HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Full - Finance Committee - 07/03/2025 -
Agenda
Council Finance Committee
July 3, 2025 - 4:00 - 6:00 pm
City Hall - CIC Conf. Room
In person with Remote Participation Available via Teams Join the meeting now
Meeting ID: 247 116 340 034
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 assistance. Please provide advance notice.
Requests for interpretation at a meeting should be made by noon the day before.
A) Call Meeting to Order
B) Roll Call
C) Approval of Minutes from May 1, 2025
D) Impact Fee Studies Josh Birks
45 minutes Jen Poznanovic
Discuss proposed updates and revisions to the 2023 Impact Fee Studies for adoption in the fall and
updated fees effective January 2026.
E) Other Business
F) Adjournment
Next Scheduled Committee Meeting: August 7, 2025
Page 1 of 58
Page 2 of 58
Council Finance Committee
2025 Agenda Planning Calendar
Revised 06/25/25 ck
July 3rd 2025
Impact Fee Studies
Discuss proposed updates and revisions to the 2023
Impact Fee Studies for adoption in the fall and
updated fees effective January 2026.
45 mins
Josh Birks
Jen Poznanovic
August 7th 2025
SE Community Center Update
LeeAnn
Williams
Appropriation of $1M of Equipment Fund to purchase
replacement vehicles. This will also kick-off a
transitional purchase strategy to move out of Lease 30 mins Chris Martinez
Sept. 4th 2025
2025 Annual Adjustment Ordinance
2026 Budget Revisions
Oct. 2nd 2025
E. Mulberry Threshold Analysis
Fleet Management Policies & Practices
Page 3 of 58
Page 4 of 58
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
nd Floor
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
Council Finance Committee Hybrid Meeting
CIC Room / Teams
May 1, 2025
4:00 - 6:00 pm
Council Attendees: Emily Francis, Kelly Ohlson, Julie Pignataro
Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Tyler Marr, Teresa Roche, Carrie Daggett. Dianne
Criswell, Max Valadez, Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Ginny Sawyer, Tracy
Ochsner, Drew Brooks, Joe Wimmer, Randy Bailey, Trevor Nash, Adam
Halvorson, Lawrence Pollack, Monica Martinez, Victoria Shaw,
Jennifer Poznanovic, Renee Reeves, Claire Turney, Jo Cech
Other:
Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm
Approval of minutes from April 6, 2025, Council Finance Committee meeting.
Motion made to approve by Kelly Ohlson and seconded by Emily Francis.
Approved via roll call.
A) Municipal Court Renovation & Parking Services Move
Sylvia Tatman-Burrus, Sr. Project Mgr.
Tracy Ochsner, Director, Facilities & Fleet
Ginny Sawyer, Lead Project Mgr.
Requesting $450k from Parking Services Reserve and $400k from the General Governmental Capital
Expansion Fees to help fund the Parking Services move from 215 Mason to Civic Center Parking
Structure. This move is necessary to make room for Municipal Court 5-year renovation at 215
Mason. Also requesting a $4.3M transfer from General Governmental Capital Expansion Fees for
the construction of the 5-year Municipal Court renovation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends all appropriations to provide funding for planned capital expenditures.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Civic Center Planning History
The Civic Center Master Plan is a dynamic document created to respond to changing conditions while
providing a vision and guidelines for future buildings, renovations, and place making activity in the civic
core.
Page 5 of 58
In 1996, City Council adopted, by Resolution 1996-86, the Civic Center Master Plan, as an amendment
to the Downtown Plan, which was an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan; the 1996 Civic Center
Master Plan was prepared in cooperation with Larimer County to guide the development of a twelve-
block area of downtown. In 2014, specific planning for City buildings on two blocks within the Civic
Center Master Plan area was set forth in the Block 32/42 Civic Center Vision Plan.
Trends Driving Municipal Court Caseloads and Service Demands
The Municipal Court was housed in the County Justice Center from 2000, when the building opened,
until 2007, when County space capacity demands necessitated that the Municipal Court be moved into
the 215 North Mason Street building. The area of the 215 North Mason Street building in which the
Court was moved was not designed or constructed for purposes of the administration and conduct of a
municipal court. Therefore, the area in the 215 North Mason Street building used by the Municipal
Court has had numerous retrofits over time to accommodate security, functionality, and user
experience.
The office space in the 215 North Mason Street building used for the Municipal Court has become
increasingly inadequate to meet the demands of a growing city. Further, policy changes adopted
through state and local laws since 2007 have increased caseloads and court costs. The City’s
population has grown from approximately 140,000 in 2007 to 178,000 today. From 2000-2007,
Municipal Court staff consisted of approximately seven (7) FTE positions. Today, staffing of the
Municipal Court requires approximately thirty-one (31) FTE positions. Based on growth, customer
service demands, security needs, an expansion of the Municipal Court is the most reasonable and
efficient near- to long-term capital project solution.
Approved Capital Improvement Plans & Funding for Municipal Court Expansion & Parking
Services Relocation
In 2021, Council funded an update to the 2014 Civic Center Vision Plan, called the Civic Center Master
Plan (the “CCMP”), which focused planning on two blocks (rather than the twelve block area of the
1996 plan). The CCMP created a long-term plan for the future facilities and amenities as well as current
buildings, including the Municipal Court. The CCMP building summary of 215 Mason noted the
following, “Functionally, the building struggles to separate the higher safety risk Municipal Court
customer service components from the lower risk customer service areas and internal offices.” City
Council adopted the CCMP, by Resolution 2021-105, as an amendment to the 2017 Downtown Plan
and the 2019 City Plan, finding that the CCMP was a capital improvements plan for purposes of general
government capital expansion fee revenues for purposes of Section 7.5-31 of the City Code.
In 2022, the Council appropriated $700,000, $ by adopting Ordinance No. 006, 2022 (ordinance
attached), to address the initial, urgent capital needs from the increased demands on the Municipal
Court.
In 2023, discussions went into more depth in considering the best long-term options within the
framework of the Civic Center masterplan. Options at the time included:
1. Renovating the entire first floor of 215 North Mason building to be utilized for the Municipal
Court (current option allows Emergency Preparedness & Security (EPS) offices and Wellness
area to remain on first floor);
2. Smaller renovations to accommodate needs in the near term while negotiating with the County
to possibly return to the Justice Center; or
3. Building an entirely new building for Municipal Court.
As a result of its discussions of these three options, the City Council decided Option #1 because of the
immediate capacity needs of the Municipal Court as articulated at the Council Finance Committee
meeting on June 6, 2024. In discussions, the cost of building a new, stand-along Muni Court was
estimated to be between $25 to $30 million for Option #3, which, considering other capital projects
identified in the 2019 City Plan, was cost prohibitive. Similarly, the discussions with the County for
Option #2, paired with the immediate and growing needs of the Muni Court, weighed against reliance
on continued discussions and negotiations about the possibility of returning to the Justice Center.”)
