HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/15/2011 - CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE F DATE: March 15, 2011
STAFF: Wanda Krajicek • • •
t
Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the February 1, February 15, and March 1, 2011 Regular Meetings and
the February 22, 2011 Adjourned Meeting.
February 1, 2011
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday,February 1,2011,
at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered
by the following Councilmembers: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy, and Troxell.
Councilmembers Absent: Kottwitz
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Ray Smith 1618 Sagewood Drive, discussed pellet stoves and insulation.
Cheryl Distaso, Center for Peace, Justice, and Environment, thanked Council for meeting with the
Poudre School Board regarding potential school closures and discouraged hosting a speaking
engagement with John Ashcroft.
Dean Hoag,6602 Spanish Bay Drive,Windsor,expressed concern regarding proposed Poudre River
Floodplain regulation changes and discussed the recent"no adverse impacts"section of the proposal.
Neil McCaffrey, 1331 Silk Oak Drive, opposed the proposed Poudre River Floodplain regulation
changes.
Greg Woods, 2621 Rigden Parkway, supported the postponement of proposed Poudre River
Floodplain regulation changes and supported additional public input processes.
Carrie Gillis, 2213 Timber Creek Drive, expressed concern regarding the short timeframe for the
proposed Poudre River Floodplain regulation changes and asked what emphasis has been placed on
economic impacts.
Mike Othello, Fort Collins resident, expressed concern regarding the impacts of proposed Poudre
River Floodplain regulation changes on the North College area.
Bob Carnahan,4325 Westbrooke Court,expressed concern regarding a seemingly arbitrary deadline
for proposed Poudre River Floodplain regulation changes.
Don Butler,540 South Taft Hill,expressed concern regarding funding sources for studies regarding
Poudre River Floodplain regulations.
Mary Atchison, 2024 Linden Lake Road, encouraged Council to refer the citizen-initiated library
measure to ballot. The ballot measure would allow for a remodel to the downtown library.
121
February 1, 2011
Peggy Reeves, 1931 Sandalwood Lane,Library Trust Boardmember,supported the citizen-initiated
library measure and noted it will not increase taxes.
Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, asked that TIF items have all associated costs and impacts
identified.
Ann Hutchison, 402 Riddle Drive, Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice-President,
encouraged Council to slow down its consideration of new proposed Poudre River Floodplain
regulations.
Charlie Meserlian, 700 North College, expressed concern regarding proposed Poudre River
Floodplain regulation changes and asked about the reason behind the changes.
Jim Palmer, South Fort Collins Business Association,supported Item No. 16,Resolution 2011-008
Authorizing and Directing Staff to Prepare an Existing Conditions Survey and an Urban Renewal
Plan for the Midtown Area.
Bill See,819 Strachan Drive,North Fort Collins Business Association,expressed concern regarding
proposed Poudre River Floodplain regulation changes.
Dan Eckles,309 South Grant, expressed concern regarding Council's consideration of public input
on the Eastside/Westside Neighborhood and Poudre River Floodplain issues.
Doug Brobst, 1625 Independence Road,expressed concern regarding a lack of emphasis on student
housing in Plan Fort Collins.
Rich Shannon, 2906 Silverwood Drive, thanked Council and staff for forming the "Working
Committee"for the Poudre River Floodplain regulation study.
Chase Eckert,ASCSU Community Affairs Director,expressed concern regarding a lack ofemphasis
on student housing in Plan Fort Collins.
Clint Skutchan, 719 Great Plains Court, Fort Collins Board of Realtors Executive Vice-President,
encouraged Council to take more time in making a decision with regard to the Poudre River
Floodplain regulation changes.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Troxell stated student housing should be part of Plan Fort Collins. He asked
whether the URA Board would convene and give recommendations regarding the Floodplain issue.
City Manager Atteberry replied the item would not be put on the agenda,given Council's schedule.
Mayor Hutchinson noted Council acts as the URA Board and stated the Leadership Team did not
find any value added by adding the item to the URA agenda.
122
February 1, 2011
Councilmember Troxell disagreed and stated the URA Board is obligated to examine the fiduciary
aspects of potential regulation changes.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the individuals who spoke from the Library Board and noted the
expansion will provide additional meeting space,an expanded children's area,additional computer
stations and a more open collection.
Councilmember Roy asked for an update regarding the City working with CSU in terms of student
housing and agreed with Ms. York that impacts to entities for TIF allocations should be outlined.
He stated he would be open to the URA Board meeting to discuss the proposed Floodplain changes.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson thanked the citizens who spoke.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the January 4 and January 18, 2011 Regular
Meetings.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 004, 2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for the Veterans Plaza Project at Spring Canyon Community Park.
The Veterans Plaza at Spring Canyon Community Park will create a public venue,bringing
community members together to recognize and commemorate the sacrifices and dedication
of service members who have served our country. The Plaza will be located on
approximately three acres of land near the main entrance of the park on Horsetooth Road.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 18, 2011, appropriates
revenue in the amount of$275,000 for the project.
8. Items Relating to the Downtown Alley Project.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No.005,2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue
in the Capital Projects Fund, Downtown Alley Enhancement Project.
B. Resolution 2011-006 Authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the
Downtown Development Authority Regarding the Renovation and Redevelopment
of Certain Downtown Alleys.
Ordinance No. 005, 2011, adopted unanimously on First Reading on January 18, 2011,
appropriates the Downtown Alley Enhancement Project funding for construction of the West
Laurel and West Myrtle Alleys Project. The City will be administering the construction
contract for the Downtown Development Authority.
123
February 1, 2011
Resolution 2011-006 authorizes an intergovernmental agreement that City staff has
negotiated with the DDA to provide for cooperative management of the Downtown Alleys
Enhancements Project for the renovation of the West Laurel and West Myrtle Alleys. The
Intergovernmental Agreement also provides for ongoing DDA maintenance of the alley
improvements, to be carried out on a contractual basis by the City at DDA expense for the
initial two years after completion,and thereafter by agreement. This is essentially the same
IGA the City and DDA successfully used for the completed Firehouse and Montezuma
Fuller alleys. After award of the construction contract, the project will proceed to
completion during the summer of 2011. Arrangements for work in additional alleys in the
future will be addressed in subsequent arrangements between the City and the DDA.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 006, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Cultural Services Fund and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Transfer to the
Capital Projects Fund and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund
for the Building on Basics Lincoln Center Renovation Project.
During the Lincoln Center addition and renovation project,an unanticipated structural issue
with the 32 year old performance hall walls was identified . The structural problem is
significant and the performance hall walls will require additional structural support. This
work must be completed before the facility can be reopened. This Ordinance,unanimously
adopted on First Reading on January 18, 2011, appropriates an additional $460,000 from
prior year reserves in the Cultural Services Fund and the General Fund to implement the
additional structural support.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No.007,2011,Authorizingthe he Appropriation of 2011 Fiscal
Year OReratine and Capital Improvement Funds for the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal
Airport.
The 2011 annual operating budget for the Airport totals $726,390, and will be funded from
Airport operating revenues, contributions from the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland
($85,000 from each City), and interest earnings. This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on
First Reading on January 18,2011,appropriates the City of Fort Collins'contribution,which
is a 50% share of the 2011 Airport budget and totals $363,195.
This Ordinance also appropriates the City of Fort Collins' 50% share of capital funds,
totaling $608,500 for the Airport from federal and state grants; contributions from Fort
Collins and Loveland; and the Airport General Fund. Most of the 2011 Airport capital
funds,totaling$1,217,000,will be used to continue runway improvements and some funds
are slated for utility master planning and design engineering to accommodate Airport
business development.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 008, 2011,Approving a Second Amendment to the Fort
Collins-Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation,
Growth Management, and Related Issues, Extending the Deadlines for the City and Town
to Amend Their Growth Management Area Boundaries,and Deleting,All References to the
Possible Purchase by Timnath of the Van bg o Property.
124 '
February 1, 2011
On February 17, 2009, the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Timnath entered into an
intergovernmental agreement regarding annexations, growth management, and related
issues. The agreement resolved certain differences that had arisen between the City and
Town concerning a variety of planning and growth management issues. The agreement set
one-year deadlines for the parties to amend their Growth Management Area boundaries and
for Timnath to exercise an option to purchase the Vangbo property from the City. In early
2010,the parties approved an amendment to this intergovernmental agreement that extended
the deadlines for approval of the Fort Collins GMA and for Timnath to decide whether to
exercise its option.Another extension is needed,and Ordinance No.008,2011,unanimously
adopted on First Reading on January 18, 2011, extends for an additional year the period of
time within which the parties' GMA boundaries are to be amended. It also deletes all
references to Timnath's possible purchase of the Vangbo property because Timnath has
decided not to move forward with the purchase.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No.009,2011,Authorizing the Lease of City Property at 200
West Mountain Avenue, Suite C, to Our Global Village Museum of Arts and Cultures For
Up to Three Years.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 18, 2011, authorizes a
lease to Our Global Village Museum of Arts and Cultures for space located at 200 West
Mountain Avenue, Suite C.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 010, 2001, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects in Accordance with
the Downtown Plan of Development.
This Ordinance will appropriate unanticipated revenue from interest earnings in the amount
of$242,561,from project savings in the amount of$289,294 and from the 2010 Bond Series
"Bonded but not Appropriated" bond proceeds in the amount of $809,145 for a total
appropriation of$1,341,000. The DDA Board has authorized the expenditure on the various
projects and programs.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2011, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors
of the City of Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment to Article II of the City Charter,
Pertaining to Council District Boundaries.
This Ordinance submits to the voters at the April 5, 2011 election, a proposed Charter
amendment modifying the method used for periodically adjusting Council district
boundaries. The proposed Charter amendment will require the City Clerk's office to adjust
Council districts on the basis of population rather than the number of registered electors.
15. Resolution 2011-007 Adopting the 2010 Update to the Three-Mile Plan for the City.
The Three-Mile Plan for the City of Fort Collins is a policy document ensures the City
complies with the regulations of the Colorado Revised Statues. This is the 2010 update to
the Three-Mile Plan.
125
February 1, 2011
16. Resolution 2011-008 Authorizing and Directing Staff to Prepare an Existing Conditions
Survey and an Urban Renewal Plan for the Midtown Area.
The Midtown Redevelopment Study, completed September 2010, included both a market
and economic feasibility analysis of the Midtown Commercial Corridor. The result of this
Study was an Action Plan with implementation strategies, priorities, and time frames to
proceed with the redevelopment envisioned. One of the main recommended actions is the
completion of an Existing Conditions Survey for the corridor. The survey would evaluate
the statutory requirements for the formation of additional Urban Renewal Plan Areas along
the corridor. The City Council established an Urban Renewal Authority(URA)to provide
assistance to redevelopment projects in specified areas of the city and to be an economic
development tool for otherwise distressed locations. Staff is seeking Council's authorization
to proceed with the preparation of an Existing Conditions Survey and draft an Urban
Renewal Plan for Midtown.
17. Items Relating to a Citizen-Initiated Ordinance Amending People's Ordinance No. 2, 1975
Pertaining to Construction in Librar} Park.
A. Presentation of a Petition for a Citizen-Initiated Ordinance That Would Amend
People's Ordinance No. 2, 1975, to Permit Expansion of the Main Library, Which
Petition Has Been Certified by the City Clerk as Sufficient for Placement on a
Regular Municipal Election Ballot. (No Action Needed)
B. Resolution 2011-009 Submitting to the Electors of the City at the Next Regular
Municipal Election on April 5, 2011, a Citizen-Initiated Ordinance Amending
People's Ordinance No. 2, 1975 Relating to Construction at Library Park.
The City Clerk's Office received an initiative petition on January 18,2011, which has been
determined to contain a sufficient number of signatures to place an initiated measure before
the registered electors of the City. Pursuant to the City Charter, upon presentation of an
initiative petition certified as sufficient by the City Clerk,the Council must either adopt the
proposed ordinance without alteration within 30 days;or submit such proposed measure,in
the form petitioned for, to the registered electors of the city. Because this initiative seeks
to modify a 1975 initiative approved by the voters, Article X, Section 4 of the Charter
requires the Council to submit the proposed measure to the voters.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 004,2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund for the Veterans Plaza Project at Spring Canyon Community Park.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 005,2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund, Downtown Alley Enhancement Project.
126
February 1, 2011
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 006, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Cultural Services Fund and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Transfer to the
Capital Projects Fund and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund
for the Building on Basics Lincoln Center Renovation Project.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 007,2011,Authorizing the Appropriation of 2011 Fiscal
Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds for the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal
Airport.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 008, 2011,Approving a Second Amendment to the Fort
Collins-Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation,
Growth Management, and Related Issues, Extending the Deadlines for the City and Town
to Amend Their Growth Management Area Boundaries,and Deleting All References to the
Possible Purchase by Timnath of the Vangbo Property.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No.009,2011,Authorizing the Lease of City Property at 200
West Mountain Avenue, Suite C, to Our Global Village Museum of Arts and Cultures For
Up to Three Years.
21. Items relating to the East and West Side Neighborhoods Design Standards Study.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 002, 2011, Increasing the Membership of the
Landmark Preservation Commission and Expanding Its Functions to Include
Establishing an Advisory Committee.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 003, 2011, Making Amendments to the City of
Fort Collins Land Use Code Pertaining to East Side and West Side Neighborhood
Design Standards.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 010, 2001, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects in Accordance with
the Downtown Plan of Development.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 011,2011, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors
of the City of Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment to Article II of the City Charter,
Pertaining to Council District Boundaries.
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant,pulled Item No. 12,Second Reading of Ordinance No. 009,
2011,Authorizing the Lease of City Property at 200 West Mountain Avenue, Suite C to Our Global
Village Museum ofArts and Cultures For Up to Three Years and Item No. 16,Resolution 2011-008
Authorizing and Directing Staff to Prepare an Existing Conditions Survey and an Urban Renewal
Plan for the Midtown Area.
127
February 1, 2011
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt and
approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry stated City employees have donated,orpledged to donate,$53,657,through
the City's United Way campaign. City employees also competed with the City of Loveland and
Larimer County for Larimer County Food Bank donations.
Items relating to the East and West Side
Neighborhoods Design Standards Study,Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 002, 2011, Increasing the Membership of the Landmark
Preservation Commission and Expandinglts Functions to Include Establishing an Advisory
Committee.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 003, 2011, Making Amendments to the City of Fort
Collins Land Use Code Pertaining to East Side and West Side Neighborhood Design
Standards. (Option B or Option B Revised)
On January 4, 2011, City Council approved, on First Reading, two Ordinances related to the East
and West Side Neighborhoods Design Standards Study. Ordinance No. 002, 2011, amends City
Code to add a function allowing a committee of the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) to
offer voluntary design consultation for interested property owners, and increase the membership
of the LPC from seven to nine members. Ordinance No. 003, 2011, amends the Land Use Code by
lowering the current limits for building floor area in the Neighborhood Conservation Low Density
(NCL)and Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density(NCM)zoning districts, by limitingfloor
area of a single-family house to 27% of the lot area. Ordinance No. 003, 2011 also includes a
requirement that any variance request to the floor area limits receive a recommendation from a
committee of the LPC to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)for its consideration in deciding the
variance request. Finally, this Ordinance also requires the City to monitor the implementation of
the Ordinance and report back to the City Council within two years.
At First Reading, Ordinance No. 003, 2011, was presented with two options, and the option
approved by Council was called Option B. For the Second Reading, Ordinance No. 003, 2011, is
again being presented with two options. Further investigation and discussion has led to a revised
version of Ordinance No. 003, 2011, Option B, called "Option B Revised". This revised version is
to be considered upon Second Reading along with the original Option B version approved upon
128
February 1, 2011
First Reading. Both the original and revised versions of the Ordinance include several minor
technical clarifications to the Ordinance language.
In conjunction with approval of the two Ordinances, Council acted to postpone the Second Reading
until February I to allow more time for investigation of issues raised at First Reading.In particular,
Council requested that staff explore questions about the floor area limit standards in Ordinance No.
003, 2011, and seek further input from the Citizen Advisory Committee and Planning and Zoning
Board.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Ordinances being presented for Council consideration are the result of a study that began in
January 2010 to explore concerns about the compatibility of new single family house construction
in the area. Particular concerns involve small, older houses being removed and replaced with
larger new construction. The fundamental question is whether the City's current zoning regulations
warrant revision to better reflect adopted polices forprotecting established neighborhood character.
To answer the question, City staffconducted a publicplanningprocess to examine concerns,identify
issues, and then identify potential options for changes to zoning standards and/or the design
process. Attachment 1 is the Agenda Item Summary from January 4, which is included to provide
additional background on the process.
The process highlighted two closely interrelated aspects of compatibility: design character, and
building size. Council has considered potential options regarding both design character and
building size in three work sessions. These options considered by Council have included the
following:
1. Lowering the current limits for allowable building floor area in the Neighborhood
Conservation Low Density(NCL)and Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density(NCM)
zoning districts. Several approaches to this topic have been considered.
2. Developing design standards.
3. Funding a Design Assistance Program.
4. Enabling the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) to offer voluntary design
consultation.
A majority of Council has found that changes to development standards may be warranted, and staff
was directed to proceed in preparing items 1, 3, and 4, above,for Council action.
Item 1, lowering current limits on floor area, emerged as the primary focus of the process. It has
received the greatest amount of attention, discussion, debate, and staff work. It is the subject of
Ordinance No. 003, 2011, which is being considered on Second Reading with two options, and it
occupies the bulk of this Agenda Item Summary following the brief explanation of items 2, 3, and
4 below.
Item 2, design standards, was not supported due to complexity and difficulty of legislating the many
variables in house design, especially given the eclectic variety of design styles found in the area.
129
February 1, 2011
Additional reasons for lack of support include the demands of effectively administering design
standards, and past history of unsuccessful efforts to establish such standards.
Item 3, the Design Assistance Program, was approved as part of an Ordinance adopting the 2011-
2012 Budget on December 21, 2010. The Budget included $40,000 each year for a Design
Assistance Program (DAP). The purpose of the DAP is to address concerns about compatible
design. The program will assist property owners building additions or new houses with the costs
of hiring a design professional.
Item 4, LPC Voluntary Design Consultation, is the subject of Ordinance No. 002, 2011, being
considered on Second Reading. It amends City Code to add a function enabling the Landmark
Preservation Commission to offer voluntary design consultation for interested property owners,and
increase the membership ofthe LPCfrom seven to nine members. The LPC is interested and willing
to provide this service in order to foster compatibility. A committee of the LPC would be formed
to provide this service. Since some property owners receiving design consultation could also
conceivably become applicants to the LPC at some point, committee members would have to recuse
themselves from LPC decisions on those items. Therefore, LPC membership should be increased
in order to avoid problems meeting a quorum as necessary to take formal action. New policies and
procedures for design consultation would be prepared by City staff in consultation with the LPC.
Ordinance No. 003, 2011 Lowering Current Limits on Floor Area
The Problem
The NCL and NCM zones contain standards for building size that do not effectively implement
adopted policies in the East Side Neighborhood Plan, West Side Neighborhood Plan, and City Plan,
which emphasize protection of the existing established character of these neighborhoods. These
current zoning standards emerged as a problem that may warrant changes to the City's Land Use
Code.
The standards limit floor area based on lot area. In the NCL zone, total floor area on a lot is limited
to 40%of the lot area. In the NCMzone, the limit is 50%of the lot area. House basements are not
counted against the limit.
One of the few points of wide agreement from the study was that these existing standards do not
reflect the established development pattern prevailing throughout most of the area, in terms of
allowable house size. In both zones, more than nine out of ten lots have floor area less than 35%
of lot area;more than seven out often lots have floor area less than 25%of lot area. The difference
between the established pattern of development and the current standards has led to concerns that
the standards allow new construction to be too large to be compatible with the established pattern
of development.
Building size as a percentage of lot area is often expressed as a Floor Area Ratio, or FAR, with the
floor area divided by the lot area. Thus, the current standards in the NCL and NCMzones can be
stated as FAR limits of.40 and .50, respectively. FAR is a common and useful term in zoning
130
February 1, 2011
regulations to deal with the size of buildings. Attachment 2 shows FAR data for existing houses in
the two zones.
Ordinance No. 003, 2011 amends the Land Use Code to lower the allowable floor area limits, and
thus, the allowable size of new houses and additions, in order to better align zoning standards with
predominant established development patterns throughout the area.
Ordinance No. 003, 2011 Option B
The version of the Ordinance adopted on January 4 was called Option B, and that term is being
carried forward to Second Reading, because an "Option B Revised"version is also beingpresented
for consideration upon Second Reading.
Option B, as adopted on First Reading, lowers the current floor area limits in the NCL and NCM
zones by limiting the floor area of a single-family house to 27%of the lot area, also referred to as
a.2 7 house Floor Area Ratio(FAR). Table 1 below shows house sizes allowed under the proposed
.27 house FAR standard.
Table ]:House Floor Area Allowed By.27 House FAR Standard
Lot Size 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
(s )
House
Floor
Area 1,080 1,350 1,620 1,890 2,160 2,430 2,700 2,970
Allowed
s
This approach of stating a maximum allowable floor area for a single-family house is slightly
differentfrom the current approach in the two zones. The current approach states a total allowable
floor area for all buildings on a lot, which may often involve a garage, carriage house, or other
accessory buildings in addition to the main house. Thus, under current standards, the maximum
allowable floor area could be allocated completely to a house, or it could be allocated among
multiple buildings on the lot, such as a house and garage.
Under the proposed.27 house FAR, a lot would also be allowed to have a detached garage, up to
600 square feet(sq ft), in addition to the house allowance. In order to accurately compare existing
standards for maximum allowed total floor area with the proposed standard for maximum allowed
house floor area, the additional detached garage allowance must be added to the .27 FAR house
allowance to find the total maximum allowance for comparison.
For example, on an 8,000 sq ft lot, the.27 house FAR allows 2,160 sq ft, and a 600 sq ft detached
garage is also allowed,giving a total potential floor area on the lot of 2,760 sq ft(a.35 total FAR).
Therefore, it is the .35 total FAR that should be compared to the .40 or.50 total FAR currently
allowed, to understand the magnitude of the proposed change. Attachment 4 is a table comparing
the total potential floor area under a .27 house FAR to existing standards.
131
February 1, 2011
Clarifications to Option B Since First Reading
To clarify what does and does not count as floor area in the proposed.27 house FAR standard,
several changes have been made to Ordinance No. 003, 2011 Option B since First Reading. The
clarifications described below can be found in Sections 4.7(D)(2)(c) and 4.8(D)(2)(c).
