HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 04/08/2014 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1
Karen Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC)
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 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 on the Comcast cable system
Steve Roy Darin Atteberry Wanda Nelson
City Attorney City Manager 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.
City Council Work Session
April 8, 2014
6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER.
1. 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. (staff: Tessa Greegor, Paul Sizemore; 10 minute staff presentation; 45
minute discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to update City Council on the status of the 2014 Bicycle Master
Plan. Staff invites feedback and direction on the Plan vision and goals, bicycle network analysis and
proposed design strategies, safety initiatives, and next steps in the planning process.
2. Update of Old Town Fort Collins Historic District Design Standards and Downtown River District (R-
D-R Zone) Design Standards and Guidelines. (staff: Josh Weinberg, Ted Shepard; 10 minute staff
presentation; 30 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to review a proposed update to the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District
(Old Town District) Design Standards and Downtown River District (R-D-R Zone) Design Standards
and Guidelines. These two projects, while separate, are brought forward in tandem due to a similar
set of design issues and geographical proximity. Both areas also contain portions of the National
Register Old Town Historic District. The Old Town Design Standards, originally adopted in 1981,
require substantial revisions to address current historic preservation practices and development
concerns related to infill and redevelopment within and around the Old Town District. The update to
the design standards will define and illustrate characteristics for compatible future development
within the Old Town District and in the adjacent area; and a means for incorporating modern
sustainable building practices into historic preservation projects. The design standards for the R-D-R
Zone District were originally adopted with City Plan in 1997. Several developments have been
brought forward, highlighting the need to take additional steps to preserve the district's distinctive
character as the commercial and industrial core of our city. The proposed design standards and
CITY COUNCIL
City of Fort Collins Page 2
guidelines for this zone have been created to better address neighborhood, site and building
attributes in order to preserve the unique character of the area.
3. Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study. (staff: Aaron Iverson, Paul Sizemore; 10
minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to update City Council on the status of Midtown in Motion: College
Avenue Transportation Study. Phase I of the project has been completed, which reviewed existing
conditions and established a vision through extensive public outreach. Phase II is underway to
develop alternatives based on results from Phase I and feedback from City Council. Staff invites
feedback and direction on proposed ideas for improving circulation for all modes in Midtown.
4. Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options. (staff: Beth Sowder; 15 minute staff presentation; 45
minute discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to discuss potential options to expand the smoking regulations in
Fort Collins. City Council indicated a desire to look into further expanding the City’s smoking
regulations at the Council Work Session on August 13, 2013. This item provides background
information, community feedback, and information about actions taken in other communities. The
additional smoking regulations to be discussed include restrictions related to:
1. Electronic Smoking Devices
2. 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
3. Natural Areas, Parks, & Trails
4. Public Events & Festivals
5. Old Town or Downtown Area.
OTHER BUSINESS.
ADJOURNMENT.
DATE:
STAFF:
April 8, 2014
Tessa Greegor, FCBikes Program Manager
Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
2014 Bicycle Master Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to update City Council on the status of the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. Staff
invites feedback and direction on the Plan vision and goals, bicycle network analysis and proposed design
strategies, safety initiatives, and next steps in the planning process.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What questions or feedback does Council have on the proposed vision, goals and Plan elements?
2. What questions or feedback does Council have on the proposed bicycle network analysis approach and
proposed approaches to bikeway design?
3. What suggestions does Council have for promoting a culture of respect and safety among all transportation
system users?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The 2014 Bicycle Master Plan is an implementation item stemming from the City of Fort Collins Transportation
Master Plan and City Plan. The planning effort is focused on developing:
A community-driven vision for bicycling in Fort Collins
A State of Bicycling in Fort Collins existing conditions report
A bicycle network level of stress/comfort analysis
High priority areas where bicycle investments are recommended
An updated proposed bikeway network and wayfinding system recommendations
Bicycle infrastructure design guidelines
Policy and programmatic recommendations, including education, enforcement, encouragement and
evaluation priorities
An implementation, funding and phasing plan
A Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan.
Background
Building on the City’s recent designation as a Platinum-level Bicycle Friendly Community, the 2014 Bicycle Master
Plan will develop a ten year vision and a comprehensive set of recommendations for improving the safety and
accessibility of bicycling for people of all ages and abilities, across the community. The 2014 Bicycle Master Plan
is an update to the City’s 2008 Bike Plan (five year plan) and 2011 Bicycle Safety Education Plan (three year
plan). Previous planning efforts, such as the Transportation Master Plan and City Plan (2011) called for an update
to the City’s Bike Plan, while also recommending an evaluation of the City’s bicycle lane and wayfinding system, a
key task of this project.
Packet Pg. 3
April 8, 2014 Page 2
Plan purpose and need
The number of people choosing to bicycle as a healthy, sustainable, and affordable means of transportation is
increasing every year. The growing percentage of people bicycling in Fort Collins demonstrates the need for
ongoing planning, program, and project implementation to ensure a safe environment for all transportation system
users. With evolving best practices for bikeway infrastructure design, programming and policy, the City’s 2014
Bicycle Master Plan provides the opportunity to develop strategies that reflect best practices for creating a safe
and inviting environment for cycling, while supporting the growing demand for bicycling in Fort Collins.
Plan elements
The following plan elements will be incorporated into a comprehensive bicycle master plan for the City:
Vision, goals, objectives and policy framework
State of Bicycling in Fort Collins existing conditions report: a summary of existing data and conditions,
programs and policies for bicycling, and results from an evaluation of the City’s roadway and bikeway
system to determine the level of comfort and perceived safety for bicyclists across the network.
Public outreach and engagement report: a summary of the outreach methods and findings, including an
online survey, WikiMap, community bike audits, open houses, stakeholder workshops, and targeted
outreach events.
Proposed bicycle network and supporting facilities plan: based on existing conditions data, public and
stakeholder input, and an extensive GIS analysis, Staff will propose an updated bikeway network,
including a refined list of physical improvements to corridors and intersections. The goal is to ensure a
seamless and interconnected bikeway network. Bicycle infrastructure design guidelines and a protocol for
implementing a bicycle wayfinding system will be included.
Policy and programmatic recommendations: this will include recommendations related to enforcement,
education, encouragement and evaluation, designed to promote a culture of respect, responsibility and
awareness among transportation system users, and to bring Fort Collins to a Diamond-level Bicycle
Friendly Community.
Implementation, funding and phasing plan: the Plan will include an implementation, funding, and phasing
plan with planning-level cost estimates for the recommended facilities, projects and programs, and a
detailed phasing plan based in three, five, and ten year increments. The implementation plan will also
address future maintenance needs for the system, as well as recommendations for performance
measures related to bicycling. The prioritization methodology will be GIS-based and will incorporate
elements of the Triple Bottom Line framework.
Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan: A separate but integrated element of the 2014 Bicycle
Master Plan is a Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan. This section will be completed in late
April 2014 and will include a demand and cost analysis, and implementation plan for launching a system
of self-checkout stations for public bikes in Fort Collins, an expansion of the Fort Collins Bike Library.
Timeline and phasing
The project was initiated in October 2013 and is led by FC Bikes staff, with support from a multi-departmental
Project Management Team and Technical Advisory Committee. A final draft plan is anticipated in September
2014. The following summarizes the key phases for the Bicycle Master Plan process:
Phase 1: Initial Public Outreach (October-December 2013): Initial public outreach was conducted by FC
Bikes to collect general input about bicycling in Fort Collins. Tools to collect input during this period
included an online survey, four community bicycle audits, stakeholder presentations and a community
issues forum.
Phase 2: Information Gathering (January-March 2014): In December 2013, Toole Design Group was
hired to assist with the development of the Bicycle Master Plan. Phase 2 focused on collecting existing
conditions data, public open houses, stakeholder presentations and interviews, and collecting input via an
online WikiMap.
Packet Pg. 4
April 8, 2014 Page 3
Phase 3: Development of Recommendations (March-May 2014): This phase will include additional
targeted outreach, analysis of public input and existing conditions data, and initial development of
recommendations. The Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan will also be completed during
this phase, with key elements incorporated into the final plan document.
Phase 4: Plan Development and Completion (June-December 2014): The draft and final draft plan will be
developed during Phase 4, with additional public outreach scheduled for June and July.
Existing conditions
An Existing Conditions Report (State of Bicycling in Fort Collins) is in progress and is anticipated to be completed
in April 2014. The following summarizes some of the information collected to date:
Bicycle Mode Share/Ridership: According to the 2012 American Community Survey data (1-year estimate), 7.9%
of adults (5.9% Female, 9.8% Male) in Fort Collins commute primarily by bicycle, up from 6.6% in 2011. Census
data indicates that the share of bicycle commuters has increased from 4.4% in 2000 to 7.9% in 2012.
Bicycle Collision Data: The number of reported bicycle-vehicle collisions ranged from 102 to 180 per year, using
data collected from 2000 to 2013. In 2012, 180 collisions were reported, trending down to 178 in 2013. High
bicycle crash locations include the following:
City Park and Elizabeth
College and Drake
Shields and Drake
Shields and Elizabeth
College and Laurel
Shields and Lake
Shields and Stuart.
Existing Network: The total bicycle network mileage in Fort Collins is approximately 275 miles - 168 miles of on-
street bicycle lanes, 35 miles of paved trails, 50 miles of natural surface trails, and 25 miles of designated bike
routes. In addition, the City has installed one bicycle box at Shields and Plum and buffered bicycle lanes on East
Prospect Road. Approximately 38% of the City’s road network includes bicycle facilities, and 85% of the City’s
arterial network.
Network Analysis (low-stress bicycling concept): Best practices for bicycle infrastructure design have evolved in
the United States, reflecting successful lessons from around the world and a better understanding of the type of
bicycle infrastructure needed to increase the level of comfort experienced by bicyclists. The low-stress bicycling
concept is premised on the experience of the Dutch who have focused on building a connected bicycle network
that minimizes bicyclist interaction with motorized traffic. Their approach targets mainstream adult bicyclists by
providing the following types of facilities:
Shared lanes on low-volume, low-speed, local streets (sometimes requires traffic calming)
Bicycle lanes on moderate volume and moderate speed streets
Protected bike lanes (cycle tracks) on high-volume or high-speed streets
Comfortable intersection crossings which minimize bicyclist stress and clarify right-of-way
To assess the City’s bicycle network in terms of low-stress bicycling, Staff utilized a Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
model, developed by the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University. This methodology
measures level of traffic stress (bicycle comfort) based on key factors including posted speed, number of travel
lanes, bicycle lane width and intersection crossings. Staff proposes to use the results from this analysis in
combination with public input and results from a GIS-based demand, equity and safety analysis, to determine the
proposed bicycle network and corresponding infrastructure recommendations. For the purposes of this Plan, the
Packet Pg. 5
April 8, 2014 Page 4
application of the LTS model is intended as a planning tool to help develop a connected low-stress bicycle
network that serves all of Fort Collins. Attachment 1 outlines the analysis methodology and basis for this
approach.
2008 Bike Plan and 2011 Bicycle Safety Education Plan Implementation: A majority of the recommendations
outlined in the 2008 Bike Plan and 2011 Bicycle Safety Education Plan have been implemented or are in the
process of being implemented. A comprehensive review of the implementation of existing plans is in progress
and will be summarized the State of Bicycling Report. Attachment 2 provides a status summary of the
recommendations from the 2011 Bicycle Safety Education Plan and other 2014 safety education initiatives.
Community engagement to date (Attachment 3 summarizes the initial public engagement)
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits: Four community bike audits were conducted by FC Bikes in four
different sectors of the city. More than 50 community members participated in the bike audits, providing
input about bicycling conditions and desired improvements. Draft notes from this outreach are
documented in Attachment 4 and will be incorporated as public feedback in the plan.
Online Survey: An online survey was conducted in Quarter 4 of 2013, receiving 1,004 responses. Survey
results are currently being analyzed.
Technical Advisory Committee and Stakeholder Visioning Workshop: A Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) was established to provide guidance over the course of this planning process. The first TAC
meeting was held in January in combination with a Stakeholder Visioning Workshop. Together, 35 people
participated, helping to shape the Plan vision and goals.
Public Open Houses (February 20 and March 12): Staff provided information about the Bicycle Master
Plan at the February 20 Citywide Planning Projects Open House (144 attendees) and on March 12
hosted a Bicycle Master Plan Open House at the Lincoln Center (236 attendees). Input from the March 12
Open House is being processed.
WikiMap: An online interactive mapping tool was hosted on the City’s webpage and used to collect
feedback about preferred bicycle routes, barriers to bicycling, recommendations for bike parking and bike
share stations. The WikiMap was available for public feedback from February 4 through March 21 and
received over 1,100 comments.
In addition, staff has presented to the Transportation Board, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Planning and Zoning
Board (April 4) and various stakeholder groups.
Triple Bottom Line analysis
Staff completed an initial Triple Bottom Line (TBL) analysis of the Bike Plan on February 28, 2014. Staff from FC
Bikes, FC Moves, Streets, Engineering, Traffic Operations and Social Sustainability participated in the analysis.
When asked about bicycling in Fort Collins, Staff identified more strengths and opportunities than weaknesses
and threats. Strengths and opportunities included the strong bike culture in the City and the environmental and
economic benefits of bicycling instead of driving. Weaknesses and threats included perceived and real safety
concerns and their consequences, the trade-offs between vehicular and bicyclist mobility, and the cost of
enhanced bicycle infrastructure. The full TBL map is provided as Attachment 5. Staff will conduct another TBL
exercise when draft recommendations are developed for the Plan.
Plan Vision and Goals
The following vision statement and goals were developed through the stakeholder visioning workshop and refined
by staff. Participants at the March 12 Open House were asked to vote on their top three goals; the results of this
exercise are ranked below based on the voting that occurred at the March 12 Open House. Attachment 6
provides a summary of the vision and goal setting process and outcomes.
Packet Pg. 6
April 8, 2014 Page 5
Vision:
The Bicycle Master Plan envisions Fort Collins as a world-class city for bicycling. It is a city where
people of all ages and abilities have access to a comfortable, safe, and connected network of
bicycle facilities, and where bicycling is an integral part of daily life and the local cultural
experience.
Goals (numbers indicate votes received at the March 12 Open House):
Connectivity (98) Complete a connected network of low-stress bicycle facilities, linking to the regional
bicycle network, and providing seamless connections to public transit, key destinations and all city
neighborhoods.
Safety (68) Improve safety for all modes of transportation by implementing appropriate, well-designed
bicycle facilities, education and enforcement programs.
Ridership (31) Increase the amount of bicycling in Fort Collins for all trip purposes by creating a
welcoming cycling environment for people of all bicycling levels.
Community (18) Foster a strong bicycle community identity while advancing a culture of respect and
responsibility for all transportation system users.
Equity (18) Provide equal access to bicycling for all members of the Fort Collins community through the
implementation of inclusive programming and outreach, and bicycle network development and
infrastructure design.
Comfort (17) Increase the level of comfort experienced by people when bicycling in Fort Collins by
building low-stress bicycle facilities and implementing programs to build confidence among riders.
Health (17) Increase access to bicycling as essential to a physically active and environmentally healthy
community.
Initial prioritization results (March 12 Open House):
Feedback from the open house is currently being analyzed; however, the results from a prioritization exercise are
summarized below:
Tell Us Your Priorities! We want the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan to reflect what you think can make Fort Collins a
world-class bicycling city. Think about everything you’ve read throughout the room and vote for what kinds of
infrastructure and programs you believe will make the biggest impact.
The priorities as ranked at the Public Open House are:
1. Protected Bike Lanes (222)
2. Improving Existing Bike Lanes (197)
3. Improving Intersections (160)
4. Education Programs (119)
5. Enforcement Programs (70)
6. Encouragement Programs (49)
7. Neighborhood Greenways (47).
Full open house feedback will be presented in the State of Bicycling in Fort Collins report and will inform Plan
recommendations for infrastructure, policies, and programs.
Safety
Safety for all modes of transportation is a principal component of this plan and will be central to the
recommendations Staff develops from this process. Staff is working closely with the Fort Collins Police
Department, Traffic Operations, and other key stakeholders to develop a comprehensive set of recommendations
to improve safety for all through a data-driven approach. Recommendations will reflect engineering solutions in
Packet Pg. 7
April 8, 2014 Page 6
addition to education and enforcement strategies focused on promoting a culture of responsibility, respect and
awareness for all transportation system users.
Proposed approaches to bikeway design
In addition to conventional bike lanes, shared-lane markings, and trails, the following types of bicycle facilities are
being explored through this process as potential design recommendations for streets and intersections
(Attachment 7 provides additional information regarding these concepts):
Neighborhood greenways (bicycle boulevards)
Bicycle wayfinding
Protected bike lanes (also termed cycle tracks or separated bike lanes)
Two-stage turn boxes
Painted bike lanes (green)
Bicycle lane or shared lane markings through intersections
Dedicated bicycle signals
Priority shared lanes (bikes may use full lane)
Greater merging clarity for motorists across bike lanes.
Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan
The Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan is a roadmap for expanding the Bike Library through self-
checkout stations of public bikes around town for residents and visitors to use for short trips. Making bikes more
readily available to the greater community will encourage cycling. It will also support the larger public transit
system (e.g., MAX) by providing first mile and last mile connectivity and will allow users to complete their trips
without having to bring their bikes on board. More than 30 cities in North America have launched or are in the
process of launching public bike share systems that have resulted in communitywide health and environmental
benefits.
2014 is an important transition year for the Bike Library. It is transitioning from Old Town Square to the Downtown
Transit Center and will operate from April through December with expanded hours compared to previous
seasons.
The Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan is laying out options for possible expansion of the Bike
Library with self-checkout stations as early as Spring 2015. The Plan will include analyses of demand/feasibility
and costs, as well as initial system planning, a proposed business model and steps for implementation:
Bike Share systems are typically implemented in phases. Based on estimated demand for bike share
trips, it is proposed that Phase 1 of the program focus on downtown and CSU areas with future phases
expanding further south particularly along MAX.
The business model currently being considered proposes City-ownership and management of the
system, with the operations contracted to a third party (e.g., non-profit or private firm). This is similar to
the structure of the existing Bike Library.
Bike share systems include both capital and operations & maintenance (O&M) expenses. Staff expects to
submit a BFO offer for partial funding of capital costs; the remaining capital costs could come from grants,
and O&M costs are largely covered through sponsorships.
The Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan is expected to be complete April 2014 and key elements
will be incorporated into the Bicycle Master Plan.
Packet Pg. 8
April 8, 2014 Page 7
Next Steps in the Planning Process
Phase 3 (March-May 2014):
Synthesize public input received to date and existing conditions data
Initial development of recommendations
Targeted outreach (events planned in partnership with VidaSana and Safe Routes to School)
Presentations to Boards and Commissions
Completion of Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan
Phase 4 (June-December 2014)
Development of Draft Plan
Public outreach and Plan feedback (Public Engagement Plan included as Attachment 8)
Council Work Session #2, August 26
Development of Final Draft Plan
Proposed Council adoption
ATTACHMENTS
1. Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method (PDF)
2. 2011 BSEP Recommendations Status (PDF)
3. Initial Public Engagement Summary (PDF)
4. FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary (PDF)
5. Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF)
6. Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary (PDF)
7. Bikeway DesignTreatments (PDF)
8. Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan (PDF)
9. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
Packet Pg. 9
1
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 20, 2014
To: FC Bikes
Organization: City of Fort Collins, FC Bikes/FC Moves
From: Fort Collins Bike Plan Project Team
Project: 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan
Re: Existing Roadway and Bikeway Network Stress (Level
of Comfort) Assessment Approach
This memorandum describes the bicycle level of traffic stress (level of comfort) assessment
methodology applied to analyze the City of Fort Collins existing bicycle facility and roadway network as a
component of the City’s Bicycle Master Plan in development.
Overview
- Purpose: implement a planning tool to analyze the City’s bicycle facility and roadway network
from the perspective of bicyclist comfort to help (1) identify a low-traffic stress, connected
bicycle network, and (2) determine the location and design of future bicycle infrastructure
investments to achieve a consistent user experience for existing and potential bicyclists.
- Process: considered two approaches to measure bicycle level of stress/comfort along roadways
and at intersections: (Model 1) U.S. Bicycle Level of Service model and (Model 2) Mineta
Transportation Institute Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) model.
- Application: Model 2 (Mineta LTS) is proposed as a more accurate representation of the level of
bicycle comfort as perceived by the “interested but concerned” population, a target audience of
this Plan. This model measures bicycle comfort on a 1 (best) - 4 (worst) scale considering factors
such as traffic speeds, number of travel lanes, bicycle lane width and intersection crossings. This
model is very sensitive to traffic speeds and volumes. For example, where traffic speeds equal or
exceed 35 mph, the resulting LTS score is a 3 or 4 even with the presence of a bicycle lane. To
improve bicyclist comfort for this example, potential measures may include installation of a
buffered bicycle lane, a protected bicycle lane, an off street path, or a reduced speed limit.
- Next Steps: Results from this analysis will be used in combination with public input and results
from a GIS-based demand, equity and safety analysis to determine the proposed bicycle
network and corresponding infrastructure recommendations. For the purposes of this Plan, the
ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
application of this model is intended as a planning tool to help develop a connected low-stress
bicycle network (LTS 1 and 2) that serves all of Fort Collins; the results of the analysis are not
intended to indicate that all streets with an LTS 3 or 4 need improvements.
Background
The planning process for the Fort Collins future bicycle network is considering the needs, skills, and
desires of a range of bicyclists. Generally, bicycle planning professionals accept that there is a large
percentage of the American population that is interested in cycling for transportation purposes but do
not currently cycle for a variety of reasons. People typically have positive memories of bicycling in their
youth and associate bicycling with expanded personal freedom and adventure. But as they have grown
older, most have come to associate bicycling as a recreational activity that is safest on trails as riding on
the street network is perceived to be unsafe and unappealing.
Research focused on bicycle transportation has historically been very limited, as has the collection of
data regarding the use and safety of roadway treatments designed to improve bicycling such as bike
lanes. Over the last 5-15 years, an increasing focus has been placed on understanding the desires and
needs of bicyclists. Research identifying reasons people choose other modes of transportation over
bicycling consistently find people cite weather, topography, trip distance, support facilities (showers,
bike parking), and perceived risk as primary discouragements to bicycling. Of these issues, perceived risk
is the most critical and challenging barrier to overcome to increase rates of bicycling for transportation
purposes.
A number of research studies have shown a bicyclist’s perception of their personal safety riding on a
roadway is greatly influenced by their proximity to and interaction with motorized traffic. At low-
volumes and speeds of traffic, many people feel safe and comfortable sharing the roadway with traffic.
As traffic speed and volume increase, their perception of safety degrades significantly resulting in a
feeling of increased stress and discomfort on the roadway.
The degree to which people experience this stress is likely to vary by bicycling experience, health, age,
and trip purpose (commuting vs. recreational family ride). A seminal 2012 survey in Portland, OR
questioned residents about their level of comfort riding on various street types with and without bicycle
facilities.1 Respondents were then sorted into four categories based upon their stated comfort level
riding on various street types with their concern about being hit by a motor vehicle. The results are
summarized in the following graphic:
1 Dill, J. and N. McNeil. (2013, January) “Four Types of Cyclists? Examining a Typology to Better Understand
Bicycling Behavior and Potential.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board.
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
3
Figure 1 - Survey response results from Dill study relating fear of being hit by motorist to bicyclist classification shows a
strong correlation between bicyclist self-classification and their stated safety concerns operating in close proximity to traffic.
The following table explains the bicyclist typology used in the Portland survey to segment the population
through their stated interest in using bicycling as a form of transportation and their stated tolerance for
traffic stress:
Bicyclist Typology Interest in Bicycling for Transportation and Tolerance for
Traffic Stress
Percent of
Population
No Way, No How Not interested in riding for transportation. 31%
Interested but Concerned Little tolerance for traffic stress with major concerns for
safety. Prefer separation from traffic on arterials with
protected bike lanes, trails, & bike lanes.
56%
Enthused and Confident Some tolerance for traffic stress. Confident riders who
prefer separation on arterials with protected bike lanes,
trails, or bike lanes.
9%
Strong & Fearless High tolerance for traffic stress. Experienced riders who
are comfortable sharing lanes on higher speed and volume
arterials. These riders are less interested in protected bike
lanes and trails than the general population.
4%
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
Low-stress Bicycling Concept
The low-stress bicycling concept is premised on the experience of the Dutch who have focused on
building a connected bicycle network that minimize bicyclist interaction with motorized traffic. Their
approach targets mainstream adult bicyclists as a design user (the equivalent United States, Interested
but Concerned population) by providing the following types of facilities:
• Shared lanes on low-volume, low-speed, local streets (sometimes requires traffic calming)
• Bicycle lanes on moderate volume & moderate speed streets
• Protected bike lanes (cycle tracks) on high-volume or high-speed streets
• Comfortable intersection crossings which minimize bicyclist stress and clarify right-of-way
This low-stress approach results in approximately 80% of the Dutch population riding at least once per
week and normal bicycle commute mode shares ranging from 25 – 50% in larger cities. For bicycling to
be an appealing transportation choice for the Interested but Concerned population, there must be an
interconnected system of low-stress bikeways on streets and trails to get people from point A to point B
without significant additional mileage or delay.
Planners in the United States have typically used a model which measures a bicyclist’s comfort operating
on roadways known as Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS).
2
It is incorporated into the Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM)3 which is a widely respected tool for evaluating roadway operating conditions for all
modes of travel. Bicycle Level of Service scores range from “A” (a street very comfortable for bikes) to
“F” (a street very uncomfortable to ride). The scores are calculated as an average score calculated from
the following attributes: posted speeds, traffic volume, parking, quality of pavement, frequency of
trucks and buses, and the bicyclist’s proximity to or separation from motorized traffic. The model is very
sensitive to the provision of a designated bicycle lane which provides bicyclists a substantially higher
degree of comfort than a shared travel lane. This model cannot evaluate protected bike lanes, the effect
of intersection crossings, neighborhood greenways and may overstate the comfort of bicycle lanes on
high-volume, high-speed roadways which limits its use to assess the needs of the Interested but
Concerned population.
To address the shortcomings of the U.S. BLOS model and to develop a scoring methodology that relates
traffic stress to bicyclists’ typology, the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University
developed a Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) model, which reflects the approach to bicycle infrastructure
2 Petritsch, T. A., B. W. Landis, et al. (2006). Bicycle Level of Service for Arterials, Florida Department of
Transportation.
3 It is important to note an important distinction in HCM level of service terminology which prescribes scores of A
through F for each mode. For motorists the LOS evaluates the delay (A – no delay, F – extreme delay) motorist
experience, not their comfort or safety. For bicyclists, the LOS evaluates comfort and perceived safety, but not
delay.
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
design as adopted by the Dutch.4 The LTS score is classified into the following four levels of traffic
stress, with “LTS 1” being the least stressful and “LTS 4” being the highest stress situation for a cyclist:
Level of Traffic Stress U.S. Bicyclist Typology
LTS 1 (Low Stress) Suitable for children
LTS 2 Interested but Concerned adults
LTS 3 Enthused and Confident adults
LTS 4 (High Stress) Strong and Fearless adults
The LTS scores are determined by the highest score (most stressful) of the following inputs: posted
speed, number of travel lanes, parking presence and width, bike lane width, right turn lane design, and
intersection crossing. By following the weakest link principal, not relying on an average score, the LTS
score represents the highest stress found on individual segment or intersection crossing. As stated by
the Mineta Report, “the stress of a route is determined by its most stressful link, not by an average”.
This may have the effect of understating the benefit of wide bicycle lane on a high-volume or high-speed
roadway.
Figure 2 - Graphical representation of LTS scores by bikeway type presented at the March 12th FC Bike Plan Open House
4 Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity. Mekuria, Furth, and Nixon. Report 11-19. May 2012. Mineta
Transportation Institute. San Jose State University, San Jose, California.
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
6
The following table from the Mineta LTS paper illustrates the LTS scoring criteria for bike lanes on
roadways that do not allow parking, which is typical for Fort Collins arterials:
Figure 3 - The red circles illustrate how a theoretical roadway with 1 through lane in each direction with 6 foot bike lanes
would result in a segment LTS score of 4 due to the 40 mph posted speed (weakest link principal)
Figure 4 –This comparison of US Bike LOS Score vs Mineta LTS Score on Harmony Road illustrates the disparate outcomes
between the two models. Traffic counts from July 2013 found 37% of bicyclists on Harmony Road traveling east-west rode on
the adjacent sidepath in lieu of the street at the intersection with South Boardwalk Drive. The 8 to 10 foot sidepath would
provide a MINETA LTS of 1 between intersections.
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
7
Stress Assessment of Fort Collins Roadways and Bikeways
A primary goal of the bicycle network for the Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan will be to identify and plan
for a connected system of low-stress routes which appeal to the Interested but Concerned population.
Staff is currently proposing the Mineta LTS approach to help identify this low-stress network over the US
BLOS due to the fact it more accurately represents the bicycle stress level of the Interested but
Concerned population. However, a hybrid model could also be considered in order to address the
shortcomings of both models, and to more accurately represent the conditions in Fort Collins.
The following summarizes the initial results
from the application of the LTS model.
Stress Assessment Approach
The stress assessment requires collection of
the following data:
• Posted traffic speed
• Number and widths of travel lanes
• Location and widths of bike lanes
and parking lanes
• Length of right turn lanes
• Right turn lane configuration at
intersections
• Locations of uncontrolled crossings
• Location and width of medians
Most of these features were included within the City’s existing GIS database. Missing features were
gathered through a desktop review of Google Earth satellite imagery which was dated 2012. The results
of the stress assessment are draft pending further field review to verify data and to fill gaps remaining in
the data set which could not be determined from Google Earth imagery review. The field work is
anticipated to be performed in April 2014. Upon completion of the field work, the GIS data and the
stress mapping will be updated.
Snapshot: Bicycle
Level of Stress
Network Analysis
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
8
Roadway Segment Results of Stress Assessment
The following table breaks down the LTS for all arterial, collector, and local streets in Fort Collins.
Despite the fact approximately 50% of Fort Collins arterial and collector roadways have bicycle lanes on
them, they almost all are considered high-stress (LTS 3 or 4) routes due to the higher posted speeds (30-
45 mph typical), multiple travel lanes, and high traffic volumes.
Level of Traffic Stress
Low High
1 2 3 4
Arterials (212 miles) 0.8% 4.1% 9.1% 86.0%
Collector (96 miles) 10.9% 55.2% 28.5% 5.4%
Locals (630 miles) 98.6% 0.4% 0.6% 0.4%
Based on this approach, the existing low-stress network in Fort Collins currently consists of low-volume
greenways and local streets which intersect high-volume streets without crossing accommodations for
bicyclists do not score as low-stress. The inherent stress level of a segment is overridden by the higher
stress level of an intersection along that route. This is based on logic stating that the lack of a crossing
accommodation limits the usefulness and appeal of the lower stress segment to bicyclists who would
need to cross through the high-stress
intersection on their trip.
Stress Island Effect
The LTS on the existing street network was
assessed to identify low- and high-stress zones,
and to find places where high-stress “gaps”
exist between existing low-stress areas. For a
network to be attractive to the Interested but
Concerned (LTS 2) population, it must provide a
seamless level of stress not only along the
proposed route, but also at each street
crossing, which themselves may be higher-
stress. By displaying only the existing network
of LTS 1 and LTS 2 streets and greenways, it is
possible to visualize the low-stress islands
throughout the City that this bike plan will seek to connect. The map shows the importance of the trail
system to connect various neighborhoods throughout Fort Collins and the importance of the local street
system. It also highlights the fragmented nature of the local street grid and the fragmented, cul-de-sac
style development pattern which is predominant outside of Old Town Fort Collins.
