HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/18/2013 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 048, 2013, AMENDINGDATE: March 18, 2013
STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley,
Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Brian Varrella
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 6
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 048, 2013, Amending Chapter 10 of the City Code Relating to Development in the
Poudre River Floodplain.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The final component of the Stormwater Repurposing program is to review the level of regulation protecting life and
property for areas within the Poudre River floodplain. Staff is recommending that Council adopt revisions to the City
Code that will establish a “performance-based” criteria and regulation that places more emphasis on life safety through
advance warning and evacuation.
The proposed Code language requires the development of a site-specific Emergency Response Preparedness Plan
(ERPP) for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within
the Poudre River 100-Year floodplain. The ERPP requires that procedures be established for evacuation a minimum
of two hours in advance of when flood waters will impact the site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation
routes. The Code language requires that the ERPP be reviewed and updated annually if there are substantive
changes to elements of the plan. In order to facilitate the implementation of this new Code language, staff has
developed the following documents:
1. A draft template that uses the requirements outlined in the proposed code language to guide the preparation
of site-specific ERPP’s
2. A draft ERPP annual checklist form.
The Working Committee and North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA) support the new approach and
recommend that the proposed revisions to the Poudre River floodplain regulations be presented to City Council for
adoption. The Water Board recommended approval of the proposed revisions as an enhancement to the existing
regulations, but encouraged Council consider prohibiting any new structures (i.e., development, redevelopment, etc.)
in the 100-Year Floodplain.
Staff recommends that an effective date of July 1, 2013 be established so that advance notice can be provided to
property owners and applicants for development submittals.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
City Council requested a review of the Stormwater program in October 2008. Staff identified a list of issues to be
addressed that included a review of the Poudre River floodplain regulations. The review was to focus on whether
revisions were needed to better address foreseeable flooding risks to improve life safety and reduce property damage
using a sustainable approach that considers environmental, economic and social factors. The current regulations
focus almost exclusively on protecting new structures from flooding damage.
Evolution of Floodplain Regulation Revisions
The floodplain regulations have undergone thorough investigation and extensive public outreach over the last 2 ½
years. Floodplain regulation options have been presented and discussed previously at four Council work sessions,
four Water Board meetings and three Natural Resources Advisory Board meetings.
A Working Committee was created to provide public discussion on these revisions met eleven times with Stormwater
and Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) staff between January 2011 and June 2012. The objective was to research,
investigate and evaluate the potential development of an Adverse Impact Review (AIR) process and criteria. The
current regulations allow non-residential development within the 100-year flood fringe on the Poudre River that meets
specific criteria (i.e., freeboard, property use, etc.). Under these existing regulations, the potential flooding impacts
associated with such development are not analyzed. In addition, the group considered additional life safety and
March 18, 2013 -2- ITEM 6
property damage reduction criteria. The overarching goal was to establish criteria that balance the competing
economic, environmental, and public safety values of the Fort Collins community.
As a result of these efforts, and taking into account concerns expressed at Council work sessions regarding the
development of an implementable approach that addresses community values, the proposed revisions have evolved
over time.
Options presented to Council over this time include:
• No change to the Poudre River floodplain regulations (null alternative).
• The Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to adopt a 0.1 foot rise floodway
• The Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to not allow any structures in the 100-year floodplain.
• Adverse Impact Review (AIR).
The Working Committee and staff recommended to City Council that additional consideration be given to implementing
specific life safety and property damage criteria that will enhance and support the existing floodplain regulations.
At the work session in October 2011, Council directed staff to:
• Investigate a "scalable" AIR regulation that would require additional investigation for any development that
happens in areas with a higher potential impact to the flood elevations;
• Work with PFA for the development of specific code language;
• Examine a notification process similar to the Land Use Code with clarification of the associated legal issues
from the City Attorney's Office; and,
• Provide a consistent summary format for the various regulation comparison charts.
In 2012, Stormwater and Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) staff worked in combination with the Working Committee to
further evaluate the AIR process and develop specific life safety criteria. At its May 14, 2012 Working Committee
meeting, the general consensus was reached to discontinue the development of a scalable AIR regulation for the
Poudre River in consideration of:
• the future construction of the Poudre River Downtown Core Improvements and subsequent reduction in
potential development within the revised 100-year floodplain near College Avenue;
• the Link-N-Greens area will develop using a full CLOMR/ LOMR process that will include improvements and
enhancements to the Poudre River adjacent to the site;
• understanding that the Poudre River RiskMAP process will result in dramatically changed (corrected)
floodplain delineation, mapping and flood elevations;
• taking into account that the Floodway Surcharge Analysis identified primarily small floodway impacts to the
Poudre River section within the Mulberry Corridor; and,
• noting that the Mulberry Corridor is in the Growth Management Area (GMA) and not within the City Limits.
Floodplain Regulation Code Language Revisions
The current regulations allow non-residential development within the 100-year flood fringe on the Poudre River that
meets specific criteria (i.e., freeboard, property use, etc.). In addition, “dryland access” by elevating the access
roadways is a typical consideration to ensure the safe evacuation of properties, but only when feasible.
The final consensus of the Working Committee was that the Poudre River floodplain regulations should be revised to
improve life safety by requiring the preparation of site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (ERPPs)
for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the
Poudre River 100-Year floodplain. Staff from the City and PFA were tasked with developing the final code language
to incorporate proposed revisions to the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations into the City Code.
The current effective Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-Year flood elevations reflect significant
flooding depths (i.e., 2 to 3 feet on Vine Drive east of College Avenue) on existing public arterials and collectors that
serve these areas. Requiring the construction of new emergency fire apparatus (access) roads to serve these
properties in times of flooding is not feasible as it will result in excessive grades and extended lengths of “elevated”
roadways that do not appropriately provide for improved life safety and emergency response.
March 18, 2013 -3- ITEM 6
At the February 4, 2013 Working Committee meeting, staff proposed the following revisions which create a
“performance-based” life safety regulation. Staff proposed that the Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan
(ERPP) require procedures be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours in advance of when flood waters
will impact the site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation routes. This places the emphasis on life safety
through advance warning and evacuation instead of the costly and in many cases infeasible construction of “elevated”
emergency access roads. It also avoids potential adverse floodplain impacts resulting from embankments constructed
to elevate new access roads. The proposed Code language that reflects the elimination of the fire apparatus
(emergency access) road requirements and includes the revised ERPP provisions is shown in Attachment 1.
In order to demonstrate how the process would work, staff presented the following documents:
• A draft template that uses the requirements outlined in the proposed code language to guide the preparation
of site-specific ERPP’s
• A sample ERPP for a property within the Poudre River 100 Year Floodplain situated along Vine Drive; and,
• A draft ERPP annual checklist form.
The Working Committee provided valuable feedback and comments on the updated approach as well as the draft
Code language and ERPP forms. The latest versions of the ERPP template and annual checklist form are included
as Attachments 2 and 3, respectively.
Effective Date
Staff recommends that an effective date of July 1, 2013 be established so that advance notice can be provided to
property owners and applicants for development submittals.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The proposed approach of requiring Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (ERPPs) places more emphasis
on life safety through advance warning and evacuation instead of the costly and in many cases infeasible construction
of “elevated” emergency access roads. This approach is also significantly less costly than the scalable AIR approach.
The requirement to prepare an ERPP is triggered by an addition, substantial improvement, change of occupancy,
redevelopment and/or new development within the Poudre River 100-Year floodplain. Anticipated costs include those
that are more easily estimated (initial preparation of the ERPP, annual review and update if conditions have changed)
and implementation measures such as signage and instructions, emergency preparedness kit, mandatory practice
drills, staff training, etc. which are more variable depending on the property location, type of structure, etc. The cost
estimates for the ERPP itself are:
• Initial Cost of ERPP Preparation $500 to $4,000 (Depends on complexity of site)
• Annual Cost (Monitoring / Notices) $0 to $1,000 (Depends on use of own staff or contract with a
meteorological consultant).
Given the typically significant project costs associated with any of the development actions that would trigger the
requirement to prepare the ERPP, the costs involved with the ERPP process are considered by staff and the Working
Committee as reasonable in order to improve life safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The existing Poudre River Floodplain Regulations provide protection to the Poudre River by restricting development
in the floodway and also, to a lesser degree in the flood fringe. Staff believes that the regulations in the Land Use
Code (especially related to buffer standards) provide the additional protections desired by this community and that any
additional code language in Chapter 10 of City Code (Flood Prevention and Protection) would be redundant and not
provide a measurable additional benefit.
When the Poudre River Floodplain Regulation Review was first initiated, one of the key areas of concern was
protecting the natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre River near the Link-N-Greens Golf Course as this was
the largest privately owned, undeveloped property along the Poudre River. The current floodplain regulations in
March 18, 2013 -4- ITEM 6
combination with the Natural Resources Buffer regulations applied at the Link-N-Greens site are achieving the desired
outcomes that were discussed at the beginning of the Poudre River Floodplain Regulation Review process. As part
of the planned Woodward development of Link-N-Greens, considerable amounts of previously placed fill are being
removed to lower the overbank to allow flows to spread out more frequently. This provides for reduced velocities and
improved water quality. Some of this excavated material will be used to elevate the buildings to protect the structures
from flood damage. An old meander bend is being recreated to allow the river to be more connected with the
floodplain. Extensive plantings of native species will create more ecologically diverse habitats. Bank stabilization work
will mitigate erosion problems along the stream banks. The river restoration work is being modeled to ensure that
there is no rise in 100-year flood elevations on nearby property owners. The floodplain maps will be revised through
the FEMA CLOMR and LOMR process to reflect the changes. This is clearly a success story of how the existing
floodplain regulations and natural resources buffer regulations can work together to achieve property protection and
improve natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
It is the recommendation of staff that the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the
proposed Code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness
Plan (ERPP) be prepared, implemented and maintained for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy,
redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. The ERPP shall be reviewed annually by the
facility operator/owner and documentation shall be provided to the City during the first quarter of the calendar year for
plans requiring no changes (annual checklist form) and for plans requiring changes (new ERPP plus annual checklist
form).
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Water Board
At its February 21, 2013 meeting, the Water Board had an extensive discussion regarding the original options and the
Adverse Impact Review (AIR) approach. Several Boardmembers questioned whether the proposed ERPP process
significantly increases life safety if the regulations still allow non-residential development in the 100-Year Floodplain.
Staff noted that any new development, redevelopment, addition or substantial improvement is required by the
floodplain regulations to elevate new structures above the 100-Year Floodplain and to meet freeboard (additional 2
feet) requirements. This greatly reduces potential flooding of and damage to the new construction. The current
regulations, however, do not address emergency access to and evacuation of these structures for employees,
customers, vendors, etc. The intent of the ERPP process is to provide emergency response plans aimed at improving
life safety by encouraging evacuation of these structures in advance of potential flooding. Prohibiting any new
structures in the 100-Year floodplain was championed by some Boardmembers as providing an even higher standard
for life safety.
