HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 06/11/2024City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2
City Council
Work Session Agenda
June 11, 2024 at 6:00 PM
Jeni Arndt, Mayor
Emily Francis, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem
Susan Gutowsky, District 1
Julie Pignataro, District 2
Tricia Canonico, District 3
Melanie Potyondy, District 4
Kelly Ohlson, District 5
Council Information Center (CIC)
300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins
Cablecast on FCTV
Channel 14 on Connexion
Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast
Carrie Daggett Kelly DiMartino Heather Walls
City Attorney City Manager Interim City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
6:00 PM
A) CALL MEETING TO ORDER
B) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
1. Staff Report: Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan.
The purpose of this item is to provide Council and the community with information on the process
for the preparation of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan. This is a 5-year planning document
required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) related to the funding
received through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and HOME
Investment Partnership (HOME) Program.
2. Land Use Code Update: Commercial Corridors and Centers.
The purpose of this item is to update Council on the scope, approach, and timeline for Phase 2 of
the Land Use Code (LUC) update.
3. Proposed Building Performance Standards Policy.
The purpose of this work session item is to provide Council additional details about the
implementation and planned resources supporting the proposed Building Performance Standards
(BPS) policy.
This item builds on the materials and discussion originally presented during the April 23, 2024
Council Work Session.
4. Hughes Site Plan and Engagement and Timeline.
The purpose of this item is to discuss and confirm an engagement plan for the creation of a use
plan for the Hughes property. Staff is seeking feedback on guiding principles to set expectations
throughout the process and on the feasibility of utilizing a “Civic Assembly” process.
C) ANNOUNCEMENTS
Page 1
City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2
D) ADJOURNMENT
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 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistanc e.
Please provide advance notice. Requests for interpretation at a meeting should be made by noon the day
before.
A solicitud, 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
970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione aviso previo. Las
solicitudes de interpretación en una reunión deben realizarse antes del mediodía del día anterior.
Page 2
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 1
June 11, 2024
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Beth Rosen, Grants Compliance & Policy Manager
Dianne Tjalkens, Grants Administrator
SUBJECT
Staff Report: Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide Council and the community with information on the process for the
preparation of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan. This is a 5-year planning document required by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) related to the funding received through the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME)
Program.
Page 3
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Social Sustainability Department
Beth Rosen & Dianne Tjalkens
Staff Report:
2024-2029 HUD
Consolidated Plan
June 11, 2024
Page 4
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes HereConsolidated Plan
2
The Consolidated Plan
•Is a required five-year planning document for the
use of federal dollars
•Includes a needs assessment and market analysis
o Housing
o Homelessness
o Community Development
•Identifies priorities and sets goals
•Earmarks resources
Page 5
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
3
HUD Funding
Resources
Federal funding from Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to support Community
Development and Affordable Housing
•Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
•HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
How much?
Approx $8.5 million over 5 years
•~$1,100,000/yr CDBG
•~$600,000/yr HOME
How Distributed?
Competitive Process
•HSHF Board recommends to Council
Page 6
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
4
Overview of Funding Sources
CDBG: Community Development Block Grant
•Purpose:Improve the physical, economic, and social conditions for low-income people
•Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
•Eligible Uses: Projects must: principally benefit low-and moderate-income persons, aid in the
elimination of slums or blight, and/or meet an urgent or unanticipated community need
Public service activities:May not exceed 15%of annual CDBG fund allocation (~$170,000/year)
Page 7
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
5
Eligible Projects
CDBG National Objectives:
Low-and Moderate-Income (LMI) Benefit
•Activities that benefit LMI populations
o Ex: services for seniors, homeless shelter, micro loans for
LMI business owners, job training, etc.
•LMI Housing
o Ex: homeowner rehab, rental acquisition, homebuyer
assistance
•LMI Jobs
•Ex: business loans, commercial rehab, infrastructure to a
business
Slum and Blight Remediation
•Area Basis
o Ex: code enforcement, infrastructure, commercial rehab
•Spot Basis
o Ex: acquisition, clearance, relocation, historic preservation,
remediation of contaminated property, building rehab
Urban Renewal
•Activities in Urban Renewal or Neighborhood Development
Program action areas
o Ex: infrastructure, economic development
Urgent, Unanticipated Community Need
•Ex: Covid Response
Page 8
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
6
Eligible Projects
CDBG Eligible Uses
•Homeownership rehabilitation: energy efficiency, handicapped accessibility, emergency repairs,
weatherization
•Homeownership purchase: direct homeownership assistance to LMI households (ie: downpayment
assistance)
•Rental housing activities:
o Acquisition: site clearance and assemblage, site improvements
o Rehabilitation: labor and materials, energy efficiency improvements, utility connections, conversion of
a closed building from one use to a residential use
o Off-site infrastructure: installation of roads & public utilities in support of housing
•Public facilities: develop facilities for persons with special needs and homeless shelters
•Public service activities: may not exceed 15% of annual CDBG fund allocation ($806,250 over 5 years—
$161,250 per year)
$5,000,000 over 5 years
Page 9
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
7
Overview of Funding Sources
HOME: HOME Investments Partnerships Program
•Purpose:Increase the supply of safe and sanitary housing affordable to low-income people.
•Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Eligible Uses: Eligible uses include development of new housing, rehabilitation of existing
housing, tenant based rental assistance and homeownership assistance.
Page 10
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
8
Eligible Projects
HOME Eligible Uses
•Affordable Rental Housing: acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction & tenant based rental
assistance.
o At least 90% of families must have incomes below 60% AMI; the remainder must qualify as low-
income.
•Affordable Ownership Housing: acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction & down-payment
assistance
o 100% of families qualify as low-income
•Includes: Building or rehabilitating housing for rent or ownership, providing homeowners with
funds to purchase or rehabilitate, site acquisition, improvement or demolition to make way for
HOME-assisted development. All units must meet current property standards.
$3,500,000 over 5 years
Page 11
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes HereConsolidated Plan
9
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Goals
•Increase the supply of affordable
housing units
•Preserve existing affordable
housing
•Provide emergency sheltering and
services
•Provide housing stabilization
services
•Increase access to services
Page 12
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes HereConsolidated Plan
10
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Funded
Projects/Programs
•328 new affordable rental housing units
•10 new affordable ownership units
•286 affordable housing units preserved
•267 people provided homelessness
prevention support
•4827 people provided overnight shelter
•990 people provided day shelter & other
services for people experiencing
homelessness
•821 people provided supportive
services to improve living conditions
(adult day care, behavioral health
services, and supports for people with
disabilities)
Page 13
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
11
Names of Funded Projects
Housing
•CARE Housing: Swallow Road Rehabilitation
•Care Housing: Greenbriar-Windtrail Rehabilitation
•Housing Catalyst: Plum Street Rehabilitation
•Neighbor to Neighbor: Coachlight Plaza
Rehabilitation
•Neighbor to Neighbor: 44 Unit Rehabilitation
•Housing Catalyst: Village on Bryan Rehabilitation
•Habitat for Humanity: Poudre Build
•Habitat for Humanity: Harmony Cottages
•Mercy Housing: Northfield Commons
•Volunteers of America: Cadence Senior Residences
•Housing Catalyst: Impala Redevelopment
•L'Arche: L'Arche Homes
•Housing Catalyst: Village on Eastbrook
Human Services
•Catholic Charities: Samaritan House
•Crossroads Safehouse: Domestic Violence
Emergency Shelter
•Family Housing Network: Shelter Programs
•Neighbor to Neighbor: Homelessness Prevention
•Disabled Resource Services: Access to
Independence
•Elderhaus: Community Based Therapeutic Care
•SummitStone: Community Behavioral Health
Treatment Program
•SummitStone: Essential Mental Health Services at
Murphy Center
Page 14
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes HereConsolidated Plan
12
2025-2029 Consolidated Plan
•What are our community needs?
•What goals can we achieve with CDBG & HOME
funds?
•How should we prioritize funding?
Page 15
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes HereConsolidated Plan
13
Determining Goals
•Data: Census, American Community
Survey, Housing Catalyst, HUD, MLS,
etc.
•Stakeholder Outreach: Stakeholder
interviews, listening session, workshops
& focus groups, boards & commissions
•Community Outreach: Community
questionnaire, public meetings
Page 16
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
14
Timeline
2024
•May–June: Community questionnaire
•July: Council questionnaire
•July–December: Stakeholder input & data analysis
•December: Draft plan goals
2025
•January–March: Continue outreach to refine and prioritize goals and funding
•May–June: Plan draft complete & public review period
•July: Council Approval
•August: Submit final document to HUD
Page 17
Item 1.
Headline Copy Goes Here
15
Questions/Contact
More Info & Community Questionnaire:
fcgov.com/socialsustainability/consolidated -plan
Questions?
Dianne Tjalkens
CDBG Program Administrator
dtjalkens@fcgov.com
970-221-6734
Page 18
Item 1.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 7
June 11, 2024
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Megan Keith, Senior City Planner
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr. Policy & Project Manager
Noah Beals, Development Review Manager
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Land Use Code Update: Commercial Corridors and Centers.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to update Council on the scope, approach, and timeline for Phase 2 of the
Land Use Code (LUC) update.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What questions or additional ideas do Councilmembers have on the topics to explore through Phase
2 of the Land Use Code update?
2. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the proposed methods for Council and community
engagement?
3. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the timeline or other considerations for Phase 2 of the
Land Use Code update?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Project Overview
The Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1 project began in summer 2021. In March 2021, in conjunction with the
adoption of the Housing Strategic Plan (HSP), Council unanimously approved an off-cycle appropriation
to fund the Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1 updates. From July 2021 through April of 2024, staff led a
process to explore changes to the LUC. The process included extensive community engagement, policy
analysis and synthesis, development of guiding principles, a diagnostic report of the existing Land Use
Code, code drafting and multiple iterations of the code. Two referendums led by a group of voters required
that Council reconsider the Ordinance in 2023 and again in 2024. Extensive community outreach and
modifications to the LUC ended with Council adoption of Foundational Land Use Code changes in April of
2024.
Phase 2 will focus on aspects of commercial corridors, organized into three workstreams outlined below.
Funding for Phase 2 comes from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA).
Page 19
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 7
Foundational Land Use Code Changes
Several foundational LUC changes were adopted by Council on April 16, 2024. These include:
Reorganized content so the most used information is first in the Code
Reformatted zone districts with consistent graphics, tables, and illustrations
Created a menu of building types and form standards to guide compatibility
Updated use standards, rules of measurement, and definitions to align with new building types
and standards
Expanded and re-calibrate incentives for affordable housing
Regulate density through form standards and building types instead of dwelling units per acre
The aforementioned changes were made to the Land Use Code in Phase 1. There is already a robust
list of potential updates to be tackled in Phase 2, including potential updates that have been identified
through extensive policy analysis and suggestions included in various Council-adopted plans. These
potential updates will be confirmed and augmented through the work to take place during Phase 2.
Policy Foundation
Code updates are complex, multifaceted efforts that build on years of previous planning work. The LUC
is the City’s primary regulatory tool for implementing our community’s vision as described in various
policies and adopted plans. It is critical to establish a clear understanding of the relationship between the
City’s policy priorities and the current LUC early in the process. The City has over 300 pages of adopted
policies and information to inform the LUC Updates that primarily come from the following documents:
City Plan
Housing Strategic Plan (HSP)
Economic Health Strategic Plan
Our Climate Future (OCF)
Transit Master Plan
15-Minute City Analysis
Land Use Code Audit (which identified opportunities to align LUC with the newly-adopted City
Plan)
Council Priorities (affordable and achievable housing strategies; 15-minute communities)
Urban Forest Strategic Plan
Relevant Goals, Policies, and Action Items
Some statements have been shortened for clarity.
Document Policy Text
City Plan LIV 2: Promote Infill and Redevelopment
City Plan LIV 3: Maintain and enhance our unique character and sense of place as the
community grows
City Plan LIV 3.4: Design Standards and Guidelines: Maintain a robust set of citywide
design standards to ensure quality future development
Our Climate Future LWPN 2: Evaluate opportunities within the LUC to better encourage the
development of “complete neighborhoods”
Page 20
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 7
Our Climate Future HAH 9: Transit-Oriented Development/Incentives for Mixed-Use development
along the MAX corridor
Housing Strategic
Plan
Create additional development incentives for affordable housing
Economic Health
Strategic Plan
Outcome 2.1: Small businesses have access to tools and resources needed
to succeed
Transit Master Plan MAP: Future Transit Network (pg 59)
15-Minute City
Analysis
GOAL: Strengthen Underserved Communities
15-Minute City
Analysis
GOAL: Shift to Active Modes Trips
Relevant Council Priorities
Council Priority No. 1: Operationalize City resources to build and preserve affordable housing
Council Priority No. 3: Advance a 15-minute city by igniting neighborhood centers
Council Priority No. 4: Pursue an integrated, intentional approach to economic health
Council Priority No. 8: Advance a 15-minute city by accelerating our shift to active modes
These documents and priorities serve as primary inputs to the formation of future Guiding Principles and
code language, augmented by work accomplished in Phase 1 of the LUC update. Staff have also begun
engaging internal staff and work sessions with the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Exploratory Questions
Exploratory questions have been formulated to help guide preliminary work streams prior to identifying a
final scope of work.
Are there opportunities to add clarity to the development review process?
How can the Land Use Code be more aligned with our policy plans?
How can we advance our 15-minute city goals through the Land Use Code?
How do we balance multiple desired outcomes through our development standards?
Process Refinement
Phase 2 of the Land Use Code update began with an analysis of goals and strategies within adopted
plans, a thorough review of the Land Use Code Audit, and the Diagnostic Report. Staff then categorized
these into potential work streams. Once a consultant has been secured, we will begin to refine the topics
within the workstreams and identify priorities and timing through Council and community engagement to
arrive at a draft code.
Page 21
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 7
Work Streams
The following workstreams are organized by subject area and include multiple potential topics within
each work stream. These may be refined through engagement with the consultant team, Council, and
community:
Commercial and Mixed-Use Corridors
o Creating Commercial and Industrial Building Types
o Recalibrating Employment & Industrial Zoning
o Standards for Specific Uses
o Small Business Considerations
o Neighborhood Centers
o 15-Minute City:
Neighborhood Centers
Transit-Supportive Development
Development Standards
o Landscaping & Trees
o Site Planning & Design
o Natural Resource Standards
o Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Connectivity
Processes and Procedures
o Amendment Process (Micro/Minor/Major)
o Basic Development Review Process
o Other Development Review Processes (Type 1 and Type 2 Reviews)
o Customer Tools & Resources
State Legislation
Several bills were passed this year through the state legislature that will affect local Land Use Policy.
Compliance with these bills will be integrated into Phase 2 work and will be brought to Council to comply
with their associated deadlines:
Page 22
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 7
HB-1313 Housing in Transit-Oriented Communities:
This bill will require the establishment of a Housing Opportunity Goal, potential rezonings, establishment
of anti-displacement strategies, and reporting on an on-going basis.
HB-1152 Accessory Dwelling Units:
This bill will require updating our Land Use Code to permit Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) wherever
we allow single-family detached homes. Code language from previous iterations of the Land Use Code
has already been drafted. Will need to confirm that previously written code language would comply with
this bill.
HB-1304 Minimum Parking Requirements:
This bill will require updates to the Land Use Code to remove minimum parking requirements for multi-
family and certain mixed-use projects close to transit.
Team Structure
The project management team for Phase 2 of the LUC update is made up of several staff members who
participated in leadership roles in Phase 1. The following is the project management team and their roles:
Clay Frickey, Planning Manager: Guides high level direction of the work
Megan Keith, Senior Planner, Co-Project Manager: Operational focus, day-to-day management
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr. Policy & Project Manager, Co- Project Manager: Relationship and
strategic focus
Noah Beals, Development Review Manager, Technical Lead: Oversees Work Streams, and
provides technical expertise
Internal Partners
Because sections of the Land Use Code impact many policy priorities managed by several departments
across the City, collaboration among internal partners will be very important. Teams most integral to this
work include, but are not limited to:
Planning and Zoning
FCMoves and Transfort
Economic Health Office
Forestry
Utilities
While these teams will be most closely involved in the work, the project team will need to connect with
several other departments across the City to ensure alignment across standards and other code
requirements. These partners will be connected through staff working groups for each of the work
streams, facilitated by the Technical Lead.
Timeline and Engagement Strategy
The June 11 Council work session is meant to confirm the general timeline, scope, and engagement
strategy for Phase 2 of the LUC update. Council feedback will then be incorporated into the scope and
project plan for the creation of a request for proposals (RFP). A community kick-off event will then be
planned for late fall 2024, and a Council Work Session will soon follow to present community feedback and
consultant findings for project refinement. There will be several cycles of consultant production, staff review
and community engagement prior to each Council work session and prior to the release of a draft code.
Page 23
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 7
The following is an illustration of one cycle of production and review, following the initial project scope,
community, and Council feedback:
Council Engagement
Council engagement will be important throughout the process. Potential methods for Council
engagement could include:
Work Sessions at key decision points
Invitations to community engagement events
Listening Sessions
Interim memos from staff
Staff will also be available to answer questions throughout the process.
Community Engagement
The LUC Phase 2 update also includes additional targeted community engagement to support the code
drafting process and confirm the priorities identified in previous engagement efforts. Community
engagement and project progression Potential engagement methods include:
Ongoing Communication Methods:
• Email Newsletters
• Frequent Website updates with comment form available
Code Creation Review Methods may include a combination of:
• In-Person & Virtual Events
• Focus Groups
• Website Videos
• Charette-style events
• Boards & Commissions work sessions
Draft Code Review Phase:
• Website videos
Page 24
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 7
• Staff Office hours
• In-Person & Virtual Events
• Draft code sections available for review and comment
NEXT STEPS
If Council is supportive of the approach outlined at this work session, staff will finalize the scope of work
and approach, draft a Request for Proposal, and secure a consultant team by fall of 2024. The staff team
will then plan to return for a Council work session in early 2025.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Presentation
Page 25
Item 2.
Land Use Code Update: Commercial Corridors and Centers
June 11, 2024
Phase 2 of the Land Use Code Update
Clay Frickey, Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Megan Keith
Page 26
Item 2.
Discussion 2
1.What questions or additional ideas do Councilmembers
have on the topics to explore through Phase 2 of the Land
Use Code update?
2.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the proposed
methods for Council and community engagement?
3.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the timeline or
other considerations for Phase 2 of the Land Use Code
update?
Page 27
Item 2.
Team Structure
Co-PM Co-PM
Technical Lead
Megan Keith
Operational focus,
day-to-day
management
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss
Relationship and strategic
focus
Noah Beals
Oversees Work Streams, provides
technical expertise
Work Stream
Work Stream
Work Stream
Planning Mgr.
Clay Frickey
Internal Partnerships:
Planning and Zoning
FCMoves and Transfort
Economic Health Office
Forestry
Utilities
Page 28
Item 2.
4
POLICIES
CODE AUDIT/DIAGNOSTIC
PRIORITIES
DRAFT
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Page 29
Item 2.
5
PURPOSE:
Implementing Our Plans
Page 30
Item 2.
