HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 08/09/2011 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center
Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Gerry Horak, District 6 on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
WORK SESSION
August 9, 2011
6 p.m.
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Update on the City’s Targeted Industry Cluster Strategy. (staff: Josh Birks, Mike
Freeman; 45 minute discussion)
On August 17, 2010, City Council adopted Resolution 2010-055, authorizing and
directing the City Manager, on behalf of the City, to continue supporting participation in
the formation and development of cluster initiatives relating to the identified targeted
industries of the City; to work with regional partners and local business entities to
develop strategic plans for the clusters; and to support the advancement of the plans as
they are implemented for the purpose of primary job retention, expansion, and creation.
This work session item will provide an update on the activities of these clusters,
including recent employment trends, active projects, and funding. In addition, leadership
from the private sector associated with each cluster will attend to answer questions about
the activities of each cluster.
3. Digital Sign and Pole Sign Regulations. (staff: Peter Barnes, Bruce Hendee, Steve Dush,
Ginny Sawyer; 1 hour discussion)
In 2006 the City Council adopted Code provisions intended to further regulate the use
and appearance of on-premise digital signs (signs that display words, symbols, figures or
August 9, 2011 Page 2
images that can be electronically or mechanically changed by remote or automatic
means). These regulations control such things as brightness, color, size and method of
display. The number of on-premise digital signs in the city has increased significantly
since the 2006 regulations were adopted. In response to this increase, City staff is
evaluating this type of sign and its relationship to the economic and aesthetic
environment of Fort Collins now and into the future. At the work session, staff will:
1. provide a brief history of the Fort Collins Sign Code;
2. provide an overview of the process to date;
3. provide potential options, ranging from the status quo, to modifying existing
regulations, to prohibiting such signs altogether; and
4. seek direction from Council whether to continue to pursue a code change.
Once direction is received, staff will refine the approach, incorporate Council comments,
inform the outreach groups, and prepare any necessary follow up materials to present to
the Planning and Zoning Board for consideration at its September 15, 2011 meeting. The
Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to City Council for consideration on First
Reading at its October 4, 2011 meeting.
Staff will also discuss a second Sign Code issue at the work session. This issue involves
establishing design criteria for pole signs (signs that are supported by usually one or two
poles instead of by an enclosed “monument” base). Direction will be sought regarding
the acceptability of the proposed criteria and whether or not all nonconforming pole signs
should be subject to a new amortization period and eventually removed or converted to a
sign that complies with the criteria.
4. Jefferson Street Project Update. (staff: Kathleen Bracke, Aaron Iverson; 45 minute
discussion)
The Jefferson Street/SH14 Alternatives Analysis Study is a joint effort of the City of Fort
Collins, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT). The project team is supported by Atkins consultants. This
Alternatives Analysis Study includes the development and evaluation of a thorough set of
design options for the Jefferson Street/SH14 corridor, including the intersection of
Jefferson/SH14 and Mountain/Lincoln Avenue, and the intersection of Jefferson and
Linden streets.
The purpose of the Jefferson Street project is to improve the air quality, livability, and
urban character of the Jefferson Street Corridor while enhancing the experience for
pedestrians, bikes, and transit and maintaining mobility of autos and trucks. The corridor
begins at College Avenue and extends along Jefferson Street and includes the Mountain
Avenue/Riverside Avenue/Lincoln Street, and Linden Street intersections.
This project process includes the development and evaluation of many options such as
traditional roadway and intersection designs, roundabouts, and other innovative, context-
sensitive design solutions based upon local, state, and national best-practices.
August 9, 2011 Page 3
Implementation of the Jefferson Street improvements can move forward beginning in
2011, based upon approval of the Corridor plan by City Council, Downtown
Development Authority, and CDOT. The schedule for construction of the Jefferson
Street Corridor improvements will be based upon the approved preferred alternative and
implementation/phasing plan as well as the available budget. The goal is to complete the
initial improvements within the 2011-13 time frame.
The purpose of this City Council work session is to present a project status update, share
the draft alternatives and findings from the alternatives analysis process, and share
feedback received to date from project partners and the community.
5. Other Business.
6. Adjournment.
Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers
Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West
Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4
Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
WORK SESSION
August 9, 2011
(after the Council Work Session)
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Downtown General Improvement District No. 1 Capital Improvements Plan. (staff:
Clark Mapes; 45 minute discussion)
City Council sits as the Board of Directors of General Improvement District No. 1 (GID).
The GID is a property tax district formed by property owners in 1976 to fund parking,
pedestrian, and street beautification improvements to enhance the downtown as a
business and commercial area.
The City’s Advance Planning Department is currently developing a new Capital
Improvements Plan to guide the use of the GID’s revenues, from 2012 going forward 15
years. It will essentially consist of a new list of potential projects to pursue using the
GID Fund.
The main purpose of this work session item is to review a preliminary list of potential
projects and priorities derived from recent public outreach. The Capital Improvements
Plan is scheduled for consideration of adoption by the Board on October 18, 2011.
4. Other Business.
5. Adjournment.
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 1 AGENDA
DATE: August 9, 2011
STAFF: Josh Birks
Mike Freeman
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Update on the City’s Targeted Industry Cluster Strategy.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 17, 2010, City Council adopted Resolution 2010-055, authorizing and directing the City
Manager, on behalf of the City, to continue supporting participation in the formation and
development of cluster initiatives relating to the identified targeted industries of the City; to work
with regional partners and local business entities to develop strategic plans for the clusters; and to
support the advancement of the plans as they are implemented for the purpose of primary job
retention, expansion, and creation. This work session item will provide an update on the activities
of these clusters, including recent employment trends, active projects, and funding. In addition,
leadership from the private sector associated with each cluster will attend to answer questions about
the activities of each cluster.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does City Council have sufficient information regarding the current activities of the
Targeted Industry Clusters?
2. Does City Council have any suggestions or thoughts regarding potential future projects or
activities for the Targeted Industry Clusters?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In 2004, the Fort Collins Economic Vitality and Sustainability Group (EVSAG), appointed by the
City Council, recommended that certain business clusters be investigated as economic development
strategies, naming several potential clusters. EVSAG made this recommendation due to the unique
strengths and assets of this community and the desire to see a more formal economic strategy to
regain and expand key industries in the community.
The basic underpinnings of a successful industry cluster include what is know as a “Triple Helix”
– the effective intersection of university, public, and private collaboration. Some of the
characteristics of a successful Triple Helix include:
August 9, 2011 Page 2
• an active University with strong research and development knowledge
• a strong public and private leadership base
• a critical mass of collaborative/competitive companies
• access to entrepreneurial support and business incubation services
• a skilled workforce
• institutional and facility support.
In 2006, the City of Fort Collins commissioned a study to evaluate the geographic concentration and
interconnectedness of companies within the community in order to determine potential industry
clusters. The study identified several existing and emerging industry clusters. The identified
clusters were modified into five targeted industry clusters, which became the focus of job creation
activities. These clusters included: Clean Energy, Bioscience, Chip Design, Software, and Uniquely
Fort Collins.
On March 21, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution 2006-037, authorizing and directing the
City Manager to join efforts with Colorado State University, the Northern Colorado Economic
Development Corporation, the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce, Poudre School District,
Larimer County and private enterprises to develop a Clean Energy Cluster for Northern Colorado.
This resolution reaffirms the City’s role with respect to the Clean Energy Cluster and provides new
authorization and direction for the City Manager to engage in similar formation and development
activities related to addition Targeted industry clusters.
Over time, the targeted industry clusters have undergone an evolution and it will be important in the
future to continue evolving and improving the City’s approach for supporting target industries.
Since the 2006 study, there has been a significant effort by the City, Colorado State University, and
the private sector to implement the cluster strategy. Some of the efforts to implement the cluster
strategy have been very successful, in particular in the Clean Energy and Biosciences area. Other
efforts in software and chip design have not progressed to date. In an effort to continuously improve
the approach and to try and create as much value and success, staff have worked to form an
additional target industry group in the water innovation arena.
On August 17, 2010, City Council adopted Resolution 2010-055, reaffirming and supporting the five
existing cluster initiatives, which consist of interrelated groups of businesses and organizations from
within the identified Targeted Industries, including:
• Clean Energy – Companies providing knowledge and expertise in renewable energy, energy
efficiency, solar and wind energy, green building, engines technologies, battery storage, and
fuel cells.
• Water Innovation – Companies active in the research and production of products and
services for water reuse and conservation, testing, filtration, efficient irrigation management,
sustainable water design, weather modeling, and water efficiency; a new proposed target
industry cluster.
• Bioscience – Companies that research, produce, and distributer medical devices, medical
instruments, pharmaceuticals, and biofuels.
August 9, 2011 Page 3
• Technology – Companies specializing in data mapping, computer programming, Internet
service, software development, and microchip design and production; replaces the previously
separate Chip Design and Software clusters.
• Uniquely Fort Collins – Companies engaged in creative industries such as design,
publishing, performing arts, visual arts/crafts, and craft and micro-brewed beverages.
CURRENT FUNDING LEVELS
The City of Fort Collins has enhanced the city’s (and the region’s) ability to support a variety of
clusters to grow and sustain themselves in recent years. This enhancement has come in the form of
financial support to the following initiatives (2011 Budget Shown):
• Colorado Clean Energy Cluster (CCEC) – The Colorado Clean Energy Cluster receives
$25,000 annually from the City. These funds are leveraged by funding from several
contributors, which provide an additional $150,000. This creates a leverage return on the
City’s investment. In addition, the CCEC has received grant funding of $100,000 per year
for two years from the State to undertake a Clean Technology Supply Chain Assessment.
This assessment will provide useful information to the City and State regarding supply chain
gaps and opportunities in the Clean Technology arena.
• Colorado Water Innovation Cluster (CWIC) – The CWIC received $20,000 in funding
from the City of Fort Collins. Economic Health staff treated these funds as a challenge
grant. The private sector and academic partners of the CWIC matched the funds $2 to $1
and contributed an additional $40,000. In addition, the CWIC received a grant from the
Colorado Water Conservation Board to undertake a project in the amount of $135,000.
These funds will be administered by the cluster, but ultimately go to fund the Lake Canal
Alternative Agriculture to Urban Water Transfer pilot project.
• NoCo Bioscience – The City provides funding through a contract with the Rocky Mountain
Innosphere to manage and oversee this Bioscience cluster group. The budget includes
$40,000 annually to support RMI’s work with this cluster.
• GIS Alley – The City had historically invested $25,000 in an effort to organize the
Geographic Information Systems companies of the region into a cohesive cluster. This effort
did not bear sufficient fruit. As of 2011, the City provided modest funding in the amount
of $5,000 to continue these efforts. The remaining $20,000 has been directed towards the
new Colorado Water Innovation Cluster.
• Keep Fort Collins Great – After the passage of Keep Fort Collins Great, the City Council
authorized an additional $100,000 annually in both 2011 and 2012 to enhance the formation
and development of Targeted Industry Clusters. These dollars are being used to offset the
operational costs of the clusters and to enhance the project work of each.
August 9, 2011 Page 4
CLUSTER EMPLOYMENT HIGHLIGHTS
Despite a dismal national economic landscape, all 5 clusters posted job gains between the second
quarters of 2007 and 2010, some highlights include:
• the Technology Cluster grew by 780 workers (13.1 percent)
N the Software Cluster gained 520 jobs (30.9 percent)
N the Hardware Cluster added 261 employees (6.1 percent)
• the Clean Energy Cluster grew by 597 employees (24.1 percent)
• the Water Cluster gained 184 jobs (15.1 percent)
• the Bioscience Cluster added 57 employees (2.8 percent)
• the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster expanded by 26 jobs (2.5 percent)
• every local cluster outperformed their respective national industries over the last 3 years
• with the exception of a 0.1 percent increase in the Software Cluster, average wages have
declined in every cluster over the last year.
While the clusters showed overall growth between 2007-2010, the national recession resulted in
mixed performance between the second quarters of 2009 and 2010, with two clusters (Clean Energy
and Uniquely Fort Collins) posting losses over this time. The overall performance outpaced the
nation, as every US counterpart to the local clusters showed job losses over this time frame.
Average estimated wages varied greatly across the clusters in 2010. On the low end, earnings per
worker in the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster averaged $32,908. Jobs in the Hardware Cluster were
the highest paying, averaging $84,178. For comparison, Larimer County’s 2010 estimated average
earnings per worker was $38,584, a drop from $40,250 in 2009.
During 2010, 225 patents were issued to cluster businesses.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Tracking the Performance of the Fort Collins Clusters, Martin Shields, Regional Economist,
Colorado State University, Winter 2011
2. Bioscience Cluster Profile, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
3. Clean Energy Cluster Profile, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
4. Technology Cluster Profile, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
5. Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Profile, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
6. Water Innovation Cluster Profile, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
7. Innovation Economy, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2011 Q2
8. Powerpoint presentation
1
Tracking the Performance of the Fort Collins Clusters
Martin Shields, Regional Economist
Michael Marturana, Research Economist
Colorado State University
Winter 2011
Executive Summary
This report uses data on employment, wages, establishment counts, location quotients, and patents to
track five major economic clusters the City of Fort Collins has identified:
• Bioscience
• Clean Energy
• Technology
o Hardware
o Software
• Uniquely Fort Collins
• Water
Despite a dismal national economic landscape, all 5 clusters posted job gains between the second
quarters of 2007 and 2010, some highlights include:
• The Technology Cluster grew by 780 workers (13.1 percent)
o The Software Cluster gained 520 jobs (30.9 percent)
o The Hardware Cluster added 261 employees (6.1 percent)
• The Clean Energy Cluster grew by 597 employees (24.1 percent)
• The Water Cluster gained 184 jobs (15.1 percent)
• The Bioscience Cluster added 57 employees (2.8 percent)
• The Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster expanded by 26 jobs (2.5 percent)
• Every local cluster outperformed their respective national industries over the last 3 years
• With the exception of a 0.1 percent increase in the Software Cluster, average wages have
declined in every cluster over the last year
While the clusters showed overall growth between 2007-10, the national recession resulted in mixed
performance between the second quarters of 2009 and 2010, with two clusters (Clean Energy and
Uniquely Fort Collins) posting losses over this time. Still, the over all performance outpaced the nation,
as every US counterpart to the local clusters showed job losses over this time frame.
Average estimated wages varied greatly across the clusters in 2010. On the low end, earnings per
worker the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster averaged $32,908. Jobs in the Hardware Cluster were the
highest paying, averaging $84,178. For comparison, Larimer County’s 2010 estimated average earnings
per worker was $38,584, a drop from $40,250 in 2009.
During 2010, 225 patents were issued to cluster businesses.
2
The table below is a summary of clusters’ employment changes and unemployment rates for the county,
state, and nation. It is important to note that total cluster jobs cannot be determined simply by adding
the jobs from each cluster, as some individual businesses appear in more than one cluster.
Fort Collins Cluster Performance Report Employment Summary
2007 - 2010 Change 2009 - 2010 Change
2007 2008 2009 2010 Level Percent
National
Percent
Level Percent
National
Percent
Employment
Bioscience 2,017 2,141 2,037 2,073 57 2.8% -3.3% 36 1.8% -0.5%
Clean Energy 2,481 2,979 3,133 3,078 597 24.1% -9.8% -55 -1.8% -2.5%
Technology 5,946 6,352 6,183 6,726 780 13.1% -5.5% 543 8.8% -7.2%
Hardware 4,265 4,361 4,147 4,526 261 6.1% -2.7% 379 9.1% -0.4%
Software 1,681 1,992 2,036 2,200 520 30.9% -3.0% 164 8.1% -0.8%
Uniquely Fort
Collins
1,020 1,083 1,091 1,046 26 2.5% -5.2% -46 -4.2% -1.0%
Water 1,222 1,365 1,374 1,406 184 15.1% -11.3% 31 2.3% -1.1%
Annual Unemployment Rates
Larimer
County*
3.5% 4.2% 6.6% 6.8% 3.3% 94.3% 0.2% 3.0%
Colorado 3.9% 4.9% 7.7% 8.1% 4.2% 107.7% 0.4% 5.2%
United States 4.6% 5.8% 9.3% 9.6% 5.0% 108.7% 0.3% 3.2%
Annual Employment Levels**
Larimer
County
136,300 137,700 133,400 132,500 -3,800 -2.8% -900 -0.7%
Colorado 2.3 mil 2.4 mil 2.2 mil 2.2 mil -127,000 -5.4%
-
40,000
1.8%
United States 137 mil 136 mil 131 mil 130 mil -7.8 mil -5.7%
-
969,00
0
7.4%
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
*Not Seasonally Adjusted
** CES Data Reported
3
I. Introduction
Region’s Economy Slow to Rebound from the Great Recession
Despite the recession officially ending in summer 2009 Larimer County’s economy continues to struggle.
The county’s estimated February job totals stood at 134,500, up 1,500 from a year earlier. Although the
county has had job growth, the February unemployment rate stood at 8.3 percent, up 1.2 percentage
points from 2 years earlier. Currently, 14,464 county residents are unemployed but looking for work, up
more than 2,000 from 2 years earlier.
Larimer County’s Annual Unemployment Rate Continues to Creep Up, but remains less than State and
Nation
Source: BLS LAUS
Stagnant household income continues to be a symptom of the downturn. According to the US
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Larimer County’s median family income stood at
$74,900 in 2010. After adjusting for inflation, this was just 3.6 percent greater than it was in 2000.
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
9.0%
10.0%
11.0%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Larimer Weld CO US
4
Larimer County Inflation-adjusted Median Family Income Relatively Flat over the Decade, but Higher
than State and US
Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development
Because wage income accounts for about 70 percent of all household income, stagnant incomes have
important implications on the City of Fort Collins. This is because the city’s most important revenues
stream is the sales tax, which in turn depends on household spending. And while year-to-date city sales
tax revenues through December 2010 were up $3.2 million (4.5 percent) from a year earlier, they
remain $1.5 million (2.0 percent) below their 2008 year-to-date levels.
$72,230
$68,199
$69,896
$73,697
$75,549
$77,011
$73,717
$71,717
$75,909 $76,606
$74,900
$50,000
$55,000
$60,000
$65,000
$70,000
$75,000
$80,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
US CO Larimer
5
Year-over-Year Changes in December Year-to-Date Sales Tax Revenues for the City of Fort Collins
Source: City of Fort Collins - Sales Tax Division
The lingering effects of the recession have generated increased interest in strategic economic health
initiatives in Fort Collins. As part of its planning efforts in this area, Fort Collins has identified and
promoted 5 economic clusters that can help diversify the city’s economic base. In this report we update
recent trends in these clusters.
The remaining sections of this report address each cluster individually. We provide cluster analysis and
data looking at trends in 1) number of establishments and start-ups (or closures), 2) number of
employees, 3) average wages paid, and 4) new patent data. Beyond providing a basic “state of the
cluster” analysis we look at changes in the competitive position of these sectors relative to the nation.
The overarching goal of our work is to help the City better understand the effectiveness and overall
impact of its cluster initiatives.
How this Report is Organized
This report has two major sections: a brief overview of each cluster and Appendix A, which is a detailed
report of each cluster. Each section follows the section number for the discussion of cluster:
• II. Bioscience
• III. Clean Energy
• IV. Technology
o IV.A. Hardware
o IV.B. Software
• V. Uniquely Fort Collins
• VI. Water
We work with The City of Fort Collins and other collaborators to track new companies in the area and
determine which firms to include in each cluster. The companies in these clusters are handpicked, based
on their industry, with the exception of the Technology Cluster – this is the summation of two smaller
clusters: Hardware and Software. The firms in the Technology Cluster are tracked using their respective
4-digit NAICS – North American Industry Classification System – code (NAICS codes are discussed in
Appendix B.I).
-8.0%
-6.0%
-4.0%
-2.0%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
6
The same outline is followed for each cluster outline. First, we discuss cluster employment over the last
3 years, from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2; the second topic narrows cluster performance over to the last
year (2009Q2-10Q2). We discuss employment and average estimated yearly wages in these sections.
We also discuss local and national cluster employment trends (‘national employment’ tracks the same
NAICS industries as the clusters). The last point in each section talks about the number of patents issued
in the clusters. We use patents as a proxy for cluster innovation, a key point when using the cluster
method to track economic health.
For greater detail on each cluster, see Appendix A. The Fast Facts tables drilldown to 3 or 4 digit NAICS
employment, which make up the clusters and provides level and percentage employment changes at 1
and 3 year intervals. If the data is available, we report the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) location
quotients (LQs) for each industry from 2006 and 2009 – these are used to determine comparative
advantages at a regional level, see Appendix B.II for LQ calculations.
Appendix A also includes charts on each cluster’s historical employment as well as a 3 or 4 digit NAICS
breakdown of current employment, compared to Larimer County, and estimated average wages paid in
2009Q2 and 2010Q2.
Data
Over a year ago, our discussions with the City led to an overhaul of the Fort Collins Cluster Reports and
some changes to the definitions of clusters. The new definitions have been applied to previous years’
data such that our current reports are uniform; however, our new reports diverge from those
performed in the initial cluster analysis performed by Development Research Partners in 2006.
An outcome of the cluster restructuring is that some firms can be represented in more than one cluster.
It is key to cluster based economic health methods that each cluster spans multiple industries. Because
of this intentional overlap, it is important not to sum cluster employment as some companies would be
counted twice.
Employment and wage information for Larimer and Weld Counties is derived from Colorado Department
of Labor and Employment’s (CDLE) publication of Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW).
We use averaged second quarter data. This database captures detailed information on every firm that
pays into unemployment in the State of Colorado. To remove cyclicality and utilize the latest data
available, we report average employment from 2007Q2-10Q2.
The information used for national comparison comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which
compiles a nationwide QCEW dataset. The location quotients reported the Fast Facts tables also come
directly from the BLS – we do not actually calculate each location quotient, just report them. See
Appendix B.II for more information regarding the calculation of location quotients.
Innovation and Intellectual Property
Patents provide incentives for research and development, which advances technology. Innovation and
technology are key drivers for the City’s targeted clusters (excluding the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster).
Without legal protection of intellectual property, provided by patents, technology advances would be
slower – studies have revealed that cluster performance is correlated with the number of patents issued
in a region.
7
Per the United States Patent and Trademark Office, 713 patents were issued in the Fort Collins –
Loveland area during 2010. One third of these patents (32.0 percent) were issued to cluster members.
Various companies in the Technology Cluster were issued a total of 174 patents. Members of the
Bioscience Cluster received a total of 32 patents. Clean Energy firms received a total of 22 patents, while
15 patents were issued in the Water Cluster.
One shortcoming of the analysis here is that patents are often assigned in places other than where they
were developed. For example, an “inventor” working in Fort Collins might develop a patent issued to
Hewlett Packard (called the “assignee”), but the patent itself may be registered in Houston, which is the
home of the assignee.
8
II. Bioscience Cluster
The number of firms tracked in the Bioscience Cluster has remained relatively constant over the last 3
years – between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, the cluster has grown by 7 firms to a total of 54 businesses.
Employment in the cluster grew by 57 workers (2.8 percent) to 2,073 employees from 2007Q2-10Q2.
This 2.8 percent employment growth was better than nationwide firms in similar industries, which lost
3.3 percent of their employment base over this time.
In the past year, from 2009Q2 to 2010Q2, the Bioscience Cluster grew by 36 jobs (1.8 percent). Fort
Collins’ Bioscience Cluster outperformed similar national industries, as employment fell by 0.5 percent in
these industries. Over the last year, estimated average earnings per worker in the cluster fell by $6,954
(10.2 percent) to $61,337. The Bioscience Cluster is expected to continue to expand as Tolmar
announced the leasing of an additional 21,000 square-foot facility for additional research and
development operations, according to the Northern Colorado Business Report.
Additionally, the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project program, created under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, has directed nearly $250,000 in research funding to Chata
Biosystems, St. Renatus LLC, Inviragen Inc and Ventria Bioscience.
In 2010, there were a total of 32 patents issued to Bioscience firms. These firms, and number of patents
registered are:
• WaterPik: 8
• Hach Chemical: 7
• Heska: 5
• XY: 5
• Value Plastics: 3
• Centers for Disease Control: 2
• Livengood Engineering: 2
Highlights
• From 2007Q2 through 2010Q2, the cluster grew by 57 employees (2.8 percent)
o In contrast, national employment in the same industries contracted by 3.3 percent over
these years
• The cluster added 36 jobs, or 1.8 percent, between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
o National employment fell by 0.5 percent during this time
• Cluster estimated earnings per worker –
o 2009: $68,291
o 2010: $61,337
• Chart II reports average employment from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2
• Table II lists the 5 largest firms the Bioscience Cluster as of 2010Q2
9
Chart II: Average Bioscience Cluster Employment from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table II: Five Largest Employers in the Bioscience Cluster
Company
Hach Chemial Company Inc
Tolmar Inc
Water Pik Inc
Heska Corporation
Centers for Disease Control
Top 5 Total Employment 1,438
Percent of Cluster Employment 69.4%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
2,017
2,141
2,037 2,073
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2007 2008 2009 2010
Bioscience Cluster Employment - Q2 Averages
10
III. Clean Energy
Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, the Clean Energy Cluster – which spans Larimer and Weld Counties –
experienced an employment growth of 597 employees (24.1 percent). During this time, the cluster has
expanded by nearly 30 percent to a total of 29 companies. This large employment growth meant that
the Clean Energy Cluster dramatically outperformed the nation, where the same industries lost 9.8
percent of employment.
The Clean Energy Cluster is one of two local clusters to shed jobs in the last year. Fifty five jobs (-1.8
percent) were lost from 2009Q2 to 2010Q2. These local losses were better than the national industries,
which lost 2.5 percent of jobs. For the second year in a row, average estimated wages in the cluster fell.
Estimated average 2010 wages were $69,005, 8.5 percent lower than 2009 levels.
Promising growth, UQM Technologies Inc has announced a contract in which they will manufacture
electric motors and controllers for Audi’s new A1 electric vehicle. Furthermore, they will also build a
small batch of motors for a Saab 9-3 test fleet, per Boulder Business Report.
Companies in the Clean Energy Cluster were issued 22 patents during 2010:
• Woodward Governor: 8
• Advanced Energy: 7
• ICE Energy: 5
• AMPT Solar: 2
Highlights
• Clean Energy Cluster employment grew by 597 jobs (24.1 percent) from 2007Q2-10Q2
o During these 3 years, national employment in the same industries fell by 9.8 percent
• In the past year, between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, the cluster shed 55 employees (-1.8 percent)
o The industries on a national level experienced a 2.5 percent drop in employment over
this year
• Estimated average estimated wages paid –
o 2009: $75,334
o 2010: $69,005
• The cluster’s employment, from 2007Q2-10Q2, is reported in Chart III
• Table III lists the largest 5 firms in the Clean Energy Cluster
11
Chart III: Average Clean Energy Cluster Employment from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table III: Top Five Largest Companies in the Clean Energy Cluster
Company
Woodward Governor Company
Vestas Blades America Inc
Advanced Energy Industries Inc
General Electric International Inc
Abound Solar Inc
Top 5 Total Employment 2,394
Percent of Cluster Employment 77.8%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
2,481
2,979
3,133 3,078
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
2007 2008 2009 2010
Clean Energy Cluster Second Quarter Average Employment
12
IV. Technology Cluster
As discussed earlier, the Technology Cluster is comprised of two smaller sub-clusters: Hardware and
Software. Of the 2 components, the Hardware Cluster accounts for roughly two-thirds of the Technology
Cluster.
Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, the Technology Cluster gained 780 jobs (13.1 percent) – identical
industries on a nationwide level contracted by only 5.5 percent during this time. Over these years, the
Technology Cluster grew by roughly 30 percent to 400 companies.
From 2009Q2 to 2010Q2, the Technology Cluster added 543 jobs (8.8 percent). Like previous, the local
cluster drastically outperformed the similar national industries, which lost 7.2 percent of employment.
In the last year, the average yearly earnings per worker dramatically decreased by 7.3 percent from
$96,335 to $89,340.
Companies in the Technology Cluster were issued 174 patents in 2010, the majority of which were
Hardware companies:
• Hewlett Packard: 121
• Avago Technologies US: 20
• LSI Industries: 17
• Agilent: 5
• Nvidia: 5
• Intel Corporation: 4
• National Semiconductor Corporation: 2
Highlights
• The cluster added 780 jobs (13.1 percent) between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2
o National employment in the same industries contracted by 5.5 percent over these 3
years
• From 2009Q2-2010Q2, the cluster expanded by 543 jobs (8.8 percent)
o Over this year, nationwide employment fell by 7.2 percent
• Technology Cluster average salary –
o 2009: $96,335
o 2010: $89,340
• Average employment from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2 is reported in Chart IV
• The 5 largest firms in the Technology Cluster are reported in Table IV
13
Chart IV: Average Technology Cluster Employment from 2007Q2-10Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table IV: Five Largest Firms in the Technology Cluster
Company
Avago Technologies US Inc
Advanced Energy Industries Inc
Intel Corporation
Aglient Technologies
Hewlett Packard Company
Top 5 Total Employment 2,084
Percent of Cluster Employment 30.0%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
IV.A Hardware Cluster
The Hardware Cluster represents the majority of the Technology Cluster, and gained 261 jobs (6.1
percent) from 2007Q2-10Q2 (the Technology Cluster added 780 jobs over this time). During these 3
years, nationwide employment in the same industries contracted by 2.7 percent. The number of firms in
the Hardware Cluster has actually increased over this time by almost one third to 343 companies.
From 2009Q2 to 2010Q2, Hardware Cluster employment fell by 379 workers (9.1 percent). The same
national industries lost 0.4 percent of employment over this year. During this time, average earnings per
worker in the cluster fell by 11 percent to $95,214.
5,946
6,352
6,183
6,726
5,400
5,600
5,800
6,000
6,200
6,400
6,600
6,800
2007 2008 2009 2010
Technology Cluster Average Employment - Q2
14
In 2010, 169 patents were issued to Hardware Cluster firms
• Hewlett Packard: 121
• Avago Technologies US: 20
• LSI Industries: 17
• Agilent: 5
• Intel Corporation: 4
• National Semiconductor Corporation: 2
Highlights
• Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, the Hardware Cluster added 261 jobs (6.1 percent)
o National employment in the same industries fell by 2.7 percent over this time
• From 2009Q2 to 2010Q2, employment in the Hardware Cluster increased by 379 jobs (9.1
percent)
o Employment in identical industries fell by 0.4 percent nationwide
• Hardware Cluster average salary –
o 2009: $106,582
o 2010: $95,214
• Chart IV.A reports average employment for 2007Q2-10Q2
• Table IV.A shows the five largest firms in the Hardware Cluster
Chart IV.A: Average Employment from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2 for the Hardware Cluster
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
4,265 4,361
4,147
4,526
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2007 2008 2009 2010
Hardware Cluster Employment
15
Table IV.A: Top Five Largest Employers in the Hardware Cluster
Company
Avago Technologies US Inc
Advanced Energy Industries Inc
Intel Corporation
Aglient Technologies
Hewlett Packard Company
Top 5 Total Employment 2,084
Percent of Cluster Employment 46.0%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
IV.B Software Cluster
The Software Cluster accounts for approximately one-third of the Technology Cluster and, in the last 3
years, it added 520 employees (30.9 percent). In comparison, similar national industries contracted by
3.0 percent. Like the Hardware Cluster, the number of firms in the cluster has grown to 357 companies
over these 3 years.
The Software Cluster experienced an employment gain of 164 jobs (8.1 percent) between 2009Q2 and
2010Q2. In comparison, employment in the same industries nationwide contracted by 0.8 percent over
this same time. Despite the employment expansions, the average earnings per worker in the cluster
increased by $646 (0.1 percent) to $75,979.
Five patents were registered to Software Cluster firms during 2009
• Nvidia: 5
Highlights
• The Software Cluster added 520 jobs (30.9 percent) between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2
o National employment fell by 3.0 percent over this time
• From 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, the Software Cluster added 164 employees (8.1 percent)
o Nationwide employment in identical industries contracted by 0.8 percent over this year
• Software Cluster average salary –
o 2009: $75,333
o 2010: $75,979
• Chart IV.B reports average employment from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2
• Table IV.B shows the five largest firms in the Software Cluster
16
Chart IV.B: Average Employment for 2007Q2-10Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table IV.B: Five Largest Employers in the Software Cluster
Company
Techni Graphic Systems Inc
Advanced Micro Devices Inc
Telvent Miner & Miner
ESG Achievement
Palladius Inc
Top 5 Total Employment 696
Percent of Cluster
Employment
31.6%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
1,681
1,992 2,036
2,200
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2007 2008 2009 2010
Software Cluster Second Quarter Average Employment
17
V. Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster
The Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster (UFCC) is the most specific cluster in this report because it only tracks
companies that are physically located and headquartered in the City of Fort Collins. The firms in this
cluster are based on the NAICS used by Colorado Creative Industries’ report on Colorado’s Creative
Economy1
.
From 2007Q2 to 2010Q2, the UFCC expanded by 26 jobs (2.5 percent). Compared to the nation, the
same industries contracted by 5.2 percent, while the number of establishments in the cluster increased
by 8 firms (10.0 percent) to 81 companies over this time.
The Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster contracted by 46 workers (-4.2 percent) from 2009Q2-10Q2. Identical
industries on a national level experienced an employment contraction of 1.0 percent during this time.
This is the only time when the national industries performed better than a local cluster. Also over this
year, the UFCC average estimated earnings per worker decreased by 7.0 percent from $35,400 to
$32,908.
No patents were issued to Uniquely Fort Collins firms in 2010.
Highlights
• Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster grew by 26 jobs (2.5 percent)
o National employment increased by 5.2 percent over this time
• From 2009Q2-10Q2, the UFCC shed 46 employees (-4.2 percent)
o National employment in the same industries fell by 1.0 percent during these three years
• UFCC average estimated earnings per worker –
o 2009: $35,400
o 2010: $32,908
• The Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster’s average employment from 2007Q2-10Q2 is reported in Chart
V
• Table V shows the five largest firms in the UFCC
1 Colorado Creative Economy study:
http://www.coloarts.state.co.us/programs/economic/co_creativeconomy/index.htm
18
Chart V: 2007Q2-01Q2 Average Employment for the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table V: The Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster’s Five Biggest Employers
Company
New Belgium Brewing Co
Triple Crown Softball
Odell Brewing Company Inc
Fort Collins Symphony Association
KT Productions Inc
Top 5 Total Employment 507
Percent of Cluster Employment 48.5%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
1,020
1,083 1,091
1,046
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2007 2008 2009 2010
Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Q2 Average Employment
19
VI. Water Cluster
The Water Cluster is the newest addition to the Fort Collins Cluster Initiative and consists of 36 firms
across 11 industries. Of the current companies, 9 firms did not exist in Larimer County as of 2007Q2 –
Rubicon Systems America is one of these firms. The spirit of the cluster is to capture companies that
work in the water industry be it construction, engineering, technology, or instrumentation.2
Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, employment in the cluster grew by 184 jobs (15.1 percent). This local job
growth was substantially greater than employment changes in the same nationwide industries, which
contracted by 11.3 percent. Rubicon Systems opened in 2008 and contributes to much of this growth.
The Water Cluster expanded by 31 jobs (2.3 percent) from 2009Q2 through 2010Q2. Here too, the
Cluster outperformed the same national industries, which lost 1.1 percent of its relative employment
base. Over this year, the average estimated salary fell from 2009’s level of $64,433 by 4.9 percent to
$61,255.
During 2010, 2 firms were issued a total of 15 patents:
• Woodward Governor: 8
• Hach Chemical: 7
Highlights
• Between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2, cluster employment expanded by 184 jobs (15.1 percent)
o National employment in the same industries contracted by 11.3 percent over this time
• Cluster employment grew by 31 jobs (2.3 percent) between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
o Over this year, nationwide employment in the same industries fell by 1.1 percent
• Water Cluster estimated average annual wages paid –
o 2009: $64,433
o 2010: $61,255
• Average employment from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2 is displayed in Chart VI
• The five largest companies in the cluster are reported in Table VI
2 Woodard Governor and AECOM both have divisions related to water, but they are only a fraction of
their company’s total employment. We do not include employment for either firm because there is no
consistent way to estimate what percent of total employment is related to water. If we were to include
these two companies, cluster employment would increase by over 1,000 jobs.
20
Chart VI: Average Employment: 2007Q2-10Q2
Source: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Table VI: Top five largest firms in the Water Cluster
Company
Hach Chemical Company Inc
Telvent Miner & Miner Inc
Advance Tank and Construction Co
In-Situ Inc
Riverside Technology Inc
Top 5 Total Employment 1,209
Percent of Cluster Employment 86.0%
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
1,222
1,365 1,374 1,406
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
2007 2008 2009 2010
Water Cluster Employment - Q2 Averages
21
Appendix A: Detailed Cluster Information
A.I Introduction to Appendix A
As we mentioned in the Introduction (section I), the goal of the previous sections is to give a brief
overview for each cluster. Appendix A provides a greater level of insight into each cluster’s performance
by disaggregating the clusters to their 3 or 4-digit NAICS.
It is important to note that we did not calculate the location quotients below; instead, they come
directly from the BLS. As a result the location quotients refer to related industries, rather than the
specific clusters of interest. This is a necessary compromise due to the fact that there are no nationally
accepted definitions of these clusters.
For example, 2010Q2 employment in the county’s Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 333) totaled 1,973
employees, resulting in an industry location quotient of 2.11, yet only 11 of these workers are employed
in the Bioscience firms within that broader industry. In this case the industry LQ greatly overstates the
cluster’s actual LQ.
