glare) Rating shall mean the quantity of light within various beam angles,
consisting of:
(1) 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.
(2) 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.
(3) Glare – the percent lamp lumens (non-LED luminaires) or the luminaire initial lumens
distributed 60 and 90 degrees vertical.
Candela (see luminous intensity), (cd) shall mean the unit of luminous intensity.
Correlated color temperature (CCT) shall mean the absolute temperature of a blackbody whose
chromaticity most nearly resembles that of the light source.
Festoon lighting shall mean electric lighting with individual bulbs suspended along a string that
incorporates power wiring and is suspended between two or more points.
Footcandle (fc) shall mean a unit of illuminance. One footcandle is one lumen per square foot
(lm/ft2).
Glare shall mean the sensation produced by luminances within the visual field that are sufficiently
greater than the luminance to which the eyes are adapted that causes annoyance, discomfort, or
loss in visual performance or visibility.
Hardscape shall mean any non-living horizontal site element, including but not limited to patios,
decks, walkways, sidewalks, driveways, and steps.
Ideally oriented luminaire shall mean a luminaire mounted with the backlight portion of the light
output oriented perpendicular to and towards the property line of concern.
Illuminance shall mean the incidental light falling on a surface as measured in footcandles (fc).
Total illuminance at a point is a combination of all light sources that contribute.
Light loss factor (LLF) shall mean 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 evaluating compliance
with Section 3.2.4.
Lumen (lm) shall mean 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.
Luminaire shall mean 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/m2 or nits) shall mean 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.
1.1
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DRAFT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW AND REVISION
Luminous flux (lumen, lm) shall mean 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 one candela emits a total of 12.57 lumens. Light sources
are rated in terms of luminous flux. Lumens are used for evaluating compliance with Section 3.2.4.
Luminous intensity (candela, cd) shall mean the basic unit of light quantity as measured in
candelas. The candela can be thought of as the number of photons per second emitted by the light
source.
Mounting height (MH) shall mean the vertical distance between the finish grade and the center of
the apparent light source of the luminaire.
Visibility shall mean 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.
1.1
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Updated Lighting Code (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
SCOLLEGEAVEW HORSETOOTH RD
W MULBERRY ST
S SHIELDS STL AP ORTE AV E
S TIMBERLINE RDSTATE HIGHWAY 392
NUS
HIG
H
WA
Y
2
8
7
SLEMAY AVESTRAUSSCABINRDZIEGLER RD
RIV
ERSID
E
AVE
S OVERLAND TRLN HOWESST9TH STW LAUREL ST
E
MO UNTA IN 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 MO UNTA IN
AV E TURNBERRYRDE W ILLOX LN
E TRILB Y RDLANDINGSDRW PROSPECT RD
E COUNTY ROA D 38
E MULBERRY ST
JE
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
ST
E DOUGLAS RD
COUNTY ROAD 54G
NCOLLEGEAVEW ELIZABE TH S T NLEMAYAVEWCOUNTYROAD38EE COUNTY ROAD 50MOUNTAINVISTADR
E HA RMONY R DN 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
N OVERLANDTRLE COUNTY
ROAD 36S MASON STMAIN STW TRILBY RD
E DRAKE RD
E SUNIGARD
ELINCOLNAVE
CA RP E NTE R RD
E TRO U T M A N
P K W Y
E CO UNTY ROAD 30S US HIGHWAY 287S COUNTY ROAD 13E COUNTY ROAD 52
S COUNTY ROAD 11S
S
U
MMIT
V
IE
WD
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: February 04, 2021
Lighting Ordinance Context Areas - Draft
City Limits - Outline
Growth Management Area
LC0
LC1
LC2
LC3
ATTACHMENT 2 1.2
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Lighting Context Area Map (draft) (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
November 27, 2019
ATTACHMENT 3 1.3
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 2
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3
Project 1: The Elizabeth Hotel ......................................................................................................... 4
Project 2: Eye Center of Northern Colorado .................................................................................. 10
Project 3: Maverik Convenience Store ........................................................................................... 16
Project 4: The Grove ...................................................................................................................... 22
Project 5: The Slab ........................................................................................................................ 28
1.3
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 3
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Executive Summary
Clanton & Associates, Inc has reviewed the exterior lighting for five projects in the City of Fort
Collins, all of which have been completed in the last seven years. The goal of this review is to
provide a better understanding of the proposed revisions to the outdoor lighting ordinance and
how the proposed changes may affect real world projects.
The five case studies were selected by City staff and were selected to show an array of project
types. Available project documentation was provided to Clanton & Associates, which typically
included documentation required for permits. For each case study, assumptions are stated where
used.
Key Conclusions
· The proposed ordinance removes subjective requirements that may allow a design to pass
without truly meeting the intent of the ordinance.
· The existing ordinance requires the submission of photometric plans. While this is helpful
information for evaluating a design, it was often submitted as incomplete, with certain
luminaires missing from the calculation, or certain areas not included. If photometric plans
are going to be required moving forward, it is recommended that a complete checklist be
provided as part of the permitting process to aid in evaluating these photometric plans. The
proposed lighting ordinance does not require the submission of photometric plans, which
may reduce the burden on both those submitting and those reviewing such documentation.
· The biggest culprit that is difficult to address with the existing ordinance is glare. The
existing ordinance provides no objective evaluation of glare, making it challenging to
understand how obtrusive certain luminaires may be. By using an industry-wide
recognized metric (the Backlight-Uplight-Glare, or BUG, Rating), the proposed ordinance
provides a numerical method for evaluating glare based on tested luminaire performance.
Nearly all reviewed designs did not meet the glare requirements of the proposed lighting
ordinance. Designers would need to specify less glary lights if compliance with the
proposed ordinance were mandatory.
· The lighting context zone makes a huge difference in evaluating designs under the
proposed ordinance. Most designs in this review are considered to have a context area of
“LZ1” which allows for half the site lumens as a site listed under “LZ2”. 3 of the 5 designs
did not comply with the total site lumen allowance. It will need to be considered whether
these designs are providing excessive light, or if the total site lumen allowances are too
strict.
1.3
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 4
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Project 1: The Elizabeth Hotel
Project Information
Name: The Elizabeth Hotel
Type: Hotel with parking garage and connecting alleyway
Site Area (Hardscape): 61,000 square feet
Lighting Context Classification: LZ3
Type Description of
Exterior Luminaires
Luminaire
Lumens Qty
Mounting
Height
(MH)
Correlated Color
Temperature
(CCT)
Backlight-
Uplight-Glare
Rating
A Alley String lights 33 lm/ft 300ft 18-ft Not given B0-U1-G0
B Alley pole lights Not given 6 18-ft Not given Not given
C Pedestrian lights 7,992 8 15-ft 3000K B3-U0-G1
D Parking garage lights 9,611 121 20-ft 3000K B1-U0-G2
E Landscape lights 85 12 Ground Not given Not given
NOTES:
1. 12 parking lot lights are shown on the top floor of the parking garage
Type A Type B Type C Type D Type E
Unknown
Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The existing lighting ordinance lists a number of requirements for compliance. These
requirements are listed in Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.
Ordinance Requirement:
Functional and security needs of the project are met in a way that does not adversely affect the
adjacent properties or neighborhood.
Subjective. The lighting design primarily consists of pedestrian-scale post top mounted lights and
low-output adjustable landscape lighting, with no large flood-lights that are more likely to adversely
affect adjacent properties.
1.3
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 5
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as
to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare and unnecessary diffusion on adjacent property. Light fixtures
shall be attached to poles and buildings by use of nonadjustable angle brackets or other mounting
hardware.
The string lights do not comply as they are not fully shielded. String lights are often given
exceptions from site lighting ordinances, or restricted to maximum lumen output, especially in
gathering spaces. The landscape lights are adjustable, which may not comply depending on
interpretation.
Ordinance Requirement:
The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare
from the light source.
Subjective. Elements appear to be consistent with the style and character of the architecture. All
finishes that are listed are ‘black’.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must
produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition.
Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with
low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources.
Subjective. Where specified, luminaires in this design have a Correlated Color Temperature
(CCT) of 3000K and Color Rendering Index (CRI) of 80+, which is generally considered
unobtrusive and appropriate for this environment.
Ordinance Requirement:
Lighting plan submitted
Yes. However, luminaire specifications are incomplete and there is no calculation summary.
Ordinance Requirement:
Meet minimum light level requirements.
Requirement: Walkways along roadside, Commercial area: 0.9-fc average minimum
· Average is not listed. There are some areas, especially around pedestrian lights, where
light levels read between 1.0 and 2.0-fc, approximately. Between these spaces, light levels
are between 0.1 and 0.3-fc, approximately.
Requirement: Parking Areas: 1.0-fc average minimum
· Average is not listed. Most points shown on the plan are at or above 1.0-fc
Ordinance Requirement:
Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the
functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property & minimize glare:
Subjective. Parking lot light is rated “B1” for a backlight rating, which is relatively unobtrusive.
Ordinance Requirement:
Maximum on-site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and
unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles.
1.3
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 6
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Maximum on-site lighting levels do not exceed 10 foot-candles.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent
to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct
result of the on-site lighting.
Not indicated on site lighting plan
Ordinance Requirement:
Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall
comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be
reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are
sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m.
shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only.
N/A
Ordinance Requirement:
Exposed L.E.D. (light emitting diode) lighting shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand
(1,000) candela per square meter (nits).
No exposed LED
Ordinance Requirement:
All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than three
thousand (3,000) degrees Kelvin.
All luminaires where this information is available are listed as 3000K.
Summary of Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The lighting design appears to meet most elements of the existing lighting ordinance, though many
items are subjective and different reviewers may have differing opinions. The lighting may not
meet minimum footcandle requirement for walkways, or stay below the maximum footcandle
requirement 20-ft beyond the property line, but this cannot be verified.
1.3
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 7
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Compliance with Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance outlines specific, numerical requirements for reducing obtrusive and
excessive light. To verify compliance with the proposed ordinance, a worksheet is used to identify
each component and address the lighting design’s compliance.
(A) Total Site Lumen Limit.
Determine the total site lumen limit. Site is classified as LZ3.
Determine the total amount of lumens used.
Luminaire Quantity Initial Lumens Each Total Initial Lumens
A 300 33 9,900
B 6 ?1 ?1
C 8 7,992 63,936
D 12 9,611 115332
E 12 85 1,020
TOTAL 190,188
Is the total amount of initial lumens less than the total site lumen allowance?