Page 6 of 58
Monies were then appropriated by Ordinance No. 005, 2023, $1,507,500 from the General Government
Capital Expansion Fund for the purpose of space planning and design associated with utilizing the first
floor of 215 North Mason Street building for the Municipal Court. (Ordinance attached.)
Parking Services is currently located on the first floor of the 215 North Mason building. A needed first
step in the plan is to move Parking Services into the Civic Center Parking Structure. This move is
designed and now needs construction funding. Staff is recommending $450K from Parking Services
reserves and $400K from Capital Expansion Fees be used to complete the full move. In addition, there
was an approved budget offer that is providing for a gender-neutral bathroom in the new space (2024
BFO Offer 16.7).
The Parking Services move not only facilitates the Municipal Court expansion but will also provide more
space for staff, easy access to electric charging of vehicles in the garage, and a convenient walk-in site
for customers.
The City is ready to proceed with the implementation and construction of the Municipal Court
construction and expansion project and is recommending that Council appropriate $4.3M from General
Governmental Capital Expansion Fees for project completion. This appropriation would be in addition
to the amounts previously appropriated from General Fund Reserves.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Funding recommendations:
• $450,000 from the Parking Services Reserve Fund for the relocation of Parking Services to the
Civic Center Parking Structure (Ordinance).
• $400,000 of General Government Capital Expansion Fee revenues for the relocation of Parking
Services as a condition precedent to the Municipal Court construction and expansion (Ordinance).
$4,3000,000 appropriation from General Governmental Capital Expansion Fee revenues for the Municipal Court
construction and expansion project (Ordinance.)
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public outreach has not been conducted for this phase of the project. Further phases may require
public outreach and input.
DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS
Kelly Ohlson; I'm assuming where Parking Services is moving is in the area that we purchased a year
or two ago.
Tracy Ochsner; that is correct. Yes, we are talking about the Postmodern Development suite that was
just to the north of District One.
Kelly Ohlson; the space that became available that we thought we could use and then we talked about
we're eventually going to need it for city staff. So that's pretty a clean space. I am wondering how these
things add up to so much money. It is a blank slate pretty much and Parking Services isn't as technical
as some of the other things. So, how does it get to $450,000 and 400,000?
Tracy Ochsner; I would categorize this as a moderate renovation. We are trying to keep as many walls
as we can. We have a contractor who would be doing the work as estimated including a full design.
Page 7 of 58
The furniture itself is about $100,000. And then we have some IT upgrades within the space as well.
But yes, it gets through all the permitting, project management and the construction that is what we're
looking at is $1.13M and that's a pretty solid estimate at this point. We have even scaled that back by
not doing renovations in one of the larger conference rooms or a break area. So, to answer your
question, I always have sticker shock when I have these construction cost conversations.
Kelly Ohlson; It is good that you have sticker shock. That makes me feel better.
Tracy Ochsner; We've gone through three iterations, I mean a couple iterations of value engineering
and this is.
Kelly Ohlson; So then what did I miss, because I read this a few days ago and again today, I thought it
was $450K + $400K. That's 850,000 and you just did a million something.
Tracy Ochsner; It's on the last page, the summary (see below)
Kelly Ohlson; thank you – Is the space currently vacant?
Tracy Ochsner; it is vacant
Kelly Ohlson; But the one says over 20 positions, for the courts and in, in the and the whatever we call
it has 31. So, it's good to know that it's 31, which is quite a bit more than 20. So now, on to the
Municipal Court; when it's only like whatever the number was in here for the appropriation for
something $4.3, how can the design and space design change? How can it take a million and a half?
I used to do this stuff. It is going to take such a large percentage of the construction cost.
Page 8 of 58
Tracy Ochsner; if you think back to where we were at when we appropriated $1.5 million which was for
a full 15-year renovation. It was for Parking Services and EPS and was designed to move those folks
and it was also for designing some of the second floor of 215 Mason to be included within this full
renovation. That has been scaled back significantly. And so, while I don't want to give you a number on
exactly how much we are going to have left. We will not use the full $1.5M for all of the design for this.
Some of that significant amount will be returned to the capital expansion fee pot once we get the full
design of the Muni Court. Again, we try to keep all of the walls we can and as much HVAC as we can
within this space so that we are not impacting the area. And then in five years, we are going to put it all
back trying to reuse what we are going on right now.
Kelly Ohlson; so, the good news is we probably won't be spending all of that on that, guaranteed. and
then on the $700,000 that we put in in 2022 and now we're going to redo it. And if even if it is, that's
OK because we approved it and we needed a short-term fix set of security and those kinds of things.
But is any of that kind of salvageable?
Tracy Ochsner; we are moving the security portion from the north entrance to the main entrance.
So that that one is kind of we're going to redo that area, the waiting rooms and the other urgent needs
items. The waiting room now is going to be more of a hearing room. So, we are not going to be moving
a lot of walls there either. So, to answer your question, some of it is.
Kelly Ohlson; it didn't say in here, but is EPS going to stay where it is?
Tracy Ochsner; we figured out from the five-year plan that we can keep EPS there and we're not
touching any of the second floor.
Kelly Ohlson; at the end the $4.3 million appropriation would be in addition to the amounts previously
appropriated from the general fund service. Is that what we're referring to as the design and all of that
or is there a total number am I missing, Am I not just adding $1.5 and $4.3?
$700,000 was approved. OK, that which we have already talked about.
Kelly Ohlson; I'm supportive unless I hear things that make me not support.
Julie Pignataro; I had one question, and it was the first one you asked Kelly. But then it started me
thinking about other things, it is those like those front facing offices that are on Mason, correct?
That is the area where you're moving Parking Services?
Tracy Ochsner; yes.
Julie Pignataro; this is not related to this, but I am just so curious about what is going on with the
stairwell in the Civic Center parking lot.
Tracy Ochsner; So, it's being renovated. We have awarded a contract, and construction is anticipated
to begin Mid-summer here and we are committed to having that reopened by the holiday season, so by
mid-November.
Julie Pignataro; And can you remind me, was it a structural failure in the stairwell, is that correct?
Tracy Ochsner; it had to be totally redesigned and rebuilt. We are going in with more durable products
and will also be taking care of some of the drainage issues so that the corrosive materials won't drain
towards the stairwell.
Page 9 of 58
Julie Pignataro; I know I won't be on the Finance Committee but when we talk about the new parking
structure, we will definitely have some lessons learned on this how this one was built.
Tracy Ochsner; very much so, we have learned a lot of lessons.
Tyler Marr; I would say that, Tracy, correct me if you disagree, I think we've learned lessons every time
like Firehouse Alley is very different than the Civic Center structure because of a lot of what we're
talking about and still fixing.
Julie Pignataro; I have similar reactions to Kelly, just that little bit of sticker shock on what it costs.