Concern was expressed that more emphasis should be placed on environmental considerations and protection of the
natural and beneficial functions of floodplains. Staff noted that the existing regulations provide protection to the Poudre
River by restricting development in the floodway and also, to a lesser degree in the flood fringe. Staff believes that
the regulations in the Land Use Code (especially related to buffer standards) provide the additional protections desired
by this community and that any additional Code language in Chapter 10 of City Code (Flood Prevention and Protection)
is redundant and does not provide a measurable additional benefit. A key concern has been protecting the natural
and beneficial functions of the Poudre River near the Link-N-Greens property. Staff from Stormwater, Natural Areas,
and Parks have been actively involved in collaboration throughout the development review process. The proposed
Woodward development is clearly a success story of how the existing floodplain regulations and natural resources
buffer regulations can work together to achieve property protection and improve natural and beneficial functions of the
floodplain.
The Water Board motion below was approved by a vote of 10 to 1::
“In order to mitigate life-safety hazards, the Water Board recommends that the existing Poudre River
floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed code language introducing the
March 18, 2013 -5- ITEM 6
requirement that a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan be prepared and
implemented for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or
new development within the 100-Year floodplain. The Water Board would further recommend that City
Council consider excluding new developments or structures within the 100-year floodplain.”
Attachment 4 contains an excerpt of the minutes from the February 21, 2013 Water Board meeting
Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB)
At its February 20, 2013 meeting, the Natural Resources Advisory Board had an extensive discussion regarding the
original options and NRAB’s previous recommendation that Council adopt the option prohibiting new structures in the
100-Year Floodplain. Staff noted that any new development, redevelopment, addition or substantial improvement is
required by the floodplain regulations to elevate new structures above the 100-Year Floodplain and to meet freeboard
(additional 2 feet) requirements. This greatly reduces potential flooding of and damage to the new construction. The
current regulations, however, do not address emergency access to and evacuation of these structures for employees,
customers, vendors, etc. The intent of the ERPP process is to provide emergency response plans aimed at improving
life safety by encouraging evacuation of these structures in advance of potential flooding.
NRAB members indicated that more emphasis should be placed on environmental considerations and protection of
the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains. Stormwater staff noted that the existing regulations provide
protection to the Poudre River by restricting development in the floodway and also, to a lesser degree in the flood
fringe. Both Stormwater and Natural Areas staff stated that the regulations in the Land Use Code (especially related
to buffer standards) provide the additional protections desired by this community. The proposed Woodward
Development of the Link-N-Greens site presented to NRAB earlier in the evening was referenced as an example of
how the existing floodplain regulations and natural resources buffer regulations can work together to achieve property
protection and improve natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
The NRAB chose not to provide a recommendation on the proposed draft Code language, citing the life safety focus
as being outside of its charter.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
In 2012, Stormwater and PFA staff worked in combination with the Working Committee to further evaluate the AIR
process and develop specific life safety criteria. The Working Committee met five times in 2012 and recommended
that the development of a scalable AIR regulation be abandoned and that staff develop final Code language to limit
flood depths on new fire apparatus (emergency access) roads to six inches and require the preparation and
implementation of Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (ERRPs) for properties that pursue some type of
development or redevelopment.
Working Committee
At its February 4, 2013 meeting, the Working Committee concurred with the staff proposal to eliminate the six-inch
flood depth criteria for emergency access roads and instead modify the ERRP requirements to create a “performance-
based” life safety regulation requiring procedures be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours in advance
of when flood waters will impact the site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation routes. The Working
Committee Meeting minutes are provided in Attachment 5. In summary, the Working Committee’s recommendations
to Council are:
1. Discontinue the development of a scalable AIR regulation; and,
2. Adopt the proposed draft Code language that requires new construction, additions, substantial improvements,
redevelopment or change of occupancy of structures within the Poudre River 100 Year Floodplain to develop,
obtain approval of, and implement an Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan.
Chamber of Commerce
On February 8, 2013, the proposed Code language and accompanying ERRP process, template and annual checklist
were presented to the Chamber of Commerce. Attendees provided varied input and feedback on the process, but in
March 18, 2013 -6- ITEM 6
general expressed that the new approach was much preferable to the AIR process that had been under consideration
previously.
North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA)
On February 12, 2013, staff received an email (Attachment 6) from the North Fort Collins Business Association
(NFCBA) expressing appreciation for the work that has gone into the investigation of potential revisions to the Poudre
River Floodplain Regulations. The NFCBA is in support of the updated approach and identified some
concerns/questions to be addressed in finalizing the process:
1. Clarify the potential liability for businesses, individuals that submit ERPP plans;
2. Recommend that the City consider providing training on the ERPP process;
3. Increase clarity on who is responsible for the ERPP (i.e., building owner, tenant);
4. Provide better information on expected initial / annual costs;
5. Recommend the City develop/offer a grant program for ERPP costs; and,
6. Requested that Council finalize the FP regulation review.
Staff will address these issues in the finalization of the Code language and administrative procedures associated with
the ERPP process.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Proposed Code Language (Chapter 10 – Flood Prevention and Protection)
2. Draft ERPP Template
3. Draft ERPP Annual Checklist Form
4. Water Board minutes, February 21, 2013
5. Working Committee Meeting Summary minutes, February 4, 2013
6. Email from NFCBA Board Secretary, February 12, 2013
7. Council Work Session Summary, October 25, 2011
8. Council Work Session Summary, February 22, 2011
9. Council Work Session Summary, January 11, 2011
10. Council Work Session Summary, August 24, 2010
11. Powerpoint presentation
ATTACHMENT 1
1
Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold
Summary of Proposed Floodplain Regulation Changes
For the Poudre River
Revised 0-23-2013
Municipal Code Chapter 10 - Flood Prevention and Protection
Definitions to be added to Section 10-16
Emergency response and preparedness plan
Fire code – will reference Chapter 9 of Municipal Code
Evacuation
Shelter-In-Place
Dry public road
Change of Occupancy
Section 10-27 (Floodplain Use Permits)
Require documentation of an emergency response plan, if required by Chapter 10.
When the Utilities Executive Director is reviewing the application and determining if it
meets the intent of Chapter 10, one of the factors to be considered is whether the
proposed use is for human occupancy, and if so, the impacts to human safety and the
extent to which emergency response and preparedness and other measures are required
and have been assured in order to reduce safety risk.
Clarify that the Utilities Executive Director may request a condition be placed on the
release of the certificate of occupancy upon submission of final documentation of
compliance.
New Section 10-48 - Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans – (This will apply
only to specific actions in the Poudre River Floodplain as noted below)
For any structure required to submit an emergency response and preparedness plan, the
following emergency planning and preparedness requirements will apply:
Formatted: Centered
Deleted: 1
Deleted: Municipal Code Chapter 9 – Fire
Prevention and Protection¶
¶
New item for inclusion in Section 503¶
¶
Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed so as to
not have more than 6” of flood depth in the
regulatory 100-year flood event.¶
Deleted: ground
Formatted: List Paragraph, No bullets or
numbering
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
2
Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold
I. Items to be included in an Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan
1. Risk Assessment
a. Source, flood frequency, expected duration, timing, depth of flooding,
b. Expected impact on activity and operations
c. Identification of persons potentially impacted
d. Impact on evacuation routes and emergency vehicle access to the site
2. Description of the method of receipt of flood warning
3. Identification and assignment of personnel to implement the plan
4. Procedures for Notification of employees, customers, and other building
occupants, including:
a. Contact information
b. Redundant methods of notification
c. Safeguards to ensure all employees received the notification; and
d. General content of the notices to be provided
5. Description of Procedures for both Evacuation or Shelter-In-Place of building
occupants, including:
a. Method and responsibility for determination of appropriate response
(evacuation or shelter-in-place). For the Poudre River, shelter-in-place is
used only as a secondary response with evacuation as the primary
response.
b. Description of evacuation process, including
i. Timing of opportunity to evacuate requiring for the Poudre River a
minimum of two hours of lead time from when flood waters
would impact the site or any portion of the evacuation routes.
ii. Map and directions with evacuation routes including exits from
building and from building to dry ground.
iii. Mode of evacuation – walking, car, and/or provided transportation.
iv. Alternative routes for evacuation when preferred routes are washed
out or otherwise impassable
c. A description of shelter-in-place, including:
i. Description of safe on-site areas for shelter-in-place occupation
ii. Development and maintenance of emergency preparedness kit
containing supplies for three days including such items as food,
water, blankets, flashlights, NOAA Weather radios, batteries
iii. A communication plan for informing emergency contacts of those
sheltered-in-place
6. Procedures for Protecting the Building from Damage or Hazardous Conditions,
including:
a. Plan for shut down of utilities or equipment
b. Relocation of computers, documents, important resources to higher areas
c. Required or other appropriate floodproofing measures
7. A Process for Distribution and Posting of Plan and Evacuation Routes and
Shelter-In-Place Instructions
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Deleted: no more than
ATTACHMENT 1
3
Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold
8. A description of Mandatory Training and Practice Drills; including
a. Procedures for training employees, including future new employees
b. Annual practice drills (plan during the first quarter of the calendar year)
implementing the plan
c. Documentation of practice drills and identified areas for improvement
9. A Description of Post Flood Recovery Measures, including
a. Procedures for notification to employees and, if applicable, the public,
of when it is safe to return
b. Site clean-up procedures
II. Documentation of emergency response and preparedness plan and required practice
drills and related process improvements shall be on file and available at the
facility for inspection. The plan shall be reviewed annually by the facility
operator/owner and documentation shall be provided to the City during the
first quarter of the calendar year for plans requiring no changes (City-provided
form) and for plans requiring changes (new emergency response and
preparedness plan).
Sections 10-71 (Poudre Floodway), 10-76 (Poudre Flood Fringe Non-Residential
Development) and 10-77 (Poudre Flood-Fringe Mixed-Use Development
New construction, additions, substantial improvements, edevelopment, or change of
occupancy of any structure shall be required to comply with the emergency response and
preparedness requirements (see above).
Deleted: <#> Documentation of PFA-approved
fire apparatus access road shall be provided.¶
Deleted: or rr
Deleted: Sections 10-74 (Change of Use - Poudre
Floodway) and Section 10-79 (Change of Use –
Poudre Flood Fringe)¶
¶
Any Change of Use shall be required to comply with
the emergency response and preparedness
requirements (see above).¶
1
Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP)
In order to mitigate life-safety hazards to occupants of private property within the Poudre River floodplain,
Chapter 10 of City Code requires for non-residential and mixed-use additions, substantial improvements,
change of use, redevelopment and/or new development that private property owners demonstrate flood-
preparedness through the development and implementation of a site-specific Emergency Response and
Preparedness Plan (ERPP). The plan includes, at a minimum, conditions and methods for emergency
preparedness and evacuation from the property. If desired by the property owner, additional measures for flood
protection may be included.