__x1__ Yes (Pass) ____ No (Fail)
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access. Assuming Luminaire ‘B’ (Alley luminaire) does not exceed 19,000
lumens per luminaire, which is extremely unlikely, then this design passes.
Hardscape Area 61,000 square feet
Base Allowance
(select multiplier
based on lighting
zone)
0.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ0
1.25 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ1
2.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ2
5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ3
Total Allowance
(multiply the
hardscape area by
the multiplier
selected above*)
305,000 lumens
* See Table 3.2.4-5 in the lighting ordinance for additional allowances
that may be used in certain circumstances.
1.3
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 8
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
(B) Limits to Off-Site Impacts - Compliance with Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) rating
Determine each luminaire’s BUG Rating.
Luminaire B U G
A 0 1 0
B ?1 ?1 ?1
C 3 0 1
D 1 0 2
E ?2 ?2 ?2
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access.
2. Since this luminaire is adjustable, the BUG rating cannot be determined as it is dependent on aiming
angles. Backlight and Glare ratings are less meaningful for a low-output landscape light, but the Uplight
may still be notable.
Determine the Allowed Backlight Rating and Compliance.
Luminaire Given
B-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
B-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 0 18-ft 36-ft Yes 5 Yes
B ?4 18-ft 22-ft No2 n/a ?4
C 3 15-ft 14-ft Yes 3 Yes
D 1 20-ft1 90-ft n/a3 5 Yes
E ?4 1-ft 16-ft Yes 5 Likely
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Since the parking lot luminaire is mounted on the top level of a parking garage, the actual mounting height
is closer to 45-ft.
2. This luminaire is mounted such that, at the luminaire location closest to the property line, the luminaire
faces that property line. As such, evaluating the impact of the backlight rating does not provide valuable
information for off-site impacts.
3. This luminaire is not ideally oriented but is mounted greater than 2 times its mounting height from the
nearest property line.
4. Not enough information to access.
Determine the Allowed Uplight Rating
Luminaire Given
U-Rating
Allowed
U-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 1 3 Yes
B ?1 3 ?1
C 3 3 Yes
D 1 3 Yes
E ?1 3 Likely
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access
1.3
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 9
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Determine the Allowed Glare Rating
Luminaire Given
G-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
G-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 0 18-ft 36-ft Yes 2 Yes
B ?2 18-ft 22-ft No 1 Unknown
C 1 15-ft 14-ft Yes 1 Yes
D 2 20-ft1 90-ft No 2 Yes
E ?2 1-ft 16-ft Yes 2 Unknown
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Since the parking lot luminaire is mounted on the top level of a parking garage, the actual mounting height
is closer to 45-ft.
2. Not enough information to access
Do all luminaires comply in all categories?
__x1__ Yes (Pass) ____ No (Fail)
NOTES:
1. Assuming Luminaire ‘B’ (Alley luminaire) does not exceed a BUG Rating of B5-U3-G1, then this design
passes.
(4) Additional Compliance
· All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin.
o Yes
· Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source
o Yes
· Required lighting controls and curfews:
o Unable to evaluate
Conclusions
With the noted assumptions made, the design passes most components of both the existing site
lighting ordinance and the new proposed ordinance. As such, it is likely that implementing the new
ordinance would not see significant changes in the design. Since the new proposed lighting
ordinance requires more information on each specified luminaire to review compliance, plans
submitted for permit review might be encouraged to provide a higher level of detail.
A photometric plan is not required for compliance with the new proposed ordinance. The existing
ordinance does require a photometric plan, but the submitted plan did not provide a calculation
summary, so compliance was difficult to assess.
1.3
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 10
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Project 2: Eye Center of Northern Colorado
Project Information
Name: Eye Center of Northern Colorado
Type: Medical Office
Site Area (Hardscape): 91,922 square feet
Lighting Context Classification: LZ1
Type Description of
Exterior Luminaires
Luminaire
Lumens Qty
Mounting
Height
(MH)
Correlated Color
Temperature
(CCT)
Backlight-
Uplight-Glare
Rating
A Parking lot area lights 5,800 27 ?1 3000K B1-U0-G1
B Wall pack 4,028 2 6-ft 8-in 3000K B1-U0-G1
C Wall sconce2 270 22 8-ft 3000K3 Not Given
NOTES:
1. Not listed in documentation.
2. Luminaire submittal contains note: “Fixture will have down light only, no up lighting will be used to meet
the dark sky requirements.”
3. Assumption, not listed in documentation
Type A Type B Type C
Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The existing lighting ordinance lists a number of requirements for compliance. These
requirements are listed in Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.
Ordinance Requirement:
Functional and security needs of the project are met in a way that does not adversely affect the
adjacent properties or neighborhood.
Subjective. The lighting design consists of parking lot area lights and two styles of wall sconces
mounted to the exterior of the building. All of the specified luminaires are of an appropriate lumen
output for the application. There is not an excessive quantity of lights, and parking lot area lights
are mounted facing away from neighboring properties.
1.3
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 11
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as
to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare and unnecessary diffusion on adjacent property. Light fixtures
shall be attached to poles and buildings by use of nonadjustable angle brackets or other mounting
hardware.
All luminaires specified are designed such that the light is directed downwards. There is no
specified external shielding to reduce glare and backlight onto adjacent properties.
Ordinance Requirement:
The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare
from the light source.
Subjective. Elements appear to be consistent with the style and character of the architecture.
Luminaire finishes are not listed in documentation.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must
produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition.
Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with
low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources.
Subjective. Where specified, luminaires in this design have a CCT of 3000K and CRI of 80+,
which is generally considered unobtrusive and appropriate for this environment.
Ordinance Requirement:
Lighting plan submitted
Lighting plan is submitted with calculation summary.
Ordinance Requirement:
Meet minimum light level requirements.
Requirement: Building surrounds (nonresidential): 1.0-fc average minimum
· Walkways directly surrounding building are not shown on calculation grid.
Requirement: Parking Areas: 1.0-fc average minimum
· Average is 1.4-fc which meets the requirement.
Ordinance Requirement:
Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the
functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property & minimize glare:
Subjective. Parking lot light is rated “B1” for a backlight rating, which is relatively unobtrusive.
Ordinance Requirement:
Maximum on-site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and
unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles.
Maximum on-site lighting levels do not exceed 10 foot-candles.
1.3
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 12
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent
to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct
result of the on-site lighting.
Grid 20-ft beyond property line does not exceed 0.1-fc.
Ordinance Requirement:
Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall
comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be
reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are
sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m.
shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only.
N/A
Ordinance Requirement:
Exposed L.E.D. (light emitting diode) lighting shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand
(1,000) candela per square meter (nits).
No exposed LED
Ordinance Requirement:
All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than three
thousand (3,000) degrees Kelvin.
All luminaires where this information is available are listed as 3000K.
Summary of Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The lighting design appears to meet nearly all requirements of the existing lighting ordinance.
Many items are subjective and different reviewers may have differing opinions. The design
appears unobtrusive and there is no excessive lighting, which meets the intention of the current
lighting ordinance.
1.3
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 13
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Compliance with Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance outlines specific, numerical requirements for reducing obtrusive and
excessive light. To verify compliance with the proposed ordinance, a worksheet is used to identify
each component and address the lighting design’s compliance.
(A) Total Site Lumen Limit.
Determine the total site lumen limit. Site is classified as LZ1.
Determine the total amount of lumens used.
Luminaire Quantity Initial Lumens Each Total Initial Lumens
A 27 5,800 156,600
B 2 4,028 8,056
C 22 270 5,940
TOTAL 170,596
Is the total amount of initial lumens less than the total site lumen allowance?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
(B) Limits to Off-Site Impacts - Compliance with Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) rating
Determine each luminaire’s BUG Rating.
Luminaire B U G
A 1 0 1
B 1 0 1
C ?1 ?1 ?1
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access.
Hardscape Area 91,922 square feet
Base Allowance
(select multiplier
based on lighting
zone)
0.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 0
1.25 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 1
2.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 2
5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 3
Total Allowance
(multiply the
hardscape area by
the multiplier
selected above*)
114,902 lumens
* See Table 3.2.4-5 in the lighting ordinance for additional allowances
that may be used in certain circumstances.
1.3
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 14
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Determine the Allowed Backlight Rating and Compliance.
Luminaire Given
B-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
B-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 1 ?1 3.5-ft Yes 0 No
B 1 6-ft 8-in 135-ft No 3 Yes
C ?2 8-ft 40-ft No 3 Likely
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access. On the south side, the luminaire is mounted very close to the property
line. Unless the luminaire is mounted below 7-ft (which is extremely unlikely), then it will require a
Backlight Rating of ‘0’
2. Not enough information to access.
Determine the Allowed Uplight Rating
Luminaire Given
U-Rating
Allowed
U-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 0 0 Yes
B 0 0 Yes
C ?1 0 Likely
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access
Determine the Allowed Glare Rating
Luminaire Given
G-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
G-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 1 ?1 3.5-ft Yes 0 No
B 1 6-ft 8-in 135-ft No 0 No
C ?1 8-ft 40-ft No 0 Unknown
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access
Do all luminaires comply in all categories?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
1.3
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 15
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
(4) Additional Compliance
· All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin.
o Yes
· Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source
o Unknown
· Required lighting controls and curfews:
o Unable to evaluate
Conclusions
In reviewing the available information for this site, the design passes under the old lighting
ordinance, but would not under the new lighting ordinance. The design fails the new ordinance on
three accounts:
1. Total site lumen allowance is exceeded. In an effort to meet the required minimum
illumination levels of the old ordinance, the parking lot is brighter than necessary for the
lighting context zone (LZ1).
2. The parking lot luminaire exceeds the backlight rating allowed at locations where the
luminaire is very close to the property line. This could be mitigated by specifying a
luminaire with a house-side shield.
3. The parking lot luminaire exceeds the glare rating allowed.
1.3
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 16
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Project 3: Maverik Convenience Store
Project Information
Name: Maverik Convenience Store
Type: Retail / Gas Station
Site Area (Hardscape): 36,956 square feet
Lighting Context Classification: LZ2
Type Description of
Exterior Luminaires
Luminaire
Lumens Qty
Mounting
Height
(MH)
Correlated Color
Temperature
(CCT)
Backlight-
Uplight-Glare
Rating
A Wall sconce 1,420 15 11-ft 3000K Not Given
B Recessed downlight 1,800 8 14-ft 3000K B1-U0-G01
C Canopy downlight 8,438 20 16-ft 3000K B3-U0-G1
D Parking lot light, 25ft 16,000 1 25-ft 3000K B2-U0-G3
E Parking lot light, 25ft 10,000 4 25-ft 3000K B1-U0-G2
F Accent, 8ft long 6,000 8 25-ft 3000K Not Given2
G Accent, 4ft long 3,000 3 25-ft 3000K Not Given2
NOTES:
1. BUG Rating for exact specification is unavailable, but estimated BUG Rating is provided for similar
luminaire from manufacturer.
