HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 05/25/2010 - PLAN FORT COLLINS: PHASE 2 - PRELIMINARY VISION A DATE: May 25, 2010
STAFF: Joe Frank WORK SESSION ITEM
Kathleen Bracke FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Plan Fort.Collins: Phase 2 -Preliminary Vision and Policy Choices.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Plan Fort Collins effort is in Phase 2 of its planning process. Phase 2 focuses on refining the
community's vision,identifying new policy choices and the associated trade-offs and consequences,
and begins to establish preferred directions for a new City Plan and Transportation Master Plan,
and related implementation actions. The primary purpose of the May 25,2010, Work Session is to
inform and obtain Council input regarding the vision and new policy choices contained in the draft
Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices Outline ("Outline"). The Outline has been prepared from
input and discussions among City staff, consultants, and City boards and commissions, as well as
from public input during Phase 1. The Outline provides the focus for the more detailed planning
work during Phase 2 of the Plan Fort Collins process. It is also important that the Council be
comfortable with the new policy choices, as they will provide the basis for the alternatives analysis
process and public discussion at community events,boards and commissions discussions,and focus
group meetings that are planned for this summer.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
The Preliminary Vision &Policy Choices Outline("Outline")document(Attachment 1)is guiding
the work of the planning team over the next month, leading up to another round of public outreach
starting in June. Staff is looking for feedback and direction on the following:
1. Does the Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices Outline contain the appropriate range of
policy choices?
2. Are any policy choices missing?
Staff is not asking the Council to identify preferred choices or priorities at this time, but rather to
help determine if the Outline contains the appropriate range of choices for the community to
consider. Later this summer, the Council will have the opportunity to provide direction on a set of
recommended directions after community input has been obtained on each of the choices.
J
May 25, 2010 Page 2
BACKGROUND
The Plan Fort Collins effort is in Phase 2 of its planning process (see Attachment 8). Phase 2
focuses on refining the community's vision, identifying new policy choices and their trade-offs and
consequences, and begins to establish preferred directions for a new City Plan and Transportation
Master Plan, and related implementation actions. The primary purpose of the May 25, 2010 Work
Session is to provide information and obtain Council input regarding the vision and new policy
choices contained in the draft Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices Outline ("Outline") (See
Attachment 1). The draft Outline was reviewed at a special joint City Boards and Commissions
Workshop on April 22, 2010. The current document reflects extensive input received from that
workshop. The policy choices will be the focus of detailed analysis during Phase 2 of the Plan Fort
Collins process. They will also be presented at public events scheduled for June 29 and 30 for
discussion and to assess preferences of the community. There will be ongoing boards and
commissions review, and other public outreach throughout the summer.
Phase 1 Outcome
Following is a brief summary of Phase 1 of the Plan Fort Collins process.
The Snapshot Report has been finished and is available for download from the project website at
fcgov.com/planfortcollins. Its purpose is to describe current values, accomplishments, challenges
and opportunities in eight topical areas:
• Arts and Culture
• Built Environment and Land Use
• Environment and Utilities
• Finance and Economy
• Health, Wellness, and Safety
• Housing
• Natural Areas
• Parks, and Recreation
• Transportation
Phase 1 also began to identify new ideas that have carried over into Phase 2.
The Snapshot Report provided the foundation for soliciting public input regarding the vision and
challenges for the future. Public input included a Council work session,on-line community dialogue
opportunities, input from City boards and commissions, special workshops, focus group meetings,
and small group presentations. Special attention was given to involving certain populations,groups,
and agencies (including Colorado State University students, Poudre School District students, and
minority groups) who may not otherwise be fully engaged through traditional outreach efforts.
Phase 1 also included two major public events: the March 3 presentation by Futurist Thomas Frey,
and the March 4 meeting of community thought leaders.
Finally, Phase 1 included extensive use of social media including Facebook and Twitter. The Plan
Fort Collins website was developed to provide public access to a comprehensive set of materials
covering the Phase 1 components and results, including a Best Practices Report that reviews ideas
May 25, 2010 Page 3
from other communities that are relevant to the topics being explored in Plan Fort Collins. The
website provides an opportunity for residents to sign up for project newsletters and announcements.
Phase 1 also included extensive media coverage, utility newsletter articles, etc. A summary of
feedback and ideas received from the community during Phase 1, titled Consolidated Feedback
Phase 1, is included in this packet as Attachment 2.
Phase 2 Status
Phase 2 of the Plan Fort Collins process focuses on refining the vision, identifying key policy
choices, and preferred directions for revisions to City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan by
exploring a range of possible plan choices and the consequences and tradeoffs of the policy choice
options. This information will be extensively reviewed by the community beginning in late June.
As described below, the Preliminary Vision & Key Choices Outline (Attachment 1) is a work in
progress. A more complete packet will be prepared over the next four weeks,to include descriptions
of each choice including visual simulations and analysis (both quantitative and qualitative).
Change to the Organization of Plan Fort Collins Topics
Based on Council guidance from the March 23, 2010 Work Session, the project team has revised
the organization of the Plan Fort Collins approach. The purpose of the reorganization is to improve
alignment between the Plan Fort Collins approach and the Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO)
organizational structure and the City's vision for a "World Class Community". The updated Plan
Fort Collins categories are:
• Community and Neighborhood Livability
• Culture, Parks, and Recreation
• Economic Health
• Environmental Resources
• High Performing Community
• Safety and Wellness
• Transportation
Policy Choices
During Phase 2, a series of citywide alternatives are being developed, ("bundled" sets of policy
choices) to explore overall land use, transportation, utilities, and other considerations, in an
integrated manner. The alternatives will be modeled and evaluated so the community will
understand the sustainability implications of different policy choices the City could pursue in the
future. The policy choices are organized and aligned with the seven categories listed above. Many
of the policy choices "cross-cut" other policy choices. Attachment 3, Policy Choices
Interrelationships Matrix, provides a summary listing of all of the policy choices included in the
Outline document, and shows how they are related to each other.
The draft Preliminary Vision &Policy Choices Outline document is the first step of Phase 2 of the
Plan Fort Collins process. Staff is seeking Council feedback on the set of choices that are contained
in this document to help the project team determine if the appropriate range of topics and choices
are included. Staff is not seeking input from the Council at this time about which of these choices
May 25, 2010 Page 4
is most appropriate for the City, nor is staff asking Council to prioritize them. The Council's input
will be used to help refine the set of policy choices and scenarios that are being developed and will
be analyzed by the Plan Fort Collins project team. As described below, these policy choices will
be evaluated by the community through a variety of public outreach activities starting in June. The
method for evaluating the policy choices is shown on Attachment 5, Triple Bottom Line Evaluation,
illustrating the application of the City's triple bottom line outcome-based approach.
Following the completion of the policy choices evaluation, the project team will develop a set of
draft preferred directions(plan and policy)that will serve as the basis for the preparation of a revised
City Plan and Transportation Master Plan. This process will identify needed changes to existing
plans and policies as well as new policies and corresponding actions needed to implement them.
This information will be presented to City Council for input at the July 27, 2010 Work Session.
How do the Policy Choices Relate to Current City Plans and Policies?
Many of the City's core values and policies are well-established and supported by the community
and are not being considered for change;thus,they are not included in the Outline document. Staff
is currently reviewing all existing policies to determine which are to be carried forward and which
may need to be modified, as guided by decisions made during this"Policy Choices"process. This
information will be part of the materials to be reviewed by the community this summer.
The Outline identifies a set of policy choices that are either suggested new policy directions, or are
refinements to existing plans and policies. The following is a brief summary,by topic, of how each
of the major sections of the Outline document relate to current policies.
Citywide Alternatives
The planning team is developing citywide alternatives to explore bundled sets of policy choices that
look at land use,transportation,stormwater management,etc. in an integrated manner. Alternatives
will eventually be presented as physical maps, with a "menu" of choices attached to each one.
These choices are based on the City Structure Plan (see Attachment 7) and Transportation Master
Plan, and explore a range of scenarios that may eventually lead to possible revisions to these plans.
As noted in the other topics below, these choices, while unique and distinct, are not necessarily
mutually exclusive.
Areas of potential change from current policies include:
• Increased emphasis on infill and redevelopment and transportation focus along the City's
core spine (Mason and College corridors) and other enhanced travel corridors.
• Increased emphasis on focused development in existing and new activity centers (such as
the future Mountain Vista Activity Center and Riverwalk area) supported by transportation
improvements along enhanced transportation corridors.
Each of the citywide alternatives will include:
• Alternative approaches to streets, including "complete streets" and green streets, designed
to accommodate stormwater in a more urban setting.
May 25, 2010 Page 5
• Visual simulations of what the character of increased density and intensity of redevelopment
and infill might look like in activity centers and along corridors, in terms of land use,
livability,mobility,environmental resources,utilities,stormwater, and other factors. Areas
to be simulated may include: a redevelopment/infill area (e.g., Mason Corridor), a
Downtown neighborhood edge area, and a future greenfield activity area (e.g., Mountain
Vista).
Economic Health Choices
This set of policy choices explores ways that the City might build on its key economic action
strategies: job creation through business retention, expansion, incubation, and attraction; be
proactive on economic issues;build partnerships;and diversify the economy. The choices represent
a variety of approaches and relative emphasis that might be used to accomplish these strategies,
ranging from more focus on job creation,targeted emphasis on retail,local business preference,and
workforce development.
Environmental Resource Choices
This set of policy choices encompasses a broad range of topics - energy, stormwater, water
resources, air quality, waste, and open lands - representing a mix of new directions as well as
enhancements to current policies. Energy choices focus primarily on the extent to which current
initiatives-energy use reduction, grid modernization,building performance- could be taken to the
"next level." It also explores new ideas related to energy use and transportation.
Stormwater choices will explore a broad range of new approaches to stormwater treatment,
including "green streets," new approaches to water quality and habitat protection, and new
partnerships.
Water resource choices will relate to ongoing planning.
Air quality choices introduce new ideas related to alterative fuels for transportation, and pricing
strategies to encourage travel reduction.
Waste choices identify enhancements to current waste stream reduction and composting,as well as
new approaches to carbon emission reduction.
Open lands choices identify possible ways to expand opportunities to increase local food production.
Community and Neighborhood Livability Choices
This set of policy choices does not reflect significant new directions,but places additional emphasis
on increasing infill and redevelopment;activity centers(with particular emphasis on centers serving
locations in addition to the Downtown area); accommodating change in housing needs to
accommodate population changes; and questions about the appropriate types of activity in the
Poudre River District. It also suggests possible new directions for stronger integration of natural
resources and "nature" within the City's built environment.
May 25, 2010 Page 6
Safety and Wellness Choices
This set of policy choices includes several topics that are not presently part of City Plan policies
(health and wellness, support for local food production), as well as choices related to ongoing
support of primary safety services (with a cross-reference to the ongoing"Resourcing Our Future"
dialogue).
Culture, Parks, and Recreation Choices
This set of policy choices primarily addresses and builds on policies in the City's recently adopted
Parks and Recreation Policies Plan and the Cultural Plan, with increased emphasis on arts and
culture as an important economic and livability driver as well as identifying potential changes
necessary to address the needs of a changing population.
Transportation Choices
The transportation policy choices build on existing policies as well as introduce some fundamental
questions to be addressed during the Plan Fort Collins process. The choices recognize that current
funding forecasts severely limit continued progress toward current goals and policies, and ask the
community to weigh in on future directions for multimodal transportation. The first set of choices
would define the extent of the City's progress in the future, ranging from a system that is largely
limited to the existing facilities and services as they exist today to the full implementation of the
Master Street Plan, Transfort Strategic Plan, Bicycle Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP), and consideration of system expansion. Other choices address a variety of topics
including regional connectivity, enhanced trail linkages, parking strategies, transit service,
pedestrian facility priorities, and strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These topics are
not meant to be mutually exclusive choices.
One set of new choices to be explored'with the community relates to new funding sources for
transportation. The ongoing"Resourcing Our Future"community dialogue is addressing the City's
pressing, immediate needs. The community dialogue with Plan Fort Collins is intended to
complement this process. The City has identified a minimum resource need of$6.5 million annually
to address pavement maintenance to keep streets in a condition that avoids higher costs associated
with deferred maintenance and increased deterioration. The funding shortfall to address transit,
bicycle, pedestrian, bridges, and other capital projects, as well as ongoing operations/maintenance
needs for all modes of travel, is much larger. The intent is to provide a set of possible new funding
sources to be considered by the community. It is likely that a combination of a variety of funding
sources over a series of years will be needed to advance the community's transportation system to
achieve long-term goals An updated Capital Improvement Plan developed through the
Transportation Master Plan process will be a tool to help guide future transportation system
investment in accordance with City Council policy direction.
High Performing Community
This is a new topic added to the Plan Fort Collins process to reflect the Budgeting for Outcomes
(BFO) category of"High Performing Government." It has been expanded to reflect that City Plan
and the Transportation Master Plan address private as well as government actions. The choices
include new topics related to creating a strong sense of community, increased emphasis on access
May 25, 2010 Page 7
to technology,effective local governance,and collaboratively engaging the community in achieving
the vision for a world class community.
City Advisory Boards and Commissions Review
The first step of public review of the draft Preliminary Vision &Policy Choices Outline occurred
on April 22, when a special workshop was conducted for City board and commission members to
provide input and feedback on the draft document. Approximately 100 board and commission
members participated. City boards and commissions were then asked whether they would like to
provide Council with their own set of comments as part of the review materials for the May 25 Work
Session. Three groups have provided additional comments(see Attachment 4, which also includes
the complete set of notes from the April 22 workshop). The input from the April boards and
commissions event was included in the current draft Outline.
Upcoming Public Outreach Activities
Feedback received on the Plan Fort Collins process has been valuable and extensive. The project
team will be using similar approaches in Phase 2 that have proven to be successful to date,including
a mix of public events, focus groups, online outreach, small group meetings, and informational
kiosks located around the community. The next major public event has been scheduled for June 29
(evening) and June 30 (morning) at the Drake Center. These two sessions will be organized as
workshops, giving the public the opportunity to review and provide input on the policy choices in
each of the seven topical areas, as well as the overall citywide alternatives.
City boards and commissions will continue to be heavily involved in the process,with many of them
having monthly meeting agenda items devoted to the Plan Fort Collins effort. The project team will
also schedule an additional round of focus groups later in the summer.
All public comments being received are logged and summarized and are available on the Plan Fort
Collins website.
Next Steps for City Council
The project team is on a tight timeline to produce the materials for the June public events and boards
and commissions review; as such, staff is requesting that if Councilmembers have any comments
to provide in addition to the discussion at the May 25, 2010 Work Session, that they please be
provided to staff no later than June 1.
Please note that this is only the first opportunity for Council to weigh in on these key policy choices;
an additional work session is scheduled for July 27,2010,(following a month-long period of public
input) and again on October 26, 2010, when the Council can review plan directions and strategies.
May 25, 2010 Page 8
ATTACHMENTS
1. Preliminary Vision &Policy Choices Outline (May 19, 2010)
2. Consolidated Feedback Phase 1
3. Policy Choices Interrelationships Matrix
4. City Boards and Commissions Input
• Bicycle Advisory Committee
• Natural Resources Advisory Board
• Transportation Board
• Notes from the April 22, 2010 Special Workshop
o Community and Neighborhood Livability
o Culture, Parks, and Recreation
o Economic Health
o Environmental Resources
o Safety and Wellness
o Transportation
5. Triple Bottom Line Evaluation
6. PowerPoint Presentation
7. City Structure Plan map
8. Plan Fort Collins Process
9. Summary from March 23, 2010 Work Session
Plan 4 Fort Collins
Attachment 1
Plan Fort Colimins
innovate , sustain , connect
PRELIMINARY VISION Et
POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Draft - 05/19/10
Contents
1 —Introduction . . . , . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Purposeof this Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . m . m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Sustainability and Cross-cutting Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2—Community Vision in Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Our Current Vision for the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Updatingthe Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
NewOrganization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
How the Vision and Policy Choices Fit within the Plan Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Modified Goals to Achieve the Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3—New Policy Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
CitywideAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Visualizing Change in Certain Areas of the City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
EconomicHealth Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Environmental Resource Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . m . m . m . m . m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . . 15
Community and Neighborhood Livability Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Safetyand Wellness Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Culture , Parks and Recreation Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
TransportationChoices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
HighPerforming Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4—Triple Bottom Line Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 1
1 — Introduction
PURPOSE OF THIS OUTLINE explored and analyzed during Phase
- 2 , and
This outline is a step within Phase 2 of Plan Fort B . Other new policy choices to be
Collins . Phase 2 focuses on refining the community's analyzed and evaluated during Phase
vision , identifying major new policy choices and their 2 . The outline follows the proposed
trade-offs and consequences , and beginning to structure and seven headings of the
establish preferred directions for the plan . It builds on Community Vision .
the work completed during Phase 1 of Plan Fort The public will have the opportunity to review the
Collins, which focused on trends , accomplishments , policy choices and analysis and weigh-in on preferred
opportunities , and challenges , and began the directions for the community in upcoming months . The
dialogue about the future of the City. more detailed set of choices and analysis will be
This outline also has been revised to reflect input and presented during a public workshop June 29th and
discussion at the joint City Boards and Commissions 30th , 2010 and other Phase 2 public events , including
meeting on April 22 , 2010 . additional input from Boards and Commissions , online
materials , focus group meetings , and 16roadshow37
The planning team is in the process of preparing discussions .
physical plan alternatives , policy choices , and
analysis as identified in this outline . The analysis will Background Materials
be based on the City's "triple bottom line" model of Additional background materials that helped lead to
social , economic , and environmental outcomes and the list of policy choices in this outline are :
include discussion of implications (costs and
benefits) , and description of "what it will take" to • The Snapshot Report ( May 2010) , which
accomplish each choice . This more detailed material identifies current values and future
will be ready for community outreach in June , opportunities and challenges .
including public workshops on June 29th and 30th . • Summary of public comments from March
2010 kick-off events .
ORGANIZATION • Summary of input from Boards and
Commissions from February and March 2010
and the joint meeting on April 22 , 2010 .
This outline contains the following sections : • Council Work Session Summary ( March 23 ,
1 . Introduction (this section ) . 2010) .Summary of input from Phase 1 Focus Groups
2 . Community Vision in Focus, includes the (through May 3 , 2010) .
proposed new organization and framework to (tBest Practices report ( May 2010) , which
achieve a World Class Community. explores how other communities are
3 . New Policy Choices , includes the set of addressing challenges and using innovative
paradigm-shifting questions that the approaches to provide for community needs .
community should explore , discuss , and
analyze during Phase 2 to arrive at All these items are available on the City's website :
meaningful preferred directions for the plan . www.fcgov . com/planfortcollins .
Many of the City's core values and policies
are well-established and supported by the
community and are not being considered for
change , and thus are not included in this
document. The policy choice section
includes :
A. Citywide physical plan alternatives
and geographic focus areas to be
2 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan ), Fort Collins
SUSTAINABILITY AND CROSS -
CUTTING TOPICS Specific Projects that Demonstrate " Triple
Wins "
Sustainability for Fort Collins As Plan Fort Collins unfolds , the planning team will
The City of Fort Collins defines sustainability as the work with the community to identify specific projects
stewardship of human , financial , and environmental that could help the City achieve its triple bottom line—
resources for present and future generations . ' The or "triple wins" that would benefit Fort Collins
concept approaches sustainability as an integrated environmentally, economically, and socially. Such
system where the three components are seen as projects should be priorities in an era of limited
mutually reinforcing instead of operating in isolation . resources and desire to achieve the greatest number
of objectives as efficiently as possible and with many
This systems-based approach , often referred to as the partners . FortZED and the Mason Street corridor are
"triple bottom line , " is based on benefits from examples of such projects .
financial , social , and environmental outcomes . Many
of the new policy choices reflect this integrated ,
sustainability concept. The community will continue to
discuss definitions and measures to be used later in
the process .
Sustainability : Triple Bottom Line
pppw-
Environmental
Sustainable
City
T oil
(See Section 4 of this outline and the Screening
Indicators chart on page 26 . )
The Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM) , developed in
Utilities , uses the terms, "social , environmental , and economic."
Plan Fort Collins should probably reconcile the slight differences
between terms being used by the City to define the three pillars of
sustainability.
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 3
F
2 — Community Vision 1 . A new organizational structure for Plan Fort
i n Focus Collins.
2 . New goals to achieve the vision .
3 . A new system to measure and monitor the vision
OUR CURRENT VISION FOR THE based on the triple bottom line sustainability
FUTURE definition .
A vision represents a desired future defined by the NEW ORGANIZATION
community. As set forth in City Plan in 2004 , the
community's vision for the future was to be able to . . . First, a proposed new structure will ensure the plan is
consistent with and captures all City services and
identify with Fort Collins as an 'enjoyable , outcomes , improves clarity, and reduces redundancy.
one-of-a-kind City' in the future . . . to make The proposed Plan Fort Collins structure is based on
change work for Fort Collins . . .while the City's Budgeting for Outcomes Results categories ,
protecting the best of what we have . . . and yet it folds in categories from the previous City Plan
recognizing who and what Fort Collins will and the Snapshot Report. It addresses the City's
become . . . by preserving a sense of vision to become a World Class Community, and
community identity and pride . Fort Collins includes supporting goals under the seven topics .
will confront and mitigate the negative
impacts of the car on our lives . Fort Collins The Seven Parts of the Vision
will share in the region 's responsibilities . The vision for the future is now more action-oriented
and topic-specific than the 2004 version . The
City Plan identified community goals to achieve the enhanced vision will integrates the goals from the City
vision as did the Transportation Master Plan and many Plan , the Transportation Master Plan , and other
other City plans . current City policy plans with new ideas for the future
to address current trends and needs . The main
UPDATING THE VISION sections are shown in the diagram below:
In 2010 , the vision and goals from those plans still 0 Economic Health
generally reflect our community's ambitions and 0 Environmental Resources
aspirations . Yet, as we look towards the future we see 0 Community and Neighborhood Livability
many ways to refine our focus and take more 0 Safety and Wellness
deliberate actions towards achieving that vision . 0 Culture , Parks , and Recreation
Several big ideas are suggested to update the vision , • Transportation
including : 0 High Performing Community
VISION Plan Fort Collins
World Class Community innovate , sustains connect
ECONOMICCOMMUNI T , CULTURE, HIGH
NEIGHBORHOO�,P
HEALTH RESOURCES WELLNESS I
LIVABILITY RECREATION COMMUNITY I
• Healthy, resilient, Healthy and • Thriving, quality, Safe and healthy • Diverse parks, Safe and reliable • Sense of
and sustainable sustainable and attractive place to live, cultural, and multi-modal community
economy environment neighborhoods work, learn, and recreational options to, from, Effective
reflecting the • High quality water • Vital and play amenities and throughout governance
values of our • Air and climote a ttractive activity • Creative City the City Technology
unique protection centers Great streets, Collaborative,
community in a • Land conservation • Distinctive image journeys, and community-based
changing world and stewardship and design destinations problem solving
• Connected open
lands Md&==
4 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan ,, Fort Collins
HOW THE VISION AND POLICY
CHOICES FIT WITHIN THE PLAN
PROCESS
The Vision for a World Class Community and
supporting goals are the organizational framework
for the set of policy choices , or new ideas to
achieve the vision , to be addressed during Phase 2 .
The diagram below illustrates how the parts fit
together.
Plan Fort Collins
ii inwdie •sustam• cunneL;t
Vision and New Policies
N Page 4 VISION Based on :
■ City Plan
NA World Class Community ■ Transportation Master
M + Goals to Achieve the Vision Plan
c ■Adopted plans aril
policies
■ Budgeting for
Outcomes
Page 8- 24 oNew POLICY CHOICES ( new) community as from the
PRODUCTS
City Plan (updated to Transportation Other Adopted
M follow new vision Master Plan plans and policies
structure — seven parts) (updated) (carry forward, no
LA Components: Components : Master change — e. g., Parks
Goals and policies, Streets Plan, Capital and Recreation Policy
a implementation Improvements Plan, Plan, Cultural Plan,
strategies, action plan, Pedestrian Plan Economic Health,
monitoring Climate Action Plan)
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 5
MODIFIED GOALS TO ACHIEVE 0 Economic Health
THE VISION • Environmental Resources
_ Community and Neighborhood Livability
• Safety and Wellness
Carrying Forward Values and Goals from 0 Culture , Parks , and Recreation
Previous Efforts • Transportation
The sections that follow assume that Plan Fort 0 High Performing Community
Collins will carry forward goals and values from the
current editions of City Plan and the Transportation
Master Plan, but will enhance and build on them to Economic Health
reflect current conditions , new trends , community
input, and innovations since the plans were In addition to carrying forward the
adopted . Economy values from City Plan and
four key Economic Action Strategies ,
'
� �Colorado additional ideas include :
Collins, Robust, resilient economy
rr
hensive Plan Strengthen the City's focus on a robust and resilient
' local economy that helps achieve fiscal sustainability
♦ and broadly shared prosperity by incorporating the
City's Business Innovation Model and targeted
industry cluster program and action strategies.
• Fort Collins Environmental Resources
may► PLC Plan Fort Collins will carry forward
existing vision ideas from the Climate
Action Plan, Energy Policy, and air
quality plans . The City's Water Utility will be working
Most current values and goals are identified in the in the coming months to prepare an updated Water
Snapshot Report. The current values and goals to Supply and Demand Management Policy based on
be carried forward will be presented in Summer a review of water resources , options for managing
2010 for the community to provide input and demand , and related issues specific to the utility.
validate and refine . Additional ideas to enhance the vision include :
The Snapshot Report contains information Reducing Carbon Footprint
Reduce energy use and promote local and
about trends and values and goals from renewable energy sources; modernize the electric
previous and existing Plans and policies distribution system ; reduce hazardous and solid
that will be carried forward for Plan Fort waste; foster clean tech companies ; incorporate
Collins . The information is not presented in carbon impact assessment of transportation and land
this outline t0 avoid duplication . use decisions ; promote green building ; and curb
greenhouse gas emissions .
The planning team also has a wealth of detailed
ideas to achieve current goals collected during Integrated Approach to Stormwater
Phase 1 community and Boards and Commissions Incorporate solutions to stormwater problems that
events . These ideas will also be carried forward protect and restore the natural functions of our
for further discussion during summer public events watersheds and streams while protecting the health
and workshops . and safety of our community (e .g . , stream restoration ,
updated floodplain regulations , low impact
Enhanced Goals to Support the Vision development, partnerships with natural areas and
This section includes possible enhanced goals to parks, and land conservation) .
support the vision under the seven categories :
6 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan % Fort Collins
Healthy River and Connected Open Lands Healthy Community
Identify conservation strategies and appropriate Incorporate new ideas about facilities for
public uses and issues related to stormwater and physical exercise , access to health and human
instream flows along the Cache la Poudre River to services , and healthy local foods to achieve an
protect the ecological system , prevent flooding , and active and healthy community.
enhance recreation and cultural opportunities .