But I understand since having just done a renovation ourselves at this house.
Emily Francis; My question is when the decision about the funding and whether or not we're going to do
the five-year expansion or wait, was this included in that kind of overall cost or is this something we just
learned?
Tracy Ochsner; when we came to this committee last year, we didn't have the full costs available to us
because we hadn't designed yet. So, to answer your question, no, those numbers were not available at
that time. And since then, now we've had the time to design both areas. Because of the five year, we
knew there was going to be some costs involved in the relocation of both of these groups.
Tyler Marr; Tracy, fair to say that I don't know that we expected the cost to be in this magnitude.
And because of I mean, we knew it would be sizable and probably came in a little over.
Emily Francis; when this goes to the full Council, I would recommend that it's a little clearer about how
much we've spent. A total for the five-year expansion for parking services.
Kelly Ohlson; because over 20 is accurate, but 31 is more accurate. So, we treat these as dress
rehearsals for the council work sessions or both. So not being totally critical, I just say 31 because
that's a lot of people and supposed to have two different numbers, even though they're both accurate
over 20 and 31. How many people are currently in Parking Services?
Drew Brooks; current staffing for Parking Services is 16 positions. 2 positions are shared with Transfort.
Page 10 of 58
Page 11 of 58
Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3
June 5, 2025
Finance Committee
STAFF
SUBJECT
Impact Fee Study Updates
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
propose revisions to the 2023 capital expansion fee studies that align with
-only fee adjustments implemented in 2024 and 2025. Staff proposes
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Does the Council Finance Committee support impact fee study revisions?
2. Does the Council Finance Committee need any additional information when this comes before the
full Council?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Fee History and Current State:
Impact fees (also known as capital expansion fees) are one-time payments imposed on new development
that must be used solely to fund growth-related capital projects. An impact fee represents new growth’s
proportionate share of capital facility needs. Fees cannot be used for improvements which solely benefit
adjacent development, existing deficiencies, and/or for maintenance. The City collects capital expansion
fees for neighborhood parks, community parks, fire protection, police, general government, and
transportation.
In November 2024, staff proposed adoption of capital expansion fees determined by studies conducted by
external consultants in 2023. For the comprehensive study and update of fees, the City contracted with
Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to update the Capital Expansion Fees (CEFs) and with TischlerBise
to update the Transportation Capital Expansion Fees (TCEFs). In place of adopting the full fees presented
by the studies, inflationary adjustments were approved by City Council for both 2024 and 2025. All capital
expansion fees have received inflationary-only adjustments since the most recent comprehensive studies
conducted in 2017.
Page 12 of 58
Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3
Concurrent with the capital expansion fee work of 2023/24, Utilities staff updated impact fee models that
were ultimately adopted in full for 2025 implementation. Utilities development fees include Water,
Wastewater, and Stormwater Plant Investment Fees (PIFs) and Electric Capacity Fee (ECF). Utilities will
continue updating fee models on a bi-annual basis and are not planned for inclusion in the 2025 capital
expansion fee review.
Realignment Objectives:
The 2023 studies largely relied on an incremental expansion (or level of service) methodology, which bases
the fees on the existing levels of service of the City’s facilities and capital assets. The incremental
expansion method is a common technique and appropriate for the City’s capital growth projections due to
the limitation of detailed capital improvement plans. This approach catalogs the current level of service in
the city and converts it to a value per unit of service demand (e.g. service population or vehicle miles
traveled).
Considering discussions from previous Council Work Sessions, staff worked EPS and TichlerBise
consultants to evaluate the assumptions and variables included in the level of service approach to
understand the maneuverability within the study models to best reflect the City’s policy objectives.
Throughout the process staff has been committed to maintaining a data-driven and defensible approach
provided by the existing models and conducting a legal review of the methodologies used.
Proposed 2023 Study Revisions:
The 2023 study revisions used an adjusted methodology to capture household size by product type. In
both the EPS and TichlerBise revised 2023 studies, household sizes have been updated using the newer
data and household size by type. In general, this has led to a shift in the fee calculations that is more
representative of household size based on product type. For CEFs new household sizes drive new fees
and for TCEFs new household size factors are used to adjust trip ends by unit size and type.
Three adjustments are recommended in the proposed study revisions. The first adjustment is a wider
variety of dwelling unit sizes that better align with Larimer County’s categories, a move from five to seven
tiers. The current maximum is 2,200 square feet and the proposed maximum is 3,600 square feet.
The second adjustment is a move from one residential dwelling unit category to three categories: single
family detached, single family attached and multifamily. The proposed average household size more
accurately reflects household size across various housing unit types and sizes. Accessory dwelling units
(ADU) fall into the multifamily dwelling unit category. The 2025 update is 2.77 persons per household, with
3.13 for single family detached, 2.58 for single family attached, and 2.04 for multifamily. For TCEFs
specifically, household size changes increases vehicle trip ends demand from single family detached and
decreases demand for single family attached and multifamily. For the vehicle trip ends per unit calculation,
both the number of people and number of vehicles at the home are included.
The final proposed adjustment is from seven fee types to eight fee types with general government broken
into two types: fleet and facilities. The move more accurately reflects how the funds are used. In the study,
the replacement costs did not change but have been split out by type.
In the revised CEF study, parks costs have been updated with development and land costs revised with
the most recent data. The cost per residential population shifted replacement cost per acre that increased
for neighborhood parks and decreased for community parks. Overall, parks impact fees have gone up for
single family attached and have gone down for single family attached and multifamily. Compared to the
2023 study, the total for all three housing types has gone down.
Summary study revisions for both CEF and TCEF studies are provided as attachments to this agenda item.
Full revised CEF and TCEF studies will be available for the September Work Session.
Page 13 of 58
Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3
Revenue Comparison:
Using 2024 dwelling until counts, the overall estimate for all impact fees is a 2% increase from current 2025
fees, with a 21% increase for single family detached, a 2% increase from for single family attached and an
18% decrease for multifamily. For CEFs this is an 11% increase from current 2025 fees, with a 27%
increase for single family detached, 13% increase for single family attached and a 5% decrease for
multifamily. For TCEFs this is a 12% decrease from current 2025 fees, with a 13% increase for single
family detached, 14% decrease for single family attached and a 41% decrease for multifamily.
These figures are estimates based on 2024 dwelling unit counts and future fee revenue depends on actual
development activity that occurs. For example, if more single family detached homes are built, TCEF
revenue could increase. Based on the TCEF study, multifamily has less impact on vehicle miles travelled
(VMT) resulting in less impact on transportation expansion demand.
For fees effective January 1, 2026, staff proposes adjusting fees for inflation prior to adoption.