2. BUG Rating will depend on mounting direction.
Type A Type B Type C Type D &
Type E
Type F &
Type G
Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The existing lighting ordinance lists a number of requirements for compliance. These
requirements are listed in Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.
Ordinance Requirement:
Functional and security needs of the project are met in a way that does not adversely affect the
adjacent properties or neighborhood.
Subjective. The lighting design consists of parking lot area lights, canopy lights for fueling area,
and two types of façade lighting. Lights are all downward facing and do not pointed at adjacent
properties.
1.3
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 17
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as
to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare and unnecessary diffusion on adjacent property. Light fixtures
shall be attached to poles and buildings by use of nonadjustable angle brackets or other mounting
hardware.
All luminaires specified are designed such that the light is directed downwards. No lights are
adjustable. The parking lot lights are specified with a house-side shield which should limit spill-
light.
Ordinance Requirement:
The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare
from the light source.
Subjective. Elements appear to be consistent with the style and character of the architecture.
Poles are coated to minimize glare.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must
produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition.
Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with
low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources.
Subjective. Luminaires in this design have a CCT of 3000K, which is generally considered
unobtrusive and appropriate for this environment.
Ordinance Requirement:
Lighting plan submitted
Lighting plan is submitted with calculation summary and complete luminaire schedule.
Ordinance Requirement:
Meet minimum light level requirements.
Requirement: Building surrounds (nonresidential): 1.0-fc average minimum
· Walkways directly surrounding building are not shown on calculation grid.
Requirement: Parking Areas: 1.0-fc average minimum
· Average is 0.74-fc which is below the requirement.
Requirement: Under-canopy area (maintained maximum): 20.0-fc maximum
· Maximum is 20.34-fc with a light loss factor of 1.00. The maintained maximum will be lower
after initial installation.
Requirement: Under-canopy area (initial installation maximum): 26.0-fc maximum
· Maximum is 20.34-fc with a light loss factor of 1.00, which meets the requirement.
Ordinance Requirement:
Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the
functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property & minimize glare:
Subjective. Parking lot lights are specified with a house-side shield which should reduce spill-light.
1.3
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 18
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Maximum on-site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and
unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles.
Maximum on-site lighting levels exceed 10 foot-candles, but do not exceed the maximum light
level requirements for fueling canopies, which is listed in the existing lighting ordinance as 26.0-fc
maximum at initial installation.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent
to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct
result of the on-site lighting.
Grid 20-ft beyond property line exceeds 0.1-fc in a couple of locations, though not excessively.
The highest reading is 0.17-fc.
Ordinance Requirement:
Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall
comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be
reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are
sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m.
shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only.
N/A
Ordinance Requirement:
Exposed L.E.D. (light emitting diode) lighting shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand
(1,000) candela per square meter (nits).
No exposed LED
Ordinance Requirement:
All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than three
thousand (3,000) degrees Kelvin.
All luminaires have a CCT less than 3000K.
Summary of Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The lighting design appears to meet almost all requirements of the existing lighting ordinance,
though it exceeds the illuminance limit 20-ft beyond the property line, and does not meet the
mandatory minimum average illuminance for parking lots. Many other items are subjective and
different reviewers may have differing opinions. The design appears unobtrusive and there is no
excessive lighting, which meets the intention of the current lighting ordinance.
1.3
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 19
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Compliance with Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance outlines specific, numerical requirements for reducing obtrusive and
excessive light. To verify compliance with the proposed ordinance, a worksheet is used to identify
each component and address the lighting design’s compliance.
(A) Total Site Lumen Limit.
Determine the total site lumen limit. Site is classified as LZ2.
Additional Site Allowance for vehicle service stations: 8,000 lumens per pump.
· 8,000 lumens x 20 pumps = 160,000 lumens
· Total Allowance: 252,390 lumens
Determine the total amount of lumens used.
Luminaire Quantity Initial Lumens Each Total Initial Lumens
A 15 1,420 21,300
B 8 1,800 14,400
C 20 8,438 168,760
D 1 16,000 16,000
E 4 10,000 40,000
F 8 6,000 48,000
G 3 3,000 9,000
TOTAL 317,460
Is the total amount of initial lumens less than the total site lumen allowance?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
Hardscape Area 36,956 square feet
Base Allowance
(select multiplier
based on lighting
zone)
0.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 0
1.25 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 1
2.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 2
5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 3
Total Allowance
(multiply the
hardscape area by
the multiplier
selected above*)
92,390 lumens
* See Table 3.2.4-5 in the lighting ordinance for additional allowances
that may be used in certain circumstances.
1.3
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 20
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
(B) Limits to Off-Site Impacts - Compliance with Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) rating
Determine each luminaire’s BUG Rating.
Luminaire B U G
A ?1 ?1 ?1
B 1 0 0
C 3 0 1
D 2 0 3
E 1 0 2
F ?1 ?1 ?1
G ?1 ?1 ?1
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access.
Determine the Allowed Backlight Rating and Compliance.
Luminaire Given
B-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
B-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A ?1 11-ft 12-ft Yes 3 Likely
B 1 14-ft 50-ft Yes 4 Yes
C 3 16-ft 63-ft Yes 4 Yes
D 2 25-ft 7-ft No n/a2 Yes
E 1 25-ft 20-ft Yes 2 Yes
F ?1 25-ft 90-ft Unknown 4 Unknown
G ?1 25-ft 20-ft Unknown 2 Unknown
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access.
2. This luminaire is mounted such that, at the luminaire location closest to the property line, the luminaire
faces that property line. As such, evaluating the impact of the backlight rating does not provide valuable
information for off-site impacts.
1.3
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 21
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Determine the Allowed Uplight Rating
Luminaire Given
U-Rating
Allowed
U-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A ?1 0 Unknown
B 0 0 Yes
C 0 0 Yes
D 0 0 Yes
E 0 0 Yes
F ?1 0 Unknown
G ?1 0 Unknown
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access
Determine the Allowed Glare Rating
Luminaire Given
G-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
G-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A ?1 11-ft 12-ft Yes 0 Likely
B 0 14-ft 50-ft Yes 2 Yes
C 1 16-ft 63-ft Yes 2 Yes
D 3 25-ft 7-ft No 0 No
E 2 25-ft 20-ft Yes 0 No
F ?1 25-ft 90-ft Unknown 2 Unknown
G ?1 25-ft 20-ft Unknown 0 Unknown
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. Not enough information to access
Do all luminaires comply in all categories?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
(4) Additional Compliance
· All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin.
o Yes
· Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source
o Yes
· Required lighting controls and curfews:
o Unable to evaluate
1.3
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 22
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Conclusions
The lighting design passes most components of the existing site lighting ordinance, but fails a
couple of components of the proposed ordinance. The design exceeds the total site lumen limit
and does not comply with minimum glare ratings for parking lot lights. A design tailored to the
proposed ordinance would need to involve a slight reduction in overall light levels. The fuel
canopy is lighted above the Illuminating Engineering Society’s recommendation of 10-15
footcandles, so this area would be most appropriate to see a reduction without compromising the
safety and security of the parking lot and retail entrance.
1.3
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 23
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Project 4: The Grove
Project Information
Name: The Grove
Type: Multi-family residential apartment complex
Site Area (Hardscape): 149,646 square feet
Lighting Context Classification: LZ1
Type Description of
Exterior Luminaires
Luminaire
Lumens Qty
Mounting
Height
(MH)
Correlated Color
Temperature
(CCT)
Backlight-
Uplight-Glare
Rating
A HPS1 Parking lot light 3,616 51 12-ft 1900K B1-U0-G2
NOTES:
1. High Pressure Sodium
Type A
Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The existing lighting ordinance lists a number of requirements for compliance. These
requirements are listed in Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.
Ordinance Requirement:
Functional and security needs of the project are met in a way that does not adversely affect the
adjacent properties or neighborhood.
Subjective. This lighting design consists of 12-ft tall parking lot luminaires which provide some
illumination for the parking lots of the complex. They are located in the center of parking lots and
do not provide high illumination levels, especially along the outer edges of the lots. It is assumed
that there are porch lights not included in this documentation that would provide additional lighting
at the entrances of the buildings. There is no pedestrian lighting for the pedestrian paths.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as
to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare and unnecessary diffusion on adjacent property. Light fixtures
1.3
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 24
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
shall be attached to poles and buildings by use of nonadjustable angle brackets or other mounting
hardware.
The luminaire information provided indicates that there is full-cutoff shielding, which will minimize
uplight.
Ordinance Requirement:
The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare
from the light source.
Subjective. Elements appear to be consistent with the style and character of the architecture.
Luminaire finishes are not listed in documentation.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must
produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition.
Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with
low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources.
Subjective. The High Pressure Sodium (HPS) light sources provide a CCT of 1900K. This warm
color temperature is appropriate for residential applications, though color rendition is compromised
with a CRI of 22.
Ordinance Requirement:
Lighting plan submitted
Lighting plan is submitted with photometric grid, but there is no calculation summary.
Ordinance Requirement:
Meet minimum light level requirements.
Requirement: Parking Areas: 1.0-fc average minimum
· Average footcandles are not provided. Most points on the photometric grid show values of
0.1-fc or less, so this plan very likely does not meet minimum light level requirements.
Ordinance Requirement:
Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the
functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property & minimize glare:
Subjective. Parking lot light is rated “B1” for a backlight rating, which is relatively unobtrusive. A
glare rating of “G2” is high for a low-output luminaire used in a residential application. However,
the warmer color temperature of the HPS light source is often perceived as less-glary and may be
considered acceptable.
Ordinance Requirement:
Maximum on-site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and
unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles.
Maximum on-site lighting levels do not exceed 10 foot-candles.
1.3
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 25
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent
to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct
result of the on-site lighting.
Where shown, light levels 20-ft beyond the property line are calculated to be 0.0-fc.
Ordinance Requirement:
Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall
comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be
reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are
sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m.
shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only.
N/A
Ordinance Requirement:
Exposed L.E.D. (light emitting diode) lighting shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand
(1,000) candela per square meter (nits).
No exposed LED
Ordinance Requirement:
All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than three
thousand (3,000) degrees Kelvin.