Snapshot:
Bicycle Level of Stress 1 and 2
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
9
Next Steps
April field work will validate the existing stress mapping. In combination with public input and additional
GIS analysis, the results of the stress analysis will be utilized to help develop a connected network of
similar stress facilities to provide a seamless user experience for each type of rider. Streets connecting
low-stress islands will be evaluated for potential physical improvements to create a continuously low-
stress, connected bicycle network. The next phase of the bicycle plan network evaluation will focus on:
• Key arterials to be evaluated for potential improvements
• Opportunities to create a system of low-stress local street alternatives which could become
neighborhood greenways
• Opportunities to connect local streets with short trail connections
• Arterial crossing improvements
Assessment of potential future bikeway network stress
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment1.1: Bicycle Level of Stress Analysis Method [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2011 Bicycle Safety Education Plan Recommendations
2011 BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION PLAN RECOMMENDATION COMPLETED ONGOING/UNDER WAY/
PLANNED FOR 2014/15
PROVIDE WALKING AND BICYCLING EDUCATION TO AT LEAST 11,000 STUDENTS FROM
KINDERGARTEN THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ANNUALLY
XX
ENCOURAGE FORT COLLINS’ SCHOOLS TO REVIEW AND ADOPT STATEWIDE BICYCLE AND
PEDESTRIAN EDUCATION CURRICULUM UNDER DEVELOPMENT BY THE COLORADO DE-
PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CDOT)
X
EXPAND BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION TO HIGH SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CITY OF FORT COL-
LINS
X
DEVELOP A SUSTAINABLE WALKING AND BICYCLING SCHOOL BUS PROGRAM FOR INTER-
ESTED SCHOOLS
X
ENCOURAGE ONE TEACHER PER SCHOOL TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SAFE ROUTES TO
SCHOOL TRAIN THE TRAINERS PROGRAM
X
DEVELOP A BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY TOWN TO SERVE CHILDREN X
HIRE FULL TIME EQUIVALENT SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL COORDINATOR X
IMPLEMENT A COLLABORATIVE COMMUNITY APPROACH TO OFFERING BIKE CAMPS TO
CHILDREN DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS
XX
EDUCATE COLLEGE STUDENTS ON BICYCLE SAFETY AND AWARENESS XX
PROVIDE BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION TO FAMILIES XX
TEACH RECREATIONAL & COMPETITIVE CYCLISTS HOW TO RESPECTFULLY SHARE THE
ROAD AND TRAILS
XX
PROVIDE BICYCLE COMMUTERS BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION AND INCENTIVES X X
ENGAGE SENIOR CITIZENS IN BICYCLING ACTIVITIES X X
ASSIST FORT COLLINS POLICE SERVICES IN PROVIDING ON GOING BICYCLE
TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES FOR OFFICERS
XX
COMMUNITY POLICING AGREEMENT X
DIVERSION PROGRAMS X
ENCOURAGE FORT COLLINS POLICE SERVICES TO CONDUCT TRAFFIC
ENFORCEMENT AT THE HIGH CRASH AREAS AND TYPES OF CRASHES
X
IMPLEMENT SHARE THE ROAD COLLABORATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS X X
DISSEMINATE UNIVERSAL BICYCLE SAFETY MESSAGES AND CRASH TERMINOLOGY X X
REVIEW THE FORT COLLINS TRAFFIC CODE - AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1412 (10)(A) X
DISCOURAGE IRRESPONSIBLE USE OF ALCOHOL WHILE CYCLING X X
TRANSLATE BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION INTO SPANISH X X
MAINTAIN DATABASE OF HIGH-PROFILE BICYCLE CRASHES X X
IMPLEMENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BICYCLE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM X X
DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A MASTER CYCLIST PROGRAM X X
INSTILL A SENSE OF SECURITY FOR ALL CYCLISTS X
ADDRESS ELECTRIC BIKE USE ON BIKE TRAILS X X
UPDATE TO THE FORT COLLINS BIKE ROUTE NETWORK (BIKEWAYS) X
INSTALL BIKE BOXES WHERE APPROPRIATE X X
INSTALL SHARED LANE MARKINGS X X
EXPLORE CONTINUED USE OF BUFFERED BIKE LANES X X
EXPLORE USE OF CYCLE TRACKS ALONG SPECIFIC CORRIDORS X
EXPLORE THE USE OF BICYCLE BOULEVARDS AND COMMUNITY GREENWAYS X
EXPLORE USE OF SCRAMBLE CROSSINGS AT SPECIFIC INTERSECTIONS X
INSTALL SIGNAL ACTUATION FOR CYCLISTS X X
OTHER 2014 FC BIKES & SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL EDUCATION INITIATIVES
WOMEN ON A ROLL - WOMEN-ORIENTED CLASSES, RIDES AND EVENTS X
OPEN STREETS INITIATIVE X
1
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 20, 2014
To: FC Bikes
Organization: City of Fort Collins, FC Bikes/FC Moves
From: Fort Collins Bike Plan Project Team
Project: 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan
Re: Summary of Initial Public Engagement
The 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan (Bike Plan) project includes high-collaboration public and
stakeholder engagement focused on the following groups:
1. Bike Plan Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Representatives from the City and other
agencies. To be met with four times during the course of the Plan.
2. Stakeholder Committee: Advocates, other City departments, and the business community. To be
formally consulted during visioning stage.
3. Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC): Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM to
present at meetings.
4. Transportation Board (T-Board): Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM to
present at meetings.
5. City Council: Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM to present at meetings.
6. General Public: Consists of four categories of people that we are trying to reach.
a. Those already biking and engaged in bike culture
b. Those interested in bicycling but concerned
c. Senior and youth residents
d. Spanish-speaking residents
e. The business community
The project will engage the aforementioned groups in a variety of ways throughout the course of the
project: electronic newsletters, TAC meetings, focused stakeholder meetings, public open houses,
focused smaller events, and participation in key citywide events. Since the Bike Plan officially began, the
City has reached out to the public in a variety of ways, which are summarized in this memorandum. The
City has also held a Stakeholder Visioning Workshop, summarized in a separate memo, one TAC
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
meeting, provided monthly presentations or updates about the Plan to the BAC, and attended citywide
events with information about the Plan. In addition, the City hosted four community bicycle audits
summarized in a separate document, and sought public input via an online survey, also summarized
separately.
ONLINE INTERACTIVE MAP
The project team developed a WikiMap, an online interactive map that was available for input from
January 29 through March 21. Users were asked to identify routes they already ride, ones they would
like to ride, barriers to bicycling, locations where bike parking is needed, and potential bike share station
locations. The map was available as a link from the fcgov.com/bike plan website, and participation in the
exercise was advertised and encouraged via the Momentum newsletter, social media blasts, several
CSU-affiliated online articles, and at the public open house.
Users
As of March 20, there were 401 registered users, 158 of which contributed at least one point, line, or
comment. Registered users are not representative of the population of Fort Collins: primarily male (64
percent); older (41 percent over the age of 50); and not typical college ages (only 7.5 percent between
the ages of 18 and 25). Nearly all of the users—90 percent—are residents of Fort Collins zip codes.
As one of the goals of the project is to reach a wide range of cyclists and potential cyclists, users were
asked to self-identify by type of cyclist. To date, registered users do not represent a typical population
distribution of cyclist types.
Self-Identified Cyclist Type
Percent of
Registered Users
Typical
Population
Percentage*
Strong and fearless
I am willing to ride in mixed traffic with
automobiles on almost any type of street
23% 1%
Enthused and confident
I am willing to ride in traffic, but I prefer
dedicated bicycle lanes/routes
60% 7%
Interested in bicycling, but concerned
I would like to bicycle more, but I prefer
not to ride in traffic
16% 60%
I do not ride a bicycle and am unlikely
ever to do so
1% 33%
*Numbers are based on the Portland Office of Transportation paper, “Four Types of Cyclists,” and are widely used
in the industry.
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
3
WikiMap Input (as of March 20)
Over 1,100 total points, lines, and comments have been added to the map.
The most utilized category is “Route I Ride” which, in combination with input from the “Route
I’d Like to Ride” category, will help determine where to focus priority projects. On an initial scan,
it is clear that many residents are riding on existing trails, but many are also using heavy traffic
arterials such as Harmony Road and Elizabeth
About 350 “Barriers to Biking” have been added to the map. Users are asked what physical or
traffic condition creates the barrier. Nearly half of the barriers were identified as crossings that
feel unsafe or gaps in the bicycle network.
Bike parking has been the category with the least input so far. 21 points have been added, most
in Old Town and along the MAX line.
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE
A public open house was held for the Bike Plan on March 12 at the Lincoln Center from 4-7 pm.
Attendees registered at the door, and 236 were recorded. To ensure that the project’s public
engagement efforts reach a variety of residents, a follow-up survey will be sent to attendees to gather
data about demographics and cyclist type. Anecdotally, there was a wide range of ages represented and
a relatively balanced representation of genders.
The project team presented information in a number of areas:
Draft vision and goals for the Bike Plan
Public involvement to date
Existing/previous planning efforts: concurrent projects and the 2013 Trails Master Plan
Stress level assessment
Non-infrastructure policies and programs in education, encouragement and enforcement
Bike share system analysis and preliminary station locations
Possible infrastructure treatments: bike lane upgrades, intersection treatments, neighborhood
greenways and protected bike lanes
March 12 Open House March 12 Open House
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
Attendees gave feedback about a number of items as well:
Voted on the draft goals and “wrote-in” possible additional goals
Commented on existing education, enforcement and encouragement programs and suggested
new ideas for the City to undertake
Agreed/disagreed with the current draft stress assessment of streets in Fort Collins
Agreed/disagreed with proposed bike share locations and suggested alternatives
Provided input on Colorado State University campus bike infrastructure and issues
Identified streets and intersections where the infrastructure treatments presented would help
fix current issues for comfort and safety
Voted on priorities among the areas that the Plan will address: infrastructure improvements
(improved bike lanes, intersection improvements, protected bike lanes and neighborhood
greenways), education programs, enforcement programs, and encouragement programs
March 12 Open House March 12 Open House
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE FEEDBACK
Feedback from the open house is currently being analyzed, but the following elements have been
summarized.
Three Words Question
Attendees were asked the following questions, and the word clouds illustrate the responses and the
relative number of each.
What three words best describe bicycling in Fort Collins today?
What three words would you like to use to describe bicycling in Fort Collins in the future?
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
6
Priorities
The final station at the open house asked people the following question:
Tell Us Your Priorities!
We want the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan to reflect what you think can make Fort Collins a world-class
bicycling city. Think about everything you’ve read throughout the room and vote for what kinds of
infrastructure and programs you believe will make the biggest impact.
The priorities as ranked at the Public Open House are:
1. Protected Bike Lanes (222)
2. Improving Existing Bike Lanes (197)
3. Improving Intersections (160)
4. Education Programs (119)
5. Enforcement Programs (70)
6. Encouragement Programs (49)
7. Neighborhood Greenways (47)
Full open house feedback will be presented in the State of Bicycling in Fort Collins report and will inform
Plan recommendations for infrastructure, policies, and programs.
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment1.3: Initial Public Engagement Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
FC Rides!
Community Bike Audits
October 12, 19, 26, and November 2, 2013
Public Outreach
City of Fort Collins, Bicycle Master Plan
DRAFT SUMMARY
ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
Picture Placeholder
Picture Placeholder
Northeast Fort Collins
October 12, 2013 | 12 Participants
S Shields St
S College Ave
S Taft Hill Rd
E
S Timberline Rd
S Lemay Ave
Laporte Ave
W Drake Rd
E Drake Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Trilby Rd
N Shields St
W Mulberry St
S Overland Trl
W Prospect Rd
W Trilby Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
E
L
i
n
coln
A
v
e
Riverside Ave
N College Ave
W Elizabeth St
Country Club Rd
W Harmony Rd
N Overland Trl
Remington St
N Lemay Ave
Richa
Mounta
S Mason St
W Vine Dr
County Road 54G
N Timberline Rd
N US Highway 287
E
W
i
l
l
o
x
L
n
Turnberry Rd
W Willox Ln
W Laurel St
S Su
Bo
3
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
Overview:
Beginning in November of 2013, FC Bikes staff hosted four community bike audits to kick off the Bicycle
Master Plan process and to seek input about bicycling conditions across Fort Collins. Each bike audit featured
a different sector of the city (NE, NW, SE, SW) and each route captured different types of streets, intersections,
bicycle routes and infrastructure. The audits were open to the public and over 50 people partcipated. The input
recieved through the community bike audits will be considered through the Bicycle Master Plan. The following
section provides a summary of the comments received during all four bike audits. A separate document is
available which outlines each comment as received by individual participants.
Northeast Fort Collins (October 12, 2013)
Intersections
(identified for potential improvements):
• Prospect and Stover: intersection jog, difficult
to cross, key connection to school
• Lemay @ Lory/Pitkin: signalized crossing
needed
• Lemay @ Railroad Tracks (north of Riverside)
• Lincoln @ Lemay: challenging turning
westbound on Lincoln (from northbound
Lemay) – two-stage turn box
• Willow @ Railroad Tracks
• All downtown intersections: enhanced
striping/green pain through intersections
• Mountain @ Lincoln: difficult to turn left from
Mountain, heading westbound from Lincoln
• Vine @ College Ave
• Willow @ Lincoln
• Elizabeth @ College Ave: crossing needed
on south side of intersection
Routes
(identified for potential improvements):
• Prospect: road diet + dedicated bicycle
facilities (protected/buffered bike lanes)
• Connection to Spring Creek Trail @
Spring Creek Drive/Remington (confusing/
additional signage needed and widened
trail)
• Stuart: door zone bike lane
• Riverside: road diet + dedicated bicycle
facilities (protected/buffered bike lanes)
Riverside Ave
Lory St and Lemay Ave
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
• Neighborhood routes: nice routes, additional
signage and designated as bicycle
boulevards/neighborhood greenways
• Lemay: road diet + dedicated bicycle facilities
(protected/buffered bike lanes)
• Lincoln: multimodal improvements needed
• College Ave (Downtown): dedicated bicycle
infrastructure needed
• N College Ave: improved transitions and
connection to Poudre River Trail
• Elizabeth: Dismount zone through Campus,
prevents consistent east-west corridor
(overall, better through routes needed
through CSU)
• Remington: should be a dedicated/improved
bicycle corridor
Other:
• “Bikes may use full lane” vs. “share the road
signage”
• Better wayfinding to trails
• Improved signal timing along Remington
Southwest Fort Collins (October 19,
2013)
Intersections
(identified for potential improvements):
• Shields @ W. Stuart: left-turn pocket or two-
stage turn box needed
• Shields @ Horsetooth + Casa Grande (bike
lane to the right of the right turn lane)
• Horsetooth @ Seneca: left-turn on to Seneca
challenging
• Harmony @ Regency: crossing not intuitive
(signal/push button on one side)
• Harmony @ Hinsdale: signalized intersection
+ protected left-turn needed (school crossing)
• Center @ Shields
Harmony Rd and Hinsdale Dr
S Shields St
Lory St
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
Routes
(identified for potential improvements):
• Shields: protected or enhanced bicycle
facility needed, existing protected lane needs
improved transitions
• W. Stuart: better signage to Spring Creek
Trail, bicycle boulevard potential
• Connection to Senior Center
• Swallow: better signage to Spring Creek Trail,
bicycle boulevard potential
• Dunbar: bicycle boulevard potential
• Horsetooth: bike lane narrow, speeds too
high, past Seneca bike lane ends (peds use
bike lane)
• Seneca: bicycle boulevard potential
• Regency: bicycle boulevard potential
• Harmony: not a great bike route
• Starflower Dr: bicycle boulevard potential,
consistent signage and facility needed
• Center/Meadowlark: bicycle boulevard
potential, improved signage and bicycle
facility
• Manhattan: bicycle boulevard potential,
improved signage and bicycle facility
Other:
• Better wayfinding through neighborhoods and
to trails
• Level of comfort map
• Protected bike lanes favorable
• Merge with Traffic vs. Bike Lane Ends
(signage)
• Signal detection at Drake and Meadowlark
Southeast Fort Collins (October 26,
2013)
Intersections (identified for potential im-
provements):
• Ziegler roundabout: additional signage
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
Harmony Rd
Lemay Ave and Oakridge Dr
W Stuart St and Shields St
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
6
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
needed on the approach (“no passing cyclists
in the roundabout” and/or “bikes merge with
traffic”)
• Harmony @ Power Trail, and all Harmony
crossings (signage, striping, increased signal
length, two-stage turn boxes)
• Corbett @ Harmony: signal length too short
• Curb ramp @ Corbett and Sunstone
• McMurray @ Harmony: difficult crossing,
access to schools
• Swallow @ Lemay: improved signage, striping
Routes (identified for potential improve-
ments):
• Kechter: bike lane terminates
• Stetson: slower speeds, bicycle facility
improvements + signage
• Rock Creek: bike lane in door zone
• Timberline: protected bike lane
• Harmony: protected bike lanes
• Corbett: improved striping (roundabouts)
• Boardwalk: narrow bike lane, driveways,
conflict points, traffic calming needed
• Oakridge: bicycle boulevard potential
• Stanford: should be improved with mall
development
• E. Swallow: bicycle boulevard potential
• Lemay: bike lanes narrow, protected bike lane
(two-way cycle track at intersection jogs)
• Centennial: bicycle boulevard potential
Other:
• Improved connections to all schools in the
area
• Improved signage to trails (e.g. at Centennial
to Power Trail)
• Improved Power Trail connection to Kruse
Elementary
Kechter Rd
Corbett Dr
Harmony Harmony Rd Rd
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
7
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
Northwest Fort Collins (November 2,
2013)
Intersections
(identified for potential improvements):
• Mason @ Cherry: difficult to cross, trail
connection, no crosswalk on south side
• Crossings along Shields
• Roundabout @ Vine and Taft: sharrows +
signage
• Laporte @ Taft: protected left-turn needed (to
help northbound cyclists)
• Taft Hill @ Lake (difficult crossing): add signal
or direct cyclists to Springfield
• City Park @ Mulberry: pedestrian crossing
needed on both sides of intersection
• Meldrum @ Laurel: potential location for
scramble/diagonal crossing
• Shields @ Lake: difficult crossing (2-way
protected bike lane to address jog)
• Laurel @ Mason: difficult turning movements,
potential challenges with MAX
Routes
(identified for potential improvements):
• Shields: improved bicycle facility needed/
protected facility to address jogs
• Cherry: sharrows/improved bicycle facility
west of Wood St.