Council Priorities
Council Priority No. 1: Operationalize City resources to
build and preserve affordable housing
Council Priority No. 3: Advance a 15-minute city by
igniting neighborhood centers
Council Priority No. 4: Pursue an integrated, intentional
approach to economic health
Council Priority No. 8: Advance a 15-minute city by
accelerating our shift to active modes
6
Page 31
Item 2.
7Strategic Plan Alignment
Document Policy Text
City Plan LIV 2: Promote Infill and Redevelopment
City Plan LIV 3: Maintain and enhance our unique character and sense of place as
the community grows
Transit Master
Plan
MAP:Future Transit Network (pg 59)
Our Climate
Future
LWPN 2: Evaluate opportunities within the LUC to better encourage the
development of “complete neighborhoods”
Housing
Strategic Plan
Create additional development incentives for affordable housing
Economic
Health
Strategic Plan
Outcome 2.1: Small businesses have access to tools and resources
needed to succeed
15-Minute City
Analysis
GOAL:Shift to Active Modes Trips
Page 32
Item 2.
8Exploratory Questions
Questions to explore through Phase II:
•Are there opportunities to add clarity to the development review
process?
•How can the Land Use Code be more aligned with our policy plans?
•How can we advance our 15-minute city goals through the Land Use
Code?
•How do we balance multiple desired outcomes through our development
standards?
Page 33
Item 2.
9Potential Work Streams
Potential Topics Explored in this Workstream:
•Creating Commercial and Industrial Building Types
•Recalibrating Employment & Industrial Zoning
•Standards for Specific Uses
•Small Business Considerations
•15-Minute Cities
o Neighborhood Centers
o Transit-Supportive Development
Workstream Name: Commercial and Mixed-Use
Corridors
Exploratory Questions:
How can we advance our 15-minute city goals through the Land Use Code?
How can the Land Use Code be more aligned with our policy plans?
Page 34
Item 2.
10Potential Work Streams
Potential Topics Explored in this Workstream:
•Landscaping & Trees
•Site Planning & Design
•Natural Resource Standards
•Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Connectivity
Workstream Name: Development Standards
Exploratory Questions:
How can we balance multiple desired outcomes through our development standards?
How can the Land Use Code be more aligned with our policy plans?
Page 35
Item 2.
11Potential Work Streams
Potential Topics Explored in this Workstream:
•Amendment Process (Micro/Minor/Major)
•Basic Development Review Process
•Other Development Review Processes (Type 1 and Type 2 Reviews)
•Customer Tools & Resources
Workstream Name: Processes and Procedures
Exploratory Questions:
Are there opportunities to add clarity to the development review process?
Page 36
Item 2.
12Potential Work Streams
Potential Topics Explored in this
Workstream:
•Amendment Process (Micro/Minor/Major)
•Basic Development Review Process
•Other Development Review Processes (Type 1
and Type 2 Reviews)
•Customer Tools & Resources
Workstream Name: Processes and
Procedures
Exploratory Questions:
Are there opportunities to add clarity to the
development review process?
Potential Topics Explored in this
Workstream:
•Landscaping & Trees
•Site Planning & Design
•Natural Resource Standards
•Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Connectivity
Workstream Name: Development
Standards
Exploratory Questions:
How can we balance multiple desired outcomes
through our development standards?
How can the Land Use Code be more aligned
with our policy plans?
Potential Topics Explored in this
Workstream:
•Creating Commercial and Industrial Building
Types
•Recalibrating Employment & Industrial Zoning
•Standards for Specific Uses
•Small Business Considerations
•15-Minute Cities
o Neighborhood Centers
o Transit-Supportive Development
Workstream Name: Commercial and
Mixed-Use Corridors
Exploratory Questions:
How can we advance our 15-minute city goals
through the Land Use Code?
How can the Land Use Code be more aligned
with our policy plans?
State Legislation:
•HB-1313 Housing in Transit Oriented Communities
•HB-1152 Accessory Dwelling Units
•HB-1304 Minimum Parking RequirementsSt
a
t
e
Le
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
o
n
Page 37
Item 2.
13Community and Council Engagement Strategy
June 11th Work Session RFP Community
Kick-Off Event
Council
Work Session
Consultant
Production
Staff ReviewCouncil
Work Session
Council
Work Session
Ongoing Communication
Consultant
Production
Staff Review
Community &
Focus Group
Engagement
Community Info
Session
Ongoing Communication
Council
Adoption
Refinement Iteration
Community &
Focus Group
Engagement
Page 38
Item 2.
14Potential Council Engagement Tools
Potential Methods for City Council Engagement:
Work Sessions at key decision points
Invitations to community engagement events
Listening Sessions
•Interim memos from staff
•Availability to reach staff for phone calls/meetings, etc. as needed
Page 39
Item 2.
15Potential Community Engagement Methods
Ongoing Communication Methods
•Email Newsletters
•Frequent Website updates with comment form available
Code Creation and Iteration Review Methods may include a combination of:
•In-Person & Virtual Events
•Focus Groups
•Website Videos
•Charette-style events
•Boards & Commissions work sessions
Draft Code Review and Refinement Phase:
•Website videos
•Staff Office hours
•In-Person & Virtual Events
•Draft code sections available for review and comment
Page 40
Item 2.
Discussion 1
6
1.What questions or additional ideas do Councilmembers
have on the topics to explore through Phase 2 of the Land
Use Code update?
2.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the proposed
methods for Council and community engagement?
3.What feedback do Councilmembers have on the timeline or
other considerations for Phase 2 of the Land Use Code
update?
Page 41
Item 2.
THANK YOU!
17
Page 42
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3
June 11, 2024
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Katherine Bailey, Energy Services Program Manager
Brian Tholl, Energy Services Manager
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Proposed Building Performance Standards Policy.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session item is to provide Council additional details about the implementation
and planned resources supporting the proposed Building Performance Standards (BPS) policy.
This item builds on the materials and discussion originally presented during the April 23, 2024 Council
Work Session.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have feedback on proposed outreach and engagement strategies?
2. Do Councilmembers have feedback related to the staff approach for providing supporting resources?
3. What additional questions or feedback do Councilmembers have ahead of considering policy adoption?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On April 23, 2024, Staff brought recommendations to a Council work session on a proposed BPS policy,
developed based on input from community contributors. Community contributors consist of a variety of
experts and community-based organizations and groups as detailed in the 04/23/24 work session
materials. Staff presented a regulatory approach to drive efficiency and building optimization in
underperforming buildings by providing a suite of economic and behavioral resources to help improve
building energy use.
Councilmembers showed general support for the proposed recommendations. Councilmembers
requested more information on planned engagement and the resources that will be available to help
building owners become compliant with the proposed BPS policy. Additional details are provided within
this AIS in Attachment 1, Implementation Guide.
A summary of anticipated policy impacts for covered buildings are listed in the following table. The targets
and program structure are customized for the Fort Collins building stock. Staff worked with the BPS
Technical Committee to develop targets and built the proposed requirements using various data sources
including local efficiency project data, electric meter data, reported building level data, and county assessor
data.
Page 43
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3
Table 1. Building Performance Standards Policy Impacts
While the electric use intensity (EUI) targets for various building types provide building owners with
flexibility in how targets can be met, Staff and community contributors also developed alternative pathways
for compliance with the policy, recognizing that every building is different and unique. These alternate
pathways were recommended to provide a safety net for buildings who may otherwise not be able to attain
set targets.
Anticipated Building Owner Costs
Costs associated with compliance were estimated at around $4.50-$5 per square foot, or an average of
$200,000/building (the same approximate cost of a tenant finish in Fort Collins) without accounting for
rebates, incentives, tax deductions, and any other funding sources.
Communication & Engagement
Building Performance Standards is an impactful policy that will affect various parts of the community
differently, and the success of the policy depends on effective engagement around policy
specifics. Communication with both building owners and representatives, as well as with occupants and
the broader community, needs to be clear, concise, inclusive, and accessible. Continuous feedback from
the community should be encouraged and incorporated. Staff will create engagement and communication
strategies that clearly outline next steps for building owners and representatives. Available resources and
contact information will also be provided.
A dedicated Help Center will provide policy information through robust outreach and educational offerings.
City Staff will leverage and build upon relationships to share information and gather feedback on available
resources and community impacts. Vendor support will help balance significant anticipated fluctuations in
staffing needs to assure a program representative is available on demand to answer questions and provide
direction.
Communication will focus on sharing the body of resources available to support policy
compliance. Planned resources include general education and guidance, along with robust technical and
financial assistance that will be housed in a central location, termed a ‘hub.’ The planned building hub will
include:
Building owner portal.
Forecasting tool.
Page 44
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3
Technical support including guidance on requesting building assessments.
Financial support including information on funding sources and green financing options.
Additional Assistance
The body of resources available to all buildings will be expanded for a subset of buildings that may require
more assistance coming into compliance. A study funded by the 2050 tax is underway to identify which
buildings in Fort Collins may need additional assistance, isolate any barriers they face in increasing
building efficiency, and ensure resources offered best align with their true needs. Shared learnings from
other jurisdictions suggest additional financial and technical assistance will be critical, along with increased
education.
Multi-family housing, especially affordable multi-family housing, frequently warrants additional
assistance. Fort Collins already offers 1.5 times the rebates for all multi-family efficiency projects through
the Efficiency Works Community Efficiency Grant, and staff anticipate extra targeted assistance may be
needed to prevent a BPS policy from exacerbating current housing affordability concerns.
Community contributors provided policy recommendations to protect affordable housing, and staff will
continue to collaborate with local partners to assure sufficient support is provided. Staff will strive to ensure
building owners understand the best ways to reach proposed targets while minimizing up-front costs that
may be passed on to tenants.
Staffing
Staff anticipate a combination of internal and vendor support will be necessary to launch a successful BPS
policy. Any vendor support will require the exceptional customer service that community members have
come to expect from City of Fort Collins staff and programs. Staff allocations to Efficiency Works and other
City programs will be evaluated so we can optimize the level of resources this program needs. Staff are
proposing a BPS navigator position and program analyst whose primary roles will include responding to
inquiries related to resources available for buildings owners. Staffing levels will need to be revisited
regularly to ensure optimal customer service. Incorporating both internal staff and vendor costs, program
costs per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent avoided are estimated to be on the lower range of current
efficiency programs, ranging from $10-$40/MTCO2e avoided.
NEXT STEPS
Staff are seeking feedback from City Council on any recommendations they may have on the BPS policy,
and to provide feedback on any additional information they may need prior to considering BPS policy
adoption.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Implementation Guide
2. Corrected Task 4 – Recommend Final Performance Standards
3. Presentation
Page 45
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 1
Fort Collins Building
Performance Standards
(BPS)
Implementation Guide
Page 46
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 2
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
Section 1: Administrative Structure ............................................................................................ 5
Full-time Employees (FTEs) and Resourcing ...................................................................... 5
Key Roles ........................................................................................................................... 5
Additional Key Responsibilities ........................................................................................... 6
Core Vendor Support .......................................................................................................... 6
Ongoing Support ................................................................................................................. 7
Section 2: Data Management and IT .......................................................................................... 9
Existing Database and Customer Relationship Management .............................................. 9
Building Owner Portal ......................................................................................................... 9
Program Administrative Dashboard ....................................................................................10
Section 3: Violations and Enforcement ......................................................................................11
Responsible parties ...........................................................................................................11
Fines ..................................................................................................................................11
Cure periods ......................................................................................................................11
Section 4: Local Coordination ...................................................................................................12
Platte River Power Authority/Efficiency Works Business ....................................................12
Core City Departments to Participate in Implementation ....................................................12
Xcel Energy .......................................................................................................................12
Affordable Housing ............................................................................................................13
Green Financing ................................................................................................................13
Local Jurisdictions ..............................................................................................................13
Workforce Development .....................................................................................................13
Section 5: Resource Hub ..........................................................................................................14
Identifying Needs ...............................................................................................................14
Launching the Hub .............................................................................................................14
Advanced Technical Support .............................................................................................15
Section 6: Communication and Engagement ............................................................................16
Overview ............................................................................................................................16
Communication and Engagement Strategy ........................................................................16
Projected Challenges .........................................................................................................17
Audiences/Impacted Parties ..............................................................................................17
Tactics ...............................................................................................................................17
Messaging .........................................................................................................................19
Page 47
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 3
Desired Outcomes and Associated Metrics ........................................................................19
Initial Notifications ..............................................................................................................19
Evaluation ..........................................................................................................................20
Costs ........................................................................................................................................21
Final Considerations .................................................................................................................22
Page 48
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 4
Introduction
The City of Fort Collins’ transformational goals around climate, energy, equity, and resilience
outline concrete and innovative steps to both protect the future of our own community and to
join the broader efforts of communities and jurisdictions across the country to fight climate
change. Leading jurisdictions are adopting Building Performance Standards (BPS), which
require performance improvements across a wide swath of buildings.
BPS can include multiple standards to increase performance in covered buildings. Targets
become stricter over time, driving continuous, long-term improvement. BPS are generally
designed to provide a flexible approach to building improvements, accounting for variations in
buildings and allowing building owners to determine the best ways to meet their own specific
targets.
In Fort Collins, over two-thirds of our community’s carbon emissions come from local buildings.
BPS are the most impactful, direct policy action the City can take to reduce emissions by 2030.
BPS have the potential to be nearly as impactful as every other existing energy efficiency
program combined. Additionally, BPS support the Council-adopted priority around electrification
through increasing building efficiency and promotion of beneficial electrification strategies.
BPS represent an opportunity to boost health, safety, comfort, and resilience. Improved building
efficiency aligns with Our Climate Future (OCF) goals by promoting clean indoor and outdoor air
quality, safe and efficient buildings, and reduced energy burden. BPS can also bolster the local
economy and improve building quality leading to more equitable outcomes.
BPS policy implementation is supported through a considerable body of best practice
documents developed by reputable research leaders in the industry, such as the Institute for
Market Transformation. There is also a growing body of knowledge and resources from other
jurisdictions, including Denver, Boulder, Aspen, and the State of Colorado, who all have adopted
BPS policies.
If City Council adopts BPS, Fort Collins Utilities will deploy a variety of planned resources and
communications to support owners of the approximately 1,400 covered multi-family and
commercial buildings. Policy recommendations outline a range of compliance options to
accommodate the variety of building functions, size, ownership, and occupancy types. It is
critical that building owners understand what is expected and that they have access to sufficient
resources to support them through implementation.
Page 49
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 5
Section 1: Administrative Structure
There is not a defined best practice around the number of staff needed to support a BPS policy,
as there are several variables that impact that decision, such as the number of covered
buildings, available alternate pathways, and the type of support offered to all versus a subset of
covered buildings. It is also crucial to maintain adequate staff to manage any potential increased
workloads due to travel, illness, turnover, etc. Fort Collins plans to have alternates determined
who can serve on an as-need basis.
Full-time Employees (FTEs) and Resourcing
Best practice documents and experience from other jurisdictions demonstrate that BPS is likely
to have significant fluctuations in both activity and the required support for building owners. To
reduce impact of these fluctuations, partnering with external vendors allows program staff the
flexibility to parallel needed support with those fluctuations without impacting City FTEs.
Contractual staff may be used to support program needs, likely from 2026-2030.
When considering staffing needs and differentiating what is most appropriate for City staff or
vendor support, the following criteria are relevant:
Fluctuations in staffing resource needs.
o Help Center support is projected to range from 0.5 FTE – 5 FTEs, with more
support needed early in BPS implementation and prior to targets.
Accessible support staff available upon demand.
o It is important to ensure there is always someone available to answer building
owners’ questions.
Consistent point of contact.
Administrative costs.
Staff acknowledge a tension between the desire for fully internal staff communicating with
building owners and the variability of staff hours needed to provide robust and timely support.
Staffing needs will be assessed annually, and any necessary changes will be recommended as
appropriate.
Key Roles
Core Internal Support:
Program Manager (1 FTE) The Program Manager will own the
implementation process and garner buy-in
from key collaborators both inside and
outside of the organization with support from
the Program Sponsor and the Strategic
Leadership Team. The Program Manager will
ensure all pieces of the BPS implementation
are developed in strong coordination.
Energy analysis / data verification (0.5
FTE)
The Program Analyst is experienced in
managing and analyzing benchmarking data
along with other available datasets. In
collaboration with content experts, this staff
Page 50
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 6
member will complete internal data
verification to run quality control on submitted
data while providing a point of contact for
escalated inquiries.
Navigator (0.5 FTE)
Staff propose a Navigator role to provide
tailored assistance to building owners to help
them understand options to cover the costs of
required upgrades. The Navigator would help
building owners and their representatives
understand and navigate the complex array
of financial resources available to them,
including rebates, incentives, tax deductions,
green financing structures and more. Staff
foresee this role being necessary from 2026-
2030.
Additional Key Responsibilities
Program Leadership
The Program Sponsor and Strategic Leadership Team will oversee program direction,
implementation and management.
Annual Building Performance Assessment
Completed through existing Benchmarking ordinance; no additional resources required.
Ongoing Program and Policy Outreach
See Section 6: Resource Hub
Supporting Equity & Responsibilities
Best practice indicates the most successful policy mechanisms to drive equitable BPS
implementation are enhanced help desk and technical support for disadvantaged communities
along with equity-targeted financial incentives. In alignment with Task Force Recommendations,
Staff are planning to provide under-resourced buildings additional support.
Core Vendor Support
Advanced Technical Support
Successful BPS implementation requires experience in whole building energy performance,
which includes energy audits, retrofit management, retro-commissioning/tune-ups, and major
retrofit work at a building. Building owners may benefit from desktop audits and/or on-site
assessments.
Waivers and alternative compliance pathways are important for a nuanced and equitable BPS
policy but can increase the required administrative effort. To relieve administrative burden,
Vendor support is planned to assist with the following:
Review both simple and highly technical documentation and queries.
Provide engineering review of target adjustments and other complex cases.
Page 51
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 7
Additional technical support including reviewing waiver and timeline adjustment requests
and responding to technical questions.
Vendor support allows the flexibility required to scale services provided as demand fluctuates.
Resource Hubs
See details in Section 6: Resource Hub.
This includes creating and maintaining the web portal including a dynamic building owner portal
and forecasting tool.
Help Center
BPS Help Center staff will be available via phone, email, and scheduled calls to provide support
for more in-depth questions for all buildings covered by the policy. Help Center staff may provide
the following services:
Sending compliance notifications to building owners informing them of the new policy,
targets, deadlines, etc.
Helping building owners understand their targets, deadlines, and options under the
policy.
Evaluating compliance status of buildings.
Providing guidance to building owners on compliance pathways and alternate pathways.
Reviewing alternate compliance pathway applications and documentation.
Host interactive, virtual webinars on BPS regulations.
Support direct mailings through the development of content and pulling mailing lists.
See Section 6, Communication Strategies, for further details on Help Center outreach and
educational activities.
The Help Center will offer additional support to under-resourced buildings, which will be
communicated to them directly through targeted outreach including email, direct mail, and
phone calls. Outreach efforts are aimed to help under-resourced building owners understand
and access additional support that will be available to them, including advanced support with
target and compliance pathway review, energy assessment analysis, and advanced technical
support (onsite energy assessment with report and recommendations on next steps to meet
their BPS target).
Bilingual and translation services will be available.
