HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 12/20/2011 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor
Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Mayor Pro Tem Council Chambers
Ben Manvel, District 1 City Hall West
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 300 LaPorte Avenue
Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Gerry Horak, District 6 on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and
will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Assisted hearing devices are available to
the public for Council meetings. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance.
REGULAR MEETING
December 20, 2011
Proclamations and Presentations
5:30 p.m.
A. None.
Regular Meeting
6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER.
2. ROLL CALL.
Page 2
3. AGENDA REVIEW:
• City Manager Review of Agenda.
• Consent Calendar Review.
This Review provides an opportunity for Council and citizens to pull items from the Consent
Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this Calendar be “pulled” off the Consent
Calendar and considered separately.
N Council opportunity to pull Consent Calendar items.
(will be considered under Item No. 26.)
N Citizen opportunity to pull Consent Calendar items.
(will be considered under Item. No. 33.)
4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
5. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP
This is an opportunity for the Mayor or Councilmembers to follow-up on issues raised during Citizen
Participation.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar consists of Items 6 through 22. This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council
to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of
the Consent Calendar. The Consent Calendar consists of:
! Ordinance on First Reading that are routine
! Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine
! Those of no perceived controversy
! Routine administrative actions.
Individuals who wish to make comments regarding items remaining on the Consent Calendar or wish to
address the Council on items not specifically scheduled on the agenda must first be recognized by the
Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem. Before speaking, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The
timer will buzz once when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. The timer will buzz again
at the end of the speaker’s time. Each speaker is allowed 5 minutes. If there are more than 6 individuals
who wish to speak, the Mayor may reduce the time allowed for each individual.
! State your name and address for the record.
! Applause, outbursts or other demonstrations by the audience are not allowed
! Keep comments brief; if available, provide a written copy of statement to City Clerk
Page 3
6. Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2011, Amending the Appeals Procedure
Contained in Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3 of the City Code Relating to the Procedures for Hearing
Appeals to the City Council to February 21, 2012.
At its meeting of October 4, 2011, City Council considered Ordinance No. 131, 2011, Amending the
Appeals Procedure. It was adopted on First Reading, but Council asked that staff conduct some
outreach on the proposed changes, and Second Reading was scheduled for December 20.
A public meeting was held on November 30, and approximately fourteen people attended. Several
concerns about the appeals process were raised that are not addressed by the proposed changes,
and there was considerable discussion of the impact of the proposed amendments.
Staff would like to request that Second Reading of this Ordinance be postponed until February 21,
2012. This will permit further discussion of the issues raised at the meeting, and refinement of the
proposed amendments to address concerns.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital
Projects Fund for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Project.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates
unanticipated revenue of $163,068 from the Discovery Science Center ($160,625) and LaFarge
($2,443) for the Museum Exhibit Capital Project.
8. Items Relating to Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 2011, Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a
Grant Contract with History Colorado, the Colorado Historical Society for Funds to Restore
Two Historic Structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Natural Areas Fund Project to Restore Two Historic Structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
The State of Colorado awarded the City a grant of $93,392 from the State Historical Fund to fund 75%
of the estimated cost of $124,523 to restore two historic structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area: the
1888 pioneer barn and log chicken house. Ordinance No. 169, 2011, authorizes the City Manager
to enter into a contract with History Colorado. The contract requires a twenty-year covenant on the
property surrounding the barn and chicken shed, which states that the City will agree to maintain the
buildings, once restored, for twenty years and will not alter anything on the property without express
written permission of History Colorado.
The City also received a $24,000 grant from the Pulliam Charitable Trust to provide most of the 25%
in funds necessary to match the funds received from the State. Natural Areas Program funds will be
used to fund the remaining $7,131 necessary to fully fund the project. Ordinance No. 170, 2011,
authorizes the appropriation of the grant funds. Both Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First
Reading on December 6, 2011.
9. Items Relating to the Seckner Brothers Building, 216, Linden Street.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 171, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for the Exterior Rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building at 216
Linden Street.
B. Resolution 2011-109 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Intergovernmental
Agreement with the State of Colorado for the Use and Benefit of the Colorado Historical
Society for the Administration of the Exterior Rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building
Located at 216 Linden Street.
Page 4
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates
unanticipated revenue in the amount of $73,890 for the exterior facade rehabilitation of the Seckner
Brothers Building, 216 Linden Street. The City was awarded a State Historical Fund grant in the
amount of $35,000. Matching funds totaling $36,890 are provided by the Downtown Development
Authority ($25,890), a City-funded Zero-Interest Loan ($6,100) and the remainder by the building’s
owners, Irwin and Judith Winterowd.
In order to accept the grant and proceed with the project, the City must enter into an
intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the Colorado Historical Society agreeing to administer the
grant. The City of Fort Collins will only be responsible for administering the grant which will be carried
out by Community Development and Neighborhood Services staff. Staff time allocated to
administration will be reimbursed by the grant. The Resolution authorizes the City Manager to
execute the IGA.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 172, 2011, Adopting the 2012 Classified Employees’ Pay Plan.
Ordinance No. 172, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, adopts the
2012 classified employees’ pay plan. The 2012 Pay Plan establishes a structure for employee
compensation. It is the framework that sets the minimum and maximum pay for City positions. The
methodology used by the City is based on compensation best practices. The 2012 Pay Plan uses
average actual salary data collected from public and private sector markets for benchmark positions
to determine pay range midpoints within occupational groups. Ranges for non-benchmark jobs are
established using a point factor system that is calibrated against the benchmark jobs.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 173, 2011, Amending the City Code Concerning the Issuance of
Special Event Permits by the Local Licensing Authority.
Legislators adopted Senate Bill 11-066, which authorizes a local liquor licensing authority to issue
special event permits to qualifying organizations and political candidates without sending the
application to the state authority for approval. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading
on December 6, 2011, authorizes the local licensing authority to approve special event permit
applications locally without obtaining state approval as allowed under Senate Bill 11-066.
Additionally, there is a proposed increase of $25 in the local application fee to help defray some of
the costs associated with the local application process, which generally exceed the proposed fee of
$50 per day of permitted event.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2011, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Adopt and
Provide for Technical Revision of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
The Stormwater Repurposing effort was initiated at a City Council work session in October 2008. The
intent of this effort was to review the City’s stormwater program in its entirety, and explore new or
reformed methods of water quality and quantity management in each of the City’s stormwater basins.
The program review was broken down into 14 categories, with one specifically identifying the need
to update the Stormwater Criteria Manual. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading
on December 6, 2011, adopts the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Criteria
Manual and will set the standard for the City of Fort Collins. Exception language that identifies key
aspects specific to the City will be adopted into the City Code concurrently with this action.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 175, 2011, Designating the Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached
Garage, 160 Yale Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates the
Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage, 160 Yale Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark. The
owner of the property, Judith Goeke, is initiating this request.
Page 5
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 176, 2011, Designating the Chestnut/ Wombacher Residence,
Attached Three-Car Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace, 331 South Shields Street/1200
West Magnolia Street, as Fort Collins Landmarks Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates the
Chestnut/ Wombacher Residence, Attached Three-Car Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace,
located at 331 South Shields Street/1200 West Magnolia Street as a Fort Collins Landmark. The
owner of the property, Margaret Wombacher, is initiating this request.
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 177, 2011, Designating the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F.
Gallagher Residence and Attached Garage, 2500 South College Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark
Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
Ordinance No. 177, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates
the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence and Attached Garage, located at 2500
South College Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Joanne Gallagher,
is initiating this request.
16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 178, 2011, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Digital Signs
and Pole Signs.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, amends the Land Use
Code regulations for digital signs and freestanding pole signs. With respect to digital signs, the
recommended Code changes address such things as brightness, color, design, and location.
Additional design criteria to enhance the appearance of pole signs are also proposed. Three
proposed standards contained in the Ordinance have been amended for Second Reading based on
questions or concerns expressed during the First Reading hearing on this matter. One additional
change is included on Second Reading to allow for flexibility in determining the compliance period for
signs made nonconforming by future sign code amendments.
17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund
for Transfer to the Transit Services Fund and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Transit
Services Fund for the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service.
Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has had recent discussions with the Associated Students of
Colorado State University (ASCSU) about creating an additional transportation option for people
leaving the downtown area on weekend nights. In this partnership Police Services hopes to
accomplish important goals of reducing the number of people and the associated problems in the
downtown area and increasing traffic safety by giving people an additional option for leaving
downtown safely and decreasing the number of drivers who have been drinking during this timeframe.
The available transportation is unable to meet the demand for transportation during this timeframe.
ASCSU has an interest in providing this service for students and is willing to invest funds from student
fees to address this need. By combining available funding, these parties are able to provide this
service to all members of our community for a modest fare. The proposal is to enter into a one year
contract between ASCSU and Transfort to provide two fixed bus routes on Friday and Saturday
nights, every weekend during the term of the Agreement, from 11:30 PM to 2:30 AM. An ongoing
assessment will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of this project, any potential
improvements, and explore opportunities for long-term funding. This Ordinance, unanimously
adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates the funds for the operation of a late
night bus service.
18. Resolution 2011–110 Approving a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police.
The City and the Northern Colorado Lodge #3, Colorado Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), using an
interest based bargaining approach, engaged in negotiations regarding the terms and conditions of
a possible bargaining agreement for 2012 and 2013. City staff and the FOP have tentatively reached
an agreement. On November 30, 2011, bargaining unit members voted to ratify the proposed
agreement.
Page 6
19. Resolution 2011-111 Authorizing the Filing of Application with the Federal Transit Administration, an
Operating Administration of the United States Department of Transportation, for Federal
Transportation Assistance Authorized by 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, Title 23 United States Code and
Other Federal Statutes Administered by the Federal Transit Administration.
The City of Fort Collins receives approximately $2.7million annually (five year average) in federal
assistance from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for mass transportation projects. One
requirement to receive this federal assistance is that the City retains on file with the FTA, an
Authorizing Resolution from City Council that authorizes the City Manager or his/her designee on
behalf of the City of Fort Collins to:
(a) execute and file application for federal assistance with the FTA
(b) execute federal assistance awards (grants) and cooperative agreements with the FTA
(c) execute and file the annual certifications and assurances and other documents that are
required by the FTA before federal assistance is awarded.
The FTA has requested that the City of Fort Collins update the current Authorizing Resolution it has
on file for the City, dated November 1990.
20. Resolution 2011-112 Adopting an Updated Policy for the Review and Approval of Easements on City
Natural Areas and Conserved Lands.
The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Open Lands Easement Policy was adopted by Resolution
2001-094. To date, approximately forty right-of-way easements have been granted by the City under
this Policy. The Natural Areas program (NAP) is proposing revisions to the Policy to address:
1. Compensation and mitigation requirements
2. Review and approval of projects proposed within existing easements
3. Above-ground features associated with buried utility cables and pipelines
4. Specific types of facilities
5. Review and approval of projects within new or existing utility easements on lands conserved
with Conservation Easements
6. Oil and Gas and Minerals Exploration and Production
7. Public Information and Review Process.
21. Resolution 2011-113 Authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Colorado State Board of
Land Commissioners and Larimer County Regarding the Energy by Design Planning Process.
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area (Soapstone) and Meadow Springs Ranch (MSR) are owned by the
City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Program and Fort Collins Utilities, respectively. Soapstone and
MSR are considered split estate properties as the City owns the surface estate and the mineral estate
(including oil and gas) is owned by other parties. The State of Colorado owns approximately 12,400
acres of mineral rights underlying the properties: 3,500 underlying Soapstone and 8,900 underlying
MSR.
The Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners (SLB) has contracted with The Nature
Conservancy (TNC) to conduct an Energy by Design (EbD) planning process on Soapstone and
MSR. The goal of the EbD process is to develop a plan that conserves key natural, recreational,
landscape view, agricultural, and cultural resource values while providing reasonable access to the
SLB’s and others’ mineral estate. This plan also includes strategies to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
surface impacts to key resources. Subject to Council review and approval of the proposed MOU, the
City will be a partner in the planning process. The Memorandum of Understanding outlines the
responsibilities of each party for the Energy by Design planning process.
Page 7
22. Resolution 2011-114 Making Appointments to Various Boards, Commissions, and Authorities of the
City of Fort Collins.
Vacancies currently exist on various boards, commissions, and authorities due to resignations of
board members and the expiration of terms of current members. Applications were solicited during
September and Council teams interviewed applicants during October, November, and December.
This Resolution appoints boardmembers to fill current vacancies and term expirations.
END CONSENT
23. Consent Calendar Follow-up.
This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent
Calendar.
24. Staff Reports.
25. Councilmember Reports.
26. Consideration of Council -Pulled Consent Items.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
The method of debate for discussion items is as follows:
! Mayor introduces the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made
by staff
! Staff presentation (optional)
! Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (five-minute limit for each citizen)
! Council questions of staff on the item
! Council motion on the item
! Council discussion
! Final Council comments
! Council vote on the item
Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure
all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room.
The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again
at the end of the speaker’s time.
27. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 2011, Amending Chapter 23, Articles IX and X of the City
Code to Update Language Related to the Use of Motorized Devices on City Trails by People with
Disabilities. (staff: Marty Heffernan; 5 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion)
On First Reading, the City Council amended Ordinance No. 167, 2011 to eliminate the provisions
pertaining to implementation of a one year trial period to allow electric assisted bicycles on City trails.
Provisions in the Ordinance to change the City Code to clarify that people with temporary or
permanent mobility disabilities are allowed to operate ebikes and other power driven mobility devices
on trails, and in parks and natural areas, in accordance with City regulations, were retained. This
Ordinance was adopted with these revisions, on First Reading on November 15, 2011 by a vote of
4-2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat).
Page 8
Changes were made to the Ordinance between First and Second Readings to shorten the title of the
Ordinance, add information about recent ADA regulations, and remove a definition that is no longer
needed.
Pursuant to a request from Councilmembers Troxell and Kottwitz and Mayor Weitkunat, an Optional
Version of the Ordinance is also provided on Second Reading that includes Code revisions to provide
for a pilot ebikes program, as originally presented on First Reading. That version, which also includes
shown in bold proposed edits to the title and in “whereas” clauses on the first page that improve the
explanation of the ADA-related changes, is labeled as “Optional Version.”
30. Resolution 2011-115 Relating to Assistance for Persons Displaced from Affordable Housing in the
Fort Collins Area. (staff: Diane Jones, Karen Cumbo, Ginny Sawyer; 10 minute staff presentation;
45 minute discussion)
Council appropriated $50,000 in November 2011 for a relocation assistance program. In light of
recent developments with the Bender Mobile Home Park, staff developed a disbursement plan that,
if approved by Council, will be implemented beginning January 1, 2012.
28. First Reading of Ordinance No. 182, 2011, Amending Section 15-483 of the City Code So as to
Eliminate the Eight-ounce Limitation on the Amount of Medical Marijuana That Can Be Distributed by
Licensees to Other Licensed Medical Marijuana Centers. (staff: Ginny Sawyer, Jerry Schiager,
Medical Marijuana Staff Team; 5 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion)
All medical marijuana businesses in Fort Collins must cease operation by February 14, 2012. This
amendment would allow existing businesses to sell more than 8 ounces of product to another licensed
business outside the City limits in an effort to eliminate inventory by February 14, 2012.
29. First Reading of Ordinance No. 183, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-owned Property at 430 North
College Avenue and 100 Willow Street to the Colorado State University Research Foundation. (staff:
Bruce Hendee, Ken Mannon, Helen Matson; 5 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion)
Colorado State University (CSU) has leased the City-owned property known as the Old Power Plant
at 430 North College Avenue for the last 17 years. CSU has used this site as the Engines and Energy
Conversion Lab (EECL). This program has grown over the years and it is CSURF’s desire to
construct a new building that will be used to house additional labs, office and incubator companies
sharing the vision of the EECL. A new lease agreement was necessary to accommodate these
changes.
The new lease agreement will be with Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF) and
CSU will relinquish all rights, title and interest in the original Lease Agreement dated February 15,
1994 and the First Amendment to Lease Agreement dated January 13, 2005.
31. Resolution 2011-116 Appointing a Representative to the Colorado Municipal League Policy
Committee. (staff: Darin Atteberry; no staff presentation; 10 minute discussion)
Fort Collins has two representatives on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee,
Councilmember Lisa Poppaw and City Manager Darin Atteberry. Councilmember Poppaw has
requested to be replaced as she is unable to attend the meetings. This Resolution will appoint
another Councilmember as the City’s representative to the CML Policy Committee.
32. Resolution 2011-117 Making an Appointment to the Zoning Board of Appeals. (staff: Wanda Krajicek;
no staff presentation; 10 minute discussion)
A vacancy currently exists on the Zoning Board of Appeals due to the term limit vacancy of Jim Pisula.
Mayor Karen Weitkunat and Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Ohlson conducted interviews but did not agree on
a recommendation for this vacancy. The Council interview team wishes to submit two names (Robert
V. Long and Rudolph C. Zitti) for Council’s consideration for that position.
33. Consideration of Citizen-Pulled Consent Items.
Page 9
34. Other Business.
35. Adjournment.
Every Council meeting will end no later than 10:30 p.m., except that: (1) any item of business commenced
before 10:30 p.m. may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the City Council may, by
majority vote, extend a meeting until no later than 12:00 a.m. for the purpose of considering additional items
of business. Any matter which has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council
meeting, and all matters scheduled for consideration at the meeting which have not yet been considered
by Council, will be continued to the next regular Council meeting and will be placed first on the discussion
agenda for such meeting.
urban renewal authority
Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers
Kelly Ohlson, Vice-President City Hall West
Ben Manvel 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz
Wade Troxell
Gerry Horak Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, Executive Director
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, Secretary
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and
will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for
assistance.
URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY MEETING
December 20, 2011
(after the Regular Council Meeting)
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Resolution No. 040 Adopting a Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. (staff: Christina
Vincent, Chris Martinez; 5 minute staff presentation; 20 minute discussion)
The Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is expected to generate $913,815 in property tax
increment collections from the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area. This prediction is based on
information from the County Assessor’s Office 2011 December Certification. In addition to the tax
increment revenue, there will be revenue from interest on investments that total approximately
$84,500. The total amount of revenue for the URA in 2012 is approximately $998,315.
The revenue from interest on investments, combined with estimated year-end fund balance in the
URA Operating Fund will be the source for the following recommended operating appropriations:
• $198,583 Operations and Maintenance
• $20,000 Consultant fees related to ongoing projects
The 2012 URA debt service payments total $645,296 for the following loans:
1. North College Marketplace - 2009
2. JAX - 2010
3. Northeast College Corridor Outfall Project - 2011
4. Kaufman and Robinson - 2011
5. North College Marketplace – 2011
The 2012 expenses for the URA total $863,879 for operations and debt service obligations.
December 20, 2011
4. Other Business.
5. Adjournment.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Steve Roy, Karen Cumbo
Steve Dush, Ginny Sawyer
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 6
SUBJECT
Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2011, Amending the Appeals Procedure Contained in
Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3 of the City Code Relating to the Procedures for Hearing Appeals to the City Council
to February 21, 2012.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At its meeting of October 4, 2011, City Council considered Ordinance No. 131, 2011, Amending the Appeals
Procedure. It was adopted on First Reading, but Council asked that staff conduct some outreach on the proposed
changes, and Second Reading was scheduled for December 20.
A public meeting was held on November 30, and approximately fourteen people attended. Several concerns about
the appeals process were raised that are not addressed by the proposed changes, and there was considerable
discussion of the impact of the proposed amendments. A summary of the meeting is attached.
Staff would like to request that Second Reading of this Ordinance be postponed until February 21, 2012. This will
permit further discussion of the issues raised at the meeting, and refinement of the proposed amendments to address
concerns.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the postponement.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Summary of November 30, 2011, public meeting
Ordinance 131‐Changes to the Appeals Process Public Outreach Meeting
Wednesday, November 30 from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.
14 people in attendance
Comments related to the Ordinance:
Allows Council members who file an appeal to participate in hearing the appeal.
What is the rationale for this?
Seems strange (and concerning) that someone could appeal and then be a decision making on same
appeal.
Allows parties‐in‐interest to file a response or statement.
Is this reactionary and maybe unnecessary?
Responses need legal review and need to be redacted prior to the hearing.
Who would know in a timely manner at a hearing if new information was being presented?
Does this add too many days to the process?
Does this improve any legal standing of the appeal or the findings?
Who determines if a response is from a Party‐in‐Interest?
By inviting all Parties‐in‐Interest into the appeal process does it mislead people to think it will be a “re‐
hearing” as opposed to an “appeal hearing?”
If Parties‐in‐Interest can write a response will that limit the speaking time at the hearing?
Expands the time within which an appeal hearing must be scheduled. (Changes from 60 to 120 days.)
120 days is excessive.
75 to 90 days is more acceptable.
120 days could require a new appraisal or re‐submittal of all financial information.
120 days is punitive and is equivalent to an entire construction season.
The timing of this is bad considering the incredibly difficult financing climate.
What is the standard in other communities?
Clarifies the extent to which new information may be presented to Council prior to and during the hearing.
Concerned about what is considered new or reconfigured. Referred to past case where applicant claimed
they did not have time to review documents.
Define reconfigured.
Clarifies the purpose and procedure for conducting site inspections.
Why is this needed?
General Ord. 131 Comments
Timing isn’t good. Public should have been involved prior to First Reading.
It would be good to have a problem statement (backed up with data) showing what the problem is we’re
trying to fix.
This ordinance may not help the process.
General Appeal Process Comments
Since we do so few appeals maybe training for Council ahead of time to ensure the process is followed
and runs smoothly.
Need a handout or materials outlining the appeal process and objective.
Have a neighborhood meeting prior to an appeal hearing.
The applicant should always be held to a higher standard than the neighbors (they know the process.)
Need a forum for people to voice non LUC related issues and concerns.
Appeal vs. Re‐hearing. Need to be clear and careful in messaging.
Will there be any change to the exparte rule to allow greater dialogue between residents and neighbors?
Need to create assurance amongst public tat the process is good and fair.
Need process changes to limit the length of hearings. No one should be expected to perform well and
think clearly at a 6‐8 hour meeting late into the night.
Before anything can move forward we must address the failure of the process and must uphold the LUC.
Verbal arguments at hearing should only address specific elements of the LUC. Can Council control this?
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Cheryl Donaldson
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 7
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund for
the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates unanticipated revenue
of $163,068 from the Discovery Science Center ($160,625) and LaFarge ($2,443) for the Museum Exhibit Capital
Project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Cheryl Donaldson
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 17
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund for the
Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance appropriates unanticipated revenue of $163,068 from the Discovery Science Center ($160,625) and
LaFarge ($2,443) for the Museum Exhibit Capital Project.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Fort Collins Museum and Discovery Science Center entered into a partnership in 2008 to design and construct
a new museum facility. The exhibit design company, Gyroscope, Inc. was contracted through the City’s competitive
purchasing process (total contract of $1.285 million) shared equally ($642,500 each) between the City and the
Discovery Science Center. The Discovery Science Center has previously provided the City $481,875. This Ordinance
appropriates the final payment of $160,625 paid to the City by the Discovery Science Center for this contract.
The Fort Collins Museum received a $2,443 donation from LaFarge toward the new Museum project. These funds will
be used toward the fabrication of the Exhibit Master Plan for the new Fort Collins Museum of Discovery.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
This Ordinance will appropriate $163,068 into the Museum Exhibit Capital Project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 168, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
FOR THE FORT COLLINS MUSEUM/DISCOVERY SCIENCE CENTER PROJECT
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2005, Fort Collins voters passed Ordinance No. 092, 2005,
approving the “Building on Basics” (“BOB”) tax for certain capital projects; and
WHEREAS, $6,000,000 was included in the BOB capital project program for construction
of a new combined-use facility for the Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center (“the
Project”); and
WHEREAS, in March 2008, the City and the Discovery Center, a Colorado non-profit
corporation, d/b/a Discovery Science Center (the “NPC”), now officially known as FCDM, Inc.,
entered into an operating agreement for the construction and operation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Project will be jointly owned, managed, and funded by the City and the
NPC and will expand the educational experience of city residents by providing a broader array of
scientific, cultural and historical exhibits in a single location, and will also provide an exciting new
City amenity; and
WHEREAS, the cost of the exhibit design contract in the amount of $1,285,000 will be
shared equally by the City and the NPC, which is $642,500 for each party; and
WHEREAS, the NPC has previously provided funds in the amount of $481,875 for the
exhibit design contract which funds have been appropriated; and
WHEREAS, the final payment of $160,625 from the NPC for the exhibit design contract has
been received by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has also received a donation of $2,443 from LaFarge for the Project
and these funds will be appropriated and used for the fabrication of the Exhibit Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to make
supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total
amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for
that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be
received during the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of the revenue as described
herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Capital Projects fund to exceed the current
estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated from unanticipated revenue in the Capital Projects Fund
the sum of ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-THREE THOUSAND SIXTY-EIGHT DOLLARS ($163,068)
for expenditure on the Building on Basics - Fort Collins Museum/Discovery Science Center Joint
Facility Project.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Mark Sears
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 8
SUBJECT
Items Relating to Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 2011, Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Grant Contract with
History Colorado, the Colorado Historical Society for Funds to Restore Two Historic Structures at Bobcat
Ridge Natural Area.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund
Project to Restore Two Historic Structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The State of Colorado awarded the City a grant of $93,392 from the State Historical Fund to fund 75% of the estimated
cost of $124,523 to restore two historic structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area: the 1888 pioneer barn and log
chicken house. Ordinance No. 169, 2011, authorizes the City Manager to enter into a contract with History Colorado.
The contract requires a twenty-year covenant on the property surrounding the barn and chicken shed, which states
that the City will agree to maintain the buildings, once restored, for twenty years and will not alter anything on the
property without express written permission of History Colorado.
The City also received a $24,000 grant from the Pulliam Charitable Trust to provide most of the 25% in funds
necessary to match the funds received from the State. Natural Areas Program funds will be used to fund the remaining
$7,131 necessary to fully fund the project. Ordinance No. 170, 2011, authorizes the appropriation of the grant funds.
Both Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Mark Sears
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 18
SUBJECT
Items Relating to Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 2011, Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Grant Contract with
History Colorado, the Colorado Historical Society for Funds to Restore Two Historic Structures at Bobcat
Ridge Natural Area.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund
Project to Restore Two Historic Structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The State of Colorado awarded the City a grant of $93,392 from the State Historical Fund to fund 75% of the estimated
cost of $124,523 to restore two historic structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area: the 1888 pioneer barn and log
chicken house. To accept the grant and proceed with the project the City must enter into a contract with History
Colorado. The contract requires a twenty-year covenant on the property surrounding the barn and chicken shed, which
states that the City will agree to maintain the buildings, once restored, for twenty years and will not alter anything on
the property without express written permission of History Colorado.
The City also received a $24,000 grant from the Pulliam Charitable Trust to provide most of the 25% in funds
necessary to match the funds received from the State. Natural Areas Program funds will be used to fund the remaining
$7,131 necessary to fully fund the project.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Bobcat Ridge Natural Area is rich in cultural resources as well as natural resources. With generous donations from
the Pulliam Charitable Trust, Natural Areas has already restored a historic cabin and a calving shed, published a book
and a booklet on the history of the Bobcat Ridge area, and hired education staff to lead many cultural interpretation
programs each year for hundreds of people of all ages. Visitors really enjoy learning about the early pioneers in the
area and the farming and ranching history on Bobcat Ridge. They enjoy seeing the historic buildings and learning
about how the early pioneers worked and lived.
The Pulliam Charitable Trust funded the preparation of the application for historic designation, which was received last
December and also funded the preparation of this grant application. Carol Tunner, retired City Historic Preservationist,
was hired to prepare both applications and serve as the grant administrator for the project. Steve Seefeld from
Operation Services will serve as the Project Manager.
Staff will put out a request for proposals early in 2012 to select an architect/contractor team to prepare plans for and
restore the two historic structures, to be completed by the end of the year. Staff and the contractor are required by
the State Historic Fund to fully document each phase of the restoration process. Before pictures of both structures
and an historic picture of the barn are attached (Attachment 2). Once the project is complete, staff will provide after
pictures to Council.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The $93,392 grant will fund 75% of the estimated cost of $124,523. The 25% cash match, $31,131, is being funded
with a $24,000 grant from the Pulliam Charitable Trust and the remaining $7,131 from Natural Areas Funds.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 18
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
There will be no environmental impacts.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its November 9, 2011 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the State Grant Contract and the appropriation of the Grants.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The preservation, restoration and interpretation of these historic structures is per the Bobcat Ridge Natural Area
Management Plan adopted administratively in 2005 after thorough public review.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location map
2. Photos of historic structures
3. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, November 9, 2011
ORDINANCE NO. 169, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A GRANT CONTRACT WITH
HISTORY COLORADO, THE COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR FUNDS TO
RESTORE TWO HISTORIC STRUCTURES AT BOBCAT RIDGE NATURAL AREA
WHEREAS, in 1990 the Colorado Constitution was amended to permit limited gaming in
three Colorado cities; and
WHEREAS, the limited gaming amendment also created the State Historical Fund (the
“Fund”) and directed that a portion of gaming tax revenues be distributed through a competitive
process for historic preservation projects throughout the state; and
WHEREAS, grants from the Fund are administered through History Colorado, the Colorado
Historical Society (the “Historical Society”); and
WHEREAS, in early 2011 City Natural Areas staff applied for a grant from the Historical
Society to help pay for restoration of two historic structures, the 1888 pioneer barn and a log chicken
house (the “Project”), at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area (the “Natural Area”); and
WHEREAS, in August 2011 the Historical Society awarded the City a grant in the amount
of $93,392 for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the estimated total cost of the Project is $124,523, with additional funding
coming from the Pulliam Charitable Trust and the Natural Areas program; and
WHEREAS, to receive the grant funding the City must enter into a Grant Contract with the
Historical Society; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements, such as a
grant agreement, to provide any function, service or facility, under Article II, Section 16 of the
Charter of the City of Fort Collins and Section 29-1-203, C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Grant Contract is on file and available for review in the office of
the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, one of the conditions of the Grant Contract is a 20-year covenant running with
the land that would prohibit the City from permitting or undertaking any construction, alteration,
movement, relocation or remodeling or any other activity on the property where the Project is
located that would adversely affect the structural soundness of the property or encroach on the open
land area of the property without the express written permission of the Historical Society; and
WHEREAS, the Natural Area property affected by this covenant would be all or a portion
of the property described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the
“Property”); and
WHEREAS, placing a restrictive covenant on the Property that is enforceable by the State
is the equivalent of conveying an interest in real property; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 23-111(a) of the City Code, the Council is authorized to
sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the
City provided that the Council first finds, by ordinance, that such disposition is in the best interests
of the City; and
WHEREAS, City staff recommends that the City Council approve the Grant Contract as
described herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the Council hereby finds that placing a restrictive covenant on the
Property as required by the Historical Society in order to receive grant funding is in the best interests
of the City.
Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to enter into the Grant Contract with the
Historical Society obligating the City to use the $93,392 in grant proceeds from the Fund for
restoration of historic structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area, including the covenant described
above, in substantially the form of agreement as is on file in the office of the City Clerk, and that
the terms of the Grant Contract are approved together with such other terms and conditions as the
City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate
to protect the best interests of the City.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-2-
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-3-
ORDINANCE NO. 170, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE
NATURAL AREAS FUND PROJECT TO RESTORE TWO HISTORIC
STRUCTURES AT BOBCAT RIDGE NATURAL AREA
WHEREAS, the City has been awarded a Colorado Historical Fund grant in the amount of
$95,392 to fund 75% of the cost to restore two historic structures at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area,
the 1888 Pioneer Barn and the log Chicken House; and
WHEREAS, the grant requires a 25% project match in the amount of $31,131 for a total
estimated project cost of $124,523; and
WHEREAS, the City has also received a grant in the amount of $24,000 from the Pulliam
Charitable Trust which will cover most of the required match; and
WHEREAS, the remaining matching funds in the amount of $7,131 are available from
existing appropriations in the Natural Areas Fund operating budget; and
WHEREAS, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the Colorado Historical Fund Grant Contract and the appropriation of the
Grants; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make
supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total
amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for
that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be
received during the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of grant funds will not cause
the total amount appropriated in the Natural Areas Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual
and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year.
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to
transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof
from one fund to another fund, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be
expended remains unchanged.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated grant
revenue in the Natural Areas Fund the sum of ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND
THREE HUNDRED NINETY-TWO DOLLARS ($117,392) for the grant project to restore two
historic buildings at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area.
Section 2. That the unexpended appropriated amount of SEVEN THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE DOLLARS ($7,131) is authorized for transfer from the Natural Areas
Fund operating budget to the grant project to restore two historic buildings at Bobcat Ridge
Natural Area and appropriated therein
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Courtney Rippy Levingston
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 9
SUBJECT
Items Relating to the Seckner Brothers Building, 216, Linden Street.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 171, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General
Fund for the Exterior Rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building at 216 Linden Street.
B. Resolution 2011-109 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the
State of Colorado for the Use and Benefit of the Colorado Historical Society for the Administration of the
Exterior Rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building Located at 216 Linden Street.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates unanticipated revenue
in the amount of $73,890 for the exterior facade rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building, 216 Linden Street.
The City was awarded a State Historical Fund grant in the amount of $35,000. Matching funds totaling $36,890 are
provided by the Downtown Development Authority ($25,890), a City-funded Zero-Interest Loan ($6,100) and the
remainder by the building’s owners, Irwin and Judith Winterowd.
In order to accept the grant and proceed with the project, the City must enter into an intergovernmental agreement
(IGA) with the Colorado Historical Society agreeing to administer the grant. The City of Fort Collins will only be
responsible for administering the grant which will be carried out by Community Development and Neighborhood
Services staff. Staff time allocated to administration will be reimbursed by the grant. The Resolution authorizes the
City Manager to execute the IGA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Courtney Rippy Levingston
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 19
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 171, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the
Exterior Rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building at 216 Linden Street.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance appropriates unanticipated revenue in the amount of $73,890 for the exterior facade rehabilitation of
the Seckner Brothers Building, 216 Linden Street. The City was awarded a State Historical Fund grant in the amount
of $35,000. Matching funds totaling $36,890 are provided by the Downtown Development Authority ($25,890), a City-
funded Zero-Interest Loan ($6,100) and the remainder by the building’s owners, Irwin and Judith Winterowd. The City
will only be responsible for administering the grant, which will be carried out by Community Development and
Neighborhood Services staff. Staff time allocated to administration will be reimbursed by the grant.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Seckner Brother’s Building, 216 Linden Street, is designated on the National, State and Local Historic Registries
as part of the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District. The turn of the century building was built by the Seckner Brothers
to house their photography shop. Over time the facade of this landmark building has suffered from deferred
maintenance, resulting in significant structural issues and an altered storefront. In keeping with the historic character
of the adjacent properties, the new owners are proposing a historic restoration and reconstruction of the building’s
facade to its 1906 appearance, with special attention being focused on the exceptional second floor square oriel
window – the only one of its kind in Fort Collins. By reconstructing the original storefront, adding structural
reinforcement to the upper bay, and rehabilitating the original windows using techniques, materials and joinery
appropriate for historic window rehabilitation, 216 Linden will once again add to the charm and character of Fort Collins’
Old Town Historic District.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The City will not be responsible for any monetary contribution, but will be responsible for receiving and administering
the funds, which will be reimbursed from the grant.
This project represents an opportunity not only to rehabilitate the facade of 216 Linden Street, but it will also add to
the positive economic impact that already exists along Linden Street in Fort Collins. With the completion of the Old
Firehouse Alley Project, pedestrian use along Linden Street is seeing a dramatic increase. The proposed project will
compliment the Old Firehouse Alley Project, increase the economic vitality of Fort Collins as a whole, and promote
civic pride of the surrounding businesses. Additionally, the project will generate sales tax revenue from materials and
services purchased locally, and increase property taxes, due to the property’s higher assessed value.
Since this matter involves an intergovernmental agreement with the State in order for the City to obtain the grant,
Section 1-22 of the City Code requires that the City Council authorize, by Resolution, the execution of the
intergovernmental agreement by the City Manager. That Resolution will be presented to the City Council at the
December 20, 2011 Council meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The project supports the City’s goal of environmental sustainability. As with all historic preservation projects, this
project maximizes the use of existing materials and infrastructure, and reduces waste in landfills from demolition costs.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 19
Historic buildings were traditionally designed to be energy efficient, with many sustainable features that respond to
climate and site. The restoration and rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building at 216 Linden Street will increase
the overall energy efficiency of the building.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its February 10, 2010 meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission reviewed plans for the exterior rehabilitation
of 216 Linden Street for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program and voted unanimously to allocate $6,100 in loan
monies to this project.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Photo of building
3. Landmark Preservation Commission minutes, February 10, 2010
ORDINANCE NO. 171, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE
GENERAL FUND FOR THE EXTERIOR REHABILITATION
OF THE SECKNER BROTHERS BUILDING AT 216 LINDEN STREET
WHEREAS, the City has been awarded a grant in the amount of $35,000 from the
Colorado Historical Society's State Historical Fund; and
WHEREAS, the grant will be used to rehabilitate the exterior facade of the historic
Seckner Brothers Building located at 216 Linden Street; and
WHEREAS, the building’s owners will provide the required matching funds in the amount
of $38,890, and will be contracting for the work from sole source vendors; and
WHEREAS, the City will administer the grant and cash match funds and be responsible for
the distribution of the grant and cash match funds; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make
supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total
amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for
that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be
received during the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of grant funds and the
matching funds totaling $71,895 will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund
to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal
year.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated grant revenue in
the General Fund the sum of SEVENTY THREE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND
NINETY DOLLARS ($73,890) for the Exterior Rehabilitation Project at 216 Linden Street.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
RESOLUTION 2011-109
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF COLORADO
FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE COLORADO HISTORICAL
SOCIETY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXTERIOR REHABILITATION
OF THE SECKNER BROTHERS BUILDING LOCATED AT 216 LINDEN STREET
WHEREAS, the City has received a grant from the State of Colorado for the use and benefit
of the Colorado Historical Society for the purpose of administration of the facade rehabilitation of
the Seckner Brothers Building located at 216 Linden Street in the City, which grant is in the amount
of $36,890 in support of Project Number 2012-M1-034 (Exterior Rehabilitation); and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Development Authority has pledged $25,890 in matching funds
while the City has obligated funds in the amount of $6,100 as a landmark rehabilitation loan with
the remainder of the cost to be funded by the building’s owners, Irwin and Judith Winterowd; and
WHEREAS, the Seckner Brothers Building is designated on the National, State and Local
Historic Registries as part of the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District and is in need of exterior
rehabilitation due to deferred maintenance and deterioration, and the owners are proposing a historic
restoration and reconstruction of the building’s facade to its 1906 appearance; and
WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has approved the granting of a
landmark rehabilitation loan in support of the project and the City Council has determined that it is
in the best interests of the City that the City Manager enter into the intergovernmental agreement
with the State of Colorado for the exterior rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an intergovernmental agreement
with the State of Colorado for the use and benefit of the Colorado Historical Society for the
administration of the exterior rehabilitation of the Seckner Brothers Building located at 216 Linden
Street in support of Exterior Rehabilitation Project Number 2012-M1-034.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December, A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Aimee Jensen
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 11
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 173, 2011, Amending the City Code Concerning the Issuance of Special Event
Permits by the Local Licensing Authority.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legislators adopted Senate Bill 11-066, which authorizes a local liquor licensing authority to issue special event
permits to qualifying organizations and political candidates without sending the application to the state authority for
approval. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, authorizes the local licensing
authority to approve special event permit applications locally without obtaining state approval as allowed under Senate
Bill 11-066. Additionally, there is a proposed increase of $25 in the local application fee to help defray some of the
costs associated with the local application process, which generally exceed the proposed fee of $50 per day of
permitted event.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Aimee Jensen
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 21
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 173, 2011, Amending the City Code Concerning the Issuance of Special Event Permits
by the Local Licensing Authority.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legislators adopted Senate Bill 11-066, which authorizes a local liquor licensing authority to issue special event
permits to qualifying organizations and political candidates without sending the application to the state authority for
approval. The proposed amendments to the City Code will authorize the local licensing authority to approve special
event permit applications locally without obtaining state approval as allowed under Senate Bill 11-066. Additionally,
there is a proposed increase of $25 in the local application fee to help defray some of the costs associated with the
local application process, which generally exceed the proposed fee of $50 per day of permitted event.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Prior to this statutory change, local authorities were authorized to approve applications for special event permits, and
then send them to the state authority for final approval. This change will allow the local authority to approve a special
event permit in a shortened time period.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The $25 local fee increase diverts the fee previously paid to the State ($25 per day for the malt, spirituous, and vinous
liquor and $10 per day for 3.2% beer) to the City, resulting in no net increase for malt, vinous and spirituous liquor
permit applicants and a 60% increase in fees for 3.2% beer permit applicants.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
When this bill was signed by the Governor on May 23, 2011, staff began informing all the special event permit
applicants about this upcoming change. The response was unanimously positive. In addition to these discussions,
staff e-mailed special event permit applicants, notifying them of these changes.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo from Municipal Judge, Kathleen Lane
ORDINANCE NO. 173, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
CONCERNING THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS BY
THE LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Colorado General Assembly adopted Senate Bill 11-066, which took effect
August 10, 2011, and which allows a local licensing authority to elect to assume sole authority to
approve or deny applications for special event permits to serve alcohol; and
WHEREAS, prior to this statutory change, local authorities were only authorized to approve
applications for special event permits and to then submit those approved applications to the State
Liquor Enforcement Division for final approval and issuance; and
WHEREAS, staff recognizes the benefit to applicants in allowing the local licensing
authority to approve special event permit applications locally without obtaining State approval; and
WHEREAS, staff believes that the current application process provides an extensive and
complete review of each special event permit application submitted to the City Clerk’s Office; and
WHEREAS, staff believes it would be in the best interest of the City to exercise local control
over special event liquor permitting allowed by Senate Bill 11-066; and
WHEREAS, in addition to exercising local control over special event liquor permits, staff
also recommends increasing the application fee for a special event liquor permit per day from $25.00
to $50.00 to help defray some of the costs associated with the local application process; and
WHEREAS, said fee increase diverts the fee previously paid to the State ($25 per day for
the malt, spirituous, and vinous liquor and $10 per day for 3.2% beer) to the City, resulting in no net
increase for malt, vinous and spirituous liquor permit applicants and a 60% increase in fees for 3.2%
beer permit applicants; and
WHEREAS, the costs associated with processing the two types of special event permits are
the same, regardless of the type of permit issued, and generally exceed the proposed fee of $50 per
day of permitted event; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it would be in the best interests of the City to
both exercise local control over special event liquor permitting, and to increase the application fee
for a special event liquor permit to $50.00 per day of the permitted special event.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 3-16 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to be read as follows:
Sec. 3-16. City Clerk duties.
The City Clerk shall:
. . .
(5) Process all applications for temporary, art gallery, special event and bed and
breakfast permits on behalf of the Liquor Licensing Authority pursuant to §
3-83.
. . .
(8) Process all applications for special event permits on behalf of the Liquor
Licensing Authority pursuant to Section 3-83.5.
Section 2. That Section 3-74 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to be read as follows:
Sec. 3-74. Application fees.
(a) Application fees shall be payable to the City as follows:
. . .
(7) Special events permit (per day) ……………. 25.50.
. . .
Section 3. That Chapter 3, Article III of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended by the addition of a new section 3-83.5 which reads in its entirety as follows:
Sec. 3 -83.5 Special Event Permit.
(a) The City Clerk may, pursuant to Section 12-48-101 et seq., C.R.S, and the
Colorado Code of Regulations 1 C.C.R. 203-2, 47-1000 through 47-1020, approve
an application for a special event permit for the sale, by the drink only, of fermented
malt beverages, or of malt, spirituous, or vinous liquors to qualified organizations
and political candidates. Such special event permit shall authorize a permittee to sell
such alcohol beverages at the location and for the duration of time specified on the
issued permit.
(b) If the City Clerk receives an objection to the issuance of a special event
permit from one or more parties in the designated neighborhood as determined by the
City Clerk’s Office, the matter will be scheduled for a hearing before the Authority
at its next regularly scheduled meeting, at which time the Authority shall consider
any and all objections, and it may, pursuant to Section 12-48-101 et seq., C.R.S. and
-2-
the Colorado Code of Regulations 1 C.C.R. 203-2, 47-1000 through 47-1020, either
approve or deny the special event permit application.
(c) If the City Clerk decides to deny the application for a special event permit
applied for under this Section, and the applicant wishes to contest the denial, the
applicant shall be entitled to a hearing before the Authority at its next regularly
scheduled meeting, at which time the Authority shall consider whether the City Clerk
properly applied the law pursuant to Section 12-48-101 et seq., C.R.S. and the
Colorado Code of Regulations 1 C.C.R. 203-2, 47-1000 through 47-1020, and
whether to uphold the decision of the City Clerk or overturn it and approve the
special event permit application.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-3-
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Janet Miller
Amy Sharkey
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 10
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 172, 2011, Adopting the 2012 Classified Employees’ Pay Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ordinance No. 172, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, adopts the 2012 classified
employees’ pay plan. The 2012 Pay Plan establishes a structure for employee compensation. It is the framework that
sets the minimum and maximum pay for City positions. The methodology used by the City is based on compensation
best practices. The 2012 Pay Plan uses average actual salary data collected from public and private sector markets
for benchmark positions to determine pay range midpoints within occupational groups. Ranges for non-benchmark
jobs are established using a point factor system that is calibrated against the benchmark jobs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Janet Miller
Amy Sharkey
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 20
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 172, 2011, Adopting the 2012 Classified Employees’ Pay Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Fort Collins 2012 Pay Plan establishes a pay range structure for employee compensation. It is the
framework that sets the minimum and maximum pay for City positions. The methodology used by the City is based
on compensation best practices. The 2012 Pay Plan uses average actual salary data collected from public and private
sector markets for benchmark positions to determine pay range midpoints within occupational groups. Ranges for non-
benchmark jobs are established using a point factor system that is calibrated against the benchmark jobs.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Prior to 2007, the philosophy used to develop the City’s annual pay plan was based on setting pay range maximums,
within occupational groups, at the 70th percentile of the market. Pay ranges were developed using pay range
maximum data collected from 18 peer organizations.
The 2008 Pay Plan began a transition toward a new compensation philosophy. Rather than using pay range
maximums to develop the pay structure, average actual pay data collected from the same 18 benchmark organizations
was used to set the pay range midpoints. The pay range minimum and maximum was developed using the pay range
midpoint, establishing a 40% difference between the minimum and maximum of pay ranges.
In 2008, staff attended a course, “Market Pricing - Conducting a Competitive Pay Analysis” to learn about best
practices in compensation, benefits and total rewards. Staff used the recommended methodology to design the 2009
Pay Plan.
This same methodology was used to design the 2012 Pay Plan and is outlined below:
Step 1 – Market Identification
Consistent with City Council direction, we utilized a market identification process to ensure that the City’s Pay Plan
aligns closely with the actual markets with which we compete (both the public and private sectors). The City identified
143 benchmark jobs for which we could gather market pay data.
The Colorado Front Range (Fort Collins to Colorado Springs) was identified as the market for professional and
technical jobs. Northern Colorado, including Larimer and Weld Counties, was the market identified for administrative
support and some labor trade jobs. Salary data for these two markets includes cities and counties with populations
greater than 50,000 and private sector data, where available.
Step 2 – Market Data Collection and Analysis
Average actual salary data was collected for the benchmark jobs using surveys from Mountain States Employer’s
Council (MSEC) and the Colorado Municipal League (CML). Average actual salary (also referred to as the mean) is
the sum of all reported pay for every employee in a benchmark job divided by the number of incumbents in a given
job. Because the salary data was collected in March 2011, staff “aged” the data by multiplying survey salaries by an
Employment Cost Index, 1.2%, (for government jobs) to arrive at an effective average actual pay rate to be
implemented in 2012.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 20
Primary Data Sources
Mountain States Employer’s Council (MSEC) Colorado Compensation Survey
MSEC Colorado Compensation Survey represents Colorado employers of all sizes. Data was collected from 442
respondents located across the State of Colorado representing 41,755 employees. Government employers represent
20% of the employers. MSEC surveys 379 benchmark jobs.
Mountain States Employer’s Council (MSEC) Information Technology Compensation Survey
Data is collected from 337 respondents. There are 5,887 employees and 81 benchmark jobs. Information is not
broken down by geographic region or type of industry.
Mountain State Employer’s Council (MSEC) Public Employers Compensation Survey
Data is collected from 118 respondents. There 33,685 employees and 344 benchmark jobs.
Colorado Municipal League (CML)
CML reports compensation from many jurisdictions in the State of Colorado, including municipalities, counties, and
special districts.
Step 3 – Establish Pay Ranges
After collecting the most recent data, each pay grade was analyzed. Average actual salaries were used to set the City’s
midpoint for each pay grade within seven occupational groups that make up the Classified Employees’ Pay Plan. In
order to determine pay grade midpoints (the pay structure), staff used regression analysis to establish the best line
of fit for the average actual salaries and pay grades. Midpoints were then used to establish the minimum and
maximum of the pay range (40% spread).
As a result of the market analysis, staff is recommending that the pay ranges for three of the seven occupational
groups be adjusted. Accordingly, all pay grades within the Administrative Professional, Information Technology, and
Electric Utility Operations and Skill Trade occupational groups have been adjusted upwards by 2%. All pay grades
within the other four occupational groups (Administrative Support, Tech/Engineering, Operation Skill Trades/non-
electric trades and Police Civilian) remain at their current levels.
The result of all this effort is the recommended 2012 Classified Employee Pay Plan.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Funding for the 2012 Classified Employees’ Pay Plan is included in the 2012 Adopted City Budget, as amended.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 172, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADOPTING THE 2012 CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
PAY PLAN
WHEREAS, Section 2-566 of the City Code requires that the pay plan for all classified
employees of the City shall be established by ordinance of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City is committed to compensating employees in a manner that is fair,
competitive and understandable; and
WHEREAS, the annual market analysis conducted by the Human Resources Department
includes public and private employer survey information for Northern Colorado and the Front
Range, providing clear benchmark information for approximately 143 benchmark positions; and
WHEREAS, the pay plan recommended by the City Manager is consistent with City
Council objectives, including the philosophy of establishing pay ranges by using the average
actual salaries for benchmark positions to set the mid-point of pay ranges for those positions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the adoption of the recommended pay plan is
in the best interests of the City and further believes that the allocation of individual salaries
within the pay plan should be related to employee performance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby adopts the 2012 City of Fort Collins
Classified Employees Pay Plan (the "Plan"), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. That the effective date of the Plan shall commence with the January 9,
2012, pay period.
Section 3. That the City Manager shall fix the compensation levels of all classified
employees within the pay levels established in the Plan except to the extent that the City
Manager determines, due to performance or other extraordinary circumstances, that the pay level
of a particular employee should remain below the minimum or be fixed above the maximum for
that employee’s job title.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley,
Basil Hamden
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 12
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2011, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Adopt and Provide for
Technical Revision of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Stormwater Repurposing effort was initiated at a City Council work session in October 2008. The intent of this
effort was to review the City’s stormwater program in its entirety, and explore new or reformed methods of water quality
and quantity management in each of the City’s stormwater basins. The program review was broken down into 14
categories, with one specifically identifying the need to update the Stormwater Criteria Manual. This Ordinance,
unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, adopts the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
(UDFCD) Criteria Manual and will set the standard for the City of Fort Collins. Exception language that identifies key
aspects specific to the City will be adopted into the City Code concurrently with this action.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley
Basil Hamden
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 22
SUBJECT
Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2011, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Adopt and
Provide for Technical Revision of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Stormwater Repurposing effort was initiated at a City Council work session in October 2008. The intent of this
effort was to review the City’s stormwater program in its entirety, and explore new or reformed methods of water quality
and quantity management in each of the City’s stormwater basins. The program review was broken down into 14
categories, with one specifically identifying the need to update the Stormwater Criteria Manual. Adoption of the Urban
Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Criteria Manual will set the standard for the City of Fort Collins.
Exception language that identifies key aspects specific to the City will be adopted into the City Code concurrently with
this action.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The “Fort Collins Stormwater Drainage Design Manual” was originally adopted in1984. It was updated in 1997 to
incorporate water quality criteria in conjunction with federal requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. The criteria were updated again in 1999 with the adoption of new rainfall
precipitation amounts. Since that time, engineering practice has evolved and new techniques have been developed,
especially in the area of water quality treatment regulations. These are commonly referred to as “Best Management
Practices” or BMPs.
The UDFCD was established by the Colorado legislature in 1969 for the purpose of assisting local governments in the
Denver metropolitan area with multi-jurisdictional drainage and flood control problems. The UDFCD includes Denver,
parts of 6 surrounding counties, and all or parts of 32 incorporated cities and towns. The UDFCD is nationally
recognized as a leader in stormwater management and the incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). This
expertise in stormwater has been captured in the UDFCD Criteria manual, a 3-volume set that has been widely
adopted for use throughout the Denver metro area and other cities in Colorado. Volumes 1 and 2 (last updated 2001)
provide guidance for planning and design of drainageway channels and hydraulic structures. Volume 3 (updated 2010)
provides guidance for the selection and design of stormwater quality best management practices.
The Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual update aims to capitalize on these new technologies by adopting the
standards that were developed by the UDFCD, while maintaining hydrologic and hydraulic policies and criteria that
are specific to the City of Fort Collins. These specific policies and criteria form what has been identified as the “Fort
Collins Exceptions Manual” and are being referenced in the proposed City Code as Sections 26-549 and 26-550. The
purpose of the updated standards is to clarify existing criteria and regulations, improve consistency with neighboring
communities, facilitate infiltration of runoff, enhance stormwater quality, increase habitat value and plant conservation,
and increase the aesthetic appeal of stormwater facilities.
The entire text of the UDFCD criteria manual (volumes 1, 2 and 3) can be found online at:
http://www.udfcd.org/downloads/down_critmanual.htm
and is available in hard copy at the City Clerk’s Office as well as the Fort Collins Utility offices for review .
It is important to note that the new low impact development (LID) design criteria will be implemented on an incentive
basis and is not required for all new developments. It is City’s intent to update these standards on a regular basis as
proven technologies for LID design and construction emerge and as more is learned from the City’s in-progress LID
monitoring program, in cooperation with Colorado State University’s Urban Water Center.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 22
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The economic implications will be mixed as some regulations will lead to slightly higher initial construction costs, but
through life-cycle analysis undertaken by the UDFCD, it was proven that lower long term replacement and
maintenance costs will offset these higher initial investment costs. Key financial considerations include:
1. More sustainable development regulations will reduce life-cycle costs of operating and maintaining detention
facilities, through lower watering and maintenance costs.
2. Less erosion and flooding damages incurred from smaller storms due to higher infiltration capacity of detention
ponds.
3. If not properly built and maintained, will lead to loss of installed vegetation, erosion threats and ultimately loss
of initial investment.
4. Higher initial investment costs for LID type design for new development projects could discourage
development.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Environmental benefits of adopting the provisions allowing LID technologies will be better stormwater quality in streams
and water bodies, improved riparian health, less stream degradation due to the reduction in sustained flows in urban
streams, and lower consumptive water use practices. Key benefits include:
1. Higher water quality in streams and water bodies receiving stormwater from detention ponds through
increased filtration of pollutants, increased evapotranspiration effects and reduced stream degradation and
erosion.
2. Less use of resources for irrigation, heating and cooling needs and land consumption.
3. Improved habitat value for flora and fauna.
4. If not properly designed, built or maintained, could lead to stagnant water conditions, nuisance odors, and
create a mosquito breeding area.
5. Improved aesthetics in public spaces due to the increased vegetation requirements and standards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its October 20, 2011 meeting, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommended Council approve the proposed
“Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual“ and recommended incorporating the proposed Stormwater Criteria Manual
update into the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code and the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code, as appropriate.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -3- ITEM 22
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The City undertook an extensive outreach program consisting of meeting with affected community members and
professionals, and presenting the new proposed regulations to community groups and professionals. The first focus
group consisted of representatives from affected City departments such as Planning, Natural Areas and Engineering.
A committee consisting of interested community members and design professionals was formed and tasked with
reviewing the proposed standards and providing comments. All expressed support for the new standards and provided
valuable input and comments aimed at improving the standards. Here is a brief listing of the public and stakeholder
meetings where the stormwater criteria manual update was presented and discussed:
Criteria Update Committee – June 22, 2011 and June 29, 20011
Public Meetings:
American Society of Civil Engineers – November 2010 (Northern Colorado Branch)
Planning and Zoning Work Session – July 15, 2011
Water Board – October 20, 2011
ATTACHMENTS
1. Criteria Manual Update Highlights
2. Water Board minutes, October 20, 2011
Note: The Fort Collins amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Manual are provided as Exhibit
A to the Ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 174, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
TO ADOPT AND PROVIDE FOR TECHNICAL REVISION OF
THE FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL
WHEREAS, in 1984, the City Council approved and adopted a manual entitled “Storm
Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards” (the “1984 Manual”), the purpose of which
was to set forth the technical criteria to be used in the analysis, design and construction of drainage
systems; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved updates and amendments to the 1984 Manual in
1991, 1999, and 2010; and
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2010, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No.
030, 2010, amending Section 26-492 of the City Code so as to update the stated purposes of the
Stormwater Utility to articulate the City Council’s intention to foster an integrated, sustainable
stormwater management program that reflects the community’s values of protecting and restoring
the City’s watersheds, and the Cache la Poudre River and its tributaries, for mutual economic, social
and environmental benefits; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recently adopted Ordinance No. 164, 2011, approving new
consolidated standard construction specifications for use by the City’s Water, Wastewater and
Stormwater Utilities in reviewing related improvements installed within new residential and
commercial developments within their respective service territories; and
WHEREAS, City staff from various departments has worked extensively with interested
community members and design professionals to develop and review updated stormwater design
criteria; and
WHEREAS, as a result of this intensive development process, staff has prepared and
proposed for City Council adoption a new set of technical criteria to govern the design and
performance of stormwater improvements and related practices, referred to as the “Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual”; and
WHEREAS, because the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual is substantially based
upon the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (“UDFCD”) Criteria Manual (the “Urban
Drainage Manual”), a widely applied and referenced set of stormwater-related standards, staff has
proposed that the Urban Drainage Manual be adopted by reference and incorporated as part of the
City Code; and
WHEREAS, to tailor the Urban Drainage Manual to meet the needs and desires of the City,
and to customize the standards, policies and practices for use in Fort Collins, staff has prepared
extensive exceptions and additions to the Urban Drainage Manual, to be adopted as part of the City
Code, attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Fort Collins
Amendments”); and
WHEREAS, in light of the magnitude of the Fort Collins Amendments, the City Clerk has
determined that the Fort Collins Amendments, which together with the Urban Drainage Manual, as
more specifically described below, constitute the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, will be
published as a separately bound document available on the same basis, but separate from, the main
City Code volume; and
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2011, the Water Board reviewed the proposed Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual and voted unanimously to recommended City Council approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual,
as proposed by City staff and set forth below; and
WHEREAS, in addition, in order to allow for the incorporation of updated technical and
good engineering techniques, equipment and industry practices, City Council desires to authorize
the administrative adoption of limited technical revisions to the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria
Manual, as set forth in the amended City Code language below.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 26-1 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, establishing the
definitions applicable in Chapter 26, is hereby amended to add the following definition:
Sec. 26-1. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Chapter, shall have
the meanings ascribed to them in this Section:
. . .
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual or Stormwater Criteria Manual shall
mean the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual adopted pursuant to §26-500, and
applicable to stormwater infrastructure, and management, operation and maintenance
of stormwater improvements, together with any technical revisions thereto, as more
specifically described in § 26-500.
. . .
Section 2. That Article VII of Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, is
hereby amended to add a new Section 26-500, to read as follows:
-2-
Sec. 26-500. Stormwater Criteria Manual.
(a) Pursuant to the authority conferred by Article II, Section 7 of the
Charter, there is hereby adopted by reference as the stormwater design criteria of the
City, the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, 2001 Edition, published by the
Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, as more specifically described
in subsection (b) of this Section, as amended by the City, which shall have the same
force and effect as though set forth herein which shall be referred to as the Fort
Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Said Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual
is enacted for the purposes of setting standards in the planning and design of
drainageway channels and hydraulic and other structures and for the purposes of
setting standards in the selection, design and implementation of stormwater quality
best management practices, all for the purpose of protecting the public health, safety
and general welfare.
(b) The following articles, sections, divisions, and subsections of the
Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, are deemed to constitute the Urban Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual, 2001 Edition, and to be adopted as part of the Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual:
(1) Volume 1, Preface, updated June 2001;
(2) Volume 1, Chapter 1, Drainage Policy, updated June, 2001;
(3) Volume 1, Chapter 3, Planning, updated June, 2001;
(4) Volume 1, Chapter 4, Rainfall, updated January, 2004;
(5) Volume 1, Chapter 5, Runoff, updated April, 2008;
(6) Volume 1, Chapter 6, Streets/Inlets/Storm Sewers, updated January, 2004;
(7) Volume 1, Chapter 7, Major Drainage, updated April, 2008;
(8) Volume 2, Chapter 8, Hydraulic Structures, updated April, 2008;
(9) Volume 2, Chapter 9, Culverts, updated July, 2001;
(10) Volume 2, Chapter 10, Storage, updated April, 2008;
(11) Volume 2, Chapter 12, Revegetation, updated June, 2001;
(12) Volume 3, Preface, November 2010;
(13) Volume 3, Chapter 1, Stormwater Management, and Planning, November
2010;
(14) Volume 3, Chapter 2, BMP Selection, November 2010;
(15) Volume 3, Chapter 3, Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction,
November 2010;
(16) Volume 3, Chapter 4, Treatment BMPs (including Fact Sheets), December,
2010;
(17) Volume 3, Chapter 5, Source Control BMPs (including Fact Sheets),
November 2010;
(18) Volume 3, Chapter 6, BMP Maintenance, November 2010;
(19) Volume 3, Chapter 7, Construction BMPs (including Fact Sheets), November
2010;
(20) Volume 3, Glossary, November 2010; and
(21) Volume 3, Bibliography, November 2010.
-3-
(c) The Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, 2001 Edition, as
described in Subsections (a) and (b), above, is hereby amended by the additions and
deletions as described in amendments adopted by the City Council and separately
codified as Fort Collins Amendments to Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
Criteria Manual.
(d) One (1) copy of each of the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
and the Fort Collins Amendments thereto, together referred to as the Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual, shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk and
available for public inspection during regular business hours.
(e) The Utilities Executive Director may adopt minor additions, revisions,
and corrections to the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual as may, in the
judgment of the Utilities Executive Director, be necessary to better conform to good
engineering and/or construction standards and practice. The Utilities Executive
Director shall approve only those proposed technical revisions that:
(1) are consistent with all existing policies relevant to the
revisions,
(2) do not result in any significant additional cost to
persons affected by the revision, and
(3) do not materially alter the standard or level of
service to be accomplished through the
specified infrastructure.
Upon adoption of any technical revisions pursuant to the authority of this Subsection
(e), the Utilities Executive Director shall provide to the City Clerk documentation
of such technical revisions specifying the date upon which they shall become
effective, and shall maintain said documentation on file in the permanent records of
the City Clerk and Utility Services and available for public inspection.
(f) The Utilities Executive Director is hereby authorized to make such
determinations, and approve such waivers and variances, in his or her discretion, as
set forth in, and in accordance with, the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
Section 3. That Section 26-544 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 26-544. Stormwater facilities required for subdivisions.
Prior to the final approval of the plat of any subdivision, or prior to
commencement of construction upon any lot or parcel of land for which a drainage
report and construction plan for the installation of stormwater facilities has not been
prepared and approved by the City, the owners of the property being subdivided or
-4-
upon which construction is being commenced shall, at such owners' cost, prepare a
detailed drainage report and construction plans for the installation of all stormwater
facilities required for such subdivision or lot, including any off-site facilities required
to convey stormwater to existing drains, channels, streams, detention ponds or other
points, all in conformity with the master plan of the stormwater basins, the Fort
Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual adopted pursuant to § 26-500 , and the Water
Utilities Development Construction Standards adopted pursuant to § 26-29. The
Utilities Executive Director shall review such reports, plans and costs estimates; and
after approval of the same, the plat of the subdivision or the building permit, if
applicable, may be approved subject to the City's being furnished with acceptable
assurance that such facilities will be constructed and installed as indicated and
approved.
Section 4. That the Fort Collins Amendments to Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District Criteria Manual, attached hereto as Exhibit A, are hereby approved and adopted as part of
the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of December,
A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-5-
1
Fort Collins Amendments
to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual
Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria
Manual, adopted by the City Council of the City of Fort Collins, as referenced in Section
26-500 (c) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, are as follows:
(A) Volume 1, Chapter 1 - Drainage Policy:
(1) Section 1.0 is amended to read as follows:
1.0 Policy
1.1 Drainage Policy
The requirements contained in the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria
Manual (the “Urban Drainage Manual”), as adopted by the City Council of the City of
Fort Collins and as modified by these Fort Collins Amendments (together referred to as
the “Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual,” the “Stormwater Criteria Manual, or
“Manual’) are the basis for all stormwater management within the city of Fort Collins and
are to be used as guidelines in the design and evaluation of all storm drainage facilities.
In general, these requirements address five areas of concern: (1) overall storm drainage
planning and management; (2) the interface between urban development and irrigation
facilities such as dams, reservoirs and canals; (3) the treatment of historic drainageways
and natural channels; (4) the requirements and specifications for engineering design of
storm drainage facilities; and (5) the quality and extent of urban stormwater runoff and
erosion control.
1.2 Purpose and Scope
(a) The purpose of this Manual is to set forth the technical criteria to be utilized in the
analysis and design of drainage systems within the city limits of Fort Collins, Colorado
and its Growth Management Area.
(b) Any reference in the Urban Drainage Manual to a city, region or district is to the City
of Fort Collins (the “City”) or the Fort Collins area or region.
(c) This Manual applies to all land disturbing activities defined as development in the
Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins (the “City Land Use Code”) or otherwise
regulated by the City, including activities on public or private lands, including but not
limited to activities on private land, public rights-of-way, easements dedicated for public
use, private roads and to all privately, publicly, and quasi-publicly owned and maintained
facilities.
(d) All planned public or private improvements, or any other proposed construction or
development activities regulated by the City must include an adequate plan for storm
drainage. This plan must be based on an analysis and design in compliance with all the
applicable regulations and specifications set forth in this Manual.
(e) Prior to commencement of any construction or development activities subject to the
requirements of this Stormwater Criteria Manual, formal approval must be obtained from
the Executive Director of the Utilities or his designee.
EXHIBIT A
2
(f) Should a conflict arise between the Code of the City of Fort Collins (the “City
Code”), the City Land Use Code, or other City adopted standards and requirements,
including but not limited to these Fort Collins Amendments, and the Urban Drainage
Manual, the City Code, City Land Use Code or other City-adopted standards will govern.
(g) References to “standards” or “criteria” refer to those in effect on the date the
“Drainage Plans” for a site development or public improvements are approved.
1.3 Regional Master Planning
(a) In recognition that drainage boundaries are non-jurisdictional, the City has developed
regional basin-wide “Master Drainage Plans”. These Master Drainage Plans establish at
a watershed level what public improvements, if any, are needed in each basin and guide
or dictate requirements for new developments proposed in each basin.
(b) Where a Master Drainage Plan for a given area of the City is available, proposed
drainage systems design and construction must comply with all requirements set forth in
that Plan. In areas where a Master Drainage Plan is not available, drainage systems must
be planned and constructed in a manner that ensures continuity in flow quantity and
quality with existing flow conditions.
(c) Master Drainage Plans must be developed and, or updated in cooperation with
Larimer County, the appropriate affected irrigation companies and any other affected
governmental agencies within a given basin or basins. Such plans or updates to plans
will be adopted only after they have been reviewed by all affected entities, and after,
soliciting public input.
(d) Master Drainage Plans are available from the City at the Fort Collins Utilities offices.
1.4 Local Master Planning
(a) Local flood control facilities, as planned by the City or developers, are an integral
part of the total drainage system required to preserve and promote the general health,
welfare, and economic wellbeing of the area.
(b) Any facility that generates benefits exclusively to a development (or a group of
developments sharing a facility) and not designated by the City as a regional facility, is
considered a local facility, and as such is to be maintained by its private owner(s).
(c) The City requires the planning and construction of all private local stormwater
control and treatment facilities be performed in a manner that ensures that such facilities
are compatible with all regional drainage master plans including the City’s Master
Drainage Plans.
