Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 06/25/2013 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 on the Comcast cable system Darin Atteberry, City Manager Steve Roy, City Attorney Wanda Nelson, City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. WORK SESSION June 25, 2013 6 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Oil and Gas Regulations Follow Up. (staff: Laurie Kadrich, Dan Weinheimer; 1 hour discussion) Council requested staff follow up on a number of issues raised regarding oil and gas regulations, including the preparation of an extension of Ordinance No. 145, 2012. Ordinance No. 145, 2012 established a Moratorium on the acceptance or processing of land use applications, permit applications, and other applications seeking approval to conduct Oil and Gas Extraction or related operations within the city or on City-owned lands. Council further requested a detailed analysis of the Operator Agreement approved with Prospect Energy to determine where local requirements exceed state or federal guidelines. Council asked for a timeline to be developed outlining the Initiative process started by “Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins”. The purpose of this work session is to discuss whether Council supports a formal consideration to extend Ordinance No. 145, 2012, and if so, which option(s) should be prepared for a Council meeting. An additional purpose is to consider what, if any, additional monitoring and/or inspections are needed, now that an Operator Agreement has been approved with Prospect Energy. 1/112 June 25, 2013 3. Consideration of a Regional Water Treatment Solutions Study with the Tri-Districts. (staff: Jon Haukaas, Lisa Voytko; 30-45 minutes) Staff proposes to enter into a joint study to examine options for regional water treatment solutions between the Tri-Districts and the City of Fort Collins. The scope of any cooperative solution is strictly limited to creating a business model of receiving raw water, treating it, and returning a finished potable water product to the member entities at a wholesale rate. Options range from remaining independent, additional intergovernmental agreements, combining facilities, or other options to be determined during the investigation phase of the study. Acquisition and control of water rights or raw water storage is not part of this discussion. The Fort Collins Utilities and the Districts would maintain separate control over their raw water and distribution systems. 4. City Council Work Plan 2013-2015. (staff: Darin Atteberry, Diane Jones; 45 minute discussion) At the May 3 and 4 City Council Planning Retreat, City Council reviewed the City’s Strategic Plan, which included the goals, the strategic objectives, and the key initiatives associated with each of the seven Key Outcomes. Councilmembers discussed questions and comments they had within each of the seven Key Outcomes. Additionally, Councilmembers suggested several ideas for new initiatives to consider as part of their work plan. Several sets of information are attached to this Agenda Item Summary. Among them are: • Staff response to Council’s questions and comments from the retreat • Initiatives suggested by Council that are or have been incorporated into the current Work Plan • Prospective New Initiatives mentioned at the retreat to consider incorporating into the Work Plan The purpose of this work session is to solidify the 2013-2015 Council Work Plan, at this point in time. While the Work Plan can, and will likely be adjusted as other policy issues arise over the Council’s two-year term, the key initiatives identified at this point in time serve as the Council’s foundational Work Plan for its term of office (2013-2015). 5. Other Business. 6. Adjournment. 2/112 DATE: June 25, 2013 STAFF: Laurie Kadrich Dan Weinheimer Pre-taped staff presentation: none WORK SESSION ITEM FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Oil and Gas Regulations Follow Up. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council requested staff follow up on a number of issues raised regarding oil and gas regulations, including the preparation of an extension of Ordinance No. 145, 2012. Ordinance No. 145, 2012 established a Moratorium on the acceptance or processing of land use applications, permit applications, and other applications seeking approval to conduct Oil and Gas Extraction or related operations within the city or on City-owned lands. Council further requested a detailed analysis of the Operator Agreement approved with Prospect Energy to determine where local requirements exceed state or federal guidelines. Council asked for a timeline to be developed outlining the Initiative process started by “Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins”. The purpose of this work session is to discuss whether Council supports a formal consideration to extend Ordinance No. 145, 2012, and if so, which option(s) should be prepared for a Council meeting. An additional purpose is to consider what, if any, additional monitoring and/or inspections are needed, now that an Operator Agreement has been approved with Prospect Energy. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council support formal consideration to extend Ordinance No. 145, 2012? If so, which option(s) should staff prepare for a Council meeting? 2. Does the Council support moving ahead with any of the monitoring and/or added inspection options? If so, should staff prepare a more detailed scope of work and budget for those options? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION PART ONE Moratorium Discussion Council requested that staff prepare an extension of Ordinance No. 145, 2012. Staff suggests the following two options be considered: 3/112 June 25, 2013 Page 2 • Option #1 Extend the moratorium by five (5) to seven (7) years and apply the extension to Prospect Energy in order to better determine the potential health impacts of various aspects of oil and gas operations. Exclude City-owned lands outside the City limits. • Option #2 Extend the moratorium to December 31, 2013 in order to re-evaluate Land Use Code (LUC) changes, engage the community in the LUC options, and codify any recommendations. Exclude City-owned lands outside the City limits. Note: If neither option is selected, the moratorium will expire July 31, 2013 at midnight. However, the City Code prohibiting hydraulic fracturing would still be in place so any new drilling activity (except for Prospect Energy) would need to secure an operator agreement with the city due to the likelihood that hydraulic fracturing would be used in the drilling process. Much work has been completed in developing appropriate regulations to minimize any adverse impacts that oil and gas exploration and extraction may have on the health, safety, and welfare of the City and its citizens including the following: • Staff testimony was given to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) rule-making process, resulting in greater set-backs from residential areas and water quality monitoring and sampling requirements. While the water quality rules went into effect in May, the setback rules are effective August 1, 2013 and can now be incorporated into Land Use Code amendments. • Local regulations were adopted by Council to prohibit the use hydraulic fracturing in the City limits and the permanent storage of waste products associated with hydraulic fracturing. • Extensive research into best management practices was incorporated into an operator agreement with the only local operator (Prospect Energy), resulting in greater health and safety protections for the residents of Fort Collins. • Staff is addressing citizen concerns by preparing a draft Ordinance for Council consideration, scheduled for the July 2, 2013 meeting, to enact reciprocal set-backs and buffering requirements for proposed residential developments in close proximity to existing oil and gas operation. The proposed Ordinance also contains disclosure, fencing and screening requirements. • Additional work is needed to incorporate the best management practices, updated COGCC regulations and other research into zoning and land use regulations. Part Two of this staff report provides a more detailed update of the work requested by Council during the time of the moratorium and the work completed. 4/112 June 25, 2013 Page 3 Monitoring and Inspection Discussion 1. Staff suggests that if additional monitoring and inspection are implemented it be done in stages. The first stage should be limited to the Fort Collins Field since that is where current production is and where expansion is likely to occur first. Staff provides the following options (see Attachment 1 for details) for consideration in the Fort Collins Field either separately or in combination: • Site assessment for water and air quality to establish current conditions N Estimated cost: $35,000 • Short or long-term air quality monitoring N Short-term estimated cost: $150,000 initial; $50,000 annually N Long-term estimated cost: $200,000-500,000 initial; $75,000-200,000 annually • A review of waste management practices N Estimated cost: $10,000-$15,000 • An inspection of the existing field for compliance with the Operator Agreement. N Estimated cost: $5,000-$10,000 • A third party contractor be placed on “retainer” to act as the City’s representative for the following: a. Visiting the site when the operator voluntarily calls to allow observation of certain activities; b. Accompany state inspectors on routine inspections; c. Be the City’s on-site representative for any emergence response actions. N Estimated cost: $200-500 per hour; costs for four (4) annual inspections would be $8,000 to $20,000. 2. Council directed staff to complete a thorough comparison of Prospect Energy’s Operator Agreement with state and federal regulations and/or guidelines to determine which Best Management Practices (BMPs) required by the Agreement meet or exceed other agencies requirements. The agreement contains forty-eight (48) general BMP requirements and exceeds state and federal guidelines in fifty-nine (59) areas. Twenty-two (22) of the guidelines that exceeded are in air quality standards. See Attachment 2 for details. Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins timeline Council further directed staff to prepare a timeline for the effort by “Citizens for Healthy Fort Collins” – see Attachment 3, prepared by the City Clerk’s office. 5/112 June 25, 2013 Page 4 PART TWO On December 18, 2012, Council adopted Ordinance No. 145, 2012, requesting staff to complete the work outlined below during the moratorium. The following is a summary of the work completed thus far. City Council direction for additional work during moratorium 1. Monitor the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s rulemaking process, as described above. Present City Council recommendations during the rulemaking process. Incorporate, as needed, any changes into proposed Land Use Code (LUC) amendments. Results Council’s recommendations were presented, although not adopted, (see details below). The Land Use Code (LUC) amendments are not completed. After nearly a year of stakeholder meetings, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) undertook rulemaking hearings on groundwater quality sampling and setbacks from November 2012 through January 2013. Fort Collins established party status for both rulemaking topics and submitted comments and testimony during the development of the new rules. The setback proceedings culminated with implementation of several measures aimed at mitigating the conflicts between oil and gas encroaching into more urban parts of Colorado. Among the steps taken was extending the distance a new well can be from a home, requiring meetings with affected property owners, giving local governments the option to have more time to comment on permit applications, and inclusion of nuisance mitigation measures. The COGCC implemented a uniform statewide standard of a 500 foot buffer between new oil and gas wells and existing homes. COGCC also established a 1,000-foot buffer zone where additional standards apply to any operator trying to drill within 1,000 feet from an existing home. Within this zone, operators must first appear for a hearing before the COGCC. Operators also must engage in expanded outreach efforts with nearby residents and take enhanced measures to minimize disruptions for all structures near a drilling rig. The setback rules go into effect August 1, 2013. Water sampling rules went into effect May 1, 2013 and require operators to sample up to four water wells within a half mile of a new oil and natural gas well prior to drilling, take two more samples each between six and 12 months of drilling, and conduct additional sampling five to six years after drilling has been completed. 2. Monitor COGCC and present City Council recommendations to any relevant bills considered during the 2013 State of Colorado Legislative Session, especially as any further legislation is considered related to air or water quality. Results During the 2013 General Assembly session, at least ten bills were introduced that would have increased regulations on the oil and gas industry. Only two of these bills were approved by the Assembly and signed into law by the Governor. The requirements of these bills are as follows: 6/112 June 25, 2013 Page 5 • HB13-1278 - Requires operators to notify state regulators and communities when there are spills of at least one (1) barrel of liquid. The prior threshold for reporting was five (5) barrels spilled. • SB13-202 - Directs the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to develop a plan for risk-based inspections and to then pilot this strategy. A risk-based inspection regime would focus regulatory efforts on processes or operations that carry the most risk of a spill or hazard. 3. Develop maps that address the following: • Identify the geological formations present within the City and the Growth Management Area. • Identify the locations of oil and shale gas deposits including the various formations • Map the locations of all wells within those areas and locations currently seeking permits to drill and include mineral ownership information where available. • Visually extend the setback criteria into the Growth Management Area. • Identify areas currently exempt from drilling, and areas that would be exempt if additional setback criteria were adopted by the COGCC. Results Partially completed. Staff found that the State Geologist and other publicly available maps did not include the area near Fort Collins. Experts at Colorado State University explained this discrepancy was because of the low likelihood of oil and gas activity in or immediately adjacent to Fort Collins. 4. Evaluate the impact of proposed regulations on existing and future oil and gas operations and consider code amendments as needed for addressing the differences in oil extraction compared to gas or methane production. Staff should specifically consider whether soil gas testing is needed for both. Results Not completed. 5. Update the Best Practice Matrix dated August 27, 2012 to include LUC Option A and B as well as more specific information on street maintenance, financial consequences, local impact fee, cultural resources, reclamation, and water source disclosure. Results Completed. 6. Propose an intergovernmental agreement with Larimer County that ensures any oil and gas activity within the GMA would be considered new development and as such annexed into the city and permitted under the city’s development process. 7/112 June 25, 2013 Page 6 Results Provided Larimer County with a copy of the approved Operator Agreement and invited further discussion regarding implementation. 7. Negotiate and present a proposal for adopting an operator agreement with Prospect Energy, the owner and operator of the Fort Collins Field. Results Completed. 8. Re-engage the boards and stakeholder groups and seek their recommendations regarding the proposed LUC amendments (Option A or B). Results: Not completed. 9. Provide additional information regarding surface use agreements, especially as the agreement relates to habitat fragmentation and restoration; include examples. Results The Natural Areas Department is developing a model surface use agreement that includes strict requirements relating to habitat fragmentation and restoration. 10. Identify areas that may be considered for a Designated Outside Activity Area, and have setbacks from oil and gas activities in alignment with High Density Area setbacks. Results None identified under current COGCC definitions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Monitoring and Inspection details 2. Operator Agreement Comparison Graph; State & Federal 3. Timeline for “Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins” 4. Powerpoint presentation 8/112 6/12/2013 Assessment and Inspection of Oil and Gas Operations in Fort Collins I. Fort Collins Field Task 1 – Baseline site assessment and initial inspection of Prospect Energy’s existing operations in the Fort Collins Field Description: The first part of this task involves the City conducting actual sampling of environmental parameters to determine if they have been impacted by present or past activity at existing well pad sites located within city limits. The second part of this task includes an initial inspection of Prospect Energy’s operations at these sites to determine compliance with the conditions of the Operator Agreement. The City may find it difficult to find contractors willing to perform compliance inspection services due to conflicts of interest with other clients. a. Water Quality and Waste Management: There are 2 parts to this task that require different types of technical expertise from a qualified consultant. i. Part 1 - assesses actual groundwater conditions and involves a comprehensive review of site hydrogeology and selection of 8 existing groundwater wells for sampling of the COGCC Rule 609 parameters plus dissolved metals. The advantage of this approach is that relevant data on actual site conditions is gathered and analyzed and is available for public dissemination. In addition to complying with industry best practices for groundwater sampling, this task would include a data quality review and a final report of investigation results and is estimated to cost $25,000. It is not likely that there will be conflict of interest issues associated with a contractor providing these services. ii. Part 2 - assesses waste management practices and involves selecting a consultant with RCRA inspection experience of oil and gas sites and familiarity with COGCC rules and the local Operator Agreement. A rough estimate of costs is from $10,000 to $15,000 for one inspection. It would also be beneficial to ensure the inspections are acceptable to COGCC if enforcement actions are required. Initial industry inquiries suggest this will present a conflict of interest for many contractors. b. Air Quality: Baseline assessment and initial inspection of oil and gas operations within city limits involves sampling, visiting the sites, and reviewing pertinent documents. i. Part 1 - A baseline assessment of air quality could include a review and analysis of existing air monitoring data within the vicinity to determine background air quality conditions. It could also include a range of air sampling and monitoring methods from representative grab samples with during specific activities to longer term or continuous monitoring with ATTACHMENT 1 9/112 2 6/12/2013 stationary, portable, or mobile sites located near residences around oil and gas well pad sites. Other considerations include conducting a short-term fence line monitoring study for VOCs and HAPs, or participating in the Front Range study being conducted by CSU. Estimated costs for this part range from $10,000 to $250,000 depending on the goals and objectives of the monitoring. Please see Attachment A – Air Monitoring Options for more information. ii. Part 2 – An initial inspection of existing operations with regard to air quality would involve selecting a contractor with knowledge of state and federal air quality regulation and permitting requirements, familiarity with the air quality provisions of the Operator Agreement, and expertise in air pollution control for the oil and gas industry. The inspection would include both onsite observation of operations and equipment and review of applicable permits to determine the status of compliance with provisions related to air quality. The cost of an initial inspection could range from $5,000 - $10,000. c. Other Areas for Site Assessment and Inspection: The operator agreement includes requirements for best management practices in several areas in addition to air and water. Initial assessment and inspection of the following areas should be included in this task, and will likely add to the costs described above: i. Cultural and Historic Resources ii. Emergency Preparedness iii. Natural Resources iv. Noise v. Pipelines and Flowlines vi. Transportation and Circulation vii. Weed Control, reclamation, rehabilitation viii. Visual and Access control – fencing, screening, color Task 2 – Contractor services for City representation at site visits, inspections and emergency responses in the Fort Collins Field Description: This task includes procuring contractor services to perform the following services on behalf of the City. The City will need to develop a scope of work and a request for proposal and provide budget support for this task. Costs for the tasks below will likely be based on an hourly rate and may range from $200 to $500 per hour (or based on a negotiated per visit charge). Initial industry inquiries indicate that the City may find it difficult to find contractors willing to perform compliance inspection services or serve as the City’s representative due to conflicts of interest with other clients.  