Planning for Future Water Supply Needs and Culture , Parks , and Recreation
Conservation Building on the Parks and Recreation
Provide for future water supply resiliency during Policy Plan , City Plan, and the Cultural
times of drought by planning for appropriate levels of Plan , additional ideas to enhance the
water storage , developing strategies for water vision include :
conservation , and coordinating with other water
providers . Creative City
Integrate arts, culture , and creativity Citywide to
Community Livability support livability and economic resiliency and
support the Cultural Plan's goal of becoming a
Plan Fort Collins is an opportunity to nationally recognized center and destination for arts
° ° • • carry forward and fine-tune goals for and culture.
growth management, land use ,
redevelopment, community appearance and Transportation
design , housing and neighborhoods , activity
centers , and historic preservation . Additional ideas This planning process will continue to
to enhance the vision include : validate vision ideas from the
Transportation Master Plan that need
Great Destinations to be carried forward . Additional ideas to enhance
Support activity centers , including Downtown and the vision include :
other destination as vibrant spaces that provide
Great Streets
housing , civic activities, employment, and shopping .
These should be places that people enjoy and can Improve function and connections of Enhanced
Travel Corridors and other parts of the system ,
access by all forms of transportation .
including vehicular travel , pedestrian , bicycle
Thriving Neighborhoods facilities , and transit to connect activity centers.
Maintain safe, cohesive, balanced , and diverse
neighborhoods . Provide for changing demographics Regional Connectivity
(growing senior population , students , etc .) balanced Foster regional connectivity (streets , trails , and
with neighborhood livability and stability. transit) .
Open Lands, Parks, and Nature in the City Connected Trails System
Provide stewardship for a connected system of open Integrate the citywide system of multi-use trails for
lands, parks , natural areas , community separators ,
transportation use , not just for recreation .
restored streams , and agricultural lands . Promote High Performing Community
nature in the City.
Distinct Community Image and Identity Goals for this new topic have not yet
emerged but will address: Sense of
Promote thoughtful design of gateways , activity community, use of technology in the
centers, and corridors to strengthen the city's identity
community, effective local governance , and
and sense of place . collaborative, community-based problem solving .
Safety and Wellness
Carry forward existing vision ideas
from City Plan , including goals related
to public safety. Additional ideas to
enhance the vision include :
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 7
2035 Projected Housing and Employment
3 — New Policy
By 2035 , the City of Fort Collins is projected to grow
Choices to approximately 206 , 000 total people (46 , 000 new
people) , 90 , 000 total housing units (22 , 000 new
housing units) , and 155 , 000 total jobs (62 , 000 new
This section includes the outline and description of jobs) . ( Note : This information is extrapolated from
the citywide physical plan alternatives , specific the Colorado State Demographer's projections for
geographic locations for prototypes and Larimer County, Oct. 2009 . )
"visualization of change , " as well as the policy
choices organized by the seven vision topics . The current Structure Plan has capacity for the
growth projected through 2025 , according to the
CITYWIDE ALTERNATIVES recent buildable land analysis . After 2025 , the
Structure Plan will be short on capacity for growth
Description and Purpose projected for the year 2035 (by about 5 , 000 housing
The planning team is developing citywide units and approximately 20 , 000 jobs) without
alternatives to be able explore bundled sets of changes to allow increased density—especially in
policy choices using a triple bottom line analysis . existing mixed-use and employment areas .
Alternatives will be presented as physical , mapped
choices , with a " menu " of choices attached to each Alternatives and Assumptions
one—for instance addressing different land use Three citywide alternatives are being studied :
patterns , different types of conservation , and
transportation system differences . The alternatives 1 . Structure Plan (base)
are for the purpose of:
2 . Strong City "Spine" Emphasis
• Modeling and evaluating impacts of 3 . Activity Centers and Corridors Emphasis
different patterns and amounts of growth on
the transportation and other systems , and The purpose is to determine where new households
vice-versa . and jobs might locate , and in what form , and to
• Considering alternative land use patterns consider different patterns of natural/built
and areas of emphasis (e . g . , what if the City environments . The alternatives are based on
promotes redevelopment in the core versus forecast growth , not resource limitations . However,
outlying development) . the City plans its utility (water and wastewater)
• Informing the community about implications capacity to meet present and future needs (based
of different choices , and assessing on 2035 forecasts and buildout of the current
preferences . Structure Plan ) . Assumptions for all alternatives
include :
Addressing Forecasted Growth : Baseline • The same amount of growth is assumed to
Assumptions
occur by 2035 (constant through all
Current Population and Jobs options) , but the pattern is different.
• Regional influences will be constant (e . g . ,
In 2009 , within the Growth Management Area , Fort not trying to vary assumptions about what
Collins has approximately 160 , 000 people , 68 , 000 neighboring jurisdictions will do) .
housing units , and 93 , 000 jobs . • The City will still seek to acquire open lands ,
trails , and park lands within the City to "fill
Entitled Housing and Employment gaps" and connect the system .
Fort Collins has approved development for • The City will continue to protect natural
approximately 6 , 000 residential units and 5 , 500 features and areas .
jobs . • For all scenarios , need to address
uncertainty, resiliency, and resource
capacity issues .
8 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan Fort Collins
Alternative 1 : Structure Plan Base
Alternative 1 is based on the current Structure Plan .
The Structure Plan was first developed in 1997 ,
updated in 2004 , and represents the City's vision for K
compact development, activity centers , Enhanced
Travel Corridors , and mixed-use development. "°" S` I
- iAra
However, as discussed in the Snapshot Report, a
number of barriers exist to actually implementing E T gDc
some of the goals of the plan , such as infill and JI
redevelopment. The Structure Plan also does not *111,144
cw '
imply focus or emphasis on particular geographic N. >
4 Rd.
areas of the City. Development tends to follow the _ d jNNW
path of least resistance where vacant lands exist. L Drake
� .
This alternative assumes for 2035 :
a
• Planned land uses stay the same but some ,,,, _
intensification of housing and employment a
areas will be necessary to accommodate E
Kechter Rd
2035 projected growth . J
Trilby Rd.
• Existing planned land uses ( in accordance =
with the Structure Plan) will drive future bA
development and result in some horizontally
Plan . Fort Collins
mixed land uses and projects . I L - - -
• Most development will disperse to the City's 1Wftk"-
vacant lands with the fewest development Alternative 1 : Structure Plan Base
constraints .
• Infill and redevelopment will occur in a
limited fashion , without major changes to "
Alternative 2 : Strong City Spine "
policies or incentives . Emphasis
Alternative 2 builds on the Structure Plan and
What Would Alternative 1 Take ? focuses emphasis or priority on infill and
The planning team will be developing more detail on redevelopment of housing and employment and
implementation strategies . In general , this baseline transportation improvements primarily along the
alternative will not require much policy change Mason/College "spine" of the City, (generally from
relative to Alternatives 2 and 3 . North College to Harmony Road ) . This alternative
assumes for 2035 :
• Current land uses along the "spine" will
change to allow increased housing and
employment (e . g . , half or more of new
development will occur there) .
• Other new development will disperse to
vacant lands .
• Taller mixed-use buildings will be
necessary.
• Increased pedestrian and bicycle
connections and safety focus will be
necessary, particularly near the Mason
Corridor stations (e . g . , like current
Downtown and Campus West areas) .
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 9
• This alternative relates to the Enhanced Alternative I Activity Centers and
Travel Corridors/District Focus Corridors Emphasis
transportation system choice (on page 22) . Alternative 3 focuses emphasis on additional
housing and employment primarily around activity
What Would Alternative 2 Take ? centers and corridors . It is a bit less concentrated
that Alternative 2 , with more dispersed
The planning team will be developing more detail on transportation improvements . This alternative
implementation strategies over the next four weeks . assumes for 2035 :
In general it would take :
• Increases to land use intensity in major
• Focusing public investment along the spine , activity centers will allow increased housing
especially transportation and parking and employment (e . g . , half or more of new
improvements , as a "catalyst" for private development would occur in activity
development. centers) .
• Emphasizing mixed-use , higher density new • Some slightly taller buildings may occur
development that fits the context and around certain activity centers (like those in
market. Downtown and Campus West) .
• Removing barriers to infill and • This alternative also relates to the Enhanced
redevelopment. Travel Corridors/District Focus
• Addressing contextually-appropriate infill . transportation system option .
• Focusing on multiple modes of transit travel ,
including the Mason Corridor Bus Rapid
Transit, and connections along Mason
Corridor and higher priority than other travel
corridors .
ow
I \
ti Ft I rry SL _ f
willox St
a j r...,..s'
a - S ff} S,�,�'�,�'�'�yq
.., ProspecLRd. .....E
_ Vine Or,
I
_ w u1i f — Drake I d.
umr
- Mul syc
CSV _ Horst_looth
ProspeetRd. *�•�e $
_ a�a
Drake F d.
� a c
� Kechter Rd .
Hors tooth Rd. m p
o E
' •••n: it F.
nt _ Trilby Rd.
Hatmony RdOM� -
S 0 ��
Fort CollinsL C
Alternative 3 Diagram: Activity Centers (locations
illustrative only) and Corridors Emphasis
Alternative 2 Diagram: Strong City Core "Spine "
Emphasis
10 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
What Would Alternative 3 Take ? VISUALIZING CHANGE IN
CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY
The planning team will be developing more detail on
implementation strategies over the next four weeks . Description
In general it would take : The planning team is developing prototypical
sketches to be focused around particular
• Making public investment a "catalyst" for
geographic locations or districts to 1visualize
new private development in activity centers change" and analyze implications of different
of emphasis . options . The prototypes will be used to :
• Emphasizing mixed-use , higher density new
development that fits the context and . Help the public and decision-makers
market in activity centers . understand implications of different land
• Removing barriers to infill and use , transportation , and other choices (e . g . ,
redevelopment. building height and relationship to street) .
• Addressing contextually-appropriate infill . "Zoom in to" an area within the citywide
• Changing traffic level of service standards alternatives , described in the previous
to allow intensification and pedestrian- section , to show potential change in three
friendly development. dimensions .
• Investing in structured parking . Study potential necessary changes to
• Ensuring compatibility between new standards or approaches (e . g . , for
development and adjacent land uses . stormwater or land use patterns or
• Changing the Adequate Public Facilities intensity) .
ordinance .
• Focusing on attractive street life .
Locations for Prototypes and Analysis
( Note : See the Community and Neighborhood Sketches and additional quantitative and qualitative
Livability choices on page 18 . ) analysis will be prepared for the following
prototypes :
1 . An infill and redevelopment area along an
Enhanced Travel Corridor
2 . A Downtown/neighborhood edge area
3 . A greenfield activity center
1 : Infill and Redevelopment Area
Location :
• Mid-town area (along Mason and College
Avenue corridors from Prospect to the
Foothills Mall ) , centered around
College/Drake .
Purpose :
• Simulate change from a low-density
commercial corridor to higher intensity,
mixed land use with housing and
employment ( illustrates Alternative 2 , Strong
City Spine) .
• Address proposed stormwater
improvements in an infill situation
( necessary standards and issues) .
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 11
• Show multi -modal transportation
improvements on College , arterial
intersections , and Mason corridor.
• Illustrate potential urban design
improvements .
2 : Downtown / Neighborhood Edge Area
Location :
• Magnolia Street corridor, west of College .
Purpose :
• Explore alternative options for transportation
and stormwater retrofits to create a " green
street" in a location where stormwater and
street improvements are currently
necessary.
• Demonstrate ideal land use transitions
between Downtown commercial and
neighborhoods .
• Demonstrate how the floodplain can be
addressed on or adjacent to potential
redevelopment site(s) .
3 : Greenfield Activity Center
Location :
• Mountain Vista at the future activity center.
Purpose :
• Illustrate a " Greenfield " development
situation where best practices can be
applied .
• "Zoom in" to an activity center in Alternative
3 .
12 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
ECONOMIC HEALTH CHOICES pursuit, each one has cost and resource
consequences .
Foundation A— Economic Strategy Choices
The City's Economic Health Program applies four
key economic Action Strategies : JOB CREATION
Should the City maximize its business retention ,
1 . Job creation through business retention , expansion , incubation , and recruitment efforts on
expansion , incubation and attraction . businesses that will bring jobs importing income or
2 . Be proactive on economic issues . dollars to the community, particularly in the
3 . Build partnerships . declared Target Industry Clusters and emerging
4 . Diversify the economy. industries tied to sustainability? Should the City put
more emphasis on attracting a creative class of
In each component, the City partners with other workers and smaller employers?
organizations , such as the Northern Colorado
Economic Development Corporation , the Rocky RETAIL RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT
Mountain Innovation Initiative , Northern Colorado Should the City maximize efforts to retain and recruit
Clean Energy Cluster, Colorado State University, the retailers or development projects with high impact
Downtown Development Authority, the Fort Collins on sales tax generation? These retailers or projects
Chamber of Commerce , and the Larimer County may do more than any other single activity to bolster
Workforce Center, among others . the City's retail sales inflow (dollars spent by non-
residents) and reduce leakage (dollars spent by
The City focuses job creation efforts on its residents outside the community) , as long as the
established Targeted Industry Clusters , including incentive package is measured and warranted .
chip design , software , clean energy, biosciences ,
and emerging clean water cluster. In addition , the LAND READY FOR NEW BUSINESSES
City supports those businesses that contribute to Some believe that the City does not have enough
the overall character of the community through its land suitable with infrastructure for large primary
efforts in the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster. employers to newly locate or expand . Should the
Economic Health Program create or facilitate the
Plan Fort Collins will carry forward these ongoing development of parcels suitable for large
initiatives , policies , priorities , and strategies . Within employers? Should the City provide incentives or
this context, there are choices regarding the City's infrastructure to make land ready for new
level of effort and priorities . businesses including redevelopment sites such as
the mall ?
For more information , please see the draft Snapshot
Report, Finance and Economy Section . LOCAL BUSINESSES
Citizens have expressed strong preference to buy
Choices local products and services and create an
Based on the input and feedback received during environment that enables entrepreneurs to thrive
Phase 1 of the Plan Fort Collins process , a number and compete with larger corporate and franchise
of economic policy choices emerged . The retailers . Should the City's Economic Health
community should discuss , debate , and either Program cultivate growth among locally owned and
support or eliminate some choices , because the operated businesses and entrepreneurs and/or
City has finite resources to commit to fostering adopt policies to make the City friendlier towards
economic health . An effective commitment to each the locally owned business community? Should the
policy choice below would likely require an City help facilitate the relocation of businesses in
allocation of existing , limited resources or redeveloping areas?
identification of new resources . While some or all of
the choices listed below may be worthy of further
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 13
WORKFORCE TRAINING Sustainable Fiscal Efforts
The Fort Collins unemployment rate has risen in the
past few years , and a number of Fort Collins RESOURCING OUR FUTURE
residents are unemployed and have skills that do The City is currently engaging in a community
not match up with job openings . Working in dialogue about how to address pressing , immediate
collaboration with the Larimer County Workforce needs and keep pace with the demand for basic
Center, should the City intensify its efforts to craft City operations and services in the future . Four key
and help fund technical training programs or areas of the city government are in need of
networking to help the local unemployed secure additional resources ; Police Services (needing
jobs or offer to help support training programs for approximately $4 . 6 million/year ($5 . 5 million in first
businesses in targeted industries or successful year) ; Poudre Fire Authority ( needs approximately
cluster industries that are likely to hire the locally $3 . 1 million/year) to serve growing demands in
unemployed? Should the City target employers to south Fort Collins ; Transportation pavement ($6 . 5
market the workforce skill-set that already exists in million/year for pavement maintenance to maintain
the City? Should the private sector take the lead? current pavement quality standards) ; and Parks and
Recreation ($2 million/year for parks maintenance
B — Economic/ Land Use Planning Choices and to preserve recreation services) .
JOBS/ HOUSING BALANCE The ongoing community dialogue will explore how
Should the City maintain the jobs/housing balance to address the needs in these areas of government
recommended in City Plan, (proactively planning for (a) either through pursuing new revenue options —
and reserve land for employment) , or should it let such as sales tax, property tax, or fees for streets or
the market drive development? parks maintenance , or ( b) through cutbacks to
services . The City is also currently assessing if
LOCATIONS FOR INDUSTRY AND JOBS current impact fees are sufficient.
Analysis in the Advance Planning department
indicates that the City generally has enough land Cross -Cutting Choices
zoned for employment uses through the year 2025 , ✓ See the Community and Neighborhood
but the planned and zoned land can be rezoned or Livability section for choices related to
used for other purposes . In addition , 2035 infill/redevelopment incentives , enhancing
forecasts for jobs may exceed the current planned activity centers mixed -use development,
land capacity. Choices might include : and historic preservation .
(a) Tightening standards for planned employment or ✓ See Culture , Parks and Recreation for
industrial land to emphasize and ensure that jobs choices related to arts and culture to
( not housing or retail ) will occur in certain locations promote economic vitality and quality of life
and that the City can accommodate Targeted (attracting a creative class) .
Industry Clusters , or ( b) Increasing allowed intensity ✓ See Transportation choices relating to
of employment, mixed -use , and multi -family housing funding .
(e . g . , medium density housing , which is in short
supply) in certain locations (e . g . , along "spine" in
Alternative 2 or in "activity centers" in Alternative 3) .
14 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE process of developing a Green Building Program to
CHOICES address the residential and commercial sectors .
The City has also received significant funding from
the U . S . Department of Energy to "jump start" the
Foundation FortZED project, and to install "smart meters" for
This section builds on the challenges and every electric account in the City.
opportunities identified in the Environment and
Utilities section of the Snapshot Report, plus Phase ENERGY USE REDUCTION
1 public input. The Environmental Resources Building on the FortZED initiative , to what level
section of the plan will address : should Fort Collins pursue net energy use
reduction? Choices could include a continuum , from
• Water " net zero" energy to more modest energy use
• Wastewater reductions . Projects could include a combination of
• Electric service/energy and green building increased energy efficiency, distributed energy
• Stormwater sources , local renewable energy, and smart grid
• Recycling and solid waste management technologies? While this choice would provide for
• Air, emissions , and climate protection greater energy security for the future , it would also
• Connected open lands require significant upgrades to the City's electric
• Protection from hazardous materials grid and scaling up of renewable and distributed
• Land conservation and stewardship local energy generation sources .
• Sustainability and performance
ELECTRIC GRID MODERNIZATION
Relevant and current plans and policies in the In addition to installing smart meters and other
Environmental Resources area will be carried programs underway with federal funding , should the
forward , including the 2008 Climate Action Plan City take a leading role in modernizing the electric
( CAP) , which sets forth community carbon reduction grid ? This choice would require significant
goals to reduce community-wide greenhouse gas investments in upgrading grid infrastructure , but
emissions . Community goals from City Plan that
would allow for more efficient management of
address open lands acquisition , management, and electric loads as well as effective integration of
stewardship , protection from hazardous materials , renewable and distributed energy sources .
waste reduction , resource conservation , and other
topics will also be carried forward . The Snapshot LINKING TRANSPORTATION TO THE GRID
Report identifies a number of other current plans .
Should the City focus efforts on linking and
integrating transportation systems with the electric
Choices grid , such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles?
Some people believe this is a pathway to energy
A►— Energy Policy Choices independence as communities plan for ' peak oil ' .
Plan Fort Collins can support and expand upon the This choice would require grid modernization but
City's carbon and energy initiatives through choices would position Fort Collins to be a leader in next-
that address buildings , mobility, and City generation energy systems that use electricity more
infrastructure . The primary goals of the City's 2009 efficiency , support alternatives to fossil fuel
Energy Supply Policy are to provide highly reliable vehicles , and help reduce carbon emissions .
electric service , support the City's carbon reduction
goals , enhance economic health , and continue to IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF EXISTING
collaborate with the Platte River Power Authority and BUILDINGS
member cities . Fort Collins Utilities has a number To what degree should the City focus on
of initiatives planned or underway to support the encouraging re-use and retrofitting the existing
Policy, including a home energy efficiency audit and building stock to support the City's energy and
retrofit program , onsite commercial energy carbon reduction efforts? Retaining the existing
assessments , and a proposed community solar stock leverages energy embodied in the original
garden , among other projects . The City is in the construction process and materials of the building .
However, many existing buildings perform much
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 15
more poorly than new buildings with respect to resulting from infill and redevelopment. Should they
energy efficiency. Should the City provide be part of multi -use systems such as being located
incentives or focus on ways to mandate in parks , open space lands , or street rights of way?
improvements over time to improve building Are there other innovative opportunities— such as
performance? complimentary network of "green streets" or
"enhanced natural corridors"? Should the City
B—Stormwater Policy Choices restrict development or purchase certain parcels for
The following are proposed key stormwater choices stormwater detention to serve Targeted
to achieve 215t Century Utility goals to achieve :
Redevelopment Area or regional needs?
restoration of streams , protect people and property STORMWATER PARTNERSHIPS
from the impact of flooding , maintaining the Federal
Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) Should the plan promote strategies for
Community Rating System (CRS) Class 4 rating , public/private partnerships or districts that serve to
(which is a high rating , keeping flood insurance consolidate stormwater facilities and thereby
costs lower) , and ensure all stormwater runoff is allowing greater localized densities of
treated by a water quality best management development? Should the City act as the lead
practice . A study in 2009 ( McBride) also included agency and fund these improvements ahead of
goals to improve ecological health of stream redevelopment through fees specific to the
corridors . On-site stormwater management benefiting parcels? Consolidated stormwater
techniques on individual privately owned sites have facilities can provide multi -use benefits but will
been , until recently , the primary approach to the require ongoing public and private cooperation for
most advanced thinking in stormwater management management and maintenance of these facilities .
because they were thought to be technically
superior in performance and were less complicated C —Water Resource Policy Choices
to implement due to focus on individual
responsibility. However, those approaches have WATER SUPPLY PLANNING / CONSERVATION
been found to be less effective in treatment and The City's water supply planning has been based
protection of stream health than anticipated , tend to on City Plan assumptions about growth and
run counter to the concept of compact development buildout. Key topics of the water demand and
and higher densities for infill , are difficult to supply policy will include appropriate levels of use
maintain , and miss opportunities to create shared or drought planning criteria , use of surplus supplies ,
multi -purpose open space , recreation , and habitat. effects of climate change , storage requirements and
regional cooperation with local water districts and
STORMWATER QUALITY AND CONVEYANCE irrigation companies . The City and region are facing
Should the City focus on solutions to flooding and increased competition for regional water supplies .
water quality problems in a way that also enhances The City recognizes public concerns and the
the natural environment and promotes the challenges related to meeting multiple objectives
ecological health of our streams even if this results with this limited resource . To what degree should
in higher costs , longer implementation timeframes , the plan explore choices to address water supply
and less area removed from the floodplain for planning and provide flexibility in decision-making
development (e . g . , through standards or for the future? Should the City increase efforts to
acquisition) ? These solutions may require more land promote water conservation ?
than conventional methods of pipes and channels
but could also achieve better ecological health in POUDRE RIVER INSTREAM FLOWS
streams , more social and recreational opportunities Maintaining and enhancing the Cache la Poudre
for the community , and curtail major public River has been a priority in previous City Plans.
stormwater investments in the future . However, water flows have been significantly
reduced from historic flows due to diversions for
STORMWATER TREATMENT LOCATIONS municipal , industrial , and agricultural uses . There
Where should the City locate detention facilities to are economic , recreation , health , and environmental
accommodate runoff from developed areas and benefits from maintaining high flows , year round
flows , and minimum instream flows . What should be
16 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
the City's policy related to instream flows for the E —Waste Choices
river? What level of City resources should be used
to improve flows and riparian habitat? CARBON INTENSITY AND CONSUMPTION
Should the plan address the City's growing per-
LOCAL AGRICULTURE/WATER CONSERVATION capita carbon intensity, primarily due to
Should the City support agricultural easements and consumption? While the City has made progress in
programs to support community food production? reducing carbon emissions through programs such
( Note : If the community decides to promote water as Climate Wise , per capita carbon intensity is
conservation as the primary strategy to address growing due to the embodied carbon emissions in
future water supply, the policy might negatively goods , from construction to food . Emphasizing
affect the ability to support local agriculture , urban local food production , for example , could help lower
natural features , and other water-dependent embodied carbon emissions associated with
features of the land use and comprehensive plans . ) industrial-scale food production and transportation .
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION SOURCE REDUCTIONIWASTE -TO - ENERGY
How much additional emphasis should the City Should the City investigate local opportunities to
place on efforts to adapt to climate change (e . g . , to shift more of the responsibility to retailers and
address water supply, habitat change , wildfire risk, manufacturers for better up-front engineering and
etc . )? design to reduce waste? Should the City contribute
to investments in the construction of systems for
WATER RECLAMATION ISSUE agricultural/organic wastes?
How should the City innovatively finance federal
and state water reclamation requirements and meet COMPOSTING
more stringent limits? Should the City increase efforts to develop
infrastructure (collection and processing facilities) to
D—Air Quality Choices help increase organic material that is commercially
( y p quality
Note : Man choices that impact air are composted and locally used in agriculture and
y defined in the Transportation section , including landscaping?
regional transportation , trail linkages , parking , F—Open Lands Choices
transit, and mobile source emissions . )
PRICE MECHANISMS MULTI - PURPOSE OPEN LANDS
In addition to pulling forward current plan goals
To what extent should the City employ price related to interconnected open space and current
mechanisms to shift citizens and business choices refinements , the City's current focus is on filling in
towards actions that reduce the amount of driving remaining "gaps" for a system of connected open
and the environmental impacts of transportation lands and to protect natural features . Should the
(e . g . , parking pricing , identifying and removing plan emphasize community gardens or other food
hidden cost subsidies of motor vehicle use) ? production uses in parks , open lands , planting
strips along streets or parkways , or detention
TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND EFFICIENCY ponds , or provide incentives to allow them in private
Net vehicle emissions are affected not only by development?
distance driven , but by fuel type and vehicle
efficiency. As sustainable alternative fuels emerge
( possibly cellulosic ethanol , CNG , biofuels , Cross -Cutting Choices
electricity) and/or highly efficient vehicles emerge , ✓ See Community and Neighborhood
to what extent should the City invest in infrastructure Livability section related to affordable
and otherwise promote and support the use of these housing performance .
fuels and vehicles? ✓ See Safety and Wellness choices related to
local agriculture and food .
✓ See the Transportation section for mobile
emissions and air quality choices .