1. Detached Accessory Buildings. Detached accessory buildings (most commonly detached
garages), are not counted as floor area in the proposed.27 house FAR standard. However,
there was nothing in the proposed standard that specified the extent to which a detached
accessory building must be separated from a house. Presumably, an inch of separation
would have qualified a garage as detached. This would be inconsistent with the intent to
break up the appearance of a single larger building mass and encourage a pattern of
separate garages in the rear of lots. Therefore, staff proposes to revise the Ordinance to
specify that in order for a detached accessory building to not be counted as floor area, it
must be built behind the main house and separated by at least ten feet.
2. Attached Garages.As originally proposed, attached garages are not counted as floor area
if more than half of the houses on the block face have attached garages. The purpose of
excluding attached garages in these cases is because there are a few subdivisions in these
neighborhoods where most or all of the houses have attached garages. In order to allow
houses in those areas to maintain the prevailing character, staff proposed to exclude the
floor area of their attached garages so that these properties would not be "penalized"in
terms of floor area,for having attached garages.
The consequence of this exclusion, as originally written, was that a property owner on a
block of houses with attached garages could replace or expand their house up to the
proposed.27 house FAR and attach a 600 sq ft garage. The areas that are characterized
by attached garages do not typically contain houses with 600 sq ft attached garages; most
attached garages are smaller. Therefore, allowing these houses to rebuild and attach a 600
sq ft garage would be out of character. Therefore, the Ordinance has been revised, to
exclude only 450 sq ft of attached garages if more than half of the houses on the block face
have attached garages. If a property owner desires an attached 600 sq ft garage, the
allowance for the house size would thus be reduced by the 150 sq ft difference.
3. Basements. Council also asked for a clarification as to what constitutes a basement. The
Ordinance has been amended to clarify that basements will not count as floor area,provided
that no portion of the basement wall is higher than three feet above the grade at the nearest
side lot line perpendicular to the center of the wall.
Ordinance No. 003, 2011 Option B Revised
Option B Revised would apply a formula based on the size of a lot to determine total allowed floor
area. As proposed, the first 3,000 square feet of a lot would be allowed a .45 FAR, and then the
remaining square feet would be allowed a.25 FAR. For example, on a 7,000 sq ft lot, .45 is applied
to the first 3,000 sq ft, which would allow 1,350 sq ft. A FAR of.25 is applied to the remaining
132
February 1, 2011
4,000 sq ft of the lot which, when added to the first calculation, would allow 2,350 sq ft of floor
area.
Note that this 2,350 sq ft is the total amount of floor area on the lot; if a property owner wanted to
build a 600 sq ft garage, their house would consequently be limited to 1,750 sq ft(2,350 sq ft-600
sq ft).Attachment 5 is a table comparing this formula for total FAR to existing standards. Table 2
shows examples of floor areas allowed under the formula.
Table 2: Total Floor Area Allowed By Formula for Total FAR
Lot Size 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
s
31000 @ 11350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350
.45
Remainder 250 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000
@.25
Total Floor
Area 1,600 1,850 2,100 2,350 2,600 2,850 3,100 3,350
Allowed
s
This formula works to gradually decrease the total FAR as the lot size increases, and a majority of
the Citizen Advisory Committee thought that if this formula is adopted, the decrease in total FAR
should stop at.32 rather than continuing to decrease ad infinitum on larger lots. The formula would
be applied to all lot sizes up to 9,000 sq ft, and then for lots larger than 9,000 sq ft, the FAR would
remain at.32.
Comparing the.27 House FAR (Option B) to the Formula for Total FAR (Option B Revised)
Potential house sizes under Option B Revised depend on whether or not a garage (or other
accessory building)is built. if no garage is built, then potential house sizes are slightly larger than
under Option B. If a 600 sq ft garage is built, then potential house sizes are slightly smaller than
under Option B. Thus, the allowances are fairly similar; house allowances in Option B Revised
"bracket" the house allowances in Option B. Despite the range of potential house sizes under
Option B Revised, its formula results in a slightly lower total FAR than the equivalent total FAR
allowances under the.27 house FAR standard.
One difference is that a property owner would have more flexibility under Option B Revised to
allocate building space between a house and garage. It also eliminates an potential incentive to
build a garage to the 600 sq ft maximum which may exist under Option B.
Attachment 8 is a table comparing the two options on various lot sizes. Attachment 9 is a graphic
comparison of the two options and current standards.
133
February 1, 2011
Other Land Use Code Revisions
Both Options contain two minor, technical clarifications to theLand Use Code in the NCL and NCM
zones, along with some minor text edits. The technical clarifications are related to the relevant
zoning standards, and would revise the way that house size is measured as described below:
1. Close the "volume loophole"that currently allows a single-story house to have twice the
volume ofa two-story house. The Ordinance language would count space as a second floor,
regardless of whether the floor is built, where the height of the space exceeds that of a
typical one-story house. Staff believes this will be a rarely invoked, but worthwhile,
clarification.
2. Change the point of measurement for side wall height to be at the property line rather than
finished grade at the base of the side wall. There is wide agreement that raising the ground
level against aside wall should not reduce the height measurement ofnew construction. The
reasoning is that the height impacts ofa side wall are the same, whether or not dirt is piled
against the wall.
In addition, in order to help ensure that any variance of the new house size standards adopted by
Ordinance No. 003, 2011, does not result in new construction or additions that are incompatible
with the neighborhood, the Ordinance also amends Section 2.10.2 of the Land Use Code,pertaining
to variances, to require that any application for such variance of these new standards be
accompanied by a written recommendation from a committee of the Landmark Preservation
Commission, as authorized under Section 2-278(b)(5) of the City Code.
Two-Year Review
Both Ordinance options also include a provision directing the CityManager to submit an evaluation
report to the City Council no later than January 31, 2013, on the experience with implementation
of this Ordinance. The report will assess whether implementation has achieved the purposes of
furthering the compatibility of additions, alterations and new houses, without hindering needed
improvements and reinvestment in property, or creating undue hardships on affected property
owners desiring to expand their houses.
Due to the interplay of multiple implementation actions resulting from this study, i.e., design
assistance, house size limits, house measurement clarifications, etc., there will not be one single
measurement ofsuccess. All of the adopted changes must be evaluated in their totality to determine
whether the process results in more compatible structures. Staff will monitor and compile objective
and subjective data including, but not limited to:
• "Before-and-after"photos.
• Variance requests heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals, and outcomes.
• Log of citizen complaints and other comments.
• Size of the "original"structure; size of the finished structure.
• Log ofproperty owners that participate in the Design Assistance Program, the amount they
were awarded, and outcomes.
• Log of property owners who seek design consultation from the LPC, and outcomes.
134
February 1, 2011
The evaluation report will be reviewed with the Landmark Preservation Commission, Planning and
Zoning Board, and Zoning Board of Appeals. Input from these boards and commissions will then
be included in a presentation of the report to City Council forfinal evaluation and discussion ofany
further actions that may be warranted.
Other House Size Limit Options Considered Since First Reading
Council requested that staff explore alternative house size limit options prior to Second Reading of
the Ordinance. Options considered include:
1. Increasing the FAR from .27 to a slightly higher allowance.
2. Using a formula for house FAR combined with sliding scale for garages
Increasing the FAR
For those concerned that a.27 house FAR is too limiting, one straightforward solution would be to
simply increase the FAR. The Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) met on January 10, 2011, to .
discuss the.27 house FAR and alternative options. Ultimately, the CAC recommended that Council
increase the house FAR to.30. The Committee preferred applying one FAR standard to all lot sizes,
and thought that the house size allowed under a .30 house FAR standard is reasonable. Table 3
shows house sizes under this proposal.
Table 3:House Floor Area Allowed with.30 House FAR Standard
Lot Size 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
(s )
House
Floor
Area 1,200 1,500 1,800 2,100 2,400 2,700 3,000 3,300
Allowed
s t
Again, in order to accurately compare the magnitude of change that would occur if the house FARs
were set at.30, the allowance for a 600 sq ft detached garage must be factored in. Then, the total
floor area allowed can be compared to the .40 total FAR and.50 total FAR existing standards.
Attachment 6 is a table comparing the .30 house FAR to existing standards.
Z Using a Formula for House FAR with Sliding Scale for Detached Garages
Another suggested method was to use a similarformula approach as proposed in Option B Revised,
but to adjust it to allow a maximum house FAR, rather than total FAR,and then include allowances
for a detached garage depending on lot size. As proposed, the first 3,000 sq ft of a lot would be
allowed a.40 FAR, with a .22 FAR applied to the remaining lot size, to find the allowance for the
house. Garages would then also be allowed, with up to 250 sq ft for lots up to 6,000 sq ft, 425 sq ft
for lots up to 9,500 sq ft, and 600 sq ft for all larger lots. Table 4 shows house and garage sizes
under this proposal.
135
February 1, 2011
Table 4: Total Floor Area Allo dBy House FAR Formula with a Sliding Scale for Gara es.
Lot Size 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
(s )
3,000 @.40 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Remainder 220 440 660 880 1,100 1,320 1,540 1,760
@.22
Allowed 1,420 1,640 1,860 2,080 2,300 2,520 2,740 2,960
House Size
Allowed
Detached 250 250 425 425 425 425 600 600
Garage
Total Floor
Area 1,670 1,890 2,285 2,505 2,725 2,945 3,340 3,560
Allowed
The purpose of this proposal was to limit the size ofgarages based on lot size to prevent smaller lots
from building a maximum sized 600 sq ft detached garage, which would likely seem out-of-scale,
and also to allow the particular house sizes that would result from the formula. Attachment 7 is a
table comparing this formula to existing standards.
Opposition to Reduction in Allowable Floor Area
Throughout the public process, concerns about larger new construction as a compatibility problem
have been countered by strong, widely held concerns that any lower building size limits or
additional design review requirements will hinder needed reinvestment and unduly hinder owners'
ability to expand houses to meet their needs and desires.
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. was hired to conduct a limited economic impact analysis
comparing the .27 house FAR standard with the previously proposed average plus 50% concept.
With regard to new house construction, all lots less than 7,400 sq ft would be restricted to homes
smaller than 2,000 sq ft using the.27 house FAR. Overall,.27 is more restrictive in terms of allowed
house size for smaller lots than for larger lots. Attachment 3 is the complete Economic Impact
Analysis.
Due to the amendments in the Land Use Code with regard to side wall height measurement and
basement height measurement, applicants will be required to hire a surveyor/engineer to prepare
an elevation certification to submit with their plans. This will result in approximately$300-600 of
additional cost for the applicants.
136
February 1, 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Staff finds no direct or definable impact on environmental resources with any of these items. One
concern that was raised in the process was the protection of solar access. After careful analysis,
staff determined that there is no reasonable new standard for defining or controlling property
owners'rights to solar access due to the established pattern of development. "
Megan Bolin, City Planner,reviewed the Ordinances approved on First Reading. Two options for
Ordinance No. 003,2011, are presented, along with the version previously approved. The purpose
of Ordinance No. 002, 2011, is to foster compatibility by assisting property owners and designing
context-sensitive new houses and additions. The Ordinance will increase the membership of the
Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) and allow the LPC to form a committee to offer
voluntary design consultation for interested property owners. The problem being addressed with
Ordinance No. 003, 2011, is that the NCL and NCM zoning standards for building size do not
effectively implement adopted policies of protecting the existing established neighborhood
character. Currently, the City allows for 40%of the lot to be covered by building floor area in the
NCL zone and 50% of the lot to be covered in the NCM zone. The existing development pattern
is characterized by a variety of lot sizes. The most significant change proposed by the Ordinance
would be to revise single family house size limits. Option B, approved on First Reading, would
adopt a 0.27 floor area ratio (FAR). Staff was asked to review other options which are presented
as Option B Revised and Option C. Both options propose to limit total FAR on a lot using a
formula; Option C includes an allowance for detached garages. The Ordinance would also require
applicants seeking a variance from the standards to first receive a recommendation from the LPC
committee. Bolin reviewed what does and does not constitute floor area and the changes made to
Option B since First Reading. The LPC voted unanimously to recommend Option B Revised. The
Planning and Zoning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals both unanimously recommend not
adopting any option of Ordinance No. 003, 2011. Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No.
002, 2011, and Option B Revised of Ordinance No. 003, 2011.
Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, thanked Council for considering existing character of
neighborhoods and supported a smaller floor area ratio.
Sean Dougherty, Fort Collins Board of Realtors President, supported Option C and asked Council
to consider the opinions of the Planning and Zoning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals.
Steve Whittall,400 Whedbee Street, By Design Homes, supported the Planning and Zoning Board
recommendation.
Ryan Schaffer,4745 Wheaton,Northern Colorado Commercial Association of Realtors President,
stated much investment has beenmade in the downtown area, without the restrictions contained in
these Ordinances.
Rick Hausman, 1813 Pawnee Drive, expressed concern the Ordinances would speak to an average
and discourage diversity and encouraged Council to adopt the option which would affect the least
number of homes.
137
February 1, 2011
Tom Tucker, 3019 Stanford, stated real estate in the downtown area sells and rents quickly and the
proposed Ordinances appear to fix a nonexistent problem. He encouraged Council to not adopt the
Ordinances.
Randy Shortridge,280 Circle Drive, stated there is no new trend regarding large houses being built
next to small houses and encouraged no changes.
Randy Zitti, 1626 Fantail Court, expressed concern there is no existing problem and only a small
number of existing homes would not conform under proposed regulations.
Heather Landenpera,280 Circle Drive,stated larger homes do not necessarily negatively impact the
environment and discouraged changes to current regulations.
Jan Krucky, 128 North Sherwood, showed photos of existing diversity in homes in downtown and
discourages changes to current regulations.
Connie Werner, 935 West Oak Street, thanked Ms. Bolin for her presentation and encouraged
Council to adopt new regulations.
Gina Janett, 730 West Oak, supported the Ordinance to cap housing size in order to maintain the
character and diversity of downtown.
Dian Sparling, 324 Jackson, supported changes to existing regulations in order to protect
neighborhoods and stated none of the proposals will discourage diversity or economic development.
Chris Guilla, 1300 West Stuart, realtor, opposed changes to existing regulations.
Brian Dagostino, 2421 Ridgecrest Road, realtor, opposed changes to existing regulations.
Laura Olive, 231 South Grant, realtor, opposed changes to existing regulations.
Glen Konen, 121 Sherwood, opposed changes to existing regulations until more research has been
completed.
Josh Shaughnessy, Fort Collins resident, stated the proposed regulations would not discourage
diversity or economic investment in downtown and supported proposed changes.
Jill Kuch, 709 Stover Street, expressed concern that all the proposed options are too restrictive but
Option C is the least restrictive.
Brad Kuch,709 Stover Street,opposed changes to current regulations but stated Option C is the least
restrictive of the proposals.
Roberto Torres, 522 West Magnolia,opposed changes in regulations citing over-complexity of the
proposed changes.
138
February 1, 2011
Mike Knowles,623 Monte Vista Avenue,supported a reduced floor area ratio and regulations which
would maintain the overall character of the neighborhood.
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, asked for clarification regarding the impact of carriage
houses on each proposed option.
Michelle Hickey-Crawford, 1015 Sycamore, opposed the Ordinances and stated new construction
has helped revitalize the neighborhood.
Troy Hiebsch, 620 West Oak Street, opposed changes to current regulations.
Chase Eckert, (not speaking on behalf of ASCSU), encouraged Council to take more time with its
decision.
Jim Reidhead,707 West Mountain,stated the proposed options are impractical and emphasized the
importance of design over size.
Bruce Brown, 425 North Whitcomb, emphasized the importance of design over size and opposed
the Ordinances.
Jim Wurz, 425 North Sherwood, stated new home construction has not revitalized the downtown
area and stated there is no other area in town where there are no design or size standards.
Cynthia Refller, 124 Fishback Avenue, encouraged Council to take more time with its decision.
Debbie Healy, 4918 La Paz Drive, expressed concern regarding government intrusion on private
property rights.
Susan Krule Faucett architect, encouraged Council to consider the opinion of the Planning and
Zoning Board and opposed the Ordinances.
Jim Givens, 618 Endicott, opposed the Ordinances.
Clint Skutchan,Fort Collins Board of Realtors Executive Vice-President,encouraged staff to more
adequately participate in two-way communication and supported Option C.
Dee Amick, 221 Park Street, stated the City has an obligation to protect and preserve existing
housing in the downtown area.
Steve Mack, 420 East Laurel, stated existing neighborhood character should be maintained.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Councilmember Manvel asked why design standards were not part of the proposal. Bolin replied
design guidelines were developed covering various aspects of character, however, a majority of
Council did not opt to place regulatory control over design aspects.
139
February 1, 2011
Councilmember Troxell asked how substantive changes between First and Second Reading can be.
City Attorney Roy replied the City Charter states that no ordinance shall be so altered on Second
Reading so as to change its original purpose.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the proposed options and whether they pertain to design
standards. Bolin replied in the negative.
Councilmember Manvel noted the option changes have resulted from citizen input.
Councilmember Troxell suggested the Ordinances should not be adopted as there is actually not a
problem. He asked how Option C has been vetted and what consequences may result from its
adoption. Bolin replied Options B and C apply the same formula, with the exception of the 200
square foot allowance for a detached garage.
Councilmember Troxell asked how the carriage house aspect would fit into Option C. Peter Barnes,
Zoning Supervisor,replied the provisions in the NCL and NCM zones that apply to carriage houses
are not affected by any of the options as they are considered a principal building.
Councilmember Troxell asked what criteria would be used to review proposed variances. Karen
McWilliams, Historic Preservation, replied the criteria used by the Landmark Preservation
Commission are set forth in the Land Use Code. A report summarizing the findings of the
Commission would be presented for each case.
Councilmember Troxell asked about projects currently under review. Bolin replied full plan
submittal would be required prior to April 1,2011,at which time any new regulations would go into
effect.
Councilmember Roy asked that Option C of Ordinance No.003,2011,be read into the record. City
Attorney Roy complied.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
003, 2011, Option C, including revisions read into the record by City Attorney Roy, on Second
Reading.
Councilmember Manvel noted citizens have voiced negative opinions about various aspects of this
issue for many years. He discussed the scatter diagrams of downtown home additions and stated
changing the standards would have had almost no impact on renovation in Old Town in the last 10
years. Large homes should be built on larger lots as opposed to small lots.
Councilmember Troxell noted large homes exist all throughout Old Town and stated a problem does
not appear to exist.
Councilmember Manvel stated 4%of the homes in the area are 2500 square feet or larger,most of
which are on Mountain Avenue and East Elizabeth.
140
February 1, 2011
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked that staff examine the architectural standpoint and bring that back to
Council for its consideration. Mapes replied Land Use Code maintenance will be completed in the
spring.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated property rights should not allow a property owner to not consider
impacts to neighbors. Core Area Neighborhoods have been a concept in Fort Collins since the
1980's. He stated this particular process has been ongoing for 13 months and he would support the
motion as it is positive progress.
Councilmember Roy stated Old Town is a valued part of Fort Collins that needs to be preserved.
Councilmember Troxell stated this item has not been an example of good governance as it has been
considerably changed since First Reading. Old Town should be preserved by letting its uniqueness
continue.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the citizens who spoke and thanked Councilmember Manvel for
his work on the item. This option is a reasonable compromise which will allow reasonable family
homes in Old Town.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson disagreed with Councilmember Troxell and stated an appeal process does
exist for individuals seeking variances.
Councilmember Troxell reiterated his stance that a problem does not exist.
Mayor Hutchinson stated a significant amount of support has been shown by citizens for some type
of regulation change. Option C will allow for diversity and flexibility and will not regulate design
standards.
City Attorney Roy read a section of the Ordinance which stated the effective start date will be April
1, 2011.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
002, 2011, on Second Reading.
Mayor Hutchinson stated this item will increase the possibility of success for a property owner
seeking a variance.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
141
February 1, 2011
Ordinance No. 009, 2011,
Authorizing the Lease of City Property at
200 West Mountain Avenue, Suite C,to Our Global Village Museum of
Arts and Cultures For Up to Three Years. Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff's memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 18, 2011, authorizes a lease to
Our Global Village Museum of Arts and Cultures for space located at 200 West Mountain Avenue,
Suite C. "
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, suggested the space in question may be better suited as
incubator space for a start-up business.
Councilmember Troxell asked about future plans for the property in general. Ken Maranon,
Operations Services Director, replied the intent is to rent the space until it can be redeveloped.
Councilmember Troxell asked about any type of out clause for the proposed lease. Helen Matson,
Real Estate Services Manager,replied most leases have an out clause allowing for termination with
a one-year notice.
CouncilmemberTroxell stated the space should be a dynamic space. City Manager Atteberry agreed
and stated he would provide a copy of the out clause for Councilmember Troxell.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
009, 2011,on Second Reading.
Mayor Hutchinson supported the proposed use of the building.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson supported the proposed use of the building and noted it could be an
incubator space for the Museum.
City Manager Atteberry supported the proposed use of the building.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell.. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
142
February 1, 2011
Resolution 2011-008
Authorizing and Directing Staff to Prepare an Existing Conditions
Survey and an Urban Renewal Plan for the Midtown Area, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Midtown Redevelopment Study, completed September 2010, included both a market and
economic feasibility analysis of the Midtown Commercial Corridor. The result of this Study was an
Action Plan with implementation strategies, priorities, and time frames to proceed with the
redevelopment envisioned. One of the main recommended actions is the completion of an Existing
Conditions Survey for the corridor. The survey would evaluate the statutory requirements for the
formation of additional Urban Renewal Plan Areas along the corridor. The City Council
established an Urban Renewal Authority(URA)to provide assistance to redevelopmentprojects in
specified areas of the city and to be an economic development tool for otherwise distressed
locations. Staff is seeking Council's authorization to proceed with the preparation of an Existing
Conditions Survey and draft an Urban Renewal Plan for Midtown.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Midtown, the South College Avenue commercial corridor runningfrom Prospect Road to just south
ofHarmony Road,has been in decline as a prominent regional destination for retail uses. Increased
regional competition, aging and outmoded space and the impact of the national recession have
contributed to approximately 650,000 square feet of vacant space.