Ongoing Support
To ensure feasibility and minimize negative impacts, various groups will provide ongoing support
that will make recommendations as needed:
Climate Equity Committee (CEC)
o Continue to provide feedback from an equity lens; monitor for negative
repercussions resulting from policy and make recommendations if they occur.
Technical Committee
o Continue to provide technical feedback. Monitor for unforeseen challenges from
the building science lens and make recommendations if they occur.
Community Contributor feedback
Page 52
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 8
o Staff will continue to engage with community contributors as outlined in sections
4 & 6.
Page 53
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 9
Section 2: Data Management and IT
Best practice encourages jurisdictions to develop robust management software to manage data
and track compliance. Planned and existing City software include a transparent means to track
energy performance, a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) tool, a portal for building
owners, and a dashboard for program administration.
Existing Database and Customer Relationship Management
Fort Collins is in a strong position to launch a successful BPS given the existing data
management system in place. The existing database tracks Energy Use Intensity (EUI) in
covered buildings while maintaining historical records. Additional metrics as provided by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tool ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager® are
also tracked, including but not limited to building size, building type, associated buildings (e.g.
multi-family complexes), and more detailed usage metrics.
The existing database also tracks building owner addresses (updated biannually from the
Larimer County Assessor), building contact information and their relationship to the building, and
tracks all historic communication with each contact.
Building Owner Portal
A planned building owner portal will allow owners and their representatives to see all properties
associated with their account, as well as important information related to each building, such as
compliance status, due dates for benchmarking and meeting BPS targets, and other fields
customized to the City’s requirements.
Owners can use the portal to:
Update personal information.
Access their previously submitted benchmarking and BPS data.
Select BPS compliance pathway, submit requests for adjustments, EUI credits, waivers,
or complete other compliance-related questions and/or upload required documentation.
The building owner portal will also include a Building Performance Forecasting Calculator tool,
allowing building owners the ability to see their future year BPS target. Building owners will be
able to add energy efficiency or renewable energy projects for forecasting and scenario
planning purposes. The forecasting module will be configured to match the City’s BPS targets
(or caps as appropriate) and considers a building owner’s historically reported benchmarking
and BPS data. The platform also provides the ability to show a building owner their potential
fines for non-compliance with BPS.
The calculator may include:
Building data, including but not limited to building address, floor area, baseline
performance, and most recent reported performance data.
Forecasted performance after site EUI reduction: tool can display BPS targets and
calculate the building’s forecasted performance based on percent reduction from
baseline/current site EUI data.
Forecasted performance after EUI credits for onsite renewable energy.
Page 54
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 10
Forecasted potential fines based on scenarios with and without a reduction in energy
use.
Line graphs for visualization of each of the data scenarios described above.
Program Administrative Dashboard
The existing database will be expanded to include BPS metrics, track all submitted
documentation (e.g., waivers, adjustments, etc.), allowing program staff to easily search and
access all relevant documentation by building or contact. Program staff can add notes or flags
and edit information (e.g. contact or address updates) as appropriate.
Software cost: Given the tools will build upon existing systems, year 1 software fees are
relatively low, estimated at $29,000 including set up and configuration. Ongoing costs are
estimated at $9,500 annually.
Page 55
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 11
Section 3: Violations and Enforcement
Fort Collins BPS has been designed and will be implemented with the intention that the vast
majority of buildings will comply without any need of an enforcement mechanism. However,
local and national experience have shown the limitations of voluntary programs (in Fort Collins
less than half of the projected opportunity within building performance is predicted to be
achievable through incentive-based pathways). Fort Collins BPS will not be a revenue-
generating policy, and every effort will be made to ensure funds are directed to building
upgrades, not to paying City fines. There is an expected administrative effort will be associated
with this effort.
Responsible parties
Building owners are the responsible party for BPS citations. In the case of a condominium, the
registered Condominium Association is the responsible party. Ownership changes are tracked
by program staff through biannual updates from the Larimer County Assessor, and additional
updates are made by the Help Center during communication with building owners or
representatives.
Fines
Fines are by kBtu (thousand British thermal unit) of non-compliance, meaning a building that is
very close to its target will have a small fine, and one farther from its target would have a larger
fine.
Individual fines in Fort Collins may not exceed $3,000, although aggregate (or reoccurring)
penalties for continued non-compliance may exceed $3,000. Best practice in other jurisdictions
suggests citations should be recurrent and should continue to reoccur until the building owner
takes action. Fort Collins recommends a monthly recurrence until the total amount of the penalty
has been included in citations, or until the building owner takes action, which would trigger a
cure period.
Cure periods
Cure periods allow for the cessation of citations when and if a building owner takes action
toward reaching their efficiency target. In practice, if a building owner receives their initial
citation and determines that they would like to take action rather than continue to receive
citations, they may demonstrate to Program Administration that they are taking action to meet
their target (this could include meetings with contractors, receiving estimates for work, etc.).
Thereafter citations would cease, however the building owner would be required to send regular
updates documenting their progress toward their target. This assures that building owners are
not directing funds toward citations that could be spent investing in building improvements. Cure
periods will reduce the administrative burden on the prosecution and Court staff, while
increasing administration on the program staff. Building owner updates and compliance status
will continue to be recorded and tracked in the administrative and building owner portals.
Page 56
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 12
Section 4: Local Coordination
Staff anticipate the need to coordinate with various governmental offices, both within and
outside of Fort Collins, throughout implementation to align messaging and resources, coordinate
with related programs, and acquire buy-in for local policy.
Platte River Power Authority/Efficiency Works Business
Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) is the wholesale power provider for Fort Collins, Loveland,
Longmont, and Estes Park. As one of the member cities, Fort Collins benefits from programming
offered through PRPA. Efficiency Works Business (EWB), a program offered in partnership with
PRPA and the other member communities, provides both financial and technical support for
efficiency projects. EWB has historically provided significant value (accounting for 70% of
historical efficiency program savings) and an opportunity for growth in support of local BPS. The
expansion of existing technical and financial resources necessary to support BPS can be
streamlined and simplified through the existing partnership with EWB.
Core City Departments to Participate in Implementation
Sustainability Services is a strong collaborator in the BPS development process and will
continue to be throughout implementation. Chief Sustainability Officer Jacob Castillo is the BPS
Executive Sponsor. NOCOBiz Connect, our region’s sustainable business program, presents an
opportunity to share resources and recognize businesses for their creativity and excellence
when implementing GHG reduction projects.
Utilities, including Communications and Marketing, Community Engagement and Energy
Services, crafted the BPS development process and will develop resources and materials
throughout implementation. Team members focus on customer-centered approaches to
outreach, engagement, and materials development. Existing City newsletters, among several
other methods, will be used to further advance communications.
Building Department and Energy Code Compliance partner with the BPS process in assuring
technical standards are achievable and complementary of current and potential future energy
code requirements.
Facilities Management continues to work toward achieving BPS that are already adopted for
City buildings. Facilities management staff also partner with implementing staff in our Technical
Committee, sharing experience to assure attainable targets and offramps.
City Attorney’s Office, Prosecution team and Court team
See Section 4: Violations and Enforcement. The Program Manager and Program Analyst will
work in partnership with the Municipal Court, Prosecution staff, and the City Attorney’s Office to
enforce BPS compliance.
Xcel Energy
Xcel Energy is a strong partner in providing both financial and technical resources to building
owners, offering over 20 programs that support building efficiency in Colorado. Xcel rebates
may be stackable with other financial incentives and will be a part of our Navigator’s financial
resource list.
Page 57
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 13
Affordable Housing
Fort Collins benefits from a strong relationship with local subsidized affordable housing
providers, which included their representation on our BPS Task Force. Affordable housing
providers offered feedback on achievability, including detailed building data that was used to
complete a BPS Case Study that demonstrates methods to meet potential targets (see BPS
Case Studies, Council Work Session Material April 23, 2024). Staff will continue to partner to
mitigate the risk of exacerbating current housing affordability concerns. Affordable housing is
typically considered under-resourced in BPS policies and additional resources and/or timeline
and target adjustments may be provided.
Green Financing
Green financing offers innovative financing techniques to enable green energy projects. Locally,
program staff partner with Colorado Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) and the
Colorado Clean Energy Fund (CCEF) to promote green financing and to isolate gaps in existing
financing resources that the City can help address.
Local Jurisdictions
The State of Colorado, and the cities of Boulder, Aspen, and Denver have already adopted BPS
policies. The existing strong relationship between these jurisdictions allows for shared learnings
and resources, as well as greater opportunity to explore federal financing in partnerships with
state and local jurisdictions. In consideration of existing State requirements, an approach to
buildings within Fort Collins that are covered by the State BPS is outlined in Community
Contributor Recommendations (Council Work Session Materials April 23, 2024).
Workforce Development
Staff partner with local industry organizations such as the Northern Colorado Home Builders
Association and Northern Colorado Construction Sector Partnership to promote City
scholarships designed to accelerate the education and knowledge of professional service
providers in our community. This enables increased capacity to support local building
requirements, BPS, and associated Council priorities.
Page 58
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 14
Section 5: Resource Hub
Resource Hubs offer services and education in support of a BPS policy and were outlined as a
critical resource by Community Contributors. A hub provides a central location where building
owners can access essential guidance, technical assistance, information on available
incentives, contractors, and more. Hubs aggregate the information that helps owners comply
with a BPS policy, removing obstacles to compliance by spotlighting best practices and aiding
those without the necessary educational, financial, or technical resources needed to act.
Throughout implementation, the City will continue to be guided by community engagement best
practices observed, analyzed and outlined by a variety of organizations, including the Institute
for Market Transformation (IMT), Colorado Energy Office (CEO), Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and Department of Energy (DOE). Given the emphasis on the criticality of
sufficient resources to support buildings owners shared by the Task Force and in best practice
documents, engagement is an important step to disseminate planned resources.
Resource Hub content and Help Center cost:
Year 1: $85,000;
Year 2-5 estimate: $50,000/year
Identifying Needs
A first step to launching the hub is to identify gaps and areas of potential collaboration. City staff
are exploring joint resources shared with local jurisdictions; however, Staff strongly recommend
a centralized Fort Collins hub that includes all appropriate local resources in one place. The hub
is expected to grow as further needs are identified throughout implementation.
Equity is a consideration when identifying needs, as Staff anticipates a subset of local buildings
will have less access to the resources needed to comply with a BPS than other like buildings.
Work is scheduled through 2024 to define and identify local under-resourced commercial and
multi-family buildings, along with outreach to representatives from those buildings to determine
barriers to increased efficiency.
Launching the Hub
The hub will include educational resources to assist in compliance. Planned resources to be
created and launched upon BPS adoption include:
A BPS compliance guide that details the City’s rules and regulations.
Live and recorded presentations (with downloadable slides) that provide an overview of
the BPS regulations including step-by-step instructions on how to comply with building
performance targets.
On-demand video series that explains: BPS rules, how BPS works, processes to
become compliant, alternate compliance options, and potential penalties for failing to
meet EUI targets.
Robust guides and documents: policy compliance checklists, FAQs, and pathway
selection tools.
o Pathway selection tools are simple, easy-to-use resources describing BPS
compliance scenarios (e.g., caps, renewables, adjustments, and guidance on
how to select a pathway and understand energy efficiency measures).
Page 59
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 15
Analysis of each building’s past energy performance and proximity to meeting their
target.
Case studies of buildings demonstrating efficiency measures to improve their energy
performance and meet their BPS target.
A financial hub focusing on available rebates, incentives, tax deductions, and other
means of offsetting costs.
o Information on green financing structures such as C-PACE and CCEF.
o Guidance to help building owners navigate existing funding and financing
opportunities.
A technical hub including resources to educate owners on the most cost-effective
upgrades to achieve their targets.
o Information on efficient technologies.
o Links tools such as the existing Building Efficiency Targeting Tool for Energy
Retrofits (BETTER) and Energy Performance Improvement Calculator (EPIC).
o Options for both desktop audits and whole building in-person assessments
offered by the City.
o Technical guidance documents for upgrades/measures related to: retrofitting
major building systems (envelope, ventilation, heating/cooling, domestic hot
water, plugs and process loads), implementing strategies to decrease energy-
related operating costs and providing estimations of potential savings, and
assessing high-performance building technology solutions.
The hub will help connect building owners to Help Center support.
Advanced Technical Support
Advanced technical support will be provided to a subset of under-resourced buildings that
require substantial assistance accounting for their existing energy use and targets.
Advanced technical support will consist of the following services:
Collecting in-depth building data.
Conducting quality assurance testing and engineering analysis.
Conducting an onsite ASHRAE Level II energy assessment.
Developing detailed building performance plans with energy-saving projects that can be
implemented to meet interim and final targets.
o The estimated energy savings for each project will be used to estimate the
resulting EUI reduction and impact toward meeting the BPS. Recommended
projects will be prioritized based on the lowest cost to meet interim and final
targets.
Reviewing performance plans with building owners to evaluate the feasibility of the
implementation timeline and estimated cost to help them select appropriate measures.
Drafting scopes of work for each project, including the steps necessary to complete the
implementation and the project schedule. Building owners will then be able to use the
plans to seek bids from vendors to perform the implementation work.
Advanced Technical Support Cost: $7,500-$10,000/building
Page 60
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 16
Section 6: Communication and Engagement
Overview
Continued communication and engagement (C&E) are planned throughout implementation to
ensure impacted segments of our community understand policy requirements and available
resources. BPS policy implementation will impact multiple sectors of our community. If Council
adopts a BPS policy, about 1,400 building owners will need to take some sort of action that can
range from as little as acknowledging they have already met their targets to completing building
upgrades.
Communication and Engagement Strategy
The level of public engagement in the initial phase of implementation is “Consult” on the IAP2
Spectrum. This is defined as obtaining feedback on analysis, alternatives, or decisions. During
this phase we will seek broad community feedback on the resources provided to support
building owners. Concurrently and subsequently, public engagement will seek to “Inform,” as
staff shares education and available resources.
C&E will begin upon policy adoption and continue throughout implementation. Implementation
will follow an annualized plan-do-check-act approach, meaning staff propose action, implement
it, measure its success, consult those impacted to understand how the process can be improved
into the future, and repeat.
The purpose of C&E is to:
Share available resources and compliance requirements with covered building owners
and representatives.
Isolate resource gaps and negative impacts to design and implement mitigation
strategies.
Inform the general community about BPS benefits and how they align with community
priorities.
The goals of C&E are to:
Integrate consultation process into annualized C&E strategy to ensure implementation
has minimal negative impacts on covered building owners and occupants.
Raise awareness and share resources supporting compliance requirements with
covered building owners and representatives.
Work with community contributors to determine if resource gaps exist and how to
address them.
Increase general community understanding of BPS alignment with community priorities.
Continue to refer to existing and developing best practice guidance, including continued
engagement with other jurisdictions.
The desired outcome of C&E is:
Covered building owners and representatives receive information and resources to
understand compliance requirements.
Covered building owners achieve targets without penalties.
Page 61
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 17
The general community understands the benefits of BPS.
Projected Challenges
Communicating a complex and technical policy with broad impacts.
o The variety of audiences will have different relevant messages.
Assuring an understanding of why this policy is important.
Exploring potential unintended consequences through a plan-do-check-act process.
Engaging with community members who may not support policy direction.
Preventing misinformation or confusion with State of Colorado BPS requirement.
Audiences/Impacted Parties
Significant Impact Light Impact
Building owners Colorado Energy Office
Commercial property lease holders Denver/Boulder/Aspen and other neighboring
communities with benchmarking/BPS policies
or goals
Property managers Poudre School District (public buildings are
not covered)
Facility and energy managers Local universities and colleges (public
buildings are not covered)
Utilities (Fort Collins Utilities and Xcel
Energy)
Developer/architects/builders
Efficiency Works Business and Platte River
Power Authority
Everyone else who lives, works, or recreates
in Fort Collins
Local business associations Municipalities considering implementing a
similar policy
Commercial real estate brokers and lenders Local boards and commissions
Building occupants and multi-family building
residents
Local politicians
Key Accounts, Chamber of Commerce,
NoCoRHA
Affordable housing representatives
Community groups/community members
Local workforce/service providers
Green building associations and researchers
Tactics
Type of Outreach Focus Audience By Whom
Direct mail Initial notifications All covered buildings Utilities
Mass email Initial and follow up
notifications
All covered buildings Help Center
Phone calls Initial and follow up
notifications
All covered buildings Help Center
Virtual webinars 3-5 interactive webinars
with Q&A
All covered buildings Help Center
Page 62
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 18
Drop-in office hours Specialized or technical
questions
All covered buildings Help Center,
tracking in CRM
E-newsletters BPS and OCF (e.g.,
Environmental Services,
City News, Building
Services, Keep Current)
General public Utilities
Media release BPS adoption and OCF,
Council alignment
General public Utilities
Unpaid and paid
social media posts
BPS and OCF, Council
priorities
General public Utilities
Tenant-owner
outreach
Facilitate strong alignment
on project opportunities
Building owners and
tenants
Utilities
Personal support Leverage NOCOBiz
Connect and Efficiency
Works Business
Select covered
buildings
Utilities and
local partners
Interviews and
promotion
Promoting efficient
buildings
(e.g., stickers or window
clings for buildings once
they reach EUI target)
Early adopters Utilities
Direct mail Additional resources
(technical, financial,
translation)
Under-resourced
buildings
Help Center
Email Additional resources
(technical, financial,
translation)
Under-resourced
buildings
Help Center
Phone calls Additional resources
(technical, financial,
translation)
Under-resourced
buildings
Help Center
Building Hub
promotion
One-stop-shop website
with resources, including
local incentives. (e.g.,
buildinginnovationhub.org)
All covered buildings Help Center and
Utilities
One-on-one
relationship
management
Maintain critical
relationships (internal and
external) through
meetings, discussions
To be determined, but
may include initial
building owners who
provided input
Utilities +/- other
City staff
Equity engagement Provide feedback on City
messaging to under-
resourced buildings and
help the City share
resources in a way that’s
accessible; leveraging
existing relationships and
trusted community groups
will hopefully lead to
greater utilization of
resources
Community-based
organizations (CBOs)
including affordable
housing providers
Utilities
Equity engagement Periodically examine
equity outcomes,
especially for
disproportionately
impacted and
marginalized communities
Climate Equity
Committee (CEC)
Utilities
Page 63
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 19
Recommendations feed
into BPS plan-do-check-
act process to identify any
negative equity-related
impacts
Community meetings
and events
Information at events
(e.g., EcoFest, Bike to
Work Day, Open Streets)
General public Utilities
Messaging
Key messages will be adapted to the audience and will provide information on the benefits of
BPS and their alignment with OCF. Key messages will utilize a change management approach
that will acknowledge and address the change that BPS presents to our community.
Desired Outcomes and Associated Metrics
To ensure we are reaching our intended audiences and making data informed decisions, we will
track various metrics to determine if we have achieved certain desired outcomes:
Track number of activities and people engaged.
o Metric: community engagement tracker statistics.
o All communications with covered building owners or their representatives will be
tracked in the Help Center CRM.
Track performance of C&E strategies to isolate the best ways to engage various
audiences.
Utilize unique website links for digital metric tracking:
o Building Hub
o E-newsletters
o Social media
o Bill insert
o Event handouts
Create a flow of information that allows engagement activity results to be organized and
referenceable.