All luminaires are HPS, which have a CCT less than 3000K.
Summary of Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The lighting design does not meet minimum light level requirements of the existing ordinance. The
design meets all other requirements, including concealed light sources, reduced uplight,
appropriate color temperature, and maximum light level beyond property line.
1.3
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 26
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Compliance with Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance outlines specific, numerical requirements for reducing obtrusive and
excessive light. To verify compliance with the proposed ordinance, a worksheet is used to identify
each component and address the lighting design’s compliance.
(A) Total Site Lumen Limit.
Determine the total site lumen limit. Site is classified as LZ1.
Determine the total amount of lumens used.
Luminaire Quantity Initial Lumens Each Total Initial Lumens
A 51 3,616 184,416
TOTAL 184,416
Is the total amount of initial lumens less than the total site lumen allowance?
__x1__ Yes (Pass) ____ No (Fail)
NOTES:
1. This design passes with the information shown. If there are luminaires at each building entrance, then that
may exceed the total site lumen limit.
(B) Limits to Off-Site Impacts - Compliance with Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) rating
Determine each luminaire’s BUG Rating.
Luminaire B U G
A 1 0 2
Hardscape Area 149,646 square feet
Base Allowance
(select multiplier
based on lighting
zone)
0.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 0
1.25 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 1
2.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 2
5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 3
Total Allowance
(multiply the
hardscape area by
the multiplier
selected above*)
187,057.5 lumens
* See Table 3.2.4-5 in the lighting ordinance for additional allowances
that may be used in certain circumstances.
1.3
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 27
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Determine the Allowed Backlight Rating and Compliance.
Luminaire Given
B-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
B-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 1 12-ft 60-ft No 3 Yes
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
Determine the Allowed Uplight Rating
Luminaire Given
U-Rating
Allowed
U-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 0 0 Yes
Determine the Allowed Glare Rating
Luminaire Given
G-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
G-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 2 12-ft 60-ft No 0 No
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
Do all luminaires comply in all categories?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
(4) Additional Compliance
· All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin.
o Yes
· Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source
o Unknown
· Required lighting controls and curfews:
o Unable to evaluate
Conclusions
In reviewing the available information for this site, the design does not pass under either
ordinance. For the existing ordinance, the lighting design does not meet minimum light level
requirements for parking lots, but complies in all other categories. For the proposed ordinance,
the lighting design passes in all categories except for the luminaire’s glare rating.
1.3
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 28
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Project 5: The Slab
Project Information
Name: The Slab
Type: Apartment Complex
Site Area (Hardscape): 38,124 square feet
Lighting Context Classification: LZ1
Type Description of
Exterior Luminaires
Luminaire
Lumens Qty
Mounting
Height
(MH)
Correlated Color
Temperature
(CCT)
Backlight-
Uplight-Glare
Rating
A Parking lot light 9,5231 11 30-ft 4000K B1-U0-G2
B Pedestrian light 9,5231 7 15-ft 4000K B1-U0-G2
NOTES:
1. Luminaire lumens and BUG Rating obtained from manufacturer’s website based on listed product number
in project documentation. Project documentation lists Luminaire Lumens as “5,890” and does not provide
BUG Rating.
Type A & Type B
Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The existing lighting ordinance lists a number of requirements for compliance. These
requirements are listed in Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.
Ordinance Requirement:
Functional and security needs of the project are met in a way that does not adversely affect the
adjacent properties or neighborhood.
Subjective. The lighting design consists of parking lot area lights and pedestrian lights along a
pathway. Some of the lights in the parking lot are located close to the edge of the property line,
although these luminaires are correctly facing the property.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources shall be concealed and fully shielded and shall feature sharp cut-off capability so as
to minimize up-light, spill-light, glare and unnecessary diffusion on adjacent property. Light fixtures
shall be attached to poles and buildings by use of nonadjustable angle brackets or other mounting
hardware.
1.3
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 29
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
All luminaires specified are designed such that the light is directed downwards. There is no
specified external shielding to reduce glare and backlight onto adjacent properties.
Ordinance Requirement:
The style of light standards and fixtures shall be consistent with the style and character of
architecture proposed on the site. Poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare
from the light source.
Subjective. Elements appear to be consistent with the style and character of the architecture.
Luminaire finishes are listed as “Black”.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light sources must minimize contrast with the light produced by surrounding uses, and must
produce an unobtrusive degree of brightness in both illumination levels and color rendition.
Incandescent and high-pressure sodium light sources all can provide adequate illumination with
low contrast and brightness and are permitted light sources.
Subjective. Where specified, luminaires in this design have a CCT of 4000K and CRI of 72. 4000K
is often perceived as more glary than warmer color temperatures. A CRI of 72 is acceptable in an
exterior environment.
Ordinance Requirement:
Lighting plan submitted
Lighting plan is submitted but there is no calculation summary provided.
Ordinance Requirement:
Meet minimum light level requirements.
Requirement: Parking Areas: 1.0-fc average minimum
· Calculation summary is not provided. Most calculation points show a value of 1.0-fc or
greater, indicating that the design likely complies.
Ordinance Requirement:
Background spaces like parking lots shall be illuminated as unobtrusively as possible to meet the
functional needs of safe circulation and of protecting people and property & minimize glare:
Subjective. The site appears to provide sufficient light for the property. Some lights are located
close to the property line, but are correctly oriented towards the property.
Ordinance Requirement:
Maximum on-site lighting levels shall not exceed ten (10) foot-candles, except for loading and
unloading platforms where the maximum lighting level shall be twenty (20) foot-candles.
Maximum on-site lighting levels do not exceed 10 foot-candles.
Ordinance Requirement:
Light levels measured twenty (20) feet beyond the property line of the development site (adjacent
to residential uses or public rights-of-way) shall not exceed one-tenth (0.1) foot-candle as a direct
result of the on-site lighting.
Fails. Grid 20-ft beyond property line shows calculation points as high as 0.44-fc.
1.3
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 30
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Ordinance Requirement:
Outdoor display lots for vehicles sales and leasing (as those terms are defined in Article 5) shall
comply with the requirements of this section. In addition, display fixture illumination shall be
reduced within thirty (30) minutes after closing so that the remaining illumination levels are
sufficient for security purposes only; provided, however, that any illumination used after 11:00 p.m.
shall be reduced to levels sufficient for security purposes only.
N/A
Ordinance Requirement:
Exposed L.E.D. (light emitting diode) lighting shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand
(1,000) candela per square meter (nits).
No exposed LED
Ordinance Requirement:
All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than three
thousand (3,000) degrees Kelvin.
Fails. All luminaires where this information is available are listed as 4000K.
Summary of Compliance with Existing Ordinance
The lighting design does not meet the requirement for CCT. It appears to meet minimum light
level requirements, thought the exact average footcandle calculations were not provided. The
lighting design meets uplight requirements and appears to meet more subjective requirements
such as minimizing glare from the light source and reducing impact to neighboring properties. The
lighting design does not meet the requirement for maximum footcandles 20-ft beyond the property
line
1.3
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 31
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Compliance with Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance outlines specific, numerical requirements for reducing obtrusive and
excessive light. To verify compliance with the proposed ordinance, a worksheet is used to identify
each component and address the lighting design’s compliance.
(A) Total Site Lumen Limit.
Determine the total site lumen limit. Site is classified as LZ1.
Determine the total amount of lumens used.
Luminaire Quantity Initial Lumens Each Total Initial Lumens
A 11 9,523 104,753
B 7 9,523 66,661
TOTAL 171,414
Is the total amount of initial lumens less than the total site lumen allowance?
____ Yes (Pass) __x1__ No (Fail)
NOTES:
1. If the much lower luminaire lumens provided in the project documentation is used, the design still exceeds
the total site lumen allowance.
(B) Limits to Off-Site Impacts - Compliance with Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) rating
Determine each luminaire’s BUG Rating.
Luminaire B U G
A 1 0 2
B 1 0 2
Hardscape Area 38,124 square feet
Base Allowance
(select multiplier
based on lighting
zone)
0.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 0
1.25 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 1
2.5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 2
5 lumens per square foot of hardscape area for LZ 3
Total Allowance
(multiply the
hardscape area by
the multiplier
selected above*)
47,655 lumens
* See Table 3.2.4-5 in the lighting ordinance for additional allowances
that may be used in certain circumstances.
1.3
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 32
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Determine the Allowed Backlight Rating and Compliance.
Luminaire Given
B-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
B-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 1 30-ft 5-ft Yes 0 No
B 1 15-ft 32-ft No1 3 Yes
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
NOTES:
1. This luminaire is not ideally oriented but is mounted greater than 2 times its mounting height from the
nearest property line.
Determine the Allowed Uplight Rating
Luminaire Given
U-Rating
Allowed
U-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 0 0 Yes
B 0 0 Yes
Determine the Allowed Glare Rating
Luminaire Given
G-Rating
Mounting
Height Distance from
Property Line*
Ideally
Oriented?**
Allowed
G-Rating
in Zone
Complies?
A 2 30-ft 5-ft Yes 0 No
B 2 15-ft 32-ft No 0 No
*use the distance of the luminaire located closest to the property line
**if the luminaire is ideally-oriented, its back is facing the nearest property line
Do all luminaires comply in all categories?
____ Yes (Pass) __x__ No (Fail)
(4) Additional Compliance
· All lighting shall have a nominal correlated color temperature (CCT) of no greater than
3000 Kelvin.
o No
· Light poles shall be anodized (or otherwise coated) to minimize glare from the light source
o Unknown
· Required lighting controls and curfews:
o Unable to evaluate
1.3
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies November 27, 2018
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 33
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Conclusions
The submitted lighting design fails both the existing ordinance and proposed ordinance in that the
specified lights are listed as 4000K. Due to the subjective nature of the existing ordinance,
disregarding the cooler color temperature, the lighting design passed the existing ordinance. The
design would have failed the proposed ordinance on several accounts, including excessive total
site lumens, high glare, and high backlight rating given the close proximity to the property line.
1.3
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Case Studies Report (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Case Studies Cost Analysis
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
October 2, 2020
ATTACHMENT 4 1.4
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Case Study Cost Analysis (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Case Studies Cost Analysis October 2, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 2
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Summary
Clanton & Associates, Inc has reviewed the exterior lighting for five projects in the City of Fort
Collins, all of which have been completed in the last seven years. Detailed information about each
of the five sites can be found in the report titled “Lighting Ordinance Case Studies.” In order to
provide additional understanding on how revisions to the Fort Collins outdoor lighting ordinance
may impact future project costs, Clanton & Associates further considered the cost of three of the
five projects.