Applicant Information
Name of Business: Type of Business:
Address:
Street Address Unit #
City State ZIP Code
County Parcel ID #: Business Phone Number: ( )
Reason for Review: Redevelopment Annual Update
New Structure Addition
Change of Occupancy Other:
Substantial Improvement
Designated Responsible Party and Status of ERPP
Submitted Date:
Accepted Date: City Staff Signature:
By signing this Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP), I understand that this property is at risk of flooding. I
understand that the ERPP is a tool to help in the planning and response for potential flood events. In the first quarter of each
year I agree to: 1) review the ERPP and submit any changes to Fort Collins Utilities; and 2) if there are no changes to the
ERPP, I will submit the necessary paperwork documenting that the plan has been reviewed, and 3) I will conduct a practice
drill of the ERPP. I understand that the ERPP may not consider all possible scenarios that could result in property damage or
life-safety issues related to flooding and that it is the responsibility of owners, operators and managers of an occupied facility to
be aware of the potential flood threat and to take appropriate actions to protect lives and property.
Signature of Designated
Responsible Party:
ATTACHMENT 2
2
Authorized Persons (Staff Contacts)
The Designated Responsible Person is responsible for preparation and oversight of implementation of the plan. The
Primary Person may be the same, or a different, person, who is responsible for executing the plan in the event of an
emergency. The Primary Person, and Backup Person, as applicable, will redirect resources and, ultimately, shut down
operations, if necessary. These persons will also initiate evacuation in the event of an emergency. I understand that the
ERPP is a tool to help in the planning and response for potential flood events. I understand that the ERPP may not
consider all possible scenarios that could result in property damage or life-safety issues related to flooding and that it is
the responsibility of owners, operators and managers of an occupied facility to be aware of the potential flood threat and
to take appropriate actions to protect lives and property.
Primary Person: E-Mail Address:
(Name)
Title: Work Phone: ( )
Cell Phone: ( )
Other Contact: ( )
The back-up person should be trained to fulfill all the duties of the primary person (monitor weather radio, have necessary
apps/programs installed on personal devices).
Back-Up Person: E-Mail Address:
(Name)
Title: Work Phone: ( )
Cell Phone: ( )
Other Contact: ( )
1. Flood Risk Assessment
a. Source of Flood Risk: Poudre River
Not all floods are the same. While some floods develop slowly over days of heavy rain, others come in the form of swift
moving flash floods, developing in mere minutes. It is important to monitor not only local conditions, but also upstream
conditions that may include the following:
Short Response Times (Minutes to Hours)
Flash Floods due to local rain
Rain on snow
Dam Break
Debris Blockage up/downstream
Longer Response Times (Hours to Days)
Rain on Snow
Snowmelt
Debris Blockage up/downstream
The property must be evaluated for how it will be impacted by flooding. This includes the direction from which flood
waters will come onto the property; critical infrastructure that will be impacted (i.e. buildings, access, etc.); and the
potential for debris blockage that will change the flooding characteristics and/or timing.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
This section to be filled out by an engineer:
3
To complete the information below, identify the location of the critical infrastructure that will be impacted first and complete
all information with respect to that location.
Critical Infrastructure Location: _________________ Elevation: _______ Source of Elevation Data: _____________
100-Year Floodplain Elevation: Flow (cfs): Map Date: Depth of Flooding:
50-Year Floodplain Elevation: Flow (cfs): Map Date: Depth of Flooding:
10-Year Floodplain Elevation: Flow (cfs): Map Date: Depth of Flooding:
b. While some floods may last only a few hours, others may persist for weeks at a time.
Potential impact on activity and operations: No impact
Some operations shut down
All operations shut down, evacuation
Building Flooded
Hazardous-Material Spill
Materials Floating Off-Site
c. Persons potentially impacted:
(i.e. employees, customers, vendors, suppliers, renters of space)
d. Impact on evacuation routes and emergency vehicle access to site:
How 100-yr flood will restrict
access:
How 50-yr flood will restrict access:
How 10-yr flood will restrict access:
No access restriction due to
flooding:_______________________________________________________________
Critical Infrastructure Trigger Point
When condition(s) trigger the 2 Hour Evacuation Warning? (Evaluate based on loss of access, impact to building,
potential debris blockage, timing, etc.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
4
2. Method of Receipt of Flood Warning (Check all that apply)
As a baseline expectation, responsible party shall monitor weather using tools such as CWCB Colorado Flood
Threat web page, NWS Outlooks and Forecasts, etc.
Weather Radio Backup batteries?
(Make/Model) – See Appendix for Supplementary Information
State Stream Gage at Mouth of Canyon (Primary)
URL: http://www.dwr.state.co.us/SurfaceWater/data/detail_graph.aspx?ID=CLAFTCCO
USGS Stream Gage at Lincoln Ave (Secondary)
See Appendix for Gage Monitoring Resources
USGS Water Alert Program
(Gage Selected) (Gage Height) (Monitoring Device)
Contract w/ Private Company for Notification:
(Company Name) (Basis for Notification)
Other:
3. Identification and Assignment of Personnel to Implement Plan (Chain of Command)
In the event that the primary person is unavailable for whatever reason, at least one additional person must be trained on
all notification and decision making processes. The same person may fill multiple roles.
Primary Lead Person: ( )
(May Be Same as 1st Page) (Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Back-Up Lead Person: ( )
(May Be Same as 1st Page) (Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Monitor Water Level/Evacuation Leader: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Shut Down Operations: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Relocate Equipment/Materials: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Notify Employees of Emergency*: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Notify Employees OK to Return: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
Lock-Up of Building/Final Check for Employees: ( )
(Name) (Title) (Phone Number)
*The applicant must keep and maintain a list of all employees and their contact information that must be notified
of an emergency. General employee contact info does not need to be submitted to the City. Businesses shall
maintain a list of standardized procedures for these tasks (not required to be submitted).
5
4. Procedures for Notifying Employees, Customers, and other Building Occupants
a Redundant Methods of Notification (Circle all that apply):
PA Announcement, Call, Text, E-Mail, Other Notification(s):
Describe Notification Process (Priority of Techniques):
c. Safeguards to ensure all employees receive the notification:
d. General content of notices to be provided:
Example: “Severe flood warning at the ______ facility. Evacuate to higher ground immediately using evac route A”
If time allows, notify vendors/suppliers of shutdown.
5. Procedures for Evacuation or Shelter-In-Place of Building Occupants
a.
Determination of appropriate response:
Description of evacuation process: Ready, Set, GO!
The ready, set, go system will allow site specific criteria to be chosen so it will be clear when to get going in the event of a
flood. Describe specific response actions for each:
Ready: Triggered by observation of weather conditions, thunderstorm or flood watch issued by the National
Weather Service. Start actively watching stream gages via computer/smartphone. Pay close attention to weather
radio and weather conditions.________________________________________________________________
Set: Conditions suggest a potential flood. Notify employees of possible need for evacuation. Prepare vehicles for
evacuation. Initiate any planned flood protection measures. _____________________________________
GO: Time to evacuate. Notify employees. Go to rally point or dismiss employees. The goal is to leave at least 2
hours before the property will be affected by flood water. __________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
b. Site specific stream gage indicator table. To be filled out by Engineer.
Gage
Height Water Level Indication
This section to be filled out by an engineer:
6
Preparation process will begin at the following gage height: Feet (This is the Set Point)
Or when NWS __________________ alert is issued or ______________________________________
Evacuation process will begin at the following gage height: Feet (This is the GO Point)
Or when NWS __________________ alert is issued or
Mode of evacuation: Personal Vehicles
Walking
Company Provided Transportation
Map of primary and alternative evacuation routes and building exits has been prepared and attached
Rally Point Address/Location:
Primary Route to Rally Point:
Secondary Route to Rally Point:
c. Shelter-in-place:
For the Poudre River flood hazard area, shelter in place is used only as a secondary response with evacuation as the
primary response.
Potential locations for on-site shelter-in-place occupation:
(i.e. Second Story Office)
Emergency preparedness kit supplies: Food Flashlights
Water NOAA Weather radios
Blankets Batteries
First Aid Kit Phone List of Emergency Contacts for
Employees
6. Procedures for Protecting Building from Damage or Hazardous Conditions
a. Plan to shut down utilities and equipment:
Important things to do before evacuating (during Set phase): Shut off natural gas
Shut off power
Shut down water supply
Move Floatable Materials to a
Secure Location
Equipment to shut down:
7
b.
Relocation of computers, documents, and important resources to higher areas or offsite
Location to move resources to:
c.
List other flood protection measures to be taken: (Ex. sandbags, install floodproofing gates or closure shields)
*Any flood protection materials need to be clearly labeled and inventoried annually. These are optional at the discretion of
the property owner, unless required as part of a floodplain use permit for a construction of a new structure, addition,
substantial improvement, or redevelopment.
7. Process for Distribution and posting of Plan and Evacuation Routes
Company-Wide meeting discussing ERPP: Date:
Map of evacuation routes displayed in multiple visible locations:
List of Posting Locations:
Shelter-in-place areas clearly identified along with evacuation maps:
Shelter-in-place areas remain unlocked and be clearly identifiable (signage):
8. Mandatory Training and Practice Drills
a. Develop procedures for training employees, including future new employees
(include in new employee orientation):
Describe Training Process:
b. Annual practice drills implementing the plan (Mandatory during 1st quarter of the year):
Date of most
recent practice:
c. Documentation of drills, keep track of places for improvement:
Track areas done well and areas for improvement
d. Annual update sent to City Date:
8
9. Post Flood Recovery Measures
All flood water is considered to be hazardous and not safe for direct contact due to potential wastewater contamination.
The following items are suggested as typical flood recovery measures. Specific actions are at the risk and discretion of
the property owner, and a specific flood recovery plan is recommended but not required to be submitted to the City.
a. Procedure to notify employees and, if applicable, the public, when it is safe to return:
Once the site is deemed safe, employees/vendors/renters should be notified that they
may return. This can be done many ways: call, text, email, update website, etc.
b. Site clean-up procedures:
Thorough documentation for insurance claims (pictures, inspection, damage assessment)
Inspection for animals, particularly snakes displaced by flood
Document flood levels
Contact insurance company
Contact restoration company
Mold remediation
Bleach, disinfection
IT Issues
Restore Utilities
Hazardous-Material Clean-up
City Substantial Damage Documentation
Building Permit for Needed Repairs
Health Inspection
Employee Assistance
Clean-Up of Equipment/Machinery
9
Appendix – Resources
Weather Radios
Many brands and models of weather radios are available for purchase. These
vary from small desktop units to large scale systems that tie into a PA system. When
looking for a weather radio to alert employees and customers of potential emergencies,
there are a few key features to look for:
NWR S.A.M.E. (Specific Area Message Encoding) Capability
o Allows user to receive only alerts for selected regions
Selectable alerting of events
o This feature will allow the user to program the radio telling it what type of
alerts to ignore
Battery backup
o Keeps radio running even if all power is lost
It is recommended that users look for weather radios with the Public Alert
and/or the NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) All Hazards logo
Tone alarm
o Alerts users of notification
External antenna
o If poor reception is discovered in the area where the radio is to be used,
an antenna will boost the signal
External device jack
o If the radio is in the front office which may not always be occupied,
attachments such as strobe lights can be connected, alerting those
outside the building of an alert
10
National Weather Service Streamflow levels
The NWS notification stages and messaging for the Poudre River at the Mouth of the
Canyon (FTDC2) revised 4/20/2010 are as follows:
Action Stage: 6.0 ft
Bankfull Stage: 6.5 ft
Flood Stage: 7.5 ft
Flood Categories
Minor Flood Stage: 7.5 ft (Through 2011, a 57% chance of occurrence)
Moderate Flood Stage: 9.0 ft (Through 2011, <10% chance)
Major Flood Stage: 10.5 ft (Through 2011, <10% chance)
Damage – Stage and Areas Affected
6.0 ft The river begins to threaten the McConnell Subdivision in LaPorte
6.5 ft The Cache la Poudre river will begin to overflow into low lying areas in and near Fort Collins
7.5 ft Considerable overbank flow and localized flooding occurs downstream in and near Fort Collins
8.5 ft The river rises to the base of the bridge at College Avenue in Fort Collins
9.0 ft Water flows into homes at College Avenue in Fort Collins
10.5 ft Numerous buildings are flooded in and near the town of LaPorte
National Weather Service Watches and Warnings
Terms to Know:
Flood
Watch
Atmospheric and hydrologic conditions are favorable for long duration areal
or river flooding.
