HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 01/26/2021 - WORK SESSION
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Wade Troxell, Mayor City Council Chambers
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
January 26, 2021
6:00 PM
• CALL TO ORDER.
1. Housing Strategic Plan Update - Strategy Prioritization. (staff: Lindsay Ex, Meaghan Overton,
Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Caryn Champine; 15 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to:
1. Briefly summarize progress the Housing Strategic Plan since the December 2020 Work Session.
2. Receive feedback on the initial set of prioritized strategies and the draft Housing Strategic Plan.
3. Begin a discussion on implementation with a focus on guiding principles that will support ongoing
prioritization and decision making.
4. Provide an update on the Ad Hoc Housing Committee’s work, including additional quicker wins.
5. Share next steps.
A read-before memo will be provided on January 26, 2021 that includes a draft summary of
community feedback on the initial set of priorities.
City of Fort Collins Page 2
2. Council Priority: Reimagine Boards and Commissions. (staff: Elizabeth Blythe, Delynn Coldiron,
Carrie Daggett, Honore Depew; 15 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on progress made towards the Council priority to
Reimagine Boards and Commissions, based on previous direction, and seek direction on
implementation. Staff will share options for Code changes intended to reduce barriers to
participation, increase consistency and clarity, and avoid redundancy.
3. Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options. (staff: Kelly Smith, Caryn Champine; 15 minute
presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to discuss regulatory options for siting new oil and gas development
within City limits. Per State statute, local regulations must match or exceed Colorado Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission (COGCC) requirements to ensure the protection of public health, safety,
welfare, the environment, and wildlife resources. The discussion will focus on various ways the City
could adopt more protective standards through different setback distances, zoning regulations, and a
combination thereof, and demonstrate how each scenario would influence where new development
could occur within the community. To help frame the discussion, a summary will be provided of
recently adopted COGCC setback rules, and feedback received through broad community
engagement.
• ANNOUNCEMENTS.
• ADJOURNMENT.
DATE:
STAFF:
January 26, 2021
Lindsay Ex, Interim Housing Manager
Meaghan Overton, City Planner
Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Caryn Champine, Director of PDT
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Housing Strategic Plan Update - Strategy Prioritization.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to:
1. Briefly summarize progress the Housing Strategic Plan since the December 2020 Work Session.
2. Receive feedback on the initial set of prioritized strategies and the draft Housing Strategic Plan.
3. Begin a discussion on implementation with a focus on guiding principles that will support ongoing prioritization
and decision making.
4. Provide an update on the Ad Hoc Housing Committee’s work, including additional quicker wins.
5. Share next steps.
A read-before memo will be provided on January 26, 2021 that includes a draft summary of community feedback
on the initial set of priorities.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the following:
• Initial set of prioritized strategies?
• Draft of guiding principles and overall approach to implementation?
2. Do Councilmembers have any feedback on the quick(er) wins identified to date?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The current update to the Housing Strategic Plan has an expanded scope to include the entire housing spectrum.
This plan recognizes that the gap between peoples’ incomes and the cost of housing continues to widen, and that
current resources are insufficient to meet our adopted goals for affordable housing production. The draft Housing
Strategic Plan (Attachment 1) was released to the community for their feedback on January 14.
Housing Strategic Plan - Progress to Date
The graphic below outlines the progression of the Housing Strategic Plan process:
Note: In the timeline graphic, the * symbol in each of the steps indicates community engagement opportunities.
1
Packet Pg. 3
January 26, 2021 Page 2
At the December 8, 2020 work session (Attachment 2), staff reviewed the progress associated with Steps 1-5.
Councilmembers provided feedback on engagement feedback to date (Step 3), the initial set of strategies
identified by the community, staff and the project’s consultant (Step 4), and the evaluation criteria (Step 5).
At the January 26, 2021 work session, staff will share the outcome of the Strategy Evaluation (Step 5), discuss
strategy prioritization (Step 6), and share the draft Plan, including indicators and metrics to evaluate plan success
as well as guiding principles for adaptive implementation (which will guide Step 8: Implementation). Below, these
elements are further described.
Step 5: Evaluate Strategies
An early theme from community engagement before the planning process officially kicked off was that priorities
should be established to guide this work, especially since there are so many areas where the housing system can
be influenced. At the December work session, Councilmembers reviewed the evaluation criteria and initial list of
56 strategies that were developed through community input (Attachment 3), the Ad Hoc Committee, the project’s
consultant (Root Policy Research), and staff input. After the work session, Root facilitated two staff workshops
using the evaluation criteria to develop a refined set of strategies for further prioritization in January.
Step 6: Prioritize Strategies
As a result of Step 5, 26 strategies are serving as the basis for a final prioritization for what strategies should be
included in the final plan. This set of 26 prioritized strategies all meet baseline vision, feasibility, and effectiveness
criteria and reflect on staff and community input on key objectives for the Plan. They are designed to address the
Greatest Challenges outlined in the Existing Conditions Assessment, produce meaningful outcomes, and expand
housing choice in Fort Collins across the entire spectrum of housing preference and need.
With this refined set of strategies, staff and Root are running a series of workshops and conversations in January
to confirm priorities and arrive at a final set of strategies to be included in the Plan at the February 16 Adoption
hearing. Workshops and/or conversations will be held with the Ad Hoc Committee, Home2Health partners, staff,
boards and commissions, and stakeholder groups. A read-before memo will be provided to Council in the January
26 packet that summarizes this feedback.
Each of these strategies are described in more detail in the Strategies and Priorities chapter in the draft plan.
Step 7: Consider Plan Adoption (February/March 2021)
Sections of the draft plan were published for public comment as they were completed in early January, and the
full draft plan was released on January 14 to facilitate community feedback and strategy prioritization. Staff will
make revisions based on Council and community feedback and will bring forward the final plan for adoption
consideration by Council at the February 16, 2021 meeting.
Step 8: Implementation
In many ways, the final step in the planning process is just the beginning of the work to ensure that everyone has
stable, healthy housing they can afford. Implementation is when community, Council and staff will transition from
“what” to “how” we achieve this vision. This work acknowledges no community in the United States has solved
this issue, and therefore, we will continually need to be in learning and testing mode to assess which strategies
can work, pilot them where appropriate, and then bring the solutions to scale. In other words, adapting to
changing conditions - both within the broader market and the community - will be critical as we proceed in the
years and decades it will take to reach the vision.
Thus, moving toward implementation involves three elements, which are described in more detail in the
Implementation section of the draft plan (Attachment 1):
• Specific implementation actions in 2021;
• Ongoing planning lifecycle for this work past 2021; and
• Guiding principles for future prioritization and decision making.
1
Packet Pg. 4
January 26, 2021 Page 3
Additional Information on Guiding Principles: For the purposes of this work session, staff is seeking Council’s
feedback on the guiding principles for future prioritization and decision making. They will support future strategy
selection and overall prioritization to determine annual work planning. While the strategies may be updated or
changed on an annual basis, the guiding principles will continue throughout the lifecycle of this plan
(approximately five years).
The Draft Guiding Principles are described in more detail in the Implementation Section of the Draft Plan and are
summarized below:
• Center the work in people
• Be agile and adaptive
• Balance rapid decision making with inclusive
communication and engagement
• Build on existing plans and policies – and their
engagement
• Expect and label tensions, opportunities, and
tradeoffs
• Focus direct investment on the lowest income
levels
• Commit to transparency in decision making
• Make decisions for impact, empowerment, and
systems change (not only ease of implementation)
Ad Hoc Housing Council Committee
In parallel with the Housing Strategic Plan update, the Ad Hoc Housing Council Committee continues to meet
monthly to explore housing-specific topics and provide recommendations to City staff and to Council. Members of
the Ad-Hoc Committee have requested pre-work before each meeting to allow time for in-depth discussion and
exploration. Meeting materials including pre-work, minutes, and recordings are available at
<https://www.fcgov.com/council/ad-hoc-housing-committee>.
Ad Hoc Committee Meetings and Areas of Focus to Date: Committee discussions have included nearly all the
initially prioritized 14 topics the Committee identified at the August meeting. The Committee has continued to
leverage a framework around quicker wins (Council term), transitional strategies (1-2 years), and transformational
strategies (2+ years) to discuss implementation while considering each topic.
Month Focus Outcomes
August Overall Focus and
Prioritization
Clarified focus of the Committee on the plan’s development and
diving deeply on 14 topics, as time allows.
September Existing Conditions and
Greatest Challenges
Clarity around the “problem we’re trying to solve.”
Encouragement to test the greatest challenges with the
community.
October Explore Housing Types and
Zoning
Initial list of strategies to support greater diversity of housing
types and LUC changes.
November Review Housing Types and
Zoning Strategies Explore
Anti-displacement and
Housing Stability
Housing Types & Zoning: Refined list of strategies to pursue as
quick(er) wins, led to off-cycle appropriation for advancing the
LUC audit be brought to the full Council on February 16. Anti-
displacement: Identification of three potential quick(er) wins to
discuss further at the December meeting.
1
Packet Pg. 5
January 26, 2021 Page 4
December Review Anti-displacement;
Explore Funding &
Financing; Explore Rental
regulations and occupancy
Anti-displacement: Two quick(er) wins identified – continuing
the Legal Defense Fund and mapping assessment and
gentrification.
Financing: Identified the Metro DPA (down payment
assistance) item as a quick(er) win, and additional strategies to
be included in the plan.
Rental regulations and occupancy: Formation of an internal
task force to address a suite of opportunities that arose in the
conversation which are further described in the December
memo.
January Explore Innovative
Partnerships; Strategy
Prioritization and Guiding
Principles
Can be shared verbally at the January 26 work session, as the
meeting occurred after the packet deadline.
Quick(er) Wins Identified Thus Far: Five quick(er) wins have been identified by the Committee thus far, two of
which require Council action to move forward. Each of these are described below.
Quick(er) wins moving forward (no Council action required):
• Assess displacement risk (Strategy 1 in the Plan) - This is a mapping exercise that will illustrate displacement
and gentrification threats at the neighborhood level. Input from Home2Health partners has identified an
opportunity to partner with the County Built Environment Team to explore this mapping in conjunction with
county-level analysis. This work is expected to be developed in Q1 of 2021.
• Evaluate opportunities to increase and recalibrate affordable housing incentives in the Land Use Code (LUC)
(Strategy 14) - Designed to increase incentives to develop affordable housing in the Land Use Code to
increase affordable housing supply. This evaluation will be conducted by Root Policy Research and will inform
the first phase of the Land Use Code appropriation work (see below).
• Foreclosure and eviction prevention programs (Strategy 25) - Provide assistance with mortgage debt
restructuring and mortgage and/or utilities payments to avoid foreclosure as well as short-term emergency
rent and utilities assistance for renters. CARES CVRF Act funding supported this in 2020 however additional
resources are required moving forward. Staff is exploring if CARES CVRF funding can continue in 2021, or if
other funding sources will need to be identified.
Quick(er) wins requiring Council action:
• Metro DPA Program (not included as a strategy, given this action will move forward prior to plan adoption) -
This program allows residents of Fort Collins to participate in a down payment assistance program
administered by the City of Denver. This program expands the range of down payment assistance available to
households earning up to $150K (most current programs administered by City partners only go up to 80%
AMI, which is $75,300 for a household of four) at no cost to the City.
Next step: This Resolution will be considered by Council on February 2 on the consent calendar.
• Bring forward an off-cycle appropriation to prioritize housing-related LUC changes (Strategy 9) - As discussed
at the December work session, this strategy will fund LUC updates to define additional housing types; create
opportunities to increase overall housing supply; recalibrate incentives for affordable housing production;
identify opportunities to add to existing incentives; refine and simplify development processes; and reorganize
the LUC.
Next step: First Reading is scheduled for February 16 and will require approximately $250,000-350,000 from
General Fund Reserves to advance (with a match of $60,000 from the Home2Health grant). (Attachment 4.)
1
Packet Pg. 6
January 26, 2021 Page 5
Next Steps
• Staff revisions to the draft plan based on Council and community feedback
• February 16 - Plan adoption, first reading; LUC appropriation, first reading
• March 2 - Plan adoption, second reading; LUC appropriation, second reading
• Spring - Community summit
• Summer - Implementation Plan, Council work session (to be scheduled)
ATTACHMENTS
1. Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (PDF)
2. Work Session Summary (PDF)
3. Fall Engagement Report (PDF)
4. Land Use Code Off-Cycle Appropriation Summary (PDF)
5. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 7
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................... 2
Title Page ............................................................................................................................................. 3
Letter To the Community (From City Leadership) ................................................................................. 4
Letter to the Community (From H2H Partners) ..................................................................................... 5
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 8
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Why Update the Housing Strategic Plan now? ......................................................................................... 9
What’s different about this plan? ............................................................................................................. 9
A Systems Approach ............................................................................................................................. 9
Centered in Equity .............................................................................................................................. 10
Connecting Housing and Health ......................................................................................................... 12
Reflects Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic .................................................................... 14
Previous Plans and Efforts .................................................................................................................. 14
From Dialogue to Policy – The Planning Process ................................................................................ 14
How to Use this Plan ............................................................................................................................... 15
Vision and Housing Goals ................................................................................................................... 17
Defining the Vision .................................................................................................................................. 17
Meeting The Vision Today and in the Future .......................................................................................... 18
Affordability Goal .................................................................................................................................... 19
How Are We Doing So Far? Are We Meeting Our Goal? .................................................................... 19
Refining The Goal ................................................................................................................................ 19
Greatest Challenges and Remaining Questions .................................................................................. 21
Greatest Challenges ................................................................................................................................ 21
Remaining Questions .............................................................................................................................. 24
Strategies and Priorities ..................................................................................................................... 26
Existing Affordable Housing Strategies and Programs ............................................................................ 26
Preliminary Strategies & Evaluation Framework .................................................................................... 28
How Strategies Were Prioritized ............................................................................................................. 30
Brief Description of Prioritized Strategies ............................................................................................... 32
Note to Readers: Acknowledgments, Letters, Executive Summary and Appendices will be released in February with the final plan. The fully
designed plan will be released in late February, after First Reading on February 16
ATTACHMENT 1 1.1
Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 7
Detailed description of prioritized strategies ......................................................................................... 39
Implementation ................................................................................................................................. 50
Immediate Next Steps in 2021 ................................................................................................................ 50
Biannual Planning Lifecycle ..................................................................................................................... 51
Guiding Principles ................................................................................................................................... 52
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................ 54
1.1
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 9
INTRODUCTION
The Housing Strategic Plan guides housing policy, sets a new vision for housing in Fort Collins, and outlines
a framework for investments in the community’s housing system. Fort Collins residents, community
partners, and the City created this plan together over the course of ten months.
WHY UPDATE THE HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN NOW?
The City has had a strategic plan for housing since 1999 and typically updates the plan every five years. In
2015, City Council adopted the previous version, the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, which set a goal
for 10% of housing to be affordable by 2040 and outlined five key strategies:
• Increase the number of affordable rental units;
• Preserve the long-term affordability and physical condition of the existing stock of housing;
• Increase housing and associated services for people with special needs;
• Support opportunities to obtain and sustain affordable homeownership; and
• Refine incentives to encourage affordable housing construction and expand funding sources and
partnerships.
Regular five-year updates allow our community to reassess our housing efforts continually, incorporate
new data and trends and adjust policies as needed. In 2019, City Council adopted “Attainable and
Achievable Housing Strategies” as a priority and established an Ad Hoc Housing Committee to guide the
development of this plan update.
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS PLAN?
• Uses a systems approach to address the entire housing spectrum;
• Centers the plan in equity for all Fort Collins residents;
• Connects housing and health; and
• Reflects some of the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.
A SYSTEMS A PPROACH
All previous housing plans adopted by the City have focused on affordable housing. The City defines
affordable housing as any home that is:
• Affordable for households earning 80% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI) without spending
more than 30% of their income for rent, or 38% of their income for a mortgage; and
• Deed-restricted, meaning the cost of rent or mortgage remains affordable for at least 20 years.
While this framework is useful, we know that it does not address the needs of many people who are
struggling to afford housing in Fort Collins. Housing is a complex, interdependent system that requires a
comprehensive approach.
Accordingly, this updated Housing Strategic Plan addresses the entire spectrum of housing. It includes
targets, metrics, and policies that include all kinds of homes and earning levels, not just those that meet
1.1
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 10
the City’s definition of affordable housing. The graphic below shows the spectrum of housing covered in
this version of the City’s housing plan:
CENTERED IN EQUITY
The Housing Strategic Plan is aligned with the 2020 City Strategic Plan’s objective to “advance equity for
all, leading with race,” so that a person’s identity or identities is not a predictor of outcomes. Leading with
equity impacts both the planning process and the plan’s intended outcomes:
• Equity in process: Ensuring everyone has meaningful opportunities to engage and provide input
into the Housing Strategic Plan process.
• Equity in outcomes: Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford.
To begin leading with equity in the planning process, we are changing the way we listen to and learn from
the community. We are recognizing the need for everyone to speak and receive information in the
language they feel most comfortable with (language justice0F
1), tailoring content and format to each unique
audience, and working on building trust with groups that historically have not been included in City
planning efforts, but this work cannot end there. We will continue to learn, adjust, and step more fully
into processes that empower community members to work with local government to create the future.
Adopting housing policies that create equity in outcomes is equally important. We need to go deeper than
the traditional economic cost/benefit method of measuring results. Who will each policy benefit? Who
will be indirectly affected? Will unfair and biased outcomes be reduced?
This work focuses on a universal outcome for our entire community – the Plan’s vision that “Everyone has
healthy, stable housing they can afford,” and will include targeted strategies to ensure a person’s identity
or identities is not a predictor of whether or not they, or our community, achieve this vision.1F
2 Centering
1 Language justice is a commitment to creating spaces where no one language dominates over any other and to
building cross-language communication over the long haul.
2 The concept of targeted universalism, developed by the Othering and Belonging Institute, means setting one single
goal that applies to everyone. Then, “the strategies developed to achieve those goals are targeted, based upon how
different groups are situated within structures, culture, and across geographies to obtain the universal goal.”
1.1
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 11
our work in equity is a process of continual growth and comes with a great deal of change and myriad
tensions to balance as we work to build a better future for all people in our community.
UNDERSTANDING THE I MPACTS OF I NSTITUTIONAL AND S TRUCTURAL R ACISM:
Fort Collins’ housing system is inextricably linked to the national and statewide context, especially the
long-term effects of institutional and structural racism.2F
3 The Housing Strategic Plan recognizes and
highlights these impacts, outlines policies to address and reduce systemic inequities, and makes
intentional decisions that move Fort Collins closer to our vision.
Despite progress in addressing explicit discrimination, nationwide racial inequities continue to be deep,
pervasive, and persistent in education, criminal justice, jobs, housing, public infrastructure and health. In
housing specifically, significant evidence proves that structural racism has unfairly limited the ability of
BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color) communities to secure healthy, stable housing they can
afford – both historically and today.
Fort Collins continues to experience the long-term effects of the displacement and marginalization of our
region’s indigenous people to create a community that did not provide equal opportunity and fair
treatment for all of its members. The legacy of neighborhood segregation and social and economic
discrimination against BIPOC community members is evident in generational wealth gaps that affect
access to healthy and stable housing today.
Segregation ensured that BIPOC residents in Fort
Collins were likely to live near the city’s industrial sites
and more likely to be exposed to toxins such as coal
smoke and soot from the sugar beet factory; constant
pollution and hazards from trains; and the odor and
environmental impacts from the original Fort Collins
City landfill and the nearby oil depots.3F
4
This segregation and disproportionate exposure to
environmental harms was often a matter of
widespread but informal housing discrimination, as
well as enforced in some cases by restrictive covenants
that excluded BIPOC residents from living in certain
white neighborhoods in Fort Collins (see example in
above image). These covenants often included
3Institutional racism refers to policies, practices, and programs that, most often unintentionally and unconsciously,
work to the benefit of white people and the detriment of people of color. Structural racism is a history and current
reality of institutional racism across all institutions, combining to create a system that negatively impacts
communities of color. (Source: fcgov.com/equity)
4 Hang your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins 1900 – 2000. Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental
Consultants, see in particular pages 7-9 for examples.
1.1
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 12
minimum sales prices for homes as well, ensuring that lower-income residents—regardless of race—were
also excluded.
4F
5
These examples highlight the legacy of institutional and structural racism in Fort Collins and help to explain
its continued ripple effects in our present housing system as well. For example, there is a higher denial
rate for mortgage lending for community members who identify as Hispanic / Latinx – these community
members are denied loans 20% of the time, while non-Hispanic / Latinx community members are denied
5% of the time even while having similar economic statuses.5F
6 Additionally, household incomes for BIPOC
households are lower than they are for white households. Median household income for African American
and Hispanic households is roughly $20,000 less than non-Hispanic white and Asian households. About
one in four nonwhite households earn less than $25,000 annually.6F
7
Whether through forced displacement, land use regulation, or the financial systems tied to housing and
wealth generation, it is clear that access to stable, healthy, affordable housing is not distributed equitably
among all communities in Fort Collins. For more information about these and other impacts of systemic
racism in the housing system, see pages 5-10 in the Existing Conditions Assessment.
CONNECTING HOUSING AND HEALTH
While housing affordability is one essential component of a healthy housing system, there are many other
elements to consider. Though Fort Collins has long acknowledged a connection between housing and
health, our housing policies have most often focused primarily on affordability:
“Economically, the more a household has to spend on housing the less money they have
for other needs. Housing costs will typically take precedence over other staples such as
food, transportation and medical care. These factors lead to less individual wellness and
less community prosperity. Less individual wellness leads to less stable housing conditions,
which leads to less stable families and neighborhoods. From an environmental
perspective, a lack of affordable housing pushes some community members that work in
Fort Collins out to other communities to live. This creates congestion on our roads and
increased pollution, which damages the environment that the Fort Collins community
cherishes. Thus to create a healthier community, Fort Collins must actively pursue policies
to ensure that people from all walks of life can find an affordable, quality place to live.”7F
8
The quote above describes some of the different health pathways that can lead to poor outcomes in
peoples’ lives. Housing conditions and costs, social and economic factors, and environmental conditions
5 Restrictive Covenant from Slade Acres, 1948 – south of Mulberry Street, at Sheldon Lake:
https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=51&docid=7701&dt=S-SUBDIVISION+PLAT
6 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, update in 2017 by City staff to original work completed by BBC
Consulting in 2012. The lending disparity cited here was identified in the 2017 update.
7 Existing Conditions Assessment, pg 38; from American Community Survey five-year data, 2018
8 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, 2015-2019 (pg. 1)
1.1
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 13
can have compounding impacts on an individual’s health and on community well-being.8F
9 ,
9F
10 Healthy,
stable, affordable housing is the foundation of both individual and community health, and this
fundamental truth is reflected throughout the vision and strategies in the Housing Strategic Plan.
H OME2HEALTH
The Home2Health project began after the 2019 adoption of City Plan. Home2Health is a collaborative,
two-year project led by the City and community partners including the Family Leadership Training Institute
at CSU Extension, the Center for Public Deliberation at CSU, The Family Center/La Familia, the Partnership
for Age-Friendly Communities, and the Larimer County Department of Health and Environment. The
purpose of this project is to increase our community’s ability to work together to carry out updates to
policies, codes, and regulations that can improve housing affordability and health equity.
After a year of community conversations, storytelling, and identifying key housing issues, Home2Health
began working to bring community voices and priorities into the development of the Housing Strategic
Plan. Hundreds of residents participated in this process, and this plan centers the voices of community
members throughout.
9 Housing and Health: An Overview of the Literature. Lauren Taylor, 2018.
10 Health Impact Assessment Summary. Larimer County Department of Health and Environment, Built Environment
Group, 2020.
1.1
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 14
REFLECTS LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
This Housing Strategic Plan was developed in the midst of the COVID-19 global pandemic, and the resulting
health and economic crisis and public health restrictions have further exposed and increased pre-existing
inequities in housing, employment, and health. Now, more than ever, the housing needs in our community
are critical and urgent. The development of this Housing Strategic Plan was a priority prior to the pandemic
and has become even more important to adopt and apply as we face a public health emergency that is
disproportionately impacting BIPOC and low-income households.
PREVIOUS PLANS AND EFFORTS
This housing plan incorporates the primary conversations and strategies identified in previous efforts,
including City Plan, the annual Community Survey, Our Climate Future, the Analysis of Impediments to
Fair Housing, the Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis, and conversations led by the Health District of
Larimer County, among others. Community members have consistently talked about the importance of
housing to a healthy environment, an equitable community, and to the physical and mental health of
individuals.
FROM DIALOGUE TO POLICY – THE PLANNING PROCESS
Conversations, storytelling and partnerships facilitated through Home2Health, community direction
from other planning efforts such as City Plan, and the strong foundation created by the previous
Affordable Housing Strategic Plan all helped make this Housing Strategic Plan possible.
The planning process steps include the following:
• Step 1 Vision: A vision paints a roadmap for the future. This plan’s vision that “Everyone has
healthy, stable housing they can afford” commits to ensuring all community members benefit
from our housing efforts and expands the focus of our work from solely on affordability to also
include health and stability.
• Step 2 Our Greatest Challenges: The housing system is complex and has many different
influences. This step identified the greatest challenges to achieving the vision in Fort Collins.
• Step 3: Community Engagement: Over a two-month period, H2H partners and staff asked
approximately 450 community members to reflect on whether the vision and greatest
challenges matched their experience and what they would like to see changed to achieve the
vision.
• Step 4: Identify strategies and create a tool to evaluate them: Strategies were identified based
on what the community highlighted as important, research on peer cities, and work with the
project’s consultant team, Root Policy Research. To date, over 50 strategies have been
identified.
1.1
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 15
• Step 5: Evaluate the strategies identified: Strategies were evaluated using 17 criteria, which
ask how well the strategy advances the vision, whether it is centered in equity, whether it is
feasible, what kind of impact it will have, and what resources are required.
• Step 6: Prioritize the strategies: With all strategies individually evaluated, staff developed an
initial set of priorities for the community to consider. Community members and City Council
prioritized solutions for final inclusion in the plan.
• Step 7: Consider plan adoption: In February 2021, Council will review the community’s
feedback, the draft plan, and will consider adoption of the Housing Strategic Plan.
• Step 8: Implementation: In many ways, the final step in the planning process is just the
beginning of the work. Implementation is when community, Council and staff will transition
from “what” to “how” we achieve this vision. The community and the City will annually review
work and determine what’s working and what’s not.
In addition to the specific planning steps, as the plan process began, we heard and incorporated some
key messages from the community that will continue to shape the City’s approach to the housing system
through our guiding principles (see the Implementation Chapter for more details on guiding principles in
implementation).
• Planning is important and it needs to be accompanied by immediate action. It is not enough to
plan for years in the future. People are struggling now to find stable, healthy housing they can
afford.
• Our strategies need to be prioritized and we need to have metrics that make sure our strategies
are working. We should be able to clearly identify where we are achieving our goals and where
we are falling short.
• The whole community needs to be involved. he City staff and City Council can only influence
some parts of the housing system. To make meaningful progress, partnerships are critical.
HOW TO USE THIS PLAN
The Housing Strategic Plan is one of many strategic or “functional”
plans that help the City set specific targets and make progress
toward the vision for our community outlined in our
comprehensive City Plan.
If City Plan identifies the “what” for the future of Fort Collins, the
Housing Strategic Plan describes the “how” that creates a
roadmap for action in the housing system and future public
funding through the City’s Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process.
Everyone has a part to play in this plan. To get to a future where
everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford, we will all
need to work together to make changes in our housing system.
1.1
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 16
We hope you will see yourself, your neighbors, and your families in this plan. We also hope you will use
this plan to build momentum and accountability. Finally, we encourage you to get involved. If you have
an idea or a project to propose, get in touch!
The remaining sections of this plan describe our housing needs, strategies, and accountability measures
in the following topic areas:
• Vision: This section articulates the vision, defines each of the terms used, how community
members shared that it affects them today and paints a picture of what it could look like in the
future.
• Greatest Challenges & Remaining Questions: The housing system is complex and is influenced by
many different factors. This section includes the six greatest challenges that affect our ability to
achieve the vision.
• Strategies and Priorities: This section illustrates the primary strategies we will use to overcome
the greatest challenges and advance us toward the vision. Strategies reflect ideas from the
community, research on how peer cities are approaching similar housing needs, and work with
the project’s consulting firm, Root Policy Research.
• Guiding Principles & Metrics to Guide Implementation: This plan recognizes that as strategies are
applied and the housing system evolves, new and updated strategies will be needed to move
toward the vision. This section will set forth guiding principles for advancing strategies in the
future and includes a set of metrics for evaluating plan success.
1.1
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 17
VISION AND HOUSING GOALS
Vision: Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford
DEFINING THE VISION
Everyone recognizes that all community members need
housing and are affected by the housing they do or do not
have. By including the entire community in the vision, we can
assess who does not have healthy, stable, or affordable
housing today and design strategies to ensure that a person’s
identity or identities is not a predictor of whether or they, or
our community, achieve this vision. (As one example, see the
sidebar on varying rates of home ownership in Fort Collins.)