In 2009, City Council recognized that the Midtown corridor deserved and required an immediate
assessment of its economic outlook and community aspirations for its future, and directed staff to
initiate the Midtown Redevelopment Study. This process occurred from late October 2009 to May
2010, during which the consultant team worked with the City, stakeholders and the public to assess
Midtown issues, and make recommendations for its future and outline next steps for action.
The recommended actions to help achieve the redevelopment envisioned by the Midtown
Redevelopment Study include additional design and planning efforts,financial feasibility analysis
and further refinement of public financing options.
Action AI of the Implementation Strategy directs the City to "Implement other Midtown Corridor
Redevelopment Opportunities...Prepare an existing conditions report for the Midtown Study area
(excluding Prospect South and Foothills Mall area previously addressed). " See Attachment 2 for
the entire language within Action A
The Existing Conditions Survey will describe the conditions in accordance with the Colorado
statutory definition of"blight"that exist in the study area. Consideration should then be given to
the creation of an Urban Renewal Plan for the area to eliminate the conditions that constitute
"blight"and to further promote the goals and objectives of City Plan.
143
February 1, 2011
Urban Renewal Plan Areas have the following objectives that are consistent with City Plan:
PRINCIPLE GM-8
"The City will promote compatible infill and redevelopment in areas within the Growth
Management Area boundary. "
POLICY GM-8.1
"Redevelopment and infill development will be encouraged in targeted locations. The
purpose of these areas is to channel growth where it will be beneficial and can best improve
access to jobs, housing and services with fewer and shorter auto trips...A major goal is to
increase economic activity in the area to benefit existing residents and businesses and,
where necessary,provide stimulus to redevelop. These areas should be defined from City
Plan, Subarea Plans, Zoning and locational criteria such as:
• Underutilized land;
• Areas already undergoing positive change, which is expected to continue;
• Areas where infrastructure capacity exists;
• Areas where public investment is warranted from a policy perspective;
• Areas with special opportunities, such as where major public or private investment
is already planned;
• Transportation opportunities:
o along travel corridors
o along enhanced travel corridors"
POLICY GM-8 S
"The City will consider opportunities, and the costs and benefits for targeted public investment
in order to encourage redevelopment and infill development in appropriate locations. "
The following are the boundaries of the area staff will study (see Attachment 1)for the potential
designation as the Midtown Urban Renewal Plan Area:
North: The southern boundary of the Prospect South study area boundary;
East: The north-south alley that runs between South College Avenue and Remington Street,
approximately one to two parcels East of College Avenue. Excluding Foothills Mall, using
JFK Parkway to the east beyond the Mall;
South: One block south of Harmony Road; and
West: The BNSF railroad tracks, along with the proposed Mason Corridor BRT.
Staff will further define the boundary as the evaluation of the existing conditions survey proceeds
and a more in-depth assessment regarding the needs of the area is made.
In 1982, the Fort Collins City Council created an Urban Renewal Authority(URA)and designated
itself as the governing board(known as the "Authority'). The boundaries of the URA are the City
144
February 1, 2011
limits. The Fort Collins URA was created to prevent and eliminate conditions in the community
related to certain "blight factors, "as defined in the State's Urban Renewal Laws. The URA has
broad powers to carry out its statutory mandate. Included are the powers to enter into contracts,
borrow funds, and acquire property voluntarily or by eminent domain, among others. Urban
renewal projects may be financed in a variety of ways. URAs are authorized to issue bonds and
accept grants from public or private sources. The principal method of financing urban renewal
projects is through obligations secured by property tax or sales tax increments from the project
area, or "tax increment financing" (TIF). The Authority exercises its powers by planning and
carrying out urban renewal plans in urban renewal areas.
The major purpose of establishing the Midtown Urban Renewal Plan would be to permit the
utilization of tax incrementfinancing in redevelopmentprojects. TIFis a tool that is commonly used
throughout Colorado for a variety of redevelopment and economic development purposes. TIF has
also proven to be an effective tool in the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area to overcome
significant public improvement costs and to make its retail projects more competitive in the region
and state. Given the lack of economic tools at the City's disposal and the proven effectiveness of
TIF,staff believes that utilizing TIF is the most effective toolto help keep the targeted redevelopment
areas competitive with other communities along the Front Range. The obvious advantage of using
TIF is that public assistance toward the development is driven by enhancements to the assessed
valuation of the property and is funded through property tax revenues versus sales tax revenues.
Authorizing staff to proceed with conducting the Existing Conditions Survey and preparation of the
Midtown Urban Renewal Plan does not commit the Council to formally adopting the Survey and
Plan at this time. City Council may, however,eventually adopt a resolution finding that blight exists
within all, or a portion of, the study area and determining that the rehabilitation and/or
redevelopment of the area is in the interest of the public health, safety, morals or welfare of the
residents of Fort Collins, and may adopt another resolution officially establishing the Midtown
Urban Renewal Plan. The Plan will examine the feasibility and desirability of implementing an
urban renewal program and will make recommendations for correcting those conditions
contributing to "blight".
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The funding for this survey was approved through the Budgeting for Outcomes(BFO)process 2011-
2012. The economic impact will be further defined by the results of this survey.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No environmental impacts have been identified at this time. The survey will reveal any
environmental impacts in the future to address. "
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, suggested the North College URA should have regulations
and a business plan and expressed concern there is no oversight committee for TIF projects. He
stated TIF should be used with caution.
145
February 1, 2011
Jim Palmer,South Fort Collins Business Association,thanked Council for its recognition of the need
for mid-town revitalization. He encouraged Council to explore options including not only the
Foothills Fashion Mall.
Councilmember Roy asked about the impacts to TIF financing for other entities, such as Poudre
School District. He encouraged an accounting of what funds are not being received by those
entities. Christina Vincent, Urban Renewal Authority Program Manager, replied that information
could be required as part of the policies and procedures. Typically, a preliminary County impact
report is completed showing what impacts a TIF project would have.
City Manager Attebetry stated the County and School District are very sophisticated in
understanding impacts ofURA and DDA projects. He supported Councilmember Roy's suggestion.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the proposed Resolution would only begin an existing conditions survey.
Councilmember Poppaw stated some of the comments may be premature.
Councilmember Troxell asked why the intersection of College and Harmony is not included within
the study area boundary. Vincent replied the boundary matches the one used in the mid-town
redevelopment study,but is flexible. City Manager Atteberry stated this study will likely affirm the
need to include that intersection.
Vincent stated the draft study will be brought before Council at a work session on April 26, 2011.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2011-008.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated Fort Collins uses TIF selectively and effectively. He asked for a
report on whether or not the state backfills URA increment monies as it does DDA increment
monies. Vincent replied former Finance Director Chuck Seest confirmed in 2009 that the state does
not backfill for the North College URA. She stated she would acquire more recent information.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson requested a one-page memo on the topic.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
146
February 1, 2011
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
147
February 15, 2011
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, February 15,
2011, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was
answered by the following Councilmembers: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
David May, Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce Director, requested that Item No. 7, Second
Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2011, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City of
Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment to Article Hof the City Charter, Pertaining to Council District
Boundaries, be withdrawn.and placed on the discussion agenda.
Thomas Edwards, 1101 South Bryan, Fort Collins Bicycle Coalition, suggested the City uphold
bicycle laws more effectively.
Kevin Cross, 300 Peterson, Strength Through Peace Steering Committee, expressed concern
regarding the invitation made by Character Fort Collins to John Ashcroft for a speaking engagement.
The speaking engagement has since been cancelled; however, Mr. Cross opposed the relationship
between the City and Character Fort Collins.
Ann Ruddy, 3724 Kentford Road, opposed the invitation made by Character Fort Collins to John
Ashcroft and opposed the City's involvement with Character Fort Collins.
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, agreed with Mr. May's comments regarding Item No. 7 and
opposed various City policies with regard to an open records request he submitted last year.
Delores Williams, 415 Mason Court, expressed concern regarding the City's involvement with
Character Fort Collins.
Bob Powell, 1309 Globe Court, stated he founded Character Fort Collins with then Mayor Ray
Martinez in 2001. He supported Character Fort Collins and encouraged the City to review and
investigate the organization.
James Owiny, 1004 Comanche Drive,Human Relations Commission,discussed the HRC-sponsored
visit from the Colorado Civil Rights'Division on Wednesday, March 2, 2011, which will involve
training regarding employee discrimination.
148
February 15, 2011
Sandy Lemberg, 6851 Poudre Canyon, expressed concern regarding Character Fort Collins and
suggested an open process should have occurred when the relationship between the organization and
the City was established. He suggested the City should revisit its relationship with the organization.
Laurie Stolen,Character Fort Collins Vice-President,apologized for the disruption around the John
Ashcroft invitation and asked that citizens consider the purpose of Character Fort Collins.
Evan Stafford, 516 Stover Street, Green Rooster Natural Medicine, discussed his delivery-only
medical marijuana business(MMB). He asked staff and Council to examine the recently-produced
maps regarding acceptable locations for MMBs. He encouraged grandfathering existing MMBs.
Dennis Moddelmog, 1805 Chesapeake Court, supported Character Fort Collins and its Poudre
School District curriculum.
Zach Heath, 2957 Telluride Court, expressed concern regarding Character Fort Collins' ties to
religious groups.
Sue Beck-Fenkiss, 1814 Wallenberg Drive, Cultural Resources Board, supported Item No. 14,
Resolution 2011-011 Adopting the Recommendations of the Cultural Resources Board Regarding
Fort Fund Disbursements, and thanked Council for its support.
Josh Kerson,244 North College,electric bicycle store owner,supported allowing the use of electric
bikes on City trails.
Rachel Mueller, Fort Collins resident, discussed the need for student housing in Fort Collins and
encouraged inclusion of students in the community.
Sally Miles, Fort Collins resident, encouraged Council to investigate the connection between
Character Fort Collins and religious organizations.
Chase Eckert,ASCSU,encouraged Council to develop a comprehensive,long-term plan to address
student housing.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset, Center for Justice, Peace, and Environment, expressed concern
regarding the expense to the City of Character Fort Collins and its ties to Bill Gothard and religious
organizations.
Ray Martinez, 4121 Stoneridge Court, stated Character Fort Collins originated during his term as
Mayor and he supported the organization.
Becky Dixon,Character Fort Collins Executive Director,invited citizens to Character Day held the
third Thursday of each month.
Steven Laffey, former Rhode Island town Mayor, thanked Council, staff, and citizens for a great
City.
149
February 15, 2011
Brett Kemp 639 Stoneham Court,Character Fort Collins President,discussed Resolution 2001-117,
which started the Character movement in Fort Collins. He stated the City thrives on diversity and
the Character initiative started to promote and encourage that diversity.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Roy asked about the number of bicycle citations issued by CSU versus the City and
agreed with Mr. Edwards that bicycle laws need to be enforced. City Manager Atteberry replied
staff would prepare a report.
Councilmember Roy encouraged staff to meet with CSU regarding student housing solutions. He
opposed the selection of John Ashcroft for a speaking engagement through Character Fort Collins
but supported the positive aspects of the organization.
Councilmember Troxell supported allowing electric bicycles on City trails. City Manager Atteberry
stated staff is working on the issue and it will be vetted through the Transportation Board and Parks
and Recreation Board prior to coming before Council in 2 or 3 months.
Councilmember Troxell thanked the citizens who spoke on both sides of the Character Fort Collins
issue and expressed the need for an active discussion to determine the best direction for the
community.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson suggested the Natural Areas Department and Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board be part of the electric bike discussion. He thanked the Cultural Resources Board
for its work and recommendations.
Councilmember Kottwitz supported the formation of a long-term student housing plan. City
Manager Atteberry replied long-term action is currently proposed for 2013 and beyond. The priority
could be changed by Council.
Mayor Hutchinson suggested Council examine approaches at Leadership Planning Team regarding
fact-finding around Character Fort Collins.
A Zenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there are no changes to the published agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 010, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects in Accordance with
the Downtown Plan of Development.
Over the past year, proceeds from the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) tax
increment finance revenues that have not been spent have accumulated interest earnings.
150
February 15, 2011
These funds, as well as the project savings, need to be appropriated for expenditure. This
Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 1, 2011, appropriates
unanticipated revenue from interest earnings in the amount of $242,561, from project
savings in the amount of $289,294 and from the 2010 Bond Series "Bonded but not
Appropriated" bond proceeds in the amount of $809,145, for a total appropriation of
$1,341,000. The DDA Board has authorized the expenditure on the various projects and
programs.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2011, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered
Electors of the City of Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment to Article II of the City Charter,
Pertaining to Council District Boundaries.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 1,2011, submits to the
voters at the April 5, 2011 election, a proposed Charter amendment modifying the method
used for periodically adjusting Council district boundaries. The proposed Charter
amendment will require the City Clerk's office to adjust Council districts on the basis of
population rather than the number of registered electors.
8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 012, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for Police Services and for the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously
Appropriated in the Police Services Program Budget.
A grant in the amount of$16,728 has been received from the Bohemian Foundation and
additional funds have also been received in the amount of $3,247 from the Colorado
Division of Criminal Justice,Juvenile Diversion,for the continuation of Restorative Justice
Services, which includes the RESTORE program for shoplifting offenses, and the
Restorative Justice Conferencing Program for all other offenses. Restorative Justice is an
alternative method of holding a young offender accountable by facilitating a meeting with
the offender,the victim/victim representative,and members of the community to determine
the harm caused by the crime, and how to repair the harm. By identifying and repairing the
harm caused by the crime, Criminal Justice officials are optimistic repeat offenses by these
youth will be reduced and the needs and concerns of the victims and affected community
will be addressed.
9. First Reading of Ordinance No.013,2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and
Transferring Prior Year Reserves in the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force Reserve to the
General Fund for the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force.
This Ordinance appropriates grant funds and money from the Northern Colorado Drug Task
Force seizure reserve. Fort Collins Police Services has received two grants from the Office
of National Drug Control Policy and U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the Northern
Colorado Drug Task Force (NCDTF) to help fund the investigation of illegal narcotics
activities in Larimer County. These two grant awards will be used in conjunction with ,
NCDTF reserves to pay for Task Force operating expenses in 2011. Combined, these three
items equal an appropriation of$348,649.
151
February 15, 2011
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2011, Designating the Durward/Hartshorn/Day
Residence and Garage, 1022 South College Avenue as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to
Chapter 14 of the CiIy Code.
The owner of the property, Kelly Day, is initiating this request for Fort Collins Landmark
designation for the property at 1022 South College Avenue. The property has individual
significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standard 2, as the home to
important Colorado State University faculty members Margaret Durward from 1911 - 1930
and Dr. Duane Hartshorn, from 1931 - 1938; and Standard 3, as an unaltered example of an
Early 20th Century Vernacular/ Early Craftsman residential dwelling, embodying many
distinctive characteristics of these architectural styles.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No.015,2011,Designating the Wisely/Willard Residence, 1114
West Mountain Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
The owners of the property,Stephen and Kathleen Willard,are initiating this request for Fort
Collins Landmark designation for the property at 1114 West Mountain Avenue. The
property has individual significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standard
3, as a nice example of Early 20th Century Vernacular Architecture, with a particularly
distinctive roof structure.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2011, Authorizing an Agricultural Lease of City-
Owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm for Up to Five Years.
Maxwell Farm, an agricultural property located in the Wellington Community Separator,
was purchased in February 2009 by the Natural Areas Program (NAP). The intent of the
purchase was to conserve the agricultural value and limit development within the Separator,
and not to develop as a traditional Natural Area property. As such,the intent of the NAP is
to sell the property with a conservation easement in place. However, to date, the NAP has
not been successful in locating a buyer.
At the time of purchase, the previous owner reserved a right of entry on the property to
produce and sell crops and agricultural products for a period of two years. That right will
expire in February 2011. The proposed lease would extend the previous owner's use of the
property for agricultural production until the NAP is able to sell the property. Lease rates
are based on the fair market value and would be adjusted on an annual basis.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 017, 2011, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Parcel of
Stormwater Utility Property to PS Poudre River, LLC.
In 2006, the City constructed the Oxbow Levee on the Cache La Poudre River to reduce
flooding risk and damages to a section of the city known as the Buckingham neighborhood,
located north and east of the River. The Oxbow Levee is located between Linden Street and
Lincoln Avenue.The Stormwater Master Planning and Floodplain Administration Division
152
February 15, 2011
has identified a small remnant parcel located adjacent to and east of the Oxbow Levee that
is no longer needed for flood control purposes. The adjacent property owner, PS Poudre
River, LLC, has expressed interest in purchasing this small parcel from the City.
14. Resolution 2011-011 Adopting the Recommendations of the Cultural Resources Board
Re.arding Fort Fund Disbursements.
The Cultural Development and Programming and Tourism Programming accounts (Fort
Fund) provide grants to fund community events. This Resolution adopts the
recommendations from the Cultural Resources Board to disburse these funds.
15. Resolution 2011-012 Supporting the Grant Application for a Local Parks and Outdoor
Recreation Grant from the State Board of the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund for the
Disc Golf Course at Hug
hes Stadium.
The City is applying for a Great Outdoors Colorado Local Parks and Outdoor Recreation
Grant. Staff is preparing an application for the Disc Golf Course at Hughes Stadium project
for the spring grant cycle. Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO)requires this resolution to be
submitted as part of the grant package.
16. Resolution 201 1 0-01 3 Relating To The Review Process For City Fees.
At the December 21, 2010 City Council meeting, Council considered on Second Reading,
Ordinance No. 125, 2010 amending the City Code to increase the amounts of Capital
Improvement Expansion Fees to reflect changes in inflation. At that time, City Council had
questions about how this action related to Resolution 2006-113, which provides a process
for implementing City fee increases. City Council deferred taking action on Second Reading
and requested that information be brought back regarding the scope of Resolution 2006-113.
After that information was provided,Council adopted Ordinance No. 125,2010,on January
4, 2011. Because there is some remaining uncertainty concerning the intended scope of
Resolution 2006-113,this Resolution stays application of Resolution 2006-113 until Council
and City staff can revisit the fee review process.
17. Resolution 2011-014 Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions.
This Resolution makes appointments to fill current vacancies on the Air Quality Advisory
Board, the Water Board and the Women's Commission.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 010, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects in Accordance with
the Downtown Plan of Development.
153
February 15, 2011
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2011, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered
Electors of the City of Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment to Article II of the City Charter,
Pertaining to Council District Boundaries.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 012, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for Police Services and for the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously
Appropriated in the Police Services Program Budget.
9. First Reading of Ordinance No.013,2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and
Transferring Prior Year Reserves in the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force Reserve to the
General Fund for the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2011, Designating the Durward/Hartshorn/Day
Residence and Garage, 1022 South College Avenue as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to
Chapter 14 of the City Code.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No.015,2011,Designating the Wisely/Willard Residence, 1114
West Mountain Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2011, Authorizing an Agricultural Lease of City-
Owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm for Up to Five Years.
Councilmember Troxell withdrew Item No. 7, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 011, 2011,
Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City of Fort Collins a Proposed Amendment
to Article II of the City Charter, Pertaining to Council District Boundaries.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson withdrew Item No. 13, First Reading of Ordinance No. 017, 2011,
Authorizing the Conveyance of a Parcel of Stormwater Utility Property to PS Poudre River, LLC,
and Item No. 17,Resolution 2011-014 Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt and
approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consent Calendar Follow-ua
Councilmember Manvel thanked the Cultural Resources Board for its service and recommendations.
154
February 15, 2011
Staff Reports
Helen Migchelbrink, City Engineer,presented an award received from the American Public Works
Association for Public Information. Claire Thomas, Economic Health Office, detailed the
submission and award.
Items Relating to the Adoption of Plan Fort Collins,
including Updates to City Plan,
Transportation Master Plan,Master Street Plan, and Pedestrian Plan, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
t
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 2011-015 Adopting Revisions to City Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan.
B. Resolution 2011-016Adopting Revisions to the Transportation Master Plan, an Element of
the City's Comprehensive Plan.
C. Resolution 2011-017Adopting Revisions to the Master Street Plan, an Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Master Plan.
D. Resolution 2011-018 Adopting Revisions to the Pedestrian Plan, an Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
The Resolutions presented for City Council's adoption culminate the year-long planning process
known as Plan Fort Collins. The name Plan Fort Collins refers to the process to prepare major
updates to four key documents: City Plan, Transportation Master Plan,Master Street Plan, and the
Pedestrian Plan. City Plan is the comprehensive plan for the City of Fort Collins, and illustrates
how we envision Fort Collins over the next 25 years and beyond, showing us how we can get there
step by step. The Transportation Master Plan (TMP), an element of City Plan, is also a long term
vision document that defines the long-term multi-modal transportation system that Fort Collins
desires in the future, and it also serves as a comprehensive referenceguide regarding transportation
issues. The TMP includes the Master Street Plan, which serves as a map of the City's long range
vision for its major street network. The Pedestrian Plan, also an issue specific element of City Plan,
addresses citywide pedestrian needs, outlines issues, and proposes solutions to problems for
pedestrians.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
City Council has previously held eleven work sessions regarding various aspects of Plan Fort
Collins, asking questions, and providing policy direction; Plans have been revised in response to
the input that the project team received. The following information is provided as a high level
summary of the history, approach, process, vision, general content, and nest steps of Plan Fort
Collins.
155
February 15, 2011
The name Plan Fort Collins refers to the process to prepare major updates to four key documents:
City Plan, Master Transportation Plan, Master Street Plan, and the Pedestrian Plan. All of these
documents are advisory (the Master Street Plan is also regulatory as a referenced regulatory
document in both Articles 2 and 3 of the Land Use Code)and provide policy directions for ongoing
decision-making, set the stage for development regulations, set forth priority actions to make the
vision a reality, and to consider plan amendments.
City Plan is the comprehensive plan for the City of Fort Collins, and illustrates how we envision
Fort Collins over the next 25 years and beyond,showing its how we can get there step by step. State
statutes authorize municipalities to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan for the physical
development of their jurisdictions. The more general principles and policies of City Plan may be
followed by issue or area specific plans, e.g., the Parks and Recreation Policy Plan and the Eastside
Neighborhood Plan. These more specific plans are considered to be "elements"of City Plan.
The Transportation Master Plan (TMP), an element of City Plan, is also a long-term vision
document that defines the long-term multi-modal transportation system that Fort Collins desires in
the future; and it also serves as a comprehensive reference guide regarding transportation issues.
The TMP includes the Master Street Plan(MSP)that serves as a map of the City's long range vision
for its major street network. The MSP update incorporated a new triple bottom line analysis
process to evaluate the street network based upon traditional transportation analysis and modeling
as well as economic, environmental, and human factors. The MSP is used in a variety of ways,
including development review, calculating Street Oversizing Fees, and planning transportation
connections.