Represent the City at visits to oil and gas well pad sites to observe operations as voluntarily requested by the Operator, 10/112 3 6/12/2013  Accompany state agency (COGCC and CDPHE) and Larimer County Department of Health staff on routine inspections at well pad sites in the Fort Collins Field,  Represent the City at any emergency response actions on well pad sites in the Fort Collins Field  Provide technical expertise to the City in the following areas: a. Water Quality: Familiarity with federal, state, and local regulations (e.g., Operator Agreement) regarding water quality protection. Oil and gas industry experience and expertise in groundwater and soil gas sampling procedures, laboratory methods, and hydrogeology are required. b. Waste Management: Familiarity with federal, state, and local regulations (e.g., Operator Agreement) regarding waste management. Oil and gas industry experience and RCRA inspection expertise required. c. Air Quality: Expertise in air quality requirements for the oil and gas sector, FLIR camera certification, ability to conduct SUMA canister air sampling and other methods for air monitoring. II. Undeveloped Area (UDA) Task 3 – Baseline site assessment and initial inspection of Prospect Energy’s future development and operations in the UDA a. Water Quality: This task involves hiring a qualified consultant to provide oversight of the Operators’ baseline sampling of groundwater at new well locations. It involves conducting a permit review, providing oversight of field sampling procedures, conducting a data quality review of laboratory results, and providing a report that summarizes the Operator’s compliance with Rule 609 and Operator Agreement requirements. The estimated combined costs for tasks a. and b. of this section are $8,000. b. Waste Management: Oversight of compliance with state and local (Operator Agreement) requirements for waste management are primarily preventive in nature when a new oil and gas site is first constructed and begins production. This task would involve hiring a qualified consultant to complete the following tasks: i. Evaluate applicant compliance with USEPA SPCC Regulations @ 40 CFR 112. ii. Evaluate Applicant compliance with Oversight of Applicant/City requirements for spill control. iii. Provide initial report on spill control compliance. 11/112 4 6/12/2013 The estimated combined costs for tasks a. and b. of this section are $8,000. c. Air Quality: This task is essentially the same as that described under Task 1 part b. Please see Attachment A for additional air monitoring recommendations. Task 4 – Contractor services for City representation at site visits, inspections and emergency responses for future development in the UDA This task is essentially the same as Task 2, except that it applies to the UDA and includes additional air monitoring. 12/112 5 6/12/2013 Attachment A – Air Monitoring Options A variety of ambient air quality monitoring equipment and methods are available for measuring air pollutants from inexpensive grab samplers and portable equipment that can measure pollutants from a specific activity or a particular point in time to sophisticated systems that meet federal reference methods and can provide continuous measurements. The selection of air monitoring equipment and methods at or near oil and gas operations is highly dependent on the goals and objectives of the air monitoring study and the ultimate end use of the data. The costs are also dependent on the type and number of pollutants to be measured and the method of analyzing the sample. Examples of air monitoring and sampling systems with typical costs and purposes are described below. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of all air monitoring systems available that could be deployed at oil and gas development sites, but rather provides a cursory examination of the range of available system and typical costs and purposes. Episodic Monitoring Purpose: The purpose of this type of monitoring is to gather immediate or short term data with which to make decisions regarding worker exposure, emergency response, or evacuations. This type of monitoring can also be useful for determining the types and concentrations of pollutants emitted during a specific event or activity. This equipment can also be used to detect leaks and effectiveness of control equipment. An example of this type of monitoring for oil and gas activities within Fort Collins would include deployment of SUMA canisters and hand held hydrogen sulfide monitors during a well completion that lasts for 7 days. Limitations: The data obtained from this type of monitoring is not typically used for determining impacts to human health from long term exposures or risk assessments. It is also not typically used in long term trend analyses or air modeling studies. Equipment: Equipment used for this purpose includes vacuum canisters, hand held monitors, grab sampling bags, and personal monitors. Costs: Costs are provided for an example scenario at and oil and gas well pad site that involves measuring hydrogen sulfide and up to six organic compounds using SUMA canisters and hand held monitors for a 7-day well completion event: $5,000 - $10,000 Short-term Monitoring Purpose: The purpose of this type of monitoring is to assess the types, sources, and concentrations of air pollutants in an area over a defined period of time such as a season, quarter, or year. A system of portable or mobile monitors can be deployed around a study area to measure concentrations of air pollutants. The data can be used to determine which pollutants may be emitted at levels of concern, where the location of highest impact may be, and depending on the methodology used can be used in health impact assessments. 13/112 6 6/12/2013 Limitations: Depending on the methodology used, this system may not be appropriate for determining compliance with emission standards or for long term trends, risk assessments, or modeling studies. Equipment: Typically, a monitoring system is designed for this purpose that includes meteorological monitoring equipment as well as portable or mobile air monitors for specific pollutants. An example of a system that might be appropriate near oil and gas activities in Fort Collins would include:  Multiple portable monitoring stations equipped with hydrogen sulfide sensors  methane/non‐methane detectors at each station that could trigger deployment of a SUMA canister at high non‐methane concentrations  Meteorological equipment that includes wind speed and direction  Real time reporting of data to a publicly accessible web based viewing system Costs: Estimated costs for a system that could be deployed around the Fort Collins field with up to three stations as described above: initial cost = $150,000, annual operation and analysis cost = $50,000 Continuous Long-term Monitoring Purpose: This type of monitoring provides continuous monitoring data over a long period of time typically 3 or more years. This is typically used for regulatory compliance with emission standards and ambient air quality standards. Depending on the methodology used, the data can be used in modeling and human health risk assessment studies. The data can be used for long term trends analyses and for determining the effectiveness of air quality improvement strategies. Limitations: This type of system can be cost prohibitive for some purposes and requires significant operation and maintenance investment. Some systems require certified operators, calibration equipment and procedures, and sophisticated sample and data analysis. Equipment: A range of stationary and mobile systems are available for this purpose. Systems include stationary monitors that comply with federal reference methods, compact air monitoring stations, and light emitting fence-line monitoring systems. These are typically multi-pollutant monitoring systems that include meteorological monitoring and can measure criteria pollutants, hazardous air pollutants, and a range of volatile organics in real time. This type of system may be appropriate for the City to consider around the undeveloped area (UDA) to establish baseline concentrations of potential air pollutants of concern and long term trends in concentrations during development of that field. This system could also be useful in determining contributions from other sources of air pollutants such as major industrial sources and oil and gas activities in Weld County during certain meteorological events. Costs: Estimated costs for a stationary monitoring system to assess regional concentrations of air pollutants of concern including ozone and some hydrocarbons around the UDA: initial costs = $200,000 - $500,000, annual operation and analysis costs = $75,000 - $200,000. 14/112 ATTACHMENT 2 15/112 Attachment #2 Oil and Gas Operations Comparison Table – Operator Agreement compared with Federal and State Regulations Updated June 11, 2013 Note: This comparison matrix only highlights the requirements set forth in the operator agreement with Prospect Energy. Additional federal and state regulations apply to their operation. More information, and available resources, can be found at the City’s Oil and Gas Website at www.fcgov.com/oilandgas. Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 1. Regulations Requires that most stringent state or federal regulations apply. N/A Meets 2. Setbacks for new wells Must meet the COGCC requirements for setbacks; in the UDA, a minimum setback of 1,000’ is required on the south and west borders. N/A Exceeds Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and Clean Water Act (CWA) all include siting requirements that protect water bodies. Statewide uniform setback – 500’ from building units; 1,000’ from institutional buildings 3. Conceptual Review Requires pre‐submittal meeting with City staff at least 30 days prior to entering state permitting process. N/A Exceeds Not applicable because this is a local requirement. Not applicable 4. Mailed Notice Requires notification of surface owner, all landowners within ½ mile of the operation, neighborhood organizations and anyone within 500’ of a proposed gathering line. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation Requires notification to surface owners within 500’ of the proposed operation 5. Posted Notice Requires a sign be posted on the property. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 16/112 Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 2 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 6. Neighborhood Meetings Must be conducted in accordance with City standards. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation If an operation is proposed within 1,000 feet of a building the operator must meet with anyone who asks. 7. Notification to the City and the public regarding commencement of operations N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation Operators must notify emergency dispatch and the Local Government Designee (LGD) in the case of flaring. 8. Inspections Added requirement that the City inspect the operation at any time, with 24 hours advanced notice (see also Emergency Response section). N/A Exceeds RCRA, SDWA, CWA establish environmental protection requirements. COGCC and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) conduct compliance inspections and enforcement under state rules that meet federal regulations. 9. Containment Berms Requires steel‐rim berms around all tanks and separators that must be lined. Tertiary containment is required when within 500’ up‐ gradient of a surface water body. N/A Exceeds RCRA sets secondary containment requirements for storage vessels. Requires new wells to have steel‐rim berms and secondary containment liner within five hundred (500) feet of building units after August 1. 10. Closed Loop Pitless Systems No pits are allowed. N/A Exceeds Pits regulated under RCRA Pits allowed under Rule 902 Pits not allowed if VOC emissions >5 tons/year and located within 1,320’ of building unit under Rule 805.b.(2).C 11. Anchoring Requires anchoring of equipment. At new wells, guy lines must be identified with a bright color and be in certain locations. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation Only requires anchoring in sensitive areas, e.g., in geologic hazards and floodplains (Rule 603). 12. Burning No open burning. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation Burning may be allowed but must comply Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 3 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 14. Chemical Disclosure and Storage Requires uploading of chemicals to Frac Focus and no permanent storage. N/A Exceeds RCRA requires chemical disclosure and maintenance of MSDS on site. State requires chemicals to be uploaded to Frac Focus (www.fracfocus.org) for public disclosure on any new well that uses hydraulic fracturing. 15. Color Requires facilities to blend with the surrounding landscape. Applies to existing wells when repainting occurs. Exceeds Meets No equivalent regulation COGCC has the same regulation as the City. 16. Cultural and Historical Resource Protection Must report discovery of a resource and mitigate any disturbances. N/A Exceeds Without federal funding or federal permits, no equivalent regulation is known to staff. No equivalent regulation 17. Discharge valves Requires open‐ended discharge valves on all tanks, pipelines and containers to be secured when a site is unattended or accessible to the public. N/A Exceeds RCRA includes closed container regulations. State enforces federal requirements for closed container requirements. 18. Dust Suppression Produced water cannot be used for dust suppression; must avoid suppression within 300’ of a waterbody unless the suppressant is water. Exceeds Exceeds Produced water not classified as hazardous waste so could be used for dust suppression if allowed by the state. Allowed under 900 series Rules 19. Electric equipment The City stresses the use of Electric Equipment at all sites; the state specifies a certain distance at which additional measures must be taken. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation known to staff Oil and Gas Facilities with engines or motors Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 4 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 20. Emergency Preparedness Plan Requires contact information, notification, training, risk assessments, response plans, and outreach to surrounding neighbors. Exceeds Exceeds Similar standards to what is proposed, but additional community engagement in the Operator Agreement. Similar standards that are used at the federal level are employed at the State level. 21. Air Quality (See below) 21.a General Duty to Minimize Emissions N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.b High‐Low Pressure Vapor Recovery Unit (HLP‐VRU) on new wells in the UDA Recovers methane and other production gases. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.d No uncontrolled venting of methane No uncontrolled venting regardless of well type. N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO with exceptions for safety and feasibility for natural gas wells CDPHE Regulation No. 6 Part A 21.d All gas vapors shall be captured to the extent feasible N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.d Vapor capture equipment shall operate at 98% efficiency or greater N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO requires 95% on some equipment at natural gas wells CDPHE Rule 805.b(2) and CDPHE Reg. 7 requires 90‐95% control depending on equipment type and uncontrolled emissions 21.e Capture and beneficial use of natural gas is preferred over flaring N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.e Flaring shall be continuously monitored N/A Exceeds 40 CFR 60.18(f) No equivalent regulation 21.e No venting of gas may occur except under COGCC Rule 805(B)(3)(b) or Rule 912 N/A Meets No equivalent regulation COGCC Rule 805 and Rule 912 allow venting for safety and emergencies 19/112 Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 5 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 21.f.1 Flare shall be operated with natural gas N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.f.1 Flare shall be operated with 98% or high Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) destruction efficiency (DE) N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO requires 95% on some equipment at natural gas wells. COGCC requires 90‐95% control required depending on the source 21.f.2 Flare shall be designed and operated in compliance with 40 CFR 60.18(f) and CDPHE Reg. 7 Section XVIIB N/A Meets Complies with EPA Federal regulation Complies with CDPHE regulation 21.f.3 The flare shall be operated with a flame present at all times when emissions may be vented to it, pursuant to the methods specified in 40 CFR 60.18(f). N/A Meets Complies with EPA Federal regulation 40 CFR 60.18 Complies with CDPHE Reg. 7 Section XVII.B.1.c 21.f.4 Ignition Systems. An automatic pilot system shall be used when feasible. Other ignition systems may include the installation and operation of a telemetry alarm system or an on‐site visible indicator showing proper function. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation CDPHE Reg. 7 Section XVII.B.1.c requires no visible emissions and observation of proper function 21.g Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) Requires a LDAR program according to EPA Method 21. LDAR shall be performed on newly installed equipment, and then on an annual basis. N/A Exceeds EPA 40 CFR Part Subpart Vva – LDAR Requirements for several industries that emit VOCs COGCC Rule 604.c.(2).f – leak detection plan required if within designated setback location 21.g A Forward‐Looking Infrared (FLIR) camera shall be used as the preferred implementation method of EPA Method 21 as available from the state; if unavailable, other methods shall be used in compliance with this method. N/A Exceeds EPA Method 21 40 – CFR Part 60, Appendix A‐7 and Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 6 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 21.g Upon request from the City, the Company shall implement EPA Method 21 upon additional concerns N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.g At least once per year, the Company shall notify the City prior to FLIR camera use in case the City wishes to observe the method N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.h One Time Baseline Air Quality Monitoring N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.i One Time Air Sampling During Well Completion N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.j Ongoing Air Quality Monitoring Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.k Monitoring in Response to Emergencies or Complaints The City may require the Company to conduct additional air monitoring as needed to respond to emergency events such as spill, process upsets, or accidental releases or in response to odor complaints in City Limits Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 21.l Air Quality Action Days Requires operator to develop temporary response actions to poor quality air days N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 22.a Green Completions. Gas gathering lines, separators, and sand traps capable of supporting green completions as described in COGCC Rule 805 shall be installed at any location at which commercial quantities of gas are reasonably expected to be produced based on existing adjacent wells within one (1) mile or well in the Fort Collins Field, whichever is greater. N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO for natural gas wells COGCC 604.c.(2).c and COGCC 805.b(3) – same requirements for wells located within a Designated Setback Location, effective August 2013 21/112 Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 7 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 22.b Uncontrolled venting is prohibited Uncontrolled venting prohibited regardless of well location. N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO for natural gas wells, exceptions for safety and feasibility COGCC 604.c.(2).c – same requirements as for wells located within a Designated Setback Location effective August 2013 22.c.1‐4 Temporary flowback flaring and oxidizing equipment Requires specific equipment regardless of where well is located and where feasible. N/A Exceeds 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOO for natural gas wells, specifies similar or equivalent equipment for reduced emission completions. COGCC 604.c.(2).c – same requirements as for wells located within a Designated Setback Location effective August 2013 23. Exhaust Requires exhaust to be vented up or in a direction away from residences. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation Exhaust from all engines, motors, coolers and other mechanized equipment shall be vented in a direction away from all building units (Rule 802.e) 24. Fencing Requires permanent fencing around the operation, which must be visually interesting. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation Required in high density areas, to protect public welfare, to minimize environmental impacts, or to protect cropland (Rule 603 and 902). 25. Flammable Material All land within 25’ of a tank or other structure must be kept free of weeds or rubbish. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation Must comply with local fire codes and control fire hazards. 26. Floodplains Must comply with Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code, including the prohibition of hazardous material critical facilities in the 100‐year floodplain. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation for critical facilities, though SDWA establish basis for siting Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 8 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 27. Water Quality (see below) 27. Sample “Available Water Sources” N/A Meets CWA, RCRA, and SDWA establish authority and enforcement requirements for water quality sampling. Water wells registered with CO Division of Water Resources preferred. Also allows permitted or adjudicated springs or monitoring wells 27. Number of water sources sampled N/A Meets Federal regulations establish authority and enforcement but do not spell out operational details. Cap of 4 water sources 27. Location of water sources sampled N/A Meets Federal regulations establish authority and enforcement but do not spell out operational details. Located within ½ mile radius of proposed well 27. Orientation of sampling locations N/A Meets Federal regulations establish authority and enforcement but do not spell out operational details. Both up‐gradient and down‐gradient sampling required 27. Multiple identified aquifers N/A Meets Federal regulations establish authority and enforcement but do not spell out operational details. Sampling of multiple defined aquifers (e.g., deepest and shallowest) 23/112 Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 9 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 27. Timing of sampling City requires additional sampling intervals after well completion. N/A Exceeds Federal regulations establish authority and enforcement but do not spell out operational details. 