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 17
COMMUNITY AND and employment development, mobility, and
NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY attractive development, along the Mason/College
corridor from North College to Harmony Road ,
CHOICES including Foothills Mall ? (See Alternative 2 . )
Foundation TRANSFORMING ACTIVITY CENTERS
City Plan provides a solid foundation for the Should the City focus investment and
community livability section to address topics of this redevelopment in activity centers? Do the locations
section , including : shown in Alternative 3 make sense as priorities for
enhancements and revitalization ( based on their
• Land use , growth management, and relationship to the Enhanced Travel Corridors) ?
compact development Which , if any, infill/targeted redevelopment locations
• Activity center and corridors or activity centers should have increased mix of
• Neighborhoods and housing uses or density (e . g . , allow buildings over 5-stories) ,
• Appearance and design or infrastructure or other improvements to
• Open lands/natural areas encourage and support community activity and
• Historic preservation neighborhood gathering (e . g . , performing spaces ,
• Gateways plazas , etc . ) ?
Within City Plan , the Structure Plan sets forth REDEVELOPMENT AND INFILL STRATEGIES
policies for future land uses , compact development, City Plan promotes infill and redevelopment, but
activity centers that are served by transit, an regulations and infrastructure improvement
interconnected open lands system , growth requirements can be counterproductive . Plan Fort
management, and multiple means of travel . City Collins participants have noted that changes will be
Plan also designates Targeted Redevelopment necessary to make infill and redevelopment truly
Areas (i . e . , North College Avenue , Midtown , areas viable . Choices include : (a) make limited changes
along Mulberry Corridor) , and Enhanced Travel or no change , or ( b) make some or all of the
Corridors ( i . e . , generally Mason Street, Harmony following changes to foster infill and redevelopment:
Road east to 1 -25 , Timberline Road , Conifer Street, • Allow mixed uses and higher densities in
and Mountain Vista Drive) . certain locations (modify parking standards ,
setbacks , and height requirements) .
Activity Centers are vibrant, walkable , bicycle- Consider fees that provide incentives in infill
friendly commercial centers that contain a mix of and redevelopment locations to go beyond
housing , retail , culture , arts and dining . The basic standards and/or disincentives for
community has shown support for these types of other locations .
places ; however, few real examples exist in Fort Increase efficiency of development review
Collins other than Downtown . Activity centers are process for focused areas .
the best location for increasing density and infill to Develop flexible standards (to avoid one-
support transportation and transit improvements , size-fits-all standards typically geared to
especially the ones that are currently successful Greenfield development) .
and well-located , or that have redevelopment . Prioritize bicycle and pedestrian safety over
potential near future transit stations . auto speeds in certain areas .
• Provide infrastructure credits for
transit/bicycle/pedestrian facilities to offset
Choices other infrastructure improvement
i requirements .
A—Activity Centers and Corridors . Allow transitional uses and transportation
improvements as areas redevelop , while
CORE CITY = MASON CORRIDOR " SPINE " considering how to lessen impacts on
To support economic health and livability, should neighborhoods .
the City craft policies , programs , and incentives to
facilitate horizontal and vertical mixed-use housing
18 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
CITY GATEWAYS/EDGE DEVELOPMENT D— Connected Open Lands Choices
Should the plan identify priority gateways that need
enhancements to say "welcome home/welcome to NATURE IN THE CITY
our City?" What kind of character and land use mix How can the community encourage places for
is necessary at each gateway? What is the role of nature and wildlife within its urban fabric? Should
private development in addressing gateways? the City encourage more natural landscaping ,
features such as green roofs , design for wildlife ,
B— Neighborhoods and Housing acquiring " pocket-sized " natural areas , and
achieving connected systems of parks , open lands ,
NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITIONS and waterways?
The City's Land Use Code provides standards to
ensure compatibility between new and existing DOWNTOWN /CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER
development. Should the City modify standards to City Plan emphasizes a balance of environment,
ensure comfortable transitions between higher development, and recreation values along the river
density "activity centers" or "corridors" and nearby near Downtown . Discussion about the river has
neighborhoods? also occurred during UniverCity Connections events
and during the focus group for Plan Fort Collins . It
NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOUSING TYPES remains to be decided , should the river area be
Which neighborhoods are generally stable , and designated as a Special District to plan for
which may need to evolve to meet the housing appropriate activities near the river (as long as
needs of future population (e . g . , for families , development activity meets natural protection and
seniors , students , etc . )? Are the areas that currently floodplain standards) ? Should east-west
allow high density and mixed housing types connections be established to connect the river to
appropriate or should they be refined?) Downtown? Should the City promote a " river walk"
urban edge on one side of the river near downtown
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY or not?
Given reduced federal , state , and local funding ,
what emphasis should the City put on ensuring FINANCING GROWTH
affordable housing is available? Should the City How should growth fund future infrastructure
increase its current level of emphasis on funding improvements? (See Economic Health and
programs? At what level should the City contribute Transportation choices . )
financial resources to subsidize housing to ensure
that low-income households can afford and benefit Cross -Cutting Choices
from longer-term cost savings associated with
energy efficient "green" units? ✓ See Economic Health choices related to
jobs/housing balance and locations and
C— Historic Preservation Choices strategies for employment development. In
As changes continue to occur in Downtown and the next steps of the planning effort, more
surrounding older neighborhoods , the City has discussion will occur about financing
found that defining historic preservation and what growth and infrastructure .
the community is trying to preserve in older ✓ See the Environmental Resources section
neighborhoods is necessary . Which related to building performance and energy,
neighborhoods should be defined as " historic" conservation , stormwater, and open lands .
based on a local definition (not a state or federal ✓ See Transportation choices related to
definition) ? Which structures and districts are priority improvement locations (e . g . ,
significant, irrespective of the 50-year age corridors) , multiple modes , and transit to
threshold ? Should the City establish stronger connect affordable housing and
design standards for scale , setbacks , and style for destinations .
defined historic neighborhoods?
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 19
SAFETY AND WELLNESS additional parks , recreation , and trails facilities and
CHOICES offerings?
HEALTHY LIVING AND EDUCATION
Foundation Should the City increase policies to promote
This section of the plan would address Fort Collins education about wellness and healthy living (e . g .
as a safe and healthy place to live , work, learn , and bicycle and pedestrian safety, nutrition , tobacco
play, drawing from some of the values and and drug education , etc . ) through coordination with
community goals from City Plan, including a "safe , local health and human services organizations (e . g . ,
non-threatening , community. " This section builds Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity
on the Snapshot Report's Health , Wellness , and (CANDO) ; Larimer County Health Department;
Safety section that identifies challenges of active Health District of Northern Larimer County; Poudre
living , health of at- risk and low-income people , and Valley Health Systems) ?
accessibility to health care facilities communitywide .
A focus group also recognized a lot of overlap HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ACCESS
between health and safety and transportation and Should the City increase coordination with health
other categories . For clarity, the City's definition of and human services providers to leverage limited
"wellness" includes physical , mental , and spiritual resources? Should the plan recommend improved
components . transit and transportation access to health and
human services clusters within the City and region
Choices (especially for disabled , lower-income , and other at-
risk groups)?
A— Safety
LOCAL AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
SAFE COMMUNITY Should the City support small -scale local
Fort Collins is recognized as a safe community, but agriculture/food production within the City on private
it is becoming more challenging for Police Services and public lands (e . g . , easements , community-
and Poudre Fire Authority to carry out their missions supported agriculture , organic production , and
and answer calls for service . The ratio of sworn farmer's markets)? Should these functions increase
police and firefighters per capita is lower than on City-owned land (e . g . , parks and open space ,
national averages . To address these issues , should markets)? Should the City coordinate with other
the City adjust the Police , Fire , and/or Emergency partners in the region on local agriculture and food
Management protection levels of service to reflect accessibility (e . g . , Larimer County and Poudre
limited funding , or should funding increase to School District)?
maintain the current level of service? This topic is
also being addressed as part of the City's ongoing Cross -Cutting Choices
Resourcing our Future discussion . ✓ See Economic Health Choices related to
Resourcing our Future (fire and police
B—Wellness services) .
✓ See Environmental Resources section
ACTIVE LIFESTYLES choices related to water conservation and
The Centers for Disease Control , other health agriculture .
organizations , and cities are beginning to recognize ✓ See Transportation choices related to
that our auto-oriented transportation systems pedestrian and bicycle network (for
sometimes offset places for people to walk and bike physical activity and healthy lifestyles) and
outdoors and get exercise . This has been a factor transit (as it relates to health and human
contributing to increased obesity rates . What services access) .
transportation investments and connections might ✓ See the Culture , Parks , and Recreation
help enhance pedestrian and bicycle activity and choices related to active lifestyles and
safety? To what degree should the plan suggest participation in arts , culture , and recreation
for at-risk youth .
20 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
CULTURE , PARKS AND
RECREATION CHOICES B— Park and Recreation
Foundation PARKS AND MULTI -PURPOSE OPEN SPACE
As densities increase , especially in redeveloping
This section builds on the Arts and Culture and areas , parts of the City that are currently well -served
Parks and Recreation sections of the Snapshot by the existing parks network may become
Report and incorporates community comments . overloaded . Should the City consider new types of
Plan Fort Collins will carry forward goals from the parks that are more urban and that might serve
Parks and Recreation Policy Plan, the 2008 Cultural seniors and other aspects of our changing
Plan, and the City Plan community goal that states , population? Should the Plan promote future multi -
"the community will have a balanced system of purpose open spaces that could also serve for
recreational areas including parks , trails , stormwater management, recreation purpose , and
recreational facilities . . . " and the Cultural P/an's bring natural qualities into the City?
goal to identify Fort Collins as a nationally
recognized arts and cultural destination . YOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS
To what degree should the plan promote recreation
Choices centers ( like the senior center) or enhanced arts ,
cultural , and recreational programming or events for
A—Arts and Culture youth ( in coordination with Boys and Girls Club ,
Beet Street, etc . )?
INTEGRATION / INTERNATIONAL CULTURE
How much should the City increase emphasis on Cross -Cutting Choices
arts and culture and contribution to the economy, ✓ See the Economic Health choices related to
neighborhood livability, and diversity—beyond the Resourcing our Future and options for parks
Arts in Public Places Program? Should the City and recreation funding .
increase its role in encouraging private arts ✓ See the Environmental Resources choices
programs (e . g . , fairs , events , shows , etc . ) , attracting related to stormwater conveyance and
artists , fostering the creative culture , and promoting partnerships .
using the arts as an economic driver? Should the ✓ See Safety and Wellness choice related to
City promote and publicize international and multi- active lifestyles .
cultural programs? And , should the City increase
citywide access to arts and participation and in
public improvement urban design projects?
FUNDING
What should be the City's role in continuing
resourcing and funding of arts and culture
organizations , programs , and facilities? (e . g . ,
Community members have suggested a Scientific
and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD) around the
Discovery Center/Museum and river district, like the
Denver model . )
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 21
TRANSPORTATION CHOICES on the City's current land-use projections as
well as to address additional future land -use
Foundation changes . These choices would need to be
The Transportation Master Plan and transportation coupled with a new funding approach that
chapter of City Plan contain far-reaching goals ,
could help ensure its viability.
policies , programs , and investments that contribute
to both mobility and quality of life . However, the (Note : No priority implied by the order of choices .)
current funding forecasts severely limit continued
progress toward those goals . A-SERVICE REDUCTIONS ( RE -SIZING )
This choice would represent a reduction of the
Key choices will determine what refinements or existing transportation services — actually pulling
prioritization of community goals might be back on services like snow removal , street and trail
necessary. In addition , the major policy choices for sweeping , and re-striping , fixing critical issues only,
transportation are highly interrelated to the new with no expansion of roadway capacity, transit
policy choices presented in other sections , service , bicycle facilities , or pedestrian systems to
especially Community and Neighborhood Livability, fit within diminishing resources . Options within this
Economic Health , Environmental Resources , and choice could include blanket cuts across the City or
Safety and Wellness . reductions in specific areas or districts or by mode
of travel .
Choices
The following list of key choices outlines a range of B- RESHAPE EXISTING STREETS
options that could be thought of as stops along the This choice would necessitate rethinking streets
way to the ultimate network. They can also be and standards to emphasize lower speeds and
described as " bookends , " ranging from the system encourage walking , bicycling , and transit modes in
and services as they exist today to the full the existing cross-section of roadways and trails . It
implementation of the Master Street plan , Transfort would mean limited roadway expansion to increase
Strategic Plan , Bike Plan , Pedestrian Plan , and vehicle capacity, improve safety, or minimize
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and beyond on the delays . In addition it would focus on a quality
other end . These choices are not mutually exclusive transportation experience that supports the context
and could be combined into sets of choices . of the place (e . g . infrastructure in activity centers
emphasizes pedestrian , bicycle , and transit safety
■ Re-sizing - This choice would limit and comfort versus arterials which emphasize
expansion of and/or reduce the existing speed and automobiles) rather than the current set
transportation facilities and level of service of street standards that apply universally throughout
to focus limited resources primarily on the City.
maintenance and critical system needs .
■ Incremental System Enhancements - This C-ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDORS/ DISTRICT
set of choices would also focus primarily on FOCUS
maintenance and critical system needs , but This choice would focus the majority of future
would add a range of options to expand or transportation investments along Enhanced Travel
reallocate the existing system , ranging from Corridors , districts , or activity centers . Emphasis
reshaping the City 3s street standards to would be priority areas that are economically vital
accommodate a broader set of travel and need a catalyst for infill or redevelopment. The
modes ; focusing future resources on mix of auto capacity, transit, bicycle , and pedestrian
specific travel corridors and activity nodes ; investments in these locations would continue to
shifting the balance of future resources occur with no major shifts in the current balance
towards the needs of a changing among modes or could include a different
population . prioritization of modes within these
■ Current or Expanded Long-Term Vision - corridors/districts .
This choice would recommit to the current
or new long-term multi-modal vision based
22 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan Fort Collins
Potential Specific Topic Areas
D-VEHICLE ALTERNATIVES/TRAILS
This choice would focus some of future investment GREAT STREETS = GREAT PLACES
on adapting the transportation system , including How can the City improve the function and feel of
trails , to meet the needs of the future (e . g . , new trail our streets to create enjoyable and connected
design standards for commuter trails , for alternative places for people of all ages and abilities? Explore
smaller/new types of vehicles , more and enhanced the concept of " Green Streets" to expand the
bicycle use , and transit for youth , seniors , disabled , purpose of our transportation infrastructure from just
and low-income community members) . Emphasis moving people and vehicles to better serve a wide
for improvements would be on adapting streets to range of utility needs and environmental functions .
serve new vehicle types and improving trail linkages
and connections between the trail system and key REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CHOICES
destinations across the City. The choice is not To what extent should the City foster, support,
mutually exclusive of other choices , it could be and/or pursue regional multimodal connectivity?
combined with other transportation choices . What sorts of policies and partnerships should the
City explore and/or commit to? For example , more
E-SYSTEM MANAGEMENT or less emphasis on regional trail and transit
This choice would build on the current system connections? Regional corridors and community
management approaches (e . g . , signal retiming , gateways?
intelligent transportation systems , carpooling ,
employer programs) . Emphasis would be on TRAIL LINKAGES
increasing the utilization of the existing facilities , Should the City more fully integrate the system of
managing demand at peak times , and improving multiuse trails for transportation (commuter) use? If
transportation information systems . The choice is further integrating , what new policies and design
not mutually exclusive of other choices , it could be standards might be necessary for construction and
combined with other transportation choices . on-going operations and maintenance (O&M ) as
well as funding implications? Where are links
F-ADOPTED LONG -TERM VISIONS needed to activity centers , special districts ,
This choice would focus efforts on the adopted neighborhoods , and Enhanced Travel Corridors to
long -term Master Street Plan , Transfort, Bike , support commuting/transportation trail use?
Pedestrian visions , and CIP and identifying new
funding approaches to achieve these visions in a PARKING
reasonable time frame . This choice would reflect What is the appropriate degree and type of parking
continued pursuit of the existing values and blend of management downtown as well as other areas (e . g . ,
multimodal , freight, and auto related choices . Enhanced Travel Corridors , special districts ,
Emphasis would be on achieving the current vision neighborhoods that border activity centers , etc . ) ?
by focusing matching the available revenues to What should be the role of the City versus the role of
adequately resource this envisioned future . the private sector? What policy choices should be
pursued ? What partnerships should be explored ?
G-EXPANDED AND ENHANCED LONG -TERM
VISIONS TRANSIT
This choice would develop an expanded or What is the appropriate role of the City in
enhanced versions of the currently adopted Master supporting/ promoting different types of public and
Street Plan , Transfort, Bike , Pedestrian visions , with private transit? What different transit types should
similar values and blends of multimodal , freight, and Fort Collins explore (e . g . , Bus Rapid Transit, street
auto related choices to serve the build-out land use cars , paratransit, regional transit (bus and rail ) ) ?
scenario . Additional emphasis would be needed to
identify revenues to adequately resource the
expanded transportation future .
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 23
A-RELY ON INCREASED COST RECOVERY
TRANSPORTATION RELATED ENERGY USE FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT TO COVER COSTS
What is the appropriate role of the City in This choice would explore the implications of having
supporting/ promoting low carbon , low energy and development pay a greater share of improvements
fuel efficient transportation choices? and operations and maintenance .
MODAL PRIORITY B-CITY ADJUSTS LEVEL OF SERVICE
What is the appropriate role of the City in STANDARDS CITYWIDE
supporting/ promoting pedestrian and bicycle This choice would assess the implications of having
improvements as a priority relative to transit, and the City reduce level of service standards—for
auto related projects and programs? Should this example in terms of pavement maintenance and/or
apply citywide or be focused in neighborhoods , mobility—recognizing that in challenging economic
school areas , and activity centers? times a reduced level of service for all modes might
be a way to balance needs .
TRANSPORTATION RELATED EMISSIONS
On-road mobile sources (e . g . , vehicle tailpipe C-CITY ADJUSTS LEVEL OF SERVICE
emissions) are the second largest contributor to STANDARDS BY DISTRICT TO HELP ACHIEVE
greenhouse gas emissions and ground level ozone . SPECIFIC GOALS
Should City policies and programs place increased
emphasis on reducing these emissions by reducing This choice would assess options for the City to
current single occupant travel demand or creating adjust standards , fees , and requirements specific to
more current single occupancy vehicle capacity? certain locations . For instance , development on the
Given limited resources , what is the appropriate edges of the community might pay higher impact
balance? What is needed to ensure better fees to account for greater impacts to the
alignment with City transportation policies and transportation system or because of greater
environmental policies? distance from utilities . Conversely, more efficient
locations may receive preferential funding for
Choices for Funding Transportation transportation investments . Level of service
standards may be lower for autos and higher for
The Resourcing Our Future community dialogue will pedestrian , bicycles , or transit service in activity
address the City's pressing , immediate needs and a centers as compared with less dense areas .
long-term vision for a stronger, sustainable
community, including transportation , where a D-PURSUE ADDITIONAL REVENUE OPTIONS TO
substantial shortfall exists today. The City has FUND THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
identified a minimum resource need of $6 . 5 million This choice would pursue new options and
annually to address pavement maintenance to keep mechanisms to fund both capital and on-going
streets in a condition that avoids higher costs operations and maintenance costs needed to
associated with deferred maintenance and support and expand the transportation system . This
increased deterioration . The funding shortfall to choice is not mutually exclusive from other funding
address transit, bicycle , pedestrian , bridges , and choices .
other capital projects and on-going operations and
maintenance is much larger.
Cross-Cutting Choices
The list below represent a range of types of ✓ See the Economic Health section related to
potential funding choices and are not mutually funding choices .
exclusive . It is unlikely that there is one " magic ✓ See the Environmental Resources section
answer" to provide the community's transportation for choices related to grid infrastructure and
resources . Solutions could involve a variety of air quality.
potential combinations , indicated in A through D . ✓ See Community and Neighborhood
Livability section related to core city and
activity centers focus .
24 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
HIGH PERFORMING COMMUNITY Intergovernmental relations with other
jurisdictions , such as Larimer County and
Foundation neighboring cities .
This category is new—it was added at the end of Collaborative , Community - Based Problem
Phase 1 , as the project team began to realign the Solving
Plan Fort Collins vision with the Budgeting for
Outcome categories . Consequently , it does not Including :
contain policy choices yet, but it includes some . Civility in interactions among community
potential topics to be addressed , focusing on the members and between government
process of governing and community interaction . representatives and citizens .
• Role of community members and
Potential New Topics organizations in implementing the vision .
• Increasing role of volunteers to accomplish
goals .
Sense of Community . Best practices , adapted from other
Includes : communities and from within our own
• World Class Community - where people community (e . g . , UniverCity Connections ,
will choose to live . Pathways Past Poverty) .
• Unified yet diverse community. Partnerships—public , private , and non-
Engagement reflecting the diversity of the profit—to achieve the vision .
community.
• Connections among people . Cross -Cutting Choices
• Promoting self-sufficiency and the ability to ✓ See Health and Wellness choice related to
age in place (e . g . , Senior Housing ) .
diversity and community engagement.
• Not just design , but on-going maintenance . ✓ See the Community and Neighborhood
• Range of services (single-person , elderly
households) . Livability, neighborhoods and housing
choices .
✓ The concepts of regionalism and
Technology partnerships appear in many of the
Addresses : sections .
Access to technology infrastructure . ✓ Sustainability relates to all the topics and is
Access across generations and cultures . part of the triple bottom line approach to
• Competitive advantage of technology. measuring choices , addressed in the next
• Multi -lingual options and infrastructure (e . g . , part of this outline .
that could benefit employers seeking to
locate in the City) .
Effective Local Governance
To address future form and role of local government
in 25 years and beyond , including :
• Role of the City of Fort Collins government
in implementing the vision .
• Effective structure of local government.
• Appropriate size of local government.
• Levels of engagement (e . g . , role of Boards
and Commissions and other public
engagement) .
• Government transparency.
• How to address challenges of multi -lingual
population .
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 25
4 — Triple Bottom
Line Evaluation
The planning team is currently developing a model
to measure the triple bottom line outcomes of each
of the policy choices . The model takes into account
land use and Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
data , the transportation model , and a cost recovery
model customized for the City.
. Carbon emissions
• Energy consumption
Plan Fort Collins • Stormwater runoff quality
innovate , sustain, connect • Water use per capita
• Air quality/mobile emissions
Triple Bottom Line • Protected open space
Wildlife habitat
Screening Indicators protected/restored
• Development efficiency
• Vehicle miles traveled
5 • Solid waste diversion
•
• Businesses and jobs , • Fire and police protection
( retained , new) • Sense of community indices
• Diversity of sectors • Public engagement/voting
• Local business • Facilities for physical
• Retail mix activity ( parks . trails ,
• Jobs-housing ratio recreation )
• Housing affordability . Proximity/access to health
• Price of government care (physical . mental )
services • Agricultural lands/local food
• Revenues per capita • Self-sufficient households
• Access to markets/freight • Housing unit mix
mobility • Arts and culture availability
• Life-long learning • Mobility/travel modes
26 PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE
Plan 4 Fort Collins
Definitions Greenfield
A greenfield is agricultural land or undeveloped site
This section includes definitions for terms used in planned for future urban uses , such as commercial
this outline . The planning team will be adding
additional definitions for the public materials in or residential .
June . In addition , City Plan has a much more
complete glossary of planning terms that will be Enhanced Travel Corridors
carried forward as part of the plan .
The purpose of an Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC)
Activity Centers is to provide multi-modal connections between two
or more major activity centers . ETCs promote safe ,
Activity Centers , as defined in City Plan, are convenient, and direct travel , with an emphasis on
commercial centers that contain a mix of housing , high frequency transit service and bicycle and
retail , culture , arts and dining . They are intended to pedestrian facilities . ETCs are intended to integrate
be vibrant, walkable , bicycle-friendly, livable places . with adjacent land uses to encourage transit
Carbon Emission 1 Footprint ridership and the ability to walk or ride a bicycle .
The total amount of greenhouse gases caused by Infill Development
an organization , event, or product, usually The development of new housing or other buildings
expressed in equivalent tons of carbon dioxide on scattered vacant sites in a built-up area .
(CO2) .
Compost Instream Flow
Water flowing in a stream or river to adequately
The purposeful biodegradation of organic matter provide for downstream uses occurring in the
(such as yard clippings and food waste) that
decays into fertilizer. stream channel .
Density Paratransit
Alternative mode of flexible passenger
Density refers to the number of dwelling units per transportation that does not follow fixed routes or
acre of residential land development. Some schedules , usually in the form of mini -buses .
typical densities for various types of housing are :
single-family is 3 to 5 units per acre , townhomes Resourcing our Future
are 7 to 10 units per acre , and apartments are 10
to 25 units per acre (and higher) . The current City dialogue about how to address
pressing , immediate needs and government
District services .
A district is an area which is large in size and Stormwater
has a distinct purpose , such as the Downtown
and CSU Campus areas . Districts , as Water that originates during precipitation (e . g . , rain
referenced in this compilation of documents , are and snow) some of which becomes surface run off
more general in nature , and are not intended to that flows into storm sewers or surface waterways .
precisely correspond to existing or future zoning Stormwater is of concern because of flood control
districts . and water pollution , due to contaminants that the
water carries .
FortZED
Fort Collins Zero Energy District, is a set of active
projects and initiatives , created by public-private
partnerships , which uses Smart Grid and renewable
energy technologies to achieve local power
generation and energy demand management.
PRELIMINARY VISION AND NEW POLICY CHOICES OUTLINE 27
Attachment 2
Plan Fort Collins
innovate sustain , connect
05118110
Consolidated Feedback - Phase 1
The community provided many new ideas during the March kick-off events , during focus groups ,
at presentations , and online . Some of the recurring themes are listed below . They are grouped
under the Plan Fort Collins categories that now more closely align with the City's Budgeting for
Outcomes results categories . Please see the feedback from each event for more detail .
PARKSHIGH
HEALTH RESWII� . .ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL CULTURE,
RECREATION N
Economic Health
• Retain , grow, incubate , and attract employment especially targeted industries . Jobs are an
important part of the economic health equation ! Be thoughtful about companies to recruit,
selecting those that will stay.
• Jobs/housing balance important.
• Businesses : Address entitlement process , possible special process for desired businesses?
Targeted industry focus . Plan for vacant big box areas and mall .
• Develop a qualified workforce (e . g . , for manufacturing related to clean energy) , but training
may be a better role for other organizations .
• Create sustainable economic development/fiscal sustainability ( i . e . , sales tax as funding
mechanism does not create jobs . Evaluate alternatives to sales tax model , such as property
tax, income tax, user fees , etc. ) Be creative about how we finance the future . Address
alternative means to pay for infrastructure needs .
• Seek more public/private partnerships .
• Support arts as part of the economic strategy .
• Foster better, higher quality retail mix — stem retail " leakage" .
