HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/08/2022 - STORMWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMDATE:
STAFF:
March 8, 2022
Matt Fater, Utilities Special Projects Manager
Theresa Connor, Utilities Deputy Director
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Stormwater Capital Improvement Program.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to respond to questions posed by Council during the Stormwater Utility Overview in
December 2021 and seek Council feedback on the capital improvement plan (CIP) for the Stormwater Utility. The
primary objectives of the stormwater CIP are to provide flood protection, improve water quality, and rehabilitate
urban streams. These objectives work together within the City’s urban watersheds to improve public safety as
well as environmental health. Future capital investments are needed to achieve these objectives. Implementation
of these improvements in terms of priorities, design criteria, and financing is the focus of this work session.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What questions or feedback is there about the current Stormwater Capital Improvement Program?
2. Which of the three Capital Improvement scenarios does Council support?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During the Stormwater Utility Overview on December 14, 2021, Council requested more information on the
Stormwater CIP, including a deeper understanding of how water quality improvements are incorporated into the
CIP; clarity on the focus of the Downtown improvements; concern about the total program cost of the Stormwater
CIP; and insight into the schedule for the Stream Rehabilitation Program.
The Stormwater Utility Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) was developed to make infrastructure investments
necessary to achieve the City’s objectives related to Safe Community and Environment Health. The 2020
Strategic Plan identifies two strategic objectives that the CIP supports:
• Safe Community 5.5 - Address flooding risk for the protection of people, property, and the environment.
• Environment Health 4.6 - Sustain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre River and all watersheds
within the city.
In addition to supporting these objectives, the stormwater CIP is in alignment with the City’s Our Climate Future
plan that strives to co-create a climate resilient community such that “people, buildings, watersheds, and
ecosystems are prepared for the threats of climate change. (Big Move 3)” The City’s 2019 Water Supply
Vulnerability study indicates that overall precipitation will more likely be higher than historical records. Also, the
study noted the risk that precipitation events could be less frequent but more severe. As a result, the resiliency of
the City’s stormwater infrastructure becomes even more critical with a changing clima te in the future.
The CIP is focused primarily around addressing on-going flood risks, treating the quality of stormwater runoff,
and rehabilitating streams. Master plans identify mitigation solutions for flood risks as well as opportunities to
improve stormwater quality, rehabilitate urban streams, and partner with other City departments on multi -use
opportunities, including open space, trails, and recreation. Recommendations from master plans are carried
forward into the CIP. There are thirteen (13) stormwater basins within the City of Fort Collins Growth
Management Area (GMA), each with their own master plan. Each master plan contains a comprehensive, multi-
disciplinary approach involving several City departments and public stakeholders to create a plan a nd vision for
March 8, 2022 Page 2
how stormwater management can be implemented in each basin.
Significant investments in stormwater infrastructure have been made over the past several decades to improve
flood protection and water quality. These investments have protected an e stimated 1,900 buildings up to the 100-
year flood risk. In addition, several regional water quality detention areas have been constructed to treat urban
runoff before entering the Poudre River. Many of these investments have been made in areas of the City that
were developed prior to the 1980’s when floodplain regulations and stormwater design criteria were adopted.
These improvements were necessary to provide service levels like newly developed areas. Yet, there is still more
investment needed to address remaining flood risks, improve water quality, and rehabilitate urban streams.
Flood Protection Improvements
Flood protection of buildings and roadways represent the greatest cost of the capital improvement plan. An
estimated 1,000 buildings are still at risk for damage in the 100-year storm with approximately half of these in
downtown. Most of these buildings that remain at risk are in areas of the city that were developed before the
adoption of stormwater design criteria and floodplain regulations.
The downtown area represents the greatest concentration of flood risk remaining in the city. The flood risk in
downtown can be characterized as urban flooding due to the lack of stormwater infrastructure or a defined stream
channel. During intense rainstorms, flow depths in downtown streets can quickly reach 2-4 feet, exceeding curb
heights and impacting adjacent homes and businesses. An estimated 550 structures remain at risk for damage
during a 100-year storm in downtown. Of these damaged structures, approximate ly half of them contain finished
or partially finished basements that are particularly vulnerable to flood risk and pose a safety risk for people that
may occupy these basements. A 2019 study noted the repetitive nature of the flood risk with an estimated cost to
the community of $151 million to $165 million over the next 50 years if no improvements are made. In addition,
these conditions create a risk in terms of economic, social, and environmental impacts, such as public safety,
business closures, traffic disruptions, and sewer overflows.