Flash Flood
Watch
Atmospheric and hydrologic conditions are favorable for short duration flash
flooding and/or a dam break is possible.
Flood
Advisory
Thunderstorms have produced heavy rainfall that may result in ponding of
water on roadways and in low-lying areas, as well as rises in small stream
levels.
Flood
Warning
Long duration areal or river flooding is imminent or occurring or is
imminent, which may result from excessive rainfall, rapid snow melt, ice
jams on rivers or other similar causes
Flash Flood
Warning
Excessive rainfall producing thunderstorms have developed, leading to short
duration flash flooding. Flash flooding is imminent or occurring. A warning
may also be issued if a dam break has occurred.
11
Accessing Stream Gages
Canyon Mouth Stream Gage
There are multiple stream gages in the Poudre River that will be helpful in monitoring
for potentially dangerous flows. One of these is located at the mouth of Poudre
Canyon. This state-owned gage will be useful for watching for flash floods. If high flows
are seen at this point on the Poudre River, they will reach Fort Collins in approximately
2 hours. If a flash flood warning is issued on a weather radio, the Division of Water
Resources (DWR) website will allow users to track flow rates at the mouth of the
canyon. This will enable users to watch for impending flood events. To get there, follow
this URL: dwr.state.co.us
On this page, you will see a map of Colorado. In the “Abbreviation” box to the
right, type in the abbreviation CLAFTCCO and click “Get Station”.
12
On this page, a graph of discharges can be seen, along with the current gage height. It
is recommended that you bookmark this page so it can be quickly accessed if need be.
Compare the current gage height to your ERPP Ready, Set, Go Gage heights.
Lincoln St. Gage
This gage is located at Lincoln St. in the Poudre River and is useful for tracking
slower flood events. There are 3 methods for monitoring this gage:
1. The easiest way to stay up to date on river conditions at critical times is to
subscribe to the USGS Water Alert program. To do this, go to this website:
http://tinyurl.com/USGSWaterAlert and fill out the subscription form.
a. It is highly recommended that you use your mobile phone to receive
notifications to ensure you get them in time.
b. In the “Threshold Condition” section, select the bubble for “Greater than
(>)” and type “9” into the box. This will alert the user via text message
when the stream gauge reads 9 feet of water, equivalent to 4210 cfs. At
this stream height, the water is approaching the base of the College Ave.
Action should be taken.
2. For iPhone users, a free app is available for download called FloodWatch.
This app will use your location to find river gauges nearby. Select the
gauge on the Poudre River near Linden St.
a. Save this location to your favorite when prompted to do so (Figure 1).
Figu
b. Once
curre
the tim
key g
show
4).
Figure
re 1: Stream
e this locatio
nt status of
me of the m
gauge heigh
w a graph of
e 2: Basics Ta
Gauge @ Lin
on is saved
f the water
most recent
hts and thei
f the water
ab Fig
nden
, the “Basic
level (rising
update (Fi
ir meanings
level activit
gure 3: Stage
cs” tab will
g or falling)
igure 2). T
s (Figure 3
ty over the
es Tab
show up di
, the curren
The “Stages
3). The “He
previous 7
Figure 4
splaying th
nt height, an
s” tab displa
eight” tab w
days (Figu
4: Height Tab
13
e
nd
ays
ill
ure
14
3. The first is to go to the USGS website: waterdata.usgs.gov.
a. From here, click on “Current Conditions”
b. On the map of the United States, click on Colorado
c. Click the link on the right titles “Colorado Statewide Streamflow Real-Time
Table”
d. Scroll down the page until you see “Cache La Poudre” and click on the link
to “06752260 – Cache La Poudre at Fort Collins, CO”
e. On this page you will see a graph displaying the flow level in real time
f. Compare this depth to the following table
1
Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP)
Annual Update
In order to mitigate life-safety hazards to occupants of private property within the Poudre River floodplain, Chapter
10 of City Code requires for additions, substantial improvements, change of use, redevelopment and/or new
development that private property owners demonstrate flood-preparedness through the development and
implementation of a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP). The plan includes, at
a minimum, conditions and methods for emergency preparedness and evacuation from the property.
This Annual Update form shall be completed by the private property owner and submitted to the City during the
first quarter of the calendar year for ERPP’s requiring no changes. If updates and/or revisions to the plan are
necessary, an updated ERRP must be submitted to the City along with the Annual Update form.
Applicant Information
Name of Business: Business Phone Number: ( )
Name of Responsible Party:
Primary Phone Number of
Responsible Party: ( )
Annual Review of Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP)
The following questions are intended to identify whether it is necessary to prepare and submit an updated ERPP to the
City. If the answer to any of the following questions is “Yes”, then That portion of the ERPP needs to be updated and
submitted to the City.
a. Are there any changes to the Authorized Persons and their respective contact information? Yes No
b. Has the Responsible Party identified in the approved ERPP changed? Yes No
c. Have there been any alternations or changes to ground elevations on the property (i.e.
landscaping, parking lots, etc.) that could require an updated determination of the lowest elevation
on the property?
Yes No
d. Review the primary and secondary evacuation routes. Are there any changes to these routes that
would prevent their use?
Yes No
e. Have you changed your methods for receipt of flood warning notices? Yes No
f. Are there any changes to the information contained in the “Identification and Assignment of
Personnel to Implement Plan (Chain of Command)” section of the approved ERPP?
Yes No
g. Are any changes proposed to the procedures for notifying employees, customers and other
building occupants as outlined in the approved ERPP?
Yes No
h. Are any changes appropriate or required to the designated trigger event for either:
1. Emergency Response Preparation Process? Yes No
2. Evacuation process? Yes No
i. Are any changes proposed to the “Rally Point(s)” identified in the approved ERPP? Yes No
j. Have there been any changes to the property (i.e. building, equipment) that necessitate additional
procedures to protect the property from damage or hazardous conditions during a flood event?
Yes No
k. Does the evacuation route and shelter in place signage need to be updated? Yes No
l. Do the mandatory training procedures and process need to be updated based on change in
business operations, staffing, or other factors?
Yes No
ATTACHMENT 3
2
Annual Review of ERPP
Submitted Date:
Accepted Date: City Staff Signature:
By signing this Annual Update, I certify that the approved ERPP on file with the City of Fort Collins remains applicable and
does not require updating or has been updated and is hereby resubmitted in addition to this annual update form. I
understand that this property is at risk of flooding and that the ERPP is a tool to help in the planning and response for potential
flood events. In the first quarter of each year I agree to: 1) review the ERPP and submit any changes to Fort Collins Utilities;
and 2) if there are no changes to the ERPP, I will submit the necessary paperwork documenting that the plan has been
reviewed, and 3) I will conduct a practice drill of the ERPP. I understand that the ERPP may not consider all possible
scenarios that could result in property damage or life-safety issues related to flooding and that it is my responsibility to be
aware of the potential flood threat and to take appropriate actions to protect lives and property.
Signature of Responsible Party:
Excerpt from Unapproved Water Board Minutes, February 21, 2013
1
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
(Attachments available upon request).
Mr. Haukaas introduced the item and introduced Stormwater and Floodplain Program
Manager Ken Sampley.
Mr. Sampley presented the purpose of the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Review:
Review of the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations is the final component of the
Stormwater Repurposing effort.
Review focused on whether revisions were needed to better address foreseeable
flooding risks to improve life safety and reduce property damage using a
sustainable approach that considers environmental, economic, and social
factors.
Thorough investigation and extensive public outreach over the last two years.
As a result of the extensive investigations and public outreach, proposed revisions have
evolved over time. The original regulations included three options. A fourth option has
been added to allow non-residential development that meets the Adverse Impact
Review (AIR) Criteria.
This item was presented to the Water Board in 2010 and 2011. Mr. Sampley presented
the Water Board recommendation from September 2011. The item was also presented
at a City Council Work Session in October 2011. Mr. Sampley presented Council’s
direction to Staff.
Staff and a working committee met five times between February and June 2012. Mr.
Sampley presented the committee’s original recommendations:
Discontinue the development of a scalable Adverse Impact Review (AIR)
regulation for the Poudre River.
Stormwater and PFA staff should develop final code language to implement the
following life-safety criteria.
Upon further consideration and detailed evaluation, Stormwater and PFA staff
determined it was impractical and infeasible for many properties adjacent to the Poudre
to construct fire apparatus roads to meet the proposed maximum flooding depth of six
inches. Staff proposed revising the Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan
(ERPP) requirements to create a “performance-based” regulation:
Eliminates the requirement to construct elevated emergency access roads
Requires that procedures be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours
in advance when flood waters will impact the site and/or any portion of the
designated evacuation routes. This places more emphasis on life safety through
advance warning and evacuation.
Staff presented their rational for eliminating the fire apparatus road 6 inch maximum
flooding depth criteria to the Working Committee on February 4, 2013. The Working
Committee discussed the new approach and provided feedback and comments. The
Working Committee revised its recommendation to concur with that of Staff.
ATTACHMENT 4
Excerpt from Unapproved Water Board Minutes, February 21, 2013
2
This information was presented to the Chamber of Commerce on February 8, 2013.
Staff presented the rationale. The attendees discussed the new approach and provided
feedback and comments. The information was also discussed by the North Fort Collins
Business Association (NFCBA). The NFCBA is in support of the updated approach;
however, they did have questions concerning liability, training, costs, etc.
Mr. Sampley presented a summary of the code language provisions. He also presented
the ERPP, including a template, example, and annual checklist form. Staff recommends
the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed
code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific ERPP be prepared,
implemented and maintained for additions, substantial improvements, change of
occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain.
Additional Considerations
Staff maintains that the natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre River are
best addressed in the Land Use Code, most notably the Poudre River Buffer
requirements.
Adoption of new Floodplain Rules and Regulations for the State of Colorado as
approved by the CWCB will be presented to the Water Board in late
summer/early fall 2013.
Highlights from the discussion:
A board member expressed concern about the effectiveness of this approach.
A board member questioned the liability related to the ERPP Template. The
board member suggested the form should have a signature line for the engineer
completing the form.