The Pedestrian Plan, also an issue specific element of City Plan, addresses citywide pedestrian
needs, outlines issues and proposes solutions to problems for pedestrians.
1. History
The initial formulation of City Plan began in 1995 and involved a two year process working with
City Council, an advisory committee, boards and commissions, City staff, a consulting team, and
the public. Adoption of the original City Plan occurred in 1997. The City first developed a
Transportation Master Plan (TMP) in concert with the development of City Plan in 1997. The
City's first Pedestrian Plan was adopted in 1996
For all oftheseplans to fzmction over time,periodic updates are necessary to respond to significant
trends or changes in the economic, physical, social or political conditions of Fort Collins. The
original City Plan directs the City to update the City Plan and the TMP every five years. The first
City Plan and TMP update was initiated in 2002 (adoption occurred in 2004).
2. Plan Fort Collins:A New Approach
In the fall of 2009, a new approach was initiated called Plan Fort Collins. Most believe that the
nest 25 years of development will be vastly different from the past 25 years. And, if our future
156
February 15, 2011
community is to be as successful as, or more than we have been in the past in managing change,
Plan Fort Collins had to be significantly more than just another five year update.
There are a number of issues and conditions that led to this conclusion. Fort Collins could reach
a quarter million residents or more by mid-century, bringing more jobs, more people, more traffic,
more expectations of City facilities and services, etc. The current financial situation certainly will
,have a bearing on how the community develops. National and regional trends will also impact our
community.
Dramatic changes at the local level are also occurring. During the next 25 years, it is likely that
the city will "build out"its growth management area, but most believe that people and businesses
will continue to find Fort Collins an attractive place to live and work. Through the Plan Fort
Collins process, new issues emerged and needed to be dealt with. These new issues included energy
use,sense of community, new transportation technologies, regional competition, healthy life styles,
climate change, green building, and fiscal sustainability, to name a few.
Since 1995, when the original City Plan and TMP documents were adopted, these dramatically
changing conditions necessitated afresh examination of how we want our community to look and
be like---how we conduct business, recreate, travel, live and interact with the broader region and
beyond---over the next 25 years or more---Plan Fort Collins.
Planning and Public Outreach Process
To meet these challenges, a new, dramatically different planning process was used. The planning
process involved three distinct phases:
• Phase 1 — "Understand" - included understanding where the city is today (and how have
we been doing in the seven topical areas); and, what trends are shaping our present and
future.
• Phase 2 — "Envision and Analyze" — included identifying "big ideas and vision"; and,
developing and analyzing a comprehensive list of key policy choices for the future.
• Phase 3— "Adopt/Implement"—includedpreparing draft Plans;developingpriorityactions
and strategies to implement the plans;and, bringingforward a set of implementation actions
that will be adopted concurrently with the adoption of the plans. Attachment 11 provides
a Summary of Major Changes to the November 2010 Public Review Draft City Plan and
Transportation Master Plan.
Underpinning all of the phases was an extraordinarypublic process approach to communicate with
and engage the community, including:
• eNETWORK, consisting of a dedicated website and electronic media for communication,
input, and on-line polling
• Community NETWORK, consisting of City Council, City boards and commissions,and other
groups and organizations. (See Attachment 7, Plan Fort Collins Event Log and Attachment
8, Public Comments on Draft Plan Fort Collins Documents)
157
February 15, 2011
• EventNETWORK, consisting offace-to face events, including public meetings, open houses
and workshops; focus group meetings; road show presentations; and meetings with
individual citizens. (See Attachment 7, Plan Fort Collins Event Log and Attachment 8,
Public Comments on Draft Plan Fort Collins Documents)
3. Vision
The overall vision forPlan Fort Collins is to make the city a World Class Community. Three broad
themes underlie this vision as follows:
• "Innovate"—reflecting our community's willingness to lead and serve as a model for other
communities.
• "Sustain"—focusing on the long term human, economic and environmental health of our
community.
• "Connect"—connecting the community physically, technologically, and socially.
At the City Council's direction, Plan Fort Collins was closely coordinated with the biannual
Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process. As a result, both the updated City Plan and
Transportation Master Plan documents were restructured to closely align with the results areas of
the BFO process. The seven topical chapters of City Plan are:
• Economic Health.
• Environmental Health.
• Community and Neighborhood Livability.
• Safety and Wellness.
• Culture, Parks, and Recreation.
• Transportation.
• High Performing Community.
The Transportation Master Plan was similarly organized around the BFO pttrchasingstrategies for
the Transportation Results Area as follows:
• Quality Travel Surfaces and Infrastructure.
• Integrated Land Use and Transportation.
• Mode Choice/Mobility Options.
• Increase Awareness.
• Traffic Flow.
4. Sustainability—Economic, Environmental and Human
A core value of both documents is sustainability. ,There are many examples of how sustainability
is addressed as a topic in City Plan and the TMP, but more importantly, sustainability was a key
driver in the process in'developing the Plans from the beginning of the Plan Fort Collins effort.
Specifically, three main tenets of sustainability—systems thinking, continuous improvement, and
158
February 15, 2011
triple bottom line analysis—were integrated into the Plan Fort Collins process. These three tenets
of sustainability are also emphasized within each of the seven topic-based chapters of City Plan.
5. What's in the Plans?
The bulk of City Plan and the TMP are allocated to vision,principles and policies. Each of the
chapters begins with a vision for the topic area. For each topic chapter, there are a series of
principles and policies. Principles provide general rules or directions for the City or community
to follow, whereas,policies specify a more definite course to follow or future decisions or actions.
Two maps in City Plan are provided in a larger format and are attached to this Agenda Item
Summary. See Attachment 12-City Structure Plan Map(page 71 of City Plan)and Attachment 13-
LIV 1: Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Map (page 55 of City Plan).
In this update, many of the ideas, principles and policies in City Plan and the TMP are carried
forward from previous versions, but are enhanced to reflect current conditions, new trends,
community input, and innovations since the plans were initially adopted.
The 2011 update also folds in and reflects other recent planning efforts and policy documents, such
as the Economic Action Plan, Climate Action Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Cultural Plan,
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, Parks and Recreation Policy Plan, and many others. Related
plans and policies are described within each of the seven topic-based chapters in the updated City
Plan.
The TMP and Pedestrian Plan vision,principles and policies form the basis for a new multi-modal
transportation Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The TMP includes an updated prioritized list of
capitalprojects, including streets, intersections, bridges, bicycle,pedestrian, transit, rail crossings,
parking and signal system facilities. The Pedestrian Plan key elements include refined vision and
policy framework pedestrian priority areas, level of service measures, priority projects list, and
action plan. An innovation in the TMP's CIP is the "triple bottom line" approach that includes
environmental, economic and human factors as project prioritization criteria in conjunction with
the traditional transportation criteria. The Master Street Plan(MSP)has been updated, also using
the "triple bottom line"approach to "right size"the street network. The recommendations in the
MSP will continue to support existing travel needs as well as future forecasts.
Three maps in the Transportation Master Plan are provided in a larger format and are attached to
this AIS. See Attachment 14—Current Master Street Plan, Attachment 15-New Proposed Master
Street Plan, and Attachment 16—New Proposed Master Street Plan Overlay.
6. What's New in the Plans
A few key new ideas reflected in the updated plans include:
• Vision -A Vision for a World Class Community and three major themes—Innovate, Sustain
and Connect.
159
February 15, 2011
• Budgetingfor Outcomes(BFO)- the structure of City Plan and the TMP are femdamentally
based on BFO's organizing framework.
• Sustainability - as a major topic in the plans; and as a key driver in the process of
developing the plans from the beginning.
• Integration of utilities (e.a, energy, water, stormwater and water quality).
• Economic Health—expanded policies.
• Safety and Wellness—a new chapter—in particular, new policies about residents leading
healthy and active lifestyles; and local food production.
• High Performing Community — new chapter — expanded to include an active, engaged
community.
• Culture—a new topic— City Plan reflects the values from the 2008 Cultural Plan.
• Shift to redevelopment and infill—the College "spine".
• Beefed uppoliciesforstudent housing;andpreservation and reuse ofneighborhoodschools.
• TMP—improved Capital Improvement Plan—new prioritization criteria.
• TMP- refinements to policies regarding context sensitive design solutions.
• TMP—expanded Enhanced Travel Corridors
• TMP—reshaping streets to match the context of the area
• Implementation - new sections -Action Plans, Catalyst and Special Focus areas.
• Monitoring—expanded program.
Z Next Steps-Implementation and Monitoring
The adoption of Ciry Plan, Transportation Master Plan, and Pedestrian Plan, is the first step in the
implementation process. Continuing action to implement and monitor these plans is needed to have
a lasting impact. Implementation will take time, especially when needed resources are limited. The
Plan contemplates an ongoing implementation process as part of the City's policy making and
budget fimctions.
Each of the Plans has an Action Plan that summarizes key projects, programs, regulations,
partnerships, organizational changes and other actions and strategies to work towards. The City
Plan Action Plan also includes Catalyst Projects - a discussion about how to implement new
catalytic projects that emerged from Plan Fort Collins and cross traditional functional areas.
Similarly, the TMP highlights Special FocusAreas that represent a distinct change or enhancement.
City Plan, TMP and the Pedestrian Plan must be monitored regularly to determine whether
implementation of the plans is occurring and whether it is achieving desired results. Although much
has been accomplished during the Plan Fort Collins process, monitoring is still a "work in
progress". One of the high priority, near-term implementation actions is to develop an
implementation and performance monitoring program. An interdepartmental team .is already
working on this effort. "
City Manager Atteberry thanked Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director, and Kathleen Bracke,
Director of Transportation Planning and Special Projects, for their work over the last year.
160
February 15, 2011
Frank stated the public process over the last year has included more than 12 focus group meetings,
11 Council work sessions,many boards and commissions meetings and events,and an extensive use
of social media. Frank discussed the history and goals of Plan Fort Collins, which include physical
and mental wellness, culture, and infill development. Plan Fort Collins also places a much greater
emphasis on implementation.
Bracke discussed the proposed changes to the Plan documents.
Frank stated that the adoption of City Plan,the Transportation Master Plan, Master Street Plan, and
the Pedestrian Plan, is the first step in the implementation process. Each Plan includes an Action
Plan and the City Plan Action Plan also includes catalyst projects. Frank discussed the
recommendations by various boards and commissions, noting every board that opted to make a
formal recommendation, made a recommendation of approval.
Linda Gabel,826 Blondel Street,Senior Advisory Board member,thanked staff for work on the item
and suggested the following additions: promotion of Fort Collins as a retirement destination,
recognition of the Fort Collins Senior Center as a world-class facility, and consideration of the area
around the Senior Center as an activity center when considering redevelopment.
Trudy Haines, 625 Hinsdale Drive, Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Vice-Chair,
recommended adoption of the Resolutions with respect to the sections considered by the Land
Conservation and Stewardship Board.
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated student housing should be more of a priority in Plan
Fort Collins.
Dana Ortiz, Parks and Recreation Board Chairperson, supported the adoption of Plan Fort Collins.
Ed Robert, 1923 Linden Ridge Drive, thanked staff for work on the Plan and discussed the lack of
funds and long-range planning in high-priority transportation projects.
Lloyd Walker, 1756 Concord Drive, suggested the neighborhood surrounding CSU be included as
a catalyst project area in Plan Fort Collins. He suggested redeveloping Campus West, developing
higher density housing near campus, preserving single family residential neighborhoods around
campus as affordable housing, and strengthening the Neighborhood Resources program.
Doug Brobst, 1625 Independence Road,suggested Plan Fort Collins place more emphasis on student
housing.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Councilmember Roy asked if marketing Fort Collins as a retirement community and designating the
Senior Center as an activity center are part of the structure plan map or text. Councilmember
Poppaw replied in the affirmative. Frank replied the map referencing targeted infill and
161
February 15, 2011
redevelopment does not show the area around the center as being targeted for infill or redevelopment
but it is shown as an activity center and is noted as a second level priority for pedestrians.
Councilmember Roy asked about the possibility of increasing funding for the Neighborhood
Resources program. Frank replied that is a budgeting issue that will be taken up as part of the BFO
process.
Councilmember Poppaw asked about the placement of early childhood care and education in the
Plan. She suggested it should be mentioned as being critical to economic vitality.
Councilmember Troxell asked how staffwill identify barriers to redevelopment and what knowledge
base staff has regarding that topic. Ben Herman,Clarion Associates,replied the topic of prioritizing
infill and redevelopment has been reviewed for years and this Plan has made a conscious effort to
focus on the issue. Staff has a great deal of expertise and information.
Councilmember Manvel asked if this document would ultimately be web-friendly with hyper links
included. Frank replied that idea would be explored. Mayor Hutchinson suggested staff return at
a later time with information regarding the feasibility, resources needed, and timeframe.
Councilmember Roy asked why this update is being referenced as a 2010 update rather than 2011.
Frank replied that plans will be dated February 2011,but the 2010 date was chosen as that year was
the timeframe of the bulk of the work on the item.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the inclusion of Thompson School District in the Plan. Frank
replied the Plan addresses both Thompson and Poudre School Districts, as well as private and
charter schools. Councilmember Troxell suggested Council have a meeting with the Thompson
School District to discuss joint school district responsibilities within Fort Collins city limits.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2011-015, as amended.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked about the reason for issues such as commercial and multi-family
recycling options, education regarding decreasing waste at the source, and a student housing plan,
have been put off to 2013 and beyond. City Manager Atteberry replied the 2011 and 2012 Plan
priorities are part of the adopted 2011-2012 budget. Council has the ability to change those
priorities; however, that will require a budgeting change.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated the recycling aspects were funded and asked about the availability
of funds. City Manager Atteberry replied Council has not allocated all of the 2011 Budgeting for
Outcomes dollars and funding would be available for studies or other Council priorities. John
Stokes, Natural Resources Director, stated the multi-family and business recycling efforts and
education regarding waste reduction at the source are near-term actions.
162
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Kottwitz asked about the impact of changing the budget, particularly with a new
Council coming in. City Manager Atteberry replied the existing or new Council would have the
prerogative to change budget priorities.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about making certain best management practices with respect to weed
and pest control are maintained into the future. Craig Foreman, Park Planning and Development,
replied best management practices will continue to be used and will be listed as a requirement.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about reduced parking standards for infill development and whether
that would affect design standards such as landscaping, as well. Timothy Wilder, Senior City
Planner, replied changes to the policy have been suggested and have been provided to Council.
Councilmember Manvel suggested the term be changed to "reduced parking requirement' which
would reference only the number of parking spaces.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about possible conflicts between the Plan wording regarding student
housing and the existing three-unrelated ordinance. Frank replied wording could be changed to
"new housing" or"new multi-family and attached housing."
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about the possibility of making future changes to the Plan documents.
City Attorney Roy replied the wording adopted tonight is the wording that will go into the Plan
unless there is clear direction as to how something will be clarified.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked if the Plan called for the inclusion of a Transportation Maintenance
Fee(TMF)as a funding source. City Manager Atteberry replied a TMF is not being considered.The
Plan implementation calls for a feasibility study that will focus on the likelihood of transportation
serving more as a utility. The 1/4 cent Pavement Management sales tax expires in 2015 and this
study is looking at ways to replace that funding.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about the striking of the phrase"discourage new development in the
100-year floodplain to avoid additional modifications and structural controls." Jon Haukaas,Water
Engineering Field Services Manager,replied that phrase was stricken due to the ongoing discussion
about floodplain regulations. He stated staff does support the statement; however, other values of
the City must be considered.
Councilmember Troxell stated the statement is somewhat value-laden and should therefore be
removed.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the item is in progress and the statement should not be included.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson to restore the phrase
as part of the Plan language.
Councilmember Kottwitz stated she would not support the motion.
163
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Roy stated he would support the motion as it was originally stricken without
Council direction to do so.
Councilmember Troxell stated Council did direct staff to remove value-laden language.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays:
Hutchinson, Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson asked about zoning flexibility with regard to infill and redevelopment.
Steve Dush, Current Planning Director, stated the concept behind the sustainable, flexible zoning
tool addresses infill and redevelopment as Fort Collins' greenfill development is basically done.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated Council never gave the direction to act flexibly with respect to
greenfill development, and that is how the wording appears. Frank replied Council directed
expansion of the zoning flexibility to development as a whole at the January 26,2011 work session.
Council has the option to narrow that to redevelopment only.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if staff had concerns about referencing redevelopment and inf 11 only.
Dush replied staff s primary concern is to address the infill and redevelopment aspects.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated his intent is to emphasize new policies and modifications to existing
policies that support a sustainable, flexible, and predictable approach io development and
redevelopment in infill areas. Frank suggested the title of Policy EH 4.2 be changed to "Reduce
Barriers to Infll Development and Redevelopment"and to insert the word"infill"ahead of the term
development.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to make the
suggested changes to Policy EH 4.2.
Councilmember Troxell expressed concern the wording change is over-specifying and asked what
constitutes greenfill.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
Nays: Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
("Secretary's note: Councilmember Kottwitz left at this point in the meeting.)
164
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Roy asked about the intent of Policy ENV 6.6. Steve Catanach, Light and Power
Operations Manager, replied the intent was to provide a policy that opens the door for models such
as solar gardens for individuals who may want alternative energy sources but may not have access
to or the ability to construct the necessary structures.
Councilmember Roy asked about Policy ENV 24.3 and stated he would like to strike the phrase"and
the areas proximity to downtown." Stokes replied staff recommends retaining that phrase because
that language provides a rationale for narrower buffer standards in that area.
Councilmember Roy stated the phrase weakens the standards.
Councilmember Troxell supported staff's recommendation.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson,to strike the phrase"and
the areas proximity to downtown" in Policy ENV 24.3.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson supported the change as it is not a policy change. Stokes replied the
downtown area represents an exception.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Ohlson and Roy. Nays:Hutchinson,Manvel,Poppaw
and Troxell.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Roy suggested using the phrase"City spine"as opposed to"commercial spine"in
Policy LIV 5.2.
Councilmember Manvel agreed with Councilmember Roy. Frank suggested the phrase be corrected
throughout the document.
Councilmember Troxell asked for the definition of an activity center. The definition was found to
be: "A commercial center that contains a mix of housing, retail, culture, arts and dining. They are
intended to be vibrant, walkable, bicycle friendly and livable spaces." Councilmember Troxell
stated he would prefer the term "commercial spine"remain.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to change the phrase
"commercial spine"to "City spine" throughout the Plan Fort Collins document.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson suggested the term "community spine."
All Councilmembers agreed on the term "community spine"to replace"commercial spine."
("Secretary's note: No vote was held on the most recent motion.)
•165
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Roy asked about air rights. Frank replied air rights reference the right to use space
above ground level and is often associated with the transfer of development rights.
Councilmember Roy proposed to change a phrase in Policy LIV A.3 to"energy saving features, air
rights and reducing." All Councilmembers accepted the change.
Councilmember Roy asked about the staff recommended changes regarding Policy UV 24.1. Mr.
Herman replied this Policy would,address the process and criteria by which the City evaluates
repurposed school buildings. Staff suggested adding the term "considered for closing" to the
repurposing phrase in the Policy. All Councilmembers accepted the proposed change.
Councilmember Roy suggested the formation of a Telecommunications Board and asked about
potential costs for the formation of such a board. City Manager Atteberry replied the costs would
be minimal.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson agreed the idea of some type Technology Board should be explored.
Mayor Hutchinson supported the exploration of the creation of a Technology Board with a clear,
focused purpose for its existence.
Mr. Herman stated, in response to Councilmember Poppaw's earlier request, staff recommends
adding the following language to the Economic Health and Sustainability section: "Community.
services, including access to early care and education enable greater workforce productivity and
well-being and can have a positive impact on the economic vitality of the City." All
Councilmembers accepted the change.
Councilmember Poppaw suggested placing the phrase in both the Economic Health section as well
as the Safety and Wellness section.
Mr. Herman suggested adding the phrase "and the community as a whole" to the aforementioned
recommendation. All Councilmembers accepted the change.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2011-016.
Councilmember Roy commended Bracke and her staff on the Transportation Master Plan section.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked Bracke for removing the Corbett connector in the Master Street
Plan.
166
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Manvel thanked Bracke for removing the Laurel connector in the Master Street
Plan.
J
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2011-017.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the capital improvement plan for bicycle projects. Bracke
replied it is part of the Transportation Master Plan.
Councilmember Troxell expressed concern about north-south bicycle connectivity. Bracke replied
the bicycle capital improvement plan is primarily based on the on-street system of bike lanes;
however, the Parks and Recreation Trail Master Plan is also referenced.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2011-018, as amended.
Councilmember Manvel asked that it be clarified that property owners are responsible for sidewalk
maintenance on their property.
Councilmember Roy thanked staff and Mr. Herman for work on the item.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson thanked staff for work on the item.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none. -
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Extension of the Meeting
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to extend the meeting
past 10:30 p.m. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
167
February 15, 2011
Ordinance No. 011, 2011,
Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City of Fort Collins
a Proposed Amendment to Article II of the City Charter, Pertaining to
Council District Boundaries, Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 1, 2011, submits to the voters
at the April 5, 2011 election, a proposed Charter amendment modifying the method used for
periodically adjusting Council district boundaries. The proposed Charter amendment will require
the City Clerk's office to adjust Council districts on the basis ofpopulation rather than the number
of registered electors. "
Mayor Hutchinson and Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson noted City Attorney Roy would be waiving
attorney/client privilege briefly to allow for the following explanation.
City Attorney Roy stated this item is coming forward on his recommendation as changing Council
districting to be based on population will likely lead to a more constitutionally-defensible outcome.
There are now more accurate means of calculating population than there were in the past. Should
this item pass, it will go into effect after the upcoming April election.
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, suggested eliminating Article XH, Section 6 of the City
Charter.
Councilmember Troxell stated the item should have been more fully vetted and asked about the
effect of student population. He stated the community deserves a broader discussion with respect
to its representation. City Attorney Roy responded the frequency with which the redistricting would
occur would be established by Ordinance according to the proposed Charter language.
Marcus Bodig,GIS Department,stated the block level census data would be used every 10 years and
the state demographers'.data would be used for the years in between. The population would be
examined every five years.
Councilmember Troxell expressed concern about the population change on an annual basis.
Mayor Hutchinson asked what percentage change would be necessary before an area would be
deemed to be incorrectly districted.