Total Cost of Development:
Impact fees are a small percentage of overall development costs. For a single family detached home in
Fort Collins (1,600 sq. ft. unit), impact fees are 3.1% of the total cost of development and would be 3.8%
with the proposed fees. For a multifamily unit in Fort Collins (1,000 sq. ft. unit), impact fees are 5.3% of the
total cost of development and would be 4.6% with the proposed fees. The proposed fee updates better
algin single family and multifamily as a percentage of the total overall cost of development.
2025 Workplan Timeline:
After guidance from the June Council Finance Committee Meeting, staff plans to bring forward adjustments
to the CEF and TCEF studies to the September 9th Council Work Session and Council Meetings in October.
Staff proposes an effective date of January 1st, 2026, for fee updates.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Based on 2024 dwelling until counts, staff estimates a 2% increase across all impact fees. This is an
estimate and future fee revenue depends on actual development activity that occurs.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
1. Presentation
2. EPS Study Revisions
3. TischlerBise Study Revisions
Page 14 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
Financial Services, Sales Tax & Revenue
Director
Jen Poznanovic
Josh Birks
June 5, 2025
Impact Fees
2025 Study Updates
Sustainability Services, Deputy Director
Page 15 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
2
Questions for City Council
•Does Council Finance Committee support impact fee study
revisions?
• Does Council Finance Committee need any additional
information when this comes before the full Council?
Core Objective: Align Impact Fees with the Land Use Code
Page 16 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
3
Realignment Scope & Objectives
Realignment effort focus:
•Fee ability to affect policy through
valid model adjustments.
•Fee alignment with adopted
policies, Council priorities, values.
Committed to maintain:
•Data-driven methodologies.
•Integrity of studies and fee
schedules.
•Defensibility and compliance with
changing legal environment.
Adopted Plans, Policies, Goals
Council Priorities,Values
Fair, Data Driven
Page 17 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
4
Current State
•In January 2025, Capital Expansion Fees (CEFs) were updated
with an inflationary factor in lieu of fees proposed by 2023
studies.
•CEFs have received inflationary-only updates since previous 2017
study adoption.
•Utilities Electric Capacity Fee and three Plant Investment Fees (PIFs)
have been fully updated.
Page 18 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
5
Proposed Adjustments to 2023 Studies – Methodology Update
General Updates
•Primary driver of fees is household size
•Household size factor update (two studies – EPS & TichlerBise)
Capital Expansion Fees (CEF)⎻ New household sizes drive new fees⎻ Household sizes updated using newer data and household size by type⎻ New sq. ft. categories used to better align with Larimer County and product type
Transportation Capital Expansion Fees (TCEF)⎻ Household size factor used to adjust trip ends by unit size and type ⎻ Number of people and number of vehicles at the home
Page 19 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
6
Proposed 2023 Study Revisions – Adjustment One
•Wider variety of dwelling unit sizes
•Square footage range adjustments
to seven tiers:
•Current maximum 2,200 sq. ft.
•New maximum aligns with
Larimer County at over 3,600
sq. ft.
Current Proposed
Up to 700 sq. ft.Up to 900 sq. ft.
700 - 1,200 sq. ft.901 - 1,300 sq. ft.
1,201 - 1,700 sq. ft.1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.
1,701 - 2,200 sq. ft.1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.
Over 2,200 sq. ft.2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.
Over 3,601 sq. ft.
Page 20 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
7
Proposed 2023 Study Revisions – Adjustment Two
•Wider variety of types
•New residential dwelling
unit categories:
•Single Family Attached
•Single Family Detached
•Multifamily / ADU
Proposed
Single Family Detached
Up to 900 sq. ft.
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.
Over 3,601 sq. ft.
Single Family Attached
Up to 900 sq. ft.
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.
Over 3,601 sq. ft.
Multifamily / ADU
Up to 700 sq. ft.
701 - 1,300 sq. ft.
Over 1,301 sq. ft
Current
Residential (per dwelling)
Up to 700 sq. ft.
700 - 1,200 sq. ft.
1,201 - 1,700 sq. ft.
1,701 - 2,200 sq. ft.
Over 2,200 sq. ft.
Page 21 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
8
CEF Study: Household Size Updates
Proposed average
household size:
•Adjusted methodology
used to capture
household size by type
•In general, this has led to
a shift in the fee
calculations that is more
representative of the
household sizes based
on product type
Current
Up to 700 sq. ft.1.40
701 - 1,200 sq. ft.2.12
1,201 - 1,700 sq. ft.2.38
1,701 - 2,200 sq. ft.2.56
Over 2,000 sq. ft.2.91
Up to 700 sq. ft.1.40
701 - 1,200 sq. ft.2.12
1,201 - 1,700 sq. ft.2.38
1,701 - 2,200 sq. ft.2.56
Over 2,000 sq. ft.2.91
Proposed
Up to 900 sq. ft.700 1.98
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.901 2.15
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.1,301 2.39
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.1,801 2.61
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.2,401 2.81
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.3,001 2.96
Over 3,601 sq. ft.3,601 3.08
Single Family Attached
Up to 900 sq. ft.700 1.50
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.901 1.74
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.1,301 2.07
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.1,801 2.37
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.2,401 2.63
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.3,001 2.83
Over 3,601 sq. ft.3,601 3.00
Multifamily
Up to 700 sq. ft.500 1.27
701 - 1,300 sq. ft.1,000 1.87
Over 1,301 sq. ft 1,301 2.09
Up to 700 sq. ft.500 1.27
701 - 1,300 sq. ft.1,000 1.87
Over 1,301 sq. ft 1,301 2.09Page 22 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
9
TCEF Study: Household Size Updates
Changes to structure:
•Increases demand from Single Family Detached
•Decreases for Single Family Attached and Multifamily
•Citywide average is a weighted average of all housing stock
Vehicle Trip Ends per Unit
All Housing
Comparison
Square Footage
per Housing Unit
SF
Detached
SF
Attached
Square Footage
per Housing Unit
Multifamily
ADU
Page 23 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
10
Proposed 2023 Study Revisions – Adjustment Three
•More accurately reflect how
funds are used
•Eight fee types, with General