A board member inquired about the consequence of not conducting an annual
update. Mr. Sampley stated there is not an enforcement provision; however, an
annual update would be required prior to any subsequent development review
actions or approvals.
A board member suggested the form should have a section concerning if the
property owner has been notified of changes to the floodplain.
The board members and staff discussed the concept of more stringent floodplain
regulations versus the proposed emergency plan.
A board member feels new buildings should not be constructed in the floodplain.
The board member feels the ERPP Plans are not sufficient and that individuals
will still be at risk. The board member is also concerned about the rise to the
floodplain if there are new developments.
A board member feels there is not political support from Council to keep new
developments from being constructed in the floodplain.
A board member asked for clarification on how many new structures this applies
to. The difficulties of predicting future development on the relatively small number
of remaining parcels in the 100-Year floodplain were discussed.
A key concern has been protecting the natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre
River near the Link-N-Greens property. The proposed Woodward development was
identified as a success story of how existing floodplain regulations and natural resources
buffer regulations can work together to achieve property protection and improve natural
and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
Excerpt from Unapproved Water Board Minutes, February 21, 2013
3
A board member asked how often the ERPP process will be reviewed. Mr.
Sampley stated this will likely occur when the Poudre River floodplain is
remapped as part of the FEMA RiskMAP program in 2015 or 2016.
A board member asked for clarification on how sediment from the High Park Fire
will impact the floodplain within the next 10 – 15 years. Mr. Sampley stated
sediment will have an impact on the floodplain as well as the water supply and
measures may need to be taken. Mr. Haukaas reiterated that staff has no way to
know the effects at this time.
The board members and staff discussed future modeling for the floodplain.
Mr. Haukaas suggested the board take action on what staff is proposing. If there
are additional actions that staff should take related to the issue, the board can
offer their suggestions.
A board member supports the suggested motion because it is a step forward, but
feels it does not go far enough to protect the floodplain.
Discussion on the motion:
A board member would like to recommend that City Council consider no new structures
in the floodplain. The board member feels this would still allow staff to move forward
with the proposed regulations.
The board discussed a friendly amendment to the motion.
Vote on the motion: 10 for, 1 against.
Reason for the nay vote:
Board Member Brunswig: The plans are not enough and will not be implemented or
followed correctly to serve the intended purpose.
Board Member Brown moved that in order to mitigate life-safety hazards, the Water
Board recommend that the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to
incorporate the proposed code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific
Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan be prepared and implemented for
additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new
development within the 100-Year floodplain. Board Member Garner seconded the
motion.
Amended Motion: Board Member Brown moved that in order to mitigate life-safety
hazards, the Water Board recommend that the existing Poudre River floodplain
regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed code language introducing the
requirement that a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan be prepared
and implemented for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy,
redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. The Water
Board would further recommend that City Council consider excluding new developments
or structures within the 100-year floodplain. Board Member Garner seconded the
motion.
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
AGENDA
I. Introduction / Opening Remarks (5 Min) Susanne Durkin-Schindler
II. Minutes from June 25, 2012 Meeting (5 Min) Susanne Durkin-Schindler
III. Emergency Access (fire apparatus) Roads (15 min) Ken Sampley
A. Review SW and PFA Staff discussions
B. Review prior 6” Flooding Depth Criteria
C. Practicability, Financial, Flood Impacts
1. Vine Drive Example
D. Change to Performance-Based Approach
IV. Presentation/Discussion on Draft Language (20 Min) Marsha Hilmes-Robinson
A. Elimination of Revision to Fire Code
(Section 503)
B. Revisions to City Code (Chapter 10)
1. Revised draft Code Language
V. Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (40 Min) Ken Sampley and
A. Overview and Process Marsha Hilmes-Robinson
B. Draft ERPP Template
C. Example ERPP Plan
D. Draft Annual Checklist Form
E. Review and Discuss
VI. Recommendation of Working Committee (20 Min) Susanne Durkin-Schindler
VII. Public Outreach and Opportunities (10 Min) Ken Sampley
A. Water Board (Feb. 21) and NRAB (Feb. 20)
B. North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA) – TBD
C. Chamber of Commerce (Feb. 8)
VIII. City Council (5 Min) Ken Sampley
A. March 5, 2013 Regular Council Meeting
IX. Adjourn Susanne Durkin-Schindler
ATTACHMENT 5
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
MEETING PARTICIPANTS
Facilitator:
Susanne Durkin-Schindler
Working Committee:
Mike Gavin Mike Bello Andrea Faucett
Brad Anderson Sean Dougherty Dean Hoag
Mike Oberlander Ken Sampley Brian Varrella
Megan Bolin Greg Koch Marsha Hilmes-Robinson
Ron Gonzales John Hunt
Others:
Jon Haukaas Chris Pletcher (Ayres Associates)
MEETING SUMMARY
Introduction / Opening Remarks
Susanne Durkin-Schindler welcomed the attendees and provided introductory comments.
Minutes from June 25, 2012 Meeting
Susanne noted that the minutes from the June 25, 2012 Working Committee were distributed to
Committee Members and interested parties by email on January 28, 2013. Also attached to the email
were the following electronic documents that respond to previous input, and provide more detail on
the proposed code language changes:
Save The Poudre Letter Response – 01_23_13
Letter to PRF Regulations Working Committee – 01_23_13
Attachment 1 – Final Draft Summary (Track Changes Version) of Poudre River Floodplain
Regulation Changes 01-23-13
Susanne asked if there were any clarifications or changes to the minutes and none were offered. She
asked that any requested changes be submitted to Ken Sampley by the end of the week.
Emergency Access (Fire Apparatus) Roads
Ken Sampley noted that at the June 25, 2012 Working Committee meeting, staffs from the City and
Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) were tasked with developing the final code language to incorporate
proposed revisions to the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations into the City Code for the City of Fort
Collins.
However, upon further consideration and detailed evaluation by Stormwater and PFA Staffs, it was
determined that the criteria requiring the construction of fire apparatus (emergency access) roads for
new construction or redevelopments in the Poudre River 100-Year Floodplain to meet a proposed
maximum flooding depth of 6 inches is impractical and infeasible for many properties adjacent to the
Poudre River. The current effective Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-Year flood
elevations reflect significant flooding depths (i.e. 2 to 3 feet on Vine Drive east of College Avenue) on
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
existing public arterials and collectors that serve these areas. Requiring the construction of new
emergency fire apparatus (access) roads to serve these properties in times of flooding will result in
excessive grades and extended lengths of “elevated” roadways that do not appropriately provide for
improved life safety and emergency response. Ken illustrated the issue using an aerial photograph of
the properties near the College Avenue and Vine Drive intersection.
As a result, Staff has proposed the following revisions which create a “performance-based” regulation.
Rather than require the construction of new emergency access roads to meet the 100-Year storm
event, it is proposed that the Emergency Response Preparedness Plan (ERPP) require procedures
be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours in advance of when flood waters will impact the
site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation routes. This will be discussed in more detail later
in the meeting.
Mike Bello asked what will trigger the requirement to prepare the ERPP. Ken noted that it would be
required for properties/structures that are proposing either an addition, substantial improvement,
change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. Sean
Dougherty asked if this requirement will apply to residential structures as well. Staff indicated it would
research this issue. (Subsequent to the meeting, Staff determined that the ERPP process would not
apply to residential properties). The challenges of the 6” flooding depth requirement were discussed
and there was general consensus that the elimination of the criteria was appropriate. Ron Gonzales
noted that PFA staff has determined that its emergency rescue equipment is able to drive through up
to 15 inches of ponded (no velocity) water. Mike Gavin noted that evacuation of people from potential
flooding situations should be pursued where at all possible when compared with emergency rescues.
Presentation/Discussion on Draft Language
Marsha Hilmes-Robinson presented and reviewed the proposed code language (Attachment 1) based
on the new approach requiring that Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (ERPPs) require
procedures be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours in advance of when flood waters
will impact the site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation routes. Marsha identified key
components of the ERPP process to include:
identification of flood risk
flood warning notification methods
procedures for notifying employees,
customers, etc.
description of the evacuation process
shelter-in-place considerations
evacuation routes
procedures for protection of utilities
signage for evacuation/shelter instructions
mandatory training and practice drills
post flood recovery measures
development triggers
relevant Code Sections
Mike Bello asked about the trigger associated with “change of occupancy” and indicated that
term requires more definition. Ron Gonzales provided information on how “change of
occupancy” applies with respect to the Fire Code. Mike suggested the term be clarified to
“Change of Building Code Occupancy” and the proposal was supported by the Working
Committee and Staff. John Hunt recommended clarifying 5 b. i. of the evacuation process to
state evacuation should occur a minimum of two hours “before” flood waters would impact the
site. It was agreed that Staff will review and revise the wording to better state this trigger point.
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
Mike Oberlander noted that the City already has established triggers when general notifications
to the public are issued for flooding events through LETA911 and news releases.
Emergency Response and Preparedness Plans (ERPPs)
Ken Sampley presented an overview of the ERPP process. In accordance with previous
discussions, Staff determined it appropriate to develop a template that incorporates and
addresses the proposed code language provisions in a format that could be completed by an
applicant with technical assistance from an engineering consultant experienced and qualified to
assess flood risk. Staff contracted with Ayres Associates to assist in the development and
preparation of the ERPP template, example and annual checklist. The intent is to simplify the
process as much as possible, but still ensure that the needed information is assembled,
evaluated and provided to establish a well thought out ERPP. Committee Members were
referred to the draft ERPP Template (Attachment 2) and draft ERPP Annual Checklist Form
(Attachment 3). Each section of the ERPP Template was presented and discussed. An example
completed ERPP template for a property along Vine Drive was also presented and discussed
with the Committee to provide an idea of how the document would be completed.
Committee members provided feedback on highlighting certain key portions of the template to
ensure clarity in determining which sections will require engineering assistance. Section 1
(Flood Risk Assessment) and Section 5 (Trigger points for evacuation process) were identified
as key elements that require technical and engineering expertise. John Hunt asked if an
applicant could identify and specify a very low threshold for evacuation to avoid having to do an
analysis specific to his/her property. Megan Bolin asked if LETA911 could be used. Staff noted
that LETA911 and news releases do not provide specific information for individual
properties/structures. Sean asked that the ERPP template be clarified to note that Section 6
(Procedures for Protecting Building from Damage) is optional if the applicant desires not to
develop a plan to protect his building equipment, computers, documents, etc.
Working Committee members asked what the estimated costs are for the ERPP process. Ken
noted that, based on the experiences of Ayres Associates, the initial costs are in the range of
$500 - $4,000 (depending on the complexity of the site) and annual costs to receive flood
warning messages are in the range of $0 - $1,000 depending on whether a consulting
meteorological firm is used or if building/property staff can be trained to perform the required
monitoring. In all likelihood, the initial costs are probably less than $2,000. It depends on how
much of the ERPP is prepared by the property owner/applicant and how much is contracted to
an engineering firm to complete.