This cost analysis is high level with the following assumptions and additional considerations:
This is not a life cycle cost analysis.
It is assumed that all site lighting not attached to buildings are currently controlled via
photocells. Photocells measure the amount of light provided by the sun and turns lights on
and off accordingly.
The cost of the current exterior lighting plans is assumed based on typical luminaire costs
for luminaires of each style, lamp technology, and pole height. Costs vary significantly, and
exact cost of the installed luminaire on date of purchase could not be determined.
There are many ways that the lighting plans could be redesigned to meet the proposed
outdoor lighting ordinance. Clanton & Associates has considered one possible redesign for
each of the three sites, based on common practice and current recommendations by the
Illuminating Engineering Society (IES).
Cost estimates exclude electrical infrastructure, installation, and design fees.
Eye Center of Northern Colorado
Estimated Installed Cost: $118,800
Estimated Proposed Cost: $103,700
Reducing the number of luminaires to meet the proposed lumen limit, even with the
addition of more sophisticated lighting controls, reduces the overall cost of the system.
Assumed Changes
The installed exterior lighting at the Eye Center of Northern Colorado exceeds site lumen limits set
forth in the proposed lighting ordinance. To bring the exterior lighting into compliance, the following
changes are suggested:
Reduce total lumens at parking lot
o Reduce parking lot light lumen output from 5800 lumens to 4700 lumens and
reduce the quantity of parking lot lights from 27 to 23
Calculations show that the parking lot meets IES recommended parking lot
light levels with these changes
Reduce lumen output of wall packs
o Two wall packs are specified at 4000 lumens each. Sufficient egress illumination
can be provided by wall packs that are 2000 lumens or less.
Reduce quantity of façade luminaires
o The design originally has 22 wall sconces. Reducing the quantity by half removes
excessive site lumens.
1.4
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Case Study Cost Analysis (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Case Studies Cost Analysis October 2, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 3
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Implement lighting control system to further dim luminaires when parking lot is not in use.
Luminaires may also be shut off by time clock
o It is assumed that building-mounted luminaires are already connected to the
building control system.
o Parking lot luminaires may be controlled by a dimming relay panel located in the
building, or by individual nodes attached to each luminaire.
The Grove
Estimated Installed Cost: $128,500
Estimated Proposed Cost: $140,700
Selecting a luminaire with improved optics may increase the cost per luminaire. The
availability of affordable, low glare parking lot luminaires is increasing in the market.
Assumed Changes
The installed exterior lighting at the Grove is under the proposed site lumen limit established by
the proposed lighting ordinance. However, the lighting does not meet BUG ratings and is
particularly glary.
Select an alternative luminaire with different light distribution and lower BUG rating.
o For this exercise, it is assumed that a new luminaire with improved optical
performance could cost $200 more per luminaire. This is likely a high estimate.
Since this is a multifamily residential site, it is not recommended to provide curfew
dimming controls.
Additionally, bright wall packs are installed on the outside of the buildings. These were not shown
in the reviewed documentation. In an improved designed, these luminaires would be reduced in
both quantity and lumen output.
The Slab
Estimated Installed Cost: $87,500
Estimated Proposed Cost: $66,300
Reducing the height of the pole will reduce the cost of the design. Selecting a luminaire
with improved optics may increase the cost per luminaire but will not offset the savings by
using a shorter pole. Selecting a lower lumen output luminaire will reduce cost slightly as
well.
Assumed Changes
The installed exterior lighting at the Slab exceeds site lumen limits set forth in the proposed
lighting ordinance. The luminaires also do not meet the proposed BUG ratings. To bring the
exterior lighting into compliance, the following changes are suggested:
1.4
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Case Study Cost Analysis (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Case Studies Cost Analysis October 2, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 4
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Select an alternative luminaire with different light distribution and lower BUG rating.
o For pedestrian path, select a luminaire with lower lumen output. This will slightly
reduce the cost of the luminaire.
Decrease pole height from 30-ft to 20-ft.
o Calculations show that this does not require the addition of more poles.
Since this is a multifamily residential site, it is not recommended to provide curfew
dimming controls.
1.4
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Case Study Cost Analysis (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
April 1, 2020
ATTACHMENT 5 1.5
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 2
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Table of Contents
Site 1: The Elizabeth Hotel .............................................................................................................. 3
Site 2: Eye Center of Northern Colorado ......................................................................................... 4
Project 3: Maverik Convenience Store ............................................................................................. 5
Project 4: The Grove ........................................................................................................................ 6
Project 5: The Slab .......................................................................................................................... 7
1.5
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 3
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Site 1: The Elizabeth Hotel
Number of Complete Responses for this site: 7
How does the lighting in this area compare with the lighting of similar areas at night?
Better: 5
About the Same: 2
Worse: 0
No Answer: 0
Survey Comments:
· Many great choices, but glaring exceptions. Especially bad egress light on East emergency
exit. Very little light on the egress pavement; high glare, high light escape into the sky at
low angles especially bad for sky glow.
· Streetlights are very bright and some building lights are bright (fire exit) most our lights are
decent for downtown commercial use.
· The streetlights are too bright. The lights that are lower CCT Generally less is more.
Several discussions occurred, but a small number of surveys were submitted for this site. Based
on on-site discussions, the following opinions were expressed:
· The lighting here is generally pleasant. The streetlights are glary for pedestrians and
appear cooler in color temperature than the recommended 3000K.
· Some of the wall-packs at the exits were low glare and comfortable. They provide an
example of good egress lighting at exits.
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Area feels safe during the day
Area feels safe at night
Lighting is comfortable
There is too much light
There is not enough light
Light is uneven
Light is glary
Face detection is good
Good color of light
Cannot tell object color
Poorly matched to the neighborhood
I like this style of lighting
1.5
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 4
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Site 2: Eye Center of Northern Colorado
Number of Complete Responses for this site: 15
How does the lighting in this area compare with the lighting of similar areas at night?
Better: 10
About the Same: 3
Worse: 1
No Answer: 1
Survey Comments:
· The entrance and indoor light is too much. The color and accent lights are nice. The sign
is one of the better ones in Fort Collins
· Not a lot of foot traffic at night and not many other business/residents directly adjacent
· The parking lot fixtures produce too much glare. Could the light source be more recessed
or shielded?
· The sign lighting is obtrusive and color temp too cold
· The lighting feels excessive
· Looks great from the road. Levels too high in the lit, and extreme in the entry.
· Entrance area seems better than the other areas
Since this is a medical facility with access in the early morning before sunrise, it was noted that
light levels at the entrance and parking lot might be good. It was agreed that curfew dimming
would be fantastic for an empty parking lot, but that shutting the lighting off completely may not be
appropriate.
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Area feels safe during the day
Area feels safe at night
Lighting is comfortable
There is too much light
There is not enough light
Light is uneven
Light is glary
Face detection is good
Good color of light
Cannot tell object color
Poorly matched to the neighborhood
I like this style of lighting
1.5
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 5
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Site 3: Maverik Convenience Store
Number of Complete Responses for this site: 6
How does the lighting in this area compare with the lighting of similar areas at night?
Better: 3
About the Same: 1
Worse: 1
No Answer: 1
Survey Comments:
· Lighting on the building is well done. Area light on high pole on north side is too bright
and a bad source Olof glare.
· The building had nice lighting but overall there was too much light. Controls on the
lights if accidents or to meet hazardous standards
· Lighting on the building is well done. Area light on high pole on north side is too bright
and a bad source Olof glare.
· Appropriate for this type of service although does seem to advertise the property as
much as light it , maybe to excess
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Area feels safe during the day
Area feels safe at night
Lighting is comfortable
There is too much light
There is not enough light
Light is uneven
Light is glary
Face detection is good
Good color of light
Cannot tell object color
Poorly matched to the neighborhood
I like this style of lighting
1.5
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 6
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Site 4: The Grove
Number of Complete Responses for this site: 18
How does the lighting in this area compare with the lighting of similar areas at night?
Better: 4
About the Same: 5
Worse: 9
No Answer: 0
Survey Comments:
· Don't like the lights on the buildings. They shine in your eyes
· The wall mounted fixtures are not good. A lot of glare. The parking lot fixtures are fine.
Feels patchy and not uniform tho
· Terrible glare from fixtures, patchy, bad hierarchy of lighting levels
· The parking lot was fine. But the wall packs were too bright, glare and direction.
· Much better lighting, not too bright but easy to see
· Wall packs on buildings are awful — glare hides the wash of light on the wall, and
degrades visual adaptation to the car park and pathways. Ground illuminance levels
seem fine, perhaps a bit uneven. Parking lot luminaires with better optics could
address this.
· Terrible glare, poor lighting overall
Wall packs were not included in the submitted documentation for the original case study.
Additionally, parking lot lights were retrofit with LED lamps, which were not included in the original
documentation.
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Area feels safe during the day
Area feels safe at night
Lighting is comfortable
There is too much light
There is not enough light
Light is uneven
Light is glary
Face detection is good
Good color of light
Cannot tell object color
Poorly matched to the neighborhood
I like this style of lighting
1.5
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lighting Ordinance Case Studies April 1, 2020
City of Fort Collins, Colorado Page 7
4699 Nautilus Court South, Suite 102 303-530-7229
Boulder, CO 80301 www.clantonassociates.com
Site 5: The Slab
Number of Complete Responses for this site: 19
How does the lighting in this area compare with the lighting of similar areas at night?
Better: 0
About the Same: 4
Worse: 15
No Answer: 0
Survey Comments:
· It was too much.
· Lights could be dimmed and still work for the same thing
· Motion activated lights on the Slab are awful glare bombs. What benefit when lit?
· A lot of glare and too much light
· Light poles in parking area way too tall, terrible glare from wall pacs, pedestrian walk
lighting produce too much light trespass and backlight, overall lighting level too high for
the context
· Like the lit stairwell with glass windows. Good visibility for those entering the stairwell.
Maybe not as bright a light.
· Wow, it's bright!
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Area feels safe during the day
Area feels safe at night
Lighting is comfortable
There is too much light
There is not enough light
Light is uneven
Light is glary
Face detection is good
Good color of light
Cannot tell object color
Poorly matched to the neighborhood
I like this style of lighting
The Slab Apartments
1.5
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Lighting Ordinance Site Surveys (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
ATTACHMENT 6 1.6
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Resolution 2016-074 (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
1.6
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Resolution 2016-074 (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
MEMORANDUM
Land Conservation & Stewardship Board
To - Fort Collins City Council
From - Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (LCSB)
Date - February 10, 2021
Subject - Lighting Code Revisions
The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (LCSB) appreciates the City’s efforts
to better control various aspects of light pollution and create contextually
appropriate lighting plans. Particularly relevant to the LCSB, the proposed revisions
provide much-needed attention to limiting nighttime light spill into Natural Areas.