Healthy Housing addresses physical and mental well-being inside and outside of the
home. Inside the home, this means high quality indoor air, comfortable temperatures
in each season, and freedom from harmful mold, pests or pathogens. Community
members defined health outside the home as feeling safe in your neighborhood and
the ability to walk, bike, or take transit to get the services you need.
Stable Housing is when a house becomes a home. For community members, a secure
place to live is a fundamental requirement for quality of life and well-being. Housing
stability is central to the best-practice “Housing First” approach to homelessness
prevention, which recognizes that housing is the most important platform for pursuing
all other life goals.
Affordable Housing recognizes that many people in Fort Collins have financial challenges
related to housing costs and that increasing the range and quantity of housing options
can support greater choice and affordability. Today, 3 in 5 renters and 1 in 5 homeowners
are cost-burdened, which means that the household spends more than 30% of their
income on housing.
Homeownership rates in Fort Collins vary
by race (Source: Equity Indicators):
- 55 in 100 white households
- 42 in 100 Hispanic/Latinx households
- 52 in 100 Asian households
- 20 in 100 Black households
- 47 in 100 Native American households
(Images Credit:
Shelby Sommer)
1.1
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 18
MEETING T HE VISION TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE
What have community members shared about their housing today and whether it is healthy, stable, or
affordable? How might Fort Collins evolve in the future as we work toward the vision?
Vision Today
What we heard from the community about their
current experiences with housing
Tomorrow
What the vision aims to
achieve in the future
Healthy
Housing
“My apartment is rising in rent every year, and the
living conditions don’t match the price. I have
maintenance issues (and) the condition of the
apartment is old and undertaken care of. . .”
“It makes it so that the places that are more affordable
are no longer safe due to living conditions and crime
rates among other things. These are important to
consider when you have kids. Do you stay broke and
live somewhere safe or give yourself more cushion but
risk safety? Some of the more affordable areas also do
not have as good of schools, which is a big concern for
me regarding my kids.”
Tools would be in place to
ensure that renters have safe
and healthy places to live.
Outside the home,
neighborhoods across the City
would provide safe, walkable
spaces for all ages and stages
of life.
Stable
Housing
“We are impacted by great uncertainty in being able to
afford to live in this City in the long-term, impacting all
facets of our lives. . . including mental health with
facing this kind of uncertainty. The right to shelter is a
basic need and there needs to be solutions that start
supporting those lower-income residents to have long-
term stable housing as soon as possible.”
“You have to live paycheck to paycheck. Sometimes
you don't even know where your next meal will come
from.”
Community members would
be able to choose where they
want to live and for how long,
making housing instability an
issue of the past.
Policies and solutions focus
on all outcome areas, from
housing to health.
Affordable
Housing
“When you lack affordable housing, it causes a lot of
stress for the individual. Do I have enough money for
rent, for food, for medicine, and for gas? You keep
making trade-offs. [If] I pay for rent, I don't buy food or
don't get medicine.”
“I think it is important that workers are able to afford
living in or near the city they work in, especially
teachers and frontline workers.”
Housing costs and the cost of
living are aligned with
individual incomes, meaning
decisions like these are rare
and nonrecurring.
There is enough housing
supply that aligns with the
incomes and needs of
community members.
1.1
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 19
AFFORDABILITY GOAL
Goal (set in 2015): Fort Collins aims to have 10% of its housing stock be deed restricted and affordable
[to households earning <80% AMI] by 2040.
HOW ARE WE DOING SO FAR? ARE WE MEETING OUR GOAL?
In 2015, affordable housing made up 5% of the City’s housing stock. Over
the past five years since the 2015 plan was adopted, the City and its
partners have added 373 new affordable homes with 240 under
construction. The total number of housing units has also increased
proportionately to 70,692, which means that affordable units still make
up only 5% of the overall housing stock. Overall, the City has 3,534
affordable units in its affordable housing inventory, which falls short by
708 units of where we should be by now. To get back on track to achieve
our 10% goal by 2040, the City would need to increase the amount of affordable housing by 282 units
every year from 2020 onward. Every year the City is unable to reach its annual affordable housing target
requires current and future generations to make up the difference.
REFINING THE GOAL
The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and
incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goal. In addition, the goal, as it is currently
defined, reflects a broad approach to affordability and does not address targeted categorical needs by
price point or tenure (rental vs. owner-occupied housing units).
The nuances in housing needs, as well as the challenge of tailoring new tools and strategies to achieve the
city’s affordability goal, suggest the City should consider defining subgoals to establish more specific
targets and monitor progress toward the overarching goal of 10% affordability by 2040. This concept is
included with the prioritized strategies, starting on page 26.
The following figures compare supply and demand for both rental and ownership housing at different
income levels (as a percentage of AMI) and illustrate that rental needs are concentrated below 60% AMI
while ownership needs are concentrated below 120% AMI.
The City needs to build 282
affordable units per year
between 2020 and 2040 to
achieve its affordability
goal.
1.1
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 20
Rental Affordability, Fort Collins, 2019
Note:
Income limits assume a 2-
person household and allow for
30% of monthly income for
housing costs.
Source:
2019 American Community
Survey (ACS), HUD 2019 Income
Limits, and Root Policy
Research.
Ownership Affordability, Fort Collins, 2019
Note:
Income limits assume a 2-
person household and allow for
30% of monthly income for
housing costs including 30-year
fixed mortgage with 4.0%
interest rate and 10%
downpayment.
Source:
2019 ACS, Larimer County
Assessor Sales Database 2020,
HUD 2019 Income Limits, and
Root Policy Research.
1.1
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 21
GREATEST CHALLENGES AND REMAINING QUESTIONS
City staff began developing the Housing Strategic Plan by analyzing housing, demographic, and job data
for Fort Collins. This analysis became the Existing Conditions Assessment (which will be added as an
Appendix in the final document), which provides an overview of what we know about the current state of
housing in Fort Collins and the many factors that influence our housing system. Some of the topics include:
• Demographics
• Equity and inclusion history and context
• Jobs and economic indicators
• Price of rental and for sale housing
• Housing policies
Based only on this initial data and analysis, staff created a preliminary list of greatest challenges and
remaining questions for the plan update. During the public engagement process, staff shared the list with
participants and asked them to compare the challenges and questions with their lived experience. Did the
list reflect their lived experience of finding housing in Fort Collins? What was missing? How could these
challenges and remaining questions be adjusted to better reflect the reality of finding a place to live in
Fort Collins? What needs to change to address these challenges? This process led to the finalized list of
greatest challenges and remaining questions in the Housing Strategic Plan.
GREATEST CHALLENGES
P rice escalation impacts everyone, and disproportionately impacts BIPOC [B lack, Indigenous and
P eople of C olor] and low-income households.
Latinx, Black or African American, and Native American
households make up a disproportionate share of low-
income households in Fort Collins. While the wages of many
low-income occupations have climbed faster than wages
overall, they still have not kept up with the increase in
housing prices. Since 2010, rents in Fort Collins have
increased 40%, single-family detached homes have
increased in value by 125%, and townhome and condo
values have risen 158%, while wages have increased by just
25%. With an ever-widening gap between housing prices
and incomes, and without further review into possible causes and explanations for that gap, BIPOC
households could be further marginalized by our housing system and suffer from the continued effects of
a gap that may be caused, at least in part, by effects of institutionalized racism, which is further outlined
in the Equity and Inclusion Section of the Existing Conditions Assessment.
Data clearly indicate BIPOC communities are
disproportionally low-income, have lower
net worth, and are less likely to be
homeowners. While structural racism is
evident across the United States and more
locally, more work is needed to establish the
exact cause of these disparate outcomes
here in Fort Collins.
1.1
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 22
There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available
and affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need.
The inventory of affordable rentals and homes for sale has
dwindled over the past several years. In 2012, 50% of the
rental housing stock cost less than $1,000 per month to rent.
In 2018, only 20% of the rental housing stock cost less than
$1,000 per month. As a result, 60% of renters in Fort Collins
are "cost burdened.” Cost burdened households spend more
than 30% of their income on housing, which means they have
less money for saving, food, healthcare, and other essential
needs. Similarly, since 2010 the median price of housing for
purchase has risen from around $200,000 to $450,000 for a
single-family detached home and from around $120,000 to
$310,000 for a townhome or condominium. This has led to an
increased percentage of renters. Fort Collins is now almost
evenly split between renters and homeowners. Participants in
the Home2Health community engagement workshops indicated that they are having to make difficult
choices to meet their housing needs. Many community members are subletting portions of their homes,
living with roommates, or working multiple jobs to afford their homes. Elderly residents and residents
with disabilities also have a difficult time finding housing that is accessible for their physical needs. This is
a mismatch between the housing that people need and the housing that is available in Fort Collins.
Community members forced to live in housing that is too expensive or that does not meet their physical
needs are making difficult decisions that lead to instability in their lives.
The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding
and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals
While the City has affordable housing incentives and provides $1.5 million to $3 million in direct subsidy
funding every year, these resources are not enough to meet the City’s affordable housing goals. The City
would need an additional 708 affordable units to meet its 2020 goal of 6% of all housing being affordable.
Assuming a $38,970 investment by the City yields one unit of affordable housing, the City would need to
invest $27,590,000 of direct subsidy funding to close the 2020 gap, which is the equivalent of 9 to 18 years
of funding at current levels. This calculation also assumes that federal subsidies for the development of
affordable rental housing (Low-Income Housing Tax Credits) remain steady, that there are enough tax-
exempt government bonds (Private Activity Bonds) available to support each project, and that private
developers have the ability to deliver projects. In addition, recommendations from the Land Use Code
Audit indicate that current land use incentives (e.g. increased density, parking reductions) for affordable
housing need to be revised and recalibrated. Every year that passes where the City does not meet its
affordable housing goals means current and future generations must make up the difference.
“I used to live in Fort Collins in the 80s and
90s. We could afford one income and raise
a family. Now, divorced, I had to leave Fort
Collins and move to Wellington where I
have to rent a room. Due to the increase in
housing prices many people were pushed
out to Wellington to find affordable
housing. If you look at Wellington now,
housing isn't affordable there either.
Homes are well over $300,000.”
—Community Engagement Workshop
Participant
1.1
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 23
Job growth continues to outpace housing growth
The Fort Collins job market grew by 2.8% per year from 2010
to 2019. The Fort Collins population only grew by 1.6%
annually during the same timeframe. While the housing stock
of Fort Collins grew by 1.73% from 2010 to 2019, this is still a
slower rate than job market growth. The community’s
unemployment rate fell from 7% to 3% between 2012 and
2015 and has held steady below 3% since 2015. All of these
factors indicate that most new job openings in the
community are being filled. If new housing supply in Fort
Collins cannot keep up with the pace of job growth, some Fort Collins workers likely are forced to live in
surrounding communities. Timnath, Wellington, and Windsor grew by 18%, 8.7%, and 7%, respectively,
from 2015 to 2018. Residents in these Northern Colorado communities, as well as others, tend to
commute into neighboring communities like Fort Collins, Loveland, and Greeley for work and many of
their daily needs. As of 2015, 18,799 car trips started in communities with cheaper home prices than Fort
Collins. Some of these commuters live in nearby communities by choice. It is likely, however, that many
of these commuters cannot afford to live in Fort Collins and must live in surrounding communities, in
hopes that they may be able to enter the Fort Collins housing market in the future. This is known as the
“drive till you qualify” phenomenon, which also requires commuters from neighboring communities to
pay more for daily transportation. In addition to the burden it creates on individuals, this trend runs
counter to the inclusive vision outlined by City Plan and the City’s climate action goals, such as the goal to
reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita. When individuals have to drive further to meet their
housing needs, VMT per capital is increasing instead of decreasing.
Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase
over time
In isolation, regulations for new housing development help
deliver the kind of development quality desired by the Fort
Collins community. Developers pay for the impact their
developments have on the community through various fees,
and regulations help ensure consistency across all kinds of
new housing development. The unintended consequence of
regulations on housing, coupled with impact fees, is that new
housing ends up being unattainable for most households.
Fees for infrastructure, water, and development review
continue to rise as resources become scarcer and
development challenges become more complex. In 2015, the
average cost to build a unit of housing was around $278,000, while today it costs close to $330,000.
Median income households can only afford a home priced at around $330,000. Developers build housing
for a profit and thus cannot build new homes that can be purchased for less than $330,000 without some
form of subsidy. In addition, the recent Land Use Code Audit identified many places where existing
“Housing is part of a more complex issue of
life in Fort Collins. We have attracted many
well paying jobs and have paid for them.
We have not done the same with lower
income/lower education jobs.”
—Community Engagement Workshop
Participant
“Fees to builders are too high to do
anything but "high end" or "luxury" as the
media likes to call it. There is a huge
market of low to middle income residents
that developers would love to help but
costs to build are too difficult to hit any
significant development.”
—Community Engagement Workshop
Participant
1.1
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 24
regulations could be revised or clarified to better encourage a wide range of housing options. However,
rewriting the Land Use Code is a complex, resource-intensive task that will require funding to complete.
Further complicating this picture is the finite quantity of natural resources in Fort Collins. Water to support
new development is increasingly scarce and expensive. Within our Growth Management Area, Fort Collins
has a limited supply of land. It will only become more expensive to develop in Fort Collins. A dollar spent
today on housing will go further than a dollar spent on housing in ten years.
REMAINING QUESTIONS
It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the impacts of the pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic has cast a shadow of uncertainty over
many facets of life. Unemployment has soared into double digits,
leaving many without a stable income. During the community
engagement process for this plan, many reported the strain the
pandemic has placed on their mental and physical health. While the
CARES Act provided enhanced unemployment benefits and
stimulus funds to individuals earning less than $75,000 and married
couples filing jointly earning less than $150,000, the medium and
long-term financial prospects are unknown for households
impacted by COVID-19. Previous recessions have seen increased
rates of foreclosures and evictions. Recovery is also uncertain since
this current recession is in direct response to a pandemic. Recovery
will depend on the success of the vaccine rollout, continued
physical distancing, how fast businesses recover, and many other
factors. It remains to be seen how the lingering effects of the
pandemic may continue to impair the mental and physical health of our community.
H ousing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for
people who rent
What does it mean for all residents to have healthy and stable
housing? With only 1 in 10 renters able to afford the median
home price is Fort Collins, how will the City support the nearly
50% of households who rent their homes? Today, the City has
several programs available to support households, e.g., income-
qualified programs, Healthy Homes, Landlord and Tenant
Information, and more, and has recently supported increased
rights for owners of manufactured homes who own the home but
rent or lease the land. Since fewer households in Fort Collins own
homes than in the past, housing policies also need to evolve to
better support renters in our community.
"With having to now deal with
COVID, being unsure as to what is
going to happen in the next couple
of months, hours getting cut and
prices rising as a student it has been
very stressful. Trying to balance all
of those things plus school, has
impacted my mental health and
makes me worried/anxious that I
may lose my job due to COVD or
miss a couple of days and be short
on rent because of COVID. "
—Community Engagement
Workshop Participant
"I want decision makers to understand
that our families are regular people
working hard and they did not plan to
take care of grandchildren. A crisis can
change one’s life forever and it affects
their financial and mental health, that
is what our senior families are dealing
with "
—Community Engagement Workshop
Participant
1.1
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 25
As noted on page 50 of the Existing Conditions Assessment, current zoning does not meet demand for
housing supply. Further, Fort Collins limits the number of unrelated people that can occupy a home
(referred to as “U+2”). While many consider U+2 to be a successful tool for preserving neighborhood
character, the extent to which U+2 impacts the housing market is unclear. More study would shed light
on how U+2 might be modified to meet its intent and advance the vision without impacting the
affordability of housing.
The Housing Strategic Plan includes the entire spectrum of housing and recognizes the critical role of
rental housing within the housing system. This will require careful consideration of new policies that could
improve housing stability and health for renters.
1.1
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 26
STRATEGIES AND PRIORITIES
Development of this plan included consideration of more than 50 potential strategies that were identified
by the community City staff, City Council’s Ad Hoc Committee, and best practice research. This section
presents the initial set of prioritized strategies that will be reviewed by the community in January 2021.
The section begins with a brief overview of existing strategies and programs, followed by a discussion of
how strategies were identified, evaluated, and prioritized.
Finally, the section presents prioritized strategies with a focus on how those strategies help accomplish
the city’s Vision and address the Greatest Challenges (see pages 17-20 for more info on the Vision and
pages 21-25 for more info on the Greatest Challenges).
EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMS
Existing housing policies, programs, and partners are summarized below to provide context for the
additional strategies set forth in this Plan. Additional details are available in the Existing Conditions
Assessment.
Funding Sources and Financial Assistance:
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Funds – federal funds allocated annually
to the City of Fort Collins to support affordable housing and economic/community development
activities benefitting low-income households. Ranges from $1.5 to $2.5 million annually.
• Private Activity Bonds (PABs) – tax-exempt bond capacity is allocated to the City of Fort Collins to
finance affordable housing development in association with the 4% Low Income Tax Credit (LIHTC)
development tools. PAB allocations to cities are based on population; Fort Collins received $8.9
million in 2020.
• Affordable Housing Capital Fund – locally generated funding as part of the Community Capital
Improvement Program quarter cent sales tax, a portion of which is dedicated to funding
affordable housing ($4 million over 10 years, sunsetting in 2025).
• Metropolitan Districts – special districts that issue tax exempt bonds to pay for infrastructure
improvements. Residential Metropolitan Districts must provide some form of public benefit.
Providing affordable housing is one of the public benefit options. Staff is currently evaluating this
policy and there is a moratorium on new residential Metropolitan District applications until
January 31, 2021.
• Fee deferral – qualified affordable housing projects can defer development fees until their
Certificate of Occupancy or until December 1 in the year building permits are obtained, whichever
occurs first.
• Fee credits – developers can seek credits to cover capital expansion fees, development review
fees, and building permit fees on units for households earning no more than 30% AMI.
• Homebuyer Assistance – the City previously provided loans to income-eligible households to cover
a portion of down payment and closing costs; however, the City is no longer offering this program
and is referring candidates to programs offered by other agencies.
1.1
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 27
Partnerships. The City works with many partners to advance Fort Collins’ housing goals. Below are just a
few examples.
• Local Non-Profit Housing Providers – include CARE Housing, Neighbor to Neighbor, Habitat for
Humanity, and Housing Catalyst. Partners provide affordable housing as well as housing-related
services such as utility/rental assistance, housing counseling, homebuyer education, and eviction
and foreclosure prevention.
• Homeward 2020 – collaborative, strategic think-tank guiding implementation of Fort Collins’ 10-
year plan to make homelessness rare, short-lived and non-recurring by setting priorities,
developing alignment and action plans, and suggesting policy.
• Northern Colorado Continuum of Care – coordinates funding and delivery of housing and services
for people experiencing homelessness in Northern Colorado, bringing together agencies in
Larimer and Weld Counties to develop a strategic, regional approach to homelessness.
• Community Land Trust – affordable ownership model that removes land from the purchase of a
home. Current partners include Urban Land Conservancy and Elevation Community Land Trust.
• Land Bank program – the City’s primary long-term incentive for affordable housing in which the
City acquires strategic parcels, holds, and then sells to qualified affordable housing developers at
a discounted price; all units developed must be affordable in perpetuity.
Land Use Code Provisions for Affordable Housing:
• Low Density Mixed-Use (LMN) Zone District Density Bonus – density increase from 9 to 12 dwelling
units per acre for affordable housing projects in the LMN zone.
• Height bonus in the Transit Oriented Development Overlay Zone (TOD) – one additional story of
building height if 10% of total units are affordable to 80% AMI or less (only applies in TOD zone).
• Reduced landscaping requirements – affordable housing projects may plant smaller trees than
required by the Land Use Code.
• Priority processing – qualified affordable housing projects receive priority processing during the
development review process (reduces each round of review by City staff by one week).
Previous and Related Studies. Complementary recommendations from the following studies are
acknowledged in the Prioritized Strategies:
• Housing Affordability Policy Study (HAPS) – 2015
• 2015-2019 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
• Land Use Code Audit – 2020
• Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing – 2020
• Homeward 2020 Strategic Plan – 2020
• Feasibility Study for Inclusionary Housing and Affordable Housing Linkage Fees - 2020
Existing programs, policies, strategies and partnerships will continue to be necessary as the City and
community partners work towards housing goals. It is still important to increase the inventory of
affordable rental units, preserve the long-term affordability and physical condition of existing affordable
1.1
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 28
housing, increase housing and supportive services for people with special needs and support
opportunities to obtain and sustain affordable homeownership. However existing efforts are limited in a
couple of ways: first, because many of these programs are focused on reaching goals related to affordable
housing, they do not address needs across the entire housing spectrum. Second, engagement with
community members and partners indicate that community members do not always see their needs or
themselves reflected in the strategies presented in previous plans. The proposed strategies are organized
in a way to address these issues.
PRELIMINARY STRATEGIES & EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
Strategy Identification
Preliminary strategies were designed to address the greatest housing challenges identified in the Existing
Conditions report and were based on findings and recommendations in previous City reports,10F
11 in
addition to engagement with various city departments, Boards and Commissions, Home2Health partners,
meetings with the City Council Housing Ad Hoc Committee, community engagement and researching peer
cities. These groups generated hundreds of ideas, which were consolidated and organized into over 50
preliminary policy strategies for consideration in the Plan.
The process of converting ideas into preliminary strategies was led by the City’s consultant, Root Policy
Research. All suggestions were included in some form11F
12; the reduction from 150 ideas to 50+ strategies
was primarily based on consolidation of duplicate or similar ideas and framing ideas for a policy format.
A full list of ideas (and which groups recommended them) as well as the resulting preliminary strategies
will be available with the Final Plan.
Strategy Evaluation and Prioritization
The preliminary strategies were evaluated based on three factors: alignment with the vision, feasibility,
and effectiveness. The evaluation of vision alignment included a series of questions that addressed each
vision element (“everyone,” “health,” “stable,” “affordable”), with particular attention to equity factors
at the individual and neighborhood level, see the evaluation framework questions on the next page. To
evaluate whether a strategy was feasible and potentially effective, the process relied on questions related
to community support, implementation options and partnerships, as well as expectations about how
effective each strategy could be. Additional details on the preliminary strategies and evaluation
framework will be available with the Final Plan.
11 2020 Land Use Code Audit, 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Homeward 2020
12 The only exceptions were ideas for which there was not a viable legal path forward (e.g., violation of basic property
rights or interstate commerce).
1.1
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 29
Staff and ad hoc housing committee members further prioritized strategies that met the baseline criteria
(vision alignment, feasibility, and effectiveness), with a variety of exercises that rated and ranked each
strategy as well as each problem the strategies are designed to solve, and discussed broad priorities and
objectives required to achieve the City’s vision and goal. The process prioritized vision alignment over
immediate feasibility, as some strategies may require additional staff time and/or funding. In other words,
strategies that currently may not be financially feasible were included if they met the other two criteria.
Prioritization efforts are ongoing and the strategies identified below reflect preliminary priorities, as of
December 2020. Feedback on this draft Plan along with additional staff and committee workshops to be
held in January 2021 will be reflected in the final version of the Housing Strategic Plan.
All prioritized strategies meet the baseline vision, feasibility, and effectiveness criteria and reflect staff
and community input on key objectives for the Plan. They are designed to address the Greatest
Challenges (discussed in detail on pages 21-25), produce meaningful outcomes, and expand housing
choice in Fort Collins across the entire spectrum of housing preference and need.
Evaluation Framework Ex. StrategyEx. StrategyDoes this strategy create/preserve housing affordable to 80% AMI or less (City-
adopted goal for affordability)?yes
Does this strategy enhance housing stability?maybe
Does this strategy promote healthy neighborhoods/housing?yes
Does this strategy increase equity in the following ways…
Address housing disparities?yes
Increase accessibility?no
Increase access to areas of opportunity?maybe
Promote investment in disadvantaged neighborhoods?yes
Mitigate residential displacement?yes
Does this strategy address highest priority needs (to be defined by sub-goal
development)?maybe
Does this strategy increase housing type and price-point diversity in the city?yes
Does the city have necessary resources (financial and staff capacity) to implement
administer and monitor?yes
Does this strategy have community support?yes
Can the City lead implementation of this strategy (or does it require state/regional
leadership and/or non-profit or partner action)?yes
If no, are partnerships in place to lead implementation?n/a
Does this strategy help advance other community goals (e.g., climate action, water
efficiency, etc.)?yes
How effective is this strategy in achieving the desired outcome (on a scale of 1 to 5
where 1 is not at all effective is 5 is very effective)?4
How resource intensive is this strategy (on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is no cost is 5
is very high cost)?2
Rating scales for efficacy and cost
Respond to each question with yes, maybe, or no:Vision CriteriaFeasibility Criteria1.1
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 30
HOW STRATEGIES WERE PRIORITIZED
Housing is a fundamental part of all communities, and a critical part of community development. Yet the
types of housing available—and the market prices—are not always in line with community needs. After
analyzing housing, demographic, and job data for Fort Collins in the Existing Conditions Assessment, staff
identified the following list of Greatest Challenges and Remaining Questions (discussed in detail on pages
21-25) related to the Fort Collins housing system:
1. Price escalation impacts everyone, and
disproportionately impacts BIPOC [Black, Indigenous
and People of Color] and low-income households.
2. There aren’t enough affordable places available for
people to rent or purchase, or what is available and
affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need.
3. The City does have some tools to encourage
affordable housing, but the current amount of funding
and incentives for affordable housing are not enough
to meet our goals.
4. Job growth continues to outpace housing growth.
5. Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase
over time.
6. It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the impacts of the pandemic.
7. Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially
for people who rent.
These challenges provide the baseline organization for
the prioritized housing strategies. Though many
strategies do address multiple challenges, they are
organized around the primary challenge addressed. (No
challenges are categorized under Greatest Challenge #6,
as a primary, though many strategies will address
housing challenges exacerbated by the pandemic). In
addition, each group of strategies is linked to the vision
(Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford)
through a vision alignment statement.
Priority strategies are summarized in the table below.
The table also includes the anticipated outcome of each
strategy and the anticipated timeline for
implementation.
Another way of thinking about the challenges
is through the following problem statements:
• We don't have enough housing units or the
types of housing we need.
• Once the housing does exist, the people who
need the housing can't get into it.
• Once the housing exists and the people who
need it can get into it, they can't stay in it (or
they are stuck in it).
The Ad Hoc Committee identified the following
strategies as quick wins:
1. Assess displacement and gentrification risk.
8. Extend the city’s affordability term.
9. Off-cycle appropriation to advance Phase One of
the
Land Use Code (LUC) Audit.
13. Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current
market conditions (existing incentives include fee
waivers, fee deferral, height bonus, density bonus,
reduced landscaping, priority processing).
14.Create additional development incentives for
affordable housing.
25.Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal
representation.
1.1
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 31
Each of the prioritized strategies are explained below and
they are organized by the greatest challenge that they
address. Descriptions include secondary challenges
addressed by the strategy (when applicable), the
expected outcome of the strategy, the group impacted by
the strategy, reasons for prioritization, and the
timeframe for when actions could be implemented.
All prioritized strategies included below received strong
support from staff and committee evaluators, reflect
community priorities, and meet baseline criteria for
vision alignment and feasibility. The reasons for
prioritization discussed below focus on why each strategy
received such support.
The timeframe is defined as:
• Quick(er) wins: actions that could be moved
forward in the very near term (less than 1 year)
• Transitional: mid-term actions requiring 1-2
years to implement
• Transformational: Longer term actions, requiring 2+ years to develop an implementation and
engagement strategy
Impacted players in the housing system that
strategies touch on include:
1. Builders/developers
2. Landlords
3. Homeowners associations
4. Special districts and government entities
5. Financial institutions
6. Manufactured housing neighborhoods
7. Homeowners
8. Renters
9. People experiencing homelessness
10. Residents vulnerable to displacement
11. Historically disadvantaged populations
12. Other community partners
This identification metric fosters broad access to
the plan by allowing all participants, businesses,
and residents to see where they “fit” in the city’s
approach to housing.
1.1
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 32
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PRIORITIZED STRATEGIES
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
Greatest Challenge #1. Price escalation impacts everyone, and disproportionately impacts BIPOC [Black, Indigenous and People of Color] and low-income
households.
Vision Alignment: The following strategies primarily address the "everyone" (i.e., equity) component of the Vision.
1. Assess displacement and
gentrification risk (New)
Map illustrating displacement and
gentrification threats at the neighborhood
level
Improve housing
equity, housing
stability, and
preservation
• Not directly referenced,
though there were many
comments to no longer being
able to afford to live here.
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
2. Promote inclusivity,
housing diversity, and
affordability as
community values.
(Expand)
Engagement should address structural racism,
myths related to affordable housing and
density, and prioritize storytelling and be
culturally appropriate
Improve housing
equity and
increase housing
choice
• Combat stigmas associated
with affordable housing
• Build community-wide
support for doing things
differently
Transformational
(2+ years)
3. Implement the 2020
Analysis of Fair Housing
Choice Action Steps
(Expand)
The Analysis of Fair Housing is a HUD-required
document that analyzes fair housing (the
intersection of civil rights and housing)
challenges for protected class populations in
Fort Collins.
Improve housing
equity and access
to opportunity
• Focus financial support on
lowest-income residents
• Ensure all neighborhoods
have access to amenities
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Transformational
(2+ years)
Greatest Challenge #2. There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available and affordable isn’t the kind of
housing people need
Vision Alignment: The following strategies drive forward affordable, healthy, stable housing for all by increasing housing choice across the entire housing
spectrum.