1 baseline sampling event prior to site construction 2 post‐completion sampling events (one between 6 and 12 months after and one between 60 and 72 months after) 27. Sampling procedures and analysis City requires additional parameters to be tested. N/A Exceeds CWA and SDWA are the foundation for all subsequent rules and regulations at the state and local level. Baseline sampling for drinking water analytes, dissolved and gaseous petroleum hydrocarbons, and microbiological parameters Post‐completion sampling for same parameters as baseline sampling Additional stable isotope analysis of methane performed if thresholds for methane exceeded 28. Landscaping Requires use of existing well pads in the Fort Collins Field, minimizing impacts to existing vegetation, and the development of a Visual Mitigation is required for any new wells. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 29. Lighting Requires down‐lighting except during drilling and completion and that a lighting plan be submitted. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation Lighting cannot trespass more than 1000’ off the operation site, as of August 1. 30. Maintenance of Machinery Routine field maintenance cannot occur within 300’ of a water body. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 31. Mud Tracking Not allowed to track mud or debris onto public streets; if mud is tracked, must be cleaned immediately. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 10 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 32. Natural Resources Requires that all natural habitats and features as identified by the City be accounted for, protected, as if necessary, mitigated in the site analysis and design; not just the resources outlined by the state, e.g., winter migration corridors for mule deer, bald eagle nests, etc. N/A Exceeds Must comply with Endangered Species Act and other federal regulations The state requires certain regulations for operating within sensitive natural areas, all of which would apply to Prospect Energy, e.g., the requirement to install wildlife crossovers if open trenches are left open for more than 5 days and are greater than 5’ in width, can also trigger consultation with the Division of Parks and Wildlife. 33. Noise Mitigation A noise mitigation plan must be submitted; requires noise mitigation measures to be constructed whenever the operation is at the edge of either an existing residential development or area zoned for future residential development. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation known to staff Similar regulations to City Code. 34. Pipelines Requires pipelines to be certain distances away from buildings and natural features and align within existing rights‐of‐way whenever feasible. Must also bore to minimize impacts. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation known to staff Rule 1100 Series contains pipeline regulations but does not require prescribed setbacks or suggesting boring to protect sensitive areas. 35. Recordation of flowlines Requires flowlines, e.g., transmission and gathering lines, to be recorded with the County Recorder. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation known to staff Requires that the flowlines can be located in the field, but not recorded. 36. Recreational Activity Standards Cannot degrade any existing recreational standards. Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 11 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 38. Removal of equipment All well drilling and completion equipment must be removed from the site within 30 days of well completion. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation Requires equipment to be removed after 90 days. 39. Soil Gas Monitoring May be used to assess well casing integrity and potential for methane gas migration N/A Exceeds CWA, SDWA, and RCRA establish authority for environmental sampling to protect human health and the environment. Only required for coalbed methane. 40. Spills Federal and state regulations apply. Also requires notification of the City and the property owner if the spill has the potential to affect a surface water body or water well. N/A Exceeds All federal laws apply All state laws apply 41. Stormwater Control Plan City standards apply for stormwater control. Exceeds Exceeds SDWA establishes authority for stormwater regulations. Must meet State and Federal regulations related to stormwater. 42. Temporary access roads. Requires that any temporary roads be reclaimed and re‐vegetated. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation 43. Trailers Allows trailers or offices on the site during active drilling and well completion. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 44. Transportation and circulation A Transportation Impact Analysis be submitted to the City during the Conceptual Review of the project; also requires proposed traffic and access routes as well as a bond to cover any damage that occurred during the well drilling and completion phase of the site. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation known to staff Must comply with state vehicle and traffic laws and if a local government requires, a traffic plan must coordinated with the local jurisdiction (Rule 334 and Rule 604). 26/112 Attachment #2 Comparison Matrix – Operator Agreement to Federal and State Regulations 12 Operator Agreement Requirement Does the Requirement Meet or Exceed State and Federal Regulations? Federal Regulations State/COGCC Existing Regulations Wells New Wells 45. Wastewater and Waste Management No land treatment or disposal of drilling muds is allowed. A Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC) is required. Exceeds Exceeds Drilling mud not classified as hazardous waste under RCRA, so states can determine disposal options. RCRA establishes authority for SPCC plans, but a SPCC plan not required for this facility because of small size. Disposal of drilling muds allowed under RCRA E&P Exemption. A SPCC plan not required for this facility because of small size. 46. Water Supply Requires disclosure of water source and details on how the water will be transported. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 47. Weed Control Responsible for ongoing weed control at all operations in compliance with the Larimer County Noxious Weed Management Plan. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation Similar regulations as in the Operator Agreement. 48. Insurance Requires $10,000,000 per occurrence liability insurance during drilling and completion. After completion, requires $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate, and general liability of $5,000,000. N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation The state has numerous levels of insurance and bonds, including a $1,000,000 general liability throughout the life of the operation. 27/112 ATTACHMENT 3 Time Line for Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins Initiative Petition May 28, 2013 Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins (CHFC) files notice of intent to circulate an initiative petition. June 6, 2013 CHFC withdraws May 28 notice of intent and files a new notice of intent with a new initiated ordinance. CHFC submits petition sections for approval as to form; City Clerk approves form of petition. CHFC has 60 days to collect signatures. July 16, 2013 First Reading of Ordinance calling a special election on November 5 in anticipation of successful initiative petition effort. August 5, 2013 Deadline for CHFC to submit petitions. Clerk has 5 working days to examine petitions. August 12, 2013 Deadline for Clerk to finish examination of petitions. August 20, 2013 Second Reading of Ordinance calling election. If petition is found sufficient upon first examination, petition is presented to the Council to adopt or place before voters. August 27, 2013 Deadline to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with Larimer County for conduct of election. September 6, 2013 Deadline to certify ballot language to Larimer County. November 5, 2013 Special Election (as a part of Larimer County Coordinated Mail Ballot Election). 28/112 1 1 Oil and Gas Regulations Follow Up Laurie Kadrich Director, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Dan Weinheimer Policy and Project Manager Lindsay Ex Senior Environmental Planner June 25, 2013 Council Work Session 2 Items for City Council Consideration: 1. Does Council support a formal consideration to extend Ordinance No. 145? If so, which option? • Option #1: Extend 5-7 years, apply to Prospect Energy and conduct a health impact study, exclude City-owned lands, or • Option #2: Extend to December 31, 2013 in order to re-evaluate Land Use Code (LUC) changes, engage the community in the LUC options and codify any recommendations. ATTACHMENT 4 29/112 2 3 Items for City Council Consideration: 2. Does the Council support moving ahead with any monitoring and/or added inspection options? If so, should staff prepare a more detailed scope of work and budget for those options? – Site assessment for water and air quality establishing current condition, – Short or Long-term air quality monitoring – Review of waste management practices, – Inspect the current field for compliance to the Operator Agreement, and/or – Hire a third party contractor 4 Third Party Contractor: Third party contractor would:  Visit the site during certain activities  Accompany the State Inspectors  Be the on-site City representative in emergency situations  In addition to the Poudre Fire Authority and the Office of Emergency Management  Looking for any Operator Agreement concerns 30/112 3 5 Costs of Monitoring and Inspection: 1. Establish current conditions: • $35,000 2. Review waste management: • $10-15,000 3. Inspect field for compliance with O/A: • $5-10,000 4. Hire a third party contractor: • $8-20,000 6 Short or Long-term Air Quality Monitoring: 1. Short-term: defined period of time, season, quarter or year • $150,000 initial • $50,000 annually 2. Long-term: continuous over a long period of time typically 3 or more years • $200-500,000 initial • $75-200,000 annually 31/112 4 7 Comparison: Operator Agreement to State & Federal guidelines: • The Operator Agreement exceeds guidelines in 59 areas: – 22 in Air Quality – 7 in Water Quality – 13 in Earth Quality – 10 in Quality Information – 7 in Nuisance Control 8 Air & Water Quality Air Quality • Leak detection and repair program ensures equipment operates without leaks • FLIR camera sees leaks human eye cannot • Soil gas monitoring is required to test for methane Water Quality • No operations allowed in 100-year floodplain • Required disclosure of water source and water transportation • Must test all known aquifers • Added sampling locations and more often 32/112 5 9 Earth & Quality Information Earth Quality • Steel-rimmed containment berms • Natural habitats and features must be protected • No on-site disposal of drilling mud allowed • Sites must minimize impact to existing vegetation Quality Information • Posted notification on site • Subscription notification available • Mailed notice within ½ mile of location • Neighborhood meetings • Chemical disclosure required • Emergency plan required 10 Nuisance Control: • Set-backs are 500’ or greater from existing and new residential areas • Electric equipment required to minimize noise and air emissions • Lighting must remain on-site unless during drilling for safety reasons • Vehicles cannot track mud offsite • Traffic plan required • Noise mitigation plan required 33/112 6 11 Timeline for Citizen Initiative: • 7-16-13 First Reading of Ordinance calling a special election in anticipation of a successful initiative • 8-5-13 Petitions must be submitted by this date • 8-12-13 Clerk must complete petition review by this date • 8-20-13 Second Reading of an Ordinance calling for a special election if petition is found sufficient • 11-5-13 Special Election – mailed ballot 12 Items for City Council Consideration: 1. Does Council support a formal consideration to extend Ordinance No. 145? If so, which option? • Option #1: Extend 5-7 years, apply to Prospect Energy and conduct a health impact study, exclude City-owned lands, or • Option #2: Extend to December 31, 2013 in order to re-evaluate Land Use Code (LUC) changes, engage the community in the LUC options and codify any recommendations. 34/112 7 13 Items for City Council Consideration: 2. Does the Council support moving ahead with any monitoring and/or added inspection options? If so, should staff prepare a more detailed scope of work and budget for those options? – Site assessment for water and air quality establishing current condition, – Short or long-term air quality monitoring – Review of waste management practices, – Inspect the current field for compliance to the Operator Agreement, and/or – Hire a third party contractor 35/112 DATE: June 25, 2013 STAFF: Jon Haukaas Lisa Voytko Pre-taped staff presentation: available at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php WORK SESSION ITEM FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Consideration of a Regional Water Treatment Solutions Study with the Tri-Districts. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff proposes to enter into a joint study to examine options for regional water treatment solutions between the Tri-Districts and the City of Fort Collins. The scope of any cooperative solution is strictly limited to creating a business model of receiving raw water, treating it, and returning a finished potable water product to the member entities at a wholesale rate. Options range from remaining independent, additional intergovernmental agreements, combining facilities, or other options to be determined during the investigation phase of the study. Acquisition and control of water rights or raw water storage is not part of this discussion. The Fort Collins Utilities and the Districts would maintain separate control over their raw water and distribution systems. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Is Council interested in pursuing a joint study of regional water treatment solutions between Fort Collins Utilities and the Tri-District Water agencies? 2. Are there additional issues Council feels should be resourced as part of the study? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City and the Tri-Districts (comprised of East Larimer County Water District, Fort Collins- Loveland Water District, and North Weld County Water District) each operate a water treatment plant, located next to each other on LaPorte Avenue. Both plants treat the same raw water sources, although there are different blends available, depending on the water rights and time of the year, and distribute potable water to their customers. In addition, the City has the ability to share potable water with North Weld and Fort Collins-Loveland through interconnections in its distribution system, using long-standing agreements. While regionalization has been discussed many times in the previous 30 years, there is a renewed interest in determining the cost benefit for regional opportunities available to the utilities. Growth of the Districts’ service area, excess capacity in the City’s facility, and costs of providing water are the driving forces for this work. Capital costs associated with new expansion, aging infrastructure, and efficiencies of operations and maintenance has led to the desire to look at the financial issues associated with collaboration. 36/112 June 25, 2013 Page 2 To that end, the Regional Water Cooperation Committee (RWCC), a committee composed of managers from each utility, developed a scope of work to request a consultant to assist with the decision making process. While the four entities agree in principle that collaborations between the utilities can only mean increased efficiencies, there has not been a thorough analysis of the financial implications of regionalization. CONSULTANT PROPOSALS The RWCC developed institutional options of regionalization, including: 1. Stay the same (status quo) 2. Enhanced collaboration through Sales Agreements, but remain separate entities 3. Merger of treatment facilities, similar to an Authority model 4. Other option as determined by the consultant The committee conducted a rigorous request for qualifications from nine firms, and short-listed three, who then provided more detailed proposals. The apparent preferred consultant, Arcadis/Red Oak Consulting, provided a strong proposal that identified its approach through stakeholder engagement, integration of a work plan and analysis of options. In the financial analysis it would provide: 1. Assessment of value and accounting of assets from the utilities 2. Development of fair and equitable wholesale and retail cost allocation 3. Present worth and future cost projects for alternatives It was unanimously agreed by the RWCC that a third-party analysis was critical to determining the financial piece of enhanced collaboration, particularly when evaluating regionalization through an authority model. In such a structure, the Authority would own, operate and maintain the two water treatment facilities, and sell the drinking water to the four members (City and three Districts) through wholesale rate sale agreements. The envisioned Authority would be a separate entity governed by a board with representation of the four utilities (similar to the Platte River Power Authority and/or the Poudre Fire Authority models). The utilities would maintain separate control over their raw water and their distribution systems. The governance would require equal representation among the entities. COST The initial fee for the consultant providing these services is $220,185. This fee would be split evenly between the four entities ($55,000 each). The Boards of the Tri-District entities have approved the expenditure of their shares of the cost. Upon approve of this expenditure by the City Council for the Fort Collins portion, the RWCC will negotiate with Red Oak to finalize the details of the scope of work. FUTURE ACTION REQUIRED The investigation and analysis phases of the project are scheduled to be complete in the fall of 2013. Staff proposes to hold a joint meeting of the City Council and District Boards to review the findings and determine the next course of action. 37/112 June 25, 2013 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Service Area Map 2. Powerpoint presentation 38/112 CollinsFort West Water District Loveland Fort Collins Water District ELCO District Water SWuantseert District Fort Utilities Collins (Water) Spring Water District Canyon C ARPENTER HARMONY MULBERRY TRI L BY SHIELDS DRAKE TIMBERLINE HORSETOOTH KECH T ER VINE PROSPECT MOUNTAIN VISTA COUNTY R O AD 5 4 G COUNT Y ROAD 9 COLLEGE TAFT HILL LEMAY OVERLAND COUNTY ROAD 5 Water District Service Areas CITY GEOGRAPHIC These and were map OF not products FORT designed and INFORMATION COLLINS or all intended underlying for general data SYSTEM are use developed by members MAP for use of PRODUCTS the by the public. City of The Fort City Collins makes for no its representation internal purposes or only, warranty dimensions, as to contours, its accuracy, property timeliness, boundaries, or completeness, or placement and of location in particular, of any its map accuracy features in ther labeling eon. or THE displaying CITY OF FORT COLLINS PARTICULAR MAKES PURPOSE, NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OF MERCHANTABILITY OR IMPLIED, WITH OR RESPECT WARRANTY TO THESE FOR FITNESS MAP PRODUCTS OF USE FOR OR THE UNDERLYING FAULTS, and assumes DATA. Any all responsibility users of these of map the use products, thereof, map and applications, further covenants or data, and accepts agrees them to hold AS the IS, City WITH harmless ALL from made and this against information all damage, available. loss, Independent or liability arising verification from any of all use data of contained this map product, herein should in consideration be obtained of by the any City's users having of these liability, products, whether or direct, underlying indirect, data. or consequential, The City disclaims, which and arises shall or not may be arise held from liable these for any map and products all damage, or the loss, use thereof or by any person or entity. Printed: March 21, 2013 Water District Service Areas Fort Collins Utilities (Water) Fort Collins Loveland Water District West Fort Collins Water District ELCO Water District Spring Canyon Water District 1 1 Regional Water Treatment Solutions Cooperative Feasibility Study City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Treatment Tri-Districts Soldier Canyon Water Treatment 2 Regional Water Treatment Solutions Cooperative Feasibility Study ATTACHMENT 2 40/112 2 3 Water Providers for the City of Fort Collins Fort Collins Utilities Water Treatment Facility Tri-Districts Soldier Canyon Treatment Plant – East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) – Fort Collins-Loveland Water District – North Weld County Water District 4 Service Areas • East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) • Fort Collins Utilities • Fort Collins- Loveland Water District • North Weld County Water District 41/112 3 5 6 Regional Water Cooperative Committee Established by our Intergovernmental Agreement for Water Sharing Operations Managers for each Treatment Facility Coordinate Existing Intergovernmental Agreements • Operation of Interconnections, and • Water Sharing / Water Sales between the entities. 42/112 4 7 Reasoning: Both Plants serve the citizens of Fort Collins Parties agree in principle that collaboration is a more sustainable approach and can increase efficiencies. A third party analysis is critical to determining the financial evaluations around costs and operations. Solution: Request for Proposal 8 Request for Proposal Scope of Work • Assessment of value and accounting of Assets • Development of equitable cost allocations • Present worth and future cost of projects Consultants will meet with Stakeholders to discuss individual concerns or constraints. 