As such, the LCSB supports this update to the City's lighting code.
If, as we expect, there are future adjustments and revisions, we look forward to
working with Community Development and Neighborhood Services and with the
Natural Areas Department to reduce ambient light levels and further protect
habitat in our Natural Areas.
ATTACHMENT 7 1.7
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Land Conservation and Stewardship Board - Memo of Support (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
1Exterior Lighting Code Update
February 23, 2021
ATTACHMENT 8 1.8
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Questions
1.Does City Council support shifting from a “one-size fits
all” regulatory approach to a context area framework?
2.Does City Council have additional follow-up actions
related to the proposed code?
2
1.8
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
STRATEGIC
ALIGNMENT
Neighborhood Livability
•1.7 Guide
Development
BUDGET
•Community
Development and
Neighborhood
Services
Strategic Plan Alignment
3
1.8
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
4
§Land Use and Building Code Updates
§Monitoring for sky quality in key locations throughout the City
§Education, training and outreach
§Pilot projects and case studies
§Pursue night sky protection without compromising health, safety or
security
Nature in the City Objective CP2:
Work cross-departmentally and with external
partners toward a darker night sky
1.8
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Tr iple Bottom Line
5
SOCIAL
Safety, Security, Comfortable
Outdoor Spaces
ENVIRONMENT
Human & Wildlife
Health, Energy
Conservation
ECONOMIC
Energy Savings,
Replacement Savings,
Maintenance Savings
1.8
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Engagement
•Case Studies Report and Tours: February/March, 2020
•Draft Released: November 1st
•Public Meetings: November 12th & 18th
•Staff Training: November 17th, 2020
•Te chnical Advisory Committee (TAC): November 20th & December 7th
•One-on-one conversations w/public, PD and DDA
•Presentations: to Boards, City departments, the Chamber of
Commerce, PD, DDA and other organizations.
6
1.8
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
City Lighting Regulations
Residential
Code
Energy Code Land Use
Code
Sign Code
(Land Use
Code)
LCUASS
Single-
Family/Duplex X
Multi-Family X X
Commercial X X
Signs X
Street ROWs X
7
1.8
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Current Regulations
8
1.8
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
9
Current Regulations
1.8
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Current Regulations
10
1.8
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Project Need
•Change in Industry
Metrics
•No Full-Cutoff
•BUG: addresses all
angles of light
11
1.8
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Project Need
12
•Lighting maximums lead to overlighting
•Pole height limits are not defined
1.8
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
IES & IDA Partnership
13
1.8
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
PROPOSED CODE
14
Lighting Context Areas
Brightness hierarchy
•LC0 -No Ambient Lighting
•LC1 -Low Ambient Lighting
•LC2 -Moderate Ambient Lighting
•LC3 -Moderately High Ambient Lighting
1.8
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Model Lighting Ordinance
15
Lighting matches land use and resource protection
1.8
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Lumen Budget
16
•Additional allowances
–Outdoor Dining
–Building Facades
–Outdoor Auto Sales
–Gas Stations
–Intersections of Public Roads
1.8
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Uplight
17
1.8
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Engagement
Concerns
Public & Boards
•Impacts of light pollution, in Natural Areas and neighborhoods in
particular
•Desire for energy conservation
•Address obtrusive lighting immediately
•Support amortization
Police Services •Safety
•Simple process for adding lights for safety
Businesses
•Cost of new lighting installations
•Safety
•Operational requirements to manage lighting control systems
•Cost if amortization is required
18
1.8
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Potential Refinements
19
•Add “relief valve” for PD to request lighting for safety
•PD not happy with minor amendment process
•Tw o potential provisions:
•Private property
•Public property
1.8
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Potential Refinements
20
•Remove redundancies between Energy Code
•Potentially remove low light level hours
•Remove Design Standard requiring lighting controls
1.8
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Code Evaluation
21
2021-Collect Data
•Alt compliance requests & nature of request
•Certification requirement
•Site Tours of new projects
•Research amortization approaches
•Track minor amendments with lighting changes
•Adding lighting for safety and nature of request
2022-Evaluations and Recommendations
•Modifications to limits?
•Amortization requirement?
•Change minor amendment threshold for retrofit?
•Safety lighting process working?
•Should development proposals be routed to PD?
•Incentives for retrofits
1.8
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Next Steps
22MARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRCOUNCILADOPTION
ALIGN ENERGY/BLDG
CODES
ENGAGEMENT
ENERGY/BLDG CODES
COUNCIL ADOPTION
ENERGY/BLDGE CODES
CODE EVALUATION &
AMORTIZATION RESEARCH
POSSIBLE WORK SESSION
ON AMORTIZATION
1.8
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
Questions
1.Does City Council support shifting from a “one-size fits
all” regulatory approach to a context area framework?
2.Does City Council have additional follow-up actions
related to the proposed code?
23
1.8
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9970 : Exterior Lighting Code Update)
DATE:
STAFF:
February 23, 2021
Amanda King, Communications/Public Involvement
Director
Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Program Manager
John Duval, Legal
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business Improvement District.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on Visit Fort Collins, COVID -19 impacts to the travel and tourism
industry, the Destination Master Plan, and to discuss the opportunity of additional funding through the creation of
a Tourism Business Improvement District.
Cynthia Eichler, Visit Fort Collins President and CEO will be presenting along with a consultant.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Part A
1. Does Council have any questions or feedback about tourism impacts and recovery or the Destination Master
Plan?
Part B
1. Does Council support this funding option, and if so, which path is preferred?
2. Is Council ready to bring this option forward?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In 1984, Fort Collins instituted a 3% lodging tax. Shortly thereafter, the Fort Collins Convention and Visitors
Bureau (now dba Visit Fort Collins) was formed to serve as the tourism and convention marketing and service
agency for the City. The City contracts with Visit Fort Collins (VFC) to provide various convention and visitors
services.
Since 2006, the contract has been based on a funding model whereby VFC re ceives 70% of the lodging tax
dollars; the Cultural Resources Board receives the remaining 30% to distribute as Fort Fund grants.
Within its contractual services, VFC oversees destination sales and marketing and conference services. VFC
provides information services for visitors and local residents through public relations and marketing programs and
through its annual Visitors Guide with 80,000 produced and distributed. VFC operates the downtown visitor
information center and the state’s Colorado Welcome Center. VFC also facilitates the successful Certified
Tourism Ambassador hospitality training program.
Destination Master Plan
In 2019, a Tourism and Destination Master Plan was funded, with the City and VFC each contributing $50,000 to
fund the plan. The planning process was paused in April 2020 due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic on
the consulting partner, stakeholder participation and continued uncertainty within the tourism industry. The
process resumed in January 2021 and a finalized plan will be presented in May of 2021.
2
Packet Pg. 88
February 23, 2021 Page 2
Tourism Business Improvement District
During the engagement process and strategic discussions for the Destination Master Plan, a need to explore
additional funding mechanisms evolved. From that engagement, an opportunity to consider the creation of a
Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) moved forward with support from the Visit Fort Collins Board of
Directors and hotel stakeholders.
Civitas Advisors were hired to conduct a Feasibility Study to determine if a TBID wa s an option for Visit Fort
Collins. At the conclusion of the study, it was found to be an option for use under Colorado statutes and City of
Fort Collins ordinance. A Formation Proposal was considered and approved by the Visit Fort Collins Board of
Directors.
While the earlier commitment to secure additional funding via a Tourism Business Improvement District would
move the organization forward competitively, there are additional benefits with the current health emergency
affecting all facets of tourism. Communities across the country are exploring TBID’s as a mechanism for “self-
rescue.” An additional assessment, such as a TBID, will allow for collection of revenue in real time to be invested
for the businesses participating in the district.
In Fort Collins, lodging collections have been negatively impacted more than any other citywide category. Lodging
tax collections are down 47.6% through December. No other category comes close to this loss.
A willingness by stakeholders to explore this option is si gnificant. Hotels are familiar with the opportunity to invest
in marketing and sales activities to generate income for their respective businesses. A self -assessment in their
industry has direct benefits. It also has the potential to positively impact addi tional business categories such as
restaurants, retail, breweries, tour operators and service providers.
The recently completed summary of economic impact demonstrates clear return on investment:
• Direct economic impact: $220 million, a 26% increase over the previous reporting period.
• Total jobs: 4,197, an 10.4% increase from the previous reporting period.
• Sales tax generated: $10million, an increase of 30.7% from the previous reporting period.
A 2020 Year End memo was recently shared with Council and included an updated Visitor Study and Economic
Impact Study:
<https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=218&docid=3512847&dt=MAIL+PACKET>
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2020 Lodging Tax Report (PDF)
2. Tourism Business Improvement Districts At-a-Glance (PDF)
3. Rocky Mountain Lodging Report (PDF)
4. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF)
2
Packet Pg. 89
201620172018201920202020 over/ under 20192016-2020JAN$81,902.08 79,597.00$ 101,000.00$ 136,670.00$ 133,029.00$ -2.7%$532,198.08FEB$76,114.00 72,367.00$ 84,000.00$ 92,474.00$ 91,951.00$ -0.6%$416,906.00MAR$86,726.00 80,606.00$ 85,000.00$ 87,042.00$ 99,669.00$ 14.5%$439,043.00APR$95,108.00 98,356.00$ 114,000.00$ 152,919.00$ 62,987.00$ -58.8%$523,370.00MAY$108,313.00 103,539.00$ 118,000.00$ 132,354.00$ 20,049.00$ -84.9%$482,255.00JUN$137,250.00 138,868.00$ 161,000.00$ 174,588.00$ 26,717.00$ -84.7%$638,423.00JUL$179,136.00 179,706.00$ 226,000.00$ 227,780.00$ 68,002.00$ -70.1%$880,624.00AUG$172,922.00 174,399.00$ 207,000.00$ 241,809.00$ 91,000.00$ -62.4%$887,130.00SEP$163,172.00 184,716.00$ 201,000.00$ 209,336.00$ 118,310.00$ -43.5%$876,534.00OCT$143,701.00 172,270.00$ 212,000.00$ 220,543.00$ 116,566.00$ -47.1%$865,080.00NOV$124,066.00 143,977.00$ 169,100.00$ 172,206.00$ 139,231.00$ -19.1%$748,580.00DEC$85,396.00 92,164.00$ 115,000.00$ 99,000.00$ 53,743.00$ -45.7%$445,303.00TOTAL$1,453,806.08 1,520,565.00$ 1,793,100.00$ 1,946,721.00$ 1,021,254.00$ -47.5%$1,453,806.08VFC's share of the the total collection will be $714,887.80. Funds for use via Fort Fund I & II will be $306,376.20CITY OF FORT COLLINSLODGING TAX COLLECTIONSC:\Users\aking\Downloads\2020 Lodging Tax Report.xlsxATTACHMENT 12.1Packet Pg. 90Attachment: 2020 Lodging Tax Report (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
At-A-Glance: Tourism Business Improvement Districts in Fort Collins
Benefits of Emphasizing Tourism Funding
1. Raising a destination’s profile
2. Increasing tourism and kicking off a virtuous cycle of economic development.
3. Generating local tax revenue
4. Enabling public investment to improve the quality of life for res idents, businesses and visitors
Assessment vs. Tax
One of the key qualities of a TBID is that the levy is an assessment, not a tax. Unlike taxes, assessment
dollars will always be used to fund programs and services that benefit only those paying the assessment,
and not to those not charged. Furthermore, assessment revenue cannot be diverted for other purposes
outside of TBID services. Taxes are a part of a City’s general fund, and can be seized at will, but TBID
assessment dollars will always remain allocated for the provision of TBID activities and services.
