Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 08/10/2010 - CONTINUATION OF THE DISCUSSION FROM JULY 27, 2010, DATE: August 10, 2010 WORK SESSION ITEM STAFF: Joe Frank FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Pre-taped staff presentation: available at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Continuation of the Discussion from July 27, 2010,on Plan Fort Collins: Phase 2—Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Directions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Plan Fort Collins planning process is currently midway through the second of three phases. Phase 2 focuses on refining the vision, policy choices and preferred directions for the revisions to City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan. On July 27, 2010, Council discussed and provided comments on the Vision and Sustainability, and Transportation policy choices needing more direction. Due to the lateness of the July 27 work session,Council decided to continue the discussion to on the remaining policy choices needing more direction, including Economic Health, Environmental Resources, Stormwater, Neighborhood and Community Livability, and Safety and Awareness to August 10, 2010. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have comments and/or direction on the following list of Policy Choices Needing More Discussion and Direction? (See table in Part B of the July 27 work session AIS starting on page 5.) Economic Health • EH2-A: Continue Retail Retention and Recruitment • E143-A: Provide Land Ready for Larger Employers • EH3-B: Incentives to Make Land Ready Environmental Resources ` • ENV4-A: Employ Price Mechanisms (to reduce miles driven) • ENV6-A: Reduce Carbon Intensity and Consumption Stormwater • ENV8-A: Expand Opportunities for Stormwater Treatment and Conveyance • ENV9-A: Improve Stormwater Quality and Conveyance • ENV 10-A: Increase Stormwater Partnerships August 10, 2010 Page 2 Community and Neighborhood Livability • LIV7-A: Identify Neighborhoods Where Protective Measures are Needed • LIV 10-A: Carry Forward Existing Policies Related to the Poudre River Corridor Activities and Protections Safety and Awareness • SW3-A: Support Healthy Living • SW5-A: Support Local Agriculture and Food Production 2. Does Council agree with the list of Policy Choices to Carry Forward and Refine? (See listing in Part C of the July 27 AIS starting on page 15.) Attached is the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) from the July 27, 2010 work session. Council previously received all of the attachments as part of the July 27 work session packet and indicated to staff NOT TO REPRINT them for the August 10 Work Session. Councilmembers indicated they will bring their materials with them to the August 10 Work Session. ATTACHMENTS 1. Agenda Item Summary from July 27, 2010: Plan Fort Collins: Phase 2—Vision,Policy Choices and Proposed Direction (without attachments) 2. July 27 Work Session Summary ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: July 27, 2010 STAFF: Joe Frank, WORK SESSION ITEM Kathleen Bracke FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Ken Waido Pre-taped staff presentation: available at fcgov.com/clerWagendas.php SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Plan Fort Collins: Phase 2 - Vision, Policy Choices,and Proposed Direction. � EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Plan Fort Collins planning process is currently midway through the second of three phases. Phase 2 started in mid-April and is scheduled to be concluded in September. Phase 2 focuses on refining the vision, policy choices, and preferred direction for the revisions to City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan by exploring a range of possible plan choices and reporting on the consequences and tradeoffs of the policy choice options to the community. The policy choices focus on ways the City can achieve t he'o�vi`s oniof a Wo d Cl s Community, building upon previous planning efforts,addressing challenges and opportunities,and offering new ideas that were identified in Phase 1. %L/ `�J The policy choices in the Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Directions(6/23/10)document have been evaluated using triple bottom line screening indicators that evaluate the costs and benefits of the choices in terms of economic sustainability,quality of life,and environmental stewardship. Over the next few months, the choices will be refined and narrowed to those that the City Council and community believes are the right directions for the community's future. These choices will serve as the foundation for writing a new City Plan and Transportation Master Plan that will begin this fall. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPEC-IFil261UESITLS TO BE ANSWERED The Plan Fort Collins Project Management Team is seeking input and direction from the City Council on the policy choices and directions; in particular,focusing Council's input on those policy choices where there is no clear cut consensus or agreement, as further described below: 1. Does Council have comments and/or direction on the list of Policy Choices Needing More Discussion and Direction? (See table in Part B starting on page 5.) 2. Does Council agree wi h theist of�Rolic-y-Choices toCarry Forward and Refine? (See listing in Part C starting on page(15.) II\\11 I� 1 3. Does Council have commentsrand/or_direction on a definition of sustainability? (See Draft Sustainability Definition in Attachment 6.) July 27, 2010 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Directions (6/23/10) document (see Attachment 1) is a major step within Phase 2 of the Plan Fort Collins planning process and includes the following sections: 1. Community Vision in Focus-reflects the new organization for Plan Fort Collins,and offers a set of vision directions to achieve a World Class Community. n 2. New Policy Choices—a series of questions, organize� �d by the seven key topic areas that the community should explore,discuss,and analyze to arrive at meaningful preferred directions for the plans. Many of the City s comvaluesland policies are well-established and supported by the community and are not being considered for change, and thus are not included in the Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Direction document. The plans and policies that are being considered to remain are listed in the Carrying Forward Existing Goals, Principles, and Policies document (see Attachment 