4. Implementation,
tracking and assessment
of housing strategies
(Expand)
Develop real-time, accessible and
performance-based data evaluating
performance of strategies to ensure they are
effective, equitable and moving towards vision
Increase and
monitor
effectiveness of
strategies
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
• Consult with BIPOC and low-
income households
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
13 Each strategy is listed as New (initiated as a result of this Plan), Expand (expansion or evaluation of existing program or policy), or Continue (Continuing existing
program or policy).
14 Staff is continuing to analyze the community engagement feedback and how it supports the prioritized strategies. This section will continue to evolve as we
hear from the community.
1.1
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 33
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
5. Advocate for housing-
related legislation at
state and federal levels
(Expand)
Monitor and support state level renter
protection legislation. Advocate for additional
state and federal funding sources. Work with
Larimer County on eviction protections and
consider statewide coalition
Varied (e.g.,
renter
protections,
funding options)
• Advocate for limits on rent
prices and/or annual rent
increases
• Provide emergency gap
funding to prevent eviction
Transitional
(1-2 years)
6. Visitability policy (New) Allows easy visitation by mobility impaired
residents in a portion/percentage of units in
new housing developments.
Improve
accessibility
• Build community-wide
support for doing things
differently
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Transformational
(2+ years)
7. Remove barriers to the
development of
Accessory Development
Units (Expand)
Remove Land Use Code barriers and create
more incentives for revamping existing
housing/neighborhoods
Diversify housing
options/Increase
housing choice
• Explore housing types
including smaller homes and
cooperative housing
• Relax restrictions in the
Land Use Code
Transitional
(1-2 years)
8. Extend the City’s
affordability term
(Expand)
The City’s current affordability term for
projects receiving City funding or incentives is
20 years but many cities use longer terms,
commonly 30 up to 60 years, to keep
inventory affordable for longer.
Increase stability
& preservation of
affordable
rental/owner
options
• Build community-wide
support for doing things
differently
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
9. Off-cycle appropriation
to advance Phase One of
the Land Use Code (LUC)
Audit (New)
Defines additional housing types; creates
opportunity to increase overall supply;
recalibrates incentives for affordable housing
production; identifies opportunities to add to
existing incentives; refines and simplifies
development processes
Diversify housing
options / Increase
housing choice
• Explore opportunities to
limit fees associated with
housing
• Remove or relax regulations
that limit creative reuse of
existing homes
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
Greatest Challenge #3. The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and incentives are not enough
to meet our goals
Vision Alignment: The following strategies primarily address the affordability component of the Vision.
10. Refine local affordable
housing goal (Expand)
Set more specific housing goals by income
level so that it is easier to track progress and
communicate our housing goals to developers
Improve targeting
of housing
investments
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
1.1
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 34
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
11. Create a new dedicated
revenue stream to fund
the Affordable Housing
Fund (Expand)
Create a fee or tax that generates money for
the Affordable Housing Fund which would
support additional affordable housing
development and rehabilitation
Increase supply
and preservation
of affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Transformational
(2+ years)
12. Expand partnership(s)
with local Community
Development Financial
Institution (CDFI) to offer
gap financing and low-
cost loan pool for
affordable housing
development (Expand)
A loan pool and gap financing for affordable
housing projects that need additional financial
support to be viable
Increase supply of
affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Transitional
(1-2 years)
13. Recalibrate existing
incentives to reflect
current market
conditions (Expand)
Existing incentives include fee waivers, fee
deferral, height bonus, density bonus, reduced
landscaping, priority processing. Alter
incentives for affordable housing
development so developers are motivated to
use them based on market conditions
Increase supply of
affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Quick(er) Win
(<1 year)
14. Create additional
development incentives
for affordable housing
(New)
Increase incentives to develop affordable
housing in the Land Use Code to increase
affordable housing supply
Increase supply of
affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Quick(er)win
(<1 year)
Greatest Challenge #4. Job growth continues to outpace housing growth
Vision Alignment: The following strategies increase housing for all by removing barriers to development and increasing housing options.
15. Explore/address
financing and other
barriers to missing
middle and innovative
housing development
(New)
Collaborate with developers and financial
institutions to understand barriers for missing
middle projects, e.g., financing, code,
materials, etc.; consider partnerships with
developers and partners to address barriers
and build support for diverse, innovative, and
efficient housing options
Diversify housing
options / Increase
housing choice
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
• Relax restrictions in the
Land Use Code to make it
easier for developers to
build new homes
• Seek out innovative ideas
from the community and
peer cities
Transitional
(1-2 years)
1.1
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 35
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
16. Remove barriers to
allowed densities
through code revisions
(New)
Revisit or remove barriers in code that limit
the number of multifamily units, have square
footage requirements for secondary or non-
residential buildings and height limitations
restricting the ability to maximize compact
sites using tuck-under parking
Diversify housing
options / Increase
housing choice
• Explore more housing types
including tiny homes and
cooperative housing
• Build more duplexes and small
multifamily units
• Remove or relax regulations
that limit creative reuse of
existing homes
• Relax restrictions in the
Land Use Code to make it
easier for developers to
build new homes
Transitional
(1-2 years)
Greatest Challenge #5. Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase over time.
Vision Alignment: The following strategies primarily address the affordability components of the Vision
17. Reconsider affordable
housing
requirements/funding as
part of metro districts
(Expand)
Consider requirement that Metropolitan
Districts containing housing must provide
affordable housing
Increase supply of
affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
18. Increase awareness &
opportunities for
creative collaboration
across water districts
and other regional
partners around the
challenges with water
costs and housing
(Expand)
Fort Collins has multiple water providers and
the cost of water is different in each district.
This collaboration could result in more
consistent water prices across districts.
Improve
affordability and
housing diversity
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Transitional
(1-2 years)
Greatest Challenge #6: It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the impacts of the pandemic.
Note: Many strategies address the challenges that COVID has created or amplified, (e.g., Strategy 25 Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal
representation). However, those strategies were all primarily linked to other challenges. These linkages will be further described below in the narrative.
1.1
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 36
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
Greatest Challenge #7. Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent.
Vision Alignment: The following strategies primarily address the health and stability components of the Vision
19. Bolster city land bank
activity by allocating
additional funding to the
program (contingent on
adopting additional
revenue stream policy)
(Expand)
The Land Bank program sets aside land for
affordable housing development. This would
allow the City to purchase more land to add to
the Land Bank.
Increase supply of
affordable
rental/owner
housing
• Incentivize developers to
build affordable housing
Transformational
(2+ years)
20. Explore the option of a
mandated rental
license/registry program
for long-term rentals and
pair with best practice
rental regulations (New)
Can result in landlord education (fair housing
or other), standardized lease agreements in
English and Spanish, application fee
reasonableness requirements, a more defined
path for conflict resolution, and health &
safety rental inspections
Improve renter
protections,
housing quality,
housing stability
and landlord
access to
information
• Explore rental licensing to
promote safe and healthy
housing
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Transformational
(2+ years)
21. Explore revisions to
occupancy limits and
family definitions
(Expand)
Occupancy limits and narrow family
definitions often create unintended
constraints on housing choice and options,
including cooperative housing opportunities
for seniors, people with disabilities, and low
income renters desiring to live with unrelated
adults in a single family home setting, as well
as non-traditional household arrangements.
Diversify housing
options / Increase
housing choice
• Remove or relax occupancy
restrictions
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Transitional
(1-2 years)
22. Public Sector Right of
First Refusal for
Affordable
Developments (New)
Typically requires owners of affordable
housing to notify the public sector of intent to
sell or redevelop property and allow period of
potential purchase by public sector or non-
profit partner.
Preserve current
supply of
affordable rental
housing
• Bolster nonprofits providing
“housing-first” models of
support
• Focus financial support on
lowest income residents
Transitional
(1-2 years)
1.1
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 37
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
23. Tenant right of first
refusal for cooperative
ownership of multifamily
or manufactured housing
community (New)
Laws that give tenants the right to purchase a
rental unit or complex (including a
manufactured housing community) before the
owner puts it on the market or accepts an
offer from another potential buyer.
Increase stability
and housing
options for
renters and
manufactured
housing residents
and preservation
of affordable
housing
• Explore opportunities for
resident-owned
manufactured housing
communities
• Explore more housing types
including tiny homes and
cooperative housing
Transformational
(2+ years)
24. Support community
organizing efforts in
manufactured home
communities and
increase access to
resident rights
information, housing
resources, and housing
programs (Expand)
Continue and expand existing efforts to work
with residents and nonprofit community
partners to address the critical need for
programs focused on manufactured housing
livability and safety, reduction of the fear of
retaliation for residents, preservation of these
as an affordable housing option, and equitable
access to City resources in historically
underserved neighborhoods and populations.
Increase stability
and housing
options for
manufactured
housing residents
• Explore opportunities for
resident-owned
manufactured housing
communities
• Preserve manufactured
housing communities
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
25. Foreclosure and eviction
prevention and legal
representation (Expand)
Provides assistance with mortgage debt
restructuring and mortgage and/or utilities
payments to avoid foreclosure; short-term
emergency rent and utilities assistance for
renters. CARES Act funding is currently
dedicated to a legal defense fund for renters
but additional resources are needed.
Increase stability
for vulnerable
renters and
owners
• Provide emergency gap
funding to prevent
eviction
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Quick(er) win
(<1 year)
26. Small Landlord
Incentives (New)
Incentivize small landlords to keep units
affordable for a period of time in exchange for
subsidized rehabilitation or tax or fee waivers.
Aligns with Strategy 20 to explore rental
registration and licensing.
Increase
affordable rentals,
housing stability
and preservation,
and improve
condition
• Advocate for limits on rent
prices and/or annual rent
increases
• Explore rental licensing to
promote safe and healthy
housing
Transformational
(2+ years)
1.1
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 38
Initial Set of Prioritized
Strategies12F13 Brief Description Outcome Community Recommendations
Alignment (Draft)13F14
Timeline
Aligning the Plan with Related Efforts
Continue the City's ongoing
efforts to implement
recommendations from
current housing-related
studies and other City efforts.
(LUC Audit, Fair Housing
Analysis, Homeward 2020,
2015-2019 Affordable
Housing Strategic Plan)
(Continue)
This work acknowledges that continuing the
City’s existing efforts (as will be noted in the
full plan chapter) is critical for achieving the
City’s goals and achieving the vision.
Diversify housing
options, increase
housing choice,
increase equity,
solutions to end
homelessness,
preservation of
affordable
housing
• Focus financial support on
lowest income residents
• Bolster nonprofits providing
supportive housing services
• Preserve manufactured
housing communities
Bolster nonprofits providing
“housing first” models of
support
Provide emergency gap
funding to prevent eviction
Ongoing and
varies
Continue to align housing
work with other
departmental plans and
programs to leverage more
funding resources and
achieve citywide goals that
advance the triple bottom
line of economic,
environmental, and social
sustainability (could include
citywide disparity study)
(Continue)
As housing impacts every aspect of the
community, integrating this work across the
triple bottom line to leverage funds, reduce
redundancies, and align toward multiple city
goals is critical to success.
Citywide
alignment
• Build communitywide
support for doing things
differently
• Seek out innovative ideas from
the community and peer cities
• Increase equity in existing
programs and services
Ongoing and
varies
1.1
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 39
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PRIORITIZED STRATEGIES
Greatest Challenge 1: Price escalation impacts everyone, and disproportionately impacts BIPOC [Black,
indigenous and People of Color] and low-income households.
1. Assess displacement and gentrification risk (New). City
staff can use examples from other communities as a guide
for building our own index for displacement and
gentrification risk using readily available data (Census,
American Community Survey, etc.). This information can
help promote and target anti-displacement
resources/programs, pair such resources with major
capital investments, and guide community partnerships.
Why Prioritized? Low-cost effort with targeted and
meaningful impact; direct impact on equity and stability.
Already identified as an Ad Hoc Committee Quick Win.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Improve Housing Equity
Lead Entity: County, City
Impacted Players: Renters, Historically
disadvantaged populations, Residents
vulnerable to displacement
Next Steps: Best practice review of
approaches to identifying vulnerable
neighborhoods; analysis and mapping;
partner with the County’s Built
Environment Group and their work to
assess displacement
Secondary Greatest Challenges: #6
2: Promote inclusivity, housing diversity, and
affordability as community values (Expand). PR
campaign and/or communications related to density,
structural racism, need for affordable housing, myths
about affordable housing, etc. Could also use "tactical
urbanism" strategies as part of this effort.
Why Prioritized? Best fundamental practice for fostering
broad access to housing vision, contributing to an
inclusive community culture, and addressing a common
and significant barrier to the creation of affordable
housing: “Not-In-My-Back-Yard" (NIMBYism). Can be high
cost, but also a high impact strategy.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Improve Housing Equity
and Housing choice
Lead Entity: Partners, Community, City
Impacted Players: HOAs, Landlords,
Builders/Developers, Financial Institutions,
Special Districts and Government Entities,
Manufactured Housing Neighborhoods,
Homeowners, Renters, People Experiencing
Homelessness, Historically disadvantaged
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement, other partners
Next Steps: Coordinate with
Communications department on approach;
Evaluate funding needs and options
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
3: Implement the 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice
Action Steps (Expand). The Analysis of Fair Housing is a
HUD-required document that analyzes fair housing (the
intersection of civil rights and housing) challenges for
protected class populations (e.g. race, individuals with
disabilities) in Fort Collins. It outlines the following action
steps:
a. Strengthen distribution of fair housing
information, educational and training
opportunities.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Improve Housing Equity
and access to opportunity
Lead Entity: Partners/Organizations
Impacted Players: HOAs, Landlords,
Builders/Developers, Financial Institutions,
Special Districts and Government Entities,
Manufactured Housing Neighborhoods,
Homeowners, Renters, People Experiencing
Homelessness, Historically disadvantaged
1.1
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 40
b. Improve housing options for people with
disabilities.
c. Support residents’ efforts to establish and build
credit.
d. Support programs, projects, and organizations
that improve housing access and affordability.
e. Continue to pursue equity in public infrastructure
and amenities.
f. Use Home2Health public engagement activities to
inform Land Use Code and policy updates.
Why Prioritized? HUD requirement for receiving federal
funds, direct and meaningful impact on addressing
segregation and discrimination, as well as improving fair
housing choice and increasing opportunity for BIPOC and
people with disabilities. Low cost effort resulting in
targeted and meaningful impact; direct impact on equity
and stability. Already identified as an Ad Hoc Committee
Quick Win.
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement, other partners
Next Steps: See Action Step details in the
Analysis of Fair Housing.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
Greatest Challenge 2: There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or
what is available and affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need.
4. Implementation, tracking, and assessment of housing
strategies (Expand). Includes:
• Regularly assess existing housing policies and
programs to ensure they are effective, equitable,
and aligned with vision. Begin with a
comprehensive review of current
programs/policies using the Government Alliance
on Race & Equity Racial Equity Toolkit. All
strategies proposed in this Housing Strategic Plan
will also be evaluated through an equity and
effectiveness lens.
• Develop real-time, accessible, and performance-
based data that evaluates the performance of
these strategies and their progress toward the
vision. This would include data for the entire
housing spectrum, from people experiencing
homeless to middle-income households.
Why Prioritized? Best practice; essential for maintaining
effectiveness, equity, and impact of housing
programs/strategies; also fosters transparency in
monitoring performance and progress toward citywide
goal for affordable housing.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Increase/monitor
effectiveness of all strategies
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: HOAs, Landlords,
Builders/Developers, Financial Institutions,
Special Districts and Government Entities,
Manufactured Housing Neighborhoods,
Homeowners, Renters, People Experiencing
Homelessness, Historically disadvantaged
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement, other partners
Next Steps: Evaluate existing
programs/policies for both equity and
effectiveness; Create data dashboard to
track housing production against
affordability goal(s).
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
1.1
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 41
5. Advocate for housing-related legislation at state and
federal levels (Expand). Focus areas could include:
monitor and support state level renter protection
legislation (e.g., fee caps, eviction protections, etc.),
advocate for additional state and federal funding sources
(e.g. real estate transfer tax), and advocate for additional
LIHTC funding and Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP). Also
work with Larimer County on eviction protections and
explore the option of pausing evictions in times of crisis
(e.g., if/when state of emergency in declared). Consider a
statewide coalition of local governments, similar to
Colorado Communities for Climate Action (or CC4CA) that
the City participates in for climate.
Why Prioritized? Low cost approach to leveraging
additional resources and strategies to achieve City’s
goal/vision. Acknowledges regional nature of housing
challenges and addresses by regional/state framework.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Varied (e.g., renter
protections and funding options)
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: Special Districts and
Government Entities, other partners
Next Steps: Continue working with the
City’s Legislative Review Committee and
initiate conversations with other
municipalities to assess how local
governments can work together to advance
common goals.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1,7
6. Visitability policy (New). Require or incentivize
developers to make a portion of developments
"visitable," meeting design standards that allow easy
visitation by mobility impaired residents (one zero step
entrance, 32-inch doorways, and bathroom on the main
floor that is wheelchair accessible). Visitable design has
been shown to add no additional cost to developers; it
can be incentivized using a variety of incentives similar to
affordability incentives (e.g., fee waivers/deferrals,
priority processing, density bonuses, variances, etc.).
Why Prioritized? Low cost approach to leveraging
additional resources and strategies to achieve City’s
goal/vision. Acknowledges regional nature of housing
challenges and addresses by regional/state framework.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Improve Accessibility
Lead Entity: City
Impacted Players: Historically
disadvantaged populations
Next Steps: Evaluate appetite for mandate
vs incentive; stakeholder outreach with
development community; review similar
policies in other communities and draft
policy language for Fort Collins; partner
with the County’s Built Environment Group
to coordinate this effort with existing
multimodal index.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
7. Remove barriers to the development of Accessory
Dwelling Units (Expand). Allow by right in all residential
zone districts (in process per the 2020 LUC audit);
reduced (or waived) tap fees and other development
fees; consider development of a grant program for low
and moderate income owners; evaluate feasibility of
ADUs by lot to determine if there are overly burdensome
standards related to lot coverage, setbacks, alley access,
etc. and address those barriers as necessary. This is
connected to strategy 9 to approve the off-cycle
appropriation for phase one of the LUC audit.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Diversity Housing
Options/Increase housing choice
Lead Entity: Community, City
Impacted Players: Homeowners
Next Steps: Housing-related elements will
be included in the off-cycle appropriation to
advance Phase One of the Land Use Code
(LUC) Audit. An update to the City’s
development fees is anticipated in 2021.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1,4,5,7
1.1
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 42
Why Prioritized? Best practice for increase housing choice
without adverse impact on community context. Already
identified as priority in the 2020 LUC audit and
implementation underway.
8. Extend the city’s affordability term (Expand).
Affordability term is the time period in which affordable
housing is income restricted, after which it can convert to
market rate. The current affordability term for projects
receiving City funding or incentives is 20 years; many cities
use longer terms of 30 to 60 years.
Why Prioritized? Current term is uncommonly short;
extension would have meaningful impact on stability and
preservation of future affordable housing stock. Already
identified as an Ad Hoc Committee Quick Win.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Diversity in Housing
Options/Increase housing choice
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers,
Renters, Historically disadvantaged
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement
Next Steps: Stakeholder outreach to
affordable housing providers and
multifamily developers to vet term options
and applicability
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 5
9. Off-cycle appropriation to advance Phase One of the
Land Use Code (LUC) Audit (New). Responds to the
greatest challenges by addressing the entire housing
spectrum with new tools and processes, including:
a. Establishment of additional housing types;
opportunity to increase overall supply
b. Recalibration of existing incentives for affordable
housing production; identification of new
incentives
c. Refines and simplifies development processes
Beginning the LUC update is an important step to
advancing several strategies including strategies 7,13,14
and 16
Why Prioritized? Brings LUC into compliance with best
practice standards for current market trends and needs;
expands housing choice and diversity; implements
priorities already identified as part of LUC Audit and an Ad
Hoc Committee quick win.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year) to
allocate resources; Transitional (1-2 years)
to complete Phase 1 code changes
Expected Outcome: Diversity in Housing
Options/Increase housing choice
Lead Entity: City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers,
Special Districts and Government Entities,
other partners
Next Steps: Off-cycle appropriation
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1,3,4,5,7
Greatest Challenge 3: The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current
amount of funding and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals.
10. Refine local affordable housing goal (Expand). The City
has already adopted a broad goal of 10% affordable at 80%
AMI. Consider formal adoption of subgoals (e.g., 10% of
rental units affordable to 60% AMI; 5% of owner units deed
restricted and affordable to 100% AMI) to help set
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Improve targeting of
housing investments
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: HOAs, Landlords,
Builders/Developers, Financial Institutions,
1.1
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 43
expectations for developers as they negotiate agreements
with the City and establish more specific targets to monitor
progress.
Why Prioritized? Critical for aligning needs with quantified
affordability target and ensuring meaningful impact of
strategies.
Special Districts and Government Entities,
Manufactured Housing Neighborhoods,
Homeowners, Renters, People Experiencing
Homelessness, Historically disadvantaged
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement, other partners
Next Steps: Convene staff and stakeholders
to refine goal according to identified needs;
Align prioritized strategies with sub-goal
targets.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
11. Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the
Affordable Housing Fund through dedicated property or
sales tax (Expand). Local funds can support a variety of
affordable housing activities, have fewer restrictions and
are easier to deploy than federal or state dollars. They can
be earmarked for a specific income level (e.g., less than
30% AMI or used more broadly). Prioritized
recommendations for revenue generation that can be
implemented together or separately are:
a. Dedicated sales or property tax; and/or
b. Linkage (or impact) fees imposed on new
commercial and/or residential development.
Why Prioritized? High impact strategy and increasingly
common among local jurisdictions in the midst of rising
housing challenges and diminishing federal resources.
Additional funding is necessary for the city to achieve
affordability goal and implement select prioritized
strategies.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Increase supply
affordable rental/owner housing
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers,
Financial Institutions, Special Districts and
Government Entities, Homeowners,
Renters, People Experiencing
Homelessness, Historically disadvantaged
populations, Residents vulnerable to
displacement, other partners
Next Steps: Propose linkage fee adoption
(based on 2020 Feasibility study) to Council;
Begin to evaluate opportunities for
dedicated sales or property tax within the
broader context of citywide needs, e.g.,
transit, parks operations and maintenance,
etc.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
12. Expand partnership(s) with local Community
Development Financial Institution (CDFI) to offer gap
financing and low-cost loan pool for affordable housing
development (Expand). Partnership with a CDFI could
include financial support through grants or low-cost debt,
risk sharing through pooled loan loss reserve, or alignment
of priorities around affordable development.
Why Prioritized? Low cost effort with potential for high
impact; capitalizes on existing partnerships to leverage
common goals.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Lead Entity: Financial Institutions, City
Expected Outcome: Increase supply
affordable rental/owner housing
Impacted Players: Financial Institutions
Next Steps: Outreach to CDFIs (e.g., Impact
Development Fund) to evaluate strategic
opportunities.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
13. Recalibrate existing incentives (fee waivers, fee
deferral, height bonus, density bonus, reduced
landscaping, priority processing) to reflect current
market conditions (Expand). Conduct a detailed review
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Increase supply
affordable rental/owner housing
Lead Entity: Partners, City
1.1
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 44
of financial benefits of existing incentives relative to their
requirements and evaluate applicability by income level
and geography and recommend changes to increase
effectiveness. This is connected to strategy 9 to approve
the off-cycle appropriation for phase one of the LUC
audit.
Why Prioritized? High impact strategy, already identified
as priority in LUC Audit and by Council Ad Hoc. Best
practice for maintaining effectiveness of incentives, which
must be regularly calibrated to market changes.
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers
Next Steps: Evaluate performance of
existing incentives (through analysis and
stakeholder outreach); conduct feasibility
analysis; and propose changes based on
results.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 2, 4
14. Create additional development incentives for
affordable housing (New). Development incentives
require a production of affordable rental or owner units.
Most policies mandate between 10 and 30 percent as
affordable units, depending on the market, and set
affordability terms between 15 and 99 years. The city
should evaluate and implement the following priority
incentives:
a. Expand density bonus program to apply in other
zone districts (currently limited to LMN zone).
Program would need to be calibrated for a variety
of zones.
b. Identify related building variances (e.g. setbacks,
lot coverage, parking requirements, design
standards, open space dedication)
This is connected to strategy 9 to approve the off-cycle
appropriation for phase one of the LUC audit.
Why Prioritized? Current incentives are limited and
additional incentives are critical for increasing production
of affordable housing. High impact strategy with low cost
to City as it leverages private sector investment to achieve
goals; very common practice throughout Colorado (and
other) communities. Already identified as an Ad Hoc
Committee Quick Win.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Increase supply
affordable rental/owner housing
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers
Next Steps: Conduct feasibility analysis for
density bonus expansion and calculate
financial benefit of variance incentives;
conduct stakeholder outreach with
developers to vet proposals.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 2, 4
Greatest Challenge 4: Job growth continues to outpace housing growth.
15. Explore/address financing and other barriers to
missing middle and innovative housing development
(New). Collaborate with developers and financial
institutions (CDFI, credit unions, and banks) to understand
barriers for missing middle projects, e.g., financing, code,
materials, etc.; consider partnerships with developers and
partners to address barriers and build support for diverse,
innovative, and efficient housing options.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Diversity housing
options/ Increase housing choice
Lead Entity: Builders/Developers, City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers,
Financial Institutions, Other Community
Partners
Next Steps: Convene developer working
group to assess barriers.
1.1
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 45
Why Prioritized? Low cost strategy with potential to unlock
production of diverse, relatively affordable housing
options. Best practice approach to foster missing middle
options.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1, 2, 3, 7
16. Remove barriers to allowed densities through code
revisions (New). As noted in the 2020 LUC Audit, barriers
to fully realizing allowed densities include multifamily unit
number maximums, square footage thresholds for
secondary or non-residential buildings, and height
limitations that restrict the ability to maximize compact
sites using tuck-under parking. Such requirements should
be recalibrated or removed entirely. This is connected to
strategy 9 to approve the off-cycle appropriation for
phase one of the LUC audit.
Why Prioritized? Removes internal conflicts in land use
code; already identified as priority in LUC audit.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Diversity in housing
options/ Increase housing choice
Lead Entity: Builders/Developers, City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers
Next Steps: Housing-related elements will
be included in the off-cycle appropriation to
advance Phase One of the Land Use Code
(LUC) Audit
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1, 2, 3
Greatest Challenge 5: Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely
continue to increase over time.
17. Reconsider affordable housing requirements/funding
as part of metro districts (Expand). The city is already
working on a specific recommendation for this strategy.
Why Prioritized? Low cost opportunity to integrate
affordable housing requirements as part of related efforts;
already prioritized by City and implementation underway.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Increase supply
affordable rental/owner housing
Lead Entity: City
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers,
Special Districts and Government Entities
Next Steps: Moratorium on Metro District
applications expires January 31. Council will
consider amendment to this policy in 2021.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 2, 4
18. Increase awareness & opportunities for creative
collaboration across water districts and other regional
partners around the challenges with water costs and
housing (Expand).
Why Prioritized? Water costs have a significant impact on
housing development cost; addressing water cost
challenges creates opportunity to improve affordability
and product diversity. Acknowledges regional nature
water impacts and seeks collaborative solutions; potential
for direct impact on sustainability and affordability.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Improve affordability
and housing diversity
Lead Entity: Water Districts, City Utilities
Impacted Players: Special Districts and
Government Entities, other partners
Next Steps: Study underway in 2021 to
identify challenges and opportunities of
multiple water providers in the GMA;
consider opportunities to expand scope to
broader region (e.g. Larimer County).
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 2
19. Bolster city land bank activity by allocating additional
funding to the program (contingent on adopting
additional revenue stream policy) (Expand). Begin with
inventory and feasibility of publicly owned land in city
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Increase/monitor
effectiveness of all strategies
Lead Entity: Partners, City
1.1
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 46
limits and growth management area. Also consider
underutilized commercial properties that could be used for
affordable housing. Continue effective disposition of
existing parcels to affordable housing developers and land
trust partners.
Why Prioritized? Leverages success of current program to
increase its impact with additional resources allocation.
High impact strategy that helps City reach affordability
target.
Impacted Players: Builders/Developers
Next Steps: Identify funding potential;
identify strategic parcels for acquisition.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1, 3
Greatest Challenge 7: Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy
housing, especially for people who rent.
20. Explore the option of a mandated rental
license/registry program for long-term rentals and pair
with best practice rental regulations (New). Having a
rental registration or license program, in which landlords
are required to either register or obtain a license from the
city, makes it easier to implement and enforce a variety of
renter protections, promote best practices to landlords,
and identify problem landlords, as well as establish
specific housing quality and performance standards.
Specific efforts promoted through such programs include
landlord education (Fair Housing or other), standardized
lease agreements in English and Spanish, reasonable
application fee requirements, a more defined path for
conflict resolution, and health and safety rental
inspections. Can include a modest fee to cover program
cost, e.g., recent research suggests these fees range from
approximately $0 to $110/unit, though fee frequency,
determination, etc. varies by jurisdiction. This is
connected to strategy 26 Small Landlord Incentives.