Each cluster analysis below follows the format:
• Bullet points noting changes over the last 3 years, 1 year, and a brief discussion on the location
quotients from 2007 and 2010
• Table A is Fast Facts and details each cluster’s average employment from 2007Q2 through
2010Q2, 3 and 1 year employment changes, and location quotients (LQs).
• Chart A graphs the clusters’ average employment from 2007Q2-10Q2 over 3 or 4-digit NAICS
• Chart B illustrates every cluster’s 3 or 4-digit NAICS employment breakdown, compared to that
of Larimer County, for 2010Q2
• Chart C displays the total wages paid in each cluster, over the NAICS breakdown, from 2009Q2
to 2010Q2
A.II Bioscience Cluster
• Cluster employment expanded by 57 jobs (2.8 percent) from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2 (Table A.II.A)
o Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325) grew by 77 jobs (31.8 percent) during this time
o The largest contraction occurred in the industry of Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and
Component Manufacturing (NAICS 335), which lost 81 jobs (-37.7 percent)
o Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing (NAICS 334) is the largest industry in
the cluster and expanded by 73 jobs (9.3 percent) over these 3 years
• Between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, the Bioscience Cluster lost 36 employees (1.8 percent; Table
A.II.A)
o The Chemical Manufacturing industry experienced the greatest growth of 69 jobs (27.3
percent)
o Miscellaneous Manufacturing (NAICS 339) was the hardest hit industry, contracting by
42 jobs (-30.4 percent)
• The location quotients for the industries in the Bioscience, on the whole, do not indicate a large
concentration of employment. The largest industry in the cluster, Computer and Electronic
Product Manufacturing, had the largest share of employment in 2006 and 2009, with LQs of 3.53
and 3.64 respectively. The industry with the second greatest relative employment
22
concentrations is Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 333), with a 2009 location quotient of 2.11,
but 2010 count of 11 jobs.
Table A.II: Larimer County’s Bioscience Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Bioscience Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
111 Crop Production 10 10 14 15 5 46.7% 1 4.8% 0.68 0.64
112 Animal Production 11 11 11 10 -1 -6.2% -1 -11.8% 1.09 1.08
115
Support Activities for
Agriculture and
Forestry
2 2 2 2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ND ND
311 Food Manufacturing 8 9 9 1 0.21 0.22
325
Chemical
Manufacturing
243 267 252 320 77 31.8% 69 27.3% 0.27 0.51
326
Plastics and Rubber
Products
Manufacturing
124 135 116 121 -2 -1.9% 5 4.3% 0.49 0.67
333
Machinery
Manufacturing
11 10 9 11 0 0.0% 2 26.9% 1.79 2.11
334
Computer and
Electronic Product
Manufacturing
782 819 816 855 73 9.3% 39 4.8% 3.53 3.64
335
Electrical Equipment,
Appliance, and
Component
Manufacturing
214 140 127 133 -81 -37.7% 6 4.7% 1.17 0.80
339
Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
42 167 138 96 55 131.2% -42 -30.4% 1.09 0.81
423
Merchant Wholesalers,
Durable Goods
63 60 58 52 -11 -18.0% -6 -10.4% 0.57 0.55
511
Publishing Industries
(except Internet)
23
Chart A.II.1: Average Employment for the Bioscience Cluster from 2007Q2-10Q2 (Table A.II.A)
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Chart A.II.2: 2010Q2 Average Employment for the Bioscience Cluster and Larimer County
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Crop Production
Animal Production
Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
Food Manufacturing
Chemical Manufacturing
Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Ambulatory Health Care Services
Administration of Human Resource Programs
Bioscicence Cluster Employment - Q2 Averages
2007 2008 2009 2010
24
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Crop Production
Animal Production
Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
Food Manufacturing
Chemical Manufacturing
Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Ambulatory Health Care Services
Administration of Human Resource Programs
374
231
58
298
424
481
1,973
3,927
275
360
1,420
1,402
8,897
504
6,271
174
15
10
2
9
320
121
11
855
133
96
52
3
186
142
10
108
2010Q2 Employment - Bioscience Cluster vs Larimer County
Bioscience Cluster Larimer County
25
Chart A.II.3: Wages Paid in the Bioscience Cluster for 2009Q2 & 10Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
$60,471
$90,230
$20,384
$42,529
$3,784,253
$1,494,011
$85,684
$10,575,983
$2,190,181
$1,965,232
$680,513
$135,618
$3,136,348
$2,523,124
$58,530
$2,090,041
$62,485
$86,892
$20,400
$36,733
$5,182,189
$1,555,216
$145,251
$13,008,006
$2,366,147
$1,584,705
$753,747
$55,073
$2,355,797
$2,303,547
$51,892
$2,225,128
Crop Production
Animal Production
Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
Food Manufacturing
Chemical Manufacturing
Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Ambulatory Health Care Services
Administration of Human Resource Programs
Bioscience Cluster Wages Paid - Second Quarter
2009 2010
26
A.III. Clean Energy Cluster
• As per Table A.III, cluster employment expanded by 597 jobs (24.1 percent) from 2007Q2
through 2010Q2
o The largest growth industry was Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 333) – this
industry gained 538 jobs (44.0 percent) in these 3 years
o The second largest industry in the cluster is Computer and Electronic Product
Manufacturing (NAICS 334). Over 3 years, this industry grew by 66 jobs (10.6
percent)
o During this time the largest job loss occurred in Professional, Scientific, and
Technical Services (NAICS 541), which lost 17 jobs (5.5 percent)
• Between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, the Clean Energy Cluster shed 55 jobs (-1.8 percent; Table
A.III)
o Only 2 industries experienced employment growth over this time
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing added 62 jobs (9.9
percent)
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing (NAICS
335) grew by 6 jobs (8.7 percent)
o The greatest employment contraction occurred in the largest industry in the cluster:
Machinery Manufacturing, which lost 67 employees (-3.7 percent)
• Analyzing the LQs for the industries in the Clean Energy Cluster reveals that, for the larger
sectors in the cluster, Larimer County has an employment base that is relatively larger than
the US. The three largest industries in the cluster their respective location quotients are:
o Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing – LQ: 3.64
o Machinery Manufacturing – LQ: 2.11
o Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services – LQ: 1.21
27
Table A.III: Clean Energy Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Clean Energy Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
221 Utilities 207 221 221 221 14 6.9% 0 0.0% 0.47 0.45
238
Specialty Trade
Contractors
8 6 5 5 -3 -34.8% 0 0.0% 1.66 1.61
325
Chemical
Manufacturing
36 33 34 33 -3 -9.3% -2 -4.9% 0.27 0.51
333
Machinery
Manufacturing
1,223 1,648 1,828 1,761 538 44.0% -67 -3.7% 1.79 2.11
334
Computer and
Electronic Product
Manufacturing
622 646 626 688 66 10.6% 62 9.9% 3.53 3.64
335
Electrical Equipment,
Appliance, and
Component
Manufacturing
63 65 65 71 8 12.2% 6 8.7% 1.17 0.80
454 Nonstore Retailers 9 6 6 -9 -100.0% -6 -100.0% 0.85 0.92
541
Professional,
Scientific, and
Technical Services
308 344 338 291 -17 -5.5% -47 -13.9% 1.40 1.21
611 Educational Services 6 10 10 9 3 55.6% -1 -6.7% 0.49 0.50
TOTAL 2,481 2,979 3,133 3,078 597 24.1% -55 -1.8%
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
28
Chart A.III.1: Clean Energy Cluster Average Employment 2007Q2-10Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Utilities
Specialty Trade Contractors
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Nonstore Retailers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
Clean Energy Cluser Q2 Average Employment
2007 2008 2009 2010
29
Chart A.III.2: 2010Q2 Clean Energy Cluster Employment Compared to Larimer County
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Utilities
Specialty Trade Contractors
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Nonstore Retailers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
719
5,170
424
1,973
3,927
275
387
8,897
15,618
221
5
33
1,761
688
71
0
291
9
2010Q2 Employment - Clean Energy Cluster vs Larimer County
Clean Energy Larimer County
30
Chart A.III.3: 2009Q2 and 2010Q2 Total Wages Paid in the Clean Energy Cluster
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
$4,870,643
$53,648
$452,055
$28,990,266
$13,119,346
$1,236,254
$38,448
$6,447,848
$126,748
$5,223,265
$48,842
$480,348
$26,229,701
$14,043,356
$1,386,188
$0
$5,573,825
$114,204
Utilities
Specialty Trade Contractors
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
Nonstore Retailers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
Clean Energy Cluster Wages Paid - Q2
2009 2010
31
A.IV. Technology (Hardware + Software) Cluster
• Table A.IV shows that cluster employment increased by 780 jobs (13.1 percent) from
2007Q2 through 2010Q2
o The greatest growth occurred in the industry of Computer Systems Design and
Related Services (NAICS 5415), which expanded by 1,067 jobs (45.9 percent) over
this time
o Other notable growth occurred in the Computer and Peripheral Equipment
Manufacturing (NAICS 3341) sector, which gained 101 jobs (9.8 percent)
o Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing
(NAICS 3345) was the hardest hit industry and lost 317 positions (-31.4 percent)
• From 2009Q2 to 2010Q2, the Technology Cluster added 543 jobs (8.8 percent), as shown in
Table A.IV
o Here too, Computer Systems Design and Related Services added the most jobs,
expanding by 740 positions (27.9 percent) over this time
o The greatest losses occurred in Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and
Control Instruments Manufacturing, which lost 112 employees (-17.6 percent)
o Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services (NAICS 5182) contracted by 69 jobs (-
22.0 percent)
• The location quotients for the Technology Cluster indicate that, on average, Larimer County
has a relatively higher concentration of employment in these industries, compared to the
nation. The LQs for firms in the Hardware Cluster indicate a relatively greater concentration
of computer hardware firms in Larimer County (compared to national employment for those
industries). Industries in the Software Cluster are closer to national ratios.
32
Table A.IV: Technology Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Technology Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
3341
Computer and Peripheral
Equipment
Manufacturing
1,025 1,070 1,113 1,126 101 9.8% 13 1.2% ND ND
3344
Semiconductor and
Other Electronic
Component
Manufacturing
1,140 1,146 992 1,044 -95 -8.4% 52 5.2% 2.48 2.83
3345
Navigational, Measuring,
Electromedical, and
Control Instruments
Manufacturing
1,008 912 803 691 -317 -31.4% -112 -13.9% 5.24 4.48
5112 Software Publishers 282 299 254 225 -57 -20.1% -29 -11.4% 1.21 1.04
5182
Data Processing, Hosting,
and Related Services
163 234 314 245 82 50.6% -69 -22.0% 0.61 1.41
5413
Architectural,
Engineering, and Related
Services
1 54 52 -1 -100.0% -52 -100.0% 1.79 1.73
5415
Computer Systems
Design and Related
Services
2,328 2,636 2,655 3,395 1067 45.9% 740 27.9% 0.99 1.04
TOTAL 5,946 6,352 6,183 6,726 780 13.1% 543 8.8%
ND: Not Disclosable
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
33
Chart A.IV.1: Average Employment in the Technology Cluster from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Chart A.IV.2: Technology Custer vs Larimer County Employment – 2010Q2
*Businesses can be listed in multiple clusters
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Technology Cluster Employment
2007 2008 2009 2010
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services*
1,126
1,044
1,722
225
245
1,730
1,126
1,044
691
225
364
1730
Technology vs Larimer County Employment - 2010Q2
Technology Cluster Larimer County
34
Chart A.IV.3: Total Wages Paid in the Technology Cluster in 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
A.IV.1. Hardware Cluster
• As per Table A.IV.1, employment in the Hardware Cluster grew by 261 jobs (6.1 percent)
from 2007Q2 to 2010Q2
o Two of the 4 industries in the cluster added jobs
Computer Systems Design and Related Services (NAICS 5415) added 573
positions (52.5 percent)
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS 3341) grew by
101 jobs (9.8 percent)
o The other 2 industries in the cluster shed jobs
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments
Manufacturing (NAICS 3345) lost 317 employees (-31.4 percent)
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing (NAICS
3344) contracted by 95 jobs (-8.4 percent)
• In the last year (from 2009Q2 through 2010Q2), the Hardware Cluster added 379 jobs (9.1
percent), per Table A.IV.1
o The greatest job growth occurred in Computer Systems Design and Related Services,
which added 426 jobs (34.4 percent)
o The only industry that lost jobs was Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and
Control Instruments Manufacturing, which contracted by 112 positions (13.9
percent)
37,355,700
21,223,020
26,253,363
4,862,132
3,613,075
33,027,661
$30,212,661
$21,065,296
$23,417,368
$5,487,409
$3,725,991
$753,516
$44,154,977
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Second Quarter Technology Cluster Wages Paid
2009 2010
35
• Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing and
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing are the two industries in
the Hardware Cluster with the greatest relative employment. When compared to these
industries nationwide, these industries have location quotients of 4.48 and 2.83,
respectively. With a LQ of 1.04, Larimer County’s employment share for Computer Systems
Design and Related Services is essentially the same as the nation.
Table A.IV.1: Hardware Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Hardware Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
3341
Computer and
Peripheral Equipment
Manufacturing
1,025 1,070 1,113 1,126 101 9.8% 13 1.2% ND ND
3344
Semiconductor and
Other Electronic
Component
Manufacturing
1,140 1,146 992 1,044 -95 -8.4% 52 5.2% 2.48 2.83
3345
Navigational,
Measuring,
Electromedical, and
Control Instruments
Manufacturing
1,008 912 803 691 -317 -31.4% -112 -13.9% 5.24 4.48
5415
Computer Systems
Design and Related
Services
1,092 1,232 1,239 1,665 573 52.5% 426 34.4% 0.99 1.04
TOTAL 4,265 4,361 4,147 4,526 261 6.1% 379 9.1%
ND: Not Disclosable
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
Chart A.IV.1.a: Hardware Cluster Historical Employment from 2007Q2-10Q2
36
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Chart A.IV.1.b: Hardware Cluster Employment Compared to Larimer County – 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Chart A.IV.1.c: Hardware Cluster Total Wages Paid for 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
- 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Hardware Q2 Employment Averages
2007 2008 2009 2010
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
1,126
1,044
1,722
1,730
1,126
1,044
691
1,665
Hardware vs Larimer County 2010Q2 Employment
Hardware Cluster Larimer County
37
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
A.IV.2. Software Cluster
• As indicated in Table A.IV.2, Software Cluster employment expanded by 520 jobs (30.9
percent) between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2
o The greatest job growth was in the industry of Computer Systems Design and
Related Services, which added 495 employees (40.0 percent)
o The industry of Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services grew by 83 jobs (50.8
percent)
o Software Publishers (NAICS 5112) lost 57 jobs (-20.1 percent)
• The Software Cluster added 164 jobs (8.1 percent) between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, as
indicated in Table A.IV.2
o The only job expansion was in the industry of Computer Systems Design and Related
Services, which added 314 jobs (22.2 percent)
o The remaining 3 industries in the cluster lost jobs a total of 150 jobs
• On average, the LQs in the Software Cluster do not indicate a greater employment
concentration, compared to the nation. The largest LQ is in Data Processing, Hosting, and
Related Services, which is 1.41; however, this industry only accounts for 11 percent of the
entire Software Cluster.
Table A.IV.2: Larimer County’s Software Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Software Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
$37,355,700
$21,223,020
$26,253,363
$31,831,772
$30,115,164
$20,655,301
$507,492
$43,976,659
Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component
Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control
Instruments Manufacturing
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Hardware Cluster Q2 Wages Paid
2009 2010
38
5112 Software Publishers 282 299 254 225 -57 -20.1% -29 -11.4% 1.21 1.04
5182
Data Processing,
Hosting, and Related
Services
163 234 314 245 83 50.8% -69 -21.9% 0.61 1.41
5413
Architectural,
Engineering, and
Related Services
1 54 52 -1 -100.0% -52 -100.0% 1.79 1.73
5415
Computer Systems
Design and Related
Services
1,235 1,404 1,416 1,730 495 40.0% 314 22.2% 0.99 1.04
TOTAL 1,681 1,992 2,036 2,200 520 30.9% 164 8.1%
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
39
Chart A.IV.2.a: Average Employment in the Software Cluster from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2
Source: CDLE QCEW and CSU
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Software Cluster Q2 Average Employment
2007 2008 2009 2010
40
Chart A.IV.2.b: Software Custer Employment vs Larimer County Employment – 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Chart A.IV.2.c: Total Wages Paid in the Software Cluster – 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
1,447
1,569
2,878
2,651
225
245
0
1,730
Software Cluster vs Larimer County Employment in 2010
Software Cluster Larimer County
$4,862,132
$3,613,075
$0
$33,027,661
$5,487,409
$3,725,991
$753,516
$23,595,686
Software Publishers
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Software Cluster Total Wages Paid
2009Q2 2010Q2
41
A.V. Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster
• As per Table A.V, Cluster employment expanded by 26 positions (2.5 percent) from 2007Q2
to 2010Q2
o The greatest growth occurred in the industry of Beverage and Tobacco Product
Manufacturing (NAICS 312), which grew by 85 jobs (30.5 percent)
o The industry of Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores (NAICS 451) added
16 jobs (53.3 percent)
o The greatest job loss occurred in Printing and Related Support Activities (NAICS
323), which shed 68 positions (37.6 percent)
• Between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, cluster employment contracted by 46 jobs (-4.2 percent;
Table A.V.A).
o Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing added 37 jobs (11.5 percent
o The industry of Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries grew by 16
employees (8.3 percent)
o Ten out of the 15 industries in the UFC cluster lost jobs over this year
o The greatest employment contraction occurred in Printing and Related Support
Activities, which lost 70 jobs (-38.2 percent)
• The greatest relative employment concentration is in the industry of Beverage and Tobacco
Product Manufacturing, with a LQ of 5.26. It is interesting to note the variance in the
Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster location quotients. Compared to the US, Larimer County has a
relatively small employment base in the industry of Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar
Institutions (NAICS 712), with a LQ of 0.13. By comparison, the industry of Sporting Goods,
Hobby, Book, and Music Stores had a location quotient of 1.97 in 2009.
42
Table A.V: Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Fast Facts
Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010 Quotients
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
312
Beverage and Tobacco
Product
Manufacturing
278 297 326 363 85 30.5% 37 11.5% 5.22 5.26
323
Printing and Related
Support Activities
182 191 183 113 -68 -37.6% -70 -38.2% 0.67 0.70
332
Fabricated Metal
Product
Manufacturing
15 21 12 12 -3 -18.2% 0 0.0% 0.37 0.34
337
Furniture and Related
Product
Manufacturing
10 12 14 10 -1 -6.5% -4 -31.0% 1.13 1.23
339
Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
1 2 1 1 -1 -50.0% 1.09 0.81
423
Merchant
Wholesalers, Durable
Goods
9 7 4 -9 -100.0% -4 -100.0% 0.57 0.55
451
Sporting Goods,
Hobby, Book, and
Music Stores
31 33 37 47 16 53.3% 10 28.2% 1.97 1.98
453
Miscellaneous Store
Retailers
29 26 23 20 -9 -29.9% -2 -10.3% 1.63 1.74
511
Publishing Industries
(except Internet)
72 68 66 58 -14 -19.4% -8 -12.1% 1.98 2.00
512
Motion Picture and
Recording Industries
18 25 18 15 -3 -16.7% -3 -18.2% 0.67 0.66
43
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
Printing and Related Support Activities
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores
Miscellaneous Store Retailers
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Food Services and Drinking Places
Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Q2 Average Employment
2007 2008 2009 2010
44
Chart A.V.2: Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster Employment Compared to Larimer County – 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
Printing and Related Support Activities
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores
Miscellaneous Store Retailers
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Food Services and Drinking Places
945
390
390
323
360
1,187
1,257
1,402
222
8,897
15,618
568
452
11,975
363
113
12
10
1
47
20
58
15
22
56
208
12
107
2010Q2 Employment - Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster vs Larimer County
Uniquely Fort Collins Larimer County
45
Chart A.V.3: Total Wages Paid in the UFC Cluster – 2009Q2 and 2010Q2
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
$4,547,005
$990,269
$98,788
$50,761
$3,800
$0
$176,602
$77,347
$556,036
$97,000
$138,213
$162,984
$1,068,716
$86,988
$548,151
$4,098,232
$1,694,708
$107,580
$74,388
$6,700
$37,565
$179,852
$79,776
$589,593
$126,599
$106,568
$170,768
$1,134,473
$102,560
$539,564
Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
Printing and Related Support Activities
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores
Miscellaneous Store Retailers
Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Educational Services
Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries
Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Food Services and Drinking Places
Uniquely Fort Collins Wages Paid
2009 2010
46
A.VI. Water Cluster Details
• The Water Cluster grew by 184 jobs (15.1 percent) between 2007Q2 and 2010Q2 (Table A.VI)
o Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services (NAICS 541) experienced the greatest
growth of 179 jobs (90.4 percent)
o Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing (NAICS 334) grew by 82 jobs (10.6
percent)
o Specialty Trade Contractors (NAICS 238 shed 109 jobs (57.6 percent)
• Between 2009Q2 and 2010Q2, the Water Cluster expanded by 31 positions (2.3 percent)
o Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing expanded by 53 jobs (6.6 percent)
o Specialty Trade Contractors lost 33 jobs (-28.9 percent)
• The location quotients for the industries in the Water Cluster, on average, indicate a relatively
larger employment base in Larimer County, compared to the US. The largest industry in the
cluster, accounting for 61 percent of cluster employment, is Computer and Electronic Product
Manufacturing and Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 333), which has a location quotient of
3.64. Over an additional quarter of Water Cluster employment is in the industry of Professional,
Scientific, and Technical Services, which has an LQ of 1.21.
47
Table A.VI: Water Cluster Fast Facts
Larimer County Water Cluster Fast Facts
Employment Location
Quotients
2007 - 2010 2009 - 2010
NAICS Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010
Level
Change
Percent
Change
Level
Change
Percent
Change
2006 2009
237
Heavy and Civil
Engineering
Construction
1 1 1 0 0.0% 1.20 1.20
238
Specialty Trade
Contractors
190 113 113 80 -109 -57.6% -33 -28.9% 1.66 1.61
314 Textile Product Mills 37 56 49 42 6 15.5% -7 -13.6% 0.44 0.64
325 Chemical Manufacturing 15 21 18 18 -4 -17.2% 0.27 0.51
333
Machinery
Manufacturing
10 10 9 11 1 10.0% 2 22.2% 1.79 2.11
334
Computer and
Electronic Product
Manufacturing
773 812 802 856 82 10.6% 53 6.6% 3.53 3.64
425
Wholesale Electronic
Markets and Agents and
Brokers
6 5 6 6 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.44 0.52
541
Professional, Scientific,
and Technical Services
198 343 359 377 179 90.4% 18 5.0% 1.40 1.21
561
Administrative and
Support Services
4 5 6 6 1 20.0% 0.92 1.05
813
Religious, Grantmaking,
Civic, Professional, and
Similar Organizations
8 8 9 9 1 12.5% 0 0.0% 1.00 0.39
TOTAL 1,222 1,365 1,374 1,406 184 15.1% 31 2.3%
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU and BLS
48
Chart A.VI.1: Second Quarter Average Employment in the Water Cluster
Source: CDLE QCEW and CSU
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Specialty Trade Contractors
Textile Product Mills
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and Brokers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Administrative and Support Services
Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar
Organizations
Water Cluster Employment - Q2 Averages
2007 2008 2009 2010
49
Chart A.VI.2: 2010Q2 Average Employment - Water Cluster Compared to Larimer County
Sources: CDLE QCEW and CSU
Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Specialty Trade Contractors
Textile Product Mills
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and Brokers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Administrative and Support Services
Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar
Organizations
1,027
5,366
69
435
1,985
3,964
403
8,800
8,142
542
1
80
42
18
1,015
856
6
574
6
9
2010Q2 Employment - Water Cluster vs Larimer County
Water Cluster Larimer County
50
Chart A.VI.3: Total Second Quarter Wages Paid in the Water Cluster
Source: CDLE QCEW and CSU
$8,177
$1,745,698
$449,915
$264,388
$16,929,608
$10,528,870
$174,680
$9,604,527
$100,635
$72,282
$17,577
$1,203,470
$412,191
$236,145
$14,026,599
$12,965,840
$152,935
$10,468,175
$354,926
$79,662
Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Specialty Trade Contractors
Textile Product Mills
Chemical Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and Brokers
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Administrative and Support Services
Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar
Organizations
Total SecondQuater Wages Paid in the Water Cluster
2009 2010
51
APPENDIX B
B.I: North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
NAICS is a basic framework for categorizing establishments and is the basis for regional economic
analysis. This system allows us to arrange the economy’s multitude of business types into discrete
industry classifications. These classifications are numerical and hierarchical, with digits on the left
defining major sectors and digits to their right specifying subdivisions. Today, much of the readily
available economic data related to employment is based on such classifications.
NAICS divides the economy into 20 major sectors and recognizes 1,170 industries. Five of the 20 sectors
are largely goods producing and 15 are entirely services-producing industries. The NAICS system is
hierarchical and identifies sectors and industries therein with from 2 to 6 digits: the more digits, the
more specific the industry identification.
New NAICS code structure
NAICS Code Industry
11 Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing
21 Mining
22 Utilities
23 Construction
31-33 Manufacturing
41-43 Wholesale Trade
44-46 Retail Trade
48-49 Transportation and Warehousing
51 Information
52 Finance and Insurance
53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
54 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
55 Management of Companies and Enterprises
56 Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation
Services
61 Educational Services
62 Health Care and Social Assistance
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
72 Accommodation and Food Services
81 Other Service (except public administration)
91-93 Public Administration
Typically, in comparative discussions of industries the NAICS codes can be used as 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 digit
codes. Discussions about manufacturing in general use the 2 digit manufacturing codes (31-33) but
discussions about particular types of manufacturing use the 3-digit sub-sector codes.
52
Here are a couple of examples:
Example #1 Example #2
NAICS Level NAICS
Code
Description NAICS
Code
Description
Sector 31-33 Manufacturing 51 Information
Subsector 334 Computer and electronic
product manufacturing
513 Broadcasting and
telecommunications
Industry
group
3346 Manufacturing and
reproduction of magnetic
and optical media
5133 Telecommunications
Industry 33461 Manufacturing and
reproduction of magnetic
and optical media
51332 Wireless telecommunications
carriers, except satellite
U.S. Industry 334611 Reproduction of software 513321 Paging
A Few Caveats
When using Industrial Classifications, there are a few important factors that you should keep in mind.
First, individual establishments are assigned an industry according to their primary economic activity.
Thus, if a business produces goods that fall under two or more industries, the business is classified
according to its major output.
Second, employment figures represent an industry and not an occupation. Thus, industry data does not
provide a clear picture of the types of work in which employees are engaged. For example, many
companies carry out some of their business services internally. Such services show up in the industry
employment statistics for the whole business. For example, an accountant at a steel mill would be
counted in the employment statistics for the steel industry (NAICS 3311) rather than the business
service industry (NAICS 5412). However, if the steel mill hired an accounting firm to do their books, this
employee would show up in NAICS 5412.
Finally, for confidentiality reasons, data is often not made publicly available when it will identify
individual businesses. While county data is usually available at very aggregated level, confidentiality
concerns often arise at more detailed levels of analysis. This is especially true in smaller economic
regions, such as rural counties.
More information on the NAICS system is available on the internet, go to:
http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html
53
B.II: Location Quotients
In a nutshell, the location quotient helps identify those local industries that are producing more than is
needed for local use and selling outside the region (exporting) and those that are not meeting local
needs and are a source of consumption leakage (importing). Often times, the location quotient
reinforces what you already know about your local economy, but just as often, it uncovers things you
did not know, or, at least, changes your perceptions. The real strength of the tool is that it is a simple,
yet effective educational resource.
Calculating a location quotient is a straightforward process, and, in practice, most often uses
employment data that is widely available (This analysis is most informative when using as disaggregated
employment data as you can find for your region (NAICS 3- or 4-digit). The basic formula for the location
quotient is:
% of Local Employment in Industry i
LQ = ----------------------------------------------------
% of National Employment in Industry i
Local Employment in Industry i / Total Local Employment
= -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Employment in Industry i / Total National Employment
Simply put, the location quotient identifies how local industries stack up with national averages.
In practice, location quotients are often used to identify regionally competitive industries. An exporting
industry is one where the industry not only meets the local demand for its products, but also produces
enough so as to sell outside of the region. An importing industry is one where local production levels are
insufficient to meet local demand.
When interpreting the data, a location quotient greater than 1.0 indicates that the economy is self-
sufficient, and may even be exporting the good or service of that particular industry. (As a rule-of-
thumb, a location quotient greater than 1.25 almost certainly identifies exporting industries.) On the
other hand, a location quotient less than 1.0 suggests that the region tends to import the good or
service. (The applicable rule-of- thumb is that a location quotient less than 0.75 indicates an importing
industry.)
Global ChallenGes
Collaborative Culture
outstandinG researCh institution
Bioscience
The Northern Colorado Bioscience Cluster is comprised of companies that research, produce
& distribute medical devices, medical instruments, pharmaceuticals and biofuels. In 2010, 32
patents were issued to area bioscience companies. The City of Fort Collins and its residents
value the bioscience companies and agencies that make their home here.
cluster profile fort collins, co
2011 Q2
ATTACHMENT 2
1
Bioscience
With 54 companies in growth mode, close
associations with research scientists at
Colorado State University, and a diverse
product base, this cluster plays an important
role in economic development and health
in Fort Collins. Fort Collins has a long history
in Bioscience research and development. We
are home to the Centers for Disease Control
Division of Vector Borne Infectious Diseases
Research Area and many other federal agencies
that test, research and develop bioscience
related solutions and products.
st. Renatus, a
Biomedical success stoRy
A Fort Collins start-up company will soon provide
needle-free relief to dental patients. St. Renatus
recently completed Adult Phase 2 trials with the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review
and will begin Phase 3 trials shortly. The application
for the nasal spray is for the upper jaw only at this
time. There is hope its use can be expanded to
effect the lower jaw as well.
St. Renatus is operating at a global level, with
manufactures in Europe helping to provide some
of the equipment and materials for the nasal spray,
and a board of directors that is similar to an all-star
athletic team. One of the co-founders, Dr. Mark
Kollar, DDS, lives in Fort Collins and has attracted
the interest of local and national specialist to fill
positions on the Board of Directors and Scientific
Advisory Board.
To learn more about the company, its drug product
and mission to knockout fear and loathing in the
dentist office, visit St-Renatus.com.
sample companies
• Aurogen
• Advanced Regenerative Therapies (ART)
• Beckman Coulter
• InViragen
• Optibrand
• Propel Labs
• Solix
• Tolmar, Inc.
stRengths
• Centers for Disease Control Division of Vector
Borne Infectious Diseases Research Area
- Annual budget for this branch of the CDC is
$51 million
- 200 employees
• Colorado State University (CSU), students,
professors and staff are on the leading,
global edge in fighting infectious disease
- The Rocky Mountain Regional
Biocontainment Laboratory
- BSL-3, in Fort Collins studies deadly
pathogens
- The Research Innovation Center, or RIC,
at CSU further compliments the research
adding 72,000 square feet of BSL-2 space
Bioscience
2007 2008 2009 2010
2,141
2,037
2,017
2,073
2010 employment composition 2010 Q2 eaRnings
other
total
Manufacturing
adminstration of
Public health Programs
$278 K
other
$753 K
Merchant Wholesalers,
durable Goods
$22.4 m
total Manufacturing
$4.5 m
administration
of Public health
Programs
Professional, scientific
& technical services
$2.3 m
Professional, scientific
& technical services
9%
12%
2%
Merchant
Wholesalers,
durable Goods
3%
75%
sources: Quarterly census of employment and Wages (QceW), Bureau of labor and statistics (Bls), and colorado state university
employment tRend
number of employees
3
Bioscience
For more information on Bioscience in Fort Collins
Ryan Speir, COO, Rocky Mountain Innosphere, 970.221.1301, ryan.speir@rmi2.org
Contact the City of Fort Collins for questions on retention, expansion, incubation or relocation
Josh Birks, City of Fort Collins, Economic Advisor 970.221.6324, jbirks@fcgov.com
Northern Colorado Bioscience Cluster nocobio.org
Colorado Bioscience Association cobioscience.com
Doing business in Fort Collins fcgov.com/business
Community information ftcollins.com
Fort Collins Cluster Performance Report available on fcgov.com/business
contacts
What’s neW
1. Chata Biosystems, St. Renatus, LLC, Inviragen Inc. and Ventria Bioscience received $250,000 in
research funding through the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project program, created under the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
2. Limagrain Cereal Seeds is expanding its North American headquarters in Fort Collins with a new
6,000 square-foot building and a 7,500 square foot warehouse.
3. Solix BioSystems has launched the production and sales of their algar growth system. The Lumian
AGS 4000 is an inflatable tank with 20 patent-pending photobioreactor panels where algae is
cultivated for its oil—a base for biofuels.
community aWaRds
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• One of the nation’s “Emerging Epicenters” for innovation and high-tech job growth in green
technology: Wired Magazine - June 2011
• Fort Collins, One of the Top 10 Cities Adopting Smart Grid Technology:
U.S.News and World Report - May 2011
• Third Happiest Metro Region, Fort Collins-Loveland, CO: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index - 2011
• 2011 Governor’s Arts Award: Colorado Creative Industries and the Colorado Office of Economic
Development and International Trade - March 2011
• One of the Top 10 Best American cities to invest your real estate dollars in 2011:
Trulia.com - December 2010
• Named 5th Most Educated City in the country based on education levels of our adult population:
Portfolio.com - December 2010
• Fourth Best State for Business, Colorado: Forbes magazine - October 2010
• One of the Top 10 Best College Towns: Small-Sized Cities Category, USA Today - September 2010
• One of the top six ‘Smarter Cities’ for Energy:
Natural Resources Defense Council, (population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• 6th Best Place to Live in the Nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
fcgov.com/business
4
Industry Leaders
renewabLe energy
InnovatIve soLutIons
clean energy
What sets Fort Collins apart from other clean energy-focused communities? The ability for
the private sector to test energy technology, products and services on the municipally owned
Fort Collins Utilities grid system. Sample projects include solar panels on private and public
buildings, electric vehicle plug-in stations and generator upgrades at select public building sites.
The City of Fort Collins and its residents value the renewable and clean energy companies and
agencies that make their home here.
cluster profile fort collins, co
2011 Q2
ATTACHMENT 3
1
clean energy
enriching the economy
• 22 patents issued in 2010 to Clean Energy
Cluster companies
• FortZED (Zero Energy District) is projected to
create 200-300 high-paying primary jobs in the New
Energy Economy and hundreds of spin off jobs
• Colorado State University recognized
internationally for pioneering many clean and
renewable energy technologies
• A collaborative working environment, attracts
quality researchers and business people to the area
collaboration
& resources
Colorado State University, founding member of
the Colorado Renewable Energy Collaboratory
• Includes CU-Boulder, Colorado School of Mines,
and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory
• Purpose: research & commercialize clean
energy technologies
Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory
eecl.colostate.edu
City of Fort Collins fcgov.com
Colorado Clean Energy Cluster
coloradocleanenergy.com
FortZED fortzed.com
Center for Smart Grid Advancement
sample companies
• Abound Solar
• Advanced Energy
• Brendle Group
• CPP Wind Engineering
• CZero, Inc. Carbon Neutral Solutions
• Ice Energy
• Spirae
• Wirsol
• Woodward
strengths
• Progressive public policies
• Municipally-owned, Progressive Utility
• Smart Grid technology developed in
Fort Collins
• Innovative, award-winning companies
• Abundant sun and wind resources
• Residents who value energy conservation and
sustainability
grants and research Funding
Colorado State University Clean Energy Supercluster
Seed Grants
Department of Energy Federal Recovery Act,
Smart Grid Technology Implementation
National Science Foundation Colorado New Energy Economic Development Grants
incubation
• Colorado State University’s Clean Energy
Supercluster- Cenergy
• Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory,
Colorado State University
• InteGrid Lab
• Rocky Mountain Innosphere
colorado’s renewable
clean energy
2010 employment composition 2010 Q2 earnings
2010
3,078
2007
2,481
2009
3,133
2008
2,979
total Manufacturing
83%
9.5%
Professional, scientific
& technical services
$42 m
total Manufacturing
$5.6 m
Professional scientific
& technical services
$5.2 m
utilities
$114 K
educational
services
$49 K
specialty trade
Contractors
educational
services
utilities
.3%
specialty trade
Contractors
.16%
sources: Quarterly census of employment and Wages (QceW), Bureau of labor and statistics (Bls), and colorado state university
employment trend
number of employees
7%
3
clean energy
community awards
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• One of the nation’s “Emerging Epicenters” for innovation and high-tech job growth in green
technology: Wired Magazine - June 2011
• Fort Collins, One of the Top 10 Cities Adopting Smart Grid Technology:
U.S.News and World Report - May 2011
• Third Happiest Metro Region, Fort Collins-Loveland, CO: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index - 2011
• 2011 Governor’s Arts Award: Colorado Creative Industries and the Colorado Office of Economic
Development and International Trade - March 2011
• One of the Top 10 Best American cities to invest your real estate dollars in 2011:
Trulia.com - December 2010
• Named 5th Most Educated City in the country based on education levels of our adult
population: Portfolio.com - December 2010
• Fourth Best State for Business, Colorado: Forbes magazine - October 2010
• One of the Top 10 Best College Towns: Small-Sized Cities Category, USA Today - September 2010
• One of the top six ‘Smarter Cities’ for Energy:
Natural Resources Defense Council, (population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• 6th Best Place to Live in the Nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
For more information on Clean Energy in Fort Collins
Judy Dorsey, Executive Director of the Colorado Clean Energy Cluster, 970.207.0058
jdorsey@brendlegroup.com
Josh Birks, City of Fort Collins, Economic Advisor 970.221.6324, jbirks@fcgov.com
Colorado Clean Energy Cluster coloradocleanenergy.com
Doing business in Fort Collins fcgov.com/business
Fort Collins Cluster Performance Report available on fcgov.com/business
contacts
what’s hot
1. Colorado State University was chosen as one of 16 teams in North America to update the engine
design of the Chevrolet Malibu in the “EcoCAR 2: Plugging into the Future,” collegian challenge.