• Support research and development (align City/CSU , education ) .
• Incentives : City has limited ability to use ; if used should be for certain businesses or
geographic areas of the community. Be careful of reducing development standards that
impact quality of life .
• Retailers : Recognized as revenue driver, at least for now, and probably not changing soon .
Focus on mall and buy local to counter regional trends .
• Resourcing Our Future : Important to consider options for revenue .
• Measure " healthy economy" with indicators .
• Don 't lose momentum or vision of economic development issue in past five years .
Environmental Resources
• Prepare for changing energy needs . Due to major changes occurring worldwide affecting
access to , production of, and distribution of energy, the community needs to decide how far
to go towards the leading edge while maintaining a secure and reliable energy system .
• Address Poudre River flow, water quality and quantity — instream flow (amount of water
needed in the river to adequately provide for downstream uses occurring in the river) and
riparian habitat. Loss of in-stream flows have potential impacts on river and water quality,
costs for water treatment, and water supply for parks , recreation , etc .
• Address water conservation and City's level of effort in promoting .
• Support recycling (incentives , increased opportunity, education , efficiency, etc . )
1
• Plan in a time of uncertainty relating to climate change , energy, water — minimize risks and
promote adaptability and resiliency.
• Promote energy efficiency in buildings , including retrofitting today 5s buildings ( but finding the
right balance of incentives and mandates and building codes ) . Extend/expand incentives to
promote energy investments by small businesses . Create an entrepreneurial atmosphere to
encourage development and deployment of green technologies . Engage the community as
part of the solution .
• Complete the Stormwater Program repurposing , incorporating ordinances into the City Code .
• Acquire "gaps" in the open lands network. Maintain City open lands , including promoting
restoration and stewardship . Promote interdepartmental cooperation on beneficial projects
(e . g . , utilities , natural resources , planning , parks ) .
• Address air quality, especially in mobile emissions and transportation programs (see below) .
Community and Neighborhood Livability
• Study infill/redevelopment and how it affects areas outside of Downtown . Recognize that
many areas of the community are ripe for redevelopment. Address different standards for
different areas — don 't use one size fits all approach .
• Focus on the " middle" part of the City. The City has previously focused on the renewal of
Downtown , the gateways , and the edges , but not the middle .
• Foster public acceptance and understanding of higher density (relationship to transportation ,
housing affordability, etc. ) .
• Create meeting places (districts) that are like Downtown . Other places in the community
should take on those characteristics .
• Address appropriate levels of development along river, possibly by districts (e . g . , some
development on one side of the river might balance habitat , access , and aesthetics and avoid
urbanization of the river. )
• Look at multiple uses for commercial buildings that are not occupied , including housing .
• Address big picture continuum of housing within more specific categories (e . g . , for seniors) .
• Promote mixed -use development with density to support housing affordability.
• Expand the housing land bank program (i . e . , reserving land for future affordable housing
needs ) .
• Address need for affordable housing rental units (especially for less than 30 % of Area Median
Income (AMI ) , which is the greatest need ) and affordable senior housing .
• Better define " preservation" goals for Downtown and surrounding east and west side
neighborhoods .
• Provide flexibility to allow unique identity and creative development.
• Foster additional cooperation between the City and developers for redevelopment, especially
midtown .
Safety and Wellness
• Do more with limited resources and be creative to address funding gaps .
• Maintain current ratio of police and fire providers .
• Enhance City relationship with non- profits/human service boards to improve effectiveness of
providing services . Recognize and build on existing community initiatives as part of the plan .
• Explore comprehensive network of dental , mental health , education for lower-income people .
• Sustain and improve transportation to recreation facilities .
• Ensure diverse community involvement, including hard-to-reach populations .
• Acquire farm land and easements and promote food production . Consider organic, local food
production and year-round farmer's market.
• Address the growing senior population and their needs .
Culture, Parks, and Recreation
• Foster a creative culture , and creativity as a community value .
• Expand arts and culture options beyond Downtown — citywide .
2
• Support green streets and " linear" parks (transforming irrigation ditches and channels to trails
and other multi-purpose recreation uses ) .
• Maintain the qualities that make Fort Collins unique .
• Support collaboration for better use of resources and facilities .
• Address funds for operations and maintenance (O&M ) of existing parks (need for sustainable
funding source) , for trails , and to complete the Master Plan (future facilities ) . Look at
public/private partners , sponsors , other opportunities (districts) to address funding issues .
• Monitor recreation trends and senior center needs
Transportation
• Maintain street infrastructure , including bicycle and pedestrian facilities .
• Develop a permanent/sustainable funding source for transportation . Make the public aware
of the need for dedicated funding to be able to effectively plan and finance transportation
projects .
• Promote public transit — it plays an important role in the whole system and in serving different
population needs , such as youth and seniors .
• Develop a clear transportation vision for the future that allows for change and adaptability .
• Optimize the system to accommodate : regional commuters ; access to highways and
airports , personal transportation vehicles , new traffic control methods , access to employment
centers , new modes of transportation , and conversion of vehicles to alternative fuels .
• Make transportation fun (e .g . , make the journey as appealing as the destination ) .
• Diversify the transportation system (e . g . , convenient mass transit, parking , freight, vehicle
sharing ) .
• Address transportation needs of youth and seniors .
• Promote bicycle programs , education , connections , and safety .
• Improve trails as part of the transportation system , including to northern parts of City and to
open spaces and recreation facilities .
High Performing Government
• Improve the Budgeting for Outcomes process to focus more on community priorities .
• Increase monitoring of utilities and other programs (e . g . , action plan for supply and quality,
replacing aging infrastructure) .
• Promote regional thinking and planning .
• Promote education , making the community part of the solution .
• Foster "be local " actions .
• Show comparisons with other cities and more data ; more fact-based decision-making .
• Refocus on the definition of Sustainability for Fort Collins . Create sustainability indicators
and improve scorecard metrics (e . g . , for bicycle , transportation , air quality , walking , VMT) .
• Grow wisely — have and use better monitoring data and modeling tools .
• Work with CSU , Front Range , and school district to promote the World Class City vision .
3
Plan «` Fort Collins
Attachment 3 : Policy Choices Interrelationships Matrix fnnovateisu -
5/19/10
Primary section addressed ( • ) / Secondary locations addressed / related topic ( 0 ) in Policy Choices Outline
Vision Topics: MEL
Economic Health Choices
A—Economic Strategy Choices
Job Creation • 0 0 0 0-
Retail Retention and Recruitment • 0
Land Ready for New Businesses • 0 0 0
Local Businesses • 0 0 0
Workforce Training • 0
B—Economic/Land Use Planning Choices
Jobs/Housing Balance • 0
Locations for Industry and Jobs • 0 0
Sustainable Fiscal Efforts
Resourcing Our Future • 0 0 0 0 0 0
Environmental Resource Choices EH ER CNL SW CPR T HPC
A—Energy Policy Choices
Energy Use Reduction • 0
Electric Grid Modernization 0 • 0 0
Linking Transportation to the Grid 0 • 0
Improving Performance of Existing Buildings 0 • 0
B--Stormwater Policy Choices
Stormwater Quality and Conveyance • 0 0 0 0
Stormwater Treatment Locations • 0 0 0 0
Stormwater Partnerships • 0 0
C—Water Resource Policy Choices
Water Supply Planning/Conservation • 0 0
Poudre River Instream Flows 0 • 0 0 0
Local Agriculture/Water Conservation 0 • 0 0
Climate Change Adaptation • 0 0
Water Reclamation • 0 0
D—Air Quality Choices
Price Mechanisms 0 • 0
Transportation Fuels and Efficiency 0 • 0
E—Waste Choices
Carbon Intensity and Consumption • 0 0 0
Source Red uction/Waste-to-Energy •
Composting • 0 0
F—Open Lands Choices
Multi-Purpose Open Lands • 1 0 1 0 1 0
Community and Neighborhood Livability Choices
A—Activity Centers and Corridors
Core City - Mason Corridor "Spine" 0 0 • 0 0
Transforming Activity Centers 0 0 • 0 0
Redevelopment and Infill Strategies 0 0 • 0 0
City Gateways/Edge Development • 0
B—Neighborhoods and Housing
Neighborhood Transitions • 0
Neighborhoods and Housing Types 0 0 0
Vision To is
Housing Affordability O 77=0 O
C—Historic Preservation Choices O O • O O
D—Connected Open Lands Choices
Nature in the City O • O O
Downtown/Cache La Poudre River O • O
Financing Growth O •
Safety and Wellness Choice ' CNL SW CPR" T HPC
A—Safety
Safe Community O O • O
B—Wellness
Active Lifestyles O • O O
Healthy Living and Education • O
Health and Human Services Access O • O
Local Agriculture and Food O 1 O 1 O • O
Culture, Parks and Recreation Choices
A—Arts and Culture
Integration / International Culture • O
Funding O •
B—Park and Recreation
Parks and Multi-Purpose Open Space O O O • O
Youth Recreation Programs O • O
Transportation Choices ' CNL SW CPR" T HPC
System Choices include:
A: Service Reductions (Re-sizing) O •
B : Reshape Existing Streets O O O O •
C: Enhanced Travel Corridors/District focus O •
D : Vehicle Alternatives/Trails O O •
E : System Management O O •
F : Adopted Long-term Vision O O O O •
G : Expanded and Enhanced Long-term Visions O O • O
Potential Specific Transportation Topic Areas
Great Streets = Great Places O O O O O • O
Regional Transportation Choices O • O
Trail Linkages O O O O •
Parking O O O •
Transit O O O O •
Modal Priority O O O •
Transportation Related Energy Use / Emissions O O •
Choices for Funding Transportation
—A-Rely on Increased Cost Recovery from New Development O •
B-City Adjusts Level of Service Standards Citywide O •
C-City Adjusts Level of Service Standards by District / Goals O O •
D-Pursue Additional Revenue Options to Fund the O O O • O
Transportation System
igh Performing Community (Potential New Topics) ' ' mqvm 0 '
Sense of Community O O 1 O •
Technology O •
Effective Local Governance O O •
Collaborative , Community-Based Approach O 0 0
ATTACHMENT 4
Attachment 4
City Boards and Commissions Input
Bicycle Advisory Committee
Draft minutes of the May 10, 2010 meeting.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
Comments on April 22, 2010, City Plan Workshop notes.
Transportation Board
May 14, 2010, Letter to Mayor and Members of Council.
Draft minutes of the May 5, 2010, special meeting.
Notes from the April 22, 2010, City Boards and Commissions Special Workshop
Community and Neighborhood Livability
Culture, Parks, and Recreation
Economic Health
Environmental Resources
Safety and Wellness
Transportation
i
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES of the
BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
May 10, 2010
6:00 PM
Community Room
215 N. Mason
Fort Collins, CO 80521
FOR REFERENCE:
Chair: Rick Price _ 970-310-5238
Vice Chair: Cathy Mathis -' _ 970-
Staff Liaison: Kathleen Bracke -970-224-6140
Staff Support: Dave "DK"Kemp 79j4l6-2411
BOARD/CITY ORGANIZATION=MEMBERS PRESENT
Bike Fort Collins: Jeff Morrell
Transportation.Board: Bill Jenkins '
UniverCity Connections: Rick Reider - - : -
Economic Advisory Commission: Rick Price-&' -
Fort Collins Bicycle C_*O�.mDoug Cutter
Poudre School District: John olcombe
Colorado State I EWRity: Daunt Hansen e
Downtown Developmen�Aut#grtyKathy CT'dona
AT LARGE MEMktR$ PRESENT
Dan 0iuld .
At LargenCathv Mathis '
ABSENT _
Air.Quality Boar__:GregNcMaster
Natural Resources lyisory Board: Clint Skutchan
Senior Advisory Board: Vacant
Parks and Recreation Board: Greg Miller
Lands Conservation and Stewardship Board: Chris Gaughan
At Large: Kim Sharpe
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE
FCBikes Coordinator: Dave"DK"Kemp
City of Fort Collins: Joe Olson
1
2
City of Fort Collins, Transportation Planning& Special Projects Director: Kathleen
Bracke
Transportation Planning Administrative Assistant: Gail Neben
Parks and Recreation Board: Dawn Thies
Former Greeley Open Space.Foundation Member: Jeff Nosal
New Belgium Tour de Fat Director: Mike Graff
Call to order
Meeting called to order at 6:01 PM
Agenda review:
Rick Price reviewed the agenda. No comments or changes bix l e members.
Public Comments:
Jeff Nosal introduced himself to the BAC. M
Approval of minutes:
Rick Price presented the meeting notes from Apn1Q10 meeting. The notes-from Craig
Foreman's presentation were given to the members.18hifHolcombe commented that the
discussion on the Fort Collins Velodrome was not include_d.in the minutes. Rick Price
will ask Craig Foreman for informatioion,this subject.
Dan Gould moved approval of the minutes—vith;.the addition o-f=the notes from Craig
Foreman. Cathy Mathis seconded. Motioi.carriedr y_
mow.
Action items: .= ,
Plan Fort Collins Upd'aie (Kathleen Bracke):
Purpose of the presentation is toTyrequest feedbaok.and comments from the BAC to submit
to the Transportation Boardregazdng flan Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan. A
graphic of the_overall proces-s was preseni<edwith a graph of where we are now'. The last
quarter's..progress-is.included`!Pthe Snapshot report which includes lessons learned from
the 19917`& 2004 Mas'FRETlans aril new-challenges and opportunities for the future. We
are revi wing the Key Polity choices;f nneling these down to a distinct set of choices,
then defiii g:the pros and=co_ns and potential outcomes to determine the preferred
direction to rno7ve forward.".-We will have the comments compiled and a report for the
Bicycle Advisoryf ommittee and Transportation Board in July prior to the City Council
Worksession.
New change for Plan-Fort Collins is using the City's Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) for
guidance in how the planning process is organized based on City Council guidance
provided in March.
The Plan Fort Collins topics are: Economic Health, Environmental Resources,
Community &Neighborhood Livability,.Safety&Wellness, Culture, Parks &
Recreation, Transportation, and High Performing Community. The new policy choices
and direction will drive the analysis and implementation/action steps recommended by
the plan.
2
3
Last time there was a traditional planning approach to the process to update City Plan and
the Transportation Master Plan. This plan is a more iterative process based on interaction
with the community and iterative analysis of land-use and transportation planning
scenarios. .
Discussion:
➢ .Doug Cutter: How much should the ideas be funding based(based on limited
funding)
➢. Dan Gould: Will the right-of-way base thresholds come up later?
➢ Kathleen: It has to do with the size of the different systems:we choose.
➢ Dan G.: Would it have to do with different time points iA=acqujring Rights of
way?
➢ Kathleen: The current master plan shows streets thif m *be built out or not. As
development occurs we may set aside funds for f re riEftif f way. Part of the
decision making is whether we want to contii ode--_thepractice .*ght of way
preservations for future expansion. WhatJ91he physical impa6f— terms of size?
➢ The Transportation section of the Key Clia—ces docuient begins on P ge 14 of the
handout. These are the same topics discusseBEa-fitl e Boards and Commissions
Special Workshop in April. Pages 14 & 15 have e Key Policy Choices. Funding
options are included-as a list o otential choices. _§_!date, we are looking at a
spectrum of choices that include lry`i qd s of transpRt i. How do we reshape
our existing streets?3t could:be ai **ri-g` d adding�bfke lanes to "road diets."
How do we use the system to accem,modle clian rg needs over time?
➢ It is importanffo sharei'th the comAunity.that we cannot afford our existing
transportat vt em. 1W are living bdykudl our means. Our traditional funding
sources are decli Uft an`f needs are incr asing. Should we downsize the system to
fit the r�re_sc3 s tha_e have�tadayy'. Vobody likes that choice but we thought it
i4ortanfTt6 the question.
➢.Mick Reider: Al alternafe choices have you offered?
_�_Oibhhleen: Altern t es cou`t_>5e multiple choices addressed in the next queue of
funding. But hoxiVQ we resource it? How do we fund it?
➢ We haechoices meant to represent both ends of the spectrum and choices in
betwee�e end i9to downsize and the other is to recommit to the current long
range plans'€.bng-lie 2004 Master Plan or to go beyond that even more (all of the
modal plans that we have in the Master Plan).
Variations could be different modes or different geographic areas. Rather than
blanket improvements we might focus on priority areas. Enhanced travel
corridors with a district focus might be focused on a specific area of emphasis in
districts: Downtown, Campus West, or the Harmony Corridor. We're trying to
look at this as a spectrum of choices. That's why we're seeking feedback.
➢ Do we have the right set of choices on this list or do we have some things
missing? This is what I'd love to hear from you tonight. The choices are not
meant to be mutually exclusive of the others. Some go hand in hand. How can we
get more efficiency from the current system? Biking plays a huge role in this. Try
3
4
not to choose which one(s) we like, at this point we're,just trying to get the right
choices listed. Ex: Adjusting our level of services. Are there other options for
funding? We might consider the amount of.potholes we fill, frequency of
sweeping or snow removal? Do we look at allocating our resources differently
across the community? What is the spectrum of options, including funding '
options? Fees, taxes, special improvement districts, or anything else.
➢ Rick Reider: Do we know as a community where all these trips are coming from
and going to and who is making them? For example. When you look at all the
transportation I imagine a lot of the trips might be parents taking kids to school.
A lot of the trips might be people going to work or going shopping. Is there a
basket of goods that tells us what all those trips are madewof`l 4
➢ Kathleen: Yes, we have several tools. Models outlinextrip patterns and changes
over time are available from North Front Range Metropolitan Planning
Organization(NFRMPO) and our City's Travel fGnandgfodel. We have a
travel demand model to analyze auto, transit-fi1ke and pedeNhi trips. NFRMPO
has just conducted a household survey ask@ g people about hoAfpy travel and
where and this data is used along with- modeling jo help guide ours analysis.
So we have regional and local data separated~by mode-split. It's a he7rful tool,
though modeling is not a magic answer. BuF t 1 s. And you can model
different scenarios. If we had-this land use, wIfft would the trips look like? With
different land use or with trangfER- uhatwould the pa ern look like?
➢ Rick Reider: To clarify, our revenue is declining but7eina6d is increasing. Where
is that increased demand coming from?�7&6T� ople diving more? Or they need
to move about more? Or is it popu`lationPF
➢ Kathleen: As the pop ation grows, people are driving, walking, cycling, or using
transit more„pan'd this iatrend over time. Transportation revenues are provided
by funding sitcF%as vehicle registration ees-and gas taxes. As the economy
declines and pricesdncrease_tasRple purchase fewer cars and less gas, and that
means4es&xeevvenue� ere is�a host T issues going on affecting our revenue
stream at the=state, nXo al and loci! levels.
➢=Transition to tfie ist of C_0427#essages heard from the Boards and Commissions
48&cial Workshop- e on theNandout.
➢ Desired input is in answer to the questions "do we have the right list of choices
for polite and funding for the May 25 Council work session?"We'll be going
back to Council inJ..uly to share the analysis of the different choices after the May
25`h work ss siorf
Rick Price invited Doug Cutter to submit the Bike Co-op's comments on the issue based
on their"listening sessions."
Doug Cutter presented the Bike Coop summary of comments from eight public sessions
for input into the Bike Plan and City Plan. Those comments were submitted in writing
and are reproduced here:
4
5
"Final Report: Bike Co-op Listening Sessions
Related to Plan Fort Collins,May 1010
The Bike Co-op held its final listening session Wednesday; May 5`h. This meeting served
to summarize citizens' comments made during eight previous sessions held throughout
the City and to prioritize action items for referral to City Planners, Transportation ,
Planners and citizen's boards and commissions.
There was unanimous consent to offer the following recommendation:
"The community should take steps to improve bicycle safety algT fficiency through a
comprehensive bicycle safety education program and throug_Lt anced engineering
efforts. The education should target motorists, cyclist, K- cllen, and CSU students
while the engineering enhancements should include: =
1. The creation of bicycle boulevards (like Ving Swallow, StdN-V Canyon, Stuart,
etc.) for efficient long distance movement-fbikes.between and ong"activity
centers,".across town and between exi�t���corriddrs including th ason Trail,
the Powerline Trails the Poudre Trail and�tl{�,�Spring&peek Trail; =p
2. Installation of additional signal actuation,dee c..60at stop lights, ineruding the use
of default modes to facilitate bicycle travel; =_=
3. The use of sharrows (shared lanesar-rows) and improved"Share the Road" signs
that include the secondary sign RME- se full lane_'
The group reviewed the list of 120 items frq�mi,1 a prevaousneetings and prioritized
seventeen items (in rand cider):
VQ_
• More gradeTsep ated crigsings at intersections and along major trails;
• "Share-the-Road gnsYshvuldanclude_" kes Use Full Lane"secondary sign;
• IncregLcO ikge ped accessibility onan across College in"mid-town;
• K&7impr7R cle Ia e ong North Shields, North College, Gregory, Lemay
;wand others; _ --
D brease speed lifibb near punpus to 25 mph;
• Adder=scramble inteMssections" (also called diagonal crossings and nicknamed the
`Barii ance") forlenry Barnes, an innovative traffic engineer at College and
Mountaii 7aurel.and College, and Shields and Elizabeth for bikes and
1-iE
• Add lighting 6n trails for safety(including use of motion detectors with lights);
• Make broader use of sharrows now that they are approved by the MUTCD
(Manual on Uniform Traffic Code Devices);
• Utilize more PR campaigns such as the"Coexist" campaign;
• Target scofflaw cyclists for education;
• Improve east-west access to, from and between the Mason and Powerline trails;
• Enforce laws consistently;
• Create more bicycle boulevards;
• Improve signal actuation for bicycles or have signals default to green for cyclists;
• Educate motorists about the rights of cyclists and the benefits of bicycling;
5
6
• Educate K-12 children on bicycle safety;
• Educate CSU students on bicycle safety;"
END OF BIKE CO-OP RECOMMENDATION
Discussion continues:
Cutter: The one key issue that came up was safety. Not just education of motorists, but
more broad based like talking to cyclists,motorists, K-12 students and CSU students who
are key audiences that we want to educate. _
F..
Among other issues, the highest priority in the short term waaimprove signal
actuation. We have deployed some, but not all corridors are covered for bike actuation for
traffic signals. There is a list on the handout (appended af=the end�bfi.these minutes).
We took nominations from the 120 ideas that we colle-ted.`We extracted the top 17
priorities to focus on. Our organization as the BAC needs to take this asearly public
input where it is not usually available. The Coy K.did this'to.provide an earPy� pportunity
for public input. Now that we have this input we eaiconrinue;_to collect more but we
need to make sure'this is forwarded on to Council.
Discussion:
➢ Rick Price: In the first set of butt points_that KahleeffiSbvide on Plan Fort
Collins the Transportation list of`"=_-=new or elzanced vision ideas" from Plan Fort
Collins have several bullet points that refer to seMT&these ideas: "should some
streets vary in en phasiszte.g. to favor tiikesT' That sounds like a bike boulevard.
Slower speeds=arid so& Further down, "be daring to try some different ideas
that might beb-6 ter:" Or"getting across,town with alternative modes doesn't
really work. Sorne�placeshave_bike lanes or sidewalks,but it's not really a city-
wide-swstern.." That theme came out b g time in our listening sessions and is
central to-thieTfRommertdation of the Bike Co-op that some of those streets-
.=Stover, Swallow�.and there�haxe°a number of others-Columbia-that, if you start
"thinking about tlieii if they could be configured through traffic engineering and
planning . . . I don''!Rnow,-do we dare say, "bicycles yield and cars stop" on some
of thoseso they do Encourage people to ride their bikes? The cost and lack of
grade separated crossings on the Mason Trail or the Powerline Trail: we heard
from some atthis inhibits them from using the trails to commute. They
would rather be on Meadowlark and Centre if they are headed to the University
because they-can sail through the lights if they get them right. So an aggressive
consideration of some of these recommendations.
➢ Consideration of these fits nicely with the key policy questions suggestions
coming forward.
➢ Dan Gould: I suggest that the concept of reshaping existing streets captures a lot
of different possibilities about how we could adapt to more mixed mode situations
with an emphasis of level of services that doesn't necessarily prioritize motor
vehicles that dealing with mismatch between safety and threat modes. It would be
6
7
good if we could fill that in with some useful concepts to move in that direction.
We would cover a lot of territory. Also to get in the idea of safety, encouragement
and safety education-fits into vehicle alternatives. We are now in a `survive
Fort Collins' mode, not Plan Fort Collins. I recommend not downsizing. All
those other bullet points fit into the ultimate plan knowing that we are going to
have some lean times. That means we should adjust our timeline.
➢ Doug Cutter: Are decisions going to be made because there is no funding source
available in the foreseeable future to deal with the projected costs? That is short
sighted. Are we setting aggressive enough goals or are we limiting ourselves? If
the funding shows up, our large goal ideas will be ready.
➢ Rick Price: That is how the Bike Plan has been handled ffen opportunities
come open for funding we need to have plans in placewan do you have
examples of reshaping existing streets?
➢ Dan Gould: Mountain Avenue is an example. What capact� vas needed for
motor vehicles? Four lanes-two lanes in eac72=direction werenka needed so two
were eliminated and bike lanes put in.
➢ Rick Price: A road diet on Remington,is=i .example. Laurel is ano 1�-We will
talk later about Share the Road signs. Appa ently-tl e-traffic engineersconsidered
a road diet on Shields, north of Laurel with!Wand bike lanes but no parking.
That would be a great enhancement and downsiz g, Another complaint area is
Lincoln which is scheduled to 4 lane arterial.Tre'd_ould be downsized for bike
lanes. This might be ideal for thesugge tons we arettg.
➢ Kathleen: What we'd like to do here is a"ection of different scenarios given the
revenues that we have over time Ifs alto ti'to consider trails for
transportation, nA-MMiecreation Ideas for trailgwould be very helpful.
➢ Dan Gould: AMe Boards and Commissions Workshop people felt that more
commuting-7MIails wo-Ta be more incp�npatible with recreational use. Maybe
commuter routes shoulA on roads. Sd:Me should reshape existing streets, not
recreatiorr-_trails. -==- =-
➢ K-4iffeeh77T-e is a cl�sificatio'system for streets in the master streets plan, but
trot for trails.s ail is Mit-whether it is a neighborhood connector or a major
arterial." Shoulde have_ ifferent gradation of trails? Like"arterial"trails vs.
"c(51lector"or"neigh,borhood"trails? Should we have different design standards
for different types oT fails? Maybe we can't just put everyone on the same 8' or
10' trail`
➢ Rick Reider eAu getting good-input from CSU with this plan since so many
students, fac@W and staff are commuters?