7). The Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Direction (6/23/10) document contains a Summary Analysis sustainability matrix within each of the topic areas where every key policy choice was evaluated based on its economic,-,socidl, and envir6nr ent&impacts. There is also a discussion for each key policy to add clarity to the evaluations con d ir\theSummary Analysis sustainability matrix. �& J_F In addition, during the May 25, 2010,/ work session on City Plan, Councilmembers asked for a discussion around the definition of the term"sustainability." There are existing City"definitions" and value statements in the current City Plan document,in the Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Directions document, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reports, and the 2004 Sustainability Action Plan. There is also a draft definition(Attachment 6)prepared by City staff for consideration by the Council during the July 27 work session. Shaping the Future Commun�iWW Vrk/s�h-ops,(lJune-29 an\\300,2010) and Online Forum The first broad, general public view oAth�e vision and d key policy choices occurred during the two workshops held on June 29 (evening)�and�June 301(morning)4Attendees at the workshops could choose to attend several break-out sessions and provide responses to questions on the policy choices. In most cases, the questions asked for the degree of support, or nonsupport, of each policy. There was also key pad polling of the attendees on several visualizations showing gradual changes for prototypical infill and redevelopment sites and green streets. Over 150 people participated in the workshops. The morning and evening events also included an "expo" of City services, as well as specific workshop sessions on the"Resourcing Our Future"and"Budgeting For Outcomes"projects. In addition, the community was invited to view online presentations and to complete an online questionnaire on the policy cho c s�Attt achment 3A-summarizes iz s the�responses to the questions from the June 29/30 workshops and online polling on specific topics; Attachment 3B summarizes the responses from the opening session key pad polling and Attachment 3C summarizes written comments received on the propose&Community Vision during1the "expo' portion of the meeting. July 27, 2010 Page 3 Boards and Commissions Involvement Members of City advisory boards and commissions were invited to attend the June 29 and 30 workshops. In addition, board and commission members were asked to participate in an online survey,and their responses were collected separately from the public responses(see Attachment 31)). Boards and commissions were also asked to provide comments directly to the City Council. Several boards/commission provided comments, which are included in Attachment 4. Focus Group Meetings A second round of focus groups`" cascond//KctelinJul�part of Pha e 2. These meetings covered: Land Use and Transportation; Econo ic`Health; Environment l (water/air/energy); Poudre River; and Sustainability (definition/measurement). The purpose of each focus group was to help narrow the policy choices and determine the preferred directions. The groups also began to discuss implementation strategies. Focus group input is contained in Attachment 5. Vision, Policy Choices, and Directions �� 'T� --�. rr �r The Plan Fort Collins Project Management'Team,has reviewed the-responses from the meetings and ti ) � i ) t x workshops, as well as online comments. (Many of the--policy choices and directions are generally supported by members of the NImmuunity1a`nd oJther, stakeholder who participated in the outreach efforts, and will likely be able to be incorporated into the Plan updates. However, there are a few key choices where respondents are divided, and these policy choices will need more discussion before a direction can be determined. The following sections are a summary of the feedback received to date on the key choices: Part A. Summary of Feedback, contains a general summary of comments received to date, organized by the seven vision topics of Plan Fort Collins; PartB. Policy Choices Needing MoreDir�ectiona Discussion contains the list of vision topics from the policy choices that need more discussion and direction from City Council;and Part C. Policy Choices to Carry Forward and Refine, is a list of policy choices that do not appear to need additional discussion and direction from City Council at this point, but will be refined as the Plan Fort Collins planning process moves forward. PART A. SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK This section includes a brief summary of recent feedback on different policy choices, starting with the Vision and through the seven vision topics and vision directions. The page numbers correspond to the Vision, Policy Choices, and oseDirection's docu�t'(Attachment 1). Fy July 27, 2010 Page 4 Community Vision (pages 3-6) In general, comments received reflect a high level of support for the draft Vision and seven vision topics and vision directions,with some suggested refinements. Respondents also expressed strong support for incorporating sustainability and the triple bottom line concept into Plan Fort Collins. However,opinions are mixed about the definition of sustainability for Fort Collins and how the City should apply the triple bottom line model to assist decision-making and monitoring of progress of the plans over time. Staff is seeking direction from Council on a definition of sustainability. Economic Health (pages 11-2 27 Comments reflect that this topic,,isP determining factor for overall community vitality. In general, comments show strong support for the City's continuing emphasis on primary job creation, support for local businesses, and support for additional parking in the downtown area, as needed. There is less support for the retail retention and recruitment, and workforce training policies. There is some sentiment that the County Workforce Center and the private and educational sectors are better able to address workforce training needs of unemployed people. Environmental Resources (pages 23-40) In general, feedback supports carrying%forward most of the environmental resources choices—with (strong supportlforlwaste reduction and diversion from landfills, support for the energy choices, general support for the stormwater treatment choices (with some questions addressed in Part B), support for water resource choices, support for adapting to climate change, and general support for the multi-purpose open lands policy direction. Respondents