2. Colorado State University and its partner, Fotowatio Renewable Ventures, have completed one of
the largest solar plants at a U.S. university. Advanced Energy provided the inverters that convert
DC electric power to AC power for the 5.3-megawatt solar plant.
industry awards
• Guy Babbitt, co-founder and president of Czero Inc. in Fort Collins, was named Emerging Entrepreneur
at the Northern Colorado Business Report’s Annual Bravo! Award Ceremony.
• Amy Prieto, a Colorado State University chemistry professor and founder of Prieto Battery, has been
named the 2011 ExxonMobil Solid State Chemistry Faculty Fellow. Prieto Battery is researching and
building batteries up to 1,000 times more powerful and 10 times longer-lasting and cheaper than
traditional batteries.
fcgov.com/business
4
cluster profile fort collins, co
HigH-TecH Workforce
enTrepreneurs
cHip Design anD sofTWare
technology
Fort Collins is home to a large, diverse high-tech workforce. Despite the ups and downs of the
tech sector, Fort Collins remains an attractive location for new businesses. Companies that
specialize in data mapping, computer programming, Internet service, software development
and computer facilities management are grouped in the Software cluster. The City of Fort Collins
and its residents value the software companies and agencies that make their home here.
2010 Q4
ATTACHMENT 4
technology
Innovation thrives here! Approximately 250
software companies are located in Fort Collins; 80
percent employ less than 10 people. Technology
they have developed is used at the top levels of
the government, military and private businesses.
Colorado State University’s main campus in Fort
Collins has a legacy of GIS curriculum and career
paths across disciplines.
Start-up assistance for seed high-tech
companies is available through the Rocky
Mountain Innovation Initiative (RMI2
), a high-
tech incubator for innovative companies.
Offering mentoring, physical space, business
advisement and funding options, RMI2
is equipped to
assist up-and-coming technology firms of all kinds.
enriching the economy
The Technology Cluster was hard hit over the last
three years, 13.8% of the workforce was lost. Ninety-
five percent of those losses occurred in the Hardware
Cluster. On the bright side, 214 patents were issued
to companies within the cluster in 2009, and more
than 475 companies are thriving in the area.
• Fort Collins has one of the highest Software and
Hardware employment concentrations in the country
• Workforce development and initiatives are priorities
for local educational institutions and businesses
collaboration &
resources
• Rocky Mountain Innovation Initiative
• Colorado State University
• Front Range Community College
• Poudre School District
• ESRI
• Fast Trac® Tech Ventures through RMI2
legacy of gis
The legacy of geospatial technology is rich and
diverse in Northern Colorado:
• Hewlett Packard established location-based
computer system centers in Loveland and Fort
Collins in 1960 and 1978
• Colorado State University began teaching GIS in
1980’s in their Natural Resources Dept.
• In the 1990s, nearly a dozen GIS companies
opened their doors in Fort Collins
• Geospatial technologies have been used
successfully by local government agencies in
Northern Colorado since the 1980’s
• In the fall of 2007, RMI2
began hosting meetings
with private businesses and public agencies to
begin the work of building a cluster to support
the “GIS Alley”
sample softWare
companies
• Clear Path Labs
• New Century Software
• I-cubed
technology
2009 employment composition 2009 Q4 earnings
computer & electronic product Mfg.
software publishing,
Websearch portals
& Data Hosting
architectural engineering,
computer systems Design
& related services
50%
12%
38%
$32 m
$94 m
harDWare Design
softWare Design
employment trenD
number of employees
2006 2007
harDWare Design softWare Design
2008 2009
4,313
1,746
6,060
5,424
5,929
5,222
3,678
1,846
4,072
1,857
3,513
1,709
sources: Quarterly census of employment and Wages (QceW) and colorado state university and Bureau of labor and statistics (Bls)
technology
What’s neW
1. Hewlett-Packard, Inc. donated $10,000 worth of technology equipment to the Community Foundation
of Northern Colorado, enhancing the day-to-day operations of the Foundation and its clients.
2. Rocky Mountain Innovation Initiative teaches entrepreneurial skills and tactics with FastTrac®
TechVenture™, a specialized curriculum developed by the Ewing Marion Kaufman Foundation.
3. Integware is relocating to the Harmony Technology Park with its 120 employees and preparing for
more growth in their new location.
4. Two Colorado State University computer scientists awarded $7.8 million from the National Science
Foundation to examine routing and security measures associated with the Internet.
5. Advanced Microlabs entered the commercialization stage for Ion Analysis in the Industrial Clean
Water Market after receiving a Phase II SBIR grant for 845K from the National Institute of Health.
community aWarDs
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• One of the top six ‘Smarter Cities’ for Energy: Natural Resources Defense Council,
(population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• Ranked 6th Best Place to Live in the Nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
• One of the Most Underrated Cities in the West: Life.com - June 2010
• One of the Greatest Places to Live in the West: American Cowboy magazine - April 2010
• Ranked 3rd Best State for Business, Colorado, CNBC April 2010
• Ranked 4th Best Place for Business and Careers, Forbes.com March 2010
• Ranked 1st Best Place to Live and Work for Young Professionals (pop. 100,000-200,000),
Next Generation Consulting - March 2009
For more information on the Software cluster and GIS Alley
Mark Forsyth, Director, Rocky Mountain Innovation Initiative, 970.221.1301, mforsyth@rmi2.org
For more information on expanding or relocating your business
Mike Freeman, City of Fort Collins Chief Financial Officer 970.416.2259, mfreeman@fcgov.com
GIS Alley, Rocky Mountain GeoSpatial Cluster gisalley.com
Rocky Mountain Innovation Initiative rmi2.org
Doing business in Fort Collins fcgov.com/business
Online entrepreneur support fortcollinsinnovation.com
Community information ftcollins.com
Fort Collins Cluster Performance Report available on fcgov.com/business
fcgov.com/business
contacts
EclEctic
AuthEntic
VibrAnt
uniquely fort collins
Unique: \yoo-neek\, adjective 1. Being the only one, sole. 2. Being without a like or equal,
unequaled. The Uniquely Fort Collins cluster is made up of companies that are unique,
independent, and contribute to Fort Collins’ high quality of life. Arts, cultural, tourism, breweries
and creative firms fall in this category. The City of Fort Collins and its residents value the unique
companies and agencies that make their home here.
Arts, Culture, tourism fort Collins, Co
2011 Q2
ATTACHMENT 5
1
uniquely fort collins
Our residents enjoy an active outdoor lifestyle by
walking on 20+ miles of trails, playing in 44 parks
or following the Poudre River that runs through
the city. The community and out of town guests
support the arts, dining out and shopping — with
so much to choose from it’s hard to stay home.
Bonus: we have the most microbreweries per
capita in the state of Colorado, including New
Belgium Brewery, the third largest microbrewery
in the United States.
Be Local Northern Colorado unites independent
businesses in Fort Collins.
Be local coupon Book
2010-2011
• 176 businesses
• $6,000 worth of discounts for $15
• 260+ coupons
• Dozens of independent business stories
• Membership directory
• Purchase the coupon book at numerous
locations around Fort Collins
• belocalnc.org
strenGtHs
• Beautiful Old Town district
• Downtown Development Authority
• Entrepreneurial residents
• Most microbreweries per capita in Colorado
• Outdoor enthusiasts
• Municipally-maintained bike trails & natural areas
enricHinG tHe economy
• Unique businesses increase the quality of life of
a region
• A high quality of life attracts high-tech firms and
entrepreneurs who can choose to live wherever
they want
• Most of the Uniquely Fort Collins businesses
operate in Downtown Fort Collins
• More than 300 employers & 3,000+ employees
work in Downtown Monday-Friday
Grants and researcH fundinG
Fort Fund National Endowment for the Arts
Institute of Museum and Library Services National Endowment for the Humanities
Colorado Creative Industries Bohemian Foundation
collaBoration
Beet Street beetstreet.org
Convention and Visitors Bureau
visit.ftcollins.com
Downtown Business Association
downtownfortcollins.com
Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce
fcchamber.org
Be Local Northern Colorado
belocalnc.org
Rocky Mountain Innosphere
rockymountaininnosphere.com
Shop Fort Collins First fcgov.com/shop
arts & culture
• Fuels the local economy with purchases and
ticket sales
uniquely fort collins
2007 2008 2009 2010
2010 employment composition
Performing Arts, Spectator Sports,
Museum & related industries
Publishing,
Motion Picture
& Sound recording
industries
Other
Sporting Goods
& retail
$254 k
Sporting Goods
$300 k & retail
Other
$653 k
Publishing, Motion Picture &
Sound recording industries
$5.7 m
beverage,
Printing,
Furniture &
Misc. Manufacturing
$1.1 m
Performing Arts,
Spectator Sports,
Museum and
related industries
$550 k
Food Service
beverage, Printing, & Drinking Places
Furniture & Misc.
Manufacturing
48%
employment trend
number of employees
21%
6%
7%
7%
Food Service
& Drinking Places
10%
1,091
1,020 1,083
1,046
sources: Quarterly Census of employment and Wages (QCeW), Bureau of labor and statistics (Bls), and Colorado state university
2010 q2 earninGs
3
uniquely fort collins
Contact the City of Fort Collins for questions on retention, expansion, incubation or relocation
Josh Birks, City of Fort Collins, Economic Advisor 970.221.6324, jbirks@fcgov.com
Doing business in Fort Collins fcgov.com/business
Be Local Northern Colorado belocalnc.org
Community information ftcollins.com
Fort Collins Cluster Performance Report available on fcgov.com/business
contacts
industry awards & news
• The Fort Collins Museum of Discovery’s new home is on track for its 2012 opening. Exhibit themes
reflect the interests of the Fort Collins community: water, local history, music and energy. The crown
jewel of the Museum of Discovery will be a digital dome, a 360-degree immersive theater half dome,
tipped at an angle that seats 85 people.
• The City’s performing arts hall, the Lincoln Center, will complete its renovation and expansion in late
2011.New features include a new rooftop deck overlooking the entry plaza, state-of-the-art acoustical
upgrades in both performance halls, a new self-contained and climate-controlled arts gallery, greatly
expanded lobby spaces with three new permanent bars, new (and more) bathrooms, and a newly
remodeled ballroom and outdoor terrace.
• Tandem Select was named a 2011 Colorado Companies to Watch award winner. Tandem Select is
a Fort Collins company that performs fast, friendly background checks and employment screenings.
• Nine local breweries created a collaboration beer for American Craft Beer Week, May 16-22. CB
& Potts, Coopersmith’s, Crooked Stave, Equinox, Fort Collins Brewery, Funkwerks, New Belgium
Brewing, Odell Brewing Co. and Pateros Creek joined forces to recognize and celebrate craft brewers
and craft beer culture in the local community.
community awards
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• One of the nation’s “Emerging Epicenters” for innovation and high-tech job growth in green
technology: Wired Magazine - June 2011
• Fort Collins, One of the Top 10 Cities Adopting Smart Grid Technology:
U.S.News and World Report - May 2011
• Third Happiest Metro Region, Fort Collins-Loveland, CO: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index - 2011
• 2011 Governor’s Arts Award: Colorado Creative Industries and the Colorado Office of Economic
Development and International Trade - March 2011
• One of the Top 10 Best American cities to invest your real estate dollars in 2011:
Trulia.com - December 2010
• Named 5th Most Educated City in the country based on education levels of our adult population:
Portfolio.com - December 2010
• Fourth Best State for Business, Colorado: Forbes magazine - October 2010
• One of the Top 10 Best College Towns: Small-Sized Cities Category, USA Today - September 2010
• One of the top six ‘Smarter Cities’ for Energy:
Natural Resources Defense Council, (population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• 6th Best Place to Live in the Nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
fcgov.com/business
4
CritiCal resourCe
international Coordination
loCal innovation
The Water Innovation Cluster focuses on water-related issues and innovation. The future of
water safety, water supply and water management is a global issue; Fort Collins area companies,
Colorado State University and industry partners around the state are ready to take on water
challenges and discover solutions that are best for the planet, for business and our societies.
The newly organized industry cluster unites these companies and organizations as they
contribute to the economic vitality of our areas and beyond.
cluster profile fort collins, co
water innovation
2011 Q2
ATTACHMENT 6
1
Collaboration
& reSoUrCeS
Local resources provide industry
expertise such as:
• hydrologic and hydraulic engineering
• water planning and systems management
• water policy development and governance
• ecosystem sustainability
Colorado Water Institute
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Colorado State University’s International
School for Water Resources
Colorado Water Innovation Cluster
water innovation
why here? why now?
By 2050 a third of the people on Earth may lack
a clean, secure source of water.
2.5 percent of all water on Earth is freshwater.
About two-thirds of that is frozen.¹
The facts and figures of water on Earth fill journals
and textbooks. Humans have an insatiable need for
fresh, clean water—for agriculture, for consumption,
for manufacturing. Scientists, researchers and
business people are creating innovative ways for
dealing with many of these issues including how to
desalinate water on an affordable, large scale; how
to get water supplies closer to people’s homes; how
to use less water in irrigation and agriculture; and
more. The problems are fixable for the most part, yet
there’s a sense of urgency to develop solutions in a
timely way, before it’s too late for some communities.
expertiSe
Businesses and research institutions in Fort Collins
are on the leading edge of solving some of water’s
most challenging problems. The City of Fort Collins,
along with a variety of private sector companies and
Colorado State University, formed the Colorado Water
Innovation Cluster (CWIC) to leverage expertise in
the area and collaborate on regional and global water
issues. Combined with initiatives already underway in
clean energy, bioscience and location-based decision
support systems, the CWIC will allow regional
stakeholders to collaboratively design and showcase
innovative solutions, which in many cases are much
larger and have far more impact than any stakeholder
could achieve on their own.
¹National Geographic magazine, April 2010
enriChing the eConomy
36 Water Innovation businesses employ more
than 1400 people.
A main focus of the Water Innovation Cluster
is to create initiatives that highlight the region’s
capabilities, involve the innovative use of
technologies and contribute to the economic vitality
of the community.
Sample CompanieS
• Aqua Engineering, Inc.
• Hach
• In Situ, Inc.
water innovation
2007 2008 2009 2010
1,365 1,374
1,222
1,406
2010 employment CompoSition 2010 Q2 earningS
$27.6 m
total manufacturing and mills
$10.8 m
Professional
services,
Management and
administrative
support services
$233 K
agents, Brokers,
Civic and other organizations
$1.2 m
Heavy & Civil engineering
Construction and specialty
trade Contractors
6%
Heavy & Civil engineering
Construction and specialty
trade Contractors
agents, Brokers,
Civic and other
organizations
total manufacturing
and mills
1%
sources: Quarterly census of employment and Wages (QceW) and colorado state university and Bureau of labor and statistics (Bls)
employment trend
number of employees
66%
27%
Professional services,
Management and
administrative support
services
3
water innovation
For more information on Water Innovation in Fort Collins
Jeff Throckmorton, co-chair, Colorado Water Innovation Cluster, 970.663.1377 x2642,
Jeffrey.Throckmorton@gmail.com
Contact the City of Fort Collins for questions on retention, expansion, incubation or relocation
Josh Birks, Economic Advisor, City of Fort Collins, 970.221.6324, jbirks@fcgov.com
Colorado Water Innovation Cluster co-waterinnovation.com
Doing business in Fort Collins fcgov.com/business
Community information ftcollins.com
Fort Collins Cluster performance report available on
fcgov.com/business/target-industries.php
ContaCtS
indUStry awardS and newS
1. The Colorado Water Innovation Cluster (CWIC) received grant funding to help complete the CWIC’s
Lake Canal Alternative Practices and In-stream Flow Demonstration Project. The demonstration will
address the municipal, industrial and environmental water “gap” during irrigation season in the Lake
Canal area.
2. In-Situ Inc. has acquired Waterra UK Limited, a United Kingdom groundwater monitoring equipment
provider. This is the first foreign country In-Situ has ventured into. The company designs,
manufactures, distributes and rents environmental equipment for monitoring the quantity and quality
of groundwater and surface water.
3. Advanced MicroLabs LLC, a Colorado State University startup company, has been awarded a pair
of research grants from the National Institutes of Health Superfund Research Program and the
National Science Foundation. The grants will be used to develop online analysis instrumentation
and chemistry for minute traces of water impurities.
CommUnity awardS
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• One of the nation’s “Emerging Epicenters” for innovation and high-tech job growth in green
technology: Wired Magazine - June 2011
• Fort Collins, One of the Top 10 Cities Adopting Smart Grid Technology:
U.S.News and World Report - May 2011
• Third Happiest Metro Region, Fort Collins-Loveland, CO: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index - 2011
• 2011 Governor’s Arts Award: Colorado Creative Industries and the Colorado Office of Economic
Development and International Trade - March 2011
• One of the Top 10 Best American cities to invest your real estate dollars in 2011:
Trulia.com - December 2010
• Named 5th Most Educated City in the country based on education levels of our adult population:
Portfolio.com - December 2010
• Fourth Best State for Business, Colorado: Forbes magazine - October 2010
• One of the Top 10 Best College Towns: Small-Sized Cities Category, USA Today - September 2010
• One of the top six ‘Smarter Cities’ for Energy:
Natural Resources Defense Council, (population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• 6th Best Place to Live in the Nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
fcgov.com/business
4
EntrEprEnEurs
EnErgy
partnErships
innovation economy
Innovation in Fort Collins is nothing new. Our city’s settlers were trailblazers and visionaries,
setting new standards for agriculture, education, and community building. That pioneer spirit
is alive and well in Fort Collins. Today, people must be agile, innovative, and creative across
business sectors and industry. In 2010, 225 patents were registered to researchers, scientists
and entrepreneurs in Fort Collins.
The City of Fort Collins and its residents value the innovative companies and agencies that
make their home here.
fort collins, co
2011 Q2
ATTACHMENT 7
1
innovation economy
What IS Fort Collins’ special sauce? We like to say
that the community has big city ideas and small town
relationships. Innovation occurs across industry
sectors in Fort Collins. Craft brewers, bioscience,
software, hardware, and clean energy companies
contribute ideas, inventions, and products that
positively affect the local economy.
The university’s innovation culture directly benefits
Fort Collins’ economy through technology transfer
and globally-focused research in clean energy,
water innovation and disease prevention and
treatment. Fort Collins City leaders and the local
business community embrace an international
outlook from an economic perspective; working
globally across industries to build relationships
and solve supply chain challenges.
Sample companieS
• Advanced Regenerative Therapies
• Clear Path Labs
• CZero, Inc
• New Belgium Brewing Co.
• Solix
• St. Renatus
• VanDyne SuperTurbos
StrengthS
• Rocky Mountain Innosphere
• Highly educated workforce, 48.2% of
population have a four year degree or higher
• Creative class –a talented, agile workforce
• A patents rate of 11.45 per 10,000
residents, one of the highest ratios in the
nation and world
the energy Behind
local ingenuity
Operating in a vacuum is seldom successful. Working
in a collaborative environment with highly skilled
resources at your fingertips? Reaching your potential
is much easier. Here’s a snapshot of three local
incubators where start-ups and entrepreneurs soar.
Rocky Mountain innospheRe
• Accelerating the success of new business
• Matches mentors to startups
• Hosts regional networking events
• Provides assistance with capital funding
• Kaufman Foundation’s FastTrac®
TechVenture™ curriculum
csu’s engines and eneRgy
conveRsion Lab (eecL)
• Creating innovative clean energy products
• Addressing health and safety issues for humanity
• $2 million a year in research funding
• Envirofit International, manufacturers of two-stroke
engine retrofit kits, and clean-burning cookstoves
• Solix, researching and producing biodiesel made
from domesticated algae
• VanDyne SuperTurbo, super turbo engines for
fleet vehicles with energy efficiencies
csu’s ReseaRch innovation centeR (Ric)
• 72,000 square foot research center focused on
innovation economy
sources: QcEW and csU, reflecting data from 2007q2 through 2010q2
innovation aSSetS
incubators
Rocky Mountain
Innosphere
Engines and Energy
Conversion Lab
Research Innovation Center
Fitzsimmons BioBusiness
Partners
Federal Labs
Centers for Disease Control
National Renewable Energy Lab
National Wildlife Research Ctr
higher education
Colorado State University
Front Range Community
College
regional innovation cluSter
Colorado Clean Energy Cluster
Colorado Water Innovation Cluster
Northern Colorado Bioscience Cluster
Colorado Engines and Transportaton Innovation Cluster
partnerShipS
private sector
public sector
City of Fort Collins
Larimer County Workforce
Center
State of Colorado Office
of Economic Development
economic development
Northern Colorado Economic
Development Corporation
Small Business Development
Center
Fort Collins Area Chamber of
Commerce
higher education
Colorado State University
Colorado State University:
- Research Foundation
- University Ventures
Front Range Community
College
University of Northern
Colorado
clean energy
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 24.1%
Industry growth in Nation: -9.89%
# of companies 29
# of employees 3,078
Average earnings $69,005
uniquely Fort collinS
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 2.5%
Industry growth in Nation: -5.2%
# of companies 81
# of employees 1,046
Average earnings $32,908
innovation economy
what’S hot
1. The Fort Collins-based volunteer weather-monitoring network known as CoCoRaHS has received a $1.2
million grant to improve its efforts nationwide. It was created in response to the 1997 Spring Creek
Flood in Fort Collins. The Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow Network is now in 50 states.
2. Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter named Director and Senior Scholar of Colorado State University’s
Center for the New Energy Economy within the School of Global Environmental Sustainability. The
policy center and Ritter’s role were created in early 2011.
3. OtterBox has received a U.S. patent for its Defender Series of cases, a five year process from
application to approval. Patent No. 7,933,122 recognizes the innovations at the core of the line of
cases for a wide variety of technology devices from more than fifteen name brands such as Apple,
BlackBerry, Sony, Amazon, Google, Barnes & Noble and HP.
For more information on Innovation in Fort Collins
Ryan speir, COO, Rocky Mountain Innosphere, 970.221.1301, ryan.speir@rmi2.org.
Contact the City of Fort Collins for questions on retention, expansion, incubation or relocation
Josh birks, City of Fort Collins, Economic Advisor 970.221.6324, jbirks@fcgov.com
entrepreneurial resources fortcollinsinnovation.com
Rocky Mountain innosphere rockymountaininnosphere.com
doing business in Fort collins fcgov.com/business
community information ftcollins.com
Fort collins cluster performance Report available on fcgov.com/business
contactS
community awardS
Following your passions and pursuing your career don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
• one of the nation’s “emerging epicenters” for innovation and high-tech job growth in green
technology: Wired Magazine - June 2011
• Fort collins, one of the top 10 cities adopting smart grid technology:
U.S.News and World Report - May 2011
• third happiest Metro Region, Fort collins-Loveland, co: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index - 2011
• 2011 governor’s arts award: Colorado Creative Industries and the Colorado Office of Economic
Development and International Trade - March 2011
• one of the top 10 best american cities to invest your real estate dollars in 2011:
Trulia.com - December 2010
• named 5th Most educated city in the country based on education levels of our adult population:
Portfolio.com - December 2010
• Fourth best state for business, colorado: Forbes magazine - October 2010
• one of the top 10 best college towns: Small-Sized Cities Category, USA Today - September 2010
• one of the top six ‘smarter cities’ for energy:
Natural Resources Defense Council, (population 100,000-249,999) - August 2010
• 6th best place to Live in the nation: Money Magazine - July 2010
fcgov.com/business
4
1
1
Target Industry Cluster
Overview/Update
August 9, 2011
2
Agenda for Work Session
• Overview/Update on Target Industry Clusters
• Dialogue with representatives from active Industry
Cluster groups
• Feedback from City Council
– Sufficient Information?
– Suggestions/Future Projects?
ATTACHMENT 8
2
3
Presentation Outline
• Overview of the Target Industry Cluster strategy
• Update on each Target Industry Cluster
– Current Funding
– Employment Data
– Strategic Plan/Goals
– Active Projects
4
Cluster Strategy Background
3
5
Timeline
• 2004: Economic Vitality and Sustainability Group
• 2005: Initial Economic Action Plan
• 2006: Target Industry Cluster Study
• 2010: City Council Resolution supporting Target
Industry Clusters
6
Triple Helix
• Leverage strengths/mitigate weaknesses:
– University: research/insight/innovation
– Government: pilot projects/policy
– Private Sector: efficiency/capital
•Outcome:
– Greater innovation reach
– Real Projects
– Local Benefit & Economic Health
4
7
Target Industry Cluster Strategy
• Clean Energy
• Water Innovation
• Bioscience
• Technology (Hardware/Software)
• Uniquely Fort Collins
8
Innovation Economy Model
5
9
Clean Energy
10
Clean Energy Funding
• Contributes $25,000 in on-going support
• Private contributions total $150,000
• Public/Private Leverage of 6:1
• Additional $100,000 for supply chain study
• Total Leverage of 10:1
6
11
Clean Energy Employment
2,481
2,979
3,133 3,078
2007200820092010
Source: Colorado State University
12
Clean Energy Composition
7
13
COLORADO CLEAN ENERGY CLUSTER
2010 – 2015 Strategic Plan
Retain and expand existing companies
– 1650 new primary jobs
Attract/Incubate 6-8 new businesses per year
– Emphasis on HQ companies
Project of regional significance
– 1 year: CO State Land Board
Project of global significance
– 5 years: FortZED
14
8
15
Initiatives-Based Approach
16
• Renewable and Distributed Systems Integration Project ($11M)
– Aggregating 24 distributed assets across 5 sites to demonstrate 20% peak load
reduction on two distribution feeders
• Renewable Energy Communities Grant ($3M)
– Energy efficiency and renewable energy on public buildings
• Smart-Grid Investment Grant ($34M)
– Metering, controls, and system upgrades for residential and commercial
accounts city-wide
• Green Restaurant Initiative (volunteer base)
– Voluntary energy efficiency and communications campaign targeting restaurants
and consumers
• Community Energy Challenge (volunteer base)
– Outreach initiative in FortZED to educate, engage and empower residents to get
involved
FortZED Progress to Date
9
17
• Over the next five years, establish
this strong international network of
cleantech clusters
• Colorado Clean Energy Cluster and Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster
have signed a partnership agreement regarding:
- build up of the network
- running and heading of ICN
- creation of a shared knowledge platform
- project management
ICN Work Plan
18
Improving the competiveness of Colorado clean energy companies
• Establish an understanding of supply chain performance and needs
• Provide an effective on-the-ground channel to support businesses
First action-focused initiative to expand and strengthen the statewide clean
energy supply chain
• An identified priority by economic development organizations
• A repeated request by Clean Energy companies
• Fits with CCEC task oriented approach
• Partnering state-wide
Colorado Clean Energy Supply Chain Initiative
10
19
Water Innovation
20
Water Innovation Funding
• City Contributes $20,000 in on-going support
• Private contributions total $46,000
• Public/Private Leverage of 2.3:1 (First Year)
• Additional $135,000 for Alternative Transfer Pilot
Project
• Total Leverage of 9:1
11
21
Water Innovation Employment
1,222
1,365 1,374 1,406
2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: Colorado State University
22
Colorado Water Innovation Cluster
Goals
• Establish our region as a global leader in water
innovation
• Increase regional water-related technology
commercialization
• Contribute to the economic vitality of our
community
Metrics
• Increase in outside capital
• Media hits
12
23
Lake Canal – Pilot Project
• Evaluate Alternative Agriculture to Urban Water
Transfer method
• Leverage technology to evaluate “on farm”
techniques
• “On farm” changes create a true savings in water
• Package water savings to create a block of
leasable water
24
Lake Canal – Pilot Project
13
25
Water Innovation Network
• Instrument the Cache la Poudre watershed
– Real Time monitoring of flow and quality
– Eventually 60 real time monitoring stations
• Pilot Project
– Waste Water Treatment Plant optimization
– Specifically relating to Phosphorus and
Nitrogen output
– Initial 8 monitoring stations
26
WIN Technology Platform
Completely Pristine
Agricultural
Influenced
Urban
Influenced
Mixed Land Use, Combined
Socioeconomic factors
14
27
Bioscience
28
Bioscience Funding
• City Contributes $40,000 in on-going support
• Other contributions total $10,000
• Total Leverage of 0.25:1
15
29
Bioscience Employment
2,017
2,141
2,037 2,073
2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: Colorado State University
30
Bioscience Composition
16
31
• 2011 Strategy
– Diversify funding sources
– Leverage Colorado Bioscience Association;
create a Northern Colorado chapter
– Build off Research Innovation Center; nearly
leased up
– CBSA Bio Boot Camp program and content
– Colorado BioSage advisor group
– Creation of RMI/Kauffman BioFastTrac
content, coaches and coalition
32
Technology
17
33
Hardware/Software Employment
4,265 4,361 4,147
4,526
1,681
1,992 2,036
2,200
2007200820092010
Source: Colorado State University
5,946
6,353 6,183
6,726
34
Hardware/Software Composition
18
35
Uniquely Fort Collins
36
UNIQUELY FORT COLLINS
Includes companies such as:
– Arts & Culture
– Tourism
– Breweries
– Creative Firms
Arts Incubator
– Physical space
– Leadership & promotion
19
37
UNIQUELY FORT COLLINS
• Be Local Northern Colorado
– Indoor Winter Farmer’s Market
– Business web search engine
– 20/20 pledge
– Pocket guides
• Shop Fort Collins First
– Spring into Action
– Home for the Holidays
38
Uniquely Fort Collins Employment
1,020
1,083 1,091
1,046
2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: Colorado State University
20
39
City Council Feedback
1. Does City Council have sufficient information
regarding the current activities of the Target
Industry Clusters?
2. Does City Council have any suggestions or
thoughts regarding potential future projects or
activities for the Target Industry Clusters?
DATE: August 9, 2011
STAFF: Peter Barnes, Bruce Hendee,
Steve Dush, Ginny Sawyer
Pre-taped staff presentation: available at
fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Digital Sign and Pole Sign Regulations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2006 the City Council adopted Code provisions intended to further regulate the use and
appearance of on-premise digital signs (signs that display words, symbols, figures or images that
can be electronically or mechanically changed by remote or automatic means). These regulations
control such things as brightness, color, size and method of display. The number of on-premise
digital signs in the city has increased significantly since the 2006 regulations were adopted. In
response to this increase, City staff is evaluating this type of sign and its relationship to the
economic and aesthetic environment of Fort Collins now and into the future. At the work session,
staff will:
1. provide a brief history of the Fort Collins Sign Code;
2. provide an overview of the process to date;
3. provide potential options, ranging from the status quo, to modifying existing regulations, to
prohibiting such signs altogether; and
4. seek direction from Council whether to continue to pursue a code change.
Once direction is received, staff will refine the approach, incorporate Council comments, inform the
outreach groups, and prepare any necessary follow up materials to present to the Planning and
Zoning Board for consideration at its September 15, 2011 meeting. The Board’s recommendation
will be forwarded to City Council for consideration on First Reading at its October 4, 2011 meeting.
Staff will also discuss a second Sign Code issue at the work session. This issue involves
establishing design criteria for pole signs (signs that are supported by usually one or two poles
instead of by an enclosed “monument” base). Direction will be sought regarding the acceptability
of the proposed criteria and whether or not all nonconforming pole signs should be subject to a new
amortization period and eventually removed or converted to a sign that complies with the criteria.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Staff seeks direction from Council in response to the following items:
1. The use of digital signs is growing in the community and could be quite prolific in the future.
Staff is seeking direction from Council among the options presented as it tries to balance the
economic and aesthetic elements of commercial signage now and into the future.
2. Does Council support a Code change to add design criteria for pole signs? If so, should
existing pole signs be subject to an amortization period to require compliance?
August 9, 2011 Page 2
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
A principle of the City’s Sign Code is to protect the health, safety, and welfare by regulating the
design, construction, and placement of signs in the city in a manner that provides a reasonable
balance between the right of a business or an individual to identify itself and to convey its message
and the right of the public to an aesthetically pleasing environment.
The City’s first comprehensive Sign Code was adopted in 1971 and required that all signs not in
compliance with the new regulations be made conforming by 1977. Many Sign Code amendments
have been adopted since 1971, most of them minor in nature. However, major amendments were
adopted in 1994, and because of the comprehensive nature of the changes, the City Council allowed
a 15-year amortization period for business owners to bring their signs into compliance. That
amortization period ended in 2009, with numerous businesses electing to replace their previously
existing nonconforming signs with conforming digital signs or conforming pole signs.
It is a continuing challenge to manage the line between meeting the legitimate needs of the business
community and protecting the visual quality of the community. Fort Collins has been a leader in
regulating signage to create a visually pleasing urban landscape. However, digital signs have had
a significant effect on the region’s visual environment. Perhaps most notable have been the signs
installed along the Interstate 25 corridor over the last 10 years. Their bright, flashing, and changing
messages have significantly changed the visual environment of I-25. Beginning around 2005, digital
signs began showing up in Fort Collins. Given the precedent along the interstate highways, it was
appropriate to consider regulating this form of sign in the community in order to protect the visual
welfare of the city. Given the relatively new technology, systems were still evolving and in 2006
the City adopted the first ordinance to regulate the size, intensity, messaging, and colors.
Since putting these measures into place, the technology has improved further and the level of
performance based on cost has improved. Today the opportunity exists to purchase signs with finer
detail and more color for lower cost. Given the continuing improvement of the electronic messaging
it seems appropriate to revisit the standards again, even though it has been only a few years since
the last sign update.
Some of the key considerations are:
• What is the latest in technology?
• Can electronic signs today meet the needs of the business community and still maintain the
same quality of the visual environment?
• Can they be better than what exists today?
• What will the community look like 30 years from now if every business in the city has
digital signs? What does this mean for the community?
• Is there an opportunity for digital signs to serve a purpose that improves the visual quality
of the community, or to serve a community need?
• Does it make sense to permit digital signs in some applications and not in others?
The judgment required in deciding about digital signs will require balancing current knowledge with
a perspective on the future. The information presented in this agenda item summary and in the
presentation to Council is intended to provide background on the various key issues of the
discussion in order to facilitate greater understanding of the subject. Staff has been working on the
August 9, 2011 Page 3
details and gathering public opinion and more information from the business and sign community.
This presentation is a work in progress with the intention of refining the study based on comments
from Council.
Digital Sign Regulations Currently in Place
The digital sign regulations in place at the conclusion of the 2009 amortization period were those
adopted by City Council in 2006. These regulations remain in effect today in Section 3.8.7(M) of
the Land Use Code as follows:
(M) Electrical Signs.
1) Flashing, moving, blinking, chasing or other animation effects shall
be prohibited on all signs, except time-and-temperature signs.
2) Illuminated signs shall avoid the concentration of illumination. The
intensity of the light source shall not produce glare, the effect of
which constitutes a traffic hazard or is otherwise detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare.
3) Every electric sign shall have affixed thereon an approved
Underwriters' Laboratories label, and all wiring connected to such
sign shall comply with all provisions of the National Electrical Code,
as adopted by the City.
4) Electrical signs that contain an electronic changeable copy module
shall be subject to the following limitations.
a. The module must be programmed so that the displayed
message does not change more frequently than once per
minute and so that the message change occurs without the use
of scrolling, flashing, fading or other similar effects.
b. The message center must be provided with automatic
dimming software or solar sensors to control brightness for
nighttime viewing.
c. The message must be monochrome in an amber, green, blue
or white color.
d. The area of the electronic message display shall not exceed
fifty (50) percent of the total area of the sign face.
e. Electrical signs that contain an electronic changeable copy
module which do not comply with the provisions of this
Section shall be removed and made to conform by December
29, 2013.
There are approximately 1,500 permitted on-premise freestanding signs (signs not attached to a
building) currently in the city. In 2009 at the conclusion of the amortization period, about 40 of the
non-conforming were converted to digital signs. This number has doubled to approximately 80.
Looking ahead over the next twenty years, based upon this rate of increase, many additional signs
could be converted to digital. It is this rate of increase in the number of digital signs that has led to
a review of the City’s current regulations. The review has included a peer city comparison and a
public outreach process to the community.
August 9, 2011 Page 4
Fort Collins Digital Sign Regulations Compared to Other Jurisdictions
Staff researched the digital sign regulations of other cities (Attachment 8). All but one of the cities
surveyed allow digital signs. Some that do allow them restrict them to certain types or uses (i.e.,
time and temperature, gas price, non-commercial uses). Fort Collins does not restrict the types or
uses. Most of the cities surveyed regulate the size of the digital module, either as a percentage of
the total sign face or as a limit on the number of characters that can be displayed. Fort Collins
restricts the size to 50 percent of the total sign. Most of the cities do not require dimming software,
but Fort Collins does. Only two cities, Fort Collins and Iowa City, regulate the color of the display.