• Taft: bike lane needs to continue south of
Laporte
• Oak/Jackson: bicycle boulevard potential
• Vine: bicycle facilities needed + improved
maintenance
• Laporte: bicycle lanes needed, squeezes
down at bridges (provide curb ramp access to
pedestrian bridges)
• City Park: diagonal parking undesirable for
cyclists (back-in angle); dedicated bicycle
boulevard/route through City Park
• Springfield: bicycle boulevard potential
Lake St and Shields St
Laporte Ave
N Mason St
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
8
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
• Mulberry: Road diet + dedicated bicycle
facilities
• W. Elizabeth: green lanes/enhanced lanes,
intersection improvements
• Lake: nice route through neighborhoods,
better crossings needed, bike lane in door
zone through CSU
• Plum: prioritized for bike/ped/transit
• Oak St. Plaza: dedicated bike path
• N. Mason St: placement of sharrows not
ideal; bike lane preferred (some would avoid
currently); concerns with bus/bike conflict
• College: back-in angle parking, bicycle facility
needed, additional signage
• Mountain: comfortable but additional
“sharrow” education needed
• Laurel: remove 3-4 parking spaces to
continue dedicated bicycle facility
Other:
• Accessing downtown from southbound Mason
is difficult
• Mixed perspectives about roundabouts
• Additional bike lane maintenance needed
• Increased signage/wayfinding
• Left-hand turns challenging for bicyclists
(consider more 2-point turn opportunities)
• More bike boxes
Meldurm St and Laurel St
Lake St through CSU
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
02/14/14
1
Project/Decision: Bicycle Master Plan- INITIAL
BRAINSTORM – Existing
Conditions, Transformative
Projects and Programs
Evaluated by: Bike Plan PMT
SOCIAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL
Strengths
Perception of cycling as fun
Being designated a Platinum BFC community
Strong bicycle culture and community
Partnership with CSU
Access to affordable transportation options
Lower health individual and community health
costs
Strengths
Perception of cycling as fun
Attracts business and tourism
Strong bicycle culture
Partnership with CSU
Reduces health costs (individual,
employers)
Existing complete street road standards
Access to affordable transportation
options
Strengths
Lower carbon footprint
Improved air quality
Support Climate goals
Limitations
Perception of safety issues
Weather
Fort Collins growth creating greater distances
between City destinations
Not 24-hour friendly
Cost of crashes
Limitations
Cost of crashes
Different regional priorities
Lack of financial support for infrastructure
Limitations
Perception of safety issues
Fort Collins growth creating greater
distances between City destinations
Opportunities
Decreases the number of single occupancy
vehicles
Increases access to affordable transportation
Provides a community health benefit
Reducing cost of crashes, reducing crashes
(safety in numbers)
Education around trade-offs
Moving toward Diamond
Opportunities
Decreases the number of single
occupancy vehicles
Increases access to affordable
transportation
Attracts business and tourism
02/14/14
2
Integrated with other modes
Education of next generation
Strengthen community
Education of next generation
Updating complete street road standards
Economic benefits to business through
improved access
Potential to reduce costs associated with
maintaining car parking, increasing
capacity for cars
tracks) can create greater separation
between cars and people on bikes, less
exposure to pollutants
Threats
Increased tension between bicyclists and
motorists
Trade-offs between modes
Not Integrated with other modes
Increased number of bicycle-vehicle interactions
Threats
Cost of implementing plan, innovative
projects
Trade-offs between modes, financial
tradeoffs
Next generation of projects more
expensive
Threats
Overselling environmental benefits
Increased short-term congestion
Exposure to pollutants for bicyclists
Reduced parking – increased
“circling”/emissions for people searching
for parking
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment1.5: Triple Bottom Line Analysis [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
1
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 20, 2014
To: FC Bikes
Organization: City of Fort Collins, FC Bikes/FC Moves
From: Fort Collins Bike Plan Project Team
Project: 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan
Re: Summary of Visioning and Goal Setting
The visioning element of the 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan (Bike Plan) is an essential first step in
the planning process, and one that paints a picture of the desired future. From the Bike Plan vision
stems the goals, objectives, and evaluation measures to be used for the project. The visioning and goals
development occurred concurrently, and were informed by three major activities:
1. The City’s Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis
2. The Stakeholder Visioning Workshop
3. The Public Open House
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS
The City completed an initial TBL analysis of the Bike Plan on February 28, 2014. A representative from
the City’s Triple Bottom Line team and FC Bikes led the analysis, with participating staff from FC Moves,
Streets, Engineering and Traffic Operations.
When asked about bicycling in Fort Collins, participants identified more strengths and opportunities
than weaknesses and threats. Strengths and opportunities included the strong bike culture in the City
and the environmental and economic benefits of bicycling instead of driving. Weaknesses and threats
included perceived and real safety concerns and their consequences, the trade-offs between vehicular
and bicyclist mobility, and the cost of enhanced bicycle infrastructure. The full TBL map is provided as
Attachment A.
ATTACHMENT 6
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
VISIONING WORKSHOP
The Bike Plan project includes high-collaboration public and
stakeholder engagement with various groups. One of those
groups is a set of stakeholders representing multiple City
departments, bicycling advocates, public health entities, and
members of the business community. This group was formally
consulted at the onset of the project during a visioning
workshop, which was held on January 29, 2014. 35 people
participated in the workshop.
Agenda
The workshop included a presentation on the background and overview of the project, an overview of
trends in bicycle design/infrastructure and programs/policies, a visioning exercise, and open discussion.
Visioning Exercise
Workshop participants were guided through a visioning exercise, where they were asked the following
questions in small break-out groups:
What three words best describe bicycling in Fort Collins today?
What should be the top three outcomes of the Bicycle Master Plan?
Attendees then shared their answers with the larger group. The “top three outcomes” were summarized
and consolidated, and attendees voted on their top three. From this came the first draft of bike plan
goals:
To improve our bicycle infrastructure to increase comfort, safety, and ridership
To make data-driven and action-oriented recommendations and to establish a baseline for
measurement moving forward
To create an integrated network of various modes of travel: bicycle, including bike share,
pedestrian, and transit
To create a low stress bicycle network that connects to the regional system
To improve safety for all modes of travel
To foster community through collaboration
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
3
January 29th visioning exercise showing results of voting
The City further refined and simplified these goals for presentation at the public meeting. Key words
were highlighted and goals related to health and equity were added.
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE
The March 12 Public Open House included two interactive exercises related to the project vision and
goals. A majority of the nearly 250 attendees participated in these exercises. The Public Open House is
summarized in a separate memo.
Goals Feedback
The first station at the open house included an overview of the Bike Plan and a presentation of the draft
goals. Attendees had a chance to vote on the goals and write in additional goals, as shown in the photos
below.
March 12 Open House – Additional Goals March 12 Open House – Draft Goals Voting
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
At the Open House, the public added a variety of goals that were more specific than the broad goals
intended for the Bike Plan. However, after the Open House, these specific public goals were generalized
to represent broader goals, and the votes for the broader goals were tallied. These goals were then
ranked according to the public’s voting.
The ranked goals and the number of votes each received are shown below.
Draft Goals Votes
Connectivity 98
Safety 68
Comfort 17
Ridership 31
Community 18
Health 17
Equity 18
Three Words Question
Open house attendees were asked the following question, and the word cloud illustrates the responses
and the relative number of each. This question relates directly to the vision and goals of the Bike Plan,
and the results will be used to inform the final vision and goals.
What three words would you like to use to describe bicycling in Fort Collins in the future?
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
VISION STATEMENT AND PROJECT GOALS
Based on input from the aforementioned activities, as well as a review of the 2008 Bicycle Plan, the 2011
Bicycle Education Safety Plan, and the League of American Bicyclists Platinum feedback report, the City
developed a vision statement for an ideal version of a future Fort Collins.
The Bicycle Master Plan envisions Fort Collins as a world-class city for bicycling. It
is a city where people of all ages and abilities have access to a comfortable, safe,
and connected network of bicycle facilities, and where bicycling is an integral part
of daily life and the local cultural experience.
Bike Plan Goals
Project goals stem from the vision statement, but represent more specific desired outcomes. Based on
the discussion and feedback received at the previously summarized activities, the following goals were
developed. These goals, along with measurable objectives to be developed, will be used to guide the
Bike Plan recommendations. The goals are listed in order of importance to the Open House attendees.
Connectivity
Complete a connected network of low-stress bicycle facilities, linking to the regional bicycle network,
and providing seamless connections to public transit, key destinations and all city neighborhoods.
Safety
Improve safety for all modes of transportation by implementing appropriate, well-designed bicycle
facilities, education and enforcement programs.
Comfort
Increase the level of comfort experienced by people when bicycling in Fort Collins by building low-stress
bicycle facilities and implementing programs to build confidence among riders.
Ridership
Increase the amount of bicycling in Fort Collins for all trip purposes by creating a welcoming cycling
environment for people of all bicycling levels.
Community
Foster a strong bicycle community identity while advancing a culture of respect and responsibility for all
transportation system users.
Health
Increase access to bicycling as essential to a physically active and environmentally healthy community.
Equity
Provide equal access to bicycling for all members of the Fort Collins community through the
implementation of inclusive programming and outreach, and bicycle network development and
infrastructure design.
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
6
Attachment A
Bike Plan Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment1.6: Bike Plan Vision and Goals Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
STOP
STOP
Neighborhood Greenways
These low speed and volume streets prioritize bicyclist and pedestrian travel and provide
safe crossings of large arterial roads. A number of roadway elements combine along the
VWUHHWWRFUHDWHWKLVWUDIÀFFDOPHGHQYLURQPHQW.
Comfort
• Low-stress LTS 1 facility
• Gives priority to bicyclists
LQPL[HGWUDIÀF
• Reduces stopping at local streets
• Reduces delay at
arterial crossings
• Provides alternative
to arterial routes
Safety
• 2 to 8 times lower bicyclist
crash rate than parallel arterials
• Safe arterial crossings provided
• 7UDIÀFVSHHGVUHGXFHG
to 20 mph or less
Equity
• Attracts ages 8 to 80
• Woman prefer 3 times
over arterials
• Improves neighborhood livability
• Creates opportunities for
green infrastructure
Credit: Urban Indy
Intersection
Neckdown
)XOO7UDIÀF
Diverter
Mini
7UDIÀF
Circle
Median
Crossing
Island
Chicanes
+DOI7UDIÀF
Diverter
Stop
Signs
STOP STOP
Stop
7UDIÀF Signs
Signal
1
ATTACHMENT 7
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
Neighborhood Greenway Elements
&RPELQJDVHOHFWLRQRIWKHVHFKRLFHVFUHDWHVDFDOPORZWUDIÀFHQYLURQPHQWRQDQHLJKERUKRRG
JUHHQZD\WKDWLVPRUHFRPIRUWDEOHIRUWKURXJKELF\FOHWUDIÀFDQGIRUQHLJKERULQJUHVLGHQWV
Low Volume
)XOO7UDIÀF'LYHUWHU 1HFNGRZQDQG6SHHG+XPS /DQGVFDSHG&KLFDQHV 0HGLDQ&URVVLQJV %UDQGLQJDQG:D\ÀQGLQJ
+DOI7UDIÀF'LYHUWHU 0LQL7UDIÀF&LUFOH 5DLQ*DUGHQ1HFNGRZQ 3HGHVWULDQDQG%LF\FOH2QO\6LJQDO 3DYHPHQW0DUNLQJV
6NLQQ\6WUHHWV 1HFNGRZQ,QWHUVHFWLRQ &RPPPXQLW\&RPSRVWLQJ3ODQWLQJ6WULS*DUGHQV 5DLVHG&URVVZDONV 6WUHHW$UW
6ORZ6SHHGV *UHHQ6WUHHW $UWHULDO&URVVLQJV Branding
2
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
Why Protected Bike Lanes?
These separated facilities provide
a low-stress riding environment
that attracts a wide variety of
riders of all ages and abilities.
Credit: Momentum Magazine
Boulder
Washington, DC New York City Toronto
Chicago
Safety
• 89% fewer bicyclist
injuries compared to streets
without bike facilities
• Shown to reduce sidewalk
riding 57 to 84%
• Minimizes intersection
H[SRVXUHWRWUDIÀF
• Eliminates obstructions
in bike lane
Equity
• Attracts riders
ages 8 to 80
• Women, children,
and elderly prefer
over bicycle lanes
Comfort
• Low-stress LTS 1 facility
• Path-like experience
• Separates bicyclists
IURPRWKHUWUDIÀF
3
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
Protected Bike Lanes
7KHVHELNHODQHVDUHVHSDUDWHGIURPERWKDXWRPRELOHDQGSHGHVWULDQWUDIÀF7KH\DUH
DOVRNQRZQDV´F\FOHWUDFNVµRU´VHSDUDWHGELNHODQHVµ
Sidewalk Level, One-Way
Landscape separated with
differentiating materials
Midblock
Dutch Intersection
0DQDJHVFRQÁLFWVEHWZHHQPRGHV
Intersections
Street Level, One-Way
3DUNLQJDQGÁH[SRVWVHSDUDWHG
Street Level, One-Way
Planter separated
Street Level, One-Way
Parking separated
7ZR6WDJH4XHXH%R[
Waiting space for left turns
Colored driveway crossing
$OHUWVXVHUVRIFRQÁLFWV
Bike signals
6HSDUDWHVFRQÁLFWV
4
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
Bicycle Intersections
Design elements that manage interactions between
bicycles and other vehicles can help make intersections
more logical and comfortable for all modes.
Pocket Bike Lane with Long Right Turn Lane
Pocket Bike Lane with Short Right Turn Lane
$GGLWLRQDO2SWLRQVIRU0DQDJLQJ&RQÁLFWV
Shared Right Turn Lane
Bicycle Box Two-Stage Turn Queue Box
&RQÁLFW=RQH0DUNLQJV
Long right turn lanes increase bicyclists’
H[SRVXUHWRPHUJLQJWUDI¿FZKLFKPD\
cross the bike lane at speeds >15 mph.
Short right turn lane minimizes bicyclists’
H[SRVXUHWRPHUJLQJWUDI¿FDQGVORZV
merging motorists. Ideally, turning
motorists speeds are < 15 mph.
Elephants
Tracks
Shared Lane
with Dashed
Line
Shared Lane
with Color
Dashed
Colored
2
3
Protected Bike Lane
Eliminates bicyclists exposure to merging
WUDI¿FPD[LPL]LQJFRPIRUWDQGVDIHW\
&RQÀLFWVDUHPLQLPL]HGE\HQVXULQJ
motorists turning speeds are < 15 mph, or
HOLPLQDWHGZLWKDELF\FOHVLJQDO7KURXJK
bicyclists’ delay may be incurred.
1
Level of
7UDIÀF6WUHVV
Dropped Bike Lane
Dropping bike lanes to add right turn
lanes maximizes bicyclists’ exposure
WRPHUJLQJWUDI¿FZKLFKPD\FURVV
4 bike lane at speeds >15 mph.
Alerts drivers to through bicycle
movement
Highlights bicyclist’s space where
vehicles merge
Gives bicyclists a head start Makes left turns across wide roads
easier
5
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
Bike Lanes
Bike lanes provide a painted separation between bicyclists and other road users.
Fort Collins already has many miles of bike lanes throughout the city. Nearly 50% of
DUWHULDOURDGVKDYHELNHODQHVWRGD\UDQJLQJIURPÀYHWRHLJKWIHHWZLGH
• LTS rating of bike lanes
YDULHVZLWKWUDIÀFVSHHGDQG
YROXPHELNHODQHZLGWKDQG
WKHSUHVHQFHRISDUNLQJ
• 6HSDUDWHVELF\FOLVWV
IURPPRVWWUDIÀF
• &DQEHEORFNHGE\
GRXEOHSDUNHGFDUV
Comfort • 5LGHUVKLSYDULHVZLWK
VWUHVVFRQGLWLRQV
• ´,QWHUHVWHGEXW
FRQFHUQHGµSUHIHUV
FRQWLQRXVODQHVWKURXJK
LQWHUVHFWLRQV
• :RPHQSUHIHUELNH
ODQHVRYHUVKDUHGODQHV
(TXLW\
• IHZHUELF\FOLVW
LQMXULHVFRPSDUHGWRVWUHHWV
ZLWKRXWELNHIDFLOLWLHV
• 0LQLPL]HVVSHHGGLIIHUHQWLDO
• 6KRZQWRUHGXFHVLGHZDON
ELF\FOLQJ
6DIHW\
Door zone bike lane
Some bike lanes are located
next to automobile parking
which can put bicyclists in the
position of potentially hitting
an open car door.
Arterial bike lane
Bike lanes on high-speed,
high-volume roads are more
stressful than those on quiet
streets and may deter many
riders from taking that route.
%XIIHUHGELNHODQH
Painted buffers provide a
horizontal barrier between
ELF\FOLVWVDQGDGMDFHQWWUDIÀF
lowering the stress level of
these facilities.