1.5 Storm Runoff Determination
(a) The runoff analysis for a particular area must be based on the proposed land use for
that area. Contributing runoff from upstream areas must be based on the existing land use
and the topographic characteristics of those areas.
(b) All runoff calculations, requirements and assumptions must be based on the Master
Drainage Plan for the area, if one is available.
(c) Natural topographic features are the basis of location for easements and future runoff
calculations. In developed and undeveloped areas, average land slopes may be utilized in
runoff computations. Wherever existing drainage patterns and slopes are defined, these
3
must be used. The drainage facilities so designed must be able to handle the design flows
with virtually no erosion damage to the system.
(d) The City requires storm runoff to be determined by the use of either the “Rational
Method”, or the “Stormwater Management Model” (SWMM), within the limitations set
forth in this Manual.
1.6 Reasonable Use
The City’s management of drainage facilities is guided by the “Reasonable Use”
principle. This principle is defined as one that:
(a) Limits the rate of flow from developing properties to those release rates as defined in
the City’s Master Drainage Plans.
(b) Limits the rate of flow from developing properties to their “2-year pre-development
condition flow rate” during the 100-year storm event unless otherwise specified by the
relevant Master Drainage Plan.
(c) Allows a larger release rate than is existing at the time of development or
redevelopment if it can be demonstrated that downstream facilities at full watershed
development, and analyzed in accordance with the applicable Master Drainage Plan(s),
can accommodate a larger release rate to a master planned major drainageway.
(d) Causes no increase in downstream runoff rates after development from that under
existing conditions unless otherwise specified in the applicable Master Drainage Plan.
(e) Properly and orderly transitions flows from developing properties to their pre-
development paths on downstream properties unless the downstream property owners
agree to alterations of those changes by granting drainage easements for the new
drainage paths.
(f) Maintains flows, to the extent possible, in their natural and historic drainage paths.
In certain instances the transfer of drainage flows from one basin to another is a
permissible alternative if it is done in accordance with the approved Master Drainage
Plan for that basin and if it causes no undue burden or harm to any downstream property.
Basin transfers of drainage flows are subject to City review and may be approved, on a
case-by-case basis, subject to a showing of no undue burden or harm satisfactory to the
Utilities Executive Director, and a determination by the Utilities Executive Director that
the modification of this requirement is appropriate.
1.7 Water Rights
The City recognizes the potential effect of drainage facilities on existing water rights.
The City requires that the interrelation between the proposed facilities and water rights be
accounted for in planning, reviewing and designing drainage and subdrain systems or
facilities.
1.8 Drainage Planning and Required Space
(a) The stormwater drainage system is an integral part of the urbanization process; and
requires storm drainage planning for all developments to include the allocation of space
for drainage facilities’ construction and maintenance which may entail the dedication of
right-of-way and, or easements.
(b) Drainage facilities, such as channels, storm sewers, and detention facilities serve
conveyance, treatment as well as storage functions for water quantity and quality. When
space requirements are considered, the provision for adequate drainage becomes a
competing use for space. Therefore, adequate provision must be made in the land use
4
plan for drainage space requirements. This may entail the dedication of adequate right-
of-way or easements, in order to minimize potential conflict with other land uses.
1.9 Use of Streets
The use of streets to convey storm runoff interferes with their primary function as
transportation corridors. However, streets are an important component of the storm
drainage system due to their large storm runoff carrying capacity obtained for little or no
drainage-related costs. In order to balance these two competing street uses, limits on the
street carrying capacity are required based on the classification of the street related to
emergency usage during flood events.
The City allows the use of streets for drainage within the limitations discussed in the
“Streets” section as described in Volume 1, Chapter 6 of this Manual, “Streets, Inlets,
Storm Sewers”. :
1.10 Nuisance Water
The City’s stormwater policies and requirements are primarily intended to address water
quantity and quality concerns as they relate to the health, safety and welfare of the
general public as well as the protection of the environment. This involves the control of
runoff during large rainfall or snow melt events on major public drainage systems that
could have flooding potential and the control and improvement of the water quality of
runoff that enters the City’s receiving waters.
Control of “nuisance” waters such as shallow ponding that occasionally concentrate on
flat lawns, landscaped, paved or other such areas is strictly the responsibility of the
property owner of the land where ponding occurs. Shallow ponding sometimes occurs in
street cross pans or flat sections of curb and gutter. These usually are not a major threat
to the health safety and welfare of the public.
The City will make reasonable efforts to minimize the occurrence of such nuisances
through its review and inspection authorities, but if such nuisances do occur, the City is
not responsible or obligated to correct or require any other party to correct such a
problem.
1.11 Retention Ponds and Pumping
1.11.1 Positive Outfall
The City requires that all drainage facilities be designed in a manner that provides a
gravity-driven positive outfall into a natural drainageway such as a river or creek, or a
component of or a tributary to the public storm drainage infrastructure system. Positive
outfall in this context refers to the provision that all sites must be designed to drain with a
gravity system to the public infrastructure system or natural drainageway(s).
1.11.2 Retention Ponds
Retention ponds are sometimes necessary to hold water until a permanent outfall is built.
The City may approve retention ponds as an interim solution until a permanent outfall is
built. If accepted, these ponds must be designed to hold twice the 100-year volume
generated by a two-hour storm and be evacuated within seventy-two (72) hours.
Permanent retention ponds are not allowed to serve as permanent water quantity or
quality control measures for any development within the city of Fort Collins.
1.11.3 Pumps in Detention Ponds
5
Pumps in detention ponds may be allowed only when approved in writing in advance by
the Utilities Executive Director or his designee. A pump shall only be approved when a
satisfactory showing is made that the pump is needed as a back-up system to an
infiltration pond or as a designed temporary retention pond. Temporary in this context
means that a permanent gravity controlled outlet system is planned to be built within the
next 5 years. These must be designed and built with a sump pit as well as a back-up
pump. The pump must be of sufficient capacity to drain the retention pond in seventy-
two (72) hours or less.
1.11.4 Sump Pumps
(a) Discharge from foundation drains or sump pumps must comply with all applicable
State requirements and those set forth in Section 26-214 of the City Code, which
prohibits discharge across the sidewalk or into or upon any street, alley or gutter and of
Section 26-498, which prohibits connections to a storm drainage facility to convey flows
other than storm drainage flows and uncontaminated groundwater flows.
(b) Discharge from sump pumps must be tied to the City’s stormwater system upon
approval from the Utilities Executive Director. All tie-in points must be installed at
approved locations such as at a manhole or at an inlet. No direct tie-in to a storm drain
pipe will be allowed. Sump pump discharge flows can only be released into a stormwater
conveyance system (such as pipes, channels or ponds) specifically designed and approved
by the City to accept such discharge. Please refer to Section 26-214 of the City Code for
further guidance.
1.12 Conveyance or Detention on Private Single Family Lots
In designing drainage systems, the City requires that no undue burden be placed on the
owners of single family lots by the placement of large storm drainage conveyance or
detention facilities on their property. In order to prevent or minimize such occurrences
all storm drainage channels, pipes or detention facilities serving more than three (3)
properties must be located within tracts dedicated as drainage easements to the City.
1.13 Lot Grading
(a) The City requires that there be a positive grade away from all structures. More
specifically, the City requires that there be a minimum grade of five percent (5%) away
from a structure within the first five to ten feet adjacent to single family residences.
(b) Minimum grades required for different types of sheet flow drainage surfaces are as
follows:
Grass swales Two (2) percent
A one percent (1%) longitudinal slope grass swale may be allowed on single family lots
when the swale is draining the runoff from only two adjoining properties.
Asphalt One (1) percent
Concrete One half (0.5) percent
(c) The top of foundation elevation for a structure must be set a minimum of six (6)
inches above the highest grade surrounding the structure.
6
1.14 Use of Criteria, Amendments, Technical Revisions and Administrative Modifications
of Standards
(a) All public or private storm drainage facilities regulated by the City must be planned
and designed in accordance with the standards and criteria set forth in this Stormwater
Criteria Manual.
(b) The Stormwater Criteria Manual may be periodically revised and amended, either by
approval of the City Council of the City or by Technical Revision approved by the
Utilities Executive Director in accordance with Section 26-500 of the City Code, as new
technology is developed and, as experience in gained in the use of the criteria.
(c) The purpose of this Manual is to promote the health, safety, welfare, and property of
the City and citizens through the proper control and treatment of stormwater, (whether
above or below surface); and, to ensure uniformity in performance with respect to design
and construction of all drainage facilities. Consequently, when the Utilities Executive
Director determines that an applicant has made a sufficient showing that an alternate
design, analysis or procedure would meet the purposes of a specific requirement of this
Manual in a manner and to an extent equal to or better than would compliance with the
specific requirement the Utilities Executive Director may authorize a modification of the
standard to allow for the use of the alternative design, analysis or procedure, as
applicable.
(2) Section 2.11 is amended to read as follows:
2.11 Historic Drainage and Easements
(a) Whether or not natural drainageways are dedicated, or otherwise formally
recognized, these are considered the most appropriate location of stormwater conveyance
systems. Historic and natural drainage paths and channels are recognized as easements
for storm drainage conveyance.
(b) Even when historic drainage is accomplished by means of sheet flow, it is reasonable
to assume that after site development, flows will be channelized and concentrated at a
point, and an easement for the concentrated flows still exists to the extent of its historic
use for the conveyance of stormwater.
(3) Section 2.12 is amended to read as follows:
2.12 Off-Site Flows
(a) The only way to maintain truly historic drainage flows is to prohibit all future
development. “Reasonable” development is allowed so long as any increase or change in
runoff does not injure downstream properties. The Master Drainage Plans, as adopted by
City Council, establish the most “reasonable” drainage system for the entire basin. All
proposed developments are required to be planned and constructed in conformance with
the approved Master Drainage Plan(s).
(b) Downstream properties have an obligation to accept off-site flows from upstream
properties. This obligation includes future developed flows provided they are the result
of “reasonable” development upstream in compliance with the applicable Master
Drainage Plan for the upstream property and do not result in any injury or have an
adverse impact on the downstream property.
(c) Drainage easements are needed on the downstream property when the upstream flows
entering that property are altered in quality, quantity, or character.
7
(d) If stormwater is being imported from one basin to another, or if a completely
artificial drainage path is being created altering the historical flow patterns (in quality,
quantity or character) of an existing channel, a natural easement argument cannot be used
to justify directing any additional drainage into an existing drainage channel.
(e) New improvements that affect or have an impact upon existing drainage easements
must preserve and maintain those easements.
(4) A new Section 2.13 is added, to read as follows:
2.13 Watershed Approach to Stormwater Management
(a) The City has initiated a “Watershed Approach” to stormwater management. This
program includes three major watershed components and associated objectives:
(i) Land – The objectives of this component is pollution prevention, including
public education, regulation, and enforcement. This is accomplished through
implementation of the City’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
permit, as described in Section 4.1.7, “Water Quantity and Quality Integration” in
this chapter.
(ii) Tributaries – The objectives of this component are stormwater treatment and
pollutant load reduction and include the development of design criteria for “Best
Management Practices” (BMPs).
(iii) Receiving Waters – The objectives of this component are aimed at stream and
habitat protection and restoration and include the creation of buffer zones on creeks
and natural drainageways.
(b) The water quality protection regulations as specified in this Manual are primarily
directed at the Tributaries component of this approach. This includes BMPs for erosion
control during construction and post-construction controls for new development and re-
development. These BMPs are intended to be located on-site and therefore address runoff
from development or re-development sites or from any public improvements.
(c) Any public or private improvement that has an impact on receiving waters must be
constructed in accordance with the criteria specified in this Manual, the City’s Master
Drainage Plans, the City Land Use Code, and any other applicable State or Federal
regulations such as the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 404 permit
requirements.
(d) Runoff generated from any public or private improvement and directed into historic
and natural drainageways must be done in a manner that would promote the multi-
functional use of these drainageways, protect and restore their natural functions and
enhance their aesthetic value.
(e) Natural drainageways, creeks or streams are considered important community assets
that contribute to the aesthetic value and the livability of the urban environment. Their
function extends beyond that of conveying floodwater, to their use as trails and open
space corridors, for water quality protection and enhancement, and to preserve natural
vegetation and wildlife habitat to the greatest extent possible.
(f) Public or private improvements located in or near receiving waters, must not
adversely affect the natural character of the stream or water course. To that effect, the
following provisions must be met:
8
(i) Pollutant reduction and treatment facilities must be located upstream of
streams and natural drainageways.
(ii) Natural drainageways must remain in as near a natural state as
practicable.
(iii) Any proposed modification, including any erosion mitigating measures,
must be designed and constructed in a manner that protects and enhances
the natural character of receiving waters. Such modification must be
addressed in the Drainage Report and clearly shown on the associated
Drainage Plans
(5) A new Section 2.14 is added, to read as follows:
2.14 Erosion and Sediment Control
The clearing and stripping of land for development can cause high, localized soil erosion
with subsequent deposition and damage to off-site properties and to receiving waters.
The City requires an “Erosion Control Plan”, be prepared and implemented for all public
improvement projects, private development projects and all redevelopment projects in
accordance with the criteria set forth in Volume 3, Chapter 7, “Construction BMPs”, of
this Manual. The terms “development” and “redevelopment” are as defined in the City
Land Use Code.
The purpose of implementing this policy is to minimize the impact of construction to an
acceptable level without placing undue burdens on any public or private infrastructure,
downstream drainageway(s), or the community in general.
(6) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(7) Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(8) Section 3.3 is deleted in its entirety.
.
(9) Section 4.1.2 is deleted in its entirety
(10) A new Section 4.1.7 is added to read as follows:
4.1.7 Water Quantity and Quality Integration
(a) The public’s concerns with stormwater are not limited to flooding and public safety.
Stormwater runoff can have a significant and lasting impact on the City’s receiving
waters. This impact is reflected not only in the quality of streams and aquatic
ecosystems, but more generally in the quality of life in the community.
(b) Pursuant to federal law and regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(“EPA”) operators of small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) in
urbanized areas are required to obtain permit coverage for their stormwater discharges.
In Colorado, the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment has primary enforcement authority over MS4 permits via the
Colorado Discharge Permit System. Pursuant to these requirements, as an operator of an
MS4 the City is required to implement stormwater management programs, which must
include the following program elements:
1. Public Education and Outreach – The city must implement a public education
program in an effort to promote behavior change by the public to reduce water
9
quality impacts associated with pollutants in stormwater runoff and illicit
discharges.
2. Public Participation and Involvement – The city must provide a mechanism and
process to allow the public to review and provide input on the MS4 Stormwater
Management Program.
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination – The city must implement and
enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges (non-stormwater
discharges to the MS4), including procedures for tracing and removing the source
and training for municipal staff.
4. Construction Site Runoff Control – The city must develop and implement a
program to assure adequate design, implementation, and maintenance of BMPs at
construction sites within the MS4 to reduce pollutant discharges and protect
water quality.
5. Post-Construction Stormwater Management in new Development and
Redevelopment – The city must implement and enforce a program to address
stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment projects that
discharge into the MS4. The program must ensure that controls are properly
designed, installed, and maintained to prevent or minimize water quality impacts.
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations – The city
must implement an operation and maintenance program to prevent or reduce
pollutants in stormwater runoff from municipal operations, including written
standard operating procedures for stormwater pollution prevention and training
of municipal staff.
(d) Requirements numbered 4 and 5 above are addressed primarily through this Manual,
reviewed through the City’s development review process, and implemented through the
City’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (“MS4”) construction and post-
construction inspection and enforcement program.
(11) Section 4.3.4 is amended to read as follows:
4.3.4 Maintenance and Maintenance Access
(a) All drainage facilities must be designed to minimize the need for facility maintenance
and must provide for ease of maintenance access to all storm drainage facilities in order
to ensure the continuous operational function of the system.
(b) Maintenance access for all stormwater control and treatment facilities must be
adequate and must be clearly delineated on the Final Plat and on the Final Development
Plans for any development. Maintenance responsibility must be clearly described on the
Final Plats and on the Final Development Plans.
(c) Stormwater control and treatment facilities must be continually maintained to ensure
their long term operational effectiveness. Maintenance of storm drainage facilities
includes, but is not limited to the regular performance of the following activities:
(i) Sediment and debris must be periodically removed from channels, storm
sewers and stormwater treatment facilities.
(ii) Trash racks and street inlets must be cleared of debris.
(iii) Pipe inlets and outlets must be regularly flushed.
10
(iv) Channel bank erosion or damage to drop structures must be repaired to avoid
reduced conveyance and treatment capability, unsightliness, and ultimate failure.
(d) The owner of the drainage facility is responsible for the maintenance of all
components of the drainage system located on their property; including inlets, pipes,
culverts, channels, ditches, hydraulic structures, detention basins or other such
appurtenances unless modified by the development agreement or as described in City
Code Section 26-547.
(e) Should the owner or responsible party fail to adequately maintain said facilities, the
City has the right to enter said property for the purpose of maintenance as described in
City Code Section 26-22. All such maintenance costs will be assessed to the property
owner in accordance with City Code Section 26-28.
. (f) Required minimum widths of drainage easements for common types of drainage
facilities are listed in Table-DP-4.
Table – DP-4
Required Maintenance Easements
DRAINAGE FACILITY MINIMUM EASEMENT WIDTH
Storm Sewer
(a) Storm Sewer Diameter < 36 inches
Depth to Invert less than5 feet
5 feet < Depth to Invert 10 feet
Depth to Invert greater than 10 feet
(b) Storm Sewer Diameter 36 inches
Depth to Invert less than 5 feet
5 feet < Depth to Invert 10 feet
Depth Invert greater than 10 feet
20 feet
30 feet
Minimum of 30 feet or Pipe I.D. + 6 + Depth*2 (in feet)
Minimum of 20 feet or Pipe I.D. + 7 + Depth*2 (in feet)
Minimum of 30 feet or Pipe I.D. + 7 + Depth*2 (in feet)
Pipe I.D. + 7 + Depth*2 (in feet)
Open Channel/Swales
100-Year Discharge less than 20 cfs
20 cfs 100 year Discharge < 100 cfs
100-Year discharge greater than 100 cfs
Minimum of 15 feet or Top Width of Channel With Freeboard + 10 feet
Minimum of 25 feet or Top Width of Channel With Freeboard + 10 feet
Minimum of 30 feet or Top Width of Channel With Freeboard + 10 feet
Detention Ponds As required to contain storage, freeboard, and associated facilities plus
adequate maintenance access around perimeter
11
(g) Smaller drainage easements widths are allowed along residential lot lines (five feet to
ten feet on each side), when these are for swales or channels that carry a limited amount
of drainage, and drain at the most three residential lots.
(12) A new Section 4.3.5 is added, to read as follows:
4.3.5 Open Channels
(a) Developments in or near major runoff channels in and near developing areas must be
designed to maintain channel stability. Developments in and near major runoff channels
must adopt measures to ensure that excessive erosion does not occur under peak flood
flow conditions.
(b) Realignment of natural channels in urban areas is not encouraged and may only be
permitted if the City approves a design that maintains stream stability and aesthetics,
enhances or improves the ecological character of the natural channel and prevents failure
and erosion under peak flow conditions.
(c) The City prohibits the use of backyard swales on residential lots where these can be
physically avoided. Where these cannot be avoided due to physical or grade constraints,
they must be designed in a manner that will minimize the basin area contributing to the
backyard swale. Backyard swales must not receive runoff from more than three (3)
residences.
(d) Residential lots that include backyard swale(s) are subject to “Certification” as
defined in Section 7.1.12.3 of this chapter, “Certifications for Single Family
Developments” as well as fencing restrictions that would prohibit the impedance of
drainage flows from one residential lot to an adjacent one. Fencing restrictions must be
recorded on the development’s plat, and the appropriate deed restrictions on that plat
must be filed with Larimer County.
(e) The design of all open channels must comply with all the appropriate provisions set
forth in Section 4.0, “Open Channel Criteria”, Volume 1, Chapter 7 “Major Drainage”, of
this Manual.
(13) Section 4.5.4 is amended to read as follows:
4.5.4 Water Quantity Control
(a) Detention storage of stormwater runoff as directed by individual Master Drainage
Plans and a hydrologic routing analysis is required. In basins where a Master Drainage
Plan has not been approved, the City may require detention storage in accordance with
the criteria set forth in this Manual as well as when such storage is deemed necessary to
protect irrigation rights or structures or to protect downstream properties. More specific
information about detention storage criteria are described in Volume 2, Chapter 9,
“Storage” chapter of this Manual.
(b) Urban development is not permitted immediately downstream of existing or proposed
emergency spillways or in areas that may act as spillways for canals, dams, or
embankments impounding stormwater.
(c) On-site detention is required for all new development, expansion, and redevelopment.
The required minimum detention volume and maximum release rate(s) for the developed
condition 100-year recurrence interval storm must be determined in accordance with the
12
conditions and regulations established in the appropriate Master Drainage Plan(s) for that
development and in accordance with the criteria set forth in this Manual.
(d) On-site detention requirements may be deemed met where the Utilities Executive
Director determines that an applicant has made a sufficient showing that existing regional
conveyance or detention facilities are sized with the capacity to accommodate flows from
a fully developed basin and are publicly owned and maintained, provided that any
requirements for cost sharing or reimbursement to the City have been met.
(14) Section 4.5.5 is amended to read as follows:
4.5.5 Water Quality Treatment
(a) Water quality treatment of stormwater runoff is required, at a minimum, for land
disturbing activities greater than or equal to one half an acre, including projects less than
one half an acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale.
(b) On-site water quality detention requirements may be deemed met where the Utilities
Executive Director determines that an applicant has made a sufficient showing that
existing regional water quality detention facilities are sized with the capacity to
accommodate flows from a fully developed basin and are publicly owned and
maintained, provided that any requirements for cost sharing or reimbursement to the City
have been met.
(c) Water quality control and treatment can be achieved through the use of an array of
methods and devices as described in Chapter 4, Volume 3, “Treatment BMPs” of this
Manual.
(d) Water quality treatment structures must be built in compliance with all applicable
City, State and Federal regulations.
(15) Section 5.1.1 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
5.1.1 Design Criteria
If a proposed development site is located within an area encompassed within a Master
Drainage Plan, the criteria specified in the appropriate Master Drainage Plan will hold
precedence over the criteria set forth in this Manual in the event these differ or conflict.
(16) Section 5.1.3 is amended to read as follows:
5.1.3 Use of Criteria
The City will make reasonable efforts to design and build storm drainage improvements
and to evaluate the design and construction of non-City drainage improvements, based on
the criteria, standards and specifications set forth in this Manual.
(17) Section 5.2.1 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
5.2.1 Design Storm Return Periods
(a) The 2-year drainage system, as a minimum, must be designed to transport the runoff
from the 2-year recurrence interval storm event with minimal disruption to the urban
environment. The 2-year storm runoff can be conveyed in the curb and gutter area of the
street or roadside ditch (subject to street classification and capacity), by a storm sewer, a
channel, or other conveyance facility.
13
(b) The 100-year drainage system, as a minimum, must be designed to convey runoff
from the 100-year recurrence interval flood to minimize life hazards and health, damage
to structures, and interruption to traffic and services. Runoff from the 100-year storm can
be conveyed in the urban street system, channels, storm sewers and other facilities,
provided the conveyance is done within acceptable criteria as specified in this Manual.
(c) Storms with recurrence intervals greater than 100-year, must still be considered in the
drainage analysis, if only on a qualitative basis.
(d) All new public and private improvements must plan, design, and construct drainage
systems that account for the 2-year storm event as well as the 100-year storm.
(e) The 100-year storm event is the standard level of protection in the city of Fort Collins
unless otherwise specified by the applicable Master Drainage Plan.
(18) Section 5.4.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(19) Section 5.5.1 is amended to read as follows:
5.5.1 Use of Ditches
(a) Stormwater facilities and improvements must be designed to avoid discharge of
runoff from urban areas into irrigation facilities except as required by water rights or
where such discharge is in conformance with the approved Master Drainage Plan. Where
these conditions are present, the responsible party must submit to the Utilities Executive
Director and the affected ditch company or other affected parties documentation of the
relevant water rights-related constraint or Master Drainage Plan condition. The Utilities
Executive Director may approve a modification of this requirement upon a determination
that sufficient showing has been made that a discharge into irrigation facilities is
acceptable to the affected ditch company and is not expected to result in harm or interfere
with the operation of affected stormwater management plans or systems, and that the
requirements for a modification have been met. Notwithstanding the foregoing, whenever
irrigation ditches cross major drainage channels in developing areas, the responsible party
must separate stormwater runoff flows from normal ditch flows.
(b) Whenever development occurs where an irrigation ditch or facility is present, the
responsible party must provide adequate right-of-way for ditch maintenance as required
by the owners of the ditch or irrigation company.
(c) The City requires the appropriate ditch company’s approval wherever public or
private improvements cause any of the following:
(i.) Alteration of the existing patterns of drainage into irrigation ditches;
(ii.) Increased flow rates or volumes discharged into the ditch;
(iii.) Changes in the quality of runoff entering the ditch;
(iv.) Change in the historic point of discharge into the ditch;
(v.) Any proposed ditch crossing(s) or relocation(s);
(vi.) Any proposed grading within the ditch right-of-way;
(vii.) Access to the ditch right-of-way during construction activities.
This approval may be in the form of signature on the construction plans or documents. If
determined by the Utilities Executive Director to be sufficient, other formal legal
agreements may be substituted for an approval signature on the construction plans. The
14
list above is not exhaustive and represents examples of circumstances when ditch
company approval is required. Early contact with affected irrigation companies may be
beneficial.
(d) In the rare instance where an irrigation ditch is allowed to serve as the outfall for a
stormwater facility the following provisions must be met:
(i) The ditch flow water surface elevation must be determined based on the
maximum amount of flow in the ditch.
(ii) The water surface elevation of the ditch must be obtained by combining the
maximum irrigation flow in the ditch with the 100-year stormwater flows in the
ditch.
(iii) The detention outlet must be designed such that backflow from the ditch
into the detention facility is prevented.
(iv) The backwater effects caused by the design of a detention outlet, if any,
must be reviewed and approved by both the City and the appropriate ditch
company.
(v) The outlet design must consider tailwater effects on the outlet pipe resulting
from the combination of the maximum irrigation flow and the 100-year storm
discharge within the ditch. The appropriate ditch or irrigation company, is the
determining authority in regards to the maximum irrigation flow in the ditch.
Written verification of the maximum irrigation flow from the ditch or irrigation
company must be submitted with the hydraulic analysis of the ditch water surface
elevation.
(vi) The 100-year water surface elevation of the ditch must be determined using
the appropriate Master Drainage Plan or if not available, additional studies may
be required from the party seeking to discharge into the ditch. For cases where
100-year discharges are not available, upstream restrictions can be considered for
determining ditch flows.
(e) If new developments are adjacent to irrigation facilities but no flows are being
directed into the ditch or canal, the ditch company must be notified of the proposed
development. In such cases, ditch company approval shall be required prior to any
approval by the City, unless the Utilities Executive Director determines that the
development will result in no impact on or to the ditch company, that there will be no
impact on stormwater flows or improvements from the adjacent irrigation facilities, and
that the conditions for a modification of this requirement have been met.
(f) The party seeking modifications to existing ditch conditions must to obtain the
appropriate ditch company approvals and signatures prior to seeking City approval for
such modifications.
(g) When privately owned and maintained irrigation facilities abut private property, it is
the responsibility of the private parties involved to develop and implement a policy
regarding safety.
(h) In summary, City requirements regarding the use of ditches are as follows:
(i) Drainage analysis must ensure that an irrigation ditch does not intercept the
storm runoff from the upstream basin and that the upstream basin is tributary to
the basin area downstream of the ditch.
15
(ii.) Plans for the development must direct the storm runoff into historic and
natural drainageways and avoid discharging into an irrigation ditch except as
required by water rights.
(iii.) Whenever new development will alter patterns of the storm drainage into
irrigation ditches by increasing or decreasing flow rates, volumes, or changing
points of concentration, the written consent from the ditch company must be
submitted with the development applications. The discharge of runoff into the
irrigation ditch will be approved only if such discharge is consistent with an
adopted Master Drainage Plan and is in the best interest of the City.
(iv.) Whenever irrigation ditches cross major drainageways within the
developing area, the developer is required to design and construct the appropriate
structures needed to separate storm runoff from ditch flows subject to the
condition noted in item (ii.) above.
(v.) Whenever drainage that is less than the historic amount in quantity and rate
drains into an irrigation canal or ditch, such flow is allowed to freely discharge
into the irrigation canal or ditch.
(20) Section 6.0 is amended to read as follows:
6.0 Review Process
(a) As it relates to drainage, all development proposals must be processed and approved
through the City’s development review process in accordance with the City Land Use
Code.
(b) Building Permit Applications, Overall Development Plans (ODPs), Project
Development Plans (PDPs), and Final Plans (FPs), and all other development
applications submitted to the City under the City Land Use Code, must include storm
drainage, floodplain, floodway and erosion control information (in addition to any other
information required by applicable City Land Use Code or other related provisions) if the
development increases the impervious area in excess of 350 square feet.
(c) An analysis and review of floodplain modifications may be necessary if the
development proposes to modify the floodplain or floodway.
(d) In addition to the submittals mentioned above, a site certification must be submitted
to the City, as well as individual lot certifications as appropriate.
(21) Section 6.1 is amended to read as follows:
6.1 Conceptual Review
The Conceptual Review is an opportunity to discuss requirements, standards, and
procedures that apply to a development proposal. During the Conceptual Review, major
problems as they relate to drainage must be identified so that they can be resolved prior to
a formal application being submitted to the City. At that meeting, the applicant must
furnish at minimum a sketch showing the location of existing and proposed streets,
drainage courses, drainage facilities and any other significant natural features near the
proposed development.
(22) Section 6.2 is amended to read as follows:
16
6.2 Overall Development Plan (ODP) Submittal Requirements
An ODP is required for any property that is proposed to be developed over time in at
least two separate project development plan submittals. The purpose of the ODP is to
establish general planning and development control parameters for these multi-phase
projects. The required drainage information presented in an ODP submittal does not
normally entail a detailed drainage analysis of the project but does require a general
presentation of the project’s features and effects on drainage. The drainage report for the
ODP must review at a conceptual level the feasibility and design characteristics of the
proposed development. The drainage report must be written in accordance with the
outline contained in Section 7.1.6 of this chapter listed below and must contain all the
applicable information as described in that section.
(23) Section 6.3 is amended to read as follows:
6.3 Drainage Plan Submittal and Review
All single family residences not in a previously approved subdivision, subdivisions
without a drainage plan, new multi-family developments, and commercial developments
with an increase in impervious area of 350 square feet or greater must submit Drainage
Reports and Plans to be approved by the City.
When an Overall Development Plan (ODP) is required an Overall Drainage Plan may
also be required. The detailed information contained in such Drainage Plan must be
consistent with the ODP. At a minimum, off-site runoff, conveyance locations, detention
ponds, outfall systems, and other drainage facilities must be shown on the Overall
Drainage Plan. Applicants are encouraged to prepare a plan with as much detail as
possible. Please contact the City Stormwater Department early in the process to
determine the detail level needed for that plan.
All 100-year storm floodplain boundaries must be shown on all preliminary and final
Drainage Plans and labeled in the NAVD 1988 and NGVD 1929 (unadjusted) vertical
datum for FEMA basins. City basin base flood elevations must be reported in NGVD
1929 only.
Review and acceptance by the City of Drainage Plans, studies, and construction drawings
are required in order to obtain a final drainage system that is consistent and integrated in
analysis, design, and level of protection to the City’s Master Drainage Plans.
Due to the dynamic nature of urbanization, the needs of the public will change with time,
requiring adjustment of design and construction requirements. Therefore, a time
limitation on the approved construction plans shall be as follows: construction of any
drainage facility not initiated within a three-year period from time of final plan approval
will be re-evaluated and be subject to a renewed approval by the City.
(24) Section 6.4 is amended to read as follows:
6.4 ODP Drainage Report Contents
Drainage report contents must contain at the minimum the following elements:
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Location
1. City, County, State Highway and local streets within and
adjacent to the site, or the area to be served by the drainage
improvements.
17
2. Township, range, section, ¼ section
3. Major drainageways and facilities
4. Names of surrounding developments
B. Description of Property
1. Area in acres
2. Ground cover (type of ground cover and vegetation)
3. Major drainageways
4. Existing major irrigation facilities such as ditches and
canals
5. Proposed land use
II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS
A. Major Basin Description
1. Reference to major drainageway planning studies such as
flood hazard delineation report, major drainageway
planning reports, and flood insurance rate maps
2. Major basin drainage characteristics, existing and planned
land uses within the basin, as defined by the Planning
Department
3. Identification of all nearby irrigation facilities within 150-
feet of the property boundary, which will influence or be
influenced by the local drainage
B. Sub-Basin Description
1. Discussion of historic drainage patterns of the property in
question
2. Discussion of offsite drainage flow patterns and impact on
development under existing and fully developed basin
conditions pursuant to zoning and land use plans adopted
by the City.
3. Soils information of the site shall be presented. The
discussion on soils shall include rainfall and wind
erodibility problems, limiting characteristics, groundwater
depths, and suitability of the soils for development.
Information shall be presented concerning conceptual
plans for controlling wind and rainfall erosion and the
effectiveness of establishing vegetation.
III. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. General Concept
1. Discussion of concept and typical drainage patterns
2. Discussion of compliance with offsite runoff
considerations
3. Discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns
4. Discussion of the content of tables, charts, figures, plates,
or drawings presented in the report
5. Discussion of the need to provide offsite public
improvements for conveyance of minor or major flows to
the major drainageway.
18
B. Specific Details (Optional Information)
1. Discussions of drainage problems encountered and
solutions at specific design points
2. Discussion of detention storage and outlet design
3. Discussion of maintenance and access aspects of the
design
4. Discussion of impacts of concentrating the flow on the
downstream properties
IV. REFERENCES
Reference all criteria, master plans, and technical information used in
support of the concept.
V. APPENDICES
A. On-site and off-site flow calculations
B. Preliminary sizing of detention ponds, storm sewers, and
channels.
(25) Section 6.5 is amended to read as follows:
6.5 ODP Drawing Contents
(a) General Location Map: All drawings must be 22" x 34" in size. A map
in sufficient detail to identify drainage flows entering and leaving the
development and general drainage patterns must be provided. The map
should show the path of all drainage from the upper end of any offsite
basins to the defined major drainageways. The map shall identify any
existing and proposed facilities from the property (i.e., development,
irrigation ditches, existing detention facilities, culverts, storm sewers)
along the flow path to the nearest major drainageway.
(b) Existing and Future Land Use: Existing and proposed vegetation and
landscaping must be shown to the extent that it is known at the ODP
level. Existing and proposed building footprints, parking lots,
sidewalks, and streets shall be submitted. If details of the proposed
information are unknown, the zoning as shown on the ODP diagram is
acceptable.
(c) Floodplain Information: All 100-year floodplain and floodway
boundaries, cross sections, and base flood elevation lines must be
shown. Base flood elevations must be reported in NAVD 1988 and
NGVD 1929 (unadjusted) vertical datum for all FEMA basins. City
basin base flood elevations must be reported in NGVD 1929 only. All
floodplain requirements as detailed in Chapter 10 of the City Code shall
apply.
(d) Drainage Plan: Map(s) of the proposed development at a scale of 1” =
20’ to 1” = 200’ on a 22" x 34" drawing must be included. The plan
must show the following:
19
1. Existing topographic contours at 2-foot maximum intervals. In
terrain where the slope exceeds 15%, the maximum interval is
10 feet. The contours shall extend 50 feet beyond the property
lines or further, if necessary, to show the drainage relationship
with the adjacent property.
2. All existing drainage facilities.
3. Approximate flooding limits based on available information.
4. Conceptual major drainage facilities including detention basins,
storm sewers, streets, culverts, channels, swales, riprap, and
hydraulic structures in the detail consistent with the proposed
development plan.
5. All watercourses, rivers, wetlands, creeks, irrigation ditches or
laterals located within 150 feet of the property.
6. Major drainage boundaries and sub-boundaries.
7. Any offsite feature influencing development.
8. Proposed flow directions and, if available, proposed contours.
9. Legends to define map symbols.
10. All water quality on-site detention facilities required for every
new development and redevelopment must be designated on the
plans, including notes indicating the approximate surface area
and volume of the facilities.
(26) Section 6.6 is amended to read as follows:
6.6 Project Development Plan (PDP) and Building Permit Submittal Requirements
A PDP is needed after the ODP if the project will be completed in phases, or a PDP is
needed after the Conceptual Review if the project will be completed in only one phase.
The PDP submittal shall contain a general description of the existing and proposed land
uses and layout of the site. All Building Permit Process submittals have the same
requirements as the PDP requirements.
All analyses and designs of storm drainage systems within the City limits of Fort Collins
must be submitted to the City for review and must obtain the City's written approval
before any phase of construction. PDP submittals to the Stormwater Utility must consist
of two copies of a Drainage and Erosion Control Report with one set of engineering
drawings containing the necessary information.
The information and calculations contained within the Drainage Report and Erosion
Control Report must be presented in a neat and orderly fashion to facilitate review.
All reports must be stamped and signed by a Colorado licensed professional engineer and
must include, at the minimum:
a cover letter indicating the date
the name of the project or subdivision
a vicinity map
the name of the engineer(s) designing the site
a statement of compliance with the this Manual.
Detailed engineering drawings must be included in the Drainage Report supporting the
information and calculations provided in the report.
20
All PDP submittals must indicate whether any portion of the development site is located
within or is directly adjacent to a FEMA or City designated floodplain. In the event
where any portion of the development site meets that condition, then the proposed
development plan must comply with all applicable floodplain regulations as specified in
Chapter 10 of City Code, “Flood Prevention and Protection”.
(27) Section 6.7 is amended to read as follows:
6.7 PDP Drainage Report
6.7.1 Report Contents
The Report must be formatted in accordance with the following outline and must contain
all the applicable information listed below and meet the requirements of Vol. 3, Chapter
7, “Construction BMPs.”
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Location
1. Vicinity Map: A map showing the project location within
the City. The project area shall be shaded, major arterial
streets labeled, the major water courses and water bodies
shall be labeled, and the City’s drainage basin that the site
is located in shall be labeled. The map shall be a minimum
size of 6 inches by 6 inches with a scale ranging from 1” =
1000’ to 1” = 3000’. The vicinity map shall be located
directly after the table of contents of the drainage report.
2. Township, range, section, ¼ section
3. Local streets within and adjacent to the subdivision with
ROW width shown.
4. Major drainageways, facilities, and easements within or
adjacent to the site.
5. Names of surrounding developments
B. Description of Property
1. Area in acres
2. Ground cover (type of trees, shrubs, vegetation, general
soil conditions, topography, and slope)
3. Major drainageways
4. General project description
5. Irrigation facilities
6. Proposed land use
C. Floodplain Submittal Requirements
1. “City of Fort Collins Floodplain Review Checklist for 50%
Submittals”
II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS
A. Major Basin Description
1. Reference to major drainageway planning studies such as
flood hazard delineation reports, major drainageway
planning reports, and flood insurance rate maps
21
2. Major basin drainage characteristics, existing and planned
land uses
3. Identification of all irrigation facilities within the basin,
which will influence or be influenced by the local drainage
design
B. Sub-Basin Description
1. Discussion of historic and proposed drainage patterns of
the property in question
2. Discussion of offsite drainage flow patterns and impact on
development under existing and fully developed basin
conditions
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations: Discussion of the optional provisions selected or
the deviation from the criteria, if any, and its justification.
B. Discussion on how the Directly Connected Impervious Area
(DCIA) is being minimized and or disconnected and discussion
on how compliance with the “Four Step Process” is being
implemented.
C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1. Discussion of previous drainage studies (i.e., project
master plans) for the site in question that influence or are
influenced by the drainage design and how the plan will
affect drainage design for the site.
2. Discussion of the effects of adjacent drainage studies.
3. Discussion of the drainage impact of site constraints such
as streets, utilities, rapid transit, existing structures, and
development or site plan.
C. Hydrological Criteria
1. Identify design rainfall
2. Identify runoff calculation method
3. Identify detention discharge and storage calculation
method
4. Identify design storm recurrence intervals
5. Discussion and justification of other assumptions or
calculation methods used that are not referenced by the
criteria.
D. Hydraulic Criteria
1. Identify various capacity references
2. Discussion of other drainage facility design criteria used
that are not referenced in the criteria
3. If there are proposed modifications to areas within the
100-year floodplain or floodway, a “Floodplain Modeling
Report” must be submitted
4. If there are proposed modifications to a natural
drainageway where a 100-year floodplain has not been
designated, a “Floodplain Modeling Study” must be
submitted
22
E. Floodplain Regulations Compliance
1. Complete a “City of Fort Collins Floodplain Review
Checklist for 50% Submittals” that clearly states the
intent to comply with all applicable City of Fort Collins
floodplain regulations as specified in Chapter 10 of the
City Code.
F. Modifications of Criteria
1. Identify provisions by section number for which a
modification is requested
2. Provide justification for each modification requested
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. General Concept
1. Discussion of concept and typical drainage patterns
2. Discussion of compliance with off-site runoff
considerations
3. Discussion of the content of tables, charts, figures, plates,
or drawings presented in the report
4. Discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns
B. Specific Details
1. Discussion of drainage problems encountered and
solutions at specific design points
2. Discussion of detention storage and outlet design
3. A summary table for each detention storage pond on the
site to include:
Stage-Storage Curve
Stage-Discharge Curve
Detention Pond Volume Required
Detention Pond Volume Provided
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
Water Quality Elevation
Spillway Elevation
Pond Freeboard
Outlet(s) size(s)
4. Discussion of maintenance access
5. Discussion of easements and tracts for drainage purposes,
including the conditions and limitations for use
6. Discussion of the facilities needed offsite for the
conveyance of minor and major flows to the major
drainageway
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with Standards
1. Compliance with Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual
2. Compliance with the City’s Master Drainage Plan(s)
3. Compliance with the City’s floodplain regulations
23
4. Compliance with all State and Federal regulations
B. Drainage Concept
1. Effectiveness of drainage design to control damage from
storm runoff
2. Influence of proposed development on the Master
Drainage Plan recommendation(s)
VI. REFERENCES
Reference all criteria and technical information used
VII. APPENDICES
A. Hydrologic Computations
1. Land use assumptions regarding adjacent properties
2. Initial and major storm runoff at specific design points
3. Historic and fully developed runoff computations at
specific design points
4. Hydrographs at critical design points
5. Time of concentration and runoff coefficients for each
basin
B. Hydraulic Computations
1. Culvert capacities
2. Storm sewer capacity. Allowable models include
StormCAD, UDSewer, FlowMaster, and Extran. Other
models will be accepted on a case by case basis upon prior
approval from the City
3. Street flow calculations for the 2-year and 100-year events
regarding street encroachment, theoretical capacity, and
allowable gutter flow
4. Storm inlet capacity including inlet control rating at
connection(s) to storm sewer system
5. Open channel design
6. Check dam and/or channel drop design
7. Detention facility design including area/volume capacity,
outlet capacity, soil analysis, and ground water table
elevations
8. Downstream/outfall system capacity to the major
drainageway system
9. Design of erosion protection measures for culverts, and
storm sewer outlets.
C. Letters of intent to acquire all necessary off-site easements
D. Water quality design calculations
E. Printed copies of input and output files for all computer models
used in the analysis and design
F. Digital copies of input and output files for all computer models
used in the analysis and design
24
6.7.2 PDP Engineering Drawings for Drainage Reports
The drawings must contain all the applicable information listed below and meet the
requirements of Vol. 3, Chapter 7, “Construction BMPs.” All drawings shall be prepared
by a Colorado licensed civil engineer and must be on a reproducible medium of one or
more sheets with an outer dimension of twenty-four by thirty-four (22x34) inches. Please
note that if feasible and legible the Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan can be
combined.
The plan set should include the following sheets:
a) Vicinity Map
b) Drainage Plan
c) Floodplain Plan
d) Grading Plan
e) Erosion Control Plan
The Drainage and Erosion Control Report and associated drawings must include the
following information in aggregate:
a) The name of the subdivision or project.
b) The date of preparation, the scale, and symbol designating true north.
c) The boundary lines of the subdivision or project, right-of-way lines of streets,
easements and other rights of way, irrigation ditches, detention ponds,
watercourses, and lot lines, with accurate bearings and distances.
d) Designations of all streets and other rights of way, including dimensions and
names of such streets.
e) The location and dimensions of any easements.
f) All required floodplain information and studies as specified in the City of Fort
Collins Floodplain Review Checklist for 50% Development Review Submittals.
g) Existing and proposed contours at two foot intervals. Spot elevations or one foot
contours where two foot contours do not show on the property or where needed
to depict the grading. Spot elevations may be needed in critical areas, especially
adjacent to existing developed property.
h) The location, size, and type of all storm sewers.
i) The location, size, and type of all inlets, cross pans, manholes, and other storm
sewer appurtenances.
j) Profile views for all subsurface drainage facilities showing their size, slope,
lengths, design storm hydraulic grade lines (2-year and 100-year), cover, details
of structures or City Standard details, and relationship with existing utilities.
k) The location, size, and type of all culverts, including box culverts.
l) The location, size, and type of all open channels, including irrigation ditches with
profile views where applicable.
m) The location, size, and type of all existing utilities.
n) Cross-sectional views of all open channels, including irrigation ditches, trickle
channels, spillway structures, etc. These views must include applicable
easement/right-of-way boundaries and water surface elevations such as the 100-
year storm depth, 2-year storm depth, major storm freeboard, and operating
irrigation level.
o) Capacity, discharge, outlet structure, spillways, permanent pool water level (if
any), and 100-year high water level for all detention ponds, including both the
25
water quality and water quantity elevations. Cross-hatching of the area inundated
by the 100-year water surface elevation is recommended.
p) Water surface profiles for all major open channels, or as required.
q) Show the lowest floor elevation (the basement floor elevation or the bottom of
the crawl space) and grade at foundation elevations of all buildings. Grading
away from the foundation within the first 5 feet adjacent to the building shall be a
minimum of 5%. In residential developments, also provide lot corner elevations
and any grade break elevations critical to the grading concept. The minimum
opening elevations are also required for all lots that are adjacent to a major
drainage channel, a detention pond, or a water body, or located in or adjacent to a
floodplain.
r) Spot elevations critical to describe drainage features and their function (e.g.,
inlets, cross pans, spillways, inlets/outlets of manholes, culverts, and storm
sewers).
s) Drainage sub-basin boundaries and concentration points for the developed site
clearly delineated and labeled.
t) A summary table of site hydrology, including offsite flows entering the site for
the 2-year and 100-year design storms, basin numbers, basin areas, runoff
coefficients, and onsite flows for the 2-year and 100-year design storms at the
concentration points.
u) A summary table for each detention pond on the site to include:
Stage-Storage Curve
Stage-Discharge Curve
Detention pond volume required
Detention pond volume provided
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
Water Quality Elevation
Spillway Elevation
Pond Freeboard
Outlet(s) size(s)
v) A vicinity map showing the project location within the city. The project area
shall be shaded, and major arterial streets labeled. The map shall be a minimum
size of 6" x 6", with a scale ranging from 1"=1000' to 1"=3000’.
w) Letters of intent to acquire all necessary offsite easements shall be included with
the submittal
x) If SWMM modeling is used, a sub-basin map and a SWMM schematic diagram
are required to depict the sub-basins and conveyance elements represented in the
model.
y) General notes relating to the design of the drainage features of the development
are required on the utility plan cover sheet. (Additional notes are required by
other departments, such as Engineering and Water/Wastewater.) The required
drainage notes are as follows:
1) All street, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water construction shall
conform to City Standards and Specifications current at date of execution
of the Development Agreement pertaining to this development. Any
construction occurring three years after the execution of the development
agreement shall require re-examination of the plans by the Director who
may require that they be made to conform to standards and specifications
current at that time.
26
2) The type, size, location, and number of all known underground utilities
are approximate as shown on the drawings. It shall be the responsibility
of the contractor to verify the existence and location of all underground
utilities along the route of the work. Before commencing new
construction, the contractor shall be responsible for locating unknown
underground utilities.
3) These plans have been reviewed by the City for concept only. The
review does not imply responsibility by the reviewing department, the
City Engineer, or the City for accuracy or correctness of the calculations.
Furthermore, the review does not imply that the quantities of the items
on the plans are the final quantities required. The review shall not be
construed in any reason as acceptance of financial responsibility by the
City for additional quantities of items shown that may be required during
the construction phase.
4) Prior to the commencement of any construction, the contractor must give
the City Engineering Department (970-221-6605) and the Erosion
Control Inspector (970-221-6700) twenty-four (24) hours advance-
notice. Initial erosion control measures must be installed and a site
inspection by the Erosion Control Inspector is required before
commencing construction activities.
5) Maintenance of onsite drainage facilities shall be the responsibility of the
property owners.
6) All recommendations of the final drainage and erosion control study for
this development by (Engineering Firm) must be met.
7) Prior to final inspection and acceptance by the City, certification of the
drainage facilities by a Colorado registered professional engineer must
be submitted to and approved by the City Stormwater Department.
(including the applicable note as set forth below)
For commercial and multi-family developments, certification of all
drainage facilities shall be submitted to the City Stormwater
Department at least two weeks prior to the release of a certificate of
occupancy. Individual lot certification, elevation certification, or
floodproofing certification, as specified in the development
agreement, must be submitted to the City Stormwater Department at
least two weeks prior to the release of a certificate of occupancy for
such lot.
For single family developments, certification of all drainage facilities
must be submitted to the City Stormwater Department in accordance
with all conditions as prescribed by the development agreement
associated with this development. Individual lot certification,
elevation certification, or floodproofing certification, as specified in
the development agreement, must be submitted to the City
Stormwater Department at least one week prior to the release of a
certificate of occupancy for such lot.
8) If dewatering is used to install utilities, and discharge will be into the
street, gutter, storm sewer, channel, irrigation ditch, or any waters of the
State a State Construction Dewatering Industrial Wastewater Discharge
Permit is required.
9) All land disturbing activities greater than or equal to one acre must
comply with the State of Colorado permitting process for Stormwater
27
Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. For more information
contact the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,
Water Quality Control Division, at 303-692-3500 or refer to the web site
at http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit/ .
10) Benchmark: City of Fort Collins Vertical Control located at the Elevation
= ______feet, City of Fort Collins Datum.
11) If fill or dredged material is discharged into waters of the United States, a
USACE 404 permit is required.
12) If construction affects any Colorado Highway, a Colorado Department of
Transportation right-of-way permit is required.
(28) A new Section 6.8 is added to read as follows:
6.8 PDP Erosion Control Report and Plan
An Erosion Control Report and an Erosion Control Plan must be prepared for all land
disturbing activity subject to this Manual for areas that are greater than or equal to ten
thousand (10,000) square feet in area and less than four to one (4:1) slopes except
emergency work or where construction activities are within fifty (50) feet of the outer
limits of sensitive areas. This includes but is not limited to floodplains, slopes, riparian
corridors, wetlands, lakes, or irrigation ditches. Said report and plan must be prepared in
accordance with the specifications set forth in Volume 3, Chapter 7, “Construction
BMPs”, of this Manual. Land disturbing activity refers to any activity that results in a
change in the existing soil cover (both vegetative and non-vegetative) and/or the existing
soil topography including but not limited to, clearing, grading, excavation, demolition,
installation of new or improved haul roads and access roads, staging areas, stockpiling of
fill materials, and borrow areas. It does not include routine maintenance to maintain
original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or the original purpose of the facility.
(29) A new Section 6.9 is added to read as follows:
6.9 Final Plan (FP) Submittal Requirements
After the PDP submittal has been approved, the applicant can present the FP submittal to
the City. The FP is the site-specific development plan, which describes and establishes
the type and intensity of use for a specific development.
The FP submittal shall contain one set of the following:
a) A statement of compliance to the approved PDP.
b) All easements in final form (except City signatures) must be submitted with
the FP submittal.
c) Any necessary revisions to the PDP Drainage Report and drawings and to the
Erosion Control Report and drawings.
d) Final construction drawings.
e) A statement of compliance with all floodplain requirements specified in
chapter 10 of the City Code as well as the completion “City of Fort Collins
Floodplain Review Checklist for 100% Development Review Submittals”
Upon approval of the Final Plan, three final Drainage and Erosion Control Reports and
one complete set of construction drawings must be sent to the City Stormwater
Department. The Engineering Department will require additional copies for other
28
departments. One copy of the report must include digital copies of the input and output
files for all computer models used for the analysis and design. In addition, one copy of
the Erosion Control Plan with details must be submitted to the Erosion Control Inspector.
(30) A new Section 6.10 is added, to read as follows:
6.10 Floodplain Modeling Reports
All guidelines and requirements as specified in Chapter 10 of the City Code must be
satisfied. All requirements identified in the document titled “Guidelines for Submitting
Floodplain Modeling Reports” must be completed and submitted.
(31) A new Section 6.11 is added, to read as follows:
6.11 Drainage Certification
All new developments are required to submit for review and approval, an overall site
certification of the constructed drainage facilities. The overall site certification must
specify the proposed and the as-built conditions of the site’s drainage facilities. Any
variation from the approved plans must be noted and proven to function properly within
the standards in this Manual. Supporting calculations to justify any variation from the
approved plans shall be provided, including but not limited to, detention volumes,
detention discharge rates, pipe capacities, channel capacities, water surface and lowest
opening elevations, and swale capacities.
The City will review the certified record drawing information with the construction
drawings. A Certification will only be accepted if:
1. The record drawing information demonstrates that the construction complies with
the design intent.
2. The record drawings are certified by both a registered professional land surveyor
and a registered professional engineer in the state of Colorado.
3. There is a compliance statement by the professional engineer.
4. Any discrepancies between the original drainage plan and the constructed system
need to be discussed and shown to function within the criteria set forth in this
Manual. If the construction does not comply with the criteria, the design
engineer must redesign the drainage facilities and plan and revise the
construction plan mylars to correct the deficiencies.
5. All Floodplain certifications required by the City’s Floodplain Administrator
must also be included. These may include FEMA Elevation or Floodproofing
Certifications and No-Rise Certifications and or other documents as specified in
Chapter 10 of the City Code.
6.11.1 Overall Site Certifications
This type of certification is for the overall site drainage facilities shown on the
construction plan drawings. The construction plans together with the development
agreement identify when and what facilities must be certified and how many building
permits and/or Certificates of Occupancy (“Cos”) are allowed prior to certifying the
facilities. Twenty-five percent of the building permits can be issued prior to acceptance
of an overall site certification. In multi-family building projects the overall site
certification must be accepted before or at the same time as the release of the first
certificate of occupancy in that phase.
29
6.11.2 Certifications for Commercial and Multi-Family Developments
Individual lot or building certification is required before the release of a Certificate of
Occupancy (“CO”). Certification of all drainage facilities must be submitted to the City
at least two weeks before the release of a CO.
6.11.3 Certifications for Single Family Developments
Certification of all drainage facilities must be submitted to the City at least one week
before the release of additional building permits to those allowed by the development
agreement. The development agreement for single-family developments usually allows
for the release of 25% of the total building permit. An overall site drainage certificate
shall be submitted and approved by the City before the release of any remaining building
permits in the development as specified in the development agreement. Individual lot
certifications are required prior to the release of a Certificate of Occupancy (“CO”) for
any lot.
6.11.4 Individual Lot Certifications
Certification may be required for individual lots to ensure lot grading was completed
according to the approved grading plan. Lots requiring certification will be specified in
the development agreement. A lot certification must show the proposed and the “as-built”
conditions of the lot grading, including corner lot elevations, high points, side-lot swales,
drainage patterns, and minimum building opening elevations.
It must include separate discussions of the intent of the grading on the previously
approved grading plan as well as the final grading being certified. If the final grading
matches the approved plan there must be a statement of compliance or if not an
explanation of what is different and why. In the latter case, the changes must be justified
or explained in order to obtain City approval and the release of the Certificate of
Occupancy (“CO”).
For properties within floodplains, a flood-proofing or elevation certificate is required for
all structures prior to the release of the CO.
(32) A new Section 6.12 is added, to read as follows:
6.12 Final Close-Out Inspection
A Final Close-Out Inspection is required for all new developments and redevelopments.
This inspection must be scheduled at the conclusion of all construction activities on the
site and prior to transferring ownership and maintenance responsibilities of the site to a
subsequent entity such as a Home Owners’ Association.
The Owner must request the Final Close-Out Inspection from the City. The Final Close-
Out Inspection must be scheduled with the City following a minimum two-week advance
notice.
At the time of the Close-Out Inspection the Owner must provide to the City contact
information for the entity that will be assuming ownership and maintenance
responsibilities and a plan for funding and carrying out these responsibilities.
During the Final Close-Out Inspection, the Owner must demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the City that:
a) All permanent drainage facilities and BMPs have been constructed in compliance with
the approved final plan documents and are functioning as designed.
30
b) All revegetation measures are complete and all soil surfaces are stable.
c) All drainage facilities and appurtenances have been cleared of any debris and
sediment.
d) All temporary BMPs have been removed from the development site.
(33) Section 7.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(34) Section 7.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(35) Section 7.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(36) Section 7.3 is deleted in its entirety.
(37) Section 7.4 is deleted in its entirety.
(38) Table DP-1 is deleted in its entirety.
(39) Table DP-2 is deleted in its entirety.
(40) Table DP-3 is deleted in its entirety.
(41) Table DP-4 “Required Maintenance Easements” is added.
(42) Figure DP-1 is deleted in its entirety.
31
(B) Volume 1, Chapter 4 - Rainfall:
(1) Section 1.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(2) A new Section 1.1 is added, to read as follows:
1.1 General Design Storms
All drainage system design and construction must take into consideration three separate
and distinct drainage problems.
The first is the eightieth (80th) percentile storm event or the rain event for which 80% of
all rain events have an equal or smaller depth of rain. This storm event is used to design
water quality features. The second is the “Minor” or “Initial Storm”, which is the 2-year
storm in the city of Fort Collins. This is the storm that has a probability of occurring, on
the average, once every two (2) years (or one that has a fifty percent chance probability
of exceedance every year). The third is the “Major Storm”, which is the 100-year storm
in the city of Fort Collins. This is the storm that has a probability of occurring, on the
average, once every one hundred (100) years (or one that has a one percent probability of
exceedance every year). In some instances the 100-year storm routing of runoff will not
be the same as that for the 2-year storm.
(3) A new Section 1.2 is added, to read as follows:
1.2 Minor (2-Year) Storm Provisions
The objectives of such drainage system planning are to minimize inconvenience, to
protect against recurring minor damage and to reduce maintenance costs in order to
create an orderly drainage system at a reasonable cost. The 2-year storm drainage system
may include such facilities as curb and gutter, storm sewer, open channels, drainageways,
ponds, rivers, streams, and detention facilities.
(4) A new Section 1.3 is added, to read as follows:
1.3 Major (100-Year) Storm Provisions
The objectives of the 100-year storm drainage system planning are to eliminate
substantial loss of life or property damage. Major drainage systems may include storm
sewers, open channels, drainageways, ponds, rivers, streams, and detention facilities.
The correlation between the minor and major storm system must be analyzed to ensure
that a well coordinated drainage system is designed and constructed.
(5) Section 2.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(6) Section 2.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(7) Section 2.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(8) Section 3.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety.
32
(10) Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety.
33
(11) Section 4.0 is amended to read as follows:
4.0 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method:
The one-hour rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency tables for use the Rational Method
of runoff analysis are provided in Table RA-7 and in Table RA-8.
Table RA-7 -- City of Fort Collins
Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table
for Use with the Rational Method
(5 minutes to 30 minutes)
2-Year 10-Year 100-Year
Duration
(min)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
5 2.85 4.87 9.95
6 2.67 4.56 9.31
7 2.52 4.31 8.8
8 2.4 4.1 8.38
9 2.3 3.93 8.03
10 2.21 3.78 7.72
11 2.13 3.63 7.42
12 2.05 3.5 7.16
13 1.98 3.39 6.92
14 1.92 3.29 6.71
15 1.87 3.19 6.52
16 1.81 3.08 6.3
17 1.75 2.99 6.1
18 1.7 2.9 5.92
19 1.65 2.82 5.75
20 1.61 2.74 5.6
21 1.56 2.67 5.46
22 1.53 2.61 5.32
23 1.49 2.55 5.2
24 1.46 2.49 5.09
25 1.43 2.44 4.98
26 1.4 2.39 4.87
27 1.37 2.34 4.78
28 1.34 2.29 4.69
29 1.32 2.25 4.6
30 1.3 2.21 4.52
34
Table RA-8 -- City of Fort Collins
Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table
for Use with the Rational Method
(31 minutes to 60 minutes)
2-Year 10-Year 100-Year
Duration
(min)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
31 1.27 2.16 4.42
32 1.24 2.12 4.33
33 1.22 2.08 4.24
34 1.19 2.04 4.16
35 1.17 2.0 4.08
36 1.15 1.96 4.01
37 1.16 1.93 3.93
38 1.11 1.89 3.87
39 1.09 1.86 3.8
40 1.07 1.83 3.74
41 1.05 1.8 3.68
42 1.04 1.77 3.62
43 1.02 1.74 3.56
44 1.01 1.72 3.51
45 0.99 1.69 3.46
46 0.98 1.67 3.41
47 0.96 1.64 3.36
48 0.95 1.62 3.31
49 0.94 1.6 3.27
50 0.92 1.58 3.23
51 0.91 1.56 3.18
52 0.9 1.54 3.14
53 0.89 1.52 3.1
54 0.88 1.5 3.07
55 0.87 1.48 3.03
56 0.86 1.47 2.99
57 0.85 1.45 2.96
58 0.84 1.43 2.96
59 0.83 1.42 2.89
60 0.82 1.4 2.86
35
(12) A new Section 4.1 is added, to read as follows:
4.1 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for SWMM:
The hyetograph input option must be selected when creating SWMM input files.
Hyetographs for the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year City of Fort Collins rainfall events
are provided in Table RA-9.
Table RA-9 – City of Fort Collins
Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table
for Use with SWMM
2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year
Duration
(min)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
Intensity
(in/hr)
5 0.29 0.40 0.49 0.63 0.79 1.00
10 0.33 0.45 0.56 0.72 0.90 1.14
15 0.38 0.53 0.65 0.84 1.05 1.33
20 0.64 0.89 1.09 1.41 1.77 2.23
25 0.81 1.13 1.39 1.80 2.25 2.84
30 1.57 2.19 2.69 3.48 4.36 5.49
35 2.85 3.97 4.87 6.30 7.90 9.95
40 1.18 1.64 2.02 2.61 3.27 4.12
45 0.71 0.99 1.21 1.57 1.97 2.48
50 0.42 0.58 0.71 0.92 1.16 1.46
55 0.35 0.49 0.60 0.77 0.97 1.22
60 0.30 0.42 0.52 0.67 0.84 1.06
65 0.20 0.28 0.39 0.62 0.79 1.00
70 0.19 0.27 0.37 0.59 0.75 0.95
75 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.56 0.72 0.91
80 0.17 0.24 0.34 0.54 0.69 0.87
85 0.17 0.23 0.32 0.52 0.66 0.84
90 0.16 0.22 0.31 0.50 0.64 0.81
95 0.15 0.21 0.30 0.48 0.62 0.78
100 0.15 0.20 0.29 0.47 0.60 0.75
105 0.14 0.19 0.28 0.45 0.58 0.73
110 0.14 0.19 0.27 0.44 0.56 0.71
115 0.13 0.18 0.26 0.42 0.54 0.69
120 0.13 0.18 0.25 0.41 0.53 0.67
36
RAINFALL INTENSITY-DURATION-FREQUENCY CURVE
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
STORM DURATION (minutes)
RAINFALL INTENSITY (inches/hour)
2-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 100-Year Storm
Figure RA-16 City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves
(13) Section 5.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(14) Section 6.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(15) Section 7.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(16) Section 7.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(17) Section 7.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(18) Section 7.3 is deleted in its entirety.
(19) Section 8.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(20) Table RA-1 is deleted in its entirety.
37
(21) Table RA-2 is deleted in its entirety.
(22) Table RA-3 is deleted in its entirety.
(23) Table RA-4 is deleted in its entirety.
(24) Table RA-5 is deleted in its entirety.
(25) Table RA-6 is deleted in its entirety.
(26) Table RA-7—City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for use
with the Rational Method (5minutes to 30 minutes) is added.
(27) Table RA-8—City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for use
with the Rational Method (31 minutes to 60 minutes) is added.
(28) Table RA-9—City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for use
with SWMM is added.
(29) Figure RA-1 is deleted in its entirety.
(30) Figure RA-2 is deleted in its entirety.
(31) Figure RA-3 is deleted in its entirety.
(32) Figure RA-4 is deleted in its entirety.
(33) Figure RA-5 is deleted in its entirety.
(34) Figure RA-6 is deleted in its entirety.
(35) Figure RA-7 is deleted in its entirety.
(36) Figure RA-8 is deleted in its entirety.
(37) Figure RA-9 is deleted in its entirety.
(38) Figure RA-10 is deleted in its entirety.
(39) Figure RA-11 is deleted in its entirety.
(40) Figure RA-12 is deleted in its entirety.
(41) Figure RA-13 is deleted in its entirety.
(42) Figure RA-14 is deleted in its entirety.
38
(43) Figure RA-15 is deleted in its entirety.
(44) Figure RA-16 is added
Figure RA-16—City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves.
39
(C) Volume 1, Chapter 5 - Runoff:
(1) Section 1.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(2) A new Section 1.1 is added, to read as follows:
1.1 Runoff Methodologies
(a) There are two runoff determination methodologies that are approved by the City, the
Rational Method and the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). The City is the
determining authority with respect to the appropriate methodology to use under different
circumstances. Early contact with the City is encouraged for the timely determination of
the appropriate runoff methodology to use.
(b) The Rational Method may only be used to determine the runoff from drainage basins
that are less than ninety (90) acres in size. The Stormwater Management Model (SWMM)
must be used to model drainage basin areas of ninety (90) acres or more.
(c) All runoff calculations made in the design of both 2-year and 100-year drainage
systems must be included with the Storm Drainage Report and all storm drainage
facilities designed must be shown on Storm Drainage Plans.
(3) A new Section 2.8 is added, to read as follows:
2.8 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients
(a) The runoff coefficients to be used in the Rational Method can be determined based on
either zoning classifications or the types of surfaces on the drainage area. Zoning
classifications may be used to estimate flow rates and volumes for an Overall Drainage
Plan (ODP) submittal, if the types of surfaces are not known. Table RO-10 lists the
runoff coefficients for common types of zoning classifications in the city of Fort Collins.
(b) For a Project Plan or Final Plan submittal, runoff coefficients based on the proposed
land surface types must be used. Since the actual runoff coefficients may be different
from those specified in Table RO-10, Table RO-11 lists coefficients for the different
types of land surfaces. The runoff coefficient used for design must be based on the actual
conditions of the proposed site.
40
Table RO-10
Rational Method Minor Storm Runoff Coefficients for Zoning Classifications
Description of Area or Zoning Coefficient
R-F 0.3
U-E 0.3
L-M-In 0.55
R-L, N-C-L 0.6
M-M-N, N-C-M 0.65
N-C-B 0.7
Business:
C-C-N, C-C-R, C-N, N-C, C-S 0.95
R-D-R, C-C, C-L 0.95
D, C 0.95
H-C 0.95
C-S 0.95
Industrial:
E 0.85
I 0.95
Undeveloped:
R-C, T 0.2
P-O-L 0.25
For guidance regarding zoning districts and classifications of such districts please refer to
Article Four of the City Land Use Code, as amended.
41
Table RO-11
Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis
Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient
Streets, Parking Lots,
Drives:
Asphalt 0.95
Concrete 0.95
Gravel 0.5
Roofs 0.95
Recycled Asphalt 0.8
Lawns, Sandy Soil:
Flat <2% 0.1
Average 2 to 7% 0.15
Steep >7% 0.2
Lawns, Heavy Soil:
Flat <2% 0.2
Average 2 to 7% 0.25
Steep >7% 0.35
(4) A new Section 2.9 is added, to read as follows:
2.9 Composite Runoff Coefficient
Drainage sub-basins are frequently composed of land that has multiple surfaces or zoning
classifications. In such cases a composite runoff coefficient must be calculated for any
given drainage sub-basin.