The frequency of message change ranges anywhere from 3 seconds to 24 hours. Fort Collins
requires a minimum of 60 seconds.
Outreach Conducted and Feedback Received
Numerous businesses replaced their nonconforming signs with new digital signs in 2009 based upon
the regulations in place at the time. It was therefore not surprising that those business owners would
have concerns and issues about the potential adoption of new regulations pertaining to their signs.
Additionally, the recent increase in the number of digital signs has raised some concerns and
questions about whether the current regulations are adequate to address aesthetics now and into the
future. Therefore, a number of outreach meetings were held with stakeholders and the public to seek
feedback on this issue. Feedback regarding pole sign design criteria was also solicited at the
meetings, but the major focus and interest was on digital signs.
Staff focused outreach on four main stakeholder groups: sign industry representatives, Chamber of
Commerce, sign owners, and the general public. Meetings included the following (number of
attendees shown in parentheses):
April 5 - Industry Representatives (12)
April 22 – Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee (LLAC) meeting
April 27 - Sign Owners (40)
May 11 - Public Open Houses (two meetings, 6 total attendees, 5 from the sign industry).
July 7 - Industry Representatives (8)
July 7 - CityWorks Alumni group (11)
July 15 – Planning and Zoning Board Work Session
Feedback was also solicited on the City of Fort Collins’ Facebook and Your Voice websites (70 total
responses). Outreach included basic overviews of the current Sign Code, open-ended questions
about the use and effectiveness of digital signs, thoughts on current and potential new regulations,
sign trends, and the impact of digital signs on the streetscape both now and in the future. The
majority of respondents believed that current regulations did a good job of regulating these signs and
that continued allowance of them would not have a negative impact. (See Attachment 7 for
individual responses).
In general, the sign industry representatives, Chamber of Commerce LLAC, and sign owners do not
support significant change to the City’s current Code. The groups strongly stressed the benefit to
businesses that digital signs offer, including ease of promoting on multi-tenant locations, employee
safety, less reliance on banners, and the ability to be timely with messaging. There was also
August 9, 2011 Page 5
comment that the City’s current Code does not allow for more attractive signs by only allowing
monochrome pixel type signs. It was noted that industry trends and technology improvements are
leading to more digital signs in the future, and they will have higher resolution and messaging
capabilities. (See Attachments 2, 3, and 4 for summary minutes of the meetings).
The Cityworks Alumni group and the members of the Planning and Zoning Board generally agreed
that they did not believe there was much of a problem with the digital signs as currently allowed.
They felt the continued use would not have a detrimental affect on the streetscapes into the future
as long as the signs are regulated with regard to frequency of change, no animation, limits on the
percent of a sign that can be digital, etc. The majority of both groups expressed that such signs
offered businesses additional flexibility. Some suggested that the City should allow the use of full-
color displays rather than just restricting to monochrome. (See Attachment 6 for summary minutes
of the CityWorks meeting).
While there are relatively few digital signs in the community (80 is about 5.5% of the total on-
premise signs), there is concern that the continued and growing use of digital signs may at some
point become excessive and detract from the pleasing appearance of our community. Consequently,
it is important to be proactive in considering regulations in order to manage the potential expansion
of these signs throughout the City.
Options for Regulation of Digital Signs (in order from least restrictive to most restrictive)
Option 1 – No Change.
This option would retain the current regulations as listed above.
Pros:
• Business owners who have incurred a considerable expense to install a new digital sign
based upon on the recently adopted regulations (2006) would not have to incur additional
expense to remodel or remove their signs.
• The majority of community feedback expressed the viewpoint that the City’s current
standards regulate digital signs in a manner that minimizes negative effects, now and into
the future, by restricting color, frequency of message change and size.
• Ongoing advancements in digital sign technology should result in more aesthetic electronic
message displays.
• Could result in fewer banner days being used by businesses.
• Maintains the benefits that digital signs offer to businesses (see Attachments 2, 3, and 4 for
specifics mentioned at outreach meetings).
Cons:
• If the number of digital signs continues to increase at current rates, there could be hundreds
of such signs along the city’s streets in the next five to fifteen years. There is no certain way
to visualize now what aesthetic impact that could actually have.
August 9, 2011 Page 6
Option 2 – Continue to allow digital signs, but with additional regulations to close some
loopholes; add additional lighting and design standards based on emerging technology and
establish a monitoring program every 2 years.
Pros:
• Additional regulations should improve what many already view as adequate.
• Closing loopholes and adding additional standards would address some of the concerns
raised. For example: require dimming software that will control maximum lighting levels
to amounts such as 600 nits (candelas per square meter) at night and 5000 nits during the day
or three tenths foot candles over the ambient light, whichever is lower; clarify that the
message must be displayed in monochrome color AND that the background color must be
black (or dark colored) in order to reduce the overall brightness of the display; allow them
only on monument signs and wall signs, not on pole signs
• Business owners would still be able to use digital signs, which are viewed by them as a tool
to increase revenue and make their business more successful.
• Could result in fewer banner days being used by businesses.
• Additional standards and protections could result in allowing full color displays, a type of
display that is viewed by some as being aesthetically more acceptable than monochrome
displays.
• Maintain the benefits that digital signs offer to businesses (see Attachments 2, 3, and 4 for
specifics mentioned at outreach meetings).
Cons:
• There is no clear way to visualize now what the aesthetic impact of continuing to allow
digital signs would be.
• Since the average life span of a sign is longer than an amortization period, owners of existing
signs would incur an expense if they are required to remodel their signs to bring them into
compliance with new regulations.
Option 3 – Prohibit new digital signs and require that existing ones be removed after an
amortization period.
Pros:
• A total ban of digital signs may advance the City’s interest in aesthetics through a cohesive
non-digital sign community.
• Removes any uncertainty as to what the future streetscape impact might be.
Cons:
• Numerous business owners who had nonconforming signs that needed to be replaced at the
end of the recently concluded 15 year amortization period decided to replace their signs with
new, expensive electronic digital signs based on the recently adopted 2006 regulations.
They have expressed serious concerns and issues with the need to once again replace their
signs, and have expressed that the City cannot be trusted if it keeps changing its mind.
August 9, 2011 Page 7
• Landlords have long-term leases based on use of an existing digital sign. If the sign needed
to be removed, a tenant could break a lease.
• The benefits of digital sign advertising claimed by businesses would be lost.
POLE SIGNS
The Sign Code allows for two types of freestanding signs (signs not attached to a building). A
monument sign is a type of freestanding sign that consists of a sign face or cabinet that is mounted
on top of a base, the width of which is at least as wide as, or almost as wide as the sign cabinet. For
instance, a 10-foot wide sign cabinet mounted on an 8-foot to 10-foot wide base. A pole sign, on
the other hand, is a sign that contains significant air space between the top of the sign and the
ground. A pole sign is often a sign cabinet mounted on top of one or two exposed poles. Such signs
are generally not as attractive as monument signs, and in fact the Sign Code contains regulations that
are intended to encourage the use of monument signs as the preferred type of sign.
The completion of the 2009 sign amortization project resulted in a number of the previous
nonconforming pole signs being replaced with new or lowered pole signs. However, the number
of pole signs in the city really did not decrease as a result of the amortization. The number of such
signs that were removed or replaced with monument signs was off-set by about an equal number of
nonconforming monument signs being replaced with new, less expensive pole signs. As a result,
opportunities to increase the number of more aesthetically pleasing signs in the city through
replacement did not materialize.
A Code change would be necessary in order to ensure that there will be fewer new or remodeled
signs supported by simply one or two poles. City staff is proposing an amendment that will require
pole signs be designed in a manner that will result in a more substantial and interesting design,
helping to ensure that they will contribute to the aesthetic appearance of the streetscape. This can
be accomplished by limiting the amount of air space between the top of the sign and the ground to
not more than 40 percent.
Staff has two questions for City Council with regard to pole sign regulations:
1. Does Council support additional design criteria for pole signs?
2. If so, should the existing pole signs that will be made nonconforming as a result, be allowed
to remain or should they be subject to an amortization period in which to be brought into
compliance?
Outreach Conducted and Feedback Received
The proposed pole Sign Code change was part of the public outreach discussion described above
for digital signs. However, the discussion and comments at the outreach meetings focused on digital
signs as being of primary interest. Likewise, Your Voice and Facebook feedback also centered on
digital signs. What little feedback there was on the pole sign issue was about evenly split between
those who believe the signs are fine the way they are and those that believe the additional design
criteria would be beneficial.
August 9, 2011 Page 8
Option: Additional Design Criteria
Pros for additional design criteria and amortization:
• Signs will be designed in a manner that will result in a more substantial and interesting sign,
which will contribute positively to the aesthetic appearance of the city’s streetscape.
• Business owners and sign designers will continue to have the flexibility of choosing from
different sign types (monument and pole).
• Amortization will result in elimination of all nonconforming pole signs within 15 years.
Cons of additional design criteria and amortization:
• Numerous business owners who had nonconforming signs that needed to be remodeled or
replaced at the end of the recently concluded 15 year amortization period decided to replace
their signs with new or remodeled pole signs. Additional design criteria would mean that
the new or remodeled pole signs would become nonconforming and would need to be
replaced by the end of the 15 year amortization requirement currently in the code. Since the
average life span of a sign is longer than an amortization period, the need to comply would
be an extra expense.
NEXT STEPS
Based on Council’s direction, staff will develop necessary documentation to implement any options.
The Planning and Zoning Board will provide a formal recommendation in September, and Council
will consider adoption in October.
September
September 9 Planning and Zoning Board work session
September 15 Planning and Zoning Board hearing
October
October 4 City Council consideration of First Reading of proposed Ordinances
October 18 City Council consideration of Second Reading of proposed Ordinances
ATTACHMENTS
1. PowerPoint presentation
2. Summary minutes of April 7 and July 7 sign industry meeting
3. Summary minutes of April 22 Chamber of Commerce LLAC meeting
4. Summary minutes of April 27 sign owners meeting
5. Summary minutes of May 11 open house meetings
6. Summary minutes of July 7 CityWorks Alum meeting
7. Your Voice and Facebook Web Comments
8. Peer City Research Table
1
1
Digital Sign and Pole Sign
Discussion
August 9, 2010
Peter Barnes, Zoning Supervisor
2
Questions
• Which, if any, option to address digital signs
should staff prepare in the form of an ordinance
for Council consideration?
• Does the Council support a change to add
design criteria for pole signs? If so, should
existing pole signs be subject to an
amortization period to require compliance?
2
3
Issue: Adequacy of existing digital sign
regulations now and into the future
• In 2006, Council adopted standards to regulate
the use and appearance of digital signs.
• Since 2006, the number of digital signs has
increased significantly and the number continues
to increase.
• Effective sign regulations need to balance the
needs of businesses with the right of the public
to an aesthetically pleasing environment.
4
Digital Sign Code - Background
• A principle of the sign code is to provide a
reasonable balance between the right of a
business to convey its message and the right of
the public to an aesthetically pleasing
environment.
• The City’s first sign code was adopted in 1971,
with many amendments since then.
• Comprehensive amendments were adopted in
1994, with a 15-year amortization period for
non-conforming signs.
3
5
Impact of Fort Collins’
First Sign Code
Historical Pictures
6
South College, south of Prospect, circa 1975
4
7
South College, south of Prospect, 1978
8
100 Block of North College,
circa 1975
5
9
100 Block of North College, 1978
10
South College, south
of Prospect, circa 1975
6
11
South College, south of Prospect, 1978
12
North College, circa 1975
7
13
North College, 1978
14
Digital Sign Regulations
Adopted in 2006
• No flashing, moving, blinking, or animation.
• Frequency of message change limited to 60 sec.
• Automatic dimming software for nighttime viewing.
• Monochrome message in amber, green, blue or
white.
• Digital area limited to maximum of 50% of sign face.
• Pre-2006 digital signs must comply by 2013.
8
15
Digital Sign Issues
• Recent increase in number of digital signs raises
concerns about adequacy of current regulations to
address aesthetics now and into the future.
• In 2009, some nonconforming signs were
replaced with digital signs based on the 2006
regulations. Code changes could result in these
signs needing to be remodeled or removed.
16
Digital Signs
Currently in Fort Collins
9
17
Conforming Signs
18
Conforming Signs
10
19
Conforming Signs
20
Non-Conforming Signs (red lettering not allowed)
11
21
Non-Conforming Signs
(full color display not allowed)
22
Newer sign
that DOES comply:
- amber message
- digital is 50% of sign
Older sign that
DOES NOT comply:
- red message
- digital is 100% of sign
12
23
North College Avenue with Existing Signs
24
North College Avenue with Digital Signs
13
25
Without Digital
With Digital
26
South College Avenue with Existing Signs
14
27
South College Avenue with Digital Signs
28
Without Digital
With Digital
15
29
South College Avenue with Existing Signs
30
South College Avenue with Digital Signs
16
31
Without Digital
With Digital
32
South Mason Street with Existing Signs
17
33
South Mason Street with Digital Signs
34
Without Digital
With Digital
18
35
Digital Sign Outreach
Meetings:
April 5 and July 7 – Industry representatives
April 22 – Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs
April 27 – Sign owners
May 11 – Two public open houses
July 7 – CityWorks alumni group
July 22 – Planning & Zoning Board work session
Web tools:
- Your Voice
- City’s Facebook page
36
Digital Sign Feedback
• Majority believe that current regulations do a
good job of regulating digital signs and that
continued allowance wouldn’t have a negative
impact.
• Industry representatives and sign owners
stressed the benefit offered by digital signs.
• Many were open to additional regulations to
improve what the City has now.
19
37
Options for Digital Sign Regulation
38
Option 1 – No Change
Pros:
– No additional expense to business owners.
– Feedback indicates that most believe current standards
work.
– Technological advancements could result in improved
displays.
– Maintains the benefits that digital signs offer to
businesses.
Cons:
– Difficult to visualize future aesthetic impact of continued
increase in number of digital signs.
20
39
Option 2 – Continue to allow, but with
additional standards for lighting, design
and to close loopholes
Pros:
– Improve what many already view as effective.
– Would address details like light dimming, background
color, monument signs only, fewer banner days.
– Allows possibility of full color displays, viewed by some
as being more acceptable than monochrome.
– Maintains the benefits digital signs offer to businesses.
Cons:
– Difficult to visualize future aesthetic impact of continued
increase in number of digital signs.
– Business expense if owners required to bring existing
signs into compliance.
40
Option 3 – Prohibit new digital signs
and grandfather existing ones
Pros:
– Ensures the number of digital signs does not increase,
and removes uncertainty of future streetscape impact.
– Existing digital sign owners would not incur additional
expense.
Cons:
– Could give unfair competitive advantage to businesses
already having digital signs.
– Could prevent existing signs, digital and non-digital,
from being upgraded or replaced.
21
41
Option 4 – Prohibit new digital signs and
require existing ones to be removed
Pros:
– A total ban of digital signs may advance the City’s
interest in aesthetics through a cohesive non-digital
sign community.
– Removes any uncertainty of future streetscape impact.
Cons:
– Costly to again replace recently purchased signs with
new, conforming signs..
– Landlords with long-term leases based on use of an
existing digital sign could lose tenants.
– Benefits of digital sign advertising would be lost.
42
Pole Signs
22
43
Proposed Pole Sign Regulations
• Add design criteria to enhance appearance of pole
signs.
• Freestanding pole signs will be limited to containing no
more than 40% of air space.
• Existing signs made nonconforming may or may not be
subject to amortization.
44
Pole Signs - Background
• Pole signs constructed with the sign cabinet mounted
on top of only one or two exposed poles are viewed as
being less attractive
• The sign code has always contained regulations
intended to encourage the use of monument signs
instead of pole signs.
23
45
Pole Signs - Background
• Opportunities to increase the number of more
aesthetically pleasing signs in the city through 2009
amortization replacement didn’t materialize.
• A code change would ensure fewer signs (new or
remodeled) supported by only one or two poles.
46
Pole Signs - Feedback
Outreach meetings:
– Very little discussion or feedback.
Your Voice and Facebook:
– Evenly split between those who believe
the signs are fine the way they are and
those who favor additional design
criteria.
24
47
Non-Conforming Under Proposed Change
48
Non-Conforming Under Proposed Change
25
49
50
Conforming Signs with Proposed Change
26
51
Conforming Signs with Proposed Change
52
Next Steps
September 9 Planning & Zoning Board Work
Session
September 15 Planning & Zoning Board
Hearing
October 4 City Council First Reading
October 18 City Council Final Reading
27
53
Questions
• Which, if any, option to address digital signs
should staff prepare in the form of an ordinance
for Council consideration?
• Does the Council support a change to add
design criteria for pole signs? If so, should
existing pole signs be subject to an
amortization period to require compliance?
54
Thank You!
28
55
Streetscape with Existing Signs (SW Enclave
Annexation – existing signs will need to come into
compliance in 2014)
56
Potential Streetscape with Digital Signs replacing
existing non-conforming signs.
29
57
Without Digital (SW Enclave
existing signs subject to 2014
compliance)
With Digital (potential
new signs replacing
existing non-conforming)
58
Streetscape with Existing Signs – North College Ave.
30
59
Potential Streetscape with Digital Signs – North College Ave.
60
Existing Signs Without Digital – North College Ave.
With Digital – North College Ave.
31
61
Freestanding pole sign currently allowed and
that will also comply with proposed revision
62
32
63
64
33
65
66
ATTACHMENT 2
Summary minutes of sign industry meeting – April 5, 2011
The group invited to this meeting consisted of licensed Fort Collins sign contractors. Also in
attendance was one business owner who attended this meeting because he will be unable to
attend the April 27th meeting (which is intended for owners of businesses that currently have
digital signs).
Staff presentation given, including PowerPoint slides
Attendees repeatedly asked the following:
Who is complaining? Concerned citizens
How many complaints? The City Manager’s office is often the recipient of emails and phone
calls from the public regarding various issues. We don’t know the exact number.
What is the main concern? Brightness and aesthetics, as well as concern about affect of digital
sign proliferation on streetscape in coming years. To which they responded that the newer signs
erected since the 2006 digital sign code changes are very well done. They also explained that
the dimming software technology is getting better all the time.
Does the community really see this as a problem? We will be conducting a community wide
open house later, and will have internet and facebook outreach as well. Opinions/results from
all meetings and other methods of outreach will be included in information that is given to City
Council for work sessions or public hearings.
Why are we doing this? The City staff was directed to evaluate the effects of this type of sign on
the streetscape as a result of the recent large increase in the number of such signs.
Can't the City make up its mind? Businesses that just spent thousands of dollars on new signs
in order to comply with the 2009 amortization now will have to pay again.
The one business owner in attendance received his invitation letter for the April 27th business
owners meeting over the weekend. He said the letter ruined his weekend and his Monday as
his anger built about the City’s timing (coming shortly after the last amortization period) and the
City once again proposing to do something that he perceives as being anti-business. He owns
a local health club, and explained that his digital sign has proven to be extremely effective.
They survey prospective members when they come in for tours and information, asking “what
brought them in?” He said that 75% of the respondents explained that it was a message on the
digital sign that peaked their interest. He also explained that since he’s had the sign, he has
never put up a banner, and therefore these signs help to reduce the number of banners that are
displayed.
The upcoming meeting schedule is:
April 22nd the Chamber of Commerce Legislative Affairs Committee
April 27th with owners of businesses that have digital signs
May 11th community-wide meeting
1
2
Summary minutes of 2nd sign industry meeting – July 7, 2011
Discussion:
Overall the group felt we have a good sign code (more restrictive than others, but good.)
They would like to see full color allowed.
With newer technology full-color signs would look like existing back-lit signs (maybe
even better.)
They would prefer a message change every 6 seconds. They realize staff will stay with
a one minute change recommendation (minimum.)
The group felt strongly that they want an opportunity to present to Council beyond 3
minutes each. They feel this important so they can educate and better explain sign
trends and technology. (Staff will check.)
Group discussed dimming software available on sign technology. If the City should
invest in a NIT meter (reads brightness) if they put levels into a code.
Group agreed that the digital boxes set atop existing signs don’t look good.
ATTACHMENT 3
Summary minutes of Chamber of Commerce LLAC meeting – April 22, 2011
The meeting was very civil and there was a great deal of input received and concern
expressed. Overall, the audience felt this hurts businesses and is a topic that does not need to
be addressed. One interesting comment came from a sign company who stated that most of
their digital sign clients are Church’s and Schools. The following is a synopsis of the comments:
We should actually go with full color as the monochromatic signs look dated and sub-par and
that the new LCD technology is very attractive.
Digital signs are great for our businesses.
The existing regulations are too restrictive, let’s not change them.
Digital signs help promote community better as they are used for CSU Game Day and other
community events.
Digital signs help prevent banner signage clutter as those who use digital signs do not use as
many banners.
The timing of this is unfortunate as many have recently changed due to recent amortization and
it seems that the city is changing things every 5 years.
Many including David May asked for data on how many concerns we had received. Staff stated
that we did not have a number and he kept pressing for one. I said I would check to see if we
could get this.
One person stated she felt betrayed as a business person as “we just changed” (referencing the
recent amortization). There were a number who echoed this statement.
A number of people compared this effort to the floodplain issue.
A couple of people compared this effort to a “Nanny State” and that the City just a few years ago
went through this process change and that this effort is a waste of their tax dollars.
Again, the meeting was very civil with some spirited comments and an overall concern that this
is not an issue the city should be working on. They reiterated the need for data in terms of how
many concerns have been received and really want this information.
The next step in this process is a meeting with the owners of digital signs on Wednesday April
27 from 4-6 at the community meeting room.
1
1
ATTACHMENT 4
Summary minutes of Digital Sign Meeting #3 – Sign Owners - April 27, 2011
The digital sign meeting for business owners and managers of businesses that have an
existing digital sign was held on Wednesday, April 27, 2011. 40 people attended.
Like previous outreach meetings, the tone was generally civil but there was a great deal
of input received and concern expressed. Also like the previous meetings, those in
attendance felt that this hurts business and is an issue that should not be pursued
further. An often repeated comment was that they want specific data regarding how
many complaints have been received, the nature of the complaints, and who is it that is
complaining. There was also a comment that the City Manager should meet with them.
Following are other comments:
Signs are already reasonably regulated with regard to aesthetics.
Digital signs are a revenue producer. They allow the business to be reactive to
changing conditions and be product specific.
Digital signs reduce the need for banners, therefore there are fewer banners cluttering
the streetscape.
They allow for individual tenant exposure for multi-tenant buildings by means of easy
message rotation.
Landlords have long-term tenant leases based on use of the digital sign. If the sign
needed to be removed, the tenant could break the lease.
Some buildings are setback a considerable distance and have landscaping that
obscures tenant wall signs. A digital sign with rotating tenant messages helps to
overcome the lack of sign and storefront visibility. Happy tenants mean fewer
vacancies.
The existing regulations as amended in 2006 have resulted in signs that are not
obnoxious. The regulations are already among the most restrictive.
Many of the digital signs aren't any brighter than conventional, illuminated cabinet signs.
It would be a huge expense to change signs.
The City is continually changing the code and the rules of the game. Council amended
the digital sign regs in 2006 and businesses relied on that. Then the 2009 amortization
concluded with numerous businesses replacing their nonconforming signs with
expensive digital signs in reliance on existing regulations. The City can't be trusted if
they keep changing their minds.
The vitality of a city is dependent on commerce.
Rotating tenant messages has been great for Scotch Pines. Their new sign replaced a
previously existing nonconforming sign.
2
The new automatic dimming software should take care of the brightness issue.
Generally, nighttime brightness levels are set at 7% of daytime levels.
Manual changeable copy signs are subject to vandalism. i.e., letters are stolen or letters
rearranged to form obscenities, etc.
It seems like complainers have more say about this than the businesses do.
Sign twirlers are worse than this. Why doesn't the City prohibit them?
Digital signs are safer than manual signs because you don’t have to go in the
snow/wind/rain and make changes.
Some owners still haven't paid off their existing signs that they purchased to meet the
City code.
Tenants have prepaid for certain amounts of display time. What happens to these
agreements?
Digital signs allow convenience stores to have fewer staff (no one has to leave the store
to go outside and change the sign.)
The digital signs are all LED which are far more efficient and sustainable than traditional
lighted signs.
This feels very anti-business.
Pole covers can be expensive (this comment was with regard to proposed design criteria
for pole signs).
Is the City doing this so they can make money from permits and taxes that would be
collected for the new, replacement signs?
The City is nit-picking on signs over and over, and spending money and staff resources.
Landlords will lose tenants if they can't have street exposure.
National corporations have sign requirements for their franchises, and landlords have
been told by prospective tenants that if they can't have certain signage exposure, they
won't come here.
It's not just the businesses that depend on signs, it's also the landlords.
Digital signs replace older, dilapidated signs.
It's a digital world now. Why wouldn't we want businesses to avail themselves of new
technology?
The City is a user of digital signs (on buses, inside the Lincoln Center, at the downtown
transit center, etc). Are they going to be removed?
3
The City of Boulder, CO is going to or already has made allowances for full color as they
think that these full color are better than monochromatic and look more vibrant and
current. (this comment from the audience is being researched by staff)
ATTACHMENT 5
Summary minutes of Digital and Pole Sign Meetings, #4 and #5 – General Public
May 11, 2011
Two digital sign meetings for the general public were held on May 11, 2011. The 5:00
p.m. meeting was attended by 6 people. 4 of the six were from the sign industry and
had attended at least one of the previous stakeholder meetings. One of the new
attendees was a sign contractor and the other new attendee was a non-sign industry
person who had not attended any of the previous meetings. No one attended the
second meeting, held at 6:00 p.m..
Following are the comments from the 5:00 p.m. meeting:
Who is complaining about pole signs?
The questions that staff is asking should include a question about what people think is
the economic impact of digital signs, not just the aesthetic impact.
If brightness is a concern, why can’t the code simply be amended to more strictly
regulate ‘dimming’? Are there new technologies?
Proliferation could lead to a loss of a “Mayberry-ish” community feel. On the other
hand, proliferation could add excitement.
Reverse display (i.e. amber background with black message instead of the other way
around) can be ok if brightness is controlled.
There is technology to shade the pixels that will help control brightness.
Can existing signs be retrofitted with this and what would the cost be?
1
ATTACHMENT 6
Summary minutes of CityWork Alum meeting – July 7, 2011
Staff: Pater Barnes, Ginny Sawyer
Attendees: Dan Lenskold, Diane Smith, Scott Quayle, Linda Vrooman, Jerry and Claudia Kiltz, , Jason
Smith, Steve Nelson, Keith and Carol Hopkins, Dana DeRouchey
Staff invited CityWork alums to this meeting after not getting any response at a previously scheduled
public meeting. The email invitation is included at the bottom of the page.
The meeting began with an overview and history of the Fort Collins sign code including photos from the
1970’s to present.
Discussion:
No one wants Las Vegas.
There was lengthy discussion on personal preferences and which signs folks liked best. Overall
people agreed there should not be any animation or flashing and that one minute message sound
like a good minimum. People tried to envision how many potential message changes a driver
might see while at one red light.
Given the current regulations (size, set backs, landscaping, etc) the group felt that full color signs
could be considered.
They felt businesses needed certain capabilities and flexibility in their advertising.
One person had concerns regarding people with seizure disorders and the potential for bright,
rapidly, changing signs to trigger an episode.
They agreed with the stakeholder group that the digital box on top of an existing sign is not very
attractive.
Overall the group was very complementary of where we are at today and our community
aesthetics. They did not voice a need for dramatic changes or additional regulation on digital
signs.
CityWork Invite
Hello CityWork Alum!
The Planning and Zoning Departments are seeking your help and input. Currently, there is policy
discussion regarding the current and future design and desire of digital signs and signage in Fort Collins.
If you’re like me, signs and our sign code are not something I paid much attention to…until I learned
more about the history and thoughts behind the sign code!!
If you look at the before and after pictures of downtown you will see how impactful regulations can be.
Unfortunately, this can be a difficult topic to interest the general public in, which is why we are asking
CItyWork alums to participate in the conversation.
Please join us on Thursday, July 7 from 6:00-7:30 pm in the Community Room. Peter Barnes, Zoning
Supervisor, will take us through some of the history (with visuals!) of the sign code and how it came to
be. We will then seek your thoughts on the near and long-term future of the digital sign code. With new
1
2
and changing technology signs are becoming more sophisticated and the City wants to ensure it meets
the needs and desires of both businesses and residents.
This is not an Alumni Forum, so food will not be provided (sorry!) but your opinions are highly
appreciated. Please contact Ginny with questions or to RSVP. Thank you!
ATTACHMENT 7
Your Voice and Facebook Feedback
1 Comments:
I like the current regulations for both digital displays and for pole signs. They makes sense and must
work as I don't recall being bothered by any signage in town.
I would not like to see these regulations relaxed.
Name: Teresa Kahle
Email: teresa@kahle.org
2 Comments:
The signs are a great way for businesses,churches, and schools, to market themselves. It is a way for
them to advertise programs, and community functions, without the use of unsightly banners. The owners
of these signs have invested a great deal of time and money in these signs, and they were all approved
by the city. All signs that have been approved by the city should remain.
Name: Selena Shannon
Email: skinbyselena@live.com
3 Comments:
Please prohibit digital signs--this is light pollution and is also unattractive. Also, please prohibit the lit bus
stop signs--it is one thing to have the stops lit for safety, another just so the ad shows up. All of this light
pollution makes our city look tacky. It is key to our asethics and economic success to keep our city's
standards high. Thank you for asking.
Name: Trudy Haines
Email: trudyh1@comcast.net
4 Comments:
I favor banning them outright. I travel for work a lot and see many cities that have more and larger digital
signs than Fort Collins. It makes coming back here even better, because I don't have to look at those
digital signs anymore. It's easy to quantify what they add to sales, etc. It's not so easy to quantify what
their absence brings to the city. You really have to stay in a hotel with one of those signs next door,
drawing animations in bright red throughout the night to appreciate how nice it is not to have them.
They're a major distraction when driving also. Perhaps someone has studied their impact, if any, on
traffic accidents. This is a cost passed on to drivers in the city where they're the signs are located.
Name: Ted Rakel
Email: tedrakel@yahoo.com
5 Comments:
The overall benefit to a local business owner having a digital message center is that the business owner
has options to generate revenue by running a "special" or "sale" to attract customers who may not have
known otherwise from looking at just the Business name and logo on a sign. The revenue generated by
this message on the sign also equals sales tax to the city. Do we really want to be that town that limits
local small business owners from possibly generating additional business. The statistics of revenue
generated from a digital message center are if nothing else amazing. The technology available today
allows us to control what message we bring to our customers. Why limit this? Digital signs are some of
the best looking signs this town has. Why don’t we look at some of the old signs in town that are
not maintained, half lit, falling apart and enforce the code in these areas to make our town look better.
This city is great at making up new codes when we do not enforce the codes already in place.
Monument signs are often more expensive then a pole sign so again the business owner is the one to
have to come up with additional money to buy a sign. Should we push all of the business owners to look
elsewhere because of costs and codes for something as simple but as essential as a sign? Before we
become a city of Wal-Mart, let’s look at what is right for everyone.
1
Name: Ian Senesac
Email: affordablesolutionsdj@gmail.com
6 Comments:
I think that the City should stop being anti business and do everything we can to attract new business
and keep existing. Forcing rediculous sign restrictions is not doing this!
Name: Dave
Email: drmccleave@pga.com
7 Comments:
I think they are fine and I'm curious about those that have issues? There should be NO prohibiting these
signs and in fact the City Council should drive to Cheyenne- they have digital billboards that are classy
and great for businesses to advertise on. I'm proud of our city and how it looks and the signage issues
here are not a problem. I'm curiuos if this is once again the 1% of the population complaining about
something they just needed to find to complain about.
Name: Connie Hanrahan
Email: Connie@mantoothcompany.com
8 Comments:
Don't you guys have something better to do than go after businesses that have spent good money on
these signs, How about working on not letting the city of Ft. Collins go bankrupt.
Name: Tim Hunt
Email: thunt@lextron-inc.com
9 Comments:
I like the creativity of the signs. Please DO NOT prohibit them outright. Let's not go backwards. I think
the less regulation the better. I believe the signs' current regulations not have a negative impact on our
city's future. In fact, I don't like the way the digital signs are regulated in thier color limitations, message
changing timees, etc. A city sign code would mean more uniformity and that takes away from the
uniqueness of our city. Let's not bore it up and keep in mind we live in a digital age. We have to assume
the distactions that a sign would cause, would be less distracting than talking or texting on the phone.
Do not babysit the city. Let us be responsible citizens.
Name: Tracy Walker
Email: twalkervols@comcast.net
10 Comments:
Businesses need signs. As long as people have conformed with the zoning rules in place at the time the
sign was installed, they should be allowed to keep the signs and recoup their investments. Digital
messages can be distracting, but also very helpful to both consumers and businesses.
Name: Kevin Houchin
Email: kevin.houchin@houchinlaw.com
11 Comments:
I think the signs are tastfully done. I would like to see this continue as small and medium size
businesses need as much support as we can give them. I do not believe any more regulations should
take place. It is very expensive and difficult to do as it is.
I think if there was an artistic councel of a sort to do a final approval of upcoming signs that would be a
good idea. I think existing signs should stay.
I Hope this helps.
Name: Wendy Foster
Email: wendy@thefineartandframecompany.com
2
12 Comments:
I like the digital signs in fort collins, it is a great way for business owners to change information without
have to build new signs. They absolutely should not be prohibited. I don't know what additional
regualations should be done, since there does not appear to be a problem with them. I think once the
city has approved the sign and the use for the sign, it should not be allowed to go back and change the
rules. Need to get it right the first time. the word "some" does not mean the majority. My family history
goes back to the 1890's here in Fort Collins and I think the signs in Fort Collins has always been great.
It's really all some have right now to promote their business. Really....is there more important things that
time and money could be wasted on?
Name: Cayenne Kerbs
Email: ckerbs@cowisp.net
13 Comments:
Leave it alone!!!!!!!! Let businesses advertise. No more regulations!
Name: Leon Green
Email: hardyclassic@yahoo.com
14 Comments:
Dear City Council,
If the City wants to pick up the tab for replacing all of the new digital signs that local business owners
have installed within the past several years, I'm in favor of the change. However, if the City is asking the
small business owners that have played by the City's rules while installing digital signs to replace the
signs at their own expense, I would not be in favor of this change to the code. Is there any opportunity
for grandfathering the existing digital signs and the change to the code to apply only to "new" signs being
installed?
Name: John Hintzman
Email: johnh@mypfsinsurance.com
15 Comments:
Don't you as a council have more important things to consider than a sign code that has worked, with out
further requlation. I'am not sure why this is even on your radar. It is anti business and petty cosidering
the budget problems and the unemployment issues that face the city today.
I would like to know what brought this up in the 1st place,is there actualy a group against digital signs in
Fort Collins? I'am sure if there is they are not business people that need to drive businees to thier door
step to pay salaries and taxes.
Lets move on to the more important issues at hand.
Michael Trinen
PS How do you mis judge the Mason Street operating budget by 400% (really).
PSS Do we need more people dancing on the street corners with signs?
Name: Michael Trinen
Email: michael_trinen@msn.com
16 Comments:
I think guidelines for new signs is a good idea, but businesses shouldn't be penalized for current
approved signage. That wouldn't help Fort Collins' economy.
Name: Nicole
Email: strategicnutr@aol.com
Comments:
3
I believe the digital signs in Fort Collins only add to the visual appeal.of the street. I think that the
regulations already in place do enough to keep Fort Collins the great city that it is. The digital signs are a
great way for business people to market, get their word out, and to make their building look beautiful.
Digital signs require much more up keep than any other type of sign and will therefore require the owners
to maintain there signs. This will help the future aesthetics of Fort Collins rather than a run down sign
that requires no up keep. Allow the digital signs to remain and keep neing built. It only adds to Fort
Collins.
Name: Patrick Soukup
Email: patjsouk@gmail.com
17 Comments:
i think that is unfair to prohibit or regulate digital signs that are already in place.. these sighns cost the
business lots if money..i would say let them keep then or if not, reimberse the companies their money.
Name: david sholl
Email: davidsholl@aol.com
18 Comments:
The current business owners that have signs that were conforming should be allowed to keep them and
any new businesses should follow the new guidelines. I am personally in favor of lower signs that do not
obstruct the view of the buildings. It seems that the pattern of anti-business decisions results in less tax
revenue and then the City asks everyone else for more money. We don't want to look like downtown Las
Vegas but City Council needs to be more pro-business and maybe some of the money that left town will
come back.
Name: Doug Perry
Email: dperrypga@msn.com
19 Comments:
I think that digital signs are aesthetically undesirable. They cannot lend themselves to a "city identity"
that is otherwise being so aggressively pursued through the Art in Public Places program and other
attempts to give our city a pleasing artistic identity.
Furthermore, they offer nothing to differentiate individual businesses from each other. This is only
compounding the already difficult business environment that small businesses face in Ft. Collins.
Aside from time and temp signs (which provide a public service), I would like to see digital signs banned.
Regarding pole signs I have no opinion.
Name: brian oliver
Email: paxtonsigns@gmail.com
20 Comments:
The current sign regulations are already too restrictive. These regulations hurt our community's business
vitality. As a consequence, we suffer a needless loss of sales tax revenues and we continue to drive
many businesses to other communities. With regulations like these it is no wonder that Fort Collins is
perceived as anti business.