Government now two types:
•Facilities
•Fleet
Current Proposed
Parks
•Neighborhood Park
•Community Park
Parks
•Neighborhood Park
•Community Park
Police Police
Fire Fire
General Government
Government
•Facilities
•Fleet
TCEF TCEF
Fee Types
Page 24 of 58
Headline Copy Goes HereCEF: Revised Residential Fee Schedule
11
Police Fire Total % Change
Land Use Type
Neighborhood
Park
Community
Park Facilities Fleet
Single Family Detached
Up to 900 sq. ft.$5,000 $2,499 $661 $1,046 $1,072 $218 $10,497 45%
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.$5,432 $2,714 $718 $1,136 $1,166 $237 $11,403 19%
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.$6,060 $3,028 $801 $1,267 $1,300 $264 $12,721 21%
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.$6,616 $3,305 $875 $1,383 $1,419 $289 $13,887 31%
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.$7,107 $3,552 $940 $1,486 $1,525 $310 $14,918 26%
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.$7,489 $3,742 $991 $1,565 $1,607 $326 $15,720 33%
Over 3,601 sq. ft.$7,800 $3,898 $1,032 $1,630 $1,673 $340 $16,373 39%
Single Family Attached
Up to 900 sq. ft.$3,962 $1,980 $524 $828 $850 $173 $8,317 13%
901 - 1,300 sq. ft.$4,569 $2,284 $605 $955 $980 $199 $9,592 0%
1,301 - 1,800 sq. ft.$5,454 $2,726 $722 $1,140 $1,170 $238 $11,449 9%
1,801 - 2,400 sq. ft.$6,237 $3,117 $825 $1,303 $1,337 $272 $13,092 19%
2,401 - 3,000 sq. ft.$6,929 $3,463 $916 $1,448 $1,487 $302 $14,545 19%
3,001 - 3,600 sq. ft.$7,466 $3,731 $988 $1,560 $1,601 $325 $15,671 25%
Over 3,601 sq. ft.$7,905 $3,950 $1,046 $1,652 $1,696 $345 $16,593 29%
Multifamily / ADU
Up to 700 sq. ft.$2,997 $1,498 $396 $626 $643 $130 $6,291 -13%
701 - 1,300 sq. ft.$4,404 $2,201 $583 $920 $944 $192 $9,243 -4%
Over 1,301 sq. ft $4,937 $2,467 $653 $1,032 $1,059 $215 $10,363 -1%
Parks Government
Page 25 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
2024 Actual
Actual revenue collected in 2024
2025 Fee
Revenue estimates for 2025
using current 2025 fees and
dwelling unit counts from 2024
Proposed
Revenue estimates for 2025
using proposed fees and
dwelling unit counts from 2024
12
CEF: Revenue Comparison
Parks 1,827,124 1,936,284 2,290,463 18%
Fire 187,427 198,629 319,288 61%
Police 104,757 110,992 201,960 82%
Government 255,312 270,578 394,280 46%
Total 2,374,620 2,516,483 3,205,991 27%
Residential New Single Family Attached
Parks 991,667 1,045,736 1,097,413 5%
Fire 101,763 107,078 152,910 43%
Police 56,925 59,401 96,076 62%
Government 138,655 145,876 188,864 29%
Total 1,289,010 1,358,091 1,535,263 13%
Multifamily / ADU
Parks 2,023,009 2,205,923 1,934,675 -12%
Fire 206,867 217,713 262,239 20%
Police 115,826 121,929 166,044 36%
Government 281,562 295,959 323,666 9%
Total 2,627,264 2,841,524 2,686,625 -5%
Grand Total 6,290,894 6,716,098 7,427,878 11%Page 26 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
•Change in maximum
supportable fee
•Single family about
double the fee of a
multifamily
TCEF: Revised Residential Fee Schedule
13
SF Detached
Residential (per housing unit)
less than 901 $4,030 $3,135 $895
901 to 1,300 $6,177 $5,475 $702
1,301 to 1,800 $7,840 $6,988 $852
1,801 to 2,400 $9,320 $8,106 $1,214
2,401 to 3,000 $10,548 $9,000 $1,548
3,001 to 3,600 $11,523 $9,000 $2,523
over 3,601 $12,330 $9,000 $3,330
Old Maximum*ChangeSquare Feet of Finished Living Space New Maximum
SF Attached
Residential (per housing unit)
less than 901 $3,097 $3,135 ($38)
901 to 1,300 $4,776 $5,475 ($699)
1,301 to 1,800 $6,096 $6,988 ($892)
1,801 to 2,400 $7,276 $8,106 ($830)
2,401 to 3,000 $8,262 $9,000 ($738)
3,001 to 3,600 $9,038 $9,000 $38
over 3,601 $9,686 $9,000 $686
Square Feet of Finished Living Space New Maximum Old Maximum*Change
Multifamily / ADU
Residential (per housing unit)
less than 701 $1,988 $3,135 ($1,147)
701 to 1,300 $3,170 $5,475 ($2,305)
over 1,301 $3,990 $6,988 ($2,998)
ChangeSquare Feet of Finished Living Space New Maximum Old Maximum*
Page 27 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
2024 Actual
Actual revenue collected in 2024
2025 Fee
Revenue estimates for 2025
using current 2025 fees and
dwelling unit counts from 2024
Proposed
Revenue estimates for 2025
using proposed fees and
dwelling unit counts from 2024
14
TCEF: Revenue Comparison
TCEF 1,808,682 1,892,764 2,144,378 13%
TCEF 922,256 960,074 826,760 -14%
TCEF 1,478,029 1,556,726 912,416 -41%
Page 28 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
15
CEF and TCEF Revenue Comparison
Overall, 2% revenue
estimate increase across all
housing units and sizes
•Single Family Detached
21% increase
•Single Family Attached
2% increase
•Multifamily / ADU 18%
decrease
Residential New Single Family Detached 2024 Actual 2025 Fee Proposed %
Change
Total 4,183,302 4,409,247 5,350,369 21%
Residential New Single Family Attached 2024 Actual 2025 Fee Proposed %
Change
Total 2,211,266 2,318,165 2,362,023 2%
Multifamily / ADU 2024 Actual 2025 Fee Proposed %
Change
Total 4,105,293 4,398,250 3,599,041 -18%
Grand Total 10,499,861 11,125,662 11,311,432 2%
Page 29 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
16
Current & Future Impact Fee Examples
Land Use Type Current Proposed % Change
Single Family Detached 18,929 23,207 23%
Single Family Attached 18,929 20,368 8%
Multifamily 17,603 14,353 -18%
2,000 square feet example
750 square feet ADU example
Land Use Type Current Proposed % Change
Multifamily / ADU 15,084 12,413 -
Page 30 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
17
Fort Collins Total Development Cost
Single Family Detached
•Impact Fees:
•3.3% of total in 2019
•3.1% in 2025 (current)
•3.8% in 2025 (proposed)
•Impact fees are a small
percentage of overall
development costs
Page 31 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
18
Fort Collins Total Development Cost
Multifamily
•Impact Fees:
•5.9% of total in 2019
•5.3% in 2025 (current)
•4.6% in 2025 (proposed)
•Impact fees are a small
percentage of the overall
development costs
Page 32 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
19
2025 Workplan Timeline
1) Comprehensive legal review
2) Assess methodological options
3) Propose alignment adjustments to 2023 study assumptions
4) Recommend fee schedules for Jan. 1, 2026 implementation
5) Plan for next cycle of comprehensive study updates
Feb 2025 Q1-Q3 2025 Jan 2026
Jan. 1
Fee Implementation
June 5
Council Finance
Committee
Oct. 7
City Council Adoption
Feb. 11
Council Work Session
Fall 2025
Sept. 9
Council Work Session
Oct. 21
City Council Adoption
Page 33 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
20
Future Cadence
Next capital expansion fee study and detailed update planned for 2030 implementation
Page 34 of 58
Headline Copy Goes Here
21
Questions for City Council
•Does Council Finance Committee support impact fee study
revisions?