Why Prioritized? Best practice, high impact, low cost
strategy that lays critical groundwork for future efforts
related to advancing vision and goal.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Improve renter
protections, housing quality, and landlord
access to information
Lead Entity: Landlords, Community, City
Impacted Players: Landlords, Manufactured
Housing Neighborhoods, Homeowners,
Renters, People Experiencing Homelessness
Historically disadvantaged populations,
Residents vulnerable to displacement
Next Steps: Form internal task force to
review best practice research on program
design; develop a proposal for policy and
community engagement.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: N/A
21. Explore revisions to occupancy limits and family
definitions (Expand). Occupancy limits and narrow family
definitions often create unintended constraints on housing
choice and options, including cooperative housing
opportunities for seniors and people with disabilities or
low-income renters desiring to live with unrelated adults in
a single family home setting. Occupancy limits can also
pose fair housing liabilities to the extent that they have a
disparate impact on people with disabilities. Current best
practices allow up to 8 unrelated or base occupancy on
building code requirements instead of family definitions.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Diversify housing
options/increase housing choice
Lead Entity: Community, City
Impacted Players: Homeowners, Renters,
People Experiencing Homelessness,
Historically disadvantaged populations,
Residents vulnerable to displacement
Next Steps: Form an internal task force to
develop a proposal for policy and
community engagement.
1.1
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 47
Occupancy limits do not always have a direct relationship
to neighborhood livability, and there may be a better way
to address livability concerns.
Why Prioritized? Best practice, both in regard to increasing
housing choice and avoiding fair housing violations
(disparate impact claims).
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1,2,5,6
22. Public Sector Right of First Refusal for Affordable
Developments (New). Typically requires owners of
affordable housing to notify the public sector of intent to
sell or redevelop property and allow period of potential
purchase by public sector or non-profit partner.
Why Prioritized? High impact preservation strategy; does
not require substantial financial resources from the city if
structured to defer rights to non-profits.
Timeframe: Transitional (1-2 years)
Expected Outcome: Stabilize current supply
of affordable rental housing
Lead Entity: Partners, City
Impacted Players: Landlords,
Builders/Developers, Special Districts and
Government Entities, Residents vulnerable
to displacement
Next Steps: Review peer city policies; draft
and institute requirement and monitoring
process.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1
23. Tenant right of first refusal for cooperative ownership
of multifamily or manufactured housing community
(New). Laws that give tenants the right to purchase a rental
unit or complex (including a manufactured housing
community) before the owner puts it on the market or
accepts an offer from another potential buyer. Laws
typically allow residents to assign their “right of first
refusal” to other entities, such as nonprofit partners that
help the residents form a limited equity cooperative, or
affordable housing providers that agree to maintain the
property as affordable rental housing for a set period of
time. Note that this provision already exists for
manufactured housing communities under the Colorado
Mobile Home Park Residents Opportunity to Purchase
(HB20-1201 passed in June 2020).
Why Prioritized? Expands housing choice, leverages
existing housing stock, and extends good policy (i.e.,
Mobile Home Park Residents Opportunity to Purchase) to
additional contexts such as multifamily tenants.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Increase stability and
housing option for renters and
manufactured housing residents
Lead Entity: Residents, Partners
Impacted Players: Manufactured Housing
Neighborhoods, Renters, Residents
vulnerable to displacement, other partners
Next Steps: Review similar policies and
consider policy options.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1
24. Support community organizing efforts in
manufactured home communities and increase access to
resident rights information, housing resources, and
housing programs (Expand). Continue and expand existing
efforts to work with residents and nonprofit community
partners to address the critical need for programs focused
on manufactured housing livability and safety, reduction of
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Increase stability and
housing option for renters and
manufactured housing residents
Lead Entity: Manufactured Housing
Neighborhoods, City
1.1
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 48
the fear of retaliation for residents, preservation of these
as an affordable housing option, and equitable access to
City resources in historically underserved neighborhoods
and populations.
Why Prioritized? Direct and significant impact to uniquely
vulnerable communities; fosters health, stability, and
equity; aligns with existing efforts and priorities related to
manufactured home community stabilization.
Impacted Players: HOA’s Landlords,
Manufactured Housing Neighborhoods,
Homeowners, Renters, Historically
disadvantaged populations, Residents
vulnerable to displacement
Next Steps: Continue work with existing
partners and evaluate options for additional
funding/support.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1
25. Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal
representation (Expand). Housing counseling generally
takes the form of providing assistance with mortgage debt
restructuring and mortgage and/or utilities payments to
avoid foreclosure; short-term emergency rent and utilities
assistance for renters. Cities often partner with local
nonprofits experienced in foreclosure counseling.
Landlord-tenant mediation is similar but generally
conducted by local Legal Aid for more involved disputes
between the landlord and tenant. CARES Act funding is
currently dedicated to a legal defense fund for renters but
additional resources are necessary to carry this strategy
beyond the duration that CARES resources allow.
Why Prioritized? High impact, best practice strategy;
leverages success of existing program; addresses acute
needs exacerbated by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic
(and related levels of unemployment). Already identified
as Ad Hoc Committee priority.
Timeframe: Quicker Win (<1 year)
Expected Outcome: Increase stability for
vulnerable renters and owners
Lead Entity: Partners
Impacted Players: Manufactured Housing
Neighborhoods, Homeowners, Renters,
People Experiencing Homelessness
Historically disadvantaged populations,
Residents vulnerable to displacement, other
partners
Next Steps: Allocate additional funding to
Legal Defense Fund.
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 1, 6
26. Small landlord incentives (New). Public sector
incentives that encourage small landlords to keep units
affordable for a period of time in exchange for subsidized
rehabilitation or tax or fee waivers. Requires identification
of properties through rental registration. Could also be
applied to current vacation rentals for conversion to longer
term permanent rentals. This is connected to strategy 20
Renter Regulations and/or Registry.
Why Prioritized? Potential for high impact on preservation
and condition; extends incentives to existing housing stock
(as opposed to just new development), unlocking
additional affordable potential.
Timeframe: Transformational (2+ years)
Expected Outcome: Increases affordable
rental housing (converts naturally occurring
affordable into income restricted
affordable) and improves condition.
Lead Entity: Landlords, City
Impacted Players: Landlords, Renters,
Residents vulnerable to displacement
Next Steps: Research similar policies and
evaluate feasibility of incentive options
(subsidies, fee waiver, etc.). Note: Requires
implementation rental registration strategy
(to identify landlords)
Secondary Greatest Challenges: 2
1.1
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 49
Recognizing That There Continue to Be Additional Ongoing Efforts, The Plan Is Also Aligned to The
Following Related Efforts:
Continue the City's ongoing efforts to implement recommendations from current housing-related studies
and other City efforts:
a. 2020 Land Use Code Audit Recommendations
b. 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice Action Steps
c. Homeward 2020
d. 2015-2019 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
This includes continuing to prioritize direct funding to the lowest-income residents. This also includes
strategies from the prior housing plan to: Increase the inventory of affordable rental units; preserve the
long-term affordability and physical condition of existing affordable housing; Increase housing and
associated supportive services for people with special needs; and Support opportunities to obtain and
sustain affordable homeownership.
Why Prioritized? High priority actions led by housing providers and others continue to be needed to drive
forward the 10% affordable housing goal
Continue to align housing work with prior Affordable Housing Strategic Plan and other departmental
plans and programs to leverage more funding resources and achieve citywide goals that advance the
triple bottom line of economic, environmental, and social sustainability (could include citywide
disparity study).
Why Prioritized? Aligns with the City’s commitment to the triple bottom line and centering this work in
equity
1.1
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 50
IMPLEMENTATION
Housing and shelter are fundamental community needs. This plan recognizes that achieving the vision of
“Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford,” requires contributions from the entire
community. This work also acknowledges that no single community in the United States has solved this
issue; therefore, we will need to be in a continual testing mode to assess which strategies can work, pilot
them where appropriate, and then bring the viable solutions to scale. Adapting to changing conditions –
both within the broader market and the community – will be critical as we proceed in the decades it will
take to reach the vision.
Based on these assumptions and this plan’s commitment to being
centered in equity, the following framework is offered as a
starting point for how to lead this work into the future:
• Immediate next steps as we transition from planning to
implementation in 2021;
• A biannual lifecycle for assessing progress, revisiting
priorities, checking in with the community and with City
leadership; and
• Guiding principles for future decision making
The following sections describe each of these elements in more
detail.
IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS IN 2021
The final step in the planning process is just the beginning of the work to ensure that everyone has stable,
healthy housing they can afford. Implementation is when community, Council and staff will transition
from “what” to “how” we achieve this vision. The following elements are key next steps:
• Community Summit (Spring): To support moving from the plan to implementation, staff is working
with Home2Health partners to design a community summit that will focus on mapping out
implementation of the prioritized strategies in the Plan. More details on this summit will be
available at www.fcgov.com/housing.
• Implementation Plan Development (Spring/Summer): With the community summit complete,
staff and community partners will develop specific implementation plans. These plans will include
metrics and indicators to evaluate progress; an explanation of how projects will ensure
accountability and embed equity for all, leading with race; and clarification about specific roles
required to implement the prioritized strategies.
o To align with Strategy 10 to Refine the Affordable Housing Goal, the implementation plan will
include more specific subgoals to achieve the vision.
• Council Work Session (Summer 2021): After the Community Summit, staff will present the
outcome of the Summit and a roadmap for implementation and ongoing tracking to City Council
in a Work Session.
As noted on page 10, centering this work in
equity includes both process and
outcomes:
Equity in process: Ensuring everyone has
meaningful opportunities to engage and
provide input into the Housing Strategic
Plan process.
Equity in outcomes: Everyone has healthy,
stable housing they can afford.
1.1
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 51
As noted above, implementation plans will be finalized this summer with specific metrics and indicators
for success. Though additional indicators may be identified for specific projects, the indicators below
should be used to guide the development of all implementation plans. These indicators specifically
address equity in process and outcomes and are intended to ensure continued transparency and
accountability as strategies are implemented.
Indicator Area Indicator
Equitable
Process
• Evaluate engagement in ongoing programs, processes, and services by income
and race
• Allocate resources in project budgets to achieve equity in process, e.g.,
language justice and compensation for community members’ time and
expertise
• Consistently provide language justice and access to interpreters/translators at
City events and in materials and programs, especially in Spanish and consider
other languages
• Consistently provide childcare and other resources to remove engagement
barriers for all community members
• Develop and apply a consistent approach to embedding equity in
implementation
Equitable
Outcomes
• Affordable housing inventory
• Fort Collins' Housing Opportunity Index (HOI) compared to western states
region HOI
• Housing stock in comparison to income levels (will be refined with the
subgoal development addressed in Strategy 10)
• Homeownership rates, disaggregated by race and income
• Accessible units
• Distribution of affordable housing throughout the city
• Percentage of cost-burdened homes (renters and owners)
• Jobs/housing balance
• Long-term homeless exits and entries
• Level of funding dedicated to affordable housing
BIANNUAL PLANNING LIFECYCLE
As noted above, this work will be ongoing for decades. The steps below illustrate how the City will assess
progress and move forward to implementation on a biannual basis.
1. Assess Progress: Work with community members, including community partners, stakeholders,
and historically underrepresented groups, to measure progress against established metrics. What
is working? What could be improved? What did not work? Who benefitted and who was
burdened?
2. Revisit Priorities: As noted above, the housing market and system will always be evolving, and
community priorities should evolve with these changes. Based on iterative assessment, revisit the
full strategy list. Ask if new strategies should be considered. With community partners and
stakeholders, apply the guiding principles to consider annual priorities and work plans.
1.1
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 52
3. Confirm Priorities: Create space for community members and City leadership to confirm priorities
and assess if others should be considered. Note tensions and opportunities as they arise,
especially from groups impacted by strategies, that should be considered in implementation.
4. Annual Design Summit: Continue efforts to partner with community members to co-create
annual work plans with community partners, stakeholders, and City staff. Create new metrics to
assess progress, as applicable, for new priorities.
Note that these steps should be viewed as a starting point for checking in every two years – they will
evolve over time as the City and community increase their experience in equity-centered planning and
implementation.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
To support this work moving toward implementation, the plan includes a set of guiding principles to
document how decisions will be made moving forward. They will support future strategy selection and
overall prioritization to determine annual work planning. While the strategies may be updated or changed
on an annual basis, the guiding principles will continue throughout the lifecycle of this plan.
Why have guiding principles? Guiding principles recognize that the prioritization of strategies will
continue to evolve as different strategies are tested, evaluated, and adapted. In addition, new strategies
will arise and ideas we initially prioritize may not have the intended impact upon further analysis. Finally,
Fort Collins’ work on housing is bigger than one person, one entity, or any one project, and transparently
documenting how decisions will be made going forward is critical for ongoing accountability.
When will the guiding principles be applied? These principles will largely be a tool for overall
prioritization of strategies in any given year. While individual strategies will continue to be assessed
against the evaluation criteria, the guiding principles will support a holistic approach to evaluating overall
priorities for the housing system.
How will the guiding principles be applied? In the biannual planning lifecycle, principles will be applied
with the community, and reviewed by decision makers, to establish the priorities at each design summit.
1.1
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Housing Strategic Plan | Draft Plan 53
Draft Guiding Principles for the Housing Strategic Plan:
Guiding Principles What the Principle Means
Center the work in
people
• One outcome, targeted strategies – achieving the vision that “Everyone has
healthy, stable housing they can afford,” will require a suite of strategies
that target different income levels, geographies, and identities; the
portfolio should reflect the entire system of impacted players
• Value in both content & context experts – strategies should be prioritized
from technical and lived experiences. Both forms of expertise should
contribute to prioritization.
Be Agile and
Adaptive
• Priorities should be reviewed annually for progress and overall work
planning
• Priorities and strategies must be specific enough to generate real solutions
and flexible enough to address the changing landscape of the community
Balance rapid
decision making with
inclusive
communication and
engagement
• Be clear that the work requires action while also prioritizing time and
space for all community members, especially those impacted by the
decisions, to engage with and influence the outcome
Build on existing
plans and policies –
and their
engagement
• Review adopted plans and policies for informing policy priorities
• Also review the feedback community members have already shared on a
topic before asking again – respect their time and prior engagement
• Identify opportunities to complement and amplify existing goals, priorities,
and where strategies can advance the triple bottom line
Expect and label
tensions,
opportunities, and
tradeoffs
• Recognize and name where limited resources impacted decision making,
where stakeholders are impacted differently and had different
perspectives, and the tradeoffs in moving forward with a given solution
Focus direct
investment on the
lowest income levels
• Limited financial resources must be targeted for housing the lowest income
households. Policy should be used all along the continuum to stimulate a
wide range of housing choice for residents at all ages, income levels and
life stages.
• Exceptions can include when an innovative technique or strategy is being
applied at higher AMI levels but generally should not exceed 120% AMI
Commit to
transparency in
decision making
• Be clear regarding how the decision maker came to their conclusions and
what was/was not considered.
Make decisions for
impact,
empowerment, and
systems (not ease of
implementation)
• Strategies should be prioritized for outcomes, not necessarily ease of
implementation. However, where high impact and ease of implementation
overlap, swift action should be taken to move these efforts forward.
• Strategies that advance multiple priorities and the triple bottom line
should be prioritized
• Assess the entire portfolio of prioritized strategies for a mix of quick wins
versus longer-term transformational solutions that may require more
dialogue and investment to implement
1.1
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan (draft) (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Social Sustainability
222 Laporte Ave.
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6758
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 11, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Affordable Housing Executive Team1
FROM: Lindsay Ex, Interim Housing Manager
Meaghan Overton, Senior City Planner
RE: December 8, 2020 Work Session Summary: Housing Strategic Plan Update
The purpose of this item was to provide a Housing Strategic Plan update, including a summary of
fall community engagement, strategy identification, draft evaluation criteria, and consideration of an
off-cycle appropriation to initiate the first phase of updating the City’s Land Use Code. All
Councilmembers were present virtually and offered the following feedback:
Community engagement
x Appreciation for engagement process, initial findings, number of residents engaged, and
staff efforts to reach out to historically underrepresented groups, especially in the context of
the ongoing pandemic.
x Encouragement also to engage proactively with neighborhood groups and homeowner’s
associations as strategies are prioritized, including Land Use Code changes.
Strategy Identification
x Support for the approach to strategy identification and breadth of strategies considered
x Interest in prioritizing strategies
x Recognition that multiple strategies and levers will need to be pulled to make progress –
there is not a single solution that will achieve the vision
x Identification of a need to consider solutions that incorporate all kinds of neighborhoods,
with and without formal Homeowners’ Association (HOA) structures.
x Desire in both strategies and prioritization to think about how we respond to the present
while also “future proofing” to stay agile over time
Evaluation Criteria
x Desire to look at both near-term actions and transformational changes
x Support for evaluation criteria approach
Off-Cycle Appropriation to Advance the First Phase of the Land Use Code (LUC) Audit, with an
emphasis on housing-related updates
x Overall support for bringing the off-cycle appropriation forward in Q1 of 2021;
x Aligns with how ad hoc committee has been focusing on near term actions.
1 Jackie Kozak Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer; Theresa Connor, Utilities Executive Director; Caryn Champine,
Planning, Development, and Transportation (PDT) Director; Julie Brewen, Housing Catalyst Executive Director;
Dave Lenz, Finance Planning and Analysis Director; Beth Sowder, Social Sustainability Director
ATTACHMENT 2 1.2
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Work Session Summary (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
2
x Desire to respond to current needs, identify what and where affordable housing incentives
can be expanded or improved, modernize code, and create a flexible approach to future
development, e.g., energy-efficient and innovative building techniques, aligning housing
strategies with transportation needs, etc.
x Councilmembers expressed interest in a more detailed scope of work; this scope will be
provided in the materials for the January 26 Work Session and will include what this first
phase of LUC changes will achieve as well as a proposed date for First Reading of an
appropriation ordinance.
Overall Feedback – Continue Planning and Doing at the Same Time:
x Support to continue the plan and taking action at the same time, and recognition of the
importance for the plan to include prioritized action steps. The housing needs in our
community are urgent and require both planning for the future and strategic action now.
x Recognition of the action Council has already taken to achieve their priority of Affordable
Achievable Housing strategies, including the following:
o Supported preservation of manufactured home communities (MHC) by establishing
a specific MHC zone district;
o Increasing residents’ rights in MHC;
o Improving the fee credit process for affordable housing projects;
o Evaluating the City’s metro district policy, which includes a component on affordable
housing; and
o Establishing a legal defense fund via CARES-CVRF resources to support residents
at-risk of eviction.
x Additional quick wins, as identified, may be brought forward at the January Work Session.
Next Steps
x Staff will host a series of strategy evaluation workshops in December and January.
x A public draft of the Housing Strategic Plan will be published January 7, with a public
comment period January 7-21, 2021.
x At the January 26 Work Session, staff will share the outcomes of initial strategy
prioritization, draft plan indicators & guiding principles, finalized scope for LUC updates, and
additional quick(er) wins as identified by the Ad Hoc Committee.
x Council will consider adopting the Housing Strategic Plan on February 16 (first reading).
1.2
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Work Session Summary (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
January 1, 2021
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN FALL 2020 ENGAGEMENT REPORT
Prepared by Cactus Consulting, LLC in partnership with the Home2Health team Executive Summary The City is updating the Housing Strategic Plan. This plan sets housing goals and guides City decisions on policy and funding for the housing system. While previous plans have focused on income-qualified Affordable Housing, this update to the Housing Strategic Plan will address the entire spectrum of housing needs in our community. The draft vision – Everyone has stable, healthy housing they can afford – reflects this shift. In October and November of 2020, nearly 450 community members took the time to share their experiences, provide feedback, and brainstorm solutions to the housing challenges in Fort Collins. This report sums up this early community feedback. Participants highlighted five priorities—Stability, Equity, Choice, Collaboration, and Creativity. Within each priority are suggested strategies for the City, nonprofits, developers, and community members. The report ends with next steps, including important community conversations around density and home ownership and recommendations from the community on how to evaluate strategies and center equity in decision-making. The Process In preparation for updating the Housing Strategic Plan, the City of Fort Collins reviewed local housing data and community feedback gathered through the Home2Health project. As a result, the City identified six key challenges related to housing: 1. Price escalation impacts everyone, and disproportionately impacts BIPOC [Black, Indigenous and People of Color] and low-income households. 2. There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available and affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need. 3. The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals. 4. Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase over time. 5. It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the impacts of the pandemic. 6. Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent. These challenges were later updated and expanded to include a specific mention of the imbalance between job growth and housing growth. The updated list of challenges is available in the Housing Strategic Plan.
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
2
The Housing Strategic Plan team designed safe and accessible engagement opportunities to gather feedback on the challenges and ideas for overcoming them. This included Community Guide discussions, in-person (distanced and masked) focus groups, virtual workshops, and an “At-Your-Own Pace” online survey. The goals for engagement were: 1) To provide safe, flexible opportunities for all community members to participate. 2) To close persistent engagement gaps, including under-engagement of Spanish-speaking residents, renters, and residents who make less than $50,000/year. To this end, workshops and surveys, which traditionally result in more responses from women, older adults, and higher income households, were combined with outreach to specific stakeholders and community groups. The City partnered with the Mi Voz community group to discuss housing with 38 Spanish-speaking residents, many of whom reside in mobile home parks. The Partnership for Age-Friendly Communities hosted conversations with older adults and mobile home park residents. The Center for Public Deliberation hosted conversations that targeted residents under 30, and those making less than the median income. Additional engagement with neighborhood groups, including homeowners’ associations, was identified as an opportunity for growth in future engagement opportunities in this plan. Overall, staff and community partners facilitated 37 different engagement opportunities. This included four events facilitated by the Partnership for Age-Friendly Communities (PAFC) and eight by the Center for Public Deliberation (CPD). Through these approaches, the City was able to gather feedback from around 450 participants in October and November of 2020. Demographic data was not analyzed because it was optional and may not provide a full picture of participation. Participants were asked six questions related to current housing challenges in Fort Collins, the housing vision, and their ideas for achieving it. The six questions were: 1. Based on your experience, do these challenges reflect what you know about housing in Fort Collins? 2. How do these challenges affect you and our community more broadly? 3. What needs to change to address these challenges? 4. Who has the ability to make the change needed? 5. What do you wish decision makers understood about your experience with housing?
1.3
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
3
6. How would you like to engage in this project in the future? Though the responses to these questions provided rich information on community experiences and ideas related to housing, it is important to note that this report is also built on the shoulders of many engagement efforts conducted over the past two years, including City Plan, Our Climate Future, and the Home2Health project. Community members have consistently talked about the importance of affordable housing to a healthy environment, an equitable community, and to the physical and mental health of individuals. Prior to analyzing responses from this year’s engagement efforts, we revisited the findings, and data from recent surveys and analysis (including the Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis and the Larimer County Community Health Survey) to ground our work. The following community priorities reflect the collective engagement of hundreds of community members who shared their time, energy, and experiences. Community Priorities Community members generally felt that the housing challenges reflected the experience of housing in Fort Collins. Some shared personal stories of their struggle to afford healthy, stable housing. As one person shared,
While organizations like the City may express goals in number of affordable housing units available or number of dollars allocated to emergency rent relief, community members described their goals for housing in very different ways—in the ability to feel secure in their homes, in the ability to choose a home with the amenities that they want and need, and in the ability to rely on their community to work towards a better future for all. Participants suggested a variety of strategies to overcome housing challenges and help everyone in Fort Collins have healthy, stable housing they can afford. These strategies are grouped into five priority areas: 1. Stability. The cost of housing is a major source of stress and instability for many households. People want options for stable rentals and home ownership. 2. Equity. Folks want a diverse community where equity guides how we fund, build, and manage housing. 3. Choice. People recognized that different households have different housing needs. They prioritized having options for the types of housing they rent or buy. This calls for increasing the total supply of housing, revamping the housing we have, and improving access to amenities like public transportation and parks. 4. Collaboration. Housing is a complex problem, and no one organization can do it alone. Community members want the City to take the lead, but also want the community and local organizations to step up and be part of the solution. 5. Creativity. People want new and innovative solutions. They want the City and the community to be willing to do things differently.
1.3
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
4
It is important to note that the community priorities are not listed in order of importance to the community, and many of the strategies and recommendations overlap.
Stability
The cost of housing is a major source of stress and instability for many households. People want
options for stable rentals and home ownership.
Community Recommendations: Advocate for limits on rent prices and/or annual rent increases ⧫ Explore rental licensing to promote safe and healthy housing ⧫ Preserve manufactured housing communities ⧫ Explore opportunities for resident-owned manufactured housing communities ⧫ Explore opportunities to limit fees associated with housing ⧫ Bolster nonprofits providing “housing first” models of support ⧫ Provide emergency gap funding to prevent eviction
What we heard: The cost of housing was described as a major source of stress and instability for households in Fort Collins. People recognized that easing the cost burden of housing could have a transformational impact on an individual’s mental and physical health, among other things, and praised nonprofit organizations pursuing a “housing first” model in the community. They stressed the importance of gap funding for emergency rent relief to prevent eviction and displacement. Participants expressed frustration that landlords could set and increase prices without any oversight, and suggested regulations at the state or local level that would limit maximum rent prices, reduce extra fees, and/or limit maximum annual increases. Many also recognized that low wages were a barrier to affordability and called on employers to increase wages. People also shared negative experiences with landlords who did not maintain their homes. Some were afraid that asking landlords to maintain homes would invite retaliation or lead to rent increases, putting their housing at risk. A rental registration or licensing program was suggested to put housing protections in place and ensure housing is safe and healthy. Residents of manufactured housing communities discussed the need for park preservation, and the desire to work towards more resident control and ownership of communities. Many owners of manufactured housing discussed struggling with costs despite owning their home because of perpetual increases in lot rent, costly utility bills, and frequent fees. Similarly, some participants expressed concern about the monthly fees from HOAs, condominium associations, and metro districts inflating the cost of home ownership.
Guidance for the Housing Strategic Plan: These comments align with community feedback from the Larimer County Community Health Survey and the Home2Health project regarding the central role of housing stability for individual and community well-being. Though many responses suggested home ownership as the preferred source of stability, some community members defined stability in a different way. The Housing Strategic Plan
1.3
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
5
should discuss how each strategy could create pathways to stability for residents, whether that be long-term, stable rentals, cooperative housing, or home ownership.
Equity
Folks want a diverse community where equity guides how we fund, build, and manage housing.
Community Recommendations: Focus financial support on lowest income residents ⧫ Increase equity in existing programs and services ⧫ Bolster nonprofits providing supportive housing services ⧫ Combat stigmas associated with affordable housing ⧫ Consult with BIPOC and low-income households on housing policy and programs
What we heard: Though community members discussed and defined equity in different ways, most emphasized the importance of focusing efforts on those who are most affected by the current housing challenges, including BIPOC households, low-income households, people with disabilities, and seniors. While some participants were concerned that specifically discussing challenges for BIPOC households was outside the scope of this plan, most comments expressed a need for more inclusive programs and practices to combat ongoing discrimination and historic inequalities. In general, folks recognized that current funding levels were not adequate to meet the housing needs in our community, and discussed the importance of balancing the very immediate need to keep people’s housing stable with the longer-term need to fund the housing options people want and need in our community. In general, community members prioritized “gap funds” to help households make ends meet and subsidized housing for low-income households over financial assistance to middle-income earners. People discussed the importance of creating specialized support systems so folks can find and keep homes. Participants praised the hard work of nonprofits in this arena and expressed support for bolstering funding and expanding services to meet the needs of seniors, seniors raising grandchildren, immigrant and refugee families, and people who were previously incarcerated. Participants discussed the importance of continuing to consult with BIPOC and low-income households as decisions about housing are being made. As one person stated,
Finally, a few community members shared personal experiences of feeling unwelcome in the community because of race, ethnicity, and/or income status. As one participant shared,
1.3
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
6
Community conversations may be needed to break stigmas around affordable housing and promote equity and inclusion in Fort Collins’ neighborhoods.
Guidance for the Housing Strategic Plan: These comments align with previous feedback from the Home2Health project and the Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis on the disproportionate impact of housing challenges on BIPOC and low-income households. The Housing Strategic Plan should consider how their decisions can support equitable outcomes (going beyond the traditional focus on equitable opportunities). In addition, the Housing Strategic Plan should include clear opportunities for consultation with BIPOC and low-income households and community conversations around equity in housing.
Choice
People recognized that different households have different housing needs. They prioritized having
options for the types of housing they rent or buy. This calls both for increasing the total supply of
housing, and changing the types of housing we are creating.
Community Recommendations: Remove or relax occupancy restrictions ⧫ Explore new housing types, including tiny homes and cooperative housing ⧫ Build more duplexes and small multifamily units ⧫ Ensure all neighborhoods have access to amenities ⧫ Remove or relax regulations that limit creative reuse of existing homes.