Name: Charlie
Email: Flashcc@gmx.com
21 Comments:
I have little problem with the current monument designs. I would like to see (if not in existence) size
limitations as well (50% of a HUGE monument sign is still huge).
Does the dimming regulation cover maximum luminance? If not, it should. White and blue signs can be
very bright at night.
4
I am in favor of restrictions against the use of pole signs.
I am also in favor of restrictions banning street-side digital signs in certain zones (ie. Old Town)
Name: Michael Feinberg
Email: mfeinberg01@msn.com
22 Comments:
I think leaving the sign code as is for the digital signs would have no impact on the community.
Name:
Email:
23 Comments:
I think there are just fine. I like getting info from them.
Can't see any reason to change regulations.
Name: Jay
Email: jgerdes@q.com
24 Comments:
The signs are a wonderful source of information.
They should be allowed as long as they fit inside the regulations of current code
No additional regulations should be added. The existing regulations are too strict as they are. Especially
in this economy.
I think continued use of the signs will help serve the community and visitors. They are not a distraction
from the beauty of our city.
I don't think design criteria should be added to the existing sign code.
Name: Steve Miget
Email: stevemiget@gmail.com
25 Comments:
1. The examples are all quality, attractive signs.
2. Continue to allow.
3. Current regulations are sufficient and allow for quality, attractive signs. Please do not add any
additional regulations, as that only adds unnecessary expense and wastes private funds.
4. Continue use as currently regulated ADDS to the community appearance now and in the future.
5. No. No more regulations or criteria. In the end, this is not truly beneficial to the town as a whole.
These types of measures are superficial and don't add TRUE value to the citizens.
Name: David
Email:
26 Comments:
I think that there are adequate regulations in place, sometimes too much, as in the limitation on allowable
LED colors.
There should not be a ban on these kinds of signs, just the existing limits on size, timing of changes in
the message, etc. There is no impact on community appearance from continuing to allow them.
Name: David Lingle
Email: dlingle@aller-lingle-massey.com
26 Comments:
Digital signs are effective in conveying marketing information to potential clients without creating a
negative asthetic appearance.
5
Information on the importance of signs in regard to business success can be referenced at the Small
Business Administration website. www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/feb03.pdf. This article from the
February 2003 edition of the Small Business Advocate states "Some sign regulations may unduly burden
small businesses, they may need to be revised, first to facilitate small business success, and at the same
time to benefit state and local governments and economies". The article goes on to state that "Many
fledgling small businesses are totally dependent on commercial signage for their customers or retail
sales".
Numerous data sources suggest that digital signs are exponentially more effective than non digital signs
in creating consumer traffic. This typically results in increased sales for the retailer.
Digital message signs are a cost effective marketing tool. The addition of regulations, or outright ban on
digital signs unfairly adds undo hardship to businesses that are trying to compete in these difficult
economic times.
Aesthetically there are considerably more unattractive items in the community than digital signs. In
comparing signs alone, I notice there are many non digital signs that lack cleanliness and curb appeal.
Some of the best appearing signs in the community are digital signs.
Digital signs convey the image that the retailer and the city are progressive in utilizing todays technology
to share information effectively. Is Fort Collins a progressive, small business friendly community?
Let free enterprise thrive. Show existing small businesses that they matter. Show new businesses that
are considering start up in Fort Collins that they are welcome here.
The current regulations already restrict land use and regulate content. Additional regulation is
unnecessary and counterproductive.
Name: Matt Everhart
Email: opocx@hotmail.com
27 Comments:
1. THe blindingly bright glare from signs like this (at night) are VERY dangerous for drivers and
pedestrians (possibly obscure drivers' vision with the glare and keep them from seeing pedestrians and
cyclists).
2. Regulation is all that's needed. Control the type of sign to avoid the super bright glare.
3. Require business to comply with safer signs with a reasonable time period, for existing LED and
digital signs.
4. These obnoxious signs are NOT in keeping with the image and esthetics of Fort Collins. Leave signs
like this in Vegas.
5. I am not opposed to pole signs. In fact, in some locations, a pole sign makes the business actually
visible to drivers BEFORE they are right in front of it.
Name: Kathleen Hollerbach
Email: khollerbach@gmail.com
28 Comments:
I like them and I wish we had more of them. The regulations should be relaxed to encourage more of
them.
Name: Aaron Harris
Email: aaron.g.harris@gmail.com
29 Comments:
Understand if modifications are needed to the code but unreasonable to eliminate signs altogether since
so many buisnesses have spent alot of money on them. Shutting them down is not an option.
Grandfather existing signs in and do regulate there after.
6
Name: Ken
Email: kforzley@comcast.net
30 Comments:
I think the current regulations are appropriate. The only kind of digital screens that I don't like are the
ones that glare brightly at night like the on in front of the Budweiser Event Center. Also on a another note
you guys have Cafe Vino's sign listed twice one saying is complies and the other saying it doesn't.
Unless you're informing that white letters w/blue background are ok and multi colors are not.
Name: Steven
Email: wild_life35@yahoo.com
31 Comments:
The regulations seem fine to me. I like the fact that the signs do change and give me info I can use. A lot
of the businesses use them to show their daily specials. In a time when saving every penny counts I am
confused as to why the city would want to take that away. I'm sure these signs help the businesses do
more in sales so I am also confused as to why the city would do anything to reduce the potential sales
tax being collected. Again in a time when every penny counts why is the city wasting time on this subject.
I would bet there are much more productive things that could be done with the time.
Name: John Rush
Email: johnrush1@me.com
32 Comments:
Digital signs are part of a modern society. I am not not sure what someone find offensive about them but
it will be very hard on businesses who have invested in this technology to ban it now. It would be my
guess that if asked most of the citizens of Fort Collins are fine with the current law. Please stand up to a
vocal few and continue to allow a harmless modern product to work for local business.
Name: Jack Fetig
Email: Jack@fossilcreeknursery.com
33 Comments:
I like most of the digital signs I see around the city. I don't see the issue with multiple colors per sign. No
additional regulations should be added. If anything, they should be relaxed. I think the current regulations
are too restrictive. I don't see the issue with limiting the number of colors as long as the sign is readable
(granted, red done wrong is illegible). The Fossil Creek Nursery Sign was a waste of money because it's
not readable, but if that was done properly, what is wrong with that? In the grand scheme of things, the
continued use of digital signs has no impact on community appearance.
Name: Jim Malone
Email: jajmalone@comcast.net
34 Comments:
Yes, we should continue to allow regulated digital signs. I feel the current regulations are adequate (for
the time being.) I don't think continued use of digital signs would detract from our city. As for "design
criteria for pole signs", design criteria that addresses safety is certainly reasonable. Other "criteria"
would need to be considered on an individual basis.
Name: Lynn Courtney
Email: lynnccs@gmail.com
35 Comments:
Why is this even a queston?
There is nothing wrong with them as they are.
I abhorr city employee time consumed by trivial things like this.
Some people will not be happy no matter what you do. They have too much time and money on their
hands.
7
If you want businesses to locate here and provide good paying jobs (rather than the focus of minimum
wage jobs that seems to be prevelant), quit making it difficult for businesses to exist. It is ultimately from
them that the City receives money to function.
If anything, the sign code needs to be less restrictive. It is difficult to find businesses under the existing
regulations. Signs too small and bland to be seen. One color signs in a strip making the signs ineffectual.
Increase money to the City coffers by being a friend to business to create a healthy business
environment, and stop acting as an adversary.
Name: Curtis Shepherd
Email: shepcr3@q.com
36 Comments:
1. They are too bright, waste electricity and lack character.
2. Make them smaller or non-existant.
3. Yes, more restrictive regulations.
4. They do not have a genuine feel and thus do not add to the beauty of FC.
5. Yes.
Thank you!
Name: David Bernoudy
Email: sbernoudy@openapproach.com
37 Comments:
By and large, I think the COFC has done a good job with getting the sign code to where it is. I think the
existing digital/LED signs are very acceptable and I do not believe there should be any further changes
or requirements. I don't think we need any further changes in the sign code, as they have become as
neutral as I would care to see them. The intent of a sign is to give directions, and/or to advertise. They
are there for a reason.
Name: John Howe
Email: johnhowe@schraderoil.com
38 Comments:
I think they are distracting and unattractive.
Continue current regulations
No more allowances
Current use is not a plus for community appearance
Yes. Only low monument signs should be allowed.
Name: Anne Messner
Email: ampwray2@msn.com
39
Comments:
I really like the larger Digital Information signs. As an example, the one set up on Horsetooth Road east
of college avenue gives the driver ample time to change lanes before having to stop at the sign itself and
impeding traffic due to a blocked lane. And the larger lane arrows really help me a lot too. I am in favor of
the larger Digital Traffic Signs.
Name: Ron Vail
Email: rgv1947@gmail.com
40 Comments:
City of Fort Collins staff and Council members,
8
Digital signs provide a great service to the City of Fort Collins residents. Gas prices, time and
temperature, City bus schedules, retail advertising, church meeting times, and important information for
schools,such as times for PTO meetings. High School scoreboards for football, soccer and other sports
are some of the biggest users of this technology, not to mention Hughes Stadium and Moby Gym .
Interior uses are numerous as well, the Lincoln Center, movie theatres, and other uses provide real time
up to date messages.
The restrictions on digital signs are many already, only 50% of the entire display maximum, regulated to
color other than red, dimming software reduces the brightness at night. Height and setback are also very
regulated .
Most other cities, including Boulder, Colorado Springs, Loveland, Thornton and Greeley have or are in
the process of decreasing the regulation for this type of sign, not increasing the regulations.
Organizations who use these type of signs provide valuable real time information, many of these signs
are much more attractive than the mechanical readerboard style.
The use of digital signs decreases the need for banners which can be very unsightly to the eye.
In addition, the city just reworked the sign code very recently and any change in this area will put an
additional heavy burden on businesses or organizations who recently purchased these.
Sincerely,
John J. Shaw - President
DaVinci Sign Systems, Inc
Name: John J. Shaw
Email: john@davincisign.com
41 Comments:
I find digital signs around town to be very appropriate, generally well maintained and informative. If
anything, it would seem the City has made much ado about nothing in regard to its sign codes. While I
am not a business owner or have any connections to any business that does have a sign, I do take great
interest in supporting small business. Large and multinational corporations are able to overcompensate
for restrictive codes such as those our City has adopted, while it seems independents find it increasingly
difficult match those resources while also battling bureaucrats with little or no appreciation for the
challenges of making our community unique.
Rather than imposing more arbitrary constraints with minimal impact to our quality of life, let's embrace a
more business-friendly atmosphere by relaxing the sign code.
Name: Joe Rowan
Email: olelauren@comcast.net
42 Comments:
As an owner of Whistle Clean Car Wash and having paid $27,000. for our digital sign which conforms to
your sign code and for which we are highly dependent;I want to vehemently oppose any further
restrictions on the use of digital signs. We also use the sign for public service announcements for non
profits. It is really our primary method of communicating with our market. We are already suffering
financially and can't take another hit.
Paul Heffron
Name: J. Paul Heffron
Email: jpheffron@comcast.net
43 Comments:
9
I am not a fan of digital signs but we have current regulations, and if people are in compliance, the signs
should be considered acceptable.
I believe that there are more pressing issues that the city should be focusing on. Live with the current
guidelines, don't waste time or money with the issue.
Name: Cathy Norman
Email: rcnorman11@gmail.com
44 Comments:
1. Digital signs that include advanced animations and are basically large television screens are extremely
distracting to drivers and dangerous to everyone else. Signs that use a wide range of colors and change
in rapid succession can also cause problems for viewers. I think the majority of digital signs are
respectfully built, but the ones that aren't create a serious issue.
2. I think digital signage can provide a great value to business and an extra level of convenience to
potential customers. These signs should be allowed and strictly regulated.
3. I think as advanced building technologies for signs develop there will have to be additional regulations
on how they are used. For example, if there is no regulation for active 3D signs, how long will viewers
have to watch products and taglines jump at them before it is regulated properly. How far out of 3D signs
should objects be able to appear to protrude? Currently I think an additional regulation to digital signs
could be a rule addressing proximity to the business it represents. If business are using digital signage to
convey an immediate and changing message to customers, I believe they should have to do it with some
close proximity to their business.
4. I think imposing a specific set of regulations will have a positive impact on community appearance.
Simply by keeping consumers, drivers and pedestrians from being distracted, unpleasantly surprised, or
confused by new signage.
5. I believe that if pole criteria were implemented it would be more difficult for businesses to create
outdoor signage simply in terms of affordability. I also think current pole signs should be grandfathered in
to any against any new regulations.
Name: Chris Lenfert
Email: chris@lenfertdesign.com
45 Comments:
I like the digital signs just as the rules allow at this time. They allow for smaller sign area but still reach
our customers. It is imperative that sign code recognizes we are in business to attract customers. I still
would be interested in who and how many complaints were received regarding LED signs. From our
perspective, we have continued to be caused to reduce our sign advertising area through the years. I do
not support additional sign restrictions beyond current code, not in any fashion. Let's leave the code
alone. Every time the code is changed, it costs we the taxpayers and businesses more money that we
then cannot use to promote our businesses and thus, afford to pay taxes.
Name: Steve Schrader
Email: socsjs@aol.com
46 Comments:
Regarding the use of digital signs in Fort Collins, I feel that there is already an adequate and sufficient
sign code currently in place with the Land Use Code and further regulation is not needed and would only
be a waste of time for our limited city staff resources and tax payer dollars. I am an architect and have
designed several projects within the city and feel that I have a good understanding of the current
standards that are in place. I personally feel that existing digital signs have no relevant impact on the
community appearance.
Name: Ian Shuff, AIA, LEED AP
10
Email: ianshuff@gmail.com
47 Comments:
I like that it can give instant information; change in gas price, temp, time, etc. I dislike the signs that are
associated with FAST FOOD!
I'm ok with regulated signs
I like the current regulations. No scrolling, flashing, bright colors, it's just tacky that way!
I think they have little impact. The current regulations, must continue to be enforced!
NO POLE SIGNS!!!! They are gross, tacky, and cheesy looking! Don't let FTC go down that road,
please!
Name: Jayne
Email: jaynemohar@gmail.com
48 Comments:
I don't mind the digital signs as long as they are small, and NOT RED. Good call. Whatever genius(es)
came up with the idea of no animation desserves credit. Actually, I think all the current regulations are
appropriate, so I don't really mind the signs I see now. And I, too, prefer monument signs.
Name: Anne Berry
Email: aberry1973@gmail.com
49 Comments:
I think digital signs are fine the way they are and should be allowed per current sign code.
Name:
Email:
50 Comments:
They are annoying and distracting. There is nothing I like about them.
Get rid of them.
Appearance - ugly.
#5 - stop being stupid - design criteria - they are poles - leave them alone.
Name: K Neith
Email: kan47@mywdo.com
51 Comments:
1) I have not dislikes about the current digital signs in Fort Collins, I like most of them. Of those I don't
like, my dislike is for the permanent part of the sign, not the digital part.
2)Fort Collins SHOULD allow digital signs and continue to regulate them.
3)NO additional regulation is needed.
4) I think the continued use of digital signs adds to the community appearance. Current signs are
tasteful and the digital sign is a good and progressive manner to deliver information to the public.
5)No additional criteria should be added to the Sign Code.
Name: Mike Brown
Email: mikeabrown@q.com
52 Comments:
11
Why do we have signs? Marketing and advertising or addressing and location? The job of the
government is to protect and serve the people. From this point of view many signage issue can be
brought into prospective.
Marketing and advertising distracts drivers and should be minimized. Digital signs that overly animated,
bright, colorful should be limited.
I think signs should be for addressing and location. Street number should be required and on-par with
largest font on the sign. Should contain business name and/or logo.
For saftey, signs should not be within 0-12' above street/ground level. Blocks view for
cars/bikes/pedestrians. Single-plane monument signs provide a place for criminals to hide and jump out.
V-shaped monuments with angle to street of 30-60 degrees 45 nominal. Low sign also subject to
vandalism and damage from landscaping. However, low signs don't need cherry picker to change.
Using digital technology to display today's price or lunch special are good. I might stop by for a 2:1
special instead of waiting until I get home.
One color makes a sign useless. I think you mean two colors, one foreground color and one background
color. Is that at one time. Can a sign's foreground be green this minute and blue the next minute?
Why restrict red? Seems like the most popular color and a ploy to get rid of signs. If you are going to
restrict colors, restrict any color that is used by construction or emergency vehicle/signs.
Should also apply to the city -- no more multi-color flashing "your speed is" signs. I've heard teens like to
"play" with this signs.
How much power do digital signs use? Where is the cost/environment trade-off?
What about signs in store windows that are visible from the street?
In general, I think some digital signs are good, others are bad, but the difference is so subjective that any
law would be too harsh or too lenient. So let's error on the side of freedom, not Nazism. Maybe allow
the petition process to be used to deem a sign a public nuisance and allow one year for the nuisance to
be resolved.
Name: Michael Pruznick
Email: mikepruz@comcast.net
53 Comments:
Based on my experience of having recently relocated here from Colorado Springs, I find the signage in
Fort Collins to be well regulated and tasteful. As I understand it, Colorado Springs is in the process of
moving toward more attractive digital signage similar to that typical in Fort Collins. When I attended the
first meeting regarding this issue, there were several very logical reasons enumerated as to why there
should not be any additional changes to the sign codes, including; cost, negative impact on current
landlords and their tenant/lease contracts, relatively recent 2006 update to the sign code (which many
businesses are still experiencing expenses related to those changes) and the challenging business
environment currently facing our business citizens.
The unknown proponent for possible change, "Some in the community" needs to be better defined and
identified to see if that represents enough constituents to require signficant City resources to be utilized
to research and "address" this issue.
I certainly think the City has more important priorities and needs to be cognizant of the possibility of
being perceived as "unfriendly" to small business. Given the economic times, we need to be promoting
12
job growth and commerce while balancing quality of life and our environment. Based on what I see in
the City, the current sign code achieves those goals.
Name: Doug Woods
Email: dwoods@cwnbank.com
54 Comments:
you have withheld the most important question - cost impact on the taxpayer - how many additional city
emplyees will end up on the payroll as a result?
Name: taxpayer
Email: taxpayer@gmail.com
54 Comments:
I feel the digital signs have added a positive, creative, informational, Community awareness programs
and a professional touch to our city streets. As these companies are rewarded with higher customer
volume ...dosent that mean the city could financially benefit as well?
Upon purchasing these signs we have to meet sign codes, guidelines for placement, use only specific
colors, as well as the overall timed verbage/content of the sign as well as your approval. The regulations
that will take effect in 2013...majority of the new digital signs recently placed are following the 2013
regulations already with minimal to no complaints.
Why is brining our city up to date in technology so wrong? We cannot continue to strive in this
Community by not being able to modernize!! Technology is constantly changing as is our
Community...Fort Collis is a fast paced, young innovative College Community...Isn't growth a good thing
for the expansion and future of Fort Collins?
No one has been able to verbalize who is objecting to a more modern professional look to our city
streets...why is that? Are we protecting a specific group or person of affulence in this town? These signs
are not cheap, as a company makes the decision to have a digital sign installed we have to consider
many different aspects...One that we certainly did not ever consider was the possiblility of losing the
$$$$$ on our investment.
In the event you "decide" to have these signs removed, some of the smaller business groups could
potentially have a loss so great that it could put them out of business....over a SIGN! Now thats criminal!
Name:
Email: wilsonl@turningpnt.org
55 Comments:
It is ridiculous to have so many rules. You nickel and dime small businesses to death by demanding all
these specifications. All these regulations do is encourage the obnoxious, hazardous, and annoying
people standing on street corners like hobos with big advertisement boards for businesses that can't
afford to put the right color sign up on their property. Just let businesses advertise with stationary signs
so a bunch of meth addicts are no longer littering our street corners dancing and dangerously waving
signs in your face. It is so ugly and distracting, I hate driving to work in this town because I know I'll
always be harassed by some weirdo shaking their butt at me to advertise something I wish I could have
just read about on a red sign flashing at me every 25 seconds, at least it wouldn't risk stepping off the
sidewalk in front of my car. I’ve lived in cities all over America and the stupid rules about signs
this city has are inconvenient for businesses and consumers and ensure only that Fort Collins will always
show its true colors as a backwater cow town. Couldn’t we just bring this city into the 21st
century so we can make a name in northern Colorado as a sophisticated city? At this point Loveland has
better commerce and places to shop than Fort Collins, maybe it is time to realize that the city’s
stupid rules have something to do with the fact that we could be as fun as a city like Austin but never will
be because we deny progress and change at every turn.
Name: Daisy Miller
Email: ddaisymiller@gmail.com
56 Comments:
13
When you say "Some in the community have expressed comcern about digital display boards" I guess I
would like to know more about the sum of some. "Some" doesn't register as a substantial number with
me in a population of 140,000. The digital signs in Fort Collins are antiquated compared to the TV signs
lined up along I-25. I have a $30,000 investment in the digital sign at Richie's and to make us change
colors is hard enough. Now you want imput on whether they should be banned altogether? Does the
public really understand what it takes to stay in business these days? We have to be able to expose our
businesses to the public if we are to succeed.
Richie Frank
Richie's Express Carwash
57 Comments:
1) I like the use of electronic digital signs in Fort Collins. It makes the city business friendly and makes it
feel like the city is alive with activity.
2) Yes, the city should continue to allow for digital signs.
3) The sign regulations should be loosened to allow for full color LED signs.
4) Continued use of digital signs would benefit Ft Collins and the community.
5) I don't think we need to add additional design criteria for pole signs.
I would like to see the sign regulations loosened to allow more than 4 colors. The technology with
electronic signs keeps advancing and you can now get full color electronic signs for about the same price
as monochrome signs. I would like the standard loosened so that full color is allowed. We own a full
color sign, but are only allowed to use amber, green, blue, or white color. Why only these colors? It's like
having a color TV, but only being able to have one color displayed at a time. Full color would allow
companies to display their company logo or other graphics that contain other colors besides these 4. I
would like to display the colors of the US Flag on our sign on the 4th of July, but can't, because it is more
than one color and has red in it. It seems like the code was written at a time when there were only
monochrome electronic signs available. The resolution on full colored signs are also getting a lot better.
Let's get the code updated to accept the current sign technology that is available to businesses.
In regards to the brightness of the signs at night. If the city sees a sign that is too bright, they can notify
the owner to make sure their sign's dimming function is working. Current electronic signs all have
dimming software that can be easily adjusted if they are too bright.
Name: Greg Richard
Email: gregrichard@summitview.com
58 Comments:
Digital signs should be prohibited outright because they are a dangerous distraction to drivers. They are
also unsightly.
Name: Tim Sagen
Email: tsagen@juno.com
59 Comments:
I think the city code for digital signs is just fine the way it is. I think there should be more time spent on
looking at all the trees that are blocking street signs and causing traffic hazards. There are also a lot of
street corners that are blocked because of trees and shrubs and you have to pull out into the street
before you can see if it is safe to pull out onto the street.
Name: Leo Braun
Email: lbman22000@yahoo.com
60 Comments:
14
Simple, one or two lines are OK but large multi line, signs are too attractive to the eye and therefore
dangerous distractions for drivers. Large bill board type signs, with changing messages are extremely
dangerous and should be banned. Keep driver distraction down, it's bad enough with cell phones.
Name: Doug Moench
Email: effrider@frii.com
61 Comments:
Just passing by and I saw the current issues.. Why the hell are we wasting money on these too lame to
be a joke issues? Raising issues about SIGNS? Of all the tiny things that don't matter... What's next, the
font on signs? Do people forget that this is America and it's not our jobs to try to control every persons
tiny action? Seriously, people are trying to control the style of SIGNS put up by others???
How about you do something about all the homeless in old town? Or maybe get rid of that annoying turn
arrow to get to petsmart? Perhaps repeal that impossible "don't get within x amount of feet of a bike rider,
even though the lanes aren't even X wide!" Perhaps repaint that dangerous pinch of a bike lane north on
shields right past drake.. Or better yet, cut back on waste by cutting votes and discussions ABOUT
SIGNS.
This is the stupidest government issue I've seen in my life. I can see all the meeting at town hall wasted
on this. The web designers paid to add this to the site. The people paid to read these emails and the
costs of future ballots. /sigh
Name:
Email:
62 Comments:
The digital parts of the signs are great- the pole-style signs, however, are unattractive and remind me of
nearly abandoned mid-kansas towns from years past.
Digital signs are a thing of the future, and are still more attractive than the manually changed "letter
signs" (for lack of a better term.) Pole signs should be required to be shorter, to avoid "height wars" and
should be required to be closer to the buildings they advertise.
Name: Shaun Salyards
Email: shaun.salyards@gmail.com
63 Comments:
It was great to see in the Coloradoan today, a huge artical about the PRO SIGN SHAKER!!! If the City
manager is so concerned with digital signs, where does he stand on the Sign shakers at every corner.
Darren saw a sign at the corner of harmony & boardwalk and he didn't like it so now he wants them all
gone! And he is telling us the community is concerned, LIE!If the community is sooooo concerned, why
were there only 3 citizens at the community meeting regarding these terrible signs that are such a
detriment to our safty and community. REALLY!!Once again our city government hard at work! How
much time each day does our city mamagement sit around trying to figure out new ways to suppress
local businesses. Fort Collins is the only town on the front range considering this ban, this is the biggest
waste on time, why don't you guys spent more time attempting to get the expense numbers on the
Mason Sreet Corridor even close to realistic! $500,000 for the buses, OOPS, sorry it's really $2,500,000
dollars, laughable!! Keep up the good work, hopefully Darrin will continue to recieve those 8% raises
every year,and hire all his buddies, while the hard working, tax paying business owners in this town
continue to get the shaft!
Name: Todd Heenan
Email: todd@ftcclub.net
64 Comments:
I like the digital signs in our area. They are much more attractive than the ones that use individual letters
to change their message. I love the ones on I-25 around the outlet malls.
YES YES YES - Do not prohibit them outright they are a great resource of information for the consumer
and the retailer.
15
NO - we over-regulate as it is.
Our sign code detracts the potential these signs have...it's a great example of having multiple tools but
only using one or two out of the group. Let the merchants/owners use these signs as they were
intended. The older signs that are in compliance are not attractive. At least digital signage can be
altered and changed with the message being delivered, tenancy of the property and event seasons. It's
a benefit to have that option. I do not see anything ugly or unsafe about the digital signs. They do not
distract me from driving.
If the city is going to regulate the number of trees and whether or not a merchant can trim the trees then
we also need to allow for the building owner the potential to increase the sign height so that the sign can
be viewed.
Name: Joan Chase
Email: joan@realtec.com
65 Comments:
1. I like the digital signs becuase they provide quick and up-to-date information such as time and temp or
informs me of a business that I previously may have been unaware of.
2. Continue to allow
3. I think the current regulations seem all encompassing and do not see the need for additional
regulation.
4. The use of these signs (as currently regulated) is a benefit to the community and the businesses of
this community.
5. There already is criteria for pole signs (no more than 18 ft. etc. and gross area). I'm not sure the
wording of the question is completely fair.
Thanks for providing this place for residents to express their opinions.
Name: Nate Heckel
Email: nheckel@realtec.com
66. Comments:
1. Current signs are fine and likely over-regulated.
2. Continue to allow for digital signs.
3. NONE
4. No impact upon community appearance now and in the future.
5. NO.
Name: Bob Vomaske
Email: bob.vomaske@vistasolutions.net
67. Comments:
Busineses are under enough pressure without having to deal with another change in regulations that
might increase their overhead. I think the current code is adequate and do not see a reson for a change
at this time.
Name: Mark Bradley
Email:
68. Comments:
I like the information found on digital signs.
They are flexible and not a distraction. I think we have enough regulations around them. They are nuetral
in impact to the community appearance in my opinion.
I don't see any new for new pole sign regulations.
Name: Peter Kast
Email: pkast@realtec.com
69. Comments:
16
17
Houska Automotive has had a digital sign for 2 years. Over the past two years we have been able to
inform passersby the time and temp, services we perform and upcoming community events. It has also
been a way for us to show what affiliations we have such as AAA and ASE, which some consumers are
interested in when getting their vehicle repaired. In the past year Houska Automotive has become a
Goodyear, Michelin and BF Goodrich Tire dealer. By using our digital sign to promote tires, we have
increased our tire sales over 3 times what they were before the sign. Houska Automotive and the
Houska Family are big supporters of giving back to the community. This sign has help promote our
different events, such as the Houska Houska 5k race. The race alone has raised almost $54,000 over
the past two years to support the bone marrow registry and PV Cancer Center. We also had over 110
people get on the bone marrow registry since our sign was installed, which actually saves lives. Other
events Houska Automotive promotes are the Halloween blood drive and two free women’s car care
clinics. For both events the main advertising is our digital sign.
If the rules are changed for these digital signs the impact would not be isolated to the cost we had to pay
for the sign to be built and installed but also the revenue lost from promoting our products and services.
Also the community would lose if we cannot advertise our charity events. With less awareness we raise
less money which directly benefits the residents of our community.
Name: LJ Houska
Email: lj@houskaautomotive.com
70. Comments:
I think our current sign code, in regards to digital signs should be left alone. Several businesses that I
have talked to really benefit from the advertising on their signs, which in turn increases the sales tax they
pay to the City. The are appropriately regulated now and I feel further restrictions or prohibiting them all
together does not demonstrate a business-friendly community.
I don't feel that the digital signs, as they are currently, are distracting. The corner sign wavers however
are.
My guess is that monument signs tend to be much more expensive than pole signs. We can't force
every business into the most expensive methods of promoting their business. We need to keep some
choices in the ordinance.
Name: Jackie O'Hara
Email: jackie@jetmarketing.net
ATTACHMENT 8
City Allowed? % of Sign Face
Animation, Blinking,
Flashing, Scrolling
Dimming
Software
Color Regulation Frequency of Change
Any Study or
Potential Changes?
Other
Ann Arbor, MI Yes; gas signs only. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No Admitted need for sign code overhaul, but it is very low priority.
Arvada, CO
Yes; not allowed in Olde
Town
Depends of pixel spacing. For signs using more
than 25mm pixel spacing, 33%. Between 20‐25
mm spacing, 66%. 20mm pixel spacing or less,
100%
No ‐ changes only
allowed through
dissolve or fade
transitions not to
exceed 1 second
Yes No 8 seconds No
Updated June 14, 2011. Lighting can not exceed 600 nits (candelas per square meter)
between sunset and sunrise; can not exceed 5,000 nits between sunrise and sunset.
Berkeley, CA
Yes; except if located
across from residential
zone
No more than 8 sq ft No No
No ‐ try to avoid
red
60 seconds No 2009 updated overall sign code, but didn't change electric portion.
Boulder, CO Yes
Subject to same area limitations as other non‐
electronic signs
No No No 60 seconds No
Some citizens have complained about EMC's, that they're obnoxious, but there are no
changes planned.
Colorado Springs,
CO
Yes No more than 5 characters No No No
24 hours for text on gas
signs; time, temp. and
date are excluded.
Yes
Currently re‐writing sign code, anticipated completion by end of 2011. The City is being
pressured from sign companies and businesses wanting to embrace the new technology, and
their new code will likey allow and further regulate digital signs.
Eugene, OR
Yes; public agencies are
exempt
3 sq feet in area, nothing more than 5
characters
No No No 3 seconds No Have chosen to leave the signs prohibitive because of the complexity involved in regulating.
Fort Collins, CO Yes 50% No Yes
Yes; blue, green,
amber, white,
monochrome
DATE: August 9, 2011
STAFF: Kathleen Bracke
Aaron Iverson
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Jefferson Street Project Update.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jefferson Street/SH14 Alternatives Analysis Study is a joint effort of the City of Fort Collins,
the Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and the Colorado Department of Transportation
(CDOT). The project team is supported by Atkins consultants. This Alternatives Analysis Study
includes the development and evaluation of a thorough set of design options for the Jefferson
Street/SH14 corridor, including the intersection of Jefferson/SH14 and Mountain/Lincoln Avenue,
and the intersection of Jefferson and Linden streets.
The purpose of the Jefferson Street project is to improve the air quality, livability, and urban
character of the Jefferson Street Corridor while enhancing the experience for pedestrians, bikes, and
transit and maintaining mobility of autos and trucks. The corridor begins at College Avenue and
extends along Jefferson Street and includes the Mountain Avenue/Riverside Avenue/Lincoln Street,
and Linden Street intersections.
This project process includes the development and evaluation of many options such as traditional
roadway and intersection designs, roundabouts, and other innovative, context-sensitive design
solutions based upon local, state, and national best-practices. Implementation of the Jefferson
Street improvements can move forward beginning in 2011, based upon approval of the Corridor plan
by City Council, Downtown Development Authority, and CDOT. The schedule for construction of
the Jefferson Street Corridor improvements will be based upon the approved preferred alternative
and implementation/phasing plan as well as the available budget. The goal is to complete the initial
improvements within the 2011-13 time frame.
The purpose of this City Council work session is to present a project status update, share the draft
alternatives and findings from the alternatives analysis process, and share feedback received to date
from project partners and the community.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Staff is requesting input from City Council regarding the Jefferson Street project, in particular to
provide input on the corridor and intersection alternatives as well as next steps for the project
process.
August 9, 2011 Page 2
1. Which of the Jefferson Street corridor and intersection alternatives does City Council prefer?
2. Is there additional information that City Council would like to see regarding the Jefferson
Street project?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis project began in May 2010. This current project builds
upon prior studies along the Jefferson Street/SH14 corridor and provides more in-depth, detailed
technical analysis and design to address City, DDA, and CDOT requirements. This project has
several purposes, including finding the most suitable solution to improve the air quality, livability,
and urban character of the Jefferson Street corridor, enhancing the experience for pedestrians, bikes,
and transit, and maintaining mobility of autos and trucks along this busy arterial/highway road. The
project seeks to balance interests among different agencies and organizations, including the City,
CDOT, DDA, Colorado Motor Carriers Association, Larimer County, adjacent railroads, local
business/property owners, and the general public. Please see Attachment 1 for a map of the project
area.
The Jefferson Street project budget is comprised of a combination of City ($250,000), DDA
($500,000), and federal Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) funding ($1 million). The
Alternatives Analysis study used approximately $400,000 of the project budget. The majority of
the project budget ($1.35 million) will be used to fund implementation of the improvements as
determined by the study recommendation(s).
Through Project Management Team and Executive Oversight Committee meetings, the participating
agencies have agreed to the following purpose statement that highlights the key goals for the project:
The purpose of the Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis project is to
improve the air quality, livability, and urban character of the Jefferson Street
Corridor while enhancing the experience for pedestrians, bikes, and transit
and maintaining mobility of autos and trucks. The Corridor begins at
College Avenue and extends along Jefferson Street and includes the
Mountain Avenue/Riverside Avenue/Lincoln Street, and Linden Street
intersections.
Corridor Alternatives
The Project Team has developed a set of conceptual alternatives for the Jefferson Street corridor
project to address the project purpose, goals, and objectives. The cost estimates for all of the
alternatives are similar at approximately $2.4 million, which can be phased depending on available
funds.
• The corridor alternatives include several “3 lane” options for Jefferson Street between North
College Avenue and Mountain Avenue. The “3 lane” Options A and B includes raised,
landscaped medians. Option A includes a raised landscaped median along the full length of
the corridor, with openings at the Jefferson/Linden intersection. Option B shows partial
medians along the corridor with more openings at streets such as at Pine and Chestnut
August 9, 2011 Page 3
streets, as well as at major driveways. The “3 lane” Option C includes designated on-street
bicycle lanes instead of the medians (both the medians and bikelanes do not fit within the
available corridor width). All of the “3 lane” options include two travel lanes in the
northwest bound direction and one travel lane in the southeast bound direction. The
determination for which direction has the two lanes versus the one lane was made based on
traffic analysis as well as the need to maximize on-street parking opportunities along the
“Old Town” side of Jefferson Street. The “3 lane” options include streetscape, urban design,
and gateway improvements along the corridor and at the intersections. In addition, the 3
lane options allow for more functional on-street parking because there is enough width to
provide a safety buffer area between the parked cars and the vehicle travel lanes. The 3 lane
options also allow for opportunities to improve the transit stops along Jefferson.
• The project team has developed a “4 lane” option which shows two lanes in each direction
on Jefferson Street between North College and Mountain Avenue. Due to the width required
for standard travel lanes, there is limited space remaining for other project elements such as
on-street parking, buffer areas, medians, transit stops, and/or streetscape improvements.
• The team has also provided a combination “3 and 4 lane” option that includes 3 lanes
between North College Avenue and Linden Street and then shows the 4 lane option between
Linden and Mountain.
Table 1: Summary Overview of Corridor Alternatives
Alternative Lanes Medians Bike
Lanes Parking
Streetscape
Areas
3 Lane Alternative -
Option A Full Median 3
Yes
Full Corridor No
36-38
Spaces
Median,
Sidewalk
3 Lane Alternative -
Option B Partial Median 3
Yes
Partial Corridor No
36-38
Spaces
Median,
Sidewalk
3 Lane Alternative -
Option C Bike Lanes 3 No Yes 33 Spaces Sidewalk
4 Lane Alternative 4 No No 38 Spaces Sidewalk
Combination
3 and 4 Lane Alternative 3/4
Yes
Partial Corridor Yes 38 Spaces
Median,
Sidewalk
Intersection Alternatives
The project team has also developed two alternatives for both the Jefferson/Linden intersection and
the Jefferson/Mountain intersection.