The Oak Street Stormwater Project is the first in a series of projects planned for downtown. The project will
extend an existing 78” storm sewer along Oak Street from Mason Street to City Park. Streetscape and low impact
development improvements are also proposed to enhance pedestrian safety and improve water quality. The
project was funded for design in the 2021 and 2022 budgets. To date, approximately $1.3 million has been spent
on alternatives analysis and design of the project. The total cost of the project is estimated at $28 million to $32
million. Staff is planning to submit a BFO offer for construction of this project for the 23/24 budget unless Council
provides feedback on changing direction of the current CIP.
In addition to the improvements identified for downtown, the CIP also identifies flood protection improvements in
other parts of the city, primarily in the Canal Importation and West Vine basins. The Plum Street area west of Taft
Hill in the Canal Importation basin has an estimated 79 homes at risk for flooding in the 100 -year storm with an
estimated cost of improvements of $10.3 million. The West Vine Basin master plan in northwest Fort Collins
identifies projects in the CIP to create a multi-functional corridor for stormwater, trails, and wildlife. The first phase
of this corridor was already constructed in 2014 from the Poudre River to Vine Drive. Also, the Puente Verde
Natural Area was purchased jointly in 2012 by the Stormwater Utility and the Natural A reas program.
Water Quality Improvements
As stormwater moves through the City’s urban watersheds it collects a variety of pollutants from frequent low
intensity storms as well as larger less frequent events. If not treated, this stormwater impacts the he alth of the
City’s streams and the Cache la Poudre River. Stormwater quality treatment has been a requirement of new
developments since the late 1990’s. Also, all new developments and some re -developments are required to meet
Low Impact Development (LID) criteria. LID components include rain gardens, permeable pavers, bioretention,
and wetland ponds. In addition, several regional water quality detention areas have been constructed as part of
the CIP over the past two decades to treat urban runoff before ent ering the Poudre River. Attachment 1
identifies the existing locations of water quality best management practices and LID facilities throughout the City.
Attachment 2 identifies remaining water quality improvements to be completed. Many of these improvemen ts
consist of new extended detention basins or retrofits of existing detention basins designed to store stormwater
and settle out pollutants. In addition to these improvements, most of the flood protection improvements identified
March 8, 2022 Page 3
in the CIP also incorporate water quality treatment.
Water quality regulations are expected to evolve from a best practice based approach to a numerical effluent
limitations approach in the next decade or so. The City will need to update stormwater master plans to respond to
new regulations which could lead to additional improvements or modifications to existing planned improvements.
Stream and River Rehabilitation Projects
The City contains ten (10) urban streams that are tributary to either the Poudre River or Fossil Creek Reserv oir.
These streams have been impacted and degraded over time due to agricultural practices and urban
development. The stream rehabilitation program was established in 2013 with the goals of improving habitat,
protecting water quality, and addressing erosion. To date, four stream rehabilitation projects on portions of Spring
Creek, Mail Creek, and Fossil Creek have been completed for approximately a mile of total stream length and a
cost of $4.85 millionM.
There remain significant rehabilitation improvements needed to achieve the objectives established for the
program with an estimated cost of approximately $76 million. This work encompasses approximately 15.5 miles
of stream along portions of Spring Creek, Fossil Creek, Mail Creek, Clearview Channel, and Bo xelder Creek.
Attachment 3 indicates the portions of the City’s urban streams that remain on the list of rehabilitation projects to
be completed.
Current Capital Improvement Plan
The stormwater capital improvement plan (CIP) is a combination of projects fr om each of the thirteen (13) basin
master plans to address these challenges with an estimated total cost of $556.1 million. The following table
identifies the proportion of the total cost by primary objective.
Table 1 - Stormwater Capital Investment
Primary Objective 10-year CIP (millions) Total Investment (millions)
Flood Protection and WQ $122.5 $297.5
Roadway Only Flood Protection and WQ $2.6 $70.0
Stream / River Rehabilitation and WQ $15.0 $115.7
Asset Rehab and Renewal $30.8 $34.2
Annexations $0 $38.7
Total CIP (2021 dollars) $170.9 $556.1
The current CIP is a comprehensive list of projects to address remaining flood risks, water quality improvements,
and stream rehabilitation projects. The list also includes funding for asset renewal to repl ace or rehabilitate
existing stormwater assets such as old clay storm sewers. The master planning process evaluates stormwater
needs within the City’s entire Growth Management Area to anticipate infrastructure investments that would be
needed if Council approved an annexation. Stormwater improvements in possible annexations do not become
part of the prioritization process until these areas are annexed by Council.