6
Attachment1.7: Bikeway DesignTreatments (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
1
2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan & Bike Share Business Plan
Public Engagement Plan – Working Draft
February 14, 2014
OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL
Collaborate (High)
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION
How can Fort Collins achieve the draft goals of the Bike Plan, which are:
Connectivity
Complete a connected network of low-stress bicycle facilities, linking to the regional bicycle network,
and providing seamless connections to public transit, key destinations and all city neighborhoods.
Safety
Improve safety for all modes of transportation by implementing appropriate, well-designed bicycle
facilities, education and enforcement programs.
Comfort
Increase the level of comfort experienced by people when bicycling in Fort Collins by building low-
stress bicycle facilities and implementing programs to build confidence among riders.
Ridership
Increase the amount of bicycling in Fort Collins for all trip purposes by creating a welcoming cycling
environment for people of all bicycling levels.
Community
Foster a strong bicycle community identity while advancing a culture of respect and responsibility for all
transportation system users.
Health
Increase access to bicycling as essential to a physically active and environmentally healthy community.
Equity
Provide equal access to bicycling for all members of the Fort Collins community through the
implementation of inclusive programming and outreach, and bicycle network development and
infrastructure design.
KEY STAKEHOLDER GROUPS
1. Bike Plan Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Representatives from the City and other
agencies. Will meet four times during the course of the Plan.
2. Bike Share TAC: Representatives from the City and other agencies. Will meet three times
during the course of the Business Plan.
3. Stakeholder Committee: Advocates, other City departments, and the business community. To
be formally consulted during visioning stage only.
4. Bike Share Specific Stakeholders: These groups include potential funders/financers, the Bike
Library, and those ultimately providing coordination and oversight.
5. Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC): Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM
to present at meetings.
ATTACHMENT 8
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment1.8: Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
6. Transportation Board (T-Board): Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM to
present at meetings.
7. City Council: Provide information to this already-existing group. City PM to present at meetings.
8. General Public: Consists of four categories of people that we are trying to reach.
a. Those already biking and engaged in bike culture
b. Those “Interested but Concerned”
c. Those who might be interested given the right encouragement
d. The youth and senior populations
e. Spanish-speaking residents
TIMELINE
Phase 0:
Timeframe: October 2013 - December 2013 (Prior to kick-off of Bike Plan)
Key Messages: The City is launching a Bike Plan Update! Main purpose was to gather input about the
City’s bike network and programs.
Tools and Techniques:
Date Tool/Technique Notes
Monthly Momentum Newsletter Monthly newsletter with updates about FC Bikes
October –
December
Online Survey Over 1,000 responses
October/
November
Bicycle Audits (FC Rides!) Four rides conducted by City staff, over 50
partcipants
October Project Website established This website will be used throughout all project
phases and will be updated regularly with the
latest information. City to manage.
December Community Issues Forum Interactive polling and tabletop exercises (Bike
Plan was 1 of 4 topics)
Phase 1:
Timeframe: January 2014 - March 2014
Key Messages: Get and stay involved in the Bike Master Plan process! Tell us where you would like to
see bike share stations and enhanced bicycle infrastructure! Main purpose is to gather input about the
City’s bike network and programs. Looking to educate about different types of bike facilities and trade-
offs.
Tools and Techniques:
Date Tool/Technique Notes
Monthly Momentum Newsletter Monthly newsletter with updates about FC Bikes
and the Bike Plan
January 27 Bike Share TAC Meeting #1 Introduction, Background, State of the Practice,
and Ranking of Goals
January 29 Bike Plan TAC Meeting # Introduction, Background, Feedback on Key
Issues
February 3 BAC Meeting City staff attended and provided project update,
sought input.
February 5 –
March 21
Online Wikimap Prominently featured on project website,
advertised through Momentum, CSU and other
distributions lists.
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment1.8: Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
3
Date Tool/Technique Notes
February Coloradoan article (Tessa
Greegor)
About the Bike Plan and the Wikimap to help
increase comments and advertise public meeting.
February Posters/postcards to advertise
wikimap and Public Meeting;
KUNC sponsorship
City to produce and distribute:
- 125 posters + more to Bike Shops
- 600 handouts
- KUNC ad
February 14 Bike Share Project Management
Team (PMT) Meeting
City staff to conduct initial Triple Bottom Line
analysis.
February 19 T-Board Meeting City staff to attend and provide project update. 30
minutes on the agenda.
February 20 Citywide Open House To give an overview of the bike plan, the bike
share plan, and advertise the wikimap and the
public meeting. TDG to provide PDFs of two
boards and potentially two handouts for the
meeting, to be printed by the City.
February 27 Bike Share TAC Meeting #2 Market analysis, demand analysis, proposed
service area, system size, proposed business
model. TDG to lead.
February
27/28
Bike Share Specific Stakeholder
Meetings
TDG to lead
February 28 Bike Plan PMT Meeting City staff to conduct initial Triple Bottom Line
analysis. TDG to attend.
March 12 Public Meeting Open house format with scrolling PowerPoint
duplicating and potentially expanding on board
information. Boards educating the public about
bike infrastructure and maps/forms soliciting
feedback about the bike network, bike programs
(enforcement, education, encouragement) and
bike share stations.
Fact sheets about bike share and the bike
plan
Boards summarizing bike share goals, bike
plan goals, existing network stress
analysis, different types of bicycle
infrastructure, and initial public outreach
results (complete list TBD)
Computers for participants to input data
into Wikimap
~236 particpants
March (late) Bike Plan Stakeholder Meetings Meetings on the following topics:
1. Safety and Enforcement
2. Level of Stress analysis, design
approaches
Phase 2:
Timeframe: March 2014 - May 2014
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment1.8: Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
Key Messages: In this phase we would like targeted input from specific stakeholders for both the Bike
Share Business Plan and the Bike Plan in order to help us develop our recommendations. Get buy-in
and feedback on Bike Share Business Plan.
Tools and Techniques:
Date Tool/Technique Notes
Late
March/Early
April
Bike Share TAC Meeting #3 Final meeting to discuss recommendations in
Business Plan and cost assumptions
Late
March/Early
April
Focused Public Event #1 Coordinate outreach event with Vida
Sana/Northside Aztlan Center and/or Senior
Center (timing concurrent with Bike Share TAC)
April 8 City Council Work Session A chance to give information and ask specific
questions of City Council. Brief PowerPoint to be
prepared and memo with supporting materials
(Agenda Item Summary) sent by March 20.
April Bike Plan TAC Meeting #2 Report back on network analysis and public
outreach. Refine goals and discuss trade-offs:
More detailed educational approach to
network recommendations
Network Prioritization exercise – How do
we approach network? consider wikimap,
cost, facility type (bike boulevard, cycle
track, bike lanes, buffered lanes),
connectivity (close bike lane gaps or add
new connections/designs)
May T-Board Meeting City staff to attend and provide project update. Get
input on recommendations.
May BAC Meeting City staff to attend and provide project update
when appropriate.
TBD Bike Plan Stakeholder Meetings Meetings on the following topics:
3. Engineering
TBD Other Potential Board
Presentations
Planning and Zoning, Parking Advisory Board,
Parks and Recreation Board, DDA, Youth
Advisory Board, Senior Advisory Board. City to
lead.
PHASE 3:
Timeframe: June 2014 – September 2014
Key Messages: Present a draft of the Bike Plan, get buy-in and feedback, and present a Final Plan.
Celebrate the Plan and emphasize implementation steps including early-implementable projects.
Tools and Techniques:
Date Tool/Technique Notes
Monthly Momentum Newsletter Monthly newsletter with updates about FC Bikes
June Bike Plan TAC Meeting #3 Present initial recommendations and get
feedback. Triple Bottom Line assessment of
recommendations.
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment1.8: Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
Date Tool/Technique Notes
June Bike Plan Stakeholder Meetings Meetings on the following topics:
Data Collection and Measurement (potential)
May 7 Focused Public Events (up to
three)
National Walk/Bike to School Day: Safe Routes to
School event with youth
June 14 Focused Public Events (up to
three)
Get Outdoors Colorado
June 25 Focused Public Events (up to
three)
Summer Bike to Work Day
July 20 Focused Public Events (up to
three)
Summer Open Streets event
July T-Board Meeting City staff to attend and provide project update. Get
input on Draft Plan.
July Public Meeting Open house format with short presentation.
Boards presenting the Bike Plan. Celebration of
the Plan and presentation of implementation plan,
including early-implementation projects.
August Bike Plan TAC Meeting #4 Present Final Plan
TBD BAC Meeting City staff to attend and provide project update
when appropriate.
August 26 City Council Work Session Present Final Plan
TBD Other Potential Board
Presentations
Planning and Zoning, Parking Advisory Board,
Parks and Recreation Board, DDA, Youth
Advisory Board, Senior Advisory Board. City to
lead.
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment1.8: Bike Plan Public Engagement Plan [Revision 2] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
1
City Council Work Session
April 8, 2014
Bicycle Master Plan Update
fcgov.com/bikeplan
ATTACHMENT 9
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
2
General Direction Sought
and Specific Questions to be Answered
1. What questions or feedback does Council have on the
proposed vision, goals and Plan elements?
2. What questions or feedback does Council have on the
proposed bicycle network analysis approach and
proposed approaches to bikeway design?
3. What suggestions does Council have for promoting a
culture of respect and safety, among all transportation
system users?
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
3
Fort Collins Cycling Today
• Platinum Bicycle Friendly Community (LAB)
• 170 miles of bike lanes
• 35 miles of paved trails
• Five E’s (FC Bikes Program and SRTS)
• 7.9% bicycle mode split – 6th highest in the
country
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
4
Plan Background
• Transportation Master Plan
implementation item
• 2008 Bike Plan and 2011
BSEP
• Paved Recreational Trails
Master Plan (2013)
• Evolving best practices for
bikeway engineering and
safety programs
• Next stop…Diamond Bicycle
Friendly Community!
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
5
Plan Elements
• Vision, goals, policy and
performance metrics
• State of Bicycling in Fort
Collins
– Existing conditions
– History and culture
– Existing plans, policies,
standards
– Bicycle network analysis
– Safety analysis
– Bicycle programs (4 E’s)
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
6
Plan Elements
• Bicycle Facilities
Plan
– High priority areas
– Updated bikeway
network
– Infrastructure design
guidelines
– Wayfinding
– Bike parking
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
7
Plan Elements
• Education, Encouragement, Evaluation and
Enforcement
• Implementation Plan
• Bike Share Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
8
Phase1
Initial Public
Outreach
• Oct. – Dec. 2013
Phase 2
Information
Gathering
• Jan. – Mar. 2014
Phase 3
Draft
Recommendations
• Apr. – Jun. 2014
Phase 4
Plan Development,
Adoption
• Jun. – Dec. 2014
Process/Schedule
We Are Here
Community Engagement
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
9
Community Engagement to Date
• Online survey
• Community Bike Audits
• Community Issues Forum
• Visioning Workshop
• Online WikiMap
• Citywide Projects Open House
• Bike Plan Open House
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
10
Three Words to Describe Bicycling
Bicycling
Today
Future
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
11
Plan Vision
“The Bicycle Master Plan envisions Fort Collins as a
world-class city for bicycling. It is a city where people
of all ages and abilities have access to a comfortable,
safe, and connected network of bicycle facilities, and
where bicycling is an integral part of daily life and the
local cultural experience.”
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
12
Plan Goals
• Connectivity
• Safety
• Ridership
• Community
• Equity
• Comfort
• Health
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
13
Bicycle Level of Comfort Analysis
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
14
Bicycle Level
of Comfort
Analysis
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
15
Bikeway Design
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
16
Bikeway Design
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
17
Bikeway Design
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
18
Safety
• Promoting a culture of respect and safety among
all modes
• Safety-driven education, enforcement and
engineering recommendations
• Ongoing partnership with FCPD
– Bicycle Safety Education Diversion Program
– Enforcement and Education Campaign
– Distribution of lights, helmets and educational
materials
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
19
Bike Share
• Expanding Bike Library
• Transit integration
• Self-checkout, public
bikes
• Phased system
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
20
Bike Share
Business Plan
• Comparable cities
• Demand and cost
analysis
• System planning
• Implementation
strategies
• Business model
Source: Capital Bikeshare (Washington, DC)
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
21
Next Steps
• Synthesize public input to date
• Draft recommendations
• Bike Share Business Plan (late April)
• Draft Plan (June)
• Boards and Commissions
• Targeted outreach events
• Public Open House (June/July)
• City Council Work Session #2 (August 26)
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
22
General Direction Sought
and Specific Questions to be Answered
1. What questions or feedback does Council have on the
proposed vision, goals and Plan elements?
2. What questions or feedback does Council have on the
proposed bicycle network analysis approach and
proposed approaches to bikeway design?
3. What suggestions does Council have for promoting a
culture of respect and safety, among all transportation
system users?
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
23
Thank you!
Tessa Greegor, FC Bikes Program Manager
tgreegor@fcgov.com
Plan information:
www.fcgov.com/bikeplan
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment1.9: Powerpoint Presentation (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
DATE:
STAFF:
April 8, 2014
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Update of Old Town Fort Collins Historic District Design Standards and Downtown River District (R-D-R Zone)
Design Standards and Guidelines.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to review a proposed update to the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District (Old Town
District) Design Standards and Downtown River District (R-D-R Zone) Design Standards and Guidelines. These
two projects, while separate, are brought forward in tandem due to a similar set of design issues and geographical
proximity. Both areas also contain portions of the National Register Old Town Historic District. The Old Town
Design Standards, originally adopted in 1981, require substantial revisions to address current historic
preservation practices and development concerns related to infill and redevelopment within and around the Old
Town District. The update to the design standards will define and illustrate characteristics for compatible future
development within the Old Town District and in the adjacent area; and a means for incorporating modern
sustainable building practices into historic preservation projects. The design standards for the R-D-R Zone District
were originally adopted with City Plan in 1997. Several developments have been brought forward, highlighting
the need to take additional steps to preserve the district's distinctive character as the commercial and industrial
core of our city. The proposed design standards and guidelines for this zone have been created to better address
neighborhood, site and building attributes in order to preserve the unique character of the area.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have recommendations for improving the illustrations, graphic layout or content of either
document?
2. Does Council have any other ideas on how best to preserve the distinctive character of the R-D-R zone
district as the area continues to attract both new development and redevelopment of existing properties?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In early 2013, Historic Preservation staff received a grant from the State Historical Fund to partially fund an
update to the design standards document for Fort Collins' Old Town Historic Landmark District (Old Town
District). Winter & Co. of Boulder, CO was chosen in May of 2013 as the project consultant. Due to the similarity
in schedules, outreach processes, and geographic proximity, Winter & Co. was also retained as project
consultants for the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R Zone District) Design Guidelines project, to maximize
resources and efficiencies.
Old Town Fort Collins Historic District Design Standards
Historic Old Town Fort Collins is renowned as a highly successful example of how historic preservation, economic
development and community planning have combined to create a dynamic sense of place essential to the
community’s quality of life. In 2006, for example, Money Magazine named Fort Collins the best place to live in the
United States, and cited Old Town as Fort Collins’ integral social and economic resource. Today, Historic Old
Town both stands as a link to the past, while serving as an engine for economic development for the community
at large.
Packet Pg. 76
April 8, 2014 Page 2
Most of the structures within the Old Town District were built between 1878 and the early 1900s. The hub of Fort
Collins’ commerce and industry, the District’s buildings underwent numerous alterations and modernizations,
notably in the 1960s and the early 1970s. Revitalization began in the late 1970s with local, state, and national
register designation, and a community wide commitment to preservation. Throughout the 1980s, 1990s, and
2000s, nearly every historic building within the District was restored and/or rehabilitated. Highlighting these
“success stories” is one of the project goals.
This document utilized an innovative and creative format to be user friendly. “Before and after" examples are
used to illustrate the document and demonstrate the functionality of the preservation standards. The format
makes use of charts and diagrams that help users plan projects efficiently and quickly determine which sections
of the document apply. The document also incorporates computer-generated models of alternative approaches
for various design topics, including additions, rehabilitation and new construction. Additionally, information on
sustainability and the use of substitute materials are interwoven through the document.
River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District Design Standards and Guidelines
The R-D-R zone district includes the original Fort Collins town site and the historic commercial and industrial core.
It is characterized by a wide variety of buildings that have served a multitude of uses over the decades.
Ranchway Feeds, Harmony Mill, Feeders Supply and the former electrical generating plant (now the CSU
Powerhouse) are all unique buildings that reflect our history as the region’s center of commerce. The primary
attribute of the area, the Poudre River, historically attracted water-powered agricultural-related industry and is
now the community’s premier natural feature. A continuous change with railroad lines, two state highways, and
the general expansion of the downtown core has resulted in range of architectural styles that are the essence of
today’s mixed character and charm.
The proposed new design standards and guidelines are specifically intended to maintain this ag-industrial
character with the compatibility of redevelopment. The existing standards that govern the relationship with the
Poudre River will be retained as these standards have been found to be effective at protecting the natural riparian
features while allowing development to occur in a sensitive fashion. Other existing standards that are not
duplicative will be retained. All applicable design standards will be merged and organized into a new set of Land
Use Code standards specific to the R-D-R zone.