Sean asked if there is a way to opt out of the ERPP requirement. He stated that the costs to
prepare the flood risk assessment, form, flood elevations and the on-going monitoring are more
than he can afford. Staff reiterated that the ERPP requirement does not apply to existing
structures and would only be triggered with a significant change to his property/structure. Sean
asked if the City could provide all of the requested technical and engineering information to
avoid costs to applicants. Jon Haukaas noted that if a property owner is improving, adding to or
redeveloping his property and structures, he/she should have the responsibility for preparation
of the required ERPP. Ken noted that the City should not be providing specific evacuation.
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
Greg Koch asked if structures associated with new development or redevelopment will have to
be elevated to meet the current Poudre River floodplain regulations (100 Year BFE plus 2 foot
freeboard), why is the ERPP still required? Marsha noted that the buildings may be elevated,
but the remainder of the property including access to the structure may not be. The ERPP plans
should have evacuation as the primary option. Shelter-in-place should only be a secondary
option give the flooding risk and potential extended flooding duration. Staff agreed that
additional review and refinement of the ERPP Template and ERPP annual checklist form are
needed to improve the clarity of the documents.
Recommendation of Working Committee
Susanne asked for comments on the revised approach by Working Committee members. Sean
Dougherty stated that the ERPP process seems reasonable, however he felt it would still be too
costly for his property. Sean stated that this approach is much better than the AIR approach.
He questions how it would apply to the property he currently owns, but sees the validity for
redevelopment of multiple parcels. Mike Bello stated that the ERPP approach seems well
thought out and logical. He stated that in order to initiate an addition, substantial improvement,
redevelopment or new development, the property owner should expect to have costs associated
with improving the property. Based on the estimated costs presented in the meeting, Mike
thought they were appropriate and not out of line considering other typical development costs.
Mike Oberlander suggested removing the references to 500 Year flooding events and
evacuation from the template. All agreed that was a great suggestion. One Committee Member
asked if the ERPP process was an overreaction to the potential flood risk on the Poudre River
and referred to flooding in Lincoln, Nebraska. Brad Anderson stated that the flooding risk along
the Poudre River must be acknowledged and that Lincoln has no higher flood risk than Fort
Collins. Brad believes the ERPP process seems logical and costs to engage a consulting
engineer to assist in their preparation should be minor. Greg Koch stated that the revised
approach is well thought out and not an unrealistic criteria to apply.
John Hunt stated that this seems like a more practical approach and avoids the significant
infrastructure costs that would have been associated with elevating emergency access roads.
John likes the performance based criteria and that it focuses on life safety. This is the least
burdensome on property owners. He did think additional insight is necessary in how business
owners (i.e. bars, restaurants) can implement evacuation procedures. Jon Haukaas stated the
City will help applicants and provide support, however the preparation and ownership of the site-
specific ERPPS should rest with the property/business owner. Megan Bolin expressed support
for the approach and noted that the costs seem reasonable. Dean Hoag expressed support for
the approach, but asked for additional guidance on how to implement the monitoring part of the
plan. He requested that Staff consider providing training to assist applicants. Dean also
questioned why this approach should also not be applied to all of the floodplains in Fort Collins.
POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS
WORKING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2013
5:30 – 7:30 PM
Fort Collins Utilities Service Center
700 Wood Street (Training Room)
Fort Collins, Colorado
Public Outreach and Opportunities
Ken Sampley noted that the proposed draft language and floodplain regulation revisions are
scheduled for presentation to the Chamber of Commerce on February 8, 2013. The proposal
will also be presented to the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) on February 20, 2013
and to the Water Board on February 21, 2013 for their review and recommendations. There is
also a potential presentation to the North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA) pending
input from the NFCBA’s three Working Committee representatives.
City Council
Ken noted that the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations are scheduled for presentation at the
March 5, 2013 City Council Meeting.
Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:40 PM.
1
Ken Sampley
From: Greg Woods <greg@workspaceinnovations.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:45 PM
To: Ken Sampley; Brian Janonis; Lisa Rosintoski; John Stokes; Aislinn Kottwitz; Bennet Manvel;
Bruce Hendee; Darin Atteberry; Gerry Horak; Karen Weitkunat; Kelly Ohlson; Lisa Poppaw;
Mike Beckstead; Sarah Kane; Wade Troxell; Bill Greenlee (bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com);
Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com); Charlie Mesercian (ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean
Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com); Megan Greer; Michael
Bello (mbello10@comcast.net); Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil
McCaffrey (neil@bkctr.com); Ron Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com); Sean Dougherty
(sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Ken,
Thank you for your follow up. It is greatly appreciated.
The Board of the NFCBA met yesterday regarding the Poudre River Floodplain regulations that Staff will be presenting to
City Council. We received valuable feedback from the three members of the NFCBA that are on the Working Committee,
Sean Dougherty, Michael Bello, and Dean Hoag. At this point we don’t feel that it is necessary to have you present to
our entire organization. The Board did ask me to e‐mail you our thoughts on the current proposal.
Overall, the sentiment of our Board was that Staff and the Working Committee had done some great work over the past
many months, and that the proposal going forward to City Council was much improved over where the discussion
began. The Board of the NFCBA was in support of the proposal going forward to City Council with a few concerns and
questions:
‐ Liability: We question the legal liability of the business that would complete the Emergency Response Plan (ERP) in
the case of a flood. While we believe that it is a good idea for business owners to have a plan in place, we question
what would happen in case of a flood. For example:
o A business declares that a certain individual is the person responsible. That person, for whatever reason,
leaves the business.
o A flood event happens, and that person is no longer there.
o Someone isn’t evacuated according to this plan and is either hurt or killed.
o What is the liability? Who is liable?
o And, was/is the person designated as the person responsible trained in how to deal with a flood event and
what to do to should one occur? Who would do this training? At what cost?
‐ Owner or tenant: It was unclear as to who would be responsible for filling out, monitoring, and carrying out the
ERP. Under the proposed plan we believe that the building owner would be responsible. However, it would not be
uncommon for the building owner to not be involved with the building on a day to day basis should it be
leased. Would every tenant in the facility have to complete and implement an ERP? Would every tenant then have
to have a responsible individual for their business?
‐ Ongoing financial and time commitment: The upfront cost of hiring an engineer is a bit unclear, with a stated range
of $500‐$4,000 to fill out the ERP. It also is unclear as to the yearly costs associated to the business to monitor the
river, etc. 24/7. Would the City be willing to offer grants of some sort to offset these ongoing costs?
‐ Finally, we trust that once this issue goes through Council discussion and implementation that the Poudre River
Floodplain discussion will be complete for many, many years to come.
We appreciate all of the energy and time that you and the rest of the Staff put into this process, and we appreciate you
involving our organization throughout. We will be interested to see where the proposal goes from here.
Thanks Ken. We will be sure to stay in touch with you.
ATTACHMENT 6
2
Greg Woods
Secretary
NFCBA
www.nfcba.org
From: Ken Sampley [mailto:KSampley@fcgov.com]
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 3:10 PM
To: Greg Woods
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Greg,
I received valuable feedback and comments from Friday’s Chamber of Commerce meeting and discussion on the updated
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations code language revisions and anticipate some clarifications and refinements to the
process based on the input. Prior to the meeting you indicated that a presentation to the NFCBA may not be needed. I
am still available to meet with the NFCBA, if requested, to present and discuss the proposed code language revisions. I
will be out of the office this Thursday and Friday (Feb. 14th and 15th). Please let me know.
Thanks for your assistance and consideration.
Respectfully,
Kenneth C. Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager
City of Fort Collins -- Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Telephone: (970) 224-6021
Work Cell Phone: (970) 658-0295
Email: ksampley@fcgov.com
From: Ken Sampley
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:28 PM
To: 'Greg Woods'
Cc: Bill Greenlee (bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com); Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com); Charlie Mesercian
(ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com); Megan Greer; Michael
Bello (mbello10@comcast.net); Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil McCaffrey (neil@bkctr.com); Ron
Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com); Sean Dougherty (sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Greg,
That sounds like a good plan. Thanks for your assistance and consideration!
Kenneth C. Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager
City of Fort Collins -- Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Telephone: (970) 224-6021
Work Cell Phone: (970) 658-0295
Email: ksampley@fcgov.com
From: Greg Woods [mailto:greg@workspaceinnovations.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:14 PM
To: Ken Sampley
Cc: Bill Greenlee (bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com); Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com); Charlie Mesercian
(ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com); Megan Greer; Michael
Bello (mbello10@comcast.net); Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil McCaffrey (neil@bkctr.com); Ron
3
Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com); Sean Dougherty (sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Hi Ken,
Thanks for checking back in with me.
Several members of the NFCBA Board talked after our regular meeting on Wednesday and here’s what we decided:
‐ Dean, Sean, and Michael all plan on being at the Working Committee meeting on Monday
‐ On Tuesday, the three of them will let the rest of the NFCBA Board members know what their recommendation is as
far as having you present to the entire group (or any other actions they think we should take).
So, we’ll be back in touch with you the first part of next week.
Thanks for following up!
Greg Woods
Secretary
NFCBA
www.nfcba.org
cc NFCBA Board of Directors
From: Ken Sampley [mailto:KSampley@fcgov.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:04 PM
To: Greg Woods
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Greg,
Just thought I would check to see if there is a date and time that works for the NFCBA to present and discuss the
proposed Poudre River Floodplain code language revisions, their applicability to the north College area, and the project
status and upcoming meetings.
Thank you,
Kenneth C. Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager
City of Fort Collins -- Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Telephone: (970) 224-6021
Work Cell Phone: (970) 658-0295
Email: ksampley@fcgov.com
From: Ken Sampley
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:17 AM
To: 'Greg Woods'
Cc: Jon Haukaas; Brian Janonis; Bill Greenlee (bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com); Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com);
Charlie Mesercian (ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com);
Megan Greer; Michael Bello (mbello10@comcast.net); Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil McCaffrey
(neil@bkctr.com); Ron Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com); Sean Dougherty (sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Greg,
Thank you for your consideration. I am hoping that Dean, Sean and perhaps Michael will be able to attend next Monday’s
Working Committee meeting. The attachments I sent to you and the Working Committee provide updates on other
4
associate items including the Poudre River Downtown Core project and the in-progress RiskMAP process that will
eventually result in updated floodplain mapping for the Poudre River throughout Fort Collins. Future construction of the
Poudre River Downtown Core project will eliminate flood overtopping of College Avenue and will significantly reduce the
100-Year floodplain in the College / Vine area. Revising the proposed floodplain revisions to focus on the emergency
response and preparedness plans (ERPPs) and eliminate the previously-proposed 6” flooding depth criteria for
emergency access roads will result in improved life safety while dramatically reducing potential financial impacts.
I look forward to meeting with the NFCBA to discuss the proposed code language revisions and their application to the
north College area.
Respectfully,
Kenneth C. Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager
City of Fort Collins -- Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Telephone: (970) 224-6021
Work Cell Phone: (970) 658-0295
Email: ksampley@fcgov.com
From: Greg Woods [mailto:greg@workspaceinnovations.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 9:50 AM
To: Ken Sampley
Cc: Jon Haukaas; Brian Janonis; Bill Greenlee (bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com); Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com);
Charlie Mesercian (ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com);
Megan Greer; Michael Bello (mbello10@comcast.net); Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil McCaffrey
(neil@bkctr.com); Ron Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com); Sean Dougherty (sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Ken,
Thank you very much for getting back with me so quickly.