• Jefferson/Linden intersection options include keeping the existing designated left turn lanes
for vehicles to turn left off of Jefferson Street to Linden Street as well as an option that
would remove the left turn lanes to create more opportunities for on-street parking and
provide raised medians to serve as pedestrian refuge islands at the intersection.
• Jefferson/Mountain/Lincoln/Riverside intersection options include improvements to the
existing signalized intersection as well as a new roundabout intersection alternative.
August 9, 2011 Page 4
Table 2: Jefferson / Lincoln Intersection Alternatives Overview
Alternative Cost
Operating /
Maintenance
Cost
Level
of
Service
Air Quality
Savings
(Carbon Monoxide)
Right-of-
Way
Signalized $1.4
million
$3,600 per year
for signals B
No Change from
Existing 2,000 sq. ft.
Roundabout $2.6
million
Depends on cost
of RR gate arm B
495 KG/yr - Short
Term
809 KG/yr - Long
Term
6,000 sq. ft.
Please see Attachment 2 for details of the various corridor and intersection alternatives.
Project Team Recommendations To-Date
The project team is now in the evaluation phase of the project which includes analyzing and
screening the various alternatives for the Jefferson Street corridor as well as the Jefferson/Linden
and the Jefferson/Mountain intersections.
Based on the technical analysis as well as community outreach efforts to-date, the project team is
leaning toward the “3 lane” corridor option with the raised landscaped median due to the multiple
benefits in achieving the project’s many diverse goals. Even though it does not include designated
bicycle lanes, cyclists can still ride the corridor by taking the lane or travel through the area on one
of the less busy streets such as Walnut or Willow streets.
Regarding the Jefferson/Linden intersection alternatives, the team’s preference is to keep the
designated left turn lanes open for drivers to turn off of Jefferson on to Linden Street. These turning
movements are important to support the local businesses along Linden Street and assist with
downtown circulation patterns.
The project team is still in progress with the analysis of the Jefferson/Mountain intersection
alternatives. Both options offer advantages and disadvantages to achieving the project goals. This
intersection provides an opportunity for multimodal transportation improvements as well as urban
design and gateway features to welcome people traveling by all of modes of transportation into the
Downtown and River District areas. Community feedback on these two alternatives is very
important, particularly given the general interests and concerns about roundabouts as well as the
specific challenges for this location given the proximity to the Union Pacific (UP) rail tracks.
The results of the technical intersection analysis to-date are provided in Attachment 3. The team
is also very interested in community feedback on this element of the project.
Community Outreach and Next Steps
The project team is in the process of presenting the initial findings and draft recommendations to
the community, boards and commissions, and City Council to gather feedback from the project
stakeholders through August. Please see Attachment 4 for a summary of the comments received
from the City’s Transportation Board, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Planning and Zoning Board,
August 9, 2011 Page 5
and the Downtown Development Authority. Attachment 5 provides a summary of the public
comments received from the project open house in June as well as individual meetings with
business/property owners and residents.
City staff has been working extensively with representatives of CDOT and the Union Pacific
Railroad throughout the Jefferson Street project as well. Attachments 6 and 7 provide letters from
CDOT and the UP railroad regarding the Jefferson Street project. Based on discussions among the
project team, CDOT will be seeking an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City regarding
any changes to Jefferson Street/SH14. The details of the IGA will be developed through interagency
collaboration and presented to Council and CDOT for review and approval as part of the Jefferson
Street approval process.
Based on the technical analysis and stakeholder input, the project team will develop and present a
recommended preferred alternative for the Jefferson Street corridor for approval by the City Council,
Downtown Development Authority, and CDOT by November.
The Jefferson Street study will also include the development of a proposed implementation phasing
plan. The implementation plan will propose timelines for construction of improvements funded by
the existing project budget as well as identification of potential financing strategies for any
additional funds needed to complete the preferred alternative for the corridor. The phasing and
implementation plan, along with the proposed funding strategies, will be developed by the project
team and presented to the community and agency partners as part of the project outreach efforts in
September–October 2011.
Project Schedule and Milestones
May-Fall 2010 (Completed)
• Organized project start-up, team formation, project initiation tasks
• Conducted Multi-agency Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT)
analysis
• Developed Purpose Statement, Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and initial Evaluation Criteria
• Developed Existing Conditions Report
Fall-Winter 2010-11 (Completed)
• Reviewed and refined evaluation criteria
• Gained consensus among agency partners on future traffic projections methodology
• Conducted No-Action Alternative operational analysis
• Began development of conceptual alternatives
• Conducted Alternative development and analysis workshops
• Commenced Alternative screening process
Spring–Fall 2011 (In progress)
• Develop alternatives, complete evaluation and draft recommendations (March–August)
• Develop draft implementation plan and finance strategy (September-October)
• Conduct Public Open House events (June and September)
August 9, 2011 Page 6
• Present Project Updates to the Downtown Development Authority (June and September)
• Present Project Updates to Bicycle Advisory Committee and Transportation Board
(June/July and September)
• Present Project Update to Planning and Zoning Board work sessions (July and September)
• Provide additional updates to City Council based upon input received from the August 9
Work Session as well as continued outreach to the community, boards, property/business
owners, residents, and project stakeholders.
• Once the project team has completed the draft Jefferson Street Study report and incorporated
feedback received from project partners and community stakeholders, including City
Council and boards and commissions, staff will schedule this item for a regular City Council
meeting in November to request approval of the Jefferson Street Study report, including the
recommended preferred alternative, implementation/phasing plan, and finance strategy.
• Public outreach will continue via website, e-newsletters, small group meetings, public open
house events, and presentations to City Council, Transportation Board, Planning and Zoning
Board, and Downtown Development Authority.
• Continued meeting of the Project Management Team, Technical Advisory Committee, and
Executive Oversight Committee.
Implementation of the Jefferson Street improvements can move forward beginning in 2011 based
upon approval of the Corridor plan. The schedule for construction of the Jefferson Street Corridor
improvements will be based upon the approved preferred alternative and implementation/phasing
plan as well as the available budget. The goal is to complete the initial improvements within the
2011-13 timeframe. Staff will continue to provide updates to City Council at key milestones
throughout the project.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of Jefferson Street project area
2; Corridor Alternatives
3. Intersection Analysis Summary
4. Summary of Board Comments
- Transportation Board/Bicycle Advisory Committee
- Planning and Zoning Board
- Downtown Development Authority Board of Directors
5. Summary of Public Comments
6. Colorado Department of Transportation Letter
7. Union Pacific Railroad Letter
8. Powerpoint presentation
Transportation Planning & Special Projects
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.224.6058
970.221.6239 - fax
fcgov.com/transportation
1
Planning, Development & Transportation
Attachment 1: Map of Jefferson Street Project
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
Corridor Alternatives Summary
Existing
3 Lane Alternative: Option A - Full Median
Option B - Partial Median
- 4 Lane Alternative
3 Lane Alternative: Option C - Bike Lanes - Combination 3 and 4 Lane Alternative
1
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
2
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
3
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
4
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
5
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
6
Attachment 2: Corridor Alternatives
7
Attachment 3: Intersection Analysis Summary
1
Signalized Intersection Roundabout Intersection
• Construction Cost Estimate = $1.4 million
• Operating Cost Estimate = $3,600 per year for signal*
• May require Public Utilities Commission application if signals are
moved
• Overall LOS B (16.4 seconds of delay)
• Air Quality Savings = n/a (same as existing conditions)
• May require approximately 2,000 square feet (0.046 acres) of
Right‐of‐Way
• Compatible with proposed corridor alternative
• Construction Cost Estimate = $2.6 million
• Operating Cost Estimate = depends on additional RR equipment*
• Will require Public Utilities Commission application
• Overall LOS B (13 seconds of delay)
• Air Quality Savings = 495 KG/yr short term reduction and 809
KG/yr long term reduction
• May require approximately 6,000 square feet (0.138 acres) of
Right‐of‐Way
• Compatible with proposed corridor alternative, allows for easy
turnarounds with raised medians
Bicycle and Pedestrian Operations Bicycle and Pedestrian Operations
Truck Operations Truck Operations
Layout Layout
*Maintenance cost is expected to be similar for both alternatives
Transportation Planning & Special Projects
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.224.6058
970.221.6239 - fax
fcgov.com/transportation
Planning, Development & Transportation
Attachment 4a: Summary of Board Comments
Transportation Board/Bicycle Advisory Committee
June 15th Transportation Board ‐ Work Session (Draft Notes)
C. Jefferson Street Project Update – Kathleen Bracke
Project Boundary: Jefferson Street between College and Mountain.
Project Partners: City of Fort Collins (City), Downtown Development Authority (DDA), Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT).
Schedule: Spring 2010 – Summer 2011
Funding: $1.75 million (Federal [CMAQ], Local, DDA)
History of Project: Downtown River District Plan 2008 – Linden Street is underway now.
Alternatives Analysis Process:
Design options & evaluation
Street & intersection alternatives
Urban design
Context sensitive solutions
Deliverables:
Preferred alternative
Implementation phasing plan & finance strategies
Project Purpose: The purpose of the Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis project is to improve the air
quality, livability, and urban character of the Jefferson Street Corridor while enhancing the experience
for pedestrians, bikes, and transit and maintaining mobility for autos and trucks.
Traffic congestion is not a primary issue for the project.
Conditions: 12,300 – 13,200 vehicles per day. 2035 forecast: 17,200 – 18,600 vpd. Intersection Level of
Service “B” or better (existing & 2035); On-street parking spaces: 53 existing (sub-standard, very
narrow due to width of travel lanes); future varies by alternative from 36 – 48, but they will be more
usable. There is a speeding problem on Jefferson. Lowering the speed limit is not easy to do without
changing the character of the street.
Alternatives range from 2-lane to 4-lane options. Fatal flaws include need for on-street parking; do not
drop level of service (LOS) more than one level; no major property impacts. Current alternatives include
3-lane options with/without medians & bike lanes; 4-lane option; combination 3/4 lane option. Existing
conditions are not good for people crossing and transitioning into and out of downtown.
3-Lane with Full Median – one lane southbound, two northbound. A buffer is built in to allow for easier
parallel parking; raised landscaped median creates a pedestrian refuge and visual interest along the
corridor as well as access management for increased safety and mobility through the corridor. On-street
parking is particularly important on the downtown side of Jefferson. The River District side of Jefferson
has off-street parking available. Intersection improvements include enhanced crosswalks.
1
2
3-Lane with Partial Median – allows access to more driveway entrances than with the full median;
features are similar to Full Median option.
3-Lane with Bike Lanes – there is not enough width for both bike lanes and medians. Alternative routes
in the area are being considered (Willow, Walnut, alleys, etc.). Some cyclists feel comfortable riding
Jefferson and take the travel lane. Others do not.
Skutchan: What is the trade-off between bike lanes versus raised medians and the impact on pedestrian
traffic?
Bracke: The raised medians do more to calm traffic and do more to help the pedestrian environment and
improve the visual character along Jefferson. Cyclists do need to cross Jefferson, especially at Linden.
Miller: Is there data that supports the increased safety of bike lanes/raised medians? Does it encourage
J-walking?
Bracke: It comes down to the time a pedestrian is exposed to traffic. A raised island provides a safer
refuge. There is data supporting the improved safety of only having to cross one direction of traffic at a
time.
Miller: Can the light be timed so a left-turning vehicle doesn’t have to stop?
Bracke: That is the progression that Traffic Operations considers on all signalized intersections along
arterial corridors.
Duvall: The demographic of the population (shelters in the area) needs to be considered.
4-Lane – 12-foot travel lanes. There could be inset parking and crosswalks at intersections, but it
doesn’t accomplish traffic calming. Basically, same as existing condition.
Combination 3 / 4 Lane – The alternative is a combination or hybrid alternative with 3 lanes from
College to Linden and 4 lanes from Linden to Mountain.
Proposed Roundabout at Jefferson & Mountain – Recommended from 2008 River District Report.
Being studied in-depth. Roundabouts achieve air quality and safety objectives and handle traffic
capacity well. It also provides a “gateway” entrance to downtown and the River District. Peterson Street
is being considered to become a cul de sac – more public outreach needed on that idea.
Off-Street Parking Options: Potential increase of off street parking spaces at the City-owned lot near
Rodizio Grill and the privately permitted Railroad lot on Linden Street.
Urban Design and Gateway Concepts: Signage, street wayfinding.
Next steps:
Continue individual property/business owner meetings.
Transportation Board & Bicycle Advisory Committee – June
Planning & Zoning Board Work Session – July
City Council Work Session – August
Project Team Meetings
The goal is to build consensus among agencies for Preferred Alternative
Develop Implementation Phasing Plan and Finance Strategies
Frazier: I like the roundabouts around the city, but am concerned about pedestrian safety in them.
Bracke: The raised landscaped medians break up the crossing length making it easier to cross.
Frazier: Trucks going south on College to turn onto Riverside back up past the railroad tracks at times.
Bracke: Overall, the intersection works at a Level of Service “B.” College Avenue has more congestion
than Jefferson/Riverside. Intersection alternatives for that intersection were considered when the North
College Avenue improvements from Riverside to the river were done.
Skutchan: With Mountain being bicycle friendly into this area, did the Bicycle Advisory Committee
express concern about bikes safely using roundabouts?
3
Miller: They said very little about bike safety in roundabouts.
Skutchan: Educating the public is a challenge.
Robert: Why do we have two different names for the same street?
Bracke: There are historical attachments to the names. Riverside was so named because it is located
along the side of the Poudre River. Lincoln was named because of the connection with the old Lincoln
Highway.
You can sign up for a project newsletter at: http://www.fcgov.com/riverdistrict/
July 20th Transportation Board ‐ Regular Meeting (Draft Notes)
B. Jefferson Street Project Update – Kathleen Bracke, Transportation Planning Manager; Aaron
Iverson, Senior Transportation Planner
We have a Council Work Session on August 9 and would like to share the Board’s feedback either as a
memo or as draft minutes.
This is a joint effort between the City, the Downtown Development Authority, and CDOT.
The project is on Jefferson Street from College Avenue to Mountain/Jefferson/Riverside. There have been
many alternatives examined. Outcomes will include a preferred alternative and implementation phasing
plan.
“The purpose of the Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis project is to improve the air quality, livability,
and urban character of the Jefferson Street Corridor while enhancing the experience for pedestrians, bikes,
and transit and maintaining mobility for autos and trucks.”
Currently 12,000 – 13,000 vehicles per day. 2035 forecast 17,200 – 18,600 per day.
Intersection Level of Service “B” or better along Jefferson Street (existing and 2035)
Existing parking spaces: 53 (substandard & very narrow). Future: varies by alternative from 36 – 48.
Existing conditions: four travel lanes, too narrow, not up to current standards. Public feedback says it is a
barrier between Old Town and the River District.
Alternatives:
3-lane with full median
Reallocating one lane for other uses.
Maximizing the on-street parking on the Old Town side of Jefferson Street is a primary goal. The River
District side has parking alternatives available. A buffer area between parking and travel lanes is common
on all alternatives.
Option A: includes raised landscaped medians for a more attractive streetscape, visually enhancing the
corridor and providing access management from a traffic flow perspective, and provide a pedestrian refuge.
Option B: includes partial medians providing some of the benefits as Option A.
Option C: includes on-street bike lanes instead of medians (no room for both).
4-lane alternative
Widens travel lanes to 11 feet. Does not include raised landscaped medians or bike lanes. No on-street
parking on the River District side.
3 and 4-lane alternative: features of both other alternatives.
4
Jefferson/Mountain Lincoln/Riverside intersection alternatives: signalized and roundabout alternatives are
being considered. The roundabout is the recommended alternative from the prior study. It is being
reevaluated.
The Jefferson/Linden intersection is also being evaluated. There are designated turn lanes off of Jefferson.
We considered removing those. It creates a shorter pedestrian crossing distance and increases available on-
street parking. The downside is limiting accessibility along both sides of Linden.
The project team recommendation leans toward the 3-lane alternative with a raised median. The team is
leaning toward keeping the turn lanes on the Jefferson/Linden intersection because of circulation patterns.
Jefferson/Mountain intersection roundabout provides a lower traffic delay compared to a signalized
intersection. Signalized intersection cost $1.4M; Roundabout $2.6M. Roundabout takes up more room. How
the intersection serves the area is a major consideration, as this is a gateway to Old Town. The team has not
reached a recommendation yet.
Off-Street Parking Options in the lot at Rodizio Grill: The project team is looking at options to add a 3rd row
of parking. Option 1 increases by 25 spaces. Option 2 increases by 16 spaces. The Union Pacific Railroad
owns a lot at Jefferson/Linden where the park is. They built a surface lot that has 10 permitted spaces. They
are investigating ways to partner with the railroad to use that lot.
Next steps:
Meeting with property/business owners/stakeholders
Boards & Commissions
City Council in August
Jordan: How will this impact existing bus routes?
Bracke: Our goal is to improve transit stops and make Jefferson more transit and pedestrian friendly. Long
term plans for downtown include a shuttle.
Thomas: I agree with the project team that the first alternative is best. It is going to be more difficult to go
south. Will trucks opt to go south on Willow?
Bracke: It is our goal to design Jefferson to accommodate all vehicle needs. Traffic congestion is not an
issue as indicated by a current and projected Level of Service “B.” Residual capacity is being examined in
the intersection study. 17,000 cars per day is not high volume. The intersections can accommodate traffic for
40 – 50 more years. We do not want to divert the truck traffic. The roundabout alternative is capable of
radius to accommodate the trucks. The Colorado Motor Carriers Association likes the one southbound lane
alternative because it prevents trucks from being passed.
Frazier: How does the BAC feel about this plan?
Bracke: The BAC gave mixed feedback. Some members felt that the bike lanes made it more bike friendly.
Others think it is too difficult to ride. Wayfinding and education can publicize alternative routes. Bike issues
on this project are more geared to crossing Jefferson to River District destinations rather than bikes traveling
on Jefferson.
Public comment:
Ray Bergner, Bergner Trucking, citizen. I met with Kathleen and Aaron yesterday. If we don’t learn from
the past, we will make mistakes in the future. I’m addressing the roundabout. Service and safety are
paramount. Roundabouts have their place. The one at Vine Drive and Taft Hill Road works well. Colorado
Motor Carriers doesn’t represent all of our interests. We are concerned that you consider the information
from 10 years ago when the roundabout on east Mulberry Street was considered. Safety in multi-lane
roundabouts needs to be considered. We are fine with the design of the road, but have concerns about off-
tracking in the roundabout. Multi-lane creates safety issues for trucks with a 300” wheel base. The high
center of gravity on these trucks is also an issue.
5
Bracke: Deflection of cars entering the roundabout is being examined. Most trucks will continue on
Riverside.
Robert: Have you looked at putting a bike lane on Willow?
Bracke: There are on-street bike lanes shown on Willow. No bike lanes are considered in the railroad right-
of-way.
Frazier: Have you done additional analysis for access to Peterson Street?
Bracke: That is part of the roundabout design study. More work is being done. If a roundabout is built there
will be a cul-de-sac at Peterson & Mountain Avenue.
Thomas made a motion that the Board recommend Option 1 but withhold a recommendation on the
roundabout pending additional information. Skutchan seconded.
Discussion:
Miller: Are sharrows considered on Jefferson under Option A?
Bracke: That hasn’t been discussed but we can ask.
Miller: Is it a safety issue for truckers to follow bikes in travel lanes?
Bergner: It isn’t a big issue from my experience.
Miller: Are maintenance costs available?
Bracke: O&M costs will be included in the final recommendation.
Miller: We are enhancing the parking experience, enhancing the pedestrian experience, but we don’t have
infrastructure for bikes. Motor carriers will be there. Enhancing parking while eliminating bike
infrastructure seems odd.
Bracke: The features we are including with landscaping and other features calm traffic and lower speeds,
making it safer for bikes.
Simonson: Does the Riverwalk design incorporate parallel bike paths? Big trucks sharing roads with bikes
doesn’t seem safe.
Bracke: The design for Willow Street includes on-street bike lanes. We are supporting and encouraging
alternative routes for cyclists.
Simonson: I like the idea of redesigning the City parking lot to gain additional parking.
After discussion, the Board voted for the motion with one descending vote (Miller) because of the lack of
bike lane infrastructure.
6
July 20th Transportation Board ‐ Letter to City Council Regarding Jefferson Street
7
June 13th Bicycle Advisory Committee ‐ (see attached meeting notes)
- Had a question about the traffic volumes and if they were broken down by axel type and
vehicle weight
- Without parking would there be room for a bicycle track
- If there were bicycle lanes the transition onto College is important
- Stated that marked bicycle lanes reduce accidents
- Noted that trucks traveling south can be dangerous to bicyclist
- Number of bicyclist crossing Jefferson is growing at Linden and at Lincoln
- Jefferson doesn’t necessarily feel safe to ride on but it is more direct than other routes
- The environment of Jefferson doesn’t feel safe to some, in particular some of the activity at
the Jefferson Street Park
- Important to make sure it’s clear that bikes belong with or without bike lanes
- Discussed the need for improved pedestrian amenities
- Pedestrian refuge zones are a high priority
- Questioned if we are trying to accommodate too much on Jefferson
- Wanted to know if anyone on the project team had first hand experience with a roundabout
located near a rail line
8
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES of the
BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
June 13, 2010
6:00 PM
Community Room
215 N. Mason
Fort Collins, CO 80521
FOR REFERENCE:
Chair: Rick Price 970‐310‐5238
Vice Chair: Josh Kerson 970‐217‐9480
Staff Liaison: Kathleen Bracke 970‐224‐6140
Staff Support: Dave “DK” Kemp 970‐416‐2411
BOARD/CITY ORGA NIZATION M EMBER
Air Quality Board
S PRESENT
Bicycle Pedestrian alit
: Michael Lynn
Education Co
Bike Fort Collins: Sylvia Cra
ion: Kim Sharpe
Downtown Development A
nmer
uthority: Ka
Fort Collins Bicycle CoOp: Tim And
thy Cardona
Fort Collins Bicycle Ret on
erson
ce: Josh Kers
atural Resources Adv
ailers Allian
isory Board: Glen Colton
ransportation Board: Shane Miller
N
T
AT LARG E MEMBER S P RESENT
At Large: Dan Gould
ABSENT
At Large: TBD
At Large: TBD
Colorado State University: Ben Miller
Economic Advisory Commission: Rick Price
Board: Kath
Parks and Recreation B e Henderson
Land Conservation & St ewardship ryn Grimes
: Bruc
Poudre School District: West
oard
Senior Advisory Board: T
Chris
BD
UniverCity Connections: TBD
City of Fort Collins:
tion Planner
ment
Aaron Iverson, Senior Transporta
Craig Foreman, Director of Park Planning and Develop
Planning
David Kemp, Bicycle Coordinator
n
9
Call to order
Meeting called to order at 6:07 PM.
II. Jefferson Street Project Update
ed PowerPoint
See attach
Michael –
our audience is families and people who will come downtown to shop and eat, right? So it
e to separate this track with a curb or something more obvious.
Y
makes sens
Kathleen –
e are trying to make it useable for everyone, but we recognize that there are alternate routes
ple who won’t use this route.
W
for peo
an –
e it would be hard to mesh the northbound flow onto N College.
D
It seems lik
athleen –
good point.
K
That is a
hane –
is the alternative without bike lanes.
S
My concern
Kathleen –
The purpose is to calm the traffic that is out there, so ideally we can slow traffic to 25/30mph so
ore users will take the lane. We will also work to improve way finding so people can choose
te.
m
their rou
Shane –
A ll I have ever read is that shared lane markings on roads reduce crashes. Has anyone read any
different?
Kathleen –
It is important to think about the Jefferson corridor. Compared to N College where we can widen
he roadway and include all of the pieces we want, on Jefferson we need to work within the space
e.
t
we hav
Josh –
I work at N. College and Jefferson and I walk that area often. The biggest issue is that truck
rivers are turning left onto Jefferson from College and speeding up so they can get through the
n at Linden without hitting the red light.
d
intersectio
Sylvia –
10
You asked if we would ride there, I don’t know if I would. You asked if I would feel safe, no. I
on’t like the idea that it would encourage cyclists to ride there and increase the amount of
k interface. I also don’t feel safe with the transient community down there.
d
cyclist/truc
athleen –
are legitimate issues and we are addressing these concerns.
K
Those
Kim –
think the more “bikes belong” signs we have, the better. It sends a good message – like Josh
that it is downtown.
I
said –
an –
ned about the intersections and having refuges for pedestrians.
D
I am concer
Kathleen –
We tried to include as many facilities as possible, but we were limited by curbs, traffic volume,
left turn lanes, etc. We did all we could to reduce pedestrian exposure. We will imitate the
edestrian crossings that we have currently along the in other areas downtown to raise
ess for drivers of pedestrian crossings.
p
awaren
Glen –
’m not sure it is necessary to keep on street parking for the local businesses because I don’t even
f the shops on Jefferson.
I
know any o
Kathleen –
There is revitalization of this area and a lot of new businesses and residential development is
oming in.
you think of the roundabout at Jefferson and Mountain?
c
What do
hane –
an example of a roundabout adjacent to a railroad in Fort Collins?
S
Do we have
athleen –
, but they are used all around the world and there are a lot of examples of how it works.
K
Not in FC
Shane –
s there a human being who has seen one? It would be worth the plane ticket to research the
ctual implementations.
I
a
Transportation Planning & Special Projects
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.224.6058
970.221.6239 - fax
fcgov.com/transportation
Planning, Development & Transportation
Attachment 4b: Summary of Board Comments
Planning & Zoning Board
July 15th Planning and Zoning (Work Session)
- There was a concern/question as to whether or not the buffer lane would become a "drive"
lane
- Concern over how pedestrian crossing would be handled
- How to control lane encroachment in the bike lane alternative?
- Questioned if it was good idea to mix the truck traffic with bicycles?
- Questioned if Jefferson was required to have bike lanes?
- Questioned traffic volumes might go down once traffic calming features are added?
- Observed that alternatives were trading off various elements due to space constraints
- Questions about Peterson Street, asked if it would be closed, noted that there may be
businesses concerns
- Asked about CDOTs position on the project
- The board generally agreed that they like the 3 lane option with the full center median
o Supports effort to make area more attractive
o Supports making a stronger connection to the River District
o Supports improving the pedestrian environment
o Support maintaining on‐street parking
o Supports the roundabout, as a defining entry feature to indicate the entrance into
Downtown Fort Collins
1
Transportation Planning & Special Projects
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.224.6058
970.221.6239 - fax
fcgov.com/transportation
Planning, Development & Transportation
Attachment 4c: Summary of Board Comments
Downtown Development Authority Board of Directors
June 9th Downtown Development Authority
- Asked if the cost includes implementation
- Asked about the condition of the sidewalks, and wanted to know if the project would include
sidewalk improvements
- Discussed the need for left turns at Pine and Chestnut, determined that there would not be a
large number of turns expected at these locations
- Concerned over the comfort level for riding bikes on Jefferson
- A gateway featured was highly encouraged
From the Minutes of June 9, 2011 Board of Directors Regular Session Meeting:
"Moved by Bill Sears, seconded by Jenny Bramhall: To support the stated downtown interests in the
Jefferson Street corridor discussions and to further support the recommendation to adopt a three‐
lane alternative for the project. The motion passed unanimously."
DRAFT Minutes:
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Directors' Meeting
PPaattttyy SS
ppeenncceerr,,
CChhaaiirrppeerr
ssoonn 9977
00--440077--9999
0000
KKeellllyy OO
hhllssoonn,, CC
oouunncciill LL
iiaaiissoonn
997700--449933
-77222255
SStteevvee JJ
oohhnnssoonn,,
CCoouunnttyy LL
iiaaiissoonn
997700--449988
-77001100
JJooaannnnaa
SSttoonnee,, SS
ttaaffff LLiiaa
iissoonn 99
7700--448844--22
002200
MINUTES of June 9, 2011
The Board of Directors of the Downtown Development Authority met in Regular Session at 7:30 a.m. on June 9, 2011 at
Home State Bank, 303 East Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524.
PRESENT
Jenny Bramhall; George Brelig; McCabe Callahan; Ben Manvel (Council Alternate); Wynne Odell; Kelly Ohlson; Bill
Sears; Patty Spencer; Ellen Zibell
ABSENT
Steve Johnson; Jerry Kennell; Cheryl Zimlich
STAFF
1
2
Matt Robenalt, Executive Director; Kathy Cardona, Financial Coordinator; Derf Green, Programs Administrator; Joanna
Stone, Administrative Manager; Jim Martell, Legal Counsel
GUESTS INCLUDED
Darin Atteberry, City Manager; Peggy Lyle, DBA; Rich Shannon, Pinnacle Consulting; Aaron Iverson, Joe Frank,
Kathleen Bracke, Randy Hensley, Clark Mapes, Timothy Wilder, City of Fort Collins; Jim Reidhead; Justin Larson, VFLA;
Michel McMahon, 137 Mathews; Emily Elmore, The Group; Emily Thorn, Food Co-op; Rayno Seaser, The Egg & I
CALL TO ORDER
Patty Spencer called the meeting to order at 7:35 a.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
William Sears moved to approve the minutes of May 12, 2011; seconded by Ellen Zibell, the minutes were approved
unanimously.
BIG IDEAS
No ideas were presented.
RECOGNITIONS
Jim Reidhead: Patty Spencer read a letter recognizing and thanking Jim Reidhead for his work with UniverCity
Connections.
Kelly Ohlson: Kelly Ohlson was congratulated for receiving the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Colorado
Association for Recycling.
UPDATES
Award: The DDA has received an award that was presented to CDM Electric for excellence in electrical construction for
the 2010 alley project from the IECRM.
Downtown Paving Project: The downtown College Avenue paving project was completed two weeks early. It was a great
project and featured great communication with business owners.
City Sales Tax Report: The sales tax report was distributed. Josh Birks was unable to attend the meeting but provided
answers to questions that board members had posed in May. The lodging category had shown and increase because of
revenues from Ace Gillett’s at the Armstrong Hotel. The electronics category decreased because of a retailer closing.
Museum Project: Patty Spencer emphasized that the Museum project if still at the top of the list of DDA priorities and the
DDA is fully committed to the project. The directors addressed the Board on two occasions and the DDA has committed a
total of $3 million for the construction of the new museum. This is an important project for both downtown and Northern
Colorado. She welcomed board questions about the recent newspaper article regarding museum funding. Matt Robenalt
added that the information missing is that staff notified the Museum in July of last year, in advance of construction, that the
DDA would fund in 2012. Kelly Ohlson believed that there has not been enough Council or public input on the project.
Ms. Spencer noted that there would not be a DDA loan to cover the shortfall. Mr. Robenalt responded that more
specifically, the DDA has received prudent financial planning advice that it should not incur any new debt before 2012.
Bill Sears expressed appreciation for Kelly Ohlson’s remarks.
CONSENT AGENDA
DDA office lease: The DDA office lease expires at the end of July and staff is seeking renewal for a three-year term. The
DDA shares space with the DBA and they are charged for their share of the expense. The monthly lease amount will
remain the same through July 31, 2012 at which time it may be adjusted up or down based on the CPI. In response to
questions from Kelly Ohlson, Matt Robenalt noted that as owners of Old Town Square, it is helpful to have office space on
the plaza. Also, the DBA manages Old Town Square and the synergy between the organizations is beneficial. City Parks
conducts daily maintenance and cares for the flowers and performs snow removal. The DDA pays for these services.
Moved by Kelly Ohlson, seconded by Bill Sears: To approve the Consent Agenda as presented. The motion passed
unanimously.
3
BOARD OFFICER ELECTIONS
Matt Robenalt thanked Patty Spencer for serving for two years as Chair of the Board. He praised her strong advocacy for
the organization and her style of accessibility and availability which has helped position the organization going forward.
Moved by Bill Sears, seconded by McCabe Callahan: To nominate Wynne Odell as Chair of the Board. The motion
passed unanimously.
Wynne Odell chaired the meeting from this point.
Moved by Kelly Ohlson, seconded by Bill Sears: To nominate Jerry Kennell as Vice-Chair of the Board. The motion
passed unanimously.
Moved by Kelly Ohlson, seconded by Ellen Zibell: To nominate Bill Sears as Secretary of the Board. The motion
passed unanimously.
There was a discussion of the role of the Treasurer. Typically, this position has been filled by the DDA Executive Director.
The budget committee of the Board serves as checks and balances. Wynne Odell speculated that the Director may fill this
role because of the complex financial structure of the organization. Patty Spencer added that the organization also has very
tight controls in place, with the Executive Director allowed to approve expenditures up to $5,000, the Executive Committee
up to $50,000 and any higher expense coming before the full Board of Directors. Bill Sears suggested that board members
should understand why it is structured this way before they think about changing it. Matt Robenalt added that it was
basically a formality to satisfy the bylaws rather than a formal role. For example, the Treasurer does
not sign contracts. Wynne Odell deferred the decision until the next meeting in order to get information from DDA legal
counsel.
137 MATHEWS PROJECT
Owners Rayno and Patty Seaser have proposed the historic rehabilitation of 137 Mathews Street and are requesting a tax
increment investment. They propose to convert the vacant property into two side-by-side townhouses. Matt Robenalt
commented that the improvements will significantly enhance an historic property. It will also transform an eyesore and
expand the offering of downtown housing options. The
DDA has adopted a policy that housing in general is a lesser priority than commercial office or retail projects at this time.
Rayno Seaser spoke to the Board about the project. Built in 1879, the house is believed to be one of the oldest, if not the
oldest brick house in Fort Collins. He hopes to restore the historic look, removing paint, adding new windows and adding a
traditional porch to the front. It will be converted into a duplex and a garage will be added in the back.
Moved by Kelly Ohlson, seconded by Patty Spencer: To accept the staff recommendation to commit funding of up to
$13,500 as a tax increment investment and authorize the Board Chair to enter into an agreement to acquire an
easement on the east-facing Mathews Street façade, contingent upon the owner submission of all DDA requirements
for project reimbursement including actual cost accounting documentation and certificate of liability insurance.
The release of funds is conditioned upon cost accounting and contractor documentation of deconstruction as a
method for minimizing construction and demolition waste from entering the landfill. The motion passed
unanimously.
415 SOUTH MASON PROJECT
(Legal counsel Jim Martell declared that his firm has a conflict with this project.)
Property owner Andre Mouton presented a tax increment proposal for the old laundromat located at 415 South Mason
Street. He proposes creating a vibrant restaurant with outdoor patios at the location. The building is located on the Mason
Corridor BRT line and is less than one block away from the Mulberry station stop. The project will replace the storefront
windows, install new decorative fascia along the roofline and on the cantilevered roof, and clean the unique masonry
column at the south end of the building. There will also be significant expense for the right-of-way improvements. Mr.
Mouton hopes to widen the sidewalk and create a pedestrian-friendly environment with enhanced landscaping and bike
racks. A discussion of possible green elements followed. Mr. Mouton said they were using energy efficient glass, reroof,
4
insulate and install modern heating and cooling. George Brelig commented that the greatest green element was maintaining
the building. Board members expressed appreciation of the project as a catalyst along Mason.
Moved by Patty Spencer; seconded by Kelly Ohlson: To support the staff recommendation to commit funding up to
$65,000 as a tax increment investment for both façade and public improvements in the right-of-way and to authorize
the Board Chair to enter into an agreement to acquire an easement on the east-facing South Mason Street façade
and contingent upon the owner’s submission of all DDA requirements for project reimbursement including actual
cost accounting documentation and certificate of liability insurance. The release of funds is conditioned upon cost
accounting and contractor documentation of deconstruction as a method for minimizing construction and
demolition waste from entering the landfill. The motion passed unanimously.
221-227 JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT
Owner Doug Holt has proposed the historic rehabilitation of 221-227 Jefferson Street and is requesting a façade grant
investment. The rehabilitation will focus on returning the building to its original historic appearance based on photo
documentation. This will include brick tuckpointing, painting, woodwork restoration, and replacement of missing
storefront glass on the north-facing façade. The south-facing façade fronts Old Firehouse Alley and work will return the
original first floor door opening, repair stucco,
and create a new deck on the second floor. The property is also home to the infamous drunk tank, which is not part of the
funding request, but will be improved with new doors, glass block window, restoration of the jail bars, and a fresh coat of
paint.
Architect Justin Larson presented the project to the Board. He noted that the building will lease commercial space on the
first floor to Phil & Ted’s. The owners will live in the upper level.
Kelly Ohlson expressed appreciation for the level of staff work, encouraging and supporting projects while looking out for
the public interest. Matt Robenalt responded that the recommendations of staff and the Executive Committee are coming
out of the recent financial discussions.
Moved by Patty Spencer; seconded by Ellen Zibell: To support the staff recommendation to commit funding up to
$20,850 as a façade grant investment and to authorize the Board Chair to enter into an agreement to acquire an
easement on the north-facing Jefferson Street façade and the south-facing Old Firehouse Alley Façade contingent
upon the owner’s submission of all DDA requirements for project reimbursement including actual cost accounting
documentation and certificate of liability insurance. The release of funds is conditioned upon cost accounting and
contractor documentation of deconstruction as a method for minimizing construction and demolition waste from
entering the landfill. The motion passed unanimously.