expressed cautions about potentially inappropriate uses on open spaces(e.g.,motorized uses). Questions and refinements are addressed in Parts B and C. Community and Neighborhood Livability (pages 41-60) In general, respondents support the current Structure Plan and emphasis on the City's "spine" (Mason/College Corridor) with/e�highe pport�6 acY vi _ enters. The comments are also supportive of taller buildings than currently exist)in specific activity centers, such as the Midtown Area, Harmony Road at College/Mason�a�n iegler, Drake 'Road and Timberline Road, in the downtown, and in the Campus West area. The comments show very strong support for redevelopment and infill strategies, with some support for better neighborhood transitions between activity centers/corridors and established neighborhoods. Respondents generally support or are neutral about the gateway policies and projects, although many note concerns about costs and relative importance. In addition, the comments support "nature-friendly" treatments in new developments,and generally support the current policy direction for the Cache la Poudre River near the downtown, which restricts development in the floodplain and includes limits on urban development near the River. Safety and Wellness (pages L-67)l 1 The comments strongly support maintaining current levels of service for community safety. In addition,the respondents support increased emphasis on active lifestyles and healthy living, better access to health and human services, and local agriculture and locally-produced food. July 27, 2010 Page 5 Culture, Parks, and Recreation (pages 69-75) The comments generally support enhanced emphasis on arts and culture promotion and funding. The respondents are interested in linking arts and culture more strongly with economic development efforts and exploring formation of a Science and Cultural Facilities District. They also appear to support adaptation of, enhancements to, and improved coordination among parks, recreation facilities/programs,and open space areas to address changing demographics and community needs. Transportation (pages 77-91) The comments generally support' ' the "m ydd' le optio�it�f range of transportation system choices presented(from service\reduuction to expand�g the longterm vision). The choices with the highest levels of support include focus on activity centers and Enhanced Travel Corridors, vehicle alternatives and trails,system and mobility management,and pursuing the adopted long-term vision. Respondents also strongly support increasing transportation investments and have a variety of ideas about possible funding approaches. Because many of the transportation topics are interrelated and could be combined, further discussion of which choices to carry forward and refine will be necessary. Community feedback regarding the update to the City's Pedestrian Plan which is an element of the �� �� Tr overall Transportation Masteralan continues to Ibe positive and supportive of new ideas and techniques to better serve pedestrians o1all ages andlabilities throughout the community. There is interest in exploring ideas about dde�signatin��alkirg as a primary mode of travel in key activity centers such as the downtown and for improving pedestrian linkages to transit stops and other destinations. High Performing Community (pages 93-99) In general, the comments reflect support for the choices presented under this topic, including collaborative problem solving,effective governance,and enhanced communications and technology. PART B. POLICY CHOIC tE/ (S'NEED1(/I'NG M OREfDIRE TON The planning team is seeking direction fr inthe)tilty' Council on a definition of sustainability and \�! \ems/✓ 1i the policy choices listed in the table below. Please note that some of the policy choices are more implementation-focused and could be deferred until later meetings (e.g., air quality strategies), whereas other topics are major drivers for Plan Fort Collins (e.g., transportation resourcing and investments). During the July 27 work session,Council may want to prioritize items(e.g.,"top five" topics) for discussion rather than proceed item by item through the table. The planning team is particularly interested in hearing feedback on the following topics addressed in the table below in order to understand how to proceed with Plan Fort Collins: • Sustainability Definitio7(EH3- • Land Ready for Busin: A and B) • Stormwater ConveyanLe in Public Streets ("Green Streets") (ENV8-A) • Poudre River Corridor Activities and Protections (LIV 10-A) July 27, 2010 Page 6 After discussion is completed on the above items, Council can proceed with a review of the other policy choices in the table below. If all of the policy choices cannot be covered during the July 27 work session,the planning team will need Council's direction as to how proceed in order to complete Council review of the policy choices. Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation _ Sought VISION AND SUSTAINABILITY Sustainability Definition • There are existing City Respondents show strong 1. Does Council have definitions and value supporrtt�for`incorporating comments and/or statements in the current sustainability and the triple direction on the draft City Plan document, in the bottom line concept into definition of Vision, Policy Choices, Plan Fort Collins. sustainability? (See and Proposed Direction However, opinions are Attachment 6.) document (Attachment 1, mixed about the definition page 7), Global Reporting of sustainability for Fort Initiative Sustainability Collins. Reports, and the 2004 /� St aff'ha\proy ided a dra ft Sustainability Action Plan/. definition for consideration b.