I forwarded your message to the Board of the NFCBA. We will talk about it and get back with you as to whether we can
1) squeeze you in at our February meeting or 2) plan to hold a special meeting.
I will get back with you as soon as I can with our thoughts.
Thanks again.
Greg Woods
Secretary
NFCBA
www.nfcba.org
From: Ken Sampley [mailto:KSampley@fcgov.com]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 4:04 PM
To: Greg Woods
Cc: Jon Haukaas; Brian Janonis
Subject: RE: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Greg,
I left you a telephone voice message earlier this afternoon. I am also trying to reach Ann Hutchison with the Fort Collins
Chamber of Commerce. I apologize for the delay in updates regarding the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations. I am
available to meet with the NFCBA to present the latest information on the effort. As noted, our primary outreach effort has
been with the Working Committee (which includes members of the NFCBA), however I agree with you that the proposed
5
revisions should be presented to the NFCBA. I believe the updated approach more specifically addresses concerns
voiced previously regarding financial impacts associated with the elevation of fire apparatus (emergency access) roads.
As background, in accordance with discussions at the June 25, 2012 Working Committee meeting, staffs from the City
and Poudre Fire Authority (PEA) were tasked with developing the final code language to incorporate proposed revisions to
the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations into the City Code for the City of Fort Collins. In his role as NFCBA
representative, Sean Dougherty indicated that the revisions as proposed would likely receive the support and
endorsement of the NFCBA. The proposed revisions were then to be presented to City Council for consideration and
action. The draft code language included requirements for fire apparatus(emergency access) roads and development of
Emergency Response Preparedness Plans (ERPPs) for properties within the Poudre River 100-Year floodplain.
During the Staff process to finalize the code language, it was determined that feasibility issues associated with the
emergency access road criteria necessitated revisions to the approach. The criteria requiring that new fire apparatus
(emergency access) roads not be subjected to more than 6” of flooding depth during the 100 Year storm presented
practical, physical and financial challenges. Therefore, the proposed approach was changed to create a “performance-
based” regulation that places more emphasis on life safety through advance warning and evacuation and eliminates the
previous proposal to limit flooding depth on the access roads. As a result, there are changes to the proposed Emergency
Response Preparedness Plan (ERPP) requirements. In order to demonstrate how the process will work, Staff contracted
with Ayres Associates to prepare the following documents:
1. A draft template that uses the requirements outlined in the proposed code language to guide the preparation of
site-specific ERRP’s;
2. A sample ERPP for a property within the Poudre River 100 Year Floodplain situated along Vine Drive; and,
3. A draft ERPP annual checklist form.
A Working Committee meeting is scheduled as outlined below to present and review the proposed code language and
ERPP template, example and checklist form:
What: Poudre River Floodplain Regulations — Working Committee
Where: City of Fort Collins -- Utility Service Center (USC)
700 Wood Street
Training Room
Date: Monday, February 4, 2013
Time: 5:30 — 7:30 PM (A light dinner will be provided at 5:00 PM)
Attached to this email are the following electronic documents that were provided by email to the Working Committee
members and interested parties on Friday (Jan. 25th):
Save The Poudre Letter Response – 01_23_13
Letter to PRF Regulations Working Committee – 01_23_13
Attachment 1 – Final Draft Summary (Track Changes Version) of Poudre River Floodplain Regulation Changes
01-23-13
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations – Final Draft 06 25 12 Working Committee Meeting Summary
I understand the Feb. 27th NFCBA meeting agenda is full. I am available to attend a special meeting date for the NFCBA
and would appreciate the opportunity to present what I believe will be an approach that the NFCBA can support and
endorse.
If there are questions, or if additional information is needed, or to discuss in more detail, please contact me using the
information below.
Respectfully,
Kenneth C. Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager
City of Fort Collins -- Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Telephone: (970) 224-6021
Work Cell Phone: (970) 658-0295
Email: ksampley@fcgov.com
6
From: Greg Woods [mailto:greg@workspaceinnovations.com]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 1:57 PM
To: Ken Sampley
Cc: Brian Janonis; Lisa Rosintoski; John Stokes; Aislinn Kottwitz; Bennet Manvel; Bruce Hendee; Darin Atteberry; Gerry
Horak; Karen Weitkunat; Kelly Ohlson; Lisa Poppaw; Mike Beckstead; Sarah Kane; Wade Troxell; Bill Greenlee
(bgreenlee@jaxmercantile.com); Bill See (bill@heathconstruction.com); Charlie Mesercian (ftctrucks@yahoo.com); Dean
Hoag (dhoag2000@aol.com); Don Butler (jhockr5141@gmail.com); Megan Greer; Michael Bello (mbello10@comcast.net);
Michael Bello (michael.bello@thecpigroup.net); Neil McCaffrey (neil@bkctr.com); Ron Lautzenheiser (rklautz@msn.com);
Sean Dougherty (sean@rmfa.com)
Subject: Poudre River Floodplain - Concerns and Meeting Request
Importance: High
Ken,
We saw on the City Council’s 6‐Month Planning Calendar that the Poudre River Floodplain regulations are once again on
the schedule. If I’m not mistaken, it was just added to the schedule in the past week or so.
The Board of the NFCBA is concerned that, after months of discussion with the Working Committee, that this issue is
heading to a regular session in March before it ever goes to another work session. Further, City Staff has not reached
out to our organization in many, many months to update us. Yes, a couple members of the NFCBA are on the working
committee, but that isn’t the same as reaching out to our entire membership. Many of our members will be affected by
any changes to the Poudre River Floodplain regulations, and we would like to be informed as to what City Staff is
recommending to City Council at the regular meeting in March.
Unfortunately, we have a full agenda already for our February 27th meeting. If we would have known that City Staff was
presenting to City Council on this issue earlier, we most certainly would have reached out to you before this.
Thus, we would like to request the following:
‐ City Staff presents their recommendations to the NFCBA at our regular meeting on March 27th IF CITY COUNCIL WILL
NOT TAKE ACTION IN FEBRUARY
OR
‐ If City Council IS taking action in March before our March 27th meeting, we would like to request a special meeting
date that City Staff can present their recommendations to our members BEFORE it goes before City Council.
Please let us know as soon as possible as to which option is best for our members to be informed. As you know, this
issue is very important to our organization
Thanks Ken.
Greg Woods
Secretary
NFCBA
www.nfcba.org
cc. NFCBA Board of Directors
ATTACHMENT 7
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 8
Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 9
Page 2 of 2
Utilities Executive Director
City of electric. stormwater. wastewater. water
Fort CoLLins 700 Wood St.
970.224.6003 TDD
utilities @fcgov.com
fcgov.com/utilities
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 26, 2010
To: Mayor Hutchinson and City Council members
Through: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive Director
From: Jon Haukaas, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager
Reference: August 24, 2010 Work Session Summary — Floodplain Regulations
Jon Haukaas, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager and Marsha Hilmes-Robinson,
Floodplain Administrator, presented Council with a brief overview of the work done to date on
the Poudre Floodplain Regulations. Council members present included Mayor Doug
Hutchinson, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly Ohlson, Ben Manvel, David Roy, Wade Troxell, and Aislinn
Kottwitz.
Staff began with the interrelationship between this effort and Plan Fort Collins. It was
recognized that the Poudre River is key to the sustainability of Fort Collins. There was
discussion indicating that Plan Fort Collins is a long range vision while revisions to the Poudre
River Floodplain Regulations are immediate considerations.
The staff presentation reviewed the three options of proposed levels of floodplain regulation.
(1) Return to a 0.1 foot allowable floodway rise limitation, or (2) implement a restriction on new
and expanded structures within the floodplain, or (3) maintain the current regulations.
Next staff explained why this item was being discussed, mainly its relation to the Stormwater
Repurposing efforts and also its relevance to the Plan Fort Collins discussion. Information
regarding the number of parcels, acreage of parcels, and maps showing specific areas of concern
under the various options was discussed. A significant portion of the remaining discussion
included clarification of the concepts associated with floodplains and the effect of fill or other
forms of development.
Key discussion and feedback by Council:
I. Public Outreach Process to explain the range of options considered for proposed changes to
the Floodplain Regulations.
In general, the Council felt that a significant amount of outreach needed to happen and more
should have occurred prior to this discussion . Staff reiterated that the work session serves as
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 10
Ft°oLLins
a process check before time and resources are utilized to move forward and that this work
session would serve as the beginning of a substantive outreach process.
Outreach efforts envisioned would include Boards and Commissions, City departments,
stakeholders (i.e. impacted property owners, business associations, interested citizens), and
the general public. Parcel-specific information is currently being developed to identify
impact to individual property owners as the next step.
2. Preference on Options for Regulating the Floodplain
Council did not feel they had sufficient public feedback to have a preferred option at this
time. They were also concerned about these regulations being applied only to the Poudre
River Floodplain. Council discussed the need to look for additional options beyond the three
currently under consideration, including those related to the “No Adverse Impact” approach
that is gaining support nationally.
Council expressed a range of comments and feedback. This included:
• The concern that the recommendations to strengthen the regulations were not justified
and that they would adversely affect the economic health and viability of Fort Collins.
The Downtown River District is a key area of development for the City and
coordinated development approach along the river would be the prudent approach.
• That there needs to be a balance between the economic, social and environmental
considerations for the river.
• Fort Collins needs to stop building where it is likely to flood. ‘Let the river he a
river.” In accordance with the City Plan, we are to protect and restore the natural
functions of the river.
• The “river is a workhorse,” and the community “should use it more as a playground,
not a plaything.”
• That ripwian edge development should be the exception, not the rule, and that 50 to
100 years from now a natural Poudre River would he the greatest community attribute
in Fort Collins.
3. Comments to be added to the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Map
Time did not allow an in depth discussion of the TBL chart. One Council member did not
feel this chart format was easy to use and that it needs to be better organized. Staff
concluded with a brief explanation of how comments would be added to the Map.
Three Council members supported continuing the discussion while two felt the need was not
sufficiently expressed to warrant continuing the process.
Specific direction was also provided to Staff to he prepared to address the following questions:
I. What is the purpose and need to change the floodplain regulations?
2. Analyze the impact on properties in more detail.
3. Provide more economic analysis.
4. Describe better “Less people at risk” - how many?
5. Provide more information on “No Adverse Impact” to the public and to the Council.
Page 2 of 2
1
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Potential Revisions
City Council Meeting
March 18, 2013
Jon Haukaas, P.E.