43/112 5 9 Request for Proposal Focused around: • Developing a cooperative business model to receive “raw water” from the participants, • Providing treatment of that water, • Returning a finished potable water product back, • Charging the members based on a Cost of Service model. 10 Limits of the Feasibility Study Member parties shall maintain control and responsibility for: • Water Rights • Raw Water Storage • Distribution Systems 44/112 6 11 Request for Proposal Evaluate several alternatives: • Status Quo • Enhanced Collaboration through IGAs • Merger of Treatment Facility Operations • Other Options determined by Consultant and Study Team Consultant to present results (pros/cons) to City and the Districts late 2013 or early 2014. 12 Why should Fort Collins be involved? • Fort Collins Treatment Plant has capacity that will remain unused at projected service area build-out. • Provide a single consistent ‘water product’ to all residents of the City of Fort Collins. • Help maintain affordability of service to Fort Collins residents. • Generate economies of scale by maximizing plant assets and reducing unit cost of production. 45/112 7 13 Regional Water Treatment Solutions Cooperative Feasibility Study Costs: • Initial fee is $220,185 split four ways. • Fort Collins share would be approximately $55,050. • The three Water Districts have approved their contributions. 14 Regional Water Treatment Solutions Cooperative Feasibility Study Questions for the City Council: • Should we join in the study to evaluate options for regional water treatment solutions? • Are there additional considerations to evaluate as part of the feasibility study? 46/112 8 15 Regional Water Treatment Solutions Cooperative Feasibility Study Questions for the City Council: • Should we join in the study to evaluate options for regional water treatment solutions? • Are there additional considerations to evaluate as part of the feasibility study? 47/112 DATE: June 25, 2013 STAFF: Darin Atteberry Diane Jones Pre-taped staff presentation: none WORK SESSION ITEM FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION City Council Work Plan 2013-2015. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the May 3 and 4 City Council Planning Retreat, City Council reviewed the City’s Strategic Plan, which included the goals, the strategic objectives, and the key initiatives associated with each of the seven Key Outcomes. Councilmembers discussed questions and comments they had within each of the seven Key Outcomes. Additionally, Councilmembers suggested several ideas for new initiatives to consider as part of their work plan. Several sets of information are attached to this Agenda Item Summary. Among them are: • Staff response to Council’s questions and comments from the retreat • Initiatives suggested by Council that are or have been incorporated into the current Work Plan • Prospective New Initiatives mentioned at the retreat to consider incorporating into the Work Plan The purpose of this work session is to solidify the 2013-2015 Council Work Plan, at this point in time. While the Work Plan can, and will likely be adjusted as other policy issues arise over the Council’s two-year term, the key initiatives identified at this point in time serve as the Council’s foundational Work Plan for its term of office (2013-2015). GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • What changes (additions, deletions or modifications) does Council have to its 2013-2015 Work Plan? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Fort Collins City Council met on May 3 and 4, 2013 to conduct its planning retreat for the 2013- 2015 term. City Council, in conjunction with the City Manager and the Service Directors, reviewed the vision, mission and values that are the foundation of the City’s Strategic Plan. The seven Outcome Areas and related goals and objectives were adopted by the City Council and serve as the framework for the organization’s operations, initiatives, and budget. All were adopted by City Council as part of the 2013-2014 Biennial Budget. 48/112 June 25, 2013 Page 2 The 2-year budget is the plan and resource allocation for how the organization accomplishes the work. With three newly elected Councilmembers, three continuing Councilmembers and the Mayor, the May 4 session focused on a review of the existing goals, objectives and key initiatives for each of the seven Key Outcome Areas. For each of the seven Key Outcome Areas, Councilmembers identified a number of questions and comments and suggested some initiatives that might be incorporated into the work plan. Staff reviewed all of the information and has prepared several documents which are attached to the Agenda Item Summary. These are the basis for the Work Session discussion. • Council Comments and Questions and Staff Responses (Attachment 1) This document lists the questions and comments raised by Council at the retreat (see the Retreat Report). For each item, staff has provided a response or additional information. Question: Are there any items for which Council would like additional information, clarification or would like to further discuss? • Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plans (Attachment 2) Several initiatives that Council mentioned at the May Planning Retreat are or can be incorporated into the existing work plan as adopted in the 2013 and 2014 Budget. This document lists each one along with comments from staff. Question: Are there any initiatives that Council would like clarified or would like to discuss further? • Prospective New Initiatives (Attachment 3) Of the initiatives mentioned by Council, several are new, which means that they are not in any existing offer in the City Budget and likely cannot be fully addressed with existing resources; they would require new or reprioritized resources including staff capacity and/or additional monetary resources. Attachment 3 lists these prospective new initiatives and includes a separate description for each initiative. Questions and Direction Sought: Given the information provided, it is suggested that the discussion focus on the options for any changes to the Work Plan: (a) Does Council have any Work Plan changes to include at this time? (b) Does Council want to put any of the initiatives on a list for discussion in conjunction with the 2014 Budget Adjustment process (September/October)? 49/112 June 25, 2013 Page 3 (c) Does Council want to put any of the initiatives on a list to discuss as part of the 2015-2016 BFO Budget process? Any new initiatives would be noted on the “Poster Board” sheets (see Attachment 6). This would then constitute City Council’s 2013-2015 Work Plan. • Long-Range Planning Calendar (Attachment 4) Staff has expanded the regular 6-Month Planning Calendar into a long-range calendar into the first quarter of 2015. The items on the calendar include all of the items that are on the current 6-Month Planning Calendar (shaded in yellow). Additionally, the calendar includes items for key initiatives or policy matters that are projected or anticipated to be brought to a Council work session and/or discussion items to be presented to Council at a regular meeting. This is a dynamic planning tool and will regularly change over time. It is a tool to show when the calendar is at or over capacity. It can be an effective tool for the Leadership Planning Team to manage Council meeting agendas. Question: Does Council have any comments or questions about the purpose and use of the long-range planning calendar? • City Strategic Plan (Attachment 5) A copy of the updated City Strategic plan is attached. Council had suggested some revisions to a couple of the objectives which have been included on this revised version (see the shaded items). • “Poster Board” Sheets (Attachment 6) At the May Planning Retreat, Poster Boards for each of the seven (7) BFO Key Outcomes were used for Council’s discussion of key initiatives. The Poster Boards include the City’s Vision, Mission and Values. And for each Key Outcome, the following are listed: • Strategic Goal • Strategic Objectives • Key Initiatives for 2013-2014 Council had a few changes—moving some key initiatives from one Key Outcome to another and a couple of additions. These are noted on the “Poster Board” sheets with strikeouts (deleted) and shaded (additions/items moved). The final list of key initiatives in each of the Key Outcomes will constitute the Council’s Work Plan. 50/112 June 25, 2013 Page 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Questions and Staff Response 2. Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 3. Prospective New Initiatives 4. Long-Range Planning Calendar 5. City Strategic Plan 6. “Poster Board” Sheets 51/112 Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 1 Do we need to offer incentives given the pace of current economic growth? We believe so. However, the use of incentives should be about more than encouraging economic investment. These tools should be used to influence the pattern of our community's economic growth, ensuring that growth is consistent with the community's vision of the future. 2 How do we measure economic health? The community dashboard focuses on a number of economic health indicators, such as Unemployment, Job Growth, Lodging Occupancy, Construction Activity, etc. These are often indirectly influenced by City policy and actions. Operationally, we measure Economic Health by leverage (private investment per public dollar invested), target industry job growth, sales tax growth, etc. 3 Need additional information on Key Initiative #1 (support of targeted industry clusters) What are the targeted industries? In 2006, the City completed an analysis of the industries in our community that present the best opportunity for growth or represent a significant portion of our employment base. In 2010, these industry clusters were formally adopted by resolution. The clusters include: (1) Clean Energy, (2) Water Innovation, (3) Bioscience, (4) Technology (Chip Design and Software), and (5) Uniquely Fort Collins (Beer, Arts & Culture, Local Food, Bikes and Recreational Technology, etc.) 4 How do we support the creative class in our community? Support Arts Incubator of the Rockies (AIR)? Initiative #11 – Carnegie Creative Center and Arts Incubator – link strategically with other communities that are doing similar things – apply best practices and link to our economic development cluster areas. Key Outcome: Economic Health Page 1 6/20/2013 10:59 AM ATTACHMENT 1 52/112 Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 5 Consider a “digital utility” and providing throughout the City the appropriate digital infrastructure as we think about GigU and the comcast franchise agreement. The proposed scope of the Gig.U initiative does include some level of investigation into the issues and opportunities related to creating a City operated Telecommunications Utility (a “digital utility”) as one of a number of possible strategies to achieve having next generation very high speed internet services widely available in the Fort Collins community. A public telecommunications utility is not the only possible approach to realizing this goal. The 2013 budget includes a $20,000 Economic Health offer to support the project. Additional research services are available to the City through our partnership with CSU as members of the Gig.U initiative and a cross departmental staff project team is in place that can support additional research and community outreach. The project team is developing a work plan for the project, and will be seeking feedback regarding the appropriate priority and emphasis of focus for this project. 6 Initiatives/projects should explain how they achieve the key outcomes Effort included within BFO Lite improvements, BFO Performance Report Metrics and overall continuous improvement efforts. Page 2 53/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 7 Reexamine Objective “b” (greenhouse gas emissions) and objective “e” (Energy Policy). City staff will begin implementing a plan to review community Greenhouse Gas goals, in close concert with other related planning initiatives (Energy Policy update, Green Build Roadmap, Road to Zero Waste, etc.) and seeking public input, and will bring a recommendation on community GHG goal to Council in December 2013. 8 Can we be authentic in our desire to invest in our renewable energies? City staff has a responsibility to reflect the values of Council and our community while also being cognizant of the fiduciary responsibility to manage costs. Maintaining balance insures a successful implementation. 9 We could incentivize or require compliance…two ways to look at this. Not sure of the context here. 10 Need to broaden the concept of Road to Zero Waste beyond simply eliminating waste. The Road to Zero Waste project will evaluate four areas: source reduction, recycling, composting, and waste to energy utilizing a systems approach. Council work session on Nov 26. 11 Consider sponsoring a conference on “Smart Cities” that blends what smart cities are or can be doing regarding zero waste, energy renewables, economic clusters Net Zero Cities will incorporate "Smart Cities" concepts ‐ being held Oct. 23 & 24, 2013. 12 Hope we’re preparing specific plans for the Poudre River initiatives. In addition to existing plans (Poudre River Natural Areas Plan, Trails Master Plan, Stormwater Master Plan), staff have just embarked on a year‐long master planning process that brings together Parks, Stormwater, and Natural Areas in the downtown core area from Shields to Mulberry. The 3 elements of the plan are recreation, habitat, and floodplain mitigation. Key Outcome: Environmental Health Page 3 54/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 13 Objective “A” – remove “proactively” – the entire objective is proactive. "Proactive" has been removed from Objective A on the Strategic Plan. 14 Add a key initiative related to Municipal Court services. Initiative #13 will be added to Safe Community: "Municipal Court Services". The action will pertain to decreasing cases not addressed by arraignment. 15 Move Initiative #12 to economic health – should also capture community gardens and link the economic and social benefit. Done. 16 Look closely at strategic partnerships. There are numerous examples in all Service Areas. These are a couple of examples: Working through Colorado Clean Energy Cluster (CCEC) & Colorado Water Innovation Cluster (CWIC) to develop strategic partnership. (Sustainability). Working with the regional water districts to optimize water treatment plant capacity and share conservation resources. Working with Greeley and North Poudre Irrigation Co. to increase raw water storage. Working with Larimer County, regional water providers and volunteer organizations on watershed protection/ rehabilitation. Partnering with the Rocky Mountain Institute on elab. (Utilities). 17 #13/#14 may not be timely – staff should do a survey and test the appetite of the community. Survey is underway. Feedback before work session. 18 Where do we see evidence of our planning and building values – planning for the future and building the plans? The evidence ranges from the policies governing land use and transportation patterns to specific qualities of individual developments, street and streetscape projects, and continuous efforts to complete the action steps outlined in CityPlan. Key Outcome: Safe Community Key Outcome: Community & Neighborhood Livability Page 4 55/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 19 If a decision is make to construct the on‐campus CSU Stadium, City should play an active role in mitigating neighborhood impacts and infrastructure issues. Work to leverage the outcomes. Staff agrees we need to proactively plan for the likely impact of a new football stadium in Fort Collins. Discussions are beginning in PDT to propose and facilitate a Citywide Task Force to analyze and develop plans addressing impacts to neighborhoods, infrastructure, accessibility, parking, and law enforcement. This will likely begin in 2014, unless directed to proceed earlier. If so, then work plans and resources will need to be adjusted. 20 Initiative #11 – Carnegie Creative Center and Arts Incubator – link strategically with other communities that are doing similar things – apply best practices and link to our economic development cluster areas. Will work with other communities. 21 Objective D – how can this be a regional objective – cooperative regional opportunities – connect with AIR – add “Regional” to “D” after world class. Objective has been revised on the Strategic Plan. 22 Connect breweries in the master trails plan. Trail improvements to better connect breweries to the trail system are part of the Trails Master Plan. 23 Allow impact fees to expand paved trails. In 2013 Council will be presented the option of implementing an impact fee to expand paved trails. 24 Nature in the City – link with trails and natural areas. The 2013 work program includes a limited scope project (8 months) to conduct the Nature in the City study to implement a City Plan policy. The intent of this Policy is to integrate design elements such as natural groupings of planting areas, water features, climbing walls and rooftop gardens within public spaces, specifically in commercial mixed‐use activity centers. An expanded scope is described in Attachment 3 as a New Key Initiative. Key Outcome: Culture & Recreation Page 5 56/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 25 Concern about limitation of 4 bikes per MAX – staff pointed out that at the driver's discretion, if the bus is not full, additional bikes can be loaded onto the bus. The MAX buses can be modified to provide additional bike capacity inside the bus by removing seating for passengers. Transfort will assess the demand for bike capacity inside vehicles once operations commence and make modifications as needed. 26 Hybrid transportation system – beyond multi modal: a) Helping people get point to point in a variety of ways, complementary modes; b) Car share/bike share PDT Service Area is responsible for planning, coordinating, building, operating, and maintaining the Fort Collins multi‐modal transportation system in order to connect our community by foot or wheel. The recently formed Mobility Group focuses the efforts of Traffic Ops, Transfort, and FC Moves, including the bike program, on addressing those critical links in a collaborative and efficient way. 27 Transfort Alignment – pay attention to connecting low income housing developments and be mindful of connecting our low income residents with essential locations (work, shopping, day care). Transfort’s service planning incorporates projected changes in land use densities, activity centers, demographic information and location of essential service sites to determine how to allocate the available resources to provide the best service possible. Route alignments and timed transfer enhancements are optimized to best link transit dependent low‐income passengers to medical facilities, employment centers, educational sites, social service and governmental centers. Transfort’s service focuses on productivity, meaning that bus routes focus on areas with higher ridership potential, as opposed to dispersed coverage, due to limited resources. Key Outcome: Transportation Page 6 57/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 28 What % of “other” funding is going to transit? KFCG was a voter approved tax increase of .85% (or 8.5 cents on a $10 purchase). 17% of this additional revenue was allocated to “Other Street and Transportation Needs” (OT). In 2011 approximately $209,000 was expended for transit purposes (18% of OT): Transfort Dial‐a‐Ride Night Service @ $33,000; Restoring Transfort Saturday service @ $150,000; Transfort Operations Marketing @ $21,134; Transfort South Transfer Center Bus Pad Concrete Improvements @ $5,000. In 2012 approximately $344,000 was expended for transit purposes (16% of OT): Skyway Transit Stop and Adjoining Sidewalk Improvements @ $ 150,000; Transfort Dial‐a‐Ride Night Service @ $29,000; Restoring Transfort Saturday service @ $150,000; and Transfort Operations Marketing @ $15,000. In 2013, $157,000 is budgeted for transit purposes (4% of OT): Transfort Operations Marketing @ $60,000; Transfort Facilities Improvements@ $97,000. In 2014, $410,188 is budgeted for transit purposes (11% of OT): Transfort Operations Marketing @ $60,188; MAX Operations @ $350,000. Page 7 58/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 29 Cycle ambassador program? Has been implemented. In April of 2012 FC Bikes and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Education Coalition (BPEC) launched the Bicycle Ambassador Program. Volunteer Ambassadors are trained and equipped to share the rules of the road, trail etiquette, route finding, basic bicycle maintenance, and more with others in the community who are interested in riding. The Ambassadors receive a minimum of 12 hours of training in everything from helmet fitting to non‐confrontational communication. They carry maps, bike lights, patch kits, and other bicycle related supplies which they provide to cyclists in need. Since its inception, the program has grown to include thirty‐one Ambassadors, including two bilingual volunteers who work to bring services to the city’s Spanish‐speaking community. The Bicycle Ambassador program was a key element of the City’s Bicycle Friendly Community application, and has been recognized as one of the achievements that helped the City obtain its Platinum rating. 30 Bicycle safety town – will move forward. The construction of a Bike Safety Town was recommended in the City’s Bicycle Safety Education Plan. A bicycle safety town is a “miniature city,” complete with streets, bike lanes, and traffic signs for teaching and practicing safe bicycling practices. In 2011, initial research and public outreach was conducted exploring the possibilities for a Bike Safety Town in Fort Collins. Due to staff turnover in FC Bikes and Transportation Planning, this project was temporarily placed on hold with the intention of resuming the planning effort once staff resources are available. Beginning in 2013, FC Bikes will review the previous Bike Safety Town research and meet with key internal and external stakeholders to determine a path forward for the planning, design and implementation of this facility. Staff will actively search for potential grant funding to support planning and construction activities. 