Continue to iterate on public engagement strategies by learning from experiences and
adjusting the engagement to best fit what is needed.
Initial Notifications
The way we introduce BPS to the community and the affected members is vital to its success.
Initial notification strategies are an important part of how we manage relationships with covered
building owners and their representatives. As such, creating notifications will be a thoughtful
process where we seek feedback from internal partners and impacted members of the
community. A critical part of this process will be to seek input from disproportionately impacted
communities, Community Based Organizations (CBOs), and the CEC to shape language and
strategies that are truly inclusive and accessible.
Initial notification of an adopted BPS policy will acknowledge the significant change that BPS
brings to the community. Messages should seek to educate, inform, and be shared in a way that
encourages building owners to share their perspective. Communication should be clear,
concise, and available in the building owner’s preferred language.
Page 64
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 20
During initial outreach, Staff will utilize the “Consult” approach, sharing the wide-ranging
resources created to support building owners and seeking feedback on accessibility, relevance,
and any isolated gaps.
Notification by email and physical mail are essential but are only a part of the planned approach
outlined in this section.
Staff benefited from robust engagement during policy development and will continue to expand
upon existing relationships with representatives of impacted industries. Furthermore, as all
potentially covered buildings are currently covered by the local Benchmarking ordinance (§12-
202 of the Municipal Code), we have confirmed contact information associated with covered
buildings.
Initial notifications will need to include several core elements:
Notification that the policy exists.
What buildings are covered.
Policy timeline.
Point of contact for questions.
How the policy was developed.
Why the policy was developed (ties to Our Climate Future and City Council priorities).
Compliance pathways.
Available resources (building owner portal, forecasting calculator, resource and technical
hubs) including specific offerings for under-resourced buildings.
Next steps (e.g., ensure your contact information is correct, link to compliance guide,
review the building owner resource hub, planned and recorded webinars, other).
Notifications will acknowledge:
Multiple audiences: different information may be relevant to various audiences.
Plain language in communicating about a technical requirement.
An opportunity for building owners to provide feedback.
Planned messaging and content will be shared with community contributors for feedback prior to
finalizing.
Evaluation
Review effectiveness of each strategy and overall efforts annually, aligning with compliance as
tracked in dashboard. Surveys of building contacts will illuminate their perspective on City
engagement efforts. Third party program evaluation at the end of the interim goal period to
ensure outcomes are being met. Continued engagement with the CEC and CBOs will evaluate
near term community impact.
Page 65
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 21
Costs
Included below are vendor costs and projected costs associated with communication and
engagement (e.g., direct mailers, social media, outreach events, etc.).
Year 1 Ongoing
C&E $20,000 $20,000
Resource Hub and Help
Center
$85,000 $50,000
Software Fees $29,000 $9,500
Advanced Technical
Support
$7,500-$10,000/building
Page 66
Item 3.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards │Implementation Guide May 2024 | 22
Final Considerations
Implementing a successful and equitable BPS will require careful planning and an investment of
resources. BPS is a new policy instrument, and as nationwide experience grows, more tools,
best practices, and resources are likely to become available.
Utilities acknowledges the significant change a BPS policy will bring to Fort Collins, and Staff
will continue to manage the process to better prepare those affected. Sufficient education and
information are an integral part of the change management strategy, along with continuing to
monitor the community for newly developing risks and aversion. The change management
approach acknowledges that opposition is a part of the process and not a pause in the process,
and it allows us to appropriately prepare to address potential concerns and questions.
Costs outlined in this guide may vary, and in general resource needs are expected to increase
leading up to 2030 targets. Program staff are open to feedback and recommendations from
leadership around proposed specifics.
Page 67
Item 3.
NEW YORK , NY | WASHINGTON , DC | NORWALK , CT | BOSTON , MA CALL US : 866.676.1972 | SWINTER .COM
City of Fort Collins Building Performance Standard
PERFORMANCE TARGET RECOMMENDATIONS
Typos in previously submitted version corrected below; see highlighted targets
BACKGROUND
In 2021, the City of Fort Collins, in partnership with residents and businesses, established a strategic goal to
reduce 2030 greenhouse gas emissions by 80% below 2005 baseline levels. Fort Collins’ buildings account
for over two thirds of carbon emissions, and thus, the largest opportunity for carbon savings. The Our Climate
Future plan, the community guide to creating a carbon neutral, zero waste, and 100% renewable electricity
future, identified Building Performance Standards as a pathway to explore under Big Move 6: Efficient,
Emissions Free Buildings.
This report recommends the Building Performance Standards, or “targets”, for buildings 5,000 square feet and
above located in the City of Fort Collins. Technical analysis aimed to recommend achievable targets for
building types (e.g., office, retail) by the year 2030.
The theory of this technical analysis is that there is a site EUI (energy use intensity) target that is technically
achievable for nearly all buildings in an occupancy type that would encourage and enable, but not require,
electrification. Setting an EUI target lower than that technically achievable lower limit would result in many
buildings being unable to comply.
This report describes how the targets were calculated based on locally available data, national data, and
achievable energy efficiency projects.
RECOMMENDED TARGETS
Final targets, which are the numeric value of site EUI that each covered building must achieve or exceed by
the final year of the performance standard, were analyzed using the CNCA EBPS tool, which is described in
Methodology section.
The primary target analyzed is an Energy Efficiency (EE) Target. These site EUI targets would be applied to
each occupancy type in a building. The EE Target assumed all energy end uses were deeply optimized and
tuned through efforts such as existing system optimization, high-efficiency water fixtures and conservation,
efficient appliances, and retro-commissioning where appropriate. Occupant behavior changes such as energy
conservation were not considered, though conservation would also work toward this target. This target-setting
method assumed that typical buildings could maintain the use of fossil-fuel burning systems for typical end
uses such as space and water heating but would eliminate inefficiencies of those systems.
Numerous studies suggest economically feasible reductions of 10-30%i,ii,iii with an upper limit to reductions in
typical buildings of 30%. The US Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Energy Retrofit Guides list
numerous measures and retrofit packages for several commercial building types without considering
electrification. See Technical References for more detail on specific measures across a few building types.
Page 68
Item 3.
2
Occupancy types with minimal gas use in the 2022 Median column have relatively smaller reductions to reach
the EE target. Within a site EUI framework, all-electric buildings are typically more efficient because electricity-
driven systems have fewer opportunities for energy waste, and that waste is expensive because electricity is a
relatively expensive commodity compared to natural gas.
Table 1: Recommended Building Performance Targets by Occupancy Type
Occupancy Type Baseline Interim EE Standard
Target
Site EUI Site EUI Site EUI
Adult Education 93 85 77
Ambulatory Surgical Center 128 117 105
Aquarium 133 122 112
Automobile Dealership 86 78 71
Bank Branch 101 91 82
Bar/Nightclub 279 264 249
Barracks 110 103 96
Bowling Alley 70 64 57
Casino 133 122 112
College/University 113 103 93
Convenience Store with Gas Station 286 262 237
Convenience Store without Gas Station 286 262 237
Convention Center 133 122 112
Courthouse 103 94 84
Data Center See Below See Below See Below
Distribution Center 66 60 54
Drinking Water Treatment & Distribution 162 147 131
Enclosed Mall 140 130 119
Energy/Power Station 162 147 131
Fast Food Restaurant 279 264 249
Financial Office 69 63 56
Fire Station 75 68 62
Fitness Center/Health Club/Gym 74 68 61
Food Sales 286 262 237
Food Service 279 264 249
Hospital (General Medical & Surgical) (Excluded) 208 191 173
Hotel 77 71 65
Ice/Curling Rink 133 122 112
Indoor Arena 48 44 40
K-12 School (Excluded)59 53 48
Laboratory 264 240 215
Library 76 70 63
Lifestyle Center 116 106 96
Mailing Center/Post Office 104 93 83
Manufacturing/Industrial Plant (Excluded) 96 87 79
Medical Office 69 63 56
Page 69
Item 3.
3
Mixed Use Property See Below See Below See Below
Movie Theater 112 102 92
Multifamily Housing 52 47 43
Museum 84 77 69
Non-Refrigerated Warehouse 43 40 36
Office 69 63 56
Other 81 73 66
Other - Education 93 85 77
Other - Entertainment/Public Assembly 66 61 55
Other - Lodging/Residential 80 75 69
Other - Mall 86 79 72
Other - Public Services 103 94 84
Other - Recreation 133 122 112
Other - Restaurant/Bar 251 235 219
Other - Services 70 63 56
Other - Specialty Hospital 128 116 104
Other - Stadium 133 122 112
Other - Technology/Science 162 147 131
Other - Utility 134 122 109
Outpatient Rehabilitation/Physical Therapy 128 117 105
Parking See Below See Below See Below
Performing Arts 81 74 67
Personal Services (Health/Beauty, Dry Cleaning, etc.) 104 93 83
Police Station 103 94 84
Pre-school/Daycare 68 62 56
Prison/Incarceration 103 94 84
Race Track 133 122 112
Refrigerated Warehouse 76 69 61
Repair Services (Vehicle, Shoe, Locksmith, etc.) 65 59 52
Residence Hall/Dormitory 71 66 61
Residential Care Facility 110 102 94
Restaurant 251 235 219
Retail Store 60 55 49
Roller Rink 133 122 112
Self-Storage Facility 5 4 4
Senior Living Community 80 74 68
Single Family Home (Excluded) 66 61 55
Social/Meeting Hall 54 50 45
Stadium (Closed) 133 122 112
Stadium (Open) 133 122 112
Strip Mall 122 112 103
Supermarket/Grocery Store 180 164 148
Swimming Pool 133 122 112
Transportation Terminal/Station 133 122 112
Page 70
Item 3.
4
Urgent Care/Clinic/Other Outpatient 80 73 66
Veterinary Office 98 89 80
Vocational School 93 85 77
Wastewater Treatment Plant 162 147 131
Wholesale Club/Supercenter 105 96 87
Worship Facility 43 39 35
Zoo 133 122 112
Certain use types require specific guidance:
Swimming Pools
Specific guidance can apply when swimming pools are a secondary use within a property. Heated swimming
pools as a non-primary building use were identified in the 2022 benchmarking data:
- 9 entries contain Heating Swimming Pools as second largest property use type
- 34 entries contain Heated Swimming Pools as third largest property use type
SWA recommends using site EUI kBtu adjustments from ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager. Portfolio Manager
does not allow swimming pool size to be entered and instead assumes given sizes based on the pool type
(recreational, short course, and Olympic). Given this, using a kBtu/SF target for pools on a per-building basis is
infeasible.
Using the assumptions contained in the Swimming Pools and the ENERGY STAR Score reference, Figure 1
and the calculations contained in Figure 2 of the same link, SWA calculated the equivalent site EUI values to
compare to the source EUI values
Denver has a similar methodology and approach to the proposed site EUI-specific translation. Indoor pool
calculations do not appear to have regionality built in, so the site EUI allowances can be used directly. See
Appendix B2.
Page 71
Item 3.
5
For outdoor pools, the impact on site energy use is relatively small, approximately 10-15% the impact of an
equivalent indoor pool based on the ENERGY STAR reference linked above. Best benchmarking practices
from ENERGY STAR indicate that pool energy use should be sub-metered and excluded from a Portfolio
Manager entry. If this is not possible, our recommendation is to use the Denver equivalencies.
Data Centers
Data centers are listed as secondary property use types in two buildings in the 2022 Fort Collins benchmarking
data. ENERGY STAR provides estimatesiv that allow buildings to identify these spaces’ energy usage. These
estimates are provided due to the complexity of calculating this space type’s usage and the variations between
them. The ENERGY STAR estimate for data center energy use per unit of floor area is as follows:
𝑆𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑦 (𝑘𝐴𝑡𝑡)=2,000 𝑘𝐴𝑡𝑡
𝑒𝑡2 × 𝐴𝑘𝑛𝑛𝑟 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑛𝑒 𝐴𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝐴𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑒𝑡2 )v
However, there is a cap for the source energy of a data center if the data center’s floor area is greater than
10% of the property’s gross floor area, which is not frequently the case. SWA recommends referring to this
guidance from ENERGY STAR to estimate energy use.
Washington DC and Denver reference this approach as well. However, the installation of a sub-meter to
provide an accurate measure of data center energy data is strongly encouraged and considered a best
practice.
Mixed Use Property
SWA recommends properties reporting as Mixed Use report their actual space use types to determine a
weighted EUI target for the purpose of complying with BPS.
ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager ESPM defines Mixed Use properties:
- “A Mixed Use (or multi use) property is one that contains multiple property types, none of which
are greater than 50% of the total Gross Floor Area (GFA), including parking GFA.”
- “Mixed Use properties can get an ENERGY STAR score and certification if they meet two criteria:
o 75% of the property's GFA (excluding parking) is comprised of property types that are eligible
for an ENERGY STAR score
o At least one property type (that is eligible for certification) is more than 50% of the GFA
(excluding parking)”vi
Parking
ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager instructs users to submeter parking usage within a building then exclude
that energy use and gross floor area, or if data is not submetered, include the parking square footage and
Portfolio Manger will estimate parking’s energy usage. Further guidance is available at:
- Parking and the ENERGY STAR Score in the United States and Canada
- How do I enter parking? (site.com)
Parking frequency was identified in the 2022 benchmarking data:
- 3 buildings list Parking as the primary property type
- 269 entries contain Parking as second largest property use type
- 19 entries contain Parking as third largest property use type
Page 72
Item 3.
6
SWA recommends two options for determining a Parking target:
- Adopt elements of Denver’s approach (Appendix B.3: Parking)vii
o “data”
▪ Stand-alone parking structures can also be excluded from BPS target setting
- Analyze IECC vs ENERGY STAR, adjust for Fort Collins weather
o Revise parking EUI targets based on ENERGY STAR Technical Reference and IECC code
2018
o Lighting power densities in the 2018 IECC are higher than the ENERGY STAR Technical
Reference, but the Technical Reference includes ventilation and heating.
o See sample below from a separate jurisdiction:
Page 73
Item 3.
7
METHODOLOGY
The study team reviewed the current methods utilized for setting performance standards across the country.
There is not a standard methodology used across jurisdictions, therefore they are selected based on localized
goals and data availability.
To identify targets, the analysis team relied on the Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance’s “Performance Standards for
Existing Buildings: Performance Targets and Metrics Final Report”viii: a methodology and workbookix (“CNCA
EBPS tool”) created to inform technically achievable performance standards across building occupancy types.
Steven Winter Associates and Sustainable Energy Partnerships authored this framework in 2020 with
participation by expert advisors and government sustainability staff from around the country.x
The target calculations are comprised of four components; Define Paths and Targets, Typology Assignment,
Baseline End Uses and Fuel Split Calculations, and Target Setting.
Define Paths and Targets
Building targets will not be useful unless based on achievable standards. These pathways, or packages of
measures that can result in a building reaching a target, must be technically feasible today for each typology.
The CNCA process identifies multiple target options:
- Energy Efficiency (EE) targets are determined based on an assumption of optimizing existing systems
in the near term. This is the method used to set the Fort Collins Targets.
- More aggressive targets, such as long-term Zero Net Carbon (ZNC) targets will require replacement
and electrification of major systems. This methodology could be implemented for future targets.
- Interim targets are developed to address technical performance limits. The most aggressive targets
may not be achievable in the next 10-20 years because of equipment life, capital planning, and retrofit
mobilization.
o For example, these interim targets identify where buildings need to be in 2027 so that the 2030
goals are achievable.
Site energy use intensity (EUI) was selected as the target performance metric as a way to promote holistic
energy efficiency as well as decarbonization of fossil fuel systems.
Typology Assignment
Buildings are organized by typology based on prevalence within the jurisdiction in order to identify reasonable
standards for each based on similarities of use and construction types.
The activities that occur within a building, along with the size, occupancy, and equipment, determine the
energy use intensity and carbon emissions. As such, setting a single performance target (i.e.. 20% reduction)
would not account for these variabilities. The City of Fort Collins’ performance targets were designed to be
achievable for each unique building typology.
EPA’s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager (ESPM) is the industry standard for measuring building performance
and tracking progress towards goals. ESPM has 87 different property types that were developed from the
Energy Information Agency’s (EIA) Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS).
While some jurisdictions choose to group building types into fewer categories to assign targets, SWA
recommends maintaining the 87 specific categories provides a more accurate representation of average
building use profiles by category.
Page 74
Item 3.
8
Additionally, the State of Colorado and the City of Denver utilized ESPM property types to both calculate and
communicate building performance targets. Aligning Fort Collins’ targets with those adopted by the Colorado
Energy Office as much as possible will minimize confusion or unnecessary complication within the building
energy industry across the state.
Baseline End Uses and Fuel Split Calculations
Site EUI Baselines
Energy use baselines in this technical analysis were based on calendar year 2022 energy use (weather
normalized) from the City of Fort Collins, when available. In the case of limited data, where there were fewer
than 10 benchmarked properties for a given use type, the most recent years of benchmarking data from
Denver and Boulder were combined with Fort Collins to get a better picture of average energy usage. The
recommended median baseline EUI was selected using the following hierarchy:
1. Fort Collins Benchmarking Data
2. CO Benchmarking Data
3. National CBECS Data
Note: Memos were generated on 1-24-2024 and 2-29-2024 describing this process and results in detail.
End Use Loads
Once median site EUI’s were selected for each use type, target EUIs were calculated by applying feasible
reductions to end uses. End use profiles in this technical analysis were based on national CBECS data and
weather normalized.
This approach was selected to account for differing implications of varying fuel reductions. This methodology
addresses the unique loads of differing building types, as well as the differences between gas and electric
equipment efficiencies. For example, the amount of achievable heating savings for a warehouse is significantly
less than what is possible for a multifamily building.
Page 75
Item 3.
9
Table 2: End Use Breakdown by CBECS Property Type
CBECS Use Type % Space
Heating
% Domestic
Hot Water % Cooking % Gas
Other
%
Cooling
% Plug
Loads and
Other
Multifamily Housing 49% 44% 7% 0% 33% 67%
Education 65% 17% 4% 14% 24% 76%
Food sales 54% 5% 41% 0% 4% 96%
Food service 18% 20% 62% 0% 20% 80%
Health care Inpatient 49% 23% 11% 17% 27% 73%
Health care Outpatient 91% 9% 0% 0% 11% 89%
Lodging 30% 56% 0% 14% 17% 83%
Mercantile Enclosed and strip
malls 38% 24% 26% 12% 13% 87%
Mercantile Retail (other than
mall) 71% 9% 21% 0% 16% 84%
Office 64% 12% 0% 24% 15% 85%
Other 95% 5% 0% 0% 15% 85%
Public assembly 73% 4% 13% 10% 40% 60%
Public order and safety 51% 42% 7% 0% 25% 75%
Religious worship 82% 0% 18% 0% 23% 77%
Service 70% 30% 0% 0% 17% 83%
Warehouse and storage 63% 11% 0% 26% 16% 84%
Vacant 91% 9% 0% 0% 15% 85%
End use profiles were then mapped to ESPM typologies to calculate averages using local benchmarking
electricity and natural gas use data.