Water Engineering Field
Operations Manager
Brian Varrella, P.E., CFM
Floodplain Administrator
Ken Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain
Program Manager
Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, CFM
Floodplain Administrator
ATTACHMENT 11
2
Purpose of Poudre River
Floodplain Regulations Review
• Final component of
SW Repurposing
• Focuses on whether
revisions are needed to
better address:
– life safety
– reduced property
damage
• Uses a sustainable
approach
3
Purpose of Poudre River
Floodplain Regulations Review
CURRENT REGULATIONS
– No new structures in the100-Year Floodway
– No new residential or mixed-use structures
in the 100-Year Floodplain Fringe
– Non-residential structures allowed in 100-
Year Floodplain fringe (if meet freeboard)
– No critical facilities in the 100-Year
floodplain
4
October 25 2011 Council Work Session
Council direction to Staff:
– “Scalable” AIR regulation
– Poudre Fire Authority (PFA)
– Consistent Summary Format
– Notification Process
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
5
ADVERSE IMPACT REVIEW (AIR)
Recommended to discontinue the development
of a scalable Adverse Impact Review (AIR)
regulation for the Poudre River because:
1. Poudre River RiskMAP
2. Poudre River Downtown Core
Improvements
3. Link-N-Greens area CLOMR/ LOMR
process
4. Floodway Surcharge Analysis
5. Mulberry Corridor / GMA
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
6
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
AND PREPAREDNESS PLAN (ERPP)
A “performance-based” regulation requiring
procedures be established for evacuation
a minimum of two hours in advance of when
flood waters will impact the site and/or any
portion of the designated evacuation routes.
Emphasis on life safety through
advance warning and evacuation
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
7
REVISE CODE LANGUAGE
Require a site-specific Emergency Response and
Preparedness Plan (ERPP) be prepared,
implemented and maintained for allowable:
– Additions
– Substantial improvements
– Change of Occupancy
– Redevelopment and/or
– New development
within the 100-Year floodplain.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
8
How ERRP works with existing FP Regs
– Retains existing floodplain regulations that
reduce potential property damage
– Establishes new ERPP criteria that provides
increased focus on life safety through
evacuation in advance of flooding.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
9
• Assessment of Flood Risk
• Flood Warning
Notifications
• Responsible Parties
• Notification of Employees
• Description of Procedures
– Evacuation
– Shelter-in-Place
(Secondary only)
• Procedures for Protecting
Buildings from Damage
• Evacuation Route and
Shelter-in-place Signage
• Mandatory Training and
Practice Drills
• Post Flood Recovery
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
ERPP Code Language
10
Emergency
Response and
Preparedness Plan
(ERPP)
Code Language
(Attachment 1)
Template / Form
(Attachment 2)
Annual Checklist Form
(Attachment 3)
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Floodplain Regulations Review
11
QUESTIONS
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
ORDINANCE NO. 048, 2013
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IN THE POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN
WHEREAS, requirements and restrictions specific to development and related activities in
the Poudre River floodplain are set forth in Division 4 of Article II of Chapter 10 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins; and
WHEREAS, after thorough investigation, public outreach, and consideration of various
options and approaches, City staff has identified certain changes to the existing provisions regarding
the Poudre River floodplain in order to better address foreseeable flooding risks so as to improve
life safety through advance warning and evacuation measures; and
WHEREAS, staff presented the proposed revisions to the Natural Resources Advisory Board
(“NRAB”) at its regular meeting on February 20, 2013, and the NRAB discussed its prior
recommendation that the City Council revise the floodplain regulations to not allow any new
structures in the one-hundred-year floodplain of the Poudre River, but chose not to make a formal
recommendation; and
WHEREAS, staff presented the proposed revisions to the Water Board (the “Board”) at its
regular meeting on February 21, 2013, and the Board voted to recommend that the City Council
approve the proposed revisions, while also recommending that the City Council consider revising
the floodplain regulations to not allow any new structures in the one-hundred-year floodplain of the
Poudre River; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes it would be in the best interests of the City to approve
the changes so as to better protect life safety in the Poudre River floodplain.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 10-16 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of the following new definitions, to read in their entirety as follows:
Change of occupancy shall mean a change of occupancy as defined in Chapter 5, if
such change of occupancy results in an increase in the number of occupants..
Dry public road shall mean a public street at the intersection of a proposed driveway
or access road where the surface of the pavement is at an elevation above the base
flood elevation.
Emergency response and preparedness plan shall mean a plan, and related
preparations and systems, that are intended to provide both a reasonable measure of
preparedness for flooding and other emergencies that may occur in conjunction with
flooding, and a reasonable ability to respond to such circumstances so as to avoid
and minimize potential harm to persons or property, as described in §10-48.
Evacuation shall mean emergency egress to allow safe passage from a structure to
dry ground in the regulatory flood event.
Shelter-in-place shall mean onsite provision of refuge from floodwaters and related
hazards to allow continued occupation of a structure in the event that circumstances
preclude safe evacuation in the regulatory flood event or more frequent flood events.
Section 2. That Section 10-27(c) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 10-27. Floodplain use permit.
. . .
(c) The following information is also required for a floodplain use permit:
. . .
(4) Specifications for building construction and materials, filling, dredging,
grading, channel improvements and changes, storage of materials, water supply and
sanitary facilities; and
(5) Detailed information documenting compliance with any specific requirements
applicable to the proposed development or activity pursuant to this Article.; and
(6) An emergency response and preparedness plan, if required pursuant to this
Article, provided, however, that this requirement shall be considered a floodplain use
permit condition to be met prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, pursuant
to §10-27(g).
Section 3. That Section 10-27(e)(6) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 10-27. Floodplain use permit.
. . .
(e) When reviewing the application for a floodplain use permit, the Utilities
Executive Director shall determine which portions of any flood hazard areas are
affected by the particular development request and then shall apply the provisions
of this Article as applicable. The Utilities Executive Director also shall determine
whether the proposed construction or development is consistent with the need to
-2-
minimize flood damage and meets the intent of this Article after considering the
following factors:
. . .
(6) Whether the proposed use is for human occupancy, and, if so, the impacts to
human safety and the extent to which emergency response and preparedness and
other measures are required and have been assured in order to reduce safety risk;
. . .
Section 4. That Section 10-27(g) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 10-27. Floodplain use permit.
. . .
(g) If the Utilities Executive Director determines that the application meets the
purposes and requirements of this Article, the Utilities Executive Directorhe or she
shall issue the permit and may attach such conditions as deemedhe or she deems
necessary to further the purposes of this Article or to ensure compliance with the
same. The Utilities Executive Director may request that the City building official
condition the release of a certificate of occupancy or other final approval upon
submission of final documentation of compliance with conditions, as appropriate.
Section 5. That a new Section 10-48 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
added, to read in its entirety as follows:
Sec. 10-48. Emergency planning and preparedness.
For any structure or portion of structure required under this Article to submit an
emergency response and preparedness plan, the following emergency planning and
preparedness requirements shall apply:
(1) An emergency response and preparedness plan shall include the following,
together with such additional provisions as may be appropriate in light of the
particular circumstances associated with the structure or activity to which the plan
applies:
a. A flood risk assessment that, at a minimum, includes:
1. The source, flood frequency, expected duration, timing, and
depth of flood impacts that impact the structure, its occupants or
activity in the structure;
2. The expected impact on activities and operations;
3. Identification of persons potentially impacted; and
-3-
4. The impact of flooding on evacuation routes and emergency
vehicle access to the site.
b. A description of the method of receipt of flood warning;
c. Identification and assignment of personnel to implement the plan;
d. Procedures for notification of employees, customers, and other
building occupants, including:
1. Contact information;
2. Redundant methods of notification;
3. Safeguards to ensure all employees received the notification;
and
4. General content of the notices to be provided;
e. A description of procedures for both evacuation and shelter-in-place
of building occupants, including:
1. Method and responsibility for determination of appropriate
response, with evacuation generally considered the primary response,
and shelter-in-place is considered a secondary response;
2. Description of evacuation process, including:
a) Timing of opportunity to evacuate requiring a
minimum of two (2) hours of lead-time from when flood
waters would impact the site or any portion of the designated
evacuation routes;
b) Map and directions with evacuation routes including,
but not limited to, exits from occupied structures and from
occupied structures to a dry public road, specifically
identifying any approved fire apparatus access roads or other
emergency access routes;
c) Mode of evacuation – walking, car, and/or provided
transportation; and
d) Alternative routes for evacuation when preferred
routes are washed out or otherwise impassable;
3. A description of the shelter-in-place, including:
a) Description of safe on-site areas for shelter-in-place
occupation;
b) Development and maintenance of emergency
preparedness kit containing supplies for three days including
such items as food, water, blankets, flashlights, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration weather
radios, batteries; and
c) A communication plan for informing emergency
contacts of those sheltered-in-place;
-4-
f. Procedures for protecting the building from damage or hazardous
conditions, including:
1. Plan for shut down of utilities and equipment;
2. Relocation of computers, documents, or other important
resources or materials to higher areas; and
3. Required or other appropriate floodproofing measures;
g. A process for distribution and posting of plan and evacuation routes
and shelter-in-place instructions;
h. A description of mandatory training and practice drills, including:
1. Procedures for training all employees, including future new
employees;
2. Annual practice drills implementing the plan during the first
three months of each calendar year; and
3. Documentation of practice drills and identified areas for
improvement;
i. A description of post-flood recovery measures, including:
1. Procedures for notification to employees and, if applicable,
the public, of when it is safe to return; and
2. Site clean-up procedures; and
j. Designation of a person responsible for operation of the occupied
facility for which the plan is required, who shall be responsible to the City
for completion of the specific requirements set forth in this §10-48.
(2) Documentation of any required emergency response and preparedness plan
and of practice drills and related process improvements shall be maintained on file
and shall be available at the facility to which the plan pertains for inspection by the
Utilities Executive Director upon request.
(3) The person designated as responsible for any required emergency response
and preparedness plan under Subsection 10-48(1)(j) shall review the plan during the
first quarter of each calendar year, and shall submit documentation of each annual
review to the Utilities Executive Director on a form satisfactory to the Utilities
Executive Director during the first quarter of each calendar year.
Section 4. That Section 10-71 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to add a new subsection (10), to read as follows:
-5-
Sec. 10-71. Specific standards for development in Poudre River floodway.
. . .
(10) Emergency planning and preparedness. New construction, addition to, or
cumulative substantial improvement, redevelopment or change of occupancy of, any
nonresidential or mixed-use structure subject to this Section, other than an accessory
structure, shall be subject to the emergency planning and preparedness requirements
of §10-48.
Section 6. That Section 10-76 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to add a new subsection (9), to read as follows:
Sec. 10-76. Specific standards for nonresidential development in Poudre
River flood fringe.
. . .
(9) Emergency planning and preparedness. New construction, addition to, or
cumulative substantial improvement, redevelopment or change of occupancy of, any
structure subject to this Section, other than an accessory structure, shall be subject
to the emergency planning and preparedness requirements of §10-48.
Section 7. That Section 10-77 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to add a new subsection (8), to read as follows:
Sec. 10-77. Specific standards for mixed-use development in Poudre River
flood fringe.
. . .
(8) Emergency planning and preparedness. New construction, addition to, or
cumulative substantial improvement, redevelopment or change of occupancy of, any
structure subject to this Section, other than an accessory structure, shall be subject
to the emergency planning and preparedness requirements of §10-48.
Section 8. That this Ordinance shall become effective on July 1, 2013.
-6-
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 18th day of
March, A.D. 2013, and to `be presented for final passage on the 26th day of March, A.D. 2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 26th day of March, A.D. 2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-7-