31 Pro Cycle Challenge is a big opportunity and can really affect our brand – move to Economic Health. We are actively working to leverage this opportunity to positively affect our brand. Given this larger focus, this initiative has been moved to Economic Health in the City's strategic plan. Page 8 59/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 1 Council Questions and Staff Response from May 2013 Retreat Question Number Council Questions & Comments Staff Response 32 Council governance is missing. Add Initiative: City Council Leadership and Governance. 33 Incorporate thermal energy with other energies. Utilities has developed programs related to thermal energy in order to support the goals of the Climate Action Plan. Looking at thermal energy solutions in the downtown area. 34 Franchise for/ with Xcel energy. Staff has previously estimated roughly $500k revenue potential from a Franchise Agreement vs. the current excise tax. Staff has been asked to document the operational benefits the City would realize with a Franchise Agrmt vs. current occupational tax. This will be completed in the first half of 2014. 35 Consider creating a City foundation to support some outcomes and long‐range budget planning. New concept and new project that would need to be scoped, prioritized, and resourced. High Performing Government Page 9 60/112 6/20/2013 10:59 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan Item 1. Link our international strategic partners with the International Cleantech Network Comments: requires alignment of Frienship Cities with Clean energy Initiatives & Colorado Clean Energy Cluster (CCEC) 2. Brewery District Planning Comments: One of the initiatives to emerge from UniverCity Connections is the concept of a Brewery District. The effort is being led by other stakeholders, including the Downtown Development Authority, the Downtown Business Association and Visit Fort Collins. Beyond a traditional district with physical boundaries, this idea is built around four primary components: educational, cultural, environmental and economic. City staff will engage in Q3 and Q4 with a particular emphasis on social sustainability and neighborhood livability. This effort will be considered during the planning for the Lincoln Corridor. 3. Modify our clusters: a) Creating class linked with AIR, Innosphere, Clusters for companies like Otterbox, CSU, Woodward Comments: BFO Offer 6.4 includes funding for exploring new clusters as well as local food production. The recent activities with the Fort Collins Bike Alliance fall into this category. 4. Digital Infrastructure – Comcast Renewal. Comments: The needs assessment for the Comcast Franchise Agreement will be conducted this summer and fall. Addressing digital infrastructure and High Definition (HD) for video service will be a cornerstone of the technical negotiations. Although the Federal Cable Act limits the franchise to video services, the needs assessment will also help to gauge community interest in having ultra‐high speed data servces available in Fort Collins. This information will support the Gig. U project where broader conversations about a digital utility or other similar options are being explored. Key Outcome: Economic Health Page 1 (Master) 6/20/2013 at 11:00 AM ATTACHMENT 2 61/112 Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 5. Subject area planning for Vine/Lemay/Linden/Jefferson area Comments: The Lincoln Corridor Plan is covered by an existing package offer that combines the Long Range Planning offer to develop the Lincoln Triangle Strategic Plan and the Lincoln corridor multi‐modal transportation plan. Expanded public outreach efforts are underway. Jefferson Street Alternatives Analysis was completed last year. River District Design Guidelines are being done in conjunction with the Historic Old Town Guidelines project. This project will develop comprehensive and defensible standards and guidelines for review and approval of alterations and new construction occurring within these areas. Conceptual work for the Vine and Lemay intersection including a grade separation of Lemay at the Burlington Northern Railroad and a new Vine and Lemay intersection was undertaken several years ago, and is being reviewed again this year. Goals for the remaining work include: updated cost estimates; phased implementation options; public outreach; and strategic options for funding. This work will be completed concurrently with the Lincoln Corridor Plan and finished in the first half of 2014. 6. Signcode/billboard full color digital. Comments: A 2‐year status update will be submitted to Council in December, 2013. The update will summarize the 2011 digital sign regulation changes, will provide information on the number of pre‐existing digital signs that have been modified to comply, the number of new digital signs erected since adoption and will provide an analysis of the effectiveness of the regulations. The report will also discuss the recent mall sign proposal for full‐color. If, after receiving the update, Council directs staff to pursue further code changes, it is anticipated that the work could be done with existing staffing resources. 7. Define metrics for economic health Comments: The Economic Health Office (EHO) has seven metrics currently listed on the Community Dashboard. These metrics were developed in consultation with the Futures Committee. 8. URA Dashboard/Metrics Comments: URA staff will work to develop dashboard metrics similar to those currently listed under Economic Health Page 2 (Master) 6/20/62/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 9. Thermal Energy strategy Comments: Current thermal energy strategy is focused on a better built environment through green building codes and home efficiency audits. However, with new, more intense development in the downtown area, another strategy is emerging. District heating options will be evaluated as part of Block 32 development. Block 32 is the block across Howes from City Hall. 10. Xcel Franchise ‐ assessment of the operational benefits of a franchise agreement Comments: Staff has previously estimated a roughly $500K revenue potential from a Franchise Agreement vs. the current excise tax. Staff has been asked to document the operational benefits the City would realize with a Franchise Agrmt. Vs. Current. This will be completed in the first half of 2014. 11. Reservoir & Ditch company’s overall City response for working with neighborhoods, understanding governance, etc. Comments: There are a myriad of concerns regarding the City's interaction with Reservoir & Ditch companies, working with neighborhoods, governance, etc. Systematic Development of Informed Consent (SDIC) would be a great tool to use to arrive at a solution. Staff will work with the City Attorney's Office, Office of Sustainability, Utilities, and the CIty Manager's Office to develop policies to guide them in working with irrigation companies and as representatives on irrigation company boards. These policies will need to be consistent with City Charter and Code requirements as well as Irrigation Company Bylaws to prevent legal conflicts. 12. Green building practices incentive policy. Comments: Offer 82.3 focuses on identifying voluntary approaches to incentivize GB above code requirements. Council work session planned on September 24. Implementation of any recommended incentives not currently funded. 13. Lower natural gas in new building & increase solar use Comments: Each new City building will be evaluated to determine the best heating and ventilation system with the lowest carbon impact. All new city building construction will be required to have solar PV. This will be added to the city’s design standards. Key Outcome: Environmental Health Page 3 (Master) 6/20/63/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 14. Shopping bags Comments: Staff would prefer to work on this in 2014. If requested for 2013, some existing work would have to be postponed without additional resources. 15. Construction Waste Regulations Comments: Part of Green Building and Code. Expect Building Services would take lead. Environmental Services play support role. URA should be involved. Existing regs need increased monitoring & enforcement. Green Building road map may recommend expansion of the regulation for all development and URA projects. Road to Zero Waste offer currently funds compliance assistance (~$10K). The 2012 I‐code review committee is underway and Building Services expects to bring the new code to Council for adoption in the Fall. 16. Recycling: a) Weekly Pick up, b) Address the contamination of recycling waste. Comments: Comments: a) Would appreciate clarification of intent. Does this mean weekly recycling and every other week trash? Topic will be addressed in Road to Zero Waste planning. Would take at least 6 months to modify Pay As You Throw (PAYT). b) Actual FC recycling contamination is verified at <8%. What is source of concern? Bigger issue is single stream recycling of glass going to Denver and not being recycled. 17. Waste to Energy Comments: Concepts will be addressed in Road to Zero Waste (RTZW), no money to implement. Will be coordinating with Utilities. 18. Prescription Drug Disposal Program Comments:Utilities and Police Services continue to wait for the regulations put forth by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be finalized and take effect. These regulations will allow Police Services to offer a year round effort in the collection of prescription drugs from our citizens. Until then the DEA will continue the semi‐annual Drug Take Back program in the spring and fall of each year. Police Services is actively monitoring the progress of these new regulations so that we can offer the year round program. The Controlled Substances Act federally prohibits private entities, such a pharmacies, to collect any used prescription drugs. Page 4 (Master) 6/20/64/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 19. Collaborate in Regional energy master plan. Comments: Utilities is working with Michael Kirk, director of the Regional Energy Master Plan. At this time, the resources required involve our time. In the future, there may be some minimal cost for participation. 20. Increased bike enforcement Comments: Officers enforce bicycle violations when observed and practical to do so. The majority of violations occur in downtown in District 1. Bicycle violations in 2011 totaled 246; 2012 totaled 261, and 2013‐to‐date is 57. FCPS also responds to specific complaints and when acute issues arise supervisors shift resources to provide specific enforcement efforts. 21. Municipal Court Services Comments: Staff proposed that "Municipal Court Services" be added to Safe Community Outcome as Key Initiative #13. Cases addressed in a timely manner, such as appearing or paying on or before the arraignment (first appearance) date, take far less administrative and judicial time to handle. As timely appearance or payment rates increase, existing Court personnel is better able to handle case load increases. Court staff continues to test and implement a number of different strategies to encourage Defendants to address tickets in a timely manner, including notification alternatives as well as positive and negative consequences. These actions can be included in the current BFO Offer 77.1. Key Outcome: Safe Community Page 5 (Master) 6/20/65/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 22. Perform a 360‐degree Development Process Review from the customer perspective. Comments: Community Development & Neighborhood Services staff has several initiatives underway in regards to this project. Staff intends to collect feedback/data on the initiatives throughout 2013 and report back to the Planning & Zoning Board during the 4th quarter. Staff plans to provide an update to City Council at a work session during the 2nd quarter of 2014. The existing Neighborhood Development Review Liaison, which was approved by City Council during the 2012 budget process, is leading this effort. 23. Impact Fee Review for infill and redevelopment Comments: This project is not currently resourced with staff time or funded for external consultants. Project will be added to Financial Services tasks for 2014 and if additional funding for consultants is required, this will be requested during the 2014 budget revision process. 24. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) vs. Infill and Redevelopment Comments: TOD is one of several initiatives identified in CityPlan to support redevelopment in the central part of the City rather than additional sprawl. The Planning and Zoning Board is currently discussing the TOD Overlay Zone and possible issues with parking and compatibility. The item is scheduled for a follow‐up discussion with the Board on June 14, 2013. It is anticipated that this will be a topic of discussion at the joint City Council/Planning & Zoning Board discussion scheduled for July 9, 2013. 25. Neighborhood Action Teams for trouble street and houses in upset neighborhood – dealing with parties and riots. Comments: Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) deals with properties and problems that create quality of life and crime issues in our neighborhoods. A proposal was submitted to fund a storefront and team of officers in Campus West. A current BFO Offer provided 4 officers for this effort under KFCG and are planned for deployment in July, 2013. An offer providing for 2 officers, a sergeant, and storefront location was submitted under the General Fund and not funded. A new offer will be submitted for these positions in the next budget cycle to fulfill this element. 26. Sustainable, affordable housing fund/program for our residents. Comments: 1) Affordable Housing Impact Fee (Foothills Mall)2) Social Sustainability Strategic Plan 3) Competitive Process ‐ allocate funding to projects 4) Homebuyers Assistance Program ‐ downpayment assistance 5) Continuum of Care/Homeless strategies ‐ new model of delivery 6) Review and update current development incentives,need to address green building, 7) Possible new Inclusive Housing Ordinance. (See "Prospective New Initiatives " #15 & #16 in Attachment 3). Key Outcome: Community & Neighborhood Livability Page 6 (Master) 6/20/66/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 27. Activity Center centrally located in District 3 & 4 (not at Fossil Creek Park) Comments: The 2013 budget includes an offer to use Recreation reserves for a feasibility study for a southeast recreation/cultural center at Fossil Creek park. The study is underway and is being expanded to include other sites in south Fort Collins. 28. Hybrid transportation system to provide point to point solutions. Comments: PDT Service Area is responsible for planning, coordinating, building, operating, and maintaining the Fort Collins multi‐modal transportation system in order to connect our community by foot or wheel. The recently formed Mobility Group focuses the efforts of Traffic Ops, Transfort, and FC Moves, including the bike program, on addressing those critical links in a collaborative and efficient way. 29. Increase number of available Transfort vouchers (make it easier for low income residents to have access to Transfort). Comments:Transfort currently operates a Ride Assistance Program that is designed to give social service agencies the ability to provide temporary transportation assistance to qualified individuals. It is a short‐term assistance program designed to assist clients in their transportation needs. In 2012 Transfort provided $51,000 in discounted ticket sales to 22 different social service agencies that support low‐income residents of Fort Collins. Transfort is currently in the process of surveying the participating Ride Assistance agencies to identify what additional assistance can be provided by Transfort to meet both near‐term and long‐term needs. This summer (2013) Transfort will work closely with the participating Ride Assistance agencies to address immediate needs as long term program adjustments are developed for Council consideration in 2014. 30. Connect from Mason Line to Senior Center and other locations. Comments: Proposed changes to future route alignments will provide connections from the MAX Station at Drake with a route going directly to the main entrance of the Senior Center every 30 minutes. An additional route would also be traveling East/West on Drake Road every 60 minutes to Centre Avenue just south of the Senior Center. These two routes combined offer improved service to/from the Senior Center when using the MAX. Key Outcome: Transportation Key Outcome: Culture & Recreation Page 7 (Master) 6/20/67/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 31. Bicycle Safety: a) Bike Ambassador, b) Safe Routes to School, c) Bike Safety Town Comments: a) Please refer to the information provided in the "Bicycle Ambassador" Question (#29 in Attachment 1: Council Questions & Comments). b) The City’s Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program addresses bicycle and pedestrian education and enforcement to help keep schoolchildren safe on their journey to and from school each day. FC Moves has a dedicated half‐time SRTS Coordinator responsible for administering grant dollars, coordinating training, working with schools and resource officers, and training community groups to run their own Safe Routes programs. It is expected that the City's SRTS program will reach more than 8,000 students this year. c) Please refer to the information provided in the "Bicycle Safety Town" Question (#30 in Attachment 1: Council Questions & Comments). 32. Pedestrian improvements: signals, sidewalks, enforcement routes Comments: The City of Fort Collins Pedestrian Plan addresses citywide pedestrian needs using a data‐driven approach. The recently completed Pedestrian Needs Assessment project provided a complete sidewalk inventory including sidewalk inadequacies, gaps and ADA deficiencies. The Pedestrian Needs Assessment survey project provides detailed maps, ability to generate rough construction estimates, and create a prioritized project list for a repair program. Staff has identified approximately 20+ sidewalk projects along with numerous accessible ramp projects for 2013. Prioritization was given based on missing sidewalks and high volume pedestrian corridors. Construction has begun this spring. Page 8 (Master) 6/20/68/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 33. Develop strategic community partnerships (e.g. UniverCity Connections). Comments: The City values local and regional partnerships; seeking new opportunities to collaborate is an ongoing effort. The City will continue to actively engage in efforts such as UniverCity Connections, eonomic clusters, affordable housing, regional transportation options, the USA Pro Challenge, and many others staff will work with. 34. Councilmember offices in districts. Comments: Councilmembers to determine who needs an office in their District and then evaluate City facilities to see what might be suitable. Option 1 would be to use a current City facility, Option 2 would be to use a Fire station, and Option 3 would be to look at leasing space. A source of funding would need to be identified for Option 3. 35. Tying together outcomes, objectives, initiatives, metrics, agenda items and metric feedback. Comments: This is part of our ongoing continuous improvement process ‐ BFO process improvements, MOR, metrics efforts, etc. 36. Multi‐year financial plan Comments: Staff resources to support this effort came online May 2013 and this effort has been on Financial Services' project list for 2013. Anticipate the creation of a framework and structure for review with Council November 2013 with the development of a Long‐Range financial plan in 2014. 37. Community Engagement: a) improve public engagement strategies Comments: In 2012, staff developed a Public Engagement Strategic Plan to ensure accountability and promote excellence in community engagement. Efforts to date have focused on improved outreach efforts and technology improvements specific to development review, the launch of IdeaLab, and utilization of Nextdoor. com. Continuing work is underway to better equip and train staff with public engagement tools. In 2013, priorities are as follows: better promote and utilize IdeaLab and Nextdoor.com, convene an interdepartmental staff team to support public engagement planning and implement best practices throughout the organization, and develop new strategies for engaging specific to hard‐to‐reach audiences. Key Outcome: High Performing Government Page 9 (Master) 6/20/69/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Attachment 2 Key Initiatives in Existing Work Plan 38. Solidify Fort Collins Brand: a) Strategic partners in community to co‐brand the City of Fort Collins Comments: The City is partnering with Colorado State University to convene a group of community stakeholders who will explore options for co‐ branding. The intent is to leverage the assets of both the University and the City in existing and new communication mediums. 39. Develop a foundation to fund City initiatives – Fort Collins City Foundation. Comments: New project. Need to research and evaluate alternatives, structures, funding implications, charter/legislative issues, resource requirements to assess and implement, etc. 40. Add Initiative: City Council Leadership and Governance. Comments: Will add to High Performing Government Outcome Initiative #25 entitled "City Council Leadership and Governance." Offer 1.1 City Council Core Services is funded for 2013 and 2014. The offer enables City Council to provide leadership for all areas of municipal government. There is no particular start and end date other than the 2013‐2015 term for this seated City Council. Page 10 (Master) 6/20/70/2013 112 at 11:00 AM Page 1 of 22 Attachment 3 Prospective New Initiatives The following is a list of initiatives that Council mentioned during the May Council Planning Retreat. These initiatives are ones that are identified as “new.” This means that the initiatives are not currently in any work program, there are no existing resources available to devote to the initiative, and the initiative would require new resources (staff time; consultant time and/or other materials). None of these have been added to the BFO Outcomes (Poster Board Sheets) as commitments for 2013 or 2014/15. For the Prospective New Initiatives listed below, attached are brief descriptions for each new initiative. These may also contain some discussion questions to help clarify if staff has interpreted the initiative accurately or if the purpose or intent of the initiative is on target with Council’s intent. For the Council Work Session, staff is suggesting that the discussion focus on this list and determine if there are any additional work plan items that are to be added to the BFO Key Outcomes as key initiatives (Attachment 6). 