Target Setting
EE Targets are set for the typologies accounting for the baseline use of buildings, feasible reductions, and
ultimate reduction goals. EE targets describe interim steps and performance standards that can be applied to
gas-using end uses to reduce energy use without electrification. The resulting energy efficiency performance
targets will not be enough to achieve zero-net carbon targets since gas and on-site combustion are implicitly
allowed.
Zero Net Carbon (ZNC) targets build off the EE Target as a new baseline and converts all fuel-burning end
uses to electricity using a ratio for that end use. This is included in the proposal for future consideration
acknowledging Fort Collins' 2050 goals.
Achievable Reductions
To calculate feasible targets, the study team approximated what the typical building of a given occupancy type
can achieve using assumptions on existing systems and their efficiency, both current and what is technically
achievable. This summarizes the approach to target setting, but it does not dictate a specific retrofit package
for a particular building. Any individual building would develop a scope of work that reflects how it would
achieve or exceed its respective target.
Page 76
Item 3.
10
The results of the following retrofits align with the Energy Efficiency (EE) target:
1. Energy efficiency improvements to all end uses that require electricity. In a carbon-neutral grid
scenario, this measure reduces electricity loads and constraints on the grid when gas end uses are
electrified.
2. Basic air sealing and, while not required, enhanced thermal efficiency of most commonly replaceable
envelope elements (i.e., windows, roofs) may be done at end of useful life to meet targets.
3. Energy efficiency of gas-based space heating systems – such as better heating controls, duct sealing,
distribution balancing. [This does not include installation of more efficient gas equipment.] Electrification
of heating systems would not be required but could be done as a way to meet the target.
4. Energy efficiency domestic hot water systems – such as better controls, pipe insulation, low flow
fixtures. [This does not include installation of more efficient gas equipment.] Electrification of domestic
hot water systems would not be required but could be done as a way to meet the target.
5. Potential efficient electrification of cooking, laundry, and other gas process loads would not be required
but could be done as a way to meet the target.
The target does not explicitly assume the addition of (a) wall insulation to the exterior of the building, (b) high
performance window installations, or (c) energy recovery ventilation systems because of the limited
applicability of the measures across all building types. However, these measures can greatly improve the
performance of buildings and make further decarbonization possible by reducing heating and cooling loads,
thereby decreasing the necessary capacity of electric heating and cooling systems. These retrofits could be
implemented by any individual building in pursuit of achieving a site EUI target, but the target-setting
calculations themselves do not assume the implementation of these retrofits.
To apply these assumptions, achievable percent reductions, described in Table 3, were applied to the end use
of each ESPM property type.
Page 77
Item 3.
11
Table 3: Achievable energy reduction percentages by end use
End Use Assumptions Current Fort Collins
Assumptions
Baseload Electricity
Lighting efficiency improvements, appliance
upgrades, plug load management, elevator
replacement; basic air sealing
20%
Space Heating Controls and distribution improvements to
reduce overheating; basic air sealing 20%
Water Heating Reduction in distribution losses and fixture
GPM reductions 10%
Cooking Improvements would require equipment
replacement with more efficient options 0%
Other
Laundry: Point of use equipment for specific
uses. Same approach as cooking
Gas Process Loads: Various industrial and
process loads (cleaning, lab equipment, etc)
including laundry. Accounts for 4% of gas use
nationwide.
Wide range of dissimilar uses.
0%
Page 78
Item 3.
12
APPENDICIES
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
While Fort Collins will begin with an Energy Efficiency standard, it is important to consider what targets are
necessary to achieve city, state, and national goals towards carbon neutrality. As such, a Zero Net Carbon-
Compatible (ZNC) target was also analyzed for future consideration.
A Zero Net Carbon-Compatible (ZNC) Target: an EUI level simulating the electrification of all fossil fuel
end uses using market-ready technology in an energy efficient building. This target was intended to be
compatible with Zero Net Carbon goals because it implicitly required the elimination of most on-site fuel
burning.
The ZNC target assumes on-site fuel burning is eliminated through electrification, further reducing site EUI
based on standard assumptions in the CNCA EBPS tool. This Zero Net Carbon-Compatible (ZNC) target can
be thought of as a technically feasible limit on building energy performance for each group.
The electrification of end uses assumes that those end uses are optimized through the energy efficiency
assumptions laid out in the Energy Efficiency target. While the order may not always be sequential, the
technical potential of buildings would be realized by optimizing end uses, especially space heating and cooling
uses and electrifying beyond those uses. Alternatively, it may be easier for some buildings, such as those with
difficult-to-optimize heating systems (i.e., central steam plants) to electrify immediately and undertake the
energy efficiency measures in parallel. Energy efficiency of heating and cooling may be achieved with the act
of modernizing the system, enabling better control and heat delivery, instead of undertaking the often-
challenging task of optimizing the existing heating systems.
The largest percentage savings required to reach the targets was in multifamily buildings, particularly older
multifamily buildings, which typically have central heating and hot water systems heated by burning fossil fuels.
These systems have the most potential for site EUI reduction because the heat pump systems that can replace
them are efficient in comparison11.
Table 4: Projected ZNC Targets
Occupancy Type Baseline
Site EUI
ZNC Target
Site EUI
Adult Education 93 40
Ambulatory Surgical Center 128 66
Aquarium 133 58
Automobile Dealership 86 41
Bank Branch 101 55
Bar/Nightclub 279 148
Barracks 110 59
Bowling Alley 70 42
Casino 133 58
College/University 113 54
Convenience Store with Gas Station 286 172
Convenience Store without Gas Station 286 172
Page 79
Item 3.
13
Convention Center 133 58
Courthouse 103 44
Data Center tbd tbd
Distribution Center 66 32
Drinking Water Treatment & Distribution 162 92
Enclosed Mall 140 78
Energy/Power Station 162 92
Fast Food Restaurant 279 148
Financial Office 69 43
Fire Station 75 35
Fitness Center/Health Club/Gym 74 41
Food Sales 286 172
Food Service 279 148
Hospital (General Medical & Surgical) (Excluded) 208 112
Hotel 77 49
Ice/Curling Rink 133 58
Indoor Arena 48 27
K-12 School (Excluded) 59 31
Laboratory 264 128
Library 76 42
Lifestyle Center 116 74
Mailing Center/Post Office 104 34
Manufacturing/Industrial Plant (Excluded) 96 48
Medical Office 69 41
Mixed Use Property tbd tbd
Movie Theater 112 67
Multifamily Housing 52 26
Museum 84 46
Non-Refrigerated Warehouse 43 21
Office 69 38
Other 81 43
Other - Education 93 40
Other - Entertainment/Public Assembly 66 35
Other - Lodging/Residential 80 46
Other - Mall 86 53
Other - Public Services 103 44
Other - Recreation 133 58
Other - Restaurant/Bar 251 110
Other - Services 70 30
Other - Specialty Hospital 128 91
Other - Stadium 133 58
Other - Technology/Science 162 92
Other - Utility 134 67
Outpatient Rehabilitation/Physical Therapy 128 66
Page 80
Item 3.
14
Parking tbd tbd
Performing Arts 81 42
Personal Services (Health/Beauty, Dry Cleaning, etc.) 104 34
Police Station 103 44
Pre-school/Daycare 68 35
Prison/Incarceration 103 44
Race Track 133 58
Refrigerated Warehouse 76 54
Repair Services (Vehicle, Shoe, Locksmith, etc.) 65 26
Residence Hall/Dormitory 71 41
Residential Care Facility 110 65
Restaurant 251 147
Retail Store 60 32
Roller Rink 133 58
Self-Storage Facility 5 3
Senior Living Community 80 49
Single Family Home (Excluded) 66 27
Social/Meeting Hall 54 27
Stadium (Closed) 133 58
Stadium (Open) 133 58
Strip Mall 122 73
Supermarket/Grocery Store 180 115
Swimming Pool 133 58
Transportation Terminal/Station 133 58
Urgent Care/Clinic/Other Outpatient 80 46
Veterinary Office 98 51
Vocational School 93 40
Wastewater Treatment Plant 162 92
Wholesale Club/Supercenter 105 66
Worship Facility 43 18
Zoo 133 58
Page 81
Item 3.
15
APPENDIX: TECHNICAL REFERENCES
Targets are intended to achieve energy efficiency savings while not specifically requiring electrification for a
median performing building. These reductions are intended to use technology and best practice O&M
strategies available today.
Estimated reductions are based on a range of literature on building retrofit outcomes:
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Systems Retrofit Trends in Commercial Buildings: Opening Up
Opportunities for Deeper Savings
o https://buildings.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/Regnier%20-
%20Systems%20Retrofit%20Trends.docx__1.pdf
- Berkely Lab, U.S. Building Sector Decarbonization Scenarios to 2050
o https://buildings2050.lbl.gov/
- Lawrence Berkley Lab, Building Commissioning
o lbnl-cx-cost-benefit-pres.pdf (lbl.gov)
- ACEEE, Moving the Needle on Comprehensive Commercial Retrofits
o https://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/b2203.pdf
- Department of Energy Advanced Energy Retrofit Guides
o https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/advanced-energy-retrofit-guides
- Energy Savings from GSA’s National Deep Energy Retrofit Program
o https://www.gsa.gov/system/files/NDEREnergySavingsReport5.pdf
- Fort Collins Provided Data
- Buildings Sector Report, A Technical Report of the Massachusetts 2050 Decarbonization Roadmap
Study
o https://www.mass.gov/doc/buildings-sector-technical-report/download
- Ecotope for the City of Seattle, Building Energy Use Intensity Targets Final Report
o https://www.seattle.gov/documents/departments/ose/bldgengy_targets_2017-03-30_final.pdf
- Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, A Search for Deep Energy Savings NEEA’s Study of Existing
Building Energy Efficiency Renewals Final Report
o https://newbuildings.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/NEEA_Meta_Report_Deep_Savings_NBI_Final81520111.pdf
- One City Built to Last: Transforming New York City Buildings for a Low-Carbon Future, Technical
Working Group Report.
o https://www.nyc.gov/html/gbee/downloads/pdf/TWGreport_2ndEdition_sm.pdf
- Guarini Center on Environmental, Energy & Land Use Law, Carbon Trading for New York City’s
Building Sector
o https://guarinicenter.org/9430/
- Building Energy Exchange, Low Carbon Multifamily Retrofit Playbooks:
o https://be-exchange.org/lowcarbonmultifamily-main/
- International Energy Agency Deep Energy Retrofit – Case Studies
o https://iea-ebc.org/Data/publications/EBC_Annex%2061_Subtask_A_Case_Studies.pdf
Page 82
Item 3.
16
APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY COMPARISONS
Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) BPS Model Ordinance
IMT created a BPS model ordinance which calls for the government department implementing the ordinance
to:
- Sort covered buildings into groups according to property type (office, retail, etc).
- Create more targeted categories if desired (affordable housing, convenience stores separate from
grocery, etc).
Ambitious but achievable final performance standards are set for each property type by a specified future date
- IMT recommends setting final performance standards 15-30+ years in the future. This long timeframe
will allow almost all buildings to encounter at least one opportunity to make a capital investment to
dramatically improve performance, such as replacing a roof or HVAC system.
- IMT recommends an interim performance standard to ensure that buildings make progress toward the
final performance standard, in five-year intervals
A “trajectory approach” identifies interim standards for each individual building to reflect its baseline
performance. The ordinance assumes that performance data is available for covered buildings for each of the
standards included in the ordinance or that needed data will be collected as the first step in implementing the
ordinance.
The diagram below illustrates how a department determines each individual building’s trajectory and interim
performance standards.
- The building’s performance level in the baseline year and its required performance in the final year are
plotted.
- Three multifamily buildings must meet the same standard, but have different improvement slopes
based on their starting performance; Building A has a higher EUI and must reduce energy more
dramatically than Building C which only needs to maintain current levels of efficiency.
The final page of the guidance document shares a recommends use of the CNCA tool:
https://www.imt.org/resources/imt-model-bps-ordinance-summary/
Page 83
Item 3.
17
Colorado
Each covered building must meet a maximum site EUI standard based on its occupancy type by the year 2030.
CO owners can also elect GHGI targets.
- Buildings are required to meet interim performance targets in 2026 to ensure progress toward the final,
2030 standard.
- Interim targets are determined according to the building’s “trajectory” from its baseline site EUI
performance in 2019 to the final site EUI standard for its property type.
Denver, CO
Denver employed IMT’s BPS “trajectory approach” from their Model Ordinance.
Denver worked with an engineering firm to analyze benchmarking data and national CBECS data to determine
EUI performance standards for covered property types.
Each covered building must meet a maximum site EUI standard based on its occupancy type by the year 2030.
Buildings are required to meet interim performance targets in 2024 and 2027 to ensure progress toward the
final, 2030 standard. Interim targets are determined according to the building’s “trajectory” from its baseline site
EUI performance in 2019 to the final site EUI standard for its property type.
There are over 70 building types with specific site EUI targets for 2030. There are several unique building
types (e.g., museums, convention centers, etc.) for which Denver was not able to set a specific Site EUI target
for 2030. Instead, buildings of these types must achieve a 30% Site EUI reduction from their 2019 baseline.
Boston, MA
Boston hired a consulting company, Synapse Energy Economics, to recommend GHG standards for each
covered property type and to estimate the cost of common emission abatement strategies.
Property types are organized by ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager building types, and each property type has
its own GHG target starting in 2025 until 2050 where all buildings are limited to 0. Targets become more
stringent every 5 years. Building owners can apply for an individual compliance schedule achieving 50%
emissions reduction by 2030 and 100% by 2050 using a 2005 or later baseline.
Montgomery County, MD
Montgomery County set specific EUI standard by building type with interim and final standards. Targets were
set using the CNCA tool methodology.
New York, NY
New York City used audit data collected under its Local Law 87 to analyze the most cost-effective energy and
GHG reduction strategies in its large building stock.
Goals include reducing aggregate GHG emissions from covered buildings by 40% in 2030 and 80% by 2050
relative to 2005 levels. This will be achieved through gradual improvements outlined in compliance cycles of 5
years, beginning in 2024.
Emissions limits for various building class types are outlined for compliance periods of five years starting in
2024, becoming more stringent each period.
Page 84
Item 3.
18
Washington DC
Washington, DC set most of its standards for most property types at the local median ENERGY STAR score
for each property type. The city worked with C40 Cities and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to
estimate the costs and savings at the building level.
The building energy performance standard shall be no lower than the District median ENERGY STAR score for
buildings of each property type. The city will issue new performance standards every six years, and will set
campus-wide standards for educational campuses and hospitals.
Chula Vista, CA
Compliance cycle occurs every five years. One target is based on ENERGY STAR scores:
- Baseline ENERGY STAR Scores of 0-45 have an improvement target of 30%
- 46-65 of 20%
- 66-79 of 10%
Alternatively, properties may comply by reducing their EUI as compared to the baseline measure.
- Baseline EUI-WN of 80+ have a reduction target of 30%
- 51-79 of 20%
- 19-50 of 10%
These targets refresh with every compliance cycle and are subject to change.
Additionally, there is a minimum improvement target buildings must meet every 10 years. This involves
minimum improvements of 15% for baseline Energy Star scores of 0-45 and 10% for 46-65.
Additional requirements include:
- Annual benchmarking through Energy Star Portfolio Manager
- Energy audits in conformance with ASHRAE Standard 211 at Level 1 or greater to be completed every
five years.
- Retrocommissioning is to be completed every five years in buildings containing 50,000 SF of
conditioned space, including HVAC, lighting, water heating, and renewable energy systems
Washington
Washington used an amended version of ASHRAE Standard 100 – Energy Efficiency in Existing Buildings to
set EUI targets for covered properties. EUI targets must be no greater than the average energy use intensity
for the building’s occupancy type with adjustments for unique energy-using features. Proposed rules set first
target at 15% below average EUI for building type.
Rather than estimate compliance costs for covered properties, the state wrote a requirement into its law that
buildings that do not meet the standard on their own by the compliance deadline will go into a conditional
compliance path.
These owners are required to conduct an energy audit and energy management plan that uses life-cycle cost
analysis to determine a bundle of measures that will meet the standard with a savings-to-investment ratio of
1.0 or greater. Thus, no owner will be required to pay for uneconomic improvements.
Maryland
Existing buildings over 35,000 square feet achieve a 20% reduction in net direct greenhouse gas emissions on
or before January 1, 2030, as compared with 2025 levels for average buildings of similar construction; and
net–zero direct greenhouse gas emissions on or before January 1, 2040.
Page 85
Item 3.
19
Saint Louis, MO
Standards to be set no lower than the 65th percentile by property type, so that at least 65% of the buildings of
the property type have a higher EUI. The Office of Building Performance will issue new performance standards
at the end of each compliance cycle.
i NYC Buildings Technical Working Group. See Rudin Management case study, page 71, among others:
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/sustainability/downloads/pdf/publications/TWGreport_04212016.pdf
ii https://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/a1402.pdf
iii DOE Advanced Energy Retrofit Guides (AERGs) for various commercial building types, also detailed in Appendix III:
https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/advanced-energy-retrofit-guides
iv Data Center Estimates in the United States and Canada (energystar.gov)
v https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/tools/Data_Center_Estimates_August_2018_EN%20-%20508%20Blue.pdf
vi
https://portfoliomanager.energystar.gov/pm/glossary?_gl=1*3hftae*_ga*MTM3MjU2OTk0Mi4xNzAxNzE3NjE5*_ga_S0KJ
TVVLQ6*MTcwMzA4NDA3My4yLjAuMTcwMzA4NDA3My4wLjAuMA..#FinancialOffice
vii https://denvergov.org/files/assets/public/v/1/climate-action/documents/energize-denver-hub/ed-technical-guidance-
buildings-25000-sq-ft-and-larger-v2_june-2023_clean.pdf
viii http://carbonneutralcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CNCA-Existing-Building-Perf-Standards-Targets-and-
Metrics-Memo-Final-March2020.pdf
ix http://carbonneutralcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CNCA-Existing-Building-Perf-Standards-Targets-Workbook-
Final.xlsx
x Slide 4. http://carbonneutralcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CNCA-Existing-Building-Perf-Standards-Project-
Summary-Final.pdf
11 Hopkins, Takahashi, Glick, Whited. “Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings”. October 2018.
Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. Page 10 says “Because a heat pump moves heat rather than generating it, the
efficiency of heat pumps can be over 100 percent… for heating season, heat pumps could typically have a COP
exceeding 3, meaning a heat output 300 percent of the energy input.” This 300% efficiency is much more efficient than the
<95% efficient gas equipment that a heat pump would replace.
Page 86
Item 3.
Program Manager, Energy Services
Katherine Bailey
Building
Performance
Standards (BPS):
Implementation
6-11 -24
Brian Tholl
Senior Manager, Energy Services
Page 87
Item 3.
BPS Questions for Councilmembers
•Do Councilmembers have feedback on
the proposed outreach and
engagement strategies?
•Do Councilmembers have feedback
related to the staff approach for
providing supporting resources?
•What additional questions or feedback
do Councilmembers have ahead of
considering policy adoption?
Page 88
Item 3.