� Courieil. See Attachi ent-6-) ECONOMIC HEALTH EH2-A: Continue Retail Retention and Recruitment (p. 15) • The City's Economic The respondents recognize 2. Should the Plan's Action Plan supports a the importance of sales tax policies continue to "balanced and targeted revenue to the City and that reaffirm retail approach to business retail is part of a complete development and retention, expansion, eco onmic health`stra et gy. redevelopment along incubation, and Differi g)vi�ewslrevolve' the College and attraction," (including arou d t c Fe graphic Harmony corridors? retail) to further the areas(e.g., core areas and economic health of the infill versus along I-25). community. In general, responses are in • Commercial zoning exists strong support of at the Carpenter Road (CO redevelopment of Foothills HWY 392), Mulberry Mall and implementation Street, and Prospect Road of the Midtown interchanges with I-25. Redevelopment strategies. Commercial development Staff Fecom nds- at the Harmony Road/I-25 continuing to�pursue retail interchange is under retention1and recruitment as consideration as part of part of the economic the amendment to the healthy strategy and Harmony Corridor Plan. continuing to enhance and July 27, 2010 Page 7 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought streamline the City's role, in particular, emphasizing retail development along College and Harmony corridors per the current City Structure Plan and ad((7 ((opted subarea-pla\ EH3-A: Provide Land Ready.fLarge mployyers and EH3-B: Incentives to Make Land Ready (p. 17) • The City's Economic The respondents have 3. Should the Plan Action Plan states, "be mixed opinions about include a policy proactive on economic making land ready for new supporting City issues and build partners business and targeted coordination and with organizations and the employers. In general, involvement in private sector to further opinions are supportive of working on an area enhance economic health." retaining zoning`for and district basis to • Current practice is for the �dustry.lComment not make land ready for �.i ../r City to evaluate the impact some support for the City businesses that will on the current inventory off assisting with-employer�up- have a broader benefit undeveloped employment front needs by coordinating to the community? land of requested changes infrastructure and capital (Note: more to convert employment projects and taking part in discussion would be land to other uses. Current providing Downtown needed regarding analysis of vacant land parking facilities. implementation, indicates that the City has Retaining land zoned for including exactly how enough land zoned for employment is also the City might employment, including supported. Questions- facilitate land appropriate for the su'rround1the�C City/ 1 ev�el/of infrastructure City's targeted industry effort and funding andl improvements such as clusters. providing support for-a stormwater drainage, variety of business types. water and sewer Some of the negative utilities, and street feedback may be tied to improvements and specific wording, such as discussion about "large employers" and incentives.) "incentives". • Staff recommends that the policy-choices-be combined• to(�focus�on an area and/ district-basis role of the ki C ty_in-helping to make land ready for business, rather than wording that July 27, 2010 Page 8 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought suggests a more speculative approach to assisting businesses. Staff also proposes removing the focus on large businesses. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Air Quality ENV 4-A: Em loy Price echanisms (to reduce miles driven) (p. 29) • City Plan states: The�price mechanism 4. Should price "Continually improve Fort policy is an existing City mechanisms to reduce Collins' air quality as the Plan policy put forward for VMT continue to be City grows." community discussion. part of the air quality • "Principle ENV-2: The Price mechanisms include, policy update City will reduce total but are not limited to, the discussion, which will motor vehicle emissions of following: incentives to include additional high priority pollutants by use alternative modes, public outreach and focusing on both location efficient Council input later technology (tailpipe mortgages, pay-las-you this summer and fall? emissions) and behavior d`\e m/ra�ncc etc. For Any suggested (driving patterns). both°the price-mechanisms changes to air quality • Policies that follow and alternative policies, including the Principle ENV-2 include: transportation fuels policy price mechanism Actions of Vehicle Miles choices, the respondents policy, will feed into Traveled (ENV-2.1), have divided opinions. the Plan Fort Collins Actions on VMT (ENV There is general support for process in a timely 2.2), Price Mechanisms the City to be a leader in manner. (ENV 2.3), and Actions on these areas, although some Tailpipe Emissions (ENV participantslnote 1 2.4). reservations about the City's role and whether these°actioris�would be better accomplished through private sector or other governmental initiatives (e.g., federal). • Staff recommends broadening and clarifying policy language to consider incentives-and -as,1 l . \\ /i part of the air q�uahty�pohcy update discussion. July 27, 2010 Page 9 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought ENV6-A: Reduce Carbon Intensity and Consumption (p. 31) • City Plan does not address The respondents have 5. Should the Plan consumption or local food divided opinions on this include a policy production. topic, with the majority regarding reducing • It contains policies supporting reducing carbon carbon intensity and regarding reducing intensity and-consumption7 consumption? greenhouse gas emissions,/ and a Smaller group who/do which need to be updated` not supportIthe policy1v( to reflect the more currents direction -Some would-``like Climate Action Plan. to understand more about • The Climate Action Plan the upfront costs, regional (CAP) (2008) includes nature of the issue, and carbon reduction goals to uncertainty about the reduce community-wide science. greenhouse gas emissions Staff recommends that this by 20% below 2005 levels policy choice not be carried by 2020 and 80% by 2050. forward the-Climate ction Plan llready\� addresses greenhouse gas emmssions and.other new policy directions that address other parts of that objective. If it is kept in the Plan it will need clarification and more discussion about implementation strategies. Stormwater ENV8-A: Expand Opportunities for Stormwater Treatment and Conveyance in Public Streets;ENV 9-A: Improve Stormwater Quality and Conveyance;and ENV10-A: Increase Stormwater partnerships(p 33=Z35) JUL • The City does not The respondents generally 6. Should the Plan currently have a policy support a"Green Streets" include a policy to support for "green streets" option (stormwater allow"Green Streets" or street standards that treatment and conveyance as an option for allow it. in streets and other uses of stormwater • Stormwater plans the parkway areas and management? currently address life medians of streets). safety protection for Ad'difional discussion is 7. Should the Plan people and reduction of needed about p_.otential include policies to damage to structures due increased costs, , support regional to