➢ Kathleen: I would say it is fair. We try to reach all ages through different media
such as web, facebook, Twitter, etc. We don't get a lot of University students
come to our meetings. We also have presentations to CSU staff so their master
plans are in sync with ours. It is challenging group to reach. We are also trying
to reach seniors and youth in elementary schools: We are trying to get broad-
based input.
➢ The transportation board added a point to our list: the example was "what if we
did increase the number of trails?" What if we considered improvements beyond
what the plan shows. What do you all think about that?
7
8
➢ Rick Price: We have a recommendation from the Bike Coop that addresses a lot
of the bullet points and ideas that have come up here. There is room to change this
but I would entertain a motion to adopt the Bike Coop recommendations?
➢ Rick Reider: There's nothing in there about the League of American Bicyclists.
Should we continue to promote that in this type of document?
➢ Rick Price: Almost any educational initiative that we undertake whether it is kids
or CSU is going to include LAB curricula so I think that would not be necessary
here, though we should keep it on the table. This is more about engineering
issues.
➢ Cathy Mathis moved that the BAC adopt the Bike Coop recommendations and
pass them on to the Transportation Board and City Cound-if s<it is in the entire 2
page report.
➢ Doug Cutter: Second.
➢ Jeff Morrell: How much of the Coop recommen ions are5 the Bike Plan?
➢ Rick Price: Probably a lot of them. Some are°ln t.others are nab=included.
➢ Jeff Morrell: Signal actuation is in the plan_-?
➢ Rick Price: It's been there forever.
➢ Kathleen Bracke: There were no suggesti'ans aboutWfnnding in the C 7Gp plan.
➢ Dan Gould: I have a comment in this regard m
➢ Rick Price asked for further discussion; there was:=none. A vote was taken on the
entire recommendation from tlto-op. Motion carried unanimously to adopt
the Bike Co-op recommendahons aspresented (see5a`bove).
➢ Rick Price: Dan, do you want to comment 04@3cditig.
➢ Dan Gould: Thi95-3Nd ld.be more high altitude, tint just a laundry list-of bike
issues. This leas to do Mth_a policy that,fosters economics, community and
sustainabilif7I yuant to point out that Transportation in Fort Collins is wasting
money by supporting two pars:in every Household. That cost is out of pocket costs
of oven—S500,000,00:f er year�Lwould like some way this plan could capture a
m_dfe eco al and sustainable transportation system; a system that saves
money and gains-more mobility: That could be done by emphasizing bicycling,
v lking and trans F=-We cou`Td'get all those for a fraction of that S500M per year.
AnU id those househol&ss having to support the cost of those cars. This calls
for vdluntarily rediie_cting household funds through some other medium than sales
taxes that-Iuctuates or gasoline tax. It could be a property based tax or a utility
tax that wouQsupport the whole system. This would involve rethinking the
transportation ystem as a basic utility as we do water, electricity, etc. I'd like to
put in a plug-for developing that coming from the bicycle community.
➢ Dawn Thies: Does transportation money transfer to different departments for
different uses such as for trails?
➢ Kathleen: That's one of the questions. What would the implications be to transfer
funds? There are typically two types of funding sources. This would be a .
paradigm shift. Trails have historically been paid for by non-transportation
funding sources such as Great Outdoors Colorado, and transportation facilities.
(bike lanes, streets, etc.) are funded through traditional transportation sources
such as vehicle registration fees and gas taxes. Question is how to have more
8
9
flexibility on funds used for trails with a transportation focus?New sources and/or
more flexibility to spend funds on different types of transportation needs.
➢ Rick Price: The funding from Washington D.C. looks good for bicycling in the
next transportation package.
➢ Kathleen: While that is likely to be the case, the federal and state funding is
typically for capital construction costs. An.important local issue is the cost for
operating and maintaining the system after it is built. O&M becomes our local
responsibility. We need funding that can be flexible over time to build and
operate/maintain our transportation system.
➢ Doug Cutter: Do we have the operations budget from the lgst? It would be helpful
to give the cost her household. The presentation from Daw s helpful.
➢ Kathleen: I can provide that information for you. Day';Jhe presentation you gave
at the Transit Finance Committee was very useful. _
➢ Rick Price: This can be discussed at another meeting. If tlire�is no more input, we
will go to the next agenda item.
Discussion/InformationalItems
Building on Basics (BOB) Bicycle Plan Funds Updaf�l�w="
Rick Price: Can you describe to us at-what point the B'7`�.will be invited to comment on
the allocation of BOB funds. - -
Update: The BOB Bike Plan funding w apced by the vte 'nd provides
$125K/year for bike improvements base&-on the 8--bike plY An annual selection
process is used to determin�rojects each ..earzwith�t=j VtEam at the City including
Transportation Planning, gi e�ering,Traft�bperatio; PSD is involved, and also
CSU. We take input projecf=fleas from tine.Bike Plan; also from community input
over the years. As°Weanove forward we have rdentified projects through 2011 so next
selections will be made-f r201: funding. In 2d 1 we will comeback to.the BAC as part
of the projecttselgetion process TheTT4i-e g for.many of the bike projects on the list is
very expensive so-fin t g proj'�cts to fit the'-available$125K per year can be challenging.
We'vewFone a variety f rojects=o�s�er_the years. Sometimes the annual funding is used as
localma hung funds foe M- engratfFfunded projects. It has to be used for capital
funding: signing and striping, equipment, technology, etc. We will come to the BAC in
2011 for 4UM the project=list for 2012.
➢ Rick Price=Wou come to us for the 2011-12 Budgeting for Outcomes
process? Wha�$OB Bike projects are selected for 2011?
➢ Kathleen: right now we are waiting for directions from the City's Finance
departmentto follow for the public outreach process for BFO and will follow-up
with the BAC when we have more information.
➢ 2011 BOB Bicycle Plan funds have been directed as part of the City's local
matching funds toward the.Natural Resources Research Center/Whole Foods
grade separated crossing project that the City is building in connection with the
Mason BRT project.
➢ Jeff Morrell: When will the 2012 project selection process take place?
➢ Kathleen: In July 2011, we will begin the process for the following year.
9
10
➢ David Hansen: It seems like some of the BOB funding would tie in nicely with
this plan from the Co-op.
➢ Rick Price: Is there still $25K left unspent from 2009?
➢ Kathleen: Yes.
➢ Rick Price: Not spent and not complicated, correct?
➢ Kathleen: When the bids are in for the NRRC/Whole Foods project, they will
decide if they need this funding or not. If that project doesn't need all of the
funding, then it could be available for other projects.
➢ Rick Price: According to Diane Jones in the paper this morning, we are getting
bids from 25-50% lower than usual. _
➢ Kathleen: We.can bring this back to BAC when we have iriore information.
➢ DK: Just to reiterate, BOB funds are to be used only,fot capital projects.
➢ Rick Price: We heard that already, thank you. 4
➢ David Hansen: Can this money be pulled out and-TeallocO%,f left?
➢ Kathleen: Yes, if bids are low and they don',t9 ed the fundingj:&will go back into
the respective bike or pedestrian pots resp�etively. It would be s appy day if the
bids come in low. And we would come-lack for your input.
➢ John Holcombe: Should it be a priority to hake mpuan the BOB funds?
➢ Doug Cutter: what is the deadline to spend tlfew�-009 funds?
➢ Kathleen: Capital funds do roll over. If funds are®available we are glad to come
back to BAC for input.
➢ Rick Price: For the record, we are mterested in the aMcati-On of BOB funds. The
last time we heard about BOB fund allRWRns.it was basically a done deal for the
overpass at the Natural Resource Campus
John Holcombe=ffil ink;LLthat should be'a priority`that this group have input on
BOB. _
➢ Doug Cutter rk-there a deadline on spending the 2009 funds?
Kathleen: No, sinee_capital-funds roll over.
.s_
➢ Rick_Prrce_Can we liave assuranceT[m staff that those monies won't be spent
w.jCc;ut com"ing�o us'for.our opinion?
➢,Aathleen: Froiifflie staff liaison perspective I can assure you that if there are any
�fempning funds Ev_zilable weYvill be glad to come back and discuss that with the
gr clop w
➢ Rick rice: So his 05K from 2009 is in that category?
Kathleen_Vhatever it turns out to be.
➢ Doug CuteT:�S-there any reason we shouldn't figure out what to spend that on?
That way we`f�-ready when the money becomes available.
➢ Rick Price: I'd love to see a workgroup to bring recommendations to BAC?
➢ Kathleen: The ballot says the project funds must be spent to implement the City's
bicycle plan so that is important to keep in mind.
➢ Rick Price: We can ask for bike plan related and capital plans. Who wants to be
on a group to make a recommendation? Note that Council has already asked
staff to consider using those funds to build a Bike Safety Town somewhere. That
could be used for bicycle education. Let Rick know if you are interested. (No
response.)
10
11
Joe Olson Presentation: Requesting in put on bike lane signs per Federal Highway
Administration(FHWA) changes (Joe Olsen)
There is an issue in Traffic Operations that could impact BAC. The FHWA made some
changes in the regulations on the retro-reflectivity level of warning®ulatory signs.
Our current signs do not meet these new,requirements. We have a Sign Replacement
program to be completed by 2014. The bike lane'signs are regulatory and come under this
program. In Fort Collins, there are 967 total bike lane signs that have a special design
(including the FCBikes logo). To replace.these signs is will casf=$T6_each for a total of
about $35,000 to change them all to meet the new FHWA requrement.'The standard bike
lane sign in the manual costs only$21 each, for a total of�l—' The City could save
$15,000 if we use the standard bike lane signs instead of=f e currer special FC Bike,bike
lane signs. We do not have the funds to replace the ntsign des M-Me would like
input from BAC before we move forward. Both signs are roughly the s]a e size.
Discussion:
w
➢ Rick Reider: It seems silly not to save the m6uey '
➢ Kathleen: The old signs were,designed by the Cif}!, and approved by FHWA in
mid 1990's as part of an educx. rogram of bringing about biking in Fort
Collins. It was part of the brandi-h` tcation, and a u yk identity to the Fort
Collins bike system. The City went throup`v extensive process through the
Federal Highways to approve the&-grepit'l-sign t-4,0 s the City's goal to have a
more unique siofdLi commumty€ian just the standard regulatory signs at the
time. The g C=was to-INve the signs lye a part of the information system.
➢ Jeff Morrell:-AFehe curxpnt signs compliant?
➢ Joe: No. They arena bngbt enough. We=-ave to replace them.
➢ Jeff MorrelL_Brandilzg zs imp,--.;&iWFort Collins
➢ Zlfftfiink tlidR? riding is important but I like the bigger sign.(signs are
dame size) _ =
•)i�vk.The logo is cs_of dateW
➢ Jo 3f we redo thelogo then we would have to redo the process for approval by
FHW�� M
➢ Jeff MoireWhats the timeline?
➢ Joe: 2014 tacamete.
➢ Jeff: How mu_c11 time.does it take to go through the approval process?
➢ Rick Price: Pam all for branding andmarketing Fort Collins.as a bicycle
community but that is a different conversation. Bike friendly signs should be
everywhere; let's take the branding message to merchants and everywhere. 967
new signs with that bicycle are great for branding,but FC Bikes is not the
message.
➢ Rick Reider: The new one stands out more.
➢ Rick Price: That's my point.
➢ Jeff Morrell: To enhance the brand is beneficial.
11
12
➢ Rick Price: I am ok with the new signs being standard. DK should work on the
branding and our image as a bike town.
➢ Dawn Thies: If you do that you are probably going to have increased costs.
➢ Rick Price: Yes, but that's a different pocket. That's not Joe's sign budget, that's
DK's encouragement budget.
➢ Kathleen: It all comes out of the same pocket eventually of the City.
➢ Rick Price: But the CMAQ monies are a different pocket that funds•DK's budget.
➢ Rick Reider: The Federal process is required to get another sign approved; do we
want to create a committee to design it would cost more money.
➢ John Holcomb: Should we vote on Joe's recommendation?
➢ Doug Cutter: Is there a deadline to be compliant? -
Joe: Yes, 2014. =�
➢ Dawn Thies: Where would the savings go? _
➢ Joe: If we go with the cheaper signs, it means wean place-#,pore other types of
regulatory or warning signs. `•
➢ Dawn Thies: Is it work $15K for the branding?
Rick Reider made a motion to approve Joe's rec_ommenetation for $21 per signwith
the standard design and approved reflectivity.
➢ Rick Price: Any discussion? Y= T
➢ John Holcomb: Are any share the road signs connecte&ANthese on the same
poles?
➢ Joe: No. Share the road is considered a warntriggn.MThey have to have the
same reflectivity-16
Rick Price calle&for a'uote as-the motion passed unanimously.
Report:
Share the-Zoad-S gn7=(ERick Pr��,
Ca thy Vlathis chaireW7heyneetzng while Rick Price gave the report.
A worlti`ngvgroup included-me (Pric_},Dan Gould, John Holcombe and DK.
We lookedatMUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Code Devices).
In certain places--Share the Road signs are recommended. Most signs in town follow that
recommendatiod--- 5 sign went up after a bike town meeting hosted by Bike Fort
Collins in November 20W. We came up with a dozen places for STR signs. They went
up without almost any.-time wasted by the end of summer 2008. We had signs go up on
places like Riverside or Prospect east of College where just a few people proposed them.
Our working group questioned whether we should rethink signs in some of these places.
For the record, the locations nominated in the Nov. 2007 meeting were:
1) Horsetooth (Stanford to across College);
2) Laurel (Remington to Howes); we solved that by eliminating parking on Laurel
except right each side of College;
12
13
3) Shields north of Laurel. And according to DK who did some research on this,
traffic Engineering considered a road diet and making bike lanes here.. But they
dropped that idea.
4) We discussed Old Town: Mountain Avenue, Magnolia, Oak and Olive and all
those that cross College and in Old Town where bike lanes are involved. Dan is
a proponent of share the road signs where there is diagonal parking but not where
there is none.
We researched where signs should go and a version of sign to recommend.
The working group has the following questions for the BAC: � _
1) Should we finalize a report and submit it to BAC form4Hy with a
recommendation? :We have looked at some areas of lri�st Collins,but not all of
them. AF
2) Or, would the BAC like to pick this up and take lagk at t9@6tire town to
consider placement of Share the Road signs she-can provide ou with a map and
current guidelines from the MUTCD.
➢ Jeff Morrell: Can we send an email to G.&-ilists asking for volunteers.0t%give their
opinion on areas where they ride? _
➢ Rick Price: So, turn to the committee? We ca q that and provide guidelines to
the community. Joe;.any comment? _
➢ Joe: We are not looking to usel7ese igns as an admit acy or educational tool. We
use them for areas with unusual-torid lion and as wart ftgsigns. We can't just
place signs out.where somebody ekants thein )}urge caution to invite people to
place them where they want them.
➢. Rick Price: Joe,�dt%.you have any comment on tlxe signs that went up on East
Prospect? = '
Joe: No, I have mot,lookec�t them in deJ"t1il.;-
➢ Dan Gould: We can discsss snare when me have more time. My opinion in places
like Effect is lha use of tl e-stgns'1s a tacit endorsement of that as a place to
use a bike.L"d 't t1uH>t=that is appropriate. There are no escape routes. It is a
eery hostile bNewenvironinent; Maybe there are places where we should not
ficer these signs.=.. =_
➢ John-Holcomb: The=g might be places in your notebook where signs would be
more aropriate. _=
➢ Dan GoURI.In the-i when we've considered places like this we have
encourage�femme routes. There is not money to make these places more bike
friendly...The more fundamental approach is to make the bikers safe. Not to assert
cyclists rights.
➢ Rick Price: You have the same position on Shields north of Laurel,.right?
➢ Dan Gould:.Yes,though it is not as bad as Prospect.
➢ DK: Riverside?
➢ Dan Gould: Parts of Riverside.
➢ Jeff Morrell: Mulberry.
➢ DK: Those are really our three hostile streets.
➢ Rick Price: I will draft something for you to share with your groups.
➢ Rick Reider: Is this City only or also the County?
13
14
➢ Rick Price: We can't put signs in the County, can we Kathleen? But we can
express an opinion.
➢ Kathleen: Yes. I would ask that Joe help review what goes out. The letter that
goes out from the BAC needs to be written so that it does not raise false .
community expectations that signs could go anywhere. That is Joe Olson's
decision as the City Traffic Engineer. Joe should have the opportunity to review
Rick Price's memo before it goes out the BAC and community.
➢ Rick Price: Joe, can you work with me on this?
➢ Joe: Thank you. Yes we need to be careful. I'd be happy to.
➢ Bill Jenkins: The current "Bikes Use Full Lane" signs from-Rick are not
appropriate for all places.
➢ Joe: We can't use this sign yet as the 2009 Draft MUaZ1) guidelines have not yet
been adopted in Colorado. But will by July, probally.
➢ Rick: I don't expect that we are going to move thal,fast.
➢ Joe: Thank you Joe for coming in.
Reports: _
Staff Report: CSU Bike Forum &Bike Safety Education K)
CSU has a campus Bicycle Advisory Committee!nww formed under the auspices of
the UniverCity Connections transit and mobility task f6f e- It started in 2009 I think, or
2008 when we started putting togethei`-_G-SLLbike summit meetings. They were really
catching on, we were accomplishing a lot,un brstanding wha�opr.-demographics were,
putting ideas to the table and bringing all the D p rtments at CSU together to talk bikes
everybody on board with teaching the sam4informatian ar i=trying to go for the same
results. We had CSU PD�IQu-s ng and Dmtz g Services Hartshorn Health Center, Bike
Fort Collins, the Bike-Co-op iM= e.
➢ Rick Price: WhrZr
epresents=the Bike Co op?
➢ DK; ItLs Anthony Denirdo. T'her'e' a--lot more in this Ride Guide here that just
came ouEfoday�Com�rehensive perspective of what's going on with cycling in
Fort Collins ans got`amiice story on the campus bike advisory committee.
-)�—_—Rdbk Price: Can you tell us What the goals or the focus or the results are that this
graup s looking fo=causel think that this is the first time the BAC has heard
about=tlis forum, or=am I wrong?
➢ DK: Yeahit's reathy coming together here. We're really working on getting the
status appNXN,Q recognized at CSU.
➢ David HansenOCSU is trying to create a committee that is seen, from a validity
standpoint, from the hierarchy of the University. So we had to go through this
first phase of meetings to generate a game plan and then go to administration to
present it. We're at that point with the administration to gain that validity.
➢ Rick Price: Is ASCSU a part of this group?
➢ David Hansen: Yes.
➢ Rick Price: And have you set any mission statement or goals?
DK: Yup. We have that.
➢ Rick Price: Am I the only one who is interested in hearing more about this? We
always hear about CSU students being a major focus of concern for bike safety,
14
15
scofflaws and so on. It would be useful for this group to hear about what's going
on over there and what our City Bike Coordinator is working on in this respect.
Can we get something in writing that documents this?
➢ -DK: Yeah, there's something in here(The.Ride Guide)?
➢ Rick Price: Is that a marketing piece for the general public or is it something that
this group can actually make use of?
➢ DK: It's an education piece, Rick.
➢ Kathleen: Do you think it would be helpful to come and give an update to this
group? Is it easier to do something in writing? I'm trying to figure out what
would work best.for CSU. ,
➢ DK: Right now we've got a number member sitting on te=B' C. David, Rick
Reider, Jeff Morrell, myself. ___
➢ Rick Price: Let me express a little frustration for havirigtanread about this in the
popular press. We should have more formal information abo this organization as
a bicycle advisory committee whose responsilsil'ity s to implement the City Bike
Plan. If I'm wrong on that please say so. ,
➢ David Hansen: I'll speak to that. We ciiidn't come to you and prWenbthis
without having the validity of having an actual group=,,The Universi�is now at
the point of recognizing the group so we car co e`"to you and say, "we've
formally created this so here we go."
➢ Rick Price: Thank you. Backoahe_BAC. Do yoTmWant a formal presentation or
an information to start with. _=_
➢ Dan Gould: I have interest in thi-Rand wt Nike to seFit successful. A progress
report might be in order.
➢ Rick Price: We.,�t on the Jung Benda. Q-6- would do that? DK and
David can gi�.i�a presei�Wtion. 30 minutes will be allotted and Cathy will chair
since I will'`lse ne. Ai0khere any foundijig documents for this group? Surely
you've told the V&versilyrw.hatyou are doing and what you will do in writing. It
would--be_useful fof 40M group=taseC-tflat so we don't have go over everything.
S.o=we a i_hWVda dialo ;
➢ ff Morrell: T-7h s dwp
Bicycle Suety_Education ban:
➢ Rick`P`n`ce: The B0 le Safety Education Plan ,
➢ DK: W&W-ike to hate it done this year.. Utilizing the strength of our partners,
BPEC, for ex�Ie—the Bicycle Pedestrian Education Coalition—providing
input. Once vn";e put a draft together we will bring it to the BAC at some point.
We.also have a Council work session scheduled in August.
➢ Kathleen: The Bike Ed plan is actually scheduled for this group in on the six-
month planning calendar in either June or July. Before it goes to Council in
August. Staff is leading this and the plan is just now being developed. Matt
Wempe will provide an update in June or July.
➢ Rick Price: Is it ok with the group to put this on the July agenda? (no objections)
We're talking input well before your plan is along so we have some input on how
it unfolds.
15
16
➢ Kathleen: Correct, this will be brought to you several times during the writing of
the plan, including key milestones including early on about the plan outline, then
what the vision, mission, objectives and recommendations might be. Matt has
laid out a series of deadlines in coming to the BAC.
➢ Rick: I'll make a note to put this on the July agenda. Thank you, DK.
Board Member Reports/Comments
Dan Gould: I would like to comment to follow up on the last meeting: the matter of
getting feedback on serious bike crashes. It seems like we read about the crashes in the
press with a vague idea of circumstances but there is little mention.of the various factors
that might have some teaching value. I have appointed myself acoinr ittee of one to
look at how that might be done: given our present analyzing ashes geographically and
categorically. I got some reports from the State Patrol. T_li'ey cr�&one by FCPD or State
Patrol. Reports are available locally but not from the coty. Reports,are short of
analysis that would be helpful. I got information on: c-r'ashes butl giant to talk to Joe
about his reports he has seen and see if Police Seces might be interes#ed=.in looking at
how this is reported.
Rick Price: Can we put this down as a standing 9111T ominilfee? You don't have to
report every time but at least we are reminded if it i -,cl"ur agenda.
Dan Gould: Yes.
Share the Road/BPEC: Rick Price
Share the Road: BPEC is not here but Itrep rt&-Kthe Bike Cii-op involvement with the
State Safe Routes to School Network. This is,:fund&&-Yy~�erbert J. Woods Foundation.
The group is forming aud_working on a work�plan. I hake been to meetings and the
group is developing_a?J-point wok plan that Includes Fort Collins with us identifying a
bike safety curricului%fonmake T ailable to all ibf..the state. CDOT has issued a contract
under Safe Routes to School to ghte a_curriculurn for this. It is not a broad program and
it is specific_torall:classroomvork, ineludmg=drt, social studies, etc. We are a part of this
because our SRTS gzant, admuu"stered by BPEC allocates money to identify and deploy a
curriculum. At the erido£the yeatwe can judge the quality of the program with local
teachers-
New Business7_hxture Agenda items:
The process for=deeiding a&enda items will be dropped for now.
Chair's request to change BAC description on Agenda:
The chair requests a change in the description at,the bottom of the agenda. I suggest using
a part of the letter from Darin Atteberry which is a letter of charge to the committee:
(Price reads the following aloud).
"The BAC is a citizen's advisory committee which will provide recommendations to the
Transportation Board on all bicycle related issues. . . . The Committee's actions will focus
on the following functions:
16
17
1. Act as a liaison between the City and the community and community groups on
issues related to bicycling.
2. Foster the interchange of ideas from existing City Boards and Commissions, as
well as other community stakeholders, such as Poudre School District, Colorado
State University, and the Downtown Development Authority, and others as
appropriate.
3. Promote bicycling as a viable form of sensible transportation.
4. Act as a sounding board for citizens who have bicycle-related questions and
concerns.
5. Assist in the development and dissemination of bicycle safey awareness and
education and encouragement materials to the communi --__
6. Develop implementation strategies for recommendation n the 2008 Bike Plan.
7. Assist with the development of evaluation metrics ferdefe mining the success of
bicycle programs and facilities."
Letter from Darin Atteberry, City Manager, Margh`9, 2009
Would BAC like this as a task list? Or, are you sed wihe mission statement
drafted by Dan Gould? I like the bullet points as a seiner or a call back fo where we
are going. Any comments?
w
Discussion: _
➢ Dan Gould: I like the present onef .It s i shorterla"the point.
s= s
➢ Doug Cutter: I like the check list.- �==
➢ John Holcomb: I like the check list 4~ZMEZ _ -
➢ Kathy Mathis: L--s gg s.t-_we leave thC- ission st4fement as is and put the bullets
on the back AY-ur namestags. '_
➢ Jeff MorrelFart�Kathy idona are with.-Dan on this.
➢ Rick Price: Canhav_&a _tc?
➢ John.H_oleamb. LenKs a'k9y-`fa Cos How long would it be? I would like less
p�jxT. VERYe=put mo iR formation in the PowerPoints and send electronically?
➢_Cathleen: We p efer electronic,:
4'' 7'k Price: Can�+e_conneci e PowerPoint to the minutes online?
➢ KRUlten: We can put it all on the web in meetings notes and a link to the
documents.
➢ Rick Pnce will request staff to put bullets on the names tags.
Other Business: _
Rick Price: Anything on the Bike Library? DK, how's the CSU Bike Library situation?
DK: Well Rick, it's looking pretty good there.
Rick Price: I would like to advise the group that I have been in touch with the City
Attorney's office regarding two potential conflicts of interest. I am the Bike Safety
Coordinator for the Bike Co-op and receive a salary or may in future. The head of the
Transportation Board suggested that I may have a conflict of interest issue since the Bike
Co-op is involved with City bicycle safety programs. The attorney says there is no
conflict of interest because the Bike Co-op is a nonprofit. But there is a potential conflict
17
18
of interest with the Bike Library because I own the website for the Bike Library
(www.FCBikeLibrar�org and .com). I will recuse myself if the BAC discusses the Bike
Library. It is an opportunity for anyone else on the BAC to go back and read the Boards
and Commissions Manual and guidelines to see if anyone else has a conflict or potential
conflict.
Kathleen and Rick report: Clint requests we add an item about BMX to the next
agenda. He gave reasons in his email. Event facilities and a cyclo-cross track were also
mentioned by citizens in the Bike Co-op listening sessions. Clint will head up the work
group on bike facilities in parks as all these fall under the purview-of Parks. DK and
Dawn expressed interest in joining the workgroup. Bike facilitief=andlhe Parks
workgroup will look at the BMX velopark. Council also mandated that the bike education
plan consider a bike safety town in a city park.