The composite runoff coefficient is obtained using the following formula:
t
n
i
i i
A
C A
C
1
*
(RO-8)
Where: C = Composite Runoff Coefficient
Ci = Runoff Coefficient for Specific Area (Ai)
Ai = Area of Surface with Runoff Coefficient of Ci, acres or feet2
n = Number of different surfaces to be considered
At = Total Area over which C is applicable, acres or feet2
(5) A new Section 2.10 is added, to read as follows:
42
2.10 Runoff Coefficient Adjustment for Infrequent Storms
The runoff coefficients provided in tables RO-10 and RO-11 are appropriate for use with
the 2-year storm event. For storms with higher intensities, an adjustment of the runoff
coefficient is required due to the lessening amount of infiltration, depression retention,
evapo-transpiration and other losses that have a proportionally smaller effect on storm
runoff. This adjustment is applied to the composite runoff coefficient.
These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table RO-12.
Table RO-12
Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis
Storm Return Period
(years)
Frequency Factor
Cf
2 to 10
11 to 25
26 to 50
51 to 100
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.25
Note: The product of C times Cf cannot exceed the value of 1, in the cases where it does a value of
1 must be used
(6) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(7) Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(8) Section 3.3 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) A new Section 4.3 is added, to read as follows:
4.3 Computer Modeling Practices
(a) For circumstances requiring computer modeling, the design storm hydrographs must
be determined using the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). Basin and
conveyance element parameters must be computed based on the physical characteristics
of the site.
(b) Refer to the SWMM Users’ Manual for appropriate modeling methodology, practices
and development. The Users’ Manual can be found on the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) website (http://www.epa.gov/ednnrmrl/models/swmm/index.htm).
(c) It is the responsibility of the design engineer to verify that all of the models used in
the design meet all current City criteria and regulations.
4.3.1 Surface Storage, Resistance Factors, and Infiltration
Table RO-13 provides values for surface storage for pervious and impervious surfaces
and the infiltration rates to be used with SWMM. Table RO-13 also lists the appropriate
infiltration decay rate, zero detention depth and resistance factors, or Manning’s “n”
values, for pervious and impervious surfaces to be used for SWMM modeling in the city
of Fort Collins.
43
Table RO-13
SWMM Input Parameters
Depth of Storage on Impervious Areas 0.1 inches
Depth of Storage on Pervious Areas 0.3 inches
Maximum Infiltration Rate 0.51 inches/hour
Minimum Infiltration Rate 0.50 inches/hour
Decay Rate 0.0018 inches/sec
Zero Detention Depth 1%
Manning’s n Value for Pervious Surfaces 0.025
Manning’s n Value for Impervious Surfaces 0.016
4.3.2 Pervious-Impervious Area
Table RO-14 should be used to determine preliminary percentages of impervious land
cover for a given land-use or zoning. The final design must be based on the actual
physical design conditions of the site.
Table RO-14
Percent Imperviousness Relationship to Land Use*
LAND USE OR ZONING
PERCENT IMPERVIOUS
(%)
Business:
T
CCN, CCR, CN
E, RDR, CC, LC
C, NC, I, D, HC, CS
20
70
80
90
Residential:
RF,UE
RL, NCL
LMN,NCM
MMN, NCB
30
45
50
70
Open Space:
Open Space and Parks (POL)
Open Space along foothills ridge
(POL,RF)
RC
10
20
20
*For updated zoning designations and definitions, please refer to Article Four of the City Land
Use Code, as amended
44
4.3.3 Conveyance Element Methodology
Embedded conveyance elements must begin at the midpoint of the sub-basin in order to
appropriately represent the basin based on its actual physical characteristics.
4.3.4 Basin Width
Basin width must be calculated as the area of the basin divided by the length of the basin.
The basin length is defined as the length of the concentrated flow.
4.3.5 Dynamic Flow Analysis
Conditions may arise where a steady flow hydraulic analysis may not provide sufficient
information on the operation of drainage facilities. This is especially of concern when
analyzing detention ponds inter-connected by culverts or storm sewers and where release
rates and pond volumes may be affected. In such cases, if the Utilities Executive Director
determines that additional analysis is required for an adequate evaluation of proposed
drainage facilities, an unsteady flow hydraulic analysis using hydrographs generated from
SWMM and the EXTRAN block of SWMM may be required.
(10) Section 5.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(11) Section 5.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(12) APPENDIX A is deleted in its entirety.
(13) Table RO-1 is deleted in its entirety.
(14) Table RO-6 is deleted in its entirety.
(15) Table RO-7 is deleted in its entirety.
(16) Table RO-8 is deleted in its entirety.
(17) Table RO-9 is deleted in its entirety.
(18) Table RO-A1 is deleted in its entirety.
(19) Table RO-10 Rational Method Minor Storm Runoff Coefficients for Zoning
Classifications is added.
(20) A new Table RO-11 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis is
added.
(21) A new Table RO-12 Rational Method Frequency Adjustment Factors is added.
(22) A new Table RO-13 SWMM Input Parameters is added.
(23) A new Table RO-14 Land Use Versus percent Imperviousness is added.
(24) Figure RO-9 is deleted in its entirety.
(25) Figure RO-10 is deleted in its entirety.
45
(26) Figure RO-A1 is deleted in its entirety.
(27) Figure RO-A2 is deleted in its entirety.
(28) Figure RO-A3 is deleted in its entirety.
(29) Figure RO-A4 is deleted in its entirety.
(30) Figure RO-A5 is deleted in its entirety.
(31) Figure RO-A6 is deleted in its entirety.
(32) Figure RO-A7 is deleted in its entirety.
(33) Figure RO-A8 is deleted in its entirety.
(34) Figure RO-A9 is deleted in its entirety.
(35) Figure RO-A11 is deleted in its entirety.
46
(D) Volume1, Chapter 6 - Streets/Inlets/Storm Sewers:
(1) Section 2.2 is amended to read as follows:
2.2 Design Requirements
(a) The Minor (or Initial) Storm is designated as the 2-year storm. The Major Storm is
designated as the 100-year storm.
(b) The encroachment of gutter flow on the street for the 2-year storm runoff must not
exceed the criteria set forth in Table ST-2. A storm drainage system must begin where the
encroachment reaches the limits found in this table.
Table ST-2
Pavement Encroachment Standards for the Minor (i.e., 2-Year) Storm
Street Classification Maximum Encroachment* **
Local (includes places, courts, and alleys) No curb-topping. Flow may spread to crown of
street.
Collector and Arterial (Without Median) No curb-topping. Maximum six (6) inch flow depth
at the gutter. Flow spread must leave at least a six
(6) foot wide clear travel lane on the one-half street
section
Arterial (with Median) No curb-topping. Maximum six (6) inch flow depth
at the gutter. Flow spread must leave at least a
twelve (12) feet wide clear travel lane in each
direction
*Where no curbing exists, encroachment must not extend over property lines.
** These criteria apply only to City streets where no floodplain has been designated. For areas
with designated floodplains, please refer to Chapter 10 of the City Code for further guidance.
(c) Standards for the Major Storm and cross-street flows are also required. The Major
Storm needs to be assessed to determine the potential for flooding and public safety.
Cross-street flows also need to be regulated for traffic flow and public safety reasons.
The City has established street inundation standards during the Major Storm event and
allowable cross-street flow standards for the Minor (2-year) Storm and the Major (100-
year) Storm.
(d) Table ST-3 sets forth the allowable street encroachment for the 100-year storm
runoff.
47
Table ST-3
Street Inundation Standards for the Major (i.e., 100-Year) Storm
Street Classification Maximum Encroachment **
Local, Collector and Arterial (without Median) The depth of water at the street crown shall not exceed six (6)
inches to allow operation of emergency vehicles, the depth of
water over the gutter flow line shall not exceed twelve (12)
inches, and the flow must be contained within the right-of-way
or easements paralleling the right-of-way. The most restrictive
of the three criteria shall govern.
Arterial (with Median) The depth of water must not exceed the bottom of the gutter at
the median to allow operation of emergency vehicles, the depth
of water over the gutter flow line shall not exceed twelve (12)
inches, and the flow must be contained within the right-of-way
or easements paralleling the right-of-way. The most restrictive
of the three criteria shall govern.
** These criteria apply only to City streets where no floodplain has been designated. For areas
with designated floodplains, please refer to Chapter 10 of the City Code for further guidance.
(e) Table ST-4 sets forth the allowable cross-street flow for the Minor (2-Year) and the
Major (100-Year) Storm events.
Table ST-4
Allowable Cross-Street Flow
Street Classification Minor (2-Year) Storm Flow Major (100-Year) Storm Flow
Local
Six (6) inches of depth in
cross pan.
Eighteen (18) inches of depth above
gutter flow line.
Collector Where cross pans are allowed,
depth of flow should not
exceed six (6) inches in cross
pan
Twelve (12) inches of depth above
gutter flow line.
Arterial None. No cross flow. Maximum depth at
upstream gutter on road edge of twelve
(12) inches.
(f) Once an allowable spread (pavement encroachment) has been established for the
Minor Storm, the placement of inlets can be determined. The inlets will remove some or
all of the excess stormwater and thus reduce the spread. The placement of inlets is
covered in Section 3.0 of this chapter. It should be noted that proper drainage design
utilizes the full allowable capacity of the street gutter in order to limit the cost of inlets
and storm sewers.
(g) Another important design consideration is the frequency of occurrence of the Minor
Storm. In other words, the design engineer must factor into his design how often the
spread of stormwater will reach or exceed the maximum encroachment limit. This is
addressed by assigning a frequency (or recurrence interval) for the Minor Storm for
48
various street classifications. The selection of a design frequency is based on many
factors including street function, traffic load and vehicle speed. In the city of Fort
Collins, the Minor Storm recurrence interval is the 2-year storm for all street
classifications.
(h) For street sump locations, provisions must be included to carry the 100-year runoff in
a pipe or an overflow channel to an acceptable outfall while the maximum water surface
depth criteria as designated in Table ST-2 and in Table ST-3 are not violated.
(i) An access and maintenance easement for the overflow drainage facility must be
provided if that facility is not contained within the public right-of-way.
(j) Two additional design considerations of importance in street drainage are gutter
(channel) shape and street slope. Most urban streets contain curb and gutter sections.
Various types exist including spill shapes, catch shapes, curb heads, and roll gutters. The
shape is chosen for functional, economic, or aesthetic reasons and does not dramatically
affect the hydraulic capacity. Swales are common along some urban and semi-urban
streets, and roadside ditches are common along rural streets. Their shapes are important
in determining hydraulic capacity and are covered in the next chapter.
(2) Table ST-2 Pavement Encroachment Standards for the Minor (i.e., 2-Year) Storm is
amended
(3) Table ST-3 Street Inundation Standards for the Major (i.e., 100-Year) Storm is amended
(4) Table ST-4 Allowable Cross-Street Flow is amended
(5) A new Section 3.5 is added, to read follows:
3.5 Inlet Design and Construction Standards
(a) Storm inlets must be designed and installed where sump (low-spot) conditions exist
or when allowable street capacities are exceeded. The outlet pipe of the storm inlet must
be sized on the basis of the theoretical capacity of the inlet, with a minimum diameter of
fifteen (15) inches, or a minimum dimension of twelve (12) inches if elliptical or arch
pipe is used.
(b) All curb openings must be installed with the opening at least two (2) inches below
the flow line elevation. The minimum transition length allowed is five (5) feet
(c) Any curb opening greater than six (6) inches in height must have a metal bar welded
horizontally across the inlet for public safety purposes such that no opening height is
greater than six (6) inches.
(d) All inlet covers must be stenciled or stamped with the following designation: NO
DUMPING - DRAINS TO POUDRE RIVER
(6) A new Section 4.5 is added, to read as follows:
4.5 Storm Sewer System Construction Standards
Construction of all stormwater facilities must be built in accordance the approved Water Utilities
Development Construction Standards or the Water Utilities Capital Construction Standards as
appropriate.
49
(E) Volume 1, Chapter 7- Major Drainage:
(1) Section 3.2.8 is amended to read as follows:
3.2.8 Open Channel Design
The minimum design criteria requirements listed below must be satisfied.
3.2.8.1 Natural Channels (Open Floodplain Design)
For development sites located out of the 100-year floodplain, the following open channel
requirements must be met:
1. If the total flow of the channel and floodplain is confined to an incised channel and
erosion can be expected to endanger adjacent structures, 100-year check structures
are required to control erosion and degradation of the channel area. See Volume 2,
Chapter 8, “Hydraulic Structures”, of this Manual for more information. In addition,
sufficient right-of-way must be reserved to install the equivalent of a trapezoidal
grass-lined channel that satisfies the velocity criteria specified in Table MD-2. Extra
width must be reserved where drop structures are needed, in which locations a twenty
(20) foot-wide maintenance access bench must be provided along one side of the
channel.
2. If the floodplain is wide and the low-flow channel represents a small portion of the
floodplain area, low-flow check structures are usually required, unless it can be
demonstrated that the channel will remain stable as the watershed urbanizes.
3. Consult the applicable City’s Master Drainage Plan document for guidance on the
design event and stable stream or waterway longitudinal slope.
4. For either of the above cases, a maintenance access trail must be provided. It should
be designed according to the guidelines for grass-lined channels in Section 3.2.8.3,
below.
3.2.8.2 Open Floodway Design (Natural Channel with Floodplain Encroachment)
Although floodplain preservation is preferable, when the development involves
preserving the floodway while filling and building on the fringe area, the open channel
design must meet the all the requirements in listed Section 3.2.8.1 of this chapter, as well
as the following requirements listed below for fill.
The fill slopes must be adequately protected against erosion with:
1. Fill slopes of four to one (4H:1V) or flatter that are vegetated in accordance with the
criteria listed in the “Revegetation” chapter of this Manual (Volume 2, Chapter 12).
2. Fill slopes must be protected by rock (not broken concrete or asphalt) riprap meeting
City criteria with up to two and a half to one (2.5H:1V) slopes.\
3. Retaining walls must not be not taller than three and a half (3.5) feet, with adequate
foundation protection.
3.2.8.3 Grass-Lined Channel Design
The design for a grass-lined channel must meet the following criteria:
50
1. Side slopes must be four to one (4H:1V) or flatter.
2. Continuous maintenance access, such as with a trail, must be provided. The
stabilized trail surface must be at least eight (8) feet wide with a clear width
of twelve (12) feet. It must be located above the minor (2-year) event water
surface elevation, but never less than two (2) feet (three feet for streams with
perennial flow) above that elevation. Trail profiles need to be shown for all
critical facilities such as roadway crossings, stream crossings and drop
structures. All access trails shall connect to public streets. Maintenance trails
need not be paved, but must be of all-weather construction such as aggregate
base course, crusher fines, recycled concrete course or Aggregate Turf
Reinforced Grass Pavement (RGP) described in Volume 3 of this Manual
and capable of sustaining loads associated with large maintenance
equipment. Paved trails are encouraged to allow for recreational use of the
trails. When paved, pavement should be five (5) inches minimum thickness
of concrete (not asphalt). Maximum longitudinal slope for maintenance-only
trails is ten percent (10%), but less than five percent (5%) when used as
multi-purpose recreational trails to meet the requirements of the Americans
with Disabilities Act. The Utilities Executive Director may accept adjacent
public local streets or parking lots as maintenance access in lieu of a trail, if
he or she determines that a modification of this requirement is appropriate.
3. A low-flow or trickle channel is desirable. See Section 4.1.5 of this chapter
for criteria.
4. Wetland bottom and bioengineered channels are acceptable when designed
according to City wetland bottom channel criteria in Section 4.2 of this
chapter.
5. The channel bottom minimum cross slope for dry bottom channels shall be
one percent (1%).
6. Tributary inflow points shall be protected all the way to the low-flow
channel or trickle channel to prevent erosion. Inflow facilities to wetland
bottom channels shall have their inverts at least two (2) feet above the
channel bottom to allow for the deposition of sediment and shall be protected
with energy dissipaters.
7. All roadway crossings of wetland bottom channels shall incorporate a
minimum of a stabilized two (2) foot drop from the outlet to the bottom of
the downstream channel in order to preserve hydraulic capacity as sediment
deposition occurs over time in the channel.
8. All drop structures must be designed in accordance with the “Hydraulic
Structures” chapter of this Manual. Underdrain and storm sewer outlets
located below the stilling basin’s end-sills are not acceptable. Construction
plans must utilize City standard details.
9. Storm sewer outlets must be designed in accordance with the criteria in
Sections 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 of this chapter. Alternatively, conduit outlet
structures, including low tailwater riprap basins design described in Section
3.0 of the “Hydraulic Structures” chapter of this Manual must be used when
appropriate.
51
10. Grouted boulder rundowns and similar features must be designed in
accordance with Section 7.0 of the “Hydraulic Structures” chapter of this
Manual.
11. Grass seeding specifications provided by the City (see the “Revegetation”
chapter of this Manual) are recommended unless irrigated blue grass is used.
The City will not maintain irrigated blue grass..
(2) Section 3.3.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.3.3 Environmental Permitting Issues
Environmental permitting, in particular wetland permitting, must be considered in
selection of the type of major drainage channel. To assist with the selection of type of
channel or drainageway improvements to be used, a flow chart is presented in Figure
MD-4. The flow chart contains a series of questions to be considered in light of the
requirements in this Manual and the requirements of the Clean Water Act, Section 404
(dredge and fill in jurisdictional wetlands and “Waters of the United States”).
Following along with the chart, the first step is to determine whether channelization is
needed or desired. In many cases, a well-established natural drainageway and its
associated floodplain can be preserved and protected from erosion damage. Therefore,
before deciding to channelize, assess whether the value of reclaimed lands will justify the
cost of channelization and whether a new channel will provide greater community and
environmental benefits than the existing drainageway.
If the decision is to neither channelize nor re-channelize an existing drainageway,
investigate the stability of the natural drainageway and its banks, design measures to
stabilize the longitudinal grade and banks, if needed, and obtain any necessary, Section
404 permits and other approvals for these improvements.
If the decision is to channelize, then determine whether the existing natural drainageway
has a perennial flow, evidence of wetland vegetation, or is a well-established ephemeral
channel. This will often require the assistance of a biologist with wetland training. If any
of these conditions exist, then the project is likely to be subject to individual or
nationwide Section 404 permitting requirements. Regardless, it is suggested that the
designer check with the local United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) office
early to determine which permit will be needed. Keep in mind that it is the responsibility
of the proponent to comply with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations.
Approvals by the City do not supersede or waive compliance with these laws.
(3) Section 3.3.4 is amended to read as follows:
3.3.4 Maintenance
(a) All major drainage channels in urban areas will require maintenance to ensure that
they are capable of conveying their design flow, such as the 100-year flow (as well as
more frequently occurring flows) and to ensure that channels do not become a public
nuisance and eyesore. Routine maintenance (i.e., mowing for weed control or annual or
seasonal clean-outs), unscheduled maintenance (i.e., inspection and clean-out after large
events) and restorative maintenance after some years of operation should be expected.
(b) Native tall grasses may require mowing three to six times a year or on a less frequent
schedule, depending on the type of channel and setting. Mowing cuts down the presence
of standing dead grasses and places them on the ground where decomposition can take
52
place. Often mowing of dry-land native grasses during the growing season may not be
necessary, except for weed control.
(c) A maintenance access platform with a minimum passage width of twelve (12) feet
shall be provided along the entire length of all major drainageways except at drop
structures, where a twenty (20) foot maintenance platform is needed
(d) When public or private drainage channels and associated facilities abut private
property, it is the responsibility of the parties involved, whether they are public or
private, to develop and implement a policy regarding fencing and safety.
(4) Section 4.1.1.5 is amended to read as follows:
4.1.1.5 Design Discharge Freeboard
All open channels shall be designed with a freeboard. Freeboard for major channels
(defined as those with capacity in excess of one hundred (100) cfs) must be a minimum
of one foot of extra depth. Freeboard for minor channels (defined as those carrying less
than one hundred (100) cfs design flow) must be designed to handle a minimum of an
additional 33 percent of runoff, over and above the 100-year design flow.
(5) Table MD-2 is adopted with the following modification:
The minimum riprap Manning’s-n value used to check for stability is 0.07.
(6) Table MD-3 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “District Maintenance Eligibility” shall be deleted.
(7) Table MD-4 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “District Maintenance Eligibility” shall be deleted.
(8) Section 4.3.6 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) Table MD-6 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “District Maintenance Eligibility” shall be deleted.
(10) Table MD-7 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to Type VL and Type L riprap designations shall be deleted.
(11) Table MD-10 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to Type VL and Type L riprap designations shall be deleted.
(12) Table MD-12 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to Type VL and Type L riprap designations shall be deleted.
53
(13) A new section 4.4.4.3 is added, to read as follows:
4.4.4.3 Riprap Specifications and Applicability
(a) Riprap applications must be designed by a professional engineer familiar with the
design of stormwater conveyance systems and structures.
(b) The minimum mean particle size (intermediate dimension) by weight for riprap,
commonly known as the D50, is twelve (12) inches.
(c) All riprap must be angular in shape and clean; no round shaped rocks are allowed.
(d) Riprap coloring must be specified to blend with the existing soil and environment
where it will be placed in a manner that will present the smallest amount of visual
contrast.
(e) Riprap shall only be used when other methods of protection or stabilization are not
appropriate or possible. Riprap alternates with the exception of gabions are
recommended whenever practical. Manufactured channel lining or revetment treatments
such as Turf Reinforcement Mats (TRMs), erosion control matting, geotextiles,
Articulating Concrete Blocks (ACBs), partially-grouted riprap, and other flexible linings
are encouraged in lieu of standard riprap applications. These alternates will be
considered by the City on a case-by-case basis in order to determine the most appropriate
material that should be specified under particular conditions and for different
applications.
(14) Table MD-13 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “District Maintenance Eligibility” shall be deleted.
(15) Section 10.0 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Rosgen, D., 1996, “Applied River Morphology” shall be deleted.
54
(F) Volume 2, Chapter 8 - Hydraulic Structures:
(1) Section 2.4.4 is deleted in its entirety.
(2) Section 2.8.3 is deleted in its entirety.
(3) Section 3.4.3.2 is adopted with the following modifications:
a. Equation (HS-17) is amended to read as follows:
T= 2D50 (HS-17)
And:
b. All references to Type L riprap shall be deleted from Table HS-9
(4) Section 4.1.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(5) Section 8.1 is amended to read as follows:
8.1 General
Maintenance of hydraulic structures includes removing debris, excessive vegetation and
excessive sediment. Replacing or realigning erosion protection, stones, repairing grout
and concrete, and replacing warning signs are items of maintenance that must be
performed regularly under normal conditions. Other maintenance activities that can be
reasonably expected for specific structures must also be performed on a regular basis.
(6) Table HS-6 is deleted in its entirety.
(7) Table HS-9 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to Type L riprap shall be deleted
(8) Figure HS-9 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) Figure HS-10 is deleted in its entirety.
55
(G) Volume 2, Chapter 9 - Culverts:
(1) Section 3.5.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.5.3 Culvert Diameter
(a) The diameter of pipe that will meet the headwater requirements must be determined
after the invert elevations have been assumed, using the design computation forms (e.g.,
Figure CU-8), the capacity charts (e.g., Figure CU-7), and the nomographs.
(b) To help prevent plugging of small diameter pipes, the minimum allowable culvert
diameter is fifteen (15) inches for round pipe. The minimum inside dimension will be no
less than twelve (12) inches for elliptical and arch pipe. .
(2) A new Section 3.5.5 is added, to read as follows:
3.5.5 Culvert Materials
All culvert design and construction must comply with the same material and
construction requirements as those specified in Volume 1, Chapter 6, Section 4.5,
“Storm Sewer System Construction Standards”, of this Manual and with the approved
City Water Utilities Standard Construction Specifications.
(3) A new Section 8.3 is added, to read as follows:
8.3 Grate Specifications
(a) Where a structure presents a safety hazard such as when a siphon, a significant drop
in elevation adjacent to a sidewalk or road, a long pipe with one or more manholes, or at
pipes near playgrounds, parks and residential areas, a grate may be required. For most
culverts through embankments and crossing streets, grates will not be required. The grate
open area must be at least four times the open area of the pipe.
(b) When called for, grates must meet the following requirements:
1. Grating must be constructed of smooth steel bars with a minimum diameter of five
eighth of an inch. Reinforcing bars shall not be used.
2. Welded connections must be a quarter inch thick at the minimum.
3. Spacing between bars must normally be five (5) inch unless site conditions are
prohibitive.
4. All exposed steel must be galvanized in accordance with AASHTO M 111.
5. Welded joints must be galvanized with a rust preventive paint.
6. Grates must be secured to the headwall or end section by removable devices such as
bolts or hinges to allow maintenance access, prevent vandalism, and prohibit entrance
by children.
7. Locks for hinged grates will be provided by the City.
8. Trash racks must be set at angles that are no steeper than three to one (3:1 H:V).
(4) Photograph CU-6 is deleted in its entirety
56
(H) Volume 2, Chapter 10 - Storage:
(1) Section 3.1.1 is amended to read as follows:
3.1.1 Use of Simplified On-Site Detention Sizing Procedures
(a) There are two methodologies approved by the City for sizing detention storage
basins, the Rational Formula-based Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) procedure
and the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). The City is the determining authority
regarding the appropriate methodology to use under different circumstances. Early
contact with the City is encouraged for the timely determination of the appropriate
detention storage sizing methodology.
(b) In general, the Rational Formula-based FAA procedure may only be used in the
design of detention storage facilities with tributary areas that are less than five (5) acres
in size. The Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) must be used to model and size
stormwater detention storage facilities with tributary areas of twenty (20) acres or more.
Preliminary sizing of detention storage volume may be performed for site planning
purposes using the Rational Formula-based FAA procedure in conjunction with a twenty
(20) percent upward adjustment to account for the larger resulting storage volume that
would be obtained from SWMM modeling.
(c) For tributary areas between five and twenty (20) acres in size, either SWMM or the
Rational Formula-based FAA procedure may be used to calculate detention storage
volume. However, if the Rational Formula-based FAA procedure is chosen as the
preferred method, the resulting storage volume must be increased by a factor of twenty
(20) percent to better match the result that would be obtained from SWMM modeling.
(2) Section 3.1.2 is amended to read as follows:
3.1.2 Detention Pond Hydrograph Sizing Procedure
(a) Whenever the area limits described above in Section 3.1.1 are exceeded (for tributary
catchments larger than twenty acres for the FAA Procedure) the City requires the use of
hydrograph flood routing procedures (e.g., using SWMM reservoir routing calculations).
In addition, if there are upstream detention facilities in the watershed that catch and route
runoff for portions of the upstream tributary area, hydrograph routing methods must be
employed.
(b) If off-site tributary areas contribute runoff to an on-site detention storage facility, the
total tributary area at existing development rate must be accounted for in the design of the
storage facility by routing the flows generated by that off-site area around the proposed
storage facility or, by fully accounting for these flows in the design of the spillway
system for that storage facility.
(3) Section 3.1.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.1.3 Water Quality Capture Volume in Sizing Detention Storage
When detention storage volume is sized for a site that also incorporates a water quality
capture volume (WQCV) defined in Volume 3 of this Manual, the 100-year volume
required for quantity detention must be added to the entire WQCV. The WQCV must
also be added in its entirety to the required 5- or 10-year volume.
(4) Section 3.2.1 is deleted in its entirety.
57
(5) Section 3.2.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(6) Section 3.2.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.2.3 Rational Formula-Based Modified FAA Procedure
The Rational Formula-based Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (1966) detention
sizing method (sometimes referred to as the “FAA Procedure”), as modified by Guo
(1999a), provides a reasonable estimate of storage volume requirements for on-site
detention facilities. This method provides sizing for one level of peak control only and
not for multi-stage control facilities.
The input required for this Rational Formula-based FAA volume calculation procedure
includes:
A = area of the catchment tributary to the storage facility (acres)
C = runoff coefficient
Qpo = allowable maximum release rate from the detention facility
Tc = time of concentration for the tributary catchment (minutes) (see the Runoff chapter)
Pi = 2-hour design rainfall depth (inches) at the site taken from the Rainfall chapter for
the relevant return frequency storms
The calculations are best set up in a tabular (spreadsheet) form with each 5-minute
increment in duration being entered in rows and the following variables being entered, or
calculated, in each column:
1. Storm Duration Time, T (minutes), up to 180 minutes.
2. Rainfall Intensity, I (inches per hour).
3. Inflow volume, Vi (cubic feet), calculated as the cumulative volume at the given
storm duration using the equation:
Vi = CIA (60T) (SO-6)
4. Outflow adjustment factor m (Guo 1999a):
m = 1/2 (1+ Tc/T) 0.5 ≤ m ≤ 1 and T ≥ Tc (SO-7)
5. Calculated average outflow rate, Qav (cfs), over the duration T:
Qav v = m Qpo (SO-8)
6. Calculated outflow volume, Vo, (cubic feet), during the given duration and the
adjustment factor at that duration calculated using the equation:
Vo= Qav (60 T) (SO-9)
7. Required storage volume, Vs (cubic feet), calculated using the equation:
Vs = Vi – Vo (SO-10)
58
The value of Vs increases with time, reaches a maximum value, and then starts to
decrease. The maximum value of Vs is the required storage volume for the detention
facility. Sample calculations using this procedure are presented in Design Example 6.2.
The modified FAA Worksheet of the UD-Detention Spreadsheet performs these
calculations.
(7) Section 3.2.4 is deleted in its entirety.
(8) Section 3.2.5 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) Section 3.2.6 is deleted in its entirety.
(10) Section 3.2.7 is deleted in its entirety.
(11) Section 3.3.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.3.3 Spillway Sizing and Design
(a) The overflow spillway of a storage facility must be designed to pass flows in excess
of the design flow of the outlet works. When the storage facility falls under the
jurisdiction of the Colorado State Engineer’s Office (SEO), the spillway’s design storm is
prescribed by the SEO. If the storage facility is not a jurisdictional structure, the size of
the spillway design storm must be based upon analysis of the risk and consequences of a
facility failure. Generally, embankments should be fortified against and/or have spillways
that, at a minimum, are capable of conveying the total not-routed peak 100-year storm
discharge from a fully developed total tributary catchment, including all off-site areas, if
any. However, detailed analysis, of downstream hazards must be performed and may
indicate that the embankment protection and, or spillway design needs to be sized for
events much larger than the 100-year design storm.
(b) The detention pond spillway crest must be set at the 100-year water surface elevation
in the pond and the spillway shall be designed such that any spills shall be no more than
six (6) inches in depth at the crest during the 100-year storm. The detention pond top of
embankment shall be set at all points a minimum of one foot above the spillway crest
elevation.
(c) Emergency spillways must be protected from catastrophic erosion failure through the
use of bank protection procedures downhill from the spillway to the toe of slope. The
slope protection for spillway embankments shall be designed in accordance with all the
specifications set forth in Volume 1, Chapter 7, Major Drainage, Section 4.4.4.3, “Riprap
Specifications and Applicability”, of this Manual.
(d) A concrete cutoff wall eight inches in thickness, three feet deep, extending five feet
into the embankment beyond the spillway opening is required on private detention ponds
larger than one acre-foot in volume and are also required on all publicly-owned regional
detention ponds larger than that size. The emergency spillway crest elevation must be
tied back to the top of the pond embankment at a maximum slope of four to one.
(12) Section 3.3.4 is amended to read as follows:
3.3.4 Retention Facilities
(a) A retention facility (a basin with a zero release rate or a very slow release rate) is
used on a temporary basis when there is no available formal downstream drainageway, or
one that is grossly inadequate. When designing a retention facility, the hydrologic basis
of design is difficult to describe because of the stochastic nature of rainfall events. Thus,
59
sizing for a given set of assumptions does not ensure that another scenario produced by
nature (e.g., a series of small storms that add up to large volumes over a week or two)
will not overwhelm the intended design. For this reason, retention basins are not
permissible as a permanent solution for drainage problems. When used, they can become
a major nuisance due to problems that may include mosquito breeding, safety concerns,
odors, etc.
(b) When temporary use of a retention basin is proposed as a solution, the City requires
that it be sized to capture, at a minimum, the runoff equal to two times the two hour, 100-
year storm plus one foot of freeboard. The facility must be situated and designed so that
when it overtops, no human-occupied or critical structures (e.g., electrical vaults, homes,
etc.) will be flooded, and no catastrophic failure at the facility (e.g., loss of dam
embankment) will occur. It is also required that retention facilities be as shallow as
possible to encourage infiltration and other losses of the captured urban runoff. When a
trickle outflow can be accepted downstream or a small conduit can be built, it shall be
provided and sized in accordance with the locally approved release rates, and be
preferably capable of emptying the full volume in seventy-two (72) hours or less.
(c) All retention ponds must be built with a pump back-up system and with a concrete
hard surface at the bottom of the pond that is capable of evacuating the full volume in
seventy-two (72) hours or less.
(d) All retention ponds must be built and operated in accordance with all applicable State
and Federal laws and must respect all established water rights.
(13) Section 3.4 is amended to read as follows:
3.4 Reservoir Routing of Storm Hydrographs for Sizing of Storage Volumes
The reservoir routing procedure for the sizing of detention storage volumes is more
complex and time consuming than the use the FAA procedure. Its use requires the
designer to develop an inflow hydrograph for the facility. This is generally accomplished
using SWMM computer models as described in the RUNOFF chapter of this Manual.
The hydrograph routing sizing method is an iterative procedure that follows the steps
detailed below (Guo 1999b).
1. Select Location: The detention facility’s location must be based upon criteria
developed for the specific project. Regional storage facilities are normally placed where
they provide the greatest overall benefit. Multi-use objectives (e.g. use of the detention
facility as a park or for open space, preserving or providing wetlands and/or wildlife
habitat, or others uses and community needs) influence the location, geometry, and nature
of these facilities.
2. Determine Hydrology: Determine the inflow hydrograph to the storage basin and the
allowable peak discharge from the basin for the design storm events. The hydrograph
may be available in City’s published Master Drainage Plans or other basin-wide studies.
The allowable peak discharge is limited by the local criteria or by the requirements
spelled out in the City-approved Master Drainage Plan.
3. Initial Storage Volume Sizing: It is recommended that the initial size of the detention
storage volume be estimated using the modified FAA method described in Section 3.2.3
or the hydrograph volumetric method detailed in Section 3.4.1.
60
4. Initial Shaping of the Facility: The initial shape of the facility must be based upon site
constraints and other goals for its use discussed under item 1, above. This initial shaping
is needed to develop a stage-storage-discharge relationship for the facility. The design
spreadsheets of this Manual are useful for initial sizing.
5. Outlet Works Preliminary Design: The initial design of the outlet works entails
balancing the initial geometry of the facility against the allowable release rates and
available volumes for each stage of hydrologic control. This step requires the sizing of
outlet elements such as a perforated plate for controlling the releases of the WQCV,
orifices, weirs, outlet pipe, spillways, etc.
6. Preliminary Design: A preliminary design of the overall detention storage facility
must be completed using the results of steps 3, 4 and 5, above. The preliminary design
phase is an iterative procedure where the size and shape of the basin and the outlet works
are checked using a reservoir routing procedure and then modified as needed to meet the
design goals. The modified design is then checked again using the reservoir routing and
further modified if needed. Though termed “preliminary design,” the storage volume and
nature and sizes of the outlet works are essentially in final form after completing this
stage of the design. They may be modified, if necessary, during the final design phase.
7. Final Design: The final design phase of the storage facility is completed after the
hydraulic design has been finalized. This phase includes structural design of the outlet
structure, embankment design, site grading, a vegetation plan, accounting for public
safety, spillway sizing and assessment of dam safety issues, etc.
(14) Section 4.3 is amended to read as follows:
4.3 Geometry of Storage Facilities
(a) The geometry of a storage facility depends on specific site conditions such as
adjoining land uses, topography, geology, preserving or creating wildlife habitat, volume
requirements, etc. Several key features must be incorporated in all storage facilities
located within the City (see Figure SO-6). These include:
i. Four to one (4H : 1V) or flatter side slopes of all banks.
ii. Low-flow or trickle-flow channel unless a permanent pool takes its place or the pond
is designed to handle low flows through infiltration.
iii. Forebay.
iv. Pond bottom sloped at least one percent to drain toward the low-flow or trickle-flow
channel or the outlet.
v. Emergency spillway or fortification of the embankment to prevent catastrophic
failure when overtopped, spillway shall be designed to safely convey the 100-year
overtopping discharge for the entire area tributary to the storage facility.
vi. The micro pool surface elevation must be set at an elevation equal to the invert of
the pond which results in the value of DMP being set at 0 (DMP = 0) as shown in
Figure SO-6 of this Manual.
(b) For safety as well as maintenance considerations, the maximum allowable ponding
depth of water in a detention storage facility during the 100-year, 2-hour storm event is
ten (10) feet.
(c) Detention storage facilities must be located at least twenty (20) feet away from an
irrigation canal or ditch. Whenever a detention pond parallels a canal no more than
twenty percent (20%) of the detention pond perimeter can be parallel to the irrigation
canal.
61
(d) In ponds that contain a littoral zone, the littoral zone should be very flat (i.e. 40H:1V
or flatter) with the depth ranging from six (6) inches near the shore and extending to no
more than twelve (12) inches at the furthest point from the shore.
(e) For more detailed guidance regarding pond shaping and geometry please refer to the
document titled “Detention Pond Landscape Standards and Guidelines” dated November
2009 included as an addendum to this Manual.
(15) Section 4.8 is amended to read as follows:
4.8 Trash Racks
Trash racks must be of sufficient size such that they do not interfere with the hydraulic
capacity of the outlet. See Figure SO-7 for minimum trash rack sizes. Trash racks must
be designed in accordance with the specifications set forth in Volume 2, Chapter 9,
Culverts, Section 8.3, “Grate Specifications” and with the City’s Water Utilities
Development Construction Standards.
(16) Section 4.9 is amended to read as follows:
4.9 Landscaping
Detention storage facilities must be landscaped to provide a water quality benefit as well
as an aesthetically pleasing amenity. Landscaping should be accomplished with native
vegetation whenever possible to reduce the amount of irrigation required after
establishment. All detention ponds must be designed and constructed in accordance with
the “Detention Pond Landscaping Standards and Guidelines” dated November 2009
included as an addendum to this Manual.
(17) Section 4.10 is amended to read as follows:
4.10 Operation and Maintenance
The performance and reliability of detention storage facilities can be reduced by natural
and man-made debris, as well as natural and man-induced sedimentation. These can,
over a period of time, reduce the storage capacity of a detention basin and thereby reduce
the degree of flood protection provided. The obstruction of outflow conduits by debris
and sediment can reduce outlet capacity and cause the premature filling of the detention
basin with stormwater, again reducing the flood protection provided by the structure.
Consequently, adequate care must be exercised in design to provide for protection of the
outlet works from debris and for the control and regular removal of sedimentation in the
basin.
Maintenance requirements during design include the following:
1. Use of flat side slopes along the banks and the installation of landscaping (thick,
thorny shrubs) that will discourage entry along the periphery near the outlets and
steeper embankment sections are advisable. Use of a safety railing at vertical or
steeper than four to one structural faces is required to promote public safety. If
the impoundment is situated at a lower grade than, and adjacent to a highway,
installation of a guardrail is in order. Providing features to discourage public
access to the inlet and outlet areas of the facility must be considered.
2. The facility must be accessible to maintenance equipment for removal of silt and
debris and for repair of damages that may occur over time. Easements and/or
rights-of-way are required to allow access to the impoundment by the owner or
agency responsible for maintenance.
62
3. Bank slopes, bank protection needs, and vegetation types are important design
elements for site aesthetics and maintainability.
4. Permanent ponds must have provisions for complete drainage for sediment
removal or other maintenance. The frequency of sediment removal will vary
among facilities, depending on the original volume set aside for sediment, the
rate of accumulation, rate of growth of vegetation, drainage area erosion control
measures, and the desired aesthetic appearance of the pond.
5. For facilities designed for multipurpose use, especially those intended for active
recreation, the play area might need special consideration during design to
minimize the frequency and periods of inundation and wet conditions. It may be
advisable to provide an underground tile drainage system if active recreation is
contemplated.
6. Adequate dissolved oxygen supply in ponds (to minimize odors and other
nuisances) can be maintained by artificial aeration. Use of fertilizer and EPA
approved pesticides and herbicides adjacent to the permanent pool pond and
within the detention basin must comply with all State and Federal regulations.
7. Secondary uses that would be incompatible with sediment deposits should not be
planned unless a high level of maintenance will be provided.
8. French drains or the equivalent are almost impossible to maintain, and should be
used with discretion where sediment loads are apt to be high.
9. Underground tanks or conduits designed for detention should be sized and
designed to permit pumping or multiple entrance points to remove accumulated
sediment and trash.
10. All detention facilities should be designed with sufficient depth to allow
accumulation of sediment for several years prior to its removal.
11. Permanent pools should be of sufficient depth to discourage excessive aquatic
vegetation on the bottom of the basin, unless specifically provided for water
quality purposes.
12. Often designers use trash racks and/or fences to minimize hazards. These may
become trap debris, impede flows, hinder maintenance, and, consequently, fail to
prevent access to the outlet. On the other hand, desirable conditions can be
achieved through careful design and positioning of the structure, as well as
through landscaping that will discourage access (e.g., positioning the outlet away
from the embankment when the permanent pool is present, etc.). Creative
designs, integrated with innovative landscaping, can be safe and can also enhance
the appearance of the outlet and pond. Such designs often are less expensive
initially.
13. To reduce maintenance and avoid operational problems, outlet structures should
be designed with no moving parts (i.e., use only pipes, orifices, and weirs).
Manually and/or electrically operated gates should be avoided. To reduce
maintenance, outlets should be designed with openings as large as possible,
compatible with the depth-discharge relationships desired and with water quality,
safety, and aesthetic objectives in mind. One way of doing this is to use a larger
outlet pipe and to construct orifice(s) in the headwall to reduce outflow rates.
Outlets should be robustly designed to lessen the chances of damage from debris
or vandalism. Avoid the use of thin steel plates as sharp-crested weirs to help
prevent potential accidents, especially with children. Trash/safety racks must
protect all outlets.
14. Clean out all forebays and sediment traps on a regular basis or when routine
inspection shows them to be a quarter to half full.
63
15. For all landscaped storage facilities the minimum amount of biodegradable,
nontoxic fertilizers and herbicides needed shall be used to maintain the facility.
All landscape debris must be collected and disposed of off-site.
16. All detention facilities must be designed to minimize required maintenance and
to allow access by equipment and workers to perform maintenance. The City will
generally maintain regional facilities and facilities on public lands. Maintenance
responsibility for facilities located on private land shall be the responsibility of
the property owner.
17. The entire detention basin including all appurtenances necessary for the operation
and maintenance of the detention facility and the area within the required
freeboard for the detention storage must be within a dedicated drainage easement.
18. All detention ponds with a water ponding depth of over four (4) feet must have a
water depth gauge. The depth gauge must be referenced to the deepest point in
the pond. The numbers on the gauge shall be visible from the detention pond
access point or the nearest street.
See Volume 3 of this Manual for additional requirements regarding operation and
maintenance of water quality-related facilities, some of which also apply to detention
facilities designed to meet other objectives.
(18) Section 4.11 is amended to read as follows:
4.11 Access
(a) An all-weather stable maintenance access must be provided to the bottom of
detention ponds. The surface of this maintenance access shall constitute a solid driving
surface of gravel, rock, concrete, or gravel-stabilized turf and should allow maintenance
access to the inflow forebay, and the outlet works areas. Maximum grades for equipment
access shall be no steeper than ten percent. For ponds less than one acre-foot in volume,
access may be allowed from an adjacent drivable surface that is not within the detention
pond area as long as equipment can safely reach and maintain all of the facility’s features
and appurtenances.
(b) When detention storage facilities abut private property, it is the responsibility of the
parties involved to develop and implement a policy regarding fencing and safety.
(19) A new Section 4.14 is added, to read as follows:
4.14 Trickle Channels in Storage Facilities
(a) Measures must be taken to control standing water and to control nuisance flows.
Detention basin bottoms are recommended to have a minimum cross slope (measured
perpendicular to the trickle channel) of two percent for grassed surfaces and one percent
for pavement surfaces where possible. For cross slopes less than these please refer to the
detailed guidance provided regarding the appropriateness of the use of trickle channels in
the addendum to this Manual titled “Detention Pond Landscape Standards and
Guidelines” dated November 2009.
(b) Whenever trickle channels are called for these must be designed to carry
approximately one percent of the 100-year design flow with a minimum longitudinal
slope of half a percent.
64
(20) A new Section 4.15 is added, to read as follows:
4.15 Detention Ponds in Parking Areas
(a) The maximum permissible detention pond depth within parking areas is twelve (12)
inches.
(b) For commercial properties an exception may be granted by the Utilities Executive
Director or his designee for ponding depths of up to eighteen (18) inches, if the
percentage of spaces with ponding depths of greater than twelve (12) inches is less than
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total parking spaces provided.
(c) In all circumstances, one foot of freeboard must be provided between the high water
elevation and the minimum opening elevations of adjacent buildings.
(d) If a water quality detention is included in a parking lot detention pond, the water
quality portion of the total detention volume must be located in vegetated areas not on
pavement.
(21) A new Section 4.16 added, to read as follows:
4.16 Underground Detention
The use of underground detention is generally discouraged. Underground BMPs should
not be considered for detention storage when surface-based systems are practicable. For
most areas of new urban development or significant redevelopment, it is feasible and
desirable to provide the required storage on the surface. The responsible party must
demonstrate that surface-based detention or other BMPs have been thoroughly evaluated
and found to be infeasible before an underground system is proposed. In the event where
an underground storage system is proposed, a written request for approval of such a
system must be submitted by the Owner describing the system in detailing. The Utilities
Executive Director may approval such a system upon a determination that the
requirements of this provision have been met and that no adverse impacts are expected to
result from the proposed system. For any underground detention, runoff must flow
through a pre-treatment facility before it enters the underground detention facility. A
standard operating procedures manual must be submitted and approved by the City for all
underground facilities. A final copy of the approved standard operating procedures
manual must be provided to City and must be maintained on-site by the entity responsible
for the facility maintenance. Annual reports must also be prepared and submitted to the
City discussing the results of the maintenance program (i.e. inspection dates, inspection
frequency, volume loss due to sedimentation, corrective actions taken, etc.).
(22) A new Section 4.16 is added, to read as follows:
4.17 Rooftop Detention
The use of rooftop detention is prohibited.
(23) A new Section 4.18 is added, to read as follows:
4.18 On-Stream Storage Facilities
The use of on-stream detention is strongly discouraged. Off-stream detention is the
preferred detention storage method in the City. On-stream detention locates the detention
facility on a drainageway that collects runoff from the upstream watershed and flows
through the proposed development site. The on-stream facility will treat runoff from the
proposed development site and runoff generated further upstream from off-site areas. An
off-stream storage facility collects and treats runoff from the proposed development site
65
before entering the drainageway. Off-site flow is conveyed by the drainageway through
the proposed development site without treatment.
(24) A new Section 4.19 is added, to read as follows:
4.19 Spill Control for Gas Stations and Vehicle Maintenance Facilities
Spill control structures are required for all new and redeveloping gas stations and vehicle
maintenance facilities. In addition to emergency spill response procedures, such as the
use of absorbent booms, structural spill controls must be used to protect creeks and
tributaries from petroleum products and other pollutants that are stored and handled at
gas stations and vehicle maintenance facilities. The spill control structure must have a
minimum capacity of 150 gallons.
(25) Section 5.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(26) Section 6.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(27) Table SO-1 is deleted in its entirety.
(28) Figure SO-8 is deleted in its entirety.
66
(I) Volume 2, Chapter 12 - Revegetation:
(1) A new Section 3.1.1 is added, to read as follows:
3.1.1 Cattail Plantings
Cattail plantings are generally not recommended for use as wetland plantings in the city
of Fort Collins. These may be allowed as part of an overall wetlands mitigation plan,
when they are part of a more diversified ecological system upon review and approval by
the City.
(2) Section 3.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.3 Seeding and Planting
(a) Seed mixtures must be sown at the proper time of year specified for
the mixture.
(b) Recommended seeding rates specified as “pounds pure live seed per
acre” (lbs PLS/acre) should be used.
(c) Seed should be drill seeded, whenever possible.
(d) Broadcast seeding or hydro-seeding may be substituted on slopes
steeper than 3(H):1(V) or on other areas not practical to drill seed.
(e) Seeding rates must be doubled for broadcast seeding or increased by
50% if using a Brillion drill or hydro-seeding.
(f) Broadcast seed must be lightly hand raked into the soil.
(g) Seed depth must be ⅓ to ½ inch for most mixtures.
(h) All seeded areas must be mulched, and the mulch should be adequately crimped and
or tackified.
(i) If hydro-seeding is conducted, mulching must be conducted as a separate, second
operation.
(j) All containerized nursery stock must be kept in a live and healthy condition prior to
installation.
(k) Containerized trees and shrubs must be installed according to the planting details
provided in Section 4.4 of this chapter.
(l) Live stakes, poles and willow bundles must be installed when dormant (late winter
and early spring) according to the planting details in Section 4.7.
(m) Beaver protection must be provided for trees and shrubs for species known to be
attractive to beavers if beavers are known to be in the area (see Figure RV-6).
(3) Section 3.3 is amended to read as follows:
3.4 Maintenance
(a) Sites must be routinely inspected following planting to implement
follow-up measures to increase success. Immediate attention to a
problem (e.g., weed infestation, failure of seed to germinate) can
prevent total failure later.
67
(b) Areas that have been planted or seeded must be monitored at least
one spring and one fall season to ensure that physical evidence
growth has been adequately established. Physical evidence of
growth shall include no more than 6 inches of bare spots and a
minimum of seventy percent of vegetative cover over the entire
seeded or planted area. If these minimums are not attained after one
fall and one spring season, planted areas shall be re-seeded
appropriately as soon as practical.
(c) Access to and grazing on recently re-vegetated areas should be
limited with temporary fencing and signage while plants are
becoming established (normally the first year).
(d) Weed infestations should be managed using appropriate physical,
chemical, or biological methods as soon as possible. See Vol. 2, Ch.
12, Sec. 6.0, “References” for more detail on weed management
options.)
(e) Stakes and guy wires for trees should be maintained and dead or
damaged growth should be pruned.
(f) Beaver protection cages should be used around tree plantings.
(g) Mulch should be maintained by adding additional mulch and
redistributing mulch, as necessary.
(h) Areas of excessive erosion should be repaired and stabilized.
(i) Planted trees and shrubs should be watered monthly or as needed
from April through September until established.
(4) Section 4.2 is amended to read as follows:
4.2 Soil Amendments
Soil amendments must comply with all requirements set forth in sections 12-130, 12-131
and 12-132 of the City Code as well as Section 3.8.21 of the City Land Use Code or other
related provisions.
When soil is amended the following provisions must be complied with:
(a) The soil in such areas must be thoroughly loosened to a depth of not less than eight
(8) inches.
(b) Soil amendments must be thoroughly incorporated into the soil of such areas to a
depth of at least six (6) inches by tilling, disking or other suitable method, at a rate of
at least three (3) cubic yards of soil amendment per one thousand (1,000) square feet
of area to be planted, unless at least four (4) inches of loose top soil has been placed
on the area after completion of construction activity on top of not less than four (4)
inches of loosened sub grade soils.
(5) Section 4.5 is amended to read as follows:
4.5 Mulching
All planted areas must be mulched within twenty-four (24) hours after planting. Mulch
conserves water and reduces erosion. The most common type of mulch used is hay or
grass that is crimped into the soil to hold it. However, crimping may not be practical on
slopes steeper than three to one (3H: 1V).
68
The following guidelines must be followed when mulching:
(a) Only weed-free and seed-free straw mulch may be used (grass hay often contains
weedy exotic species). Mulch should be applied at two (2) tons per acre and
adequately secured by crimping, tackifier, netting, or blankets.
(b) Crimping is appropriate on slopes of three to one (3H : 1V) or flatter and must be
done so as to tuck mulch fibers into the soil three to four inches deep.
(c) Tackifier or netting and blankets anchored with staples must be used on slopes
steeper than three to one (3H : 1V)
(d) Hydraulic mulching may also be used on steep slopes or where access is limited. In
these circumstances, wood cellulose fibers mixed with water at two thousands to two
thousands five hundreds to pounds per acre and organic tackifier at one hundred
(100) pounds per acre to four hundred (400) pounds per acre, depending on slope,
must be applied with a hydraulic mulcher.
(e) Wood chip mulch must be applied to planted trees and shrubs, as shown in Figures
RV-2 and RV-3.
Additional details on mulching can be found in Volume 3 of this Manual.
(6) Table RV-1 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(7) Table RV-2 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(8) Table RV-3 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(9) Table RV-4 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(10) Table RV-5 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(11) Table RV-6 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to wildflowers are deleted.
(12) Table RV-7 is deleted in its entirety.
(13) A new Section 5.1 is added, to read as follows:
5.1 Land Disturbing Activity and Security
(a) No land disturbing activity subject to this Stormwater Criteria Manual is
permitted to commence until an Erosion Control Plan has been approved
by the City and the responsible party has provided security designated to
ensure the rehabilitation of the disturbed land. Land disturbing activity
refers to any activity that results in a change in the existing soil cover
(both vegetative and non-vegetative) and/or the existing soil topography
including but not limited to, clearing, grading, excavation, demolition,
installation of new or improved haul roads and access roads, staging
69
areas, stockpiling of fill materials, and borrow areas. It does not include
routine maintenance to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic
capacity, or original purpose of the facility. A performance bond,
irrevocable letter of credit, or cash escrow, acceptable to the Utilities
Executive Director, and naming the City as the protected party, is
required. Such performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or cash
escrow shall further guarantee the continued maintenance and
replacement of any installed erosion control measures shown on the
approved plan.
(b) The amount of the security must be based on one and one-half times the
estimate of the cost to install the approved measures, or one and one-half
times the cost to re-vegetate the disturbed land to dry land grasses based
upon unit cost determined by the City's Annual Revegetation and
Stabilization Bid, whichever is greater. In no instance, will the amount of
security be less than one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) for
residential development or three thousand dollars ($3,000) for
commercial development.
(c) If the requirements of an approved Erosion Control Plan are not be
complied with, the City may apply such portion of the security deposit(s)
as may be necessary to pay all costs incurred by the City in undertaking
the administration, construction, and, or the installation of the erosion
control measures required by any plan and these criteria. In addition, the
City shall have the option to pursue any other legal remedy available to it
under any development agreement or as it deems necessary in order to
ensure that the required erosion control measures are implemented.
(d) In the event that the City exercises its rights under the security or pursues
any other legal remedy, the City is not thereafter obligated to routinely
administer the construction of the measures shown on the Erosion Control
or SWMP Plan. However, the City reserves the right to enter upon the
land and take whatever actions are necessary to stabilize and re-vegetate
all disturbed areas, or to have the plan constructed and to make repairs as
necessary.
(e) Upon acceptance by the City of the initial installation of all erosion
control and sediment transport measures, the security may, at the request
of the owner, be reduced to twenty-five percent (25%) of the original
amount. This remaining amount will be retained by the City until erosion
control and sediment transport measures on the project are no longer
necessary (when all permanent erosion control measures are complete
and/or all required re-vegetation measures installed and established
through two growing seasons). If the City determines after completion of
the Close-Out Inspection as defined in Section 6.12, Volume 1, Chapter 1,
that the responsible party has met all of the applicable requirements and
the security will be released.
(14) A new Section 5.2 is added, to read as follows:
5.2 Warranty
(a) The responsible party must warrant that the measures shown on the approved
Erosion Control Plan are properly constructed, installed, and are free from
defective materials and/or workmanship, with said warranty to continue for
the terms set forth below.
70
(b) The responsible party must warrant and maintain all vegetative measures for
two growing seasons after installation or until seventy percent (70%)
vegetative cover has been established. Any acceptance of installed measures
shall not be construed to relieve the responsible party of the duty to warrant
and maintain the installed vegetative measures as aforesaid.
71
(J) Volume 3, Chapter 2 - BMP Selection:
(1) Section 1.1 is amended to read as follows:
1.1 Physical Site Characteristics
The first step in BMP selection is identification of physical characteristics of a site including
topography, soils, contributing drainage area, groundwater, base flows, wetlands, existing
drainageways, and development conditions in the tributary watershed (e.g., construction activity).
A fundamental concept of Low Impact Development (“LID”) is preservation and protection of
site features including wetlands, drainageways, soils that are conducive to infiltration, tree
canopy, etc., that provide water quality and other benefits. LID stormwater treatment systems are
also designed to take advantage of these natural resources. For example, if a portion of a site is
known to have soils with high permeability, this area may be well-suited for rain gardens or
permeable pavement. Areas of existing wetlands, which would be difficult to develop from a
Section 404 permitting perspective, could be considered for polishing of runoff following BMP
treatment, providing additional water quality treatment for the site, while at the same time
enhancing the existing wetlands with additional water supply in the form of treated runoff. Some
physical site characteristics that provide opportunities for BMPs or constrain BMP selection
include:
(a) Soils: Soils with good permeability, most typically associated with Hydrologic Soil
Groups (“HSGs”) A and B provide opportunities for infiltration of runoff and are well-
suited for infiltration-based BMPs such as rain gardens, permeable pavement systems,
sand filter, grass swales, and buffers, often without the need for an underdrain system.
Even when soil permeability is low, these types of BMPs may be feasible if soils are
amended to increase permeability or if an underdrain system is used. In some cases,
however, soils restrict the use of infiltration based BMPs. When soils with moderate to
high swell potential are present, infiltration should be avoided to minimize damage to
adjacent structures due to water-induced swelling. In some cases, infiltration based
designs can still be used if an impermeable liner and underdrain system are included in
the design; however, when the risk of damage to adjacent infrastructure is high,
infiltration based BMPs may not be appropriate. In all cases, consult with a geotechnical
engineer when designing infiltration BMPs near structures. Consultation with a
geotechnical engineer is necessary for evaluating the suitability of soils for different BMP
types and establishing minimum distances between infiltration BMPs and structures.
(b) Watershed Size: The contributing drainage area is an important consideration both on
the site level and at the regional level. On the site level, there is a practical minimum size
for certain BMPs, largely related to the ability to drain the WQCV over the required drain
time. For example, it is technically possible to size the WQCV for an extended detention
basin for a half-acre site; however, designing a functional outlet to release the WQCV
over a 40-hour drain time is practically impossible due to the very small orifices that
would be required. For this size watershed, a filtering BMP, such as a rain garden, would
be more appropriate. At the other end of the spectrum, there must be a limit on the
maximum drainage area for a regional facility to assure adequate treatment of rainfall
events that may produce runoff from only a portion of the area draining to the BMP. If
the overall drainage area is too large, events that produce runoff from only a portion of
the contributing area will pass through the BMP outlet (sized for the full drainage area)
without adequate residence time in the BMP. As a practical limit, the maximum drainage
area contributing to a water quality facility should be no larger than one square mile.
For treatment facilities serving tributary areas that are larger than one (1) acre in size, an
extended water quality detention basin is the preferred and recommended water quality
treatment device.
72
(c) Groundwater: Shallow groundwater on a site presents challenges for BMPs that rely
on infiltration and for BMPs that are intended to be dry between storm events. Shallow
groundwater may limit the ability to infiltrate runoff or result in unwanted groundwater
storage in areas intended for storage of the WQCV (e.g., porous sub-base of a permeable
pavement system or in the bottom of an otherwise dry facility such as an extended
detention basin). Conversely, for some types of BMPs such as wetland channels or
constructed wetland basins, groundwater can be beneficial by providing saturation of the
root zone and/or a source of baseflow. Groundwater quality protection is an issue that
should be considered for infiltration-based BMPs. Infiltration BMPs may not be
appropriate for land uses that involve storage or use of materials that have the potential to
contaminate groundwater underlying a site (i.e., "hot spot" runoff from fueling stations,
materials storage areas, etc.). If groundwater or soil contamination exists on a site and it
will not be remediated or removed as a part of construction, separation from the
groundwater must be provided. As an example, it may be necessary to use a durable liner
to prevent infiltration into contaminated areas.
(d) Base Flows: Base flows are necessary for the success of some BMPs such as
constructed wetlands ponds, retention ponds and wetland channels. Without base flows,
these BMPs will become dry and unable to support wetland vegetation. For these BMPs,
a hydrologic budget should be evaluated. Generally, water rights are also required for
these types of BMPs in Colorado. Constructed wetland ponds are allowed provided
adequate documentation is submitted to establish the presence of a sufficient and
sustained flow of water to support the proposed vegetation in the planned constructed
wetlands. Hydrologic documentation must be supplied to the City during the initial
planning phase. The City must also receive adequate documentation to establish that the
responsible party has secured the required water rights to sustain the proposed
constructed wetlands ponds. The City is the final determining authority regarding
whether the amount of water flow is deemed sufficient to support the wetlands. For some
BMPs such as sand filters, base flows are not desirable since they may lead to bio-fouling
and failure. If base flows are present, care should be taken to treat the runoff with an
appropriate type of BMP that can better handle such conditions.
(e) Watershed Development Activities (or otherwise erosive conditions): When
development in the watershed is phased or when erosive conditions such as steep slopes,
sparse vegetation, and sandy soils exist in the watershed, a treatment train approach may
be appropriate. BMPs that utilize filtration should follow other measures to collect
sediment loads (e.g., a forebay). For phased developments, these measures must be in
place until the watershed is completely stabilized. When naturally erosive conditions
exist in the watershed, these measures should be permanent. The designer should
consider existing, interim and future conditions to select the most appropriate BMPs.
(2) Section 1.9 is amended to read as follows:
1.9 Integration with Flood Control
In addition to water quality, most projects will require detention for flood control, whether on-
site, or in a sub-regional or regional facility. In many cases, it is efficient to combine facilities
since the land requirements for a combined facility are lower than those for two separate
facilities. Wherever possible, it is recommended WQCV facilities be incorporated into flood
control detention facilities
The City requires the following approach be followed, as applicable:
73
(a) Water Quality: The full WQCV is to be provided according to the design procedures
documented in this Manual for water quality facilities.
(b) Minor Storm: The full WQCV, plus the full minor storm detention volume, is to be
provided for facilities designed for flows associated with minor storm events.
(c) 100-Year Storm: The full WQCV plus the full 100-year storm event volume must be
provided for volumes obtained using the FAA Method or any hydrograph routing
methods including SWMM for facilities designed for flows associated with 100-year
storm events. When the analysis is done using hydrograph routing methods, each level of
control needs to be accounted for and the resultant 100-year flood control volume in
addition to the full WQCV should be used in final design.
Finally, designers should also be aware that water quality BMPs, especially those that promote
infiltration, could result in volume reductions for flood storage. These volume reductions are
most pronounced for frequently occurring events, but even in the major event, some reduction in
detention storage volume can be achieved if volume-reduction BMPs are widely used on a site.
Additional discussion on volume reduction benefits, including a methodology for quantifying
their effects on detention storage volumes, is provided in Volume 3, Chapter 3 of this Manual,
“Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction”.
1.9.1 Sedimentation BMPs
Combination outlets are relatively straightforward for most BMPs in this Manual. For
BMPs that utilize sedimentation (e.g. EDBs, constructed wetland ponds, and retention
ponds) see BMP Fact Sheet T-12. This Fact Sheet shows examples and details for
combined quality and quantity outlet structures.
1.9.2 Infiltration/Filtration BMPs
For other types of BMPs (e.g. rain gardens, sand filters, permeable pavement systems,
and other BMPs utilizing processes other than sedimentation), design of a combination
outlet structure generally consists of multiple orifices to provide controlled release of
WQCV as well as the minor and major storm event. Incorporation of full spectrum
detention into these structures requires reservoir routing. The UD-Detention worksheet
available at www.udfcd.org can be used for this design. When incorporating flood control
into permeable pavement systems, the design can be simplified when a near 0% slope on
the pavement surface can be achieved. The flatter the pavement the fewer structures
required. This includes lateral barriers as well as outlet controls since each pavement cell
typically requires its own outlet structure. When incorporating flood control into a rain
garden, the flood control volume can be placed on top of or downstream of the rain
garden. Locating the flood control volume downstream can reduce the total depth of the
rain garden, which will result in a more attractive BMP, and also benefit the vegetation in
the flood control area because inundation and associated sedimentation will be less
frequent, limited to events exceeding the WQCV.
74
(3) Section 1.10 is amended to read as follows:
1.10 Land Use, Compatibility with Surroundings, and Safety
Stormwater quality areas can add interest and diversity to a site, serving a multitude of purposes
in addition to providing water quality functions. Gardens, plazas, rooftops, and even parking lots
can become amenities and provide visual interest while performing stormwater quality functions
and reinforcing urban design goals for the neighborhood and community. The integration of
BMPs and associated landforms, walls, landscape, and materials can reflect the standards and
patterns of a neighborhood and help to create lively, safe, and pedestrian-oriented districts. The
quality and appearance of stormwater quality facilities should reflect the surrounding land use
type, the immediate context, and the proximity of the site to important civic spaces. Aesthetics
will be a more critical factor in highly visible urban commercial and office areas than at a heavy
industrial site. The standard of design and construction should maintain and enhance property
values without compromising function. Public access to BMPs should be considered from a
safety perspective. The highest priority of the City is to protect public health, safety, and welfare
of the citizens of Fort Collins. Stormwater quality facilities must be designed and maintained in a
manner that does not pose health or safety hazards to the public. As an example, steeply sloped
and/or walled ponds should be avoided. Where this is not possible, emergency egress, lighting
and other safety considerations should be incorporated. Facilities should be designed to reduce
the likelihood and extent of shallow standing water that can result in mosquito breeding, which
can be a nuisance and a public health concern (e.g., West Nile virus). The potential for nuisances,
odors and prolonged soggy conditions should be evaluated for BMPs, especially in areas with
high pedestrian traffic or visibility.
75
(K) Volume 3, Chapter-3 - Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction:
(1) Section 1.0 is amended to read as follows:
1.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the hydrologic basis and calculations for the Water Quality Capture Volume
(“WQCV”) and discusses the benefits of attenuating this volume. This chapter also describes
various methods for quantifying volume reduction when using LID practices. Use of these
methods should begin during the planning phase for preliminary sizing and development of the
site layout. The calculations and procedures in this chapter allow the engineer to determine
effective impervious area, calculate the WQCV, and more accurately quantify potential volume
reduction benefits of BMPs.
(2) Section 2.4 is deleted in its entirety.
(3) Section 4.2 is amended to read as follows:
4.2 Watershed-Level Volume Reduction MethodFor a given value of total
imperviousness, and depending on overall site imperviousness and typical development patterns
there are two levels of LID implementation:
(a) Level 1: The primary intent is to direct the runoff from impervious surfaces to flow
over grass-covered areas and/or permeable pavement, and to provide sufficient travel
time to facilitate the removal of suspended solids before runoff leaves the site, enters a
curb and gutter system, or enters another stormwater collection system. Thus, at Level 1,
to the extent practical, impervious surfaces are designed to drain over grass buffer strips
or other pervious surfaces before reaching a stormwater conveyance system.
(b) Level 2: As an enhancement to Level 1, Level 2 replaces solid street curb and gutter
systems with no curb or slotted curbing, low-velocity grass-lined swales and pervious
street shoulders, including pervious rock-lined swales. Conveyance systems and storm
sewer inlets will still be needed to collect runoff at downstream intersections and
crossings where stormwater flow rates exceed the capacity of the swales. Small culverts
will be needed at street crossings and at individual driveways until inlets are provided to
convey the flow to storm sewer. The primary difference between Levels 1 and 2 is that
for Level 2, a pervious conveyance system (i.e., swales) is provided rather than storm
sewer. Disconnection of roof drains and other lot-level impervious areas is essentially the
same for both Levels 1 and 2.
Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8 can be used to estimate effective imperviousness for Level 1
and Level 2. Because rainfall intensity varies with return interval, the effective
imperviousness also varies, as demonstrated by the separate curves for the 2-, 10- and
100-year return intervals (see Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8). The effective imperviousness
determined from Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8 can be used as input for calculation of the
WQCV, as the basis for looking up runoff coefficients based on imperviousness in the
Runoff chapter in Volume 1. Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8 are intended for use at the
planning level when specifics of the development patterns are not yet well established.
It is notable that the reductions in effective imperviousness shown in Figure 3-7 and
Figure 3-8 are relatively modest, ranging from little to no benefit for large events up to
approximately 12% for Level 2 for a total imperviousness of roughly 50% (reduced to
about 38% for the 2-year event)., When site-specific disconnected areas, receiving
pervious areas, flow paths, and other design details are available, the site-level methods
76
in Section 4.3 can be used to better quantify volume reduction, and results will typically
show greater reductions in effective imperviousness for aggressive LID implementation.
Even so, it is unlikely that conveyance-based BMPs alone will provide adequate pollutant
removal and volume reduction for most project sites, and a storage-based BMP (i.e.,
WQCV) will also be required.