flooding, quality aihtenancle-and long'-term stormwater basins streams, rivers, and water viability. Similarly, the and partnerships to resources. respondents have questions address stormwater July 27, 2010 Page 10 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sou ht • The City has a goal to related to the enhanced quality and provide restoration of 21 stormwater quality through conveyance in areas miles of streams to more regional basins and where traditional naturalized conditions by partnerships. Questions approaches are 2035. relate to possible increased difficult to • 21st Century Goals strive land requirements, cost, implement? (Note: to treat all new or and impacts on-developabl"e Additional discussion redeveloped properties land. 11 I \� will occur at the with a Stormwater Best Staff recommends that the August 24th Council Management Practice by "Green Streets" option-be work session 2035. included in the Plan and regarding the issue of • See also Transportation explored in more detail floodplain regulations Choice Tl-B: Reshaping during the implementation costs and benefits). Existing Streets, which phase. For example, street refers to "Green Streets." standards will need modification and more research about costs, maintenance,=and long-term• viability is necessary. COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY POLICYCHOICES LIV7-A: Identify Neighborhoods where Protective Measures are Needed (p. 55—56) City Plan states: Respondents have divided 8. Should the Plan • Goal: "Our community opinions about identifying continue to include will encourage additional neighborhoods policies that promote preservation of existing for protective measures and neighborhood housing." conservation. Some are conservation? • "Policy HSG-2.4: concerned aboutsprotecting Detailed i�. r \` y Preservation of existingneighborhoods�and implementation Neighborhoods. The City historic properties, yet the strategies should be will attempt to retain com e ts-rehect thatJJmany refined through existing affordable may be unaware of existing subarea plans that housing stock through protective measures. There address the issue. conservation efforts of are also concerns about older residential over-regulation of older neighborhoods." (not historic) properties and • "Principle HSG-3: interest in letting the Neighborhood stability market drive must be maintained and redevelopment and enhanced." conservationi • Policy EXN-1.1 —"No Staff recommends the City \\ // Itic significant changes to the continue with-current character of existing policies with residential developments July 27, 2010 Page 11 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought will be initiated by City implementation refined Plan...The character of through subarea plans. stable residential neighborhoods should be protected..." LIV10-A: Carry Forward Exist n�g Poli es,,Related to PU re River Corridor Activities and Protections (p. 59) • Current policies and The respondents generally 9. Should the Plan carry regulations protect most support existing City forward existing areas along the river near policies and plans that policies for the Cache the downtown and define address the relationship of la Poudre River(as acceptable river-related the Poudre River to the noted in the first land uses and design (e.g., Downtown. Some column)? a buffer, stabilized bank, comments express desire and stepped back for some urban edge buildings). development in specific Floodplain regulations for ations with public minimize development in access or)greater V the 100-year floodplain elarif catt'ior%in the natural but do not prohibit buffer area for the Poudre development. River. Other comments • A handful of properties are suggest maintaining a river eligible for corridor that is as natural as development—they have possible. (Note: This not been conserved for LIV 10-A Poudre River open space or are already choice also relates to the developed. water-policy choices in the /vir off i?Szk \T Environmen dal Resource section (EIiV-1}1 and ENV 12),which r6ceived general support.) • Additional discussion will occur at the August 24th Council work session regarding the issue of floodplain regulations. Staff will prepare recommendations based on tripl�ottom ne outcomes. ' July 27, 2010 Page 12 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sou ht SAFETY AND WELLNESS SW3-A: Support Healthy Living(p. 65) • City Plan does not contain The respondents generally 10. Should the Plan goals or policies regarding support City education and support continued healthy living. coordination to promote City coordination on healtliy�living;but opinions and education about are mixed about whether opportunities for the City/should play a role healthy living? iri edu ati n L Some area' interested in expanding this policy direction to include coordination with alternative and mental health care providers. • Staff has not formulated a recommendation on this topic. SW 5-A: Support Local Agriculture'and Food Production (p. 66) • City Plan does not The espond_ents haveiL Should the Plan mention local agriculture expressed strong support support promoting or food production. for local agriculture and local agriculture and food production, especially food production on on private properties. City-owned Opinions are mixed about properties? the City's role and level of involvement on City- owned.pro perties. Sta�f recommend's further r i �:i L� J:� w exploration of`whether local agriculture (and water) and food production is appropriate on City- owned properties and, if so, what types of properties. TRANSPORTATION T1-B: Reshape Existing Streets (p. 81-82) • The Transportation The comments reflect 12. Should the Plan \1 � r \ .r Master Plan provides mixed reaction to the support reshaping context for this question m `ncept)of re'shaping1 streets and context- policies TC-4.6 Facility exist�g�streets over time to sensitive street Design, "Facility design emphasize lower vehicle standards to address will support all modes of seeds and accommodate multiple needs July 27, 2010 Page 13 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought transportation and be walking, bicycling, and including stormwater, matched to appropriately transit, with concerns about and "tailored" for support the surrounding the tradeoff between different areas of the development," and maintaining capacity for community and levels policies that address a vehicles and enhancing of service for balanced and integrated adjacent uses. There has walking, bicycling, network of transportation / been interest-and support transit, and vehicle corridors (TC-1.2 and TC- for more flexib1'Pstreet capacity? 