BPS Overview: Covered Buildings in Fort Collins
Building
Size
Building
Count
Building
Count
Reduction Target Reduction Target Reduction Target Upgrade Cost
(Per Square Foot)
Number of
buildings
Buildings
that need to
act
Compliance
requirement
timeline
Individual
reduction cap
Average reduction
to target
5,000-
10,000
square feet
310 200 (65%)2035 15%9%$4.11 to $4.56
10,000+
square feet
City
covered
780 520 (66%)2030 25%13%$4.69 to $5.05
State
covered
80 60 (77%)2030 29%17%$4.40 to $4.74
Based on 2023 reported benchmarking data; some buildings are campuses which include multiple structures
Page 89
Item 3.
4
Implementation: Communication and Engagement (C&E)
C&E will be:
Human-Focused
•Accessible
•Inclusive
•Encourage and incorporate
feedback
•Acknowledges the change
BPS brings
•Be sensitive to buildings'
unique challenges and
needs
Dynamic
•Leverage various
communication channels
•Offer robust resources and
options
•Provide personalized
support
•Enable covered buildings to
meet targets without
citations
Page 90
Item 3.
5
Implementation: Communication and Engagement
Help Center
•Raise awareness and educate building owners
about requirements
•Provide direct, timely assistance and information
to covered buildings across each step of the
compliance journey
•Carefully manage customer relationships
City Staff
•Collaborate with industry and community partners
•Strengthen community relationships
•Ensure seamless administration of BPS
processes
Page 91
Item 3.
Resources
Technical Support Financial Support
Building Owner Portal Navigator Role
Helps building owners find financial resources
Forecasting Calculator Tool Additional City Incentives
Educational Hub
Trainings, video series, educational guides,
checklists, FAQs, case studies, etc.
Financial Hub
Information on rebates, incentives, tax
deductions, green financing, etc.
Technical Hub
Guidance documents, strategies to reduce
energy use, on-site and remote audit options
Partnership with green financing programs
A Hub is a central location with critical guidance, technical assistance, access to
available incentives, contractors, and more.
A Hub provides a critical resource for building ownersPage 92
Item 3.
Additional Support
Work Underway
•Outline which Fort Collins buildings
need more resources
•Engage with building representatives
to isolate barriers to efficiency
Projected Additional Resources
•Educational, technical, financial,
enhanced engagement strategies
Check Back In
•Partner with the community to ensure
resources are offered in a way that’s
accessible to all building
representatives
Page 93
Item 3.
Affordability
Best Practice
•Extra assistance available to affordable housing
•Project management support
•Robust technical and financial support
Outreach
•Actively recruit affordable housing providers to
make sure they are aware of additional support
Community Contributor Feedback
•Multi-family buildings
Page 94
Item 3.
9
Violations
Role of Fines
Fines in regulatory programs are designed to drive engagement and compliance. To
achieve this, fines need to be slightly higher than the projected cost of compliance.
Recommendation:
•$0.70 per kBtu (thousand British thermal unit) of non-compliance
•A building that is very close to its target will have a small fine, and one farther
from its target would have a larger fine.
•Citations reoccur until the building owner takes action or total amount of penalty is paid.
•Building owner action triggers a cure period.
•Cure periods allow for the cessation of citations when and if a building owner
takes action toward reaching their efficiency target .
BPS is not a revenue generatorPage 95
Item 3.
10
Implementation Costs
Proposed
City Staff
Staff # of Full Time Employees
Program Manager 1
Program Analyst 0.5
Navigator 0.5
Support Year 1 Costs Ongoing Costs
Communication and
Engagement --$20,000
Resource Hub and
Help Center
$50,000 $85,000
Software Fees $95,000 $29,000
Advance Technical
Support
$7,500-10,000 per
building --
Direct City
Costs including
Vendor Costs
Page 96
Item 3.
Building Owner and Community Engagement: Next Steps
Target DateImplementationAdoption
Consult
Inform
•Usefulness and accessibility of
resources
•Additional challenges/gaps?
•Requirements and next steps
•Tools for success
•How to find support
Plan
Do
Check
ActCommunity
contributor inputAll resources
Page 97
Item 3.
BPS Questions for Councilmembers
•Do Councilmembers have feedback on
the proposed outreach and
engagement strategies?
•Do Councilmembers have feedback
related to the staff approach for
providing supporting resources?
•What additional questions or feedback
do Councilmembers have ahead of
considering policy adoption?
Page 98
Item 3.
BPS Questions:
13
Kbailey@fcgov.com
970-221-6818
Program Manager, Energy Services
Katherine Bailey
Page 99
Item 3.
Program Manager, Energy Services
Katherine Bailey
Additional Context
Page 100
Item 3.
15
Covered Multi-family Buildings
Recommended Definition
§12-202 of the Municipal Code: Covered buildings include
apartment and condominium buildings three stories or more in
height above grade
•150 multi-family buildings
•100 need to take action to meet recommended
target
•Average reduction to target aligns with other property use
types
•Cost per square foot is lower than other property use types
due to average size of covered buildings:
Page 101
Item 3.
16
Bottom-up Data Analysis Approach
How do we calculate building targets, savings, and costs?
•Benchmarking data from 1350 Fort Collins building Portfolio Manager reports
•Cross referenced with 54,000 Larimer County tax parcels, 74,000 electric services,
77,000 City GIS addresses
•Aggregating to 46,000 buildings with unique identifiers
•Resulting in 200+ data fields/building
•Incorporating national energy data, local potential studies, reported data from other
jurisdictions, detailed local project data (Efficiency Works Business)
Page 102
Item 3.
17
Administrative Program Costs/MTCO2e Avoided
Utilities 2023 Energy Services portfolio of programs costs an average of $31
per MTCO2e avoided
•Individual projects and efforts range from $10 to $150 per MTCO2e avoided
•Income qualified program $126 /MTCO2e
•Benchmarking $11/MTCO2e
Building Performance Standards projected cost per MTCO2e avoided:
$10 to $40/MTCO2e
•Incorporating a range of advanced technical support (offered to ¼ to 100% of covered
buildings)
•Incorporating additional incentives of up to $2 million/year
Page 103
Item 3.
Fort Collins Electrification Strategy
Utility Rates
Incentives
Financing
Other City Fees
Distribution Grid
Contractors
& Workforce
Advanced Grid
Management
Education
Awareness
Transparency
Technical Assistance
Policies
Building Codes
Standards
Some levers can be used to make
progress toward goals across
several segments of the community,
while others are more unique to a given
segment.
•Existing buildings impacts recognized
by economic and behavioral levers.
•New construction impacts mostly
recognized in advancement of building
energy code.
Areas of Impact
Page 104
Item 3.
19
Case Studies
Status Occupancy
Type
Purpose Estimated
Cost/SF
Completed Office
Moderate energy
savings required
(9% reduction)
$2.85
Completed Multifamily
Housing
Energy savings cap
(25% reduction)$4.44
Completed Retail Store
Energy savings cap
(25% reduction)$4.36
Underway Strip Mall
Energy savings cap
(25% reduction)TBD
Case studies provide examples for other building owners
Case studies are provided on the most common property use types covered by the proposed BPS
Page 105
Item 3.
For More Information, Visit
THANK YOU!
ourcity.fcgov.com/bps
Page 106
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3
June 11, 2024
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Ginny Sawyer, Lead Policy Manager
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Senior Project Manager
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Hughes Site Plan and Engagement and Timeline.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss and confirm an engagement plan for the creation of a use plan for
the Hughes property. Staff is seeking feedback on guiding principles to set expectations throughout the
process and on the feasibility of utilizing a “Civic Assembly” process.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
2. What feedback do Councilmembers have on utilizing a Civic Assembly vs. an in-house engagement
process?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The original Hughes Stadium was built in the early 1960’s. To build the stadium, the entire site was re-
graded to create large parking lots that accommodated thousands of visitors during football games and
other events. The site remained open to pedestrians and a disc golf course was later built in the southeast
corner of the site where a large, regional stormwater detention pond is located.
The stadium operated until 2016. After efforts to consider housing on the property, residents initiated a
ballot measure to maintain the property as Public Open Lands.
In 2021, the ballot initiative passed, requiring the City to purchase the former Hughes Stadium property,
rezone the 164.56-acre parcel to Public Open Lands District (POL) and use the site for “parks, recreation,
and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration.”
The City rezoned the property POL in May 2021 and started the work to acquire the property. Acquisition
was finalized in June 2023 for $12.5 million with $2M each from General Fund and Natural Areas and the
difference coming from bonding. Final costs will be allocated proportionally and retroactively to
corresponding funds once land uses are determined.
Page 107
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3
In late 2022, in anticipation of acquisition, City staff began an outreach process to engage community
members in envisioning potential future activities on the site. City staff engaged Kearns & West, a third-
party consulting firm specializing in public engagement efforts.
Throughout the process was clear that this site is a highly valued, cherished piece of property, and it is a
relatively large parcel of land with countless opportunities.
Interests ranged from making the entire property a Natural Area to interest in a bike park. In between these
stated desires were numerous possibilities including restoring native grassland habitat, creating an
accessible and balanced space, the addition of a few amenities such as a basic restroom, signage, and
more parking, and a need for more shade and seating areas. This outreach process became a mechanism
for residents to mobilize their interests.
See attached engagement report for full details.
Current State
Since 2019, and to date, the Hughes site has seen little to no improvements or management. The disc golf
course sees continued use and the sledding hill is utilized when conditions allow. There is also a cell tower
and above ground distribution lines located on the property.
For additional context, staff has provided visuals in the power point comparing the size of numerous
community parks to the 164-acre Hughes property. Spring Canyon is the largest park at 123 acres.
Developing a Use Plan
Staff is prepared to create and implement an engagement plan resulting in options for Council
consideration by Q2 2025. Prior to initiating work, there is value in determining Guiding Principles for the
process. Staff is proposing the following Guiding Principles:
• Develop a plan that meets the ballot language, is contextually appropriate for site location, and can be
implemented over time.
• Create integrated, multi-use spaces that can serve the community year-round.
These principles help to guide the process and set expectations.
Staff is also seeking feedback on the outreach mechanism. There has been some interest in pursuing a
Citizen’s Assembly which can be more inclusive and more empowering to residents. A Citizen Assembly
utilizes a random drawing of self-selected residents who are ensured to be representative of the community
demographics. Participants are compensated for their time and will be tasked to make a recommendation
to Council. In order to be consistent with inclusive language that the City adheres to, rather than call it a
“Citizen Assembly,” our proposed name will be the “Civic Assembly.”
The Council Futures Committee had a presentation and discussion on Citizen Assemblies at their April 8,
2024 meeting. A recording can be found at: https://www.fcgov.com/council/futures
NEXT STEPS
Based on Council conversation and direction, staff will create an outreach plan and begin implementation.
Page 108
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENTS
1. Kearns and West Engagement Report
2. Presentation
Page 109
Item 4.
Prepared by Kearns & West
for the City of Fort Collins
Engagement conducted between October 2022 – February 2023
Community Engagement Findings
for the
Former Hughes Site
to the
City of Fort Collins City Council
Page 110
Item 4.
Neutral Engagement, Collaboration, and Strategic Communications
1776 Lincoln Street, Suite 1825
Denver, Colorado 80203
www.kearnswest.com
Cover Photo: Aerial photo of the Hughes site and Maxwell Natural Area. Credit: City of Fort Collins.
Page 111
Item 4.
Page 2 of 24
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 4
II. Background ............................................................................................................................... 6
III. Engagement Findings .............................................................................................................. 7
A. Areas of Universal Common Interest ....................................................................................... 7
B. Leveraging Existing Data ......................................................................................................... 7
C. Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey (Survey #1) ............................................................... 8
D. Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey (Survey #2) ............................................................... 9
E. Focus Groups......................................................................................................................... 10
Recreation Focus Group ........................................................................................................ 10
Wildlife Focus Groups ............................................................................................................ 11
PATHS Focus Group ............................................................................................................. 12
Conservation Interests Focus Group ..................................................................................... 13
F. City Boards & Departments Discussions ............................................................................... 14
Parks Department .................................................................................................................. 14
Natural Areas Department ..................................................................................................... 15
Land Conservation and Stewardship Board .......................................................................... 16
Parks & Recreation Board ..................................................................................................... 16
Disability Advisory Board ....................................................................................................... 17
Natural Resources Advisory Board ....................................................................................... 17
G. Indigenous Peoples Involvement Findings ............................................................................ 17
IV. Engagement Procedure ......................................................................................................... 17
A. Goals ...................................................................................................................................... 17
B. Key Messages........................................................................................................................ 18
C. Participants ............................................................................................................................ 19
D. Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 19
OurCity Platform and Community Surveys ............................................................................ 20
Focus Groups......................................................................................................................... 21
City Boards & Departments Discussions ............................................................................... 21
Neighborhood and Adjacent Property Owner Outreach ........................................................ 22
Indigenous Peoples Involvement ........................................................................................... 22
V. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 23
A. Potential Impact Measurements ............................................................................................ 23
Page 112
Item 4.
Page 3 of 24
Page 113
Item 4.
Page 4 of 24
I. Executive Summary
This document provides the Fort Collins City Council with
findings from five months of community engagement to
understand the community’s desired uses of the former
Hughes Stadium site. This document does not provide
the City with agreed-upon future land use scenarios, but
reflects the input heard from the community through a
variety of engagement methodologies to inform next
steps that Council may decide to take to advance
planning at the Hughes site.
Although this discrete phase of engagement spanned five
months, the City has been conducting engagement with
the community regarding the Hughes site since 2016, as
different land use scenarios were discussed. This
engagement phase revealed that there is a diversity of
desired uses for the site.
With this report, neither the engagement consultant,
Kearns & West, nor City staff are providing
recommendations. However, as the property comes into
City ownership and engagement continues, these findings
ideally promote a conversation among Council Members
that is informed by an understanding of the variety of
community interests in Fort Collins surrounding Hughes.
Throughout surveys, focus groups, and discussions with
and among City boards and staff, it’s clear that the former
Hughes Stadium site is a highly valued, cherished piece
of property, with endless opportunity. In April 2021, nearly
70% of voters supported ballot language to rezone the
property as Public Open Lands and use the property for
“parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and
wildlife rescue and rehabilitation.” The community group
Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably
(PATHS) collected 8,300 signatures in support of placing
the measure on the ballot.
This property already meets many community needs.
Adjacent property owners use it as an informal place to
spend time outdoors, within proximity of their homes. In
some respects, Hughes is an extension of some their
backyards and neighbors feel a sense of ownership over
it. It’s used by bird watchers and wildlife observers, and is
adjacent to the Maxwell Natural Area, Dixon Reservoir,
Pineridge Natural Area, and Horsetooth Reservoir, where
countless families, bike riders, hikers, and nature
enthusiasts enjoy outdoor, nature-based experiences. The existing disc golf course and
sledding hill are seasonal uses.
FIGURE 1: THE HUGHES SITE. PHOTO CREDIT:
CITY OF FORT COLLINS.
Page 114
Item 4.
Page 5 of 24
The community members who contributed their time to share input on potential future uses for
Hughes share a common set of interests and none are mutually exclusive. Community
members showed up to focus groups, surveys, meetings, and other forms of outreach in good
faith, ready to think creatively about the site, willing to hear other perspectives, and willing to
find compromise. The care that the community feels for the site and its potential to bring people
together, regardless of their interest, came across, and is a true testament to the health of the
Fort Collins community and ability for individuals and groups to find common ground behind an
opportunity for inspiration, connections both physical and spiritual, and restoration in all forms.
Overall, people share the belief that the views of the foothills that Hughes provides should be
preserved; that a community space for recreation and nature in that part of the City is sorely
needed; that the existing and potential future habitat and buffers for nature should be enhanced;
and that access to nature, wildlife habitats, recreation opportunities, and community spaces
should be prioritized.
The themes of a community was the common thread throughout all outreach, regardless of an
individual or group’s position or desires. However, there are divergent opinions about what that
means. For some, it means a place for people of all ages and abilities to ride a bike in a safe,
closed, family-oriented environment. For others, it means a place to demonstrate how to restore
native grassland habitat and together “do the right thing” to create an accessible and balanced
space. For others, that could mean a place where little happens beyond current activities, with
the addition of a few amenities such as a basic restroom, some signage, more parking, and the
continuation of sledding and disc golfing at the site.
This document does not represent a consensus outcome, but reports on the engagement heard,
and reflects on the engagement to represent the highest need combined with the best use of the
property given its history, ecological state, and using this property versus another property.
Tensions will remain between interests groups, which could manifest in skepticism or distrust of
this particular engagement phase.
Some groups reflected that the community focus groups should have been sequenced to first
engage PATHS, the group that spearheaded the community organizing effort to build
community support for placing the rezoning and acquisition effort on the ballot. PATHS leaders
argued that understanding PATHS’ perspectives and experiences speaking directly with voters
in the earliest part of this engagement phase would have yielded valuable background on the
project and key community members to engage. Other criticisms of the public process include
that some renters did not get postcards during the neighborhood outreach, and that the process
favored recreation or infrastructure-heavy uses. All engagement was valued and incorporated
equitably, and although it benefitted the process in some respect to hear from PATHS members
mid-way through the process to report back on feedback heard and contrast it to PATHS’
experiences, it’s been acknowledged that the sequence for engagement was called into
question.
However, as is noted throughout this document, divergent opinions on how the space should be
used, or critiques of the engagement process don’t preclude forward momentum on the Hughes
site planning process. With the energy, positive mindset, and depth of knowledge that
community members have brought to this process to date, there is unmistakable willingness to
bridge gaps, find creative paths forward, partner on funding opportunities, and create an
inclusive and innovative space.
Page 115
Item 4.
Page 6 of 24
II. Background
The City of Fort Collins’ citizen-initiated
ordinance related to the former Hughes
Stadium site was approved in April
2021. The ordinance requires Fort
Collins to “rezone upon passage of the
ordinance” the 164.56-acre former home
of the Hughes Stadium to the Public
Open Lands (POL) District and required
the City to acquire the property at fair
market value, for “parks, recreation, and
open lands, natural areas, and wildlife
rescue and rehabilitation.”
To understand community desires,
visions, and uses of Hughes,
a project team comprised of Fort Collins
staff and Kearns & West, a neutral third-
party outreach and engagement firm (the project team) designed an engagement plan to solicit
community input into potential development options for City Council's considerations. The team
considered each community group’s relationship to the Hughes site and sought to balance
priorities and needs in these findings.
In the engagement, many community members were confused by the terms used in the ballot
measure and between “Public Open Lands” and “Natural Areas,” terms explained below:
• “Public Open Lands” is a zoning designation that allows for designated uses that can
include parks, recreation activities, urban agriculture, composting facilities, wildlife
rescue and education centers, small scale solar.
• City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department-managed lands are called “Natural Areas”
where the primary focus is conservation and restoration with limited recreational activity,
with dedicated funding through a voter-approved tax that articulates designated uses.
This is noted because community members interpret “Natural Areas,” “Open Lands,” “Parks,”
and “Recreation” differently, which may have affected the survey results conducted as part of
this engagement. That said, the survey conducted via the City’s OurCity platform does provide
an overview of general desired uses, beyond the specific terms such as natural areas or open
lands. The ballot language can be interpreted to meet many community needs, and although the
City is obligated to follow the POL zoning in its Land Development Code, there are different
uses allowed based on different levels of review. The City intends to try to deliver on as many of
the uses stipulated in the ballot language as possible, based on feasibility.