Stability of Funding
Another hallmark quality of a TBID is the stability of funding that it provides to those paying the assessment.
Revenue generated by a local tax, such as bed taxes, are often at the mercy of both the City and the
economy. TBID assessments are levied at a consistent rate allocated for a specific purpose, and therefore
provides much greater stability than other funding sources.
Home Rule vs. BID Statute
A TBID in Fort Collins can be formed via the Business Improvement District Law (BID Law) or through the
passage of a local ordinance (home rule).
Proposed Fort Collins TBID Assessment Rate
The annual assessment rate is proposed to be three percent (3%) of gross short term (stays less than 31
days) room rental revenue. Based on the benefit received, assessments will not be collected on lodging
business stays of more than thirty (30) consecutive days.
Proposed Governance
Lodging Businesses paying the assessment will be eligible to serve as the TBID Governance to provide
improvements and activities for the FCTBID. The TBID Governance must provide an annual report on
activities and expenditures to the City, which is also available to business owners.
Steps to Formation
1. Hotel & local government outreach
2. Stakeholders determine parameters and service plan
3. Identify legal authority
4. Plan prepared
5. Hotel approval process
6. Local government approval process
ATTACHMENT 2 2.2
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Tourism Business Improvement Districts At-a-Glance (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business Improvement
ROCKY MOUNTAIN LODGING REPORT
Colorado Edition December 2020
2020 YEAR-TO-DATE 2019 YEAR-TO-DATE
ROOM NIGHTS OCC OCC OCC
LOCATION AVAILABLE OCCUPIED % ADR REVPAR % ADR REVPAR % ADR REVPAR
DENVER 1,146,539 379,428 33.1% $84.04 $27.81 41.7% $104.53 $43.60 74.3% $146.14 $108.64
COLORADO SPRINGS
LEVEL 1 105,493 33,170 31.4% $95.28 $29.96 45.1% $109.13 $49.19 68.5% $125.73 $86.08
LEVEL II 62,930 27,722 44.1% $80.53 $35.48 58.6% $93.37 $54.70 72.7% $109.62 $79.73
TOTAL 168,423 60,892 36.2% $88.57 $32.02 50.0% $102.42 $51.19 70.0% $119.62 $83.76
RESORTS
VAIL 47,045 21,414 45.5% $466.73 $212.45 41.6% $371.36 $154.53 52.5% $348.40 $182.92
ASPEN 25,730 10,072 39.1% $807.62 $316.14 56.1% $598.18 $335.73 66.2% $569.17 $377.01
TELLURIDE 14,999 4,686 31.2% $609.95 $190.56 48.5% $419.61 $203.71 52.8% $369.02 $194.87
BRECKENRIDGE 39,376 20,890 53.1% $342.82 $181.88 47.0% $246.20 $115.82 55.6% $223.25 $124.16
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS 23,002 10,515 45.7% $188.39 $86.12 54.6% $166.13 $90.63 65.6% $174.66 $114.65
OTHER RESORTS 121,891 44,813 36.8% $394.77 $145.14 43.9% $313.34 $137.42 55.4% $296.68 $164.48
TOTAL RESORTS 272,043 112,390 41.3% $425.49 $175.78 46.3% $334.74 $155.05 56.7% $318.72 $180.64
DURANGO 18,507 7,301 39.4% $103.70 $40.91 53.5% $119.04 $63.70 69.8% $132.86 $92.69
GRAND JUNCTION 29,711 11,909 40.1% $60.44 $24.23 51.7% $69.75 $36.04 60.4% $84.00 $50.73
GLENWOOD SPRINGS 35,836 18,523 51.7% $138.23 $71.45 57.0% $131.58 $74.96 65.0% $143.52 $93.31
ESTES PARK 26,108 9,473 36.3% $178.19 $64.65 42.0% $195.66 $82.12 54.9% $195.83 $107.56
LONGMONT 29,481 7,759 26.3% $72.13 $18.98 34.3% $87.39 $29.94 61.4% $120.56 $73.98
FT. COLLINS 56,749 14,728 26.0% $87.98 $22.83 44.4% $98.40 $43.70 67.3% $125.64 $84.59
LOVELAND 31,961 10,796 33.8% $82.18 $27.76 48.3% $98.58 $47.60 71.2% $125.14 $89.05
GREELEY 21,421 9,418 44.0% $72.24 $31.76 50.6% $84.85 $42.93 75.4% $106.38 $80.21
CRAIG 13,404 5,751 42.9% $73.57 $31.57 50.0% $79.15 $39.55 51.8% $81.98 $42.44
OTHER COLORADO 57,357 22,659 39.5% $84.01 $33.19 49.0% $86.47 $42.35 59.2% $99.41 $58.83
TOTALS 1,907,540 671,027 35.2% $143.92 $50.63 44.0% $133.16 $58.64 69.7% $160.21 $111.59
Colorado Hotel & Lodging Association 1701 California Street, Suite LL-1061 Denver, Colorado 80202
(303) 297-8335 FAX: (303) 297-8104 www.coloradolodging.com
AFFILIATED WITH AMERICAN HOTEL AND LODGING ASSOCIATION
The Rocky Mountain Lodging Report is compiled by Plante Moran, in cooperation with the Colorado Hotel & Lodging Association,
Robert S. Benton & Associates, Inc. and W. R. Hopping & CO. Readers are advised that the above do not represent the data contained herein to be definitive.
Neither should the contents of this publication be construed as a recommendation on policies or actions. This report is subject to copyright laws.
Reproduction of this report, in whole or in part, without written permission, is prohibited.
For additional information, please contact Robert Benton at (303) 840-1666, Bill Hopping, MAI (303) 798-4045 or Bob Hottman at (303) 740-9400
The Rocky Mountain Lodging Report • P.O. Box 632242 • Littleton, CO 80163 • rockymountainlodgingreport@comcast.net • www.rockymountainlodgingreport.com
PANDEMIC IMPACT ON ROOMNIGHT AVAILABILITY
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some hotels have elected to temporarily close their doors. To be consistent
with past methodology for when hotels close, either temporarily or permanently, closed rooms and hotels are
removed from inventory so that calculated occupancies and average daily rates shown in the report reflect data
only for those rooms that are available for occupancy. Hotels open for a portion of the month are included in the
survey, and rooms available reflect the portion of the month that the hotel was open. As hotels reopen or make
some of their rooms available for occupancy in the future, that supply will be added to the rooms survey when
available for occupancy.
ATTACHMENT 3 2.3
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Rocky Mountain Lodging Report (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business Improvement District)
ROCKY MOUNTAIN LODGING REPORT
Summary of Occupancy and Average Daily Room Rates for the Colorado
OCCUPANCY AVERAGE REVENUE PER
PERCENTAGE DAILY RATE AVAILABLE ROOM
2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019
JANUARY 58.1% 58.7% $167.32 $169.79 $97.15 $99.69
FEBRUARY 63.5% 64.1% $172.18 $174.87 $109.28 $112.15
MARCH 38.8% 69.3% $151.15 $169.00 $58.65 $117.05
APRIL 16.8% 66.3% $82.23 $139.00 $13.80 $92.16
MAY 26.5% 69.5% $83.27 $142.94 $22.07 $99.30
JUNE 38.3% 80.5% $104.85 $166.65 $40.19 $134.17
JULY 48.9% 85.4% $132.06 $176.31 $64.57 $150.55
AUGUST 51.1% 81.3% $131.64 $167.13 $67.28 $135.80
SEPTEMBER 50.8% 76.6% $121.04 $159.70 $61.50 $122.39
OCTOBER 50.5% 71.9% $110.29 $151.84 $55.66 $109.14
NOVEMBER 34.4% 58.1% $99.20 $130.27 $34.16 $75.69
DECEMBER 35.2% 53.4% $143.92 $167.38 $50.63 $89.45
YEAR TO DATE 44.0% 69.7% $133.16 $160.21 $58.64 $111.59
90
75
60
45
30
15
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
COLORADO
PERCENTAGES OF OCCUPANCY
2020 vs. 2019
2020 OCCUPANCY 2019 OCCUPANCY
COLORADO
AVERAGE ROOM RATES
2020 vs. 2019
JAN MAR MAY JUL SEPT NOV FEB APRIL JUN AUG OCT DEC
2020 AVERAGE RATE 2019 AVERAGE RATE
JAN MAR MAY JUL SEPT NOV FEB APRIL JUN AUG OCT DEC
2.3
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Rocky Mountain Lodging Report (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business Improvement District)
Vi sit Fort Collins –To urism Update
Destination Master Plan and Road To Recovery
Pr oposed Tourism Business Improvement District
ATTACHMENT 4 2.4
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Agenda
•Tr avel & To urism updates
•Impacts of COVID-19
•Destination Master Plan
•To urism Business Improvement District
2.4
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Destination promotion drives broader
economic development by:
1.Raising a destination’s profile
2.Increasing tourism and kicking off a virtuous cycle of economic
development.
3.Generating local tax revenue
4.Enabling public investment to improve the quality of life for
residents, businesses and visitors.