1.3). designs to beta r fit the Policy ETC-1.2 Facility context(adjacent landluses) Design also notes that and for exploring "Green facilities will be matched Streets" concepts to to appropriately support integrating stormwater. surrounding development. treatment and other uses of • Policy T-1.10 Context the parkway areas and Sensitive Design. The medians. intent of the policy is to Staff recommends ensure that transportation continuing*the°discussion projects not only move regarding potential new vehicles, bikes, and sheet design pedestrians safely, but are(�� techniques/treatments as- sensitive to the well as implications for environmental, scenic, costs for capital, aesthetic, and historic operations, and values of the area. maintenance, as noted in However, existing street the stormwater policy standards tend to be choices. uniform and require a "one-size fits all" 0 -\v approach to sizing streets despite the context of th i street and currently do not offer design flexibility. T1-D: Vehicle Alternatives/Trails (p. 84) • City Plan and the The comments reflect 13. Should the Plan Transportation Master general support for support enhancing Plan (TMP) both address recognizing the need to trails as part of the trails as primarily expand trail use for transportation system, recreational in purpose. trans ortation as w e as beyond their current • In TMP Policy TC 2.42 ;reational�puiposes'N recreational purpose? "Corridors are the linking how �erJthere are concerns elements of the City" about diverting already- including the Poudre limited resources to vehicle July 27, 2010 Page 14 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought River Corridor). The TMP alternatives and trails, as goals also state that the well as need to address City will provide access to potential conflicts between major activity centers and new types of motorized destinations by building vehicles and non-motorized on combinations of travel within the on-street existing and planned and�o—ff-street`transportatiori commuter and recreational systeml� ( \ facilities. Staff recommends further ezploration�of this topic and identify potential trail linkages and new design standards for trails and/or on-street facilities to address safety and accessibility concerns for multiple types of trail users. T2-A: Increase Transportation Investments to Achieve Goals (p. 89) • Currently, TMP Policy T-\ Theme myty opposes 14. Should the Plan 10.2 Funding states that reducing transportation explore new tools to the City will continue to service to fit within achieve more reliable actively pursue all diminishing resources (e.g., long-term funding available long-term, less maintenance, transit sources for capital consistent funding frequency, roadway system improvements and mechanisms from federal, improvements), and operations and state, and local sources to supports increasing maintenance for all implement and maintain a transportation investments modes of multi-modal transportation io/�i v` t�p ua it on transportation? system and travel demand goals. Nell ideas are�� management program. emerging about possibly • Financing tools under funding sources that would discussion (in Attachment be more reliable over time 1, page 89) include: and less dependent on o Sales Tax (existing external factors; questions source) about the potential revenue o Property Tax (existing generation from each of the source) various types of funding o Auto Ownership Taxes sources; and ideas about (existing source) need ni g top kaca ge various o Bicycle Ownership fiindingl�urces to achieve Taxes (new source) ours goal ,Comments vary o Impact Fees (existing regarding how much source) additional investment is July 27, 2010 Page 15 Respondent Comments and Council Direction Current Policy Staff Recommendation Sought o Tax Increment Funding needed to maintain existing (new source) system as compared with o Transportation Utility needs for expansion of or Maintenance Fees system and services. This (new source) topic is also closely related o Pricing and User Fees to the current Budgeting for (new source) Outcomes grid°Resourcirig7 o Local District Our Future discussions Assessments (new Staff recommends 11 source) continung•thle discussion o Negotiated Agreements regarding potential with CSU and/or transportation investment Neighboring strategies to support Communities (existing existing and planned and new sources). capital and operations/maintenance needs and to explore more reliab le.long=ter m.funding7- tools. �1 r PART C. POLICY CHOICES TO�CARRY'FORIWARD-AND REFINE In addition to current City Plan and Transportation Master Plan goals and policies that have been identified to carry forward as is or with non-substantive refinements, and other current policies and values identified in the Snapshot Report that need to be brought into alignment with Plan Fort Collins, the following is a list of new policy topics that participants during this process appear to support—particularly during recent outreach efforts. The planning team does not believe that City Council needs to discuss each topic individually, unless Council desires to do so, and is asking for permission to carry forward and ,efine the,.entire list -of the Plan Fort Collins draft revisions 1, �' N \,\ I 1 1) "\the), Plan City Plan and the TransportationMaster to be in upcoming months. Community Vision (pages 3-6) • Vision Refinement—Strengthen the economic health vision directions and clarify and refine terms within each of the topic areas to reflect the proposed policy directions. • Sustainability— Carrying forward the triple bottom line concept and further refining it and work on the triple bottom line integrated model. Economic Health (pages 11-22) • EH1-A: Primary Job Crean tion�- Continue eMp asiYoj creation. More discussion is needed regarding specifc implementation strategies and role of the City. • EH4-A: Local Businessee\s\�Encourage-localebusiness,colntinuing the Shop Fort Collins First program. July 27, 2010 Page 16 • EH5-A: Workforce Training — Continue coordination and partnerships with the Larimer County Workforce Center and other organizations for workforce training. The City should not take a lead role in assisting workforce training of the unemployed. Environmental Resources (pages 23-40) • ENV1-A, ENV2-A, ENV3-A: Energy Policies — Reduce net energy use; modernize the