JEFFERSON STREET/ HWY 14 ANALYSIS
Matt Robenalt introduced the background to the Jefferson Street/Highway 14 analysis project. He has served on the
executive oversight committee for the project. This has been an eighteen month process for achieving consensus on urban
design and highway design on the Jefferson Street corridor. A watershed moment was reached last week when all parties
reached consensus on the basic components of the project. The process has been to find the most suitable alternative to
improve the air quality, livability, and urban character of the Jefferson Street corridor while enhancing the experience for
pedestrians, bikes, transit and maintaining the mobility of autos and trucks. The project seeks to balance interests of
different agencies and organizations including the City, CDOT, DDA, local business/property owners and the general
public. The DDA committed $500,000 in 2008 to fund future capital improvements related to the alternatives analysis.
DDA staff has advanced downtown interests throughout the analysis. The preferred alternative should feature on-street
parking; accommodate the continued use of the Jefferson Street corridor for trucks; provide access to individual businesses
to the greatest extent possible while striving to maintain the goals of the project; and, recognize that bike lanes, while
providing an important element of a multi-modal transportation system, are a lesser priority in this area than the elements of
pedestrian mobility, truck/traffic mobility, and on-street parking.
Kathleen Bracke of City Transportation Planning provided the status report, answered questions and received feedback on
the project from board members. Ms. Bracke reported that the process involved a huge team effort and there was a wide
divergence of views at the start. The current list of options includes 3-lane alternatives, a four-lane alternative and a
combination 3/4 lane alternative. Both on-street and off-street parking was also evaluated. Ms. Bracke reviewed drawings
of each of the options and discussed features of each. Board members George Brelig and Bill Sears met recently with the
5
City and consultant staff to review the alternatives and expressed a preference for the three-lane scenarios as the
alternatives that best reflect the interests of the DDA and downtown. In response to wide-ranging questions, Ms. Bracke
noted that the plan assumes the current level of truck traffic, which is about 7.4% of total. The project does include
sidewalk improvements. Some of the advantages of the three lane options are to encourage slower traffic. A full median
serves many purposes including raised landscaping; pedestrian refuges; and increased safety. Off-street parking options are
also being explored. These general concepts have achieved consensus from the partners.
The roundabout at Jefferson and Mountain is considered important to the project. It helps capacity, improves air quality
and provides the opportunity to create a gateway into downtown. City staff is working
closely with CDOT, PUC and the railroad on this aspect of the project and additional analysis will occur through the
summer.
Next steps will include working towards selecting the preferred alternative for the corridor this summer. This will be
followed by the development of an implementation plan and finance strategy. As the project develops there will be
individual outreach to property owners as well as public open houses.
Moved by Bill Sears, seconded by Jenny Bramhall: To support the stated downtown interests in the Jefferson Street
corridor discussions and to further support the recommendation to adopt a three-lane alternative for the project.
The motion passed unanimously.
PARKING PLAN UPDATE
Randy Hensley, Parking Services and Timothy Wilder, Advance Planning presented an update on the recently initiated
effort to update the City’s Parking Plan. The focus will be on downtown with the purpose of updating policies, strategies
and programs. They are in the process of collecting data and seeking public input and will develop a draft parking plan by
January 2012. They are developing a business and customer questionnaire and information is available on the City website.
Mr. Hensley invited Board members to attend the Council work session in September. They hope to finalize the project by
April 2012. Currently they are studying parking supply and demand.
Board members asked many questions and brought up topics for consideration. These included the effect of the Mason
Corridor BRT on parking; Saturday enforcement; the possibility of partnering with private entities to create more parking;
paid on-street parking. Matt Robenalt summarized the discussion by encouraging members of the Board to support Mr.
Hensley and Mr. Wilder to explore and use a systems approach to downtown parking. He felt this would produce great
outcomes for the district. A subcommittee of the Board was formed to work on parking. Ellen Zibell and McCabe
Callahan offered to serve on the committee.
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST
Clark Mapes, Advance Planning presented information on the project underway to develop a capital improvement plan for
the GID. City staff oversees the GID and have developed and overseen the projects. It is now time to update the plan. In
an early brainstorming exercise with City staff in April, DDA staff suggested several DDA-related items for inclusion in
the plan: Old Town Ice Rink expenses; holiday light display; maintenance in the enhanced alleys; and, renovation of Old
Town Square. Open houses will be held at the end of June to gather further input from the public.
OTHER BUSINESS
July Meeting: There will be no regular meeting in July.
Downtown Publicity: Patty Spencer noted that the negative tone of recent articles about crime in Old Town has been
elevated. She would like to develop communication to address the issue.
ADJOURN
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.
______________________________________
Bill Sears, Secretary
6
Transportation Planning & Special Projects
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.224.6058
970.221.6239 - fax
fcgov.com/transportation
Planning, Development & Transportation
Attachment 5: Summary of Public Comment
June 2nd: Public Open House
The open house was held on Thursday June 2 from 4 to 7 pm at the City Streets facility. There were
approximately 14 people in attendance representing business and property owners as well as residents
from the project area.
Results of the comment sheets are summarized below;
- The primary interest of attendees was business / property owner followed by area resident.
- The most selected priority for Jefferson Street was "pedestrian mobility" followed by
"improving safety and security" and installing "streetscape/landscaping amenities". Installing
"gateway features" was the next most selected priority.
- The majority of respondents preferred the 3-lane alternative.
- The majority of respondents which liked the 3-lane alternative preferred the "full-median"
option.
- For the intersection of Jefferson Street and Linden all the respondents supported keeping left
turns from Jefferson to Linden.
- For the intersection of Jefferson Street with Mountain/Lincoln the respondents were split
between a roundabout or a signalized intersection
Comments provided on comment sheets at the public open house included:
- "The full median option appeal to me most, because I feel that it would provide the most
attractive alternative"
- "As a business located at the intersection of Linden and Jefferson [Café Ardour] I feel strongly
that left turns should be maintained. I also like the idea of the roundabout to be used as a
gateway to Old Town / River District. I also like that it would help to improve air quality."
- "Very dangerous road, need to slow traffic to safeguard kids going to O'Dell's, and New
Belgium".
- "I think that roundabouts are confusing"
- "If we want to encourage people to head to the river we need to make if friendly and safe to
cross Jefferson!"
- "Suggest you start from the perspective that through-traffic on Jefferson should be re-routed to
Willow and merged with Mulberry at Timberline. This through route should be designed by
using pedestrian and traffic over/under passes."
- "Integrate Jefferson into the Linden area for local low-speed travel with lots of parking /
walking / biking opportunities."
- "Rather than accommodating anticipated increased flow on Jefferson, design an outcome
focused on enhanced quality of life."
2
- "Want 2-Lane alternative that slows traffic increases parking and is more pedestrian friendly."
- "Do not limit access to Linden from either direction of Jefferson."
- "Jefferson from College to Lincoln has been a barrier for decades to the northeast towards the
river, my priorites are:
o Reduce speeds on Jefferson in both directions
o Increase parking!!!
o Increase ease of pedestrian/bicyclist to go both directions on Linden across Jefferson
o Do not think of Jefferson or Riversides as bicycle/transit corridor!!
o No roundabouts - horrible when semi's, pedestrians and or bikes are present
o Promote access towards River District
As someone who lives/works here 24/7 you're looking for the wrong solutions
(suggest looking closer at Carl's (Carl Glaser) ideas!!!"
- "No bike lane"
- "No roundabout"
- "I like full median if the buffer zone was a bike lane, and the street parking is elevated. I think
it will slow the speeds, and create a better atmosphere along Jefferson."
- "I like the gateway notion of the roundabout. I think it's mostly a cost factor for me if there are
alternate funds outside of limited DDA funds, then I'm up for it!"
- "Add more on-street spaces on Old Town side of Jefferson, north of Linden."
- "The traffic on Jefferson is significantly reduced from what is use to be. The truck count after
5:00 PM and weekends is negligible. Use the third lane for alternative parking during these
times."
Jefferson Street – Individual Outreach Meetings May-June 2011
May 25th
Encompass Technologies
- Concerned about dirt, dust and mud from trucks driving too close to the front of their building
- Does not use on-street parking due to the proximity of passing trucks
- Has parking lot for employees, also contract with businesses across the street for employee
parking as well
- Would like to see better pedestrian environment
- Interested in making improvements to the façade of their building
- Would like to make improvements to the back of the building, perhaps building a concrete
walkway along the back of the buildings between the track and the buildings
- Supportive of the three lane option, questioned why the 2 lanes were on their side of Jefferson
- Supportive of a median and landscape/streetscape improvements
3
May 27th
Nice Car - Subaru Repair Shop
- Concerned over which side of Jefferson has 2 lanes versus 1 lane in the 3 lane options
- Questioned the need for on-street parking on Jefferson, would like to see it eliminated all
together
- Opposed to the roundabout
o Concerned it would kill his business
o Concerned with train activity
o Concerned with cost of right-of-way
o Questioned the need as the intersection seems to flow fine currently
- Very concerned with too many unknowns surrounding the project which has the property
owners very worried
- Agrees that the aesthetics of Jefferson need to be fixed
May 27th
Pine Street Lofts Residents
- Concerns with truck traffic
- Safety concerns over the Jefferson Street Park
o Would like to see it turned into a plaza
- Is favorable to the roundabout, thinks it works well and would look nice
- Concerned about an empty lot across from the Pine Street Lofts, needs to be cleaned up
- Supports a full median
- Suggests bike lanes may not be appropriate on Jefferson
- Would like to see the on-street parking in front of the Pine Street Lofts retained which is use by
residents guests at times
June 17th
Vogel Paint
- They need both existing driveways to get delivery trucks in and out
- They were ok with the roundabout
- Concerned over the safety of bicyclists on Jefferson
- They like the 3 lane option with the full median
- Very supportive of improving the corridor
- They do not use or support the use of the on-street parking in front of their business, dangerous
with the proximity to trucks
June 16th
Local Trucking Interest: Burgener Trucking, Hersh Trucking, O’Leary’s Trucking
- Supportive of the full median to restrict left turns
- Very supportive of the 3 lane concept
- Cautious of the height of the median, needs to be a normal curb height in case they do run into
it
- Limited access is important, which minimizes conflicts with the trucks moving through the
corridor
- They didn’t like the idea of mixing bicycles with trucks on Jefferson
- They suggested a 2 lane configuration would be better, as it would eliminate passing, which is a
primary safety concern, and their contention is that this section of Jefferson essentially
functions as a 2 lane roadway currently, especially when larger loads are using the corridor
4
- Not supportive of the roundabout at this location
- They have a particular issue with multi-lane roundabouts, because cars try and pass the trucks
within the roundabout (signed or not) which is a significant safety issue with the truck taking
both lanes to maneuver through the roundabout. One lane roundabouts are safer in this respect
- They questioned if there was enough space to build the roundabout
- What size truck was used for the design?
- They are concerned as they have no other options within the City as this is the designated truck
route.
- If a roundabout is considered it needs to be specifically designed for through trucks, and make
consideration for the longer lengths now being used (average of 75’ to 80’, with oversize of
125’ long)
- They have concern of rollovers in roundabouts
- The mountable truck apron can be damaging to tires (which are expensive) if not designed
correctly, also if they are too high they can cause loads to shift leading to potential rollovers
- They want to continue to be involved in the process for this project
June 16th
Rodizio Grill
- Major issue with the trucks on Jefferson including:
o Speed of trucks
o Vibration from the trucks
o Dirt and dust caused by the trucks and debris falling from trucks
o Clipping of cars parked in front of the restaurant causes lost side mirrors
o Dangerous situation with people walking across Jefferson at or near Pine Street
- Would like to see trucks eliminated or reduced on Jefferson
- Supportive of the 3 lane option with full medians
- Supportive of improved pedestrian safety particularly at the Pine Street intersection
- Does not consider the corridor to be bike friendly, would rather see pedestrian improvements
- Not supportive of the roundabout, unless the intent is to discourage through trucks
- Wants to slow down traffic, improve the pedestrian environment, improving the safety of
pedestrians crossing Jefferson and the idea of landscaping in the median
- Likes the idea of the inset parking in front of the restaurant
- Concerned about Jefferson Park, and the perception of safety and security, and how the current
situation discourage the connection (walking) to Linden and the River District
- They desire to be highly involved in the project moving forward
Attachment 6: Colorado Department of Transportation Letter
1
2
1
Attachment 7: Union Pacific Railroad Letter
2
1
1
Jefferson Street Project Update
City Council Work Session
August 9th 2011
2
Jefferson Street Project Update
1. Which of the Jefferson Street corridor and intersection
alternatives does City Council prefer?
2. Is there additional information that City Council would
like to see regarding the Jefferson Street project?
ATTACHMENT 8
2
3
Jefferson Street Project Update
• Project Partners:
– City of Fort Collins (City)
– Downtown Development Authority (DDA)
– Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)
• Schedule: Spring 2010 – Summer 2011
• Funding: $1.75 M (Federal, Local, & DDA)
• History of Project:
– Downtown River District Plan (2008)
4
Jefferson Street Project Area
3
5
Jefferson Street Project Update
• Alternatives Analysis Process
– Design Options & Evaluation
– Street & Intersection Alternatives
–Urban Design
– Context Sensitive Solutions
• Deliverables:
– Preferred Alternative
– Implementation Phasing Plan & Finance
Strategies
6
Jefferson Street Project Purpose
• “The purpose of the Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis
project is to improve the air quality, livability, and urban
character of the Jefferson Street Corridor while enhancing the
experience for pedestrians, bikes, and transit and maintaining
mobility for autos and trucks”
• Traffic congestion is not primary issue for project – purpose is
broader:
• urban corridor, all modes, air quality, safety, improved on-
street & off-street parking, and linkages between
Downtown/Old Town and the River District
4
7
Jefferson Street Project Update
• Traffic Conditions:
Existing: 12,300 – 13,200 vehicles per day
2035 forecast: 17,200 – 18,600 vpd
• Intersection Level of Service “B” or better along
Jefferson Street (existing & 2035)
• On-Street Parking spaces:
Existing: 53 (sub-std, very narrow spaces)
Future: Varies by alternative from 36 – 48
8
Jefferson Street Project Update
• Alternatives ranged from 2 lane to 4 lane options
• Fatal flaws include:
– Must have on-street parking
– Not drop LOS more than one level
– Major property impacts
• Current list of alternatives include:
– 3 lane options, with/without medians & bikelanes
– 4 lane option
– Combination 3 lane/4 lane option
5
9
Jefferson Street –– Existing Conditions
10
Jefferson Street –– 3 lane with full median
Cross Section
Concept Sketch
ParkingBuffer SB Travel Median NB Travel NB Travel
6
11
Jefferson Street –– 3 lane with partial median
Cross Section
Concept Sketch
12
Jefferson Street –– 3 lane with bike lanes
Cross Section
Concept Sketch
7
13
Jefferson Street –– 4 lane
Cross Section
Concept Sketch
14
Jefferson Street –– Combo ¾¾ lanes
3 Lane - Cross Section
3 Lane - Concept Sketch
4 Lane - Cross Section
4 Lane - Concept Sketch
8
15
Jefferson & Mountain Signalized Alternative
16
Jefferson & Mountain Roundabout Alternative
9
17
Jefferson & Mountain Intersection Evaluation
Construction Cost Estimate
• Signalized = $1.4 million
• Roundabout = $2.6 million
Operating Cost Estimate
• Signalized = $3,600 per year
• Roundabout = Depends on cost of RR arm
Overall Level of Service (LOS)
• Signalized = B (16.4 seconds of delay)
• Roundabout = B (13 seconds of delay)
Air Quality Savings
• Signalized = n/a (same as existing conditions)
• Roundabout = 495 KG/yr short term reduction and 809
KG/yr long term reduction
Right-of-Way
• Signalized = Approximately 2,000 square feet (0.046
acres) of Right-of-Way
• Roundabout = Approximately 6,000 square feet (0.138
acres) of Right-of-Way
Signalized
Roundabout
18
Jefferson Corridor
Off-Off -Street Parking Options
10
19
Urban Design & Gateway Concepts
20
Jefferson Street Project Update
Next Steps
– Continue individual property/business owner mtgs
– Transportation Board & Bicycle Advisory Committee
(June)
– Planning & Zoning Board Worksession (July)
– City Council Worksession (August)
– Project Team Meetings
• Goal is to build consensus for Preferred Alternative
• Develop Implementation Phasing Plan & Finance
Strategies
11
21
Jefferson Street Project Update
1. Which of the Jefferson Street corridor and intersection
alternatives does City Council prefer?
2. Is there additional information that City Council would
like to see regarding the Jefferson Street project?
22
Jefferson Street Project Update
• Contact Information:
Kathleen Bracke, Transportation Planning&Special
Projects Director
• kbracke@fcgov.com or ph: 224-6140
Aaron Iverson, Senior Transportation Planner
• aiverson@fcgov.com or ph: 416-2643
• Project website:
http://www.fcgov.com/riverdistrict/jefferson.php
Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers
Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Vice-President City Hall West
Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4
Gerry Horak, District 6 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
WORK SESSION
August 9, 2011
(after the Council Work Session)
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Downtown General Improvement District No. 1 Capital Improvements Plan. (staff:
Clark Mapes; 45 minute discussion)
City Council sits as the Board of Directors of General Improvement District No. 1 (GID).
The GID is a property tax district formed by property owners in 1976 to fund parking,
pedestrian, and street beautification improvements to enhance the downtown as a
business and commercial area.
The City’s Advance Planning Department is currently developing a new Capital
Improvements Plan to guide the use of the GID’s revenues, from 2012 going forward 15
years. It will essentially consist of a new list of potential projects to pursue using the
GID Fund.
The main purpose of this work session item is to review a preliminary list of potential
projects and priorities derived from recent public outreach. The Capital Improvements
Plan is scheduled for consideration of adoption by the Board on October 18, 2011.
4. Other Business.
5. Adjournment.
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 1 AGENDA
DATE: August 9, 2011
STAFF: Clark Mapes
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Downtown General Improvement District No. 1 Capital Improvements Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council sits as the Board of Directors of General Improvement District No. 1 (GID). The GID
is a property tax district formed by property owners in 1976 to fund parking, pedestrian, and street
beautification improvements to enhance the downtown as a business and commercial area.
The City’s Advance Planning Department is currently developing a new Capital Improvements Plan
to guide the use of the GID’s revenues, from 2012 going forward 15 years. It will essentially consist
of a new list of potential projects to pursue using the GID Fund.
The main purpose of this work session item is to review a preliminary list of potential projects and
priorities derived from recent public outreach. The Capital Improvements Plan is scheduled for
consideration of adoption by the Board on October 18, 2011.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does the Board have any questions, comments, or ideas about potential projects and
priorities?
2. Does the Board need any additional information for the adoption hearing on October 18?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Purpose of the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
The purpose of the new CIP is to guide ongoing work by staff and provide a framework for Board
decisions. The CIP does not represent a specific commitment or obligation to fund any given
project. Rather, it provides a working framework and guide for staff to formulate projects, assemble
funding, and then move projects forward to construction (or maintenance or renovations as the case
may be). The GID Board of Directors will see any such projects in annual budgets or appropriation
requests.
August 9, 2011 Page 2
Why is the CIP needed in 2011?
A CIP for GID No. 1 was last updated in 1994 and consisted of a memo to City Council that
identified a list of potential projects to be pursued over approximately a 15-year period. Most of the
projects on that list have been completed, along with several others. Bonds that financed a group
of the projects were retired in 2009. Additional background on the past project list is included later
in this agenda item summary.
Along with the substantial completion of a group of projects, a number of issues and questions
emerged over the past several years regarding the use of the GID Fund. A new CIP is needed to
identify the next generation of potential projects to pursue with the GID Fund. The new list of
projects will provide clarification on a number of the issues and questions.
The main issues and questions to be addressed in the CIP regarding the GID Fund are:
• What new capital improvements should be listed as potential projects to pursue?
• What maintenance and renovations of existing improvements should be on the list?
• What are the top priorities?
• What is the right balance of responsibilities for various special improvements among the
City’s General Fund, the Downtown Development Authority, and the GID, given recent
changes in budgets and revenues among the three funding sources?
• What is the best balance between a fixed project list and schedule that commits the GID
Fund, versus a more general list with flexibility for staff to respond to partnership
opportunities or urgent needs that may arise?
Process to Develop the CIP
The CIP process involves property owners who self-fund the GID, the GID Board of Directors, and
other key stakeholders to determine how the GID should continue to invest in downtown public
improvements. The City's Advance Planning Department is managing the CIP, in collaboration with
other key City departments and the Downtown Development Authority (DDA). The CIP will be
presented to City Council members, who sit as the governing board of the GID, for approval.
The main steps in the process are outlined below:
• May – Assembled background information, identified issues, and brainstormed potential
future GID projects.
• June – Discussed the CIP with the DDA Board and Downtown Business Association (DBA)
Board, the DBA Executive Committee, and DBA Membership.
• Late June/Early July – Gathered public input with a mailing, open house, and online
questionnaire, seeking thoughts and ideas on projects and priorities.
• August – Discuss preliminary material with the GID Board (City Council) at the August 9
Work Session. Continue internal work among key City departments and DDA to flesh out
project ideas with analysis of costs, partnership opportunities, constraints, etc. Assemble a
draft plan. Continue communications with DBA.
August 9, 2011 Page 3
• September - Review draft CIP material with stakeholders at a second open house, and
assemble the CIP document.
• October - Present the CIP to the GID Board (City Council) at the October 18 meeting for
approval.
Current Status in the Process – A Preliminary List of Projects
A preliminary list of potential projects to pursue, using the GID Fund, has been developed. The list
is derived from planning documents, staff discussion, and public outreach. Attachment 2 is the list,
and Attachment 3 is a set of descriptions of potential projects on the list.
The attached list shows six levels of priority that emerged in a recent public open house and online
questionnaire. The list also shows a conceptual magnitude of estimated cost, and identifies potential
leverage and funding partnership opportunities. Staff will continue to refine all of this information,
as recommendations are drafted for review with the public in a second round of outreach, with a
second open house in September.
Additional Context: GID Fund Revenues
The GID receives revenues primarily from a mill levy set by City Council members acting as the
Governing Board. The mill levy has remained at 4.94 mills since 1992. Secondarily, the GID
receives other revenues from a share of vehicle registration tax, and interest on the fund balance.
The magnitude of the GID Fund can be demonstrated, using some 2011 figures, as follows:
Property tax revenues, 2011 budget: $247,000
Other revenues, 2011 budget: $ 51,000
Total revenues, 2011 budget: $298,000
Reserve balance in 2011
(separate from 2011 revenues): $535,000
15-year projected revenues: $5-6 million
Annual revenues are projected to continue growing slowly, from approximately $300,000 in the next
few years, to approximately $500,000 over 15 years.
The Board approves spending through annual GID Budget ordinances required by state law, and also
in the City’s overall budget process, known as Budgeting For Outcomes (BFO). Approximately
$36,000 is committed annually for ongoing, routine disbursements including residential rebates,
Larimer County Treasurer's Services, and small water and electric bills for irrigation and lighting.
The approved budget for 2011 includes $421,000 for sidewalk, curb and gutter replacement, and
$38,000 for staff administration, mainly to conduct this CIP process. This budget item decreases
to $20,000 in 2012. $246,000 is allocated for projects to be determined in the current CIP process
in 2012.
Approximately $500,000 of the $535,000 reserve balance has been earmarked for an appropriation
request to install the Wayfinding Sign System, to be submitted in late summer or early fall 2011.
When any appropriation is requested, the Board will have the opportunity to provide direction on
the project involved.
August 9, 2011 Page 4
Additional Context: What’s Been Done by the GID
The GID transformed the face of downtown with streetscape installations on College Avenue and
Linden Street. A large initial package of improvements was constructed in 1977. That package
included the corner plazas, medians, and street trees along College Avenue, the Oak/Remington
parking lot, and Oak Street Plaza. The GID provided the largest share of financing for that package,
with a $1.1 million, 15-year bond issue. Secondarily, a special assessment on specified properties
provided additional funding.
In 1992, the bonds that financed the initial package were
retired (paid off). A public process affirmed support for
continuation of the GID, and a list of potential projects
was developed. The list was last updated in 1994 (box
at right), and since then, most of the projects have been
completed, along with a few other projects as well.
Projects numbered 1,2,3,5, and 6 on the 1994 list have
been completed. Also, the corner plazas at the
Olive/College intersection were renovated along with the
other intersection renovations listed as numbers 1,2,3,
and 6.
Projects not completed are numbers 4 and 7 –
Mulberry/College intersection streetscape, and
Downtown signage. Design work has been completed
on a signage system, and staff will bring forward an
appropriation request for installation funding in coming
weeks. The Mulberry/College intersection streetscape is
still a potential project under consideration.
Several of the completed projects involving paver replacement at intersections were done as a group,
with a $1.1 million bond issue providing financing. This bond debt committed most of the GID
Fund revenues for a ten-year period from 1999-2009.
Also, a number of projects were completed on a pay-as-you-go basis, using available reserves and
revenues. Staff formulated these projects in response to leverage opportunities, partnership
opportunities, and urgent needs. These include some additional projects that were not on the 1994
list, as follows:
• Linden Street streetscape, done in a funding partnership that saved the Linden Hotel and
completely reconstructed Linden Street (1994-1995).
• Oak Street Plaza renovation, done in a funding partnership with City and DDA funds.
• A package of sidewalk, curb, and gutter replacements, largely completed over the past two
years, with another phase of replacements scheduled for later in 2011.
• On a much smaller scale, a package of bicycle dismount signs and sidewalk decals, installed
in the past year.
List of Potential Projects from
1994:
1. Paver Replacement, east side of
Oak /College intersection
2. Laporte/College intersection
streetscape
3. Paver Replacement
Mountain/College intersection
4. Mulberry/College intersection
streetscape
5. North College Streetscape,
Laporte Avenue to the Poudre
River
6. Paver replacement, bus shelter
and fountain improvements, west
side of Oak/College intersection
7. Downtown Signage
August 9, 2011 Page 5
The intent of the new CIP is to continue to allow flexibility for staff to pursue these kinds of
opportunistic projects, in addition to projects on the list.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of the GID
2. Preliminary List of Potential Projects
3. Descriptions of Potential Projects
4. Log of Public Comments on Potential Projects
5. Powerpoint Presentation
ATTACHMENT 1
Downtown General Improvement District
Potential Projects List - Draft
COST MAGNITUDE
► Old Town Square Renovations $$-$$$$$
► Holiday Lights and Electricity Funding $
► Additional Pedestrian-Enhanced Alleys $$$$-$$$$$
► Enhance Linkages to New Museum $-$$
► Sidewalks, Curbs and Gutters Replacement $
► Jefferson/Mountain Gateway Urban Design and Landscaping $-$$
► More Public Restrooms Funding $-$$$
► Maintenance of Pedestrian-Enhanced Alleys $
► Old Town Square Plaza Lighting Renovation $$
► Jefferson Streetscape $-$$
► Mulberry/College Streetscape/Gateway $$
► Ice Rink Funding $
► Upgrade Restrooms at Oak/Remington Parking Lot $-$$$
► Public Art $
► Transit Circulator $
► Trolley Track Extension $
► Linden Street Pedestrian Lights Replacement or Augmentation $-$$
► Enhance Bus Stops $
► Linden Street Paver Renovation $
► Canyon Art Walk $$-$$$$$
► Enhanced Crosswalks $
► W. Oak Street Parking - Design to Close for Events $-$$
► Mid-block ped crossing @ Opera Galleria DSP p. 151 $$
► Shorten E/W Pedestrian Crossings Leading Into Downtown $-$$
► Banner Infrastructure $
► Other - Reserve Fund for Other Opportunities $
Priority Level 4 Based on Ratings
Priority Level 5 Based on Ratings
Cost Magnitude Key:
$ = < $100K $$ = $100-250K $$$ = $250-500K $$$$ = $500K-1M $$$$$ = > $1M
Priority Level 1 Based on Public Ratings
7/22/2011
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
Priority Level 2 Based on Ratings
Priority Level 3 Based on Ratings
Priority Level 6 Based on Ratings
Examples of Ideas for Other Opportunities:
Mason Corridor Enhancements, Linkages
Additional Enhanced Interpretive/Wayfinding Signage
Portable Security Cameras
Enhance Lighting, South Side of Mountain from College to Remington Garage
Festival Grounds Somewhere Near Downtown
More Bike Parking
Full Size Multi-Use All-Season Outdoor Ice Rink
Smoother Railroad Crossings at Oak and Olive
Parks Maintenance Shop Participation
Linden/Willow Water Feature (Outside GID Boundary)
Other Pedestrian Lighting
Amphitheatre Participation
Community Marketplace Participation
Handicap Spaces
Other Parking Facilities, Renovations
Special Events Facility Participation
Parking Structure Participation
POTENTIAL
FUNDING PARTNERS
DDA
DDA, City
DDA
Developers, Owners
City, Owners
?
City, DDA
DDA
DDA
DDA, CDOT
?
DDA, City
City, DDA
?
City (Transfort)
FC Muni Railway
?
City (Transfort)
?
?
?
?
?
?
DBA, DDA, City
?
1
Downtown General Improvement District
Capital Improvements Plan
Descriptions of
Potential Projects
$ = < $100K $$ = $100-250K $$$ = $250-500K $$$$ = $500K-1M $$$$$ = >
$1M
Cost Magnitude Key:
August 2, 2011
ATTACHMENT 3
2
This potential project is to enable the GID to assist with funding portions of Old
Town Square (OTS) renovations. Specific components would be determined
through additional planning and design work. Some example needs include
electric infrastructure for performance sound and lighting, plaza lighting
renovation, a fire place, and possible reconfiguration of the fountain, stage, and
restroom building to make room for larger performances, enhance the connection
with Linden Street, and renovate the fountain equipment.
Old Town Square is now over 25 years old, and draws more, bigger crowds than
ever. Numerous needs and ideas for renovations have come up over the years.
OTS has been maintained by the DDA in the past, but DDA funding is now sharply
reduced to a level where they have lost the ability to cover a significant majority of
the renovation costs.
Origin: Old Town Square Needs Assessment Study, 2009.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$-$$$$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
North end of Old Town Square at its junction with Linden Street.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 1
► Old Town Square Renovations
3
Lights in trees along E. Mountain Avenue
This potential project is to enable the GID to assist with funding all or a share of
the holiday lighting installation.
This annual installation is currently funded by the DDA under a contract set to
expire after 2011. The DDA, DBA, and City have been parties to a three-way
partnership in the contract, but all three have had revenue cuts that place the
program in question.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
► Holiday Lights and Electricity
Lights in trees along East Mountain Avenue.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 1
4
Existing alley on extending south from Mountain Avenue, across Oak Street to Olive Street, on the
east side of College Avenue. (Behind Old Chicago and Ace Hardware.)
This potential project is to enable the GID to assist in funding additional enhanced
alleys.
A Downtown Alleys Master Plan Report by the DDA identifies a system of alley
makeover projects to enhance pedestrian connectivity and interest. A number of
these projects have been executed by the DDA, but more remain. Examples of
prime candidates for funding are: Linden to Chestnut, behind Armadillo and the
Wright Life; Mountain to Olive on the west side of College, behind Old Chicago
and Ace Hardware; Laporte to Tenney Court between the Civic Center garage and
Tenney Court; and Oak to Olive at the Oak/Remington Lot, behind the Aggie
Theater and Tony’s Lounge.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment:: $$$$-$$$$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
► Additional Pedestrian-Enhanced Alleys
A pedestrian-
enhanced alley
(Trimble Court).
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 2
5
This project is to help the museum function as an integral part of Downtown’s
attractiveness for visitors, by making the linkages clear and inviting. Components
would be determined through further planning and design.
Key streets include College, Mason, Jefferson/Maple, and Cherry/Willow. Visual
cues, like wayfinding signage, artistic markers, or landscape features of some
kind could be considered. Physical features, such as sidewalk segments,
crosswalks and corner plazas at intersections, pedestrian lighting, bollards, and
other urban design features could highlight the connections. Also, a trolley track
extension to the Trolley Barn could be a part of enhanced linkages. A “wild card”
factor is the redevelopment status of the block between Maple and Cherry on the
west side of College Avenue. The museum is outside of the GID boundary,
separated by this block.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Existing street edges
on the block between
the museum and the
GID’s boundary .
► Enhance Linkages to New Museum
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 3
6
This potential project is an ongoing program to repair and replace damaged
sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. A large, one-time project is currently fixing the
extra-wide, core-area sidewalks in 2011. This project would fund smaller scale
replacements, throughout the GID, as an ongoing program.
Modest funding amounts could be useful, e.g., as little as $10,000 in a given year.
There is currently no effective program for this concrete work. Municipal Code
places responsibility on property owners to maintain sidewalks, curbs, and gutters
so they do not endanger the public; but that is difficult to implement, and does not
require consistent quality of finish. A GID program could provide a more practical,
organized, quality approach for Downtown.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment:: $
► Sidewalks, Curbs, and Gutters Replacement
New sidewalk, curb, and gutter fitted in among older existing portions of
sidewalk that were in good condition.
Example showing cracks and heaving in concrete sidewalk and tree grate
curb.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 3
7
This potential project is dependent on the outcome of a Jefferson Street
Alternatives Analysis Study currently underway by the City, DDA, and CDOT.
That study is scheduled for completion in Fall 2011. It includes a funding
allocation for subsequent construction of its recommendations.
This project is could help meet a need or opportunity to partner in design
enhancements to fully realize the community’s desires to mark this Downtown
gateway, if the enhancements exceed the scope of the committed funding. Any
GID funding would be used to augment and partner with, and not to replace, the
committed funding.
Existing conditions at the southwest corner of this key Downtown entry.
► Jefferson/Mountain Gateway
Urban Design and Landscaping
Origin: Downtown Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 3
8
This project is a general idea for the GID to assist ongoing efforts to seek
locations for additional public restrooms, and also assist with funding if a good
location is found. Restrooms are a continual topic for Downtown bar owners,
Police District 1, City facilities managers, and other interests.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
► Additional Public Restrooms Funding
Example of a “have2p” restroom locator program from another city that has
restroom options.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 3
9
This project is to use the GID to fund maintenance of enhanced pedestrian alleys
(trash, cleaning, snow removal, flowers, lighting, etc.). This would be a
cooperative effort with the DDA which currently funds the maintenance, to allow
the DDA to use its funding for other capital projects, such as a portion of the Old
Town Square renovation and the continuation of its public/private facade
improvement program.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Photo: alley pavers, flowers, lighting, and trash receptacle.
► Maintenance of Enhanced Pedestrian Alleys
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 4
10
This project would be included as part of any larger Old Town Square renovation
package, but it was also suggested as a special, smaller project to highlight
separately as a possible first step. The idea is to update lighting with more
historic-styled fixtures that offer today’s better performance in terms of energy
efficiency, aesthetics, and functionality in lighting the plaza.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
The predominant existing lighting type in Old Town Square.
► Old Town Square Plaza Lighting Renovation
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 4
11
This project idea is dependent on outcome of a Jefferson Street Alternatives
Analysis Study currently underway by the City and CDOT. That study is
scheduled for completion in Fall 2011. It includes a funding allocation for
subsequent construction of its recommendations. The idea is to help meet a
need or opportunity for additional streetscape enhancement funding that the GID
could add to committed funding, based on an assumption that the committed
funding will not be adequate to build the full streetscape recommendations that
may result from the study. Any GID funding would be used to augment and
partner with, and not to replace, the committed State funding.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Concept sketch of one early alternative being examined, with three traffic lanes, median segments,
a bike lane, and improvements to parking and sidewalks.
► Jefferson Streetscape
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 4
12
This project was on the previous 1994 project list. It would upgrade the west side
of College Avenue at current Sports Authority frontage, reinforcing the theme set
by landscaping on the east side. The goal is to enhance the image at this key
south entry to Downtown. Street trees, low screen walls, plantings, irrigation, and
a seating area are recommended. Also, a median planter could reinforce the
Downtown theme, and new enhanced crosswalks could aid pedestrian crossings
and highlight the link between Downtown and CSU.
Origin: Downtown Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$
West side of College
Ave. at Mulberry
Existing median
Existing crosswalk
Downtown median planter
Enhanced crosswalk
► Mulberry/College Streetscape/Gateway
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
13
This project would supplement or replace current funding by the DDA on an
annual basis. A recent reduction in DDA funding has placed continued
operations in question. Also, the current system is reaching the end of its life
cycle and will soon need significant equipment replacements. This project would
involve exploring alternatives for the location and character of an ice rink into the
future. It may be dependent on a larger Old Town Square Renovations project.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Ice rink on Old Town Square.
► Ice Rink Funding
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
14
This project idea is to transform the nondescript, anonymous appearance of the
facility with an architectural makeover. The concept is that the character of the
facility may be contributing to undesirable/illicit activity which is an extensive
problem currently; and that enhancing the appearance, with a roof and other
architectural enhancements, could affect behavior and use of the facility. Also,
the current door/entry arrangement, which is based on occupying the facility
behind a locked door, could be reconsidered. Other ideas, such as adding
classical music, could be tried.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
The existing public restroom.
An example from another city.
► Upgrade Existing Restrooms at
Oak/Remington Lot
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
15
This project is to seek ways to add sculpture or figurines, paving inlays, murals,
artistic treatment of urban design features such as signal and light poles, or other
features. The City’s Art in Public Places Program could assist with logistics. Any
GID funding would augment, not replace, any City APP efforts.
Origins: UniverCity Connections Report, and a past GID design exercise.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Sketch: street
art sculpture.
Sketch: bronze city
map paving inlay.
Sketches: ideas for streetscape features – pylons, a sandstone horse trough fountain, and a
mortar-and-pestle sculpture have historic precedents.