What we heard: Many community members expressed frustration with the lack of housing choices currently available, especially for low- and middle-income earners. As one participant shared,
People called for building more housing and revamping the housing Fort Collins has to offer. Community members emphasized the need to build new housing options that people can afford on a typical salary, rather than “luxury” homes or apartments. Some also expressed a desire for options that go beyond the “traditional” large single-family home, including more duplexes, small multi-family developments, and tiny houses. Community members highlighted that the goal should be to increase options—not to expect that every low-income household should live in an apartment building. People stressed the importance of being able to access the amenities that were important to them. Some mentioned the value of having access to a personal yard or garden. Many advocated for improved community amenities in all neighborhoods, including parks, open space, and public transportation. Many participants also saw zoning and occupancy restrictions as a significant barrier to having enough housing, and to having housing that is affordable for all residents. Many supported repealing or modifying “U+2”, which limits the number of unrelated people who can live in a house. This was seen as a potential benefit
1.3
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
7
for people of all ages living on single incomes, and an opportunity to “free up” additional homes for rental or purchase. Some participants acknowledged concerns around noise or parking that can come with higher occupancy levels, but many felt that the rule was unfairly limiting the housing choices of the larger community to prevent problems caused by a small group. Community members also suggested relaxing some restrictions in the Land Use Code to make it easier for homeowners and developers to renovate homes and set up living arrangements that work for modern households. Ideas included making it easier to add Accessory Dwelling Units (carriage houses, in-law apartments, etc.), convert single-family houses into duplexes, and set up cooperative housing. In addition to increasing available housing units, duplexes and Accessory Dwelling Units in particular were seen as a benefit for extended families who could pool resources to purchase a home, and adults for caring for aging parents. Finally, there was a perception among participants that “investment buyers” were unfairly driving up prices and reducing opportunities for home ownership by buying homes to rent out. As one participant shared,
Community members expressed frustration that first-time homebuyers were “competing” with purchasers looking for a source of income rather than a place to call home. Some community members suggested limiting the ability of investors to purchase homes, though there was recognition that this would pose a serious challenge. Additional conversations will be necessary to understand the impact of investment buying on the community and discuss opportunities to support first-time homebuyers.
Guidance for the Housing Strategic Plan: These comments align with previous feedback from City Plan engagement on relaxing occupancy ordinances and Land Use Code restrictions to allow for more housing choices. The Housing Strategic Plan should discuss how each strategy can increase the housing choices available in our community. In addition, continued conversations are needed on the right balance between encouraging homeownership and providing enough rental options.
Collaboration
Folks recognized that a challenge like housing requires community-wide action. Many of the ideas for
addressing housing challenges would require changes to local or statewide policies. However,
responses also highlighted the importance of bringing in nonprofits, developers, and local employers.
Community Recommendations: Incentivize developers to build affordable housing ⧫ Relax restrictions in the Land Use Code to make it easier for developers to build new homes ⧫ Collaborate with large employers on housing ⧫ Partner with nonprofits to provide specialized support ⧫ Build community-wide support for doing things differently
1.3
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
8
What we heard: Though many of the recommendations were City policies or programs, community feedback highlighted the importance of collaboration to reaching Fort Collins’ vision for housing. People shared strategies that would encourage developers to build more affordable, diverse types of housing, including waiving fees or providing other financial incentives, and relaxing requirements in the Land Use Code on density (or the number of houses in an area), building height, and parking. Some also suggested placing requirements on builders and developers to provide some affordable housing in all new developers. There was some support for City-led development of subsidized housing or “tiny home” sites, but largely folks did not see the City as a major supplier or manager of affordable housing. People recognized the work of nonprofits to provide housing and supportive services to vulnerable populations, and called for increased collaboration and support for these existing programs. Some also called on local employers to take a larger role in housing policy and provision. In addition to calling for higher wages, folks suggested that large employers should take a greater responsibility for helping their employees find healthy, stable housing. One suggestion was for the City to incentivize employers who provide housing or housing stipends to their employees. Finally, people recognized the need for public awareness and education to build community-wide support for doing things differently. Community members want increased public awareness around the true size, scope, and impact of housing challenges on our community. Some expressed concern that current homeowners may resist changes that they see as a threat to their wealth and livelihood (for example, allowing more homes and occupants in their neighborhood).
Guidance for the Housing Strategic Plan: These comments align with past feedback from City Plan, Our Climate Future, Home2Health, and the Larimer County Community Health Survey on the importance of recognizing and leveraging the connections between housing and other important community priorities. Continued collaboration and dialogue will be essential to understanding the needs and the true community costs and benefits of any potential actions. The Housing Strategic Plan should discuss opportunities to leverage the skills and resources of our entire community, including community members, nonprofits, developers, and local employers.
Creativity
People want new and innovative solutions. They want the City and the community to be willing to do
things differently.
Recommendations: Explore opportunities for creative reuse of buildings ⧫ Seek out innovative ideas from the community and peer cities
What we heard: Fort Collins is a city known for innovation. Community members highlighted that they valued the spirit of innovation and creativity in the City’s approach to housing. Though many recognized that the largest and most impactful solutions were likely to be more traditional strategies—things like changing the Land Use Code and offering incentives to developers—people also wanted to see new and creative ways to provide housing. Some
1.3
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
9
suggestions included turning hotels into group homes and instituting “housing swaps” between older individuals looking to downsize and live in more accessible homes and younger people looking for more space. The City should continue to seek out innovative ideas from within the community, and from peer cities moving forward.
Guidance for the Housing Strategic Plan: Though it can be difficult to commit resources and times to ideas that may end up being less impactful, the Housing Strategic Plan should discuss ways to pilot creative strategies for ensuring healthy, stable, affordable housing. Next Steps Community feedback identified five priorities for housing as the City adopts its new Housing Strategic Plan—Stability, Equity, Choice, Collaboration, and Creativity—along with a number of exciting and creative strategies that the City could use along the way. These community priorities and ideas have provided a starting point for the Housing Strategic Plan’s efforts. The following section outlines two important next steps.
Evaluate housing strategies with community priorities in mind The community has highlighted priorities for housing that build on prior feedback from the Home2Health project, City Plan, Our Climate Future, and more. As the City evaluates strategies, the following questions could help ensure that these community priorities are centered in decision-making: 1. Does this strategy increase the housing choices available for the community, particularly for vulnerable or traditionally under-resourced groups? 2. Does this strategy increase opportunities for housing stability for renters and homeowners? 3. Does this strategy leverage the resources and skills of our whole community? Incorporating these questions and centering community recommendations in any Housing Strategic Plan documents and decisions will be vital to achieving our housing vision.
Facilitate community conversations on “sticky” issues People recognized that changes in housing policy and programs have community-wide impact and require community-wide action. As one participant shared,
1.3
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
10
Honest conversations about what is needed to achieve the vision—Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford—will be vital to identifying the best path forward. Below, a few important topics are highlighted. Understanding and de-stigmatizing affordable housing Participants recognized that there are many misconceptions and fears around affordable housing. More conversations are needed to understand what affordable housing looks like in our community, and to promote acceptance and understanding between all people—no matter their income level or whether they rent or own their home. Balancing Density and Occupancy Many recognized that removing U+2 and/or increasing density in neighborhoods may be a challenging transition and could be unpopular with some homeowners. Some participants acknowledged concerns around noise or parking that can come with higher occupancy levels, but many felt that the rule was unfairly limiting the housing choices of the larger community to prevent problems caused by a small group. More conversations are needed to identify the root causes of occupancy concerns, and discuss potential alternatives. Balancing Options for Renting and Home Ownership There was a perception among participants that “investment buyers” were unfairly driving up prices and reducing opportunities for home ownership by buying homes to rent out. More data is still needed on the impact of investment buying in Fort Collins, and the right balance between promoting home ownership and supporting quality rental supply. Understanding the housing goals of the community, including what percentage prefer renting over home ownership, and the types of rentals and for-sale units that people would select, could help the City to better understand challenges and opportunities related to investment buying. Ultimately, additional conversations could reduce the perception of competition between renters and homeowners for housing. Conclusion The Fort Collins vision for housing – everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford -– is not currently a reality for everyone. Realizing this vision and overcoming the complex challenges of our housing system will require big, community-wide solutions. Overall, these responses suggest that the community is ready to do things differently. Centering both the five community priorities—Stability, Equity, Choice, Collaboration, and Creativity—and the ideas and feedback of low-income and BIPOC households will be essential to the continued efforts of the Housing Strategic Plan.
1.3
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Fall Engagement Report (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Phase 1 LUC Update: Appropriation Summary
Bottom Line: This summary outlines the proposed scope and budget for an off-cycle appropriation in
the amount of $250,000-$350,000 for Phase 1 of the Land Use Code (LUC) update. This appropriation
will enable Staff to draft critical LUC changes that will implement City Plan and the Land Use Code Audit,
implement the Housing Strategic Plan, and improve the housing system in Fort Collins.
Background: As recommended by the Ad Hoc Housing Committee at the November meeting and
supported by Council at a December 8 work session, staff is seeking an off-cycle appropriation to initiate
the housing-related LUC changes outlined in the Land Use Code Audit (2020) and prioritized in the draft
Housing Strategic Plan (adoption scheduled for February 2021). In concert with other efforts, changes to
the LUC have been identified as a high priority action to support the creation of new affordable homes
and increase housing variety.
Scope: Phase 1 of the LUC update will prioritize Housing-Related Changes and a Reorganization of the
Code. Specific examples are outlined below, and a detailed scope will be prepared as part of the RFP
process.
Housing-Related Changes:
• Define new housing types. Example: co-housing, ADU, cottage development, triplex
• Revise housing types permitted in each zone district. Example: allow duplexes in more/all zones
• Evaluate level of review for housing. Example: Basic Dev Review (BDR) for small multifamily
• Recalibrate Affordable Housing incentives. Example: density/height bonus, parking reductions
• Remove barriers to accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Example: allow attached ADUs
• Remove barriers to permitted densities. Example: remove limits on number of units per building
Code reorganization:
• Consolidate similar standards. Example: All design requirements for multifamily in one place
• Remove repetition, increase user-friendliness. Example: Uses in a table instead of a list
• Simplify language to improve clarity and consistency
Budget: This off-cycle appropriation of $250,000-$350,000 will be used to fund four required tasks to
successfully complete Phase 1 of the LUC update:
Task Est. Amount Description
Community engagement $10,000 - $20,000 Meetings, translation/interpretation, community
partner funding, data analysis
Analysis, modeling, best
practices
$40,000 - $70,000 Pro forma analysis, visualization, testing, economic
analysis, graphics and renderings, etc.
Legal Review
$60,000 - $90,000
Review of relevant case law and legal context for
proposed code changes
Code Drafting $140,000 - $175,000 Concept development and evaluation of
alternatives, writing and revising new LUC
language; collaborating across departments for
consistency with other regulations
Total estimated cost $250,000 - $350,000
ATTACHMENT 4 1.4
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Land Use Code Off-Cycle Appropriation Summary (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Phase 1 LUC Update: Appropriation Summary 2
City staff will lead this effort, supported by outside consultants to help balance daily work assignments
with the demands of this complex update to the LUC regulations.
Timeline: Phase 1 is expected to be completed by the end of 2022. Phase 2 of the LUC update is
anticipated to be completed by the end of 2025.
Next Steps: First Reading of the appropriation has been scheduled for February 16, 2021 in conjunction
with consideration of adoption for the Housing Strategic Plan. If the appropriation is approved by
Council, Staff anticipates releasing an RFP for consultant support and beginning work in the second
quarter of 2021. To initiate Phase 2 of the Land Use Code update, staff will be preparing a BFO offer.
1.4
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Land Use Code Off-Cycle Appropriation Summary (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
1
Housing Strategic Plan Work Session
Jackie Kozak Thiel, Caryn Champine, Lindsay Ex, Meaghan Overton
January 26, 2020
ATTACHMENT 5 1.5
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Questions for Consideration
2
What feedback do Councilmembers have on the following:
•Initial set of prioritized strategies?
•Draft guiding principles?
Do Councilmembers have any feedback on the quick(er) wins
identified to date?
1.5
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
CITY PLAN
•Principle LIV 5: Create more
opportunities for housing
choices
•Principle LIV 6: Improve
access to housing
…regardless of their race,
ethnicity, income, age, ability,
or background
Strategic Alignment
3
COUNCIL
PRIORITIES
•Affordable and Achievable
Housing Strategies
•Equity and Inclusion
•Reimagining Community
Engagement
STRATEGIC
OBJECTIVES
Neighborhood Livability & Social
Health
•NLSH 1.1 Improve and
increase…housing…
affordable to a broad range of
income levels.
1.5
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Step 8: Implement* (Spring +)
Step 7: Consider Adoption* (Feb/Mar)
Step 6: Prioritize Strategies* (Jan)
Step 5: Evaluate Strategies(Dec)
Step 4: ID Strategies, Criteria (Nov/Dec)
Step 3: Engage Community (Oct/Nov)
Step 2: Greatest Challenges (Sep)
Step 1: Vision (Aug)
Housing Strategic Plan Process
Progress to Date
50+Strategies Identified Thus Far
Consultant Support
Community
Engagement,
Priorities Peer Cities & Leading Authors Initial Set of Prioritized Strategies (26)
Evaluation Criteria
1.5
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
5
Identification, Evaluation,
and Prioritization Process
Step 4: ID Strategies,
Criteria
(Nov/Dec)
Step 5: Evaluate
Strategies
(Dec)
Step 6:
Prioritize
Strategies* (Jan)
•Findings in previous City reports
•Community engagement
•Ad Hoc Committee, stakeholder and staff input
•Best practices and peer cities
•Outcome:Initial set of 56 strategies shared at the December Work Session
•Tw o staff workshops to evaluate the 56 potential strategies
•Evaluated using the criteria of vision, equity, feasibility, cost and impact
•Outcome: Refined set of 26 strategies that meet the evaluation criteria
•Holding workshops and conversations to refine the list
•Council Work Session, Ad Hoc Committee, Home2Health Partners, Staff, Boards
and Commissions, Community
•Outcome: Final List of Priorities for the Ad option Draft
1.5
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
6
Communicating the 26 Strategies
Brief Descriptions
Strategy Name, Description, Outcome, Alignment with
Community Recommendations, and Timeline
Detailed Descriptions
Strategy Name, Description, W hy Prioritized, Timeframe,
Outcomes, Lead Entity, Impacted Players, Next Steps,
Secondary Greatest Challenges
1.5
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
7
Strategies by Timeline
Quicker Wins (<1 year)
1. *Assess displacement and gentrification risk (New)
4. Implementation, tracking and assessment of housing
strategies (Expand)
8.*Extend the City’s affordability term (Expand)
9. *Off-cycle appropriation to advance Phase One of the
Land Use Code (LUC) Audit (New)
10. Refine local affordable housing goal (Expand)
13.*Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current
market conditions (Expand)
14. *Create additional development incentives for
affordable housing (New)
17. Reconsider affordable housing requirements/funding
as part of metro districts (Expand)
24.Support community organizing efforts in
manufactured home communities and increase
access to resident rights information, housing
resources, and housing programs (Expand)
25. *Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal
representation (Expand)
Summary: 10 strategies (3 new, 7 expanded)
Key Outcomes:
Assess and evaluate current programs; Initiate Land Use Code work; Support stability and preservation
*Quick(er) wins identified by the Housing Ad Hoc Council Committee
1.5
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
8
Strategies by Timeline
Tr ansitional Strategies (1-2 years)
5. Advocate for housing-related legislation at state and
federal levels (Expand)
7. Remove barriers to the development of Accessory
Development Units (Expand)
12.Expand partnership(s) with local Community
Development Financial Institution (CDFI) to offer gap
financing and low-cost loan pool for affordable
housing development (Expand)
15.Explore/address financing and other barriers to
missing middle and innovative housing development
(New)
16.Remove barriers to allowed densities through code
revisions (New)
18. Increase awareness & opportunities for creative
collaboration across water districts and other regional
partners around the challenges with water costs and
housing (Expand)
21. Explore revisions to occupancy limits and family
definitions (Expand)
22. Public Sector Right of First Refusal for Affordable
Developments (New)
Summary: 8 strategies (3 new, 5 expanded)
Key Outcomes:
Increase advocacy; Complete housing-related LUC changes; Develop new financing tools; Increase
collaboration around water; Revisit occupancy; Preserve existing affordable inventory
1.5
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
9
Strategies by Timeline
Tr ansformational Strategies (2+ years)
2. Promote inclusivity, housing diversity, and affordability
as community values. (Expand)
3. Implement the 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice
Action Steps (Expand)
6. Visitability policy (New)
11 . Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the
Affordable Housing Fund (Expand)
19.Bolster city land bank activity by allocating additional
funding to the program (contingent on adopting
additional revenue stream policy) (Expand)
20.Explore the option of a mandated rental
license/registry program for long-term rentals and pair
with best practice rental regulations (New)
23.Te nant right of first refusal for cooperative ownership
of multifamily or manufactured housing community
(New)
26.Small Landlord Incentives (New)
Summary: 8 strategies (4 new, 4 expanded)
Key Outcomes:
Promote community values; Increase accessibility of units and Fair Housing; Additional funding for housing;
Expand the land bank; Explore renter regulations & incentives; Preserve existing affordable inventory
1.5
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Tr ansition to Implementation
10
2021:
•Community Summit
•Implementation Plan
•Council Work Session this
Summer
Ongoing:
•Biannual Implementation
Process
•Guiding Principles for Overall
Prioritization
Draft Implementation Process (2-years)
2. Revisit
Priorities
3. Confirm
Priorities
1. Assess
Progress
4. Design
Summit
1
2
3
4
1.5
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Draft Guiding Principles
•Center the work in people
•Be agile and adaptive
•Balance rapid decision making with inclusive
communication and engagement
•Build on existing plans and policies –and their
engagement
•Expect and label tensions, opportunities, and
tradeoffs
•Focus direct investment on the lowest income
levels
•Commit to transparency in decision making
•Make decisions for impact, empowerment, and
systems (not ease of implementation)
11
•Why:
•No one has solved this –stay in
testing & learning mode
•Ever changing environment
•Accountability & Transparency
•When: Applied biannually to
develop overall priorities
•Evaluation criteria à Individual
strategies
•Overall prioritiesà Guiding
Principles
•How: With community, reviewed
by decision makers, basis for
design summit
1.5
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Ad Hoc Committee & Quicker Wins
12
Au gust: Overall Focus & Priorities
September: Challenges & Existing
Conditions
October: Housing Types & Zoning
November: Housing Types & Zoning;
Displacement and gentrification
December: Displacement and
gentrification; Funding & Financing;
U+2, Rental licensing
January: Strategy prioritization,
Innovative Partnerships
February: Plan Deep Dive
March: Implementation, End-of-Te rm
Ap ril: Where to Head Next
Quick(er) wins moving forward:
•Evaluate opportunities to increase and recalibrate
affordable housing incentives in the Land Use Code
•Assess displacement risk (mapping exercise)
•Foreclosure and eviction prevention (TBD)
Quick(er) wins requiring Council action:
•Metro DPA P rogram -no cost to the City
(Resolution on Feb 2)
•Off-cycle appropriation to advance Land Use Code
audit -$250-350K with $60K match from
Home2Health (First Reading on Feb 16)
Additional “quick(er) wins”may continue to be identified
1.5
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
13
PLACEHOLDER:
•Community feedback on the plan and strategies is open thru
January 27
•Staff will share the summary of feedback to date in the January
26 Read Before Packet
1.5
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Step 8: Implement (Spring +)
Step 7: Consider Adoption (Feb/Mar)
Step 6: Prioritize Strategies (Jan)
Step 5: Evaluate Strategies(Dec)
Step 4: ID Strategies, Criteria (Nov)
Step 3: Engage Community (Oct/Nov)
Step 2: Greatest Challenges (Sep)
Step 1: Vision (Aug)
Next Steps & Implementation
Key 2021 Dates:
•January 7, 2021 –Initial Set of Strategies released
•Full draft plan released the week of Jan 11
•Jan 7 -Jan 27 -Community review
•Jan 26 –Council Work Session
•Jan 27 -Feb 3 -Staff Revisions
•Feb 16 –Adoption (1st Reading)
•April/May –Community Summit
•Summer –Implementation Plan & Council Work Session
Next Steps
14
1.5
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
Questions for Consideration
15
What feedback do Councilmembers have on the following:
•Initial set of prioritized strategies?
•Draft guiding principles?
Do Councilmembers have any feedback on the quick(er) wins
identified to date?
1.5
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (9898 : Housing Strategic Plan - Prioritization)
DATE:
STAFF:
January 26, 2021
Elizabeth Blythe, Senior Public Engagement Coordinator
Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk
Carrie Daggett, City Attorney
Honore Depew, Interim Policy and Project Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Council Priority: Reimagine Boards and Commissions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on progress made towards the Council priority to Reimagine
Boards and Commissions, based on previous direction, and seek direction on implementation. Staff will share
options for Code changes intended to reduce barriers to participation, increase consistency and clarity, and avoid
redundancy.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the proposed changes to City Code?
2. Are the proposed changes ready to come forward for consideration in Q1?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The options for updates to City Code represent significant and meaningful improvements to the system of Boards
and Commissions. While not as far-reaching as some of the early possibilities, there are several timely
enhancements that would help reduce some barriers to participation and create more clarity and consistency for
board members, staff, and Councilmembers. The City Clerk’s Office will continue to pursue improvements to the
system in support of Council’s adopted priorities and goals.
The City has 25 boards and commissions that perform a range of functions from advising to decision making.
Over 200 residents volunteer valuable time and expertise through board membership. Approximately 45 City staff
members spend time directly supporting them in various ways. Six of these boards are considered “quasi-judicial,”
meaning they make official decisions/deliver findings, in addition to advising Council.
In 2017, the City’s Equity Team researched and created a Public Participation Report that included a survey and
analysis of existing board member demographics, as well as recommendations to remove barriers and increase
diverse participation. Link to report:
<https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/files/publicparticipationreport-final.pdf?1557934233>
On July 2, 2019, Council adopted the priority to Reimagine Boards and Commissions:
Better structure the board and commission system to set up success into the future, align with Outcome Areas
and allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that allow for greater use of ad hoc meetings, diverse
stakeholders and additional community participation.
To carry out the intention of this priority, staff explored ways to enhance advisory groups to ensure value for board
members and Councilmembers, so that Council receives timely and useful advice from diverse perspectives. This
included as much public engagement as allowed during the COVID-19 health crisis, multiple Council work
sessions, several rounds of input and discussion with current board members, peer city research, and careful
review of current City Code and board functions.
2
Packet Pg. 84
January 26, 2021 Page 2
Timeline and Engagement History
Below is a high-level summary of the timeline of this priority and its touchpoints with Council and board and
commission members, followed by a summary of engagement efforts.
Time Item
Q2 2019 Council Priorities Adopted
Q3 2019 City Council Work Session
Q4 2019 City Council Work Session
Q1 2020 Boards and Commissions Questionnaire
Q1 2020 Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
Q3 2020 City Council Work Session
Q4 2020 Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
Q1 2021 Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
In February 2020, staff engaged 79 board members with a Reimagine Boards and Commissions questionnaire
and convened 55 board members at the Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting to discuss this Council
Priority in small, facilitated groups. Since adoption of this Council priority, staff has had extensive communication
with current and former board members on what works and what could be improved.
The next phase of planned engagement was to hold a Spring 2020 Community Issues Forum with the support of
CSU’s Center for Public Deliberation, and to conduct focus group sessions/interviews with the intended goal of
engaging underrepresented community members. These outreach efforts were canceled to adhere to public
safety guidelines and in respect of community needs during the emergency response to COVID-19. City staff met
directly with representatives from Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU) as well as the
Straayer Center for Public Service Leadership at CSU to discuss how the proposed changes to term lengths will
enable more participation by students in the board and commission system.
Previous Council Direction
During three previous work sessions in 2019 and 2020 (Attachment 1), Council discussed the appropriate scale
of changes associated with the Reimagine Boards and Commissions priority. Councilmembers gave direction to
focus on continuous improvements (that do not require policy change) as well as policies that reduce barriers to
participation and improve efficiency and consistency. The recommended options for changes to City Code,
detailed below, may be grouped into those same categories of continuous improvements, reduced barriers and
alignment of City Code with board functions to reduce redundancy and improve efficiency and consistency in the
system.
Reduce Barriers to Participation
• Continue to allow remote meeting option.
• Allow for shorter board member terms.
Improve Efficiency & Consistency
• Revise Board Grouping
• Revise Naming Structure
• Term Change Options
• Revise Attendance Policy
• Joint Meeting Flexibility
• Removing Bylaw Redundancy
• Adjustments to Several Boards
2
Packet Pg. 85
January 26, 2021 Page 3
Continuous Improvement
During 2020, two major continuous improvement items made headway, including edits to the Boards and
Commissions Manual and improvements to training with a draft training program. The completion and
implementation of these two items are contingent on the results of this City Council Work Session discussion and
subsequent Ordinances. Completion of these improvements is a 2021 priority for the Boards and Commissions
Program.
• Updates to Board and Commission Manual
• Staff and Board Member training
POSSIBLE CODE CHANGES
Board Grouping and Naming Structure
Revise Board Grouping
The proposed change to add an additional category of “Decision-Making” boards is to provide clarity and
organization to the differences in responsibility and functions of certain advisory boards. The change in board and
commission grouping is reflected in the chart below.
Draft definition of Decision-Making Boards: “In addition to serving an advisory function to Council and staff,
decision-making boards also have, as part of their assigned functions, the authority to make decisions on certain
matters specified in City Code, which then serve as formal recommendations to Council or staff for their
consideration and adoption.”
The following Boards and Commissions are recommended to be categorized as Decision-Making boards instead
of Advisory Boards:
• Art in Public Places Board
• Community Development Block Grant Commission
• Cultural Resources Advisory Board
• Citizen Review Board
Revise Naming Structure
Based on the August 11, 2020, work session discussion, Council was in support of the change to the naming
structure. The changes below are still being recommended and will be paired with other changes brought forth in
this item. As a reminder, the reason for this recommendation is that the current naming structure lacks clarity and
there is confusion and concern among staff and board members about the meaning behind “board” versus
“commission” titles. Staff recommends the below naming restructure. (Attachment 2)
1. Use “Commission” for quasi-judicial groups.
2. Use “Board” for advisory and decision-making groups.
2
Packet Pg. 86
January 26, 2021 Page 4
Term Change Options
Revise Term Length
The proposed changes to term lengths create a boards and commissions structure that maintains the benefits
from having longer terms that provide institutional knowledge and consistency, as well as, adding shorter terms
that provide a diversity of membership and perspectives.
Staff recommends that Quasi-Judicial Commissions maintain 4-year terms for all seats due to the complexity and
responsibility of functions. Decision-Making and Advisory Boards would have a mix of term lengths with the
majority seats being 4-year terms and the remainder of seats being 1 and 2-year terms. The chart below outlines
the ratio of terms.
Revise Term Limits
To support the recommended changes to term lengths, term limits need to be adjusted as well. The following
recommendation allows for members to hold a mixture of terms which allows for flexibility of service. The term
limit for Quasi-Judicial Boards and Commissions will remain the same at 2 consecutive terms which is the
equivalent of 8 years. Decision-Making and Advisory Boards will be term-limited at 6 consecutive years.
Revise Number of Members
Staff recommends the proposed changes below to the number of members per board and commission based on
its grouping. These changes provide consistency and support the proposed change of shorter terms.
(Attachment 3)
Revise Attendance Policy
Currently, there is a demonstrated history of lack of adherence and enforceability of the current attendance policy.
As a result, attendance issues create rippling impacts on the effectiveness of boards. The proposed attendance
policy and its proposed placement in the City Code are intended to alleviate these issues.
2
Packet Pg. 87
January 26, 2021 Page 5
Code Clean-up
The changes listed below were identified by previously paused Ordinances, Code change drafts or staff
proposals. The recent review of City Code identified the potential for additional changes that may be brought forth
to Council after further review and consideration.
• Name Changes:
o Community Development Block Grant Commission is to be decided by 1st reading
o Landmark Preservation Commission to Historic Preservation Commission
o Zoning Board of Appeals to Land Use Review Commission
• Adjust membership/participation parameters of the:
o Bicycle Advisory Committee
o Youth Advisory Board
o Senior Advisory Board
• Adjust functions from previously paused ordinances to the:
o Affordable Housing Board
o Community Development Block Grant Commission
Allow for Remote Meetings
At the August 11, 2020 work session, Council gave support for the proposal to allow Boards and Commissions to
continue to meet remotely beyond what is currently permitted in Emergency Ordinance No. 079, 2020. After
further staff review, below is the recommended scope and parameters for the use of remote meetings:
• Who:
o Chairperson of any City board or commission, after consultation with the staff liaison
o Remote participation is not allowed in any quasi-judicial proceeding.
• What:
o Any regular or special meeting
o In whole or in part by Remote Technology
• When/If:
o The meeting room is equipped for remote participation to provide reasonably available participation by
members of the board or commission and by the public.
▪ Everyone can see and hear one another.
▪ Everyone can see, hear, or read all discussion, comment and testimony in a manner designed to
provide maximum information sharing.
▪ Members of the public have equivalent access.
Revise Code Language for Convening Joint Meetings
Based on the outcomes of the 2017 Public Participation Report and the 2018 Joint Meeting Pilot, as well as
feedback received from board and commission members for increased flexibility to collaborate cross-functionally,
staff is recommending adding Code language that permits joint meetings. Outlined below are the major
parameters of the recommended Code language.