SOURCE: US Travel
2.4
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
2.4
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
In 2019, Colorado v isitors spent a record $24.2
billion, generating $1.5 billion in state and local
taxes. Spending directly supported over 181,200
jobs and earning over $7.4 billion.
Economic Impact of Travel on Colorado 1996-2016P. Dean Runyan Associates
2.4
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Fort Collins To urism ~
Summary of Economic Impact Report
Direct economic impact
in 2019/20 was $220M Up 26% from 2016/17
To tal jobs in 2019/20 increase 10.4% to 4,197 from 3,801
in 2016/2017
City of Fort Collins sales tax
generated by tourism was $10M
in 2019/20.
This was a 30.7% increase from
2016/2017
2.4
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
•To tal economic impact of tourism for the City
of Fort Collins was $346.3 M
•ROI on marketing to influence leisure trip
spending by Visit Fort Collins was $35.4 to $1
2.4
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Then COVID-19 Impacted Everything
2.4
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Current Sales & Use Ta x –
Ye ar to Date
Lodging is down -47.6%
Re staurant and Bars is down -16%
Miscellaneous Retailers is up 13.6%
Grocery, Convenience, Liquor is up 8.9%
Building Material, Garden Equipment & Supplies is up 7.3%
2.4
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Ro cky Mountain
Lodging Report
2.4
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Destination Master Plan
2020
2.4
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Destination Master Plan
Fort Collins Hotels
MULTIPLE LEADERS
Striving for Inclusion
Connecting Talent 2.0
Responding to Community Issues
Encouraging Aspirational Concepts
Fort Collins
community partners
Configuring Events
Supporting the needs
of the Nighttime
Economy
Branding Pride of
Place
Expanding Basecamp:
Fort Collins
Leveraging
Community
Connections
Funding the FutureHarnessing the
Essence of Fort Collins
Investing in Quality of
Place
Improving Gateways &
Corridors
Fostering Creative
Community
2.4
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Funding for the Future
Leveraging Community
Connections
Fostering Creative
Community
Harnessing Essence of
Fort Collins
Configuring Events
Discussing Re covery Pr iorities
Improving Gateways &
Corridors
Branding Pride of Place
Expanding Basecamp
Fort Collins
Supporting the Needs of
the Nighttime Economy
Re covery Actions Aspirational Needs
Vital
Linkages
Striving for Inclusion
Connecting Talent 2.0
Re sponding to Community Issues
Investing in
Quality of Place
2.4
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Pa rt A Re cap
Question Opportunity
•What questions does Council have on tourism
impacts and/or short and long term plans?
2.4
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Destination Master Plan
2020
Funding for the Future
Securing competitive level funding for
implementation of plan and showing the
overall value of tourism to Fort Collins
M ASTER P LAN S IGNATURE L INK
Destination 2018
Budget
Lodging
Tax Total Tax Assessment
Rate
Visit Denver $ 38,800,000 10.8%14.75%1%
Snowmass Tourism $ 7,200,000 2.4%12.40%
Breckenridge Tourism Office $ 5,682,000 3.4%10.90%
Visit Colorado Springs $ 4,862,747 2.0%10.25%
Visit Aurora $ 4,065,000 8.0%12.50%$2
Visit Estes Park $ 3,001,283 2.0%10.70%
Aspen Chamber Resort Assoc.$ 2,900,000 2.0%11.30%
Visit Grand Junction $ 2,890,000 6.0%14.02%
Gunnison/Crested Butte $ 2,300,000 4.0%9.00%
Telluride Tourism $ 2,300,000 2.0%12.65%
Boulder CVB $ 2,021,315 7.5%12.49%
Visit Fort Collins $ 1,293,582 3.0%10.55%
Visit Durango $ 1,212,954 4.0%10.40%
Visit Loveland $ 1,107,524 3.0%9.70%
Visit Glenwood Springs $ 1,019,242 2.5%11.10%
Steamboat Springs Chamber $ 850,000 3.0%11.40%**
Visit Pagosa Springs $ 800,000 4.9%11.80%
Alamosa Conv. & Visitors Bureau $ 739,620 5.9%13.90%
Pursue Tourism Business Improvement District funding
structure
oAssemble the steps and understanding
oDevelop the funding level model
oConstruct the benefit strategy
oNavigate the legal and approval process
2.4
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Loss of Lodging Ta x
Ye ar 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Lodging Tax $807,748 $908,908 $1,001,840 $1,102,694 $1,304,613 $1,451,008
Ye ar 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Lodging Tax $1,453,307 $1,520,567 $1,793,693 $1,946,406 $1,021,171
Compounded Annual Growth Rate between 2010 –2019 was 10.3%
2020 Lodging Tax Revenue lost 8 years of lodging tax revenue growth.
2.4
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Why a TBID in Fort Collins?
Dedicated funding through a business-based assessment that provides
benefit to the payors through a direct benefit.
2.4
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Why a TBID over a Lodging
Ta x increase
Dedicated funding for programs and services that will be
leveraged to increase demand for overnight visitation.
Since the fee/assessment is levied against the businesses, the
funding shall be used to benefit the businesses paying the
fee/assessment. Unlike fee/assessments, taxes are not
required to benefit the businesses paying them and generally
go to fund general fund services.
2.4
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
TBIDs in
Colorado
Tw o possible existing authorities:
1.Home Ru le:To urism Business
Improvement District
2.Business Improvement District –
C.R.S.§31-25-12
2.4
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Business
Improvement
Districts
Colorado Re vised Statute §31-25-12
authorizes the creation of Business
Improvement Districts (BIDs).Under
Colorado law,the municipalities of the
state may form BIDs for the purpose of
developing and implementing economic
improvements for a district.
•Ta x,Fee,or Assessment are levied on real
property within the BID
2.4
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Home Rule
The City of Fort Collins is a Home Ru le Authority
under Colorado's Article XX.
The City of Fort Collins Charter,Article 1 Section
4 defines the Po wer of the City to "have all the
powers granted to municipal corporations and to
cities by the Constitution and general laws of this
state,together with all the implied powers
necessary to carry into execution all the powers
granted.The enumeration of particular powers by
this Charter shall not be deemed to be exclusive,
and in addition to the powers enumerated or
implied,or appropriate to the exercise of such
powers,it is intended that the city shall have and
may exercise all powers of local self-government
which,under the Constitution of this state,it
would be competent for this Charter specifically
to enumerate."
2.4
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Business-Based
Assessment
Property-Based
Assessment
Governing Law Local ordinance BIA Act
Assessment Basis Ty pe of business, annual
revenue,
occupancy/capacity,
number of employees
Lot size, built square
fo otage, frontage linear
fo otage, use code/zoning
Collection Collected with transient
occupancy taxes or other
method as determined by
the TBID and the City
Collected with property
taxes
Overlap Allows for overlap with
existing and future
districts
No allowable overlap
authorized
2.4
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Fe e/Assessment
vs. Tax
Fee/Assessment
•Fee/Assessment funds are used to
provide a specific benefit to the payors
that is not provided to those not charged.
Assessment funds can not be diverted to
the general fund or other services that do
not specifically benefit the payor.
Ta xe s
•A tax goes into a jurisdiction’s general
fund and can be spent at the City ’s
discretion.Common services are police,
fire,transportation,sewer,environmental
issues,general economic development,
etc.
2.4
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
How it Works
Businesses pay a
fee/assessment…
Collected by
the local
government…
And managed
by a Board of
Director
comprised of
Business
Owners
Characteristics
•Level playing field—no free riders
•Tr ansparency
•Re liability
•Pa ss-through to customers
2.4
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Governance
Lodging Businesses paying the assessment
will be eligible to serve as the TBID
Governance to provide improvements and
activities for the FCTBID.The TBID
Governance must provide an annual report
on activities and expenditures to the City,
which is also available to business owners.
2.4
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Pr oposed
Fee/Assessment
Rate
The annual fee/assessment rate is proposed
to be three percent (3%)of gross short term
(stays less than 31 days)room rental
revenue.Based on the benefit received,
assessments will not be collected on
lodging business stays of more than thirty
(30)consecutive days.
2.4
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Local Ordinance Date BID Statute Date
Initiate project; Initial Steering Committee Meeting October 2020 Initiate project; Initial Steering Committee Meeting October 2020
Ongoing outreach and consensus building to hotel
and lodging business representatives; confirm
proposed district parameters
October -Ongoing
Ongoing outreach and consensus building to hotel
and lodging business representatives; confirm
proposed district parameters
October -Ongoing
Draft Ordinance, Operating Plan & Petition; Steering
Committee & City review
November 2020 –
February 2021
Draft Operating Plan & Petition, Steering Committee
& City review
November 2020 –
February 2021
City Council-Adopt Local Ordinance, the “Business-
Based Improvement District Act”March –April 2021
Finalize Operating Plan & Petition April 2021 Finalize Operating Plan & Petition April 2021
Petition Drive-Need signatures of business owners
subject to assessment, in the proposed District
having a valuation for assessment of not less than
fifty percent.
May –June 2021
Petition Drive-Need signatures of property owners
having of the valuation for assessment of all real and
personal property in the service area of the
proposed District and who own at least fifty percent
of the acreage in the proposed district.
May –July 2021
Notice of Hearing-not less than 20 days nor more
than 40 days after filing of petition
·Must be published in the newspaper and
mailed to each assessed business owner
July 2021
Notice of Hearing-not less than 20 days nor more
than 40 days after filing of petition
Must be published in the newspaper and mailed to
each assessed property owner
August 2021
Hearing on Formation of the District July 2021 Hearing on Formation of the District August 2021
City Council-Adopt District Formation Ordinance July 2021 City Council-Adopt District Formation Ordinance August 2021
District begins collecting assessment August 2021 District begins collecting assessment September 2021
Ti meline Comparison
2.4
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Hotel
SUPPORT
Since October 2020, Visit Fort
Collins has been meeting with a
group of hotel general managers
to educate and build consensus
for a TBID to support a
dedicated funding mechanism
for tourism sales and marketing
programming and destination
development initiatives.
2.4
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Pa rt B Recap
Question Opportunity
•Does Council support this funding option?
•If yes, which path is preferred?
•Is Council ready to bring this option forward?
2.4
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business
Proposed
Budget
Service Initial
budget %
Sales, Marketing, and
Communications $900,000 60%
Destination
Development $300,000 20%
Administration and
Operations $225,000 15%
Contingency / Reserve $45,000 3%
City Collection Fee $30,000 2%
TOTAL $1,500,000 100%
Benchmarked from 2019 Lodging Tax Collections
2.4
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (9971 : Visit Fort Collins Update and Tourism Business