Community members by and large did ask questions about the meaning of the ballot language –
whether structures are allowed to be built in the first place, if all the desired uses must be
developed, if the list contained within the ballot language serves as a series of options, and
what constraints there are on the proposed uses. It is recommended that the meaning of the
ballot language and rezoning parameters be described and interpreted for community members
beyond this engagement phase.
FIGURE 2: THE HUGHES FOOTBALL STADIUM. PHOTO CREDIT:
THE COLORADOAN-DON REICHERT
Page 116
Item 4.
Page 7 of 24
III. Engagement Findings
The following findings reflect what the project team heard over the course of the five-month
engagement period. These findings can serve as the basis for discussion among City Council
and staff, and the basis for future outreach and deliberation around next steps. As scenarios are
developed, various community members can assist in refining the approach and providing user-
specific insight into the planning. For many, Hughes is in a part of the City that many consider to
be a “programming desert.” The community generally would like to see the City develop a
coherent vision for the whole site that incorporates multiple uses and fosters public/private
partnerships. Funding and management could come from a combination of departments and
creative third-party funding sources.
In the most basic sense, there is support for wildlife center, potentially in one corner, disc golf in
another, small bike park in another, and restoration/connected habitat in another.
A. Areas of Universal Common Interest
B. Leveraging Existing Data
To ensure current engagement builds on previous efforts, the project team used findings from
the 2021 Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the 2022 Fort Collins Community Survey, both
statistically valid and recent surveys. Understanding residents’ outdoor facility needs amenities
assisted the project team in framing engagement strategies and activities regarding the Hughes
site. During the time in which development of the Hughes site was an option, residents did
FIGURE 3: AREAS OF UNIVERSAL COMMON INTEREST HEARD THROUGHOUT THE
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
Page 117
Item 4.
Page 8 of 24
express the desire to restore the property and plan
uses that fostered conservation and recreation. While
a "no development" option was not on the table at that
time, community preference still pointed to desires for
that outcome.
The Fort Collins Community Survey identified quality
outdoor and recreational opportunities as an asset to
City residents, results that the public engagement
efforts around the Parks and Recreation Master Plan
reiterated. The survey found that 97% of the Fort
Collins population believe that quality parks, paved
trails, and recreation facilities are important to the
City’s identity.
Within outdoor facilities, respondents identified the
following top five amenities as most important to their
households:
• Paved, multi-use trails
• Hiking trails
• Natural areas and wildlife habitats
• Unprogrammed spaces
• Playgrounds
Similarly, residents identified the follow ten items as
recreational needs for their households:
• Multi-use paved trails
• Multi-use soft surface trails
• Natural areas & wildlife habitats
• Unprogrammed space
• Parks and plazas downtown
• Park shelters and picnic areas
• Community gardens
• Playgrounds
• Dog parks
• Water-play features
C. Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey
(Survey #1)
The first round of digital engagement specific to this
phase asked community members to share their
desired potential uses for the former Hughes site.
The survey was live from the launch of the website in
late December 2022 until January 31, 2023. Duplicate
responses were removed, and the data were
summarized to understand the respondents’ priorities
FIGURES 4 AND 5: RESULTS FROM THE FIRST
ROUND OF DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT. THE WORD
CLOUD SHOWS ANSWERS TO “HOW WOULD
YOU LIKE TO SEE THE SPACE USED?”
Page 118
Item 4.
Page 9 of 24
and desired activities for the site. The survey received 2,710 unique responses.
Respondents supported an even distribution of community
priorities for the site. Fifteen percent of respondents
supported recreation, 16% open lands, 16% parks, 11%
natural areas, and 18% wildlife rescue and restoration.
The public was also given an opportunity to prioritize
“other,” elaborating on the type of open lands or
recreational activities they hoped to see on the site.
Figures 4 and 5 show answers to the question of how
community members would like to see the space used.
High preferences were voiced for a bike park, open and
natural space, mixed use recreation space, multi-use
connected trails, an Indigenous Peoples community
gathering area, and maintaining the disc golf course. The
word cloud was populated from the question: “How would
you like to see the space used?” Responses that were
most popular are represented with larger font size,
including trails, natural, area, wildlife, park, bike, open,
and space.
The results of the first survey helped draft the second
round of digital engagement, which looked to understand
the desired level of impact and potential phasing of
activities on the site.
D. Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey
(Survey #2)
The second round of digial engagment specific to this
phase asked community members to share their
preferences for level of activity on the Hughes site.
The survey was live between February 10 – 24, 2023.
Duplicate responses were removed, and the data were
summarized to understand the community’s desired
activities for the site. The survey received 1,896 unique
responses.
When asked about their desired level of impact/activity for
the site on a scale of 1-5 (1 being low impact activities
and 5 being high impact activities), about 50% of
respondents supported high impact activities, 11%
supported medium impact activities, and 20% supported
low impact activities. Both levels “2” and “4” received
support from 10% of respondents.
Respondents could pick their top five preferred activities
on the site. Figure 6 shows results of the question as a bar chart starting from highest to lowest.
FIGURE 6: RESULTS FROM THE SECOND
ROUND OF DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT.
Page 119
Item 4.
Page 10 of 24
High preferences were voiced for trail connections and improvements, a bike park, a Nordic
skiing course, land restoration, restrooms, and a cross country running course.
The survey also included a free response question where many respondents reiterated their
activity preferences.
E. Focus Groups
Findings from focus groups and conversations across the community are represented by
engagement opportunity below. The separation between recreation, wildlife, conservation, and
other interests as reflected in the summaries helped the project team make space for group-
specific interests to be heard, but don’t imply that future conversations should be segregated by
use or interest, or that scenarios for Hughes should exclude one group or another. At this stage
of the engagement process, it’s helpful to gather like-minded interests together to hear,
collectively, thoughts on the direction of the property from a particular point of view.
Community members were identified based on their role within community organizations and
previous engagement with City efforts, including Hughes site outreach, the Parks and
Recreation Master Plan, and wildlife rehabilitation discussions.
Across all engagement, community members reflected a desire to understand each other’s
interests and come together on proposed approaches for Hughes. The sense of community and
co-creation was strong across all engagement.
The focus groups either took place in person, as a hybrid meeting, or virtually. The meetings
typically began with a short presentation on the process, after which the project team facilitated
a discussion to understand the group’s or individual’s position on using the Hughes site and how
that relates to the original ballot language.
The input under each theme reflects thoughts from a variety of attendees and is not weighted
based on frequency of mentions or type of organization who provided that feedback. The
comments are summarized to indicate key themes, then organized by topic.
Recreation Focus Group
A November 16 focus group was held with recreation community members from the following
organizations: Parkour, Overland Mountain Biking, Wolfpack, YourGroupRide.com, Poudre
School District, Radio Controlled Rock Crawlers, Fort Collins Baseball Club, Bike Fort Collins.
The project team also spoke separately (due to scheduling conflicts) with individuals
representing drone park, velodrome, and disc golf interests. Their feedback is incorporated
below.
Key themes: Community members reflected the desire to maintain the natural, open space feel
of the property, while providing a space that allows residents and visitors alike to play sports,
build community, improve their quality of life, spend time outdoors, and be inspired. Community
members representing bike interests greatly wish to see a bike park built at Hughes, modeled
after the Valmont Bike Park in Boulder, while others could use the space for a wildlife
rehabilitation facility. Community members widely support the spirit of the ballot language and
desire to maintain the views of the foothills and ensure that any new structures are consistent
with the zoning requirements in the POL zoning district. Community members also reflected the
need to offer unique amenities for the community and visitors in a public space, rather than a
Page 120
Item 4.
Page 11 of 24
private one, to promote connecting with others and inspire future generations of outdoor
enthusiasts.
• Enhance Recreational Spaces and Build a Bike Park
o Consider building a bike park or "bike hub" that includes all ages features,
including a paved perimeter trail, unpaved mountain bike and cyclocross
courses, a pump track, and dirt jumps; with opportunities for skills development
and intermediate/advanced features.
o A bike hub could connect to the Maxwell Natural Area, nearby trails, and the City
bike route system.
o A bike hub could accommodate other uses than a bike park such as a radio-
controlled rock crawler track, a Nordic skiing course, and cross-country running
track, and a parkour facility.
o Community members support maintaining the disc golf course and water
retention areas. Community members generally agree that the site does not need
to house sports fields for a local school district or to meet community needs.
o The disc golf course is suitable for disc golfers in its current form but could
benefit from enhancements such as trees or movable pin locations.
• Consider a Community Center
o Community members advocated for a space that inspires residents to explore
new recreational hobbies and connect to the natural environment.
o The history of the site could be interpreted in any development and incorporated
into future land-use scenarios.
o The space could be left open in areas for informal community or neighborhood
uses.
Wildlife Focus Groups
Two November 16 focus groups were held with the
Rocky Mountain Raptor Center and the Northern
Colorado Wildlife Center, separately.
Key themes: The Hughes site is an ideal location to
help the Northern Colorado Wildlife Center grow its
organization and expand its ability to help the
community. The Rocky Mountain Raptor Center also
sees opportunity in relocating its center to Hughes. The
footprint it requires is greater than that of the wildlife
center, but there’s the possibility of co-locating the
facilities. Both organizations believe that the capital
investment in building a new center would be significant but are willing to help with fundraising.
Hughes is an optimal site because it also offered the opportunity for community members to
become more integrated into nature through educational opportunities.
• Build a Wildlife Rehabilitation Facility
o Community members would like dedicated, spacious facilities to house existing
and future rehabilitation services and presented a variety of site location
scenarios.
FIGURE 7: GREENWOOD WILDLIFE
REHABILITATION CENTER IN LONGMONT,
COLORADO.
Page 121
Item 4.
Page 12 of 24
o Community members suggested the
concept of a “Nature in the City” visitor
center that provides community
engagement and education on raptor and
wildlife rehabilitation practices.
o Rehabilitation spaces require a natural
buffer space from development.
o A rehabilitation space could provide
emergency rescue operations for wildlife.
o Developing dedicated, suitable
rehabilitation and recovery spaces can
build upon Fort Collins’ efforts to promote
conservation and preservation within the
City and to meet broader county and state
needs.
PATHS Focus Group
The project team met on January 25 with Planning Action
to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS). PATHS is a
citizen-funded, nonprofit, grassroots organization that
organized the citizen-led ballot initiative. The
organization is founded on preserving the Hughes land
as a public open space for the Fort Collins community
and local wildlife.
Key themes: Representatives from PATHS would like to
see Hughes turned into a Natural Area with a wildlife
center. Ecological continuity is a priority. PATHS
supports maintaining the disc golf course and sledding
hill, and opposes a bike park, built facilities, hard surface
paths, and playground. It was indicated that the word
“recreation” was included in the ballot language to
ensure that the disc golf course and sledding hill were
preserved. They reflected that the essence of the ballot
initiative process was to create open space with no
development, and people voted to protect Hughes, not
develop it.
• Continue the community engagement
process.
o Use the PATHS group as a resource and
reflection of the community’s desires.
o Consider increasing participation in the
engagement process by keeping the
survey open.
o Describe the differences between “natural areas” and “open space” in future
engagement activities.
o Foster a relationship with CSU and the Poudre School District to teach students
about the natural environment.
• Consider the intent of the ballot language.
FIGURE 8: RED FOX MEADOWS AND A RAPTOR
OVER FORT COLLINS. PHOTO CREDIT: CITY OF
FORT COLLINS.
Page 122
Item 4.
Page 13 of 24
o Turn Hughes into a Natural Area and prioritize protected open space.
o Keep the disc golf course and sledding hill as a recreational space due to its low
impact and the City’s love of the activity.
o Lease space to the Northern Colorado Wildlife Center.
• Preserve the land as a natural, open space.
o Preserve the dark, natural open space to allow stargazing.
o Preserve the views of the foothills.
o Prevent recreation uses that require infrastructure.
o Use the space for only low-impact recreation use, such as low-impact trails.
o Consider incorporating a shaded community space.
o Emphasize the value of this property in relation to Pineridge and Maxwell Natural
Areas.
o Protect the highly traveled migrations routes for the wildlife in the area.
o Prevent the expansion of parking at the Hughes site.
Conservation Interests Focus Group
Two identical February 9 focus groups were held with individuals and organizations
representing conservation interests. The first focus group was attended by individuals from
CSU’s Conservation Leadership Thru Learning program, Colorado State University’s Warner
College Diversity and Inclusion Program, Wildlands Restoration Volunteers, Colorado Natural
Heritage Program, and Audubon Fort Collins. The second focus group was attended by
individuals from the Save the Poudre, The High Plains Environmental Center, The Bird
Conservancy of the Rockies, Colorado Open Lands, and the Sierra Club-Poudre Canyon
Group.
Key themes: The Hughes site offers countless opportunities for innovation – innovation in
restoration, inclusivity, integrating technology, and accessible design. The opportunities to bring
back habitat for birds is rare, and the grassland habitat at Hughes provides a chance to let the
community watch the land be restored. Any restoration effort at Hughes should be guided by a
study of the existing plant and animal habitat and what areas can be restored. Restoring
Hughes can give future stewards of the land a vision of what their legacy could look like, but we
need to design systems that allow people to enjoy the space.
• Engage and create a space for a diverse demographic of people.
o Use the wealth of knowledge and lively student population from CSU.
o Create spaces that are inclusive for all populations including underrepresented
communities, older generations, and those with physical and mental disabilities.
o Ensure engagement with underrepresented communities to better understand
how to make the space inclusive for all.
o Understand what will attract or invite community members to the space.
o Create a space on the property that is planned for nature appreciation for all
people, including those with cognitive and mental disabilities.
o Create community agreement amongst different interest groups and the
community.
• Use current and past City examples as a guide.
o Consider how people view or socialize with this space to understand future
uses.
o Learn the mistakes of previous planning efforts and incorporate lessons learned
into this project.
Page 123
Item 4.
Page 14 of 24
• Plan for multiple uses on the site.
o Expand the definition of restoration to include social dimensions such as
restoring the history of the site and giving future generations a vision of legacy.
o Incorporate low impact recreation opportunities with the grassland habitat, such
as a community pavilion, playground, nature observation points, or bike paths.
o Consider lighting on the site to be sensitive to birds and wildlife, while also
promoting a safe experience for community members.
o Find balance in the various perspectives to create a site.
o Consider a multi-use park where activities vary from season to season.
o Develop trail connections to Natural Areas.
o Plan for additional shade, whether natural or manmade.
o Consider moving the disc golf course to the northeast part of the property to
create a contiguous tract of development and recreational uses on the northern
half of the property, and a contiguous tract of Natural Area (abutting Maxwell) on
the southern part of the property.
• Restore the land to its natural grasslands’ habitat.
o Use the Hughes site as an opportunity to bring back the grassland habitat for
local birds and animals and connect to wildlife corridors.
o Continue to engage the community while restoring the land to a grassland habitat
to create learning and community volunteer opportunities.
o “Tiny” areas of restoration are not as valuable as contiguous habitats.
• Explore partnerships and opportunities for Hughes.
o Explore grants and partnerships to secure funding.
o Embrace areas of conflict or tension to understand points of consensus,
creativity, and innovation.
o Consider the history of fire and flooding in this area when designing the site.
o Prioritize a space that would bring more environmental education to the
community, school districts, and CSU students.
F. City Boards & Departments Discussions
The input under each theme reflects thoughts from a variety of board and department members and
is not weighted based on frequency of mentions or group that provided feedback. The comments are
organized by themes.
Parks Department
Key themes: The Parks Department is interested in exploring the use of Hughes to fulfill many
of the facilities gaps identified in its master plan. There are trail connectivity options and
relatively large swaths of land that make the property an appealing option for passive or active
recreation opportunities. The Department has a need for a large footprint park, and Hughes
meets that need.
• Use the Hughes site to address gaps identified through the City’s Parks and
Recreation Needs Assessment Findings Report.
o Include passive recreation activities on Hughes (e.g., seating/casual use spaces,
community gardens, walking trails, landscape features, sledding, and regional
stormwater detention).
o Implement active recreation on Hughes (e.g., bike trails, outdoor fitness and
exercise facilities, naturalistic play attractions, playgrounds, cross-country track,
RC car track).
Page 124
Item 4.
Page 15 of 24
o Build Facilities on Hughes (e.g., dog park, individual picnic and seating areas,
group picnic areas, park shelters, restrooms, Native American center,
educational facilities).
• Explore the Department’s interest in the area.
o Desire for proximity to the foothills to allow
community members such as mountain
bikers and Nordic skiers to use in this area.
o Desire for a paved trail that connects north-
south, and ideally, crosses through the
Hughes site.
o Understand the funding needs to acquire the
property and open a new facility.
Natural Areas Department
Key themes: The Natural Areas Department understands
the community’s desire to see Hughes restored to meet high
conservation and ecological values. Hughes is a highly
disturbed site, and it would take significant investment to
preserve it. Land use regulations would shift when comes
under the City’s management (e.g., related to off leash dog
use). The opportunity cost of acquiring and restoring
Hughes would compromise the Department’s capacity and
resources to acquire and/or restore other parcels of land.
There’s a middle ground between wholesale Parks
Department management of the site and Natural Areas
Department management of the site that should be
explored. A blended, cost-shared solution is preferred.
• Continue conversations about restoring Hughes to
natural habitat.
o Acknowledge that restoration costs are high
for Hughes to meet ecological goals.
o Be flexible, if Hughes were to be designated
a Natural Area, to understand where the
property fits within the Department’s
restoration framework and mission.
o Explore ADA and accessibility considerations
for the space.
o Explore the trade-offs of restoring Hughes
versus restoring and acquiring other City
properties.
• Explore how natural areas could integrate with
wildlife rescue on the site.
o Discuss whether a wildlife center can be
placed within a natural area and what
relationship, or partnership would exist
between the City and the center, particularly
around facility management and the site’s
mission.
• Connect to surrounding natural areas.
FIGURE 9: FORT COLLINS NATURALIST
COMMUNITY. PHOTO CREDITS: CITY OF FORT
COLLINS.
Page 125
Item 4.
Page 16 of 24
o Explore connections for visitors to the adjacent Maxwell Natural Area.
o Explore connections to the existing trails within the Foothills Zone.
Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
Key themes: Equitable engagement is a priority for outreach. Restoration at the area should be
prioritized and informed by a natural resource inventory and habitat study. Partnerships with
community groups is critical to success.
• Consider how to fund potential activities on Hughes.
o Consider additional funding sources to fund the planning or implementation.
o Explore public-private partnerships that could assist in funding future activities.
o Embrace the cost of restoration as this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to
restore this site.
o Connect funding with uses – for example, funding for natural areas should be
spend on natural area activities, and funding for recreational activities should be
spent on parks and recreation activities.
o Avoid investing significant funding into maintenance and facilities costs.
• Prioritize open natural space.
o Conduct a resource inventory at Hughes.
o Restore the natural habitat for grassland birds.
o Prevent Hughes from becoming a tourist destination.
o Understand that recreational activities negatively impact wildlife.
o Maintain the disc golf course as a compatible use to a natural area.
o Minimize the use of water.