(4) Section 4.3.1 is amended to read as follows:
4.3.1 SWMM Modeling Using Cascading Planes
Because of complexities of modeling LID and other BMPs using SWMM, the cascading
planes alternative for site-level volume reduction analysis is recommended only for
experienced users. The following guidance for conveyance- and storage-based modeling
must be followed:
(a) Each sub-watershed should be conceptualized as shown in Figure 3-6. Two
approaches can be used in SWMM to achieve this:
Create two SWMM sub-catchments for each sub-watershed, one with UIA
100% routed to RPA and the other with DCIA and SPA independently routed
to the outlet, or
Use a single SWMM sub-catchment to represent the sub-watershed and use
the SWMM internal routing option to differentiate between DCIA and UIA.
This option should only be used when a large portion of the pervious area on
a site is RPA and there is very little SPA since the internal routing does not
have the ability to differentiate between SPA and RPA (i.e., the UIA is
routed to the entire pervious area, potentially overestimating infiltration
losses).
(b) Once the sub-watershed is set up to represent UIA, DCIA, RPA and SPA in SWMM,
the rainfall distribution should be directly input to SWMM.
(c) Parameters for infiltration, depression storage and other input parameters must be
selected in accordance with the guidance in the Runoff Chapter ,Volume 1 - Chapter 5, of
this Manual.
(d) For storage-based BMPs, there are two options for representing the WQCV:
i. The pervious area depression storage value for the RPA can be increased to
represent the WQCV. This approach is generally applicable to storage-based BMPs
that promote infiltration such as rain gardens, permeable pavement systems with
storage or sand filters. This adjustment should not be used when a storage-based
BMP has a well-defined outlet and a stage-storage-discharge relationship that can
be entered into SWMM.
ii. The WQCV can be modeled as a storage unit with an outlet in SWMM. This
option is preferred for storage-based BMPs with well defined stage-storage-
discharge relationships such as extended detention basins.
These guidelines are applicable for EPA SWMM Version 5.0.018 and earlier versions
going back to EPA SWMM Version 5.0. EPA is currently developing a version of EPA
SWMM with enhanced LID modeling capabilities. This Manual will be updated as
newer SWMM modeling capabilities are developed and adopted.
(5) Section 4.4 is deleted in its entirety.
77
(L) Volume 3, Chapter 4- Treatment BMPs:
(1) Fact Sheet T-5 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Excess Urban Runoff Volume or (EURV)” and “Full Spectrum Detention” are
deleted.
(2) Figure EDB-3 is adopted with the following modification:
“Micropool” Depth = 0
(3) Table EDB-4 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Micropools” are deleted.
(4) Fact Sheet T-7 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Retention Pond” are replaced with the term “Wet Pond”.
(5) Fact Sheet T-11 is amended to read in its entirety as follows:
Description
Underground stormwater BMPs include proprietary and non-proprietary devices installed
below ground that provide stormwater quality treatment via sedimentation, screening,
filtration, hydrodynamic separation, and other physical and chemical processes.
Conceptually, underground BMPs can be categorized based on their fundamental
treatment approach and dominant unit processes. Some underground BMPs combine
multiple unit processes to act as a treatment train.
Historically, underground stormwater quality treatment devices have not been
recommended based on City policies and criteria. This is due to several factors including
problems with unmaintained or poorly maintained devices, remobilization by wash-out
(scour) of accumulated pollutants during larger events, lack of performance data for
underground devices in the region, and other issues discussed in this Fact Sheet. While
underground flood-control detention is still discouraged, this section provides criteria for
determining when the use of underground BMPs may be considered for water quality.
When surface BMPs are found to be infeasible, underground BMPs may be the only
available strategy for satisfying regulatory water quality requirements, especially in
highly built-up urban areas where water quality measures must be implemented as a part
of a retrofit to meet regulatory requirements.
Underground BMPs should not be considered for standalone treatment when
surface-based BMPs are practicable. For most areas of new urban development or
significant redevelopment, it is feasible and desirable to provide the required WQCV on
the surface. It is incumbent on the design engineer to demonstrate that surface-based
BMPs such as permeable pavements, rain gardens, extended detention basins and others
have been thoroughly evaluated and found to be infeasible before an underground system
is proposed. Surface-based BMPs provide numerous environmental benefits including
infiltration, evapotranspiration, groundwater recharge, aquatic habitat, mitigation of "heat
island effect", and other benefits associated with vegetation for those that are planted.
Additionally surface-based BMPs are much easier to monitor and maintain.
78
Site Selection
The most common sites for underground BMPs are "ultra urban" environments with
significant space constraints. These could include downtown lot-line-to-lot-line
development projects, transportation corridors, or small (less than 0.5 acre)
redevelopment sites in urban areas. Important site features that must be considered
include the following:
Depth to Groundwater: Due to the potentially large displacement caused by an
underground vault, if there is seasonally high groundwater, buoyancy can be a problem.
Vaults can be sealed to prevent infiltration of groundwater into the underground system
and these systems can be anchored to resist uplift. If seasonally high groundwater is
expected near the bottom of an underground system, the engineer should evaluate the
potential for infiltration of groundwater and uplift forces and adjust the design
accordingly.
Proximity to Public Spaces: As material accumulates in an underground system, there is
potential for anoxic conditions and associated odor problems.
Gravity versus Pumped Discharge: The ability to drain to the receiving storm drainage
system via gravity is an important consideration. In the city of Fort Collins a gravity
outfall system is required for all underground BMPs.
Access: Equipment must be able to access all portions of the underground BMP, typically
at multiple locations, to perform maintenance. As the size of the underground system
increases, so must the number of access points.
Traffic Loading: Due to space constraints, in some situations, underground BMPs may
be located in a right-of-way or other location where there may be traffic loadings. Many
underground BMPs are or can be constructed for HS-20 traffic loading. Take additional
measures when necessary to ensure that the BMP is designed for the anticipated loading.
Potential for Flooding of Adjacent Structures or Property: For underground BMPs, it
is important that the hydraulic grade line be analyzed to evaluate the potential for
backwater in the storm sewer system. In addition, some types of underground BMPs,
such as catch basin inserts, have the potential to clog and cause flooding if not frequently
maintained.
Designing for Maintenance
All underground BMPs must be sized so that routine maintenance is not required more
than once per year. The only exception to this is inlet inserts which may need to be
cleaned as frequently as following each runoff producing event. Because underground
BMPs are generally less visible and more difficult to access than surface-based
BMPs, regular maintenance and early detection of performance issues can be a
challenge.
When developing a design for an underground BMP, the engineer should ensure that all
portions of the underground facility can be accessed with maintenance equipment. For
multi-chambered systems, access should be provided to each chamber, and openings
should be of sufficient size to accommodate the equipment recommended by the
manufacturer or designer for maintenance.
79
Underground BMPs are generally considered confined spaces and OSHA confined space
training typically will be required if a person must enter the underground BMP to
perform maintenance. In all cases, a maintenance plan should be developed at the time
that the underground BMP is designed. The maintenance plan should specify, at a
minimum, quarterly inspections with maintenance performed as needed based on
inspections. The required inspection frequency may be reduced to biannually if, after two
or more years, the quarterly regimen demonstrates that this will provide adequate
maintenance. Owners of underground BMPs must provide written inspection and
maintenance documentation to the City to ensure that required inspection and
maintenance activities are taking place. All maintenance records must be kept on file by
the owner and must be provided to the City promptly upon request. Owner must
demonstrate that maintenance activities are occurring on an annual basis or on other
frequencies as specifically required.
Design Procedure and Criteria
Two primary options are available for underground BMPs:
1. Underground BMPs Based on a Surface BMP design: BMPs that satisfy the
requirements for capture and slow release of the WQCV and that are based on and
designed in substantial conformance with the criteria for surface-based BMPs described
in this Manual.
2. Underground Proprietary BMPs: Proprietary BMPs that satisfy the requirements for
capture and slow release of the WQCV. The owner needs to demonstrate that the BMP
will at a minimum treat the design storms flow rates and volumes as stated in this Manual
as well as the slow release of the WQCV and provide a level of treatment for targeted
pollutants that is comparable to that of the surface-based BMPs provided in this Manual.
1. Underground BMPs Based on a Surface BMP Design
This class of underground BMP includes sand filter basins and retention facilities
designed for below grade installation. The design must provide the WQCV and empty it
over a time period of 12 hours or more. Not all of the surface-based BMPs that provide
the WQCV can be adapted for underground use. For example, the vegetative components
of a constructed wetland pond render it unsuitable for underground use. Underground
extended detention basins are also problematic due to historical problems with
remobilization of collected sediment. The most commonly used underground BMP to
date in the City is the underground sand filter.
In addition to the criteria for an above ground sand filter, underground sand filters should
meet the following criteria:
a) A pretreatment chamber for removal of coarse sediments with a volume equivalent to
0.10 times the WQCV should be provided. The pretreatment chamber must be separated
from the underground BMP sand filter chamber by baffles, and serves as the sediment
forebay to reduce the frequency of maintenance required in sand filter. Also consider
incorporating a vertical baffle to trap oil and grease. This can be easily incorporated into
the forebay and should be included where oil and grease are target constituents.
Absorbent mats or booms could also be used for this purpose.
b) For flows in excess of the water quality design event, a diversion must be sized so that
excess flows bypass the sand filter chamber and the sand filter is not surcharged (in terms
of depth or hydraulic grade line) beyond the WQCV maximum elevation.
80
c) Maintenance access must be provided to each chamber. Access must be sufficient to
allow complete removal and replacement of the filter material. Allow for at least 6 feet of
headroom (from the surface of the filter) to facilitate maintenance. All areas need to be
designed to facilitate human access.
2. Underground Proprietary BMPs
In some situations, the use of an underground manufactured or proprietary BMP may be
the only practicable solution due to site or engineering constraints. In such cases the use
of a proprietary BMP may be appropriate. There are numerous proprietary BMPs with
wide variability in performance, design flow rates, unit processes, and volume of storage
provided (if any). Sizing methodologies for proprietary devices vary from device to
device—some are flow based, some are volume based, some consider surface/filter
hydraulic loading, etc. As a result, this Manual does not seek to provide a one-size-fits-all
sizing methodology for proprietary BMPs. Instead, this Manual provides criteria for
determining what type of proprietary BMP should be used and whether a specific
proprietary BMP is acceptable for use.
Once it has been determined that use of this BMP category is warranted due to site or
engineering constraints, the proprietary BMP must meet the following requirements:
a) Technology Verification: The proprietary BMP must be verified for use by a
nationally recognized technology verification program.
For the two main categories of proprietary BMPs, these programs are:
For hydrodynamic separators:
The New Jersey Corporation for Advanced Technology (NJCAT) Technology
Verification Program (http://www.njcat.o0rg/verification/protocol.cfm) Tier II (Field
Testing) verification is required.
For filters or other technologies receiving standalone treatment designation:
The NJCAT Tier II (Field Testing) verification or completion and approval by the
Washington State Department of Ecology (2002) TAPE protocol and General Use Level
Designation for TSS are required. Reference: Guidance for Evaluating Emerging
Stormwater Treatment Technologies, Technology Assessment Protocol – Ecology
(TAPE), October 2002 (Revised June 2004), Publication Number 02-10-037.
(http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0210037.html).
Verification by both programs is preferred. If the specific design flow rates for the filters
differ, then the most conservative flow rate should be used since sediment loads within
the Fort Collins region tend to be fine.
To receive an approval for use by the City, the manufacturer must also provide final
verification statements for the technology in consideration.
b) Performance Standards:
Once accepted for use, the sizing of the BMP must be done in accordance with the
verification and also achieve the treatment level required by the City. In general, the
proprietary BMP approved for standalone treatment should be capable, on an annual
basis, of producing an effluent quality with a median TSS concentration of no more than
thirty (30) mg/L, Event Mean Concentration (EMC), for the WQCV within a twelve (12)
81
hour drawdown time for influent TSS concentrations of one hundred forty (140) mg/l or
less. This level of treatment is comparable to the long-term effluent median
concentrations from the International Stormwater BMP Database for surface-based
BMPs. For influent TSS concentrations of one hundred forty (140) mg/l or more an
eighty (80) percent load removal rate by the proprietary BMP is required.
Depending on long-term median effluent concentrations and whether or not the BMP
provides the required WQCV, a proprietary underground BMP will fall into one of three
categories:
1. Not recommended: This category is for underground BMPs that have not
demonstrated the ability to capture the required WQCV or meet the performance
expectation of thirty (30) mg/l TSS effluent for influent TSS concentrations that are less
than one forty (140) mg/l or an eighty (80) percent removal rate for influent TSS
concentrations of one forty (140) mg/l or more. Even for underground BMPs that meet
these conditions, these are not recommended if they are deemed by the City to be too
difficult and, or too expensive to maintain compared to a surface BMP alternative. The
City is the final determining authority regarding whether these are considered too
difficult or too expensive to maintain over the long term.
2. Pretreatment: This category is for underground BMPs that generally provide little, if
any, surcharge storage WQCV. BMPs in this category may be useful as an initial step in a
treatment train approach to water quality. A BMP meeting these criteria could be used in
conjunction with a downstream BMP that provides slow release of the WQCV. For
pretreatment applications, verification programs remain the same however since the
volume storage and fine fraction of the TSS are addressed through separate unit
processes, the primary design criteria are that the BMP be sized to meet the peak
hydraulic flow association with the entire treatment train.
To avoid washout, the peak treatment flow will be the same as verified by NJCAT
associated with the eighty (80) percent removal rate of the NJCAT PSD. Flows in
excess of the water quality design event Flows in excess of the water quality design event
need to be bypassed to avoid re-suspension and washout of accumulated sediments.
3. Standalone: This category is for underground BMPs that demonstrate the ability to
meet the performance expectation of thirty (30) mg/l TSS EMC effluent for influent
concentrations that are less than one forty (140) mg/l or an eighty (80) percent removal
rate for influent TSS concentrations of one forty (140) mg/l or more. "Standalone"
devices must be designed to provide for the release of the WQCV in no less than twelve
(12) hours. Furthermore, this category of BMP can only be used where it is determined
that surface BMPs are not feasible.
In some situations such as in highly urbanized areas with existing infrastructure, right of
way issues, achieving this level of treatment for the entire WQCV using a twelve (12)
hour drawdown period may not be practicable. In such cases the design of the proprietary
BMP must be done to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP).
The MEP design approach for underground manufactured BMPs will only be allowed
when this is the only practicable alternative available to achieve any level of water
quality treatment. In such cases, the design engineer must to present sufficient
information to:
82
Gain acceptance of a specific proprietary BMP, using the verifications described
above
Demonstrate that due to site and engineering constraints that this approach is the
most viable solution
Demonstrate that the technology is sized and designed in accordance with the
applicable verification
Show that the MEP approach was used to approach to the maximum extent
practicable the treatment levels and volumetric goals required above.
See Figure UG-1 for typical underground BMPs that may fall into each category. The
City does not maintain a list of specific devices that fall into each of these categories. It is
the responsibility of the designer to identify the appropriate category for the BMP based
on whether the required treatment level can be provided in the underground BMP. The
City, reserves the right to prohibit altogether the use of underground BMPs, proprietary
or not. In addition, the City may require the presentation of the proprietary underground
BMPs’ performance and maintenance records, in locations where they have been
previously installed, and more particularly in areas with climatic conditions similar to the
Colorado Front Range area. Additionally, the City may require agreements that run in
perpetuity attached to the property served by the BMPs, assuring that they will be
inspected and maintained by the owner as required by the City (or recommended by the
manufacturer).
Finally, a standard operating procedures manual must be submitted and approved by the
City for all underground facilities. A final copy of the approved Standard Operating
Procedures manual must be provided to the City and must be maintained on-site by the
entity responsible for the facility maintenance. Annual reports must be prepared and
submitted to the City discussing the frequency and results of the maintenance program.
Construction Considerations
Improper installation will cause poor performance of proprietary underground BMPs.
This problem has been noted not only by manufacturers, but also by a number of
Colorado municipalities who have observed that the "as built" BMPs often vary
significantly from the design. Most underground BMPs already face challenges due to
limited vertical fall and because of head losses, so they may be sensitive to slight changes
in elevation. In addition, many of the proprietary underground BMPs require assembly of
special baffling or patented inserts that may not be familiar to contractors.
For these reasons, it is important to discuss the installation of the underground BMP with
the manufacturer prior to selecting a contractor so that the installation requirements are
clearly understood. Construction observation by the design engineer, and, if possible, a
manufacturer's representative is essential for proper installation. At a minimum, the
installation must be inspected by the manufacturer's representative once completed. Any
deficiencies of the installation identified by the manufacturer's representative inspection
must be immediately corrected.
(6) Table UG-1 is deleted.
(7) Fact Sheet T-12 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Micropools”, “EURV”and “Full Spectrum Detention” are deleted.
83
(8) Table OS-4 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to Figure OS-2 and Figure OS-7 are deleted
(9) Figure OS-2 is deleted in its entirety.
(10) Figure OS-3 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Permanent Water Surface Elevation (WSE)” are deleted.
(11) Figure OS-4 is adopted with the following modification:
Add Note: Lowest opening must be set at the invert of the pond.
(12) Figure OS-5 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Micropools” are deleted.
(13) Figure OS-6 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Micropools” are deleted.
(14) Figure OS-7 is deleted in its entirety.
(15) Figure OS-8 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “Micropools” are deleted.
(16) Figure OS-9 is added.
84
Figure OS-9, City of Fort Collins Water Quality Outlet Structure Details
85
(M) Volume 3, Chapter 5 - Source Control BMPs:
(1) Section 1.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(2) Section 2.0 is amended to read as follows:
2.0 Structural Source Control BMPs
Site operations and potential pollution source control needs should be considered early in the
planning and design process. This will reduce the load of pollutants into stormwater and may also
facilitate site operations and reduce maintenance requirements for on-site treatment BMPs.
A discussion must be provided specifying the permanent structural source control BMP that is
used in relation to the planned use of the project.
Representative questions that must be considered prior to finalizing the site layout include:
1. What materials are stored on-site?
2. How are these materials handled and moved through the site?
3. What on-site operations take place that could potentially cause materials to enter the storm
sewer system?
4. Where and how might these materials enter the storm sewer?
5. How can storage and handling areas and drainage facilities be designed to reduce pollutant
loading? Is it feasible to cover these areas?
6. When a spill occurs, how and where will it be controlled and contained? Are structural spill
containment measures needed?
(3) Section 3.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(4) Section 4.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(5) Section 5.0 is deleted in its entirety.
(6) Source Control BMP Fact Sheets are deleted in their entirety.
(7) Table 5.1 is deleted in its entirety.
(8) Table 5.2 is deleted in its entirety.
(9) Table 5.3 is deleted in its entirety.
86
(N) Volume3, Chapter 6 - BMP Maintenance:
(1) Section 2.0 is adopted with the following modification:
All references to “UDFCD maintenance” are deleted.
(2) Section 7.7 is amended to read as follows:
7.7 Sediment Removal from the Forebay, Trickle Channel and the BMP Bottom
Remove sediment from the forebay and trickle channel annually. If portions of the watershed are
not developed or if roadway or landscaping projects are taking place in the watershed, the
required frequency of sediment removal in the forebay may be as often as after each storm event.
The forebay should be maintained in such a way that it does not provide a significant source of
re-suspended sediment in the stormwater runoff. Ensure that the sediment is disposed of properly
and not placed elsewhere in the basin.
Potential accumulation of sediment in the area directly upstream of the outlet structure at the
bottom of the BMP must be checked for on a regular basis as well as after every significant storm
event. Removal of accumulated sediment or debris must be done immediately when such
sediment or debris blocks any portion of the outlet structure and must be done at least on a
monthly basis between the months April and September as well as during any rainy period.
87
(O) Volume 3, Chapter 7 - Construction BMPs:
(1) A new Section 1.1 is added, to read as follows:
1.1 Purpose and Scope
The Stormwater Criteria Manual provides the minimum design and technical criteria for the
design and analysis of drainage and erosion control plans. The erosion-related requirements of
this Manual are intended to reduce erosion to an acceptable level, emphasizing the control of
erosion and sediment transport from the surface of disturbed land by water. Channel erosion
control for temporary channels (diversions, gullies) and major channel stabilization are addressed
as erosion control matters in this Manual. The requirements of Volume 3, Chapter 7, as amended,
apply to all land disturbing activities covered by this Manual, except for the following:
(1) Emergency work; and
(2) Single Family Residential lots less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet in area
and less than four to one slopes except when construction activities are within 50
feet of the outer limits of sensitive areas including floodplains, slopes, riparian
corridors, lakes, irrigation ditches, or other features subject to natural areas buffer
requirements under the City Land Use Code
(2) A new Section 1.2 is added, to read as follows:
1.2 Review and Acceptance
The City will review all erosion control submittals for general compliance with this
Manual. An acceptance by the City does not relieve the owner, engineer, or designer
from responsibility of ensuring that calculations, plans, and specifications are in general
compliance with the criteria.
(4) A new Section 1.3 is added, to read as follows:
1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements
1.3.1 Policy
Erosion and sedimentation are natural processes, the intensity of which is increased by
land disturbing activities. Clearing and stripping of land can cause localized increased
erosion rates with subsequent deposition of sediments and damage to adjacent
downstream and leeward properties. Erosion can reduce or destroy the aesthetic and
practical values of neighboring properties, streams and lakes.
The City is committed to the enhancement and protection of existing development,
streams, lakes, wetlands and rivers that may be impacted by sediment laden runoff
resulting from land-change activities.
Therefore, it is the policy of the City to encourage maintenance of the natural balance
between sediment supply and transport.
It is also the City's policy to encourage water erosion control by leaving land undisturbed
as long as possible (by project phasing) and using temporary and permanent erosion
control Best Management Practices (BMPs).
88
1.3.2 Elements of an Erosion Control Plan
Erosion control plans must consist of the elements noted below. For developments
subject to the subdivision review process, these must be submitted with the final drainage
reports. All reports must be typed on 8-1/2" x 11" paper and bound. Drawings, figures,
plates, and tables must be bound with the report. The report must include a cover letter
presenting the plan for review and must be prepared by or supervised by and engineer
licensed in Colorado.
Information used for the Erosion Control Plan must be consistent with the Drainage
Report and the grading and drainage plans.
For City projects, the Erosion Control Plan must be submitted and reviewed through the
Construction Coordination process, or through the specific department’s review process.
1.3.3 PDP Erosion Control Report and Drawings Submittal Requirements
Erosion Control Report and Plans are required at time of PDP Submittal.
The Erosion Control Report must contain or comply with the following:
a. A written analysis of the area proposed for construction in reference to developed
conditions, rainfall erodibility, and proposed rainfall erosion and sediment control
methods. Control of rainfall erosion and sediment transport shall be analyzed in a
manner that clearly demonstrates an understanding of how temporary and permanent
mitigation methods will be used, including a discussion of the timing of construction
phases and the sequential installation of all erosion and sediment control Best
Management Practices (BMPs) proposed in the plan.
b. Stormwater Management Controls:
Include a description of all stormwater management controls that will be
implemented as part of the construction activity to control pollutants in stormwater
discharges. The appropriateness and priorities of stormwater management controls
should reflect the potential pollutant sources identified at the facility. The description
of stormwater management controls should address the following components, at a
minimum:
i.) Identify SWMP Administrator: Identify a specific individual(s), position, or
title that is responsible for developing, implementing, maintaining, and revising
the SWMP. This designated individual(s) should address all aspects of the
facility's SWMP.
ii ) Identification of Potential Pollutant Sources: Identify and describe sources
that may contribute pollutants to runoff, and provide means of control through
BMP selection and implementation. At a minimum, evaluate each of the
following potential sources of pollution:
1. All disturbed and stored soils;
2. Vehicle tracking of sediments;
3. Management of contaminated soils;
4. Loading and unloading operations;
5. Outdoor storage activities (building materials, fertilizers, chemicals,
etc.);
89
6. Vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling;
7. Significant dust or particulate generating processes;
8. Routine maintenance activities involving fertilizers, pesticides,
detergents, fuels, solvents, oils, etc;
9. On-site waste management practices (waste piles, liquid wastes,
dumpsters, etc.);
10. Concrete truck/equipment washing, including the concrete truck
chute and associated fixtures and equipment;
11. Dedicated asphalt and concrete batch plants;
12. Non-industrial waste sources such as worker trash and portable
toilets; and
13. Other areas or procedures where potential spills can occur.
c. For the establishment of dryland vegetation, the discussion must include soil types,
seed mix, soil amendments, and mulches.
d. Detailed sequence of construction activities must be submitted as part of the erosion
and sediment control plan. The plan identifies the sequence for all the major
construction and erosion and sediment control activities, including overlot grading,
soil and aggregate stockpiling, construction of permanent drainage facilities, and
maintenance activities. The construction sequence will be used as a basis for
inspection of construction sites for compliance with the erosion and sediment control
plan.
The sequencing plan must clearly indicate the timing, extent and location where
temporary BMP measures are installed and/or removed, depending on the type of
construction activities undertaken, e.g. site grading, utilities installation, paving,
flatwork, or vertical construction.
The construction sequence must include at least the following:
1. Installation of temporary erosion and sediment control measures
2. Sequence of all land disturbing activity
3. Drainage facility construction
4. Sediment basins, temporary channel stabilization
5. Seeding
6. Mulching
7. Required maintenance activities (e.g. expected frequency of sediment pond
cleaning, after-storm checks of all BMPs, etc.)
e. Erosion control security calculations.
The Erosion Control Drawing must contain or comply with the following:
The Erosion Control Drawing must use same base used for drainage study. The erosion
and sediment control plan may be combined with the grading plan, providing all the
required information can be shown, and the combined plan is not so cluttered with
90
information that all the elements cannot be readily seen and deciphered. All drawings
must be twenty-two by thirty-four (22x34) inches in size. A General Location Map shall
be provided in sufficient detail to identify drainage flow entering and leaving the
development and general drainage patterns. The map should be at a scale of 1" = 1000' to
1" = 8000' and show the path of all drainage from the upper end of any off-site basins to
major drainageways. The map must identify any major construction (i.e., development,
irrigation ditches, existing detention facilities, culverts, storm sewers) along the entire
path of drainage. Basins and divides are to be identified and topographic contours are to
be included. The Erosion Control Plan drawings of the proposed development or
redevelopment must have a scale of 1" = 20' to 1" = 200' on 22" x 34" drawings.
a. Standard and job-specific construction details of erosion and sediment
control measures, and standard and job specific erosion and sediment
control notes.
b. List vegetative specifications from this Manual if standard vegetation is
to be used. Include alternate specifications and justification if they are to
be used.
c. List structural specifications from this Manual if standards are to be used.
Include other specifications and justifications if they are to be used.
d. A construction detail for all proposed construction BMPs.
e. The following standard erosion and sediment control notes:
1) The City Stormwater Department erosion control inspector
must be notified at least 24 hours prior to any construction
on this site.
2) All required BMPs must be installed prior to any land
disturbing activity (stockpiling, stripping, grading, etc). All
required erosion control measures must be installed at the
appropriate time in the construction sequence as indicated in
the approved project schedule, construction plans, and
erosion control report.
3) Pre-disturbance vegetation shall be protected and retained
wherever possible. Removal or disturbance of existing
vegetation shall be limited to the area required for immediate
construction operations, and for the shortest practical period
of time.
4) All soils exposed during land disturbing activity (stripping,
grading, utility installations, stockpiling, filling, etc.) shall be
kept in a roughened condition by ripping or disking along
land contours until mulch, vegetation, or other permanent
erosion control is installed. No soils in areas outside project
street rights of way shall remain exposed by land disturbing
activity for more than thirty (30) days before required
temporary or permanent erosion control (e.g. seed/mulch,
landscaping, etc.) is installed, unless otherwise approved by
the Stormwater Department.
91
5) The property must be watered and maintained at all times
during construction activities so as to prevent wind-caused
erosion. All land disturbing activities shall be immediately
discontinued when fugitive dust impacts adjacent properties,
as determined by the City Engineering Department.
6) All temporary (structural) erosion control measures must be
inspected and repaired or reconstructed as necessary after
each runoff event and every 14 days in order to assure
continued performance of their intended function. All
retained sediments, particularly those on paved roadway
surfaces, shall be removed and disposed of in a manner and
location so as not to cause their release into any
drainageway.
7) No soil stockpile shall exceed ten (10) feet in height. All
soil stockpiles shall be protected from sediment transport by
surface roughening, watering, and perimeter silt fencing.
Any soil stockpile remaining after 30 days shall be seeded
and mulched.
8) City Ordinance prohibits the tracking, dropping, or
depositing of soils or any other material onto city streets by
or from any vehicle. Any inadvertent deposited material
shall be cleaned immediately by the contractor.
9) Additional notes can (should) be added to reflect the
erosion/sediment control plan of the individual development.
(4) A new Section 1.4 is added, to read as follows:
1.4 Security for Erosion Control
No land disturbing activity subject to this Stormwater Criteria Manual can begin until an
Erosion Control Plan has been approved and the Owner has submitted proof of security to
ensure rehabilitation of the disturbed land. A performance bond, irrevocable letter of
credit, or cash escrow, acceptable to the Utilities Executive Director, and naming the City
as the protected party, is required. Such performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or
cash escrow shall further guarantee the continued maintenance and replacement of any
installed erosion control measures shown on the approved plan.
The amount of the security is based on one and one-half times the cost to revegetate the
disturbed land to dryland grasses (soil preparation, seed, and mulch) based upon unit cost
determined by the City Stormwater Department’s Annual Revegetation and Stabilization
Bid. In no instance, shall the amount of security be less than one thousand five hundred
dollars ($1,500) for residential and three thousand dollars ($3,000) for commercial
projects
Should the Owner be out of compliance with provisions of the approved Erosion Control
Plan, the City may exercise its rights under the security provided. In the event that the
City exercises such rights, it is not the City's intention to routinely administer the
construction of the measures shown on the erosion control plans, however, the City
reserves the right to enter upon the land and take whatever actions are necessary to
stabilize and revegetate all disturbed areas, or to have the plan constructed and make
repairs as necessary.
92
The erosion control security will normally be retained by the City until the project has
been completed and there is no further possibility of erosion or sediment transport from
the site. This includes the time for two full growing seasons for the establishment of
grasses on any revegetated areas. At that time, the security will be released. However, if
a part or phase of the site has been completed (including any revegetated areas which are
established but have not yet reached the two growing season warranty limit), and if it can
be determined by the City that there is no further erosion or sediment transport risk from
that part or phase as it relates to the entire project, then the portion of the erosion control
security that would apply to that part or phase can be released, whether or not the entire
project has been completed. Any partial release of the erosion control security must be
requested by the responsible party.
(5) A new Section 1.5 is added, to read as follows:
1.5 Warranty
The Owner must warrant that the measures shown on the approved erosion and sediment
control plan are properly constructed, installed, and are free from defective materials
and/or workmanship, with said warranty to continue for the terms set forth below.
The Owner shall warrant and maintain all structural measures for such period of time as
construction on the site continues and/or said measures are necessary to protect against
erosion and sediment transport. The Owner must warrant and maintain all vegetative
measures for two growing seasons after installation. Any acceptance of installed
measures shall not be construed to relieve the Owner of the duty to warrant and maintain
as aforesaid.
(6) A new Section 1.6 is added, to read as follows:
1.6 Enforcement
No land disturbing activity subject to this Stormwater Criteria Manual can begin on any project
unless it is associated with an approved Erosion Control Plan, a signed Development Agreement,
and a submitted erosion control security. All erosion control measures must be installed when
they are necessary as indicated by the approved Erosion Control Plan and Report, and maintained
in accordance with these Criteria. In order to ensure that all required measures have been
correctly installed and are in proper order and repair, no building permit will be issued on any
project until an inspection of the site and its required erosion control measures has been made and
deemed acceptable by the City.
If, at any time during construction activities, the Owner fails to adhere to the approved Erosion
Control Plan and Report, the construction phase sequence, or any of the erosion control criteria,
the City may employ any or all of the following:
Stop all or any part of the work on the project.
Withhold building permits.
Withhold certificates of occupancy.
Exercise the City’s rights under the security provided
Issue summons and or fines.
93
(7) Section 2.4 is added, to read as follows:
2.4 Fundamental Erosion Control Principles
The intent of erosion control design is to protect adjacent properties and downstream
properties from the detrimental effects of land disturbing activity. Water erosion is
always directional, i.e., always down-slope. This directional nature of water erosion can
be used to design resistance to sediment movement near the downstream edge of the
disturbed property. The erosion control design may govern slope placement so that
sediment-laden runoff is not directly tributary to an adjacent property. The slope may
need to be built to accommodate a temporary diversion channel, which keeps water on
the disturbed parcel.
Control measures are necessary for each phase of development (each phase of a
development must have a “stand alone” erosion control plan), and it is understood that
initial grading and construction will require certain control measures, which will change
or be replaced as development progresses. Temporary control measures such as silt
fences or diversion structures may be used during the initial grading and construction
phase and later either removed completely or replaced with grass or permanent sediment
basins.
Erosion control measures can be arranged to perform in sequence so that sediment
reduction caused by one measure releases less sediment to the next. In this manner,
series resistance to sediment movement can be built into a project so that stormwater
released to adjacent properties or streams is carrying the allowable amount of sediment.
The resistance to released sediments can be designed to minimize costs and minimize
interference with on-site construction activities.
The construction and maintenance of erosion control measures is critical to ensure proper
performance. Erosion Control Plans must include construction details and maintenance
guidelines.
(8) Section 3.0 is deleted in its entirety
(9) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety
(10) Section 3.2.1 is amended to read as follows:
3.2.1 Inspection Frequency
Documented inspections are required on a biweekly basis and within twenty four (24)
hours of a storm event, with some limited, temporary exceptions for inactive sites. The
City recommends spot-checking BMPs every workday. This is typically reasonable to
achieve and can help to ensure that the BMPs remain in good working condition. For
example, vehicle tracking of sediment onto the roadway is a common problem that often
requires maintenance more frequently than weekly. Curb socks, inlet protection and silt
fence are other BMPs that are prone to damage and displacement, also benefiting from
more frequent inspections.
When the site or portions of the site are awaiting final stabilization (e.g., vegetative
cover), where construction is essentially complete, the recommended frequency of
inspection is at least once every week. Be sure that this change is documented and in
accordance with relevant permit requirements prior to reducing the inspection schedule.
When snow cover exists over the entire site for an extended period, inspections are not
always feasible. Document this condition, including date of snowfall and date of melting
94
conditions, and be aware of and prepare for areas where melting conditions may pose a
risk of surface erosion.
Inspections of disturbed sites must be done by the responsible party, at the minimum, on
a bi-weekly basis. Records of inspections including date and time of inspection,
corrective action(s) taken and future planned maintenance activities must be kept at the
construction site by the responsible party and submitted to the Erosion Control Inspector
upon request.
(11) Section 4.2 is amended to read as follows:
4.2 Sediment Control Measures
Sediment control measures limit transport of sediment off-site to downstream properties
and receiving waters. Sediment controls are the second line of defense, capturing soil that
has been eroded. Sediment control generally rely on treatment processes that either
provide filtration through a permeable media or that slow runoff to allow the settling of
suspended particles. A third treatment process that is used in some parts of the country
includes advanced treatment systems employing chemical addition (flocculent) to
promote coagulation and settling of sediment particles. The City does not recommend the
use of chemical treatment as the improper application of chemicals can be more
detrimental than simply removing the sediment.
“Sediment Control” (SC) BMPs Fact Sheets in this chapter are:
SC-1 Silt Fence (SF)
SC-2 Sediment Control Log (SCL)
SC-4 Brush Barrier (BB)
SC-5 Rock Sock (RS)
SC-6 Inlet Protection (IP) (multiple types)
SC-7 Sediment Basin (SB)
SC-8 Sediment Trap (ST)
SC-9 Vegetated Buffers (VB)
SC-10 Chemical Treatment (CT) (also known as Advanced Treatment Systems [ATS])
No Fact Sheet is included for “SC-3 Straw Bale Barriers” (SBB) as these are prohibited
from use as a post-construction sediment control measure in the City.
(12) Fact Sheet SC-3 is deleted in its entirety.
(13) Figure SBB-1 is deleted.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 13
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 175, 2011, Designating the Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage, 160 Yale
Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates the Bartlett/Goeke House
and Attached Garage, 160 Yale Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Judith Goeke, is
initiating this request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 23
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 175, 2011, Designating the Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage, 160 Yale
Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The owner of the property, Judith Goeke, is initiating this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the
Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage at 160 Yale Avenue. The residence is eligible for designation as a
Landmark under Designation Standard 3, for its architectural significance to Fort Collins. A 1950s Split-Level home,
it is a early example of this housing type within Fort Collins, and exhibits a high level of physical integrity relative to
the seven aspects of integrity: location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, association, and feeling.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Constructed in 1958, this Split-Level home exhibits many character-defining features, including the one-and-one-half
story form paired with a one-story bay; the central entry; window pattern; use of new types of exterior building
materials; the use of decorative 4 x 10 and 4 x 12 purlins under the eaves; and two car attached garage. This housing
type was marketed to families with older children and was designed to create zones for noisier living and service areas,
such as the kitchen and TV room, and quieter activities, such as the living room, and sleeping areas. This home, like
most Split-Levels, features a below grade basement with small slider windows. The upper story windows on the
central bay indicate the bedrooms. The window and entry pattern on the non-garage bay support the existence of a
living room, kitchen, and stairway located near the front door. The location of the two car garage in the separate bay
on the facade gives this home a more sprawling appearance than most.
The property at 160 Yale Avenue has been home to a number of local professionals over its fifty-three year history.
The original owners were Marty F. Koolen, a pharmaceutical salesman for Pitman Moore, his wife Aletha, and their
son, also Marty F. During the 1960s, dentist Cecil L. Bartlett and his wife Carolyn R. Bartlett, a registered nurse, lived
in the house. From the 1970s to the mid 1990s, Delbert McGuire, his wife, Virginia, and their son, Delbert Jr., lived
in the house. Delbert McGuire was responsible for establishing the Department of Journalism at Colorado State
University. He died in 1993, and at that time his widow sold the home to Dennis R. and Julie Drake. The Drakes in
turn sold the house to Amy L. and Mark A. Talbot in 1997. The current owner, Judith Goeke, purchased the home from
Mark Talbot in 2005. A Licensed Professional Counselor, Ms. Goeke is a behavioral health and social service
provider, with a specialization in mental health.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At a public hearing held on November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation Commission voted unanimously to
recommend designation of this property under Designation Standard (3), Architecture, as an early example of Split-
Level Architecture in Fort Collins.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Historic Landmark Designation Nomination Form and Agreement
2. Staff Report
3. Resolution 6, 2011, Landmark Preservation Commission, Recommending Landmark Designation of the
Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage at 160 Yale Avenue.
4. Photos
ORDINANCE NO. 175, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DESIGNATING THE BARTLETT/GOEKE HOUSE AND ATTACHED
GARAGE, 160 YALE AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO,
AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14
OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a
public policy encouraging the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of landmarks within the
City; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution dated November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation
Commission (the "Commission") has determined that the Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached
Garage have significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Designation Standard (3), as an early
example of the split-level housing type within Fort Collins, with a high level of physical integrity;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission has further determined that said property meets the criteria of
a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the City Code and is eligible for designation as a
landmark, and has recommended to the City Council that said property be designated by the City
Council as a landmark; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property has requested such landmark designation; and
WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the property's significance to the
community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and
desires to approve such recommendation and designate said property as a landmark.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the property known as the Bartlett/Goeke House and Attached Garage,
and the adjacent lands upon which the historical resources are located in the City of Fort Collins,
Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit:
All of Lot 67 and a Portion of Lot 66 in South College Heights Second Subdivision,
Fort Collins, according to Plat filed November 10, 1955 in Plat Book 6, page 106
contained within boundary lines described as follows: Beginning at the most
Westerly Front Corner of said Lot and running thence S 57 degrees 50 minutes East
along the Southwesterly side line to the most Southerly corner of said Lot, and
running thence N 25 degrees 10 minutes E 3.44 feet along the rear line of said Lot,
thence N 58 degrees 19 minutes West 112.22 feet to the front line of said Lot, thence
Southwesterly along said front line along the arc of a 297 feet radius curve to the
right 2.51 feet, the long chord of which bears S 31 degrees 55.5 West 2.50 feet to the
Point of Beginning, County of Larimer, State of Colorado
be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter l4 of the Code of the City of
Fort Collins.
Section 2. That the criteria in Section 14-48 of the City Code will serve as the standards
by which alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the
above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 14
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 176, 2011, Designating the Chestnut/ Wombacher Residence, Attached Three-Car
Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace, 331 South Shields Street/1200 West Magnolia Street, as Fort Collins
Landmarks Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates the Chestnut/ Wombacher
Residence, Attached Three-Car Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace, located at 331 South Shields
Street/1200 West Magnolia Street as a Fort Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Margaret Wombacher, is
initiating this request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 24
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 176, 2011, Designating the Chestnut/ Wombacher Residence, Attached Three-Car
Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace, 331 South Shields Street/1200 West Magnolia Street, as Fort Collins
Landmarks Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Chestnut/Wombacher Property, at 331 South Shields Street, is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark
under Standard 3, for its architectural significance to Fort Collins. The house and attached three-car garage embody
distinctive characteristics of the Tudor Revival style, prevalent in the 1920s and 1930s. Notable features include the
stucco exterior, with randomly placed decorative large rock; the large chimney; steep, multi-gabled roof lines; a classic
sloped gable or “cat-slide” entryway; and two and three light casement windows. The house contains two separate
apartments in the basement. The property also contains a freestanding historic brick and stone fireplace, dating to
the period of construction.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Chestnut/Wombacher House has additional architectural and historical significance for its construction originally
as a “basement house.” Basement houses were a low-cost approach to housing in pre-World War II America.
Generally rectangular in shape, basement houses had masonry walls extending two to three feet above grade level,
and low to moderately pitched roofs. Access to the underground living area was gained through a gabled vestibule
entrance containing a flight of stairs leading down. The owners expected to use the structure of the basement house
as the foundation for a standard residence at a later time.
Four families have made this residence at 331 South Shields Street their home since its construction. The original
owners were Donald and Marjorie Chestnut, who built the basement house and enlarged it to the existing 1 1/2 story
Tudor Revival. Mr. Chestnut had a plumbing business, and one of the garage bays was used as his workshop.
Doctors George and Olga Brown practiced in Fort Collins, and occupied the house from 1948 until 1972. The home
was owned for a brief period by Frank and Connie Marthinsen, before Margaret and Karl Wombacher purchased the
house in 1978. The Wombachers met in 1953 in Cameroon, West Africa when both were in the Peace Corps. The
couple married in 1964 and had three children. They both taught in Saudi Arabia, and after Mr. Wombacher’s death
in 1984, Margaret continued to teach in Korea, Kuwait, and Thailand. Now retired, Margaret Wombacher continues
to substitute teach in the Poudre School District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At a public hearing held on November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation Commission voted unanimously to
recommend designation of this property under Designation Standard (3), Architecture.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Historic Landmark Designation Nomination Form
2. Staff Report
3. Resolution 5, 2011, Landmark Preservation Commission, Recommending Landmark Designation of the
Chestnut/Wombacher House, 331 South Shields.
4. Photos
ORDINANCE NO. 176, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DESIGNATING THE CHESTNUT/WOMBACHER RESIDENCE, ATTACHED
THREE-CAR GARAGE, AND HISTORIC FREESTANDING FIREPLACE, 331 SOUTH
SHIELDS STREET/1200 WEST MAGNOLIA STREET, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
AS FORT COLLINS LANDMARKS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14
OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a
public policy encouraging the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of landmarks within the
City; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution dated November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation
Commission (the "Commission") has determined that the Chestnut/Wombacher property has
significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Designation Standard (3), as an excellent example of
a Tudor Revival residence and attached garage, with historic freestanding outdoor fireplace; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has further determined that said property meets the criteria of
a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the City Code and is eligible for designation as a
landmark, and has recommended to the City Council that said property be designated by the City
Council as a landmark; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property has consented to such landmark designation; and
WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the property's significance to the
community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and
desires to approve such recommendation and designate said property as a landmark.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the property known as the Chestnut/Wombacher Residence, Attached
Three-Car Garage, and Historic Freestanding Fireplace, and the adjacent lands upon which the
historical resources are located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as
follows, to wit:
Lot One (1) and vacated portion of West Magnolia Street adjoining Lot One (1)
described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Block Eight (8) of Scott-
Sherwood Addition to the City of Fort Collins, thence South 30 feet; thence West
190 feet; thence North 30 feet; thence East 190 feet to the point of beginning; of
Block Eight (8) of Plat of Block Eight (8) and Eleven (11), Scott-Sherwood Addition
to the City of Fort Collins, according to the recorded Plat thereof, County of Larimer,
State of Colorado
be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter l4 of the Code of the City of
Fort Collins.
Section 2. That the criteria in Section 14-48 of the City Code will serve as the standards
by which alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the
above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the Code
of the City of Fort Collins
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 15
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 177, 2011, Designating the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence
and Attached Garage, 2500 South College Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City
Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ordinance No. 177, 2011, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, designates the Lewis and
Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence and Attached Garage, located at 2500 South College Avenue, as a Fort
Collins Landmark. The owner of the property, Joanne Gallagher, is initiating this request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Karen McWilliams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 25
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 177, 2011, Designating the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence and
Attached Garage, 2500 South College Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The owner of the property, Joanne Gallagher, is initiating this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the
Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence and Attached Garage, at 2500 South College Avenue. The
residence with attached garage is significant under Designation Standard (2) for its association with Mae, Lewis, and
Bill Tiley, Fort Collins developers who platted and developed several post-World War II residential subdivisions,
including the South College Heights subdivision where this property is located; and under Designation Standard (3),
as an architecturally significant example of a mid-1950s Ranch type home. This property retains a very high level of
integrity relative to the seven aspects of integrity: location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, association, and
feeling.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The original owners of this home were Lewis and Mae Tiley, and their two children. Moving to Fort Collins at the
beginning of the Great Depression, the Tileys were true entrepreneurs. In the 1930s and 1940s, they operated a
grocery store at 338 East Elizabeth Street. During the 1940s, the couple purchased and renovated homes, which they
then sold for a profit. Most significantly for Fort Collins, both Lewis and Mae Tiley and their son Bill were involved with
postwar subdivision development in Fort Collins. In 1956, Mae and Bill partnered with local lumberman turned
developer Robert Everitt, to plat the South College Heights subdivision. All three Tileys worked again with Everitt in
1962, to develop the University Acres subdivision. Mae Tiley was involved in real estate beyond Fort Collins,
purchasing the Doud House, formerly belonging to the parents of Mamie Doud Eisenhower, in Denver in 1961. Mae
was also half of the inspiration for Lemay Avenue in Fort Collins: Bob Everitt and Bill Tiley renamed Hospital Road
“LeMae,” after Everitt’s father, Les, and Tiley’s mother, Mae; the street name was, however, mislabeled as Lemay.
Constructed in 1956, this residence is also architecturally significant as an excellent example of a mid-1950s Ranch
type home. Character-defining features include its larger size as compared to early Ranch homes, the horizontal
orientation, picture window, prominent chimney, and attached two-car garage. The flared eaves, color-scheme of the
home, bay window on the facade, and numerous diamond pattern windows all contribute to the Tudor appearance of
the house.
Joanne F. Gallagher, the current owner of the property, purchased the home in 1994. Ms. Gallagher, a former
elementary teacher with a Masters degree in Social Work, established Adoption: Advocacy & Alternatives in 1992.
The nonprofit adoption placement agency has been located at 2500 South College Avenue since 1994, where Ms.
Gallagher serves as both Executive Director and a birth parent counselor.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At a public hearing held on November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation Commission voted unanimously to
recommend designation of this property under Designation Standard (2), for its historical association with Mae, Lewis,
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 25
and Bill Tiley, and Designation Standard (3), for its architecture.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Historic Landmark Designation Nomination Form
2. Staff Report
3. Resolution 7, 2011, Landmark Preservation Commission, Recommending Landmark Designation of the Lewis
and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher Residence and Attached Garage, at 2500 South College Avenue.
4. Photos
ORDINANCE NO. 177, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DESIGNATING THE LEWIS AND MAE TILEY/JOANNE F. GALLAGHER
RESIDENCE AND ATTACHED GARAGE, 2500 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE,
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a
public policy encouraging the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of landmarks within the
City; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution dated November 9, 2011, the Landmark Preservation
Commission (the "Commission") has determined that the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher
Residence and Attached Garage has significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Designation
Standard (2), for its historical association with Lewis, Mae and Bill Tiley; and Designation Standard
(3), for its architecture as an excellent example of a mid-1950s Ranch-type home, with a high level
of physical integrity; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has further determined that said property meets the criteria of
a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the City Code and is eligible for designation as a
landmark, and has recommended to the City Council that said property be designated by the City
Council as a landmark; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property has requested such landmark designation; and
WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the property's significance to the
community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and
desires to approve such recommendation and designate said property as a landmark.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the property known as the Lewis and Mae Tiley/Joanne F. Gallagher
Residence and Attached Garage, and the adjacent lands upon which the historical resource is located
in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit:
Lot 35, South College Heights Addition, 1st Filing
be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter l4 of the Code of the City of
Fort Collins.
Section 2. That the criteria in Section 14-48 of the City Code will serve as the standards
by which alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the
above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the City
Code.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Peter Barnes, Steve Dush,
Bruce Hendee, Ginny Sawyer
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 16
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 178, 2011, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Digital Signs and Pole Signs.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 6, 2011, amends the Land Use Code regulations
for digital signs and freestanding pole signs. With respect to digital signs, the recommended Code changes address
such things as brightness, color, design, and location. Additional design criteria to enhance the appearance of pole
signs are also proposed. Three proposed standards contained in the Ordinance have been amended for Second
Reading based on questions or concerns expressed during the First Reading hearing on this matter. One additional
change is included on Second Reading to allow for flexibility in determining the compliance period for signs made
nonconforming by future sign code amendments.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The changes are:
1. Section 2 of the Ordinance is amended to require that pole signs contain no more than thirty (30) percent air
space instead of forty percent as proposed on First Reading, except that pole signs located in the safe sight
distance triangle will be allowed up to forty (40) percent air space to ensure signs don’t create a safety hazard.
2. Section 3.8.7(M)(4)(c) in Section 3 of the Ordinance pertaining to the permitted display colors for digital signs
is amended to allow the message to be in any single color displayed against a single color background. The
Ordinance as adopted on First Reading requires the message to be monochrome in one of five colors.
However, concerns were raised about limiting the number of colors allowed to only five and about the ability
to define and limit the use of various shades of the selected color. Staff evaluated the concerns and
recommends that the five-color limit be removed and that whatever single color is used for the message, all
images comprising the message must be displayed in the same color, value and hue. The same criteria would
apply to the single background color against which the message is displayed. Displayed messages in multi-
color or full-color will continue to be prohibited as originally adopted on First Reading. Staff will monitor the
impact of this proposed change as signs begin to display single-color messages using colors beyond those
currently allowed.
3. Section 3.8.7(M)(4)(e) in Section 3 of the Ordinance pertaining to the design of digital signs is amended to
include more specific criteria for electronic message centers that are located on the top of a sign. Specifically,
a top-mounted display must include a substantial cap feature above the electronic message center which
consists of the same material, form, color and texture as found on the sign face or structure.
4. The Ordinance adopted on First Reading will cause some existing signs to become nonconforming. Three
different compliance dates are established in the Ordinance, with dates ranging from thirty days to eight years
depending on the expense involved in achieving compliance with the new standards. Section 3.8.7(A)(3)(b)
of the sign code currently contains a provision that signs made nonconforming by Code amendments need
to be brought into compliance within fifteen years of the date of the amendment which caused the
nonconformity. This fifteen year period was established with the 1994 comprehensive sign code revisions
which resulted in most signs in the city being made nonconforming. However, ordinances containing sign
code amendments that were adopted in the last five years or so have established different compliance periods
as part of the adopting ordinance, with the dates being less than the fifteen year period. That again is the
situation with the three different compliance periods contained in this ordinance. Section 1 of Ordinance No.
178, 2011 as amended between First and Second Reading, is a new section that was not included in the
Ordinance on First Reading. Staff believes it makes sense to replace the current fifteen year compliance
period with a requirement that any sign code ordinance that causes nonconformity should contain a section
in the ordinance establishing a compliance period that is appropriate to the nature of the code amendment.
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 16
For example, a change that would reduce the maximum size of banners from forty square feet to thirty square
feet might have only a three month compliance period, whereas a change that would reduce the maximum
size of permanent monument signs from ninety square feet to seventy-five square feet might have something
like an eight year compliance period. Slight wording changes in Section 2 of the ordinance and in
3.8.7(M)(4)(j) of Section 3 are included in order to reflect the new wording found in Section 1.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Peter Barnes, Steve Dush
Bruce Hendee, Ginny Sawyer
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 33
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 178, 2011, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Digital Signs and Pole Signs.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In response to Council feedback, staff has prepared an ordinance amending current Land Use Code regulations for
digital signs and freestanding pole signs. With respect to digital signs, the recommended Code changes address such
things as brightness, color, design, and location. Additional design criteria to enhance the appearance of pole signs
are also proposed.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The continuing proliferation of digital signs within the community may begin to impact the overall aesthetic
environment. Given these concerns, staff conducted an evaluation of the existing sign code regulations pertaining to
digital signs. Fort Collins has been a leader in regulating signage to create a visually pleasing urban environment and
staff determined that while the current standards provide a framework for effective regulation, improvements can be
made.
A principle of the City’s sign code is to protect health, safety, and welfare by regulating the design, construction, and
placement of signs in the city in a manner that provides a reasonable balance between the right of a business or an
individual to identify itself and to convey its message and the right of the public to a safe and aesthetically pleasing
environment.
The City’s first comprehensive sign code was adopted in 1971 and required that all signs not in compliance with the
new regulations be made conforming by 1977. Many sign code amendments have been adopted since 1971, most
of them minor in nature. However, major amendments were adopted in 1994, and because of the comprehensive
nature of the changes the City Council allowed a 15 year amortization period for business owners to bring their signs
into compliance. That amortization period ended in 2009, with numerous businesses electing to replace their
previously existing nonconforming signs with conforming digital signs or conforming pole signs.
At the August 9, 2011 City Council work session, City staff presented an overview of issues regarding the following:
• the adequacy of the City’s current sign regulations to address the increasing number of digital signs in the
community now and into the future, and
• adding design criteria to improve the aesthetic appearance of pole signs.
After considering various options at the work session, Council requested staff come return with an ordinance for
consideration that continues to allow digital signs, but with additional regulations, and an ordinance that includes
additional design criteria for pole signs.
Digital Signs
Digital signs (signs that display words, symbols, figures or images that can be electronically or mechanically changed
by remote or automatic means) began appearing in Fort Collins in the early 2000s and it was appropriate at that time
to consider regulating this form of sign in the community to protect the visual welfare of the city. In response, the City
adopted a digital sign ordinance in 2006 to regulate the size, brightness, method of display, and color of such signs.
There are approximately 1,500 permitted on-premise freestanding signs (signs not attached to a building) currently
in the city. In 2009 at the conclusion of the amortization period, about 40 of the non-conforming signs were converted
to digital signs. This number has doubled to approximately 80, and represents 30% of all new freestanding signs
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 33
erected since 2009. Looking ahead over the next twenty years, based upon this rate of increase, many additional
signs could be converted to digital.
To address the anticipated proliferation and the renewed concerns about brightness and aesthetics, it is appropriate
to evaluate this type of sign and its relationship to the economic and aesthetic environment of Fort Collins now and
into the future. Staff believes that the current standards provide a framework for effective regulation, but improvements
can be made that will help to more effectively balance the right of a business to convey its message with the right of
the public to enjoy an aesthetically pleasing streetscape.
City staff held a series of meetings with stakeholders before and after the August 9, 2011 City Council work session.
These meetings have resulted in a number of proposed changes to the current digital sign regulations. Key elements
of the changes are:
• Brightness levels
The current regulations do not contain specific maximum brightness levels. The proposed ordinance requires
that automatic dimming software and solar sensors maintain a maximum brightness of 0.3 foot candles over
the ambient light conditions at any time of day or night. The permit application must contain written
certification from the sign manufacturer that the light intensity has been factory pre-set not to exceed this level.
Additionally, something that will be unique to Fort Collins is that the permit holder and the business manager,
business owner, or property manager must be present at the time the City inspects the sign for compliance.
This will offer an opportunity for City staff to explain the regulations and how the brightness level will be
inspected for future compliance and enforcement.
• Color
Staff believes full-color displays limited to just the logo or ‘brand’ of the business could be acceptable given
the proposed brightness controls and other proposed regulations. However, the City Attorney advised staff
that only allowing the logo or brand without allowing pictures of products or other images would be unlawful.
Staff believes that allowing full color displays of products and images that could change as frequently as once
per minute would be detrimental; therefore, staff is recommending that the current full-color ban be kept. Also
with regard to color, staff is recommending that red should once again be allowed as an acceptable color for
monochrome displays. The proposed brightness controls and tighter pixel spacing for new signs make red
an acceptable color.
• Design criteria
In order to ensure that digital signs do not detract from the aesthetic appearance of streetscapes, the
recommended ordinance requires that an electronic module not exceed 50% of the area of the sign face, that
it is integrally designed as a part of the larger sign face or structure, that it is not the predominant element or
uppermost portion of the sign, and that it is not allowed on a pole sign. Another significant criterion is that
there would be a maximum pixel spacing of 16 mm for all new digital signs capable of allowing a selection of
more than one color (but not more than one color displayed at a time) and a maximum spacing of 19 mm for
signs that are manufactured as monochrome-only. The industry is moving toward closer pixel spacing and
this is a cutting-edge criteria intended to ensure that future signs will display a sharper image of higher quality.
Most existing digital signs in the City have pixel spacing between 19 mm and 35 mm.
• Location and number of signs
The ordinance limits the number of digital signs to not more than one wall sign or one monument sign per
street abutting any property or development, requires that such signs be at least 100 feet apart, and prohibits
them on walls of downtown buildings that are located within the boundaries of the Portable Sign Placement
Area Map (See Attachment 9). Signs that are located inside a building and visible from a street or sidewalk
will be subject to compliance with all of the regulations pertaining to method of display, flashing, color, etc.
• Compliance dates
The current code allows a fifteen year period in which signs made nonconforming by code amendments must
be brought into compliance. This fifteen year period was enacted as part of the 1994 sign code revisions.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -3- ITEM 33
Because those revisions were very comprehensive, affecting most signs that existed in the city at that time,
the City Council determined that a very generous compliance period was appropriate.
The proposed amendments recommended with this ordinance affect only a small portion of all existing signs.
Therefore, staff believes that it is not appropriate to apply the fifteen year time limit to existing digital signs. Instead,
this ordinance establishes several compliance dates of different duration for signs that are made nonconforming by
the new regulations. Staff is proposing that signs which can be corrected by simply flipping a switch (e.g., interior
window signs), will have thirty days in which to comply with the new regulations. Signs that will require more
substantial modifications, but not removal or structural modifications, will have four years. Signs that require removal
or structural changes will have eight years. However, as required by existing code provisions, such signs will have
to be brought into compliance sooner than the applicable date if the use of the property changes or if the premises
promoted by the sign comes under new ownership or tenancy and the sign is proposed to be changed for the purpose
of displaying the new name or other new identification of the premises.
Pole Signs
The sign code allows for two types of freestanding signs (signs not attached to a building). A ground sign (also known
as a monument sign), is a type of freestanding sign that consists of a sign face or cabinet that is mounted on top of
a base, the width of which is at least 80% of the width of the sign cabinet, i.e, a 10-foot wide sign cabinet mounted on
a base that is at least 8-foot wide. A pole sign, on the other hand, is often a sign cabinet mounted on top of one or
two exposed poles, with considerable air space between the sign and the ground. Pole signs are generally not as
attractive as ground signs, and in fact the sign code contains regulations that are intended to encourage the use of
ground signs as the preferred type of sign. (See Attachment 10 for pictures of monument signs and pole signs).
The completion of the 2009 sign compliance project resulted in a number of the previous nonconforming pole signs
being replaced with ground signs. However, some existing pole signs were simply lowered rather than replaced. The
number of pole signs in the city really didn’t decrease as a result of the 15 year compliance period, and there may have
actually been a slight increase in the number of such signs since some of the nonconforming signs that were ground
signs were replaced with new pole signs. As a result, opportunities to increase the number of more aesthetically
pleasing ground signs in the city through replacement did not materialize.
In order to ensure that there will be fewer new or remodeled signs supported by simply one or two exposed poles, a
Code amendment is necessary. The amendment will require that pole signs be designed in a manner that will result
in a more substantial and interesting design, helping to ensure that they will contribute to the aesthetic appearance
of the streetscape. This can be accomplished by limiting the amount of air space between the top of the sign and the
ground to not more than 40%. This added design criteria for pole signs will further the purpose of the sign code to
enhance the visual streetscape of the city.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Business owners have strongly expressed that the advertising flexibility offered by digital signs is an important factor
that contributes to increased sales and the success of local businesses. Owners installed digital signs at great
expense in reliance on the regulations adopted in 2006 and the proposed revisions will allow many of these signs to
remain without the need for expensive modifications or removal.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The primary environmental concern associated with signs in the community is their impact on the visual environment
of Fort Collins. With regard to digital signs, it is important to be proactive in considering regulations in order to manage
the potential expansion of these signs throughout the city. Staff and the Planning and Zoning Board believe that the
recommended changes will improve upon the existing standards through better and more enforceable brightness
standards and through standards that will improve the design and visual appearance of digital signs and pole signs.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -4- ITEM 33
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. Staff believes that the new regulations provide
additional standards necessary to contribute to an aesthetically pleasing environment while allowing businesses to
continue to effectively utilize digital and pole signs to convey their message. Continued monitoring of the effectiveness
of the regulations is very important and Staff is proposing that a monitoring program to analyze their effectiveness after
two years be added to the Policy and Plan Review Schedule.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its regular meeting on November 17, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 6-0 to recommend that City
Council adopt the Ordinance amending the Land Use Code.
The Board’s motion to recommend approval contained a provision that the design criteria in Sec. 3.8.7(M)(4)(e) be
amended by removing the words “or uppermost portion”. This change has the effect of allowing an electronic message
center to be placed as the uppermost portion of the sign as long as it is an integral part of the overall design of the sign.
Staff agrees with this change, and the language in the recommended ordinance has been amended.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
A number of outreach meetings have been held with stakeholders and the public to seek feedback on the issues. Staff
focused outreach on five main stakeholder groups: sign industry representatives, Chamber of Commerce, sign
owners, small business owners, and the general public. Feedback regarding pole sign design criteria was also
solicited at the meetings, but the major focus and interest was on digital signs. Most of the outreach meetings were
conducted prior to the August 9, 2011 City Council work session, with an additional 4 meetings held after the work
session.
Prior to August 9, 2011, feedback was also solicited on the City of Fort Collins’ Facebook and Your Voice websites
(70 total responses). Outreach included basic overviews of the current sign code, open-ended questions about the
use and effectiveness of digital signs, thoughts on current and potential new regulations, sign trends, and the impact
of digital signs on the streetscape both now and in the future. The majority of these respondents believed that current
standards did a good job of regulating these signs and that continued allowance of them wouldn’t have a negative
impact. (See Attachment 7 for individual responses).
In general, the sign industry representatives, Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee, and sign
owners do not support significant change to the City’s current Code. The groups strongly stressed the benefit to
businesses that digital signs offer, including ease of promoting on multi-tenant locations, employee safety, less reliance
on banners, and the ability to be timely with messaging. There was also comment that the City’s current Code does
not allow for more attractive signs by only allowing monochrome pixel type signs. It was noted that industry trends
and technology improvements are leading to more digital signs in the future, and they will have higher resolution and
messaging capabilities. (See Attachments 2, 3, and 4 for summary minutes of the meetings).
The Cityworks Alumni group and the members of the Planning and Zoning Board generally agreed that there is not
much of a problem with the digital signs as currently allowed. However, they were supportive of adjustments to the
Code to ensure quality standards with the anticipated increase in the number of such signs. They felt that continued
use would not have a detrimental affect on the streetscapes into the future as long as the signs are regulated with
regard to frequency of change, no animation, limits on the percent of a sign that can be digital, etc. The majority of
both groups expressed that such signs offered businesses additional flexibility. Some suggested that the City should
allow the use of full-color displays rather than just restricting to monochrome. (See Attachment 6 for summary minutes
of the CityWorks meeting).
What little feedback there was on the pole sign issue was about evenly split between those who believe the signs are
fine the way they are and those that believe the additional design criteria would be beneficial.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -5- ITEM 33
Meetings:
April 5 and July 7 – Industry representatives
April 22 – Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs
April 27 – Sign owners
May 11 – Two public open houses
July 7 – CityWorks alumni group
July 22 – Planning & Zoning Board work session
August 9 – City Council work session
September 27 – Digital sign demonstration display
September/October – Four meetings with the Chamber of Commerce/Fort Collins Sign Coalition (representatives from
the Chamber, sign industry, and business owners)
November 10 – Planning & Zoning Board work session
November 17 – Planning & Zoning Board public hearing
Web tools:
Your Voice
City’s Facebook page
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session summary, August 9, 2011
2. Sign industry meetings, April 5 and July 7, 2011
3. Chamber of Commerce LLAC meeting, April 22, 2011
4. Sign owners meeting, April 27, 2011
5. Open house meetings, May 11, 2011
6. CityWorks Alum meeting, July 7, 2011
7. Your Voice and Facebook Web Comments
8. Peer City Research Table
9. Portable Sign Placement Area Map
10. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, November 17, 2011
11. PowerPoint presentation
ORDINANCE NO. 178, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE
REGARDING DIGITAL SIGNS AND POLE SIGNS
WHEREAS, commencing in 1971 and continuing thereafter, the City Council has adopted
various provisions regulating the size and appearance of signs within the City all of which
regulations were designed and adopted in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the City
by regulating the design, construction and placement of signs in a manner that provides a reasonable
balance between the right of a business and/or individual to identify itself and to convey its message,
and the right of the public to an aesthetically pleasing environment; and
WHEREAS, in 2006, the City Council adopted Code provisions further regulating the use
and appearance of on-premise digital signs which regulations controlled brightness, color, size and
method of display; and
WHEREAS, since 2006, the number of on-premise digital signs has increased significantly
and, in response to this increase, and to concerns about brightness and aesthetics, the City Council
directed City staff to evaluate the possibility of further regulation of digital signs to protect the
economic and aesthetic environment of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has also requested that City staff present a proposal for
additional design criteria for pole signs for the purpose of limiting the amount of air space between
the top of the sign and the ground to make the signs more substantial and aesthetically interesting
with a view toward enhancing the aesthetic appearance of the streetscapes of the City; and
WHEREAS, City staff has prepared new regulations for the City Council to consider
regarding digital signs and pole signs; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board has examined the regulations proposed by City
staff and has recommended that the City Council adopt said regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the adoption of the regulations proposed
by City staff with regard to digital signs and pole signs are in the best interests of the health, safety
and welfare of the City and should be adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 3.8.7(A)(3)(b) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read
as follows:
3.8.7 Signs
(A) General.
. . .
(3) Nonconforming Signs.
. . .
(b) Existing on-premise signs for which a sign permit was issued pursuant to the
previous provisions of this Code, and which have become nonconforming
because of an subsequent amendments to this Code, shall be brought into
conformance with the provisions of this Section 3.8.7. within fifteen (15)
years from the date of the amendment the period of time specified in the
ordinance containing the amendment which causedcauses the
nonconformity,. In determining such period of time, the City Council shall
consider the length of time since the last Code change affecting that same
category of signs as well as the cost of bringing the signs into compliance.;
provided, however, that dDuring saidthe fifteen-year period of time that the
signs may remain non-confirming, such signs shall be maintained in good
condition and no such sign shall be:
. . .
Section 12. That Section 3.8.7(G) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new subparagraph (12) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(G) Freestanding and Ground Sign Requirements
. . .
(12) Freestanding signs (pole signs) shall contain no more than forty (40)thirty (30)
percent (forty [40] percent if located within the site distance triangle as described in
Section 3.8.7[G][1] of the Land Use Code) free air space between the top of the sign
and the ground, vertically, and between the extreme horizontal limits of the sign
extended perpendicular to the ground. A base or pole cover provided to satisfy this
requirement shall be integrally designed as part of the sign by use of such things as
color, material, and texture. Freestanding signs that existed prior to December 30,
2011 and that do not comply with this regulation shall be removed or brought into
compliance as required by Section 3.8.7(A)(3)(b) of this Land Use Code, except that
the fifteen (15) year period contained in said Section shall be changed to eight (8)
yearsby December 31, 2019, provided that such signs otherwise comply with
subsection 3.8.7(A)(3)(b).