• Two or more boards or commissions, committees of boards or commissions, or representatives from each
2
Packet Pg. 88
January 26, 2021 Page 6
such board, commission, or committee.
• If the subject of the meeting specifically relates to an item or project in the work plan of each participating
board or commission.
• If the City Manager or Council has approved the joint meeting.
Reserve Bylaws for Quasi-Judicial Commissions Only
It has been demonstrated that Advisory Board (including new Decision-Making Boards) bylaws create confusion
for staff and board members and create an opportunity for expansion of board responsibility beyond the scope of
City Code permitted functions.
Additionally, staff found that the vast majority of Advisory Board bylaws were a direct duplicate of City Code
function and membership language. Reserving bylaws for Quasi-Judicial Commissions only would eliminate
redundancy and increase consistency and efficiency related to City Code revisions and clarity.
This change would not impact the functionality or capability of these boards, and in the case that future updates to
any board membership or function are needed, changes can be made through other processes.
Summary of Proposed Changes
New Board Category Decision-Making
Aligning Names w/ Categories Advisory and Decision-Making Boards; Quasi-
Judicial Commissions
Shorter Term Options Add 1- and 2-year terms (not for Q-J)
Adjusting Term Limits Advisory and Decision-Making - 6 yrs; Q-J - 8 yrs
Revised Attendance Policy Move Policy to City Code; Adjust Absences Allowed
Remote Meetings Continue to Support Remote Participation
Joint Meeting Flexibility Council/CM-approved Multi-Board Meetings
Removing Bylaw Redundancy Move Bylaws to City Code (not for Q-J)
Adjustments to Several Boards YAB, SAB, BAC, AHB, CDBG
Next Steps
Based on Council discussion, staff will bring forth an Ordinance proposing Code changes, as well as the draft
Boards and Commission Manual for review and approval by Council. Through 2021, staff will focus on
implementations of these changes, as well as improvements to training, recruitment, and onboarding processes.
An additional round of Code revisions may be brought forth as additional program improvements are reviewed.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session Summaries (PDF)
2. Name Change Table (PDF)
3. Number of Members Chart (PDF)
4. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
2
Packet Pg. 89
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 14, 2020
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manger
Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager
Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk
FROM: Honore Depew, Interim Policy and Project Manager
Elizabeth Blythe, Sr. Coordinator, Public Engagement
RE: August 11, 2020 Work Session: Reimagine Boards and Commissions
All Councilmembers were present. The purpose of this item was to provide an overview
of implementation since previous Council direction for addressing the Council Priority,
Reimagine Boards and Commissions, and to seek direction on next steps.
General Feedback
Support for Tier 2 options:
o Choices for shorter terms, continued remote meeting access,
standardized nomenclature, code clean up
Explore Tier 3 options with additional public input
Support for making it easier for people to participate
o Flexible timing, childcare, technology access & training, transportation
Support for letting boards lead and maintain independence
o Set their own expectations around Council interaction and meeting
frequency
Explore sunset provisions as part of a formalized review process
Need to zoom out when talking about structural changes and engagement more
generally
o Many ways to engage; not effective to force people into a certain type/role
Next Steps
Bring forward ordinances to implement Tier 2 options
Continue staff-level system improvements
Conduct additional public engagement around Tier 3 options
DocuSign Envelope ID: BA59B417-E5CE-4F6B-9519-31DCF06E5ACC
ATTACHMENT 1 2.1
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Work Session Summaries (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2.1
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Work Session Summaries (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2.1
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Work Session Summaries (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2.1
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Work Session Summaries (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS NAME CHANGE TABLE
Current Name Recommended Name
Affordable Housing Board Affordable Housing Board
Air Quality Advisory Board Air Quality Advisory Board
Art in Public Places Board Art in Public Places Board
Building Review Board Building Review Commission
Citizen Review Board Citizen Review Board
Commission on Disability Disability Advisory Board
Community Development Block Grant
Commission
Social Investment Board
Cultural Resources Board Cultural Resources Board
Economic Advisory Commission Economic Advisory Board
Energy Board Energy Board
General Employee's Retirement Committee General Employee's Retirement
Committee
Golf Board Golf Board
Human Relations Commission Human Relations Commission
Land Conservation Stewardship Board Land Conservation Stewardship Board
Landmark Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission
Natural Resources Advisory Board Natural Resources Advisory Board
Parking Advisory Board Parking Advisory Board
Parks and Recreation Board Parks and Recreation Board
Planning and Zoning Board Planning and Zoning Commission
Senior Advisory Board Senior Advisory Board
Transportation Board Transportation Board
Water Board Water Resources Commission
Women's Commission Women's Advisory Board
Youth Advisory Board Youth Advisory Board
Zoning Board of Appeals Land Use Review Commission
Board v. Commission Naming Structure Change
Content Name Change
ATTACHMENT 2 2.2
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Name Change Table (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
BOARD AND COMMISSION NUMBER OF MEMBERS TABLE
Quasi-Judicial Commissions
Current Proposed Change
Building Review Board 7 7 0
Human Relations Commission 9 7 -2
Landmark Preservation Commission * 9 9 0
Planning and Zoning Board 7 7 0
Water Board 11 7 -4
Zoning Board of Appeals 7 7 0
Decision-Making Boards
Art in Public Places Board 7 7 0
Citizen Review Board 7 7 0
Community Development Block Grant 9 7 -2
Cultural Resources Board 7 7 0
Advisory Boards
Affordable Housing Board 7 9 +2
Air Quality Advisory Board 9 9 0
Commission on Disability 9 9 0
Economic Advisory Board 9 9 0
Energy Board 9 9 0
Golf Board 7 9 +2
Land Conservation Board 9 9 0
Natural Resources Board 9 9 0
Parking Advisory Board 9 9 0
Parks and Recreation Board 9 9 0
Senior Advisory Board 9 9 0
Transportation Board 9 9 0
Womens Commission 9 9 0
Youth Advisory Board* 5-9 5-9 0
ATTACHMENT 3 2.3
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Number of Members Chart (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
January 26, 2021
Council Priority: Reimagine Boards & Commissions
Honore Depew, City Manager ’s Office; Elizabeth Blythe, City Clerk’s Office
ATTACHMENT 4 2.4
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Direction Sought
2
1.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the
proposed changes to City Code?
2.Are the proposed changes ready to come forward for
consideration in Q1?
2.4
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2019 Adopted Council Priority
3
Reimagine Boards and Commissions:
“Better structure the board and commission system to set
up success into the future, align with Outcome Areas and
allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that
allow for greater use of Ad Hoc meetings, diverse
stakeholders and additional community participation.”
HPG 7.3 –Improve effectiveness of community
engagement with enhanced inclusion of all
identities,languages and needs
Strategic Alignment:
2.4
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2017 Public Participation Report
Findings:
•Lack of representation & diversity
•Race, age, income
•Lack of clarity regarding expectations
Recommendations:
•Reduce barriers to participation
•Recruit from underrepresented populations
•Improve clarity and consistency
4fcgov.com/cityclerk/boards
2.4
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Summary of Boards & Commissions
•25 Boards & Commissions
•6 Quasi-judicial
•Governed by Chapter 2, Articles 3&4 of
Municipal Code
•Majority created in the 80s and 90s
•Between 7 and 11 members each
•210 (+/-) Total Volunteers
•45 Staff Liaisons and Admin Support
5
2.4
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Ti meline and Engagement History
6
Q2 2019
Council Priorities Adopted
Q3 & Q4 2019
City Council Work Sessions
Q1 2020 Boards and Commissions Questionnaire
Q1 2020
Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
Q3 2020
City Council Work Session
Q4 2020
Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
Q1 2021
Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting
2.4
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Themes from Board Member Input
•More clarity on role and timing of board action
•Better on-boarding and training for members
•Flexibility for board collaboration
•More effective attendance policy
•Differing perspectives on shorter term lengths
7
2.4
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Previous Council Direction
8
Reduce Barriers to Participation
•Continue to allow remote meeting option
•Allow for shorter board member terms
Improve Efficiency & Consistency
•Revise Board Grouping
•Revise Naming Structure
•Te rm Change Options
•Code Clean-up
•Revise Attendance Policy
•Joint Meeting Flexibility
•Remove Bylaw Redundancy
2.4
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Board Grouping and Naming Structure
Current
Grouping
& Naming
Recommended
Grouping
Recommended
Naming
Ad visory
Boards and Commissions
Quasi-judicial Boards
and Commissions
Ad visory Board
Decision-Making Board
Quasi-Judicial Commission
9
Proposed Decision-
Making Boards:
•Art in Public Places
•Cultural Resources
•Citizen Review
•Community
Development Block
Grant
2.4
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Te rm Change Option
Ty pe Number of
Members
Te rm Lengths
(Number of seats: Term
Length)
Te rm Limit
Quasi-Judicial*7 7:4 2 Consecutive Te rms
Decision-
Making
7 4:4, 2:2, 1:1 6 Consecutive Ye ars
Ad visory 9 4:4, 3:2, 2:1 6 Consecutive Ye ars
10
*Landmark Preservation Commission would remain at 9 members
2.4
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Revised Attendance Policy
Current Recommended
Dismissal after 3 consecutive absences
without notice
Dismissal after 2 consecutive absences
without notice
Dismissal after 4 absences in one calendar year
without written notice
Dismissal after 3 absences in one calendar year
with or without notice
City Council approved exceptions to policy
In the Boards and Commissions Manual In the City Code
11
2.4
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Proposed Name Changes
12
Current Recommended
Naming Structure and Clarity Change
Community Development Block Grant Commission [TBD by 1st Reading] Board
Landmark Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission
Zoning Board of Appeals Land Use Review Commission
Naming Structure Change
Building Review Board Building Review Commission
Commission on Disability Disability Advisory Board
Economic Advisory Commission Economic Advisory Board
Planning and Zoning Board Planning and Zoning Commission
Women’s Commission Women’s Advisory Board
Wa ter Board Wa ter Resources Commission
2.4
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Additional Changes & Code Clean Up
Adjust membership/participation parameters
•Bicycle Advisory Committee, Senior Advisory Board and Youth Advisory Board
Include previously paused 2018 ordinance changes
•Affordable Housing Board and Community Development Block Grant
Re move bylaw redundancy
•Reserve Bylaws for Quasi-Judicial Commissions
Pe rmissions for joint meeting flexibility
•Add to the City Code
Support for remote meetings
•Add to the City Code
13
2.4
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Summary of Proposed Changes
14
New Board Category Decision-Making
Al igning Names w / Categories Advisory and Decision-Making Boards;
Quasi-Judicial Commissions
Shorter Term Options Add 1-and 2-year terms (not for Q-J)
Ad justing Term Limits Advisory and Decision-Making –6 yrs; Q-J –8 yrs
Revised Attendance Policy Move Policy to City Code; Adjust Absences Allowed
Remote Meetings Continue to Support Remote Participation
Joint Meeting Flexibility Council/CM-approved Multi-Board Meetings
Removing Bylaw Redundancy Move Bylaws to City Code (not for Q-J)
Ad justments to Several Boards YA B, SAB, BAC, AHB, CDBG
2.4
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Direction Sought
15
1.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the
proposed changes to City Code?
2.Are the proposed changes ready to come forward for
consideration in Q1?
2.4
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation [Revision 1] (9903 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
DATE:
STAFF:
January 26, 2021
Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner
Caryn Champine, Director of PDT
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss regulatory options for siting new oil and gas development within City limits.
Per State statute, local regulations must match or exceed Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
(COGCC) requirements to ensure the protection of public health, safety, welfare, the environment, and wildlife
resources. The discussion will focus on various ways the City could adopt more protective standards through
different setback distances, zoning regulations, and a combination thereof, and demonstrate how each scenario
would influence where new development could occur within the community. To help frame the discussion, a
summary will be provided of recently adopted COGCC setback rules, and feedback received through broad
community engagement.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What feedback does Council have regarding setback and zoning regulations for new oil and gas development?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During a Council work session held on September 16, 2019, staff was directed to begin developing local
regulations for oil and gas development. A work session was scheduled on April 28, 2020, to discuss regulatory
options for siting new oil and gas development within City limits. The work session was moved multiple times to
accommodate more time sensitive topics related to COVID-19 and other priorities.
The work session delay has impacted the project schedule; however, new oil and gas development within City
limits is unlikely and not imminent. To keep Council apprised of project progress, staff provided a workplan and
public engagement summary (Attachment 1). Staff also maximized the use of time provided by the delay to
actively participate in the COGCC rulemakings, an ambitious process that sought to align state requirements with
the goals of Senate Bill 19-181. Rulemakings concluded on November 23, 2020 and resulted in broad changes to
state permitting, reporting, operational and setback requirements. The regulations also defined roles and
authorities of local and state governments, as well as improved interagency coordination during the permit review
process.
The purpose of developing local regulations is to create requirements that are contextually appropriate to Fort
Collins. For this discussion, staff is seeking feedback on location requirements that are equal to or more restrictive
than the State for new oil and gas development. Accessing mineral resources within the City is already limited
and will become increasingly so as the City continues to grow.
SENATE BILL 19-181
On April 16, 2019, the State adopted Senate Bill 19-181 (“SB181” or “Bill”), which amended several sections of
the Colorado statutes. The Bill prioritizes the protection of public health, safety and environmental concerns in the
regulation of oil and gas development, over fostering development through balancing impacts with mineral
extraction.
3
Packet Pg. 111
January 26, 2021 Page 2
SB181 also granted new land use authority to local governments to regulate the siting of new oil and gas well
locations, and to regulate land use and surface impacts, including the ability to inspect oil and gas facilities;
impose fines for leaks, spills and emissions; and impose fees to cover costs of permitting, regulation, monitoring
and inspection. Importantly, SB181 established that local government land use regulations would not be
preempted by overlapping state regulations, and that state regulations would serve as baseline requirements,
thus allowing local governments to adopt more protective regulations than the state. However, this authority is
limited to surface impacts; the COGCC retains the authority over subsurface and other technical aspects.
COGCC SETBACK REGULATIONS
Historically, the COGCC has regulated the siting of new oil and gas facilities through the use of setbacks, or
buffers, from existing developments. Setbacks have incrementally grown over the years, with the last increase
occurring in August of 2013. Prior to SB181, COGCC setbacks were 500 feet from Residential Building Units, and
1000 feet from High Occupancy Building (i.e., schools, hospitals, assisted living facilities). The justification used
for the setbacks was to “provide strong protective measures without imposing undue costs or restrictions on oil
and gas exploration and production.” At the time, the COGCC acknowledged the setbacks “do not address
potential human health impacts associated with air emissions...and believes there are numerous data gaps...that
warrant further study.” (Statement of Basis, Specific Statutory Authority, and Purpose New Rules and
Amendments to Current Rules, COGCC 2 CCR 404-1. Cause No. 1R Docket No. 1211-RM-04 Setbacks).
In November 2020, COGCC adopted more stringent setbacks in an attempt to better address potential human
health impacts associated with oil and gas development, a requirement of SB181. A core justification (and not the
only justification) was a study published by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)
that implicates potential acute health impacts (e.g., headaches; dizziness; respiratory, skin, and eye irritation)
could result from pre-production activities as far away as 2,000 feet under worst-case weather conditions and
peak emissions. The anticipated health impacts listed in the CDPHE study also mirror recent complaints received
by the COGCC from people living in proximity to oil and gas locations.
New COGCC setbacks were developed with these findings in mind and start with a presumptive 2,000-foot
setback for Residential Building Units and High Occupancy Buildings, with specific exceptions that would allow
working pads to be located less than 500 feet from Residential Building Units, and between 500 feet and 2,000
feet from Residential Building Units and High Occupancy Buildings. The COGCC justified a variance because
other protective measures could be employed that could potentially mitigate impacts equal to or greater than
distance alone. Additionally, a 2,000 foot setback may prohibit operators from accessing minerals in certain
scenarios. Please note the COGCC does not allow exceptions for the 2,000 foot setback from schools and
childcare centers.
Other relevant setbacks in COGCC rules include:
• 200 feet from buildings, public roads, above ground utility lines and railroads;
• 150 feet from a surface property line;
• 1000 feet from Public Water System (surface water supply areas, groundwater wells, aquifer wells); and
• Environmental setbacks for specific resources.
ANALYSIS OF SITING REGULATIONS WITHIN CITY LIMITS
Setbacks
The COGCC’s regulations set the floor for oil and gas development. Therefore, local regulations must be equal to
or greater than the state. To better understand the implications of siting requirements, staff evaluated alternative
regulatory scenarios through a mapping exercise to identify areas within the Growth Management Area that would
be open to new oil and gas development. These maps are intended to offer high-level visual overviews of
projected outcomes and do not depict the full complexity of regulations. For example, many existing buildings are
not differentiated by land use, therefore setbacks are applied somewhat uniformly. Setbacks from existing
buildings were completed in 500-foot increments and ranged between 500 feet to 2000 feet. Staff used 2000 feet
3
Packet Pg. 112
January 26, 2021 Page 3
as the maximum setback distance because it results in no land available for development. All scenarios
accounted for buffer requirements for roads, railroads, FEMA and City regulated 100-year floodplains.
Opportunities for increasing state standards through local setback regulations include:
• Increasing setbacks from 2,000 feet;
• Adopting setbacks without variances;
• Applying setbacks to workplaces, commercial buildings and other land uses; and
• Applying setbacks to visitor use amenities at parks and natural areas, such as athletic fields, playgrounds,
recreation trails and parking lots.
Zoning
Zoning is a land use tool that the City employs to ensure compatibility between development sites. In the context
of oil and gas, zoning could be used as a starting point to determine appropriate locations for new development. A
range of setback distances with zoning requirements were applied to demonstrate the incremental effects of
zoning with more protective setbacks. By nature, Oil and gas development is an industrial use and has the
potential to impact public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife resources. Therefore, staff restricted
oil and gas to the Industrial Zone District in the mapping exercise as it is the only zone district to allow heavy
industrial uses and prohibit residential uses. Because zoning adds another layer to COGCC setbacks, it is more
restrictive than State standards.
KEY FINDINGS OF SCENARIOS
Mapping scenarios revealed that development opportunity is limited and predominantly concentrated in outlying
locations of the City. The exercise also suggested that if the City adopts more protective siting regulations than
the State, it may preclude new oil and gas development from occurring in the future. Areas where oil and gas
could occur in City limits include:
• Foothills Natural Areas (no immediate access)
• Fossil Creek Reservoir area (no immediate access)
• Montava development area and surrounding area (accessible in northwest corner and pockets surrounding
FTC Oil Field)
• Planned future PSD high school near Montava (no immediate access)
• I-25 corridor (no immediate access)
TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF REGULATORY SCENARIOS FOR SITING IN CITY LIMITS
SETBACK ZONING LAND
AVAILABLE
NOTES
1000’ All Buildings No 7.2% One pocket of land around FTC Oil Field with
access to mineral resources. Remainder of land
with no access to mineral resources*
1500’ All Buildings No 3.3% No land with access to mineral resources*
2000’ All Buildings No 1.3% No land with access to mineral resources*
1000’ All Buildings Yes .2% No land with access to mineral resources*
1500’ All Buildings Yes 0% No land with access to mineral resources*
2000’ All Buildings Yes 0% No land with access to mineral resources*
*Assessments are based on current horizontal drilling technology and the location of known mineral resources.
Horizontal drilling can access mineral resources up to nearly 3,000 feet away.
3
Packet Pg. 113
January 26, 2021 Page 4
TABLE 2: CROSS-COMPARISON OF REGULATIONS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES
While one of the primary objectives of local regulations is to develop requirements that are contextually
appropriate to Fort Collins, it is helpful to highlight how other local jurisdictions have approached regulating the
siting of new oil and gas development within their communities. Below is a cross-comparison of siting regulations
communities across the Front Range are considering or have adopted.
COMMUNITY SETBACK ZONING NOTES
Larimer County
Adopted Feb 2020
1000’ No Setbacks from Residential Building Units (RBU)
and High Occupancy Buildings (HOBs)
Broomfield Draft 2000’ Yes • Zoned to Industrial Zone District
• Setbacks from lot line of athletic fields,
recreational facilities, HOBs, RBUs,
undeveloped residential lots
• DRAFT regs to be released soon
Boulder County
Adopted Dec 2020
2500’ No • Setbacks from RBUs and HOBs
• Included setbacks from recreation trails and
parking lots at Open Spaces
• Included setbacks from workplace buildings in
specific zone districts
• Setbacks are 2500’ but not less than 2,000’
Adams County
Adopted Oct 2020
1000’ Yes • Restricted to non-residential zone districts
Setback measured from property line of
existing or platted development and boundary
of environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands,
wildlife corridors, etc.)
• Updating standards to potentially exceed State
Lafayette Draft in
progress
No Extended Moratorium on new OG development or
exploration to May 31, 2021 until conclusion of
COGCC rulemakings and adoption of Boulder
County regulations
Longmont 750’; 1000’
HOB
Yes • Setbacks from RBU, platted residential lots,
parks, sports fields, playgrounds or
designated outside activity areas
• Development must occur outside residential
zone districts, including mixed-use districts
with a residential component
• Considering new regulations
Windsor COGCC No No new regulations
Greeley COGCC No No new regulations
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
To help understand siting preferences and big-picture concerns about oil and gas development in Fort Collins,
staff engaged in numerous meetings and conversations with various City Departments, City Boards, industry
representatives, and environmental and neighborhood groups. Input was gathered through the following outreach
activities:
• Direct mailing to property owners within 2000 feet of existing active oil and gas wells, with information on the
project, public open houses, city website, and CDPHE’s health study (500 letters mailed)
• Interactive presentation at a Super Board Meeting held in February 2020 (over 50 attended with 14 boards
represented)
• Online questionnaire to collect feedback on concerns and thoughts, as advertised through direct mailing,
social media, news release, and Nextdoor website (163 completed responses)
• Two interactive public open houses with Larimer County, CDPHE and operator available to answer questions
3
Packet Pg. 114
January 26, 2021 Page 5
• Presentations to the Planning & Zoning Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board, and Air Quality Advisory Board work sessions
• Presentations to City departments
• Individual phone calls and emails to discuss questions and concerns, as needed
In addition to broad community outreach, staff also consulted with the following targeted groups:
• Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
• Colorado Oil and Gas Association
• Prospect Energy (local oil and gas operator)
• Country Club Reserve land owner
• Local Government Roundtable: a group of 14 local jurisdictions. Attended biweekly meetings to discuss
COGCC rulemakings and local regulations under consideration
• Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment staff
• Larimer County staff
A general summary of public input and potential regulations are presented in Table 3. (Attachments 3-6)
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT
Public Input Siting Regulations that Align w/ Public Input
Majority support not allowing oil and
gas development within City limits
• Zoning that restricts development to Industrial Zone District
• 2,000 foot setbacks with no exceptions
• Setbacks from other building types (office, commercial,
industrial, etc)
Majority support restricting oil and gas
within City conserved Natural Areas
and Parks
• Zoning that restricts development to Industrial Zone District
Other Considerations • Setbacks from amenities in Natural Areas and Parks (trails,
parking lots, recreation fields and recreational trails)
• Setbacks from buildings of other land uses, including
commercial, institutional, industrial.
Oil and Gas Industry Input
Adopt regulations that do not result in
prohibiting new development
• COGCC setback standards with opportunities for reduced
setback through variance
NEXT STEPS
Staff will begin drafting local regulations based on feedback received by Council and through community
engagement with the goal of protecting public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife. An additional
work session is recommended in Fall or Winter of 2021 to focus on developing regulations. This will require multi-
agency coordination between Larimer County, CDPHE and the COGCC, as well as analysis of State rulemakings
and additional community outreach. Potential elements to be explored include, but are not limited to:
• Registration and permitting requirements;
• Impact and maintenance fines and fees;
• Requirements for existing facilities;
• Reclamation requirements;
• Financial securities and insurance;
• Development review and approval process;
• Environmental protection standards above state requirements;
• Emergency Preparedness Plan requirements; and
• Additional monitoring, testing and reporting requirements for air, water, odor.
3
Packet Pg. 115
January 26, 2021 Page 6
Given the current uncertainty around public health guidelines and regulations related to COVID-19, staff will
evaluate how to adapt to ensure meaningful community engagement. This may potentially affect the project
schedule. Delays will be communicated to Council via memorandum.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (PDF)
2. Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (PDF)
3. Public Input (PDF)
4. Our City Questionnaire Results (PDF)
5. Public Comments (PDF)
6. Superboard Meeting Questionnaire Results (PDF)
7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
3
Packet Pg. 116
ATTACHMENT 1 3.1
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3.1
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Environmental Services
222 Laporte Ave
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6600
970.224.6177 - fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 18, 2019
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
FROM: Cassie Archuleta, Air Quality Program Manager
SUBJECT: Oil and Gas - Air Quality Monitoring
The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to a Council request during the December 3, 2019
regular meeting to provide information regarding local and regional air quality monitoring related to
oil and gas operations.
Bottom Line
A number of local and regional air quality monitoring studies have been implemented in the region
to better understand how oil and gas development contributes to emissions and air pollution. In
Fort Collins, there have been small-scale monitoring efforts to better characterize emissions related
to local operations, and efforts that have leveraged larger regional studies. Upcoming studies will
provide more information and we are seeking opportunities to enhance monitoring through
partnerships and grants.
Air Quality Monitoring Studies
Air Quality impacts are often cited as one of the highest priority concerns related to oil and gas
development. While definitive health impact information is a continuing subject of interest and
research, regulations in Colorado are continually evolving in response to best available
information, including monitoring and health assessment studies. Some key local and regional oil
and gas monitoring activities to date include:
In 2013, air sampling was performed in Fort Collins per the terms of the City’s Operator
Agreement with Prospect Energy. Measurements indicated concentrations of oil and gas
related air pollutants were lower in Fort Collins than near larger oil and gas fields in eastern
Colorado.
In 2014, several large-scale studies were performed along the Front Range to better
understand oil and gas contributions to ozone formation. In 2017, the City of Fort Collins
leveraged this work by contracting with the National Center for Atmospheric Research
(NCAR) to prepare a locally relevant assessment. This assessment indicated that oil and
gas emissions, along with transportation sources, were the largest contributors to the
region’s high ozone events.
In 2016, Colorado State University (CSU), in collaboration with the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) and several operators, completed a monitoring
study that characterized emission rates from oil and gas operations along the northern
Front Range. The lowest emission rates were measured during hydraulic fracturing
operations, followed by production. The highest emissions rates were measured during
DocuSign Envelope ID: C346291C-830F-45C7-BAFF-F4BF61AC44BC
3.1
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
flowback, which is a pre-production stage where the fracking fluid, produced water, oil, and
natural gas flow up and out of the well before it is placed into production.
In 2017, the City, CSU and Prospect Energy collaborated on a sampling effort just outside
City limits to characterize emissions during the hydraulic fracturing and flowback stages of a
well recompletion. Measurements indicated that emissions were lower than other
measurements along the Front Range, as characterized in the 2016 CSU study.
In 2019, the CDPHE released a health impacts study that used the 2016 CSU results. This
study concluded that air emissions related to oil and gas development may cause short
term negative health impacts (e.g., headaches; dizziness; respiratory, skin, and eye
irritation) during “worst-case” conditions at up to 2,000 feet from operations.
Currently, Broomfield, Boulder County, and the City of Longmont are investing in sampling
and analysis programs to further investigate local impacts related to oil and gas pollutants.
Next Steps
While there is little oil and gas development within Fort Collins city limits, there is urban
development interest near existing wells and concern over possible air pollutant impacts. Some air
quality monitoring has occurred related to local operations, and many of the regional air studies are
locally relevant. For next steps, staff proposes to:
Leverage updated studies to further identify ozone reduction strategies that are most
important to Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. In 2020, the Regional Air Quality
Council (RAQC) will update emissions profiles and ozone attribution summaries as part of
efforts required by the EPA to meet federal standards for ozone.
Continue to participate in updated rulemaking regarding methane emissions from oil and
gas. Currently, the State Air Quality Control Commission is conducting public hearings on
new rules (to be completed in December 2019), and the City of Fort Collins has party status
through the Colorado Communities for Climate Action (CC4CA), in accordance with the City
approved CC4CA Policy Agenda.
Explore opportunities to enhance operator monitoring requirements, per new authorities
granted under Senate Bill 181, for oil and gas related emissions. This may include targeted
monitoring during stages of well completions and development expected to have the
highest emissions (such as flowback), and monitoring for accidental spill and release
indicators.
Seek grants and other funding opportunities to enhance and expand local monitoring
networks, including increased use of particulate monitoring instrumentation that has
become less expensive and more portable.
cc:
Caryn Champine, Planning, Development and Transportation Director
Tom Leeson, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director
Kelly Smith, Senior Environmental Planner
DocuSign Envelope ID: C346291C-830F-45C7-BAFF-F4BF61AC44BC
3.1
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Community Development &
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/planning
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 28, 2020
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
Caryn Champine, Planning, Development and Transportation Director
Tom Leeson, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director
FROM: Kelly Smith, Senior Environmental Planner
SUBJECT: Oil and Gas – Status Update
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update on the development of new oil and gas
regulations at the State and local levels in response to authorities granted through Senate Bill 19-
181.