City Attorney Roy replied it will never be possible to know the exact deviation between actual and
estimated population. The permissible maximum deviation between the population of the smallest
district and the most populous district is approximately ten percent; however, that number is case-
specific with respect to the courts.
168
February 15, 2011
Councilmember Troxell stated the current method of districting based on voter counts is more exact
than the proposed method. City Attorney Roy replied, if there were a challenge, the number of
registered electors would be compared against an imprecise measure of population in determining
whether the outcome was defensible.
Councilmember Manvel noted the proposal will provide equal representation to the population.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
011, 2011, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Roy stated Charter amendment items should not be on the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Troxell stated he would not support the motion as the item was originally on the
Consent Calendar, it needs more vetting, and should be the topic of a broader discussion.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson stated he would support the motion, though the item should have been
originally scheduled as a discussion item.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 017, 2011,
Authorizing the Conveyance of a Parcel of Stormwater
Utility Property to PS Poudre River, LLC, Postponed Indefinitely
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2006, the City constructed the Oxbow Levee on the Cache La Poudre River to reduce flooding
risk and damages to a section of the city known as the Buckingham neighborhood, located north and
east of the River. The Oxbow Levee is located between Linden Street and Lincoln Avenue. The
Stormwater Master Planning andFloodplain Administration Division has identified a small remnant
parcel located adjacent to and east of the Oxbow Levee that is no longer needed for flood control
purposes. The adjacent property owner, PS Poudre River, LLC, has expressed interest in
purchasing this small parcel from the City.
BA CKGR O UND/D IS C USSIO N
The City purchased a tract of land along the Cache La Poudre River in 2004 as part of the Poudre
River Enhancement Project. The purpose of this Project was to construct various flood control,
ecological,and recreational improvements along two segments of the Poudre River in the downtown
area. The Oxbow Levee (previously known as the Buckingham Levee Project) was constructed in
169
February 15, 2011
2006, between Linden Street and Lincoln Avenue. The Oxbow Levee reduces flooding risk and
damages to a section of the city known as the Buckingham neighborhood, which is located to the
north and east ofthe River. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR)recognizing the change in floodplain
boundaries as a result of the construction of the Oxbow Levee was approved by FEMA in December
2006
The alignment of the new levee created a small remnant parcel of land adjacent to Linden Street.
The StormwaterMaster Planning and Floodplain Administration Division has since determined that
this small parcel of land, 0.224 acres in size, is not needed for any current or future flood control
purposes. The adjacent property owner, PS Poudre River, LLC, has expressed interest in
purchasing this small parcel from the City. PS Poudre River, LLC, has agreed to purchase the
property at a fair market value as determined by the City's Real Estate Services Department.
FINANCIAUECONOMIC IMPACTS
PSPoudre River,LLC has agreed to compensate the City of Fort Collins$2,500 for the small parcel
of land, as well as convey an easement to the City along the easterly boundary of the Oxbow Levee
for access and maintenance of the improvements at no cost. PSPoudre River,LLC, has also agreed
to convey to the City, an access easement along the boundary of its property for the purposes of
accessing and maintaining the Oxbow Levee improvements.
Conveyance of the remnant parcel of land will reduce City maintenance costs. PS Poudre River,
LLC plans to incorporate this parcel of land as part of a proposed future development project.
Conveyance of the access easement from PS Poudre River, LLC to the City along the easterly
boundary of the Oxbow Levee will provide access and reduce maintenance costs. "
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson discussed the property in question and asked whether or not the buffer zone
prohibits development there. Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist, replied the Planning
Department indicated there is a possibility that,should additional right-of-waybe needed for Linden
Street, a portion of the property could be dedicated for that purpose.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated he would not support the item as it contradicts existing buffer
policies.
Councilmember Manvel asked if a private property owner could encroach into the buffer zone for
a driveway or other private use. Kuntz replied in the negative.
City Manager Atteberry stated this item is not time-sensitive and could be postponed.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to postpone the item
until it is deemed ready for Council review by the City Manager.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson commended staff and the City organization for making as much information
public as possible.
170
February 15, 2011
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2011-014
Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Resolution makes appointments to fill current vacancies on the Air Quality Advisory Board,
the Water Board and the Women's Commission.
BA CKGR O UND/DIS C USSION
6
A vacancy currently exists on the Air Quality Advisory Board that was not filled during the annual
appointment process at the end of 2010. A vacancy also exists on the Water Board due to the
resignation of Eileen Dornfest. Two vacancies exist on the Women's Commission due to the
resignations of Ashley Burroughs and Beth O'Brien.
Applications were solicited and Councilmembers David Roy and Wade Troxell conducted
interviews. The Council interview team is recommending the following appointments with terms to
begin immediately:
• Michael Lynn to fill the vacancy on the Air Quality Advisory Board(term expires December
31, 2014),
• Steve Malers to fill the vacancy on the Water Board(term expires on December 31, 2012),
Lea Hanson to fill one vacancy on the Women's Commission(term expires on December 31,
2012), and
• Randi Nelson to fill one vacancy on the Women's Commission (term expires on December
31, 2012). "
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution
2011-014.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson objected to the Water Board appointment and stated he would not support
the motion.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: Ohlson.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
171
February 15, 2011
Adjournment
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adjourn to February
22, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
Councilmember Troxell asked why the adjourned meeting is being proposed. City Attorney Roy
replied the upcoming regular meetings have full agendas and the proposed item for the February 22
meeting is likely to take a fair amount of time.
Councilmember Troxell expressed concern the medical marijuana issue is currently being discussed
on a state level and asked if it is appropriate for it to be considered by Council at this time. City
Attorney Roy replied it is important for the item to be considered by the current Council as it is this
Council that has established certain policy parameters within which this Code has been drafted.
Additionally, staff does not believe potential changes at the state level will dramatically change the
proposed local regulations. There is a provision in the state law regarding moratoria put.in place
prior to December 2010, can be kept in existence until state regulations are issued.
Councilmember Troxell expressed concern about the perceived rush of the item. He stated no new
information has come before Council since the last time the item was heard. He asked about staff
recommendations in terms of the grandfathering issue.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated the item was placed on an adjourned meeting agenda in order to not
have items considered at a late time at a regular meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
172
February 22, 2011
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Adjourned Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday,February 22,
2011, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was
answered by the following Councilmembers: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Items Relating to Medical Marijuana Businesses, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of OrdinanceNo. 018, 2011,AuthorizingtheContinuingOperationofExisting
Medical Marijuana Businesses.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 019, 2011, Making Certain Amendments to Chapter 15,
Article AW of the City Code Governing the Licensing, Number, Location and Operation of
Medical Marijuana Businesses, and Adding a New Article Governing the Cultivation of
Medical Marijuana by Primary Caregivers and Patients.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 020, 2011,Amending the City's Land Use Code by Adding
Medical Marijuana-Infused Product Manufacturing Facilities as Permitted Uses in Various
Zones Districts, and Renaming Dispensaries and Cultivation Facilities.
These three ordinances are beingpresented to Council to further clarify,regulate,and align medical
marijuana businesses to the State regulations and to the intent ofprevious local ordinances.
Ordinance No. 018, 2011, will allow for existing medical marijuana businesses that have met all
requirements and paid appropriate fees to both the City and the State to continue operating, even.
if such businesses do not meet the required zoning and location requirements.
Ordinance No. 019, 2011, will amend the provisions of Chapter 15, Article 16 and 17 of the City
Code to align the City's local regulations with the Colorado Medical Marijuana Code, to adopt
certain additional, more restrictive regulations as permitted under State law, and to adopt local
regulations for primary caregivers.
173
February 22, 2011
Ordinance No. 020, 2011, will amend the Land Use Code to add a definition for a Medical
Marijuana -Infused Products Manufacturing Facility, to add the use of such facility to the list of
permitted uses in the appropriate zones, and to rename dispensaries and cultivation facilities to be
consistent with the Colorado Medical Marijuana Code.
BA CKGRO UNDIDISCUSSION
Since March 2010, City Council has adopted numerous ordinances related to the operation and
regulation of medical marijuana businesses (MMBs) in Fort Collins. On June 7, 2010, the State of
Colorado passed the Colorado Medical Marijuana Code, which regulates MMBs and allows for
municipalities to adopt more restrictive regulations or even to ban such businesses, and imposes a
moratorium on any new applications until July 1, 2011.
Under Ordinance No. 25, 2010, existing MMBs in Fort Collins had until June 30, 2010, to submit
an application for a business license. The City has so far inspected and issued provisional licenses
to 19 medical marijuana centers (formerly known as medical marijuana dispensaries), and 10
associated optionalpremises cultivation facilities(formerly known as medical marijuana cultivation
facilities), with 21 more locations(4 centers and 17 cultivation facilities)that arepending approval.
An additional requirement imposed on these businesses under State law is that the applicant must
apply and pay fees to the State by August 2010. The City currently has four outstanding
applications that could potentially bring the total number of Centers to 23.
In August 2010, Council passed a resolution which delayed the decision as to whether existing
MMBs should be allowed to remain in their current locations and as to when, if at all, applications
for new MMBs should be accepted by the City until additional information was gathered on the
number of existing local businesses that were eligible for licensing under State law.
Of the 19 medical marijuana centers that have provisional licenses issued by the City, only two meet
all ofthe zoning and separation requirements. One additional center, which is notyet licensed, also
meets all zoning and separation requirements. Ordinance No. 018, 2011, proposes allowing all
current licensed centers to remain in their current locations or in new, conforming locations.
Ordinance No. 019, 2011,proposes limiting the total number ofallowable center licenses available
in Fort Collins to 23. This would honor the good faith business investments made by MMBs that
were in operation prior to our current regulations while addressing the concerns heard from
citizens.
The surrounding municipalities, including Larimer County, Loveland, Longmont, Windsor, and
Greeley, have all banned or continued their moratoriums on marijuana related businesses. This has
placed additional pressure on Fort Collins from those individuals looking for a location to start a
MMB. Capping the total allowable number of MMB licenses in Fort Collins provides a means to
prevent Fort Collins from becoming a regional MMB capital. If all the local medical marijuana
centers that have applied to the State are licensed, there would be a capacity to serve 7,600patients.
At last report, there were 116,000 patients in the State; 8 to 10% of the State patients have
historically resided in Larimer County; and Fort Collins has about 47% of the population of the
county. Using these figures, a generous estimate of the total number ofpatients in Fort Collins is
174
February 22, 2011
about 5,482. While the exact figures are not available, it is apparent that the current number of
centers can easily provide for the patients that reside in Fort Collins, especially since primary
caregivers could grow medical marijuana for up to five patients each and patients could also opt
to grow medical marijuana for themselves.
Ordinance No. 019, 2011, implements and aligns definitions, language, and regulations with State
law.Additionally, it allows for the licensing of a new type of business for persons who manufacture
medical marijuana-infused products (such as baked goods, tinctures, and beverages)in conformity
with State law. Further, it creates a medical marijuana licensing authority as required by State law,
removes duplicative regulations by eliminating those that are already covered in State law,and adds
a number of more restrictive provisions than exist under State law. The following are some
examples of more restrictive provisions:
• Limits any applicant to only two medical marijuana center licenses in the City.
• Caps the total number of allowable centers in the City.
• Maintains the existing local separation requirements and measuring techniques, both of
which are more restrictive than the State.
• Requires the reporting of all disturbances and unlawful activity at any MMB licensed
facility.
• Limits the type.ofplants, clones, or seedlings that centers may sell.
• Requires all cultivation facilities within the City to have a center in Fort Collins.
• Allows for the exchange of no more than 8 oz. of medical marijuana per seven-day period
between licensed centers. (This relaxes the previous local limit of 4 oz)
• Continues the current local limit on the amount of medical marijuana that can be dispensed
to patients or primary care givers (2 oz. within a seven-day period).
• Requires all cultivation of medical marijuana to be conducted entirely within a building or
other fully enclosed structure.
• Prohibits the cultivation of any medical marijuana within any duplex or multi family
dwelling, or within any structure that is located on the same legal parcel as a duplex or
multi family dwelling.
• Imposes a twelve(12) marijuana plant count, including no more than'six(6)mature plants,
that may be cultivated or kept within, or on the same legal parcel as, any single-family
dwelling.
• Establishes the following local regulations for manufacturers of medical-infused products:
175
February 22, 2011
prohibits the operation ofa medical marijuana-infused products manufacturer in the
City unless such manufacturer also operates a center in the City;
prohibits the posting ofsigns or other advertising materials identifying the premises
as being associated with the production or use of medical marijuana; and
requires that all products produced by a medical marijuana-infused products
manufacturer be sold only through a center under the same ownership.
In prior ordinances, the City did not address provisions for the manufacturing of medical
marijuana-infused products. Since the State law now allows for the licensing of a medical
marijuana-infused products manufacturer and because staff has been informed by local industry
representatives that this is.an important element of a MMB, Ordinance No. 020, 2011, adds a
definition and allowable zone districts for this use. Medical marijuana-infused products
manufacturing facilities are proposed to be allowed in the same zone districts as cultivation
facilities, and like those facilities, would have no separation requirements.
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Staff has identified only a few financial impacts. The time and effort to process MMB application
and issue licenses was initially underestimated. Staff has been tracking the workload and
anticipates raising fees to ensure that staff time is covered. If the number of MMB licenses is
limited, those individuals looking to start a business in Fort Collins could be financially impacted.
In 2010, the City received approximately $260,000 in sales tax revenue from MMBs. "
Captain Jerry Schiager, Police Services, discussed the history of the medical marijuana business
issue in Fort Collins and outlined the current and pending business and cultivation facility licenses.
Ordinance No. 018, 2011, will grandfather the 23 current, existing medical marijuana businesses.
Ordinance No. 019, 2011 is the regulatory, licensing ordinance and it will amend local provisions
to match those of the State. This Ordinance creates a licensing authority, caps the number of
allowable businesses to the existing 23, allows two medical marijuana licenses per applicant,
maintains the recommended distance requirements, distinguishes between the dispensary and
cultivation facility, requires an individual with a cultivation facility in Fort Collins to also have a
retail center in Fort Collins, and increases the amount of transactions allowed between licensed
centers from 4 to 8 ounces per week. Additionally,centers are required to report disturbances or law
violations. Ordinance No. 020, 2011 changes the Land Use Code to accept infused product
manufacturers into the same zones in which cultivation facilities are currently allowed.
Alfred Reaud, 1104 Columbine Court, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Steve Ackerman, 346 East Mountain, Organic Alternatives, supported grandfathering existing
businesses.
Dawn Nannini,321 North Meldrum,Team Fort Collins,opposed grandfathering existing businesses.
Kyle Kaufinan, 1101 Academy Court, Top Shelf Colorado, supported grandfathering existing
businesses.
176
February 22, 2011
Damian Farris, 1101 Academy Court, Top Shelf Colorado, supported grandfathering existing
businesses.
Wes Melander, Larimer County resident and patient advocate, supported grandfathering existing
businesses.
David Schwaab,351 Linden Street,Abundant Healing,supported grandfathering existing businesses
and opposed fixed amount limits.
Michael Stolting, 810 North College, Medical MJ, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Sam Leuschen, 810 North College, Medical MJ, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Doug Anderson, 1630 South College, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Carrie Cortiglio, Health District of Northern Larimer County Policy Analyst, opposed
grandfathering existing businesses and favored stringent regulations, specifically regarding the
amount of edibles allowed to be purchased.
Dr. Nancy Smith, 420 South Loomis, opposed grandfathering existing businesses and the medical
marijuana industry as a whole.
Evan Stafford, Green Rooster Natural Medicine, expressed concern regarding the grandfathering
of his delivery-only medical marijuana business and supported grandfathering all existing
businesses.
Jesse Levine, Dufek Group, discussed his delivery-only medical marijuana business and supported
grandfathering it and all existing businesses.
Michael Popovich, Fort Collins resident, medical marijuana patient, supported grandfathering all
existing businesses.
Julie Kresky, Fort Collins resident, medical marijuana patient, supported the industry and
grandfathering existing businesses.
Kirk Scramstead, A Kind Place, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Ken Correa, 301 Smokey Street, Solace Meds, supported grandfathering existing businesses and
stated very little crime has occurred relating to the businesses.
Deb Earl, Loveland resident and medical marijuana patient, discussed the benefits of medical
marijuana and supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Travis Mate, FOCO Compassion Center, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
177
February 22, 2011
Nick Dice, 810 North College, Medical MJ, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Don Krukshank, A Kind Place, supported grandfathering existing businesses.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked about regulations regarding the amount of edibles allowed to be
purchased and whether or not State regulations would apply. Schiager replied he has not seen State
regulations regarding edibles. Infused product manufacturers are not regulated in any way; they
may have an unlimited number of plants and do not have to have patients designate them as primary
caregivers. They are required to have a contractual relationship with a center to be able to sell their
products.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if individuals or other businesses within the MMB areas were
contacted. Ginny Sawyer,Neighborhood Administrator,replied there was no direct contact though
comments have been heard from some neighbors.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if it is possible for more than the existing two MMBs to meet
regulations, should grandfathering not occur. Schiager replied businesses have stated it is difficult
to find locations meeting the requirements. The maps show 410 acres of available space, though
structures may not exist on those acres.
Councilmember Poppaw asked how many MMBs could be accommodated within the 410 acres c,
given separation requirements. Steve Dush, Current Planning Director, replied it is a difficult
question to answer given separation requirements between each other and other protected uses.
Councilmember Poppaw asked if the 410 acres are located throughout the City. Dush replied in the
affirmative. Sawyer discussed the maps and locations available for MMBs and cultivation facilities.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked about the delivery-only business and whether that business could
appeal to the medical marijuana licensing authority or if it needs to be dealt with in the
grandfathering discussion. Schiager replied the original City Ordinance allowed a cultivation-
delivery model which is not allowed under State regulations. The delivery-only business has been
allowed to find a physical location.
Councilmember Manvel asked for further detail regarding the delivery-only business. Schiager
replied the business was allowed to find a location and has opted to attempt to use the facility in
which he is currently growing; however, that is in a zone that does not allow retail sales.
Councilmember Manvel asked if it would be possible to grant a variance which would allow the
retail location without sales. Schiager replied the State prohibits a delivery model unless patients
are homebound.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the City would be fully in compliance with Amendment 20 if
Council does not grandfather existing businesses, leaving only the two compliant businesses in
operation. Schiager replied the State allows municipalities to ban the activity entirely. City
Attorney Roy concurred.
178
February 22, 2011
Councilmember Troxell asked about outreach to the medical community. Schiager replied talks and
discussions have been held with members of the medical community and input has been received
from other interests as well.
Councilmember Troxell asked why staff is recommending grandfathering all existing locations.
Schiager replied staff had a difficult time prioritizing different location requirements accepted by
Council.
Councilmember Manvel asked what determines the capacity of a center. Schiager replied the State
licensing requires centers to apply with patient ranges; most in Fort Collins are listed up to 300
patients, some up to 500.
Councilmember Manvel asked if it is possible to keep centers from accepting patients from other
communities. Schiager replied in the affirmative. City Attorney Roy replied he would need to
further examine the issue to be completely confident in the response.
Sawyer stated centers' patient numbers are attached to their plant numbers and they can sell to
individuals who are not on their specific patient rosters.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson supported not capping the number of allowable centers in a market
economy. He asked for input on the instances in which the City's regulations are more strict than
those of the State. Schiager replied, as many of the surrounding jurisdictions are banning the
industry, this Ordinance specifically addresses the fact that the desire is not for Fort Collins to
become the producer of medical marijuana for all of northern Colorado. The increase to 8 ounces
will reduce the wholesale large-scale marijuana transactions. The State's 70/30 split deals with the
annual amount of marijuana produced and requires a center to produce 70% of what it sells on an
annual basis. It is not as enforceable as the 8 ounce proposal in the Ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked about the logic behind capping the number of centers allowed.
Schiager replied staff is concerned about having an over-capacity and is confident the current
number of centers is adequate, should grandfathering occur,.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked what the downside would be of becoming the medical marijuana
center of Northern Colorado. Schiager replied, as the number of centers grows, exposure to youth
and to other protected interests increases. Allowing additional grow operations to provide product
to other municipalities would not generate additional revenue, other than via the leasing of
properties, and crime concerns would increase Staff s approach is to serve the local community,
respect the local, existing businesses that have gone through the licensing process, but also limit
potential negative impacts on the community.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked how many more centers would actually surface. Schiager replied
growth could occur as some of the aforementioned 410 acres are developed, or possibly through
annexations or zoning changes. With the existing location and separation requirements, and with
the existing facilities, there is not a huge risk of many more centers surfacing.
179
February 22, 2011
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson noted the City's Code provisions are considerably stricter than State
regulations in terms of separation requirements and asked about the history of those requirements.
Schiager replied the City put its requirements into effect,despite staff s recommendation that it wait
until the State regulations came out. Sawyer noted staff has not been before Council since the State
passed its regulations and Council has the opportunity to change the requirements. Staffs
recommendations attempt to balance the needs of all in the community.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked if the medical marijuana industry is primarily concerned about the
grandfathering issue or if it would like to see other regulations changed. Sawyer replied some of
the new proposed regulations are required by the State and others are set to match proposed
regulations.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked for industry input regarding the State's 70/30 rule. Mr. Correa
replied, while the rule does provide some enforcement challenges, it would allow for centers who
may have a catastrophic failure in a grow operation to procure medicine to provide patients.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated he would support the staff recommendation if it would be possible
to craft some type of language providing for a solution for a business with a catastrophic crop
failure. He requested that issue be examined prior to Second Reading.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked which surrounding communities have banned the industry. Schiager
replied Larimer County, Loveland, Longmont, Windsor, and Greeley have banned the industry.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel to adopt Ordinance No.
018, 2011, on First Reading.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed concern that outreach to affected protected neighbors has not
occurred. She asked if regulations regarding edibles could be considered in a future ordinance. City
Attorney Roy replied this Ordinance could be amended in the future, particularly after the State
regulations are set.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson supported future regulations on edibles as well as grandfathering.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed concern regarding the lack of consistency in regulating this
industry versus other regulated industries in the City, specifically with regard to uses not allowed
in a given zone district.
Mayor Pro Tem Ohlson noted the centers went into appropriate commercial areas prior to the City
setting distance requirements.