► Public Art
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
16
This project is a general idea to enable the GID to partner in physical facilities
(shuttle stops) in and around the GID, if the project moves forward in the future.
The DDA and Transfort have a concept for a downtown shuttle that would offer
continuous loop service linking main routes including Mason, Mountain, Linden,
Willow, and Lincoln.
Origin: UniverCity Connections Report
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
► Transit Circulator
Example circulator shuttles from other cities.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
17
This project would enable the GID to partner with the Municipal Railway Society
and any other interests in extending the trolley’s operations. It was presented in
public outreach as an extension of the tracks one block eastward from Howes to
Mason, to bring the trolley closer to the core area, with the additional possibility of
extending the tracks northward to the Trolley Barn on North Howes to store and
maintain trolley cars. Input from the Municipal Railway Society clarified that the
priority need is not to extend the tracks to the Trolley Barn, and not to extend the
tracks eastward on Mountain Avenue.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Current east terminus at Howes Street in the Mountain Avenue median.
► Trolley Track Extension
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
18
This project is to design and install additional lighting consistent with other similar
areas. Linden Street lighting is not consistent with lighting levels in other high-
activity areas, due to long distances between the current pedestrian fixtures,
creating darker areas.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
A stretch of Linden Street sidewalk that could benefit from more street/sidewalk lighting.
► Linden Street Pedestrian Lights
Replacement or Augmentation
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 5
19
This project is to improve the few bus stops on College Avenue in the GID. The
concept is that they present opportunities for highly visible features to
complement the streetscape, such as pavilions, shelters, markers, etc.
Origin: Downtown Strategic Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Existing Bus Stop
► Enhance Bus Stops
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
20
This project is to lift and re-set pavers that have settled on the Linden Street
sidewalk. This could be included as part of a larger overall sidewalk replacement
program which is listed as another potential project. But, it has also been
suggested as a potential project to highlight separately because it is a defined
issue in a one-block area. This is a task that currently does not clearly fall under
any other funding source.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
► Linden Street Paver Renovation
Pavers that have sunken due to settling of the subgrade.
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
21
This project is to develop a pedestrian promenade linking the Lincoln Center to
the retail core. A series of display areas for artwork at key points would invite
walking from one display to the next. Concepts include narrowing streets with
curb extensions to improve pedestrian use and provide special landscape areas,
new sidewalk sections and plaza areas, curb plantings and irrigation, sculpture,
pedestrian lights and banner mounts, and display lighting are recommended.
The diagonal orientation of Canyon offers unique design opportunities, and the
Canyon/Mulberry corner is important to the image of the Lincoln Center and as
the southwest entry to Downtown.
Origin: Downtown Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$-$$$$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Sketch: pedestrian features at Canyon and Meldrum
► Canyon Art Walk & Southwest Entry
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
Sketch: Canyon/Mulberry intersection looking east
22
This project is to enhance key street crossings to more clearly favor pedestrians.
One prime example location would be the crossing of Mulberry Street along
College Avenue, to better tie Downtown to CSU. That location, which is
considered the southern entry into Downtown, could potentially be related to a
larger gateway streetscape project. This concept includes identification of the
key crossings that may warrant enhancements.
Origin: Downtown Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
Example of an enhanced crosswalk with colored, textured paving, a median refuge,
and corner plaza pavers.
► Enhanced Crosswalks
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
23
This project is to create a temporary location for mid-size events at the 100 block
of West Oak Street abutting Oak Street Plaza. Features could include landscape
islands, bollards, pedestrian lighting, paving enhancements, coloring existing
paving, overhead string lighting, overhead banners, electrical infrastructure for
event equipment, and similar elements. Design could reinforce the linkage to Oak
Street Plaza. The idea could be tested experimentally and incrementally.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
A test of temporary, partial street closure in another town, demonstrating historical lighting,
overhead light strings, café seating, a flower market, art studio, live music, and more, done
as a demonstration with a budget of $1,000.
► Oak Street Parking Lot – Design for
Temporary Events
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
24
This project would explore a potential mid-block crossing in the 100 block north
of College Avenue, linking the Civic Center parking garage through the Opera
Galleria to Trimble Court and Old Town Square. The concept would trade
parking spaces for pedestrian connectivity. Exploring this idea would involve the
Colorado Department of Transportation in evaluating changes to traffic flow and
safety.
Origin: Downtown Strategic Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$
The idea is for a crosswalk at this mid-block location
connecting to the Opera Galleria, center of photo,
which provides public access to the Civic Center
parking garage.
Example of such a crosswalk, at the County Office Building on Mountain
Avenue.
Aerial view of the idea.
► Mid-block Pedestrian Crossing @ Opera
Galleria
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
25
This project would extend curb lines at key street corners, similar to the curb
bulges at corners on College Avenue. The Downtown Strategic Plan recommends
orienting redevelopment in the near West Side and East Side areas to E/W streets
leading into the core area, and recommends this kind of enhancement. For
example, crossing Mason and Howes at Mountain, Oak, and Magnolia are
mentioned. Some east side locations may be similar, e.g., Olive at Remington and
Mathews.
Origin: Downtown Strategic Plan
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
Example of Olive Street crossing Remington – the pedestrian in the photo is walking into the core
area.
► Shorten East/West Pedestrian
Crossings Leading Into Downtown
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
26
This project would add banner-ready brackets or arms to street light and traffic
signal poles, to allow efficient management of a coordinated Downtown banner
program.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Photo: example banner on signal mast.
► Banner Infrastructure
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
27
This project was suggested at a public open house, and so it was not rated and
is not included on the project list for the GID Board Work Session on August 9,
2011. It would create a 'european style' open plaza bounded by buildings,
behind the twenty-plus restaurants that currently back up to the existing parking
lot near the southeast corner of Mason and Mountain. For example, the current
slate of potential restaurant patios includes Tasty Harmony, Rio Grande,
Ingredient, Lulu's, Beach House, Sonnys, Old Chicago, The Indian Buffet, Fish,
Dempseys, and Everyday Joes Coffee.
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $$$$-$$$$$
Addition to Old Town: The Piazza.
More than a dozen restaurants
back up to this space.
► The Piazza
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
28
This is a general idea for the GID to have funds to be able to respond
opportunistically to projects that may arise. A number of examples have been
noted:
► Participation in a future new parking structure
► Mason Corridor enhancements and linkages
► Enhanced Wayfinding/Interpretive Signage
► Other parking facilities, renovations, or enhancements
► Community marketplace participation
► Maintenance shop participation
► Pine streetscape partnership on redevelopment sites
► Bicycle parking
► Other unforeseen opportunities for partnership or leverage
► Urgent problems with existing GID improvements
► Others?
► Reserve Fund to Respond
to Emerging Partnership Opportunities
Downtown GID – Potential Projects – Priority Level 6
Preliminary Cost Magnitude Assessment: $-$$
(Dependent on GID role in partnership with
other funding sources.)
Attachment 4
1
Public Comments
Following are comments received in response to an online questionnaire and a public
open house regarding potential projects to fund using the GID. Some comments pertain
to potential projects which were presented and rated in the outreach, and some comments
suggest other topics to consider.
Online Comments Received
• Enhance lighting from College to Remington parking garage along South side of
Mountain Ave.
• Keep up the good work with District One officers. They help to make it safer for
regular folks who want to enjoy downtown. My Mom enjoys Old Town, but without
police presence, I don't take her there.
• Move some events more north.
• We need a festival grounds somewhere near downtown to put all the public events
that are so popular here. Where, I don't know.
• I think more bike parking would be a good thing. You can’t ride them downtown so,
it would be great to have enough places to park them!
• Could the 200 n college block be improved? There are no street lights on the
sidewalk. For shoppers, it would be nice to even have a garbage can on the northwest
corner. I'm not sure if there could be benches and other improvements made on the
street as well, but it is a really neglected street that holds the city building on it. If the
city wants growth in the downtown to continue, I would think that this block that
links the downtown to the bus stop and the discovery center would be an important
street to improve to encourage people to go downtown after being in the
museum/discovery center.
• Consider partnerships for funding a permanent full size multi-use outdoor ice rink
downtown to accommodate all season activities.
• Comment. The pedestrian bulbs that stick out in the streets, for example on Mountain
and Mason, are hazardous to bike riders because they push them into the traffic lane.
While I appreciate the new sharrows, the drivers don't know what they mean and it's
still dangerous to ride in the middle of the lane. I'd suggest not adding any more
bulbs. New Projects How about smoothing out the railroad crossings at Oak and
Olive. They almost know your teeth out on a bike. How come the city is studying
sound protections from trains only south of downtown and not in downtown? The
residents here have to listen to loud and frequent train horns in the middle of the
night.
Attachment 4
2
• Wide streets need large banners. Some of the existing banners have been too small
and do not call enough attention to themselves. Size the brackets accordingly. I am
interested in how the public art /artists is/are chosen. I think we need to have some
standards for the public art.
• Restroom Signs, and more public transport at
night!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• Yes, please oh please....more parking for bikes! We are finally getting folks to ride
downtown, but they have no place to lock up. I hate to see people lock to trees....
• Large downtown roofed amphitheater two small open-air amphitheaters two hotels--
boutique and mid-level--200 rooms max round-about at College/Laporte/Walnut
• Instead of extending the trolley straight east on Mountain, send it up Howes to
Laporte and over on the north side of Laporte to Mason. This will allow for Transfort
and the Municipal Railway to be more seamlessly integrated. On Jefferson/Riverside,
positioning the bike lanes between moving traffic and parking lanes is unacceptable
considering the truck traffic. Bikes will either have to choose between getting doored
or going under the wheels of a semi truck. A 2 way contra-flow cycle-track
constructed on the Northeast side of Riverside would be safer and more pleasant to
ride.
• I guess this is outside the GID area, but there is significant tourist (and local) travel
between downtown and Odell Brewing (and FCB) via West Mountain Ave and
Lincoln Ave (by bike, car, and some pedestrians). Pedestrian sidewalks and bike
lanes (and signage, landscaping, etc) along Lincoln Ave would be a benefit and have
a high-profile. A friendlier connection from Odell's to Linden and/or NBB via
Willow or 1st Street also is an idea. (and/or enhanced visibility of the entrances to the
Poudre trail there.) (b) The railroad crossings on Mason Street at Oak and Olive are
very rough for bicycles. It would be great to upgrade them to the track crossing type
used at Mountain and Laporte. (c) rather than add downtown circulator shuttles, I’d
rather see more circulator shuttles to get to and from downtown from area hotels, etc.
(d) Kudos to DDA on the great alleyway improvements in recent years. Thanks for
the downtown planning and ongoing improvements.
• Better public transit options for getting to downtown from other areas.
• More regular late bus routes to downtown from other parts of Fort Collins (Such as
Harmony and Timberline). The routes right now are not viable options for going out
even for dinner on some evening, or downtown events.
• This is a great list so far! Keep up the good work.
Attachment 4
3
• There is a street in Denver that has open grates in the sidewalk where sounds
emanate from. It leads to the art and cultural complex and is so cool! I think that
when considering art in the public places (which is always interesting) that this
"sound art" could be incorporated somehow.
• Extend trolley line to new museum.
• Not at this time but the need for proper toilet and trash facilities is very important in
my opinion. I'm not even sure I would know where to find a restroom if I were in Old
Town at 11pm.
• Keep the Mason Corridor project alive!!! Especially through/around campus!
• Didn't see the year-round community market place anywhere in here. A market place
would add a lot more to Old Town than fancy cross walks.
• Some great ideas here!
• Downtown tries to be very pedestrian friendly but it still has 287 running right
through the center. I think the best thing for Old Town is reducing the traffic. I wish I
had suggestions on how to reroute traffic away. The other thing as far fetched as it is
would be a monorail. They can be beautiful and they are raised so they don't affect
traffic. Also, it can be used to get all around town and even connect surrounding
towns.
• A non-grade pedestrian/bicycle crossing of the railroad track running through Mason
Street.
• Get folks who live in FC to volunteer to help on projects, including labor (skilled and
unskilled). People will show up and help if asked.
• Thanks for posting on FB for more input.
• All of these projects are nice, but if we don't get a grip on the drunks and violence
surrounding Old Town then all of the improvements are in vein.
• Physically separated bike lanes are welcome anywhere downtown where appropriate!
• Watch the spending.
• Please consider adding a fence to the Oak Street Plaza fountain. My family loves to
play in the water, but I hesitate to take them because there is no visual barrier from
the street fountain and the street. Perhaps a row of benches, it would add additional
seating and create a boundary for children. It feels very unsafe in its current
condition. Thank you for taking time to gather opinions!
Attachment 4
4
• I strongly support projects that integrate solar and other renewable technologies that
showcase art and the City's commitment to being green. In my opinion projects that
directly relate to the Mason Street BRT investments will be extremely valuable long-
term and will make the community that much more accessible and appealing to
students, visitors and existing residents. I'm not sure if Lincoln Street is included in
the boundary but I think it is one of the biggest priority streetscape/improvement
projects that needs to be addressed due to the significant bike traffic and impression
that it leaves on tourists (visiting the breweries).
• THE PIAZZA~ A brilliant idea to create a 'european style' open plaza behind the
twenty-plus restaurants that currently back up to the existing parking lot near the
south east corner of mason and mountain ave. Remove the parking and build a
beautiful plaza for outdoor patios connected to each restaurant etc. The patios could
include Tasty Harmony, the Rio Grande, Ingredient, Lulu's, Beach House, Sonnys?,
Old Chicago, The Indian Buffet, Fish, Dempseys?, and Joes Coffee, This would
GREATLY enhance our town!!
• I think the sidewalks are in extreme need of repair and should be the top priority. It
would be neat to extend the plaza at Oak westward and remove parking to keep it
competlely for pedestrians. Jefferson definitely needs streetscape improvements - I
liked the rendering showing a median -that might help mitigate the truck noise. The
alley/parking lot behind 281 N College/Washingtons needs lighting and other
enhancements - it does not feel safe there at night. Improving that same section along
College is necessary as well. The aesthetics drop in quality on that block compared to
south of Laporte. The alley improvements are wonderful and shouldn't stop until
they're all complete.
• I'd like to see projects that help bring a closer link between old town and attractions
like: 1) the Breweries (bike tours) 2) new Museum on Cherry 3) and even the Poudre
river. Given this, I like the ideas involving enhancements of roadways, sidewalks,
signs, etc. on the East and North sides of Old Town. Jefferson can be busy with all of
the trucks and biking can be a little scary without a bike lane. If there is some way
the DBA and/or the City of Fort Collins to proactively search for and incentivize a
business or businesses to develop the empty block between Maple and Cherry. It
would be nice if something was developed that complemented Fort Collins and even
help attract visitors and additional tax revenues!! A little tax incentive now will pay
off in the long run. From my experience, most people drive their own cars or bike to
Old Town. I feel addressing high dollar public transportation projects is something
that can wait until Old Town is beefed up a bit.
• If mini electric cars grow then create parking spaces for them because you can get 2
in one auto spot. Also more parking for bikes & under 50cc scooters. Thank you!!
• Keep some holiday lighting in the trees up year-round
Attachment 4
5
• Adding medians down Loomis Ave. To slow traffic down and make it safer for bikes,
pedestrians and also slow storm water
• Use FEDERAL grants and opportunities to fix roads, traffic lights, etc.
• Keep up the great work!
• The trolley extension to Mason is a bad idea! The goal is to reach the old trolley barn
on Howes. That needs to have the priority.
• Yeah, enhance the streets, they need repaving!
• GID funds should be used primarily for new capital projects and not for maintenance
of existing or new projects. Need to do projects that increase activity and interest in
downtown which will generate more money for GID to do more projects.
• Maintain existing facilities ... quit spending on useless ideas.
• There is nothing about bicycling enhancements here. Bike guideways through Oak
St. Plaza and Old Town Square would help direct and smooth out cycling in old
town. Also, roundabouts at Canyon and Magnolia, Olive and Oak would help make
this a better bike route to Old Town. (Not to mention Mulberry and Canyon).
• I endorse Glenn Konen's "The Piazza" project between Mountain and Oak Street.
• Gateways at Mulberry and Whitcomb, and at Mulberry and Canyon, to invite and
lead the CSU communities toward the downtown. 2. Roundabout at Mulberry and
Canyon.
• Improve the DDA parking lot that "fronts" and is defined by two intersecting alleys
between Mountain and Oak to become a Piazza for public events etc., in the same
way that so many open spaces occur in Europeon cities and towns. THIS IS NOT TO
SAY IT BECOME A "park" that is mostly green OR to become another Oak Street
Plaza dominated with things and trees but an open, mostly hard surfaced space with
pavers that are loose set for easy revisions and maintenance and other infrastructure
to support the "events".
• Public transportation is key for this town going forward.... a street car or electric car
system would put Fort Collins above and beyond the future........ the bus system is
simply not up to par for a town of our size.......... safety call phones would be another
great addition....to be able to call for assistance if needed..
• I would really like the downtown to work on getting more free parking because I
really believe that that issue is a big reason why FC has a successful downtown.
Attachment 4
6
• The questionnaire is a bit too long and it would be helpful when setting a priority if
you could see the list of possibilities at the beginning. I live on W. Oak and go into
the downtown daily. While it is a central place for our entire community, it is also a
part of our own neighborhood and we "locals" support it more than the rest of the
community because we are there more often. The residential neighborhood
surrounding Old Town should always have opportunities for direct impact on DDA
activities.
• Less about making it look pretty and more about functionality, first!!!!
• If Mulberry street leading to College and Mason streets is considered the major DT
gateway, then it seems to me that a vision plan is necessary that would guide future
enhancements, future developments (Sports Authority lot, for example), signage,
streetscaping, etc... I suggest that this also ties in nicely to the pending Mason
Corridor. If some of the suggestions in this surveys had been more connected as part
of a plan, it would be easier to assessment them relative to one another and prioritize
accordingly.
• PLEASE do not invest in the $500,000 bathroom on Oak Street. Can't believe the
City is recommending such a boondoggle!
• A thought: with enough foot traffic downtown, a private entity could run something
like the ice rink. With that in mind, perhaps GID and public funding should focus on
advancing public works (e.g., streetscapes, gateways, shuttles between downtown
and conference hotels) which help maintain activity and interest downtown.
• Many parking issues could be resolved by putting parking outside the downtown area
and providing free, or inexpensive, consistent shuttle service into the core area. This
would reduce the number of cars in old town while potentially increasing the number
of pedestrians.
• I would really like to see Old Town get away from using pavers. I'm guessing they
are as costly as quality concrete, but seem more prone to settling causing tripping
hazards and more work when it comes to snow removal. In addition, if business
owners need to use a lift to maintain their facade, much more work goes into
protecting the pavers from damage. They seem really 80s too, just a terrible idea!
• Thanks for taking input....our city rocks.
• I am happy to see continued focus to make this one of the best towns ever. We had
friends in from Texas and Arizona this weekend, and LOVED the Old Town
atmosphere! Beautiful flowers, music in the square, art visible, just a great mix!
• A lot of the projects are ridiculous and seem totally unnecessary.
• Thank you for getting people's opinions.
Attachment 4
7
• Spend more money just outside downtown....like Mid Town.
• Include fiscal information in the questionnaire. Knowing approximately how much of
the GID funding will be used for each of these projects, and how much each of the
projects cost could significantly change my opinion of what is important
• I would have appreciated the option to respond "DO NOT SUPPORT THIS
PROPOSAL AS DEPICTED HERE". Hi, Medium, Low priority or No Opinion do
not cover the spectrum!
Comments from Open House
Wayfinding Sign System
• Need signage for existing restrooms.
• Way-finding to Poudre Trail access – current signage is very poor; need to be a local
to know where to go.
• Need way-finding on I-25 – it is very poor as it exists.
• The way-finding in Grand Junction is very effective and impressive. The scale, color
and location are all great. In Grand Junction it is difficult to find Old Town and the
National Monument, but they did a fantastic job.
• High priority because we need cohesive signage that leads visitors all the way to Old
Town from I-25 to parking garages, museum and river corridor.
• Pedestrian Signs/Kiosks are another target for graffiti; at least in the form you are
showing now.
Mulberry/College South Entry to Dowtnown
• I really like the pavers for interest. Check out Weaverville, CA. They have
thermoplastic fake bricks that look really fun. Can see on Google street view.
• Mulberry/College needs major help. Realy would be great to have pedestrtan refuges
but not sure if possible. Encourage parking lot to be mini pocket park w/ mini
smoothie/coffee or other small business idea.
Canyon Avenue Art Walk & Southwest Entry
• Yes, yes, yes, but NOT a roundabout.
• Very dangerous intersection solution potential. Suggestions: create a roundabout,
close off Canyon to Mulberry, and reduce the number of options leaving South from
Canyon to Mulberry.
• Repaint crosswalk by Mulberry pool to Mulberry. NO ONE stops for pedestrians.
• I really like the pavers for interest. Check out Weaverville, CA. (Caltrans Project –
view a Google street view). They have thermoplastic fake brick X-walls that look
really fun.
Attachment 4
8
• Mulberry and College needs major help! Really would be great to have pedestrian
refuges not the same, if possible. Encourage parking lot at Sports Authority to be mini
pocket park with mini smoothie/coffee or other business idea at corner.
• Hire the designers who did Ashland Oregon’s Lithia Park. It fully utilizes a small,
narrow area for a fantastic public park. Adds value to the town.
• Too much money to rebuild now. Put a Farmer’s Market here. Close Mulberry
connection. Two narrower lanes.
• I am a big fan of gateways to Old Town so pedestrian traffic is comfortable, safe and
it is a pleasant stroll downtown.
• Narrow Canyon to two narrow travel lanes and provide a public space for Farmer’s
Markets, concerts etc, and during off time, a place to travel through or to and enjoy
Fort Collins.
Linden Street Paver Sidewalk Paver Renovation
• When is Linden going to be paved? I love paved streets. Are we going to continue
with pavers on NE Linden?
• When is paving on Linden Street going to be done?
Jefferson Streetscape
• No median. Jefferson should be part of DBA. Fort Collins history is very important
on corner of Jefferson and Linden. I think it should be kept quiet. Make Willow a
truck route.
Jefferson/Mountain Gateway
• NO Roundabout. Landscaping great. Jefferson should be inclusive for Old Town. A
walkable area from Linden to College.
• I like these because of leverage possibilities and the entrance aspect to Downtown.
• Enhanced gateway to Old Town great use of GID.
• Roundabout please.
Old Town Square
• I’m not so sure about a fire place.
• We need more enforcement in Old Town Square for people on their bikes and
skateboards.
• Cameras in Old Town Square will deter negative behavior.
• Cameras would be great there for negative behavior. More cafes/restaurants with
outside seating or rooftops for people to sit and eat during concerts.
• Economic driver of Old Town. Let’s keep it current and viable. Good use of GID.
Holiday Lights
• Lights in picture have been reduced – it made a difference. Photography setting at
OTS drop-off completely different (worse). Museum cuts also.
• Have Pat Stryker and other businesses, NGO’s and foundations fund.
Attachment 4
9
Ice Rink
• NO ice rink.
• I like the idea of a new full size rink, but where?
• Fund new full size rink in appropriate location.
• We need to make the plaza more family friendly than a bar district.
• Move it to parking lot behind Lyric Cinema, or Oak and Remington parking lot. Does
not add to ambience of Old Town feel.
Sidewalks, curbs and gutters
• GID funding should not be used for costs related to city maintenance. This is general
fund projects responsibility.
Pedestrian Crossing @ Opera Galleria
• I like the centerline at College parallel parking idea with sidewalk in middle. It is
challenging today the way it exists.
• Paid parking downtown like Boulder.
Enhanced Crosswalks
• Enhancement of crosswalks period! Drivers do NOT stop.
• Thermoplastic brick x-walks. The city standard enhanced seems to not be eye
catching enough and too pale.
East/West Pedestrian Crossings into Downtown
• Bulb-outs whenever possible. I agree – shorten the ped crossings. Art on the corners
could be low maintenance.
Additional Pedestrian-Enhanced Alleys
• Love the alleyway projects. Good on ya DDA !
Enhanced Linkages to new Museum
• This would get people’s attention more once the museum is built. Yes, we definitely
need an enhanced pedestrian connection between the transit center and Mason Ct.
Mid-block crossing possible?
• High importance one it is built.
Public Art
• Love the utility box art.
• The wonderful planters and flower beds are more important for me if costs compete.
• Art on the corners like Grand Junction. Call them and ask them for details.
• NO TAX DOLLARS FOR THIS, PERIOD! Hideous, white, marble monstrosity
and other “modern” art stinks!!!
• I like the new location of the white statue. In the right location it shines and is
appropriate.
Attachment 4
10
Additional Public Restrooms
• Public restrooms need to be highly maintained. Example of restrooms in Bryant Park,
NYC.
• Should be paid for by City General Fund, not GID.
Upgrade Existing Restrooms at Oak/Remington
• Restrooms must be maintained, ex. Bryant Park, NYC.
• Downtown needs far more restrooms to accommodate the late night crowd, which can
be 2000-3500 on any given weekend night. Would cut down on public urination.
• Good idea to improve this and it will reduce public urination and make it more
comfortable for Old Town pedestrians.
• Existing restrooms are often locked by cleaning service. Ensure these are available
for residents and citizens.
Oak Street Parking Lot
• I like this idea. Temporary sounds great.
• West Oak St and Chestnut St. could be more utilized for events.
Enhanced Transit Stops
• I totally agree! Also, have additional pull-outs for buses to keep traffic moving.
• This should be funded by City General Transportation Fund, not GID.
• I am the only person I know who rides the bus.
Transit Circulator
• The cost of maintaining this transit circulator negatively impacts other more
important projects.
Trolley Track Extension
• I like anything to do with the trolley. Extend tracks to trolley barn, have parking
there, run the trolley more often, get the second car up and running, etc.
• Have parking at City Park with free rides for people who get validated tickets from
merchant. Don’t know how to manage, but …
• The loss of parking for the infrequent use of the trolley is not a good idea.
Additional Ideas
Additional Parking Facility
• Include river district into to GID and extend Old Town feel to Poudre River – Expand
boundary.
• We have two parking structures – probably should be free so people will use them.
Noise Abatement
• Yes, noise abatement in Old Town! Especially train noise.
• Bars on College that have outside patios, especially Tony’s. It is so annoying since
that was put in.
Attachment 4
11
Other
• Tie in North College improvements to Old Town appearance. Fill in blocks that don’t
have continuous sidewalks/bike lanes/ landscaping. Partner with city funds for this
North Gateway to Old Town.
• Enhance Mulberry/College intersection AND Mason St. block west of intersection to
improve “gateways” to Old Town.
• More bike racks like the NB ones in parking spaces.
• Jefferson St. is so much a part of Old Town – on the west side with shops and on the
east side with Historic site. Please do not put a roundabout there. I suggest moving it
for traffic to Willow and Lincoln. More areas for business and arts.
• I coordinate responsible alcohol retreats (CRAR) and we work to get people home
from bars safely. Tow signs and ticketing are a deterrent for people needing to leave
their car in Old Town. I’d like to explore the idea of developing some sort of system
that would exempt a tow or a ticket from someone who sought a safe walk home
(rather than drive drunk). Bars would distribute them.
• The property north of transit facility (Maple, Cherry, College and Mason) block 23 is
under contract for several million dollars and is zoned for a 9-story building. How
about having a basement parking garage, and the first four story exterior similar to
Northern Hotel, with floors 2 and 3 affordable rent or purchase condos, 4,5,6 and 7
hotel, floor 8 six-figure condos, and floor 9 seven-figure penthouses.
• Move bike parking from on-street parking places to upper level of courthouse parking
garage and make those parking places into handicapped parking. NO METERS
EVER! Reduce two-hour parking to one hour and expand two-hour parking area.
• We need to move bicycle parking off sidewalks and streets to parking garages or
create bicycle lots.
• Enforcement of bikes and skateboards on sidewalks.
• I like the idea of a horse trolley. I hope the city would partner with local companies to
make this work.
• Hard to get things done in one hour – need to park longer than two hours.
• People shopping in Old Town can’t get things done in one hour – need to move car
every hour. Encourage use of parking structures – there is parking!
1
DOWNTOWN GID
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
DOWNTOWN GID
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
1
2
CIP for the GID
- A List of Potential Projects
CIP for the GID
- A List of Potential Projects
ATTACHMENT 5
2
3
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
• Are there any questions, comments, or ideas
about:
- Potential projects?
- Priorities?
• Does the Board need any particular information
for the adoption hearing on October 18?
• Are there any questions, comments, or ideas
about:
- Potential projects?
- Priorities?
• Does the Board need any particular information
for the adoption hearing on October 18?
THE THE GID GID
4
Maple Street
Jefferson Street
Meldrum
Street
Peterson
Street
Mulberry Street
North
3
5
Mil Levy: 4.94 mills
Annual Revenues about $300,000
Reserve Balance about $535,000
15-Year Projection $5-6 million
Mil Levy: 4.94 mills
Annual Revenues about $300,000
Reserve Balance about $535,000
15-Year Projection $5-6 million
THE THE GID GID
6
PURPOSE PURPOSE of of the the NEW NEW CIP CIP
• Guide Staff Work
• Framework for Decisions
• NOT a commitment or obligation
• Guide Staff Work
• Framework for Decisions
• NOT a commitment or obligation
4
7
NEED NEED for for a a NEW NEW CIP CIP
• Project list last updated in 1994
• Mostly completed
• Bonds retired in 2009
• New Ideas, questions, and issues
• Project list last updated in 1994
• Mostly completed
• Bonds retired in 2009
• New Ideas, questions, and issues
8
5
9
10 10
6
11
12 12
7
13 13
14
PROCESS PROCESS
• May -- Grounding, issues, and brainstorming.
• June -- Discussions with DDA Board, and DBA
Board, the DBA Executive Committee, and DBA
Membership.
• June/July -- Sought thoughts and ideas from
property owners and the public: mail, open house,
online.
• May -- Grounding, issues, and brainstorming.
• June -- Discussions with DDA Board, and DBA
Board, the DBA Executive Committee, and DBA
Membership.
• June/July -- Sought thoughts and ideas from
property owners and the public: mail, open house,
online.
8
15
PROCESS PROCESS
• August
-- GID Board Work Session
-- Analyze costs, partnership opportunities, constraints,
etc.
• September
-- Review draft CIP material with property owners and
the public
-- Assemble the CIP document.
• October 18 – Board Meeting for Approval.
• August
-- GID Board Work Session
-- Analyze costs, partnership opportunities, constraints,
etc.
• September
-- Review draft CIP material with property owners and
the public
-- Assemble the CIP document.
• October 18 – Board Meeting for Approval.
16
THIS WORK SESSION
9
PROJECT LIST
18
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
• Are there any questions, comments, or ideas about:
- Potential projects?
- Priorities?
- The balance of responsibilities among the City, the
DDA, and the GID?
- The balance between a fixed project list and
schedule, and a more general list with flexibility for
staff to find partnerships or respond to needs?
• Does the Board need any particular information for
the adoption hearing on October 18?
• Are there any questions, comments, or ideas about:
- Potential projects?
- Priorities?
- The balance of responsibilities among the City, the
DDA, and the GID?
- The balance between a fixed project list and
schedule, and a more general list with flexibility for
staff to find partnerships or respond to needs?
• Does the Board need any particular information for
the adoption hearing on October 18?
Kathleen Bracke, Director of Transportatio
nator
ager
Molly North, Assistant Bicycle Coordi
Randy Hensley, Parking Services Man
Timothy Wilder, Senior City Planner
60 seconds Yes
Study underway of current regs and other options to Council re: possible changes or
prohibition
Gainesville, FL No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No
Prior to 2008 they were allowed under limited circumstances, but the code changed and they
were not permitted because of their distraction. When the change occurred, there was a
provision that the prohibition would be reviewed in 3 years. That review is occuring for their
entire code, and no changes are being proposed to remove the prohibition.
Greeley, CO Yes 50% No Yes No 30 seconds No
New sign code was adopted October 2010; committee, research, old code was too
prohibitive, technologies change open door to look at it again
Iowa City, IA
Yes; only within
commercial or public
zones. Only time and
temp signs allowed in
residential zone.
40%, monument sign 50% No Yes
Limited to just
one color
60 minutes; time and
temperature signs are
not regulated
No Code was revised about 5 years ago to allow these signs.
Norman, OK Yes Only regulate for institution signs, 50% No No No
Gas signs are allowed to
change because of
assumed infrequency, all
others are not
No Code has been in effect with minor changes since '92.
Provo, UT Yes N/A
Flashing/Scrolling in
commercial zones
Yes No 10 seconds No
Recently amended the shopping center area, adopted new zones for downtown area that sign
code has changed. Downtown needs rejuvenation, large shopping center wanted to do
signage that wasn't permitted, so Provo accommodated their request and revised other
sections of sign code.
Santa Barbara, CA
Yes; only for theater
marquee signs, business
directories, church and
museaum signs, gas
price signs.
N/A No No No N/A No
Last month, City Council approved gas stations to allow electronic message advertisements.
Was surprised City Council allowed this ‐ they're trying to be business friendly. Since it's so
new, not many are taking advantage, so it hasn't been a problem so far.
Tempe, AZ
Yes; only for theaters,
places of worship,
museams, and gas
stations
Gas price sign ‐ 50%; others are not limited Yes No No N/A No Code was revised in 2005. Churches have been the most common user of digital signs.
Peer City Review ‐ Digital Sign Regulations
technology: SoFtware
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 30.9%
Industry growth in Nation: -3.0%
# of companies 357
# of employees 2,200
Average earnings $75,979
BioScience
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 2.8%
Industry growth in Nation: -3.3%
# of companies 54
# of employees 2,073
Average earnings $61,337
technology: hardware
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 6.1%
Industry growth in Nation: -2.7%
# of companies 343
# of employees 4,526
Average earnings $95,214
water innovation
Industry growth in Fort Collins: 15.1%
Industry growth in Nation: -11.3%
# of companies 36
# of employees 1,406
Average earnings $61,255
3
developing new products to treat and diagnose
infectious diseases
• Includes a bioscience business incubator
• Launching pad for scientific discoveries which
are patented and brought to market
• Faculty and students, as well as startup
companies and other private-sector scientists
use the lab
2
• OptiEnz
• Regenisis
• Riverside
• Rubicon
• Stewart Environmental
• Symbios
StrengthS
• Headwater state
• Abilities of Water Innovation Cluster
members to produce long-term solutions to
global water issues.
• Hydraulic engineering programs at CSU
which attract international students for
implementation in their home countries
grantS and reSearCh FUnding
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture National Science Foundation
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Office of Naval Research
2
• Variety of technical and creative jobs
• Supports other creative companies
• Adds value to our high quality of life
• Online resource for Fort Collins Arts District,
fortcollinsarts.org
2
• Information Technology Experts, Inc. (ITX)
• Integware, Inc.
• Red Hen Systems
• Riverside Technology, Inc.
• Secure 64
sample harDWare
companies
• AMD
• Avago
• Hewlett Packard
• Intel
• LSI
• National Semi-Conductor
• NVIDIA
• Pelco
strengths
• Synergistic relationships between other
software companies along the
Colorado I-25 Corridor
• Access to skilled workforce
• Reliable and affordable infrastructure
• High quality of life
• Denver International Airport, one hour’s drive
energy supply chain
A new initiative is in the works that will map
out the supply chain for the region’s wind and
photovoltaic industries. Before this study, there
was no proactive, focused, statewide renewable
energy supply chain analysis or development
strategy in Colorado. The industry will use the
results of the supply chain study to maximize job
creation by identifying recruitment opportunities
of companies outside our area and forging new
business relationships with existing manufacturers
to produce more products in Colorado.
The study will take place in 2011. Learn more about
the initiative at coloradocleanenergy.com.
2
• NoCoBio Northern Colorado Bioscience
Cluster nocobio.com
gRants and ReseaRch Funding
Colorado State University U.S. Depts. Of Energy and Agriculture
Center for Disease Control Vice President of Research, Colorado State University
National Science Foundation Fund 1, Colorado State University
2
541
Professional,
Scientific, and
Technical Services
15 17 22 22 4 25.0% 1.40 1.21
611 Educational Services 42 53 62 56 15 35.2% -5 -8.6% 0.49 0.50
711
Performing Arts,
Spectator Sports, and
Related Industries
198 190 192 208 10 5.0% 16 8.3% 1.35 1.34
712
Museums, Historical
Sites, and Similar Inst
17 18 15 12 -5 -29.4% -3 -20.0% 0.14 0.13
722
Food Services and
Drinking Places
118 126 119 107 -11 -9.3% -12 -10.1% 1.41 1.33
TOTAL 1,020 1,083 1,091 1,046 26 2.5% -46 -4.2%
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS
Chart A.V.1: Average Employment in the Uniquely Fort Collins Cluster from 2007Q2 through 2010Q2
13 11 6 3 -10 -76.3% -3 -50.0% 0.67 2.00
541
Professional, Scientific,
and Technical Services
264 254 225 186 -78 -29.6% -39 -17.5% 1.40 1.21
551
Management of
Companies and
Enterprises
146 151 140 142 -4 -3.0% 2 1.2% 0.34 0.27
621
Ambulatory Health
Care Services
10 13 11 10 0 0.0% -1 -11.8% 1.03 1.06
923
Administration of
Human Resource
Programs
82 92 103 108 25 30.8% 4 4.2% ND 0.31
TOTAL 2,017 2,141 2,037 2,073 57 2.8% 36 1.8%
ND: Not Disclosable
Sources: CDLE QCEW, CSU, and BLS