Utilities develops a financial strategic plan for each of the four utilities to evaluate the im pact to utility rates and
debt issuance needed to fund capital investments. The current stormwater CIP is based on a 25 -year build out
period while maintaining annual rate increases to less than 5%. The current plan also emphasizes the build out of
the Downtown Stormwater Improvements Program (DSIP) in the next 12-15 years due to the high concentration
of flood risk in the area. This emphasis on DSIP is also based on feedback received from Council at the
December 2019 work session regarding DSIP. Table 2 indicates the impact of rates on an annual basis to
implement the current CIP.
Table 2 - Proposed Rate Increases based on Current Stormwater CIP
Model Output Rate Increase 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 5.0% 2.3% 2.1% 1.8% 4.9%
Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Rate Increase 0.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1-3% 1-3% 3-5% 2-4% 2-3% 2-4% 3-5%
March 8, 2022 Page 4
Debt Issued ($M) $34.0 $58.0 $33.0
Ave Residential $/mo $16.95 $17.29 $17.63 $17.99 $18.35 $19.26 $19.71 $20.11 $20.47 $21.48
CIP Options
Based upon Council’s feedback during the Stormwater Utility Overview work session, staff has prepared options
for Council consideration for modifying the Stormwater CIP. The best path to pursue will vary depending upon
Council’s priorities. If there is concern that the total progr am cost is excessive, then modification to the Flood
Protection Design Criteria would need to be considered. If there is concern about maintaining rates, then
keeping the current design criteria with a modification to the build out period for the improvem ents, especially for
the downtown area, and use of debt to fund the improvements will allow a consistent level of service throughout
the community, maintain rates, and open up capital to do other projects outside of the Downtown area.
Design Criteria for Flood Protection
One approach to reduce the overall cost of the CIP is to consider a change to the design criteria used to design
flood protection projects. The design of flood protection improvements is focused on balancing the risk of flooding
with the cost of constructing improvements. The level of flood risk that a given improvement will mitigate is one of
the design criteria established for designing flood protection improvements. This level of flood risk is typically
identified in terms of a return period or design storm. These values are statistically developed based on historical
rainfall data for a given location to establish a design storm correlated to an annual probability of being equaled or
exceeded. Table 3 identifies a range of design storms for Fort Collins that may be used for designing flood
protection improvements.
Table 3 - Precipitation Design Criteria
Return Period Annual Risk of Exceedance 2-hr Design Storm (in)
2-year 50% 0.98”
10-year 10% 1.71”
50-year 2% 2.90”
100-year 1% 3.67”
This range of design storms allows for a risk -based approach for planning and designing infrastructure. The 100-
year storm has historically been used within Fort Collins for mapping and regulating floodplains, standards for
new development, as well as flood protection improvements identified in the CIP. This standard for the CIP is
based on direction from previous City Councils dating back to 2001 and confirmed by other City Councils in 2004,
2007, and 2009. Significant investments in capital improvement s have been made in the past two decades to
provide 100-year flood protection in areas previously at risk for flooding, such as improvements in the Spring
Creek, Old Town, Canal Importation, and Dry Creek basins. The primary objective of these improvements is to
provide life safety and minimize damage to residential and commercial structures up to the 100 -year flood. The
design of these projects seeks to optimize the risk reduction with the cost of improvements. In some cases,
removing the 100-year flood risk entirely from a building is not feasible or too costly. However, in most areas, the
stormwater master plans have identified improvements that can cost-effectively address the flood risks.
The 100-year storm design criteria is robust and reflects the Ci ty’s past commitment to public safety. A survey of
other regional communities shows that each community requires use of the 100 -year storm for the design and
construction associated with new development. The differences occur when communities such as Love land and
Greeley are retrofitting stormwater infrastructure in older areas of town. Both communities typically design and
construct facilities using the 10-year storm in older retrofit areas.