4
Jeff Morrell: Do we have all at large member seats f. d?VThe senior advisory is short
members and Chris Gaughan moved away. Kathy;-Dan and Kim are tliF-my at large
members at present. DK will pursue this with.thOland conservation stewaimdship`board if
they have someone interested. The Senior Advisdy=Boardi"oes not have anyone
interested. =T r
Adjourn: -
Meeting adjourned at 8:10 PM
Respectfully submitted, = '_
Rick Price V W-
Bicycle A(ha—m y ittee Chair
18
19
NRAB Comments on April 22 City Plan Workshop notes
Environmental Resources
1. Incomplete notes. As best as I could tell, the environment.group
notes at our table were not included in the notes Waido sent out. Our'
table was the non-Stokes table headed by a "facilitator" from the
electric utility.
2. The questions were highly subjective. As a rule, I'd saKthat most
people at our table did not know the full story about all.the" Slans"
that were being asked about. That was certainly true:fa me regarding
the energy "plans". `-
-
3. The "plans" being evaluated in some cases-.cem't even exis��g.,
Poudre River instream flows) so it is imp Qsible to evaluate their
status at all.
4. 1 was unsure where some of the plans eveane from. I found no
reference to them in previou&planning dots, e.g. ie "snapshot". This
leads me to believe that this is=e-of a staff-gendaa exercise and
less of a grass-roots exercise, ariti�friy,something` tvas done so
that staff could say that they got 6bard ihM.:
1. Not sure where trees= -lt 3 Tt. Collins environment=St in, but more emphasis should
be placed on the importance OR es in the community of Ft. Collins, and not only in
parks. I have heari'dRkussions1 at trees take'_p too much water and should be restricted
in Ft. Collins; that they sltade th.&_�oads and inhilfit snow removal. Before we jump to
the conclusion ha xrees are pore fr u I lhan they are worth we need a scientific
discussiort7o tide—g-lz the comi�tnnity. The US Forest Service has an excellent program
calledJlTban Forestryha;can be= ed to help the community understand the
impdff5�7Cee_of trees - especially with— obal warming an issue, Ft. Collins would be well
served to e ally increasiMbes inAe community. I'm just saying that we need an in
depth discussOn%with scier fic information before we as a community start to reduce the
number of trees 3rt.Collrs.
Yp
Safety and Wellness
(1) Include in the planning process a branch senior
center for southeastern Fort Collins.
(2) Increase the number of City police officers.
19
20
CULTURE PARKS AND RECREATION:
1. Parks and Recreation Opportunities enhance the quality of life for Ft. Collins
residents. It is more than a nicety,but an opportunity to balance life. One of the reasons
Ft.Collins shows up high on preferred communities by magazines is the Parks and
Recreation Opportunities. We need to make sure they are protected.
2. Ft. Collins and CSU should PARTNERSHIP for culture events. They can make a
buck go further by exploring opportunities to have students perform in public while
fulfilling that cultural nitch for Ft. Collins. WORK TOGETHER even more.
3. The City of Ft. Collins should work together with Home Owner Associations to
evaluate the park needs for the city. Many HOA's have open space that serve the whole
community. City should take that into consideration befoze moving tom recreation to
other priorities. ram
:r
20
21
Transportation Board
May 14, 2010
Mayor Hutchinson and Members of Council,
In order to have time to adequately consider the current iteration of.the Plan Fort Collins
project, the Transportation Board met in a special session on M_:FR'k;,The two hour
discussion was wide ranging with the highlights listed below:As usual the minutes of the
meeting will have more detail.
Given the workload these days with Plan Fort Collins;Budgeting for ffi tcomes, and
Resourcing Our Future all underway, the Transp Aa—tion Board appreciates4.the time City
Staff took to have one more evening meeting tacommo'late this speciafiseon.
Overall the Plan Fort Collins process seems to be well-designed with the current stage
being mostly dedicated to defining what are the questions�d issues that the final plan
needs to address. The Transportation e!ard comments be-1aamaze directed to the
Transportation section of the New Polic-yM iced Outline. 111oah+e r, it was frequently
noted that all of the various segments inter•.act w`itEeach other,PHopefully the final
product of this plan will cross reference Ase elemen-:&At;impact multiple segments.
The following comments are meant to be additive to the various choices:
Downsizine: The current=language seems to sggest that all elements of the current
system would_be=reduced together:�nRRT Board suggests that the various elements and
modes mid-Fnot-be:giV.en simn ar treatment and this choice should anticipate that
outcome: -
Reshape Exfstins Streets: W day most streets attempt to serve all modes equally. An
alternative m`floit,be to foci some streets on a particular mode. The concept of a bike/
pedestrian throuray where automobile traffic was limited to local access only would
be one example.
Enhanced Travel Comdors: The Transportation Board suggests the concept of an
enhanced travel corridor be explained in more detail. What kinds of enhancements and
uses would be in such a corridor, and might each corridor differ based on the nature of
the area it served?
Recommitting to the Long Range Vision: Since resource limitations have inhibited
progress on the last transportation master plan, the T-Board suggests that improved
funding for that plan should be another offered choice.
21
22
Parking: The Transportation Board has heard from time to time that there are alternative
parking strategies such as free time in structures and pay to park on the streets. It is
suggested that the City's parking policies be reviewed to see if they are having the
desired impact with some alternatives presented as new choices.
Choices for Funding: The T-Board is keenly aware of the funding cuts already made in
transportation services. However, it is recommended that the concept of improved
efficiencies should remain in any funding discussion to keep open the possibility of any
yet-undiscovered efficiency. Also, although implied by the choices, it is suggested that
the concept that services must match the available resources be explicitly stated.
As mentioned above these comments are offered to be additiVe-to the other explanations
and concepts already in the document and are not presented o suggest they are a higher
level of importance than other concepts at this point in tl?e�process�_
Finally, obviously, there is a lot more work to come as the questions d choices become
resolved into plan statements. The TransportaUon;Board thanks the City Staff-_for their
efforts and looks forward to staying involved^in fl e proces&
As usual, I would be happy to expandon these comments=at your convenience.
Best regards, -
Gary D. Thomas
Chair — —
22
23
***DRAFT***
MEETING MINUTES
of a Special Meeting of the
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
May 5,2010
6:30 p.m.
215 North Mason, Conference Room 1A_
Fort Collins, CO 80524
FOR REFERENCE:
Chair: Gary Thoma-F
482.71215----,
Vice Chair: Ed Robert
224.4864 -
Staff Liaison: =Mark Jackson -�
T6=.-029 =_
Administrative Support: P61 Bennett `''
221b601 �' -
BOARD MEMBERS--PRESENTT: CITY STWAFF PRESENT:
Bill Jenkins _ Mark JacRWI, PDT Budget, Policy& Communications
Manager,
Olga Duval:,:-M—M:�.,;_ µ d Liaison, 416.2029
Kip Mc0a-uley Polly Bennett, PDT Executive Administrative Assistant,
221.6691<.
Sid Si won PrKathleen Bracke, Transportation Planning Manager, 224.6140
Gary Thom ZRPa. _r Scott Weeks, Senior Transportation Planner, 416.2643
Sara Frazier Jeremy Klop, Fehr& Peers
Gary Steen _
Council Member B`en�lanvel
ABSENT: OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE
Ed Robert Bob Overbeck;'Citizen
Scott VanTatenhove
John Lund
Shane Miller
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Thomas called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m.
23
24
2. AGENDA REVIEW
The Agenda was approved as written.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
None. Mr. Overbeck attended out of interest in the project being presented tonight.
4. ACTION ITEMS
A. Plan Fort Collins
Bracke: The purpose of our appearance tonight is to gain=—o r eedback on the
project's policy choices.
Key Choices Model and Packet will be presented tb focu9jroups, Council,boards
and commissions at a public workshop on Jur:029,`2010. Affe> that, decisions and
priorities will be made and established through Boards & Comm s-sions and
Council.
Result areas from Budgeting for Outcomes were=,used in the Plan: economic,
environmental resources, community&neighbozfood livability, safety&
wellness, culture,parks, & recrektiun; transportatio '~high performing community
The"new"transportation plannirrgproces cycles projects through project
development and review until it miets_gols tits sTielved.
Thomas: DgMsizmg option means we cut everything back across the board—
could we hOWS ions tha0 only cut somethings back or is more targeted?
Bracke: We cou`'Id ave:a=l-a_and lb. =°
Jenkins•�Maybe use another teim he ri kghtsizing or something that relates to the
constramt t1r t-term-Wthers me.
.Arimonson: I've&bard theterinsrealigning" a lot.
If you are going to hake to make difficult choices, using a tough term may
haNes9me merit.
Sim _on: We shouldn't visit new taxes or fees in an economic downturn.
Jackson�erhaps add "to meet revenues" after"Adjust level of service standards
Citywide? =-_ -
Bracke: Reshape existing streets is a city-wide effort. Enhanced Travel Corridors
are targeted in specific areas with a district focus. The Mason Corridor is the most
well-known of the four currently in the Plan. The other Enhanced Travel
Corridors are Harmony Road connecting from the Mason Corridor; Timberline
Road up north, and the Mountain Vista/North College Corridor.
Klop: Generally speaking; we see the transportation system supporting Land Use
decisions, not driving them.
Bracke: There are questions about the trail system and if we should have different
classifications of trails like we do streets(arterial, collector, etc.).
Klop: Size and weight of the vehicles figures into it.
24
25
Bracke: There is a lot more that can be done in System Management. How can
we get more efficiency out of our existing system?
Jackson: Lifecycle maintenance costs also determine what infrastructure is
included.
McCauley: The word"recommit"bothers me. It is a current commitment.
Bracke: We would also like feedback on Regional Connectivity, Parking
Management(in some areas,parking is market driven). We also added Transit
and are looking at what Transit will look like in the future.
Transportation funding challenges: do we have the right items on the list?
Thomas. Are there efficiencies that can be made(i.e. ho-iPTfansfort outsourced
Dial-A-Ride for less money). _
Bracke: Resourcing Our Future is an ongoing commumywide discussion.
Steen moved that we write a letter to Council-fRkahach tonigh`l notes. Simonson
seconded. The motion passed unanimouslf=
9. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS 12�
Steen:NPR did a story on parking last night. I rr kAffiost of it, but it seems that the
same debate on capitalizing something we've taken foanted is taking place nation-
wide.
Frazier: I parked in a 2-hour parking Sgcdgdowntown 0-rT-1-_png meeting. I had a
nice conversation with the Parking Officeran-learned quite a bit. They don't ticket
if you are sitting in your car. They usedjo�ve a paz@7_ garage coupon for a free
hour if they issue a 906 &=�
McCauley: I follow'FCGowon Twitter, and it is really well done.
Simonson: I receiued_Preside t Obama's aware-for volunteerism, and part of my
involvement includesfhis Boarder
Thomas Wexe~i5 anotherxox'Trdf--`rou' p n house in Loveland tomorrow night if
you n't HOM-1 tonight=wThe new route begins June 7.
10. SrATF LIAISON RESORT-Dark Jackson
Thank q—Gary for pra� ling food this evening.
Resourc g- Future 111 be on the May agenda.
The Railroa&Aiet Z i:W will be on the May agenda.
May 25 Plan Foi-F�lins, TMP will be at the Council work session.
First round budge�ffers are due at the end of this week.
11. OTHER BUSINESS
None
12. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p
25
26
Respectfully submitted,
Polly Bennett
Executive Administrative Assistant
Planning, Development, &Transportation
.a.
'^=.�•.�.... Mom"
�1
rT.-n
yr
.......L.M. �y.....
1 y
26
Community and Neighborhood Livability
ESN OR0-URAN 0:
Great Destination
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs • Too Downtown-centric. Identify ALL activity centers or none in
refinement Vision statement.
❑ Delete • Community Centers need to be more self-sustaining.
Parks and green spaces need to be included in overall Vision,
ThrMng Neighborhoods
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Missing affordability actually highlighted in Vision statement
refinement
❑ Delete
Distinct Community Image and Identity
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
x Needs • All private development to dictate more. Gateway emphasis
refinement means resources, May not necessarily need to focus on
❑ Delete gateways, If doing other areas of the city. How much does City
have control over private development?
• Don't understand why there's so much emphasis on gateways.
More of an outcome than a vision
Other New Ideas?
(adherence to City Plan_Need to find ways to Implement policies we already have.
'Backyard"plans have really altered what was supposed to be Vision.
1. Citywide Land Use Balance
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs Comments incorporated in other items. Chose not to discuss for
refinement sake of time,since Economic Health Group was discussing.
❑ Delete •
NIA
2. Acthnty Centers and Corridors
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Market has yet to support mixed-use development(e,g., Penny
refinement Flats),
❑ Delete • Force or limit types of activity centers.
Need to make this development scalable (1-2 stories, as opposed
27
to 4-5)to allow for phased density support.
• Don't necessarily have density to support this intense
development yet. Will take time to develop out.
• Will enhanced travel corridors have density to support (e.g. Mason
Corridor). Will take a long time to develop out(5-10 years).
• Mixed-use activity centers may not be highest and best use.
• May look pretty,but when you get down to it, use not working in
current market
3. Neighborhood Vitality
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs Needs to be acceptance of all kinds of lifestyles(students, service
refinement workers).
❑ Delete
4. Historic Preservation
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs Historic and Unique Preservation in Title,
refinement • What is right prioritization for Fort Collins?—even if it doesn't line
❑ Delete up with State or National standards.
• Identify structures that are significant, not just 50 years old—
arbitrary.
• Process very subjective, Need more predictability of outcomes..
5. Housing Affordability
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Balance of cost and affordability.
refinement • Green buliding, but not at the expense of"affordability"
❑ Delete . Need to breakout policy question into two questions.
6. Nature In the City
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Need to resource amenities WITHIN city.
refinement • Using open space money to support Operations& Maintenance—
❑ Delete which is currently a big constraint.
Better use of areas being used for other purposes (drainage
areas, etc.).
7. Old Town/Poudre River
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Maybe not a San Antonio, but something. Need to enhance
refinement natural features.
❑ Delete • More integral part of Downtown—east-west connection.
• Establish a district to promote better use. Currently challenged
with existing zoning and setbacks.
28
• Really settle the question on what types of development will be
allowed.
• What it should be, should be a community decision.
S. Key City Gateways
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs Focus on zoning to allow natural progression, rather than
refinement dictating, pushing.
❑ Delete • City should serve as a facilitator for gateways, allowing process to
occur,rather than being a hindering influence.
• Need flexibility in allowing what opportunities, proposals, come to
the City
• [Harmcnyl1-25 development process was of real concern to this
group. Didn't like the way it was handled by Council or City.]
9. Financing Growth
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
• Impact fees should not be the only way to finance growth.
29
Community and Neighborhood Livability
Great Destination
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
X Needs • Need to focus on areas to south, and yet not take away from
refinement Downtown. DDA, DBA, Beetstreet—lots of money to spend on
❑ Delete Downtown. We need to focus on resourcing other areas.
• Focus on centers.
• Don't like title.
• The way this is framed may not highlight alternative transportation
modes enough.
• Vision focuses/highlights Downtown too much.
3
ThD-iving Neighborhoods
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs See individual items.
refinement
❑ Delete
Distinct Community Image and Identity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs See 8 & 9.
refinement
❑ Delete
Other New Ideas?
1VIT.RQLI:C'TIi:CQIGS . .
1. Citywide Land Use Balance
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs Citywide Land Use AND TRANSPORTATION Balance.
refinement
❑ Delete
NIA
2. Activity Centers and Corridors
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs The language only marginally addresses bicycling. Should be
refinement added EVERYWHERE pedestrian items are mentioned In text of
30
❑ Delete anything produced in this process. Bike-ability. Bicycling activity.
• How can we more specifically overall mobility to and within activity
centers (e.g., scramble crossings)?
• Impact fees are limited to funding auto-related connections. Need
to address transit, bike, and pedestrian (e.g.,when Foothills Mall
redevelops).
• Use Mason Corridor infill overlay in other areas. Good model.
• Should we use bicycle boulevards to connect neighborhoods to
activity centers (e.g., CSU to Downtown along Whitcomb and
Canyon)?
• Should we consider new activity center locations with tools already
in place?
• Should we develop and implement tools to encourage pedestrian
and bicycle activity?
• In prior development of these, did not take into consideration
neighborhood concerns. What additional tools do we need to
respond to neighborhood concerns?Currently no recourse, etc.
3. Neighborhood Vitality
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • How can the planning process be changed to promote more
refinement neighborhood input, especially in core areas?
❑ Delete • Need to examine effect of multiple variances on neighborhood
character.
4. Historic Preservation
x Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs •
refinement
❑ Delete
5. Housing Affordability
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed;
x Needs • How can we develop high quality transit systems to support
refinement affordability?
❑ Delete • Are there other tools that could be used to enhancelincrease
affordable housing?
• Acknowledge that green building costs more, make adjustments
for affordability where is makes sense (Le., does this promote
lower heating bills, what is payback period on investment for each
green component)?
• What are financing mechanisms? Property tax assessment,
bonding for retrofits, etc.
6. Nature in the City
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Need to address linear parks, drainages.
refinement • How can we utilize current opportunities (see above and
31
❑ Delete stormwater facilities)—similar to what happened after'87 flood.
• At some point,we will need to deal with wildlife conflicts and
address public health concerns with increased peoplelurban or
other wildlife interface (rabies, etc.)—foxes, bobcats, mountain
lions.
7. Old Town /Poudre River
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Settle the"San Antonio or Not"question once and for all. Upfront.
refinement • Should be even consider allowing development? NOT in
❑ Delete floodplain,anyway.
• Conversation should address full range of uses along full
geographic area in question.
8. Key City Gateways
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs • Focus more towards diverse transportation modes that need
refinement enhancements.
❑ Delete • Throw out the"suggestions" at the end of this.
9. Financing Growth
X Needs
refinement
Impact fees should also be used to significant fy resource multi-modal
access and connections.
32
Community and Nei hborhood Livabilit
Great Destination
X Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Thriving Neighborhoods
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Add "balanced"—i.e.,maintain safe, cohesive, balanced and diverse
❑ Delete neighborhoods.This refers to a balance of diversity.
Distinct Community Image and Identity
X Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Other New Ideas?
1. Cbtywbde Land Use Balance
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement Should the City be more flexible and let the market drive development, or
❑ Delete should the City resist and impose standards to—i.e., resist the urge to make
1-25 a retail corridor.
2. Activity Centers and Corridors
X Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Developments need Incentives to go above and beyond basic standards—
❑ Delete City should remove barriers to help them afford to make
improvements/redevelop.
• Standards are written around Greenfield projects. Should we allow more
flexibility to our standards and codes recognizing existing conditions,to
encourage redevelopment/rehabli Cation.
33
3. Neighborhood Vitality
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Edges of neighborhoods are key—how does the transition occur from higher
❑ Delete to lower density?
• How should neighborhoods provide opportunities for changino demographics
and allow for inclusiveness and diversity?
4. Historic Preservation
❑ Keep as is tBefnements needed:
X Needs refinement The question is confusing and leading. *Staff note: clarify if you're asking
❑ Delete them about designated historic districts vs. zoning (i.e. Neighborhood
Conservation Low, Medium. and Buffer)vs. design standards.All are
different and have different implications—what is the real issue ou want to
ask citizens?
• Should there be better/stronger design standards for scale, setbacks, and
style for historic neighborhoods?
5. Housing Affordability
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
6. Nature in the City
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
7. old Town I Poudre River
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
•
8. Key City Gateways
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
9. Financing Growth
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
34
• Is there a way to cover Affordable Housing,Historic Preservation,and sustainabilitv concepts into a City-
program—integrate financial incentives from the different programs rams to help lower income people move into
a historic home and help them make repairs?
• Should the community consider expanding the Growth Management Area—that way Fort Collins can
control the development and not risk territory battles with adjacent, growing communities. Note: mixed
reaction to this question within-group].
35
Community and Neighborhood Livability
Great Destination
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement What defines an 'activity center' (higher density, mixed use?)
❑ Delete • Confusion over what is meant by"connected by the transportation system"
(which wouldn't be connected?) —more clarity needed around this statement.
Does the transportation include mass transit,orjust cars, maybe multi-modal
isn't appropriate for all(i.e. "suicide lanes"for bikers on Harmony)
Thriving Neighborhoods
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Should include preserving existing neighborhoods and providing for
❑ Delete "transition". For example, if you begin redeveloping an area with higher
densities and more intense uses, but the transportation system isn't quite in
place, you're putting a burden on the existing neighborhood in the short-term.
• Consider how to the transition to more compact development livable for
existing neighborhoods.
• Should there be more elements of the former Land Development Guidance
System (LDGS)into City Flan, i,e, more neighborhood input and required
impact studies for new developments to make sure they protect the affects of
higher intensity on existing neighborhoods.
• Balance is great, but need to ensure"factions" not created in neighborhoods.
Distinct Community Image and Identity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Community needs help to define what it means by"small town"feel.
❑ Delete • Fort Collins already has an image—how does that impact individual
"gateways".
• What is the purpose of the gateway?
• How to incorporate the individuality of distinct neighborhoods into the broader
community image—how to unify?
• Help people define the identity of their neighborhood —formally, so that
developers know how they need to build to"fit in."
• How do gateways strengthen the broader Community's identity, without
losing the individuality of neighborhoods.
• How does distinct neighborhood identity help to identify the Community as a
whole?
• How do we account for diversity?What unifies everything?
other New ideas?
• Don't want policies that exclude groups of people—how do we create a unified community with diverse
populations and provide equitable opportunities.
NE�IVPQL�t��°Gk1Z�l._ �
36
1. Citywide Land Use Balance
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
Needs refinement • Distinguish between primary and secondary Jobs —those should also be
Delete balanced.
2. Activity Centers and Corridors
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement See comments from vision
❑ Delete •
3. Neighborhood Vitality
0 Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement See comments from vision
❑ Delete •
4. Historic Preservation
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement Need to better define areas of redevelopment and have guidelines for
❑ Delete developers on how best to preserve—afso need teeth to enforce
6. Housing Affordability
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Consider setting land aside.
❑ Delete • What is affordable—define?
• As we fill in our fixed GMA, land will become more expensive and it will be
less affordable to live.
6. Nature in the City
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement Now does this tie to street size?
❑ Delete •
•
7. Old Town!Poudre River
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Bring back the Mill Race—ifs an unparalleled opportunity.
❑ Delete The river should Include restaurants, housing, walkways—make a focal
opop int.
• Questions 7 and 4 should be tied together—want to put these in sequence.
8. Key City Gateways
r] Keep as is Refinements needed:
37
❑ Needs refinement See comments from vision
❑ Delete
9. Financing Growth
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Provide city-wide incentives—there are many problem areas that are in need
❑ Delete of redevelopment but can't because it's cost prohibitive—developers can't
afford to make_improvements.
•
Other Important trit ttilr�t y an d tV irgl l .tax �Q: WOW. C.l .n ces
38
Culture, Parks and Recreation
d18M.SIR.B
Creative City
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement Creatively Integrate arts, culture, parks and recreation, citywide to expand
❑ Delete and reach outlying areas of the community to support livability and economic
resiliency.
Other New Ideas?
' > M1 1 r
1. Arts and Culture Integration
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Recognize Arts&Culture as an economic driver.
❑ Delete • Integrate Arts & Culture into Parks (possible events in City parks).
• Increase community awareness in arts/cultural programs.
• Utilize other areas of town(south- Fossil Creek Park, etc.). Not just Old
Town. .
• How do we expand Arts &Culture throughout the community and into the
neighborhoods?
2. Arts and Cultural Funding
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Consider creating a Science and Cultural Finance District—Parks?
❑ Delete • Options for Public and Private Partnerships.
• Collaboratelpartner locally.
• City cooperatelpartner on a regional basis.
• Create a ballot which gives a list of options for funding.
• Consider minimal user fee/impact fee.
3. Leveraging CSU Cultural Programs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Change the word"promote"to"collaborate."
❑ Delete • How can we leverage CSU-events citywide?
• Publicizing and enhance communication with the community.
Connect City/CSU programs.
4. Refinements to Parks
❑ " Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement Facilities—partnership between City and Poudre School District(PSD).
39
❑ Delete • Change in Parks Policy- number of parks/per person change?
• Should design of urban parks shift from a recreational focus?
• Allow alcoholic beverages in more parks.
• Enforce pet leash laws in parks.
5. Recreation/Youth Programs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • To what degree should the plan promote multi-purpose activity centers?
❑ Delete • How can the City partner with PSDICSUIBase Camp to enhance recreation &
youth programs? Share facilities?
• How can the City increase summer camp availability?
• Offer a variety of sports focused parks—bike, frisbee, etc.
• Provide transportation options to youth activity sites.
• Expand programs to the south side of town.
• Find support from other local organizations.
• Look for other locations, possibly parks, for organizations like the Boy & Girls
Club.
• Create scholarships.
6. Parks and Recreation Funding
[] Keep as is Refinements needed:
X Needs refinement • Community involvement in park maintenance/stewardship (in exchange for
❑ Delete utilities).
• Consider a Science and Cultural Finance District& Parks District
• How should the City improve park funding? Uutility fee, impact fee that goes
to parks maintenance.
• Lower parks maintenance needs? Closing restrooms, stopping trash pick-up,
less watering, etc.
• Promoting community cultural events that provide economic stimulus.
Qftlze� finporiaa?Ett�Iftai��fPCarks,�ri�i Eiecr�a#ton,IGh�zc�s. .
• Does Culture, Parks&Recreation really fit together?
40
Culture, Parks, and Recreation
Creative City
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Doesn't capture Parks &Recreation,focuses more on Arts/Culture. Parks
❑ Delete seems let out.
• Culture may be too broad to capture in parks.
• Parks has more elements: Recreation (e.g.; Senior Center)
Open Spaces
Restoration
Other New Ideas?
• Arts/Culture/CreatMty followed by sentence about Parks.
• What if we want to become a regional cultural center; does the vision cover that?As compliment to other
communities' resources, like Loveland's sculptures.
• Not enough diversity expressed in"cultural" definition; ethnicity In particular.
1. Arts and Culture Integration
❑ Keep as is. Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • More cross-over needed with economic vitality.
❑ Delete • How do"events"figure into this policy? Look at ways to change the policy to
enable City to encourage and support private contribution. Leverage.
• Access issues regarding transportation Is a big problem, example; buses to
shuttle people to July 4 events.
• Access also refers to affordability to attend events. Maybe use Arts in Public
Places funds—could help subsidize "Arts for All p
• Physical arts are well integrated already..
2. Arts and Cultural Funding
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Taxing district could also fund the recreation facilities; Lincoln Center, not just
❑ Delete Science area.