electric grid,and improve the energy performance of existing buildings. Continue to explore voluntary versus mandatory_measures (with comments exppressing more favor for voluntary i Try �T P9 measures) and carefully, consider up-front costs vs long-term benefits. • ENV 7-A: Waste Reduction—Continue waste reduction Iand diversion efforts,provided that they are generally voluntary measlu.res j I1_l • ENV 11-A,ENV 12-A,ENV 13-A: Water Policies—Address balanced water supply planning and conservation,a resilient Cache la Poudre River, and adapting to climate change through the Water Demand and Supply Policy Plan 2010 update. • ENV 14-A: Open Lands— Continue partnerships and strategic planning for multi-purpose open lands that enhance and restore streams, improve water quality, provide and enhance trail corridors,enhance wildlife and aquatic habitat, allow for agriculture and water for food production, provide parks and recreational purposes, and achieve other aims. Refine the terminology related to open lands. Community and Neighborhoo' 'd Livabili�eS 41-60) • LIV 1-13, LIV 1-C: Structure Plan—Emphasize the activity centers and the City's "spine" with strong connections between activity centers and Mason/College corridors. • LIV2-A: Allowable Building Heights — Allow and encourage taller buildings in activity centers and along the spine (with the currently allow four to five stories generally being an ideal height except for in Downtown). • LIV3-A: Redevelopment and Infill Strategies-Support redevelopment and infill. Continue to explore the specific implementation strategies proposed. • LIV4-A: City Gateway—Support City gateways,but as a relatively lower priority item due to concerns about potential o ts. Explore po sible locations for priority future gateways (possibly I-25 and Harmony and I-25 an Mulberry)and`b�racket potential elements of future gateways. • LIV5-A: Neighborhood Transitions—Refine neighborhood transition standards,especially those related to transitions in height and use, and spacing between new and existing development. • LIV6-A: Mix of Housing Types —Provide a mix of housing types to meet the needs of a diverse population. Explore ways to protect stable neighborhoods and to factor in changing demographics. • LIV8-A: Affordable Housing—Maintain existing affordable housing programs at current levels. • LIV9-A: Alternative Landscape Trea mentsModify landscaping standards to allow and encourage"nature friendly"alternatives totoI grass an�Id(n/ither water-intensive landscaping; hard surfaced swales, etc `��/ J� 1� July 27, 2010 Page 17 Safety and Wellness (pages 61-67) • SW 1-13: Community Safety—Maintain current levels of service for community safety. Note: Provide more information about current levels of safety and emergency response times. • SW2-A: Active Lifestyles—Continue to provide and expand opportunities for residents to lead active lifestyles. • S W4-A: Health and Human Services Access—Improve access to health and human service providers. Emphasize regional coordination and access to traditional and alternative health care providers. � d ut �SW5-A: Support Local AlturFoo Production Culture, Parks, and Recreation�(page�69-75))r • CPR1-A: Arts and Culture Promotion—Promote and continue to integrate arts and culture. Explore formation of an arts council. • CPR3-A: Parks Adaptation—Promote new and different types of parks and multi-purpose parks and open space areas. Continue discussions about types of parks and multi-use spaces desired, including possible pocket parks and a kayak park. • CPR4-A: Recreation Enhancements—Coordinate to enhance recreational programming and pursue multi-purpose facilities in the future. Transportation (pages 77-91)// OPV • TI-C: Enhanced Travel Corridors/District Focus—Focus City investments along Enhanced Travel Corridors(ETC)and in activity centers. Continue discussions about where to"jump- start" these long-standing policies, and how to prioritize them. • TI-E: System Management and Mobility Management — Focus on maximizing the effectiveness of current systems, and combine this practice with other transportation directions. • T1-F: Adopted Long-Term Vision—Maintain the current long-term vision for a multi-modal transportation system. Seek opportunities to include more local and regional connections (trails, transit, roadways). High Performing Commumty,(pages 93- 99) • HIl-A: Collaborative Problem Solving Involve citizens and forge partnerships at a local and regional level. Explore opportunities for collaboration nationally and globally. • HI2-A: Effective Local Governance — Continue to provide effective, representative government. Explore new ideas about City Council representation(e.g., at-large members) and underscore the need to include a range of voices. • HI3-A Communications and Technology — Support robust community interaction and explore expansion of communications technology as basic infrastructure. Explore impacts on current technology service providersi July 27, 2010 Page 18 NEXT STEPS Following the July 27 work session and direction from the City Council,the Plan Fort Collins team will continue to work on refining the Vision and preferred policy directions that will serve as the basis for preparing the updated City Plan and Transportation Master Plan documents this fall. The team will continue to work with boards and commissions as the policy directions are refined,as well as provide other opportunities for continued community input. The team has already begun the process of refining the indicators that will be used to complete the triple bottom line model that will be used to further evaluate policy directions as well as becoming part of the Plan Fort Collins i1 l" -STD monitoring process that will be/ngoing after plan adoption.. The primary emphasis of Phase 3, which`wll cow ence thy summer; is the identification of implementation strategies and priorities as part of the draft Plan documents;and preparation of select implementation actions(such as code revisions),following the adoption of the Plans. The next City Council work sessions, are scheduled for October 26 and November 30, 2010, and will focus on implementation strategies as well as the draft Plan documents, and the team will be seeking Council's input on implementation actions that should be a priority. ATTACHMENTS -VT 77- " ( l `V/ 1. Vision, Policy Choices,(a(d Propo lied D r ectilon(6/23/101)document(this is the same version as the one distributed to the=CounciPon July-16). 