BOTTOM LINE
A Work session was scheduled for April 28, 2020 to discuss regulatory options for siting new oil
and gas development within City limits. This W ork session was moved to the unscheduled agenda
to accommodate topics related to COVID-19. The schedule change will not result in project
impacts.
At the time of the September 16, 2019 Oil and Gas Work session, a recompletion permit within City
limits was under Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) review. Since then,
the operator has withdrawn the application. If development interests in City limits emerge, staff will
know in advance of the state permitting process through preliminary inquiries regarding mineral
resource pooling requirements. Should new development interest become known prior to the
adoption of local regulations, staff will notify Council and provide timelines and level of urgency.
BACKGROUND
Mission Change Rulemaking Update
On March 14, 2020, the COGCC released Draft Mission Change rules that provide a glimpse into
how the COGCC is interpreting state requirements, and the division of local and state authorities.
The schedule for the Mission Change rulemakings is pending, as the COGCC develops an approach
to engage the public during safer-at-home restrictions. Staff is actively participating in the rulemaking
process and has joined party status with the Alliance of Local Government Coalition that include
Lafayette, Longmont, Broomfield and Boulder County.
STATUS UPDATE
The project team has facilitated multiple outreach opportunities using a variety of platforms to
understand high level concerns and community preferences for regulating the siting of new oil and
gas development. Staff collaborated with the City’s GIS Department to evaluate areas within the
GMA that are currently vulnerable to oil and gas development using existing COGCC setbacks.
Staff also applied more protective siting regulations, using setback distances and zoning, to
determine how regulations would influence where oil and gas development could occur within the
DocuSign Envelope ID: C0C6C599-70E1-415A-B1B9-85845D829717
3.1
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
community. Scenarios were presented to community members at public open houses and City
board meetings. The Our City project website also featured open house materials and a
questionnaire to broaden the community conversation. Over 250 community members participated
in the process. Key preferences are listed below:
Prohibit oil and gas development on Natural Area properties (91%)
Develop more protective regulations than the state (92%)
Top 3 concerns:
o Regional air quality
o Localized air quality
o Ecosystem, surface water and environmental impacts
Community feedback has been collected through the following outreach activities:
Direct mailing to property owners within 2000 feet of existing active oil and gas wells, with
information on the project, public open houses, city website, and CDPHE’s health study
(500 letters mailed)
Interactive presentation at a Super Board Meeting held in February 2020 (over 50
attendees with 14 boards and commissions represented)
Online questionnaire to collect feedback on concerns and thoughts, as advertised through
direct mailing, social media, news release, and Nextdoor website (180 completed
responses to date)
Two interactive public open houses with Larimer County, CDPHE and operator in
attendance to answer questions (50 attendees)
Presentations at Planning & Zoning Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, and Air
Quality Advisory Board Work sessions
Individual phone calls and emails to discuss questions and concerns as needed
In addition to broad community outreach, staff also consulted with the following groups:
Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
Representative of Prospect Energy (local oil and gas operator)
Developer of the proposed Country Club Reserve residential project
Local Government Roundtable: 14 local jurisdictions meeting biweekly to discuss COGCC
rulemakings
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Larimer County Planning staff
Larimer County Department of Public Health
Representatives from the American Petroleum Institute (API) and Colorado Oil and Gas
Association (COGA).
NEXT STEPS
Staff will continue to evaluate regulatory options and provide quarterly updates, pending additional
opportunity for a future Work session. Given the current uncertainty around safer-at-home orders
and social distancing related to COVID-19, staff will evaluate how to ensure continuous meaningful
community engagement.
cc:
Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
Cassie Archuleta, Air Quality Program Manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: C0C6C599-70E1-415A-B1B9-85845D829717
3.1
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Community Development &
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/planning
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 15, 2020
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager
Caryn Champine, Planning, Development and Transportation Director
Paul Sizemore, Interim Community Development and Neighborhood Services Deputy
Director
FROM: Kelly Smith, Senior Environmental Planner
SUBJECT: Oil and Gas – State Rulemaking Update
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update on City staff’s involvement in the Colorado
Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) rulemaking process, and next steps for
development of local regulations.
BOTTOM LINE
On November 23, 2020, the COGCC adopted new comprehensive rules related to oil and gas
operations. A City Council work session is scheduled for January 26, 2021 where staff will present
regulatory options for siting new oil and gas development within city limits using recently adopted
State regulations as a framework for baseline requirements. The COGCC is expected to initiate
additional rulemakings in the future, including updates to financial assurances for leaks, spills and
reclamation requirements.
STATE RULEMAKING
In Colorado, oil and gas operations are regulated by the COGCC, and air pollution associated with
operations is regulated by the Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC). On April 16, 2019, the State
adopted Senate Bill 19-181, which prompted the COGCC to initiate comprehensive oil and gas
rulemakings. Staff actively participated in the rulemaking process by joining party status with the
Affiliated Local Government Coalition (ALGC), which included the City and County of Broomfield,
Boulder County, City of Lafayette, Town of Erie, City of Longmont, and the Northwest Colorado Council
of Governments. The ALGC represented the largest party comprised of local governments and played
a central role in influencing outcomes, particularly related to increased coordination and clearer defined
authorities between local/State entities.
During the rulemaking, the COGCC released five drafts of the 200-600 series and two drafts of the
800-1200 series. After the release of each draft, staff coordinated with the ALGC to provide verbal
testimony, written testimony, redlines and responses to positions made by other parties. Below is a
description of key high-level positions advocated by the ALGC (organized by rule) that were integrated
into COGCC adopted rules:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 6BAE31BE-A467-4B23-B415-BE7CC78FD0BD
3.1
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
Key ALGC Positions:
200 Series (General Provisions)
Require operators to ensure contractors and subcontractors comply with rules.
Engage local governments in investigations regarding non-compliance with COGCC rules and
transfer of ownership
300 Series (Permitting Process)
COGCC sets minimum regulatory floor above which local governments can adopt more
stringent regulations
Alternative Location Analysis (ALA) must include local governments during the analysis, and
be triggered if the project is sited within 500 feet of an “area of concern” (e.g. floodplain)
Require operator to submit detailed data on potential human health impacts and air emissions
Require operator to submit Cumulative Impacts Plan with each application
Increased local consultation during the completion of Comprehensive Area Plans
400 Series (Operations and Reporting)
Statewide ban of toxic chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluids
Continuous noise monitoring requirements for locations within 2,000 feet of a home
Increased submittal requirements for pre-production and production lighting plans
600 Series (Safety and Facility Operations Regulations)
Commission adopted a 2,000-foot setback from homes and high occupancy buildings (with
waiver provisions)
1200 Series (Protection of Wildlife Resources)
Advocated for broader protections for different species and habitats. While not incorporating all
of ALGC’s comments, the COGCC added a provision that allows Colorado Parks and W ildlife
to recommend protections for additional species not mentioned in High Priority Habitats
definition
Increased setbacks for streams
COGCC is creating a working group that City staff may join to define biological resources and
help establish a compensatory mitigation approach
LOCAL STATUS UPDATE
Currently, there are 3 producing wells and a total of 10 active wells within City limits, with no pending
applications for new development. In addition to State requirements, operational requirements for
the City’s active wells are regulated through an Operator’s Agreement, which was adopted by
Council in 2013 and will remain in effect until 2023. New residential development around existing
wells is regulated by reciprocal setback provisions in the Land Use Code, which may need to change
as a result of new State regulations.
NEXT STEPS
A Council Work Session is scheduled for January 26, 2021, where staff will present a summary of
public outreach and seek direction regarding siting regulations for new oil and gas development.
Following the Work Session, staff will return to Council with options related to local permitting,
approval processes, and operational requirements. These options will be based on direction from
Council, opportunities to strengthen State requirements, and additional public engagement.
CC: Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
Cassie Archuleta, Air Quality Program Manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: 6BAE31BE-A467-4B23-B415-BE7CC78FD0BD
3.1
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas using
Current COGCC Setbacks
within City and GMA
Available Drilling Areas
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1000 ft outside of high occupancy
buildings
- 500 ft outside other buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
ATTACHMENT 2 3.2
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas using
1000 ft Building Setback
within City and GMA
Available Drilling Areas
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1000 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas using
1500 ft Building Setback
within City and GMA
Available Drilling Areas
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1500 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas using
2000 ft Building Setback
within City and GMA
Available Drilling Areas
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 2000 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas and
Industrial Zones using
Current COGCC Setbacks
within City and GMA
Available Land for Drilling within Industrial Zone
City Zoning - Industrial
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1000 ft outside of high occupancy
buildings
- 500 ft outside other buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas and
Industrial Zones using
1000 ft Building Setbacks
within City and GMA
Available Land for Drilling within Industrial Zone
City Zoning - Industrial
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1000 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdPotential Drilling Areas and
Industrial Zones using
1500 ft Building Setbacks
within City and GMA
Available Land for Drilling within Industrial Zone
City Zoning - Industrial
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 1500 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: January 31, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
!"`$!!!!
I³S College AveS Timberline RdEMulberry
S
t
S Shields StN Shields StCarpenter Rd
W Willox Ln
SLemay AveN College AveNHighway1S Taft Hill RdW Elizabeth St
S Overland TrlW Horsetooth Rd
W Harmony Rd
W Mulberry St
E Harmony Rd
N GarfieldAveW
C
o
u
n
t
y
Road
5
4
G
E
T
r
i
l
byRd
E Prospect RdN Overland TrlZiegler RdLaporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E
Lincoln Av
e N Timberline RdRiv
ersid
e
A
veE Horsetooth Rd
W Vine Dr
E Douglas RdW Douglas
Rd
N Taft HillRdLindenmeier RdKechter Rd
Country
C
l
u
b
Rd
SCente
nnia
l
DrE
Willox
L
n Turnberry RdEVineDr
W Prospect Rd
WCountyRoad38EMountain Vista Dr
E Drake Rd
Richards
Lake
R
dTerryLakeRd
W Trilby Rd
Gr
e
g
o
r
y
R
d
Highway
392
N CountyRoad 11EStraussCabin RdN BoydLake Ave
Rist
C
a n yonRd N CountyRoad 9S CountyRoad 9Giddings RdAbsence of Potential Drilling
Areas within Industrial Zones
using 2000 ft Building Setbacks
within City and GMA
City Zoning - Industrial
Fort Collins Oil Field (source: COGCC)
City Limits
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Unincorporated areas within GMA
CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City
makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of
any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any user of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility
of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this
information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Excluded Areas:
- 2000 ft outside of buildings
- 200 ft from roads and railroads
- water bodies
- 100-year floodplain
Date Created: February 3, 2020
01234
Miles
3.2
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
ATTACHMENT 2
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY TABLE
Group/Event Feedback
Public
Public Open Houses
03/2/2020, 3/2/2020
Online Questionnaire
• No development in Natural Areas
• No development in City limits
• Biggest concerns: Climate Change, Air Quality
Boards and Commissions
Natural Resources
Advisory Board
11/20/2019
• Supportive of aggressive timeline, and potentially a moratorium on
new development
• New regulations should prioritize environmental and economic
safeguards so as to protect the health and welfare of current and
future residents of Fort Collins
SuperBoard Meeting (all
Boards)
2/24/2020
• No development in Natural Areas
• No development in City limits
• Biggest concerns: Climate Change, Air Quality
Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board
8/12/2020
• Interested in protecting Natural Areas through buffering of property
boundaries
• Concerned over protecting Soapstone NA
• Drafting a memo to City Council
Planning and Zoning
Board Work Session
8/14/2020
• Air quality (regional) is the biggest concern
• Operational standards need to minimize impacts
• Should limit development in Natural Areas
• New regulation should consider potential future advances in
technology that may make previously inaccessible mineral resources
available
Air Quality Advisory
Board
12/21/2020
• Supported 2000’ setbacks, at minimum
• Do not support exceptions to setback distances
• Supportive of industrial zoning as tool to regulate surface locations
• Concerned about potential development in GMA and in City owned
natural areas.
Industry/Other
Chamber of Commerce
10/9/2020
• Interested in revenue projections and economic impacts of new
regulations
COGA and API • Supportive of reasonable local regulations
• Concerned about regulations that effectively appear to ban additional
development
Current Operator • No interest in new well locations
• Potential concerns about new regulations that inhibit operations at
existing wells
ATTACHMENT 3 3.3
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Public Input (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Project Report
26 April 2017 - 30 December 2020
Our City
Oil and Gas Regulations
Highlights
TOTAL
VISITS
585
MAX VISITORS PER
DAY
77
NEW
REGISTRATI
ONS
17
ENGAGED
VISITORS
193
INFORMED
VISITORS
257
AWARE
VISITORS
422
Aware Participants 422
Aware Actions Performed Participants
Visited a Project or Tool Page 422
Informed Participants 257
Informed Actions Performed Participants
Viewed a video 0
Viewed a photo 0
Downloaded a document 17
Visited the Key Dates page 23
Visited an FAQ list Page 0
Visited Instagram Page 0
Visited Multiple Project Pages 82
Contributed to a tool (engaged)193
Engaged Participants 193
Engaged Actions Performed
Registered Unverified Anonymous
Contributed on Forums 25 0 0
Participated in Surveys 7 0 163
Contributed to Newsfeeds 0 0 0
Participated in Quick Polls 0 0 0
Posted on Guestbooks 0 0 0
Contributed to Stories 0 0 0
Asked Questions 0 0 0
Placed Pins on Places 0 0 0
Contributed to Ideas 0 0 0
Visitors Summary
Pageviews Visitors Visits
New Registrations
1 Jan '20 1 Jul '20 1 Jan '21
250
500
ATTACHMENT 4 3.4
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Visitors 67 Contributors 25 CONTRIBUTIONS 92
04 March 20
Barbara Seckinger
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
23 April 20
dowiatt
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
25 April 20
TomRhodes2010
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
25 April 20
FredFortCollins
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
FORUM TOPIC
Fort Collins Oil and Gas Regulations
The last figures I read about air pollution in Fort Collins/Larimer County stated that 40
% is due to the oil and gas industry. This does not even address groundwater issues.
Another 40% is due to vehicle emissions. Our air quality is of utmost concern to me as
a person with asthma and chemical sensitivities. I literally become ill as well as have d
ifficulty breathing on our poor air quality days. ANYTHING we can do to improve
these statistics is essential to our quality of life, that of all living things and of the
planet upon which we live. I urge the City of Fort Collins government to become aggre
ssive in addressing regulation of the oil and gas industry as well as air quality in gene
ral.
As evidenced by other Northern Colorado Communities such as Windsor, Erie, Berth
oud and Firestone, fracking and population centers do not mix. The level of toxic emis
sions from fracking is hazardous to our health. There are numerous other health and
safety concerns including explosions and other accidents, and ground water contamin
ation. In addition, fracking is a huge eyesore and noise pollutant. Fort Collins resident
s choose to live here because of the beautiful environment and open space for recrea
tion. We do not want to see fracking wells in our view. Please consider a ban of all fra
cking within city limits and in growth management areas.
Please reinstate the moratorium on future Oil & Gas development as passed by the r
eferendum in 2013. Senate Bill 19-181, passed last year, gives local governments th
e authority to regulate O&G development within their borders. The 2013, a citizens ref
erendum mandating a moratorium on O&G development passed by a noticeable mar
gin. Although that moratorium was ultimately overturned by the courts, SB-181 has re
newed the Fort Collins' municipal authority to reinstate the wishes expressed by a maj
ority of our citizens. Please enact the moratorium as soon as possible.
Why risk public health and potential remediation liability on tax payers for a failing ind
ustry?
Page 4 of 15
3.4
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
25 April 20
Obie
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
25 April 20
steve10brink
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
25 April 20
rcasey7
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
25 April 20
cowormman
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
1
26 April 20
ChrisStockinger
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
26 April 20
Kevin Cross
AGREES
1
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
FORUM TOPIC
Fort Collins Oil and Gas Regulations
We need clean air and a safe environment in which to live. More development of oil a
nd gas is contrary to both these objectives. We need a permanent ban on oil and gas
development in the city. The city should seek to influence the county commissioners t
o enact a ban. At a minimum we need to place a moratorium on permitting until the C
OGCC releases its regulations. Real time air quality monitoring needs to be implemen
ted and violations by existing wells needs to be responded to with significant penalties
.
I would prefer that the city re-enact a version of the five year moratorium on oil and ga
s development. It is now obvious that in addition to the pollution caused by the interna
l combustion engine there is also strong evidence that fracking is releasing tons of me
thane gas into the atmosphere which accelerates global warming. We cannot afford t
o do any more harm to our environment.
I also would like to see the city reinstate the moratorium on future oil and gas develop
ment as passed by the referendum in 2013. SB 181 provides ample legal power to th
e city council to regulate oil and gas development within their borders. Barring a morat
orium, the city should at least heed the latest scientific studies on what are safe setba
cks from oil and gas sites, and adopt at least a 2500' setback from any property boun
dary with human residents. Bottom line: this heavy industry should not be allowed her
e. We don't need it for our economy, the world is currently awash in an oil glut, and th
e city should recognize any drilling proposals for what they are: attempts to make a q
uick buck at our's, and the planet's, expense.
The city government we given clear direction from the engaged voter in 2013 despite
multi-million dollar misinformation campaign from the tax payer subsidized industry. T
hat has not changed just because the state supreme court said no. You are
supposedly elected to represent the citizens of Fort Collins wishes only and their healt
h and safety as well as took and oath to do so. Why do we have to continue to press f
or you to do so? Please explain?
Please reinstate the moratorium on future Oil & Gas development as passed by the r
eferendum in 2013 and do everything to make this a permanent rule. Thinking 10, 20
or 50 years into the future it is clear that we need to do everything to protect yOUR
children and their children from further damage of the very environment we depend o
n to live. The latest price meltdown and the related background information shows aga
in that the oil and gas industry is not sustainable on many levels. As a technologist I k
now there are alternatives. Please do everything you can to protect this wonderful city
that I have lived in for so long and live so close to (Loveland) from oil and gas related
damage. Thank you.
The City should reinstate the moratorium on oil and gas extraction put in place by the
voters in 2013. The moratorium should stay in place until the Colorado Oil and Gas C
onservation Commission completes the work it was mandated to do by the State Legi
slature in 2019. Thanks.
Page 5 of 15
3.4
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
26 April 20
LoriBrunswig
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
26 April 20
LoriBrunswig
AGREES
0
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
26 April 20
lmet
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
27 April 20
gmaxmar
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
27 April 20
slpkt
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
FORUM TOPIC
Fort Collins Oil and Gas Regulations
The people spoke and they wanted a moratorium. We cannot increase the number of
oil and gas facilities in the City of Fort Collins! Our air quality already suffers from the
drifting of pollutants from the O&G facilities south and east of the City. When the City
has the opportunity to opt out, DO IT! There is nothing to gain by allowing this pollutin
g and dangerous industry inside the City of Fort Collins and our health will suffer with i
t. It is sad it has come to this madness...
Yes, why does the city continue to ask the same questions over again when clearly th
e people do not want Oil and Gas in the City of Fort Collins?
I am asking you to re-enact the moratorium on oil and gas development within city limi
ts that that was passed by voter referendum in 2013. This is a critical time to make de
cisions that protect our current health and safety but, more critically, the long-term hea
lth and safety of our planet. Please make the decision with your children and
grandchildren in mind. We must make decisions that are in line with giving them a pla
net that is as livable as the one we were given.
Let me first express my appreciation for the city's openness to public comment. I atten
ded one of the open houses back in Feb? March ? (when life was still normal and we
could meet one another in person). It was well prepared and informative and provided
ample opportunity for citizen input. Thank you. As the city moves forward, I hope that
you will keep AIR QUALITY front and center in your decision making process. The pe
ople of Fort Collins have already clearly expressed their desire for a moratorium on oil
and gas development. I would urge you, given the increased authority provided to
local governing bodies by SB-181, to instate that moratorium on new permits until both
state and city regulations are fully in place.
I am requesting that the city re-enacts the moratorium on oil and gas development wit
hin city limits that was passed by voter referendum in 2013. We are already facing un
precedented times of climate crisis that we must act on. The Oil and Gas Industry is a
major pollution-causing industry and is the reason for our terrible air quality here in N
orthern Colorado. People, especially people in power have known for years that fracki
ng is radioactive and extremely harmful to our health, air quality, water quality and
over all health of the planet. This should be an easy decision to stop oil and gas devel
opment within the city limits.
Page 6 of 15
3.4
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
27 April 20
edbehan
AGREES
4
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
27 April 20
Rmh
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
1
28 April 20
dd
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
28 April 20
wsublette
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
28 April 20
fingersfly
AGREES
3
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
FORUM TOPIC
Fort Collins Oil and Gas Regulations
When my wife Pamela and I were planning on our return to Colorado for our retireme
nt, we actually chose Fort Collins in no small part because of its attempt to put a mora
torium on oil and gas activity, even if that effort was dashed by the State Supreme Co
urt. Senate Bill 19-181 renders that court ruling moot, and we would be happy to see t
he moratorium that voters had passed in 2013 re-instated. . . if not for five years, then
certainly until such time as the State finishes their own rule making process. Having b
een involved in the disappointing process of holding the County accountable for drafti
ng meaningful oil and gas regulations, I would hope the City of Fort Collins will adopt f
ar more stringent controls, guided by the process that the State is engaged in to ensu
re the protection of health, safety, the environment, and wildlife in our fair city over the
need to accommodate inappropriate industrial activity that the people clearly do not fa
vor. Thank you.
Yesterday, April 26, OILPRICE.com published the article "Big Oil's Dilemma: Cut Divid
ends or Cut Operations." This article reported that Royal Dutch has postponed two lar
ge oil and gas projects in the Gulf of Mexico and that in the last 10 days about 2,500 o
il workers have been laid-off in Texas. This type of news added to the billions of
dollars in debt that the oil industry already has indicates that the financial future of oil o
perations, especially operations that are expensive like fracking, cannot be optimistic.
That is, losses rather than profits are in the horizon of the oil industry. Hence, before a
warding a permit to dig a well, the authorities should make sure that the financial
condition of the applicant is good enough to assure that the taxpayer will not have to p
ay for the costs caused by abandoned wells and abandoned equipment.
I applaud the City Council members who voted to investigate the need for City Oil and
Gas regulations and to seriously look into reinstating the moratorium on new well
pads (passed by voter referendem, but previously struck down by CO Supreme Court
). The new state law, SB-181 reinstates community's rights to protect the health, safet
y, welfare and environment OVER the wishes of the O&G industry. Please reinstate t
he 5-year moratorium-- as voted in by over 55% of residents and please create protec
tive regulations for the City of Fort Collins. The County regulations do not meet the spi
rit of SB-181 and basically allow well pads anywhere within the county-- 100 year
floodplains, less than the 1000-ft. setback if approved by the BOCC, etc. and allow gr
eenfields, recompletions, EXCLUDED from the regulations. We need the City's
protection and strong voice.
I respectfully request the City to continue the moratorium until further inquiry is made
as to the safety of any exploration or production in view of the respiratory illness of Co
vid-19. Weld County has prolific oil and gas production and exploration and Weld Cou
nty has a much greater Covid-19 incidence and death rate. Is there any correlation? S
hould we wait to study this matter?
Not only should we assure that an applicant has means, but bonding should be in escr
ow so that a convenient bankruptcy can't remove obligation.
Page 7 of 15
3.4
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
28 April 20
fingersfly
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
28 April 20
Nancy York
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
28 April 20
AndrewLOGIC
AGREES
2
DISAGRE
ES
0
REPLIES
0
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
FORUM TOPIC
Fort Collins Oil and Gas Regulations
Because the city has few requests from drillers, I suggest a full-on ban rather than a
moratorium. We have a proud reputation as a city brave enough to guard our natural
capital and set example for fast pursuit of carbon neutrality. A ban fits that profile. We
wouldn't be losing a huge revenue stream, AND we'd save by not having to revisit the
issue of whether or not to release a moratorium in the future. Also, it could help the fig
ht for cleaner air at the county level because drillers could not extend horizontally und
er city property from just outside city limits. Circumstances, political precedent and th
e stated goals of our city make a ban logical. We really have not much to lose and eve
rything to guard.
Scientists warned in 2018 that we have 12 years to make massive and
unprecedented reductions in fossil fuel use in an effort to limit the consequences of th
e climate crisis - extreme heat, droughts, food shortages, rising sea level forcing
climate migration and poverty. That UN report leaves the City of Fort Collins no
choice but to reject oil & gas development unless you don’t believe in science. Study
after study attributes serious health consequences to air pollution associated with frac
king sites. A city, which has been out of compliance to federal regulations for ozone f
or years, has no choice but to deny O&G development if they value the well-being of t
heir constituents. And then there is water, an essential resource upon which all of life
depends. The median volume of water consumed is 1.5 million gallons per well, accor
ding to the EPA . Water which is made toxic in the process. In my opinion it would be
a fool’s choice to approve O&G development.
I strongly encourage the City of Fort Collins to extend its moratorium on oil and gas d
evelopment within city limits and develop its own oil and gas regulations to protect its
residents. While I am not a resident of Fort Collins, the League of Oil and Gas Impact
ed Coloradans has worked closely with a number of Fort Collins residents on the Lari
mer County regulatory revision process, and will continue to do so with the City of For
t Collins process. Extending the City's moratorium is an essential first step, and well w
ithin the City's authority. A local government may enact a moratorium as long as it is f
or a well defined public purpose (protecting residents) and is not for an indefinite perio
d of time. Enacting good regulations takes time, and we must make sure that the resid
ents of Fort Collins are protected from any potential adverse impacts from oil and gas
operations during this development period. Removing the threat of impending
development will also ensure that the regulatory process is not rushed, and that the Ci
ty will be able to adopt well reasoned, defensible regulations. The need for these regu
lations is now more serious than ever. Unfortunately, Larimer County has enacted a s
et of weak, unprotective regulations that riddled with loopholes and permissive langua
ge that put oil and gas operators ahead of public health, safety, and welfare, the envir
onment, and wildlife resources. It is now up to the City to make sure that its residents
are prioritized over the profits of oil and gas companies. I strongly encourage you to w
ork with your residents to enact the strongest regulations possible to ensure that the h
ealth and safety of Fort Collins is protected.
Page 8 of 15
3.4
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Visitors 212 Contributors 170 CONTRIBUTIONS 174
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
ENGAGEMENT TOOL: SURVEY TOOL
Oil and Gas Questionnaire
Are you a city of Fort Collins resident?
147 (84.5%)
147 (84.5%)
27 (15.5%)
27 (15.5%)
Yes No
Question options
Page 9 of 15
Optional question (174 response(s), 0 skipped)
Question type: Radio Button Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
How concerned are you about existing oil and gas development in Fort Collins?
10 (5.8%)
10 (5.8%)
24 (14.0%)
24 (14.0%)
46 (26.7%)
46 (26.7%)
90 (52.3%)
90 (52.3%)
2 (1.2%)
2 (1.2%)
Not at all concerned Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned I don't know
Question options
Page 10 of 15
Optional question (172 response(s), 2 skipped)
Question type: Radio Button Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
How concerned are you about new oil and gas development in Fort Collins?
10 (5.8%)
10 (5.8%)
8 (4.7%)
8 (4.7%)
29 (16.9%)
29 (16.9%)
125 (72.7%)
125 (72.7%)
Not at all concerned Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned
Question options
Page 11 of 15
Optional question (172 response(s), 2 skipped)
Question type: Radio Button Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
What are your biggest concerns when it comes to oil and gas facilities in Fort Collins
(check top 5)?
121
121
120
120
20
20
127
127
126
126
15
15
70
70
47
47
34
34
102
102
5
5
9
9
Regional Air Quality Localized Air Quality (e.g., odor, dust, pollutants)Noise Water Quality (subsurface)
Ecosystem, Surface Water and Wildlife impacts Traffic Emergency response (e.g., spills, leaks)
Flowlines/pipelines Property value impacts Climate change impacts None Other (please specify)
Question options
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Page 12 of 15
Optional question (172 response(s), 2 skipped)
Question type: Checkbox Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements?
9
9
144
144
22
22
7
7
123
123
5
5
6
6
30
30
10
10
18
18
3
3
38
38
3
3
4
4
8
8
3
3
36
36
20
20
7
7
150
150
16
16
44
44
131
131
20
20
2
2
1
1
No idea
Definitely disagree
Somewhat disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat agree
Definitely agree
Question options
50 100 150 200
• The oil and gas industry
is already regulat...
• Fort Collins should
adopt regulations that ...
• Oil and gas is an
important industry and
ec...
• The oil and gas industry
is safe and reliab...
• The negative
environmental and health
impac...