1. MAX BRT: Early Childhood Care Facility Feasibility Analysis 2. Evaluate Availability and Usability of Excess Private Space by Non-Profits 3. Airport Business and Economic Plan (Strategic Plan) 4. Solar Access Ordinance 5. CSU Stadium Task Force 6. Prospect Corridor Plan 7. Campus West Community Policing Team (linked to Four Officers hired with KFCG funds) 8. Urban Agriculture/Community Gardens (to implement portions of City Plan) 9. Key East/West MAX Connections 10. Nature in the City (to integrate and implement design features) 11. Greenhouse Gas Goal Review and Climate Action Plan Update 12. Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Decision Framework and Toolbox 13. City-wide Deconstruction Ordinance and Program 14. Develop Community Information Program for Public Health and Safety 15. Inclusionary Zoning for Affordable Housing Analysis and Ordinance Recommendation 16. Emerging Opportunities Housing Program 71/112 Page 2 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: MAX BRT - EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE FACILITY FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: The City’s Economic Health Strategic Plan (EHSP) contains a strategy to preserve and enhance Fort Collins quality of place by improving the delivery of high quality early childhood education and other services to support working families. A feasibility study to evaluate the development, construction, and operation of a physical – sticks and bricks – facility for providing quality early childhood education facility adjacent to the MAX BRT will further this strategy. The EHSP calls for the support of the Social Sustainability Gap Analysis and Strategic Plan underway now. The Gap Analysis and Strategic Plan are meant to provide a greater understanding of the need within the community. The key issues to be addressed by a feasibility plan, include:  Understand the financial underpinnings of a project – market demand, ability/willingness to pay, number of potential customers, market capture, etc.;  Understand the unique physical attributes of a potential facility – site size requirements, outdoor play space requirements, accessibility requirements, etc.;  Understand the locational attributes of a potential facility – proximity to transit, parking and vehicular access requirements, proximity to target market, etc.;  Understand the available funding opportunities for a facility – use of locally controlled funding sources, availability of state and federal grants, etc. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: The scope of a feasibility analysis would differ from the completed and on on-going work related to Early Childhood Education needs in several ways. The scope may include, but is not limited to, the following items:  A market analysis providing the demand and ability/willingness to pay for service;  Development of a facility program (e.g. building size, classrooms, outdoor play space, kitchen facilities, etc.) to be used in analyzing available sites;  Development of facility locational requirements to be used in analyzing available sites;  Identification and prioritization of several potential sites for a facility;  Development of a financial pro forma for a potential facility, including a consideration of the potential funding sources; and  If possible development of a Request for Proposals to solicit a non-profit or private partner to develop and operate a facility. COST ESTIMATE: $50,000- $70,000 TIMEFRAME: 6-9 Months DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What is City Council’s key objective for providing an Early Childhood Care and Education facility? 72/112 Page 3 of 22 2. Is the facility intended to meet the needs of the entire market or a specific target group (e.g., low-income or transit dependent)? 3. Does the City Council anticipate providing long-term assistance to a facility? Or will the facility need to stand on its own feet, at least operationally? 73/112 Page 4 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: EVALUATE AVAILABILITY AND USABILITY OF EXCESS PRIVATE SPACE BY NON-PROFITS BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: The City of Fort Collins has a heritage of encouraging incubation of new companies. This has occurred through a variety of activities, including support for the Rocky Mountain Innosphere (“RMI”) and the Arts Incubator of the Rockies (“AIR”). A potential enhancement to this activity and means of supporting existing non-profits is to evaluate the ability for collaboration between the Non-Profit and For-Profit sectors in our community, especially evaluating a potential model in Denver where entrepreneurs are paired with non-profits. This evaluation would primarily focus on the availability and usability of excess private office space. However, a more complete analysis may evaluate a broad range of collaborative opportunities. There are two potential options for enhancing the access of non-profits to low costs office space: (1) developing a tool to connect non-profits with private entities with surplus space; and (2) evaluate the use of existing surplus City space for subsidized office space available to non- profits. OPTION 1: A simple approach would be to develop an on-line tool for matching up private and non-profit companies. The tool would allow for private sector companies to list the available office space, resources, amenities, and cost associated with the space. In essence, this tool would document the available and willing partners that have office space to sub-lease. The tool could be developed in partnership with an existing commercial brokerage firm or office space listing service. ESTIMATED BUDGET: $20,000 + on-going website hosting costs OPTION 2: A broader approach could consider providing a subsidized venue for non-profits to office; similar to the RMI and AIR approach. This subsidized space could come from surplus space owned by the City of Fort Collins. There would be a cost associated with tenant finish of the space and management that could significantly increase the cost of this offer. ESTIMATED BUDGET: $100,000 to unknown TIMEFRAME: 6-8 months DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Prior to commencing work on a specific approach, other models would be evaluated. 2. As part of the analysis the investigation would consider the success rates of other models relative to the investment to help inform the value proposition. 74/112 Page 5 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: AIRPORT BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC PLAN (STRATEGIC PLAN) BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: The City of Fort Collins has an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Loveland to jointly own and operate the regional airport located at I25 and Crossroads in Loveland; the Fort Collins- Loveland Airport (“FNL”). The vast majority of funds for operating the airport come from federal grants through the Federal Aviation Administration. A recent study by the State of Colorado shows the total direct and indirect regional economic benefit created by the airport is $56 million annually. This offer would evaluate the ability to enhance the regional economic benefit the airport provides through a Strategic Business and Economic Development Plan (“Strategic Plan”) including the potential for reinstating commercial passenger carriers. The Airport is guided by two key documents, the Airport Master Plan (“Master Plan”) which outlines capital improvement projects and the Airport Business Plan (“Business Plan”) that addresses more near term strategic and funding issues. The Business Plan was adopted September 15, 2009. The Fort Collins-Loveland Airport has not previously developed or implemented a Business Plan. In 1993 and again in 2006/2007, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the two municipal owners completed an FAA Master Planning Project. The goal of the Master Planning Projects was “…prepared to assess and direct improvements that will likely be necessary to accommodate future aviation needs… a long-term plan for …potential future facilities.” The Master Plan did not identify some critical components. The subsequent Business Plan has identified most of these components, notably:  Business vision and goals;  Funding plans, revenue and expenditure goals;  Economic development principals;  Encourage private investment;  Operational success strategies; and  Opportunities, both short and long-term, for improvement. (See http://www.fortloveair.com/pdf/Final_BusinessPlan_Sept_15_2009[1].pdf for the full document) SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: Scope: A Strategic Plan would pick up where the Business Plan left off by providing a clear set of action items and tactics to enhance the regional economic impact of the airport and assist the two owners in leveraging the asset. A broad outline of the scope might include: a. Review of existing business usage of the airport; b. Evaluation of the available property adjacent to the airport, for development capacity and likelihood; c. Evaluation of business development opportunities adjacent to the airport; 75/112 Page 6 of 22 d. Evaluation of economic development opportunities presented by the airport; e. Development of action items and tactics to enhance the regional economic impact of the airport; f. Other similar tasks to develop a holistic Strategic Plan for FNL. TIMEFRAME: 6-8 months COST ESTIMATE: $100,000 to $150,000 in consulting fees DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What are the main objectives City Council hopes to achieve with an Airport Economic Development Plan (e.g. increased commercial service, enhanced private travel amenities, safety enhancements, development of property) 2. How does City Council view the economic development of the Airport? Should the strategy include a plan for land the Airport owns as wells as adjacent privately controlled property? 76/112 Page 7 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: Purpose: Explore a citywide ordinance protecting solar access from neighboring properties Background: As part of the recent Eastside/Westside Neighborhood Study, City Council approved amendments for a new “Solar Access Setback” standard for building construction (Ordinance 033, 2013). The standard indirectly limits the amount of shading that a new home or addition can cast on a neighboring lot to the north, with a limit on building wall height tied to the setback of the wall from the lot line. Context: This offer responds to Council interest in exploring this solar access concept in residential neighborhoods City-wide. Further study may be warranted. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: Preliminary Project Outline: The project would require an analysis and assessment of existing conditions, extensive public engagement, and development and testing of strategies. Estimated Timeframe: 15 months (Q4 2013 thru Q4 2014) Estimated Personnel Requirements: .6 FTE for project management and staff work, a staff technical team comprised of relevant departments to review progress and provide input, public information staff to assist with public outreach and event facilitation. Specialized consulting services should be used for graphics and architectural expertise. COST ESTIMATE: $50,000 to $100,000 Costs may include up to $40,000 or so for an architectural consultant to assist with graphics and concept development, depending on the goal and scope. If adequate internal staff resources are not available (which depends on overall project implementation) additional consulting resources would be needed to conduct a larger share of the project work, up to $100,000. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. A full solar access ordinance measures specific degree/amount of direct shading on neighboring property, house etc. Application of Ord. 033 only adjusts side wall height of proposed expansion/addition of building on south property – to indirectly reduce solar access impacts. Staff believes it would be important to understand applicability of a similar ordinance to varying contexts throughout the city. For example, different zoning districts, and different eras of subdividing and building, might have different implications. Also, it might be important to distinguish existing established neighborhoods versus newly developing ones. 2. The objective might need clarification, i.e. whether the objective is to protect a certain degree or amount of solar access, e.g., for gardens, windows, or rooftop solar equipment; whether to 77/112 Page 8 of 22 account for varying lot shapes, sizes, and slopes; or whether to simply to add the general degree of protection provided by the E/W ordinance. 78/112 Page 9 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: CSU STADIUM TASK FORCE BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: Purpose: This effort coordinates City of Fort Collins neighborhood services, transportation infrastructure, parking services, traffic operations, transit and law enforcement planning in anticipation of a new CSU football stadium located on the Main Campus. The intent is to proactively identify needed resources, infrastructure, and strategies to address, minimize and mitigate community impacts during game days and special events. This information will inform conversations and negotiations with CSU as they plan their construction and operations. SCOPE: A Task Force/Planning Group of representatives from various City services and departments will be convened to coordinate analysis of various impacts associated with an on-campus stadium, and develop recommended operations and mitigation strategies if the new facility is built. Issues to consider include but are not limited to:  Infrastructure: identify improvements needed to Prospect Road and surrounding roads to handle capacity pressures of anticipated game day traffic (auto, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit) within a constrained arterial footprint. Note: this effort could be done in conjunction with the proposed Prospect Corridor Transportation Plan.  Traffic Operations: identify operational issues related to special event traffic flow, and develop recommended strategies to get people in, out, and around the stadium influence area.  Neighborhood Relations: identify potential issues and mitigation strategies related to game day and special events problems such as crowds, spillover parking, access, noise, etc.  Special Event Transit Service: identify opportunities and strategies for game day/special event transit service  Law Enforcement: Identify issues, strategies and resources needed for dealing with pressures of game day/special events such as crowd control and safety  Parking: Identify potential game day/special event parking opportunities and challenges (remote and near the stadium), and develop proposals for special event parking agreements TIME FRAME: Mid 2014 thru 2015 COST ESTIMATE: $250,000 placeholder request in anticipation of any consultant assistance identified during the Task Force efforts. Technical assistance may be necessary for preliminary engineering design, game day traffic operations planning, etc. STAFF REQUIREMENTS: Unknown at this time, but would include a Project Manager/Coordinator as well as ongoing participation by representatives from several City Departments. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What is the appropriate scope of City work in advance of a decision by CSU to move forward with the stadium? 79/112 Page 10 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: PROSPECT CORRIDOR PLAN, PHASES I & II BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: This offer will develop two transportation corridor plans for Prospect Road (Western Segment and Eastern Segment) from I-25 to Overland Trail. Phase one of the planning effort will encompass Prospect Road from Overland Trail to College Avenue. Phase two will encompass Prospect Road from College Avenue to I-25. The study will address the variety of adjacent uses, sensitive environmental areas, and constrained right-of-way, through street design that includes multi-modal enhancements with minimal impacts to properties and residences. SCOPE: Prospect Road is an Enhanced Travel Corridor from I-25 to the MAX corridor. Colorado State University has designated this corridor as a primary gateway from I-25 to the main campus. West of College Avenue, the character of the street changes considerably. As CSU continues to grow, as well as to develop plans for a new on-campus stadium, it will become increasingly necessary to plan for infrastructure appropriate to the changing context of the area. The Prospect Road Corridor Master Plan(s) will identify strategies for improvements to Prospect Road leading to a functional, safe, and identifiable roadway for pedestrian, bicycles, buses, and cars. Note: This project can be done in conjunction with the CSU Stadium Task Force project described in another New Initiative offer. TIMEFRAME: Phase I: 2014 Phase II: 2015 COST ESTIMATE: (Very preliminary estimate) Phase I: $200,000 Phase II: $200,000 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What are the proper parameters of Phase I & II study areas? Is College to Overland Trail appropriate or should Phase I address Lemay to Taft Road? 2. What is the appropriate scope of City work in advance of a decision by CSU to move forward with the stadium? 80/112 Page 11 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: CAMPUS WEST COMMUNITY POLICING TEAM BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: Police Services is interested in creating a team of officers working out of a substation in the Campus West Area. Campus West is a hot spot for neighborhood complaints, party calls, traffic issues and minor criminal activity such as thefts from automobiles and bicycle thefts. The team would be structured similar to our District 1 (Downtown) Unit that focuses resources on key times when there is more activity in the area and has the ability to work on longer-term problem solving efforts. In addition, with the Police Headquarters on the east side of town, having a substation on the west side would increase the public access to department services. It may be possible to partner with Neighborhood Services/Code Enforcement or some off-campus University services to create a strong team to address issues in that area. In order to affect these types of problems Police Services would like to staff this team with six police officers and one sergeant. The addition of at least one civilian records technician would enable this facility to maintain consistent hours of operation in a “storefront” location allowing for regular public access. In the 2013-2014 budget process Police Services submitted two BFO Offers to start building this team. Offer 83.3 proposed hiring two officers and one sergeant from the General Fund. Offer 133.6 proposed adding the other four officers with KFCG funds. It was proposed that the funding for the substation and civilian support staff would follow in the 2015-2016 budget cycle. The KFCG offer funding four officers was funded, but the General Fund offer was not. The approved officers are currently completing their training. While we will be able to add these officers to shifts and increase the staffing assigned to the Campus West area at certain times, we are unable to implement the community policing team that is envisioned. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: It takes 12-18 months to hire and train a new police officer after funding is approved. If the remaining funding for this initiative is approved in the 2015-2016 budget, this team will be fully functional by fall 2016. COST ESTIMATE: One sergeant and two police officers including equipment is estimated at $429,583 for the first year. A civilian records technician and the annual cost of a substation is estimated at $150,000 not including the one-time costs that would be required to modify and equip a suitable location. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Police Services is interested in knowing the Council interested in pursuing this initiative. 2. Is there support for creating a police substation in the Campus West area? 81/112 Page 12 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: URBAN AGRICULTURE BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: City Plan contains principles and policy statements in support of urban agriculture in three of the seven key issue chapters. Partnerships internal and external to the City are working to implement these policy and principle statements. For example, the Social Sustainability Department and the Gardens on Spring Creek are implementing the Community Gardens Outreach Program (Offer 236.1) to promote access to community gardens in low-income neighborhoods. The Planning Department is coordinating with numerous entities to ensure the Land Use Code and City Codes are not acting as a barrier to implementing urban agriculture in the City. Beginning in May of 2013, representatives from the private sector, public sector, and academic sector have come together to identify how to strategically implement City Plan through the development of a Local Food Cluster, sponsored by the City’s Economic Health Department. Each of these efforts is critical to implement the urban agriculture portions of City Plan. Recently an Urban Agriculture Cluster has begun forming. Various efforts are beginning to evolve which will clarify the future of urban agriculture. This will likely create additional budget offers in the future. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: Through the Economic Health Budget there is some funding for Cluster Development which could be directed toward the Urban Agriculture effort but this is a rapidly emerging area of community interest. Some of the key issues relate to:  Business model analysis  Business education for farmers  Analysis of distribution  Coordination with local grocers  Meeting with local CSAs (Community Supported Agriculture)  Community Gardens  Land availability potential through the Natural Areas Department and others  Winter gardens  Promotion and marketing  Working with low income populations- workforce development and service to low income populations  In-city animal practices  Healthy habits  Policy Development Work is already being done in many of these areas but it has not been in an overall coordinated manner. In order to be successful this proposal would begin the coordination effort of pulling together the many disparate efforts to develop a coordinated approach to Urban Agriculture. A consultant would be brought on for this effort to help in the overall development of the effort. The expectation is that this would result in recommendations during the BFO process 82/112 Page 13 of 22 COST ESTIMATE: $45,000 - $55,000 [Consultant Services are estimated to be $20,000 of this amount] TIMEFRAME: 3-6 Months DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What are the key considerations that staff should take into account in developing overall policies for urban agriculture? 83/112 Page 14 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: KEY EAST-WEST MAX CONNECTIONS (ENHANCED MAX-RELATED SERVICE) BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: This offer proposes the implementation of critical east/west elements of the adopted Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) to complement the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service MAX. The timing of implementation will correspond with MAX, which is planned to begin service in May 2014. Priority east/west connections include 30-minute frequencies on three (3) of the major east/west arterial streets in the city – Drake, Horsetooth and Harmony. Currently, both Drake and Horsetooth only have limited service between Taft Hill Rd and Stover Street and Harmony Road only has hour frequencies. Higher frequencies on MAX’s feeder routes will make MAX and the overall system perform better. SCOPE: New Service on East and West Drake Road 1. 30-minute frequency on Drake Road between Taft Hill Road and the King Soopers shopping center just east of Timberline Road. Connects into the MAX BRT service at the Drake and Swallow Stations. Serves single and multi-family land uses, the CSU Veterinary Campus, several commercial centers along Drake Road and MAX riders east/west connection needs on Drake Road. Service is estimated to generate 112,816 annual rides. New Service on East and West Horsetooth Road 2. 30-minute frequency on Horsetooth Road between the Spring Canyon Park and the intersection of Ziegler and Horsetooth Roads. Connects to the MAX BRT service at the Horsetooth and Swallow Stations. Serves the Spring Canyon Community Park, single and multi-family land uses, Foothills Mall, Collindale Golf Course, Fort Collins High School, various commercial centers along Horsetooth Road and MAX riders east/west connection needs on Horsetooth Road. Service is estimated to generate 112,048 annual rides. Increase Frequency on East and West Harmony Road 3. Enhanced frequency on Harmony Road from 60 minute to 30 minute between Front Range Community College and Lady Moon Drive. Connects into the MAX BRT service at the Harmony Station and at the South Transit Center. Serves the Harmony Libraries (at Front Range Community College and Front Range Village), Front Range Community College, College America, Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus, Preston Middle School, Fossil Ridge High School, various commercial and industrial centers along Harmony Road and MAX riders east/west connection needs on Harmony Road. Service is estimated to generate 69,208 annual rides. SCHEDULE: 2014 (commensurate with opening of MAX service) COST ESTIMATE: $636,825 per year DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What is the appropriate source of funding for this service (assuming this ongoing supplemental service)? General Funds, KFCG Other Transportation, et al. 84/112 Page 15 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: NATURE IN THE CITY STRATEGIC PLAN BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: The 2013 work program for Planning Services (funded Offer 40.1) included a limited scope (8 months) to conduct the Nature in the City study, based on direction from City Plan Policy LIV 14.1. The intent of this Policy is to integrate design elements such as natural groupings of planting areas, water features, climbing walls, and rooftop gardens within public spaces. An expanded scope has been prepared to develop a Nature in the City Strategic Plan; this plan will facilitate a connected system of public and private lands, weaving together the natural elements throughout our City. As our community develops, especially with higher densities, the potential for losing these special features is threatened unless we take action to ensure they are preserved. The intent of this plan is to develop a triple bottom line approach to preserve, enhance, and add to those natural areas within our community that are so important to creating our sense of place and to provide elements of nature within the City. A second phase of this project may be added next year to address the impact of and incorporate the network of ditches in the community. This offer is enhanced by extensive partnerships, both internally through a multi-disciplinary staff team (Planning, Natural Areas, Utilities, Sustainability, Parks, GIS) and externally through the involvement of Colorado State University. SCOPE: The expanded proposal assesses our existing Nature in the City assets and gaps, identifies opportunities for integrating new landscape features into public spaces, develops a strategic plan for how to build upon our assets and bridge the nature gaps, and initiates plan implementation. PERSONNEL: Planning would lead the Nature in the City Project with an interdisciplinary team composed of the Natural Areas, Parks, Utilities and Sustainability Departments. An Environmental Planning Technician would be hired to lead the field data collection. Consultants from Colorado State University would be contracted to provide the data collection for the ecological components of the project. Private consultants would be hired to design and implement the pilot project, e.g., a detention pond retrofit to include native species plantings and diverse habitat opportunities instead of a bluegrass lawn. TIMEFRAME: 18 Months (July 2013 to December 2014) COST ESTIMATE: $120,000 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Is the expanded scope appropriate given the current development activity or is the limited scope project more appropriate at this time? 85/112 Page 16 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: GREENHOUSE GAS GOAL REVIEW AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: In 2008, City Council adopted the carbon reduction goals for the Fort Collins community and a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that provides a strong framework for making progress towards the goals. Timing is optimal to review and update the community’s greenhouse house gas (GHG) goals in 2013 because the Energy Board will be discussing energy policy goals in 2013. Resources are available to begin the GHG goal review through the Sustainability Plan initiative, supplemented by Utilities resources to support the Energy Policy update. Although the CAP is scheduled to be updated in 2015/2016 according to the 2011 City Plan, it would be beneficial to update it now for several reasons:  The state of scientific knowledge and discourse has advanced significantly since 2008, increasing the urgency to take action now.  New opportunities have emerged since 2008, including advancements in energy technologies, vehicle electrification opportunities, changes in the price of energy solutions, new waste reduction strategies, etc. that warrant a fresh look at reduction strategies.  The 2008 CAP is considered an “interim strategic plan towards the 2020 goal”. It does not contain a complete suite of strategies to achieve the adopted 2020 goal; it only identifies strategies to achieve up to 88% of the reductions needed to meet the 2020 goal.  The City’s carbon accounting system has evolved significantly since the CAP was adopted. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: A review of the greenhouse gas goals should be conducted in close concert with the Energy Policy update (2013), Green Building roadmap update (2013) and Road to Zero Waste planning (2013). The GHG goal update will begin in the summer 2013 with the CAP update to be completed by early to mid-2014. This timing would allow priority CAP strategies to be considered in the 2015/2016 BFO process. COST ESTIMATE: $60,000 with $50,000-$55,000 anticipated for a consultant and the additional to support public engagement on the draft goals and plan. A limited amount of funding is already available in the Sustainability Plan process to support GHG goal analysis in 2013. This funding will be used to identify best practices in carbon mitigation strategies, opportunities relevant to Fort Collins, and to assess pathways towards alternative carbon or sector-specific goals. Additional funding of $60,000 is requested to complete the GHG goal analysis and to update the CAP. The additional funding would be used for consultant assistance on further best practice research including new areas such as net zero city, food, community engagement, integration with climate adaption strategies, etc. that incorporate a systems-thinking approach, update of emissions forecasts, triple bottom line analyses of strategies to aid in strategy prioritization, and assistance with public engagement. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Does Council want the GHG goal discussion to have some underlying analysis about pathways to achievement? 86/112 Page 17 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE (TBL) DECISION FRAMEWORK & TOOLBOX BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: City Council has increasingly asked for more analysis of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) as it makes decisions regarding the community. This has been increasingly important in economic health and in many other City matters. The City of Fort Collins has determined that no single Triple Bottom Line (TBL) decision support tool will meet all needs across the organization for evaluating the sustainability benefits and tradeoffs associated with organization-wide decision-making. Instead, key staff has decided the best course is to develop an overarching TBL Decision Framework to guide development of organization-wide policies, plans, strategies, and projects, and to create a toolbox of TBL tools. The toolbox would consist of various existing TBL tools designed for specific applications that have been evaluated and selected for use by the City. A TBL Decision Framework is needed to assist in clarifying the City’s policy development process by assessing positive and negative effects of development. The overall aim of the TBL Decision Framework is to facilitate progress towards the City’s major sustainability goals. It should reveal synergies (win-wins) among the TBL spheres of economy, environment, and social sustainability. In some circumstances it might exemplify clear tensions between different objectives and highlight the tradeoffs. It should support active decision-making and engagement with the often complex issues faced by the organization. The framework will help encourage early collaboration and integration across departments and should address a range of policy priorities, (e.g. climate change impact assessments, poverty impact assessments, etc.). Another desired feature for the TBL Decision Framework is that it be scalable so that it can be used for relatively simple proposals (e.g., developing a green-purchasing policy) and for complex proposals (e.g., major new infrastructure project). It should also be easy to update or change the Framework (and associated tools) as necessary. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: The development of the TBL Decision Framework and the TBL Toolbox will require input from multiple City departments to refine the vision, determine and prioritize applications for the framework and tools, and to provide feedback throughout the design phase. An overall framework design would likely include a first step that provides a multi-dimensional scan across all 3 bottom lines that helps identify when a more detailed analysis is needed for any 1 or more dimensions (e.g., a carbon emissions assessment is warranted). This multi-dimensional scan is the basis for informed decision making, which can be supported by the key detailed analyses (using TBL tools). Any intermediate analysis steps would be determined during design of the Framework. Another task associated with this offer includes conducting research to identify the available TBL tools that exist and an evaluation of each to determine if they meet City needs for TBL decision-making. Some examples of tools that may be evaluated include the Portland State University TBL Tool, City of Eugene TBL Analysis Tool, AccountAbility, Life Cycle Analysis, and EcoBudget. 87/112 Page 18 of 22 COST ESTIMATE: It is likely the TBL tool will be evolved over time beginning with an initial tool which is this offer and then be refined as it is tested in active operations. ESTIMATED BUDGET: $20,000 (Consultant Services) TIMEFRAME: 3-6 Months DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What are the key considerations that would make a triple bottom line tool and toolbox really effective in enabling Council to make informed decisions? 88/112 Page 19 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: CITY-WIDE DECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: As the City’s open spaces available to new development are reduced, more redevelopment will occur that will require the removal of existing buildings and structures. To reach the City’s goals of diverting new or old construction waste from the landfill, deconstruction is a viable option. Deconstruction can be defined as the systematic removal of a building’s components for the purpose of re-use with some materials recycled, rather than demolition where the components are damaged to an extent that re-use is no longer possible, although some recycling may occur. With this offer staff will convene a committee of stakeholders who will identify key questions to be addressed such as; is the local infrastructure capable of accepting all deconstruction materials; what level of deconstruction is appropriate for infill, alteration, or addition projects; what are the associated costs with deconstruction; and what could be the unintended results of a deconstruction ordinance? With the appropriate questions identified a consultant will be brought on to help staff formulate a proposal, establish regulations, assist with outreach and training needs. SCOPE: Confirm goal, scope and public engagement plan, conduct analysis and assessment of existing conditions, develop strategies, conduct public outreach, and implementation, including code changes and training. PERSONNEL: The bulk of this project would be completed through outside consulting services. It is estimated that .25 FTE would be required of an existing staff person to oversee the project. As well there would be a staff technical team including all interested departments to review progress and provide input and assistance with public outreach, event facilitation and other project support. Availability of internal staff is contingent on development demand. Key Stakeholders include homeowners and interested citizens, City Boards and Commissions, environmental interests, development and real estate interests, design professionals, contractors, and vendors who manage construction waste. TIMEFRAME: 10 months (January 2014 to fourth quarter 2014). COST ESTIMATE: $55,000 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Can the City’s goals for mitigating environmental impact, encouraging infill development, and increasing the affordability of housing be reconciled in a Deconstruction Program? 89/112 Page 20 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: DEVELOP COMMUNITY INFORMATION PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: Purpose: Staff is seeking more information on Council’s intent for this offer. It is assumed that this offer would include outreach information on what to do in varying health and safety circumstances ranging from what to do to prepare for wild fire to emergency weather information to where to find resources on healthy lifestyles. However, staff wants to ensure that Council’s intent is understood. Background: In 2012 Council approved an enhancement (Offer 223.1) for the Office of Emergency Management (OEM). The primary intent of this offer was to increase staffing to better respond to the ever growing responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Management. OEM provides a platform for community emergencies of a wide range but does not provide information for public health and safety outside the range of emergency preparedness, response, mitigation, and recovery. A new offer could possibly expand the City’s abilities to provide public health and safety information across its various platforms including the City’s Internet site, OEM’s web site, social media and PFA’s web site. There are possible opportunities for partnerships with The Health District of Northern Larimer County, University of Colorado Health, or other health care providers. However, more information regarding Council’s intent is required to explore options. Context: This offer responds to Council’s desire to explore new ways to deliver public health and safety information across the various platforms available. Further conversations with Council on the intent of this offer are necessary to define desired outcomes, timelines, responsibilities and budget. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: Further information is needed from Council to determine the specific scope and timeline of the offer. COST ESTIMATE: The determination of cost is dependent on the scope of Council’s intended project. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. The primary question for Council is what is their intent of this offer? 2. What outcomes do Council desire from the offer? 3. Are there similar projects in other communities that can be investigated as a resource for preparing this offer? 90/112 Page 21 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: INCLUSIONARY ZONING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANALYSIS AND ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: City Council has identified affordable housing funding as a priority for the next two years. As part of that goal, negotiations involving the mall redevelopment included conversations about the mall developer complying with any inclusionary housing ordinances put in place within a specific time frame after their development had been approved. The Affordable Housing Strategic Plan prioritizes rental affordable housing but does state that “for sale” affordable housing should be considered too. A study on the effectiveness and feasibility of adding inclusionary zoning ordinances for the purpose of increasing the available housing inventory in the City of Fort Collins would assist in determining if this is the best strategy to pursue. SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: The analysis of the benefits and potential barriers of an inclusionary zoning ordinance will require input from multiple City departments to refine the appropriate use of such zoning and its likely effect on current housing development projects and the development community. Additionally, several City boards and commissions would also be informed and asked for input. Public outreach would be required too. Economic conditions would need to be measured and assessed for an informed decision to be made in whether the City is well suited to this type of regulations. Consultants would be advising on: advisability of adding inclusionary zoning ordinances; proposed ordinance language; set benchmarking standards for ordinances implementation; and conduct public outreach. COST ESTIMATE: It is likely this project could be done in phases with decision items necessitating additional inquiry. ESTIMATED BUDGET: $60,000 TIMEFRAME: 6 to 12 months This project would likely involve several phases and take one year to be completed. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. What market conditions support using inclusionary zoning to promote the development of affordable housing? 2. Do the market conditions present and projected in Fort Collins match those ideal conditions? 