The relationship between the design storm and costs of improvements is not linear because a large portion of the
cost for the improvements is opening the street and not the actual pipe size that is installed. For example, an
analysis of the 50-year storm was done as part of the master planning for downtown. The c ost to construct
improvements for the 50-year storm (2% chance of occurrence) was 5 - 15% less than the cost to construct
improvements for the 100-year storm (1% chance of occurrence). Staff has not completed an analysis of the
costs of improvements for other design criteria, such as the 2, 5, 10 or 25-year storm event. To realize a
significant cost differential, it is likely that design criteria of a 10 -year storm would need to be considered for
March 8, 2022 Page 5
downtown. This would extend the inequity in flooding and stormwater quality treatment between the older
downtown and west side areas in comparison with the level of service provided to the rest of the community.
Other communities have different levels of service for newer areas of the community compared to the older areas,
so Fort Collins would not be unique in this situation.
It should be noted that some properties will remain at risk within the 100 -year floodplain if less intense design
criteria is used for flood protection improvements. Properties that remai n in the floodplain will also still be subject
to floodplain regulations related to new and redevelopment.
If Council would like to consider modifying the design storm for the CIP, it is recommended that a BFO offer be
submitted for the 2023/2024 budget to evaluate this option and that the Oak Street Stormwater Improvement
project be delayed.
Extend Buildout Time Period of DSIP
The Downtown Stormwater Improvement Program is no doubt a robust and expensive undertaking for the
community. The DSIP has been prioritized due to the high density of structures at risk for flooding. Many of the
structures do have finished basements that are occupied that create a hazard to community safety. In the
current CIP, the buildout period for DSIP is 12-15 years. This is a lot of construction in the downtown area that
will be disruptive. One option is to maintain the current design standard but extend the build out period to 20 -30
years. This would allow projects to be completed in other areas of the City and incorporate more stream
rehabilitation and water quality projects.
Acceleration of the Stream Rehabilitation Program and Water Quality Projects
Accelerating the urban stream rehabilitation program was identified as a 2021 Council priority. The program
consists of 55 stream reaches yet to be completed for a total cost of $76 million. Historically, these reaches were
completed as a single project design and constructed every 2-3 years. One approach to align this program with
the Council priority is to consolidate these 55 reaches into approximately 25 larger scale projects to be designed
and constructed every budget cycle. These larger scale projects would cost an estimated $3 million - $5 million
depending on complexity. This approach will save time during the per mitting process and save cost during the
construction phase. The current 10-year CIP has a projected investment of $1.2 million per year. Staff will need
to adjust the approach within the 10-year CIP to accommodate this consolidated approach to the Stream
Rehabilitation program.
In addition, there is an estimated $18 million worth of water quality projects not associated with flood protection
projects. These projects have typically been completed as collaboration opportunities with other construction
projects. One option to accelerate this program is to start funding these water quality projects in each budget
cycle for an estimated cost of $500,000 to $1.5 million depending on complexity. As stormwater water quality
regulations shift to numerical effluent limits, master plans will need to be updated to account for these new
regulations. These regulatory changes may result in modifications to these projects and possibly additional
improvements.
Scenarios for Consideration:
• Scenario 1 - Stay with the Current Approach - the DSIP program has been prioritized due to the risk
associated with flooding to the community. The projected build out period of 12-15 years reflects the need to
address this risk in the community. It can be completed with modest rate increases over time. Water quality
improvements are a part of DSIP to address this high priority area of town that generally does not have
stormwater best management practices already in place.
March 8, 2022 Page 6
Considerations for Scenario 1:
o Completes DSIP in 12-15 years, addressing flood risk on approximately 550 structures.
o Limits stream rehabilitation funding to $1.2 million/year, resulting in smaller individual projects.
o Provides for an equitable design level throughout the city.
o Requires significant debt issuance every three years for the next 15 years.
o Addresses remaining 100-year flood risk in a 25-year build out period.
o Annual rate increases of 2-5% would be required to fund improvements.
o This option emphasizes flood protection projects over stream rehab and water quality.
• Scenario 2 - Extend the Buildout Time Period for DSIP and further Accelerate Stream Rehabilitation and
Water Quality Programs - recognizing that the priority for Council is accelerating the Stream Rehabilitation
program, this option allows the City to continue to work towards an equitable level of service throughout the
community for flood protection while accelerating the program. Delaying the total buildout period of the DSIP
does open up significant capital funding to construct larger scale projects in the stream rehabilitation
program, water quality improvements, as well as incorporate smaller flood protection projects in other areas
of the City. The Oak St. project would proceed with a construction funding offer in the 23/24 b udget. The
impact on stormwater rates can be managed through annual rate increases of less than 3%.