• We have to start investing in order to get long term returns.
• Need to refer to Fort Collins' regional draw for arts/culture—we should build
on our already good base.
3. Leveraging CSU Cultural Programs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed;
® Needs refinement • All sorts of great free cultural events on campus; but rest of community
❑ Delete doesn't hear bout it.
• Many people find CSU intimidating to go on campus. CSU should open itself
up more to the community.
• Future: City employee to help do public relations for CSU.
41
4. Refinements to Parks
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Need to re-thinklmodernize many older parks. Serious lack especially In
❑ Delete Downtown, get community to help with new design.
• Have to look at more smaller-scale sites in urban areas. Example:
redevelopment opportunities for left-over bits.
• Define"urban" more clearly.
• Redefine"storm water detention"to create park-like features. Maybe part of
changed development requirements.
5. Recreation/Youth Programs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Well,"duh"I
❑ Delete Problem with age-specific facilities. Better to mix people of all ages, more like
private athletic clubs. Encourage activities to be more diverse. Each
recreation site should have multiple activities (don't just have a pool,for
instance).
6. Parks and Recreation Funding
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Could we combine taxing districts to include arts/culture with Parks and
❑ Delete Recreation?
• See if neighborhoods could "adopt"the neighborhood park and help with
maintenance?
• Remove reference to decrease maintenance. Not acceptable. Consider out-
sourcing to private sector.
• Parks are critical to quality of life and economic health.
ea Parksx a #rR l r� n: h wes.
• No, this covers it pretty well.
• Consider re-visiting idea of large performing arts center. Critical to include in long-term plan. Needs to be in
heart of Downtown.
• Need to start ponying up the money to protect health of our parks system.
• How about:
o Minor league ball park
o Big outdoor concert venue
o Farmers/Public market
• Science Museum is inadequate.
• Expand on Winter programming Downtown.
• Public market place as draw for performing musicianslartists, tourist destination.
• River walk, river presence awareness needs to be Increased.
• Hire locals on architect/design work.
42
Economic Health
Robust,Resilient Economy
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • - Include sustainability in vision (predictable and diverse economy),
❑ Delete • Define "Unique"community
• Are targeted industry clusters defined?
• Need to be emphasize"realonal economy", not lust Fort Collins.
• Clarify action strategies.
Other New Ideas?
• Do we want to focus on primary iobs or diversified business approach?
• How does the city see itself in the Northern Colorado market? What role?
• Ensure vision and policy direction support and promote businesses to move here from other areas.
Economic Strategies
1. Retailers
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • How does this fit into to theme of sustainability?
1 Delete • How does the city fit into the realonal market mix?
• Focus on retaining retailers in city.
How do lower paving lobs fit into a °healthy" economy?
• Encourage mixed-use retail in other activity centers outside of downtown.
• City needs to assess other revenue generating sources than just retail sales
tax for supporting General fund.
• We have too much repetitive retail that the economy cannot support.
• Find ways to capture retailers that have left city fi.e.—specialty clothing,
home furnishing)
2. Primary Jobs
x Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Primary jobs are important, but maintain healthy balance with local iobs.
❑ Delete • Need to set new standard for City to support and attract individuals who
can/want to work from home.
3. Local Businesses
x Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • See primary mobs notes above.
❑
Delete • Need to support local businesses to better compete with larger corporate
franchise retailers.
43
4. Land Ready for New Development
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • Need to ensure available infrastructure is in place.
❑ Delete • Is there enough future employmentrndustrial land at GMA buildout?
• City should be proactive to support development/redevelopment but not take
role as developer.
• City land bank role has worked well in Downtown to control quality
development and should be considered in other areas.
• Ensure enough land is available to attract primary employers.
• In Mountain Vista Plan area much of employment land inventory is potentially
held back due to adequate public facilities requirements.
5. Workforce Training
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • Do we need to target new employers to market existing workforce skill-set
❑ Delete including unemployed and underemployed?
• How can you provide training with no educational background in that field?
• Private business should take the lead on this topic.
Economic Strategies •
6. Mixed-Use Activity Centers
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • Downtown is the only true mixed-use primary activity center in community
❑ Delete and already successful
• So we need to focus on other activity centers in city to make sure the mix of
uses pets Implemented,particularly residential uses.
• Need to be flexible to ensure market supports mixed-use development.
• Activity centers need to include civic uses, culture, business, residential, and
pedestrian oriented facilities.
• Destinations need to have better connections in between for auto, transit,
bicycle,and Pedestrian mobility.
7. Citywide Jobs/Housing Balance
x Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Maintain current iobsthousing balance for long-term sustainability of healthy
❑ Delete economy.
Economic Strategies
8. Resourcing Our future
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
x Needs refinement • See above comment—not just focus on sales tax as primary revenue source
❑ Delete •
Other importantEcomtemt Holkh Minims
44
• Qevelopment review process should be business and user friendly including more efficient review time and
competitive with other iudsdic8ons.
45
Economic Health -- Round 1
NEW OR EWHAWWVWK[IDEAS
Robust, Resilient Economy
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Delete •
Other New Ideas?
• HP as E Driver/H.Tourism
Economic Strategies
1. Retailers
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ NeslriLf Maintain Current Approach vs. maximize or aggressive approach.
❑ Delete •
2. Primary Jobs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Target industry employment clusters? Didn't like the term"primary." Focus on
❑ Delete targeted industry and Economic Health lobs (using innovative economy lobs
model).
• Make Primary Jobs a hinher Priority. Reorder priorities: Retention.
Expansion, Incubation,Attraction ( Recruitment 1
3. Local Businesses
❑ IMMI Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement Keep as is. Industry and retail and services.
❑ Delete •
A. Land Ready for New Development
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement *Split between aggressive Infrastructure funding and maintain the course, no
❑ Delete new funds.
46
5. Workforce Training
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
Workforce needs linkages (match back to existing).
J si"
Delete Can City funds: partnerships (new/others): CSU (keep them here)?
Economic Strategies •
6. Mixed-Use Activity Centers
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • OTHER (MOVE}
❑ Delete •
7. Citywide Jobs/Housing Balance
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ � . A Metric—one of many. Delete D.
❑ Delete • "More intensity/density(all uses).
Economic Strategies
8. Resourcing Our Future
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ :�- �;bgj • A. Resourcing questions/revenue sharing.
❑ Delete • B. Long-rant
e forecasts (scenarios Leverage strengths:Ocher revenues:
expenditure efficiency(lean & mean).
Ohm • BLFtO—'ydoes it wwork?
47
Economic Health Round 2
NEW°QR iE[aQf�fE[� I 's,ICVbE7kS
Robust, Resilient Economy
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Other New Ideas?
• What is the right level of City involvement?
bt
-10
Economic Strategies
1. Retailers
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
❑ ° ' • Renovate the mall/midtown (uses other than retail). .
❑ Delete • Emphasis on the core.
• Don't ignore downtown (retail/services?).
2. Primary Jobs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Primary lobs sell outside our community.
❑ Delete • Order good/balance of iobs! (strike parenthesis).
3. Local Businesses
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ eixhent • Retail/services are key to sustainabiiity: emphasis on services.
❑ Delete • Facilitate—does this imply pushing?
4. Land Ready for New Development
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
eg-M� - -` Strike master development/no to City funds/other solutions.
❑ Reeds re jnirm€ f
❑ Delete •
5. Workforce Training
❑ Keep as Is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
48
Economic Strategies
6. Mixed-Use Activity Centers
I Keep as is Refinements needed:
,J Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
7. Citywide Jobs/Housing Balance
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Economic Strategies
8. Resourcing Our Future
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ dSiH_ Are current impact fees sufficient?
❑ Delete • Can we continue to reduce costs?
• Look at all revenue sources.
Other'l�rrpaGEat ffltairtt% tl . ttQi.. e-S .
• Attract visitors {touristslother community residentsletc.).
• Use historic preservation as economic development tool.
• Does the city have sufficient infrastructure to support local business/relocations?
Effective(?)incentives.
• What is a primary job?
• Leverage our education attainment.
49
Safety and Wellness
�Y�(�F�If �SIFf�f�� ; �f�itQ;Af=�Q'EAti_-�r_1 : •
Healthy Community
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement How is Poudre School Districts Health and Wellness Program?
❑ Delete •
Other New Ideas?
•
ft iGY C- r s.
1. Active Places
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement • Need to ask additional questions. What will encourage parents to allow their
❑ Delete children to walk or bike to school? Should we have a livable street
movement in Fort Collins to-promote walking, biking, etc?
• We need to prepare for an aging population. How do you make trails and
sidewalks safe for the elderly? Potentially add resting places along these to
promote walking and provide needed rest for aping population.We need to
have sidewalk connectivity. Private property owners are not required to
provide a sidewalk. Should this be a requirement so sidewalks can be
continuous. Sidewalks also need to be wider.
• How does the train and the traffic delays it cause effect safety and access to
medical care?
•- Should we have a"scramble crossing" at the intersections of
Mountain/College. Laurel/College and Shields/Elizabeth?
• Should we have a left turn for bicycles?
2. Health and Human Services Access
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement. Plan should include other areas of the City. Not lust North-add areas
❑ Delete including Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus, Loveland Medical
Center of the Rockies, and McKee.
• Yes, resources should be leveragedl An exam le of good partnership and .
collaborations is the H1 N1 Flu Ctinics with the County Health Department
and City. Synergy was excellent.
• Improving transit and transportation access to medical care.Also transit
between senior residences and the services and shopping, Some are
physically close, however transit requires an hour with transfers to get there.
Train and the delays to these services it creates. (Emergency vehicles, fire,
police, etc.).
51
3. Diversity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ deeds refinement Change"celebrate"to"inclusive'. Celebrate disabilities is not appropriate
❑ Delete Celebrate hints at race, diversity is much wider, age physical abilities
demoorwhic. .
• Better language to reflect why it fits here? Diversity needs to be added to the
other topic areas as well.
• How do You define diversity? Racial. Ethnic, Socio Economic Ableness
Physical.
•
4. Local Agriculture and Food
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement • Yes we should support small scale local food production Good opportunity
❑ Delete for publictprivate partnership.
• Should we promote healthy eating?
• Food grown locally should be more affordable, organic, provide walkable
access and help reduce our carbon foot printl
• Need to connect the Food Bank to local markets to provide better access to
food and more of it.
• Potential gardens/food trees in public spaces and/or partnership with schools
and community for gardens.
5. Safe Community
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement • Law enforcement needs to work to engage the communities in the promotion
❑ Delete of more"watch"programs to assist citizens in protecting themselves.
• Plan needs to include and discuss other services besides police such as,
ambulance,fire, etc.,that provide for a safe community.
Plan also needs to address protection of the elderly from scams.
• Should every child be taught pedestrian and bicycle safety?
• Should Patrol Officers receive training regarding recent State bicycle law
changes?
Should the speed limit City-wide be reduced to 35 or less?
• Speed limit needs to be more consistent on any given street- Less up and
down!
• Moore enforcement of the speed limit.
• Should the City take a more aggressive stance on the use of cell phones in
motor vehicles? Should cell phone use be limited to only"hands free"?
Other. (mo. €atrt; af,rtyan:d tlteElesshoies
52
Safety and Wellness
RA
Healthy Community
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement Improvements needed to"feel"safe—Le, call boxes in Old Town and parking
❑ Delete garages for someone who feels threatened.
• World Health Organization—definition of"healthy" community includes
mental, spiritual, and physical health—all of these elements should be
included in this section of Plan Fort Collins.
Other New Ideas?
• Add'bike-ability"
• Streets,sidewalks, Intersections should all be and feet safe for pedestrians (afforded by transportation) -
measure the effect on bicycles and pedestrians—holistic approach.
1. Active Places
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
r] Needs refinement • Accessibility is a huge Issue for disabled population—needs to be
] Delete addressed.
• Street designs for safer streets for all (over/under passes, bulb outs, median
refuges, etc.).
• Neighborhood design—new and redevelopment of existing neighborhoods—
Neighborhood "centers"of activity—higher value,
• Need a"branch" senior center on the southeast part of town—there's a good
cluster of active places where the current Senior Ccenter and Northside are
located.
• Continue to promote connectivity—more emphasis and greater commitment
to this,
• Need more healthy choices for activitles at night—particularly for families
(other than bars),
• Family-oriented night Ilfe/activities.
• More choices for youth and school age students.
• Have more City events (like concerts) in other parts of the city—not just
downtown (in neighborhood or community parks).
2. Health and Human Services Access
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Difficult for people to get there who don't have easy access to a car—need to
❑ Delete put priority on transportation (efficient and low-cost)for people who need to
access the Health and Human Services.
• Promote focus on public transportation and mass transit,
• Socioeconomic support of services effects the quality of the community—the
fundamentals create a great community.
53
• Work together(with County, and other agencies)to provide the best services.
• Elderly—transportation between Poudre Valley Hospital campuses—difficult
and costly to get to them.
• Impoverished community—not enough busses or frequency of routes.
• Transfort doesn't serve the entire community—narrow grid — Dial-A-Ride
costs too much.
• There's a monopoly on alternative transportation(Shamrock)—rates are too
high.
3. Diversity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Promote diversity—where others can engage equally.
❑ Delete More opportunities for diverse people to mix together.
• International/cultural events —so people can meet and interact.
• Focus and promote attracting more diverse applicants to serve on the Boards
and Commissions.
4. Local Agriculture and Food
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Support community agriculture—we need more locally produced foods and
❑ Delete local markets.
• Promote and focus on healthy choices.
5. Safe Community
❑ Keep as is Refinements eeded:
❑ Needs refinement • Need to maintain or increase funding for police and fire—not decrease
❑ Delete services due to limited funding (have noticed more vandalism and gang
activity in neighborhoods).
• Number of Police Officers per 1,000 is very low—grossly understaffed.
• Safety and ability to cross large streets—either walking, wheelchair,with
kids, etc.
• Riding bikes on main streets doesn't feel safe.
• Pedestrians feel safe Downtown but not in other parts of the City of Fort
Collins.
• Slower speed limits would help people feel more safe.
• Parking garages don't feel safe—more police patrol at night.
• People don't feel safe at night.
• Concerned with trains—emergency vehicles stuck behind a train during an
emergency(access and passage).
• Traffic—need both bicyclists and motorists to Follow laws.
• Need enforcement of bike crossing with flashing yellow or red lights—people
don't stop for them.
• Outside fire alarm"light"to notify that a fire is there.
• More Public Education—safety and fire safety.
Other Im. poTtarit Safety�antl W&14 :0SO CIAo4:ees
Should put more emphasis and commitment on making all of Fort Collins function and feel like the
Downtown area.
54
• Put the bike lanes behind a curb—with their own set of lights (for mopeds and bikes)—this is done in
Amsterdam and China.
• Emphasize the overall "feel'of the"Fort Collins Lifestyle"—irs not just a place to hang your hat at the end
of the day—unique and different community that people want to be a part of and just"be" in..
Better user-friendly bus for elderly.
• Use World Health Organization definition of Healthy Community.
55
Transportation
Great Streets
X❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
X❑ Needs refinement • More flexibility. Don't think of standards as uniform. Flex to fit character of
❑ Delete unique harts of town. Question whether some streets should vary in
emphasis, e.g. to favor bikes. E.g.bollards detour cars but bikes get through
on some streets. Some places may warrant slower speeds, land closures,
more congenial mixfng...don't know exactly what, but flexibility seems
important...Look at Level of Service standards, meaning allow it to go lower
for cars if it suoports more density and better places. Help to shift attitudes
with examples and education,
• Relate great streets to fossil fuel and carbon, face the reality of needed
change•_
• Be clear about great streets for getting across town, versus great places
neighborhoods with streets with character that slow people down. Mobility
and access.
• Our streets ARE good so be careful. Don't diminish services [levels of
service?
• Change our immediate direction, short term. E.g., re-think realigned Vine.
Typical 4-lane arterial. Emis_sioo s anaivsis done In 2009 comes out about the
same as any vision from the mid'90's. BUT- remember the private sector,
especially developers. in any changes, Involve them.
• Experiment! Be daring to try some different ideas that might be better.
• Explain current standards. They seem based on car volume, not land use
places..
• Gettinczacross town with alterative modes doesn't really work. Some places
have bike lanes or sidewalks, but it's not really a city-wide system.
• Get/allow neighborhoods to be more involved in reshaping streets. More
citizen input. Lincoln Ave. Is one example.
Regional Connectivity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Trails as Part of Transportation System
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • They're crowded with recreational users. For getting from A to B the
❑ Delete quickest, probably not the best way. Streets are better. Trails would need to
be bigger.
Parking
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement Tailor parking to support the desired program of land use. Not just Physical
Delete impacts of oarking. E.g., 2 hour downtown doesn't allow for lunch and
57
shopping._Consider pay parking adjacent to CStI as an example. There
may be other places where parking can support or fit the desired land uses
better. Example of new museum: until transit comes to Mason, it will need
significant parking. Need to provide parking-to support use of facilities.
• Parking will be THE key factor in redevelopment and infill. E.g., Mason—
how will parking fit in intensification? It's goinq_to need structures. Very
expensive. Parking is the single biggest impact of higher densitv ideas.
Must address this.
Other New ideas?
• Health—whit would be the right analysis metrics?
• Metrics--what is our miles of street per person? is it consistent among cities or does it vary? Just a
question.
• Cross cutting with land use—all houses must face a street has led to unnecessary streets
NEW Pa L(.GY C-401
Choices for Prioritizing Improvements
1. Downsizing
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Term downsizing is misunderstood. Need clarification better term for intent
0 Delete of this. "how to sustainably maintain a system"..:'adjust expectations"...
• Policies do need tp reflect costs. E.a., mantiCollectors seem to be oversized
unnecessarily, not sustainable cost wise. don't make sense. Mountain Vista
Pian an example of big streets required where there's limited development
due to ditches. Powerlines. Master Street Plan (MSP)vs reality of costs.
Collectors are required based on EXPECTED demand. If it doesn't happen.
it's tough to shrink them back down—amending the NMSP, and then
ohn calls and financially doing it.
• Cross cutting With land use—qll houses must face a street has led to
unnecessary streets.
2. Basic
❑ Keep as is A. Reshape Existing Streets
❑ Needs refinement
❑ Delete Refinements needed:
• May be needed. Some constrained street have no chance for extra space
might have to reallocate some.
• Get/allow neighborhoods to be more involved in reshaping sgeets. More
citizen input, Lincoln Ave. is one example.
B. Enhanced Travel Corridors 1 District Focus
Refinements needed:
• "Cross-cutting"topic—expand these into zero-carbon energy efficient
corridors...
58
C. Vehicle Alternatives
Refinements needed:
• Need a spectrum cholces with some more flexible than current bus, but less
expensive and intensive than current cars.
• Solar transit system demonstrated at CSU.
• How will alt, vehicles contribute to fundlnq? E.a., licenses?
D. System Management
Refinements needed:
• This section of the report needs to be expounded upon. Could be better
addressed.
• Energy cost is uncertain, but likely to go in one direction. High Level of
Service for transit appears to be the future.
• Two different aspects: riqhts to SPACE needs to come before a specific
technology.
• Keep space for GOODS in mind. Freight. Freight, heavy rail in 1-25?, e.g.,
median?
• Don't keep buildina capacity for a paradigm that's going to fail...exl. going
from 2 backed-up lanes to 4 backed-up lanes. Still backed up, but harder to
breathe.
• Transportation tvpically chases development. Mason Corridor an example of
different approach,
• Improve we have and support a bus to key destinations a q. Longmont
Boulder.
• Be careful, don't skimp on space that may be needed in the future. Maintain
scalability.
3. Recommit to the Existing or Slightly Modified Long Term Vision
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement
❑ Delete •
Regional Transportation Chokes
0 Keep as Is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Be clear about the relevant region you're talking about. E.q. the Northern.
❑ Delete Colorado Inter-urban area vs, the north-south corridor to Denver metro
re lon,
• Street and highway connectivity is THERE Shift allocation of new attention
and resources off of the highways and arterials for traffic which will clocl
up ..where should new emphasis be? Car, trail,transit? Clarify modes along
with clarification of what's meant bV"reglon".
• What should be CiWs obiigation to the region, regional systems? E.g., catch
people at gateways, THEN have great transit? Or have great transit outside
of the city?
• Need space.
59
Trail Linkages
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Parking
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Transit
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement The system currently is not integrated enough to support use bythoose with a
❑ Delete choice. Only will be used by those without much choice. System has to
actually work. E.g. on the ground,with the sidewalks,with the slopes with
the land uses.
• Define"transit".
Mobile Source Emmissions
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
Choices for Funding Transportation
i. Rely on Increased Cost Recovery from New Development to Cover Costs
❑ Keep as is Reffnements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
2. City Adjusts Level of Service Standards Citywide
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
❑ Delete •
3. City Adjusts Level of Service Standards by District to Help Achieve Specific Goals
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement •
60
❑ Delete
•
Pursue Additional Fees to Fund the Transportation System
�] Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Need more robust funding. Not sure what, but not sales tax. Maybe a
❑ Delete Mobility Utility, with a fee. Vehicle Miles Traveled x weight? Push the
system.
• Don't have the trust with voters. They only support prolect-specific taxes. A
gap in trust.
Other Important Tr spoutat7on:Choices
• Question:is there a south hub or destination for Mason Corridor, like Downtown is the north hub? Any
other big destinations?
• Also about Mason, will more stops be needed south of CSU if more urbanization occurs?
• Have tofund the fife cycle of transportation facilities. Sustain the original investment. This must be a major
new consideration.
61
Transportation — Table 2 (Wempe/O'Donnell)
NE AS.
Great Streets
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Speeding is an_Issue (safety impacts, most people go 5-10 mph over the
❑ Delete limit, street design issue? Number of lanes issue?)
• Streets must be designed with all modes in mind (engineering and safety
standards especially—who are we protecting, just cars or everyone?)
• How can we balance street design speeds versus posted speed limits to
protect all users, not just cars?
• Streets need some sort of separation between bike/travel/parking lanes.
Regional Connectivity
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement Consider ali uses of public right-of-way (i.e. utilities, stormwater,pedestrians)
❑ Delete when planning across boundaries—keep our options open for long-terrn
solutions even if another city/county/state is implementing a short-term
solution.
Trails as Part of Transportation System
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement Bikes need to follow laws even on trails.
❑ Delete
Parking
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement Consider higher parking fees to fund short-and long-term improvements and
❑ Delete operations and maintenance.
• Consider fee based versus time based parking turnover methods (i.e.
graduated parking fees).
Other New Ideas?
• Downtown valet parking—using middle lane along College Avenue.
• Examine alternative power sources for signage, lights, etc., in the public right-of-way.
• Need to keep development paying Its way.
NEW OUCY cRotc:l~S
Choices for Prioritizing Improvements
1. Downsizing
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Explicitly state pulling back now costs us later (€.e. street maintenance).
❑ Delete Need a comprehensive, life-cycle understanding of all of these options—
construction cost, contingency, year-by-year multiplier to update costs
annually, operations and maintenance,
Financing discussion must occur at the same time as the transportation
planning discussion.
62
2. Basic
❑ Keep as is A, Reshape Existing Streets
Needs refinement Delete Refinements needed:
• Avoid gaps in the bicycle and sidewalk network.
Don't designate a bike lane on an existing street unless it can be a minimum
width—avoid bad examples like the Lemay Avenue bike lane.
• Need a comprehensive, fife-cycle understanding of all of these options—
construction cost, contingency, year-by-year multiplier to update costs
annually, operations and maintenance.
• Financing discussion must occur at the same time as the transportation
planning discussion.
S. Enhanced Travel Corridors/ District Focus
Refinements needed:
• Push densities higher in these areas—include an explicit land use
component for this option.
• Need a comprehensive, life-cycle understanding of all of these options—
construction cost, contingency, year-by-year multiplier to update costs
annually, operations and maintenance.
• Financing discussion must occur at the same time as the transportation
planning discussion.
C. Vehicle Alternatives
Refinements needed:
• Do not create a dual transportation system.
• Need a comprehensive, life-cycle understanding of all of these options—
construction cost, contingency,year-by-year multiplier to update costs
annually, operations and maintenance.
• Financing discussion must occur at the same time as the transportation
planning discussion.
D. System Management
Refinements needed:
Consider alternative work schedules/days.
Telecommuting—see Seattle,WA, example of shared office space,reduces
need to travel to main office but gives,computer/phone access near worker's
homes
• Need a comprehensive, life-cycle understanding of all of these options—
construction cost, contingency,year-by-year multiplier to update costs
annually, operations&maintenance
Financing discussion must occur at the same time as the transportation
planning discussion,
3.Recommit to the Existing or Slightly Modified Long Term Vision
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement Citizens should not be determining what streets are built (reference to BOB
❑ Delete and 8CC tax packages—removing politics from transportation planning
choices).
• Thoughts on funding issue: what type of tax? Need to calculate long-term
expenses (Le., Operations and maintenance, annual construction cost
increases, etc.); is this the right time for a new tax? The City does not do
long-range financial estimates or scenario planning.
• Must identify the funding mechanism for transportation —there are no 'users"
of the transportation system as this implies there are residents who do not
63
use the system.
• Instead, funding mechanism should focus on residents who benefit from the
transportation system (i.e., all of them for the most part) to be fair.
Regional Transportation Choices _
® Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Avoid Colorado Department of Transportation-style regional planning (i.e.,
❑ Delete short needs timeframe, long funding timeframe).
Trail Linkages
® Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Financial elements tie Into the above discussion.
❑ Delete • Need a regional planning context—what is the vision for trails across Larimer
and Weld?
Parking
® Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement • Examine graduated parking fees/parking turnover for parking at businesses
❑ Delete versus garage.
• Designated parking lots/exchange points at outlying areas.
Transit
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Whatever we choose for transit needs to decrease pollution per person—
❑ Delete Transfort currently increases pollution based on ridership and bus size.
• Prior to adding a new service line or expanding an existing route, complete
an analysis of the air quality impacts.
• Consider using different bus sizes and types to meet demand.
• Seniors, disabled residents, and CSU students all benefit from transit—
transit must serve more than just a cash benefit for the City.
Mobile Source Emmissions
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • The question as written was very confusing—had to discuss the meaning for
❑ Delete a bit before answering.
• Moving traffic efficiently can have air quality benefits (i.e,, grade separated
railroad crossings).
• Air quality impacts should be a component of capital project choice.
Choices for Funding Transportation
1. Rely on Increased Cost Recovery from New Development to Cover Costs
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
64
® Needs refinement • Ties into financial discussion above.
❑ Delete
2. City Adjusts Level of Service Standards Citywide
Keep as is Refinements needed:
10 Needs refinement Ties into financial discussion above.
❑ Delete
3. City Adjusts Level of Service Standards by District to Help Achieve Specific Goals
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
® Needs refinement • Ties into financial discussion above.