• Does Council Finance Committee need any additional
information when this comes before the full Council?
Page 35 of 58
Page 36 of 58
1600 Stout St, Suite 1850 Denver, CO 80202
303.623.3557 www.epsys.comTheEconomics of Land Use
FORT COLLINS IMPACT FEE STUDY UPDATE May 16, 2025
Page 37 of 58
CHANGES FROM 2023 STUDY
SLIDES FROM EPS
Page 38 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 2
CHANGES FROM 2023 DRAFT STUDY
•New Household Sizes
–Based on housing structure type
–2023 study had one fee for all residential units based on size
–2025 update differentiates between SFD, SFA, and MF structure types
and sizes
•New Square footage Ranges
–2023 study used 5 ranges: up to 700 sf, 701-1200 sf, 1201-1700 sf,
1701-2200 sf, and 2201 sf or more
–2025 update uses 7 ranges for SFD/SFA: up to 900 sf, 901-1300 sf,
1301-1800 sf, 1801-2400 sf, 2401-3000 sf, 3001-3600 sf, 3601 sf or
more
–2025 update uses 3 ranges for MF: up to 700 sf, 701-1300 sf, 1301 sf or
more
•General Government has been split into two categories: Fleet
and Facilities
•Parks costs have been updated and calculation modifiedPage 39 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 3
CHANGES FOR AN AVERAGE SIZED HOME
Police Fire Total
Fee Study Version
Neighborhood
Park
Community
Park Total Parks Facilities Fleet
Current Fee (2017 Inflated to 2025)
Single Family Detached (1,846 square feet)$3,377 $4,767 $8,144 $467 $837 $10,588
Single Family Attached (1,236 square feet)$3,343 $4,719 $8,062 $461 $824 $10,470
Multifamily (974 square feet)$3,060 $4,322 $7,382 $424 $757 $9,591
11/21/23 Draft Study Inflated to 2025
Single Family Detached (1,846 square feet)$5,326 $5,326 $10,651 $723 $1,142 $14,154
Single Family Attached (1,236 square feet)$4,951 $4,951 $9,902 $672 $1,062 $12,948
Multifamily (974 square feet)$4,410 $4,410 $8,821 $599 $946 $11,534
Revised Methods on 11/21/23 Draft, Inflated to 2025
Single Family Detached (1,846 square feet)$6,616 $3,305 $9,921 $875 $1,383 $1,419 $289 $13,887
Single Family Attached (1,236 square feet)$4,569 $2,284 $6,853 $605 $955 $980 $199 $9,592
Multifamily (974 square feet)$4,404 $2,201 $6,605 $583 $920 $944 $192 $9,243
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Parks General Government
$1,140
$1,123
$1,028
$1,168
$1,638
$1,312
•On an averaged size home for this example
•From the current fee to the 2025 study here are the changes:
•SFD: total increase of $3,299, or 31.2% increase
•SFA: total decrease of $878, or 8.4% decrease
•MF: total decrease of $348, or 3.6% decrease
Page 40 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 4
GENERAL GOVERNMENT CHANGES
•2023 Inventory replacement cost of $152.2 million
Description Location Factor Cost Factor Bldg. Cost Land Cost Replacement Cost
Facilities SF Cost per SF
281 North College 281 N College Ave 37,603 $513 $19,290,339 $855,000 $20,145,339
City Hall 300 LaPorte Ave 31,553 583 18,401,710 1,306,358 19,708,068
215 N Mason Office 215 N Mason St 72,000 518 37,324,800 1,238,000 38,562,800
300 LaPorte (OPS Services) 300 LaPorte Ave 26,564 540 14,344,560 0 14,344,560
Streets Building 625 9th St 51,314 513 26,324,082 1,817,640 28,141,722
Traffic Operations Building 626 Linden St 9,500 540 5,130,000 424,440 5,554,440
Fleet / FACs Warehouse - Loomis 518 N Loomis Ave 10,122 432 4,372,704 22,050 4,394,754
IT Equipment ----------9,706,551
Subtotal 238,656 $525 $125,188,195 $5,663,488 $140,558,234
Fleet Quantity Cost per Unit
Heavy Equipment 180 $112,554 $20,259,649
Misc. Maintenance Equipment 67 43,531 2,916,571
Vehicles, Trucks, and Trailers 96 52,782 5,067,109
Subtotal 343 $82,342 $28,243,329
Debt Principal
2012 COPS -$280,000
2019 COPS -13,780,260
Vehicle Equipment -2,543,294
Subtotal -$16,603,554
Total $152,198,009
Cost per Service Population Functional Population:203,952 $746.25
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 41 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 5
2025 GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES
•2025 update replacement cost of $126.5 million (facilities only)
Description Location Factor Cost Factor Bldg. Cost Land Cost Replacement Cost
Facilities SF Cost per SF
281 North College 281 N College Ave 37,603 $513 $19,290,339 $855,000 $20,145,339
City Hall 300 LaPorte Ave 31,553 583 18,401,710 1,306,358 19,708,068
215 N Mason Office 215 N Mason St 72,000 518 37,324,800 1,238,000 38,562,800
300 LaPorte (OPS Services) 300 LaPorte Ave 26,564 540 14,344,560 0 14,344,560
Streets Building 625 9th St 51,314 513 26,324,082 1,817,640 28,141,722
Traffic Operations Building 626 Linden St 9,500 540 5,130,000 424,440 5,554,440
Fleet / FACs Warehouse - Loomis 518 N Loomis Ave 10,122 432 4,372,704 22,050 4,394,754
IT Equipment ----------9,706,551
Subtotal 238,656 $525 $125,188,195 $5,663,488 $140,558,234
Debt Principal
2012 COPS -$280,000
2019 COPS -13,780,260
Subtotal -$14,060,260
Total $126,497,974
Cost per Service Population Functional Population:203,952 $620.23
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 42 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 6
2025 GENERAL GOVERNMENT FLEET
•2025 update replacement cost of $25.7 million (fleet only)
•Replacement costs did not change, they were just split out by
type
Description Factor Cost Factor Replacement Cost
Fleet Quantity Cost per Unit
Heavy Equipment 180 $112,554 $20,259,649
Misc. Maintenance Equipment 67 43,531 2,916,571
Vehicles, Trucks, and Trailers 96 52,782 5,067,109
Subtotal 343 $82,342 $28,243,329
Debt Principal
Vehicle Equipment -$2,543,294
Subtotal -$2,543,294
Total $25,700,035
Cost per Service Population Functional Population:203,952 $126.01
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 43 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 7
2025 UPDATE - PARKS CHANGES
•3 inputs
–Maintenance facilities costs allocated to
neighborhood and regional parks
–Community Parks costs
–Neighborhood Parks costs
•2023 study included 3 maintenance facilities
as shown in table
–Resulted in $26.1k community park cost per acre
and $7.7k neighborhood cost per acre
•2025 study only used East Shop and spread
the cost across all parks to average
–Most recent cost data