Considerations for Scenario 2:
o Completes DSIP over a 20-30 year build out period, addressing flood risk on approximately 550
structures.
o Some flood protection projects would be delayed, leaving properties at risk until projects are constructed
to address these risks.
o Opens up capital in the next 10 years to fund larger scale stream rehabilitation and water quality projects
in line with the Council priority.
o Some properties would remain subject to floodplain regulations limiting redevelopment options until
projects are constructed.
o Debt issuance could be spread out to limit annual rate increases.
o This option puts a greater emphasis on stream rehabil itation projects than scenario 1.
• Scenario 3 - Modify the Flood Protection Design Criteria for DSIP and further Accelerate Stream
Rehabilitation and Water Quality Programs - this scenario would reduce the total program costs for the flood
protection program. It would require a pause on the Oak Street Stormwater project and a budget offer in
2023/2024 to study other design criteria. Staff would bring back options to modify the design criteria in late
2023 or 2024. Upon community outreach and Council dir ection, a revised design storm would be adopted to
move forward with improvements in the downtown area. This scenario would open capital funding to
accelerate the stream rehabilitation program and water quality improvements.
Considerations for Scenario 3:
o Less total investment would be required due to a lower design storm and smaller infrastructure.
o Some areas of the city would have a lower service level for flood protection than other areas of the city.
o Some structures would remain subject to floodplain regulations permanently, limiting redevelopment
options in the 100-year floodplain
o Opens up capital in the next 10 years to fund larger scale stream rehabilitation and water quality projects
in line with the Council priority.
o Some properties would remain at risk in the 100-year floodplain permanently.
o This option may emphasize stream rehabilitation and water quality projects.
Next Steps:
Based upon Council feedback, BFO offers for 2023/2024 can be developed and the 10 -year CIP will be modified.
March 8, 2022 Page 7
ATTACHMENTS
1. Existing Water Quality Features with Stormwater Basins (PDF)
2. Proposed Water Quality Features with Stormwater Basins (PDF)
3. Consolidated Stream Rehab Projects (PDF)
4. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
County
R
oa
d
5
4G
Laporte Ave
S Overland TrlW Mulberry St
Exist
N
i
U
n
sHi
g
gh
w
Water Quality Features
ay
28
7
Laporte AveN Shields StNCollegeAveE
M
u
l
be rry StTurnberry RdN TaftHill Rd
E
V
ine Dr
S Taft HillRdW Drake Rd
W Trilby Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
S Shields St
W Prospect Rd
S College Ave
E
H
armony Rd
E
P
rospect Rd
E
T
r
i
l
by Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Drake Rd
Carpenter
R
dSLemay AveS LemayAveZieglerRdState Highway 392
Water Quality Features
BMPs
LID Treatments
Tributaries
Cache la Poudre River
Other Tributaries
Storm Water Basins
CACHE LA POUDRE BASIN
CANAL IMPORTATION BASIN
COOPER SLOUGH/BOXELDER BASIN
DRY CREEK BASIN
FOOTHILLS BASIN
FOSSIL CREEK BASIN
FOX MEADOWS BASIN
MAIL CREEK BASIN
McCLELLANDS BASIN
OLD TOWN BASIN
SPRING CREEK BASIN
WEST VINE BASIN
0 1.5 30.75 Miles
ATTACHMENT 1
Proposed Water Quality Features
Count
y
Roa
d
5
4G
Laporte Ave
S Overland TrlW Mulberry St
N
U
s
H
i
ghway
28
7
Laporte AveN Shields StN College AveE
M
u
l
be rry StTurnberry RdN TaftHill Rd
E
V
ine Dr
S Taft HillRdW Drake Rd
W Trilby Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
S Shields St
W Prospect Rd
S College Ave
E
H
a
r
m
o
n
y Rd
E
P
rospect Rd
E Trilby Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Drake
R
d
Carpenter
R
dSLemay AveS Lemay AveZieglerRdState Highway 392
Proposed WQ Features
Water Quality Ponds
BMPs
Tributaries
Cache la Poudre River
Other Tributaries
Storm Water Basins
CACHE LA POUDRE BASIN
CANAL IMPORTATION BASIN