Section 23. That Section 3.8.7(M) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Section 3.8.7 Signs
(M) Electrical Signs and electronic message center signs.
-2-
(1) Flashing, moving, blinking, chasing or other animation effects shall be
prohibited on all signs.
(2) Illuminated signs shall avoid the concentration of illumination. The intensity
of the light source shall not produce glare, the effect of which constitutes a
traffic hazard or is otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare.
(3) Every electric sign shall have affixed thereon an approved Underwriters'
Laboratories label, and all wiring connected to such sign shall comply with
all provisions of the National Electrical Code, as adopted by the city.
(4) Signs that contain an electronic message center shall be subject to the
following limitations.
(a) The electronic message center must be programmed so that the
displayed message does not change more frequently than once per
minute and so that the message change from one static display to
another occurs instantaneously without the use of scrolling, flashing,
fading or other similar effects. The message or image displayed must
be complete in itself without continuation in content to the next
message. Electronic message centers that display ONLY time and
temperature do not need to comply with the above-described time
limitations, but shall not change more frequently than once per three
seconds.
(b) The electronic message center must be provided with automatic
dimming software or solar sensors to control brightness for nighttime
viewing and variations in ambient light. Lighting from the message
center shall not exceed three tenths (.3) foot candles over the
ambient light as measured using a foot candle meter at the following
distances from the face of the message center: thirty-two (32) feet for
a sign face greater than zero (0) square feet and not more than ten
(10) square feet per side; thirty-nine (39) feet for a sign face greater
than ten (10) square feet and not more than fifteen (15) square feet
per side; forty-five (45) feet for a sign face greater than fifteen (15)
square feet and not more than twenty (20) square feet per side; fifty
(50) feet for a sign face greater than twenty (20) square feet and not
more than twenty-five (25) square feet per side; fifty-five (55) feet
for a sign face greater than twenty-five (25) square feet and not more
than thirty (30) square feet per side; fifty-nine (59) feet for a sign face
greater than thirty (30) square feet and not more than thirty-five (35)
square feet per side; sixty-three (63) feet for a sign face greater than
thirty-five (35) square feet and not more than forty (40) square feet
per side; and sixty-three (63) feet for a sign face greater than forty
(40) square feet and not more than forty-five (45) square feet per
-3-
side. Lighting measurements shall be taken with the meter aimed
directly at the message center face, with the message center turned
off, and again with the message center turned on to a full white image
for a message center capable of displaying a white color, or a full
amber or red image for a message center capable of displaying only
an amber or red color. The difference between the off and the white,
amber or red message measurements shall not exceed three tenths (.3)
footcandles. All such signs shall contain a default mechanism that
will cause the message center to revert immediately to a black screen
if the sign malfunctions.
Prior to the issuance of a permit for a sign containing an electronic
message center, the permit applicant shall provide written
certification from the sign manufacturer that the light intensity has
been factory pre-set not to exceed the levels specified above. Prior
to acceptance of the installation by the City, the permit holder shall
schedule an inspection with the City Zoning Department to verify
compliance. The permit holder and the business owner, business
manager or property manager shall be in attendance during the
inspection.
(c) A displayed message must be monochrome in an amber, green, blue,
red or white colorpresented in a single color, value and hue and the
background must also be a single color, value and hue.
(d) The maximum allowed size of an electronic message center shall
be fifty (50) percent of the total area of the sign face.
(e) Electronic message centers shall be integrally designed as part of a
larger sign face or part of the structure,integrated harmoniously into
the design of the larger sign face and structure, shall not be the
predominant element of the sign, and shall not be allowed on a
freestanding pole sign, and if located at the top of the sign, must
include a substantial cap feature above the electronic message center
which consists of the same material, form, color or texture as is found
on the sign face or structure.
(f) With respect to sign permits issued after December 30, 2011, the
pixel spacing of an electronic message center shall not exceed sixteen
(16) mm, except that the maximum pixel spacing for a message
center that is manufactured as a monochrome-only sign shall not
exceed twenty (20) mm.
(g) In the D – Downtown zone district, wall signs with electronic
message centers are not permitted on properties located within the
boundaries of the Portable Sign Placement Area Map.
-4-
(h) With respect to sign permits issued after December 30, 2011, no
more than one electronic message center sign shall be allowed to face
each street abutting or within any property and/or site specific
development plan. The minimum horizontal distance between
electronic message center signs located on the same side of a street
shall be one hundred (100) feet measured in a straight line.
(i) An electronic message center located inside a building but visible
from a public sidewalk or public street is subject to all of the
regulations contained in Section 3.8.7(M).
(j) Signs that contain an electronic message center which do not comply
with the provisions of this Section shall be removed or made to
conform as required by Section 3.8.7(A)(3)(b) of this Land Use
Code, except that the fifteen (15) year period contained in said
section shall be changed to a date certain as follows:by the dates
specified in subparts 1, 2, and 3 below and provided that such signs
otherwise comply with subsection 3.8.7(A)(3)(b).
1. Electronic message centers that contain dimming software or
solar sensors capable of meeting the brightness levels
described in Section 3.8.7(M)(4)(b) shall be required to
comply with such levels by January 31, 2012, and all
electronic message centers located inside a building but
visible from a public sidewalk or public street shall be
required to comply with Sections 3.8.7(M)(1) and
3.8.7(M)(4)(a) and (c) by January 31, 2012.
2. Except as otherwise required in subsection (j)(1) above, all
signs that do not comply with the requirements of Sections
3.8.7(M)(4)(a), (b), and/or (c) shall be made to comply with
those requirements by December 31, 2015.
3. Structural changes or sign removal that may be required in
order to comply with the requirements of Sections
3.8.7(M)(4)(d),(e), and or (g) shall be completed by
December 31, 2019.
Section 34. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition
of a new definition “Electronic message center” which reads in its entirety as follows:
Electronic message center shall mean the portion of an on-premise ground or wall sign that
is capable of displaying words or images that can be electronically changed by remote or automatic
means.
-5-
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-6-
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Kurt Ravenschlag, Jeremy Yonce,
Mark Clitnovici, Jerry Schaiger
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 17
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2011, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Transfer to
the Transit Services Fund and Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Transit Services Fund for the Safe Ride
Home Weekend Bus Service.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has had recent discussions with the Associated Students of Colorado State
University (ASCSU) about creating an additional transportation option for people leaving the downtown area on
weekend nights. In this partnership Police Services hopes to accomplish important goals of reducing the number of
people and the associated problems in the downtown area and increasing traffic safety by giving people an additional
option for leaving downtown safely and decreasing the number of drivers who have been drinking during this
timeframe. The available transportation is unable to meet the demand for transportation during this timeframe.
ASCSU has an interest in providing this service for students and is willing to invest funds from student fees to address
this need. By combining available funding, these parties are able to provide this service to all members of our
community for a modest fare. The proposal is to enter into a one year contract between ASCSU and Transfort to
provide two fixed bus routes on Friday and Saturday nights, every weekend during the term of the Agreement, from
11:30 p.m. to 2:30 a.m. An ongoing assessment will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of this project, any
potential improvements, and explore opportunities for long-term funding. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on
First Reading on December 6, 2011, appropriates the funds for the operation of a late night bus service.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - December 6, 2011
(w/o attachments)
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: December 6, 2011
STAFF: Kurt Ravenschlag, Jeremy Yonce,
Mark Clitnovici, Jerry Schaiger
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 34
SUBJECT
Items relating to the Safe Ride Home Program.
A. Resolution 2011-108 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with the Board of Governors of the
Colorado State University System for the Benefit of the Associated Students of Colorado State University to
Create the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2011, Appropriating Unanticipated Reserves in the Transit Fund For the
Operation of a Late Night Bus Service.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has had recent discussions with the Associated Students of Colorado State
University (ASCSU) about creating an additional transportation option for people leaving the downtown area on
weekend nights. In this partnership Police Services hopes to accomplish important goals of reducing the number of
people and the associated problems in the downtown area and increasing traffic safety by giving people an additional
option for leaving downtown safely and decreasing the number of drivers who have been drinking during this
timeframe. The available transportation is unable to meet the demand for transportation during this timeframe.
ASCSU has an interest in providing this service for students and is willing to invest funds from student fees to address
this need. By combining available funding, these parties are able to provide this service to all members of our
community for a modest fare. The proposal is to enter into a one year contract between ASCSU and Transfort to
provide two fixed bus routes on Friday and Saturday nights, every weekend during the term of the Agreement, from
11:30 PM to 2:30 AM. An ongoing assessment will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of this project, any
potential improvements, and explore opportunities for long-term funding.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
One of the most challenging issues for the District One officers of FCPS is the safe management of approximately
4,000 people who exit the many liquor licensed businesses in the downtown area at bar closing time. The existing
transportation options for people leaving the downtown area at this time primarily consist of taxis and the Ram Ride
program supported by ASCSU. These available transportation options do not meet the demand at this time. This
creates a situation where people either stay in the area, which contributes to the difficulty of managing the behavior
of this number of people, or may choose to drive after drinking. Additionally, ASCSU has an interest in providing safe
transportation for students during this timeframe.
FCPS and ASCSU have developed a positive relationship in addressing issues where complementary interests exist,
such as with the Party Registration program and the Community Welcome. Discussions about transportation options
downtown began recently, and mutual interests were identified. This proposal involves providing four buses that will
run two dedicated routes to areas where a high volume of students and other residents who frequent the downtown
area live. The pilot program will operate on Friday and Saturday nights between the hours of 11:30 PM and 2:30 AM.
Extensive surveying conducted by ASCSU and FCPS has indicated strong support for this service. In addition, many
of the bars downtown have expressed an interest in this program and have proposed purchasing tickets for this service
in advance and providing them to bar patrons.
The funding for this pilot program for 2012 will include $50,000 from FCPS Camera Radar funds, $34,000 from ASCSU
student fees, fares generated by a proposed one-dollar per ride fare and potential advertising revenues generated by
this service. FCPS generates revenue from Camera Radar, which is used to support traffic safety initiatives and other
police-related needs. This project is a good use of this non-tax funding source as it provides safe transportation for
people leaving the downtown area who may have been consuming alcohol. In addition, this service provides an
environmentally beneficial public transportation option during this high traffic timeframe. Even with the preliminary
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
December 6, 2011 -2- ITEM 34
surveying that shows a very positive response to this service, it is difficult to estimate the actual ridership. For this
reason, the contract for this service will be written to allow for the cancellation of the contract before the year is
completed. FCPS has committed to making up any shortage in the cost of this service from the same funding source
if funds generated do not pay the remaining costs for the contract.
This Resolution authorizes the City Manager to enter into a contract with ASCSU to provide this service and the
Ordinance appropriates $34,000 in revenue from ASCSU in two payments during 2012. The service will be provided
by a private company under contract with Transfort and using existing Transfort buses.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
FCPS will contribute $50,000 from existing funds that have been generated by fines paid for Camera Radar tickets
with the understanding that additional funds may be necessary to complete the payment of the contract. This
partnership includes funding from ASCSU student fees in the amount of $34,000 to be paid in two payments. Additional
funding will be generated from fares paid by users of this service and advertising revenues generated. This service
will provide employment for drivers from a private company that will be contracted by Transfort for this purpose.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The environmental impacts of this pilot project are expected to be positive by providing mass transportation service
to hundreds of people who may otherwise be traveling by automobiles.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its November 16, 2011 meeting, the Transportation Board unanimously supported the proposal.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
A survey of people leaving the downtown area during this timeframe was conducted by ASCSU and FCPS. In addition,
a Student Voice Survey was conducted electronically by ASCSU. These surveys showed that 94% of the people
surveyed liked the idea of providing public transportation during this timeframe. This survey data also helped to
determine the best routes for this service. At a meeting with bar owners and managers this concept was presented,
and there was strong support.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of the proposed service
2. Transportation Board minutes, November 16, 2011
3. Survey data
4. PowerPoint presentation
ORDINANCE NO. 179, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND
FOR TRANSFER TO THE TRANSIT SERVICES FUND AND APPROPRIATING
UNANTICIPATED REVENUE IN THE TRANSIT SERVICES FUND FOR THE SAFE RIDE
HOME WEEKEND BUS SERVICE
WHEREAS, Fort Collins Police Services has had discussions with the Associated Students
of Colorado State University (“ASCSU”) about creating an additional transportation option for
students leaving the downtown area on weekend nights; and
WHEREAS, approximately four thousand people exit the downtown area during the late
night hours in connection with the closing of the downtown liquor-licensed establishments; and
WHEREAS, the existing transportation options for people leaving the downtown area during
the late night hours is limited to taxis and the Ram Ride program and is insufficient to accommodate
the need for transportation services during those hours; and
WHEREAS, in order to increase traffic safety by giving people an additional option for
leaving the downtown area without the necessity of driving automobiles after having been drinking,
ASCSU and Fort Collins Police Services have developed the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service
for the purpose of operating two fixed bus routes on Friday and Saturday nights every weekend
during the term of the agreement, from 11:30 p.m. to 2:30 a.m.; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2011-108, the City Council has determined that it is in
the best interests of the City that the City Manager enter into an intergovernmental agreement with
the Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System , acting on behalf of the ASCSU,
to create the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service; and
WHEREAS, in Ordinance No. 114, 1999, and in subsequent City budgets, the City Council
authorized the use of excess revenue from camera radar funds for other programs intended to
address other City traffic problems; and
WHEREAS, funding for the program will include Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) from
the Camera Radar Reserve in the General Fund; Thirty Four Thousand Dollars ($34,000) from
ASCSU Student Fees; an estimated Twenty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($25,500) from
fares generated by a proposed One Dollar ($1) per ride fare; and an estimated Ten Thousand Dollars
($10,000) from potential advertising revenues that might be generated by this service; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance appropriates the total amount of $119,500 in the Transit Services
Fund for the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate
by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from
reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously
appropriated; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make
supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total
amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for
that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be
received during the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the appropriation of the revenue as described
herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Transit Services Fund to exceed the
current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year.
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to transfer
by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one
fund to another fund, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended
remains unchanged.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in
the General Fund the sum of FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,000) for transfer to the Transit
Services Fund and appropriated therein for the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service.
Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated revenue
in the Transit Services Fund the sum of SIXTY-NINE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS
($69,500) for the Safe Ride Home Weekend Bus Service.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 6th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Wendy Williams
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 18
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011–110 Approving a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City and the Northern Colorado Lodge #3, Colorado Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), using an interest based
bargaining approach, engaged in negotiations regarding the terms and conditions of a possible bargaining agreement
for 2012 and 2013. City staff and the FOP have tentatively reached an agreement. On November 30, 2011,
bargaining unit members voted to ratify the proposed agreement.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Passage of Citizen Ordinance No. 001 in August 2004 by City voters modified the City Code to provide for collective
bargaining between the City and members of the Police Services bargaining unit. Members of the bargaining unit
selected the Northern Colorado Lodge #3, Colorado Fraternal Order of Police to serve as their bargaining agent.
Adoption of the Resolution would approve the terms and conditions of employment for members of the bargaining unit
for 2012 and 2013 and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.
A summary of the bargaining agreement is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit “A”.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The financial cost impact for 2012 will be approximately $450,000. The financial impact for 2013 is unknown but is
estimated to be approximately $390,000, including a 2% salary budget which will vary by position, based on market.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
RESOLUTION 2011-110
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROVING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
WITH THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE
WHEREAS, on August 10, 2004, the electors of the City approved at a special City election
an ordinance that contains a comprehensive scheme for collective bargaining between the City and
certain employees of its Police Services (the "Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance amended the City Code by adding a new Division 7 to Article
VII Chapter 2 of the Code entitled "Public Safety Administration Cooperative Agreement"; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2005, the District Court for Larimer County, Colorado,
entered an Order in Case Number 05 CV 1146 invalidating portions of the Ordinance dealing
primarily with binding arbitration and leaving intact those portions of the ordinance requiring good
faith negotiations between the City and the designated bargaining agent; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Ordinance, the Northern Colorado Lodge #3,
Colorado Fraternal Order of Police ("FOP") was selected as the designated bargaining agent for
those employees of Police Services who are members of the bargaining unit; and
WHEREAS, the City and the FOP entered into a collective bargaining agreement for 2006
and 2007, which agreement expired on December 31, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the City and the FOP entered into a collective bargaining agreement for 2008
and 2009, which agreement expired on December 31, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City and the FOP entered into a collective bargaining agreement for 2010
and 2011, which agreement will expire on December 31, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the City and the FOP have, pursuant to the provisions of the Ordinance,
engaged in negotiations regarding the terms and conditions of a possible collective bargaining
agreement for 2012 and 2013; and
WHEREAS, City staff and the FOP have tentatively reached an agreement which addresses
the terms and conditions of employment of the members of the bargaining unit for 2012 and 2013;
and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended Council approval of such agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having considered the terms and conditions of the agreement,
believes that it would be in the best interests of the City to approve the same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the City Council hereby approves the terms and conditions of that certain collective
bargaining agreement, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and a summary of
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "A", and authorizes
the City Manager to execute the collective bargaining agreement on behalf of the City.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
1
Exhibit A
The City (City of Fort Collins) management and the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police),
representing the members of the Fort Collins Police Services Bargaining Unit, have
reached a tentative agreement for the 2012-13 contract.
The following is a summary of the agreement.
1. General Contract Language: The 2010-11 contract contained certain provisions
which were ambiguous, out of date, or rendered obsolete under current law. A
number of minor corrections were made to address these issues and bring the contract
up to date.
2. Furlough Days: The City and the FOP agreed upon the fundamental ability of the
City to use furloughs to manage the budget during difficult times.
a. The City and the FOP agreed the City has the sole discretion to manage the
budget and implement furlough days as necessary due to budgetary reasons or
service prioritization.
b. The City agreed to work with Bargaining Unit members through the Labor
Management Committee to inform members when furlough days will be
implemented and work together to design a method of implementation which
minimizes the impact on members of the bargaining unit.
3. Sharing of bargaining expenses (Fair Share): The FOP and the City agreed to a new
system which will create an option for all individuals who are covered by the
bargaining unit contract to share in the costs of negotiating and maintaining the
contract, regardless of their membership in the FOP.
4. Dispatch pay skill levels: The Dispatch skill level was modified from five to six steps
with defined skill requirements for each level to accomplish this purpose.
5. RHS (Retirement Health Savings): Because bargaining unit members frequently
work in physically demanding positions and under dynamic circumstances, this can
result in increased workplace injuries which have a negative effect on bargaining unit
members and cause increased costs to the city.
a. To address this problem, the City and the FOP have agreed to support a BFO
(Budgeting for Outcomes) offer in 2012 to seek funding for a 1% base pay
match by the City for Bargaining Unit members existing RHS contributions.
b. If the BFO offer is successful, the RHS match would begin in 2013.
c. Based on a 2% contribution to RHS (1% from the Bargaining Unit employee
and 1% from the City), Bargaining Unit employees can accrue sufficient
funding to cover health care costs between retirement age and Medicare
eligibility.
6. Long Term Disability and Medicare: Through discussion and research by the City
and FOP, it was confirmed Bargaining Unit members who are over the age of 55 and
2
have served more than 25 years as a Police Officer are ineligible for coverage under
the State of Colorado’s FPPA (Fire and Police Pension Association) disability
program. Additionally, there are 12 members of the bargaining unit who were hired
prior to 1986 and the City has not participated in the 1.45% contribution to Medicare
for these employees. As a result, these employees are ineligible for Medicare upon
retirement.
a. The City has agreed to include Bargaining Unit members who are not eligible
for FPPA in the City Long Term disability program.
b. The City has also agreed to contribute 1.45% of salary which would normally
be allocated to Medicare to the individual RHS accounts of the 12 employees
who were hired prior to 1986 and not covered by Medicare.
7. Leave Policies: The FOP and the City agreed on a leave policy which is in line with
the market, equitable with other City employees, and provides for the health and well-
being of bargaining unit employees.
a. Sick Leave:
i. The Bargaining Unit employees will participate in the standard sick
leave policy including STD (Short Term Disability) offered by the
City.
ii. Bargaining Unit employees will have the ability to roll accrued sick
leave from their existing leave amount into their STD bank up to a
maximum of 265 hours.
b. Vacation:
i. Bargaining Unit employees will participate in the standard vacation
accrual policy offered by the City.
c. Floating Holiday:
i. The Bargaining Unit employees will retain one floating holiday.
d. Emergency Leave:
i. The Emergency Leave policy will be unchanged.
8. Market Compensation Adjustments: The City and the FOP agreed to salary
adjustments bringing Bargaining Unit employees as close to market as possible with
the available funding provided by City Council.
a. The salary adjustments, by position, are as follows:
i. Police Officer: 2.0% increase.
ii. Police Sergeant: .83% increase.
iii. Police Lieutenant: 2.9% increase.
iv. Dispatcher: 1.74% increase.
v. Dispatch Supervisor: 0.9% increase.
vi. Dispatch Manager: 9.9% increase.
Consistent with the current contract, salaries for Skill Level 3 and above will also include
a performance component. Employees with a 3 rating will be based on the salary
adjustments above. An additional $500 is added to salaries for employees with a 4 rating
and an additional $1000 is added for those with a 5 rating. Salaries are reduced by $500
for employees with a 2 rating and by $1000 for employees with a 1 rating.
3
In 2013, skill level pay for all positions will be adjusted based on market data using the
previously agreed upon comparable jurisdictions. The adjustments cannot exceed an
overall 2% increase above 2012 salary levels within the bargaining unit.
9. Unpaid Administrative Leave:
a. The FOP and the City agree on the importance of protecting the public trust
through the proper use of salary expenditures by the City as well as the
significance of providing employees with an equitable due process system.
b. The City and the FOP agreed to develop a committee under the direction of
the Human Resources Director to research the issue of Unpaid Administrative
Leave. The committee will be comprised of representatives from both the
FOP and the City. The committee will identify and evaluate the variables
related to unpaid administrative leave and prepare a solution which may be
included in the next contract negotiation.
1
Exhibit A
The City (City of Fort Collins) management and the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police),
representing the members of the Fort Collins Police Services Bargaining Unit, have
reached a tentative agreement for the 2012-13 contract.
The following is a summary of the agreement.
1. General Contract Language: The 2010-11 contract contained certain provisions
which were ambiguous, out of date, or rendered obsolete under current law. A
number of minor corrections were made to address these issues and bring the contract
up to date.
2. Furlough Days: The City and the FOP agreed upon the fundamental ability of the
City to use furloughs to manage the budget during difficult times.
a. The City and the FOP agreed the City has the sole discretion to manage the
budget and implement furlough days as necessary due to budgetary reasons or
service prioritization.
b. The City agreed to work with Bargaining Unit members through the Labor
Management Committee to inform members when furlough days will be
implemented and work together to design a method of implementation which
minimizes the impact on members of the bargaining unit.
3. Sharing of bargaining expenses (Fair Share): The FOP and the City agreed to a new
system which will create an option for all individuals who are covered by the
bargaining unit contract to share in the costs of negotiating and maintaining the
contract, regardless of their membership in the FOP.
4. Dispatch pay skill levels: The Dispatch skill level was modified from five to six steps
with defined skill requirements for each level to accomplish this purpose.
5. RHS (Retirement Health Savings): Because bargaining unit members frequently
work in physically demanding positions and under dynamic circumstances, this can
result in increased workplace injuries which have a negative effect on bargaining unit
members and cause increased costs to the city.
a. To address this problem, the City and the FOP have agreed to support a BFO
(Budgeting for Outcomes) offer in 2012 to seek funding for a 1% base pay
match by the City for Bargaining Unit members existing RHS contributions.
b. If the BFO offer is successful, the RHS match would begin in 2013.
c. Based on a 2% contribution to RHS (1% from the Bargaining Unit employee
and 1% from the City), Bargaining Unit employees can accrue sufficient
funding to cover health care costs between retirement age and Medicare
eligibility.
6. Long Term Disability and Medicare: Through discussion and research by the City
and FOP, it was confirmed Bargaining Unit members who are over the age of 55 and
2
have served more than 25 years as a Police Officer are ineligible for coverage under
the State of Colorado’s FPPA (Fire and Police Pension Association) disability
program. Additionally, there are 12 members of the bargaining unit who were hired
prior to 1986 and the City has not participated in the 1.45% contribution to Medicare
for these employees. As a result, these employees are ineligible for Medicare upon
retirement.
a. The City has agreed to include Bargaining Unit members who are not eligible
for FPPA in the City Long Term disability program.
b. The City has also agreed to contribute 1.45% of salary which would normally
be allocated to Medicare to the individual RHS accounts of the 12 employees
who were hired prior to 1986 and not covered by Medicare.
7. Leave Policies: The FOP and the City agreed on a leave policy which is in line with
the market, equitable with other City employees, and provides for the health and well-
being of bargaining unit employees.
a. Sick Leave:
i. The Bargaining Unit employees will participate in the standard sick
leave policy including STD (Short Term Disability) offered by the
City.
ii. Bargaining Unit employees will have the ability to roll accrued sick
leave from their existing leave amount into their STD bank up to a
maximum of 265 hours.
b. Vacation:
i. Bargaining Unit employees will participate in the standard vacation
accrual policy offered by the City.
c. Floating Holiday:
i. The Bargaining Unit employees will retain one floating holiday.
d. Emergency Leave:
i. The Emergency Leave policy will be unchanged.
8. Market Compensation Adjustments: The City and the FOP agreed to salary
adjustments bringing Bargaining Unit employees as close to market as possible with
the available funding provided by City Council.
a. The salary adjustments, by position, are as follows:
i. Police Officer: 2.0% increase.
ii. Police Sergeant: .83% increase.
iii. Police Lieutenant: 2.9% increase.
iv. Dispatcher: 1.74% increase.
v. Dispatch Supervisor: 0.9% increase.
vi. Dispatch Manager: 9.9% increase.
Consistent with the current contract, salaries for Skill Level 3 and above will also include
a performance component. Employees with a 3 rating will be based on the salary
adjustments above. An additional $500 is added to salaries for employees with a 4 rating
and an additional $1000 is added for those with a 5 rating. Salaries are reduced by $500
for employees with a 2 rating and by $1000 for employees with a 1 rating.
3
In 2013, skill level pay for all positions will be adjusted based on market data using the
previously agreed upon comparable jurisdictions. The adjustments cannot exceed an
overall 2% increase above 2012 salary levels within the bargaining unit.
9. Unpaid Administrative Leave:
a. The FOP and the City agree on the importance of protecting the public trust
through the proper use of salary expenditures by the City as well as the
significance of providing employees with an equitable due process system.
b. The City and the FOP agreed to develop a committee under the direction of
the Human Resources Director to research the issue of Unpaid Administrative
Leave. The committee will be comprised of representatives from both the
FOP and the City. The committee will identify and evaluate the variables
related to unpaid administrative leave and prepare a solution which may be
included in the next contract negotiation.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Kurt Ravenschlag
Karl Gannon
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 19
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-111 Authorizing the Filing of Application with the Federal Transit Administration, an Operating
Administration of the United States Department of Transportation, for Federal Transportation Assistance Authorized
by 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, Title 23 United States Code and Other Federal Statutes Administered by the Federal Transit
Administration.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Fort Collins receives approximately $2.7million annually (five year average) in federal assistance from the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for mass transportation projects. One requirement to receive this federal
assistance is that the City retains on file with the FTA, an Authorizing Resolution from City Council that authorizes the
City Manager or his/her designee on behalf of the City of Fort Collins to:
(a) execute and file application for federal assistance with the FTA
(b) execute federal assistance awards (grants) and cooperative agreements with the FTA
(c) execute and file the annual certifications and assurances and other documents that are required by the FTA
before federal assistance is awarded.
The FTA has requested that the City of Fort Collins update the current Authorizing Resolution it has on file for the City,
dated November 1990.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In preparation for the City's triennial federal review in 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has requested
that the City update the required documentation and forms on file with the FTA, in order to become current with its filing
requirements. Both the Authorizing Resolution and Opinion of Counsel documents that are on file with the FTA are
in excess of 10 years old. Complying with federal requirements is essential to receiving annual federal transit
assistance and the remittance of updated documentation to the FTA will ensure the City's participation in future federal
assistance awards.
In addition to updating the Authorizing Resolution, the FTA has requested that the City provide an updated "Opinion
of Counsel" as the version it currently has on file is dated February 1991. Please see Attachment 1 for an updated
version of the Opinion of Counsel that staff will remit to the FTA along with the Authorizing Resolution.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Failure to provide the requested documentation to the FTA could lead to the City not being allowed to participate in
future mass transportation federal assistance awards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Opinion of Counsel
RESOLUTION 2011-111
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF APPLICATION WITH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, AN OPERATING ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR FEDERAL
TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE AUTHORIZED BY 49 U.S.C. CHAPTER 53,
TITLE 23 UNITED STATES CODE AND OTHER FEDERAL STATUTES
ADMINISTERED BY THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
WHEREAS, the Federal Transportation Administrator has been delegated authority to award
Federal financial assistance for a transportation project; and
WHEREAS, the grant or cooperative agreement for Federal Financial assistance will impose
certain obligations upon applicants, and may require the City of Fort Collins, as the “Applicant” for
Mass Transportation Assistance Grants (the “Projects”) to provide the local share of the project cost;
and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has or will provide all annual certifications and assurances to the
Federal Transit Administration required for the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECTS, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Manager or his/her designee is authorized to execute and file
application for Federal assistance on behalf of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, with the Federal
Transit Administration for Federal Assistance authorized by 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, Title 23, United
States Code, or other Federal statutes authorizing a project administered by the Federal Transit
Administration.
Section 2. That the City Manager or his/her designee is authorized to execute and file
with its application the annual certification and assurances and other documents the Federal Transit
Administration requires before awarding a Federal assistance grant or cooperative agreement.
Section 3. That the City Manager or his/her designee is authorized to execute grant and
cooperative agreements with the Federal Transit Administration on behalf of the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: John Stokes
Daylan Figgs
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 20
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-112 Adopting an Updated Policy for the Review and Approval of Easements on City Natural Areas
and Conserved Lands.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Open Lands Easement Policy was adopted by Resolution 2001-094. To
date, approximately forty right-of-way easements have been granted by the City under this Policy. The Natural Areas
program (NAP) is proposing revisions to the Policy to address:
1. Compensation and mitigation requirements
2. Review and approval of projects proposed within existing easements
3. Above-ground features associated with buried utility cables and pipelines
4. Specific types of facilities
5. Review and approval of projects within new or existing utility easements on lands conserved with Conservation
Easements
6. Oil and Gas and Minerals Exploration and Production
7. Public Information and Review Process.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Open Lands Easement Policy was adopted by Resolution 2001-94. To date,
approximately forty right-of-way easements have been granted by the City under this Policy. The Natural Areas
program (NAP) is proposing revisions to the Policy to address:
1. Compensation and Mitigation
The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Open Lands Easement Policy (Resolution 2001-94, July 17, 2001) (current
Policy) requires the City to be compensated for the value of the right-of-way easement and the costs for processing
and managing the easement. Proposed revisions to the policy will require that compensation be required for the loss
of ecological services and recreation values of the property (ecological goods and services). Compensation for the
value of the land and for damages will continue to be based on fair market value as determined by accepted appraisal
techniques. Compensation for loss in ecological goods and services will be based on values reported in appropriate
professional and technical publications. Compensation for losses in ecological goods and services may be negotiated
to be paid in cash or through the completion of appropriate mitigation measures, either on or off the property impacted
by the easement. Loss in ecological goods and services will be compensated on a weighted, multi-year scale to
capture the time it takes for the ecological goods and services to return to a pre-disturbance condition.
It is important to note that some entities have the authority to condemn City owned lands. NAP will negotiate the value
of the easement as directed by the Policy. However, the final value may be influenced by factors outside the scope
of this Policy and may differ from the methods described in the Policy.
2. New Projects Within Existing Easements
The current Policy is limited to new requests for easements or rights-of-way and is silent on new projects within
easements previously granted by the City or within easements granted prior to City ownership. The revised Policy
addresses new projects within existing easements and states the City take advantage of any opportunity to establish
terms and conditions or specific project plans consistent with the terms of this Policy.
Easements previously granted may not require advance notice to the City for work proposed on a natural area or
conserved land. The revised Policy states that in connection with any work anticipated to take place within an existing
easement, the City will establish a mutually agreed plan for notification and consultation regarding the work. Also, the
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 20
City will negotiate with the easement holder to establish a process for advance coordination, scheduling and planning
for avoidance of impacts and mitigation, if necessary.
3. Above Ground Features or Markers
Above ground features or markers associated with buried utilities are addressed in the current Resource Protection
Standards for Easements and Rights-of-Way but not within the governing Policy. The revised Policy requires that any
above-ground features associated with buried utility cables and pipelines will not be allowed on City property unless
required by applicable technical standards for public safety and utility marking or other applicable legal or regulatory
requirements. The location, color and height of any such above-ground features must be approved by the City.
4. Specific Types of Facilities
The revised Policy generally prohibits private streets or other private access, overhead electric lines, and drainage
facilities on City property. However, the Policy does recognize there may be cases where these types of facilities may
be beneficial to the City, and therefore may be allowed in these specific instances.
5. Conservation Easements
The current Policy does not address request for new easements or new projects within easements previously granted
on lands conserved with conservation easements (a conservation easement is a deeded property right that restricts
the development of a property). The owners of private property protected by a conservation easement, which
easement held by the City’s Natural Areas program, may receive requests for right-of-way easements across their
property for roads, utilities and other uses. Notice to the City of the easement request generally is required within the
terms of the conservation easement, and ideally property owners (or entities seeking a new right-of-way) will notify the
Natural Areas program
6. Oil and Gas and Minerals Exploration
The revised Policy recognizes that access, pipeline, and other easements may be requested in connection with the
exploration of oil and gas, and mineral resources. The Policy prohibits granting of these types of easements unless
crossing the City’s land is the only feasible means or unless it is determined to be of benefit to the City property in the
specific circumstance. The Policy also states the most current version of the Natural Areas Programs Best
Management Practices will be incorporated and used in connection with oil and gas exploration activities.
7. Public Information and Review Process
The applicant requesting an easement on City-owned natural area or conserved land will be required to arrange for
a public meeting to describe the project and respond to questions posed by the public. Documentation of the public
meeting will be provided to the City. The public process is in addition to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
and City Council review.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
As a condition of approval for any easement or right-of-way, the City requires compensation for the value of the
easement or right-of-way, the administrative costs for processing and managing the easement, and the value in the
loss of ecological services, recreation values, and other intrinsic values of the property.
A base administrative fee of $1,500 in 2011 dollars will be charged to process easement requests. The fee will be paid
by the Grantee at the time the easement is granted. Staff will track its cost to administer the easement and will bill the
Grantee for any cost in excess of $1,500 at a rate of $100 per hour for staff time. Staff will regularly inform the
applicant of the costs the applicant is incurring during the administrative process.
Following final grading and initial seeding of the disturbed site and acceptance by the City, the NAP will be responsible
for ongoing vegetation management, including weed control, mowing, and reseeding, as needed. The cost for the City
to perform the vegetation management over the next five to ten years is calculated to be three thousand dollars
($3,000.00) per acre of disturbance based on grassland / shrubland cover types. Vegetation management fees will
December 20, 2011 -3- ITEM 20
be determined for other cover types on a case-by-case basis. The cost of this service will be evaluated and adjusted
as needed.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
All impacts associated with the granting of the easement will be restored. Impacts during construction activities will
be restored to the current version of the Natural Areas and Conserved Lands Resource Protection Standards.
The Policy recognizes the temporary loss in ecological services that will result from granting the easement and requires
Natural Areas to be compensated through cash, mitigation efforts or a combination of both. In general, compensation
and fees will be administered so as to result in a net benefit to the site being impacted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its December 14, 2011, meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board discussed the proposed Policy.
A memo from the Board has been provided and minutes from the meeting will be provided in the “Read-before” packet
on Tuesday, December 20, 2011.
ATTACHMENTS
1. City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Conserved Lands Easement Policy with major changes highlighted
2. Natural Areas and Conserved Lands Resource Protection Standards
3. Guidance Document: Compensation and Mitigation Requirements for Easements on City of Fort Collins
Natural Areas and Conserved Lands (November 2011)
4. Guidance Document: Alternatives Analysis for Easements on City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and
Conserved Lands (December 2011)
5. Work Session Summary, November 30, 2011
6. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, September 14 and October 12, 2011
7. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board memo, December 15, 2011
1
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL AREAS AND CONSERVED LANDS
EASEMENT POLICY
Original Policy Adopted by Resolution 2001 – 94, July 17, 2001
***Note: Changes to original text or new text in this revised policy are highlighted in
green***
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the policy statement is to clarify the policies and procedures of the City of
Fort Collins (“City”) with respect to requests for easements or rights-of-way that affect
publicly owned Natural Areas or other lands that are managed by the Natural Resources
Department; lands owned in part by the Natural Resources Department; and private lands
with Conservation Easements held by the Natural Resources Department. The policy
does not apply to requests for easements or rights-of-way on or across other lands owned
by the City.
APPLICABILITY:
The policy applies to requests for new easements or rights-of-way and to projects within
existing easements, as appropriate, which provide for a wide variety of purposes,
including without limitation, streets, water, sewer, drainage, flood control, electric power,
wind generation, solar generation, pipelines, oil and gas and minerals exploration, and
telecommunications facilities. The policy applies to projects of the City as well as those
proposed by other public entities, such as special Utility Districts, and private parties.
The policy does not apply to trails, parking lots, interpretive features or other facilities
that are proposed as part of the management of public natural areas.
GENERAL POLICY:
Most of the natural areas and other conserved lands addressed by these policies were
acquired by the City with dedicated funds from sales taxes that were approved by the
voters of Fort Collins or Larimer County for the specific purpose of protecting natural
areas and conserved lands. These lands are part of the fabric of the Fort Collins
community, and are viewed as a type of “community facility” intended to meet specific
community goals.
For natural areas, the goal is to “preserve and protect natural areas within Fort Collins
and the Community Growth Management Area to provide habitat essential to the
conservation of plants, animals, and their associated ecosystems and to enrich the lives
of citizens by providing opportunities for education, scientific research, nature
interpretation, art, fishing, wildlife observation, hiking and other activities.”
For other types of conserved lands, e.g., agricultural areas, lands are protected to shape
the physical structure of the community: These lands “provide the community with a
well-defined edge, establish community separators, direct growth, and preserve rural
character.”
2
Requests for easements or rights-of-way that affect natural areas or other conserved lands
must be considered within this context. Accordingly, the general policy is to avoid, to the
maximum extent feasible, granting easements or rights-of-way for activities that will
adversely affect the use of the land for meeting the community’s goals for natural area
protection or community shaping. Where easements or rights-of-way are authorized by
ordinance of the City Council, the general policy is to minimize the impact on the natural
area or the community, to the maximum extent feasible, by limiting the size and visibility
of the area affected, managing construction or other human activities with respect to their
timing, duration, and frequency of occurrence, and restoring affected areas to a condition
that is equal to or better than the condition at the time the easement is granted.
Because the natural areas and other conserved lands owned by the City are in many
instances within an urban context, it is recognized that easements and rights-of-way may
be necessary to allow for the orderly development of the community in accordance with
the adopted Plan Fort Collins (2011). Individual easement requests will be evaluated in
accordance with both the general policy and with the specific policies listed in following
sections.
In addition, many properties owned by the City were subject to easements and rights-of-
way granted by prior owners at the time the City acquired them. In connection with any
work anticipated to take place within an existing easement, the City will establish a
mutually agreed plan for notification and consultation regarding the work. The City will
negotiate with the easement holder to establish a process for advance coordination,
scheduling and planning for avoidance of impacts and mitigation, if necessary.
SPECIFIC TYPES OF FACILITIES:
Public Streets. New public highways, roads, or streets will not be allowed within City-
owned natural areas or conserved lands, except for those specifically identified in the
adopted City Master Street Plan or comparable Master Transportation Plan adopted by
the appropriate governing body in cases where the natural area or conserved land is
located outside of the city limits of Fort Collins. Widening or other street improvement
projects on existing streets within natural areas or conserved lands will be allowed,
consistent with the City Master Street Plan or comparable adopted Master Transportation
Plan. The City will work to influence the alignment and design of any highway, road, or
street improvement so as to avoid or minimize the effect on the natural area or conserved
land.
Private Streets or Other Private Access. Requests by private parties for private streets
or access easements to cross natural areas or conserved lands in order to gain access to a
private parcel of land will not be considered unless crossing the City’s is the only feasible
means of providing access to a legal parcel of land, or unless determined to be beneficial
for the Natural Areas Program in the specific circumstances.
Overhead Electric Power, Telephone, or Cable Lines. New overhead cable lines will
not be allowed within any City-owned natural area or conserved land, unless determined
to be beneficial for the Natural Areas Program in the specific circumstances.
Replacement of existing overhead cables with underground cables will generally be
3
encouraged unless the installation of underground lines will result in adverse impact to
the natural area that is inconsistent with these policies. Use of the latest technology
reasonably available will also be encouraged.
Any change in above ground features (number of poles, pole height, number of wires,
etc) within easements granted by the City or granted prior to City ownership of the land
(to the extent there is an opportunity to negotiate or impose new conditions) will require
review and approval by the City.
Aboveground Structures. New buildings or other structures, including without
limitation, towers, transmitters, receiving stations, tanks, substations, or billboards, other
than those of the City, will not be allowed on City-owned natural areas or conserved
lands. The City will seek and take advantage of opportunities to require or negotiate for
the undergrounding, avoidance or removal of above-ground structures associated with
existing infrastructure.
Underground Utility Cables or Pipelines. Consistent with standard practice within
Fort Collins, underground utility cables (e.g., electric, telephone, fiber optic, etc.) and
pipelines (e.g., gas, water, sewer) will be located within the street and utility right-of-way
adjacent to the natural area or conserved land. In instances where the existing right-of-
way does not conform to the planned future street right-of-way as depicted on the
applicable adopted Master Transportation Plan, cable or pipeline easements will be
located parallel to the existing roadway and within the area encompassed by the future
street and utility right-of-way.
Some larger utility transmission cables or pipelines are not typically placed beneath
streets due to reliability or safety concerns. In instances where the cable or pipeline
cannot safely be placed within the road right-of-way, it will be located as close as
practicable, and parallel to the road right-of-way.
Above-ground features associated with buried utility cables and pipelines will not be
allowed on City property unless required by applicable technical standards for public
safety and utility marking or other applicable legal or regulatory requirements. The
location, color and height of any such above-ground features must be approved by the
City. The City will seek and take advantage of opportunities to require or negotiate for
the undergrounding, avoidance or removal of above-ground structures associated with
existing infrastructure.
Drainage Facilities for Private Development. Drainage facilities that serve new
development (such as detention, retention, or water quality ponds) shall be located on
private land within the development and not on City-owned natural areas or conserved
land. Easements for conveyance facilities will be considered on a case-by-case basis
when the City-owned land is located between the private parcel and the historic receiving
channel or stream. The design of the new flow conveyance must utilize existing
drainages to the maximum extent feasible and must blend into the surrounding terrain;
must not impact the existing geomorphic character of the drainage; and must enhance the
natural habitat features and character of the site.
4
Requests will not be granted for easements by private entities to construct flood control
or drainage structures on natural areas or conserved lands to create developable land by
removing it from the floodplain, unless determined to be beneficial for the Natural Areas
Program in the specific circumstances. Requests will be considered on a case by case
basis for construction of flood control measures to address existing flood hazards that
threaten public health or safety; in these cases, use of the natural area or conserved land
must be the only reasonable alternative to address the flood hazard and the structure or
measure must be designed to minimize the impact to the natural area.
Public Flood Control and Drainage Facilities. The City’s Natural Areas, Storm
Drainage, and Water Quality programs have a strong record of collaboration in the joint
acquisition of land and in the design of projects that meet multiple community needs. To
the maximum extent feasible, planning for storm drainage, water quality and natural areas
and land conservation acquisitions shall continue to be coordinated so that lands needed
for all of these uses are purchased jointly. Innovative approaches shall continue to be
used so that flood control and water quality facilities are designed, constructed, and
managed to maintain or enhance natural area protection values while meeting flood
control, stream stability, and water quality needs. Easements or rights-of-way for flood
control structures or facilities will be considered on natural area or conserved land when
the facility is part of the implementation of an adopted basin-wide master plan (e.g.,
Canal Importation Master Drainageway Plan, Poudre River Master Drainageway Plan).
***New Sections***
Oil and Gas and Minerals Exploration. In connection with the exploration of oil and
gas and minerals resources, access, pipeline, and other types of easements may be
needed. Such requests, will not be considered unless crossing the City’s land is the only
feasible means of providing access to the location on which the oil and gas or minerals
exploration will occur, or unless determined to be beneficial for the Natural Areas
Program in the specific circumstances. Any easement for this type of activity will
incorporate, to the extent applicable, the most current Best Management Practices
requirements developed for use in connection with oil and gas exploration activities.
Conservation Easements. The owners of private property protected by a conservation
easement held by the City’s Natural Areas Program may receive requests for easements
across their property for roads, utilities and other uses. Notice to the City of the easement
request is generally required in the applicable conservation easement, and property
owners should notify the Natural Areas program of any such requests. Staff will consult
with the property owner to evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis, taking into
account the terms of the conservation easement, the conservation values of the property,
and this Policy, to the extent permissible. In order to complete the appropriate review of
any such requested easement, the City will obtain information regarding the nature,
scope, design, location, timetable and other material aspects of the proposed activity, and
evaluate the proposed activity to determine if it is permissible under, and consistent with,
the applicable conservation easement and the conservation values of the property.
5
The City’s Natural Area Program owns lands protected with conservation easements held
by other entities. Once the City receives a request for an easement across these
properties, the City will notify the owner of the conservation easement. Staff will then
work with the conservation easement owner to evaluate such requests on a case-by-case
basis, taking into account the terms of the conservation easement, the conservation values
of the property, and this Policy, to the extent permissible.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
In general, a right of way or easement across a City-owned natural area or conserved land
will only be approved if it is the only reasonable alternative, considering environmental
impacts, impacts to the recreation uses of the natural area by the community, financial
costs, engineering feasibility, public health and safety and other appropriate factors.
Applications for easements or rights-of-way must identify and evaluate the environmental
impact, engineering feasibility, and the cost of alternatives that do not affect the city-
owned natural area or conserved land. Depending on the type of proposal, alternatives
will need to consider both alternative locations for the facility as well as alternative
designs. The number of potential alternatives to be considered will depend on the
location and nature of the proposal, but must be sufficient to allow City staff, the Land
Conservation and Stewardship Board, and City Council to evaluate the cost and
environmental impact of the available alternatives for meeting the intent of the proposal.
Applicants should expect to provide information on the available alternatives at a level of
detail to allow independent review of the conclusions by City staff or outside consultants
retained by the City to assess the easement request.
LAND USE CONSISTENCY:
Applicants for rights of way and easements must demonstrate that any development to be
served by the proposal is consistent with the Plan Fort Collins, the City’s Comprehensive
Plan. Where the purpose of the easement is to provide utility services to areas outside the
land use jurisdiction of the City, the applicant must demonstrate consistency with the
adopted comprehensive plan of the governing jurisdiction, and with any applicable
growth management policies of the City. Applications for easements that facilitate
development or growth that is contrary to the policies of the City will not be approved.
MASTER PLAN CONSISTENCY:
As a condition of approval, the applicant must demonstrate that the requested easement or
right-of-way is consistent with the adopted utility master plan or service plan for the area
where the easement is requested. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed
project is located and designed appropriately to meet the future needs of the service area
based on the adopted land use plans and/or zoning in the area served. This requirement is
intended to encourage thorough planning, coordination among property owners, and to
avoid multiple requests for easements or premature expansion or modification of the
facility before the end of its normal service life.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES:
Generally, the City will not grant exclusive easements. As a condition of approval, the
applicant must contact other utility service providers in the project vicinity to determine
if they have current or future plans for additional facilities in the area. To the extent
feasible, the planning, design, and construction of facilities shall be coordinated among
6
utility providers to conserve easement corridors and to avoid repeated construction
activities that may affect the natural area or conserved land. Applicants must provide
copies of written requests for utility coordination and the responses received from other
service providers.
COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING EASEMENTS:
Applicants must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of prior easements on
land subject to this Policy or other City property. Requests for new or additional
easements will not be considered if the applicant has not met the requirements of existing
easement agreements and has failed to make diligent efforts to correct the situation after
notification by the City.
RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS:
As a condition of approval of any easement or right-of-way, the City will impose
appropriate measures to assure adequate resource protection for the natural area or
conserved land. These measures will be determined based on the characteristics of the
proposal and the affected land, but may include, without limitation: field investigations to
determine the presence of sensitive plants and wildlife; siting requirements to minimize
the effect on natural resources; seasonal timing restrictions to avoid impacts to wildlife or
sensitive habitat during critical periods of the year; access restrictions to control times
and locations of access to the easement; construction management measures to ensure
that activities are restricted to designated areas, to control erosion, to limit noise, or other
impacts; restoration requirements to ensure the timely regrading and revegetation of
disturbed areas to a condition consistent with the future management of the area;
mitigation measures to replace resource values lost to the community as a result of the
project; and requirements to minimize the impact to the natural area of ongoing operation
and maintenance of the facility. The City Manager or his or her designee shall develop
and maintain a general list of resource protection standards that are applicable to natural
areas and conserved lands. This list, which is now maintained by the Natural Areas
Program may be modified from time to time based on the experience gained in managing
easements, developing knowledge about the resource values of the City’s natural areas
and conserved lands, and improved knowledge related to best management practices
needed to protect the natural values of the City’s properties and to reflect specific
circumstances or concerns in connection with a particular easement or project.
7
COMPENSATION AND MITIGATION:
As a condition of approval of any easement or right of way, the City will require cash
compensation for the value of the permanent and temporary easements and for the
administrative costs of processing and managing the easement, except where there is
offsetting value and benefit to the Natural Areas Program. In addition, the City will
require compensation for the loss of ecological service values, recreation values, and
other intrinsic values of the property. Compensation for the value of the land and for
damages will be based on fair market value as determined by accepted appraisal
techniques. Compensation for loss in ecological services and recreation use will be based
on values reported in appropriate professional and technical publications. Compensation
for losses in ecological services and recreation use may be negotiated to be paid in cash
or through the completion of appropriate mitigation measures. Additional fees assessed
for other costs associated with processing the easement request and approval process,
overseeing construction activities, and managing the easement following construction
will be based on the estimated actual costs of the service provided. In general,
compensation and fees will be administered so as to result in a net benefit to the Natural
Areas Program.
**New Section**
PUBLIC INFORMATION AND REVIEW PROCESS:
In addition to the formal advisory board and City Council review procedures described
below, any party requesting an easement on City-owned natural area or conserved land
will be required to arrange for a public meeting at which information regarding the
proposed easement and related project will be provided, and at which questions regarding
the easement and related project will be taken. The party requesting the easement shall
be responsible for ensuring that responses are provided to questions asked at the meeting
to the extent practicable, and that such questions and responses and any input received at
the meeting are documented and provided to City staff. The party requesting the
easement shall be responsible for providing timely and meaningful notice to the general
public in advance of any such public meeting.
ADVISORY BOARD AND COUNCIL REVIEW:
Granting an easement or right-of-way conveys a property right, and must be approved by
the City Council by ordinance. The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board will also
review the easement proposal and make a recommendation in its advisory role to the City
Council. City staff will be responsible for working with the applicant on the application
process, reviewing and evaluating the application, and making a recommendation to both
the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board and the City Council. If an easement is
granted by the City Council, staff will be responsible for overseeing and managing the
easement and ensuring that the conditions of the grant are met.
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND REVIEW PROCESS:
In addition to this Policy, the City Manager or his designee will establish procedures for
reviewing applications for easements and rights–of-way that affect City-owned natural
areas and conserved lands. These procedures shall establish the fees, necessary steps and
information requirements for the timely consideration of requests for easements or rights-
of-way. The City Manager or his or her designee will ensure that easement requests are
presented to City Council for decision in a timely manner.
Page 1 of 6
General Resource Protection Standards
for
Easements or Rights of Way
on
City of Fort Collins (“City”)
Natural Areas and Conserved Lands
Introduction
This document lists the various resource protection standards that may be required as
conditions of granting an easement, license to enter or right-of-way (collectively referred
to in this document as “easements”) on City Natural Areas and other conserved lands,
in order to protect or restore natural resource values. These measures are consistent
with the requirements in the City Land Use Code for Ecological Characterization Studies
and for Resource Protection associated with development projects. The measures will
be evaluated for each easement request and applied as needed, depending on the site
location, characteristics of the site, and on the nature of the easement.
The applicable resource protection standards will be specifically included in the terms of
the easement agreement. They must also be included as notes on the approved
construction plans for the easement request. The easement holder (“Grantee”) must
provide these standards to all contractors who will be doing work for the Grantee within
the easement area. The City may also attach some or all of these requirements as an
addendum to the Grantee’s Development Agreement, if applicable.
These resource protection standards are current as of June 2011. They may be
updated from time to time by the Natural Resources Department based on new
information about the resources of the City’s natural areas or on new information about
best management practices. Applicants must contact the Natural Resources
Department for a current list of standards.
The Grantee is responsible for completing, or requiring its contractors to complete, each
of the following conditions that the City determines is applicable to the Grantee’s
project:
Plans and Permits
Prior to starting any construction on the Project:
1. Submit final plans to the City and ensure that they have been approved and
signed on behalf of the City. Confirm that all permanent and temporary
easements have been approved by City Council and that the easement
documents have been signed by both parties and recorded at the County Clerk’s
Office. Plans must include: 1’-2’ contours; property lines with adjoining property
ownership shown; all wetlands; streams; ditches; riparian areas; prairie dog
colonies; all existing and proposed man made structures; all existing utilities; all
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 2 of 6
needed easements for access, construction staging areas, and construction (limits
of disturbance); construction plans and profiles; restoration plans; and general
notes stating all construction and restoration requirements.
2. Obtain a City Excavation Permit.
3. Perform field investigations and surveys to determine the presence and location of
sensitive plants or animal species and geological or archeological features.
4. Develop an erosion control plan. This plan must comply with the City’s Storm
Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards. Ensure that the erosion
control plan has been approved and signed by the City.
5. Contact the Corps of Engineers to obtain a 404 permit and/or clearance of the
project. Submit two copies of the permit, or the letter of clearance from the Corps,
to the City.
6. Conduct a Preble’s meadow jumping mouse survey according to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service guidelines. Submit two copies of the report and letter of clearance
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the City.
7. Conduct a Ute ladies’ tresses orchid survey according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service guidelines. Submit two copies of the report and letter of clearance from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the City.
Construction Coordination and Project Acceptance
8. Arrange for the City’s designated representative to attend the pre-construction
meeting to meet the contractors, discuss the importance of the resource protection
requirements, discuss and approve the construction schedule and establish lines
of communication to be used during construction.
9. Maintain ongoing communication with the City’s representative during construction
to communicate progress, changes in schedule, problems, and periodic
inspections.
10. Once the project has been completed, arrange for the City’s representative to
inspect the project site to verify that the project was completed and the site
restored according to the applicable plans and agreements. Once the City
accepts the restoration work, the City will generally take over the vegetation
maintenance, per the specific terms of the easement agreement.
11. Provide the City with Drawings of Record within sixty (60) days after the
completion of the improvements.
Page 3 of 6
Wildlife
12. Raptors: Survey the site to determine if any of the following species are present
and check with the City for information on possible nesting, feeding or roosting
sites.
a. If the site is used as a winter feeding area by large birds of prey,
construction cannot take place from October 15 through March 15 to avoid
disturbing feeding eagles and large hawks, unless otherwise directed by
the City.
b. If a bald eagle and/or ferruginous hawk winter night roost is located near
the proposed easement, construction cannot take place from October 15
through March 15 to avoid disturbing night-roosting eagles and/or hawks.
c. If a Swainson’s hawk nest is located near the proposed easement,
construction cannot take place from April 1 through July 15 to avoid
disrupting the nesting cycle of the hawk.
d. If a red-tailed hawk nest is located near the proposed easement,
construction cannot take place from March 1 through July 15 to avoid
disrupting the nesting cycle of the hawk.
e. If burrowing owls are nesting within 330 feet of the limits of development,
construction cannot take place from April 1 through August 1 to avoid
disrupting the nesting cycle of the owls.
13. If construction will be taking place in or through an area that contains or may
contain prairie dogs, either relocate the prairie dogs or fumigate the burrows
immediately prior to any grading. Relocation of Prairie dogs between February 1
and August 1 is not permitted.
14. Perform the wildlife surveys described below, notify the City of the survey results
and obtain approval of construction schedule prior to starting construction. These
surveys may be done several months prior to construction, but if done more than
30 days prior to construction they must be performed again within 30 days prior to
the start of construction to verify results.
a. The site may contain den sites for red foxes. Conduct surveys to determine
if any foxes are denning within 100 feet of the limits of development. If fox
are found to be denning within 100 feet, then construction cannot take place
during the normal denning and pup-rearing season (February 1 through
October 1).
b. The site may contain den sites for coyotes. Conduct surveys to determine if
any coyotes are denning within 300 feet of the limits of development. If
Page 4 of 6
coyotes are found to be denning within 300 feet, then construction cannot
take place during the normal denning and pup-rearing season (February 1
through October 1).
c. The site may contain den sites for badgers. Conduct surveys to determine if
any badgers are denning within 300 feet of the limits of development. If
badgers are found to be denning within 300 feet, then construction cannot
take place during the normal denning and young-rearing season (January 1
through August 1).
Plants
15. The site may contain plant species listed as rare in Colorado. If a rare plant is
discovered prior to or during construction activities, notify the City. The City may,
in its discretion, require the Grantee to remove all such plants within the limits of
disturbance prior to construction, keep plants alive and replant after construction
is completed, or the City may salvage existing plants and shrubs for transplanting
to other sites.
16. The site may contain native shrubs and/or trees that may be within the limits of
development. Any native shrubs/trees removed to allow construction or
damaged during construction must be replaced on a two-for-one/same species
basis. All replacement shrubs/trees must be 1-gallon container size and must be
warranted to survive for 2 complete growing seasons.
Structures
17. Remove, store, protect and replace any man-made structures (e.g., kiosks,
raptor perch poles, prairie dog barriers and fencing) within the limits of
disturbance.
18. Repair any damage to concrete bike trails, fences, parking lots, or any other
improvements caused directly or indirectly by the construction. Repair/replace
improvements immediately to current City standards, including matching the
color of the concrete.
Field Demarcation
19. Install orange construction fencing to mark the easement limits (limits of
disturbance) on the site. Do not begin any construction activities until the City’s
representative has approved the fence location.
20. Post temporary signs informing the public that this is the Grantee’s project and
indicating the purpose of the project and the Grantee’s phone number. Signs
must be posted at the locations designated by the City.
Page 5 of 6
Erosion Control
21. Have erosion control measures in place and approved by a City representative
prior to any construction.
Grading/Construction
22. For areas with native vegetation, strip topsoil in all areas of excavation to a depth
of 8 inches and stockpile separately. Wetland and upland soils must be
stockpiled separately from each other. Place the topsoil in an 8-inch layer on top
of the subsoil in the corresponding zone immediately following the completion of
construction.
23. For areas with non-native vegetation, strip the top 2 inches of topsoil from the
entire construction easement area and remove the topsoil from the site to
remove the non-native vegetation seed source. Then strip 8 inches of topsoil
from the area to be excavated and stockpile separately. Wetland and upland
soils must be stockpiled separately from each other. Place the topsoil in an 8-
inch layer on top of the subsoil in the corresponding zone immediately following
the completion of construction.
24. Maintain a safe work area and protect the safety and welfare of Grantee’s
employees, contractors or subcontractors, and the general public, including
without limitation providing barricades and safety fences around excavations and
drop-offs left open at the end of a work day. Safety precautions must be in
compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations.
25. Compact backfill in trenches to 95% Standard Proctor Density. Test the
compacted soils at 100’ intervals vertically and 2’ intervals horizontally within the
area of excavation to ensure that this requirement has been met. Submit to the
City all laboratory Proctor density results, and a copy of all field compaction tests.
After compaction to final subgrade (8” below finished grade), the top 6 inches of
subsoil must be ripped, and the previously stripped and stockpiled topsoil
materials spread evenly over the excavated areas. Soils in backfilled,
compacted, topsoiled trenches must match the grade of the surrounding
undisturbed areas.
26. Set all manhole covers, valve lids, vaults, etc. below or flush with the finished
topsoil surface. If any improvements are approved for construction above the
final grade, they must be painted with a color approved by the City.
27. Remove the upper sections of all existing manholes to be abandoned and fill the
holes with soil. This soil must be compacted to 95% Standard Proctor Density to
prevent settlement.
Page 6 of 6
28. Remove the upper sections of all existing manholes to be retained, but that are
not flush with the finished topsoil surface, and rebuild to be flush with the topsoil
surface.
29. Bring to grade (match surrounding topography) all settled and eroded areas
along the existing pipeline, if any, to be abandoned during construction of the
new pipeline. Repair any settlement that occurs over the existing pipeline or new
pipelines after completion and acceptance of the project by the City. Any
necessary repairs must be conducted in a manner and at a time directed by the
City. Repaired areas must be restored as per restoration requirements outlined
in this document or in the easement agreement.
30. Areas within the limits of disturbance that have been driven over, compacted or
rutted by equipment must be scarified to a depth of 8” and regraded to original
grade and contours.
31. Meet with the City’s representative to discuss and get approval of the final
grading and the seeding/mulching process prior to reseeding. Seed all disturbed
and topsoiled areas with a seed mix of native species specified by the City. The
seed must be drilled into the soil an appropriate depth for the species in the mix
and existing conditions, using a range drill (not a Brillion). Immediately following
seeding roll the seeded areas with a sheeps foot roller to lightly compact and
imprint the soil. This removes air voids, provides better seed-soil contact and
provides indention’s in the soil that will capture moisture. All seeded areas must
then be hydromulched in accordance with the City’s Storm Drainage Design
Criteria and Construction Standards. Following final grading and initial seeding of
the Construction Easement Area and acceptance by the City, the City will be
responsible for ongoing vegetation management, including weed control,
mowing, and reseeding, as needed, in areas disturbed and seeded in
accordance with this paragraph. The cost for the City to perform the vegetation
management over the next five to ten years is calculated to be three thousand
dollars ($3,000.00) per acre of disturbance based on grassland/shrubland cover
types. Vegetation management fees will be determined on a case-by-case basis
for other cover types.
Any requirements listed above that are not completed in a timely manner may be
corrected by the City at the Grantee’s expense. The City will bill the Grantee for the
cost of the correction plus management costs.
Page 1 of 5
Guidance Document: Compensation and Mitigation Requirements for Easements
on the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Conserved Lands.
November 2011
The mission of the Natural Areas Program is to “protect and enhance lands with existing
or potential natural areas values, lands that serve as community separators, agricultural
lands, and lands with scenic values. Protection of natural habitats and features is the
highest priority, while providing for education and recreation for the Fort Collins
community.”
Lands purchased and conserved by the Natural Areas Program (NAP) provide a wide
variety of benefits to the citizens of Fort Collins and Larimer County that include fish and
wildlife habitat, wildlife viewing, recreation opportunities, agricultural products,
community separation and simply the value provided by open space views. Other
benefits include water and air purification, water infiltration, flood control, habitat for
pollinators of crops and natural vegetation, erosion control, and maintenance of
biodiversity. Collectively these benefits are described as ecological goods and services
(also called natural goods and services) and represent resources and processes that are
supplied by natural ecosystems. Ecosystem goods are considered tangible items such as
food, timber, and natural fiber. Ecosystem services are less tangible but just as integral to
a healthy, functioning ecosystem. These services often go unnoticed and include such
items as water purification and flood control.
The conservation community has long recognized that ecological goods and services
have a financial value based in part on the fact they are difficult and costly to duplicate.
Numerous studies published in natural resource and economic literature have delineated
and quantified these ecological goods and services, and others have devised
methodologies for placing a value on the ecological goods and services provided by
conserved lands. NAP has selected a document prepared by the Trust for Public Land
titled A Return on Investment: The Economic Value of Colorado’s Conservation
Easements (see Attachment 1) to establish the value of ecological goods and services on
NAP lands. TPL conducted this analysis to determine Colorado’s return on investments
in conservation easements. As part of this project, TPL estimated the value of ecological
goods and services provided by conserved lands in Colorado based on information
gathered through a literature review of values previously calculated for the major land
cover types featured in the National Land Cover Dataset, created by the U.S. Geological
Survey. Ecological goods and services considered in the analysis include water supply,
flood control, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, aesthetics, carbon sequestration,
dilution of waste water, erosion control, grazing, and agricultural crop production.
While, this synthesis document will be used to establish ecological goods and service
values for NAP conserved lands, NAP recognizes this is a growing field of study and will
continue to pursue opportunities to better define and adjust the values. In all cases,
ecological goods and service values will be adjusted on an annual basis based on the
Denver-Boulder-Greeley CPI-U. Table 1 provides the value per acre per year for the
cover types in Colorado; values are reported in 2011 dollars.
Compensation
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 2 of 5
The Natural Area Program owns and/or manages over 35,000 acres of land within Fort
Collins and in unincorporated Larimer County. As such, NAP is contacted with requests
for easements and rights-of-way that cross conserved lands. The general policy is to
avoid, to the maximum extent feasible, granting easements or rights-of-way for activities
that will adversely affect the use of the land for meeting the community’s goals for
natural area protection and or community shaping. When easements or rights-of-way are
authorized by City Council, efforts will be made to avoid and/or minimize environmental
impacts and NAP will be compensated for the value of the property.
Compensation to the NAP will be based on the property’s fair market real estate value as
determined by accepted appraisal techniques, and the value of the ecological goods and
services lost due or impacted by the project as described below in “Ecological Goods and
Services Calculation.”
Administration and Maintenance Fees
Once a site is disturbed, not only is the value of the natural goods and services lost for a
period of time, but it takes many hours of staff time to administer the restoration of the
disturbed site. A base administrative fee of $1,500 in 2011 dollars will be charged to
process easement requests. The fee will be paid by the Grantee at the time the easement
is granted. Staff will track its cost to administer the easement and will bill the Grantee
for any cost in excess of $1,500 at a rate of $100 per hour for staff time. Staff will
regularly inform the applicant of the costs the applicant is incurring during the
administrative process.
Following final grading and initial seeding of the disturbed site and acceptance by the
City, the NAP will be responsible for ongoing vegetation management, including weed
control, mowing, and reseeding, as needed. The cost for the City to perform the
vegetation management over the next five to ten years is calculated to be three thousand
dollars ($3,000.00) per acre of disturbance based on grassland / shrubland cover types.
Vegetation management fees will be determined for other cover types on a case-by-case
basis. The cost of this service will be evaluated and adjusted as needed.
Ecological Goods and Services Calculations
The length of time needed for ecological goods and services to return to a pre-disturbance
condition is difficult to predict. Since the time necessary for full restoration is difficult to
predict the following assumptions are made: (1) a period of ten years will be used to
estimate the length of time ecological goods and services are lost or reduced (2)
ecological goods and services are lost in full for the first five years and compensated at
one hundred percent (100%) of the assigned value, and (3) ecological goods and services
are partially restored in years six through ten and compensated at fifty percent (50%) of
the assigned value. Payment will be due in full at the time the easement is granted and
will be based on the entire ten year period.
Page 3 of 5
Table 1 provides the per acre per year value for the cover types in this area (from
Sargent-Michaud, J. 2010. A return on investment: The economic value of Colorado’s
conservation easements. The Trust for Public Lands)
Ecosystem Type Fee/Acre/Year
(2011 Dollars)
Mixed Forest $891
Deciduous Forest $890
Evergreen Forest $890
Emergent Herbaceous
Wetland $793
Woody Wetland $793
Scrub/shrub $617
Agriculture $286
Open Water $270
Developed – Low Density
Urban/Open Space $196
Developed – High Intensity
Urban $196
Shortgrass Prairie $88
Grassland/Herbaceous $86
Sagebrush $83
Barren N/A
Altered or Disturbed N/A
Developed –
Oil/Mine/Quarry N/A
Examples of Ecosystem Goods and Services Compensation
Two easements that had been already granted by the NAP were looked at again to use as
examples of how compensation for ecosystem goods and services would affect the fees
assessed to the grantee of the easement.