Councilmember Poppaw agreed that is the case with most centers, but noted there are some
dispensaries located within residential neighborhoods. Sawyer showed a map of the location of A
Kind Place,near a residential zone. Councilmember Poppaw noted the facility abuts a commercial
zone but asked if the center itself is in a residential zone. Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator,
replied the property at 123 East Drake is in the RL—Low Density Residential zone;however, that
180
February 22, 2011
building has been approved for a commercial use. There are no existing centers in areas in which
they would not have been allowed.
Councilmember Manvel noted grandfathering has occurred in many instances. He stated Council
has not received communications regarding large problems with existing centers. Schiager replied
there is no perceptible difference in crime in the areas within,1/8 of a mile of existing centers.
Burglaries have occurred occasionally.
City Attorney Roy stated staff is recommending these centers be treated as legal non-conforming
uses in the same sense as businesses that were put out of conformity by changes in zoning laws.
Trial courts have, thus far, said there is no legal obligation to grandfather when the non-conformity
is the result of a licensing law..Staff is recommending grandfathering to respect investment-backed
expectations; though Council is not legally required to grandfather. Selective grandfathering
becomes a more complex issue.
Councilmember Roy stated the issue should be supported as voters approved the use of medical
marijuana and it is now allowed as part of the State constitution. Additionally,the attrition rate has
brought the number of existing businesses down to 19 with four pending.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if it would be possible to display signs on or near the properties to
alert nearby residents in order to assure everyone is informed prior to Second Reading. Sawyer
replied a letter could be mailed to residents within a certain radius of each business.
Councilmember Kottwitz stated residents as well as individuals dropping children off at childcare
facilities have the right to know the dispensaries exist.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated he would support the idea providing notice.
Sawyer stated most of the dispensaries have been in their locations for at least nine to twelve
months. Their signs have been regulated in terms of size and language but signs do exist.
Councilmember Roy expressed concern about providing notice to citizens as they should be
participating if they have concerns.
Councilmember Manvel asked what impact negative replies to the notices would have on Council's
decision.
Councilmember Poppaw noted many dispensary owners have already contacted neighbors but stated
she would support the idea of providing notice.
City Attorney Roy noted it is possible to consider selective grandfathering,though additional issues
will need to be discussed.
Councilmember Kottwitz made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to provide notice
to schools, colleges,jails, rehab facilities, churches, and childcare group homes, of the intent to
grandfather existing medical marijuana centers, prior to Second Reading.
181
February 22, 2011
Councilmember Troxell stated he would support the motion.
Councilmember Roy noted the topic has been up for discussion since November 2009,is a statewide
issue, and has been the topic of numerous work sessions. He opposed the idea of providing notice
at this point.
Councilmember Poppaw stated she could not oppose outreach.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw and
Troxell. Nays: Roy.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Hutchinson stated Council has accommodated the State law allowing medical marijuana,
while providing some strict regulations. He asked'about the ultimate impact of not grandfathering
existing businesses. Schiager replied two existing dispensaries would meet regulations and others
could potentially find land on which to relocate. This would result in shutting down, or forcing
relocation of 21 dispensaries.
Councilmember Troxell stated the separation requirements were designed to protect the community
as a whole. He supported upholding the separation requirements.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson supported grandfathering.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked citizens who have voiced opinions on the topic and thanked
Council for the discussion on the item. She stated she would support the motion given the
compromise on the outreach issue.
Councilmember Kottwitz stated some ofher concern lies with the physicians prescribing the medical
marijuana cards. She stated she would support grandfathering, particularly given the decision to
provide additional outreach.
Councilmember Troxell stated he would appreciate the voters in Fort Collins being able to
ultimately determine the outcome of the issue.
Mayor Hutchinson stated grandfathering makes sense as the businesses were authorized prior to the
regulations being set.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz, Manvel,Ohlson, Poppaw and
Roy. Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
019, 2011 as amended, on First Reading.
182
February 22, 2011
Mayor Pro Tern stated he would support the motion but was uncertain about capping the number of
allowed businesses.
.Councilmember Troxell asked what would cause a center to lose its license. Schiager replied a
license revocation hearing or act could occur as a result of violating any number of the regulations.
City Attorney Roy replied the specific acts are spelled out in the Ordinance.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed concern about the capping provision. Sawyer replied Council
can give direction to remove that provision prior to Second Reading.
City Attorney Roy asked for confirmation Council is looking for more information prior to Second
Reading as to a justification for the cap, as well as an explanation of the other areas in which these
regulations are more stringent than the State. Council confirmed it will make a decision following
receipt of that information.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated he would support a motion to eliminate the cap.
Councilmember Kottwitz made a friendly amendment to eliminate the cap on the number of centers.
The amendment was accepted by Councilmembers Roy and Manvel.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
20, 2011, on First Reading.
Councilmember Troxell asked for clarification regarding the zones allowing medical marijuana
infused product manufacturers. Barnes replied that use is proposed to be allowed in the same five
zones that allow cultivation facilities:RDR—River Downtown Redevelopment,CCN—Community
Commercial North College, CS—Service Commercial, I—Industrial, and the non-river side area of
the CL zone. All of the zones allow light industrial uses which would include food product
manufacturing as well as cultivation.
Councilmember Troxell asked for details about these types of facilities. Barnes replied facilities can
grow plants as well as manufacture the various medical marijuana products.
Councilmember Troxell asked if there is a concern regarding humidity or carbon dioxide output.
Sawyer replied the cultivation facility and manufacturing facility must be separated and inspected
by the Building Department. The size will be limited by the fact that each edible manufacturer must
be tied to a licensed dispensary.
Councilmember Manvel asked about the frequency of sales of infused products. Sawyer replied
staff would return with more detailed information but allowing the manufacturing facilities is part
183
February 22, 2011
of staff s recommendation.Center owners have requested the ability to produce the products locally
as opposed to purchasing from out-of-town dealers.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Manvel stated CSU professor George Wallace has requested Fort Collins participate
in a friendship-type arrangement with San Cristobal.
Councilmembers Manvel and Roy and Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated they would support
investigating the possibility.
City Manager Atteberry stated staff would return with additional information.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
184
March 1, 2011
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, March 1, 2011,
at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered
by the following Councilmembers: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy, and
Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Cheryl Distaso, 135 Sunset, Center for Justice, Peace, and Environment, discussed Character Fort
Collins and noted Mayor Hutchinson informed her there will be an independent investigation
regarding potential religious ties of the organization.
Donovan Dougherty,Fort Collins resident, thanked Councilmember Troxell for assisting him with
his Boy Scout requirements.
Eric Sutherland,3520 Golden Currant,supported Character Fort Collins and discussed Fort Collins'
public power system.
Josh Kerson, 244 North College, supported legalizing the use of electric bikes on City trails and
invited citizens and Council to a demo day on March 26. He discussed modified vehicles spewing
black smoke and asked that Police officers be"empowered to stop them.
Kim Sharpe,900 Marshall Street,Healthier Communities Coalition of Larimer County,Bicycle and
Pedestrian Education Coalition, supported Item No. 21,Resolution 2011-021 Adopting the Bicycle
Safety Education Plan 2011.
Preety Sathe, 3506 Limestone Court, Human Relations Commission member, invited citizens and
Council to a training March 2 regarding employment discrimination and asked for submissions for
candidates for 2011 Human Relations awards.
Rick Price, 1925 Wallenberg, supported Item No. 21, Resolution 2011-021 Adopting the Bicycle
Safety Education Plan 2011 and encouraged training police officers regarding bicycle regulations.
He thanked Mayor Hutchinson and Councilmembers for their service.
Doug Brobst, 1625 Independence Road,supported a"night in the life of a neighbor"program to help
educate CSU staff and Councilmembers about the issues in neighborhoods bordering CSU.
185
March 1, 2011
Jim Reidhead, 707 West Mountain, supported the Eastside/Westside Neighborhood design
standards.
Carrie Byrne, 1801 Broadview, Campus Bicycle Advisory Committee, supported Item No. 21,
Resolution 2011-021 Adopting the Bicycle Safety Education Plan 2011 and encouraged additional
education for Police Officers.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Troxell thanked electric bike supporters and thanked Jim Reidhead for his
community service. He suggested creating decade-by-decade pattern books to provide design
assistance for historic neighborhoods.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked residents who discussed the Bicycle Safety Education Plan and
thanked staff for its work on the item.
Councilmember Roy stated a work session with Tony Frank, CSU President,will occur next week.
He supported bicycle regulation and safety enforcement.
Councilmember Manvel thanked staff for work on the Bicycle Safety Education Plan and thanked
Mr. Reidhead for his comments regarding the Eastside/Westside Neighborhoods.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2010, Appropriating Funds from
the Citv's Stormwater Reserves for Transfer to the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority
for the Purpose of Providing a Loan for the Northeast College Corridor Outfall Project
Indefinitely.
On December 7, 2010, the City Council voted unanimously to adopt Ordinance No. 123,
2010 on consent agenda. This Ordinance appropriates funds from the City's Stormwater
Reserves for transfer to the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority for the purpose of
providing a loan for the Northeast College Corridor Outfall Project. However, that same
evening,the Urban Renewal Authority Board voted unanimously to postpone consideration
of the loan agreement pertaining to the Northeast College Corridor Outfall project. The
primary reason for postponement was the desire to understand the project more fully,
especially the potential environmental impacts of the project. Staff was directed to bring the
item before the City Council Finance Committee for consideration and recommendation
prior to the full Board reconsidering the item. The scheduling of the City Council Finance
Committee briefing has delayed the URA Board's consideration. As a result, this item will
likely be reconsidered during the summer of 2011. Therefore,Second Reading of Ordinance
186
March 1, 2011
No. 123,2010 should be postponed indefinitely. A new ordinance appropriating funds from
the City's Stormwater Reserves for Transfer to the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority
will be introduced at the same time as the Urban Renewal Authority considers the loan
agreement.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 012, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for Police Services and for the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously
Appropriated in the Police Services Program Budget.
Ordinance No. 012, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 15, 2011,
appropriates a grant in the amount of$16,728 from the Bohemian Foundation and additional
funds in the amount of$3,247 from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Juvenile
Diversion, for the continuation of Restorative Justice Services, which includes the
RESTORE program for shoplifting offenses, and the Restorative Justice Conferencing
Program for all other offenses.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 013, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Transferring Prior Year Reserves in the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force Reserve
to the General Fund for the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading,on February 15, 2011, appropriates
grant funds and money from the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force seizure reserve. Fort
Collins Police Services has received two grants from the Office of National Drug Control
Policy and U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force
(NCDTF) to,help fund the investigation of illegal narcotics activities in Larimer County.
These two grant awards will be used in conjunction with NCDTF reserves to pay for Task
Force operating expenses in 2011. Combined, these three items equal an appropriation of
$348,649.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2011, Designating the Durward/Hartshorn/Day
Residence and Garage, 1022 South College Avenue as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to
Chapter 14 of the City Code.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 15, 2011, designates
the Durward/Hartshorn/Day residence and garage, 1022 South College Avenue, as a Fort.
Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Kelly Day, is initiating this request.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 015, 2011, Designating the Wisely/Willard Residence,
1114 West Mountain Avenue,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code. -
Ordinance No. 015, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 15, 2011,
designates the Wisely/Willard residence, 1114 West Mountain Avenue, as a Fort Collins
Landmark. The owners of the property, Stephen and Kathleen Willard, are initiating this
request.
187
March 1, 2011
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2011, Authorizing an Agricultural Lease of City-
Owned Property Known as the Maxwell Farm for Up to Five Years.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 15, 2011, authorizes a
lease of Maxwell Farm, an agricultural property owned by the Natural Areas program and
located near County Road 56 and 1-25 (approximately two miles north of Fort Collins).
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 021, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
The Fort Collins Police Services Victim Services Team has been awarded a 12-month grant
in the amount of$40,000 for the period from January 1,2011 to December 31, 2011,by the
Eighth Judicial District Victims Assistance and Law Enforcement(V.A.L.E.)Board to help
fund services provided by this team. These funds will be used for part of the salary for the
victim advocate who provides crisis intervention services during weekday hours and is
housed in the Victim Services office. These funds will also pay for some of the operational
expenses needed to provide 24-hour a day, 7-day a week services to victims of crime in Fort
Collins.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 022,2011, Establishing Rental Rates and Delivery Charges
for the City's Raw Water for the 2011 Irrigation Season.
This Ordinance approves rates for the rental and delivery of the City's raw water supplies.
The Water Utility uses these rates to assess charges for agricultural use, for various
contractual raw water obligations and for raw water deliveries to other City departments.
The proposed rate for each type of water is based on several factors, including market
conditions and assessments charged by irrigation companies.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2011, Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enter into
an Agreement for the Lease-Purchase Financing of Vehicles and Equipment and
Appropriating,the Amount Needed for Such Purpose.
This Ordinance authorizes the Purchasing Agent to enter into a lease-purchase financing
agreement for vehicles and equipment with Pinnacle Public Finance at 2.60 percent interest
rate. The cost of the items to be lease-purchased is $ 1,405,001. Payments at the 2.60%
interest rate will not exceed $225,429 in 2011. Money for 2011 lease-purchase payments
is included in the 2011 budget. The effect of this transaction position for the purpose of
financial rating of the City will be to raise the total City debt by 2.5%. A competitive
process was used to select Pinnacle Public Finance for this lease.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 024, 20111 Amending Chapter 2, Article V, Division 3 of
the City Code Pertaining to City Service Areas.
The City Manager and executive leadership team continue to examine and consider ways to
enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the City organization. The City Manager has
188
March 1, 2011
decided to implement some changes to the City's internal organizational structure. These
changes impact existing service areas which necessitates updates to related provisions of the
City Code.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No.025,2011,Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive
Permanent Easement on Fossil Creek Regional Open Space to the Colorado Department of
Transportation.
The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has requested a permanent non-
exclusive easement on a portion of the Fossil Creek Regional Open Space as part of the I-
25/SH392 Interchange Project (the "Project"). The requested easement consists of 3,558
square feet located within the wetland north of Highway 392 and will be used to construct
-box culverts for stormwater control purposes and to maintain the existing wetland
connection under the highway.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No.026, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-owned Property
at 222, 224, and 226 West Mountain Avenue for Up to Five Years.
The City has been the owner of the properties located at 222, 224 and 226 West Mountain
Avenue since 1985. Moe Kamandy of the Mountain Cafe has been leasing this space since
1991. The total yearly lease payment for these spaces will beat least$11,200. The term of
the lease shall be for one(1)year with automatic renewal for up to four(4) successive one-
year terms. With this lease, either party will have the option to terminate at any time upon
twelve (12) months advance written notice to the other party. In addition, the tenant is
responsible for the following expenses: taxes, all utilities, and janitorial.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 027, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
Located at 2313 Kechter Road for Up to Five Years.
The City acquired the property located at 2313 Kechter Road as part of the Affordable
Housing Land Bank Program in January 2006. Located on the 15.9 acre property is a single
family house and three outbuildings. This property has been leased since 2006.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 028,2011,Vacating Right-of-way as Dedicated On the Plat
Griffin Plaza Subdivision.
In 1977,the Griffin Plaza Subdivision, located south of Prospect Road and west of College
Avenue,platted several lots and a public street extending into the site named Tamasag Drive.
Although development did occur on the two lots adjacent to Prospect Road,Tamasag Drive
was never constructed as anything more than a driveway. The property owner at the
southeast corner of Tamasag Drive and Prospect Road(former Gasamat site)has requested
the vacation of Tamasag Drive. The owner of this parcel is considering redeveloping the
site, but an application for development has not been submitted.
189
March 1, 2011
20. Items Relating to the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport.
A. Resolution 2011-019 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement
with the Colorado Department of Transportation(Colorado Aeronautical Board)for
Funding Pertaining to the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport.
B. Resolution 2011-020 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the 2011 Grant
Agreement With the Federal Aviation Administration for Improvements at the Fort
Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport.
The Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport has received grant funds from the Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) — Division of Aeronautics. The grant supports the
FAA and local capital improvement plans. The 2011 grant is $400,000. The Resolution
accepts the grant and authorizes the City Manager to execute the contract documents.
The Airport has also received grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA).
As a commercial service airport with over 10,000 enplaned passengers per year the Airport
receives an entitlement grant of$1,000,000. In 2-3 year cycles, the Airport also receives
discretionary grants to tackle large FAA approved airside related projects. It is anticipated
that in 2011,the Airport will be granted up to$7,000,000 from the FAA to support a runway
rehabilitation project. This resolution authorizes the City Manager to execute the grant
award contracts with the FAA.
21. Resolution 2011-021 Adopting the Bicycle Safety Education Plan 2011.
In March 2010, City Council directed staff to prepare a Bicycle Safety Education Plan
(BSEP), including the concepts of a "Master Cyclist' program and a bicycle safety town.
Bicycle education programs are designed to increase bicycle safety by improving the ability
for cyclists to ride safely and increase awareness among all modes of travel. The Plan
focuses on the safety needs of the Fort Collins community while providing practical
solutions and implementation strategies to improve overall safety from both a programmatic
and infrastructure perspective. The BSEP is a component of the 2008 Bicycle Plan and the
recently adopted Transportation Master Plan.
22. Resolution 2011-022 Making_Appointments to the Downtown Development Authority.
This Resolution makes appointments to fill current vacancies on the Downtown
Development Authority.
23. Routine Easement.
Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from Mitchell and Vicky L.
Green, to install electric transformer and primary system at 224 Wood Street. Monetary
consideration: $0.
190
March 1, 2011
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 012, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for Police Services and for the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously
Appropriated in the Police Services Program Budget.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 013, 2011,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Transferring Prior Year Reserves in the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force Reserve
to the General Fund for the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2011, Designating the Durward/Hartshorn/Day
Residence and Garage, 1022 South College Avenue as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to
Chapter 14 of the City Code.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 015, 2011, Designating the Wisely/Willard Residence,
1114 West Mountain Avenue,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2011; Authorizing an Agricultural Lease of City-
Owned Property.Known as the Maxwell Farm for Up to Five Years.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 021, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in
the General Fund for the Police Services Victim Services Team.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 022,2011,Establishing Rental Rates and Delivery Charges
for the City's Raw Water for the 2011 Irrigation Season.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2011, Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enter into
an Agreement for the Lease-Purchase Financing of Vehicles and Equipment and
Appropriating the Amount Needed for Such Purpose. .
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 024, 2011, Amending Chapter 2, Article V, Division 3 of
the City Code Pertaining to City Service Areas.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No.025,2011,Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive
Permanent Easement on Fossil Creek Regional Open Space to the Colorado Department of
Transportation.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No.026, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-owned Property
at 222, 224, and 226 West Mountain Avenue for Up to Five Years.
191
March 1, 2011
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 027, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
Located at 2313 Kechter Road for Up to Five Years.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 028,2011,Vacating Right-of-way as Dedicated On the Plat
of the Griffin Plaza Subdivision.
27. First Reading of Ordinance No. 029, 2011, Repealing And Reenacting Division 1, Article
IV of Chapter 15 of the City Code Relating To Door-To-Door Solicitation.
28. Items Relating to the Green Building Program.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No.030,2011,Amending Chapter 5,Article II,Division
2, of the City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Building
Code as adopted.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No.031,2011,Amending Chapter 5,Article 11,Division
2, of the City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Energy
Conservation Code as Adopted.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 032,2011,Amending Chapter 5,Article II,Division
2,of the City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Residential
Code as Adopted.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 033, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article IV, of the
City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Mechanical Code as
Adopted.
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 034, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article IV, of the
City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Fuel Gas Code as
Adopted.
F. First Reading of Ordinance No. 035, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article V of the
City Code for the Purpose of Repealing the Uniform Plumbing Code and Adopting
a Local Amendment to the Colorado Plumbing Code to Establish Water Flow Rate
Restrictions on Certain Fixtures.
29. Items Relating to the Implementation of Plan Fort Collins, Including Amendments to Three
Subarea Plans and the Land Use Code.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No, 036, 2011, Making Amendments to the Land Use
Code Implementing Policies of the 2010 Update of City Plan.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 037,2011,Amending the Zoning Map by Changing
the Name of the"Commercial District(C)"to"General Commercial District(C-G)."
192
March 1, 2011
Thomas Edwards, Fort Collins Bicycle Coalition, withdrew Item No. 21, Resolution 2011-021
Adopting the Bicycle Safety Education Plan 2011.
Councilmember Roy withdrew Item No. 15,First Reading of Ordinance No. 024, 2011, Amending
Chapter 2, Article V, Division 3 of the City Code Pertaining to City Service Areas.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt and
approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked, regarding Item No. 14,First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2011,
Authorising the Purchasing Agent to Enter into an Agreement for the Lease-Purchase Financing
of Vehicles and Equipment and Appropriating the Amount Needed for Such Purpose,how citizens
are to determine complete departmental budgets, given some vehicles are owned by fleet services
and some are not. Ken Mannon,Operations Services Director,replied all new vehicles are replaced
within each department's budget. Once the vehicle goes into the fleet,it is the responsibility of Fleet
Services to replace it.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked that the information be more readily available for citizens. City
Manager Atteberry replied staff would work on the issue. Mannon stated it would be possible for
the initial capital purchases to be made by Fleet Services and have the individual departments pay
to lease the vehicle.
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry discussed the Governor's Arts Awards Luncheon he attended with Mayor
Hutchinson and Jill Stillwell, Cultural Services Director. Stillwell stated Fort Collins was honored
with the 2011 Governor's Arts Award.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Manvel gave a report regarding Municipal Court and stated Judge Lane's caseload
has increased. He discussed the expiration of the City's 2-year amnesty program to register
duplexes.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the ad hoc Municipal Court committee, consisting of the Mayor and two
Councilmembers, has greatly improved oversight of the Court and Judge.
Councilmember Roy commended Stillwell and staff for receipt of the Governor's Arts Award..
193
March 1, 2011
Councilmember Troxell stated he attended the Women's Commission breakfast and commended
the Women's Commission for its work to include other boards and commissions in its efforts. He
asked if it would be possible for other boards and commissions to communicate between each other.
Councilmember Poppaw stated many of her boards and commissions have liaisons to other boards
and she supported the idea of furthering that concept.
Ordinance No. 029, 2011,
Repealing And Reenacting Division 1, Article IV of Chapter 15 of the City Code
Relating To Door-To-Door Solicitation. Withdrawn on First Reading
City Manager Atteberry recommended postponement of Item No. 27 First Reading of Ordinance
No. 029, 2011, Repealing And Reenacting Division 1, Article IV of Chapter 15 of the City Code
Relating To Door-To-Door Solicitation for additional community conversation.