COOPER SLOUGH/BOXELDER BASIN
DRY CREEK BASIN
FOOTHILLS BASIN
FOSSIL CREEK BASIN
FOX MEADOWS BASIN
MAIL CREEK BASIN
McCLELLANDS BASIN
OLD TOWN BASIN
SPRING CREEK BASIN
WEST VINE BASIN
0 1.5 30.75 Miles
ATTACHMENT 2
W Vine Dr W
V
i
ne Dr
W Mulberry St
Laporte AveN Shields StN College Ave
W Willox Ln
E Mulberry
S
tN TaftHillRdN Lemay Ave
E
V
i
n
e
D
r
N Timberline RdS Taft Hill Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
W Drake Rd
S Mason StW Prospect Rd
S College AveE Harmony Rd
E P
r
o
s
p
e
c
t
Rd
E
H
o
r
s
e
t
ooth Rd
EDr ake
R
dS Lemay AveS Timberline Rd
W
E
l
izabeth
S
t
GMA
W
T
r
i
l
by
R
d S College Ave
E Trilby
R
d
Carpenter
R
d S Timberline RdS Taft Hill RdS County Road19E
M
u
l
b
e
r
r
y
S
t N County Road 5
Mountain Vista Dr
E
V
i
n
e
D
r
GMAZiegler RdZieglerRdE
P
r
o
s
p
e
c
t
Rd
Strauss Cabin RdMain St
E County Road 38S County Road 5S County Road 5Ziegler Rd
State Highway 392
101
10
2
118
1
2
2
123
111
120
1
0
7
109 10911
2
103
101
121
115
114105110 113102117124 119104116106
108
Consolidated Stream Rehab Projects
Basin Name
CACHE LA POUDRE BASIN
CANAL IMPORTATION BASIN
COOPER SLOUGH/BOXELDER BASIN
DRY CREEK BASIN
FOOTHILLS BASIN
FOSSIL CREEK BASIN
FOX MEADOWS BASIN
MAIL CREEK BASIN
McCLELLANDS BASIN
OLD TOWN BASIN
SPRING CREEK BASIN
WEST VINE BASIN
0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles
ATTACHMENT 3
Stormwater Utility Capital Improvement Program
March 8, 2022
Protecting People, Property and Our Environment
Theresa Connor –Interim Utilities Executive Director
ATTACHMENT 4
2Questions for City Council
What questions or feedback is there about the
current Stormwater Capital Improvement Program?
Which of the three Capital Improvement scenarios
does Council support?
Previous Work Session
1 | Water Quality Tr eatment
2 | Overall Cost of Stormwater CIP
3 | Downtown Emphasis
4 | Stream Rehab Program Ti meline
3
4Strategic Alignment
Safe Community Environmental Health Community Benefits
Other Areas of Al ignment
•Municipal Sustainability
Action Plan
•Our Climate Future
•Resiliency
•Multi-functional approach
Stormwater Policy Guidance
•Water quality
•Flood protection
•Stream rehabilitation
•Low impact development
AH25
5Our Climate Future Alignment
This capital plan supports Big Move 3: Climate Resilient Community
It also…
•centers community with comprehensive engagement in
planning and executing projects.
•centers equity by seeking to reduce storm event risks across
the whole community.
OCF Approach in Practice –Data Driven
The stormwater capital plan is rooted
in creating a climate resilient community.
CIP Levers That Impact Rates Vs. Overall Costs
Design Criteria for
Flood Protection
Buildout Period Financing
Mechanism
6
Design Storms
Ve ry Likely
WQ Storm
0.5”
2-Ye ar
50%
0.98”
10-Ye ar
10%
1.71”
50-Ye ar
2%
2.9”
100-Ye ar
1%
3.67”
7
Level of Flood Protection = Design Criteria
More flood damage
Less total capital expenditure
Larger residual floodplain
(more FP regulations)
Less flood damage
More total capital expenditure
Smaller residual floodplain
(less FP regulations)
2-Ye ar
0.98”/2 hrs
10-Ye ar
1.71”/2 hrs
50-Ye ar
2.91”/2 hrs
100-Ye ar
3.67”/2 hrs
>100-Ye ar
8
What Do Other Communities Do?9
City Master
Plans
Minor Storm
(Design Storm)
Major Storm
(Design Storm)
Fort Collins Y 2-year 100-year
Loveland Y 2-year (new development)
100-year (new development)
10-year (retrofit downtown)
Greeley Y
2-year (residential)
5-year (commercial)
100-year (new development)
10-year (retrofit downtown)
Longmont Y 2-year 100-year
KS29
Risk of Flooding 10
Flood Risk Map For Structures 11
Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan (DSIP)12
AH27
Project(s) Benefits
•Improve public safety
•Avoid estimated $151M -$165M in
flood damages
•Address recurring street and
intersection flooding
•Improve stormwater quality to the
Poudre River
•Opportunities for green infrastructure
•Remove regulatory floodplain
•Previous studies in the Old Town basin
have shown a 5-15% reduction in
overall cost using a 50-year design
storm.