The first easement revisited was an 0.9 acre easement consisting of a 50 ft. wide
permanent, non-exclusive easement and a 75 ft. temporary construction easement. The
total compensation paid for the easement was $4,662.50, of which $1,500 was for the
Market value of the permanent easement, $400 for the temporary construction easement,
and $2,762.50 for the restoration of the site after the project was completed.
Page 4 of 5
If compensation for ecosystem goods and services (E.G.S.) were in implemented, the
additional compensation would be calculated as follows:
Land Cover
Type Acreage Value/Acre/Yr
Years 1 -5:
Assessed at
100% E.G.S.
Lost
Years 6 -10:
Assessed at
50% E.G.S.
Lost
Total Value of
E.G.S. Lost by
Land Cover
Type
Cultivated
Crops 0.57 $286 $815 $408 $1,223
Developed –
Low
Intensity/Open
Space
0.33 $196 $323 $162 $485
TOTAL $1,708
The $1,708 would be assessed in addition to the $4,662.50 that was originally charged for
a total of $6,370.50.
The second example is a 3.2 acre easement consisting of a 25 ft. permanent, non-
exclusive utility easement and a 30 ft. temporary construction easement. The total
compensation for the easement paid by the grantee was $48,531, of which $25,240 was
for the permanent easement, $6,011 for the temporary construction easement, and
$17,280 for the Restoration Management Fee. With lost E.G.S. lost compensation
calculated, additional compensation would be calculated as follows:
Land Cover
Type Acreage Value/Acre/Yr
Years 1 -5:
Assessed at
100% E.G.S.
Lost
Years 6 -10:
Assessed at
50% E.G.S.
Lost
Total Value of
E.G.S. Lost by
Land Cover
Type
Cultivated
Crops 0.837 $286 $1,197 $598 $1,795
Grasslands/Her
baceous 0.265 $86 $114 $57 $171
Developed –
Medium
Density
.097 $196 $95 $48 $143
Developed –
Low
Intensity/Open
Space
1.58 $196 $1,548 $774 $2,322
Page 5 of 5
On-site or Off-site Mitigation
NAP may select cash or mitigation as compensation for the loss in natural goods and
services. Mitigation projects may occur on or off-site and include such items as:
Habitat or vegetation restoration beyond what is disturbed by the project,
Trail construction or repair
Natural Area Public Facility upgrade or repair
Removal or undergrounding of above ground features.
Preference will be given to mitigation projects that occur within or adjacent to the Natural
Area affected by the easement. If additional acres are restored, preference will be given
to the restoration of the same cover type within or adjacent to the affected Natural Area.
In all cases, the site impacted by the easement project will be restored and the mitigation
project approved by Council.
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 4
Guidance Document: Alternatives Analysis for Easements on City of Fort Collins
Natural Areas and Conserved Lands (December 2011)
As stated in the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Conserved Lands Easement Policy
“In general, a right of way or easement across a City-owned natural area or conserved
land will only be approved if it is the only reasonable alternative, considering
environmental impacts, impacts to the recreation uses of the natural area by the
community, financial costs, engineering feasibility, public health and safety and other
appropriate factors. Applications for easements or rights-of-way must identify and
evaluate the environmental impact, engineering feasibility, and the cost of alternatives
that do not affect the city-owned natural area or conserved land. Depending on the type
of proposal, alternatives will need to consider both alternative locations for the facility as
well as alternative designs. The number of potential alternatives to be considered will
depend on the location and nature of the proposal, but must be sufficient to allow City
staff, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board, and City Council to evaluate the
cost and environmental impact of the available alternatives for meeting the intent of the
proposal. Applicants should expect to provide information on the available alternatives
at a level of detail to allow independent review of the conclusions by City staff or outside
consultants retained by the City to assess the easement request.”
Prior to providing the information required by this section, the Applicant must meet with
a representative of the Natural Areas Program to discuss alternate routes and alternate
designs that must be considered in the Alternatives Analysis.
The following information should be included within the Alternatives Analysis provided
by the applicant.
1. A map of appropriate scale that clearly identifies alternate routes considered for
the easement both on and off City-owned property.
2. A written description of the environmental impacts, engineering feasibility, and
project cost for each alternate route including supporting documentation on
feasibility and costs. The written description shall summarize the wildlife and
vegetation survey information and recreation and wildlife structure information
described in the Plans and Permits, Wildlife, Plant, and Structures sections of the
Resource Protection Standards.
3. A written description of any anticipated recreation impacts that will result from
the City granting of the easement or right-of-way.
4. A map of appropriate scale that clearly identifies the location of the requested
easement or right-of-way on City-owned property (including temporary
construction easements and access easements).
5. A written description of public safety benefits from the use of the City-owned
natural area or conserved land.
Page 2 of 2
6. A written summary describing the environmental impacts, recreation impacts,
cost savings, engineering feasibility, and public safety issues avoided by selection
of the proposed route on City-owned land.
7. A written description of the restoration and/or mitigation plans related to the
project on City-owned land how these activities will benefit the City.
8. A map of appropriate scale showing the location of proposed mitigation activities.
9. A summary of the input received from the public at the required public meeting
and all other input received from the public.
Based upon the information received from the applicant, public input, Land Conservation
and Stewardship Board input, the Policy requirements, and staff research; staff will
analyze the alternatives and make its recommendation to the LCSB and Council for
approval or denial.
ATTACHMENT 5
1
Excerpt – Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Utility Easement Policy Discussion
Figgs: The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas and Open Lands Easement
Policy was adopted by Resolution in 2001. To date, approximately forty
easements have been granted by the City under this Policy.
Recently City Council requested staff to review the easement policy and
recommended appropriate changes for adoption by Council. Once
revisions are finalized, staff will present the revised policy to the Land
Conservation and Stewardship Board for their consideration and
recommendation for City Council adoption.
Revisions to the Policy being considered by Natural Areas staff are:
o Fee Structure and Restoration/Mitigation
o Existing easements (previously granted by the City or in place at
the time of acquisition)
o Easements that occur on private lands encumbered by
Conservation Easements
Knowlton: Have you looked at other places like Boulder?
Figgs: That is part of what we are doing as well.
Scharton: We are on the front edge of fee structure and restoration
requirements.
Quayle: Where I work, when restoring the army land, we set up a success
rate area and it has to meet those criteria before transferring the land.
Figgs: We have that as well, and how we typically do it is to allow them
to do their own restoration to our performance standards. The more
common way is once the initial restoration is complete, as long as it is to
our specifications, we would receive payment per acre and we would,
instead of them, manage the site through the restoration standard. We
would then fold that into our day to day management activities.
Stanley: I like the ecosystem service value very much and others will
follow.
Cameron: I like the ecosystem service value also.
Daggett: We have gotten better over time; including specific requirements
for the kinds of things that we have learned are helpful like,
communication, and plan review. Early in the program the easements had
a lot less of this language. We are now watching for opportunities to try
and leverage for instance, if they need a construction easement, it would
give us an opportunity to negotiate something with them, maybe even an
internal easement.
Knowlton: It could also happen that in the future we could acquire a piece
of land that would have an existing easement.
Figgs: There is a second parallel project that Justin Scharton is working on
where we are currently going back and looking at the properties that we
ATTACHMENT 6
2
hold title to and looking at the easements that are in place and figuring out
which ones are in use and which ones can be vacated.
Daggett: We may be able to argue that some of them were abandoned and
now is the time to do this.
Figgs: Even though our policy hasn’t changed since 2001, the resource
protection standards and easements have evolved.
Germany: I agree that you should be looking at this policy and reviewing
the easements that exist and making them more restrictive or specific if at
all possible.
Haines: Could you explain the ecosystem service value.
Figgs: Generally what they are based on is several criteria or several
parameters, anywhere from carbon storage, water purification and
filtration. It applies utilitarian values to land, and it also has values
associated with wildlife habitat.
Stanley: There is a lot of research in this area; it’s not new in terms of
application.
Grimes: How do you quantify it?
Scharton: The Trust for Public Land (TPL) document took research from a
lot of different areas for example, studies from herbaceous wetlands to
agricultural developing and everything in between with the wetlands being
most economically beneficial down to a highly developed altered state.
The quantifying goes by the natural land cover data set, which is an easily
quantifiable GIS tool.
Haines: Do you put a value on opportunity costs, because when you are
watching over these easements you’re not doing other things.
Figgs: We do not and I’ve struggled with that mostly from a restoration
standpoint. How I was trying to get at it was with the ratio of mitigation
of one acre disturbed two acres replaced, and work it into the ecosystem
service formula.
Haines: When this happens on private land how are these things done in
terms of what the private landowner requires?
Figgs: There would be a negotiation between buyer and seller.
Sears: If we can walk away from an easement with the citizens satisfied it
is a win, win situation.
Daggett: Sometimes there is a situation where we are dealing with an
entity that would ultimately have the power to take what they want if we
don’t give it to them. We have to be careful to bring them along so that
they want to cooperate with us and don’t give up.
Haines: A lot of these agencies want to do the right thing too. Is there a
way to build in that approach of saying we’d like to be made whole plus?
Sears: Our goal is that this is as much a win for the Natural Areas program
or the Natural Areas site as it is for the agency.
Daggett: We can explain a rational as to why something makes sense, and
give the party that wants the easements a way to justify internally for
themselves why they should go along with what we are asking.
3
Cameron: The Legacy Land Trust holds the easements over your
properties and when you are looking at making yourself whole, include
making the entity pay for the cost that it takes to make adjustments and
include the Legacy Land Trust and its staff review costs also.
Figgs: That’s a good point, thank you.
Sears: I’m advocating whole plus because, if an agency is going to put a
line across our property as opposed to having to put it under a street, they
are coming out whole plus likely, it will save them a substantial amount of
money from going somewhere other than across or adjacent our natural
areas. They are getting an economic advantage.
Figgs: I will gather up the comments received, and provide a redlined
version of the revised policy hopefully in October. There is an internal
review process that the policy will go through; we will then bring it back
to this Board for recommendation.
Excerpt – Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Utility Easement Policy Update/Discussion
Figgs reviewed the Draft Proposed Changes from the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas
and Open Lands Easement policy. This was a discussion item in an effort to gather input
from the Board and finalize the proposed revisions to the Policy. No formal action by the
Board was requested at this time. Staff will bring the Policy back to the Board in
November or December for the Board’s recommendation to Council.
Cameron: When conservation easements are held by others on Natural Areas
property, that entity should be notified when a request is coming in for an easement.
Should that be in the Policy?
Figgs: Yes, I think it should be.
RESOLUTION 2011-112
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADOPTING AN UPDATED POLICY FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL
OF EASEMENTS ON CITY NATURAL AREAS AND CONSERVED LANDS
WHEREAS, the City has acquired and designated natural areas and open space properties
for the benefit of the citizens of the City, using multiple local, County and State funding sources
intended for the conservation of natural areas and open lands; and
WHEREAS, the City is responsible for managing its natural areas and other conserved lands
in a manner that protects the natural features and functions for which those properties were acquired;
and
WHEREAS, the City from time to time receives requests for easements and other
encroachments on City natural areas and other conserved properties, which requests are typically
reviewed by City Natural Areas Program staff, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board, and
such other interested City staff or advisory boards or commissions as may be appropriate given the
specific circumstances; and
WHEREAS, after staff and advisory board review, easement requests are then presented to
the City Council for approval pursuant to City Code Section 23-111; and
WHEREAS, in July 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution 2001-094, establishing a
policy for review and approval of easements on City natural areas and open lands, in an effort to
document a standardized method of processing and evaluating such requests for easements and
encroachments; and
WHEREAS, as the City has acquired more natural areas and other conserved properties, and
as development pressure in the Fort Collins area has continued to increase, the number and
frequency of requests for such easements and encroachments has steadily increased, and will likely
continue to increase; and
WHEREAS, based on the City’s growing experience with the management and review of
easements on City property, and particularly on natural areas and conserved lands, staff has
developed an updated policy outlining the various requirements, considerations and standards that
will serve as a guideline in the future processing of easement requests, which policy is attached
hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Easement Policy”); and
WHEREAS, at its work session on November 30, 2011, the City Council reviewed a draft
of the Policy; and
WHEREAS, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board discussed and reviewed a draft
of the Policy at its regular meetings on December 14, 2011, and voted to recommend that the City
Council approve the Easement Policy; and
WHEREAS, in light of the comments received by staff from the Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board and from the City Council, staff has refined and added language to the Easement
Policy to clarify and describe expectations regarding certain items, including the addition of a
requirement for a public meeting to be conducted by the party requesting an easement, language
regarding easements related to oil and gas and minerals exploration, and other various items; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the adoption and implementation of the Easement
Policy will provide clear guidelines for City staff and for persons seeking to acquire easements on
City natural area or other conserved property, and will assist with the protection of those properties
and facilitate the effective and efficient processing of requested easements and encumbrances; and
WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons, the City Council wishes to approve the Easement
Policy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby approves and adopts the Easement Policy.
Section 2. That the City Council hereby directs the City Manager to receive, review and
present for City Council consideration as appropriate in accordance with the Easement Policy,
requests for easements on City properties acquired with funds dedicated to the acquisition of natural
areas and other conserved property, properties otherwise managed and operated by the City for
natural areas purposes, and properties on which the City has acquired a conservation easement.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
1
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL AREAS AND CONSERVED LANDS
EASEMENT POLICY
Adopted December 20, 2011
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the policy statement is to clarify the policies and procedures of the City of Fort
Collins (“City”) with respect to requests for easements or rights-of-way that affect publicly
owned Natural Areas or other lands that are managed by the Natural Resources Department;
lands owned in part by the Natural Resources Department; and private lands with Conservation
Easements held by the Natural Resources Department. The policy does not apply to requests for
easements or rights-of-way on or across other lands owned by the City.
APPLICABILITY:
The policy applies to requests for new easements or rights-of-way and to projects within existing
easements, as appropriate, which provide for a wide variety of purposes, including without
limitation, streets, water, sewer, drainage, flood control, electric power, wind generation, solar
generation, pipelines, oil and gas and minerals exploration, and telecommunications facilities.
The policy applies to projects of the City as well as those proposed by other public entities, such
as special Utility Districts, and private parties. The policy does not apply to trails, parking lots,
interpretive features or other facilities that are proposed as part of the management of public
natural areas.
GENERAL POLICY:
Most of the natural areas and other conserved lands addressed by these policies were acquired by
the City with dedicated funds from sales taxes that were approved by the voters of Fort Collins
or Larimer County for the specific purpose of protecting natural areas and conserved lands.
These lands are part of the fabric of the Fort Collins community, and are viewed as a type of
“community facility” intended to meet specific community goals.
For natural areas, the goal is to “preserve and protect natural areas within Fort Collins and the
Community Growth Management Area to provide habitat essential to the conservation of plants,
animals, and their associated ecosystems and to enrich the lives of citizens by providing
opportunities for education, scientific research, nature interpretation, art, fishing, wildlife
observation, hiking and other activities.”
For other types of conserved lands, e.g., agricultural areas, lands are protected to shape the
physical structure of the community: These lands “provide the community with a well-defined
edge, establish community separators, direct growth, and preserve rural character.”
Requests for easements or rights-of-way that affect natural areas or other conserved lands must
be considered within this context. Accordingly, the general policy is to avoid, to the maximum
extent feasible, granting easements or rights-of-way for activities that will adversely affect the
2
use of the land for meeting the community’s goals for natural area protection or community
shaping. Where easements or rights-of-way are authorized by ordinance of the City Council, the
general policy is to minimize the impact on the natural area or the community, to the maximum
extent feasible, by limiting the size and visibility of the area affected, managing construction or
other human activities with respect to their timing, duration, and frequency of occurrence, and
restoring affected areas to a condition that is equal to or better than the condition at the time the
easement is granted.
Because the natural areas and other conserved lands owned by the City are in many instances
within an urban context, it is recognized that easements and rights-of-way may be necessary to
allow for the orderly development of the community in accordance with the adopted Plan Fort
Collins (2011). Individual easement requests will be evaluated in accordance with both the
general policy and with the specific policies listed in following sections.
In addition, many properties owned by the City were subject to easements and rights-of-way
granted by prior owners at the time the City acquired them. The City will take advantage of any
opportunities to establish terms and conditions or specific project plans consistent with the terms
of this Policy in connection with any such prior
In connection with any work anticipated to take place within an existing easement, the City will
establish a mutually agreed plan for notification and consultation regarding the work. The City
will negotiate with the easement holder to establish a process for advance coordination,
scheduling and planning for avoidance of impacts and mitigation, if necessary.
SPECIFIC TYPES OF FACILITIES:
Public Streets. New public highways, roads, or streets will not be allowed within City-owned
natural areas or conserved lands, except for those specifically identified in the adopted City
Master Street Plan or comparable Master Transportation Plan adopted by the appropriate
governing body in cases where the natural area or conserved land is located outside of the city
limits of Fort Collins. Widening or other street improvement projects on existing streets within
natural areas or conserved lands will be allowed, consistent with the City Master Street Plan or
comparable adopted Master Transportation Plan. The City will work to influence the alignment
and design of any highway, road, or street improvement so as to avoid or minimize the effect on
the natural area or conserved land.
Private Streets or Other Private Access. Requests by private parties for private streets or
access easements to cross natural areas or conserved lands in order to gain access to a private
parcel of land will not be considered unless crossing the City’s property is the only feasible
means of providing access to a legal parcel of land, or unless determined to be beneficial for the
Natural Areas Program in the specific circumstances.
Overhead Electric Power, Telephone, or Cable Lines. New overhead cable lines will not be
allowed within any City-owned natural area or conserved land, unless determined to be
beneficial for the Natural Areas Program in the specific circumstances. Replacement of existing
overhead cables with underground cables will be encouraged unless the installation of
3
underground lines will result in adverse impact to the natural area that is inconsistent with these
policies. Use of the latest technology reasonably available will also be encouraged.
Any change in above ground features (number of poles, pole height, number of wires, etc) within
easements granted by the City or granted prior to City ownership of the land (to the extent there
is an opportunity to negotiate or impose new conditions) will require review and approval by the
City.
Aboveground Structures. New buildings or other structures, including without limitation,
towers, transmitters, receiving stations, tanks, substations, or billboards, other than those of the
City, will not be allowed on City-owned natural areas or conserved lands. The City will seek
and take advantage of opportunities to require or negotiate for the undergrounding, avoidance or
removal of above-ground structures associated with existing infrastructure.
Underground Utility Cables or Pipelines. Consistent with standard practice within Fort
Collins, underground utility cables (e.g., electric, telephone, fiber optic, etc.) and pipelines (e.g.,
gas, water, sewer) will be located within the street and utility right-of-way adjacent to the natural
area or conserved land. In instances where the existing right-of-way does not conform to the
planned future street right-of-way as depicted on the applicable adopted Master Transportation
Plan, cable or pipeline easements will be located parallel to the existing roadway and within the
area encompassed by the future street and utility right-of-way.
Some larger utility transmission cables or pipelines are not typically placed beneath streets due to
reliability or safety concerns. In instances where the cable or pipeline cannot safely be placed
within the road right-of-way, it will be located as close as practicable, and parallel to the road
right-of-way.
Above-ground features associated with buried utility cables and pipelines will not be allowed on
City property unless required by applicable technical standards for public safety and utility
marking or other applicable legal or regulatory requirements. The location, color and height of
any such above-ground features must be approved by the City. The City will seek and take
advantage of opportunities to require or negotiate for the undergrounding, avoidance or removal
of above-ground structures associated with existing infrastructure.
Drainage Facilities for Private Development. Drainage facilities that serve new development
(such as detention, retention, or water quality ponds) shall be located on private land within the
development and not on City-owned natural areas or conserved land. Easements for conveyance
facilities will be considered on a case-by-case basis when the City-owned land is located
between the private parcel and the historic receiving channel or stream. The design of the new
flow conveyance must utilize existing drainages to the maximum extent feasible and must blend
into the surrounding terrain; must not impact the existing geomorphic character of the drainage;
and must enhance the natural habitat features and character of the site.
Requests will not be granted for easements by private entities to construct flood control or
drainage structures on natural areas or conserved lands to create developable land by removing it
from the floodplain, unless determined to be beneficial for the Natural Areas Program in the
4
specific circumstances. Requests will be considered on a case by case basis for construction of
flood control measures to address existing flood hazards that threaten public health or safety; in
these cases, use of the natural area or conserved land must be the only reasonable alternative to
address the flood hazard and the structure or measure must be designed to minimize the impact
to the natural area.
Public Flood Control and Drainage Facilities. The City’s Natural Areas, Storm Drainage, and
Water Quality programs have a strong record of collaboration in the joint acquisition of land and
in the design of projects that meet multiple community needs. To the maximum extent feasible,
planning for storm drainage, water quality and natural areas and land conservation acquisitions
shall continue to be coordinated so that lands needed for all of these uses are purchased jointly.
Innovative approaches shall continue to be used so that flood control and water quality facilities
are designed, constructed, and managed to maintain or enhance natural area protection values
while meeting flood control, stream stability, and water quality needs. Easements or rights-of-
way for flood control structures or facilities will be considered on natural area or conserved land
when the facility is part of the implementation of an adopted basin-wide master plan (e.g., Canal
Importation Master Drainageway Plan, Poudre River Master Drainageway Plan).
Oil and Gas and Minerals Exploration. In connection with the exploration of oil and gas and
minerals resources, access, pipeline, and other types of easements may be requested. Such
requests, will not be considered unless crossing the City’s land is the only feasible means of
providing access to the location on which the oil and gas or minerals exploration will occur, or
unless determined to be beneficial for the Natural Areas Program in the specific circumstances.
Any easement for this type of activity will incorporate, to the extent applicable, the most current
Best Management Practices requirements developed for use in connection with oil and gas
exploration activities.
Conservation Easements. The owners of private property protected by a conservation easement
held by the City’s Natural Areas program may receive requests for easements across their
property for roads, utilities and other uses. Notice to the City of the easement request is
generally required in the applicable conservation easement, and property owners should notify
the Natural Areas Program of any such requests. Staff will consult with the property owner to
evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the terms of the conservation
easement, the conservation values of the property, and this Policy, to the extent permissible. In
order to complete the appropriate review of any such requested easement, the City will obtain
information regarding the nature, scope, design, location, timetable and other material aspects of
the proposed activity, and evaluate the proposed activity to determine if it is permissible under,
and consistent with, the applicable conservation easement and the conservation values of the
property.
The City’s Natural Area Program owns lands protected with conservation easements held by
other entities. Once the City receives a request for an easement across these properties, the City
will notify the owner of the conservation easement. Staff will then work with the conservation
easement owner to evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the terms
of the conservation easement, the conservation values of the property, and this Policy, to the
extent permissible.
5
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
In general, a right of way or easement across a City-owned natural area or conserved land will
only be approved if it is the only reasonable alternative, considering environmental impacts,
impacts to the recreation uses of the natural area by the community, financial costs, engineering
feasibility, public health and safety and other appropriate factors. Applications for easements or
rights-of-way must identify and evaluate the environmental impact, engineering feasibility, and
the cost of alternatives that do not affect the city-owned natural area or conserved land.
Depending on the type of proposal, alternatives will need to consider both alternative locations
for the facility as well as alternative designs. The number of potential alternatives to be
considered will depend on the location and nature of the proposal, but must be sufficient to allow
City staff, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board, and City Council to evaluate the cost
and environmental impact of the available alternatives for meeting the intent of the proposal.
Applicants should expect to provide information on the available alternatives at a level of detail
to allow independent review of the conclusions by City staff or outside consultants retained by
the City to assess the easement request.
LAND USE CONSISTENCY:
Applicants for rights of way and easements must demonstrate that any development to be served
by the proposal is consistent with the Plan Fort Collins, the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Where
the purpose of the easement is to provide utility services to areas outside the land use jurisdiction
of the City, the applicant must demonstrate consistency with the adopted comprehensive plan of
the governing jurisdiction, and with any applicable growth management policies of the City.
Applications for easements that facilitate development or growth that is contrary to the policies
of the City will not be approved.
MASTER PLAN CONSISTENCY:
As a condition of approval, the applicant must demonstrate that the requested easement or right-
of-way is consistent with the adopted utility master plan or service plan for the area where the
easement is requested. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed project is located and
designed appropriately to meet the future needs of the service area based on the adopted land use
plans and/or zoning in the area served. This requirement is intended to encourage thorough
planning, coordination among property owners, and to avoid multiple requests for easements or
premature expansion or modification of the facility before the end of its normal service life.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES:
Generally, the City will not grant exclusive easements. As a condition of approval, the applicant
must contact other utility service providers in the project vicinity to determine if they have
current or future plans for additional facilities in the area. To the extent feasible, the planning,
design, and construction of facilities shall be coordinated among utility providers to conserve
easement corridors and to avoid repeated construction activities that may affect the natural area
or conserved land. Applicants must provide copies of written requests for utility coordination
and the responses received from other service providers.
COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING EASEMENTS:
Applicants must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of prior easements on land
subject to this Policy or other City property. Requests for new or additional easements will not
6
be considered if the applicant has not met the requirements of existing easement agreements and
has failed to make diligent efforts to correct the situation after notification by the City.
RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS:
As a condition of approval of any easement or right-of-way, the City will impose appropriate
measures to assure adequate resource protection for the natural area or conserved land. These
measures will be determined based on the characteristics of the proposal and the affected land,
but may include, without limitation: field investigations to determine the presence of sensitive
plants and wildlife; siting requirements to minimize the effect on natural resources; seasonal
timing restrictions to avoid impacts to wildlife or sensitive habitat during critical periods of the
year; access restrictions to control times and locations of access to the easement; construction
management measures to ensure that activities are restricted to designated areas, to control
erosion, to limit noise, or other impacts; restoration requirements to ensure the timely regrading
and revegetation of disturbed areas to a condition consistent with the future management of the
area; mitigation measures to replace resource values lost to the community as a result of the
project; and requirements to minimize the impact to the natural area of ongoing operation and
maintenance of the facility. The City Manager or his or her designee shall develop and maintain
a general list of resource protection standards that are applicable to natural areas and conserved
lands. This list, which is now maintained by the Natural Areas Program, may be modified from
time to time based on the experience gained in managing easements, developing knowledge
about the resource values of the City’s natural areas and conserved lands, and improved
knowledge related to best management practices needed to protect the natural values of the
City’s properties and to reflect specific circumstances or concerns in connection with a particular
easement or project.
COMPENSATION AND MITIGATION:
As a condition of approval of any easement or right of way, the City will require cash
compensation for the value of the permanent and temporary easements and for the administrative
costs of processing and managing the easement, except where there is offsetting value and
benefit to the Natural Areas Program. In addition, the City will require compensation for the loss
of ecological service values, recreation values, and other intrinsic values of the property.
Compensation for the value of the land and for damages will be based on fair market value as
determined by accepted appraisal techniques. Compensation for loss in ecological services and
recreation use will be based on values reported in appropriate professional and technical
publications. Compensation for losses in ecological services and recreation use may be
negotiated to be paid in cash or through the completion of appropriate mitigation measures.
Additional fees assessed for other costs associated with processing the easement request and
approval process, overseeing construction activities, and managing the easement following
construction will be based on the estimated actual costs of the service provided. In general,
compensation and fees will be administered so as to result in a net benefit to the Natural Areas
Program.
PUBLIC INFORMATION AND REVIEW PROCESS:
In addition to the formal advisory board and City Council review procedures described below,
the applicant requesting an easement on City-owned natural area or conserved land will be
required to arrange for a public meeting at which information regarding the proposed easement
7
and related project will be provided, and at which questions regarding the easement and related
project will be taken. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that responses are provided
to questions asked at the meeting to the extent practicable, and that questions and responses and
any input received at the meeting are documented and provided to City staff. The applicant shall
be responsible for providing timely and meaningful notice to the general public in advance of
any such public meeting.
ADVISORY BOARD AND COUNCIL REVIEW:
Granting an easement or right-of-way conveys a property right, and must be approved by the
City Council by ordinance. The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board will also review the
easement proposal and make a recommendation in its advisory role to the City Council. City
staff will be responsible for working with the applicant on the application process, reviewing and
evaluating the application, and making a recommendation to both the Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board and the City Council. If an easement is granted by the City Council, staff
will be responsible for overseeing and managing the easement and ensuring that the conditions of
the grant are met.
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND REVIEW PROCESS:
In addition to this Policy, the City Manager or his designee will establish procedures for
reviewing applications for easements and rights–of-way that affect City-owned natural areas and
conserved lands. These procedures shall establish the fees, necessary steps and information
requirements for the timely consideration of requests for easements or rights-of-way. The City
Manager or his or her designee will ensure that easement requests are presented to City Council
for decision in a timely manner.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: John Stokes
Daylan Figgs
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 21
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-113 Authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Colorado State Board of Land
Commissioners and Larimer County Regarding the Energy by Design Planning Process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area (Soapstone) and Meadow Springs Ranch (MSR) are owned by the City of Fort Collins
Natural Areas Program and Fort Collins Utilities, respectively. Soapstone and MSR are considered split estate
properties as the City owns the surface estate and the mineral estate (including oil and gas) is owned by other parties.
The State of Colorado owns approximately 12,400 acres of mineral rights underlying the properties: 3,500 underlying
Soapstone and 8,900 underlying MSR.
The Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners (SLB) has contracted with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to
conduct an Energy by Design (EbD) planning process on Soapstone and MSR. The goal of the EbD process is to
develop a plan that conserves key natural, recreational, landscape view, agricultural, and cultural resource values while
providing reasonable access to the SLB’s and others’ mineral estate. This plan also includes strategies to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate surface impacts to key resources. Subject to Council review and approval of the proposed
MOU, the City will be a partner in the planning process. The Memorandum of Understanding outlines the
responsibilities of each party for the Energy by Design planning process.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Colorado, like many western states, recognizes separate ownership of the surface estate and the mineral estate and
the private property rights associated with each. When different parties own the surface and minerals, this is referred
to as “severed” or “split” estates. Soapstone and MSR are considered split estates as the City owns the surface estate
and other parties own the mineral estate (including oil and gas). Of the several parties that own the underlying mineral
rights, the majority are owned by Anadarko Land Corp, Anadarko E&P Company LP (together referred to as
Anadarko), and the State of Colorado. State-owned minerals are managed by the SLB.
A mineral investigation conducted by a professional geologist as part of the due diligence investigations during the
purchase of Soapstone in 2004 revealed the mineral rights were severed from the surface ownership. The
investigation concluded the probability of resource extraction was so remote as to be negligible. A second
investigation conducted in 2008 that focused primarily on the potential for petroleum exploration supported this finding.
During the period from 2008 to present, technologies have greatly advanced in the areas of horizontal drilling and
hydraulic fracturing or “fracking”. Geologic formations once thought to have limited potential for economic viability are
now being developed into productive oil and gas wells. The recent discovery of economically viable wells in the
Niobrara Shale formation, the same shale formation underlying Soapstone and MSR, is a result of these new
technologies.
To date, oil and gas activities on City properties have been limited to a small portion of MSR located in Weld County.
In 2010, the City received Notices of Intent by Slawson Exploration to drill on two sites located within MSR. The
minerals were leased to Slawson by the SLB in 2005; Slawson did not drill the intended wells.
In 2011, the City was contacted by Tidelands Geophysical and Seitel Data with requests for seismic surveys on
portions on MSR. Access to MSR was granted by the City and the surveys were conducted in the summer of 2011.
In March 2010, SLB staff contacted Natural Areas staff to discuss the possibility of leasing State owned mineral rights
underlying portions of Soapstone and MSR. The dialog that occurred between the City and SLB led to the decision
to delay the leasing actions and to form a collaborative effort between the SLB, City, County, and TNC to develop a
plan for oil and gas development that preserves key natural, recreational, landscape view, agricultural, and cultural
resource values while providing reasonable access to the SLB’s and other’s mineral estate.
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 21
In the November 4, 2011 SLB Board of Commissioners Meeting, SLB staff were authorized to contract with TNC to
fund a planning process developed by TNC called Energy by Design and to enter into a Memorandum of
Understanding with the City and Larimer County to complete the plan. Larimer County was included, given its role
as a long term conservation partner in the Mountains-to-Plains project and due to the fact the SLB owns a portion of
the minerals underlying Red Mountain Open Space.
The City, County, and SLB will utilize the TNC Energy by Design planning process to develop a Comprehensive Drilling
Plan for the Project Area generally described as Soapstone, MSR, and Red Mountain Open Space. This partnership
will also work with other surface and mineral estate owners and mineral lessees in the Project Area to develop terms
and conditions for a form of Surface Use Agreement (SUA). The SUA would allow defined surface use activities for
oil and gas development in the Project Area while minimizing surface impacts and protecting natural, recreational,
agricultural, landscape view, and cultural resources. The approach entails a “no net loss” strategy that requires mineral
companies to protect habitat of equal value accomplished through on-site as well as off-site mitigation (including land
and water conservation). For those minerals that are not controlled by the State, the ability to achieve no net loss will
depend on the willingness of oil exploration and production companies to participate in the planning process as well
as the implementation phase. While no company has as yet committed to the process, the three major exploration
and production companies affiliated with the properties (either through ownership or lease holdings) have been
contacted and expressed interest in the project.
The MOU indicates the City and Larimer County will be responsible for:
• Managing public outreach and organizing public information sessions
• Responding to public concerns
• Managing the process for any required approvals from the City Council or the County Board of Commissioners
• Managing communications with other stakeholders in the project area
• Providing TNC and the SLB previously acquired data, maps, field studies, research, and other information
regarding the cultural, natural, recreational, agricultural, and landscape resources within the Project Area.
The SLB will be responsible for:
• Scope of Work with TNC
• Providing the staff support and financial compensation for TNC’s work products
• Implementing the Comprehensive Drilling Plan, Surface Use Agreement, and goals of the MOU by
incorporating appropriate terms and conditions in the SLB oil and gas leases
• Obtaining any required approval from the Board of Land Commissioners.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The City will be responsible for providing staff time necessary to complete the Energy by Design planning process.
The State Land Board is contracting with TNC and is responsible for compensating TNC for the work products
described in the MOU.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Energy by Design is a process designed to bring together all of the parties of interest, including surface owners,
mineral rights owners and lessees, in order to develop a common understanding of natural, cultural, scenic,
agricultural, and economic resources. One the resources have been carefully identified and understood, the
participants design an approach to exploration and production activities intended to direct surface activities associated
with extraction activities away from critical natural and cultural resources (such as wetlands, rare species, and cultural
sites). The approach entails a “no net loss” strategy that requires participating mineral companies to protect habitat
of equal value accomplished through on-site as well as off-site mitigation (including land and water conservation). Staff
believes this collaborative process represents the City’s best approach for protecting the City’s surface interest.
December 20, 2011 -3- ITEM 21
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At its December 14, 2011 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board discussed the proposed
Memorandum of Understanding. A memo from the Board is attached (Attachment 3) and the minutes from that
meeting will be provided in the “Read-before” packet on Tuesday, December 20, 2011.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of the Project Area and State Land Board Mineral Ownership
2. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board memo, December 15, 2011
!H
!H
¹
Attachment 1 - State Land Board Sections in the Laramie Foothills Area
Created by City of Fort Collins Natural Areas - 2011
Project Area
Larimer County
!H Slawson Abandoned Drill Site
Siesmic Site
State Land Board Sections
City of Fort Collins Utilities
Larimer County
City of Fort Collins NA
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
RED MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE
SOAPSTONE PRAIRIE NATURAL AREA
MEADOW SPRINGS RANCH
RESOLUTION 2011-113
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
WITH THE COLORADO STATE BOARD OF LAND COMMISSIONERS AND
LARIMER COUNTY REGARDING THE ENERGY BY DESIGN PLANNING PROCESS
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of major land holdings in northern Larimer County,
including Soapstone Prairie Natural Area (“SPNA”) and Meadow Springs Ranch (“MSR”); and
WHEREAS, both SPNA and MSR (together referred to as the “Properties”) were acquired
by the City for significant public purposes, and each are of substantial value and concern to the City;
and
WHEREAS, the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners (“State Land Board”) owns
the minerals associated with approximately 3,500 acres that are part of SPNA and approximately
8,900 acres that are part of MSR, for a total of approximately 12,400 acres; and
WHEREAS, Larimer County (the “County”) has a similar interest in preservation of the
conserved lands in northern Larimer County, including Red Mountain Open Space, which is owned
by the County and also is the site of substantial mineral rights holdings of the State Land Board; and
WHEREAS, in response to concerns raised by the City and the County regarding the
potential for oil and gas exploration on the Properties through leasing of mineral interests by the
State Land Board, and in recognition of the substantial natural resource and other values associated
with the Properties, the State Land Board has proposed to collaborate with the City and the County
in developing a plan for oil and gas development that preserves key natural, recreational, landscape
view, agricultural and cultural resource values while providing reasonable access to the mineral
interests on the Properties; and
WHEREAS, the State Land Board has contracted with The Nature Conservancy (“TNC”)
to provide consulting assistance and support for the proposed collaboration, referred to as the Energy
by Design process; and
WHEREAS, in order to document the parties’ respective rights and responsibilities, the State
Land Board has proposed an intergovernmental agreement between the Board, the City and the
County, entitled Memorandum of Understanding, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
“A” and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the proposed Memorandum of Understanding, and has
recommended that the City proceed as proposed in order to allow the Energy by Design process to
proceed; and
WHEREAS, the Memorandum of Understanding provides that the City and the County will
manage public outreach associated with the process, and will provide to the State Land Board and
TNC previously acquired data, maps, field studies, research and other information regarding the
natural, recreational, landscape view, agricultural and cultural resource values on their respective
properties; and
WHEREAS, in addition, the Memorandum of Understanding provides that the Energy by
Design process will result in the development of a comprehensive drilling plan on the parties’
properties to preserve existing resource values and avoid net loss of such values that may result from
oil and gas exploration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Memorandum of Understanding and
considered the benefits and advantages associated with developing a plan for preserving the resource
values on the Properties in anticipation of potential oil and gas development; and
WHEREAS, Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter empowers the City Council of the
City, by ordinance or resolution, to enter into contracts with other governmental bodies to furnish
governmental services and make charges for such services or enter into cooperative or joint
activities with other governmental bodies; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. §29-1-203 also provides that governments may cooperate or contract
with one another to provide certain services or facilities when such cooperation or contracts are
authorized by each party thereto with the approval of its legislative body or other authority having
the power to so approve.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an intergovernmental agreement
with the State Land Board and Larimer County in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit
“A”, entitled Memorandum of Understanding, together with such additional or modified terms and
conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, deems necessary and
appropriate to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution or protect the interests of the City.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
FINAL DRAFT
1
Memorandum of Understanding
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made and entered into as of
, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and among the State of Colorado (the
“State”), acting by and through the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners, (the
“Board”), the City of Fort Collins, and Larimer County. The parties may be referred to
hereinafter collectively as the “Parties” and each individually as a “Party.”
Recitals
This Memorandum is made with respect to the following facts:
A. The Board is a trustee agency and governmental entity of the State and,
pursuant to Article IX, Sections 9 and 10 of the State Constitution and Title 36, Article 1,
Sections 100.3 through Section 153 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, the Board serves as
the trustee of the lands granted to the State in public trust by the federal government, lands
acquired in lieu thereof and additional lands held in public trust. The Board owns a portion
of the mineral estate within the Project Area (as defined below).
B. The City of Fort Collins is a governmental entity and is the owner of surface
estate in Meadow Springs Ranch and the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area which are a
portion of Project Area.
C. Larimer County is a governmental entity and is the owner of surface estate in
Red Mountain Open Space which is a portion of the Project Area.
D. The Nature Conservancy (“TNC”) is a non‐profit corporation which has been
hired by the Board to utilize its Energy by Design framework to create an analysis and map
of the project area for the Board as described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A.
E. The Project Area includes three open space parcels which are adjacent to one
another and cover over 60,000 acres north of Fort Collins, along the Wyoming border:
Meadow Springs Ranch. City‐owned, 26,000 acres.
Red Mountain Open Space. County‐owned, 15,000 acres.
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area. City‐owned, 22,058 acres.
These properties are split estate, with the major mineral owners/lessees being the Board,
Anadarko, Marathon, and Chesapeake. A map of the Project Area is attached as Exhibit B.
Agreement
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Vision. The Board is interested in leasing and developing its oil and gas
holdings on trust lands within the Project Area. TNC shall provide the Board an analysis
and map of the Project Area which depicts areas and resources critical to meeting both
community value and statewide conservation goals. Utilizing TNC’s work product, the
Parties will work collaboratively with each other and with oil and gas lessees and other
EXHIBIT A
FINAL DRAFT
mineral owners, to develop a plan for oil and gas development that seeks to preserve key
natural, recreational, landscape view, and cultural resource values while providing
reasonable access to the Board’s and other’s mineral estate, with specific strategies to
avoid, minimize, and mitigate surface impacts to such resources.
2. Purpose. The Parties acknowledge that the general purpose of this
Memorandum is to establish the Parties’ intent and expectations regarding their long‐term
cooperation and good faith dealing towards each other related to the future development
of the mineral estate within the Project Area. The Parties recognize that such cooperation
and good faith dealing is necessary to ensure that successful realization of the vision of this
Memorandum of Understanding. The Parties shall, on an ongoing basis, cooperate and
coordinate with each other to achieve the goals in this Memorandum of Understanding and
the Scope of Work, including, without limitation, attending meetings and sharing
information relevant to the Project Area on a timely basis and by acting in good faith
towards each other in the management and implementation of activities on both parcels.
The Parties shall use reasonable efforts to cause their employees, consultants and agents to
cooper ate with the provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding.
3. Products. The Parties envision that the following products will be developed
to accomplish the goal of managing oil and gas development so as to avoid, minimize, and
mitigate the surface impacts and protect natural, recreational, scenic, and cultural
resources.
a. TNC shall provide the final product and analysis required under the Scope of
Work to the Parties.
b. The Parties shall work with each other and other mineral estate owners in the
Project Area to develop a Comprehensive Drilling Plan that serves the goals of
this Memorandum of Understanding.
c. The Parties and other mineral estate owners in the Project area shall develop
proposed terms and conditions for a form of Surface Use Agreement that would
allow for defined surface use and impact for development of oil and gas in the
Project Area while avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating surface impacts and
protecting natural, recreational, landscape and cultural resources. The Surface
Use Agreement may restrict oil and gas development completely on certain
portions of the Project Area to avoid impacting sensitive natural or cultural
resources. However, the Parties contemplate that said Surface Use Agreement
will provide reasonable access for development of the oil and gas in the mineral
estate.
4. Roles and Responsibilities of the Parties. The Parties agree to the roles and
responsibilities as allocated in this paragraph in addition to cooperating to develop the
products as discussed in paragraph 3. The Parties intend to use best efforts by assigning
staff resources to meet these responsibilities.
2
FINAL DRAFT
a. City of Fort Collins and Larimer County shall be responsible for the following:
i. managing the public outreach and information process by communicating
with the public, organizing public information sessions, and responding to
public concerns regarding this Memorandum of Understanding in a manner
consistent with the spirit of and stated purpose of this Memorandum of
Understanding,
ii. managing the process of any required approvals of the form of Surface Use
Agreement from the City Council of Fort Collins and the Board of County
Commissioners for Larimer County, respectively, upon development of a
mutually agreeable form of Surface Use Agreement,
iii. managing communications with other stakeholders in the Project Area
including Great Outdoors Colorado, citizens’ groups, and surface lessees, and
iv. providing to TNC and the Board previously acquired data, maps, field
studies, research, and other information regarding the cultural, natural,
recreational, and landscape resources within the Project Area for TNC’s use
in creating the final products required in the Scope of Work. This shall be
considered an in‐kind contribution to support the goals of this Memorandum
of Understanding.
b. The Board shall be responsible for the following:
i. entering into the Scope of Work with TNC and providing the staff support
and financial compensation for TNC’s work product;
ii. incorporating terms and stipulations in their oil and gas leases in the
Project Area designed to implement the Comprehensive Drilling Plan, Surface
Use Agreement, and the goals of this Memorandum; and
ii. obtaining any required approval from the Board of Land Commissioners
for the Surface Use Agreement, Comprehensive Drilling Plan, and oil and gas
3
leases.
5. Ongoing Cooperation. In addition to consulting on the Comprehensive
Drilling Plan and Surface Use Agreement, the Parties shall, on an ongoing basis, cooperate
and coordinate with each other regarding the development of the mineral estate and
furthering the goals to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the impacts to the surface estate and
the protected resources described above in the Project Area. Such ongoing cooperation
shall include, without limitation, sharing relevant information on a timely basis and acting
in good faith towards each other in the implementation of activities in the Project Area. It
is the Parties’ intent that upon development and execution of one or more Surface Use
Agreements in the Project Area, the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County shall enforce
the terms of the Surface Use Agreement and the Board shall enforce the terms of any oil
and gas lease in the Project Area in order to ensure long term success in implementing the
FINAL DRAFT
goals of this Memorandum. The commitments in this paragraph shall survive termination
of this Memorandum.
6. Communications. The Parties agree to the following process for addressing
media contacts and requests for inspection of records under the Colorado Open Records
Act:
a. With regard to media contacts and news releases, the parties will work together
on joint news releases, public announcements, advertisements or publicity
concerning the products anticipated from this Memorandum. This is not to
limit the parties from responding to media inquiries or information requests
from constituents. Standard talking points and project information will be
jointly created and used by the parties to provide consistent and clear details to
the general public. The parties will also keep each other informed when
interviews have been conducted with various media outlets, to ensure parties
involved are kept informed of public response.
b. The Parties acknowledge that certain Parties to this Memorandum are subject
to the provisions of the Colorado Open Records Act and may, in certain
circumstances, be obligated to allow inspection of certain records that are
made, maintained or kept by the Parties. Upon receipt of a request to inspect
any records concerning this Memorandum or its products, the Party in receipt
of the request shall confer with the other Parties to provide them notice and an
opportunity to respond to the request for inspection.
7. Term. If the Parties have not developed a Comprehensive Drilling Plan and
Surface Use Agreement by December 31, 2013, this Memorandum shall terminate and be of
no furth e r forc e or effect.
8. Termination. Any Party to this Memorandum may terminate participation in
the Memorandum by providing thirty (30) calendar days written notice of termination to
the other Parties. In the event of termination of any party, upon expiration of the notice
period, the entire Memorandum shall also terminate as to the remaining Parties’
particip at ion a nd all Parties shall be relie ved of further obligation under the Memorandum.
9. Miscellaneous Provisions
a. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given under this
Memorandum shall be in writing and shall be deemed given upon personal delivery
or on the second business day after mailing by registered or certified United States
mail, postage pr epaid, to the appropriate party at its address stated below:
If to the Board:
hrough the Colorado State Board
4
State of Colorado, acting by and t
of Land Commissioners
1127 Sherman Street, Suite 300
FINAL DRAFT
Denver, CO 80203
Attn: Director, and Minerals Director
ins:
If to the City of Fort Coll
___________________________
If to Larimer County:
________ _________________
b. Amendment. This Memorandum may be amended by written agreement
executed and delivered by the Parties.
c. No Partnership. Nothing in this Memorandum shall be deemed in any way to
create between any of the Parties any relationship of partnership, joint venture or
association, and the Parties hereby disclaim the existence of any such relationship.
d. Assignment. No Party may assign, charge, encumber or otherwise amend any
of its rights and obligations under this Memorandum without the prior written
consent of the other Parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each Party has executed this Memorandum of
Understanding or has caused it to be executed, under seal, on its behalf by its duly
authorized representatives as of the Effective Date.
STATE OF COLORADO, acting by and through
the COLORADO STATE BOARD OF LAND
COMMISSIONERS:
By:
N ame: William E. Ryan___________________________
T itle: Director, State Board of Land Commissioners
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
By:
Name:
Title:
5
FINAL DRAFT
6
LARIMER COUNTY
By:
N ame:
T itle:
Exhibit A Scope of Work
Mountains to Plains Energy by Design
Summary: The Nature Conservancy (TNC) will utilize its Energy by Design (EbD) framework to identify
opportunities to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the impacts of oil and gas development to natural and cultural
values associated with three open space parcels in northern Larimer County. EbD is designed to achieve “no
net loss” outcomes to biodiversity values in light of energy development. TNC will work collaboratively with
the State Land Board (SLB) as its client, project partners including the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County,
and with a technical team comprised of experts from government agencies (federal, state, and local) and
conservation organizations. The project will provide for an “onsite analysis” of priority biodiversity values
prior to SLB’s lease sale (Phase I), which SLB can use to guide the development of a Minerals Development
Plan (Phase II). Following the creation of the Minerals Development Plan, the lessee(s) may opt to participate
in a third phase of the project, to identify and implement offsite mitigation opportunities associated with
unavoidable impacts onsite (Phase III). This SOW covers Phases I and II, and briefly describes Phase III.
Project goal: SLB seeks a strategy to lease and develop its oil and gas holdings on trust lands within the
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area, Red Mountain Open Space, and Meadow Springs Ranch parcels in northern
Larimer County. SLB and TNC will work collaboratively with Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins, and
in conjunction with oil and gas lessees and other mineral owners, to develop a plan for oil and gas
development that provides access to the state’s mineral estate, with specific strategies to avoid and minimize
surface impacts to key natural and cultural resource values. This initiative may also be part of SLB’s goals to
create oil and gas development master plans on specific trust lands in the future.
Project area: The project area includes three open space parcels with severed estate ownership between the
surface owners and minerals holders, with the SLB being one of the major minerals owners with over 15,000
acres in trust. The three open space parcels are adjacent to one another and cover over 60,000 acres north of
Fort Collins, along the Wyoming border:
Meadow Springs Ranch. City‐owned, 26,000 acres.
Red Mountain Open Space. County‐owned, 15,000 acres.
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area. City‐owned, 22,058 acres.
Timing and milestones: The project will be completed by December 30, 2012. There are three phases of
this project, of which the SLB and TNC will work together directly on the first two. The deliverables for Phase
I will be completed by June 30, 2012. TNC’s work on Phase II will be completed by December 30, 2012. There
will be three project check‐ins over the life of the project, during which time SLB and TNC will agree whether
to proceed and if so, whether changes are needed. Documentation of these decision points will be recorded
through review and acceptance of summary meeting notes exchanged by the parties as part of the progress
reports provided after each technical team meeting.
Milestone Date
PHASE I – ONSITE ANALYSIS (Led by TNC)
Target selection, collect available data, identify data gaps
Technical team meeting #1 November 30, 2011
Project Check‐in: evaluation and status review between SLB and TNC December 2011
Create draft maps of importance of natural and cultural values. Develop
different options for combining this information to identify important
places for avoidance and minimization of energy development
Technical team meeting #2 January 2012
Project Check‐in: evaluation and status review between SLB and TNC February 2012
Based on input from technical team, create draft final results for priority
areas for avoidance and minimization of impacts associated with potential
energy development
EXHIBIT A
to MOU
Milestone Date
Technical team meeting #3 March 2012
Project Check‐in: evaluation and status review between SLB and TNC April 2012
Complete Phase I
Send draft deliverables to SLB for comm ent April 2012
Edit and send final deliverables to SLB June 2012
PHA SE II – MINERALS DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Led by SLB)
TNC’s contribution to minerals plan complete December 2012
Phase I (Onsite Analysis) – Identify priority areas for avoiding and minimizing impacts: TNC will lead
this phase. This phase will identify and map priority natural and cultural resource values for the three open
space properties to inform SLB’s oil and gas leasing decisions. Example inputs include maps of natural and
cultural values such as rare plants, wildlife habitat, cultural sites, and viewsheds. Example data sources
i nclude Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife and the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. TNC will look to
the City and County for guidance on how best to address cultural values.
This phase will aid SLB decisions regarding which stipulations to build into the Minerals Development Plan
and associated leases, such as no surface occupancy and restricted surface occupancy (see Phase II below),
a nd may also be used to decide provisions of Surface Use Agreements between the SLB and the surface
owners (City of Fort Collins and Larimer County).
The onsite analysis will involve the identification and mapping of priority natural and cultural resource
values by the project partners and a technical team. The final product will show a map of areas and resources
that are critical to meeting both local community value and statewide conservation goals (see Figure 1 as
example). The map will incorporate available GIS data and may involve habitat modeling as necessary. The
final product will take into account the uniqueness (i.e., irreplaceability) and importance of the natural
resource values in any one unit of analysis relative to the Central Shortgrass Prairie ecoregion as a whole,
with rare and difficult‐to‐mitigate‐for values being of greater importance (e.g., rare plants) than more
common and easier‐to‐mitigate‐for values (e.g., mule deer habitat).
Phase II (Minerals Development Plan) – Identify a drilling plan for the project area: SLB will lead this
phase. The second phase of the project, in which some support will be required on an hourly basis from TNC
to the SLB, will require the development of a drilling plan for the minerals estate on SLB holdings, which may
also include a leasing plan, stipulations and surface use agreements. This phase will also require participation
and involvement with other mineral estate owners, representatives from Larimer County and the City of Fort
Collins, and a potential operator. In this phase, there are no specific deliverables for TNC. Rather, TNC will
ontribute technical support in the development of the drilling plan upon SLB request, and as the budget
nder this contract permits.
c
u
Optional Phase III (Mitigation Plan) – Identify a plan for potential offsite mitigation: TNC would lead this
phase, should it occur. This phase of the project is not defined in this scope of work, as the goal of the parties
is to have a comprehensive plan which seeks to avoid and minimize disturbances to the site first, essentially
conducting onsite vs. offsite mitigation plans. However, there may be a need for offsite mitigation. This
project phase is anticipated to require participation with TNC, other mineral estate owners, representatives
from Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins, the selected minerals operator, and other stakeholders as
ecessary. The SLB may be a participant, but does not anticipate financially supporting this phase of the
roject.
n
p
Summary of deliverables from TNC
Phase I Report – This report will describe the background, methods, results, and participants for
Phase I so the SLB has documentation of what decisions were made, by whom and why. For example,
the report will describe:
o Natural and cultural targets selected and rationale
o
o GIS layers used, including sources of data and modifications made
Weighting/prioritization of each GIS layer and rationale
o Method for combining individual GIS layers – final method used and other methods tried – in
order to identify recommended avoidance and minimization areas.
o Any other information and explanation to make it clear how the analysis was developed.
The fina
system m
l map(s) will prioritize important areas, with a “ranking system.” For example, this ranking
o
ay show:
Tier 1 – areas where avoidance is legally required (e.g., threatened and endangered species)
o Tier 2 – areas where avoidance (e.g., no surface occupancy) is recommended based on rarity
or other significance of the natural and cultural values
o Tier 3 – areas where minimization of impacts (if avoidance is not possible) would be
sufficient to protect natural and cultural values
o Tier 4 – areas where energy development is preferred, such as already‐disturbed areas.
TNC will provide all materials, include the reports and associated shapefiles by email and/or CD,
based on the delivery method preferred by the SLB. Color hard copies of the report will only be
provided upon request by the SLB and if the budget allows.
Phase II contributions – SLB does not necessarily expect any specific deliverables from TNC for the
Minerals Development Plan. However, as described above, SLB may request input from TNC on an
hourly basis as needed and as the project budget permits.
Use of results:
The final report for Phase I will be provided to the SLB from TNC, with copies of the report also going to the
contributing stakeholders. All parties will be providing data and services for the study and will share in joint
ownership of the document and findings. The final report is also expected to be a “living product” which will
be used to make decisions regarding a Minerals Development Plan, which is expected to include a leasing
plan, stipulations, surface use agreements, and a drilling plan. “Living product” means that SLB may include
additional or updated data should the need for doing so arise between the completion of this project and the
lease sale; it is not expected that TNC would rerun the EbD analysis after its completion. While all parties
expect to use the report, the contract to provide data and the memorandum of understanding do not
guarantee that the plans devised in this report will be implemented.
Responsibilities
TNC will facilitate the completion of all work on the Energy by Design analysis, including the
completion of all GIS work, and soliciting input from Project Partners and the technical team. TNC
will provide input to the drilling plan as requested by SLB and as remaining hours allow under the
project budget.
SLB will participate on the technical team and work with TNC to ensure that EbD deliverables will
meet SLB’s needs, and provide data to TNC as needed for the EbD analysis. SLB will facilitate the
completion of the Minerals Development Plan (Phase II) once the EbD analysis is complete.
Project partners (City, County) will participate on the technical team and provide data to TNC as
needed and complete all duties pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between the SLB, the
City and the County.
Figure 1. Sample results for onsite analysis.
This map shows the final results for the onsite analysis of sensitive features for an EbD project that TNC completed
with Questar, in northwestern Colorado and southwestern Wyoming. The map shows three types of avoidance areas
– legal avoidance, recommended avoidance, and sensitive vegetation avoidance. TNC could create a similar map for
the Mountains to Plains project area.
MountainsBoard to Plains Energy by Design 12/14/11 2011 - State Land
Sources:
Surface- 8/1/2011 SAMS
Minerals- 3/29/2010 SAMS
Red Mountain
Open Space
Soapstone Prairie
Natural Area
Meadow Springs
Ranch
¦¨§25
2 1
1
7
6 5
6
5
8
4
5 4 3 2 1 4
9
5
8 9
8 9
9 8
8
4 3 2 1
9
5
7
4 2 1
8
3
1
7
3 2 6
5
3
9
4
6
7 7
6
6
7
3
2
23
14
26
34
13
35
36
30
11
35 31
29
24
31
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Wanda Krajicek
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 22
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-114 Making Appointments to Various Boards, Commissions, and Authorities of the City of Fort Collins.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vacancies currently exist on various boards, commissions, and authorities due to resignations of board members and
the expiration of terms of current members. Applications were solicited during September and Council teams
interviewed applicants during October, November, and December. This Resolution appoints boardmembers to fill
current vacancies and term expirations.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Section 1 of this Resolution makes 12 appointments to 9 boards and commissions to fill current vacancies with terms
to begin immediately. Names of those individuals recommended to fill current vacancies have been inserted in the
Resolution with the expiration date following the names.
Section 2 of this Resolution makes 52 appointments to 22 boards and commissions to fill expired terms to begin on
January 1, 2012. Names of those individuals recommended to fill expired terms have been inserted in the Resolution
with the expiration date following the names.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Vacancies were advertised in the Coloradoan and the City News (utility bill insert) and flyers were posted at various
City buildings. Vacancies were also posted on fcgov.com, fortcollins.com and in the City’s Neighborhood News
Newsletter. Flyers were also mailed to various diverse population groups/organizations, service organization, major
employers, board and commission members, Active Applicants (applicants on file during 2011) and term limit
boardmembers. 122 applications were submitted to fill 53 vacancies.
RESOLUTION 2011-114
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS
BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND AUTHORITIES
OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WHEREAS, vacancies currently exist on various boards, commissions, and authorities of the
City due to resignations by board members and due to the expiration of the terms of certain
members; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make appointments to fill the vacancies which exist
on the various boards, commissions, and authorities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the following named persons are hereby appointed to fill current
vacancies on the boards, commissions, and authorities hereinafter indicated, with terms to begin
immediately and to expire as set forth after each name:
Affordable Housing Board Expiration of Term
Wayne Thompson December 31, 2012
Art in Public Places Board Expiration of Term
Jill Kruetzer December 31, 2013
Commission on Disability Expiration of Term
Jim Dunlap December 31, 2014
Jenny Arndt December 31, 2014
Gwen Dillman December 31, 2015
Golf Board Expiration of Term
Steve Simonson December 31, 2015
Housing Authority Expiration of Term
Cathy Mathis December 31, 2013
Human Relations Commission Expiration of Term
James Lesco December 31, 2014
Senior Advisory Board Expiration of Term
Jeff Arduino December 31, 2012
Water Board Expiration of Term
Katherine Liesel Hans December 31, 2012
Youth Advisory Board Expiration of Term
Patrice Quadrel December 31, 2013
Sarah Pruznick December 31, 2013
Section 2. That the following named persons are hereby appointed to fill expired terms
on boards, commissions, and authorities hereinafter indicated, with terms to begin January 1, 2012
and to expire as set forth after each name:
Affordable Housing Board Expiration of Term
Jeff Johnson December 31, 2015
Troy Jones December 31, 2015
Art in Public Places Board Expiration of Term
Liz Good December 31, 2015
Jane Nevrivy December 31, 2015
Dwight Hall December 31, 2015
Building Review Board Expiration of Term
Jeffrey Schneider December 31, 2015
George Smith December 31, 2015
Commission on Disability Expiration of Term
Wendie Robinson December 31, 2015
-2-
Community Development Block Grant Commission Expiration of Term
Catherine Costlow December 31, 2015
Margaret Anne Long December 31, 2015
Anita Basham December 31, 2015
Cultural Resources Board Expiration of Term
Francisco Guiterrez December 31, 2015
Maggie Dennis December 31, 2015
Downtown Development Authority Expiration of Term
Jenny Bramhall December 31, 2015
Ellen Zibell December 31, 2015
Jerry Kennell December 31, 2015
Economic Advisory Commission Expiration of Term
Blue Hovatter December 31, 2014
Jim Clark December 31, 2014
Sam Solt December 31, 2014
Energy Board Expiration of Term
Britt Kronkosky December 31, 2013
Margaret Moore December 31, 2013
Peter O’Neill December 31, 2013
Barrett Rothe December 31, 2014
Steve Wolley December 31, 2014
Greg Behm December 31, 2014
Peggy Plate December 31, 2015
Ross Cunniff December 31, 2015
Stacey Baumgarn December 31, 2015
-3-
Golf Board Expiration of Term
Jason Patello December 31, 2015
Human Relations Commission Expiration of Term
Christine Hays December 31, 2015
Colleen Conway December 31, 2015
Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Expiration of Term
Ed Reifsnyder December 31, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission Expiration of Term
Sondra Carson December 31, 2015
Mark David Serour December 31, 2015
Natural Resources Advisory Board Expiration of Term
Paul Natsu December 31, 2015
Joe Halseth December 31, 2015
Justin Shepard December 31, 2015
Parks and Recreation Board Expiration of Term
Ragan Adams December 31, 2015
Planning and Zoning Board Expiration of Term
Kristin Kirkpatrick December 31, 2015
Retirement Committee Expiration of Term
John Lindsay December 31, 2015
Rodney Albers December 31, 2015
-4-
Senior Advisory Board Expiration of Term
Angela Condit December 31, 2015
Linda Gabel December 31, 2015
Transportation Board Expiration of Term
Sid Simonson December 31, 2015
Mary Atchison December 31, 2015
Eric Shenk December 31, 2015
Water Board Expiration of Term
Brian Brown December 31, 2015
Eric Garner December 31, 2015
Megan Smith December 31, 2015
Women’s Commission Expiration of Term
Marija Weeden-Osborn December 31, 2015
Annette Zacharias December 31, 2015
Zoning Board of Appeals Expiration of Term
Mike Bello December 31, 2015
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-5-
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Marty Heffernan
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 27
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 2011, Amending Chapter 23, Articles IX and X of the City Code to Update
Language Related to the Use of Motorized Devices on City Trails by People with Disabilities.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On First Reading, the City Council amended Ordinance No. 167, 2011 to eliminate the provisions pertaining to
implementation of a one year trial period to allow electric assisted bicycles on City trails. Provisions in the Ordinance
to change the City Code to clarify that people with temporary or permanent mobility disabilities are allowed to operate
ebikes and other power driven mobility devices on trails, and in parks and natural areas, in accordance with City
regulations, were retained. This Ordinance was adopted with these revisions, on First Reading on November 15, 2011
by a vote of 4-2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat).
Changes were made to the Ordinance between First and Second Readings to shorten the title of the Ordinance, add
information about recent ADA regulations, and remove a definition that is no longer needed.
An Optional Version of the Ordinance is also provided on Second Reading that includes Code revisions to provide for
a pilot ebikes program, as originally presented on First Reading. That version, which also includes shown in bold
proposed edits to the title and in “whereas” clauses on the first page that improve the explanation of the ADA-related
changes, is labeled as “Optional Version.”
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - November 15, 2011
(w/o attachments)
2. Powerpoint presentation
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: November 15, 2011
STAFF: Marty Heffernan
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 32
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 2011, Amending Chapter 23, Articles IX and X of the City Code to Allow Electrical
Assisted Bicycles on the City’s Paved Trails for a One Year Trial Period.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council has expressed interest in considering a trial period to allow electric assisted bicycles (ebikes) on City paved
trails. In response, the City Manager formed a cross-departmental team to: investigate the relevant issues; gain input
from associated boards and commissions; conduct a public opinion survey; and find out how other cities are managing
ebikes. City staff presented this information to the Council at the June 28, 2011 Work Session.
After reviewing the information provided at the work session, the City Manager’s recommendation, and other input
received from citizens, Council supported consideration of a change to the City Code to implement a one year trial
period to allow electrical assisted bicycles on the City’s paved trail system. Council requested that staff prepare an
ordinance to make the needed changes to the City Code to implement the trial period and return to Council at a regular
meeting for a determination on whether or not the trial period should be implemented.
Adoption of Ordinance No. 167, 2011, implements a one year trial period allowing ebikes on City paved trails from April
1, 2012 through March 31, 2013.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
Council expressed interest in considering a trial period to allow ebikes on City paved trails. In response, the City
Manager formed a cross-departmental team to: investigate the relevant issues; gain input from associated boards and
commissions; conduct a public opinion survey; and find out how other cities are managing ebikes on their trails. City
staff presented this information to the Council at its June 28, 2011 Work Session. (Attachment 2).
After reviewing the information provided at the Work Session, the City Manager’s recommendation, and other input
received from citizens, Council supported consideration of a change to the City Code to implement a one year trial
period to allow electrical assisted bicycles (ebikes) on the City’s paved trail system. Council requested staff prepare
an ordinance to make the needed changes to the City Code to implement the trial period and return to Council at a
regular meeting for a determination on whether or not the trial period should be implemented.
Council requested that the trial period expire after one year unless renewed, be limited to paved trails, and encompass
an uninterrupted warm weather season. Council also indicated the trial period should be limited only to ebikes, which
should be defined to exclude other electric vehicles or devices like mopeds, motorcycles, skateboards and scooters.
Council also requested that staff prepare a plan to educate the community about the rights of people with mobility
impairments to use ebikes on the trails and also help educate the community about trail etiquette, warnings, safety
and the recreational purpose of the trail system. Additionally, Council asked staff to develop a plan to gather
information and assess the impacts of ebike use during the trial period. Issues regarding safety, conflicts with other
trail users, impacts to wildlife, public opinion and related issues were to be addressed.
CODE CHANGES
Adoption of Ordinance No. 167, 2011, implements a one year trial period allowing ebikes on the City’s paved trails and
clarifies that people with mobility disabilities can use ebikes and other power-driven mobility devices on the trails (as
required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)) by making the following changes to Chapter 23 of the City Code:
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
November 15, 2011 -2- ITEM 32
1. Defines a “bicycle” by adopting the definition used in the Fort Collins Traffic Code.
2. Defines an “Electrical Assisted Bicycle:
Electrical assisted bicycle shall mean a vehicle having two (2) tandem wheels, or two (2) parallel
wheels and one (1) forward wheel, fully operable pedals, an electric motor not exceeding seven
hundred fifty (750) watts of power and a top motor-powered speed of twenty (20) miles per hour,
which also has a tire size of not more than three (3) inches in width, a wheel diameter of not less than
fourteen (14) inches, and a weight of not more than seventy-five (75) pounds. A bicycle with an
electric-powered bike trailer that meets the power and speed limitations listed above is also
considered an electrical assisted bicycle. The electric-powered bike trailer need not meet the above
wheel and tire requirements.
3. Defines “Mobility Disability” and “Other Power-Driven Mobility Device” by adopting the definitions in the ADA.
4. Modifies the prohibition against operating a motor vehicle or other motorized means of conveyance in or on
a natural area, park, or trail by allowing ebikes to be ridden on paved trails from April 1, 2012 through March
31, 2013.
5. Clarifies that a person with a temporary or permanent mobility disability is allowed to use a motorized
wheelchair or other power-driven mobility device in City natural areas, parks and trails, in accordance with City
regulations.
OUTREACH AND EDUCATION
City staff has launched the education campaign to inform citizens that people with mobility disabilities are allowed to
use ebikes and other power-driven mobility devices on City trails. Articles in City News, Fort Shorts and Neighborhood
News are being published and the information is also posted on the City’s web page and social media outlets.
In the spring of 2012, staff will launch an outreach campaign on trail etiquette to remind citizens to share the trail, give
audible warnings, stay to the right, ride at controlled speed, stay alert! and similar messages. The campaign will
include: press releases, videos on Cable 14 and on-line; posters; partnerships with bike shops; FC Bikes materials,
the Recreator, Natural Areas Tracks and Trails publication, and social media. If Council approves the ebike trial
period, the trail etiquette campaign will be expanded to publicize the trial period, including the on-line feedback form
to gather citizen input. In mid-summer staff will engage in additional outreach to promote the on-line ebike feedback
form and reinforce the trail etiquette message, with additional reminders deployed in the fall.