2. City Council Work Session PowerPoint Presentation 3. Public Input Results A. Summary of the responses to the questions from the June 29/30 workshops on specific topics and on-line polling. B. Summary of the responses from the June 29/30 opening session key pad polling C. Summary of the comments received during the"expo"portion of the meeting on the Vision D. Summary of results1rom board-andvcornmission members on-line polling 4. Board and Commission Comments \Il • Air Quality Adv `ry Board (Draft F Y • Bike Advisory Committee , • Downtown Development Authority • Electric Board • Land Conservation and Stewardship Board • Natural Resources Advisory Board • Planning and Zoning Board • Senior Advisory Board • Water Board • Transportation Board �--1 5. Extended Focus Groups;Phase Summary of)Input 6. Draft Sustainability Defimtion� 7. Carrying Forward Existing=Goal's;P-rind Ales, and Policies document (this is the same version as the one distributed to the Council on July 16). ATTACHMENT 2 City ®f Advance Planning 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 I Fort Collins.CO 80522 970.221.6376 F6 r t OADI- I I mrdlk S 970.224.6111111 -fax Icgov.com/advanceplanning Memorandum DATE: August 2, 2010 TO: Mayor Hutchinson and City Counnciiltnembers THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager 1 Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager Karen Cumbo, Planning Development, and Transportation Director FROM: Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director Ken Waido, Chief Planner Kathleen Bracke, Director of Transportation Planning and Special Projects RE: Work Session Summary—July 27, 2010—Plan Fort Collins, Phase 2— Vision, Policy Choices, and Proposed Directions Work Session Participants: Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager Joe Frank, Advance Planning Department Director Kathleen Bracke, Director of Transportation Planning and Special Projects John Stokes, Natural Resources Director Ben Herman, Clarion Associates Jeremy Klop, Fehr& Peers Judy Dorsey, Brendle Group Direction Sougght/Questions to be Answered: The Plan Fort Collins Project Management Team was seeking input and direction from the City Council on the policy choices and directions, in particular, focusing Council's input on those policy choices where there is no clear cut consensus or agreement. The specific questions to be addressed during the work session were: 1. Does Council have comments and/or direction on the list of Policy Choices Needing More Discussion and Direction? 2. Does Council agree with the list of Policy Choices to Corm Forward and Refine? 3. Does Council have comments and/or direction on a definition of sustainability? of Fort Collins Council's Discussion[Direction: The planning team asked the Council to address the following priority topics in order to understand how to proceed with the balance of Phase 2 of Plan Port Collins: • Sustainability Definition • Land Ready for Business (EH')-A and B) • Stormwater Conveyance in Public Streets ("Green Streets") (ENVS-A) • Poudre River Corridor Activities and Protections (LIV 10-A) • Reshaping Existing Streets (T1-B) • Vehicle Alternatives/Trails (TI-D) • Transportation Investments to Achieve Goals (T2-A) / Sustainability Definition Question seeking Council direction: Does Council have comments and/or direction on the draft definition of sustainability? o There was no Council support to use the draft sustainability definition prepared by staff. e The Brundtland Commission definition established in 1983, and a couple of other rather simple definitions were identified as good examples that had support as a base definition. o Staff was directed to focus on a simpler, higher level definition with supporting guidance on an operating definition. o There were mixed opinions as to whether the definition should be supported by a list of indicators as an explanation of the Triple Bottom Line approach to sustainability. TI-B: Reshape Existing Streets The discussion on policy choice T1-B was next because the transportation planning consultants would not be available on August 10 when the work session would continue. Question seeking Council direction: Should the Plan support reshaping streets and context- sensitive street standards to address multiple needs including stormwater, and "tailored" for different areas of the community and levels of service for walking, bicycling, transit, and vehicle capacity? This choice is related to the Stonnwater topic of"Green Streets". • There was general support for multiuse streets. • Such an approach could be desirable especially in some key areas with low traffic volumes and/or areas of high bicycle and pedestrian activity. (Example: Laurel Street along CSU campus). • Location specific differences were noted so that there was the need to be context sensitive. City of Fort CoRins • There was some concern about potential costs associated with construction and/or on- going operations/maintenance. TI-D: Vehicle Alternatives/Trails Question seeking Council direction: Should the Plan support enhancing trails as part of the transportation system, beyond their current recreational purpose, and how to address new vehicle types? • There was general support for further exploration of this idea but there were also some critical concerns such as: o trails should not be wider through a natural areas. o some trails are already too close to habitat areas in some locations. • There might be some trail sections that can have dual or multiple use purposes for commuting purposes such as the Power Trail and/or Mason Trail. • Another important issue is what to do about non-traditional types of"motorized vehicles" (electric bikes, etc). ■ Conduct research to provide examples of other communities with potential conflicts. T2-A: Transportation Investments to Achieve Goals Question seeking Council direction: Should tine Plan explore new tools to achieve more reliable long-term funding sources for capital improvements and operations and maintenance for all modes of transportation? • There were some Council concerns as to the appropriateness of this being in the Plan Fort Collins process. • There was no opposition to Plan Fort Collins exploring longer-term funding sources. • Council would like to see more information about how this topic relates to the long-tern transportation planning purpose of the Transportation Master Plan and the multimodal Capital Improvement Plan, including the fiscally constrained plan. Next Steps: The July 27 work session will be continued on August 10.