❑ Delete
4. Pursue Additional Fees to Fund the Transportation System
❑ Keep as is Refinements needed:
❑ Needs refinement Some type of tax—ties into financial discussion above.
❑ Delete
Other important T' nspartailG 0:haicess
65
Attachment 5 e Carbon emissions
e Energy consumption
Plan �ti� Fort Collins • Stormwater runoff quality
innnvate si israin , connect • Water use per capita
e Air quality/mobile emissions
Triple Bottom Line e Protected open space
Wildlife habitat
Screening Indicators protected/restored
Development efficiency
. Vehicle miles traveled
Solid waste diversion
I
Businesses and jobs , Fire and police protection
(retained , new) Sense of community indices
Diversity of sectors Public engagement/voting
Local business Facilities for physical
Retail mix activity ( parks , trails ,
e Jobs-housing ratio recreation )
Housing affordability . Proximity/access to health
Price of government care (physical , mental )
services . Agricultural lands/local food
Revenues per capita . Self-sufficient households
e Access to markets/freight . Housing unit mix
mobility . Arts and culture availability
Life-long learning 9 Mobility/travel modes
Attachment 6
Plan Fort Collins
innovate sustain , connect
05119110
PowerPoint
The following slides contain images that are larger and more legible in other parts of the Council
packet, as follows :
Slide 2 : Process and public input opportunities (See Attachment 8 , Process Chart. )
Slides 7-9 : Vision categories and chart (see Attachment 1 , Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices
Outline , pages 4 and 5 . )
Slide 14 : Interrelationships matrix (See Attachment 3 , Policy Choices Interrelationships
Matrix . )
Slide 15 : Sustainability graphic (See Attachment 1 , Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices
Outline , page 3 . )
Slide 16 : Structure Plan map (See Attachment 7 . )
Slides 17- 18 : Alternatives (See Attachment 1 , Preliminary Vision & Policy Choices Outline , page
10 . )
Slide 43 : Triple Bottom Line Screening Indicators (See Attachment 5 . )
1
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
, I .
Plan Fort Collins
City Council Work Session
May 25 , 2010
1
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Plan Fort Collins Process
Plan Fort Collins
Public Input Opportunities
PHASE 1
PHASE 1
1 /�1 rAi - 'N L•-F'
1
o ADOPTION &
ii r CS IMPLEMENTATION
• • i l
(APTURLD IN. (APTURED IN (APTUREDIN. CAPTUREDIN.
Phase 1 Key Choices Draft Plan City Plan , Trans.
Summar Model and Packet Master Plan,
Reports Policies and Codes
Fort Collins
2
1
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
dq
Wano Collins Purpose Reminder
• Not quite half way through the process
• Diverse community input will help shape
the direction of the plan
• Update to City Plan and the Transportation
Master Plan , but more rigorous than just
" redlining " because :
— Integrated , sustainable approach to all
City policies
— New policy directions to achieve the
Vision of World Class Community
— Greater focus on implementation Cityof
t ollins
3
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Purpose of the Work Session
Plan Fort Collins Phase 2
Present and obtain input and
direction on the draft Preliminary
Vision & Policy Choices Outline .
Wit.fins
4
2
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
Council Discussion Questions
1 . Does the Preliminary Vision & Policy
Choices Outline provide the
appropriate range of policy choices ?
2 . Are any Policy Choices missing ?
CI
t_ ns
5
Plan Fort Collins
We are not asking at this time . . .
• Council to identify preferred choices
• Council to select priorities
City of
F`rt\�`
ollins
3
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
Plan Fort Collins Structure
• Seven categories based on BFO :
• Economic Health
• Environmental Resources
• Community and Neighborhood Livability
• Safety and Wellness
• Culture , Parks , and Recreation
• Transportation
• High Performing Community
® ® _ MIMI ® �
7
�Ftf�
Plan ,, Fort Collins
7 Vision Categories
mo --imam
g5.,on and New Pdtcrt
N Page VISION eased on
•City wan
ul A World Class Community •ftonsportation Masts
M + Goals to Achieve the Vision wan
t •AdoptM Bans and
Vision a 6adgetinq for
linked to aatroine,
City Plan
PO9e POLICY CHOICES (new) •Nmmunpry mtnr
and TMP
policies PRODUCTS
and city Plan (updated to Transportation Other Adopted
actions t» follow new vision Master Plan plans and policies
structure - seven parts) u
ql (updated) (carry)orward, no
in Components: Components. Master change - e.g., Parks
f6 g"
L Goals and policies, Streets Plan, Capitol and Recreation Policy
d implementation Improvements Plan, Plan, Cultural Plan,
strategies, action plan, Pedestrian Plan Economic Health,
monitoring Climate Action Plan)
4
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
Pl
VISION Plan ;�, Fort Collins
World Class Community
onmono
Thri4ng. auatiry.
and wstobtoble sustoinebk andataacnve pbce to Eve, cultwol. and mutao-moMst cornmudry
emnamy em sonment ncVbort%wds work kern, and rmmdonal options to.from • fffma
refkcbng the Nigh quahty water Ytaland May orn Nnes and throughout govnrorae
mlu of our Air and dmott ottrocrNcoca.ily • bmMr Qry theory • Tectnobp
unique protection centres Great sheep. • CoMdborathe,
mmmuruty in Land mnsersaron DntkXWw insope /ou s. and community based
chony'nq world ondve rdship and design destinations probkm satwav
Connecsed open
lands
• Each topic supported by goals to achieve the
Vision of a "World Class Community"
• Will continue to enhance and update the Vision
as the process moves forward
ortr�
9
Plan Fort Collins
Policy Choices Outline
• First step in the Phase 2 process of
Plan Fort Collins
• The outline includes :
• Policy Choices that are aligned with the
seven Vision categories
• Citywide alternatives that look at integrated
topics ( e . g . , land use , transportation ,
stormwater)
• Triple bottom line screening indicators
City of
Fort Collins
10
5
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
What the Choices Represent
• They reflect a set of potential policy directions
that are either new to City Plan and the
Transportation Plan , or are enhancements to
existing policy directions
• They focus on what it might take to " move the
City to the next level " towards the Council ' s
Vision of a World Class Community
�t_ ns
11
Plan Fort Collins
How Were the Choices Derived ?
• Response to " challenges and opportunities"
identified in the Snapshot Report
• Comments from community members , focus
groups , boards and commission members , and
Council
• Earlier outline draft reviewed by board and
commission members at a joint workshop
City of
F`rt\�`
ollins
12
6
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
m
in novate,su stain,connect
How do the Choices Relate to
Current Plans and Policies ?
• Many build on and refine existing plans and
policies ( as indicated )
• Some take the City to the next level of World
Class Community
• Agenda Item Summary explains the
relationship between existing plans/policies
and the Policy Choices
t-ins
13
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Many Address " Cross -Cutting " Topics
• Some to be evaluated �
independently Sa
Aii00
O J
11�Y �MYwF O
• Many have potential `
impacts on other topics
+'•'7.9�R ROO
grq..rwgl.�•r�
FY�IIOOY
f•.�ylA•o _��6.
4�IrYs.00O
o•�a'e.•� O O
Y-.rylus
n.. rrr• O
. rae
a.swe..rro.a
�owu�o�
• _
O J 0--0-
14 -a-
O
7
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
in novate,su stain,connect
Phase 2 in Progress
• Policy Choices are a work in
progress
• Preparing a more detailed set
with :
• Detailed description ( including
visualization )
• Analysis , using triple bottom
line model (quantitative and
qualitative )
• Input from Council work
session CiH
t ollins
15 so
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Citywide Alternatives
• Explore integrated land
use and conservation
patterns , stormwater - �-
management , and ` - - - -
�
transportation approaches
Focus on areas of '
potential change
• Alternative 1 : Based on , w-3-- �--
Structure Plan and
Transportation Master
Plan e�
Cityof
16
trins
8
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
Citywide Alternative 2
• Increased emphasis on
infill and redevelopment ~
and transportation along - w
City' s core spine : - -
a
( Mason/College )
rrr '
.- np
S
ram.®cam � L
�tf�S
17
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Citywide Alternative 3
• Increased emphasis on
infill and redevelopment
in activity centers - ;
Location of centers are , owl.
,
illustrative only !
rrr, Y `y
P
t
Fort Collins
^F M
18
9
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
in novate,su stain,connect
Visualization
• Will show change from existing
built environment to the future in :
. Infill / redevelopment location
— Downtown/neighborhood edge
• Greenfield activity center sketches
• Examples follow . . .
Wit_ Coll
ins
19
Plan ,, Fort Collins
ON n example of Visualization : today (one-way traffic)
7,
Now
.
20 r
Dana Pt . , CA
10
in n ovate,s u stain,connect
Y �
4
Aft!
,►� y
Urban.,
a
_ ' Urban_
r -
i
� a
M
1
• I
• `Y� y+ .
ROW
val • •e`er, !• p�}1•� [� � I I y,� � ►�-
It
n � t
I
innovate,sustain,connect
Urban w74!�t
Commissioned by Roma Design Group; City of Dara Point
t �
" i
• • i
t
• • • . • . v
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
New Economic Health Choices
• Does City want to emphasize
one or more of the following -
- jobs
— retail retention and
recruitment
— land ready for new
business
— local businesses
— workforce training
, Ft "s
27
Plan ),, F� Collins
Resourcing Our Future v=
• Plan Fort Collins is linked closely to the
ongoing community dialogue about how to
fund future City operations and services .
• Resourcing Our Future is especially
related to Policy Choices in -
- Safety and Wellness ( police and fire )
— Culture , Parks and Recreation
— Transportation
CI
2s
- tr'�
14
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
.
Environmental Resources
• Encompasses/builds on plans for:
— Water, wastewater
— Electric service/energy/green NMI
building
— Stormwater
— Air , emissions , and climateb .
protection ,t
— Waste management
— Land conservation and
stewardship
— Sustainability and performance City&
Fit Collins
29
Plan ,, Fort Collins
New Environmental Resource Choices
• Key choices include : .
— Energy : net use reduction ,
electric grid modernization ,
linking transportation , existing
building performance
— Stormwater : conveyance ,
green streets , water
quality/habitat protection , new _
partnerships
— Water : supply planning/
conservation , instream flows
30
tr'�
15
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
in novate,su stain,connect
Environmental Resource Choices , Cont .
• Additional key choices include : ) I
— Air quality : price
mechanisms , transportation
fuels and efficiency , Z
— Waste : carbon emissions ,
waste stream reduction ,
composting
— Open lands : opportunities to
increase local food
production and multi - use
partnerships to connect Kai"
system
of
F�`ort_`
31
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Community & Neighborhood Livability
._x
• Building on City Plan :
— Land use , growth
management
— Activity centers and corridors
— Neighborhoods and housing
— Open lands , natural areas
— Historic preservation
— Gateway
— Targeted Redevelopment
Areas ,
F r
32 t�`s
16
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan )), Fort Collins
New Community & Neighborhood
Livability Choices
• For Mason/College corridor and
activity centers ( beyond Downtown ?" "
• Infill and redevelopment
• Neighborhoods and housing for
future (e . g . , seniors )
• Historic preservation — locally
defined
• Nature in City
• Appropriate activity in the Poudre
River District
t ollins
33
Plan ,,, Fort Collins
New Safety & Wellness Choices
• Safety is addressed in City
Plan and Transportation
Master Plan
• Section incorporates new
topics that are not part of City
Plan , including : _
— Active lifestyles and healthy
living and education
— Health and human services
— local food production and
urban agriculture
cit
34
' Ftr�s
17
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
40ar jIm
Culture , Parks , & Recreation
• Policy Choices build on
recently adopted Parks
and Recreation and
Cultural Plan .
t_ ns
35
Plan Fort Collins
New Culture , Parks , & Recreation
Choices
• New choices -
- Increased emphasis on arts
and culture as economic -
driver and livability factor _
— Funding for arts and culture
— Multi - purpose open space
and parks
— Parks and recreation
changes to accommodate
changing population
WO City of
F`rt\�`
ollins
36
18
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Plan
imm !=j" innovate,sustain,connect
Transportation
• Builds on Transportation Master
Plan and the transportation
chapter of City Plan
t .
• Provides closer linkages with
land use , utilities , economic
health , and environment
F�`ort_`
37
Plan „ Fort Collins
Transportation Topic Areas
• Great streets = great places
• Regional transportation
• Trail linkages 73
• Parking
• Transit
• Modal priority
• Transportation - related energy use
• Transportation related emissions
City of
Fort
Collins
\�`
38
19
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
in novate,su stain,connect
New Transportation Choices
Spectrum of System Options :
A . " Resizing " System
B . Reshape existing streets -
M
C . Enhanced Travel Corridors/
district focus mob
D . Vehicle Alternatives/trails irli
E . System Management
F . Adopted Long -Term Visions
G . Expanded Long -Term Visions
F�`ort_ c
39
Plan „ Fort Collins
New Transportation Choices
Range of funding options :
A . Increased Cost Recovery from New
Development? T
B . Adjust Level of Service Standards
Citywide ?
C . Adjust Level of Service Standards by
District?
D . Pursue Other Funding Options ?
Connect to Resourcing our Future
City of
F`rt\�`
ollins
40
20
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
INAW Plan
High Performing Community Topics
• New category , not in previous
plans
• To address :
— Sense of community
— Access to technology
— Effective local governance
— Collaborative community-
based problem solving
, Ft "s
41
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Next Steps in the Process
• Triple Bottom Line Evaluation
• Developing a model to measure the
outcomes of each of the Policy Choices
Wit.fins
42
21
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
Caron emesions
• Erbrgy mnarprpton
Plan Fort Collins e
• waw iae per aped
• Ar yualayfmuele emescns
Tnp1e Bottom Line • PmtecwO upaa
• Wsr/Ae laelbt
Screening Indicators crokichidVaslomd
Da'relopmeM efFoercy
Whae mles eaveW
. Solo rwsle dve+sion
�5
�'P o
�pPO�ar
. 6iciewes aM pos • . Fin ano price Drole000n
Iretaned, rlexj � . Sense of wnununty .bces
• Dy"ify of eenws a Pubb: a WprnemW"
• Local ouseloss . FaNNes for peysiral
• Retail = annoy 1perm raft
. lobs-lmsirg raeo reaeaoonl
. Houmg allordadlcy . 11munilyac torte"
R[0 of gorernmont are Iprtys 1, nprval l
sklv[ek . Agrftwaf 4ndsloal food
• R.sanues Par cap" • Self sufkgenl houstt*ss
• Axass Ip M&ke8ll t • NousN uM ma
O My . Arts and a✓.um avatii081y
• LA►Mn•lear••t• MOOagtravelmwes
43 Attachment 5
Plan „ Fort Collins
Next Steps , cont .
• A more complete document will be
prepared over the next 4 - 6 weeks
• Public events will continue with
community workshops on June 29
( evening ) and June 30 ( morning )
• Next Council work session is July 27th
focusing on preferred directions
City of
Fort
Collins
\�`
44
22
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
We are not asking at this time . . .
• Council to identify preferred choices
• Council to select priorities
ins
45
t_`
Plan ,, Fort Collins
Council Discussion Questions
1 . Does the Preliminary Vision & Policy
Choices Outline provide the
appropriate range of Policy Choices ?
2 . Are any Policy Choices missing ?
CI
46
tf'�
23
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5 / 19/2010
Flan in . I . - connect
; Ville or41
a Csu
m H ' .a PeDipeOtftd
f] =X '
f
r:. �. U Drake
' z
HonHoom Ra. `
1
N
.x�
Kochtnr Rd
!j J
1 Trdpy Rd
i
Fort Collins "' Cityaf
Fort
Collins
47
Plan „ Fort Collins
t _
' Mulc,em 5l
d cw
¢ n ftd
_ a
O.Yr
9
2
_ RQ �.
G
� ry
Harmony RIL
6 E Kech1w Rd
7i E
' E
7niey Rd,
City of
For
Collins
t,�`
48 a
24
Plan Fort Collins - City Council Work Session - May 25 , 2010 5/ 19/2010
Wllba Sl.
r
_ �kIQlflYSt_
pV
- j. Pru.MaLRd_
a I
a
•1.
7 ' `
.ZIAi�941f
- r = Krchter Rd
E
1 L E
�tilby Rd.
1
e
Plant ' Fort CO&M J Cityof
/Fort Collins
f�
49
Attachment 8
Plan , Fort Collins
Public Input Opportunities
® u
661111
F Input: focus groups,
PHASE 1 t
SPRING 2010 PHASE 2A-B
SUMMER PHASE 3
• • • r • FALL - WINTER ^
L SPRING 2011
ADOPTION &
8� IMPLEMENTATION
low 1w
CAPTUREDIN : CAPTUREDIN : CAPTUREDIN : CAPTUREDIN:
Phase 1 Ke Choices Draft Plan City Plan , Trans .
Master Plan ,
Summary Mode and Packet Policies and Codes
Reports
25
Attachment 7
oi�tColl�ns CITY OF FORT COLLINS STRUCTURI", PLAN
r �}
''I 1+ , tl�_ � j; ', - - �`• Wallin ton
_
I t Fort Collins -
-
' tti j�_�� 1 Ilin rrt —6R-5o
'� - •�+ eparator
Lai �te N
t
r R-54G I� c•' -fts?
ou91ryl'lub —�
t t CSU G I"-
1 t Yuoe�
Sr �... Foothills ? I' I:>� -T._ .A --
- - -y1 Campus I 'r
GMA
Expansion
( Area . 'I _f" • I -I )
-q�-Mltlbe ry
Loy
State
Park
_ oSU
� •i
_ Csu S .n
tadwa
��-- —Drake
1
Tarn ath
Sepai ator
Horsetooth
Mountain k�,setoelr
I
Park
1 1 rn
y ' N) 17 i nath
' lr
-r-
x
� ..-'➢' �_j�.. _ �� 1 �.... � � i Tin oath
Se irator
r'
I
a
Wildflower; I
IF
7
I` I jAl'ea.. 1 r
?iarnemte — --SFF30�
{-Fort Collins -
Loveland . .
Separator Winds
Lov land
0 0.5
Boundaries D isMiles
Fort Cdlins GMAof if
Downtown District Industrial District Edges Corridors
Community Separator N Enhanced Travel Corridor(Transit)
Potential GMA Expansion 111F Community Commercial District Neighborhoods
Foothills Poudre River Corridor ,a
Other City GA IV Commercial Corridor District Urban Estate
M �]
Rural Lands PoWre River D
J Lov Density Mixed-Use
s7l-panning Area Neighborhood Canmerdal Center GpentaMs, Parks,
Stream Corridors x
_Lj�Mjacent Planning Areas ep Campus District Medium Densely
Mined-Use Adopted
^/ City Units Employment District March 3, 2009 Z
J
Attachment
•
Plan , Fort Collins
OpportunitiesPublic Input
Input : events , key polling , f
surveys , video , focus groups , — f
boards & commissions , and Input : focus groups ,
Council Council , boards , Input : Public events
commissions , public boards , coSPRING 2010 PHASE 2A - B
mmissions
PHASE 1
workshop June 29 - 30 and Council
FALL - WINTER
EXISTING !
CONDITIONS A . KEY CHOICES i -SPRING 0
11
BEST & ANALYSIS STRATEGIES �
ADOPTIUN
PRACTICESIMPLEMENTATION
B . PREFERRED
CAPTU
� PRIORITIES
BIG IDEAS DIRECTIONS
• D , , ' '
ChoicesPhase 1 Key
Summary Model and Packet Master Plan ,
Reports
- -- - ATTACHMENT 9
s
Advance Planning
City Of 281 North College Avenue q
F6rt Collins 97 Box 580
21.63
Fort Collins,CO 80522 9
970.221.6111
970.224.617 t-fax
fcgov.00ndadvanceplanning ;
a
April 1, 2010
Memorandum
TO: Mayor Hutchinson and City Councilmembers
TH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager�N
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager
FM: Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director Q rd 1fX1V-
Ken Waido, Chief Planner rl',C(V.
Kathleen Bracke, Director of Transportation Planning and Special Projects/0
I
RE: Work Session Summary—March 23,2010-Update on Phase 1 of the Plan Fort Collins
Planning Process
Work Session Participants: 1
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager j
Joe Frank,Advance Planning Director j
Kathleen Bracke,Director of Transportation Planning and Special Projects
Ben Herman,Principal and Vice President, Clarion Associates
Lesh Ellis,Principal, Clarion Associates
,
Direction Sought/Ouestion to be Answered:
i
Related to the Plan Fort Collins planning process: �
1
Values:
Are there values missing within the current City"values"in Snapshot report?
Ideas as Foundation for Phase 2:
Does the list of ideas submitted to the Council include the right mix for study? Are any missing?
Key Discussion Points:
I
1. Provide an update on Phase 1 of the Plan Fort Collins process.
2. . Seek Council's input on values and the list of ideas for next phases of Plan Fort Collins. 3
1 Discuss ongoing public outreach and next steps.
1
i
7
3
City of
Fort Collins j
Council's Discussion/Direction: a
j
Presented below are the comments and questions on the topics raised by Council members
during the March 23 work session. Staff responses to these questions and comments will be
forwarded to the Council before the May 25 work session.
1. Need to have close coordination and alignment between the Plan Fort Collins process,the
Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO)process, and the Resourcing our Future process, in terms
of consistent language,topics covered,and results. This will be important if a decision is
made to seek approval from the voters for additional taxes in November.
2. What is actually meant by "sustainability"and does it include the"triple-bottom-line"
approach of the term as used in the Snapshot report and the City's current definition as ;
contained on the City's website?
3. May want to consider whether the Snapshot report should also include discussion as to I
what hasn't worked.
4. The topical area of"Natural Areas,Parks, and Recreation"needs to be expanded to
include Open Space. j
5. In reporting information to the public, do not report such information based on a
"sampling"of data. Information needs to be based on a thorough analysis of all data.
6. Clarification is needed on what is meant by a"clean job"and a"high quality job"related
to the triple-bottom-line of sustainability.
7. Challenge: Taller buildings. What will be acceptable, 10 stories, 4 stories, or what? Will
depend on location and design. Human scale aspect needs to be strongly considered in 1
order to convey the idea that height isn't the only consideration.
8. Need a better understanding of what is meant by"balancing growth and conservation of
natural resources." Need a better understanding of the interrelationships between
economy and the environment.
9. There were questions related to the potential use of open space for flood prevention and
energy production. May be prohibited based on open space tax ballot language. Current
City policy documents may be silent on the use of open space for flood prevention and
energy production subject. '
10. What is meant by"Long-term financial viability and maintaining a long-term balance
between land conservation and stewardship"? Long-term financial viability is not
mentioned in any other issue.
11. Missing Value: Protect the remaining natural areas in and around Fort Collins.
12. Please clarify what the 2010 Natural Areas Strategic Plan is.
13. The listed value, "Leveraging community strengths for economic benefit"is not"new;"it
i
is an on-going effort that needs to go to the"next level."
14. In the effort to expand public input to include"youth dialog,"groups dealing with"early 1
childhood"issues need to be added, as well as CSU students.
15. It should be clearer that the Top 5 lists for"Keep"and"Different"are not in any
hierarchical order(order of importance).
16. Issues that are currently underemphasized: hazardous materials; waste reduction(not just
recycling); the importance of CSU and federal labs for economic development;the
barriers to redevelopment, including the rules for compatibility; gentrification and the
i
3
1
i
City of
F6rt Collins
potential loss of affordable housing, including mobile home parks; and information
regarding"growth paying for itself."
17. Platte River Power Authority(PRPA)needs to be included in conversations about
utilities and the environment.
18. The concept of a shared grid is important and will require cooperation with Fort Collins' j
sister cities within PRPA. j
19. There are no comments on retrofitting of existing buildings to save energy and reduce
greenhouse gases. i
20. "Para-transit"needs to be included in the"public transit"category.
21.Need to add into the plan the issue of"water storage"in addition to existing issues of
conservation,water supply, water quality,minimum flows in the Poudre,etc.
22. Plan Fort Collins language should avoid value laden terms such as "growth"of the
community. Use value neutral statements in the document.
23. Need to preserve"employment land"for the long term and not give in to short term
landowner requests to respond to a current market condition.
24. How is the diversion rate of recyclables measured? Questions about 33%reduction
estimates. Recycling is only one factor..-.first reduce, second reuse, and third recycle.
The City may be able to do more with the management of hazardous materials. Does the
City's Climatewise Program include reduction of hazardous materials?
25. The history of the 2005 paradigm shift for economic health needs to be expanded and
reworded to reflect the values of a unique community in a changing world.
26. Can input from City boards and commissions in the future be distilled to cover the i
unified statements and the different statements?
27. What is meant by, "Address future management and uses along the Poudre River."Will
the thoughts from a diversified group that worked through the UniverCity Connections
process be included? i
28. What steps can be taken to ensure that there is a balance and variety of view points within
,
the Focus Groups? j
29. The Snapshot report that states commercial buildings are built for a 40-year life cycle; is !
this supportive of our sustainability efforts? Are there things the City can do to lengthen 1
that period of time(not meant to indicate the City needs new regulations)?
30. What are"green corridors"?
31. "Work regionally to maintain open space corridors"should be reworded to include,
"preserve,maintain, and enhance"open space corridors.
32. Has the protection of environmental concerns become so ingrained in current processes
that they don't need to be continuously mentioned in the Snapshot Report? Such a
concepts as fragmentation of open space, movement corridors,etc.,need to be reinforced.
33. Should NISP be listed as.the only resource for"more information"about the Poudre
River?
34. How is the City going to deal with the fundamental electronic bed rocks of an emerging
democracy?
35. Will there be a"scorecard" eventually to monitor the success of implementation of City
Plan and the Transportation Master Plan?
36. Concern was expressed about the emphasis/obsession on"assuring long term financial i
viability"and the uncertainty of open space funding of the Natural Areas Program. Staff
needs to plan to have a Council work session briefing on.long term stewardship issues.
i
J—
1
Otyof
F6rt Collins
37. Community gateways need to be constructed, as they are important to establish the
character of the community.
In summary, the Council was unanimous that the Plan Fort Collins process is off to a good
start, and the decisions are going in the right direction in terms of topics, involvement of the
public,etc.
Next Steps:
• A revised Snapshot report will be completed by mid-April; staff still needs to obtain input
from Focus Groups, on-line surveys, etc. d
• Focus Groups will meet to discuss more specific topics.
• In May, the Council another,update will be provided on the Plan Fort Collins process,.
and staff will report back on the questions and comments raised at the March 23 work
session.
r
4
I
9
i
9
1
a
p_.
i
if
1
tl
i
i
j�
j
i
I
i
i
7
I.
i'