Finally, staff will be improving the signage along the trail system. Signage will be standardized and will include stop
signs, warnings about sharp curves or steep grades, trail etiquette reminders, wayfinding and distances and directions
to parks, natural areas and public facilities.
SURVEYS
Staff has been conducting trail use surveys to gather information on how the trails are being used. The surveys record
the number of users in a 30 minute time frame, what they are doing (walking, running, biking, rollerblading,
skateboarding etc.) and related information. Trail maintenance staff and rangers also have good information on trail
use from the time they spend on the trails. This information provides a general baseline of trail use information that
can be compared against information gathered during the ebike trial period, if it is implemented. Staff will conduct trail
use surveys (using volunteers and paid hourly workers) during the trial period and will include information on ebike
use, user conflicts, safety issues and impacts on wildlife. Trail maintenance staff and rangers will also be asked to
report on ebike use they observe on the trails. The public will also be encouraged to report their observations and
experiences with ebikes on the trails through the City’s on-line feedback form.
FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION
If the ebike trial period is implemented, and prior to the expiration of the trial period, staff will provide Council with all
the information gathered during the trial period. Council can then determine if the trial period should be extended,
made permanent, or be allowed to expire.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
November 15, 2011 -3- ITEM 32
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Minimal funding may be needed to pay hourly staff to conduct trail use surveys. The cost is estimated at less than
$5,000 and is currently budgeted.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Environmental impacts from ebikes on the trails is unknown but will be assessed during the trial period.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Board and Commission recommendations were summarized and included in the June 28th Work Session materials
(Attachment 2).
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff conducted a citizen survey on the topic of allowing ebikes on City paved trails. Over 200 responses were
received with 49% opposed and 47% in favor of allowing ebikes on the trails. The results of the outreach effort were
included in the June 28 Work Session materials (Attachment 2).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session Summary, June 28, 2011
2. Agenda Item Summary (and attachments) from the June 28, 2011 Work Session
3. Powerpoint presentation
1
1
CITY CODE CHANGES REGARDING THE
USE OF POWER DRIVEN MOBILITY
DEVICES IN PARKS, NATURAL AREAS AND
ON TRAILS
2
Introduction
• On first reading of Ordinance No. 167, 2011 on
November 15th, Council amended the Ordinance
to remove provisions that would have modified the
City Code to implement a trial period allowing
electric assisted bicycles on City trails.
• The remaining code changes in Ordinance No.
167 pertain to the use of power driven mobility
devices in natural areas, parks and on trails by
people with mobility disabilities.
ATTACHMENT 2
2
3
Introduction
• By adopting Ordinance No. 167, 2011 the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) regarding the use of power driven
mobility devices by people with mobility
disabilities will be incorporated into the City Code.
4
City Code Changes
• The Ordinance clarifies that a person with a
temporary or permanent mobility disability is
allowed to use a motorized wheelchair or other
power-driven mobility device (which includes
ebikes) in City natural areas, parks and on trails,
in accordance with City regulations.
• Power-driven mobility devices also include
mopeds, Segways and similar devices.
3
5
CITY REGULATIONS
• City regulations are in place which regulate the use of
power-driven mobility devices to address safety and
resource damage issues.
• The regulations allow only electric powered devices, limit
their weight to 500 pounds, noise levels to 55 dBA, and
width to 32 inches.
• The mobility devices must be operated in a safe manner,
between dusk and dawn and must not cause damage to
park, natural area or trail infrastructure or facilities.
ORDINANCE NO. 167, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 23, ARTICLES IX AND X OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO UPDATE THE LANGUAGE REGARDING THE USE OF
MOTORIZED DEVICES BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES IN ORDER TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH RECENT FEDERAL REGULATIONS UNDER THE AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT TO UPDATE LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE USE OF
MOTORIZED DEVICES ON CITY TRAILS BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
WHEREAS, Article IX of Chapter 23 of the City Code regulates behavior on City natural
areas properties, and Article X of Chapter 23 of the City Code regulates behavior in City recreation
areas, which includes parks and trails; and
WHEREAS, both the natural areas and parks Code provisions currently prohibit the use of
motorized vehicles or other motorized means of conveyance in natural areas and recreation areas,
except that motorized wheelchairs or similar assistive devices may be used by a person with a
mobility impairment; and
WHEREAS, in 2010 the U.S. Department of Justice released revised regulations
implementing the accessibility provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), which
regulations went into effect on March 15, 2011 (the “2011 Regulations”); and
WHEREAS, among other changes, the 2011 Regulations redefine the scope of mobility
devices that public entities must allow individuals with disabilities to use in areas where pedestrians
are allowed, subject to legitimate safety requirements that an entity may adopt; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to amend various provisions of Chapter 23, Articles
IX and X in order to update the language regarding the use of motorized devices by people with
disabilities on City trails in order to be consistent with recent federal regulations under the
Americans with Disabilities Act the 2011 Regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 23-192 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of three two new definitions, which read in their entirety as follows:
Sec. 23-192. Definitions.
...
Bicycle shall have the same meaning as defined in the Fort Collins Traffic
Code.
...
...
Mobility disability shall mean a disability, as defined in Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, that limits an individual’s mobility within a natural
area.
...
Other power-driven mobility device shall have the meaning ascribed to it by
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Section 2. That Section 23-193(d)(18) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 23-193. Prohibited acts; permits.
. . .
(d) Except as authorized by a permit obtained for such use from the Service
Area, it shall be unlawful to:
. . .
(18) Operate or park a motor vehicle or other motorized means of
conveyance anywhere in a natural area other than on established
roadways and in designated parking areas; provided, however, that a
motorized wheelchair may be used by any person with a temporary or
permanent mobility disability anywhere in a natural area that public
access is allowed, and an other power-driven mobility device may be
used in a natural area by any person with a temporary or permanent
mobility disability, in accordance with City regulations regarding such
use of other power-driven mobility devices
Section 3. That Section 23-202 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of three two new definitions, which shall read as follows:
Sec. 23-202. Definitions.
. . .
Bicycle shall have the same meaning as defined in the Fort Collins Traffic Code.
. . .
-2-
. . .
Mobility disability shall mean a disability, as defined in Title II of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, that limits an individual’s mobility within a recreation area.
. . .
Other power-driven mobility device shall have the meaning ascribed to it by Title
II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
. . .
Section 4. That Section 23-203(a)(1) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 23-203. Prohibited acts; permits.
(a) It shall be unlawful to:
(1) Operate or park a motor vehicle or other motorized means of conveyance
anywhere in a recreation area other than on established roadways and in
designated parking areas; provided, however, that a motorized wheelchair
may be used by any person with a temporary or permanent mobility
disability anywhere in a recreation area that public access is allowed, and
an other power-driven mobility device may be used in a recreation area
by any person with a temporary or permanent mobility disability, in
accordance with City regulations regarding such use of other power-
driven mobility devices.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of
November, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-3-
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-4-
Optional Version
ORDINANCE NO. 167, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 23, ARTICLES IX AND X OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO ALLOW ELECTRICAL ASSISTED BICYCLES
ON THE CITY’S PAVED TRAILS FOR A ONE YEAR TRIAL PERIOD AND TO UPDATE
LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE USE OF MOTORIZED DEVICES ON CITY TRAILS
BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
WHEREAS, Article IX of Chapter 23 of the City Code regulates behavior on City natural
areas properties, and Article X of Chapter 23 of the City Code regulates behavior in City recreation
areas, which includes parks and trails; and
WHEREAS, both the natural areas and parks Code provisions currently prohibit the use of
motorized vehicles or other motorized means of conveyance in natural areas and recreation areas,
except that motorized wheelchairs or similar assistive devices may be used by a person with a
mobility impairment; and
WHEREAS, in 2010 the U.S. Department of Justice released revised regulations
implementing the accessibility provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), which
regulations went into effect on March 15, 2011 (the “2011 Regulations”); and
WHEREAS, among other changes, the 2011 Regulations redefine the scope of mobility
devices that public entities must allow individuals with disabilities to use in areas where
pedestrians are allowed, subject to legitimate safety requirements that an entity may adopt;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has expressed an interest in allowing a one year trial period
during which electrical assisted bicycles (“ebikes”) would be permitted on paved City trails in parks
and natural areas; and
WHEREAS, the proposed trial period would begin on April 1, 2012 and expire on March
31, 2013 unless further action is taken by the City Council to permit long-term use of ebikes on
trails; and
WHEREAS, during the trial period City staff would gather information and assess the
impacts of the use of ebikes on the City’s trail system; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to amend various provisions of Chapter 23, Articles
IX and X in order to allow ebikes on City trails during the trial period, and to update the language
regarding the use of motorized devices by people with disabilities in order to be consistent with the
2011 Regulationsrecent federal regulations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 23-192 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of four new definitions, which read in their entirety as follows:
Sec. 23-192. Definitions.
...
Bicycle shall have the same meaning as defined in the Fort Collins Traffic Code.
...
Electrical assisted bicycle shall mean a vehicle having two (2) tandem wheels,
or two (2) parallel wheels and one (1) forward wheel, fully operable pedals, an
electric motor not exceeding seven hundred fifty (750) watts of power and a top
motor-powered speed of twenty (20) miles per hour, which also has a tire size of not
more than three (3) inches in width, a wheel diameter of not less than fourteen (14)
inches, and a weight of not more than seventy-five (75) pounds. A bicycle with an
electric-powered bike trailer that meets the power and speed limitations listed above
is also considered an electrical assisted bicycle. The electric-powered bike trailer
need not meet the above wheel and tire requirements.
...
Mobility disability shall mean a disability, as defined in Title II of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, that limits an individual’s mobility within a natural area.
...
Other power-driven mobility device shall have the meaning ascribed to it by Title
II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Section 2. That Section 23-193(d)(18) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 23-193. Prohibited acts; permits.
. . .
(d) Except as authorized by a permit obtained for such use from the Service
Area, it shall be unlawful to:
. . .
-2-
(18) Operate or park a motor vehicle or other motorized means of
conveyance anywhere in a natural area other than on established
roadways and in designated parking areas; provided, however, that a
motorized wheelchair or similar assistive device may be used by any
person with a temporary or permanent mobility impairment disability,
anywhere in a natural area that public access is allowed., and an other
power-driven mobility device may be used in a natural area by any
person with a temporary or permanent mobility disability, in accordance
with City regulations regarding such use of other power-driven mobility
devices. In addition, from April 1, 2012, through March 31, 2013,
electrical assisted bicycles, as defined in this Article, may be ridden on
paved designated trails within natural areas.
Section 3. That Section 23-202 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of four new definitions, which shall read as follows:
Sec. 23-202. Definitions.
. . .
Bicycle shall have the same meaning as defined in the Fort Collins Traffic Code.
. . .
Electrical assisted bicycle shall mean a vehicle having two (2) tandem wheels,
or two (2) parallel wheels and one (1) forward wheel, fully operable pedals, an
electric motor not exceeding seven hundred fifty (750) watts of power and a top
motor-powered speed of twenty (20) miles per hour, which also has a tire size of not
more than three (3) inches in width, a wheel diameter of not less than fourteen (14)
inches, and a weight of not more than seventy-five (75) pounds. A bicycle with an
electric-powered bike trailer that meets the power and speed limitations listed above
is also considered an electrical assisted bicycle. The electric-powered bike trailer
need not meet the above wheel and tire requirements.
. . .
Mobility disability shall mean a disability, as defined in Title II of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, that limits an individual’s mobility within a recreation area.
. . .
Other power-driven mobility device shall have the meaning ascribed to it by Title
II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
. . .
-3-
Section 4. That Section 23-203(a)(1) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 23-203. Prohibited acts; permits.
(a) It shall be unlawful to:
(1) Operate or park a motor vehicle or other motorized means of conveyance
anywhere in a recreation area other than on established roadways and in
designated parking areas; provided, however, that a motorized wheelchair
or similar assistive device may be used by any person with a temporary
or permanent mobility impairment disability, anywhere in a recreation
area that public access is allowed., and an other power-driven mobility
device may be used in a recreation area by any person with a temporary
or permanent mobility disability, in accordance with City regulations
regarding such use of other power-driven mobility devices. In addition,
from April 1, 2012, through March 31, 2013, electrical assisted bicycles,
as defined in this Article, may be ridden on paved designated trails within
recreation areas.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of
November, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of December, A.D.
2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-4-
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Jerry Schiager, Ginny Sawyer,
Medical Marijuana Staff Team
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 28
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 182, 2011, Amending Section 15-483 of the City Code So as to Eliminate the Eight
Ounce Limitation on the Amount of Medical Marijuana That Can Be Distributed by Licensees to Other Licensed
Medical Marijuana Centers.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
All medical marijuana businesses in Fort Collins must cease operation by February 14, 2012. This amendment would
allow existing businesses to sell more than 8 ounces of product to another licensed business outside the City limits
in an effort to eliminate inventory by February 14, 2012.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During the creation of regulations addressing medical marijuana businesses in Fort Collins limits were included on both
sale of medical marijuana to patients and to other licensed businesses. The existing Code includes the following:
Sec. 15-483. Prohibited Acts.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensee holding a medical marijuana center licensed, or for any
agent, manager or employee thereof, to:
(2) sell, give, dispense or otherwise distribute to any patient or primary caregiver who is not a
licensee more than two (2) ounces of any usable form of medical marijuana (excluding
medical marijuana-infused products) within any seven-day period of time;
(3) sell, give, dispense or otherwise distribute to another licensed center more than eight (8)
ounces of medical marijuana in any usable form within any seven-day period of time;
The proposed ordinance maintains the sale limitation to patients but amends the restriction to other licensed
businesses. Knowing that local businesses are needing to eliminate their inventories, staff feels this amendment will
help provide a legal means to do so. The Ordinance would only allow these sales to licensees outside the City limits.
Should Council approve the amendment on First Reading on December 20, 2011 and on Second Reading on January
3, 2012, local businesses would have from January 17, 2012 to February 14, 2012 to make these amended sales.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 182, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING SECTION 15-483 OF THE CITY CODE SO AS TO ELIMINATE
THE EIGHT-OUNCE LIMITATION ON THE AMOUNT OF MEDICAL
MARIJUANA THAT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED BY LICENSEES TO OTHER
LICENSED MEDICAL MARIJUANA CENTERS
WHEREAS, Chapter 15, Article VI of the City Code establishes a comprehensive licensing
system for medical marijuana businesses in the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2011, the voters of the City approved a citizen-initiated
ordinance that, in effect, requires such businesses to cease operation on or before February 14, 2012;
and
WHEREAS, under federal, state and local law, the possession of medical marijuana by such
businesses after the closure of the businesses would be unlawful and such medical marijuana would
be subject to seizure and destruction by state or local law enforcement officers; and
WHEREAS, the avenues presently available to the owners of such businesses to lawfully
dispose of their inventory of medical marijuana prior to the cessation of their businesses are limited
by state and local law; and
WHEREAS, at the local level, Section 15-483(b)(3) of the City Code prohibits any licensed
medical marijuana business from selling, giving, dispensing or otherwise distributing to another
licensed medical marijuana center, either inside or outside of the City, more than eight ounces of
medical marijuana in any usable form within any seven-day period of time; and
WHEREAS, this limitation was imposed by the City Council in order to deter the wholesale
distribution of medical marijuana in the City and to keep the production and distribution of medical
marijuana at a level commensurate with the purpose and intent of Article XVII, Section 14 of the
Colorado Constitution; and
WHEREAS, in view of the fact that medical marijuana businesses in the City will be ceasing
operation pursuant to the citizen-initiated ordinance, the limitation imposed by Section 15-483(b)(3)
is no longer necessary for the protection of the citizenry; and
WHEREAS, the inability of licensees to sell larger quantities of medical marijuana to
licensed centers outside of the City impedes the ability of such licensees to lawfully dispose of their
inventory prior to February 14, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the City Council therefore believes it to be in the best interests of the City to
modify this provision of the Code so as to allow licensees to sell more than eight ounces of medical
marijuana within a seven-day period of time to another licensed center, but only if such center is
located outside the City limits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that Section 15-483(b)(3) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 15-483. Prohibited acts.
. . .
(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensee holding a medical marijuana center
licensed, or for any agent, manager or employee thereof, to:
(1) sell, give, dispense or otherwise distribute medical marijuana or medical
marijuana paraphernalia from any outdoor location;
(2) sell, give, dispense or otherwise distribute to any patient or primary caregiver
who is not a licensee more than two (2) ounces of any usable form of medical
marijuana (excluding medical marijuana-infused products) within any seven-
day period of time;
(3) sell, give, dispense or otherwise distribute to another licensed center that is
located within the City limits more than eight (8) ounces of medical
marijuana in any usable form within any seven-day period of time;
. . .
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 3rd day of January, A.D. 2012.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 3rd day of January, A.D. 2012.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-2-
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Bruce Hendee, Ken Mannon
Helen Matson
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 29
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 183, 2011, Authorizing the Lease of City-owned Property at 430 North College Avenue
and 100 Willow Street to the Colorado State University Research Foundation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Colorado State University (CSU) has leased the City-owned property known as the Old Power Plant at 430 North
College Avenue for the last 17 years. CSU has used this site as the Engines and Energy Conversion Lab (EECL).
This program has grown over the years and it is CSURF’s desire to construct a new building that will be used to house
additional labs, office and incubator companies sharing the vision of the EECL. A new lease agreement was
necessary to accommodate these changes.
The new lease agreement will be with Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF) and CSU will
relinquish all rights, title and interest in the original Lease Agreement dated February 15, 1994 and the First
Amendment to Lease Agreement dated January 13, 2005.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
History of Site and Current use
The City acquired the property located at 430 North College Avenue in 1912. A municipal landfill operated on a portion
of the site in the mid-1900s. The City constructed the existing facility as a power plant. This plant was in operation
from 1935 until 1972. From 1972 until 1988, it was used as a switching station. The next use was as an art gallery
in 1988 and 1989. On February 15, 1994, the City entered into a Lease Agreement with CSU to use the site and the
old power plant building for laboratory and research purposes focusing on internal combustion engine. This Lease
Agreement had an original term of ten years with automatic renewals for three successive five year periods, or a total
25 years. The rental rate during these years was $1/year.
That Lease Agreement was modified in the summer of 2004. This modification was to add another five year extension
period to the lease, making the lease a total of 30 years. Also included in this modification, the City agreed to increase
the termination notice period to five years. The City agreed to these changes to assist CSU with fundraising activities
for EECL’s programs and the potential of a new building.
New Lease Terms and Definitions
Due to CSU’s plan to add the new building on the City-owned property, staffs from CSU, CSURF and the City started
negotiations for a new lease agreement. An agreement has been reached on the terms of the lease (Attachment 2).
A summary of the lease definitions and lease terms is provided below:
Lease Definitions
City Property – the Power Plant property currently leased to CSU.
Main Building – the existing Power Plant building.
Main Parcel – the Power Plant property that would be leased to CSURF in the new lease.
New Building – the building CSURF plans to build on the Main Parcel.
Parking Parcel – a parcel of City property south of the Main Parcel that CSURF would lease to build a parking lot on.
Leased Premises – the Main Parcel and Parking Parcel.
CSURF Affiliates – CSU or any person, persons or entity working for CSURF or CSU or their subsidiary departments,
programs or organizations.
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 29
Lease Terms
Tenant: CSURF would be the tenant. The current lease to CSU dated February 15, 1994, with an amendment dated
January 13, 2005, would terminate.
Lease Term: CSURF intends to construct a new building and related improvements on the property. The “Initial
Term” of the Lease would be 40 years, with two 20 year extensions at CSURF’s sole option, if CSURF builds the New
Building. However, if CSURF does not build the New Building within eight years, the Initial Term would be 10 years
with one five year extended term at CSURF’s sole option, and up to two additional 10 year terms with the City’s
consent in its discretion. (Articles II and III)
Rent: “Base Rent” for the Initial Term of the Lease would be $1,000 and $1,000 for each extended term if CSURF
builds the New Building. If CSURF does not build the new building, there would be no additional rent paid for the five-
year extended term, and rent for each succeeding 10 year term would be $500. (Article IV)
Option to Purchase: CSURF has the option to purchase the Leased Premises in the future if the City and CSURF
can agree on terms, and subject to City Council approval. (Article V)
Uses of the Leased Premises: CSURF can build the New Building on the Main Parcel and parking improvements
on the Parking Parcel. The City has the right to approve the final plans for all improvements. The Main Parcel can
be used for instructional, teaching and laboratory and research purposes focused on developing innovative and
alternate energy solutions, developing and testing entrepreneurial models, and similar purposes. (Article VI)
Maintenance: CSURF is responsible for maintaining the Leased Premises including the Fountain, Monument and
Grotto located on the property. CSURF also agrees to restore the Fountain. The City is responsible for any restoration
of the Monument and Grotto. (Article VII)
Alterations and Improvements: All alterations, additions and improvements to the Leased Premises must be
approved by the City as owner of the property, and must comply with the “Reasonable Steps in Vicinity of Poudre River
Site” developed in accordance with the EPA’s Administrative Order on Consent for the Northside Aztlan Community
Center property cleanup. (Article VIII.)
CSURF agrees to relocate or remove improvements comprising at least 50% of the existing utility court area adjacent
to the Main Building, which lies within the Poudre River Buffer. (Article VIII)
Lease Expiration or Termination: On expiration of the Lease all improvements made by CSURF on the Leased
Premises would become the property of the City. If CSURF terminates the lease because of a default by the City, the
City would compensate CSURF for the fair market value of the New Building. (Article IX)
Right of First Refusal: If the City wants to sell its interest in the Leased Premises it must first give CSURF the
opportunity to purchase it on the same terms and conditions. (Article XII)
Utilities: CSURF will pay for all utilities used on the Leased Premises. (Article XIV)
Subletting and Assignment: CSURF can sublease portions of the Leased Premises with the City’s consent, except
that City consent is not needed for CSURF to assign the Lease to CSU or to sublease to CSURF Affiliates. Any
money CSURF receives for subleases must be used to financially support CSURF’s approved activities on the Leased
Premises. Any money left over after paying CSURF’s costs and expenses for such activities will be divided equally
between the City and CSURF, but the amount paid to the City will not exceed the fair market rental value of the Leased
Premises for any applicable year. (Article XVI)
Environmental Concerns: The City, CSU and CSURF are each responsible for remediation of any environmental
contamination on the property that results from their respective occupancies of the property. In addition, CSURF would
be responsible for proper removal, remediation or special management or handling of any materials it handles or
disturbs on the Leased Premises, during construction or otherwise. In constructing the New Building and other
improvements CSURF is responsible for proper worker training, arranging for proper treatment and disposal of waste
from the Leased Premises, and for submitting a Voluntary Clean Up Program (VCUP) application to the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) for the area of construction and complying with the resulting
December 20, 2011 -3- ITEM 29
CDPHE Soil Characterization and Management Plan (SCMP). If CSURF decides not to build the New Building
because of environmental contamination issues on the Leased Premises, CSURF may terminate the Lease on 90 days
notice to the City. (Article XXVI)
Parking: If CSURF makes parking improvements on the Parking Parcel the City will be able to use it for public
purposes at times other than 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. The City and CSURF will work on
identifying possible parking spots on the Main Parcel that could also be available for public parking. (Article XXVIII)
A copy of the Lease Agreement is attached (Attachment 2).
Follow-up Items from the September 27 Work Session presentation:
Fountain: CSURF is planning to move the fountain to a new location on attached Exhibit D. Staff from Historic
Preservation did not have any information that the fountain had ever been moved since it was placed at 430 North
College Avenue. Along with day to day maintenance of the fountain, CSURF must also restore the fountain to the
specifications of the Landmark Preservation Commission.
Maintenance of grotto and monument: The grotto could be used for water filtration, with the proper permits. If
CSURF does not utilize the grotto, then it will only be responsible for day-to-day maintenance of the grotto and
surrounding landscaping and the monument. Renovation of these two landmarks would be the responsibility of the
City, at its sole option and cost. If CSURF does want to utilize the grotto, it would not only be responsible for regular
maintenance, but would also be responsible to renovate the grotto and landscaping.
Removal of items in the River Buffer: Exhibit G of the Lease Agreement (Attachment 2) shows the utility court area
and the Lease Agreement specifies that this area will be reduced by at least 50%. This will be accomplished by, upon,
or prior to final completion of the New Building. The design for the new building has not been completed, so specifics
of equipment to be removed cannot be provided. Exhibit G also shows the proposed Utility Court to be moved farther
from the Poudre River, but still within the River Buffer. This is subject to the City’s development review process, and
approval by the City as property owner.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Regional Economic Development
• As a research institution the EECL has been awarded over $20M in research awards: these funds are used
locally to fund infrastructure at the EECL, students at CSU, research staff, etc. The EECL currently employs
a dozen professional research and support staff, as well as approximately 50 graduate and undergraduate
students
• The EECL has actively engaged in the development of “spin-off” enterprises, which have been awarded over
$55M in funding commitments. In addition these spin-off companies currently employ over 70 professional
engineers, managers, and scientists.
• Additional companies have been attracted to Fort Collins as the EECL has become an “anchor” for the clean-
tech industry
• Additional companies have been (or are in the process of being) accelerated through partnerships with the
EECL (CZero, Van Dyne Superturbo, Spirae). These companies represent additional 20-30 primary jobs in
the Fort Collins downtown area.
Typical universities will see one start-up company generated for every $100M of R&D, the best universities will see
one start-up per $25-$35M of R&D (CalTech, MIT, etc). At the EECL the ratio is 1 start-up per $7M of R&D
investment.
December 20, 2011 -4- ITEM 29
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A portion of the Main Parcel had been used in the past as part of a historical municipal landfill and the Parking Parcel
is a portion of the Poudre River/Aztlan site (the Brownfields site to the south of the Main Parcel). With this knowledge,
the City updated its Phase I of the Main Parcel and followed that with a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment.
Since the Parking Parcel is a part of the Poudre River/Aztlan site, CDPHE required the City to update its Soil
Characterization and Management Plan of the Poudre River/Aztlan Site. CSURF and the City have agreed to share
the costs of these reports since these reports are beneficial to both the City and CSURF.
The Phase II Assessment did identify the following: soil contamination, including arsenic, lead and asbestos;
groundwater contamination, including benzene, and poly-aromatic hydrocarbons; and, soil vapors including methane.
Although soil and groundwater contamination was identified at the site, the contamination may be managed
appropriately as to not prohibit construction of a new building and improvements.
CSURF has agreed to apply to CDPHE for a Voluntary Clean-up Plan (“VCUP”). The requirements established by
CDPHE in the VCUP process will detail to CSURF how potential contamination will be managed during the project.
CDPHE will be the primary source for information regarding management of contamination encountered during the
construction project. Such measures may include an indoor system to mitigate soil vapors from methane
contamination.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location map
2. Lease agreement, with all exhibits attached
3. Summary of September 27, 2011 Work Session
4. Powerpoint presentation
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
1
LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT (the “Lease”), made and entered into this ____ day of
______________, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and between THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado Municipal Corporation (the “City”), THE BOARD
OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, formerly
known as THE COLORADO STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, acting by and
through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY (“CSU”), and THE COLORADO STATE
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION, a Colorado Non-Profit Corporation
(“CSURF”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of that certain parcel of real estate, together with the
improvements located thereon, situated in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which is
legally described on attached Exhibit “A”, incorporated herein by this reference, with a street
address of 430 N. College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado (“City Property”); and,
WHEREAS, on February 15, 1994, the City and CSU entered into a Lease Agreement for
a portion of the City Property, which was modified by the First Amendment to Lease Agreement
dated January 13, 2005 (together, the “1994 Lease”); and
WHEREAS, CSU has been in continuous possession of the City Property since 1994 and
has been using said Property for its Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory; and
WHEREAS, CSU’s desired use of the City Property has changed since the 1994 Lease
was executed, and the parties wish to enter into this new Lease in order to permit this change in
use and clarify the parties’ rights and responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, by this Lease and signature hereon, CSU agrees to relinquish all right, title
and interest in and to the Lease Agreement dated February 15, 1994, and the First Amendment to
Lease Agreement dated January 13, 2005, referenced above, and the real estate described therein
and herein above as Exhibit “A,” in order to allow the City and CSURF to come to a written
agreement for the lease of said City Property; and
WHEREAS, CSURF intends to construct a new building (the “New Building”) on said
City Property and/or other improvements thereto, which improvements are contemplated by the
terms and provisions of this Lease and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to lease to CSURF, and CSURF desires to lease from the
City, that portion of the City Property consisting of 4.091 acres with a main building (the “Main
Building”) 38,509 square feet in size, and a metal outbuilding (the “Metal Outbuilding”) 2,455
square feet in size, and the real estate as generally described on attached Exhibit “B”, which is
incorporated herein by this reference (the “Main Parcel”); and
WHEREAS, in addition, the City desires to lease to CSURF and CSURF desires to lease
ATTACHMENT 2
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
2
from the City, that certain parcel of real estate, together with the improvements located thereon,
situated in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which is legally described on attached
Exhibit “C”, incorporated herein by this reference (the “Parking Parcel”); and
WHEREAS, the Main Parcel and the Parking Parcel are collectively referred to herein as
the “Leased Premises”; and
WHEREAS, the previous and current use of the City Property has enabled the
development of the Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory, thus benefiting CSU as well as
the common good of the citizens of the City. CSU and CSURF agree that the uses contemplated
by this Lease are in the best interests of the Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory, and the
parties agree this Lease is mutually beneficial; and
WHEREAS, on , City Council approved Ordinance No. , 2011 which
authorized the leasing of the Leased Premises.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises and
agreements herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
Lease of the Leased Premises
1.1 The City hereby leases, demises and lets unto CSURF, and CSURF hereby hires,
rents, and takes from the City the Leased Premises.
1.2 This Lease supersedes and vacates the 1994 Lease between the City and CSU.
The 1994 Lease terminates on the first day of the term of this Lease and will be of no further
force and effect, except for those terms intended to survive its termination.
1.3 CSU retains all rights to the fixtures, improvements and personal property owned
by CSU and currently in the Leased Premises. To the extent CSU wishes to leave such fixtures,
improvements and personal property in the Leased Premises, CSU may arrange with CSURF to
do so, and the City assumes no responsibility for the same. CSU hereby agrees to relinquish all
of its right, title and interest in and to the City Property and the 1994 Lease, and the real estate
described herein on Exhibit “A,” by signature hereon.
ARTICLE II
Term
2.1 The initial term of this Lease is for a period of forty (40) years beginning on the
Effective Date (the “Initial Term”). However, should CSURF not complete construction of the
New Building within eight (8) years from the Effective Date, then the Initial Term shall be ten
(10) years, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. This Lease may be extended under Article III
below.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
3
2.2 This Lease will not be recorded; but, at the request of either party, the City and
CSURF will execute a Memorandum of Lease for recording, containing the names of the parties,
the legal description of the Leased Premises, the term of the Lease and such other information as
the parties mutually agree.
ARTICLE III
Lease Extension Option
3.1 Provided CSURF has constructed the New Building and is not in default in the
keeping and performing of any of the conditions and covenants of this Lease, then the following
lease extension provisions shall apply:
3.1.1 CSURF shall have the option and privilege of extending the term hereof
for (i) an additional twenty (20) year extended term (the "First Extended Term"), commencing at
midnight on the day on which the Initial Term of this Lease terminates and (ii) an additional
twenty (20) year extended term (the "Second Extended Term, and together with the First
Extended Term, the "Extended Term"), commencing at midnight on the day on which the First
Extended Term of this Lease terminates.
3.1.2 CSURF shall provide the City with notice of CSURF's intent to extend or
terminate the term of this Lease no less than two (2) years prior to the end of the Initial Term or
the First Extended Term, as applicable.
3.2 If CSURF is not in default in the keeping and performing of any of the conditions
and covenants of this Lease, but the Initial Term has been shortened to ten (10) years in
accordance with section 2.1 above, then the following lease extension provisions shall apply:
3.2.1 CSURF shall have the option and privilege, in its sole discretion, of
extending the term hereof for an additional five (5) year extended term (the "First Extended
Term"), commencing at midnight on the day on which the Initial Term of this Lease terminates.
At the end of the First Extended Term CSURF shall have the option and privilege, with the
City’s consent in the City’s sole discretion, of extending the term hereof for (i) an additional ten
(10) year extended term (the "Second Extended Term"), commencing at midnight on the day on
which the First Extended Term of this Lease terminates and (ii) an additional ten (10) year
extended term (the "Third Extended Term, and together with the First and Second Extended
Terms, the "Extended Term"), commencing at midnight on the day on which the Second
Extended Term of this Lease terminates.
3.2.2 CSURF shall provide the City with notice of CSURF's intent to extend or
terminate the term of this Lease no less than two (2) years prior to the end of the Initial Term or
each Extended Term, as applicable.
3.2.3 The City will provide CSURF with notice of the City’s intent not to renew
the Lease no less than five (5) years prior to the end of the First Extended Term or Second
Extended Term as applicable.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
4
3.3 As used herein "Term" shall mean individually, the Initial Term and any
Extended Term, and collectively, all of such terms.
ARTICLE IV
Rent
4.1 The Base Rent for the Initial Term of this Lease is One Thousand Dollars
($1000.00), based on a rent of Twenty-Five Dollars ($25.00) per year. The full amount of the
rent is due on the Effective Date. If this Lease is extended pursuant to Section 3.1, the rent for
the First Extended Term will be One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), and for the Second
Extended Term will be One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00). If the Lease is extended pursuant to
Section 3.2, there will be no additional rent due for the First Extended Term, the rent for the
Second Extended Term will be Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) and the rent for the Third
Extended Term will be Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). No portion of the rent is refundable in
the event of early termination of this Lease for whatever reason.
4.2 Additional Rent shall be paid by CSURF to the City according to the terms,
provisions, conditions and definitions contained in Section 16.8.
4.3 CSURF will make all rent payments to the City at such place as the City may,
from time to time, designate in writing. For the present, the City designates Real Estate Services,
300 LaPorte Ave., P.O. Box 580, Fort Collins, CO 80522, as the place for making rental
payments.
4.4 The rental amounts set forth in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 above are in addition to
CSURF's obligations with respect to the payment of real and personal property taxes (if any),
insurance premiums, utilities and maintenance of the Leased Premises and other amounts as
shown herein.
ARTICLE V
Option to Purchase
5.1 Provided CSURF is not in default in the keeping and performing of any of the
conditions and covenants of this Lease, CSURF shall have the option to purchase the Leased
Premises at a time and on terms to be negotiated by the Parties in good faith, such option being
subject to the mutual agreement and satisfaction of the Parties and subject also to such legal
limitations or requirements as may exist now or in the future upon the exercise of such option,
including but not limited to the consent of the Fort Collins City Council, in its sole discretion.
The purchase price of the Leased Premises shall not reflect any increased value that is the result
of improvements made during the Term of the Lease by CSURF or its assignee.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
5
ARTICLE VI
Use of Leased Premises
6.1. CSURF may use the Leased Premises for construction of the New Building and
related improvements on the Main Parcel and parking improvements on the Parking Parcel as
generally shown and described on Exhibit “D”, attached and incorporated herein by reference.
CSURF must obtain the approval of the City, as owner of the Leased Premises, of the final plans
for the New Building and all related improvements prior to commencement of construction.
This approval is in addition to any required regulatory approvals including the City’s
development review process.
6.2 CSURF, or its authorized tenants, sub-tenants, assignees, or occupants, as herein
provided (“CSURF’s Tenants”) may use the Main Parcel for: (1) instructional, teaching, and
laboratory and research purposes focused upon developing innovative and alternate energy
solutions, including but not limited to equipment, fuels, software, operational techniques and
processes, developing and testing entrepreneurial models, and similar purposes; (2) related office
and administrative purposes; and (3) ancillary uses related thereto, such as outreach and
extension activities, experimentation or demonstration areas or activities, seminars and
instructional uses, provided that such uses fit within the limitations of this Article. CSURF or
CSURF’s Tenants may use the Parking Parcel for the construction, maintenance and use of
above-ground parking facilities and related improvements. CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants shall
make use of the Leased Premises only in such manner as shall be for the common benefit and
good of the citizens of the City. It is understood and agreed that CSURF and CSURF’s Tenants
shall use the Leased Premises for the purposes that benefit the human condition and achieve
global impact, which may include commercial and non-commercial endeavors, thereby
benefiting the citizens of the City, as well as the State of Colorado, which benefit has been
determined by the City Council to serve a valuable public purpose which transcends the purely
educational and academic purposes normally associated with an institution of higher education.
The parties acknowledge and agree that the permitted uses described herein are for the common
benefit and good of the citizens of the City.
6.3 The parties understand and agree that the Charter of the City prohibits the City
from making any appropriation for any “educational” purpose to any organization not under the
absolute control of the City, but the parties further understand that the purpose to be served by
this Lease is the valuable public purpose of developing and utilizing energy solutions and that at
any time that CSURF and CSURF’s Tenants should cease to serve those purposes then this
Lease shall summarily terminate and be at an end; provided however, that CSURF shall be given
a reasonable opportunity to submit a different or additional public purpose to the City for
approval by the Fort Collins City Council in its sole discretion.
6.4 CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants must not: (a) put the Leased Premises to any use
other than the uses described in this Article without the prior written approval of the City; (b) use
the Leased Premises in any manner that violates any applicable law, rule, ordinance or
regulation; (c) permit any nuisance or disorderly conduct upon the Leased Premises, or (d)
permit any environmental condition in violation of applicable legal standards or any
environmental condition requiring removal or remediation to develop or remain on the Leased
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
6
Premises. CSURF and the City agree to mutually and cooperatively resolve any issues or
problems that may arise out of the use of the Leased Premises by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants.
6.5 The Leased Premises includes the “Fountain”, the “Grotto” and the “Monument”,
as depicted on Exhibit “B”. The parties’ obligations with respect to these features are described
in Section 7.4 below. CSURF may discharge water into the Grotto in compliance with any
applicable regulatory requirements until such time as the improvements on the Leased Premises
are connected to the public sanitary sewer system.
6.6 The City reserves the right to access and use the “Utility Tunnel” connected to the
basement of the Main Building, as depicted on Exhibit “E”, attached and incorporated herein by
reference, including the right to install, operate, maintain, repair and replace existing or
additional facilities within the Utility Tunnel. Entry to the Utility Tunnel is prohibited except as
specifically authorized by the City in writing. The City shall give notice to CSURF of its intent
to enter the Utility Tunnel in accordance with the provision of Article XXXI, below. The above
notwithstanding, CSURF may use a portion of the Utility Tunnel for cooling of the New
Building, subject to the following:
(a) CSURF must obtain advance written approval from the City Utility of the proposed
design and construction of any facilities CSURF proposes to place in the Utility
Tunnel, and any concerns the City Utility has about the proposed design must be
resolved to the City’s satisfaction prior to any work in the Utility Tunnel;
(b) CSURF may only use the north 400 feet of the Utility Tunnel;
(c) CSURF must construct a wall and a door at the south end of this 400 foot section,
the design for which must be approved in advance by the City Utility;
(d) the installed door must remain locked at all times, with the City’s Utility having the
only key;
(e) any modifications other than the wall shall not restrict walking access throughout the
length of the Utility Tunnel or restrict access via the existing entry door;
(f) any changes CSURF makes to the Utility Tunnel must preserve the existing lighting
system or provide an equivalent or better system with wall switches at both ends;
(g) anyone entering the Utility Tunnel must comply with all OSHA requirements,
including but not limited to confined space requirements; and
(h) until the above wall has been constructed, CSURF must contact the City Utility to
obtain access to the Utility Tunnel and must be accompanied by City Utility staff.
6.7 The City has constructed a hiking/bike trail approximately fifty (50) feet in width
along the south bank of the Cache La Poudre River (the “Trail”). The Trail right-of-way and
related improvements are not part of the Leased Premises, and the City will maintain control over
and responsibility for them. The City reserves the right to remove, replace, relocate or improve
the Trail at any time, provided such actions do not unreasonably interfere with CSURF’s rights
under this Lease. CSURF shall have no responsibility for the maintenance of the Trail or of the
Trail right-of-way. CSURF and CSURF’s Tenants are entitled to use the Trail and related
improvements in the same manner as the general public.
6.8 The City reserves a right of access to and exclusive use of the room in the
basement of the Main Building that houses a fiber optic node. The City will lock and mark the
door to this room to indicate its location. The City shall give notice to CSURF of its intent to
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
7
access this room in accordance with the provisions of Article XXXI, below.
ARTICLE VII
Maintenance and Repair
7.1. With the exception of the areas reserved in 6.6, 6.7 and 6.8 above, CSURF will,
during the term of this Lease and at its sole expense, keep and maintain the Leased Premises,
including the grounds, Fountain, Monument, Grotto and parking lots, in a clean, orderly and safe
condition, free of litter, debris, and any unsightly or dangerous condition as required by
ordinances, resolutions, statutes and health, sanitary and police regulations. CSURF is
responsible for snow removal from sidewalks and parking areas within the Leased Premises.
CSURF will also, at its sole expense, maintain the Leased Premises including without limitation,
the exterior walls, foundation and roof of any building, plumbing, electrical, and the heating and
air conditioning system located on the Leased Premises and replace any and all plate, window
and other glass (structural or otherwise) in, on or about the Leased Premises, which may be
broken or destroyed, with glass of the same or similar quality. CSURF acknowledges that any
maintenance to these Leased Premises must be done in a manner that protects and retains the
historic significance of the City Property.
7.2 All repairs or replacements to the Leased Premises required of CSURF must be
made promptly and when necessary.
7.2.1 All replacements must be of a quality and class at least equal to the
original work.
7.2.2 Any and all repairs, replacements, modifications, improvements, additions
or other construction on or within the Leased Premises shall be performed by licensed
contractors or equivalently licensed technicians on the staff of CSU, under contract or agreement
with CSURF.
7.2.3 None of CSURF’s Tenants, as described herein, shall be authorized to
perform any of the maintenance and repair actions or activities described in this Article without
the prior written approval of CSURF.
7.3 The City will, during the term of this Lease and at its sole expense, keep and
maintain the areas reserved in 6.6, 6.7 and 6.8 above, in the same condition and under the same
restrictions as provided for CSURF in 7.1 and 7.2 above.
7.4 CSURF is responsible for all maintenance and repair of the Fountain and the
Grotto. As part of the construction of the New Building, CSURF agrees to restore the Fountain
in accordance with the Landmark Preservation requirements of the City Code. The City is
responsible for any restoration or repair of the Monument and Grotto beyond routine
maintenance as described in 7.1 above.
7.5 CSURF must neither permit nor suffer any disorderly nuisance or noise
whatsoever about the Leased Premises in violation of any applicable City ordinance or
regulation. CSURF may neither hold nor attempt to hold the City liable for any injury or
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
8
damage, either proximate or remote, occasioned through or caused by defective electrical wiring
or the breaking or stoppage of plumbing or sewage upon the Leased Premises, whether said
breakage or stoppage results from freezing or otherwise. CSURF must not permit or suffer the
Leased Premises or the walls of the Main Building to be endangered by overloading, nor permit
the Leased Premises to be used for any purpose which would render the insurance thereon void
or insurance risks that would cause the need for insurance coverage higher than that specifically
provided for in Section 13.1 herein, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent
may be conditioned upon, without limitation, CSURF obtaining additional specific insurance
coverage for such more hazardous risks.
7.6 On default of CSURF to make any repairs or replacements required to be made by
it under this Lease, the City may, but is not required to, make such repairs or replacements for
the City’s account and the expense thereof shall constitute and be collectible by the City as
additional rent owed by CSURF due at the beginning of the next calendar year.
ARTICLE VIII
Alterations and Improvements
8.1 All alterations, additions, improvements or changes to the Leased Premises by
CSURF subsequent to the commencement of the Lease term are subject to the written approval
of the City, as owner of the City Property, and must be done in a good and workmanlike manner
without impairing the structural soundness of the Main Building, the Trail, or the Utility Tunnel.
The parties acknowledge and agree that temporary changes within the Leased Premises for the
purpose of designing and implementing research projects and experiments are not deemed
alterations or improvements, and any such experiments and projects should be removed upon
their completion or termination or the Lease, and any resulting damage to the Leased Premises
repaired.
8.1.1 Any and all repairs, replacements, modifications, improvements, additions
or other construction on or within the Leased Premises shall be performed by licensed
contractors or equivalently licensed technicians on the staff of CSU, under contract or agreement
with CSURF.
8.1.2 None of CSURF’s Tenants, as described herein, shall be authorized to
perform any of the actions or activities described in this Article, or to change the Leased
Premises in any way, without the prior written approval of CSURF and, except for the temporary
changes described in 8.1, the prior written approval of the City, as owner of the City Property.
8.1.3 All alterations, additions, improvements or changes, and any and all new
improvements, including any New Building or buildings, whether made by CSURF or CSURF’s
Tenants on the Leased Premises, are subject to the prior written approval of the City as owner of
the City Property. In addition, such new improvements must be in compliance with the building
and zoning laws of the City of Fort Collins applicable to a non-government-owned development,
must comply fully with any such City codes, rules, regulations, and governing processes and
with all other applicable laws, ordinances, orders, rules, regulations and requirements of all
federal, state or municipal governments and with appropriate approvals of the various
departments, commissions, boards and officers thereof as would be applicable to a non-
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
9
government-owned development, and must comply with the “Reasonable Steps” outlined in
Exhibit “F”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. CSURF shall procure
certificates of occupancy, if required by law.
8.1.4 Such alterations, additions and improvements must not be commenced
until any contractor or subcontractor engaged for such purpose delivers to CSURF (with a copy
to the City) a certificate evidencing that proper workmen's compensation insurance is in full
force and effect, covering any persons performing such work, and that the same may not be
canceled without at least ten (10) days prior written notice to the City and CSURF.
8.1.5 Furthermore, such alterations, additions or improvements must not be
commenced until CSURF has procured and paid for all required City and other governmental
permits and authorizations of the various municipal departments and governmental subdivisions
having jurisdiction over the matter.
8.2 Any alterations or modifications proposed by CSURF involving the façade of the
Main Building, the “Fountain”, the “Grotto” or the “Monument”, must first be approved by the
City’s Landmark Preservation Commission in accordance with the ordinances, rules and
regulations of the City.
8.3 CSURF reserves the right hereby to hypothecate, pledge or use as security the
leasehold interest created by this Lease including, CSURF’s leasehold interest in any
improvement located on the Leased Premises, or CSURF’s interest in any improvement owned
by CSURF located or to be constructed on the Leased Premises, for any loan to CSURF for the
use on or benefit to the Leased Premises.
8.4 The City reserves the right, from time to time (without invalidating or modifying
this Lease), to make alterations, changes and/or additions to the “Fountain,” the “Grotto,” or the
“Monument,” located upon the Leased Premises, provided said modifications do not interfere
with CSURF’s or CSURF’s Tenants’ use of the Leased Premises. The City shall give CSURF
appropriate notice in advance, in writing, of its intentions, estimate of work state date and
estimated time of completion for such work.
8.5 CSURF acknowledges that the Main Parcel is subject to the 200 foot Poudre
River Buffer, and any development on the Main Parcel must be done in compliance with the City
Land Use Code, including but not limited to the requirements of Section 3.4.1(E) regarding
buffer zones, as now in effect or hereafter amended. The parties acknowledges that certain
improvements existing on the Leased Premises as of the date of this Lease may not be in
compliance with all current City Land Use Code requirements. CSURF agrees to relocate or
remove the improvements comprising at least fifty percent (50 %) of the existing Utility Court
area, as generally depicted in Exhibit “G”, attached and incorporated herein by reference, upon
or prior to final completion of the New Building. Should CSURF wish to move any portion of
such improvements to another location within the 200 foot Poudre River Buffer, CSURF must
obtain in advance the written approval of the City as Landlord upon review of CSURF’s plans
for such relocation, as well as any necessary approvals through the City’s development review
processes. The City owned outbuilding and other improvements installed by CSU as indicated
on Exhibit G will be removed by CSURF prior to completion of the New Building; provided
however, in the event that CSURF does not go forward with construction of the New Building, it
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
10
will not be obligated to remove the outbuildings and other improvements as described above.
8.6 No changes or alterations may be undertaken by CSURF unless there is
conspicuously placed on the Leased Premises the following notice:
NOTICE
Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 38-22-105(2), C.R.S., that the
owners of the within premises have not ordered any construction or
reconstruction of the improvements on these premises; and the owners'
interest in the premises shall not be subject to any lien on account of any
construction, alteration, removal, addition, repair or other improvements of
the premises.
8.7 Where the City’s approval, as owner of City Property, is required under this
Article VIII, a response shall be provided to CSURF within a reasonable period of time
following receipt from CSURF of all necessary information related to the request for
approval. This time period shall not exceed thirty (30) days unless the City determines
that approval by the City Council is necessary or appropriate, in which case the City shall
have sixty (60) days to provide its approval.
ARTICLE IX
Expiration or Termination of Lease
9.1 At the expiration of this Lease, whether at the end of the Initial Term or at the end
of one or both Extended Terms as applicable, or upon termination of the Lease because of a
default by CSURF pursuant to Article XXI below, all improvements made on or to the Leased
Premises by or on behalf of CSURF shall become the property of the City, free and clear of all
mortgages, deeds of trust, and similar security interests encumbering the leasehold interest of
CSURF or such improvements. At such time, CSURF agrees to execute any reasonable
documentation evidencing such transfer as may be reasonably required by the City and deliver
said documents to the City. The cost of any recordation of such documents shall be at the sole
cost and expense of the City.
9.1.1 The Main Building is and shall remain the sole property of the City and no
document of transfer from CSURF to the City shall be required hereunder.
9.1.2 All trade fixtures and equipment installed by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants
shall be removed from the Leased Premises prior to the transfer of title to the City as herein
provided, or any or all of such items remaining at the expiration herein defined shall become the
property of the City and CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants shall execute such documents of transfer
as required by law.
9.2 In the event of a termination of this Lease by CSURF because of a default by the
City under any provision hereof prior to the end of eighty (80) years from and after the Effective
Date of this Lease, then and in that event, the City shall compensate CSURF for the value of the
New Building and additions thereto as follows: During the first twenty (20) years of the Initial
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
11
Term, the purchase price shall be the fair market value of the New Building and additions thereto
as of the date of termination, as established by an MAI appraisal. For the remainder of the Initial
Term and the Extended Term, the City shall compensate CSURF for the New Building and any
additions thereto at the appraised fair market value of the same, reduced by the annual fair
market rent of a comparable ground lease for premises similar to the area upon which the
improvements were constructed (as determined by the appraiser), less the actual rent paid by
CSURF to the City hereunder, for each complete year of the Lease that has elapsed from the
Effective Date until the date of default by the City.
9.2.1 All trade fixtures and equipment installed by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants
shall be removed from the Leased Premises prior to the transfer of title to the City as herein
provided, or any or all of such items remaining at the expiration herein defined shall become the
property of the City and CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants shall execute such documents of transfer
as required by law.
ARTICLE X
Covenant of Title and Quiet Enjoyment
10.1 The City covenants that it is well seized of and has good title to lease the Leased
Premises and does warrant and will defend the title thereto.
ARTICLE XI
Taxes, Real and Personal
11.1 During the term of this Lease, CSURF is responsible for payment of the real
property taxes and assessments, if any, that may be lawfully imposed upon the Leased Premises.
11.2 CSURF will pay or ensure the payment of all sales and use taxes, if any, that may
be imposed as the result of the business conducted on the Leased Premises and all personal
property taxes assessed against personal property situated thereon during the term hereof.
11.3 In default of the payment of any such taxes by CSURF, the City may pay the
same (but shall be under no obligation to do so), and CSURF will reimburse the City for the
amount so paid no later than the fifth business day of the next calendar year. However, it is
understood that by paying any such amount, the City does not waive any of its rights hereunder
related to such default.
11.4 CSURF is not required to pay any tax, assessment, tax lien or other imposition or
charge upon or against the Leased Premises or any part thereof or the improvements at any time
situated thereon so long as CSURF, in good faith and with due diligence, contests the same or
the validity thereof by appropriate legal proceedings, which have the effect of preventing the
collection of the tax, assessment, tax lien or other imposition or charge so contested, provided
that, pending any such legal proceedings, CSURF gives the City such reasonable security as may
be demanded by the City to insure payment of the amount of the tax, assessment, tax lien or
other imposition or charge and all interest and penalties thereon.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
12
ARTICLE XII
Right of First Refusal
12.1 If at any time during the Initial Term or any Extended Term of this Lease, the
City shall decide to accept an offer (the “Offer”) from any potential purchaser to purchase the
City’s fee interest in the Leased Premises (the “Transferred Rights”), the City shall provide
CSURF with written notice of and a copy of such Offer. CSURF shall have the right to purchase
the Transferred Rights on the same terms and conditions contained in the Offer by providing
notice of such election to the City within thirty (30) days from the date that the City received said
Offer (the “Election Period”). Upon such election by the CSURF, the City and the CSURF agree
to act in good faith to consummate an agreement for the Transferred Rights incorporating the
express terms of such Offer and other customary terms and provisions for similar transactions of
similar commercial property located in the same geographic area as the Leased Premises (the
“Transfer Agreement”); provided, that in the event (a) CSURF shall fail and/or refuse to deliver
to the City written notice of the CSURF’s election to accept the Transferred Rights within the
Election Period, or (b) CSURF and the City do not execute and deliver a Transfer Agreement in
form and content acceptable to both parties within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt by
the City of the CSURF’s election to accept the Transferred Rights, the City shall be free to
transfer the Transferred Rights to the Offeror pursuant to the terms of the Offer (but not on
materially different financial terms), subject to this Lease.
12.1.1 CSURF’s decision not to accept a transfer of the Transferred Rights on the
same terms and conditions of any Offer shall not waive the City’s right to accept a transfer of the
Transferred Rights on the same terms and conditions of any other Offers.
ARTICLE XIII
Insurance
13.1 CSURF and CSURF’s Tenants will, during the term of this Lease, procure, pay
for and keep in full force and effect a policy of commercial general liability insurance and
casualty insurance covering the improvements and the Leased Premises insuring CSURF in an
amount not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) covering bodily injury, including death to
persons, personal injury and property damage liability arising out of a single occurrence. Such
coverage shall include, without limitation, legal liability of the insureds for property damage,
bodily injuries and deaths of persons in connection with the operation, maintenance or use of the
Leased Premises (including acts or omissions of CSURF). The amount of casualty insurance
must be sufficient to cover all improvements made to the Leased Premises by CSURF and
CSURF’s Tenants, including the New Building. Upon renewal of the Lease, the types and
amounts of required insurance may be reviewed by the parties and adjusted, if necessary, to meet
current industry standards.
13.2 All policies of insurance carried by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants with regards to
the Leased Premises, including any policies of environmental insurance, must name as insured
CSURF or CSURF’s Tenant, as appropriate, and name the City as an additional insured. The
policy or policies must contain a provision that the policy or policies cannot be canceled or
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
13
materially altered either by the insureds or the insurance company until thirty (30) days prior
written notice thereof is given to the insureds and the City. Upon issuance or renewal of any
such insurance policy, the insureds must furnish a certificate of insurance showing evidence of
coverage that names the City of Fort Collins as additional insured.
13.3 Any insurance policy purchased by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants must be written
by an insurance carrier with a current rating by Best's Insurance Reports of "A" (excellent) or
better and a financial rating of "X" or better or such equivalent classification as may hereinafter
be required customarily for properties similarly situated, and must be authorized by law to do
business in the State of Colorado.
13.4 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, CSURF's obligation to
carry insurance as provided herein may be brought within the coverage of a “blanket” policy or
policies of insurance carried and maintained by CSURF, so long as such policy or policies
segregate the amount of coverage applicable to the Leased Premises. In the event that CSURF
fails to procure, maintain and/or pay for at the times and for the duration specified herein any
insurance required by this Lease, or fail to carry insurance required by law or governmental
regulation, the City may (but without obligation to do so) at any time or from time to time and
without notice, procure such insurance and pay the premiums therefore. In such event, CSURF
must repay the City all sums so paid by the City, together with interest thereon and any costs or
expenses incurred by the City in connection therewith, within ten (10) days following the City’s
written demand to CSURF for such payment.
13.5 Should CSU become a CSURF Tenant, CSU may comply with any provision of
this Lease regarding Insurance under this Article in any lawful manner applicable to such
institutions of the State of Colorado, meeting the intents and purposes stated within this Article.
ARTICLE XIV
Utilities
14.1 CSURF agrees to pay all charges for electricity, sewer, gas, light, power, trash
removal, janitorial services, telephone and other communication services used, rendered or
supplied upon, to, or in the Leased Premises. To the extent permitted by law, CSURF agrees to
indemnify the City against any and all liability or damages on such account. CSURF will pay all
such utility charges before the date the same become delinquent.
ARTICLE XV
Signs
15.1 CSURF may not affix, erect or maintain on the Leased Premises any permanent
sign or advertisement, not already on the Leased Premises on the date of the signing of this
Agreement, without first obtaining the City’s approval as to the sign or advertisement to be
erected on the Leased Premises. Any such sign must comply with all applicable laws and City of
Fort Collins regulations. The cost of erection and maintenance of such sign or advertisement is
the responsibility of CSURF.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
14
ARTICLE XVI
Subletting and Assignment
16.1 Except as provided in Section 16.2 below, CSURF may not sublease or otherwise
allow occupation of all or any part of the Leased Premises, or assign this Lease, any interest or
any part thereof, or any right or privilege appurtenant to the Lease or the Leased Premises
without the prior written consent of the City, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. If
the City does not approve or disapprove the proposed sublease, assignment or occupation in
writing within fifteen (15) business days of receipt, the City’s approval is deemed given. A
consent to one assignment, sublease or occupation shall not be construed as a consent to any
subsequent assignment, sublease or occupation. Unless such written consent thereto has been
obtained, any assignment or transfer or attempted assignment or transfer of this Lease or any
interest therein, or sublease or occupancy of all or any part of the Leased Premises, either by the
voluntary or involuntary act of CSURF, may, at the option of the City, terminate this Lease; and
any such purported assignment, transfer, sublease or occupancy without such consent shall be
null and void. Such consent does not relieve CSURF from any obligation under this Lease
unless the City expressly agrees in writing to relieve CSURF from such obligation.
16.2 CSURF may assign the Lease to CSU, or sublease or otherwise allow occupation
of all or any part of the Leased Premises to CSU or any person, persons or entity working for
CSURF or CSU or their subsidiary departments, programs or organizations (“CSURF
Affiliates”) for any use consistent with Article VI, which has been approved by CSURF in
writing, without the consent of, but with prior notice to, the City. Assignment of the Lease to a
CSURF Affiliate other than CSU requires prior written notice to and the consent of the City,
which consent will not be unreasonably withheld.
16.2.1 Written notice to the City of CSURF’s intention to sublease, or allow
occupancy of all or any part of the Leased Premises by CSURF Affiliates for the use and
purposes herein required, shall be clearly stated on the form shown in Exhibit “H” attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and sent to the City. CSURF’s approved
signature on any form sent to the City under this provision indicates CSURF’s approval of the
stated tenant, subtenant, assignee or occupier.
16.2.2 The City shall acknowledge CSURF’s intention stated on the form
referenced above, by signature thereon by an authorized representative of the City, within fifteen
(15) business days from and after the date said written notice is mailed to the City by U.S. Mail,
postage pre-paid, certified mail, with return receipt requested. If such notice is not signed by the
City’s representative or not received by CSURF within such fifteen (15) business day period,
then and in that event the City’s acknowledgment is deemed given and CSURF shall thereafter
be authorized hereunder to carry out the intention to lease, sublease, assign or occupy the Leased
Premises as stated in said written notice.
16.3 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Lease, CSURF agrees hereby to
restrict the total number of square feet of the Leased Premises, which includes the Main Building
and any New Building or buildings, to be used, subleased, assigned or occupied by any tenant,
subtenant, assignee or occupier that is not a CSURF Affiliate to not more than eighty per cent
(80%) of the aggregate useable square feet of the Leased Premises.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
15
16.4 Each subtenant, assignee or occupant that is not a CSURF Affiliate must enter
into a written agreement with CSURF, in a form acceptable to the City, which incorporates the
applicable terms of this Lease, and in which such subtenant, sub-lessee, or occupant agrees to
comply with and be bound by the applicable terms of this Lease. CSURF must provide a copy of
all such subleases to the City. CSURF must require any such assignee or subtenant that is not a
governmental entity to agree in writing to indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against
all claims by or on behalf of any person, firm, corporation or other entity arising from such
assignee’s or subtenant’s use or occupation of the Leased Premises, any condition caused by
such assignee or subtenant on the Leased Premises, or from any action performed by such
assignee or subtenant or its agents, employees, invitees or contractors under this Lease. CSURF
must further require any assignee or subtenant that is not a governmental entity to procure, pay
for and keep in full force and effect the insurance coverage required in Article XIII, above,
naming the City as an additional insured.
16.5 The provisions of Section 16.4 notwithstanding, in the event that CSURF
subleases or assigns this Lease to a governmental entity other than CSU, the defense and
indemnification requirements of Sections 23.1, 23.2, 24.1, 24.2 and 25.2 shall apply only to the
extent permitted by law. In the event that CSURF subleases or assigns this Lease to CSU,
CSU’s obligations under the indemnification provisions listed above will be limited to claims
arising from the negligent acts or omissions of CSU and its employees, which occurred during
the performance of their duties and in the scope of their employment, except where such acts are
willful and wanton. Such claims shall be further subject to the limitations of the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act.
16.6 Any monies or other consideration received by CSURF from such subleases,
assignments or occupancies will be used by CSURF to financially support CSURF’s approved
activities on the Leased Premises as defined in Section 6.2 above. “Financial Support,” as used
herein, shall mean the payment by CSURF of all costs and expenses directly associated with the
operation or improvements of the Leased Premises, including, but not limited to the following:
maintenance and repair costs (Article VII herein); interest payments or amortization of principal
and interest in payments for any loans by CSURF for alterations or improvements to the Leased
Premises (Article VIII herein); real estate and personal property taxes (Article X herein);
insurance (Article XIII herein); utilities (Article XIV herein); or similar costs or expenses
associated with the use or improvement of the Leased Premises. “Financial Support” shall also
include an annual amount not to exceed the annual budgeted and utilized portion of the CSU
budget set aside for the operation and support of the Engine and Energy Conversion Laboratory,
which amount, if any, will further provide CSU with the funds and means to expand, improve, or
increase the activities of that department and related tenants, subtenants assignees or occupants
on the Leased Premises approved by CSURF Lease Agreement.
16.7 All revenue generated under the definitions of this Article and all costs and
expenses specifically defined as Financial Support above, shall be shown in an annual report (the
“Annual Report”) prepared by CSURF on a fiscal or calendar year basis, as determined by
CSURF, and provided to the City’s Operation Services Director and Finance Director for review,
within ninety (90) days after the end of CSURF’s fiscal or calendar year. The City shall have
thirty (30) days to examine the same after receipt and to submit comments, questions,
suggestions and/or requests for further information to CSURF.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
16
16.8 Any monies remaining from subleasing, assignment or occupancies of the Leased
Premises after the payment of those costs and expenses defined in Section 16.6. above shall be
divided be divided between CSURF and the City, fifty per cent (50%) to CSURF and fifty per
cent (50%) to the City, which amount to the City shall be “Additional Rent” to the City under
Section 3.2 above provided that the total “Additional Rent” shall not exceed the fair market
rental value of the Leased Premises for any applicable year.
ARTICLE XVII
Mechanic's Liens
17.1 CSURF will pay or cause to be paid promptly all bills and charges for material,
labor or otherwise in connection with or arising out of any alterations, additions or changes made
to the Leased Premises by CSURF or its agents or subtenants; and CSURF agrees to hold the
City free and harmless against all liens and claims of liens for such labor and materials, or either
of them, filed against the Leased Premises or any part thereof and from and against any expense
and liability in connection therewith. CSURF further agrees to discharge (either by payment or
by filing the necessary bond or otherwise) any mechanic's, materialman's or other liens against
the Leased Premises arising out of any payment due or alleged to be due for any work, labor,
services, materials or supplies claimed to have been furnished at CSURF's request in, on or about
the Leased Premises and to indemnify the City against any lien or claim of lien attached to or
upon the Leased Premises or any part thereof by reason of any act or omission on CSURF's part.
CSURF shall, however, have the right to contest any mechanic's liens or claims filed against the
Leased Premises, provided CSURF shall diligently prosecute any such contest and at all times
effectively stay or prevent any sale of the Leased Premises under execution or otherwise and pay
or otherwise satisfy any final judgment adjudging or enforcing such contested lien and thereafter
procure record satisfaction or release thereof. CSURF also agrees in any such contest, at
CSURF's cost and expense, to defend the same on behalf of the City.
ARTICLE XVIII
Condemnation
18.1 If, during the term of this Lease: (a) the title to the whole or substantially all of the
Leased Premises is taken; or (b) if the Leased Premises are deprived of adequate ingress or
egress to or from all public streets and highways abutting the Leased Premises, and as the result
of the exercise of the power of eminent domain (hereinafter referred to as “proceedings”)
CSURF cannot reasonably operate in the remainder of the Leased Premises the businesses being
conducted on the Leased Premises at the time of such taking, then this Lease shall terminate as of
the date of such taking pursuant to such proceedings. For the purpose of construing the
provisions of this Article, “proceedings” include any negotiated settlement of any matter
involving a condemnation; and a “taking” is deemed to occur when the governmental authority
acquires title to the Leased Premises or possession thereof, or any portion of the Leased
Premises, whichever first occurs.
18.2 If, during the term of this Lease, title to less than the whole or title to less than
substantially all of the Leased Premises is taken in any such proceedings and CSURF can
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
17
reasonably operate in the remainder of the Leased Premises the business being conducted on the
Leased Premises at the time of such taking, this Lease will not terminate; and the rental
thereafter due and payable by CSURF shall not be reduced.
18.3 All damages awarded for any taking described in this Article that affects the Main
Building are the property of the City, except to the extent that any amount thereof is specifically
attributable to CSURF’s or CSU’s equipment or trade fixtures to the extent that the City is
permitted by law to recover any damages it may sustain as the result of such taking, and all
damages awarded for any taking described in this Article that affects any other improvement,
alteration, addition, or equipment or trade fixture owned by CSURF, CSU or CSURF’s Tenants,
shall belong to CSURF, to the extent that CSURF is permitted by law to recover any damages it
may sustain as the result of such taking.
ARTICLE XIX
Total or Partial Destruction
19.1 If, during the term of this Lease, the Main Building or any part thereof is
destroyed or so damaged by fire or other casualty so as to become untenantable, then, at the
option of CSURF, that portion of this Lease pertaining to the Main Building shall become null
and void from the date of such damage or destruction, and CSURF shall immediately remove its
personal property from the Main Building and surrender the Main Building and its interest
therein to the City, provided, however, that CSURF shall exercise such option to so terminate a
portion of this Lease by notice in writing delivered to the City within thirty (30) days after such
damage or destruction. In the event CSURF does not elect to terminate this Lease pertaining to
the Main Building, this Lease shall continue in full force and effect, subject to subparagraph
19.1.1 below.
19.1.1 If CSURF does not elect to terminate this Lease as stated above, the City
shall have the option to terminate that portion of this Lease pertaining to the Main Building or
repair the Main Building with all reasonable speed, placing the same in as good a condition as it
was at the time just prior to the damage or destruction, and for that purpose may enter upon the
Leased Premises. The City shall exercise such option to so terminate a portion of this Lease by
notice in writing delivered to CSURF within thirty (30) days after such damage or destruction.
19.1.2 If the Main Building is only slightly damaged by fire or the elements so as
to not render the same untenantable and unfit for occupancy, then the City will repair the same
with all reasonable speed. No compensation or claim shall be made by or allowed to CSURF by
reason of any inconvenience or annoyance arising from the necessity of repairing any portion of
the Leased Premises, however the necessity may occur.
19.1.3 Whether the City chooses to terminate the Lease or to repair the Main
Building, CSURF shall remove all merchandise, furniture, furnishings, fixtures, equipment and
other items of its personal property located within the affected areas within twenty-five (25) days
after the request is made by the City, in writing.
19.1.4 If the damage to the Main Building is the result of the possession, use or
occupation of the Leased Premises by CSURF, its employees, agents, sub-tenants or assigns, the
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
18
cost of any repairs contemplated by this section 19.1 will be the responsibility of CSURF.