The proposed new standards and guidelines build upon previous efforts that address this area, particularly the
Downtown River Corridor Implementation Plan (2000) and the Downtown River District Streetscape
Improvements Project (2008). These two efforts formed the basis of the public improvements along Linden Street
that were completed in March 2012. The new standards call for new development to complement these public
improvements.
The proposed new standards and guidelines are also in alignment with the proposed new design for a fully-
improved Willow Street. The Engineering Department is currently overseeing a design project for Willow Street
between North College Avenue and Linden Street and the projects have been in close coordination.
The project has also closely coordinated with the Poudre River Downtown Project being led by the Parks and
Natural Resources Departments. That project is exploring potential improvements within the immediate River
corridor. Since the proposed standards and guidelines retain all existing standards related to the Poudre River,
and since the River project addresses ecosystem, stormwater / floodplain management and recreation, the two
projects are not in conflict.
It is noteworthy that this project is not a land use plan. It is not an up-zoning or down-zoning, and there no
changes to maximum allowable height standards. The proposed standards and guidelines address how building
height can be addressed in redevelopment projects based on the context of the site and proximity to historic
structures. The fundamental approach is context-based site analysis and sensitive design that is complementary
to the area’s character.
The proposed standards and guidelines acknowledge that this area has an ag-industrial character that is not as
refined as the more ornate portion of the Old Town Historic District across Jefferson Street, with its retail and
entertainment activity and architectural embellishments. In contrast, the R-D-R zone features commercial and
Packet Pg. 77
April 8, 2014 Page 3
industrial uses where building forms are simpler and less detailed. Industrial activities, such as manufacturing
and outside storage and truck docks, are part of the area’s character. The somewhat rough-hewn character can
be incorporated into more active streets to achieve a walkable and interesting district that is worth exploring.
In summary, the draft standards and guidelines implement the action plan from City Plan Update - 2011 in order
to respect the ag-industrial character of the area. They enhance, clarify and update the existing standards that
govern the R-D-R zone district. The new standards will be inserted directly into the Land Use Code for maximum
effectiveness. Explanatory text, graphics, and illustrations will be available in an accompanying document for the
benefit of land owners, architects and developers in order to provide more detail and remove ambiguity. Overall,
the project is anticipated to result in an improved development review process for all interested parties.
Public Engagement
Boards and Commission Outreach:
- Work Sessions with Landmark Preservation Commission (June 26, October 23, and December 11, 2013)
- Work Session with Planning and Zoning Board (January 3, 2014)
- Downtown Development Authority (February 13, 2014)
- Parking Advisory Board (March 10, 2014)
- Natural Resources Advisory Board (March 19, 2014)
Citizen Outreach:
- Tour of subject areas with consultant and stakeholder group (June 26, 2013)
- Poudre River Project Open House, Lincoln Center (June 26, 2013)
- Public Workshops (October 3 and November 13, 2013)
- Website: <http://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/otrd-design-standards-and-guidelines.php> (October,
2013)
- Poster and table at joint Planning and Transportation open house, Museum and Discovery Science Center
(February 20, 2014)
- Correspondence with representatives of Save the Poudre and Protect Our Old Town Homes (Ongoing)
Next Steps
Based on Council's recommendations at the April 8 Work Session, revisions will be made and presented to the
community through the following outreach plan prior to returning to Council on June 3:
Citizen Outreach:
- Present findings and invite comments at public workshop (April 2014)
- Present final drafts on website and provide opportunity for community input (April 2014)
- Downtown Business Association Presentation (May 2014)
Boards and Commission Outreach:
- Planning and Zoning Board Hearing (May 2014)
- Landmark Preservation Commission Hearing (May 2014)
Packet Pg. 78
April 8, 2014 Page 4
ATTACHMENTS
1. River District Map (PDF)
2. Old Town Historic District Map (PDF)
3. Public Engagement Plan (PDF)
4. River District Design Standards and Guidelines (PDF)
5. Old Town Historic District Design Standards (PDF)
6. Old Town Historic District Design Standards (PDF)
7. Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF)
8. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
Packet Pg. 79
ATTACHMENT 1
Packet
ATTACHMENT 2
Attachment2.2: Old Town Historic District Map (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
PROJECT TITLE: OLD TOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS/RIVER DISTRICT DESIGN
GUIDELINES
OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Inform and Involve
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Are there suggestions for improving the content, design, and/or direction of
either project?
KEY STAKEHOLDERS: Area property owners, business owners, residents, State Historical Fund (Old Town
Historic District), Parking Advisory Board (River District), Landmark Preservation Commission, Planning and
Zoning Board, Downtown Development Authority, Downtown Business Association, Save the Poudre,
Natural Resources Advisory Board, Protect Our Old Town Homes (POOTH), and City Council.
TIMELINE: September 2013 – June 2014
Phase 1: Involve
Timeframe: June 2013 – November 2013
Key Messages: Pre-development of draft standards/guidelines - Presentation of current gaps in each
and overview of proposed changes with areas of focus.
Tools and Techniques:
Coordination with consultant and State Historical Fund project manager (June 18)
Tour of subject areas with stakeholder group (June 26, 2013)
Poudre River Project Open House, Lincoln Center (June 26, 2013)
Work Session with Landmark Preservation Commission (June 26)
Public workshop (October 3)
PHASE 2: Inform
Timeframe: October 2013 – April 2014
Key Messages: Present draft design guideline/standards documents, invite suggestions and feedback.
Tools and Techniques:
Website: http://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/otrd-design-standards-and-guidelines.php
Work Sessions with the Landmark Preservation Commission (October 23 and December 11, 2013)
Public workshop (November 13, 2013)
Work Session with Planning and Zoning Board (January 3, 2014)
Presentation to the Downtown Development Authority (February 13, 2014)
Poster and table at joint Planning and Transportation open house, Museum and Discovery Science
Center (February 20, 2014)
Presentation to Parking Advisory Board regarding proposed LUC changes for parking in R-D-R
Zone District (March 10, 2014)
Presentation to Natural Resources Advisory Board (March 19, 2014)
Correspondence with representatives of Save the Poudre and Protect Our Old Town Homes
(Ongoing)
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment2.3: Public Engagement Plan (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
PHASE 3: Inform
Timeframe: April 2014 – June 2014
Key Messages: Present final draft design guideline/standards documents, request board and commission
recommendations prior to June 3 adoption hearing with City Council
Tools and Techniques:
Present findings and invite comments at public workshop, April 2014
Present final drafts on website and provide opportunity for community input, April 2014
Downtown Business Association Board Meeting, April 9, 2014
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing, May 2014
Landmark Preservation Commission Hearing, May 2014
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment2.3: Public Engagement Plan (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
FORT COLLINS RIVER DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES
JANUARY 27, 2014
ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES 1
Overview 3
Policy Base for the Design Guidelines 6
Vision For the River District 7
I UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT 9
Evolution and Change 11
II HOW TO USE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES 17
How the Guidelines are Organized 19
Understanding the Content of a Design Guideline 20
III KEY PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGN 23
Key Principles for Design 25
IV NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL DESIGN 27
Neighborhood Level Design Overview 29
Connectivity 30
Views 33
Riverfront Relationship 34
V SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES 35
Overview to the Site Design Guidelines 37
Open Space Amenities 38
Street Edge 42
Parking Edge 43
Fencing and Site Walls 44
Service Area 45
VI BUILDING DESIGN GUIDELINES 47
Building Design Guidelines 49
Mass and Scale 50
Pedestrian-Friendly Edge 53
Solid-to-Void 55
Roofs 56
Building Materials 57
Building Features 60
Structured Parking 64
Miscellaneous 65
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
CREDITS - FORTHCOMING
Prepared by:
Winter & Company
1265 Yellow Pine Avenue
Boulder, Colorado 803034
303.440.8445
www.winterandcompany.net
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
INTRODUCTION TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines 3
The River District is important to the history of Fort
Collins and offers a significant opportunity for future
redevelopment. Although it is the site of the original
fort that grew into the present day city, only a few
significant reminders of the past remain. These historic
resources help inform the community vision for a River
District that extends the vibrancy of downtown while
also hosting a diverse mix of uses that honor the area’s
agricultural-industrial past. The vision is also informed
by the community’s desire to highlight and respect the
Poudre River, which runs along the district’s northern
boundary.
This document provides guidelines that promote the
community’s vision for the River District through
compatible new construction and redevelopment. It
also assists with interpretation of the special zoning
standards that apply to the district. The goal is to
support investment that builds a strong, pedestrian-
oriented urban fabric and encourage creative design
that is compatible with the historic context.
Historic resources, including the 102 year old Northern Colorado Feeders Supply Building,
inform the community vision for a diverse mix of uses that honor the River District’s agricul-
tural-industrial past.
Zoning Standards for the River District
The Fort Collins Land Use Code sets forth the
R-D-R zone district to implement special develop-
ment standards for the River District. The guide-
lines in this document assist with interpretation of
R-D-R zone district standards.
See “Fort Collins Land Use Code” on page 6
for more information.
OVERVIEW
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
42014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
LOCATION
The River District is part of the City’s Poudre River
Corridor. It also is described as a sub-district of down-
town and as the “Historic and Cultural Core Segment”
of the Poudre River Corridor. The entire Corridor also
is part of a “national river corridor,” which Congress
designated in 1996 for the Cache La Poudre River to
recognize its critical historical value in the westward
expansion of the U.S.
The River District includes the area just northeast of
the city’s Old Town Historic District including Jeffer-
son, Linden, and Willow Streets and Lincoln Avenue.
Jefferson Street is also State Highway 14. Linden Street
is the primary connection linking the River District to
the Old Town (Local) Historic District to the south
and northward to surrounding neighborhoods and
employment areas. Linden Street also provides one of
the main connections over the Poudre River and is one
of the most convenient access points to the Poudre
River Trail. Willow Street is a locally well-known route
to connect from College Avenue (US287) through the
River District to Lincoln.
A portion of the River District, between Jefferson
Street and Willow Street, also is part of the Old Fort
Collins National Register Historic District.
APPLICATION OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The design guidelines in this document apply to new
construction projects and additions to existing buildings
within the boundaries of the River District. Property
owners, architects, developers and the general public
should refer to the guidelines to learn about design in
the River District and strategies for compatible new
construction. The design guidelines do not address
improvements to historic buildings; these are instead
addressed in the separate Old Town Historic District
Guidelines. Owners of historic properties should
use those guidelines for improvements to buildings
designated, or eligible to be designated as local historic
landmarks. A portion of the River District is located
within the Old Town National Register Historic Dis-
trict. In some cases, special design guidelines apply to
new construction in this area. See Chapter 1 for more
information.
The design guidelines also do not generally apply to
public realm (streets, sidewalks and parks) improve-
ments, which are addressed in a separate Streetscape
Plan.
HISTORIC RESOURCES AND THEIR
RELATIONSHIP TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Several properties in the River District have historic
significance, and may be identified as such in a variety
of ways: A property may be a locally designated land-
mark, or it may be listed as a contributor to the Old
Town (Local) Historic District. It also may have been
determined to be individually eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places, or it may have
been rated as a “contributor” to a potential historic
district. For each of these four types of identification,
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines 5
Map Key
National Register District
Old Town Historic District
River District
Properties determined to be ELIGIBLE for listing as
a local landmark
These are generally properties that have been deter-
mined in a formal survey to be eligible individually to
the National Register, or are already so listed. For
these properties, the city’s development review pro-
cess will take impacts on the historic significance into
consideration.
Contributor to a potential National Register district
or a local historic district.
The city conducted an inventory of cultural resources
in the Old Fort Site area in 2002. The inventory
identified several properties that could be contribu-
tors to a National Register District, but overall did
not find a sufficient concentration of these resources
to justify designating a district. For those properties,
owners may still seek to apply best practices in historic
preservation, and may ELECT to use the preservation
guidelines for Old Town.
Preservation guidelines
Special guidelines for preservation of historic resources
exist for the Old Town (Local) Historic District. These
should be used when considering improvements af-
fecting historic properties, including all of the types of
resources listed above.
North
NTS
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
62014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
POLICY BASE FOR THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The River District Design Guidelines reflect the City’s
goal to enhance its image while promoting sustain-
ability and economic development. The policy base for
the Design Guidelines is provided in several key policy
documents including the City Plan comprehensive
plan, Land Use Code and River District Streetscape
Improvements Project.
CITY PLAN
In February 2011, the City of Fort Collins published an
update to its City Plan, a comprehensive plan for the
City which illustrates a vision of Fort Collins for the
next twenty-five years and beyond.
City Plan policies and principles seek to improve access
to the River District and establish gateways to draw
attention and convey the character of the district. City
plan principles and policies for historic preservation
also help provide a policy base for the Design Guide-
lines, including:
Principle LIV16: “The quality of life in Fort Collins will be en-
hanced by the preservation of historic resources and inclusion
of heritage in the daily life and development of the community.”
Policy LIV 16.6 - Integrate Historic Structures “Explore oppor-
tunities to incorporate existing structures of historic value into
new development and redevelopment activities.”
FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE
The Land Use Code sets forth the regulations that
shape development throughout Fort Collins. Division
4.17 of the Land Use Code establishes the River
Downtown Redevelopment District (R-D-R) to imple-
ment special zoning standards for the River District.
In addition to special regulations, the Code’s intent
statement for the R-D-R zone district helps establish a
policy base for the Design Guidelines:
“The River Downtown Redevelopment District is intended
to reestablish the linkage between Old Town and the River
through redevelopment in the Cache la Poudre River cor-
ridor. This District offers opportunities for more intensive
redevelopment of housing, businesses and workplaces to
complement Downtown.
Improvements should highlight the historic origin of Fort
Collins and the unique relationship of the waterway and
railways to the urban environment as well as expand cul-
tural opportunities in the Downtown area. Any significant
redevelopment should be designed as part of a master
plan for the applicable group of contiguous properties.
Redevelopment will extend the positive characteristics
of Downtown such as the pattern of blocks, pedestrian-
oriented street fronts and lively outdoor spaces.”
The River District Design Guidelines build on this in-
tent statement and the specific design topics addressed
in the R-D-R zone district to help ensure compatible
design that is consistent with the vision for the River
District. The Design Guidelines include cross refer-
ences to Code standards when applicable.
Note that industrial uses continues to be welcomed.
RIVER DISTRICT STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines 7
The vision for the River District is that it will be an
active place, where the river, industry, art and history
come together to provide a vibrant complement to Old
Town Fort Collins. A mix of uses, including housing,
commercial and industrial activities enjoy the amenities
of the river and its preserved natural areas. Modern
housing, restaurants, shops and office buildings join
with established industrial enterprises to reflect the
District’s historic past and celebrate its future. Every-
one enjoys the recreational opportunities found there.
In the future, the River District connects Old Town
with the Poudre River, and celebrates its agricultural
and industrial architecture and the rich history of the
area. It does so in creative ways that express a look
to the future, while respecting the past. The area will
be known for new, well-designed infill buildings and
landscapes that offer opportunities for business and
industry and also facilitate relaxation, exposure to
Some recently constructed local brewery buildings provide cultural activities and civic interaction.
design inspiration for new buildings that reflect the River
District’s agricultural-industrial heritage.
VISION FOR THE RIVER DISTRICT
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
82014 Introduction to the Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
1
UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Understanding the Context 11
EVOLUTION AND CHANGE
Understanding the context for design in the River Dis-
trict is essential in planning any improvement project in
the area. While substantial new development is envi-
sioned, there are references from the past that should
inspire design. This section introduces some aspects of
the context to consider.
The core of the River District near Linden and Willow
Streets is significant in its role in the settlement of the
city of Fort Collins. The original “Fort Collins” military
post was established there in 1864 and consisted of
a parade ground, officer’s quarters & barracks, store-
houses and other buildings. The Army relinquished
ownership in 1872 and fort structures were gradually
removed one by one until 1942 when the last build-
ing for the Fort was demolished. Some archaeological
resources may exist from this era.
LATER DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA
Uses that followed the military post included residen-
tial, flour milling, retailing, farming, ranching, lodging,
animal feed production and, much later, the city dump.
New buildings were erected over several decades, and
by the early twentieth century, the area had a distinct
urban form, with commercial buildings concentrated
near the intersection of Jefferson and Linden Streets,
and a mix of residential and industrial uses extending
from Jefferson north to the river.
A diverse range of building types existed, reflecting
the mix of uses and the changing economy in the area.
Commercial and industrial buildings took a variety of
forms: Some were massive masonry or frame struc-
tures, rising to four and five stories. Others were only
one or two stories in height, but sprawled across large
parcels. Residential structures were typically single
family wood frame structures, although some masonry
ones are documented to have existed.
THE INFLUENCE OF THE RAILROAD
Railroads significantly shaped the character of the area.