Items Relating to the Green Building Program, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff's memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 030, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article II, Division 2, of
the City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Building Code as
adopted.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 031, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article II, Division 2, of
the City Code for the Purpose ofAmending the 2009 International Energy Conservation
Code as Adopted.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 032, 2011, Amending Chapter 5, Article IT, Division 2, of
the City Code for the Purpose of Amending the 2009 International Residential Code as
Adopted.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 033, 2011,Amending Chapter 5,Article IV, of the City Code
for the Purpose ofAmending the 2009 International Mechanical Code as Adopted.
E. First Reading of OrdinanceNo. 034, 2011,AmendingChapter5,ArticleIV, oftheCityCode
for the Purpose ofAmending the 2009 International Fuel Gas Code as Adopted.
F. First Reading of Ordinance No. 035, 2011, Amending Chapter 5,Article V of the City Code
for the Purpose of Repealing the Uniform Plumbing Code and Adopting a LocalAmendment
to the Colorado Plumbing Code to Establish Water Flow Rate Restrictions on Certain
Fixtures.
194
March 1, 2011
Implementation ofthe Fort Collins Green Building Program has the primarygoal ofbetter aligning
the built environment with community goals of reduced carbon emissions, reduced energy use and
reduced water use. The Green Building Program framework is designed to support market
transformation through a combination of regulatory and voluntary elements. Green Building
Program work-over the past year has focused on developing a package of"green amendments"for
incorporation into the Fort Collins Building Code. This process has been led by staff, working
closely with stakeholders. The proposed amendments address opportunities with regard to resource
efficiency, energy efficiency, water efficiency, indoor and outdoor environmental quality, and
buildings operation and maintenance. The benefit cost analysis shows an overall netpositive benefit
compared with buildings constructed to current Code requirements. The changes in Code
requirements are projected to increase initial design and construction costs by I% to 2%for
residential buildings and 1%to 4%for commercial buildings. Among other benefits, the proposed
changes will provide energy, water and carbon savings compared with buildings constructed to
current Code requirements. Staff recommends the green amendments become effective January 1,
2012, with the exception of the amendments establishing more stringent requirements for electrically
heated buildings, to be effective upon adoption.
BA CKGR O UND/D I S C USSION
Implementation of a Green Building Program was identified as a City Council priority during the
2010—2011 budget process, with a primary goal of better aligning Fort Collins'built environment
with community goals of reduced carbon emissions, reduced energy use and reduced water use.
Green building has a strong policy basis with the 2008 Climate Action Plan, 2009 Energy Policy
and 2009 Water Conservation Plan.
The Utilities department is leading the effort of developing the Green Building Program in close
collaboration with Community Development and Neighborhood Services (CDNS).
The Green Building Program framework is designed to support market transformation through a
combination of regulatory and voluntary, market-driven elements. Green Building Program work
to date has focused on developing a package of"green amendments"for incorporation into the Fort
Collins Building Code.
Green Amendment Development Process
After review of national model green building codes and standards, staff recommended to City
Council at the July 13, 2010 Work Session that the project focus on developing a strategic selection
of effective amendments to fin-ther "green" the existing Building Codes. A majority of Council
members supported the recommendation. Developing a green amendment proposal was the focus
of the project from July through November 2010. (The 2009 International Codes(I-Codes)package,
adopted by Council in September 2010, is the baseline for these amendments)
The green amendment development process closely involved two Technical Review Advisory
Committees, one focused on the residential sector, the other on the commercial sector. Members
were invited to participate based on their technical and market expertise. Each committee typically
195
March 1, 2011
met twice a month from May through November 2010. Attachment 5 lists committee members.
Attachment 12 lists comments from committee members on the green amendment proposal.
At the December 14, 2010 Work Session, staff presented a draft of the proposed green building
practices under consideration as amendments, along with four additional "options, "a proposed
implementation schedule and a preliminary benefit cost summary. A majority of Council supported
the direction and directed staff to finalize the proposal and develop ordinances for adoption in
March 2011 (Attachment 4).
Since the December Work Session, staff has refined details of the proposal, developed ordinances
to amend the Building Code,finalized the benefit cost analysis and reviewed the proposal with
boards and commissions.
Community Outreach
In addition to the community involvement via the technical review advisory committees, other
community engagement activities have included:
• Web site. Information and opportunities to provide input have been available via the project
web pages at fcgov.com/gbp.
• Public meetings. All advisory committee meetings have been open to the public. Meetings
have been listed on the project web pages and City web calendar.
• Board, commission and other stakeholder meetings. Staff has presented multiple updates
to City boards and commissions and the Green Building Program Advisory Committee
(Attachment 5), as well as to several other stakeholder groups by request. Board and
commission recommendations regarding adoption of the green amendment ordinances are
itemized below.
• Public Open House. A public open house was held on November 17, 2010. The associated
summary offeedback was included in the December Work Session Agenda Item Summary.
Attachment 10 is a log of community engagement activities.
Green Amendments Proposal
Thegreen amendmentsproposal has changed littlefrom the draftpackagepresented to City Council
at the December 14, 2010 Work Session. "Amendment proposals-at-a-glance" — listing the
proposed green building practices with brief descriptions, for the residential and commercial
sectors—are included as Attachments 1 and 2. Additional details about each practice are available
at the Green Building Program web pages, www.fcgov.com/gbp.
Proposal refinements made since the December Work Session are as follows:
• Occupancy sensor controls of lighting in defined spaces. This measure was added to the
commercial amendment proposal, applicable to commercial and multi family residential
buildings. The proposed amendment would require automatic reduction of connected
196
March 1, 2011
lighting power by at least 50%in corridors, enclosed stairwells,parking garages and other
intermittently used spaces, when these spaces are unoccupied. This measure was added as
a low-cost practice for reducing electric energy use and carbon emissions.
• Certified wood. A requirement for sustainable forestry certification of wood products used
in construction was in the "option"category at the December 14, 2010 Work Session. A
.subset of this has been developed as a proposed amendment. Tropical hardwoods, used in
both residential and commercial projects, would be required to have Forest Stewardship
Council certification. Staff recommends this as an appropriate step for regulation that will
help to stimulate more attention and thought toward the "upstream impacts"of extracting
and processing building materials. Since tropical hardwoods are rarely used in entry-level
projects, this does not represent an added expense to the most cost-sensitive portion of the
market.
• Building envelope requirements for electrically heated residential buildings. The
December 2010 draft package included more stringent thermal requirements for attics,
frame walls, windows, crawl spaces and air leakage of electrically heated buildings,
reflecting the significantly higher cost to heat with electricity versus natural gas. The
refinements increase stringency for basement walls, slab-on-grade foundations and mass
walls as well, to more comprehensively address electrically heated buildings.
• Effective date for electric heat buildings amendments. Based on Council direction at the
December 14, 2010 Work Session, the amended envelope requirements for electrically
heated buildings are proposed to become effective upon adoption of the amendment
ordinances. The proposed effective date for the balance of the amendments is proposed as
January 1, 2012.
Other "options"discussed with Council at the December 14, 2010 Work Session, not included in
the final proposal, are:
• Envelope requirementsforgas-heatedhomes. Staffrecommends that thermal requirements
for gas-heated residential buildings not be increased beyond those in the recently adopted
2009 I-Code package. In staff's experience, the more important next step in achieving
thermal envelope efficiency is increased focus on the details necessary to install components
so they deliver rated performance. This is what drives the amendments regarding insulation
installation standards and installation procedures for windows,skylights and doors, as well
as plans for training and developing field guides that clearly illustrate important thermal
envelope details. Staff expects to recommend that the next steps in thermal envelope
requirements be taken with the 20121-Codes package, currently planned for adoption in
2013.
• Renewable energy. Staff recommends that renewable energy requirements remain in the
voluntary, market-driven realm at this time, because they represent a much larger increase
in f rst cost than anything else included in the proposal. For example, the installed cost of
a typical solar electric system for residential use, three kilowatt peak capacity, is on the
order of$18,000. This would add about 7% to the cost of the residential prototype house
197
March 1, 2011
used for the benefit cost analysis, far greater than the total estimated cost increase
associated with the green amendment proposal as a whole (see "Financial/Economic
Impacts" below). It would produce about half of the electrical energy used by atypical
customer. The average cost of the electricity produced by the photovoltaic system (over a
20 year life, with a 7%discount rate), would be about$0.40 per kilowatt-hour, compared
to the current Fort Collins Utilities'residential rate of about $0.08/kWh. The same-sized
system on the commercial prototype would add about 1% to the cost of the building, while
meeting only about 3% of annual electrical needs. The $18,000 cost assumes no tax
incentives or utility rebates.
• Higherperformance requirementsfor larger homes. Staffrecommends that variable green
requirements, based on house size, not be incorporated as part of the Building Code.
Though a case can be made that larger homes built to the same standards as smaller homes
have a larger environmental footprint, preliminary discussion at stakeholder meetings
suggested that mandating stricter standards would be very controversial. This approach is
incorporated in the national, voluntary green building rating systems as well as the updated
ENERGY STAR®Homes standard that will be effective in January 2012. As otherportions
of the Green Building Program develop, the City may offer increasing levels of recognition
and/or incentives based on some of these programs. Staff recommends gaining more
experience through the voluntary approaches before addressing this through a Code
requirement. Attachment 7 provides data on the sizes of single family homes built in Fort
Collins from 2005 through 2010.
Proposed ordinances have been developed to incorporate the green practices as amendments to the
existing Fort Collins Building Codes. Table 1 itemizes the specific Codes that will be amended and
how they apply to different building types.
Table 1:Building Code and Green Amendment Applicability, by Building Type
Building Type
Residential: All Commercial
Building Code esidential:
Single-Family Detach Mulltifamily 4-
Duplexes ulti family 1-Story Story
Townhouses to 3-Story and Higher
International Building
Code Applies Applies
International Residential Applies
Code
International Energy Applies (Chapter 4) Applies (Chapter 4) Applies (Chapter
Conservation Code 5
International Mechanical
Applies Applies
Code
Colorado Plumbing Code Applies Applies
International Fuel Gas
Applies Applies
Code
198
March 1, 2011
Green Building Practices Not Included in Proposed Amendments
Green building practices that were considered in the development process but not included in the
proposed amendment package are listed in Attachment 6. Many of these practices are already
addressed to some extent by current Fort Collins Codes or will be promoted through voluntary
Green Building Program elements (education, training, recognition, incentives). Some will likely
be reviewed in the future for inclusion in other parts of the City Code or the Land Use Code.
Implementation Planning
Staff recommends a high level of support be provided for a smooth transition to the new Code
requirements. A proposed effective date of January 1, 2012 for all but the electric heat amendments
was supported by Council at the December 14, 2010 Work Session. The period between adoption
and implementation provides time to detail certification requirements and testingprotocols,develop
new submittalforms and templates associated with the amendments,developf eldguides illustrating
acceptable techniques for compliance, and provide training for contractors and enforcement staff.
Utilities and CDNS will closely work together in support ofa successful transition Table 2 outlines
general City responsibilities, by department:
Table 2: Implementation Roles and Responsibilities
Community Utilities
Description Development and Energy
Nei hborhood Services Services
Development of verification procedures Primary Secondary
Development of support materials Secondary Primary
Training and education (contractors, inspectors,
Secondary Primary
public)
Day-to-day implementation (plan review,field Secondary
inspections, administration) Primary (technical
support)
Monitoring and evaluation of the implementation
process and results Secondary Primary
FINANCL4LECONOMIC IMPACTS
Benefit Cost Analysis
A benefit cost analysis of the proposed green amendments considers benefits and costs related to
owners/occupants, the building sector and the community/ecosystem. The report, Attachment 3,
describes the methodologies and assumptions used in the analysis.
199
1
March 1, 2011
Results show:
• The proposed green amendments align with Fort Collins community goals embodied in the
Energy Policy(2009), Water Conservation Plan(2009)and the Climate Action Plan(2008),
while providing a variety of benefits for building owners and occupants.
• Costs incurred at the individual, building sector or community/ecosystem levels can produce
benefits at multiple levels.
• Near-term cost increases, associated with the design and construction ofa buildingproject,
are balanced by recurring benefits delivered over the life of the building. Other community-
level benefits improve the economic picture.
• Initial cost increases projected for building projects are not insignificant, but represent
relatively small percentage increases (1%to 4%); these are within typical variance ranges
for construction. It is anticipated that increased design and construction costs incorporated
in this analysis will decrease as contractors gain experience and infrastructure matures.
There are exemplary green, high-performance buildings in Fort Collins that deliver a strong
array of benefits with little or no cost increase compared with conventional construction.
• Reductions of energy, water and carbon are projected on the order of 5% to 10%for
residential projects and 20%to 30%for commercial projects.
• The proposed green amendments do not provide a quick "payback"for building owners,
based on a traditional view of utility savings compared with increased design and
construction costs.
• Increases in Code enforcement time are estimated on the order of 45%for residential
projects and 25%for commercial projects, requiring additional staffing.
Using generally conservative assumptions and the elements quantified to date, total benefits are
projected to exceed total costs, with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.3.
There are direct costs to the City in two areas:
• Development of support materials and training. These pre-implementation phase costs,
estimated at $100,000, will primarily be incurred in 2011. They are one-time costs. The
planned materials and training, discussed above under "Implementation Planning, " will
support a smooth transition to the new Code requirements. Funds covering these needs have
been appropriated in the Utilities 2011-2012 budget.
• Enforcement. The amendments will represent increased enforcement staff time. This cost
has been accounted for in the benefit cost analysis. Council recently allocated funding from
Amendment 2B revenues to cover increased enforcement staffing,for 2011 and 2012. This
means that, in this time frame, building permit fees will not increase as a result of the green
amendments.
AppraisaUvaluation
The benefit cost analysis documents ranges of increased initial design and construction costs
associated with the proposed green amendments for prototypical buildings. Staff is aware of
potential appraisal and underwriting challenges related to these cost increases. Residential
200
March 1, 2011
appraisal procedures have become much more tightly regulated since the recent mortgage
foreclosure crisis, leaving appraisers little latitude in recognizing non-standard features. These
challenges can be real for any building containing features which have not yet been widely
implemented in the market. The challenges are not specific to Fort Collins or green building; they
are national in scope and part of the challenges buyers face when trying to secure financing for a
home they wish to build or buy.
Efforts are underway at the state and national level to modify regulations to make it possible to
more readily recognize the benefits ofgreen features in the appraisal process. "Green fields"were
recently added to the Multiple Listing Service database serving Northern Colorado. Education and
public awareness building in Fort Collins will also help to increase market recognition of these
benefits.
The proposed green amendments are not unlike other Code updates that have occurred on a regular
basis for many years. Typically, Code updates include increased requirements related to health,
safety and energy, many of which are not immediately recognized by the marketplace. The most
recent Fort Collins Code update.went into effect in October 2010 with,for example, increased
prescriptive insulation requirements for single-family homes. Appraisal and valuation issues have
not generally been an issue for previous Code updates in Fort Collins.
Development trends
Some stakeholders have expressed concern that adding new regulations to construction in Fort
Collins may drive development to nearby communities with less stringent building codes. This, in
turn,could potentially undermine thegreen intent of the proposed amendments by increasing vehicle
miles traveled and associated environmental effects. These stakeholders have pointed out that
construction activity is currently very low in Fort Collins and that the proposed amendments may
cause a further decline.
Council members asked staff to provide information on development trends in Fort Collins,
regionally and nationally to help better understand these dynamics. Relevant data is summarized
in Attachment 8. Construction activity in Fort Collins, while currently low, is not as low as
comparable Northern Colorado communities;it has actually outperformed the comparables in 2008
to 2010.
As indicated in the benefit cost analysis, concerns about higher initial costs associated with
increased Code requirements are balanced by a variety of other factors. A higherprofile for green
building can increase a commimity's competitive advantage, attracting development and business.
The U.S. Green Building Council outlines a business case for green building for commercial
building owners (Attachment 9). This information suggests that green building is a competitive
differentiator, mitigates risk, attracts tenants, is cost-effective and increases rental rates. All of
these factors bolster the City's economic health.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The proposed amendments provide a variety of environmental benefits. Though construction will
continue to have environmental impacts, buildings meeting the proposed amendments will have less
impact than buildings built to the current code.
201
March 1, 2011
• Energy savings. These are projected at 5%to 10%ofannual use for residential construction
and 24% to 36%for commercial construction.
• Water savings. These are projected at 5% to 10% of total annual use for residential
construction and about 20% of indoor water use for commercial construction. Less water
use translates to reduced wastewater treatment needs.
• Carbon reduction. These are projected at 5% to 10% of annual emissions for residential
construction and 17% to 26%for commercial construction.
• Landfill diversion. The construction waste recycling amendment will divert materials from
the landfill. Enhanced durability anticipated to resultfrom several amendments will reduce
maintenance requirements and associated waste disposal. These benefits have not been
quantified.
• Sustainable forests. The certified wood amendment will require tropical hardwoods used in
construction projects to be obtained from sustainably managed forests. Benefits will be
"upstream, "in the areas from which the lumber is harvested, rather than in Fort Collins.
Impacts have not been quantified.
More information is provided in the benefit cost analysis report. "
Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive Director, discussed the environmental, economic, and social
benefits of the Program.
Bruce Hendee, Assistant to the City Manager, stated the Program presents an incremental change
that elevates the Green Building environment but does not mandate extraordinary costs.
John Phelan, Energy Services Manager, state the primary goal of the Green Building Program is to
align the built environment with community goals around reducing carbon emissions, energy and
water use. The Building Review Board did not recommend adoption of the Ordinances; the Air
Quality Advisory Board did recommend adoption of the Ordinances. These Ordinances will begin
a more intentional process to make green building mainstream in Fort Collins.
Jeff Schneider, 755 Peregrine Run, thanked staff for work on the item but opposed the Green
Building Program Ordinances.
Rick Cohen, solar installer, commended staff on the community input process and stated this
Program is an incremental step which is not too strict so as to inhibit development.
Sean Dougherty, Fort Collins Board of Realtors President, supported the Green Building Program
with the exception of preferring an incentive-based approach as opposed to a regulatory approach.
Additionally, the Board is concerned with the cost and ability of bringing older structures into
compliance with remodel and addition requirements.
Clint Skutchan,Fort Collins Board of Realtors Executive Vice-President,thanked staff for work on
the Program and expressed overall support of the Ordinances.
202
March 1, 2011
Councilmember Troxell asked how many new home construction starts have occurred in the last
year. Steve Dush, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, replied there
were 171 single-family detached home starts in 2010.
Councilmember Troxell asked how many of the 171 homes would have met the proposed mandatory
requirements. Phelan replied he was unsure of the exact number but stated only a few builders target
a green building or higher performance market place and none would have been requirement to meet
these regulations in 2010.
Councilmember Kottwtiz asked about the applicability of these Ordinances to redesign projects,
such as carpet replacement. Phelan replied these Ordinances apply only to projects requiring a
building permit.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked about economic and environmental assumptions in terms of
redesigning projects which would initially fall under these requirements but may not be redesigned
under these requirements. Phelan replied conservative estimates were made in terms of long-term
benefits.
Councilmember Kottwitz noted the Affordable Housing Board was concerned about this program
not being voluntary for affordable housing units. She asked if there is precedent for making the
program voluntary for affordable housing. Phelan replied he had not seen a case of that.
Mayor Hutchinson noted Council has historically not placed regulations on existing homes which
would need to be retrofitted to meet the standards. He asked about unintended impacts of remodels
and additions which would be required to meet the standards. Phelan replied the proposed
amendments do not change the scope of when building permits would be required. An unintended
impact may result from the combustion safety, or carbon monoxide, testing of water heaters and
furnaces.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked about the green building items which were not included in the
Ordinances and noted the entire list of unaccepted commercial items was included in the staff report.
He asked for the entire list of residential items that were not included prior to Second Reading.
Phelan replied the commercial review committee used different processes than did the residential
review committee, which resulted in the variance.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked about the factors for items not being included in the Ordinances.
Phelan replied the committees were made up of a broad range of individuals,many of whom are in
the construction trade, and some of whom were overwhelmed by the idea of adoption of the entire
International Green Building Code.
Gary Schrader,Utilities Energy Services Engineer,facilitator on the commercial review committee,
stated, for example, the committee opted to recommend requiring a no-cost energy assessment for
building alterations.
203
March 1, 2011
Mayor Hutchinson asked about the cost-benefit analysis of each of the items. Schrader replied cost-
benefit analyses were part of all discussions and those items with the highest benefits were often the
items remaining on the list.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked why the regulations are effective immediately for electrically heated
buildings and nine months later for the other regulations. Phelan replied the later effective date was
provided to allow for a smooth transition and for the Building Department to prepare. The electric
heat amendments have been part of older versions of the Code so they were deemed appropriate to
have an immediate effective date.
Councilmember Troxell noted there is a one-time training cost of$100,000 in 2011 and asked if that
will be ongoing. Phelan replied that cost represents the start-up training to help the building
community become familiar with the amendments. Mike Gebo, Building Department, replied the
$100,000 is the City's cost to implement the new Codes, including additional plan review and
additional inspections. Some of those costs are included in the adopted budget.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked what types of incentives other communities have used when
instituting these as voluntary measures. Phelan replied there are financial incentives, such as the
commercial Integrated Design Assistance Program which provides incentives based on the actual
performance of the building from an electrical savings perspective. There are also recognition
incentives.
Councilmember Roy asked about partnerships with PRPA. Phelan replied existing commercial
energy efficiency rebates and incentives are co-funded between PRPA and Fort Collins Utilities.
The amount this year is about$900,000 total. The wholesale purchase power costs are in the upper
$80 millions.
Councilmember Roy encouraged attempts to increase the PRPA input.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
030, 2011, on First Reading.
Councilmember Troxell asked when the next update to these Codes would come out. Phelan replied
the next update would be in 2012 and would be published in 2013.
Councilmember Kottwitz made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to make amend all
the Ordinances to make all mandates incentive-based and voluntary.
Councilmember Manvel stated compromises have been made and he would not support the motion.
He noted many of these regulations are currently voluntary.
204
March 1, 2011
Councilmember Poppaw stated she is the Vice-Chair of the Fort Collins Housing Authority and
stated green building is becoming the norm. It would be a misstatement to say it will be a problem
for affordable housing.