13
Opportunities for Collaboration
•Downtown Plan
•Utility infrastructure replacement
•Nature in the City
•Streetscaping
•Green infrastructure
14
Stream Rehabilitation
Before After
Mail Creek
McClelland’s Creek
Before During After
15
Stream Rehabilitation Projects 16
N
13 Stormwater Basins
Growth Management Area (GMA)
RS9KS34KS35
Water Quality Tr eatment 17
N
13 Stormwater Basins
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Existing Water Quality Features
BMPs
LID Treatments
Water Quality Tr eatment 18
N
13 Stormwater Basins
Growth Management Area (GMA)
Proposed Water Quality Features
BMPs
Water Quality Ponds
Current Long Term Capital Improvement Plan
Primary Objective 10-year CIP
(millions)
To tal Investment
(millions)
Flood Protection and WQ $122.5 $297.5
Roadway Only Flood Protection and WQ $2.6 $70.0
Stream / River Rehabilitation and WQ $15.0 $115.7
Asset Rehab and Renewal $30.8 $34.2
Annexations $0 $38.7
To tal CIP (2021 dollars)$170.9 $556.1
19
Forecasted Rates and Bonds 20
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Rate Increase 0%2%2%1-3%1-3%3-5%2-4%2-3%2-4%3-5%
Debt Issued ($M)$34 $58 $33
Approx. Avg.
Residential
Cost/Month
$16.95 $17.29 $17.63 $17.99 $18.35 $19.26 $19.71 $20.11 $20.47 $21.48
TC2
Options for Stormwater CIP
To tal Program Cost Evaluate Reducing
Design Criteria
Delay Oak Street
Project and submit
BFO offer to
evaluate design
criteria in 23/24
Downtown Emphasis Extend Buildout
Period of DSIP
Postpone two
downtown projects
to free up capital
dollars for other
projects
Acceleration of Stream
Rehab and WQ Programs
Increase Rates and Extend
Buildout of Flood Protection or
Reduce Design Criteria
2023-2024 BFO Offer
21
MF2
Scenario 1: Stay the Course
Design Criteria:Maintain 100-year
DSIP:Continue, buildout 12-15 years
Stream Rehab:Accelerate on a reach basis
Wa ter Quality:Continue to incorporate into
other projects
22
§Completes DSIP in 12-15 years.
§Equitable design criteria with other portions of the city (100 year).
§Limits stream rehabilitation funding to $1.2 million/year.
§Requires significant debt issuance every three years.
§Rates increases of 2-5% annual needed.
§Addresses remaining flood risk in the next 25 years.
Scenario 2: Extend Buildout Timeframe for DSIP
Design Criteria:Maintain 100-year
DSIP:Extend buildout ~ 25 years
Stream Rehab:Accelerate with one larger
scale project / BFO cycle
Wa ter Quality:Accelerate with
individual projects
23
•Completes DSIP over time, providing 100-year flood protection.
•Some flood protection projects would be delayed, leaving properties
at risk.
•Ability to fund larger scale stream rehab and W Q projects.
•Some properties will remain subject to floodplain regulations for
redevelopment until projects are built.
•May result in less rate increases.
Scenario 3: Change Design Criteria for Flood Protection
Design Criteria:Modify for flood
protection program
DSIP:Delay until new design criteria
Stream Rehab:Accelerate
Wa ter Quality:Accelerate
24
•Less total investment required.
•Some areas of the city will have a lower service level than others.
•Some structures will remain at risk in the 100-year floodplain.
•Ability to fund larger-scale stream rehab and W Q projects.
•Some structures will remain subject to floodplain regulations that may
limit redevelopment in 100-year floodplain.
25Questions for City Council
What questions or feedback is there about the
current Stormwater Capital Improvement Program?
Which of the three Capital Improvement scenarios
does Council support?
For More Information, Visit
THANK YOU!
FCGOV.COM/STORMWAT ER