• Engage the community on potential uses and partnerships.
o Connect with conservation interests and the PATHs group to hear their
perspectives.
o Partner with the Raptor Center and Northern Colorado Wildlife Center.
o Engage with those who visit the Maxwell Natural Area to understand how their
activities could expand into Hughes.
o Develop online surveys in multiple languages and engage underserved
communities.
o Align community engagement with property acquisition.
o Restore trust with citizens by engaging those who developed the ballot measure
to understand their perspective on current desired activities.
Parks & Recreation Board
Key themes: Funding will be a key issue to address in any scenario, and many of the scenarios
advanced by recreation group will require significant funding. City Council should align the uses
at Hughes with gaps identified in previous planning documents and master plans. There is
overlap between desired uses and values for the property, regardless of individual’s positions.
• Collaborate with Indigenous Peoples and understand their needs.
o Consult or hire Indigenous People in subsequent phases of work on the Hughes
site.
o Create opportunities for Indigenous Peoples storytelling.
• Understand how Hughes can support other City planning efforts.
o Use the Trails Master Plan, the Parks & Recreation Master Plan, and the Active
Modes Plan to see how Hughes could support City priorities.
• Use the site for recreation programming.
Page 126
Item 4.
Page 17 of 24
o Explore the idea of a mountain bike park.
o Develop a “safe” list of agreed upon amenities that allows future Hughes
planning processes to be successful.
o Consider community gathering spaces, such as a festival or community garden
space.
o Create a space that blends with the surrounding Natural Areas.
• Create transparency with the public.
o Discuss funding considerations in public.
Disability Advisory Board
Key Themes: The board supports the idea of a community space, but with little new
development. A potential bike park is generally supported, given the size of the cycling
community. Hughes would be an ideal location for walking trails, if the area is developed with
adaptive needs in mind. The property could become a sanctuary for birds or other animals
through a nature or wildlife preserve with education opportunities. Accessibility key, especially
with parking, and the board would like to be part of future discussions to ensure accessibility.
The board raised questions and concerns were raised regarding water usage, Dial-A-Ride
services, and shade.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
Key Themes: The board generally supports the idea of this being an important area to
transition between Natural Areas and surrounding urban uses and preserve existing wildlife
habitats. A desire to incorporate community feedback for potential restoration as a Natural Area
at least on portions of the property and consider other areas for recreational uses. The board
raised questions regarding upcoming engagement and whether youth and other interested
parties have been engaged in the process.
Indigenous Peoples Involvement Findings
These conversations are ongoing. On February 25th, City staff met with a group of Native
American and Indigenous community members to discuss more broadly the topic of land use
and meaningful community spaces within the Fort Collins and Northern Colorado region.
IV. Engagement Procedure
The engagement process to inform potential uses for Hughes entailed developing overall
communications goals and objectives, developing consistent project messaging, facilitating
discussions with community members, engaging Indigenous Peoples, and managing digital
engagement focused on educating, engaging, and surveying the Fort Collins community.
A. Goals
The project team developed a “Hughes Engagement Plan” that outlined the messaging,
strategies, and tactics to implement in support of listening to the community on desires for
Hughes. The public engagement process aimed to inform the broader community through
shared knowledge and consult various groups regarding the continuum of future options
available for the Hughes site. The following engagement goals were established to ensure
alignment throughout the project:
Page 127
Item 4.
Page 18 of 24
• Inform the Fort Collins community about the Hughes site engagement effort and
opportunities to engage.
• Engage the community through focus groups and digital platforms to identify and record
potential uses and preferences for the Hughes site and identify other parties to engage
in the process.
• Report on and inform the community on a variety of scenarios and budget constraints for
the Hughes site.
• Present findings to the Fort Collins City Council.
B. Key Messages
The project team sought to advance key messages about the history of the site, the
engagement effort, and next steps in the process to equitably inform the community and make
sure that the correct information was disseminated through community partners. These
messages were as follows:
• A citizen-initiated ballot measure was added to the April 2021 municipal election ballot
and was passed.
• This ballot language required the City Council of Fort Collins to rezone the former
Hughes Stadium property to a Public Open Lands District. Language in the ballot
requires the City to acquire the property at fair market value and use the property for
parks, recreation, open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration.
• The City completed the rezoning of the former Hughes Stadium property, and is in the
process of acquiring the former Hughes Stadium site.
• The City is in the process of meeting its obligation of the ballot language.
• The engagement builds upon past engagement efforts specific to Hughes, and
acknowledges the broad range of desires related to the property from those who voted
on it.
• Engagement efforts are in coordination with existing City plans, including the City's
Master Plan, City's Transportation Master Plan, Fort Collins Park, and Recreation Master
Plan, and builds upon previous engagement around the site.
• The City is engaging internally, across departments, to discuss appropriate uses given
the area’s context.
• This phase of community outreach focuses on determining and envisioning the
continuum of options the Hughes site could offer given the ballot language. Targeted
community outreach will help the City understand potential future uses for the land,
which will then be presented to City Council.
• The Hughes site is a valuable but relatively small parcel of land, at 164 acres. The ballot
language gives the City flexibility in how to meet a broad set of community needs with
the land. While the City cannot accommodate all desires for the property, it will make
every effort to listen to community needs and plan the property in a useful and beneficial
way for the community.
• There is not currently funding in place to proceed on any potential use scenarios.
Page 128
Item 4.
Page 19 of 24
C. Participants
Between October 2022 and February 2023, the project
team engaged with the community in a variety of ways.
A postcard was sent to 633 residents with proximity to
the Hughes site. Digitally, approximately 14,600 visited
the website, and the first survey saw 2,710 unique
responses (open December 1, 2022 – January 31,
2023). The second survey saw 1,876 unique
responses (open February 10, 2023 – February 24,
2023). The City sent email blasts, reached out to
adjacent HOA property management companies,
posted on social media, and provided updates on
Hughes in e-newsletters.
For in-person board presentations and focus groups,
the project team also met with about 67 community
members with a variety of interests and sent
invitations to about 111 community members.
D. Methodology
The outreach effort sought to inform and hear
feedback from interested individuals through digital
communications and engage community members
through focus groups.
The community’s interests are infinite and
conversations with community members about their
views, desires, and needs related to Hughes are a
never-ending source of inspiration and a true window
into the Fort Collins community. Understanding the
community’s interest and vision for the site within the context of the ballot language was a key
tenet of engagement.
The project team conducted a variety of engagement activities to collect feedback on specific
desired uses, aspirations, barriers, and community concerns or opportunities for the Hughes
site. The structure of those activities is explained above and summaries of the outcomes from
each activity are available in III.Engagement Findings. Across all engagement, the questions
asked followed these themes:
• How have you been involved in planning the former Hughes site?
• What have you heard from the community to date?
• Given the allowable uses, how would you like to see the space used?
• What would you like to see here?
• Do you have a view on what uses (within the parameters of the ballot language) should
be prioritized?
• What do you see as the keys to success for ensuring an effective, inclusive
engagement process?
• Is there anyone you know who should be involved in this process, who is not currently?
FIGURE 11: AUDIENCES ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS.
FIGURE 10: NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS
CATEGORIZED BY AUDIENCE TYPE.
Page 129
Item 4.
Page 20 of 24
OurCity Platform and Community Surveys
Consistent communications strategies are important to understand how the target audiences will
be engaged throughout the process. Considerations were given to tools that would best inform,
educate, and engage the community throughout the process. Outreach to community members
and groups through a community survey administered on the City’s OurCity website was the
first tier of engagement. The built-in engagement activities available on the OurCity platform lent
themselves well to conducting the following two community surveys:
• Future of Hughes Stadium Site Desired Uses Survey (survey #1)
• Future of Hughes Stadium Community Prioritization Survey (survey #2)
Using the OurCity engagement
platform, community members could
stay informed on the current process
and ideas heard to date. Community
members were able to provide
additional feedback through digital
questionnaires with potential activities
and a prioritization exercise. In
addition to the OurCity platform, the
project team used existing
communication channels, including e-
mail and newsletter to promote the
website launch and online
engagement opportunities. This
allowed the project team to provide
updates to the various audiences and keep all informed.
The first survey questions were designed by the project team. Translation for additional
languages was provided through the OurCity interface. The survey asked individuals to rank
which of the five uses in the ballot language they would like to see prioritized, asking the
following questions:
• How would you like to see the space used?
• Who else should be engaged in this process?
• Is there anything else you would like the City to know?
Over the course of the outreach during the first survey, 7,700 community members visited the
site. Figure 12 shows the various spikes in digital engagement from November 1, 2022, until
February 2023. When analyzing the sources of traffic to the OurCity page, many community
members used a direct hyperlink to access the page followed by social media, referrals, or
emails. A small portion found the site through search engines. The spikes on the graph are the
following:
• The first spike corresponds with the launch of the website around December 1, 2022.
• The second spike happens around January 3, 2023, likely due to the neighborhood
postcards arriving to mailboxes.
• The third spike of 1,244 visitors was on January 31, 2023, the day the first community
survey closed and the day after a Coloradoan article on the topic.
FIGURE 12: VISITORS TO THE OURCITY PROJECT PAGE IN THOUSANDS
OVER TIME.
Page 130
Item 4.
Page 21 of 24
• The most recent spike correspond to the launch and closure of the second community
survey with 1,135 visitors.
The second survey was designed similarly to the first survey. Questions were drafted by the
project team. Translation for additional languages was provided through the OurCity interface.
The bulk of the engagement was performed in English. This survey asked community members
to consider their preferred level of activity on the site on a scale of 1-5 (1 being lower impact or
activity uses, and 5 being higher impact or activities). Additionally, the survey asks community
members to answer the following questions:
• Of the items listed on the survey, pick your top 5 uses or activities that you prefer to see
on the site.
• Is there anything else you would like the City to know?
The activities and uses included on the survey were not exhaustive or comprehensive, but were
instead a list of most common requests on current and past engagement phases. An option for
other was included in the list for community members to raise an additional activity or use for
the site.
Focus Groups
Representatives that participated in focus groups were engaged because of their relationship to
the ballot measure, the mission of their organization aligned with the allowable uses in the ballot
language, they were identified as potential users of the Hughes site, or they expressed interest
in the process. These groups included those who worked to pass the ballot measure, wildlife
rescue and restoration interests, conservation interests, recreation groups previously engaged
during the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and open space and natural areas
advocates.
The main goals of the focus groups were to:
• Gather input and suggestions on potential uses and preferences for the Hughes site.
• Share information on a variety of scenarios and budget constraints for the site.
• Assess the community’s continued interest in participating in the process.
Each meeting began with a short presentation on the process, after which the project team
facilitated a discussion to learn each group’s interests in using Hughes (and how), and the
feasibility of implementing those uses. For consistency, the project team developed a script and
discussion guide for each conversation.
City Boards & Departments Discussions
A primary interest in engaging with key City advisory boards was to inform community leaders
about the process while collecting feedback on outreach efforts and findings to date. The project
team met with the following four City boards:
• Disability Advisory Board
• Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
• Natural Resources Advisory Board
• Parks & Recreation Board
Page 131
Item 4.
Page 22 of 24
Neighborhood and Adjacent Property Owner Outreach
The project team engaged residents and adjacent property owners to inform them about the
Hughes site engagement process through a post card mailer. Kearns & West supported the
City’s communications department in developing the postcard. Six hundred and thirty-three
households surrounding the Hughes site received the postcard in early January 2023.
The postcard was designed to educate these households about the Hughes site engagement
process, knowing that many neighbors and adjacent property owners use the site informally to
walk and be in nature. Hearing from these community members is especially important since
they will bear witness to any changes to the site, and their daily lives may be temporarily
impacted, or their daily routines may be altered. The call to action in the postcard to adjacent
property owners was to visit the OurCity website and take the survey to share their vision for the
land.
Indigenous Peoples Involvement
The project team listened to Indigenous Peoples to understand their needs and how these
needs could be folded into the Hughes site planning. The project team worked with City staff
engaged in Indigenous programming to ensure engagement was responsive to cultural needs.
FIGURE 13: THE FUTURE OF HUGHES POSTCARD SENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.
Page 132
Item 4.
Page 23 of 24
V. Conclusion
Community members approached potential planning scenarios with creativity, flexibility, and
pragmatism, suggesting ways for multiple facilities to exist on the site, and offering that various
organizations’ desired uses for the site could be adapted and blended for co-location while
maintaining safety, particularly for wild animal enclosures. All community members reflected
their willingness to find opportunities for collaboration among organizations and partners.
Despite the appetite for a variety of restoration or recreation scenarios, an option to make
minimal changes to the property represents one end of the spectrum of development (or no
development), to keep the property as is, with its existing uses. These might be considered of
lower potential impact, as detailed in this section. On the other end of the spectrum of potential
scenarios, generally considered medium- or high-impact is an option to fully develop the
property consistent with both the various options in the ballot language (“parks, recreation, and
open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration”) and the cross section of desired
City activities from the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the City’s community wide survey
(paved, multi-use trails, hiking trails, natural areas and wildlife habitats, and unprogrammed
spaces).
Land ownership plays a big part in what can happen at Hughes. It appears that there are
multiple scenarios for land acquisition, the three most notable being whether the land is
acquired by the Natural Areas Department, the Parks Department, or with general funds; or a
combination of all three, depending on how the site will be used. The plan for uses will
determine funding for acquisition, and the different uses have tradeoffs and opportunity costs.
While the topic of funding various proposals was addressed through engagement, no
conclusions were made on specific funding streams. All groups recognized that implementation
of most, if not all, scenarios, would require funding partnerships or external funding, but were
committed to leading those efforts and entering in creative funding partnerships with the City.
Community members also support the idea creating consensus-based proposals to expand the
list of potential partners who could help fund and fundraise toward development, and bringing in
a variety of funding partners. Each scenario has its own phases of construction, funding,
challenges, departmental constraints.
A. Potential Impact Measurements
Many of the desired uses for the former Hughes site sit along a spectrum of implementation
considerations – some may be relatively easily implemented with little budget and a short
development schedule or requiring minimal restoration. For example, developing a pit toilet or
enhancing the disc golf course could be realized with minimal investment and a relatively low
footprint or staff mobilization.
In the second survey, community members were asked to reflect on how the site could be used,
on a scale from lowest level of impact/activity and the highest level of impact/activity, based on
activities categorized by three levels of potential impact – low, medium, and high. Then,
community members were asked to pick the top five uses or activities that they would prefer to
see on the site in the future. Community members were reminded that there is currently no
funding designated for restoration or any other potential activities or uses on the site, and that
overall funding sources were could combing Natural Areas and Parks resources based on
usage/activities; and that uses and activities are not exhaustive or comprehensive and are
instead a list of most common requests on various survey and outreach results to date.
Page 133
Item 4.
Page 24 of 24
In this context, the level of impact generally reflects the amount of effort and resources required
to implement a potential use or the ease of implementing a scenario but can also reflect the
amount of time it would take to implement or the level of funding. The potential level of impact
and the ease of implementation from funding and construction perspectives are correlated, and
implementation costs are generally consistent with the implementation timing.
FIGURE 14: CORRELATION BETWEEN THE POTENTIAL LEVEL OF IMPACT/ACTIVITY, FUNDING STREAMS,
AND IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD.
Page 134
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Council Priority
June 11, 2024
Develop a Use Plan for the Hughes Property
Page 135
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here 2Council Questions
QUESTIONS:
What feedback do Councilmembers
have regarding the guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
What feedback do Councilmembers
have on utilizing a People’s Assembly
vs. an in-house engagement process?
Page 136
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
3
Background
1968 2016 2019-2022
CSU Closes the 164-acre
Hughes Stadium Site
20232021
City considers options for the site
(Council considers rezoning the
site for housing in Nov 2019)
Consider community input
on activities for use of the
site
Stadium opens for
CSU football games
2022-2023
Citizens vote to rezone the site for
“parks, recreation, open lands,
natural areas, wildlife rescue and
restoration.” Council rezones
property as “Public Open Lands”
City acquires the site
from CSU
Page 137
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
4
Historic Site Context
1950 2017
Page 138
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
•In 2021, citizen-initiated petition to rezone the164.56-
acre Hughes Stadium to the Public Open Lands District
for “parks, recreation, and open lands, natural
areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration.”
•City re-zoned parcel to Public Open Lands (POL)
•Zoning designation or district for Natural Areas,
Publicly-Owned Parks, and open lands which have
a community-wide emphasis
•City acquired land in 2023 for $12 Million
•Internal payment agreement to balance out
contributions based on final use (Parks/Natural Areas)
5
Ballot Language & Background
Page 139
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
6
Engagement Process -2023
•Based on the 2021 ballot
language, how would you
prioritize the following uses?
•How would you like to see the
space used?
Page 140
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
7
Survey Results
Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey (Survey #2)
1,896 unique responses
Desired Level of Impact
High preferences were voiced for trail connections and
improvements, a bike park, a Nordic skiing course, land
restoration, restrooms, and a cross-country running
course.
Future of Hughes Stadium Site Survey (Survey #1)
2,710 unique responses
Based on the 2021 ballot language, how would you
prioritize the following uses?
•15% of respondents supported recreation
•16% open lands
•16% parks
•11% natural areas
•18% wildlife rescue and restoration
Page 141
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereCommunity Park Comparison
Hughes
168.36 ac
City Park
77 ac
Rolland Moore
68 ac
Edora
core: 49 ac
Fossil Creek
79 ac
Spring Canyon
123 ac
Twin Silo
53 ac Martinez
48 ac
Page 142
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
9
Guiding Principles
Purpose:
Set expectations and vision for final use plan.
Proposed Principles:
•Develop a plan that meets the ballot language, is contextually appropriate for site
location, can be implemented over time.
•Create integrated, multi-use spaces that can serve the community year-round.
Page 143
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
10
Process and Timeline
Civic Assembly
Q2/24:
Coordinate plan with partners
Q3/24:
Outreach and education campaign with
the public
Q4/24:
Randomized mailing and Assembly
selection
Q1/25:
Begin Assembly
Q2/25:
Present recommendation to Council
Internal Process
Q2/24:
Develop outreach plan and budget
Q3 & Q4/24:
Begin outreach opportunities
Q4/24:
Council update
Q1/25:
Develop site plan options/drawings &
continue outreach
Q2/25:
Present recommendation to Council
Page 144
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
11
Why Civic Assemblies
1
2
3
Participants selected by a
democratic lottery
Group provided enough time for
learning and in-depth deliberation.
Recommendations are generated
with supermajority agreement.
Civic Assemblies:
•Bring together a representative
group of everyday people through a
lottery process.
•Provide education and opportunity to
learn, discuss complex issues, hear
from other residents.
•Work through complex and
polarizing issues to create common
ground.
•Can resolve tough issues, engage all
voices, and foster social cohesion.
Page 145
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here 12Council Questions
QUESTIONS:
What feedback do Councilmembers
have regarding the guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
•What feedback do Councilmembers have regarding the proposed guiding principles?
What feedback do Councilmembers
have on utilizing a People’s Assembly
vs. an in-house engagement process?
Page 146
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereAt larger scale
Hughes
168.36 ac
City Park
76.7 ac
Rolland Moore
67.5 ac
Page 147
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
City Park
Page 148
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Rolland Moore
Page 149
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Edora
Page 150
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
17
Fossil Creek
Page 151
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
18
Spring Canyon
Page 152
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
19
Twin Silo
Page 153
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
20
Martinez
Page 154
Item 4.