An initial rail line, the Greeley, Salt Lake and Pacific
Railroad (GSL&P), was established in the area in 1881-
83. It followed a raceway that was constructed to
provide power for mills in the area (This followed what
became Willow Street.) Industrial uses then located
along the rail line. A more dramatic change occurred
in 1910-11, when the Union Pacific constructed a rail
line closer to Jefferson. This caused the demolition of
several buildings and the construction of new ones,
such as the freight depot and passenger depot. It also
further separated the Old Town commercial district
from the river.
CHANGES IN THE RIVER ITSELF
One significant topographical change included the
channelization of the river between Linden Street
and Lincoln Avenue. Historically, the Poudre River
channel in the section between Linden Street and
Lincoln Avenue followed a large meander to the east
of its current alignment. (The ox-bow is still visible in
some aerial photos.) During the 1960s, the oxbow was
122014 Understanding the Context River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
MAPPING CHANGES IN THE AREA
As a part of a cultural resource report prepared
in 2002 for the city by Jason Marmor of Entranco, a
series of maps were produced that draw upon a variety
of historic data sources to chart the progression of
development in the area. A few of the maps from that
report are reproduced here. The ones selected begin
with development that occurred after the original
fort closed and land became available for private use.
They provide insights into the patterns of development
in the area, and to the ways in which various trends
shaped its urban form.
A general review of these maps demonstrates some
key points:
› Evolution and change are a part of the heritage
of the River District. This is reflected in the
guidelines that appear later in this document.
› A mix of uses has always been a part of the
dynamics of the area, with percentages within
the mix of different uses changing over time.
A continuing mix of uses is anticipated in city
policies for the River District and in the design
guidelines.
› A diversity of building forms and types is also a
part of the River District’s heritage. These range
from small wood frame single-family residences
to massive masonry mill buildings. This diversity
of form and materials is also promoted in the
guidelines.
› The river and the railroads were major influ-
ences in the area’s development patterns. Some
evidence of these influences remain today, albeit
sometimes in subtle ways. These also inform
some of the design principles and guidelines
that appear in this document. Retaining refer-
ences to some of these features in landscape
and building orientation is also put forth in the
guidelines.
MAP KEY
This key applies to the maps shown on the following
three pages.
An early view of the River District documents the location
of the Raceway along Willow Street and the position of the
GSL&P rail line.
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Understanding the Context 13
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 1891
This map illustrates the overall number of buildings and the patterns of land uses
that emerged after the closure of the fort of Fort Collins. Of note:
› The arc of the main channel of Cache la Poudre River is shown.
› A raceway, used for water power, runs along Willow Street.
› The GSL&P railway line follows along the raceway in the center of the
map.
› A clustering of industrial buildings appears in Block 9 along Lincoln Av-
enue, including the Harmony Mill (built c. 1886-87), where the raceway
joins the channel of the river.
› Commercial development is focused at the intersection of Linden and
Jefferson.
› Residences lie between the commercial area and the raceway. (Note
that the Sanborn maps, upon which this information is based, did not
extend beyond Willow Street at this period, and therefore no buildings
are shown in that area.)
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 1909
This map illustrates the continued expansion of development in the area. Of
note:
› A second cluster of industrial uses appears near Spruce and Willow
Streets, including the Poudre Valley Supply Company feed mill.
› Some buildings are aligned parallel to the tracks, and thus they reflect the
location of this feature.
› Residential development north of Willow is now documented.
› The Denver & Interurban Railroad streetcar line runs along Linden Street.
› More commercial buildings appear along both sides of Jefferson Street.
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
142014 Understanding the Context River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 1917
This map dramatically documents the effect that the construction of the Union
& Pacific railroad (1910-11) had on the built environment of the area. Many
buildings were removed to make room for it. Of note:
› Most industrial, and residential buildings have been removed from Blocks
6, 7, 8, 9, and 10.
› A new main railroad track appears, just east of Jefferson Street.
› A new rail siding appears, running parallel to Jefferson Street, and
approximately midway between Jefferson and Willow Streets. (This
survives as a partial view corridor today.)
› Portions of Pine and all of Spruce Street are vacated for the new rail line.
› The Union Pacific passenger and freight depots stand on Jefferson and
Linden Streets, respectively.
› More industrial facilities are located within the rail corridor.
› Residential buildings have diminished in number.
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 1948
This map documents the continuing expansion of industrial uses. Of note:
› The raceway has disappeared.
› New commercial uses appear, including the Trostel lumber yard on the
north side of Linden Street 400 Linden Street (Block 1).
› The municipal power plant, (erected in 1935-36) appears along North
College Avenue.
› The Libby, McNeil & Libby pickle plant at 355 Linden Street was greatly
expanded by 1948, and contained a total of 36 cylindrical pickling vats.
This demonstrates the variety of building forms that have appeared over
the years.
› Residential use remains relatively unchanged.
› The course of the Cache la Poudre River has been modified.
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Understanding the Context 15
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 1963
This map documents the enlargement of the former Lindell Mills, after its
acquisition by Ranch-Way Feeds and conversion to a livestock feed mill and
packaging plant. Of note:
› The pickling plant on Linden Street is gone.
› The adjacent grain elevator has been converted to commercial use as a
livestock feed store.
› Another new commercial venture is the El Burrito café on Linden Street
near Willow, started in 1960.
› Industrial uses have expanded.
› The Cache La Poudre River has been further straightened.
RIVER DISTRICT CONTEXT 2002
This map illustrates the continuing mix of uses in the area, and the introduction
of new public parks and community facilities, as the river is now recognized as
an amenity. Of note:
› Several houses razed on Block 2
› The erection of new lumber warehouses and Kiefer Concrete facilities
between Lincoln Avenue and Linden Streets
› Construction of a large commercial building on Lot 10 in Block 2
› The United Way building on Pine Street, indicating the introduction of
social services into the area
› The former GSL&P railroad tracks along Willow Street were removed by
2002, leaving only the Union Pacific mainline and a spur serving Ranch-
Way Feeds.
› Old Fort Collins Heritage Park appears on the site of the old city dump.
› Jefferson Street Park is located southeast of the former UP passenger
depot.
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
162014 Understanding the Context River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
2
HOW TO USE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 How to Use the Design Guidelines 19
The design guidelines are organized into a series of
chapters that reflect a progression in scale of consider-
ing different contexts and design variables. They begin
with topics that address how a project relates to its
larger neighborhood and continue with topics that
focus on site design. They then continue with guidance
for building design.
NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL
Design guidelines in this category focus on ways in
which individual projects work together to create a
vital, functioning neighborhood. Design in the public
realm and consideration of how an individual property
relates positively to others in the vicinity are important
considerations.
SITE LEVEL
Design guidelines in this category focus on how im-
provements on an individual property are organized,
including the placement and orientation of buildings,
the location of service areas and landscaping. Some of
these guidelines focus on maintaining a sense of con-
tinuity with the neighborhood, while others address
making the best use of the property in terms of creat-
ing a sense of place and enhancing function for users.
HOW THE GUIDELINES ARE ORGANIZED
BUILDING LEVEL
Design guidelines in this category address architectural
character, scale, materials and details, with a focus on
fitting with the design traditions of the River District,
while also encouraging new, creative approaches.
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
202014 How to Use the Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
UNDERSTANDING THE CONTENT OF A DESIGN GUIDELINE
TERMS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE
When applying design guidelines, the city balances a
combination of design objectives that appear through-
out the document, in the interest of helping to achieve
the most appropriate design for each project. Because
of this, and the fact that the design guidelines are
also written to serve an educational role as well as a
regulatory one, the language sometimes appears more
conversational than that in zoning and development
standards. To clarify how some terms are used, these
definitions shall apply:
Guideline
In this document the term “guideline” is a criterion
with which the city will require compliance when it is
found applicable to the specific improvement project.
In this sense it is a standard, albeit one that is subject
to some interpretation when determining compliance.
Shall
Where the term “shall” is used, compliance is specifi-
cally required, when the statement is applicable to the
proposed work.
Should
The term “should” is frequently used in the guidelines.
This indicates that compliance is expected, except in
conditions in which the city finds that the guideline is
not applicable, or that an alternative means of meeting
the intent of the guideline is acceptable.
Will Be Considered
The phrase “will be considered” appears in some
guidelines text. This indicates that the city has the
discretion to determine if the action being discussed
is appropriate. This decision is made on a case-by-case
basis, using the information specifically related to the
project and its context.
Feasible
“Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, environmental, legal,
social, and technological factors. This term is used
in some guidelines in this document to indicate that,
while meeting the particular guideline in full is usually
required, there may be instances in a specific applica-
tion in which it may not be possible to do so. In all
cases, the city shall make the determination of what is
feasible.
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 How to Use the Design Guidelines 21
Sidebars
These provide additional infor-
mation that will be helpful in
understanding the guideline. In
some cases a sidebar includes links
that direct the user to additional
material; this may be technical
information about a rehabilitation
procedure or other helpful infor-
mation.
Appropriate and
Inappropriate Solutions
In many cases, images and dia-
grams in the historic preservation
guidelines are marked to indicate
whether the represent appropri-
ate or inappropriate solutions
4
A check mark
indicates appropriate
solutions.
8
An X mark indicates
solutions that are not
appropriate.
A
B
C
D
E
Design Topic Heading
Intent Statement: This explains
the desired outcome for the specific
design element and provides a basis
for the design guidelines that follow.
If a guideline does not specifically ad-
dress a particular design issue, then
the city will use the intent statement
to determine appropriateness.
Design Guideline: This describes
a desired outcome related to the
intent statement.
Additional Information: This
provides a bullet list of examples of
how, or how not to, comply with the
guideline.
Illustration(s): These provide
photos and/or diagrams to illustrate
related conditions or possible
approaches. They may illustrate ap-
propriate or inappropriate solutions
as described at right.
DESIGN GUIDELINES FORMAT
The River District design guidelines are presented in a standardized format as illustrated below. Each of the illustrated com-
ponents is used by the city in determining appropriateness. Additional elements that appear on a typical page of the historic
preservation guidelines are summarized at right.
Accent Features
Accent features can add interest to the building design and may
222014 How to Use the Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
3
KEY PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGN
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Key Principles for Design 25
KEY PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGN
Promote creativity.
Design with consistency and use materials with long term dura-
bility.
Achieve excellence in design. Design with authenticity.
These design principles establish expectations for
design at a “high level” for the district and shall apply to
all improvement projects.
ACHIEVE EXCELLENCE IN DESIGN
Each project in the River District should express excel-
lence in design, and it should raise the bar for others
to follow. This includes using high quality materials and
construction methods and paying attention to detail.
PROMOTE CREATIVITY
Innovation in design is welcomed in the River District.
Exploring new ways of designing buildings and spaces is
appropriate when they contribute to a cohesive urban
fabric. This type of creativity should be distinguished
from simply being “different.”
DESIGN WITH AUTHENTICITY
The River District should be defined by buildings and
places that reflect their own time. The result should
be a sense of authenticity in building and materials. All
new improvements should convey this quality.
DESIGN WITH CONSISTENCY
Buildings and places in the River District should have a
cohesive quality in the use of materials, organization of
functions and overall design. Each new project should
also embody a single, consistent design concept.
Packet Pg. 112
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
262014 Key Principles for Design River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
DESIGN FOR DURABILITY
Buildings and spaces in the River District should be
designed for the long term with durable materials.
DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABILITY
Aspects of cultural, economic and environmental sus-
tainability that relate to urban design should be woven
into all new improvements.
ENHANCE THE PUBLIC REALM
Sidewalks, promenades and other pedestrian ways
should be designed to invite their use through thought-
ful planning and design. Improvement on private prop-
erty also should enhance the public realm where they
abut.
ENHANCE THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE
Each improvement project should contribute to a
pedestrian-friendly environment. This includes defining
street edges with buildings and spaces that are visually
interesting and that attract pedestrian activity.
PROVIDE SIGNATURE OPEN SPACES
These include public and private yards, promenades,
plazas and courtyards. Enhance natural resources and
habitat for wildlife on-site, for the public to experience.
KEEP THE PARKING SUBORDINATE
Parking lots and parking structures should support
other functions and not dominate the setting. They
should be visually buffered.
Enhance the pedestrian experience. Provide signature open spaces.
Keep the automobile subordinate.
Design for sustainability.
Enhance the public realm.
Packet Pg. 113
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
4
NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL DESIGN
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Neighborhood Level Design 29
NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL DESIGN OVERVIEW
A key aspect of the vision for the River District is
that it establish an image as a distinct place that is
rich with a diversity of uses and varied designs, but at
the same time is to be perceived as its own distinct
neighborhood. For that reason, each project should be
conceived such that it relates well to other properties
and reinforces the continuity of the public realm.
This section addresses at systems that connect proper-
ties into the district as a whole. It will be relatively
brief, because much of these design variables relate to
the public realm and are addressed in other policies
and documents.
This section looks at systems that connect properties into the district as a whole. One way of achieving neighborhood
connections is to highlight older abandoned transportation corridors including streets and rail lines. Examples include
Chestnut St., Pine St. and the Union Pacific rail spur. An opportunity exists to highlight these as view corridors, pedestrian
ways, internal lanes and multipurpose alleys, for example.
Old rail spur
Historic
Pine St ROW
Historic
Chestnut St ROW
Old rail spur
Jefferson St
Willow St
Linden St Linden St
Old rail spur
North
NTS
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
302014 Neighborhood Level Design River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
CONNECTIONS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Pedestrian circulation systems provide access to
buildings, courtyards, internal paths and plazas. These
systems should interconnect and promote pedestrian
movement throughout the neighborhood. In most
cases, these connections will simply involve an exten-
sion of the existing sidewalk network but should also
include internal circulation systems within the develop-
ment.
Auto circulation should also interconnect to minimize
automobile impacts. Shared drives, limited curb cuts
and turning movements should be considered.
4.1 Provide convenient vehicular ,
pedestrian and bikeway connections
among abutting properties.
› Create an internal circulation system that will
link those of adjacent properties, when feasible.
4.2 Reinforce the historic network of
streets, rail lines and alleys.
› Reinforce the historic network of streets, rail
lines and alleys as public circulation space and
for maximum public access.
› Consider ways to express the location of earlier
circulation routes; for example, highlight rail
spurs.
› Link to existing public right-of-ways, when
feasible.
Appropriate pedestrian connections include mid-block
passages.
Provide convenient vehicular, pedestrian and bikeway
connections among abutting properties.
4 4
4
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses street
connections in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“Redevelopment shall maintain the existing block
grid system of streets and alleys. To the extent
reasonably feasible, the system shall be augmented
with additional connections, including new walkway
spines in substitution of streets and/or alleys.” (Divi-
sion 4.14)
Reinforce the historic network of streets, rail lines and
alleys as public circulation space and for maximum public
access. The treatment of the Old Historic District alleys
are a successful example of enhanced connectivity.
CONNECTIVITY
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Neighborhood Level Design 31
4.3 Connect a development to
established pedestrian ways.
› Appropriate pedestrian connections include:
• Sidewalks
• Internal walkways, within an individual
property
• Mid-block passages
• Multi-use alleys
› Appropriate features with which to connect
include:
• Plazas and courtyards
• Other buildings
4.4 Locate a new walkway to animate the
River District pedestrian network
and its associated outdoor spaces.
› Direct a walkway through a plaza, courtyard
or other outdoor use area to help animate the
space.
4.5 Where a curb cut is to be installed,
keep the width to a minimum.
› Consider using shared driveways between
properties to reduce the number of curb cuts.
› Utilize smaller curbs radii when feasible.
4.6 Minimize the width of a curb cut.
› Avoid disruptions in the walkway systems.
CONNECTIVITY
Direct a walkway through a plaza, courtyard or
other outdoor use area to help animate the space.
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
322014 Neighborhood Level Design River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
EARLY RAIL LINES
4.7 Existing railroad corridors, spurs
and tracks should be expressed in
new design to the extent feasible.
› This may be accomplished by using the area as a
linear open space, a pathway or a drive.
› Where they exist, incorporate railroad tracks
into the project design.
› The adaptive reuse of abandoned railroad cor-
ridors and spurs to provide public green space
or other amenities for use and enjoyment of the
neighborhood is encouraged.
› Retain the corridor as open space, a walkway or
service land when feasible.
› In any case, maintain the feature as a view cor-
ridor to the extent feasible.
4
CONNECTIVITY
Where they exist, incorporate railroad tracks into the
project design.
The adaptive reuse of abandoned railroad corridors and
spurs to provide public green space or other amenities for
use and enjoyment of the neighborhood is encouraged. 4
4
4
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Neighborhood Level Design 33
VIEW CORRIDORS
Providing view corridors, in terms of open space, con-
nections, and building massing is a key concept.