91/112 Page 22 of 22 PROSPECTIVE NEW INITIATIVE/“OFFER” NAME: EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES HOUSING PROGRAM BACKGROUND/CONTEXT/OFFER SUMMARY: City Council has requested a “sustainable, affordable housing fund/program for our residents”. Currently the City provides $325,047 through the BFO process to fund affordable housing projects/programs to supplement the federal CDBG and HOME funds. These General Fund dollars often provide funding for projects that either cannot be funded with federal dollars or add a substantial burden or costs to projects because of federal regulations. In addition, the current funding is available only by application through the semi-annual Competitive Process. The timing of that process can limit when funds are available or lead to missing an important housing opportunity. This proposal is to fund a housing program that would make funds available to housing opportunities that arise throughout the year. The funds would supplement our existing process and provide opportunities that might otherwise be missed. The primary focus would be on the four goals identified in the City’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan: 1.) Increase the inventory of affordable rental housing units 2.) Preserve existing affordable housing units 3.) Increase housing and facilities for people with special needs 4.) Provide financial assistance for first-time homebuyers SCOPE AND TIMEFRAME: The design and development of the Emerging Opportunities Housing Program would involve input from City Council, Affordable Housing Board, the CDBG Commission and a committee that would be established for this purpose. Researching best practices from other communities would need to be completed. The program would have to be designed to determine how/when funding decisions for proposals would take place, what the proposals would look like and which staff member(s) would be involved. COST ESTIMATE: Helping meet the community needs for affordable housing requires a meaningful amount of money to establish the fund. In the 2013 Spring Competitive Process, there were requests in the housing/public facility category for nearly $2,350,000. Less than $750,000 in CDBG funding was available. In the Fall 2012 Competitive Process, the housing/public facility requests were over $2,000,000, with $1,670,000 in available funds ($750,000 in CDBG funds were reprogrammed from a previous year’s project that could not be completed). This year there is about $1,000,000 available for the fall cycle from HOME and the Affordable Housing Fund. The offer’s estimated budget includes 15% for administrative costs. ESTIMATED BUDGET: $575,000 TIMEFRAME: 3-6 Months DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. Who would be involved in making the funding decisions? 2. What types of programs/projects would be funded? What is the funding source? 92/112 2013‐15 Long Range Planning Calendar YEAR QTR WORK SESSION DATE REGULAR MEETING DATE Foothills Mall Redevelopment 4/23/2013 Foothills Mall Redevelopment 5/7/2013 Urban Agriculture 5/14/2013 Oil & Gas Regulations Improvements to the Development Review Process 5/28/2013 Reappropriation 4/16/2013 Oil & Gas Regulations 6/25/2013 Regional Water Update 6/25/2013 Council Retreat Follow‐up 6/25/2013 River District and Old Town Design Standards Regional Transit Study Capital Expansion Fees Revisions Ordinance 7/9/2013 Urban Agriculture 7/2/2013 Board and Commission Periodic Review 7/9/2013 Harmony Road Enhanced Travel Corridor Master Plan 7/2/2013 Planning and Zoning Board Joint Work Session 7/9/2013 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations 7/2/2013 Updates to Exterior Property Maintenance Codes 7/23/2013 Natural Areas Office Building at Nix Farm 7/2/2013 Climate Action Plan 7/23/2013 Annual Land Use Code Update 7/2/2013 Lincoln Triangle Strategic Plan & Lincoln Blvd Plan 7/23 7/23/2013 Electric Vehicle Charging Fees 7/2/2013 URA Policy Changes – Energy Efficiency & Waste Reduction 7/30/2013 Watershed IGA 7/2/2013 Smoking in Public Places Ordinance 8/13/2013 Neighborhood Parking Permit Program 7/16/2013 Amendment 64 Retail Marijuana 8/13/2013 CDBG Spring Competitive Process 7/16/2013 Board and Commission Structure Review 8/13/2013 Fort Collins‐Loveland Water District Agreement 7/16/2013 Historic Preservation Process Improvements 8/27/2013 URA Storefront Improvement Program 7/18/2013 Poudre Valley Fire Protection Board Joint Meeting 8/27/2013 URA Public Financing Polices 7/30/2013 Energy Conservation On‐Bill Financing First Year Review 8/27/2013 Capital Expansion Fees Revision Ordinance 8/20/2013 Commercial Water Allotments 8/27/2013 Midtown Plan 9/3/2013 TOU Rate Behavior Study 8/27/2013 Electric Construction Standards 9/3/2013 Utilities Building Update 8/27/2013 Colorado Water Conservation Board Regulation Updates 9/17/2013 Planning for Next Community Capital Program (BOB II) 9/10/2013 Social Sustainability Gap Analysis & Strat Plan Update 9/10/2013 URA Policy Changes – Energy Efficiency & Waste Reduction Budget Revisions 2014 9/10/2013 North College Improvements – PH III Green Building Roadmap Update 9/24/2013 FC Walks and the Sidewalk Improvement Program Foothills Mall Nuisance Code Update – Fugitive Dust Community Dashboard/BFO Metrics Report Update to Capital Expansion Fees Including Possible New Fee for Paved Trails Collective Bargaining FOP 2 0 1 3 2 QTR 3 QTR Revised June 18, 2013 Highlighted = Currently Scheduled on 6‐Month Planning Calendar ATTACHMENT 4 93/112 2013‐15 Long Range Planning Calendar Possible New Fee for Paved Trails Southeast Recreation and Art Center Study Midtown Corridor College Ave Blvd Transportation Study GigU Feasibility Study Energy Policy and Greenhouse Gas Goal Review Sustainability Community Plan Dr. Tony Frank, CSU Update 10/8/2013 2013 Clean Up Ordinance 10/1/2013 Poudre River Master Plan 10/8/2013 Utility Bond Ordinance 10/1/2013 2012 Building Code Review 10/22/2013 Utility Rate & Fee Ordinances 10/15/2013 Road to Zero Waste Plan 11/26/2013 Annual Appropriation Ordinance 2014 10/15/2013 Revenue Diversification & Long Term Financial Planning Update 11/26/2013 Annual Appropriation Ordinances / Resolutions 2014 (GID, DDA, PFA, URA) 10/15/2013 Lincoln Corridor Plan 11/26/2013 Utility Rate & Fee Ordinances 11/5/2013 Energy Policy and Greenhouse Gas Goal Review 12/10/2013 Adoption of 2012 Building Codes 12/3/2013 Planning for Next Community Capital Program (BOB II) 12/10/2013 Road to Zero Waste Plan 12/17/2013 Utility Bills & Conservation Programs Review 12/10/2013 Water/WW Rate & PIF Adjustments and Water Resource Development Fee Fee Alternatives Review ‐ Covering Possible Transportation, Parks Maint., Parking, &Transit Fee Water Allotments for Commercial Accounts Bicycle Plan Update Collective Bargaining FOP Green Street/Street Reshaping Demonstration Project Master Planning and Redevelopment of Block 32 for City Facilities Police Firing Range & Driving Track Design of Community Gateway Features on I‐25 FortZed GigU Feasibility Study Affordable Housing Fee per Mall Agreement Foothills Mall Long Range Financial Plan Urban Agriculture 4 QTR 2 0 1 3 Revised 94/June 112 18, 2013 Highlighted = Currently Scheduled on 6‐Month Planning Calendar 2013‐15 Long Range Planning Calendar YEAR QTR WORK SESSION DATE REGULAR MEETING DATE Median Renovations Social Sustainability Gap Analysis & Strategic Plan Update River District and Old Town Design Standards Sustainability Community Plan KFCG Annual Report Drought Response Update Southeast Community Park Design Comcast Franchise Renewal ‐ Needs Assessment & Performance Review River District and Old Town Design Standards Reappropriation Nature in the City Plan Median Renovations Midtown Corridor College Ave Blvd Transportation Study Nature in the City Plan Bicycle Plan Update Midtown Corridor College Ave Blvd Transportation Study BFO process for 2015‐16 Budget (2 work sesssion) Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Update 2014 Clean Up Ordinance BFO process for 2015‐16 Budget (2 work sesssion) Nature in the City Plan Paved Trail Master Plan and Trail Improvements Midtown Corridor College Ave Blvd Transportation Study Bicycle Plan Update Adoption of the 2015‐16 Budget and 2015 Annual Appropriation Ordinance Annual Appropriation Ordinances / Resolutions 2015 (GID, DDA, PFA, URA) 1 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 2 0 1 4 2 QTR Revised 95/June 112 18, 2013 Highlighted = Currently Scheduled on 6‐Month Planning Calendar 2013‐15 Long Range Planning Calendar YEAR QTR WORK SESSION DATE REGULAR MEETING DATE KFCG Annual Report Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Update Comcast Franchise Agreement Reappropriation BFO Revision Process & Revise Revenue Police Firing Range & Driving Track 2015 Clean Up Ordinance Annual Appropriation Ordinance 2015 Annual Appropriation Ordinances / Resolutions 2015 (GID, DDA, PFA, URA) 2 0 1 5 1 QTR 3 QTR 4 QTR 2 QTR Revised 96/June 112 18, 2013 Highlighted = Currently Scheduled on 6‐Month Planning Calendar Vision To provide world-class municipal services through operational excellence and a culture of innovation Mission Exceptional Service for an exceptional community Values Outstanding Service Innovation & Creativity Respect Integrity Initiative Collaboratio n & Teamwork Stewardship 6/18/2013 Key Outcom 1 Communi Neighborh Livabili 2 Culture Recreati 3 Econom Health 4 Environm Health 5 High Perform Governm 6 Safe Commun 7 Transport mes St ity & hood ity Provid envir Strategic Goal Provide a high quality built environment and support quality, diverse neighborhoods. Strategic Objectives A. Develop innovative enforcement efforts & voluntary compliance with City codes B. Provide, enhance & maintain attractive public spaces C. Preserve the character of neighborhoods & enhance/maintain the attractiveness of neighborhoods D. Encourage partnerships with private entities and public agencies for housing, & other programs E. Improve neighborhood parking management 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. Nature in the City Plan 2. Median Renovations 3. Neighborhood Parking Permit Program 4. Low Income, Senior and Disabled Rebate Programs 5. Social Sustainability Gap Analysis 6. Sustainability Community Plan 7. Community Garden Outreach Program 8. Police Campus West District Staffing 9. Neighborhood Street Tree Replacement 10. Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation 11. Updates to Exterior Property Maintenance Codes 12. Urban Agriculture (to EconH) 13. West Central Neighborhood Plan Update 14. Eastside/Westside Neighborhood Plans Update KEY OUTCOME ATTACHMENT 6 106/112 Strategic Goal Provide diverse cultural and recreational amenities. Strategic Objectives A. Provide exceptional programs and facilities that contribute to the health & cultural vibrancy of the community B. Provide outstanding customer service & operational excellence C. Provide programs that are diverse, innovative and tailored to our unique community D. Maintain and enhance a world class regional, interconnected system of parks, trails & open lands E. Promote the arts and make Fort Collins the cultural destination in northern Colorado 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. Senior Center Expansion 2. Southeast Recreation and Art Center Study 3. Foothills (Mall) Recreation Center 4. Disc Golf Course Improvements at Edora Park 5. Natural Areas Office Building at Nix Farm 6. Poudre School District After- Hours Program 7. The Great Lawn at the Gardens on Spring Creek 8. Southeast Community Park Design 9. Paved Trail Master Plan and Trail Improvements 10. Possible New Fee for Paved Trails 11. Carnegie Creative Center-Arts Incubator 12. EPIC Pool Water/Air Quality Improvements Building Codes KEY OUTCOME 107/112 Strategic Goal Promote a healthy, sustainable economy reflecting community values. Strategic Objectives A. Enhance opportunities for both businesses & local workforce B. Foster a diverse mix of employment & retail opportunities C. Focus and invest in downtown area, river district, Lincoln Triangle and Midtown Corridor D. Ensure adequate staff to provide timely review of development opportunities E. Revitalize and strengthen business centers 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. Support of Targeted Industry Clusters 2. Business Appreciation Program 3. Foothills Mall Redevelopment 4. Woodward 5. Storefront Improvement Program 6. Midtown Corridor College Avenue Boulevard Transportation Study 7. Lincoln Triangle Strategic Plan & Lincoln Boulevard Plan 8. Downtown Holiday Lighting & Flower Program 9. Midtown & Mason Corridor Urban Design Plan 10. Economic Health Partnerships (Existing & Potential Agreements) 11. GigU Feasibility Study 12. Enhanced Business Retention Program 13. Shop Fort Collins 14. Improvements to the Development Review Process 15. Improvements to Historic Preservation Process 16. River District and Old Town Design Standards 17. Adoption of 2012 Building Codes 18. Urban Agriculture 19. Pro Bicycle Challenge KEY OUTCOME 108/112 Strategic Goal Promote, protect and enhance a healthy & sustainable environment. Strategic Objectives A. Maintain and improve air and water quality B. Reduce greenhouse gas emission to by 20% below 2005 & by 2020 and 80% by 2050 C. Conserve & restore natural habitat & promote biological health & diversity D. Reduce waste and resource consumption E. Increase energy conservation, efficiency & renewable energy F. Align water quantity with storage and conservation policies 2013–2014 Key Initiatives KEY OUTCOME 1. Climate Adaptation Planning 2. Poudre River Restoration and Rehabilitation 3. Poudre River Ecosystem Response Model 4. Poudre River Instream Flows 5. Feasibility Study with CSU for Dual Water System Design 6. Integrated Recycling Facility and Other Recycling Programs 7. Fort Collins Solar Program, Small Scale Solar Incentives Program, and Community Solar Garden 8. Downtown Poudre River Recreation, Habitat and Stormwater Improvements 9. Oil and Gas Standards and Regulations 10. Road to Zero Waste plan 11. Green Building Roadmap Update 12. Energy Policy and Greenhouse Gas Goal Review 13. Brewery Waste Carbon Source Study 14. FortZED Special Projects 15. One Stop Shop (web portal) for City Sustainability Initiatives 16. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations 109/112 Strategic Goal Deliver an efficient, innovative, transparent, effective and collaborative city government. Strategic Objectives A. Improve leadership capability and increase leadership effectiveness B. Improve organizational fiscal literacy, financial management & fiscal strength C. Implement a systematic approach to identify, organize, & communicate performance measures D. Attract, engage and retain a high quality, creative workforce with a diverse set of skills E. Promote and invest in employee health and safety F. Develop and foster key community partnerships G. Establish a culture of exceptional customer service and deliver services that exceed community expectations. 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. Leadership Development Programs 2. Performance Management Improvement 3. Employee Recruitment / On-boarding Enhancements 4. Monthly Operating Report (MOR) & Financial Report 5. Revenue Diversification 6. Community Dashboard and a BFO Metrics Report 7. Improve our Safety Culture and Work Practices 8. Sustainable Purchasing Program 9. Sustainability Strategic Plan (City Organization) 10. Sales Tax Software 11. Comcast Franchise Renewal 12. Collective Bargaining Agreement w/ Fraternal Order of Police 13. Planning for Next Community Capital Program (BOB II) 14. Funding Analysis Tied to ¼-Cent Renewal for Street Maintenance 15. Utilities Knowledge Transfer/ Succession Planning 16. Master Planning and Redevelopment of Block 32 for City Facilities 17. Information Technology VoIP Implementation 18. Enterprise Wireless Access 19. Performance Excellence: Timberline Application 20. World Class Defined Across the City 21. Brand Management/Excellent Public Presentations 22. Manager/Supervisor 360 Assessments 23. Risk Assessments 24. Green Vehicle Purchasing 25. City Council Leadership and Governance KEY OUTCOME 110/112 Strategic Goal Provide a safe place to live, work, learn and play. Strategic Objectives A. Proactively Support prevention and community safety through education and outreach initiatives B. Improve response to collisions, crimes, fires, utility emergencies and medical services C. Improve the safety and reliability of the City’s built environment D. Support community wide planning, preparedness and recovery from community disasters 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) Electronic Data Management 2. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) iPhone Application 3. Complete Advanced Meter Installations 4. Customer Web Portal and Demand Response Program Deployment 5. Data-driven Policing 6. Police Accreditation 7. Natural Areas Ranger Program 8. West Vine Stormwater Outfall Channel Construction & Forney Detention Pond Land Acquisition 9. Harmony Flood Mitigation Feasibility & Preliminary Design 10. Northeast College Corridor Outfall Phase 1 Construction 11. River District/Jefferson Street: Design of Stormwater Improvements 12. Drought Response 13. Municipal Court Services KEY OUTCOME 111/112 Strategic Goal Provide for safe and reliable multi-modal travel to, from and throughout the City. Strategic Objectives A. Provide safe, well-functioning, high quality streets, bikeways, sidewalks, trails & infrastructure B. Provide long-term transportation planning to enhance citizen mobility and improve traffic flow C. Limit the rate of increase or reduce vehicle traffic and enhance alternative travel modes D. Address long-term maintenance & operations cost of transportation infrastructure E. Enhance the sustainability of the physical assets as well as the operations of transportation systems 2013–2014 Key Initiatives 1. North College Improvements- Phase III 2. Timberline Road Improvements – Drake Road to Prospect 3. Max Construction 4. Transfort Service Realignment 5. Max Operations 6. Bicycle Plan Update 7. Pro Cycling Challenge(to EconH) 8. FC Bikes to Platinum 9. City Bridge Repair and Replacement Program 10. Traffic Signal Controller Replacement 11. Design of Community Gateway Features on I-25 12. Mulberry Bridge Design: Urban Enhancements 13. Lemay & Vine: Review Design Concept 14. Green Street/Street Reshaping Demonstration Project 15. Regional Transit Study 16. Implementation of FC Walks and The Sidewalk Improvement Program KEY OUTCOME 112/112 quality, & ion Provid recr mic h Promot econom ental h Promote hea ming ment Deliver trans collabo nity Provid wo tation Provi multi- and City trategic Goal de a high quality ronment and sup diverse neighbo de diverse cultur reational amenit e a healthy, sust my reflecting com values e, protect and en althy & sustaina environment an efficient, inn sparent, effective orative city gover de a safe place to ork, learn and pl ide for safe & rel modal travel to, throughout the of Fort C ls y built pport orhoods 1.1. D 1.2. P 1.3. P 1.4 En 1.5 Im ral and ties 2.1 Pr 2.1 Pr 2.1 Pr 2.1 M 2.1 Pr tainable mmunity 3.1 En 3.2 Fo 3.3 Fo 3.4 En 3.5 Re nhance a ble 4.1 M 4.2 Re 4.3 Co 4.4 Re 4.5 In 4.6 A ovative, e and rnment 5.1 Im 5.2 Im 5.3 Im 5.4 At 5.5 Pr 5.6 D 5.7 Es o live, lay 6.1 Pr 6.2 Im 6.3 Im 6.4 Su liable from, city 7.1 Pr 7.2 Pr 7.3 Li 7.4 A 7.5 En Collins 20 Develop innovative Provide, enhance & Preserve the charac ncourage partnersh mprove neighborho rovide exceptional rovide outstanding rovide programs th Maintain and enhanc romote the arts and nhance opportuniti oster a diverse mix ocus & invest in the nsure adequate staf evitalize and streng Maintain and improv educe greenhouse g onserve & restore n educe waste and re ncrease energy cons lign water quantity mprove leadership c mprove organization mplement a systema ttract, engage and r romote and invest i evelop and foster k tablish a culture of roactively Support mprove response tim mprove the safety a upport community rovide safe, well-fu rovide long-term tr imit the rate of incr ddress long-term m nhance the sustaina 013-2014 e enforcement effor & maintain attractiv ter of neighborhoo hips with private en ood parking manage programs and facil customer service & hat are diverse, inno ce a world class reg d make Fort Collin es for both busines of employment an e downtown area, r ff to provide timely gthen business cent ve air and water qu gas emission to by natural habitat & p esource consumptio servation, efficienc y with storage and c capability and incre nal fiscal literacy, f atic approach to ide retain a high qualit in employee health key community par f exceptional custom prevention and com mes to collisions, c and reliability of the wide planning, pre unctioning, high qu ransportation plann rease or reduce veh maintenance & oper ability of the physic Strategic Strategic O rts & voluntary com ve public spaces ods & enhance/main ntities and public ag ement lities that contribut & operational exce ovative and tailored gional interconnect ns the cultural destin sses and the local w nd retail opportuniti river district, Linco y review and critiqu ters uality 20% of 2005 by 20 romote biological h on cy & renewable ene conservation polici ease leadership effe financial managem entify, organize, & ty, creative workfor h and safety rtnerships mer service and de mmunity safety thr crimes, fires, utility e City's built enviro eparedness and reco uality streets, bikew ning to enhance citiz hicle traffic and enh rations cost of tran cal assets as well a c Plan Su Objectives mpliance with City ntain the attractiven gencies for housing te to the health & c llence d to our unique com ted system of park nation in northern workforce ies oln triangle & midt ue of development 020 and 80% by 20 health & diversity ergy ies fectiveness ment & fiscal streng & communicate perf rce with a diverse s liver services that e rough education an y emergencies and m onment overy from commu ways, sidewalks, tra zen mobility and im hance alternative tr sportation infrastru s the operations of ummary y codes ness of neighborho g, & other program cultural vibrancy o mmunity ks, trails & open lan Colorado town corridor opportunities 050 gth formance measures set of skills exceed community nd outreach initiativ medical services unity disasters ails & infrastructur mprove traffic flow ravel modes ucture f transportation syst oods ms f the community nds s y expectations. ves e w tems Strate egic Initiativees ATTACHMENT 5 105/112 Sunset Water District City Limits - Outline Growth Management Area Water Features 0Major 1 2 3 Streets - Miles ©Scale000 1:100, ATTACHMENT 1 39/112 N/A Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 37. Removal of debris Requires removal of all construction debris. Meets Meets No equivalent regulation Similar standard 25/112 24/112 requirements. Certain regulations apply, but critical facilities are allowed within the floodplain, if criteria are met. 22/112 40 CFR 60.18(g) (FLIR camera is an alternative compliance method accepted by EPA COGCC Rule 604.c.(2).f ‐ leak detection plan required if within designated setback location. 20/112 which are not electrically operated that are within four hundred (400) feet of Building Units shall be equipped with quiet design mufflers or equivalent. All mufflers shall be properly installed and maintained in proper working order (Rule 802.f). 18/112 with local regulations (Rule 603) 13. Chains Must be removed before entering City streets. Exceeds Exceeds No equivalent regulation No equivalent regulation 17/112