Councilmember Kottwitz noted the Affordable Housing Board recommended making the proposed
changes to the Code voluntary, at least for affordable housing, as enforcing the requirements would
result in fewer affordable housing units being built.
Councilmember Poppaw read from a memo from the Fort Collins Housing Authority and noted
green building issues are important to people living in affordable housing.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated staff developed exactly what was requested: a meaningful change but
not an overreach. He noted some of the issues are health and safety issues and stated the following
boards recommended adoption of the Ordinances: Economic Advisory Board, Natural Resources
Advisory Board, Water Board, Air Quality.Board, Landmark Preservation Commission, and the
Electric Board. He stated he would support the Ordinances as proposed.
Mayor Hutchinson stated, in examining costs and benefits, there is potentially room for making
some of the regulations voluntary. He stated he would support the amendment.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Troxell. Nays: Manvel,
Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Manvel stated staff has already completed a cost-benefit analysis.
Councilmember Kottwitz stated voluntary measures with incentives would further decrease the cost,
ideally with the same benefit. Voluntary measures should come before mandatory measures. She
thanked staff for work on the item.
Councilmember Troxell stated there are remaining implementation issues and he would not support
the Ordinances.
The vote on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 030, 2011 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas:
Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays: Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
031,2011;on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw and Roy. Nays: Kottwitz
and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
205
March 1,12011
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
032, 2011, on First Reading.
Mayor Hutchinson stated voluntary regulations would be more appropriate for this Ordinance.
Councilmember Kottwitz made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to amend Ordinance
No. 032, 2011 to make all mandates incentive-based and voluntary.
Councilmember Troxell stated it is not necessary to mandate, even though it is possible.
Councilmember Manvel stated it is important to make a baseline with greater benefits for not a large
increase in cost. .
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson stated there is a cost to inaction and well-written, appropriately enforced
regulations are critical for functioning societies and economies.
The vote on the motion to amend was as follows: Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz and Troxell. Nays:
Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy.
THE MOTION FAILED.
The vote on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 032, 2011, on First Reading,was as follows: Yeas:
Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays: Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance
No. 033, 2011, on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays:
Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance
No. 034, 2011, on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays:
Kottwitz and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
035,2011,on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw and Roy. Nays:Kottwitz
and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
206
March 1, 2011
Items Relating to the Implementation of Plan Fort Collins, Including Amendments to
Three Subarea Plans and the Land Use Code. Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No, 036, 2011, Making Amendments to the Land Use Code
Implementing Policies of the 2010 Update of City Plan.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 037, 2011, Amending the Zoning Map by Changing the
Name of the "Commercial District(C)"to "General Commercial District(C-G). "
C. Resolution 2011-023 Amending the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan, the Mountain Vista
Subarea Plan and the Northwest Subarea Plan to Comport with the 2010 Update of the
City's Comprehensive Plan Known as "Plan Fort Collins".
The Resolution and Ordinances implement amendments to three subarea plans and the Land Use
Code related to adoption of the update to City Plan.
BA CKGR O UNDID IS C USSION
The Land Use Code was first adopted in March 1997. Subsequent revisions have been
recommended on a regular basis to make changes, additions, deletions and clarifications. The
current proposed changes result from the recent update to City Plan, which identifies specific
amendments to the Land Use Code to be implemented concurrent with the adoption of City Plan.
The proposed changes are listed in City Plan as follows:
Land Use Code Amendments
Neighborhoods and Housing
• Amend Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (L-M-N) requirements regarding: (1) mix
of housing; (2) density requirements; and(3) neighborhood convenience centers (building
footprints for retail and offices).
• Eliminate Infill Area and retain flexible density for smaller projects.
Community Appearance and Design and Others
• Establish gateway standards for the I-251392 Interchange (as part of the interchange
project).
• Change all references in the Land Use Code and the Zoning Map from Commercial to
"General Commercial" to improve clarity and match zoning map text.
207
e
March 1, 2011
These items are morefully described in Attachment 1-List ofLand Use Code Issues and Attachment
2 -I-251SH 392 Interchange Project- Corridor Activity Center-Proposed Gateway Standards.
The Resolution, providing revisions to three subarea plans, is directly related to the proposed
amendments to the L-M-N density standards. Changes are needed to ensure that L-M-N density
numbers in these subarea plans are consistent with City Plan and the Land Use Code. These
changes are more fully described in Attachment 3-Subarea Plan Amendment Report.
City Council has held two worksessions regarding the amendments, the first on December 14, 2010
and the second on February 8, 2011. At these worksessions, Council asked questions and provided
policy direction (See Attachment 4). A follow-up memo was provided with responses to several
questions that could not be answered during the February Work Session.
Since the February 8, 2011 Work Session, staff made one change to the Land Use Code
amendments:
Amend 3.9.12 Corridor Activity Center Design Standards (Draft Ordinance page 2 and Land
Use Code Item #866). The Code revision has been changed to establish a maximum building
height of 90 feet, rather than 6112 stories or 90 feet. The purpose of this change is to provide
a simpler and clearer numeric building height standard.
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPACTS
There are no direct financial impacts to the City as a result of these amendments. The proposed
amendments represent a follow up implementation action with the City Plan update, and the Plan
addresses the tenets of sustainability—economic, environmental and human.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
There are no direct environmental impacts as a result of these amendments. The proposed
amendments represent a follow up implementation action with the City Plan update, and the Plan
addresses the tenets of sustainability—economic, environmental and human. "
Timothy Wilder, Senior City Planner,discussed the Ordinances and Resolution which will make the
Land Use Code consistent with City Plan and Plan Fort Collins. The purpose of the amendments
to the LMN zone is to increase the mix of housing in new Low Density Mixed-Use projects. The
renaming of the Commercial zone district to General Commercial will provide consistent naming
within the City's commercial zone districts. Changes to the I-25/392 interchange are intended to
increase the quality of standards at the interchange and achieve a consistent set of standards between
Windsor and Fort Collins. Changes to subarea plans are needed to ensure consistency between these
plans, City Plan, and the Land Use Code. Wilder discussed the public outreach completed as part
of the process.
208
March 1, 2011
Bill Pelissier, Pueblo resident,requested the use of insulated stucco be allowed without restriction.
He stated the proposed Ordinance will discourage design professionals from the use of any insulated
stucco at all.
James Mercer, Colorado Springs resident,requested the use of insulated stucco be allowed without
restriction.
Mark Austin, Longmont resident, requested the use of insulated stucco be allowed without
restriction.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked if Council would be violating Windsor's regulations by allowing
the use of insulated stucco and whether or not the two towns would meet to discuss the issue. Pete
Wray,Senior City Planner,replied direction to identify and approve this package of design standards
was outlined in the intergovernmental agreement adopted by Council in December. The design
standards need to be finalized by March 31, 2011. As currently designed, the aforementioned
standard calls for a masonry product at the building entrance elevation of future commercial
buildings, visible from a public street. Those materials include brick, stone, synthetic stone, or
textured or split faced concrete block. Windsor and Fort Collins staff met with the synthetic stucco
trade group and staff is working with Windsor to provide additional language to identify where other
materials could be applied.
Councilmember Kottwitz expressed concern about excluding this product,if it is the least expensive
and most environmentally sound. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner, replied staff did examine the
building materials from an aesthetic perspective and Fort Collins is relying on the adopted 2009
IEEC Commercial Building Code for these and all commercial buildings. Changes to the language,
to be presented prior to Second Reading, clarify that synthetic stucco is not prohibited altogether,
but only at the first floor level.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked for photos of acceptable stucco construction to be presented prior
to Second Reading.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the R value for stone. Shepard replied all requirements of the
2009 IEEC standards must be met.
Councilmember Troxell asked about the added R value of stucco and how it relates to the green
building requirements just adopted on First Reading. Shepard replied the R value is gained from
the Styrofoam behind the stucco.
Councilmember Kottwitz asked for staff input regarding statements made by the stucco group that
their product can be made to look like any of the other acceptable materials. Wray replied the
industry has provided staff with photos of these types of designs but staff has not been convinced
they reflect authentic masonry products in texture or appearance.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if durability is a consideration. Shepard replied staff relied on adopted
Codes in terms of durability.
209
March 1, 2011
Councilmember Roy asked Mr. Pelissier if he was aware the stucco product would be acceptable
for other parts of the building. Mr. Pelissier replied the proposed regulation is unclear as to the
restriction in regard to views from the right-of-way.
Councilmember Roy asked for staff clarification. Shepard replied staff is working on language
clarification for Second Reading. Synthetic stucco will be allowed on floors above the ground floor
on the building side facing the right-of-way,or at any level on any building side not facing the right-
of-way.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
036, 2011, on First Reading.
Councilmember Kottwitz stated she would support the motion but anticipates her requested
information prior to Second Reading.
Councilmember Roy supported applying the green building codes previously adopted on
construction of these buildings.
Councilmember Troxell stated he would like information regarding energy comparisons prior to
Second Reading.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
037, 2011, on First Reading. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution
2011-023. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 024, 2011,
Amending Chapter 2, Article V. Division 3 of the City Code
Pertaining to Citv Service Areas, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
210
March 1, 2011
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Manager and executive leadership team continue to examine and consider ways to enhance
the efficiency and effectiveness of the City organization. The City Manager has decided to
implement some changes to the City's internal organizational structure. These changes impact
existing service areas which necessitates updates to related provisions of the City Code.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Under the current structure, the City Manager has seven direct reports with five(Service Directors)
managing major functions in the organization. These are:
1. Deputy City Manager— Community Services
2. Assistant City Manager—Internal Services
3. Chief Financial Officer—Financial Services
4. Utilities Executive Director— Utility Services
S. Chief of Police—Police Services
With the completion and Council approval of the 2011-2012 City Budget, the City Manager and
the City's executive leadership team began to address how to implement the upcoming policy work
and address pressing operational needs. The needs focused on:
• Strategic Planning—development of an organizational strategic planning process and
implementation of a performance excellence initiative.
• Policy Issues—more executive capacity for Council policy issues
• Succession Planning—in the next three years, significant changes in leadership positions
are anticipated.
Community Services will be renamed Policy, Planning, and Transportation Services Area. This
service area will be directed by the Deputy City Manager(Diane Jones)and will include Planning,
Development and Transportation services, the City Clerk's Office and Performance Excellence and
Strategic Planning(new responsibility).
Internal Services will be renamed Community and Operations Services. This service area will be
directed by the Assistant City Manager(Wendy Williams)and will include Managementlnformation
Services (MIS), Operations (Facilities and Fleet), and Legislative services. Culture, Parks,
Recreation and Environmental Services (CPRE—new responsibility) will shift from Community
Services to this service area.
Anew service area will be entitled Employee and Communication Services. This service area will
be directed by the Assistant to the City Manager (Kelly DiMartino) and will include
Communications and Public Involvement and Human Resources (new responsibility) which both
shift from Internal Services to this new service area.
211
March 1, 2011
Under this revised structure, the City Manager will have a total of eight direct reports-six Service
Area Directors, an Executive Assistant to the City Manager (Tauny Gilmore) and an Assistant to
the City Manager (Bruce Hendee). The six major management positions (Service Directors) and
related functions that report directly to the City Manager are as follows:
1. Deputy City Manager—Policy, Planning and Transportation Services (amended)
2. Assistant City Manager—Community and Operations Services (amended)
3. Chief Financial Officer—Financial Services
4. Assistant to the City Manager—Employee and Communications Services (new)
5. Utilities Executive Director—Utility Services
6. Chief of Police—Police Services
The Assistant to the City Manager's responsibilities include improving collaboration and
implementation of the City's sustainability programs and practices and applying expertise to the
City's built environment. Because the responsibilities and focus of this position continue to be
refined,further information will be forthcoming to City Council.
The changes and reassignments are intended to maximize and continue to develop the expertise
among the executive managers, to continue to drive organizational efficiencies, and to address more
effectively the Council policy development, strategic planning, performance excellence. Finally,
anticipating that several executive managers will be retiring in the nest three to five years, we are
working to position staff to assume key leadership positions as those retirements occur.
Code Revisions
Under Article II, Section 5 of the City Charter, the City Council has the power to establish, change,
consolidate or abolish administrative offices, service areas or agencies of the City by ordinance,
upon report and recommendation of the City Manager, so long as the administrative functions and
public services established by the Charter are not abolished in any such reorganization. The
proposed reorganization would not abolish any of those essential functions and services.
The organizational structure of the City is contained in Chapter 2, Article V of the City Code. The
service areas are established in Division 3 of Article V. This Ordinance would amend Division 3
to codify the organizational changes described above.
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPA CTS
The financial impacts for the changes noted above will be pay grade adjustments for two of the
Service Area directors—Assistant City Manager for Community and Operations Services and
Assistant to the City Manager for Employee and Communications Services—and to reclassify the
current Public Relations Coordinator to the Communications and Public Involvement Manager.
The total salary impact is estimated at$34,000. "
Judy Dorsey, 1327 West Magnolia, supported the hiring of Bruce Hendee in the City Manager's
Office and stated he is a"best in class" example of a civil entrepreneur.
212
March 1, 2011
Jim Reidhead, UniverCity Connections Director, supported the hiring of Bruce Hendee.
Brian Dunbar, 1607 West Mulberry, supported the hiring of Bruce Hendee.
Mayor Hutchinson asked for clarification on the purpose of the item. City Manager Atteberry
replied this Ordinance does not speak directly to the hiring of Bruce Hendee but rather to some
changes in Service Area designations.
City Attorney Roy clarified the purpose of the Ordinance is to make changes to some Service Areas.
Council's role is to provide the basic administrative structure within which the City Manager has
the prerogative and responsibility to assign duties and functions.
City Manager Atteberry stated he is willing and prepared to respond to questions regarding any
appointment he makes.
Councilmember Roy asked for a review of the Service Area changes. City Manager Atteberry
replied Deputy City Manager Jones will continue to oversee Planning, Development, and
Transportation and the City Clerk's Office, and will take on the Performance Excellence Program,
Council policy functions, and strategic planning. Wendy Williams, Assistant City Manager for
Internal City Services,will continue to oversee Management Information Systems,Communications
and Public Involvement, and Operations Services, and will begin to oversee Cultural, Parks and
Recreation, Natural Resources, and Legislative Affairs. A new Assistant to the City Manager
position will be created and filled by Kelly DiMartino, who will oversee the Human Resources and
Communications and Public Involvement departments. Bruce Hendee, Assistant to the City
Manager, will be responsible for sustainability, innovation, and the built environment.
Councilmember Roy asked what Hendee will be specifically responsible for accomplishing. City
Manager Atteberry replied sustainability and oversight of the built environment will be major
aspects of Hendee's position.
Councilmember Roy asked how Hendee's position will move Fort Collins toward promoting
sustainability, decreasing the community's reliance on fossil fuels and moving toward climate
neutrality. City Manager Atteberry replied Hendee's efforts will be part of a team effort.
Councilmember Roy asked what types of improvements can be made to the existing built
environment to move toward fulfillment of sustainability goals. Hendee replied the Green Building
Code is an initial step and opportunities are there to apply additional regulations to existing
structures. Management techniques exist to improve sustainability efforts without being
prohibitively expensive.
Councilmember Poppaw welcomed Hendee and asked where Utility Finance and Budget went under
the new organizational chart. City Manager Atteberry replied the City's General Finance and
Utilities Finance positions were merged and recruitment is currently occurring for that position.
213
March 1, 2011
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson asked for staff to provide definitions of a Service Area, Service Unit, and
Department. He suggested a more vivid, distinctive organization chart, particularly for external
release, and suggested providing consistent details on the chart. He rioted Hendee's position was
not advertised and was not budgeted. City Manager Atteberry replied Hendee's hiring was in
response to Council's desires. The Code does not require advertising positions reporting directly
to the City Manager. Normally, a national search and public process are conducted. This case was
different because of an opportunity to hire an individual with unique skills and strong relationships
with the community and City staff.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
024, 2011, on First Reading.
Councilmembers Roy and Troxell commended the hiring.
Mayor Pro Tern Ohlson requested further work on the organizational chart.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson,Kottwitz,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw, Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Extension of the Meeting
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to extend the meeting
past 10:30 p.m. Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2011-021
Adopting the Bicycle Safety Education Plan 2011, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum for this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In March 2010, City Council directed staff to prepare a Bicycle Safety Education Plan (BSEP),
including the concepts of a "Master Cyclist"program and a bicycle safety town. Bicycle education
programs are designed to increase bicycle safety by improving the ability for cyclists to ride safely
and increase awareness among all modes of travel. The Plan focuses on the safety needs of the Fort
Collins community while providing practical solutions and implementation strategies to improve
overall safety from both a programmatic and infrastructure perspective. The BSEP is a component
of the 2008 Bicycle Plan and the recently adopted Transportation Master Plan.
214
March 1, 2011
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Fort Collins is one of the most bike friendly communities in the United States. With increasing
bicycle ridership, however, comes the challenge of ensuring cyclists are safe both on-road and off-
road. In March 2010, City Council directed staff to prepare a Bicycle Safety Education Plan,
including the concepts of a "Master Cyclist"program and a bicycle safety town. The goal is to
create a comprehensive plan that reflects the safety needs of the Fort Collins community and
provides programmatic and infrastructure implementation strategies to improve overall safety.
The Plan is composed of several different sections to address a variety of bicycle safety topics and
audiences. The audiences include children, adults (commuters, recreationalists, college students,
senior citizens), motorists (fleet drivers, buses/transit, everyday drivers), and law enforcement
officials. The "big ideas"in the plan include:
• Long-Term Vision: The City will strive to reduce citywide bicycle traffic deaths and serious
injury to zero.
• Location, design, and construction of a bicycle safety town.
• Focus on providing bicycle safety education for youth.
• Targeted bicycle education for adults—CSUstudents,families, commuters, senior citizens.
• Collaboration on bicycle safety training and programs with Fort Collins Police Services.
• Review of"best management practices"for innovative safe cycling infrastructure.
• Analysis and recommended solutions to address nine high bicycle crash areas.
• Inclusion of bicycle-related performance measures from Transportation Master Plan.
Short-and Long-Tern: Vision
The BSEP, as part of the 2008 Bicycle Plan, is focused on reducing the number of bicycle crashes
in Fort Collins. In the short-term, adoption and implementation of the BSEP will strive to reduce
bicycle crashes 25% by 2012 and 50% by 2013. In the long-term, the community will strive to
reduce citywide bicycle deaths and serious injury to zero.
Policy and Programmatic Recommendations
The Plan outlines a number of recommendations to address bicycle safety education for the wide
spectrum of transportation system users in Fort Collins. Each of the recommendations, while part
of larger campaigns for each target audience, address known bicycle safety issues and reflect public
comments and concerns. Staff has included recommendations to pursue a Master Cyclist program
and the design and construction of a bicycle safety town. In addition, the Fort Collins 2010 Bicycle
Accident Summary data was extensively used to identify bicycle crash trends andpotential solutions.
Safe Cycling Facility Recommendations
There are many innovative infrastructure options to support safe cycling. These include
advancements in striped bike lanes, shared lane markings, bicycle detection at intersections, and
new strategies from around the country such as bike boxes. The Plan outlines many of these options,
215'
March 1, 2011
when they may be appropriately used, and costs and benefits. The implementation action plan
includes a recommendation to further study and construct safe cycling infrastructure when and
where appropriate to improve safety.
High Bicycle Crash Areas Recommendations
Staff reviewed the Fort Collins 2010 Bicycle Accident Summary and identified nine high bicycle
crash intersections based on the overall number of bicycle crashes and the bicycle crash rate per
100,000 bikes.
In each case, City staff looked for crash patterns and trends, environmental factors, or other unique
circumstances that might highlight larger problems. This analysis included a review of Police
Services accident reports, crash diagrams,and field visits.A summary of the observed problems and
recommended solutions was then prepared using the 6"Es"framework:encouragement, education,
engineering, enforcement, environment and evaluation. Chapter 6 outlines the analysis process,
observed problems and recommended solutions for the nine high bicycle crash intersections.
Implementation Action Plan
The Plan includes a variety ofprograms, collaborations, improvements and other actions that will
help achieve the vision of a bicycle safe community. Action items are organized by audience,
responsibility, cost and funding source, and anticipated outcomes. The actions are important to
realizing the Plan vision and should be implemented as soon as time and funding resources are
available. As community priorities shift, implementation priorities can change to ensure the most
effective use of staff and funding resources and benefit for the community. This will result in a
phased approach to implementing the BSEP. Action items also include performance measures to
help identify continuous improvements. Please see Chapter 7 for the full Implementation Action
Plan.
Evaluation and Performance Monitoring
The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) includes a number of performance measures for bicycle
safety and education efforts. The BSEP performance measures are the same as for the TMP. The
intent of the performance measures is to serve as useful tools for continuous improvement and
provide input for future plan updates. The results of the performance measures will monitor the
City's progress toward achieving the BSEP vision. Please see Chapter 6 of the Plan for the detailed
performance measures.
FINANCIAL/ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The Implementation Action Plan (see Chapter 7) outlines the costs and potential finding sources
of all BSEP recommendations. Existing grant funding through the federal government and the
Colorado Department of Transportation, City staff time, community volunteers, and public/private
partnerships will be key to implementing the Plan. City Council has also designated $50,000
216
March 1, 2011
annually in the 2011-12 budget for implementation of the BSEP. City staff will continue to work to
identify local, state, and federal funding sources and partnerships to augment existing
implementation funds.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Education is one component ofthe City's 6 "Es"approach to bicycling:education, encouragement,
engineering, enforcement, environment, and evaluation. Implementation of the Plan will not only
ensure residents ride safely, but encourage more residents to start cycling more often. This will
further increase the mode share of bicycles in Fort Collins and lead to reductions in energy and fuel
consumption, greenhouse gases, and other air i emissions. "
Thomas Edwards, 1101 South Bryan,Fort Collins Bicycle Coalition,encouraged furthering motorist
and bicyclist education but opposed the Resolution until such time as enforcement of bicycle
regulations is included.
Councilmember Roy asked for staff input regarding the enforcement. D.K. Kemp, Bicycle
Coordinator, replied this:Plan included input from the Fort Collins Police Department, Larimer
County Sheriff's Department, and CSU Police. Enforcement is one of the five main pieces of the
Plan and includes providing training to law enforcement officials.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Resolution
2011-021.
Councilmember Roy expressed support for the Plan.
Councilmember Manvel expressed support for the Plan.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas: Hutchinson, Kottwitz,Manvel, Ohlson Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
217