–$10.5k/acre community park
–$3.8k/acre neighborhood park
Description Replacement Cost
Maintenance Facilites
East District $7,325,000
Community Park Share (80%)$5,860,000
Community Park Acres Served 118
Community Park Cost/Acre $49,493
Neighborhood Park Share (20%)$1,465,000
Neighborhood Park Acres Served 84
Neighborhood Park Cost/Acre $17,399
Spring Canyon $1,815,147
Community Park Share (80%)$1,452,117
Maintenance Facility Need 103
Community Park Cost/Acre $14,098
Total Park Replacement Cost $363,029
Neighborhood Park Acres Served 132
Neighborhood Park Cost/Acre $2,750
Fossil Creek $2,623,710
Community Park Share (80%)$2,098,968
Community Park Acres Served 142
Community Park Cost/Acre $14,781
Neighborhood Park Share (20%)$524,742
Neighborhood Park Acres Served 167
Neighborhood Park Cost/Acre $3,152
Total Replacement Cost $11,763,856
Maintenance Facility Need
Community Park Average Cost/Acre $26,124
Neighborhood Park Average Cost/Acre $7,767
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 44 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 8
2025 UPDATED PARKS COSTS
•Development and land costs were revised to use the most
recent data
–Neighborhood Parks
2023: $830,708 total cost per acre; 2025: $848,776 total cost per acre
–Community Parks
2023: $465,342 total cost cost per acre; 2025: $303,196 total cost per acre
Description
Land &
Water Cost
Development
Cost Total Cost Acres
Total Cost
per Acre Total Cost Acres
Total Cost
per Acre
Neighborhood Parks
Dovetail Park (2022)$550,000 $4,030,000 $4,580,000 6.1 $750,820 $4,818,851 6.1 $789,976
Traverse Park (2020)$1,330,000 $3,130,000 $4,460,000 5.6 $796,429 $5,247,984 5.6 $937,140
Sugar Beet (2018)$590,000 $2,490,000 $3,080,000 5.3 $581,132 $3,765,962 5.3 $710,559
Crescent Park (2017)$1,250,000 $4,090,000 $5,340,000 7.2 $741,667 $6,707,590 7.2 $931,610
Weighted Average $3,720,000 $13,740,000 $17,460,000 24.2 $721,488 $20,540,388 24.2 $848,776
Community Parks
Twin Silo (2016)$2,110,000 $14,720,000 $16,830,000 53.6 $313,875 $21,856,079 53.6 $407,611
Spring Canyon (2006)$1,170,000 $14,650,000 $15,820,000 103.0 $153,592 $25,630,481 103.0 $248,840
Weighted Average $3,280,000 $29,370,000 $32,650,000 156.6 $208,466 $47,486,560 156.6 $303,196
Note: Total cost includes land and development.
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
2023 Inflated CostBase Cost
Page 45 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 9
PARKS COST PER RESIDENT POPULATION
•The cost per residential population shifted as shown below:
–Neighborhood Parks: $2,028 per resident (2023); $2,062 per resident
(2025)
–Community Parks: $1,614 per resident (2023); $1,031 per resident (2025)
Description Neighborhood Parks Community Parks
Total Park Replacement Cost per Acre A $848,776 $303,196
Developed Acres B 422 573
Existing Park Replacement Cost = A x B $358,183,630 $173,731,317
Maintenance Facility Cost per Acre of Park C $3,765 $10,558
Developed Acres D 422 573
Maintenance Facility Need = C x D $1,589,000 $6,050,000
Total Park Replacement Cost $359,772,630 $179,781,317
Cost per Residential Population 174,445 $2,062 $1,031
Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems
Page 46 of 58
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Fort Collins Impact Fee Study Update 10
PARKS IMPACT FEE CHANGES
•Overall, parks impact fees have gone up for SFD and down for
SFA and MF compared to current fees
–Average sized SFD: $8,144 current total; $9,921 new total
–Average sized SFA: $8,062 current total; $6,853 new total
–Average sized MF: $7,362 current total; $6,605 new total
•Compared to the 2023 study, the total for all three housing
types has decreased
Page 47 of 58
Page 48 of 58
Fort Collins TCEF
May 14, 2025
Page 49 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 2
•Results from 5/7/25
•Used the low end of each size grouping to calculate vehicle trip ends
TCEF Analysis
SF Detached SF Attached Multifamily
Residential (per housing unit)Residential (per housing unit)Residential (per housing unit)
less than 901 $4,030 $3,135 $895 less than 901 $3,097 $3,135 ($38)less than 701 $1,988 $3,135 ($1,147)
901 to 1,300 $5,249 $5,475 ($226)901 to 1,300 $4,070 $5,475 ($1,405)701 to 1,300 $2,734 $5,475 ($2,741)
1,301 to 1,800 $7,035 $6,988 $47 1,301 to 1,800 $5,486 $6,988 ($1,502)over 1,300 $3,606 $6,988 ($3,382)
1,801 to 2,400 $8,612 $8,106 $506 1,801 to 2,400 $6,740 $8,106 ($1,366)
2,401 to 3,000 $10,006 $9,000 $1,006 2,401 to 3,000 $7,848 $9,000 ($1,152)
3,001 to 3,600 $11,076 $9,000 $2,076 3,001 to 3,600 $8,698 $9,000 ($302)
over 3,600 $11,962 $9,000 $2,962 over 3,600 $9,406 $9,000 $406
Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)
Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32 Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32 Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32
Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47 Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47 Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47
Old
Maximum*Change
Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
New
Maximum
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
Page 50 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 3
•Results for the midpoint of size grouping to calculate vehicle trip ends
•Increase from 3-18%
TCEF Analysis
SF Detached SF Attached Multifamily
Residential (per housing unit)Residential (per housing unit)Residential (per housing unit)
less than 901 $4,030 $3,135 $895 less than 901 $3,097 $3,135 ($38)less than 701 $1,988 $3,135 ($1,147)
901 to 1,300 $6,177 $5,475 $702 901 to 1,300 $4,776 $5,475 ($699)701 to 1,300 $3,170 $5,475 ($2,305)
1,301 to 1,800 $7,840 $6,988 $852 1,301 to 1,800 $6,096 $6,988 ($892)over 1,301 $3,990 $6,988 ($2,998)
1,801 to 2,400 $9,320 $8,106 $1,214 1,801 to 2,400 $7,276 $8,106 ($830)
2,401 to 3,000 $10,548 $9,000 $1,548 2,401 to 3,000 $8,262 $9,000 ($738)
3,001 to 3,600 $11,523 $9,000 $2,523 3,001 to 3,600 $9,038 $9,000 $38
over 3,601 $12,330 $9,000 $3,330 over 3,601 $9,686 $9,000 $686
Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)Commercial $11,720 $11,747 ($27)
Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32 Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32 Office & Other Services $7,557 $7,525 $32
Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47 Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47 Industrial $3,888 $3,841 $47
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Development Type
New
Maximum
Old
Maximum*Change
Page 51 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 4
•Changes to structure increases demand from SFD, decreases for SFA & MF
•Citywide average is a weighted average of all housing stock
•*Adjustment to the fitted line curve
TCEF Analysis
Square Footage
per Housing Unit
Vehicle Trip Ends per Unit
All Housing
Comparison
SF
Detached Multifamily
SF
Attached
Square Footage
per Housing Unit
Page 52 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 5
•Single Family Detached Maximum Supportable Fee
TCEF Analysis
Gross Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
Net Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
less than 900 13.85 $3,340 2.34 $690 $4,030 $2,958 $1,072 36%
901 to 1,300 22.51 $5,428 2.54 $749 $6,177 $5,493 $684 12%
1,301 to 1,800 29.04 $7,003 2.84 $837 $7,840 $7,133 $707 10%
1,801 to 2,400 34.86 $8,406 3.10 $914 $9,320 $8,341 $979 12%
2,401 to 3,000 39.67 $9,566 3.33 $982 $10,548 $8,941 $1,607 18%
3,001 to 3,600 43.49 $10,488 3.51 $1,035 $11,523 $8,941 $2,582 29%
over 3,601 46.67 $11,254 3.65 $1,076 $12,330 $8,941 $3,389 38%
Commercial 45.48 $10,968 2.12 $752 $11,720 $10,885 $835 8%
Office & Other Services 26.56 $6,405 3.26 $1,152 $7,557 $8,019 ($462)-6%
Industrial 11.93 $2,877 2.86 $1,011 $3,888 $2,588 $1,300 50%
Increase/
Decrease
Persons
per Unit
Jobs
per KSF
Active
Modes Fee
VMT
per KSF
Fee Component
Residential (per dwelling unit)
Percent
Change
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
Percent
Change
Development Type
Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Cost
per VMT
Cost
per Person
Cost
per Job
Increase/
Decrease
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Current
Fees
VMT
per Unit
Active
Modes Fee
Current
Fees
Page 53 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 6
•Single Family Attached Maximum Supportable Fee
TCEF Analysis
Gross Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
Net Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
less than 900 10.57 $2,549 1.86 $548 $3,097 $2,958 $139 5%
901 to 1,300 17.19 $4,145 2.14 $631 $4,776 $5,493 ($717) -13%
1,301 to 1,800 22.16 $5,344 2.55 $752 $6,096 $7,133 ($1,037) -15%
1,801 to 2,400 26.60 $6,415 2.92 $861 $7,276 $8,341 ($1,065) -13%
2,401 to 3,000 30.29 $7,304 3.25 $958 $8,262 $8,941 ($679)-8%
3,001 to 3,600 33.20 $8,006 3.50 $1,032 $9,038 $8,941 $97 1%
over 3,601 35.64 $8,595 3.70 $1,091 $9,686 $8,941 $745 8%
Commercial 45.48 $10,968 2.12 $752 $11,720 $10,885 $835 8%
Office & Other Services 26.56 $6,405 3.26 $1,152 $7,557 $8,019 ($462)-6%
Industrial 11.93 $2,877 2.86 $1,011 $3,888 $2,588 $1,300 50%
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Persons
per Unit
Active
Modes Fee
Fee Component
Cost
per VMT
Cost
per Person
Cost
per Job
Residential (per dwelling unit)
Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
Development Type
VMT
per KSF
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Jobs
per KSF
Active
Modes Fee
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Current
Fees
Increase/
Decrease
Percent
Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
VMT
per Unit
Percent
Change
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Current
Fees
Increase/
Decrease
Page 54 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 7
•Multifamily Maximum Supportable Fee
TCEF Analysis
Gross Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
Net Total $241.15 $294.78 $353.90
less than 701 6.53 $1,575 1.40 $413 $1,988 $2,958 ($970) -33%
701 to 1,300 10.63 $2,563 2.06 $607 $3,170 $5,493 ($2,323) -42%
over 1,301 13.72 $3,309 2.31 $681 $3,990 $7,133 ($3,143) -44%
Commercial 45.48 $10,968 2.12 $752 $11,720 $10,885 $835 8%
Office & Other Services 26.56 $6,405 3.26 $1,152 $7,557 $8,019 ($462)-6%
Industrial 11.93 $2,877 2.86 $1,011 $3,888 $2,588 $1,300 50%
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Persons
per Unit
Active
Modes Fee
Fee Component
Cost
per VMT
Cost
per Person
Cost
per Job
Residential (per dwelling unit)
Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet)
Development Type
VMT
per KSF
Roadway
Capacity Fee
Jobs
per KSF
Active
Modes Fee
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Current
Fees
Increase/
Decrease
Percent
Change
Square Feet of
Finished Living Space
VMT
per Unit
Percent
Change
Maximum
Supportable Fee
Current
Fees
Increase/
Decrease
Page 55 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 8
•Updated active modes cost adds $20 per person, $20-$60 per unit
TCEF Study
Current Estimated Cost $93,789,345
Current Estimated Cost $93,789,345
Growth-Share of Project List 13%
Growth-Related Cost of Active Modes Plan $12,192,615
Residential Nonresidential
Proportionate Share [1]78.0% 22.0%
Attributed Capital Cost $9,510,240 $2,682,375
10-Year Population/Jobs Increase 32,262 7,580
Capital Cost per Person/Job $294.78 $353.90
Old Capital Cost $275.18 $330.37
Change $19.60 $23.53
7%7%
Page 56 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 9
•To keep revenue similar to report, 0.4 lane miles are reduced from
roadway portion
•$810,000
•Decrease of $1 per VMT
TCEF Study
Fort Collins Growth-Related Lane Miles 57.2
Construction Cost per Lane Mile $2,005,000
Fort Collins Growth-Related Construction Cost $114,677,405
10-Year Increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)475,548
Capital Cost per VMT $241.15
Page 57 of 58
TischlerBise | www.tischlerbise.com 10
•MF Calibrating Factor by Trip Ends Compared to Fort Collins Average
TCEF Analysis
ITE Wkdy Trip Ends
Code Per Dmd Unit
210 Single-Family Detached 9.43
215 Single-Family Attached 7.20 76%
SF Attached
Calibrating Factor
Land Use Group
Housing Type
Single Family 12.70 118%
Multifamily 6.00 56%
Fort Collins Average 10.80
Local Trip
Ends per Unit
Calibrating
Factor
•SFA Calibrating Factor by Trip Ends Compared to Fort Collins Average
Page 58 of 58