19.2 If, during the term of this Lease, the Leased Premises, any New Building, or any
part of the Leased Premises, except the Main Building, is destroyed or so damaged by fire or
other casualty so as to become untenantable, then, at the option of CSURF, the term hereby
created shall cease, this Lease shall become null and void from the date of such damage or
destruction, and CSURF shall immediately surrender the Leased Premises and its interest therein
to the City, provided, however, that CSURF shall exercise such option to so terminate this Lease
by notice in writing delivered to the City within thirty (30) days after such damage or
destruction, and provided that CSURF shall remove its property, including any damaged
improvements not owned by the City, from the Leased Premises, unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the City. In the event CSURF does not elect to terminate this Lease, this Lease shall
continue in full force and effect; and CSURF will repair the Leased Premises with all reasonable
speed, placing the same in as good a condition as it was at the time just prior to the damage or
destruction, except that in these circumstances CSURF has no obligation to replace the Metal
Outbuilding. Any repairs to or replacement of any portion of the Leased Premises except the
Main Building will be at CSURF’s sole expense. If the Leased Premises is only slightly injured
by fire or the elements so as to not render the same untenantable and unfit for occupancy, then
CSURF will repair the same with all reasonable speed.
ARTICLE XX
Holding Over
20.1 Any holding over after the expiration of the term of this Lease is prohibited
without prior approval by the Fort Collins City Council.
ARTICLE XXI
Default of Lessee
21.1 If any one or more of the following events (herein referred to as “an event of
default”) happens:
(a) CSURF defaults in the due and punctual payment for the rent or any other
amounts required to be paid hereunder and such default continues for thirty (30) days
after the receipt of written notice from the City; or
(b) Either party neglects or fails to perform or observe any of such party’s other
covenants or obligations under this Lease, and fails to remedy the same within thirty
(30)days after receiving from the non-defaulting party written notice specifying such
neglect or failure; or within such period, if any, as may be reasonably required to cure
such default if it is of such nature that it cannot be cured within said thirty (30) day
period, provided that the defaulting party commences to effect such cure within said
thirty (30) days and proceeds with due diligence to complete said cure.
Then, and in any one or more such events, the non-defaulting party has the right, at its election
and while such event of default continues, to give the defaulting party written notice of the non-
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
19
defaulting party’s intention to terminate this Lease on the date of such given notice or any later
date specified therein; and on such specified date, CSURF's right to possession of the Leased
Premises will cease; and this Lease will thereupon be terminated.
21.2 The City reserves the right to make any payments or perform any action required
hereunder by CSURF (but is not required to do so); and all amounts expended by the City,
together with interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum, will be due and payable by
CSURF thirty (30) days after receiving notice from the City of the amount due.
ARTICLE XXII
Interest and Late Charges
(Intentionally Omitted)
ARTICLE XXIII
Attorneys' Fees
23.1 CSURF agrees to pay and indemnify the City against all legal costs and charges,
including attorneys’ fees, lawfully and reasonably incurred in obtaining possession of the Leased
Premises after default of CSURF, or incurred after CSURF surrenders possession upon the
expiration or sooner termination of this Lease, or incurred in enforcing any covenant of CSURF
herein contained or any right granted to the City.
23.2 In the event of any arbitration or litigation relating to this Lease, the arbitrator or
court shall award to the prevailing party all reasonable costs and expenses, including attorney
and legal fees.
ARTICLE XXIV
Lessee to Save City Harmless
24.1 CSURF will indemnify, release, and hold the City harmless from all claims,
demands, judgments, costs, and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of any accident or
occurrence causing injury to any person or property whomsoever or whatsoever due directly or
indirectly to the condition of the Leased Premises or the use or neglect of the Leased Premises by
CSURF, its agents, employees, sub-lessees and business invitees or any person or persons (and
their agents, employees, and business invitees) holding under the Lessee, unless such accident or
occurrence results from any tortious misconduct or negligent act or omission on the part of the
City, its agents and employees.
24.2 CSURF will further indemnify, release and hold the City harmless from any
damages and all penalties arising out of any failure of CSURF to comply with all of the
requirements and provisions of this Lease Agreement. CSURF covenants that it will keep and
save the City and the City’s interest in and to the Leased Premises forever harmless from any
penalty, damage or charge imposed by any violation of any laws, whether occasioned by an act
of neglect of CSURF or by another or others in the Leased Premises holding under or through
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
20
CSURF.
ARTICLE XXV
Hazardous Material
25.1 As used herein, the term “Hazardous Material” means any hazardous or toxic
substance, material or waste which is or becomes regulated by any local governmental authority,
the state of Colorado or the United states Government in amounts that are subject to regulation.
The term “hazardous material” includes, without limitation, any material or substance that is: (i)
defined as a “hazardous substance” under appropriate state law provisions; (ii) petroleum and
petroleum products; (iii) asbestos; (iv) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); (v) designated as
“hazardous substance” pursuant to section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. section 1321); (vi) defined as “hazardous waste” pursuant to section 1004 of the Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. Section 6903); (vii) defined as a
“hazardous substance” pursuant to Section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. Section 9601); or (viii) defined as a “regulated
substance” pursuant to Subchapter IX, Solid Waste Disposal Act (Regulation of Underground
Storage Tanks) (42 U.S.C. Section 6991).
25.2 CSURF shall not cause or permit any Hazardous Material to be brought upon,
kept or used in or about the Leased Premises by CSURF, its agents, employees, contractors or
invitees, without the prior written consent of the City, which the City shall not unreasonably
withhold as long as CSURF demonstrates to the City’s reasonable satisfaction that such
hazardous material is necessary or useful to CSURF’s activities on the Leased Premises as
described in Article VI, and will be used, kept and stored in a manner which complies with all
laws regulating any such Hazardous Material. If CSURF breaches the obligation stated in the
preceding sentence, or, if the presence of Hazardous Material on the Leased Premises caused or
permitted by CSURF results in contamination of the Leased Premises or if contamination of the
Leased Premises by Hazardous Material otherwise occurs for which CSURF is legally liable to
the City for damage resulting therefrom, then CSURF shall indemnify, defend and hold the City
harmless from any and all claims, judgments, damages, penalties, fines, costs, liabilities or losses
(including, without limitation, diminution value of the Leased Premises, damages for the loss or
restriction on use of rentable or usable space or of any amenity of the Leased Premises, damages,
arising from adverse impact or marketing of space, and sums paid in settlement of claims,
attorneys' fees, consultant fees and expert fees) which arise during or after the Lease term as a
result of such contamination. Without limiting the foregoing, if the presence of any Hazardous
Material on the Leased Premises caused or permitted by CSURF results in any contamination of
the Leased Premises, CSURF shall promptly take all actions at its sole expense as are necessary
to return the Leased Premises to the condition existing prior to the introduction of any such
Hazardous Material to the Leased Premises; provided that the City’s approval of such action
shall first be obtained, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld so long as such action
would not potentially have any material adverse affect on the Leased Premises.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
21
ARTICLE XXVI
Environmental Concerns
26.1 By executing this Lease, CSURF is deemed to have accepted the Leased Premises
in their present condition “as is”. CSURF acknowledges that the Leased Premises, in their
present condition, comply fully with the City’s covenants and obligations hereunder.
26.2 The parties agree to the following times regarding responsibility for any
environmental contamination found or caused:
26.2.1 The City shall be responsible for the remediation and clean up of any such
contamination resulting from the City’s occupancy and use of the City Property prior to February
15, 1994;
26.2.2 CSU shall be responsible for the remediation and cleanup of any such
contamination resulting from CSU’s occupancy and use of the Leased Premises after February
15, 1994 and up to the Effective Date of this Lease Agreement.
26.2.3 CSURF shall be responsible for the remediation and cleanup of any such
contamination resulting from CSURF’s occupancy and use of the Leased Premises from and
after the Effective Date of this Lease Agreement, excepting therefrom any contamination caused
or resulting from CSU’s use and occupancy either prior to the Effective Date of this Lease or
during any occupancy or use of the Leased Premises as a tenant of CSURF, which shall be the
responsibility of CSU, as herein contemplated. CSURF acknowledges and agrees that it is
responsible for meeting all applicable legal and regulatory requirements for the proper removal,
remediation or cleanup, or special management, handling or disposal of any materials handled or
disturbed by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants on the Leased Premises, during construction of
improvements or otherwise. CSURF shall not, however, be responsible for removal or
remediation of soil or groundwater contamination not resulting from CSURF’s occupancy and
use of the Leased Premises, except as required for CSURF’s construction of improvements or
other use of the Leased Premises.
26.2.4 Except as described in Section 26.3 below, should any party find or
become aware of any such environmental contamination during the term of this Lease, such
party shall inform the other parties hereto of such discovery or determination, by letter mailed to
the addresses of the parties shown herein, regarding: the nature and extent of the contamination
found or caused; the party responsible for such contamination based on the above, if that
information can be readily determined; the scope of remediation needed to clean such
contamination from the Leased Premises, if known; the time needed to conduct and complete an
investigation of such contamination, remediation, or clean up, if known; and any other
provisions suitable for the continued undisturbed and peaceable use and occupancy of the Leased
Premises by CSURF or CSURF’s Tenants, or for the removal or remediation of any Hazardous
Material or environmental condition exceeding applicable regulatory standards, posing a risk to
human health or the environment, occurring on the Leased Premises.
26.2.5 No later than sixty (60) days from and after the date of the letter informing
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
22
the parties hereto of the contamination found or caused, as shown above, the parties hereto, or
their designated representatives, shall meet and determine the nature and extent of the
contamination, the responsibilities for the remediation or cleanup of that contamination, the time
to accomplish the remediation or cleanup and other provisions necessary to the restoration of the
Leased Premises, and reduce the same to writing to be signed by all parties hereto. In the event
that the parties are unable to agree upon the allocation of responsibility for such remediation or
cleanup, the parties agree to participate in mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator in an
attempt to reach a voluntary resolution of the disputed issues. Unless otherwise required by the
contamination found or caused, the responsible party or parties shall complete remediation
and/or cleanup of the contamination within one hundred eighty (180) days from and after the
date of the agreement of the parties, as herein provided.
26.3 In connection with the construction of the New Building and the improvements to
the Parking Parcel contemplated in paragraph 6.1 above, CSURF will:
26.3.1 Provide any necessary worker training related to construction activities on
the Leased Premises;
26.3.2 Arrange for the proper treatment and/or disposal of waste from the Leased
Premises;
26.3.3 As authorized by the City, submit a Voluntary Clean Up Program
Application (“VCUP”) satisfactory to the City to the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment (“CDPHE”) for the area of construction;
26.3.4 Comply with the resulting CDPHE approved Soil Characterization and
Management Plan (“SCMP”); and
26.3.5 Cooperate with the City in coordinating with and confirming the
acceptability of the general design and manner of construction of the New Building and other
related improvements to the interested parties under the Administrative Order on Consent (as set
forth in Exhibit F hereto), and provide periodic updates on the construction to said interested
parties.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, any clean-up and/or remediation of the Leased Premises which
may be required by any state or federal law, regulation, order or otherwise, that is not located in
the area of construction will not be the responsibility of CSURF other than as set forth in Section
26.2.3 above.
26.3.6 Should CSURF decide not to build the New Building as a result of issues
with environmental contamination on the Leased Premises, CSURF shall have the option to
terminate this Lease upon ninety (90) days notice to the City.
26.4 In connection with the preparation of plans required by or intended to comply
with applicable federal or state environmental regulations, CSURF shall coordinate with the City
so as to ensure that any such plans address any shared use of the Leased Premises in a manner
satisfactory to the City. For example, in connection with the development and implementation of
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures plans as may be required by federal or state law,
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
23
CSURF shall coordinate with the City to ensure that any City facilities on the Leased Premises
are properly reflected within said plans,
26.5 In order to provide continuing communication and coordination regarding the
environmental obligations related to the Leased Premises, the parties shall annually convene a
meeting of representatives, to include representatives of the City, CSURF and CSU. At the
meeting, CSURF will provide the City with information about all CSURF Tenants directly using
or responsible for any processes, materials handling, or site maintenance involving regulated
materials or procedures or described in any approved plan described herein or environmental
compliance requirement applicable to the Leased Premises pursuant to this Lease. CSURF will
ensure that all CSURF Tenants are kept informed of and comply with all environmental
requirements and obligations related to the Leased Premises.
ARTICLE XXVII
Notices
27.1 Any notice or other communication relating to this Lease must be given by one
party to the other at its respective address as set forth below by hand delivery; commercial
carrier; or U.S. mail. The notice or other communication will be effective on the date it is
delivered or on the third business day after being sent, whichever comes first.
If to the City, to:
Real Estate Services Manager
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
With a copy to:
City Attorney’s Office
City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
If to CSU, to:
CSU Real Estate Office
Mail Code 6009
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
With a copy to:
CSU System
General Counsel Office
Colorado State University
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
24
01 Administration Building
Fort Collins, CO 80523
If to CSURF:
CSURF Real Estate Office
PO Box 483
Fort Collins, CO 80522
ARTICLE XXVIII
Parking
28.1 CSURF is solely responsible for the costs of developing parking areas on the
Leased Premises and for obtaining any necessary regulatory approvals or permits for such
parking. As additional consideration for the lease of the Parking Parcel, CSURF agrees that if it
makes parking improvements on the Parking Parcel the City can use such parking for public
purposes at any time other than 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. The City will
provide signage for the Parking Parcel regarding the restrictions on public parking. In addition,
CSURF agrees to work cooperatively with the City to identify possible parking spots on the
Main Parcel that could be made available for public parking at times and under conditions
mutually acceptable to the parties.
ARTICLE XXIX
Americans with-Disabilities Act (ADA)
29.1 CSURF will comply with all Federal, State and local laws, including the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The City does not represent that the
Leased Premises meet the requirements of the ADA for the purposes of Lessee's intended use of
the Leased Premises.
ARTICLE XXX
Time of the Essence
30.1 Time is of the essence of this Agreement and each and every provision hereof.
ARTICLE XXXI
Landlord’s Right of Entry
31.1 During this term of this Lease, the City reserves the right at all reasonable times
and with reasonable notice of not less than twenty four (24) hours, and at all times during
emergencies, for the City or the City’s agents to enter the Leased Premises for the purpose of
inspecting and examining the same, or to show the same to prospective purchasers or tenants, or
to make such repairs, alterations, improvements or additions as the City may deem necessary or
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
25
desirable. During the ninety days prior to the expiration of the term of this Lease or any renewal
term, the City may exhibit the Leased Premises, with prior notice and so as not to interfere with
regular use of the space, to prospective tenants or purchasers, and place upon the Leased
Premises, the usual notice advertising the Leased Premises for sale or lease, as the case may be,
which notices CSURF shall permit to remain thereon without molestation. The City reserves the
right at all times to enter the Leased Premises for purposes of accessing those portions of the
Leased Premises reserved to the City in Article VI. In the event of an emergency to protect or
minimize the risk of harm to life or property, if CSURF’s designated representative shall not be
personally present to open and permit an entry into said premises, at any time, when for any
reason an entry therein shall be necessary or permissible, the City or City’s agents may enter the
same by a master key or may forcibly enter the same, without rendering the City or such agents
liable therefore, and without in any manner affecting the obligations and covenants of this Lease.
Nothing herein contained, however, shall be deemed or construed to impose upon the City any
obligation, responsibility, or liability whatsoever for the care, maintenance or repair of the
building or any part thereof, except as otherwise herein specifically provided.
ARTICLE XXXII
Miscellaneous
32.1 Words of the masculine gender include the feminine and neuter genders; and
when the sentence so indicates, words of the neuter gender refer to any gender. Words in the
singular include the plural and vice versa.
32.2 This Lease shall be construed according to its fair meaning and in such a manner
as to comply with all applicable charters, constitutions and laws, and as if prepared by both
parties hereto, and is deemed to be and contain the entire understanding and agreement between
the parties hereto. There should be deemed to be no other terms, conditions, promises,
understandings, statements or representations, express or implied, concerning this Lease unless
set forth in writing and signed by all parties hereto.
32.3 The section headings used herein are for convenience of reference only and in no
way define, limit or prescribe the scope or intent of any provision under this Lease.
32.4 Subject to the provisions hereof, the benefits of this Lease and the burdens
hereunder shall inure to and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective agents,
successors and permitted assigns.
32.5 No waivers by any party hereto of any one or more of the terms, covenants,
conditions and agreements of this Lease shall be deemed to imply or constitute a waiver of any
succeeding or other breach hereunder; and the failure of any party to insist upon strict
performance of the terms, conditions, covenants and agreements herein contained or any of them
does not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any party’s rights thereafter to enforce any such
default or term, condition, covenant or agreement; and the same will continue in full force and
effect.
32.6 The remedies of the parties under this Lease are cumulative, and no one of them
shall be construed as exclusive of any other or of any other remedy provided by law. This Lease
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
26
will be governed by and its terms construed under the laws of the state of Colorado.
32.7 The City reserves the right to grant such utility easements and other easements as
it desires over, across and under portions of the City Property so long as such easements do not
unreasonably interfere with CSURF’s continuing use of the Leased Premises.
32.8 At any time, and from time to time, CSURF agrees, upon request in writing from
the City, to execute, acknowledge and deliver to the City a statement in writing certifying that
this Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or if there have been modifications, that the
same is in full force and effect as modified and stating the modifications) and the date to which
the rent and other charges have been paid.
32.9 No payment by CSURF or receipt by the City of a lesser amount than the rental
herein stipulated shall be deemed to be other than on account of the earliest stipulated rent; nor
shall any endorsement or statement on any check or any letter accompanying a check or payment
as rent be deemed an accord and satisfaction; and the City may accept such check or payment
without prejudice to the City’s right to recover the balance of such rent or to pursue any other
remedy available to the City.
32.10 “CSURF” as used in this Lease includes CSURF’s successors in interest to or
assigns under the Lease, except as otherwise specified in this Lease.
32.11 CSURF, upon the expiration of this Lease, either by lapse of term or otherwise,
and after the conveyance of all improvements, additions and alterations to the Leased Premises
to the City, as provided in Article IX above, agrees to peaceably surrender to the City the Leased
Premises, including the alterations, additions, improvements, changes and fixtures other than
CSURF’s movable trade fixtures, equipment and furniture, in broom-clean condition and in good
repair, as herein above provided, and except for acts of God and ordinary wear, and damage by
fire or other casualty not caused by the negligence of CSURF or anyone under CSURF’s control.
32.12 CSURF acknowledges and agrees that CSURF has not relied upon any
statements, representations, agreements or warranties except such as are expressed herein.
32.13 Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or construed by the parties hereto nor
by any third party as creating the relationship of principal and agent or a partnership or a joint
venture between the parties hereto, it being agreed that none of the provisions set forth herein nor
any acts of the parties herein shall be deemed to create a relationship between the parties hereto
other than the relationship of lessor and lessee.
32.14 The parties hereto acknowledge that certain items of personal property may be
located within the buildings located on the Leased Premises. The City makes no representations
or warranties regarding their ownership of any such items of personal property or the condition
thereof. The parties hereto acknowledge that the said items of personal property located within
said building may belong to third parties. CSURF agrees to release, indemnify and hold the City
harmless against any liability for any improper use or disposition by CSURF of any items of
personal property belonging to third parties.
32.15 The parties acknowledge that both the City and CSU are government institutions
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
27
governed by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-101, et seq.
(the “Act”). Notwithstanding any other provision of this Lease to the contrary, no term or
condition of this Lease shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any
of the immunities, rights, benefits, protection, or other provisions of the Act , as now or hereafter
amended. The parties understand and agree that liability for claims for injuries to persons or
property arising out of negligence of the City or the State of Colorado, their respective
departments, institutions, agencies, boards, officials and employees, is controlled and limited by
the provisions of the Act, as now or hereafter amended, which provisions are hereby
incorporated and made a part of this Lease.
32.16 The obligations of the City under this Lease are subject to annual appropriation of
funds in an amount sufficient therefore by the City Council of the City of Fort Collins, in its
discretion.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Lease to be executed the
day and year first above written.
THE CITY:
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO,
a Municipal Corporation
By: __________________________
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
ATTEST:
_______________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
Assistant City Attorney
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
28
CSU:
FOR THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM,
by and through Colorado State University
By: _________________________________
Anthony A. Frank, President
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Associate Legal Counsel
CSURF:
THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH FOUNDATION
A Colorado non-profit corporation
By: ______________________________
Kathleen Henry, President/CEO
ATTEST:
___________________________
Julie Birdsall, CFO
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “A”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: CITY PROPERTY
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “B”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LEASED PREMISES – MAIN PARCEL
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “C”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LEASED PREMISES – PARKING PARCEL
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “D”
NEW BUILDING AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “E”
UTILITY TUNNEL
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “F”
REASONABLE STEPS IN VICINITY OF POUDRE RIVER SITE
June 2009
An area consisting of the Poudre River adjacent to the Northside Aztlan Community
Center, the Northside Aztlan Community Center property and certain additional property in that
vicinity (“the Poudre River Site”) is the subject of a CERCLA Section 104(b) Removal Action,
formally referred to as the Poudre River Site - Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The Site
ID # for that action is 08HE (The Category of Removal was Removal Action, Non-NPL, PRP-
Lead). Public Service Company of Colorado “(PSCo”) agreed to take responsibility for the
Removal Action, which included removal of coal tar contamination on the Poudre River Site,
pursuant to EPA’s Administrative Order on Consent with the City of Fort Collins, PSCo and
Schrader Oil Company, dated October 28, 2004 (the “AOC”). PSCo has completed the Removal
Action, but continues to monitor conditions in the area pursuant to the AOC.
The bona fide prospective purchaser and contiguous property owner provisions state that
a person meeting the criteria of Section 107(r) and Section 107(q) of CERCLA (Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act), 42 U.S.C. § 9607(r) and 9607(q),
respectively, is protected from CERCLA liability. However, to the extent that EPA's response
action increases the fair market value of the bona fide prospective purchaser's property, EPA
may have a windfall lien on the property. The windfall lien is limited to the increase in fair
market value attributable to EPA's response action, capped by EPA's unrecovered response costs.
To qualify as a bona fide prospective purchaser or a contiguous property owner, a person must,
among other requirements, take “reasonable steps” with respect to continuing releases,
preventing threatened future releases, and preventing or limiting human, environmental, or
natural resources exposure to earlier releases.
As noted above, EPA has conducted investigations and is in the process of working with
other parties to take steps to abate the release of coal tar at the Poudre River Site. In the process,
EPA has identified a number of environmental concerns. Based on the information EPA has
evaluated as of early 2005, EPA has indicated that, for an owner of property affected by the
releases of concern, the following would be appropriate reasonable steps with respect to the coal
tar contamination found at the property. As a condition and requirement of the Lease Agreement,
the following requirements must be taken into account and complied with in connection with
actions on the Leased Premises. Additional reasonable steps may become necessary if site
conditions change or new information is discovered which necessitates further reasonable steps.
1. Minimize subsurface excavations to the extent possible.
$ Provide above-ground, rather than underground, parking facilities.
$ Use caissons, piers, pilings, and/or at-grade slab building foundations.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
minimize burial depths of tanks, piping, foundations, and other
improvements.
$ During the design of underground utility installations, the design or
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
construction of new structures or demolition of an existing structure, take
into account the potential presence of the contamination that has been
delineated and, to the extent practicable and consistent with good
engineering practices, minimize excavation volumes.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices, adopt
as a preference for sewer line maintenance and repair the application of an
in situ liner as opposed to removing and replacing the sewer line.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
incorporate into new or replacement utility improvements design
measures, such as protective sleeving, choice of materials and other
features intended to minimize the need for future replacement or repair
due to effects of subsurface contaminants.
2. Monitor for NAPL in areas in which you are performing work during any excavation.
$ Use the information incorporated as part of the AOC and related
investigations, and any subsequently obtained information, to identify
areas in which NAPL may be present.
$ Sample soil and water encountered during excavations, as well as air
within work area during excavation and restoration. You are not required
to characterize the extent of any contamination, but should be
characterizing the soil and water accessed or moved during excavation, as
well as the air within and above the excavation.
$ Properly characterize any materials that are to be removed from the
excavation prior to appropriate disposal.
3. Protect workers, bystanders and building occupants.
$ Where NAPL is encountered or monitoring results indicate the presence of
NAPL at levels exceeding health based standards, require workers to wear
appropriate personal protective equipment and/or undertake engineering
controls to accomplish the same level of worker and bystander protection.
$ Provide training for workers on visual identification of NAPL as well as
on the appropriate use of personal protective equipment.
4. Prevent preferential pathways that may be created by underground work.
$ Use the information incorporated as part of the AOC and related
investigations, and any subsequently obtained information, to identify
areas in which NAPL may be present.
$ Seek professional assistance to design excavations in the identified areas
that will not change pathway and/or rate of flow of the NAPL plume.
5. Properly dispose of contaminated materials that must be removed from the excavation
in order to implement the work being performed.
$ Properly characterize any materials that are to be removed from the
excavation.
6. Identify and use properly licensed facilities for the disposal of the contaminated
materials that must be removed from the excavation.
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “G”
UTILITY COURT AREA
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
EXHIBIT “H”
NOTICE OF INTENT TO LEASE/USE SPACE and ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Restrictive Use of Leased Premises: These premises must be used for instructional, teaching,
and laboratory and research purposes focused upon developing innovative and alternate energy
solutions, including equipment, fuels, software, operational techniques and processes, developing
and testing entrepreneurial models, and similar purposes; related office and administrative
purposes; and ancillary uses related thereto, such as outreach and extension activities,
experimentation or demonstration areas or activities, seminars and instructional uses; for the
common benefit and good of the citizens of the City; and which benefit the human condition and
achieve global impact thereby benefiting the citizens of the City, as well as the State of
Colorado.
Name: ________________________________________________
Address: __________________________
__________________________
__________________________
Contact Information:
Telephone: ________________
Cell: ________________
Fax: ________________
Email: ________________
Other: ______________________
Type of Entity: (individual, department, corporation, foundation, etc.): ____________________
Supervision by: (CSU, CSURF, or subsidiary department or organization):_________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Purpose of building use: _________________________________________________________
Type of Occupancy: (sublease, assignment, other): ____________________________________
Amount of space needed: (in square feet): _________________
Use of space: (office, lab, lecture, other): ____________________________________________
Rental charged: _____________________
Purpose of any rental abatement/reduction: ___________________________________________
Compliance of use of space to City requirements (explain): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
[Signatures on following page]
Draft Lease – Clean 12-6-11
CSURF Approval
Date: __________________ By: _____________________________
Attest:
______________________
City Acknowledgment
Date: __________________ By: _____________________________
EXHIBIT A
1
REASONABLE STEPS IN VICINITY OF POUDRE RIVER SITE
June 2009
An area consisting of the Poudre River adjacent to the Northside Aztlan
Community Center, the Northside Aztlan Community Center property and certain
additional property in that vicinity (“the Poudre River Site”) is the subject of a CERCLA
Section 104(b) Removal Action, formally referred to as the Poudre River Site - Fort
Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The Site ID # for that action is 08HE (The Category
of Removal was Removal Action, Non-NPL, PRP-Lead). Public Service Company of
Colorado “(PSCo”) agreed to take responsibility for the Removal Action, which included
removal of coal tar contamination on the Poudre River Site, pursuant to EPA’s
Administrative Order on Consent with the City of Fort Collins, PSCo and Schrader Oil
Company, dated October 28, 2004 (the “AOC”). PSCo has completed the Removal
Action, but continues to monitor conditions in the area pursuant to the AOC.
The bona fide prospective purchaser and contiguous property owner provisions
state that a person meeting the criteria of Section 107(r) and Section 107(q) of CERCLA
(Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act), 42 U.S.C.
'' 9607(r) and 9607(q), respectively, is protected from CERCLA liability. However, to
the extent that EPA's response action increases the fair market value of the bona fide
prospective purchaser's property, EPA may have a windfall lien on the property. The
windfall lien is limited to the increase in fair market value attributable to EPA's response
action, capped by EPA's unrecovered response costs. To qualify as a bona fide
prospective purchaser or a contiguous property owner, a person must, among other
requirements, take Areasonable steps@ with respect to continuing releases, preventing
threatened future releases, and preventing or limiting human, environmental, or natural
resources exposure to earlier releases.
As noted above, EPA has conducted investigations and is in the process of
working with other parties to take steps to abate the release of coal tar at the Poudre River
Site. In the process, EPA has identified a number of environmental concerns. Based on
the information EPA has evaluated as of early 2005, EPA has indicated that, for an owner
of property affected by the releases of concern, the following would be appropriate
reasonable steps with respect to the coal tar contamination found at the property. As a
condition and requirement of the Lease Agreement, the following requirements must be
taken into account and complied with in connection with actions on the Leased Premises.
Additional reasonable steps may become necessary if site conditions change or new
information is discovered which necessitates further reasonable steps.
1. Minimize subsurface excavations to the extent possible.
$ Provide above-ground, rather than underground, parking facilities.
$ Use caissons, piers, pilings, and/or at-grade slab building
foundations.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
minimize burial depths of tanks, piping, foundations, and other
improvements.
$ During the design of underground utility installations, the design or
construction of new structures or demolition of an existing
EXHIBIT F
to Lease
2
structure, take into account the potential presence of the
contamination that has been delineated and, to the extent
practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
minimize excavation volumes.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
adopt as a preference for sewer line maintenance and repair the
application of an in situ liner as opposed to removing and replacing
the sewer line.
$ Where practicable and consistent with good engineering practices,
incorporate into new or replacement utility improvements design
measures, such as protective sleeving, choice of materials and
other features intended to minimize the need for future
replacement or repair due to effects of subsurface contaminants.
2. Monitor for NAPL in areas in which you are performing work during any
excavation.
$ Use the information incorporated as part of the AOC and related
investigations, and any subsequently obtained information, to
identify areas in which NAPL may be present.
$ Sample soil and water encountered during excavations, as well as
air within work area during excavation and restoration. You are
not required to characterize the extent of any contamination, but
should be characterizing the soil and water accessed or moved
during excavation, as well as the air within and above the
excavation.
$ Properly characterize any materials that are to be removed from the
excavation prior to appropriate disposal.
3. Protect workers, bystanders and building occupants.
$ Where NAPL is encountered or monitoring results indicate the
presence of NAPL at levels exceeding health based standards,
require workers to wear appropriate personal protective equipment
and/or undertake engineering controls to accomplish the same level
of worker and bystander protection.
$ Provide training for workers on visual identification of NAPL as
well as on the appropriate use of personal protective equipment.
4. Prevent preferential pathways that may be created by underground work.
$ Use the information incorporated as part of the AOC and related
investigations, and any subsequently obtained information, to
identify areas in which NAPL may be present.
$ Seek professional assistance to design excavations in the identified
areas that will not change pathway and/or rate of flow of the NAPL
plume.
5. Properly dispose of contaminated materials that must be removed from the
excavation in order to implement the work being performed.
$ Properly characterize any materials that are to be removed from the
3
excavation.
6. Identify and use properly licensed facilities for the disposal of the contaminated
materials that must be removed from the excavation.
ATTACHMENT 3
1
1
Lease Agreement for 430 North College to
Colorado State University Research
Foundation ( ““CCSSUURRFF””))
_____ Main Parcel
_____ Parking Parcel
2
History
Fort Collin’s Power Plant from 1935-1972
Decommissioned but used as switching station
1972-1988
Art gallery 1988-89
CSU has leased the site since 1994 for use as the
Engines and Energy Conversion Lab (“EECL”).
The proposed lease agreement allows a new
building on site.
ATTACHMENT 4
2
3
Lease Terms
CSURF will be the tenant.
Term:
Initial term of 40 years
Two (2) twenty year extensions at CSURF’s
sole option
Rent:
$1,000 initial term
$1,000 for each renewal term
4
Lease Terms (cont.)
Option to Purchase:
CSURF has option to purchase subject to City
Council approval.
Maintenance:
CSURF responsible for maintaining Leased
Premises.
Environmental:
City, CSU and CSURF responsible for
contamination from their use.
CSURF will be required to properly manage
materials during their construction.
3
5
Lease Terms (cont.)
Approval of proposed new construction:
Must be in compliance with City Code rules and
regulations.
Must be approved by City, as property owner.
Approval period shall not exceed 30 days, or 60
days if City Council action is required.
Proposed building expansion is shown on the
following slide.
6
Proposed Improvements
4
7
Follow-Up from City Council Work Session
Based on City Council’s Work Session comments,
negotiations continued with CSURF on the following
items:
Removal of items in River Buffer
• CSURF has agreed to reduce Utility Court
by at least 50%, subject to their final design.
• Items to be removed are on the next slide.
Items will be removed by the end of
construction.
8
Removal of Items in the River Buffer
5
9
Follow-Up from City Council Work Session
(cont.)
Fountain Maintenance:
The fountain is currently in its original location
on site.
CSURF plans to move the fountain to a new
location on site.
CSURF must restore the fountain to historical
specifications.
CSURF will be responsible for day-to-day
maintenance.
10
Follow-Up from City Council Work Session
(cont.)
Grotto Maintenance:
If CSURF uses the Grotto for water filtration:
CSURF will be required to renovate the Grotto,
including landscaping, to historic specifications.
Use will be subject to proper permits.
If CSURF does not use the Grotto:
CSURF will be responsible for day-to-day
maintenance, including landscaping.
The City will be responsible for the renovation of
the Grotto.
6
11
Lease Agreement for 430 North College to
Colorado State University Research
Foundation ( ““CCSSUURRFF””))
Thank You
ORDINANCE NO. 183, 2011
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT 430 NORTH COLLEGE
AVENUE AND 100 WILLOW STREET TO THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH FOUNDATION
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of the property located at 430 North College Avenue, Fort
Collins, Colorado, known as the Old Power Plant (the “City Property”); and
WHEREAS, the City Property was previously used by the City’s electric utility but is no
longer needed, except incidentally, for utility purposes; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 1994, pursuant to Ordinance No. 11, 1994, the City and
Colorado State University (CSU) entered into a lease agreement for a portion of the City Property
for up to 25 years (the “1994 Lease”); and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2005, pursuant to Ordinance No. 123, 2004, the 1994 Lease was
modified by a First Amendment to Lease Agreement, which added a five-year renewal term and
increased the termination notice period to five years (the “2005 Amendment”); and
WHEREAS, the 1994 Lease authorized CSU to use the City Property only for laboratory and
research purposes focused upon increasing the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, and
related office, administrative, outreach, extension and instructional uses; and
WHEREAS, since 1994 CSU has been using the City Property for its Engines and Energy
Conversion Laboratory, but this program has grown in size and expanded in purpose over the years
and the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF) wishes to build an additional
building on the City Property to house labs, offices and subtenant incubator companies (the “New
Building”); and
WHEREAS, through several years of discussion and negotiation, City staff and
representatives from CSU and CSURF have drafted a new lease agreement, a copy of which, dated
December 6, 2011, is on file in the office of the City Clerk and available for review (the “Lease
Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, under the Lease Agreement the City would lease to CSURF a portion of the
City Property as described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Main
Parcel”), as well as a portion of the adjacent City-owned property known as Lot 1, Northside Aztlan
Community Center, located in the 100 block of Willow Street, Fort Collins, Colorado, as described
on Exhibit “B”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Parking Parcel”); the Main
Parcel and Parking Parcel are collectively referred to as the “Leased Premises”; and
WHEREAS, upon execution of the Lease Agreement CSU would relinquish all right, title
and interest in and to the City Property under the 1994 Lease and the 2005 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, key terms of the proposed Lease Agreement include the following:
• The initial term of the Lease would be 40 years with two 20-year extensions at
CSURF’s sole option if CSURF builds the New Building. If CSURF does not build
the New Building within eight years, the initial term of the Lease would be ten years
with one five-year extension in CSURF’s sole option and two additional ten-year
extensions with the City’s consent.
• CSURF would pay rent in the amount of $1,000 for the initial term of the Lease and
$1,000 for each extension unless it does not build the New Building, in which case
rent would be $1,000 for the first ten or fifteen years of the Lease and $500 for each
ten-year extension.
• CSURF would be permitted to build the New Building and related improvements on
the Main Parcel and parking improvements on the Parking Parcel, subject to the
City’s approval of the plans for the improvements.
• Upon termination of the Lease the improvements constructed by CSURF would
become the property of the City unless CSURF terminates the Lease because of a
default by the City, in which case the City would compensate CSURF for the value
of its improvements.
• CSURF would be permitted to assign the Lease, or sublease the Leased Premises, to
CSU and to sublease portions of the Leased Premises to third parties whose activities
on the Leased Premises must be consistent with the purposes of the Lease; and
WHEREAS, leasing the Leased Premises to CSURF for the uses described in the Lease
Agreement serves the valuable public purpose of developing and utilizing energy solutions; and
WHEREAS, leasing the Leased Premises to CSURF further benefits the City by reducing
the City’s costs for maintenance and utilities on the City Property; and
WHEREAS, under Section 23-111 of the City Code the City Council is authorized to sell,
convey or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City
provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the
best interests of the City and, with respect to real property that is a part of the City’s water or utility
systems, that such disposition will not materially impair the viability of the system as a whole and
will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that leasing the Leased Premises to
CSURF as provided herein serves a valuable public purpose, is in the best interests of the City, will
not impair the viability of the City’s electric utility system as a whole, and will be for the benefit of
the citizens of the City.
-2-
Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a lease agreement
with CSURF in substantially the form of the Lease Agreement that is on file in the office of the City
Clerk, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with
the City Attorney, determines to be necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or
effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including but not limited to any necessary changes to the
legal description of the Leased Premises, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size
or change the character of the Leased Premises.
Section 3. That as part of the Lease Agreement, CSURF is hereby authorized to enter
into subleases for portions of the Leased Premises in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the Lease Agreement.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 20th day of
December, A.D. 2011, and to be presented for final passage on the 3rd day of January, A.D. 2012.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 3rd day of January, A.D. 2012.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-3-
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158
200 S.College Ave. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80524
FAX:970.221.4159
WEBSITE:
www.northemengineering.com
NORTHERN ENG I NEERING
ExhibitA
DESCRIPTION:
A portion of Lot 3 in Reservation on the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 7
North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., lying North and West of Right of Way of the
Fort Collins Development Railway Company, less deed recorded May 3, 1994 at
Reception No. 94038222 being more particularly described as follows;
Considering the West line of Section 12 as bearing South 00°23'57" West and with all
bearings contained herein relative thereto:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 12; thence along the West line of
said Section 12, South 00°23'57" West, 482.47 feet; thence departing said West line,
South 89°36'03" East, 73.47 feet to a point on the East line of said Reception No.
94038222, said point also being the POINT OF BEGli NING; thence along the
approximate Top of Bank of Cache La Poudre River the following ten (10) courses:
(1) South 68°26'25" East, 27.26 feet;
(2) North 86°52'14" East, 40.22 feet;
(3) South 68°17'47" East, 44.32 feet;
(4) North 82°34'37" East, 118.30 feet;
(5) South 84°24'53" East, 151.12 feet;
(6) South 75°36'07" East, 63.13 feet;
(7) South 68°36'28" East, 42.92 feet;
(8) South 79°23'46" East, 50.91 feet;
(9) South 71°20'59" East, 61.83 feet;
(10) South 76°36'43" East, 63.27 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of
Burlington Northern Railroad Right of Way; thence along said Northwesterly line,
South 57°00'09" West, 776.12 feet to a point on the East line of said Reception
No. 94038222; thence departing said Northwesterly line and along said East line, North
00°34'27" East, 521.48 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above described easement contains 4.091 acres (178,190 square feet) more or less
and is subject to all easements and rights-of-way now on record or existing.
December 1, 2011
CNS
Sheet 1 of2
POINT OF
COMMENCEMENT
NORTHWEST CORNER
S12, T7N, R69W
EXHIBIT A
MAIN
PARCEL
178,184 sq.ft.
4.091 ac.
/
/
/
/
/
/
//' /
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOT2
(NORTHSIDE
AZTLAN
COMMUNITY
CENTER)
I 50' BNRR
EASEMENT
I
I
I
LOT 1
393,184 sq.ft
9.026 ac.
410 NORTH
COLLEGE, LLC
RECEPTION
No. 2003006605
WEST CORNER
S12, T7N, R89W
I (NORTHSIDE AZTLAN
I COMMUNITY CENTER)
I 361,142 sq.ft.
I 8.297 ac.
I
I
SHEET 2 OF2
100 0 100 Feet
eF3=c eas= :=:=:=31 NORTH
( IN FEET)
1 Inch - tOO ft.
NORTH ERN
ENGINEERING
l'fO« tPOUI 41st fA.l. -tJOUI 415ot
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158
200 S.College Ave. Suite 100
Fort Collins,CO 80524
FAX:970.221.4159
WEBSITE:
www.northernengineering.com
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Exhibit B
DESCRIPTION:
All that portion of Lot 1, Northside Aztlan Community Center lying west of the
Burlington Northern Railroad as described at Reception No. 2000032174 being more
practically described as follows;
Considering the North line of Lots 1 and 2, Northside Aztlan Community Center as
bearing North 57°00'09" East and with all bearing contained herein relative thereto:
POINT OF BEGINNING being the Northwest comer of said Lot 1; thence along the
North line of said Lot 1, North 57°00'09" East, 261.57 feet to a point on the Westerly
line of Burlington Northern Railroad Easement; thence along said Westerly line along a
non-tangent curve concave to the Southeast having a central angle of32°28'24" with a
radius of794.49 feet and an arc length of 450.29 feet and the chord of which bears
South 16°02'11" West, 444.29 feet; thence continuing along said Westerly line, South
00°12'01" East, 148.00 feet to a point on the Southern line of said Lot 1; thence along
the South line of Lot 1 along a non-tangent curve concave to the South having a central
angle of 12°27'11" with a radius of 400.00 feet and an arc length of 86.94 feet and the
chord of which bears North 61°02'07" West, 86.77 feet to the Southwest comer of said
Lot 1; thence along the Western border of said Lot 1 the following three (3) courses:
(1) North 00°45'15" West, 190.24 feet;
(2) North 89°36'03" West, 20.14 feet;
(3) North 00°23 '57" East, 200.17 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above described easement contains 1.159 acres (50,474 square feet) more or less
and is subject to all easements and rights-of-way now on record or existing.
November 28, 2011
CNS
Sheet 1of2
>
z
0
...
""
''""*"'-"""•
EXHIBIT B -
w
::>
z
w
<(
w
<.9
.w .-l
0 ..-l
()
I
I
n
-
::
NORTH UNE
OF LOTS 1 & 2
(NORTHSIDE AZTI.AN
COMMUNITY CENTER)
.
!,U
,._10
-: M
ON
O o
NO 0z
410 NORTH
COLLEGE. LLC
RECEPTION
PARKING
PARCEL
50474 sq.ft.
1.159 ac.
1-
$,. I
t.u I
(/) 8 I
_liS H I
f5 i. I
0:: Jf I
LOT 2
(NORTHSIDE
AZTLAN
COtvlMUNITY
CENTER)
393,184 sq.ft.
9 026 ac
No. 2003006605
N89 36'03"W
20.14'
!:
0:: Q: I
I
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Diane Jones, Karen Cumbo
Ginny Sawyer
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 30
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-115 Relating to Assistance for Persons Displaced from Affordable Housing in the Fort Collins Area.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council appropriated $50,000 in November 2011 for a relocation assistance program. In light of recent developments
with the Bender Mobile Home Park, staff developed a disbursement plan that, if approved by Council, will be
implemented beginning January 1, 2012.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Disbursement Plan Overview
Staff is preparing to implement the recently approved budget amendment offer establishing a program that provides
relocation assistance for displaced residents of affordable housing in the Fort Collins area. In view of recent concerns
expressed by the City Council and the Community regarding the residents of Bender Mobile Home Park, staff has
considered that situation in the course of developing the disbursement program.
Council appropriated $50,000 in 2012 for a relocation assistance program. Neighbor to Neighbor is able and willing
to administer City relocation assistance funds; however, however, to cover its client service and administrative costs
it will charge 20% fee on the funds provided. This is an amount allowed by HUD for administration of funds. The fee
covers reviewing applications, determining eligibility, disbursement of funds, all accounting, record keeping, and
providing reports as requested.
Public Purpose
Providing monetary assistance to displaced low-income residents in the City, and on the fringes of the City within the
City’s Growth management Area promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of a population that, without help,
is at great risk of becoming homeless and placing greater burden on existing human service programs. Providing
assistance in extreme cases where other resources are not available or residents cannot qualify helps to prevent
imminent homelessness.
The direct and indirect effects of increased homelessness in Fort Collins have been considered in other contexts,
including a Council work session earlier this fall. Keeping people in housing and supporting low-income and affordable
housing options supports existing City policies. City Plan (2011) speaks directly to this issue:
Policy LIV 8.6 – Mitigate Displacement Impacts-- Explore ways to mitigate the impact upon
residents displaced through the closure of manufactured housing parks or conversion of rental
apartments, including single room occupancy units, to condominiums or other uses.
Proposed Disbursement Plan
Staff recommends a uniform cap not to exceed $2,000 per household. Applications for assistance will be processed
in the order they are received until all funds have been disbursed. Funds will be available to low-income residents,
defined as being below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for the City of Fort Collins, being displaced by
redevelopment on property that is either in the City or adjacent to the City boundaries and within the Growth
Management Area. The disbursement would be a maximum amount per household, to be used for any of the following
purposes:
• moving costs, including costs to move a trailer or move personal belongings
• first month’s rent for new housing
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 30
• security deposit for new housing
• temporary storage of belongings
• short-term hotel stays when a lease has been signed for new housing but such housing is not yet available;
and
• in the case of mobile homes, upgrades to mobile homes to enable acceptance at another park.
Funds will be paid directly to a service provider or reimbursed upon documentation of valid receipt and payment. Only
insured commercial service providers may receive funds.
The $2,000 per household cap is consistent with the recent Grape Street relocation and takes into account typical
expenses which would include security deposit, first months rent, moving expenses, and potential move out expenses.
2012 – Next Steps
In 2012, Advance Planning will monitor and review this relocation assistance program plan. Work on a Relocation
Policy Plan to address displacement of low-income residents is scheduled to begin in early 2012. Pending approval
by City Council of this relocation assistance program, staff will use data and information from this program to develop
and refine policy and program improvements in 2012.
Funding for relocation assistance in fiscal years after 2012 will be reviewed as part of the Budgeting for Outcomes
process for 2013-2014.
Application of Program to Bender Park Residents
The Bender Mobile Home Park is located at 912 Wood Street. The property is approximately 17 acres and borders
the Poudre River. (See the attached map).
The recent sale of the Bender Mobile Home Park and the state’s deadline to vacate due to a failed septic system
increased the urgency and need for a relocation assistance program. State law requires mobile park residents to be
given 6 months notice when the sale of a park will result in a change in use. These residents were given six months
notice and the deadline for vacating the mobile home park is April 2, 2012. The state has extended their deadline to
vacate or completely repair the septic system to align with the 6 month change in use notice.
As of November 1, 2011 there were 23 trailers in the park with 17 of those being a primary residence. Of those 17,
approximately 5-7 are able to be moved and accepted by another park. The remaining trailers cannot be moved and
will most likely be abandoned on the property. For those able to relocate their trailers the average cost is $3,000 to
$5,000. This includes the disassembling, transporting, reassembling, and required permitting. Many older trailers
could also potentially be required to install new skirting, siding, and roof upgrades.
For residents to move from the mobile home park into a rental unit typically requires first and last month’s rent, a
cleaning deposit, start up costs and deposits for utilities, and moving personal belongings. These costs usually range
from $ $1,500 to $ 2,500.
In light of the relocation costs and the general intention of the City to assist with a portion of the displacement and
relocation costs, staff suggests a $2,000 cap is a meaningful amount that will help residents budget and offset some
of their costs.
Staff is working with local agencies and the developer to assemble assistance for residents.
Neighbor to Neighbor and the Murphy Center are currently assisting residents where they are able within their existing
programs. One household has received first month rent assistance from Neighbor to Neighbor and at least one other
qualifies. Five residents had initial appointments with a case manager at the Murphy Center but have not returned
since the first meeting. The Housing Authority strongly recommended that all residents complete an application with
them although the wait list for housing is well over a year. Disabled Resource Services also offered their services.
Staff continues to work with the developer in an attempt to leverage and pool funds. To date the developer has shown
a willingness to help individuals as their needs are presented. By helping on a one-on-one basis, the developer is able
to provide more timely assistance without the paperwork and documentation required by a City/agency program.
Developer assistance to date has included:
December 20, 2011 -3- ITEM 30
• Waived rent on one of two trailers owned by a resident
• Return or non-collection of rent for residents with plans or in process of moving
• Direct funds to help resident move trailer to new park
• To date has provided 20 roll-offs and disposal for residents to dispose of unwanted items
• Has agreed to incur all costs for trailers and items left at time of park closure (estimated cost to dispose of
abandoned trailers is $1500-$2,000 per trailer.)
As of December 2, 2011 the Northstar Trailer Park had spots for up to four Bender residents. The Northstar owner
and the developer are working together to get these residents moved.
The County was approached and asked to be a partner in assistance but based on current revenue and funding
shortfalls and priorities they will not be offering assistance beyond existing human services programs.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Providing relocation assistance in these instances is a long term investment. Helping people remain in housing
prevents future community costs associated with homelessness. If the disbursement plan is approved by Council, it
is likely that a significant portion, if not all funds, will be used by Bender households in 2012, leaving little or no funding
assistance available for additional needs that may arise.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location map
2. Powerpoint presentation
Bender Mobile Home
CITY GEOGRAPHICCOLLINS OF FORT INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS
These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only,
and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty
as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions,
contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES
NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products,
map applications, or data, accepts same AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further
covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map
product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available.
Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data.
The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential,
which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
Cac
h
e l
a
Po
u
dr
e
Riv
e
r
Bender Mobile
Home
N SHIELDS ST
LAPORTE AVE
MAPLE ST
WOOD ST
CHERRY ST
LAPORTE AVE
ELM ST
SYCAMORE ST
HICKORY ST
PARK ST
WEST ST
N GRANT AVE
N SHERWOOD ST
HEMLOCK ST
N WHITCOMB ST
W VINE DR
N MASON ST
N MELDRUM ST
N HOWES ST
HANNA ST
BUNGALOW CT
HAWKINS ST
ELM ST
LAPORTE AVE
N SHIELDS ST
W MULBERRY ST
E VINE DR
N COLLEGE AVE
N LEMAY AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
W VINE DR
N TAFT HILL RD
0 0.5 1 2
1
1
Resolution 2011‐‐111155 2011
Relating to Assistance for Persons Displaced
from Affordable Housing in the Fort Collins
Area
City Council Meeting
December 20, 2011
2
Resolution 2011‐‐111155 2011
Council appropriated $50,000 in 2012 for a
relocation assistance program.
Program would assist low‐income residents
displaced from affordable housing due to
redevelopment.
ATTACHMENT 2
2
3
Resolution 2011‐‐111155 2011
Public Purpose
Providing monetary assistance to displaced
low‐income residents:
– promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of
a population at risk of becoming homeless
– reduces burden on existing human service
programs.
4
Neighbor to Neighbor is willing and able to administer
program.
20% fee for administration
– includes:
• reviewing applications,
• determining eligibility
• disbursement of funds
•all accounting
•record keeping
• providing reports
Resolution 2011-2011 -115
3
5
Resolution 2011‐‐111155 2011
Program provides:
• $2,000 per household cap
•Payment to insured, commercial providers
• Reimbursed payments with documentation
Eligible expenses to include:
•Moving costs
•Rents and deposits
• Short term storage
•Trailer upgrades
6
Resolution 2011‐‐111155 2011
Program will be monitored throughout 2012.
Improvements or enhancements will be
identified and brought back to Council.
Future program dollars will be reviewed as
part of the 2013‐14 Budgeting for Outcomes
process.
4
7
Application to Bender Residents
Bender residents will be eligible for this
program.
Residents must submit their applications
within 30 days after moving out of the
redevelopment property.
8
Application to Bender Residents
Residents displaced after October 1, 2011 may
submit applications for funds beginning
January 1, 2012.
Residents who moved prior to January 1,
2012, must submit their applications by
January 31, 2012.
5
9
Council Considerations
Does Council have any questions or suggested
changes regarding the Resolution or
implementation of a relocation assistance
program?
RESOLUTION 2011-115
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
RELATING TO ASSISTANCE FOR PERSONS DISPLACED
FROM AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE FORT COLLINS AREA
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2011, as part of Ordinance No. 156, 2011, the City Council
appropriated $50,000 in funds for a relocation assistance program for displaced residents of
affordable housing in the Fort Collins area; and
WHEREAS, to implement this appropriation, staff has developed a proposed disbursement
plan to take effect January 1, 2012, subject to City Council approval through this Resolution (the
“Disbursement Plan”); and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Disbursement Plan is attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated
herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the main elements of the proposed Disbursement Plan are as follows:
• A cap of $2,000 per household would be imposed;
• Applications would be processed in the order received until all funds have been
disbursed;
• Funds would be available only to low-income residents being displaced by
redevelopment on property that is either in the City or adjacent to the City
boundaries and within the Growth Management Area;
• Funds could be used only for specific costs related to relocation;
• Neighbor to Neighbor would administer the Disbursement Plan in exchange for a
20% fee; and
WHEREAS, in 2012 the City’s Advance Planning Department would monitor and review
the Disbursement Plan and develop recommendations for program improvements or enhancements
as appropriate, with funding to continue the relocation assistance in fiscal years after 2012 being
reviewed as part of the Budgeting for Outcomes process; and
WHEREAS, the disbursement of funds for the purposes described herein serves the public
purpose of promoting the health, safety and general welfare of a population at risk of becoming
homeless in the general Fort Collins service area for social services, thereby placing a greater burden
on the City’s existing human services and law enforcement programs and creating other community
costs associated with homelessness; and
WHEREAS, keeping people in the Fort Collins area in housing and supporting low-income
and affordable housing options in the Fort Collins area also supports existing City policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the Disbursement Plan as described in this Resolution serves a public
purpose by promoting the health, safety and general welfare of individuals at risk of becoming
homeless in the Fort Collins community, thereby reducing a potential additional burden on City
social services and law enforcement resources.
Section 2. That the Disbursement Plan, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit “A”,
is hereby approved along with such additions or modifications to the Disbursement Plan as the City
Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to
implement the Disbursement Plan, provided such additions or modifications do not materially
change the scope or purpose of the Disbursement Plan.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM – 2012
(DRAFT POLICY)
A. Purpose
The City of Fort Collins is allocating funds for a relocation assistance program for displaced residents of
affordable housing in the Fort Collins area. Providing monetary assistance to displaced low‐income
residents in the City, and on the fringes of the City within the City’s Growth management Area, promotes
the health, safety, and general welfare of a population that, without help, is at great risk of becoming
homeless and placing greater burden on existing human service programs. Providing assistance in extreme
cases where other resources are not available, not sufficient or residents cannot qualify helps to prevent
imminent homelessness.
B. Program Eligibility and Process
1) Funds are available only to low‐income residents, defined as being below 50% of
the Area Median Income (AMI) for the City of Fort Collins, who are losing their
primary residence and being displaced due to redevelopment on property that is
either in the City or adjacent to the City boundaries and within the Growth
Management Area.
2) Payments are capped at $2,000 per household. Applications will be processed in
the order they are received until all funds have been disbursed.
3) Funds may be paid directly to insured commercial service providers or reimbursed
to residents.
4) Funds will be disbursed only upon receipt by the City of documentation
establishing, to the City’s reasonable satisfaction, actual costs incurred.
5) Funds may be used only for the following purposes:
moving costs, including costs to move a trailer or move personal
belongings;
first month’s rent for new housing;
security deposit for new housing;
temporary storage of belongings;
short‐term hotel stays when a lease has been signed for new housing
but such housing is not yet available; and
in the case of mobile homes, upgrades to mobile homes to enable
acceptance at another park.
6) Residents displaced after October 1, 2011 may submit applications for funds
beginning January 1, 2012. Residents must submit their applications within 30 days
after moving out of the redevelopment property. Residents who moved prior to
January 1, 2012, must submit their applications by January 31, 2012.
C. Program Administration
The Relocation Assistance Program will be administered by Neighbor to Neighbor in accordance with this
policy. Administration includes reviewing applications, determining eligibility, disbursement of funds, all
accounting, record keeping, and providing reports as requested.
D. Program Revisions
Advance Planning will monitor and review this relocation assistance program plan throughout
implementation and will develop recommendations for program improvements or enhancements
as appropriate. Funding for relocation assistance in fiscal years after 2012 will be reviewed as part
of the Budgeting for Outcomes process for 2013‐2014.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Darin Atteberry
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 31
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-116 Appointing a Representative to the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fort Collins has two representatives on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee, Councilmember Lisa
Poppaw and City Manager Darin Atteberry. Councilmember Poppaw has requested to be replaced as she is unable
to attend the meetings. This Resolution will appoint another Councilmember as the City’s representative to the CML
Policy Committee.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Policy Committee is responsible for reviewing legislative proposals and recommending to the League Executive
Board, positions of support, opposition, no position or amendment to a wide variety of legislation affecting cities and
towns. At each annual conference in June, the Policy Committee proposes to the membership, revisions to the
League’s policies which guide League positions on public policy issues affecting municipalities.
The Committee meets three or four times a year, before and during legislative sessions as well as in May prior to the
annual conference. The next CML Policy Committee meeting will be held on February 23, 2012.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
RESOLUTION 2011-116
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPOINTING A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE
COLORADO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE POLICY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the Colorado Municipal League (the “League”) is an influential voice for
municipal interests on state and federal policies affecting municipalities; and
WHEREAS, the League is also an important source of information for municipal officials
in serving their communities; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins are best served by an informed and effective local
government; and
WHEREAS, the League Policy Committee (“Policy Committee”) is responsible for
reviewing legislative proposals and making recommendations to the League Executive Board; and
WHEREAS, the Policy Committee proposes to the League membership revisions to the
League’s policies which guide League positions on public policy issues affecting municipalities; and
WHEREAS, on August 16, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution 2011-069 appointing
Councilmember Poppaw as one of the City’s representatives on the Policy Committee; and
WHEREAS, Councilmember Poppaw is no longer able to serve as the City’s representative
on the Policy Committee; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to have maximum representation on the
Policy Committee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that Councilmember is hereby appointed to represent
the City on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of December A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Wanda Krajicek
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 32
SUBJECT
Resolution 2011-117 Making an Appointment to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A vacancy currently exists on the Zoning Board of Appeals due to the term limit vacancy of Jim Pisula.
Mayor Karen Weitkunat and Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Ohlson conducted interviews but did not agree on a
recommendation for this vacancy. The Council interview team wishes to submit two names (Robert V. Long and
Rudolph C. Zitti) for Council’s consideration for that position.
RESOLUTION 2011-117
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO
THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
WHEREAS, a vacancy currently exists on the Zoning Board of Appeals due to the term limit
expiration of Jim Pisula; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to fill the vacancy which exists on the Zoning Board
of Appeals.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the following named person is hereby appointed as a member of the Zoning Board
of Appeals hereinafter indicated, with a term to begin January 1, 2012 and to expire as set forth after
the name:
Zoning Board of Appeals Expiration of Term
December 31, 2015
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 20th day of December,
A.D. 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
urban renewal authority
Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers
Kelly Ohlson, Vice-President City Hall West
Ben Manvel 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz
Wade Troxell
Gerry Horak Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, Executive Director
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, Secretary
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and
will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for
assistance.
URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY MEETING
December 20, 2011
(after the Regular Council Meeting)
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Resolution No. 040 Adopting a Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority. (staff: Christina
Vincent, Chris Martinez; 5 minute staff presentation; 20 minute discussion)
The Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is expected to generate $913,815 in property tax
increment collections from the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area. This prediction is based on
information from the County Assessor’s Office 2011 December Certification. In addition to the tax
increment revenue, there will be revenue from interest on investments that total approximately
$84,500. The total amount of revenue for the URA in 2012 is approximately $998,315.
The revenue from interest on investments, combined with estimated year-end fund balance in the
URA Operating Fund will be the source for the following recommended operating appropriations:
• $198,583 Operations and Maintenance
• $20,000 Consultant fees related to ongoing projects
The 2012 URA debt service payments total $645,296 for the following loans:
1. North College Marketplace - 2009
2. JAX - 2010
3. Northeast College Corridor Outfall Project - 2011
4. Kaufman and Robinson - 2011
5. North College Marketplace – 2011
The 2012 expenses for the URA total $863,879 for operations and debt service obligations.
December 20, 2011
4. Other Business.
5. Adjournment.
DATE: December 20, 2011
STAFF: Christina Vincent
Chris Martinez
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY 3
SUBJECT
Resolution No. 040 Adopting a Budget for the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is expected to generate $913,815 in property tax increment
collections from the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area. This prediction is based on information from the County
Assessor’s Office 2011 December Certification. In addition to the tax increment revenue, there will be revenue from
interest on investments that total approximately $84,500. The total amount of revenue for the URA in 2012 is
approximately $998,315.
The revenue from interest on investments, combined with estimated year-end fund balance in the URA Operating Fund
will be the source for the following recommended operating appropriations:
• $198,583 Operations and Maintenance
• $20,000 Consultant fees related to ongoing projects
The 2012 URA debt service payments total $645,296 for the following loans:
1. North College Marketplace - 2009
2. JAX - 2010
3. Northeast College Corridor Outfall Project - 2011
4. Kaufman and Robinson - 2011
5. North College Marketplace – 2011
The 2012 expenses for the URA total $863,879 for operations and debt service obligations.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
This Resolution appropriates the operating and debt services budget for the URA. Specific project commitments will
still require future approval by the URA Board on a project by project basis.
Should significant projects or plan areas materialize that require URA appropriations from the URA Operating Fund,
a related request for both approval of the project and the necessary appropriations and related financing will be
presented to the URA Board. The only appropriations covered by the budget appropriation are for the administrative
and debt service expenses.
The total tax increment revenue for the North College Urban Renewal Plan Area in 2012 is projected to be $913,815.
By 2013 this amount will exceed $1 million in annual revenue collection.
Midtown Urban Renewal Plan Area was created in 2011 and will not begin to collect revenue from the Prospect South
tax increment financing district until 2013.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
This Resolution includes the annual operating appropriation for 2012 at $198,583 in the URA Operating Fund and the
debt service appropriation at $645,296 in the Debt Service Fund. Any specific appropriations related to URA
participation in projects will be presented to the URA Board separately so that the URA funding is approved on a
project by project basis.
December 20, 2011 -2- ITEM 3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Powerpoint presentation
1
1
URA Budget 2012
URA Board Meeting
December 20, 2011
2
2011 Financial Highlights
Increased tax increment revenue:
Budget = $517,000
Actual = $527,667
Increased interest collected on investments
Budget = $5,000
Actual = $9,500
New TIF District created within Midtown Plan Area
ATTACHMENT 1
2
3
2011 Financial Highlights
Loan agreements:
•• North College Marketplace -Phase 2
•• Kaufman and Robinson
•• NECCO
New Redevelopment agreement:
•• The Commons
* Paid off loan for 1sstt 1 URA Project –– Valley Steel
4
NC MMkkttppllaaccee (phase 1) : 10 yr loan -last pmt 2020
RMI: RMI : 20 yr loan, 1sstt 1 7 yrs. IInntt only -last pmt 2029
Jax: Jax : 5 yr loan -last pmt 2015
NECCO: NECCO : 10 yr int. only -last pmt 2020
Kaufman&Robinson: Robinson : 5 yr loan –– last pmt 2016
NC MMkkttppllaaccee (phase 2) : 18 yr loan –– last pmt 2029
Existing Loan Terms
3
5
URA Budget 2012
Revenues $998,315
•• Property Tax Increment Collection
•• Interest Earned on Investments
Expenses $863,897
•• Operating Fund
–– Management for Projects
–– Use of Loan Proceeds to Projects
•• Debt Service Fund
•• Create Debt (loans and bonds)
–– Collect Tax Increment to Pay Off Debt
6
Tonight’’s Tonight s Action
Adopt the 2012 Budget for the
Urban Renewal Authority
4
7
Questions?
RESOLUTION NO. 040
OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE
FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY
ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FORT COLLINS
URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the "URA") was created on January
5, 1982, by City Council's adoption of Resolution 1982-010, which designated the City Council as
the Board of Commissioners of the Authority; and
WHEREAS, the URA operates to eliminate blight and prevent the spread of blight within
the urban renewal area in accordance with the Urban Renewal Law of Colorado, Section 31-25-101;
and
WHEREAS, the URA has considered a proposed budget for fiscal year 2012 and wishes to
adopt the 2012 URA budget as described herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY as follows:
Section 1. That the budget shown on Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference, is approved and the amounts stated therein are appropriated for fiscal year
2012.
Section 2. That the City of Fort Collins' Financial Officer is hereby directed to file a
certified copy of the attached budget with the office of the Division of Local Government,
Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins
Urban Renewal Authority this 20th day of December A.D. 2011.
________________________________
Chairperson
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Secretary
EXHIBIT A
North College Urban Renewal Plan Area
Estimated Revenue:
Tax Increment Collections (Debt Service Fund) $ 913,815
Interest on Investments (Debt Service Funds) $ 9,500
Interest on Investments (Operating fund) $ 75,000
Total estimated Revenue for the URA $ 998,315
Expenses:
Operations and Maintenance $ 198,583
Consultant Fees associated with existing projects $ 20,000
Total Operational Costs $ 218,583
Annual Debt Service Payments
Loan #1 - Valley Steel (Completed in 2011) $ -
Loan #2 - North College Marketplace 2009 ($5M) $ 354,821
Loan #4 - JAX 2010 ($173K) $ 37,186
Loan #5 - NECCO 2011 ($326K) $ 9,827
Loan #6 - Kaufman and Robinson 2011 ($192K) $ 4,745
Loan #7 - North College Marketplace 2011 ($3M) $ 238,717
Total Debt Service Payments $ 645,296
Total 2012 Urban Renewal Authority Budget $ 863,879
Midtown Urban Renewal Plan Area (Prospect South TIF District) $ -
*no revenue projected in 2012
*no expenses projected in 2012
URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY
2012 BUDGET
Miles
Bender Mobile
Home
Bender Home Mobile
VICINITY MAP
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
Legend
City Limits
Parcel
PoudreRiver
Streets
ATTACHMENT 1
I STERLy UNE OF
I BNRR EASEMENT
I
LOT 1
300 NORTH
COLLEGE, LLC
RECEPTION
No. 2005000'-03
. to
N.
o•
.I
_t
.)
"' 00
0z
I
I
w I
c; a I
(NORTHSIDE AZTLAN
COMMUNITY CENTER)
361,142 sq.ft.
8.297 ac.
R=400.00' L=86.94'
6=12 27'11"
Chord Bearing=N61•o2·orw
Chord Length=86.77'
SOUTH UNE OF LOT 1
(NORTHSIDE AZTLAN
COMMUNITY CENTER)
g
{j)
I
I
I
I
I
I
<o'i
&
>-
SHEET OF 2
100 F3 E3 0 1:=:=:==100 31 Feet NORTH
( IN FEET )
1 Inch - 100ft.
l<DIGcii · ·..- lOIJ
ti)gt
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
..,tJO-.U-l n .y.f.A..l 'J-JO ..U-1 uu
32
11
32
11
11
12
25
10
25
11
18
36
28
33
13
26
17
25
19 23
27
25
26
14
33
34
10
35
30
33
29 28
20
33
36
16 17 16
32
20 21
26
24
17 13
17
21
32
12
35 36
13
12
28
34
25
17
15
32
28
33 34
20
35
16
16
10
29
35 34
29
15
36
13
27
22
12
27 29
36
12
14
26 27
29 25
24
10
15
14 13
12
15
32
21
14
26
18
28 27
22
16
23
16
31 33
18
15 18
30
10
22 19
17
30
28
31
30
18
11
31
10
30
14
31
18
19
15
34
27
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 23 24
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
3
27
22
11N 69W 11N 68W
10N 69W 10N 68W
11N 70W 11N 67W
12N 69W 12N 68W
10N 70W 10N 67W
12N 67W
12N 70W
LARIMER WELD
^
¦¨§25
¦¨§70
¦¨§76
Project Area Outline
SLB Mineral Estate
SLB Surface Ownership
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area-
City of Ft. Collins
Meadow Springs Ranch-
City of Ft. Collins
Red Mountain Open Space-
Larimer County
0 1 2
Miles
Mountains Energy by to Design Plains
Project Area
EXHIBIT B
to MOU
TOTAL $4,431
The $4,431 would be assessed in addition to the $48,531 that was originally charged for a
total of $52,962.