Page 13 of 15
Optional question (172 response(s), 2 skipped)
Question type: Likert Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
What is your preference for how the City should regulate the location of new oil and
gas facilities? Select all that apply:
13
13
81
81
35
35
143
143
2
2
I don't know Do not permit new oil and gas development within Fort Collins City limits
Restrict oil and gas development to heavy industrial areas only
Develop local regulations that increase State setback distance standards
Rely on State setback standards to determine oil and gas locations
Question options
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Page 14 of 15
Optional question (172 response(s), 2 skipped)
Question type: Checkbox Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Our City : Summary Report for 26 April 2017 to 30 December 2020
How should oil and gas development be regulated on City-owned conserved
properties (e.g., Soapstone Prairie Natural Area, Maxwell Ranch, natural areas within
city limits). Select all that apply:
154
154
9
9
9
9
4
4
None of the above Follow State recommendations and standards for approval of new wells on City-owned conserved properties
Permit new wells on City-owned properties provided the development would not result in adverse impacts to wildlife and the
environment
New wells should not be permitted on any City-owned conserved properties
Question options
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Page 15 of 15
Optional question (171 response(s), 3 skipped)
Question type: Checkbox Question
3.4
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Our City Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Dylan Clear <advodylan@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 2, 2020 5:00 PM
To:Cassie Archuleta
Cc:Kelly Smith
Subject:Re: City of Fort Collins website - Oil and Gas Regulations
Thanks Cassie. I appreciate the fast reply and correction about the old permits using conventional development. I think
the larger concern for citizens and local officials is unconventional drilling, using fracking and long horizontals, moving
West from the East. These technologies bring a host of human, environmental, and quality of life risks that are
incompatible with Fort Collins.
Now is the time to draw that line with prohibitive city regs.
Best,
Dylan
ATTACHMENT 5 3.5
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
On Mar 2, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com> wrote:
Hi Dylan‐
Really appreciate this feedback! Current operations in Fort Collins are a lot different than some of the
activity west of us, as we only have one active field, and it is conventional development – which most of
the time looks like the pump jack at our active wells. I hear your point about what the larger well pad
and storage sites can look like, and we’ll look for some ways to also set that context.
Also, thanks for the note about mentioning the hydraulic fracturing process. Most of the process
descriptions regarding current operations are on this page:https://www.fcgov.com/oilandgas/, and I will
look for a place to add some relevant information about fracking and other development processes.
Thanks,
Cassie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CASSIE ARCHULETA
Air Quality Program Manager
City of Fort Collins
970-416-2648 office
3.5
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3
From: Dylan Clear <advodylan@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2020 3:17 PM
To: Kelly Smith <ksmith@fcgov.com>; Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com>
Subject: City of Fort Collins website ‐ Oil and Gas Regulations
Hello,
The photo of the old pump jack with the pretty sunset in the background,
on https://ourcity.fcgov.com/oil‐and‐gas‐regulations, is of conventional oil production, and is misleading
to Fort Collins citizens. The only feasible way to drill for oil and gas in areas like Fort Collins is using the
combination of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, targeting the shale thousands of feet
beneath us. The word fracking is not mentioned anywhere on the page or the survey.
Here’s what a finished site looks like in North Fort Collins:
<image001.png>
Here’s some real photos of sites from Windsor/Timnath/Greeley:
<image002.jpg>
<image003.jpg>
<image004.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
And here’s freely reusable online photos that show what it looks like, above‐ground, before completion.
https://pixabay.com/photos/hydraulic‐fracturing‐shale‐gas‐863206/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing
Any of these photos would give citizens a better idea visually of what they are signing up for with
fracking in Fort Collins.
Thank you,
Dylan Clear
Fort Collins resident and parent
3.5
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
This is intended as comment as Fort Collins begins to deal with the re-write of its oil and gas
regulations. Specifically, the comments pertain to the need for local governments, in this case,
Fort Collins, to include the siting of oil and natural gas gathering lines in their regulations.
By means of introduction, my name is Josh Joswick; my background is that I have worked for
roughly 30 years as a private citizen, mayor of Bayfield, CO, three term La Plata County
commissioner, and community organizer for the San Juan Citizens Alliance and the Earthworks
Oil and Gas Accountability Project, in an effort to hold the oil and gas industry accountable for
its impacts to communities and their residents.
Recently, I have been giving presentations to Front Range local governments and citizens’
groups on the need for local governments to become involved in the siting of gathering lines. .
Background :
In general, distinction should be made between commercial/retail lines and production lines.
Commercial/retail lines are usually smaller, lower pressure lines that move gas to structures to be
used by consumers, and these are regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission
(COPUC). These comments do not pertain to commercial lines.
Production lines are lines that move product from the well to market; and there are essentially 3
kinds of production lines: transmission, flow, and gathering lines.
Transmission lines are large, high pressure lines, usually interstate and regulated by the
Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, a federal agency.
Flowlines are smaller, lower pressure lines regulated by the Colorado Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission.
Gathering lines fall between these two in size and pressure. While there are aspects of
their installation that are regulated (how they are installed), their siting (where they are
installed) is not regulated by any state or federal agency.
And this lack of regulatory oversight over the siting of gathering lines is where local
governments must come in to fill the regulatory gap.
By their nature, pipelines experience failure events. If failure events are seen as infrequent, they
must also be seen for the potentially serious consequences that may significantly impact the
general public.
Failure events create areas of impact. In the case of oil lines, that means spills; in the case of
natural gas lines, that means explosions. It is these impact areas (especially if they are in what
would be considered High Consequence Areas, that is, areas of significant population densities)
that are critical for local governments to be aware of and base their actions on.
Actions:
Where this is leading is local governments’ need to do two things:
1. Get full disclosure from operators on the location of existing gathering lines;
2. Establish a permitting process for the placement of proposed gathering lines.
For existing lines, local governments need to know:
Location and depth
Age
Content and Daily Flow Rate
Size
Pressure
3.5
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Estimated worst case scenario for spill or explosion
This is information the pipeline operator will have readily available and should be required to
disclose to the community.
For proposed gathering lines, local governments need to establish a permitting process through
which operators would have to go in order to get local government approval to put in a line.
Local governments need to know:
The same things as are listed above for existing lines, most especially where the line will
be, its size, and the pressure under which it will be operating.
With this information, local governments can then determine the adequacy of proposed locations
by determining the size of the impact area a failure event would create. In other words, local
governments should assess if the distance (setbacks) of the proposed line from structures and
infrastructure is adequate for public safety.
There are ways to make that assessment. In the case of natural gas lines, these distances or
setbacks can be determined by application of the industry-accepted equation found in the Gas
Research Institute (GRI) Report 00/0189 A Model For Sizing High Consequence Areas
Associated with Natural Gas Pipelines. The report describes itself as “A simple and defendable
approach to sizing the ground area potentially affected by a worst-case ignited rupture of a high-
pressure natural gas pipeline.”
The diameter and operating pressure of a pipeline are put into the equation and the size of the
affected area, in the event of a credible worse-case failure event, is determined. Application of
this formula will tell the permitting agency if the proposed pipeline location is safe.
There are local governments that are, on some level, already doing this, and have not been
challenged in court by the industry. And with SB 181 now giving local governments the ability
to more fully regulate oil and gas development in their jurisdictions, there is no legal obstacle to
putting a permitting process for the siting of gathering lines in place.
This is a matter of public safety, and the information and process described herein increase the
safety of the residents of Larimer County.
Thank you for affording me the opportunity to comment of Larimer County’s draft regulations.
If you have any questions, need anything clarified, or would like to have a presentation to staff of
what I discuss in this comment document, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Josh Joswick
josh_joswick2004@yahoo.com
970-903-0876
3.5
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
From:Cassie Archuleta
To:Kelly Smith
Subject:FW: Support a moratorium on oil and gas development
Date:Friday, August 30, 2019 4:49:02 PM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CASSIE ARCHULETA
Air Quality Program Manager
City of Fort Collins
970-416-2648 office
From: Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel <jkozak-thiel@fcgov.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 10:20 PM
To: Lindsay Ex <lex@fcgov.com>; Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com>
Subject: Fwd: Support a moratorium on oil and gas development
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Barbara Gotshall <bhgotshall@gmail.com>
Date: August 28, 2019 at 7:46:36 PM MDT
To: cityleaders@fcgov.com
Subject: Support a moratorium on oil and gas development
Dear City Leaders,
Please pass a resolution to support a moratorium on oil and gas development as the
county task force (and other citizen groups) iron out regulations that will meet the
goals of the new Colorado law that prioritizes health, safety, and the environment
regarding the oil and gas industry.
Thank you.
Barbara Gotshall
Fort Collins, 80526
3.5
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel
Sent:Sunday, September 1, 2019 9:20 PM
To:Cassie Archuleta; Kelly Smith
Subject:Fwd: Local oil and gas regulations
Attachments:Prospect Energy MSSU 30-08 Consultation 040819.pdf; ATT00001.htm; C__181_enr.txt.pdf;
ATT00002.htm; Fort Collins Drilling Applications.docx; ATT00003.htm
Just FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Karen Artell" <k_artell@msn.com>
To: "City Leaders" <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>
Subject: Local oil and gas regulations
Hello Mayor and City Council Members
Your 6 month planning calendar topics for 9/17/2019 include a presentation by
staff regarding Oil and Gas Operations‐Overview and Options ‐ Provide updates regarding oil
and gas operations, and seek direction regarding potential regulatory options to consider in the
context of new land use authority granted by the State SB 181.
Thank you for prioritizing oil and gas operations.
City staff are much more knowledgeable than I about oil and gas operations. I'll try and listen in
to their presentation.
I'm forwarding my previous email asking that the City update it's oil and gas regulations to be
inline with SB 181. At this point, I also ask that the City not approve any oil and gas operations
until updated City regulations are in place. With SB 181 legislation, local governments have
much more authority. Both the State and local governments are given the authority to
prioritize public health, safety, welfare and the environment.
As you know, the City's and the northern front range's air quality is compromised by oil and gas
emissions. Emissions are carried on prevailing winds form the east, Weld County, to the foothills
causing high ozone days during the summer months. Anything the City can do to decrease oil
and gas emissions from operations within it's boundaries would be beneficial. Working with Weld
County and Larimer County to decrease emissions would improve the City's air quality.
Prospect Energy's 3 Form 2 re‐completion applications, while not Form 2A location applications,
are very concerning. As with my previous email, I have attached CDPHE's concerns and
recommendations for Prospect Energy's MSSU 30‐08 application. I also attached maps from the
COGCC web site and Google Maps to illustrate how close the 3 sites are to the Hearthfire
3.5
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
neighborhood, lakes and reservoirs and irrigation ditches. I'm hoping the City does all it can to
protect this neighborhood and the area's air and water quality.
I've linked some resources you may find helpful to making decisions about oil and gas operations
in the City.
Final Report for: Monitoring network assessment for the City of Fort Collins, July 2017. National Center
for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Atmospheric Chemistry Observations and Modeling Laboratory
(ACOM).
Contains an explanation of ozone formation and monitoring and recommendations for the City.
https://www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/20170731_NCARAssessment_Final.pdf?1526312514
This recent article provides some background you may find helpful.
https://www.boulderweekly.com/news/oil‐industry‐exemptions‐may‐doom‐epa‐efforts‐to‐
improve‐front‐range‐air‐quality/
Thank you for your consideration.
From: Karen Artell
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 8:28 AM
To: cityleaders@fcgov.com <cityleaders@fcgov.com>
Subject: Local oil and gas regulations
Hello Mayor and City Council Members
I'm writing to implore the City to update its oil and gas regulations. The current regulations are
based on COGCC regulations that controlled where oil and gas operations could be sited. SB 181
now allows local governments to regulate oil and gas operations siting along with other related
land use issues. COGCC rule making is in flux and reportedly may not be complete for at 2 years
making it all the more important that Fort Collins have comprehensive updated oil and gas
regulations to protect City residents and our environment. Please see attached SB 181.
Note also that Prospect Energy has applications in for 3 recompletions. Please see attached
recommendations from CDPHE and COGCC for one of the applications. Can Fort Collins enforce
these recommendations without updated oil and gas regulations?
What about City owned land north of Fort Collins ‐ Soapstone Prairie and Meadow Springs
Ranch. Would City regulations apply to and help protect these areas if applications were
submitted?
See Colorado: Mountains to Plains Energy by Design
https://www.conservationgateway.org/Files/Pages/m2penergybydesign.aspx
Here's a list from SB 181 of topics local governments can regulate:
Land use
Location and siting of oil gas facilities and oil gas locations
Impacts to public facilities and services
Water quality and source
Noise
3.5
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3
Vibrations
Odor
Light
Dust
Air emissions and air quality
Land disturbances
Reclamation procedures
Cultural resources
Emergency preparedness and coordination with first responders
Security
Traffic and transportation impacts
Financial securities
Indemnification
Insurance
All other nuisance type effects of oil and gas development
Protection of environment
Inspect all facilities
Impose fines for leaks, spills and emissions
Impose fees
Thank you for your consideration. Please note I write as a private citizen and am not
representing the Air Quality Advisory Board.
3.5
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel
Sent:Saturday, November 9, 2019 7:17 AM
To:Lucinda Smith; Cassie Archuleta; Kelly Smith
Subject:Fwd: air quality in Ft Collins and Larimer County
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Doug Henderson <dhender@gmail.com>
Date: November 9, 2019 at 1:57:01 AM MST
To: Larimer Alliance for Health & Safety <larimer‐alliance@googlegroups.com>, PiCA Air Quality group
<pica‐aq‐wg@googlegroups.com>, City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>, Larimer Co Board of
Commissioners <bocc@larimer.org>, Sierra Club PCG Core <RMC‐PCG‐CORE@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG>
Subject: air quality in Ft Collins and Larimer County
This is relevant to air quality in Ft Collins and Larimer County ‐‐
https://www.dailycamera.com/2019/11/07/opinion‐harv‐teitelbaum‐weld‐county‐
commissioners‐are‐
wrong/?fbclid=IwAR0BRYcEO6ddafDa4qqSLdAnpzj6ry1Z5R_EMZqyyROA2ezwEgh0FJb_C
bc
Opinion: Harv Teitelbaum: Weld
County commissioners are wrong
November 8, 2019 at 12:49 pm
By Harv Teitelbaum
In a Guest Commentary on Oct. 20, Barbara Kirkmeyer and her fellow
Weld County Commissioners responded defensively to Andrew
O’Connor’s letter (‘Boulder County must sue Weld County’) about the
health impacts imposed on citizens from oil and gas-produced
pollution in Weld County and exported across its borders to Boulder
County.
The industry’s emissions of methane, volatile organic compounds
(VOC’s), nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants have been increasingly
3.5
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
recognized as major sources of the deteriorating air quality along
Colorado’s Front Range.
While Kirkmeyer touts some cherry-picked county health conditions
(but not infant mortality, which in Weld has risen to about twice that of
surrounding counties, in spite of decreasing poverty levels), over 1,000
peer-reviewed studies referenced in the
“Compendium of Scientific, Medical, and Media Findings Demonstrating
Risks and Harms of Fracking, 5th Edition” attest to a multitude of
health impacts, ranging from rashes to respiratory illnesses to cancers
and childhood leukemia.
Her suggestion that most of Colorado’s ozone problem originate from
outside is simply wrong. Communities such as Cheyenne, Pueblo,
Colorado Springs, and Grand Junction do not experience the same
exceedances of EPA’s 70 ppb ozone health standard. So, where is
Boulder’s high ozone coming from?
The ozone and particulates we breathe are among the most damaging
of air pollutants. The unique topography of Colorado’s Front Range
causes air circulation where the predominant flow is east-to-west
during the day, and the reverse at night. This places Boulder and
Larimer counties downwind of Weld during the day. Weld County’s
polluted air then backs up against the mountain slopes, resulting in the
worst air pollution for communities such as Boulder, Longmont,
Loveland, and Ft. Collins.
According to an NCAR report, while transportation and oil/gas
operations each contribute about 30-40% on average to regional
ozone, oil/gas operations are the primary driver of non-compliance
ozone days north of Denver, while transportation emissions have
higher importance to the south. This accords with the fact that Weld
County has over 20,000 oil and gas wells, not just the highest number
in the state, but the highest number of any county in the US. Not
surprisingly therefore, according to data from CDPHE and NOAA, there
is a far greater probability that air blown in from the east of Boulder,
from places such as Platteville and elsewhere in Weld, rather than air
from Denver and all other directions, is responsible for ozone non-
compliance days.
3.5
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
3
NOAA and CU data show that VOC emissions from Weld County’s oil
and gas operations are more than 10X those from all cars in Colorado.
Over one year, these VOCs would fill a large oil tanker. Emissions of
benzene alone, a VOC that is carcinogenic at even low concentrations,
would fill 22 full size tanker trucks, according to CU researchers.
In December 2017, at the Boulder Reservoir, benzene was measured at
10X its usual background in a plume that had passed by a well site in
Windsor app. 10 hours before that site exploded and burned. Those
measurements were taken some 35 miles downwind. We’ll never know
how much higher the benzene levels were between Windsor and
downwind communities closer to the site, such as Fort Collins,
Loveland and Longmont. But we do know from the data taken at the
Boulder Reservoir that such incidents of venting toxic emissions are
much more common than realized or reported.
A recent EPA study concluded that at current emission rates and
projected industry growth, by 2025, 70 Coloradans will die each year
from air pollutants spewed into the air by Colorado’s oil and gas
industry. Many more will become sick from respiratory illnesses.
Children, elderly, and people with pre-existing conditions are at
highest risk. That’s 70 people who will die every year for the revenues
and expediences of an industry and its backing politicians who refuse
to accept any responsibility for its toxic emissions.
Boulder County citizens should reasonably expect the Weld
Commissioners to at least acknowledge the science and the impact that
its oil and gas industry has within and across its borders, and to take a
stand in protecting the health and safety of their constituents and
residents of neighboring counties.
We all want to be good neighbors. Dismissing the impacts of Weld’s oil
and gas industry on the Front Range’s dirty air and the health of
Coloradans, while attacking those who seek solutions and a better
future, will not accomplish this goal.
Harv Teitelbaum leads the Beyond Oil and Gas Campaign for Sierra Club
Colorado.
3.5
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Carrie Daggett
Sent:Tuesday, January 14, 2020 11:58 AM
To:Brad Yatabe; Judy Schmidt; Cyril Vidergar; Kevin Gertig; Cassie Archuleta; Lucinda Smith; Kelly Smith
Subject:FW: King Operating
I’m forwarding this fyi.
~C
From: Karen Artell <K_ARTELL@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 11:51 AM
To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>
Subject: King Operating
Hello
I'm sure you are aware that King Operating has approached PRPA about oil and gas drilling under and near the
Rawhide Plant.
See starting at page 47 at this link https://www.prpa.org/wp‐content/uploads/2019/07/07.25.2019‐Platte‐
River‐Board‐of‐Director‐packet‐ELECTRONIC.pdf
"Although Platte River owns all of the surface rights to the Rawhide Energy Station property, Platte River only
has partial mineral rights ownership, with others also holding partial ownership of the mineral rights to this
property. King Operating Corporation (“King”), a Texas based oil and gas company, approached
Platte River to perform oil and gas exploration on the Rawhide property on behalf of a number of mineral
rights holders. Platte River has granted King a permit to conduct a seismic survey designed for oil and gas
exploration, which was completed in March 2019. King has notified Platte River that it is in the planning stages
for wells to extract oil and gas from reservoirs underneath the Rawhide property. King has also approached
Platte River regarding a potential lease of Platte River’s mineral rights. Platte River will be coordinating with
King regarding its extraction plans and will be considering the terms of a mineral rights lease. The lease may
provide Platte River with additional control of King’s oil and gas extraction activities that occur near the
Rawhide Energy Station."
King Operating web site https://kingoperating.com/
The company plans to lease up to 40,000 adjacent acres, or 62.5 square miles/sections in Larimer County.
"King’s business model specializes in strategically acquiring oil and gas projects to further develop, divest and
maximize investor returns."
"Within two to five years, we plan to prove the field’s value through either further development or sell to a
public company to maximize profits.*"
The company drills and then leaves the burden for others all for their profit.
When you think of all the care the City took for the path of a transmission line from the wind project in
Wyoming ‐ the study of wildlife issues, public meetings and input but now have the possibility of fracking
with PRPA/Fort Collins being surface owners and, at least in part, mineral owners.
3.5
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
2
I've emailed previously with concerns about the possibility of fracking in this area and feel like my concerns
were not taken seriously.
This was one of my questions regarding the development of oil and gas regualtions:
What about City owned land north of Fort Collins ‐ Soapstone Prairie and Meadow Springs Ranch. Would City
regulations apply to and help protect these areas if applications were submitted?
See Colorado: Mountains to Plains Energy by Design
https://www.conservationgateway.org/Files/Pages/m2penergybydesign.aspx
Colorado: Mountains to Plains Energy by Design
Based on The Nature Conservancy’s Development by Design methodology, this report identifies priority
biological, cultural, scenic, and recreational resource values within 60,000 acres in northeastern Colorado
and recommends strategies to avoid, minimize, and offset the potential impacts of oil and gas
development to these values. It provides an example of collaborative energy planning ...
www.conservationgateway.org
3.5
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Cassie Archuleta
Sent:Friday, August 30, 2019 4:49 PM
To:Kelly Smith
Subject:FW: Oil and Gas permits
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CASSIE ARCHULETA
Air Quality Program Manager
City of Fort Collins
970-416-2648 office
From: Jacqueline Kozak‐Thiel <jkozak‐thiel@fcgov.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 11:03 PM
To: Lindsay Ex <lex@fcgov.com>; Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com>
Subject: Fwd: Oil and Gas permits
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Psyche Spangler <psychespangler@gmail.com>
Date: August 28, 2019 at 10:58:59 PM MDT
To: cityleaders@fcgov.com
Subject: Oil and Gas permits
I believe our city of Fort Collins should support an oil and gas permit moratorium until the State of
Colorado completes its new regulations. As the largest city in Larimer county it is important that we
should set the example for our entire county. Thank you for considering this measure.
Psyche Spangler
3.5
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Cassie Archuleta
Sent:Friday, August 30, 2019 4:49 PM
To:Kelly Smith
Subject:FW: New oil and gas drilling
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CASSIE ARCHULETA
Air Quality Program Manager
City of Fort Collins
970-416-2648 office
From: Jacqueline Kozak‐Thiel <jkozak‐thiel@fcgov.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 10:41 PM
To: Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com>; Lindsay Ex <lex@fcgov.com>
Subject: Fwd: New oil and gas drilling
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dolores Williams <tinytornado@mac.com>
Date: August 27, 2019 at 9:44:34 PM MDT
To: City <cityleaders@fcgov.com>
Subject: New oil and gas drilling
Now that county government is responsible for assuring that oil/gas development adheres to health
considerations of its residents, please institute a moratorium on new oil/gas permits until the State has
studies and recommended siting restrictions.
Consideration to the fact that a Larimer committee feels that it is over‐represented by the oil/gas
company. Could this be studied and fixed before the county rules are considered and produced?
Dolores williams
415 Mason Court 7A
Fort Collins, CO 80524
3.5
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:josh joswick <josh_joswick2004@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, February 25, 2020 1:02 PM
To:Kelly Smith
Subject:Oil and gas Gathering lines
Attachments:Fort Collins comments 02.25.20.docx
Kelly,
Thank you for taking the time to return my call and for looking at the attached. As I mentioned, if you have any
questions or if anything needs to be explained better, please do not hesitate to contact me. I have given power
points to Front Range councils, commissions, boards, and citizens groups, and if you think that would help, let
me know and I can give you the 10, 20 40 minute version; I would go for the 20 if I were you.
Again, thanks and I look forward to hearing from you if you think talking would help.
Josh Joswick
Earthworks' OGAP Organizer
970-903-0876
josh_joswick2004@yahoo.com
3.5
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1
Kelly Smith
From:Cassie Archuleta
Sent:Sunday, March 15, 2020 5:55 PM
To:Jan Stepp; Kelly Smith
Subject:RE: oil and gas
Hi Richard‐
Thanks for reaching out and providing comments on this. If you are interested, we have also posted an online
questionnaire (https://ourcity.fcgov.com/oil‐and‐gas‐regulations) to collect additional feedback.
Cassie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CASSIE ARCHULETA
Air Quality Program Manager
City of Fort Collins
970-416-2648 office
From: Jan Stepp <janstepp2002@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 1:49 PM
To: Cassie Archuleta <carchuleta@fcgov.com>; Kelly Smith <ksmith@fcgov.com>
Subject: oil and gas
Ms Archuleta,
I was unable to attend the recent hearings regarding oil and gas
extraction.
Although, as a general comment and concern regarding oil and gas
extraction with in city limits, all residents have a human right to clean
water, clean land and clean air.
These new regulations must protect these rights to the greatest extent
possible, including ground water (waste water injection wells) and methane
leaks at drill sites.
I trust the city shares these concerns.
Sincerely,
Richard Stepp
3.5
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Public Comments (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
What words come to mind when you think of Oil and Gas?
What is your zip code?
ATTACHMENT 6 3.6
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Superboard Meeting Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
How should oil and gas development be regulated on City-owned conserved properties?
What is your preference for how the City should regulate the location of new oil and gas facilities?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
80525 80524 80521 80526 80528
Zip Code
0 5 10 15 20 25
New wells should not be permitted on any
City-owned conserved properties.
Follow State recommendations and
standards for approval of new wells on City-
owned conserved properties
Permit new wells on City-owned properties
provided the development would not result
in adverse impacts to wildlife and the
environment
Responses
3.6
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Superboard Meeting Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
0 5 10 15 20
Do not permit new oil and gas development
within Fort Collins City limits
Rely on State setback standards to
determine oil and gas locations.
Restrict oil and gas development to heavy
industrial areas only.
Develop local regulations that increase State
setback distance standards
Responses
3.6
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Superboard Meeting Questionnaire Results (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
1Oil and Gas Regulations
AT TA CHMENT 7
3.7
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Question
•What feedback does Council have
regarding setback and zoning regulations
for new oil and gas development?
2
3.7
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
COUNCIL
PRIORITY
Oil and Gas
•Mitigate Surface
Impacts and
Encroachment in GMA
STRATEGIC
ALIGNMENT
Neighborhood Livability
•1.7 Guide
Development
BUDGET
•Planning and
Environmental
Services Ongoing
Offers
Strategic Plan Alignment
3
3.7
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Why Are We Here?
Senate Bill 19-181 (April 2019):
•Change in Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC)
Mission from fostering responsible, balanced development to regulating
in a manner that protects public health, safety & environment
•Local must be equal to or more restrictive than State; State sets floor
Results in:
•Expansion of COGCC requirements (adopted November 2021)
•Opportunity for increased local requirements (TBD)
Council Direction (October 2019):
•Begin developing regulations
4
3.7
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Approach
•If/where new O&G can
occur, per:
•Setbacks
•Zoning
•Will influence:
•Development Standards
•Operational Standards
5
3.7
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Current Oil and Gas Operations
Active Wells:
•Colorado: 50,840
•Weld County: 19,357
•Larimer County: 263
•City Growth Management
Area: 17
•City of Fort Collins: 10
6
Fort Collins
Well (producing, injecting, shut-in or abandoned)
City Limits
Source: http://cogcc.state.co.us/maps.html#/gisonline (1/4/2021)
3.7
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Local Oil and Gas Operations
North Fort Collins GMA
DOUGLAS RD
TURNBERRY RD7
COUNTRY CLUB RD
One Operator
•Prospect
Energy
10 Active Wells
•2 Producing
•4 Injecting
•4 Shut-In
20 Inactive
Wells
3.7
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Setbacks
Pre-SB181 Rules
8
“fostering responsible, balanced development…”
BUILDING SETBACK JUSTIFICATION
HIGH OCCUPAN CY
BUILDINGS (HOB)
-1000’-“Provides strong protective measures without imposing
undue costs or restrictions on oil and gas exploration and
production”
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS UNIT
(RBU)
-500’
3.7
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
New COGCC Setbacks
9
“regulating in a manner that protects public health, safety & environment”
BUILDING SETBACK JUSTIFICATION
SCHOOLS/
CHILDCARE CENTERS
2000’•CDPHE’s Health Impact Assessment
•Children are more vulnerable
•Noise and other nuisances (truck traffic) would
impact learning and safety
HOBs& RBUs Presumptive 2000'
500’-2000’Va riance
•CDPHE study, other studies, complaints
•Apply for variance
3.7
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
COGCC Setbacks
10
•Incremental Increases in
State Setbacks
2000'
1000'
500'
150'
3.7
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Pre-SB181 COGCC Setbacks
11
•500’Residential Building Units
(RBUs)
•1000’from High Occupancy
Buildings (HOBs)
•13.4% LAND AVA ILABLE
Drillable Areas
FTC Oil Field
3.7
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
New COGCC Setbacks
12
•2000’Presumptive Setbacks
•1.3% LAND AVA ILABLE
Drillable Areas
FTC Oil Field
3.7
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Zoning + Pre-181 COGCC Setbacks
13
•Industrial Zone District
•500’from Building Units
•1000’HOBs
•Note: GMA not included
•<1% LAND AVA ILABLE
Drillable Areas
FTC Oil Field
3.7
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Zoning + New COGCC Setbacks
14
•Industrial Zone District
•2000’Setback
•Note: GMA not included
•0% LAND AVA ILABLE
Drillable Areas
FTC Oil Field
3.7
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Public Input and Options
15
ZONING SETBACK
Public Support
•No new Oil and Gas in City
•No new Oil and Gas in NAs
•Industrial Zone
District
•2,000’+
no exceptions
Industry Support
•No full exclusion of new
development
•Zoning not applied •Align with COGCC
Other Considerations
•Setbacks from buildings of other land uses
•Setbacks from recreation trails, parking lots, recreation fields
3.7
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)
Questions
•What direction does Council have
regarding siting regulations for new oil and gas
development?
16
3.7
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8998 : Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options)