Views from public rights-of-way to landmarks and
natural features should be maintained and taken into
account in the designing of sites and buildings. The
location of the building on a site, in addition to its scale,
height, and massing, can impact views from the adja-
cent public right-of-way, including streets, sidewalks,
intersections, and public spaces. Development projects
should try to preserve noteworthy views, such as
views to the river, a landmark or along the railroad
right-of-way.
4.8 Enhance views from the public way
to natural features and historic
landmarks when feasible.
› Strategically locate a building on a site to main-
tain key views or frame views as perceived from
the public right-of-way.
› Vary a building’s height and massing to provide
view corridors.
Maintain existing railroad tracks as a view corridor to the
extent feasible.
4
VIEWS
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
342014 Neighborhood Level Design River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
SITES ALONG THE RIVERFRONT
The guidelines in this section provide additional detail
regarding compatible development along the river.
Note that opportunities for connections exist for
properties behind those that abut the river as well.
4.9 Retain historic relationships between
buildings, landscape features, and
open spaces.
4.10 Where two or more buildings will
be located on a site, arrange them
to def ine an outdoor space.
› Clustering buildings to create active open spac-
es, such as plazas and courtyards, is encouraged
along the street and river edges.
› Consider seasonal sun and shade patterns when
positioning plazas and courtyards. Provide op-
portunities for shade in summer months and
sun in winter months.
4.11 Provide connections to the river
trail, when feasible.
› Consider these approaches:
• directly from an individual property
• along a shared walkway
• align with the grid
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses riv-
erfront sites in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“On sites that have River frontage between Linden
Street and Lincoln Avenue, buildings or clusters of
buildings shall be located and designed to form
outdoor spaces (such as balconies, arcades, terraces,
decks or courtyards) on the River side of the build-
ings and/or between buildings, as integral parts of
a transition between development and the River. A
continuous connecting walkway (or walkway system)
linking such spaces shall be developed, including
coordinated linkages between separate development
projects.”
RIVERFRONT RELATIONSHIP
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
5
SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Site Design Guidelines 37
This section addresses site design principles as they ap-
ply to an individual parcel or to a complex of properties
being planned as a coordinated project. The objective is
to promote developments that have a comprehensive
approach to the use of land, with a focus on enhanc-
ing the street, providing for efficient functional site
requirements using high quality and enduring designs.
The Site Design Guidelines address the placement of
a building on its site, as well as basic approaches to
landscaping and construction of outdoor amenities.
Functional requirements related to parking and site
engineering are also addressed.
Each site improvement project should enhance the
character of the district and, even though the work may
be within individual property lines, it should enhance
the experience of the public way whenever feasible. In
general, building entrances should be sited such that
they are relatively close to the street, with parking and
service areas screened from view. A general alignment
of building fronts along the street is desired, to enhance
the pedestrian experience. However, some variation in
setbacks is in character with traditional development
patterns partially in the National Register District por-
tion. Where buildings are set back from the sidewalk,
the area should be an active outdoor use, a green space
or other amenity (that is, not parking or a service
area). A variation in setbacks may also be preferred
when building adjacent to a historic structure, in order
to help retain the perception of the cultural resource
in its setting.
Landscape designs that reference the industrial heri-
tage of the area or of the river heritage are especially
appropriate.
Some of the key site design features that should be
used to enhance the street edge are these:
› Pedestrian-oriented entries
› Windows facing the street
› Small public spaces linked to the sidewalk
› Urban streetscape design and landscaping
› Street furniture
› Public art
The vision for development
immediately adjacent to the Cache La
Poudre River focuses on a connecting
walkway that links properties. This
is a key site design concept for this
part of the River District. Providing a
“progression” of outdoor spaces that
orient to the river is also important.
OVERVIEW TO THE SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES
4
The scenic Cache La Poudre River
Some of the key site design features that should be
used to activate the river edge are these:
› Pedestrian-oriented entries
› Windows, balconies, arcades, dining areas and
verandas
› Plazas
382014 Site Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
COORDINATION OF OPEN SPACE
AMENITIES
Open space at the ground level should be provided as
an amenity in a project, and may take the form of a
plaza, courtyard, or a green space. Other types may
be walkways that connect outdoor areas. Still others
may be a part of the architecture, as decks, balconies
and rooftop areas. Each open space should be designed
to enhance the public way, to the extent feasible, in
addition to providing amenities for the site itself.
5.1 Create open space for public
enjoyment.
› Where open space is required, design the area
so that it can be used, or at least observed, by
the public as an asset.
› Also design it for year-round appreciation.
Open space that can be enjoyed visually and functionally is
considered to be “positive,” as opposed to areas that are
not well designed to accommodate use or serve as a visual
amenity. Planning a landscape design to coordinate with
abutting properties is encouraged.
OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses open
space in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“Buildings and extensions of buildings shall be
designed to form outdoor spaces such as balconies,
arcades, terraces, decks or courtyards, and to inte-
grate development with the landscape to the extent
reasonably feasible.”
4
Open space at the ground level should be provided as an amenity in a project, and may take the form of a plaza,
courtyard, or a green space.
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Site Design Guidelines 39
LOCATING OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
Courtyards, plazas and pocket parks provide places for
people to gather, engage in activities and enjoy a sense
of community, and these are encouraged throughout
the River District.
5.4 Locate an open space amenity
where it will activate the street and
enhance the pedestrian experience
throughout the district.
› Orient this space to link with other pedestrian
activities, primary circulation paths, views, cul-
tural resources and natural features.
› Locate the space along active pedestrian circula-
tion paths.
› Locating a space at the sidewalk level is pre-
ferred; however, raised areas that mimic loading
docks are appropriate.
5.2 Coordinate open space designs with
those of abutting properties when
feasible.
› Position a landscaped open space so it can be
shared by adjoining buildings or an individual
property.
› Also, position outdoor open space on an indi-
vidual site so it may also visually or physically
connect with open space on adjoining proper-
ties.
5.3 Design a water detention feature to
serve as amenity.
› Design the detention area to serve as a visual
amenity year round.
› Also coordinate a detention area design with
adjoining properties when feasible.
Position a landscaped open
space so it can be shared
by adjoining buildings or an
individual property.
Design a plaza, courtyard or pocket
park to be inviting.
Hardscape plaza amenity along the rear
of a property
Softscape natural amenity.
4 4 4
The storm detention areas shown above are designed to serve as site amenities. Both
design approaches are appropriate.
OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
4
4
Raised areas that mimic loading docks are
appropriate open space amenities.
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
402014 Site Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
SCALE OF OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
The size of an open space as an amenity should be suf-
ficient to accommodate the intended uses and provide
a sense of energy. It should not be over-sized, such that
the space will appear to be under-utilized.
5.5 Design open space to provide a
comfortable scale for pedestrians.
› Define the space with building fronts that con-
vey a human scale.
› Include landscape elements and site structures
that convey a human scale.
4 4
4 4 4
OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
The size of an open space as an amenity should be sufficient to accommodate the intended uses and provide a sense of energy. It should not be over-sized, such that the
space will appear to be under-utilized.
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Site Design Guidelines 41
SIDEWALK DINING AREAS
Outdoor dining areas and sidewalk cafés can help
animate the public realm. While most dining areas are
expected to be located within individual properties,
there may be cases in which dining will be permitted
on a public sidewalk. These areas typically include a
grouping of tables and/or seating for the purpose of
eating, drinking, or social gathering. Each one should
be designed to maintain comfortable pedestrian flow
along the sidewalk.
5.6 Locate a sidewalk dining area to
accommodate pedestrian traffic
along the sidewalk.
› Placing a sidewalk dining area immediately
adjacent to a building front is preferred, thus
maintaining a public walkway along the curb
side.
› Maintain a clear path along the sidewalk for
pedestrians; a width of 8 feet for this clear path
is recommended, but this may be reduced to 5
feet where no other obstacles in the sidewalk
will impede pedestrian traffic.
› A railing, barrier, series of planters, or similar
edge treatment should be used to define the
perimeter of a sidewalk dining area.
› Any railing or barrier should be sturdy and of
durable materials. Using a chain, cord, or other
flexible system is typically inappropriate.
The boundary of a patio area may be defined with an
awning in addition to temporary railings.
4
Rail construction must be sturdy and of durable materials.
4
5.7 Design a sidewalk dining area to be
an asset to the River District.
› Tables and chairs should be of high-quality and
durable, and specifically designed for outdoor
use.
› Tables, chairs, and other components of a
sidewalk dining area should not be permanently
attached within the public right-of-way.
OPEN SPACE AMENITIES
Each development project should contribute to the public
realm in a positive way. Where buildings are set back from
the sidewalk, the area should be an active outdoor use,
a green space or other amenity (that is, not parking or a
service area).
4
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
422014 Site Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Outdoor furnishings should be of durable materials.
4
CHARACTER OF THE STREET EDGE
Landscape design within an individual property should
be in character with the tradition of agricultural, indus-
trial and commercial uses that are a part of the heritage
of the River District. Where such a landscaped area
abuts a public way, or is visible from it, the design
should enhance the pedestrian experience as well
5.8 Create a well-def ined street edge
with pedestrian-scaled design
elements.
› Include decorative paving, planted areas, public
art, ornamental lighting and other pieces of
street furniture.
› Design the site edge to be compatible with the
streetscape in the public realm.
5.9 Design site furnishings and
landscapes to complement the
character of the district.
› Designs that draw upon the agricultural-
industrial utilitarian heritage, while introducing
new designs are encouraged.
› Use materials seen traditionally, such as metal
work.
5.10 Locate site furnishings in areas of
high pedestrian activity.
› Position site furniture at pedestrian route inter-
sections, major building entrances and outdoor
gathering places.
Landscape designs and site furnishing used within
an individual property should be compatible with the
established palette of street furnishings that is used in the
public realm.
A consistent palette of street lights, trees and furniture
helps establish continuity in the public realm. A similar
sense of consistency in design should appear in private
landscape designs.
4
STREET EDGE
4 4
Include decorative paving, planted areas, public art,
ornamental lighting and other pieces of street furniture to
enhance the street edge.
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Site Design Guidelines 43
PARKING LOCATION
Parking areas, including surface lots and structures,
should be positioned such that they are subordinate to
other uses on the site, with respect to edges that abut
the public realm.
5.11 Locate a parking area to be visually
subordinate to landscapes and
buildings.
› Locate it to the interior of a site where feasible.
› This is especially important on a corner prop-
erty, where it is important to provide a sense of
enclosure of the street wall.
› This is also essential for properties abutting the
river.
5.12 Site a surface lot so it will minimize
gaps in the continuous building wall
of a block.
› Place the parking at the rear of the site, or if this
is not feasible, to the side of the building.
Locate a parking area to the interior of a site where
feasible.
Building
Alley
Street
Parking
4
PARKING EDGE
VISUAL IMPACTS OF PARKING
Parking facilities, such as surface lots, should be de-
signed to be visual assets and to minimize negative im-
pacts upon the public realm. Where a portion of a lot
will be exposed, it should be buffered with landscaping.
5.13 Provide a visual buffer where a
parking lot abuts a public sidewalk.
› Note that “buffering” does not mean fully
screening the parking, but it does require cre-
ating a visual “filter” that softens the view of
parked cars.
› A low wall may be used as a buffer. Its materials
should be compatible with those of the building
on the site.
› A planted buffer may also be used, consisting
of a combination of trees, shrubs and ground
covers.
A planted buffer may be used, consisting of a combination
of trees, shrubs and ground covers.
4
Visually buffer parking areas.
4
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses park-
ing locations in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“Proposed parking lots and/or vehicular use areas
located within fifty (50) feet of any street right-of-
way shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the street
frontage of the parcel upon which the parking lot or
vehicular use area is proposed.”
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
442014 Site Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
FENCE AND SITE WALL DESIGNS
Site walls and fences should be integrated with build-
ing design and the character of the district. Fences and
walls can provide security and privacy and may be ap-
propriate along the rear and side of lots. While fences
and walls often serve a utilitarian function, they should
also enhance the character of the street and appear
to be integral components of building and site design.
Aside from those that may be used to screen trash
storage, fences and walls should be pedestrian scaled
and permit partial views into the property.
5.14 Design a fence or a site wall to be an
integral part of the landscape and
serve as an amenity that adds visual
interest to the property.
› Use materials that are durable and compatible
with the primary structure on site.
› A decorative metal design is preferred for a
fence.
› Using brick or stone piers is also encouraged.
› Native stone and brick are appropriate for site
walls.
› Vinyl, chain link, or wire is inappropriate.
› Opaque privacy fences are inappropriate along
primary street frontages.
4
4
Design a site fence and wall to be an integral part of the
building and site.
FENCING AND SITE WALLS
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses site
walls and fences in the R-D-R District. It states
that:
“Walls, fences and planters shall be designed to
match or be consistent with the quality of materials,
the style and colors of nearby buildings. Brick, stone
or other masonry may be required for walls or fence
columns.”
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Site Design Guidelines 45
SERVICE AREA DESIGN
Service areas, such as loading docks, dumpsters, and
delivery entrances, should be visually unobtrusive and
should be integrated with the design of the site and the
building. Service areas are typically most appropriate
when located to the rear of a building and not visible
from the public right-of-way. However, in an industrial
setting other orientations may be considered if they
are designed to enhance the public realm.
5.15 Locate a service area that requires
vehicle access where conflicts
with pedestrian circulation will be
minimized.
› Provide access from an alley when feasible.
› If an alley access is not feasible, then consider
using a secondary street.
› If necessary, install a service drive, which is lo-
cated away from intersections and other areas
with high levels of pedestrian traffic.
5.16 Minimize the visual impacts of
service areas.
› Orient the service area toward service lanes or
alleys and away from major streets.
› Where a service area or dumpster must be ori-
ented to the street, screen it with an architec-
tural feature. The design should be in character
with the building and provide visual interest at
the street level.
SERVICE AREA
5.17 Position a service area to minimize
conf licts with other abutting uses.
› Service areas should be located away from any
abutting residential uses, where possible.
› Service areas should be shared between prop-
erties when feasible.
5.18 Design a service drive to be a visual
asset.
› Consider using decorative and porous paving
materials in service drives
Screen equipment from view or design it to complement
the building design. (In this industrial context, a metal and
concrete screen is used.)
4
4
Where a service area or dumpster must be oriented to the
street, screen it with an architectural feature. The design
should be in character with the building and provide visual
interest at the street level.
4
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
462014 Site Design Guidelines River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
6
BUILDING DESIGN GUIDELINES
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 49
This section provides guidelines for the design of new
buildings in the River District. New buildings are an-
ticipated throughout the River District as investment
in the area continues. At the same time, it is important
that each development contribute to an overall sense
of continuity. Designs that result in a compatible sense
of scale, and an enhanced pedestrian-oriented environ-
ment are key, while also drawing upon the building
traditions of the River District at large as inspiration
for new, creative designs. These building guidelines
express the concept that each project can have indi-
viduality while also helping to establish a visual unity
for the district.
ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The agricultural industrial and early commercial past
establishes a design context for the River District. New
infill buildings should draw upon the characteristics of
agricultural industrial and commercial architecture of
the past. Historic styles should not be imitated, and
new construction should appear as a product of its
own time, while also being compatible with historic
resources.
6.1 Build upon the industrial, agricultural
and commercial heritage of the
River District.
› New buildings should reflect the industrial, agri-
cultural and commercial buildings of the area in
new, creative ways.
› Contemporary interpretations of building
forms, massing, materials and details are en-
couraged.
4 4 4
4 4
6.2 The exact imitation of historic
styles is inappropriate for new
construction.
› This blurs the distinction between old and new
buildings and makes it more difficult to visually
interpret the architectural evolution of the dis-
trict.
BUILDING DESIGN GUIDELINES
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
502014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
BUILDING MASS AND SCALE
A new building should reflect the mass and scale of
traditional industrial, agricultural and commercial
buildings types, which was typically a composition of
simple geometric forms.
To ensure that human scale is achieved in new devel-
opment, it is important to focus design attention on
aspects most directly experienced by pedestrians, such
as the height of a building and architectural details
as perceived at the street level. Providing a series of
vertical pilasters, a band of windows and storefront
features are examples. Other vertical and horizontal
articulation features are also appropriate.
This building is designed with a composition of simple geometric building
forms of various size in horizontal and vertical orientation, reflecting the
industrial character of the area. This is an appropriate building design.
These buildings are designed with simple geometric shapes that reflect the agricultural and industrial character of the area. These are
appropriate building forms.
4
4 4
The Fort Collins Land Use Code
addresses building mass and scale in
the R-D-R District. It states that:
“Multiple story buildings of up to five
(5) stories are permitted; however,
massing shall be terraced back from
the River and from streets as follows:
› buildings or parts of buildings
shall step down to one (1) story
abutting the River landscape
frontage; and
› buildings or parts of buildings
shall step down to three (3) sto-
ries or less abutting any street
frontage.
No building wall shall exceed one
hundred twenty-five (125) feet on the
axis along the River.”
(2) Provide examples of stepped
building forms; indicate general
depth of setback that is appropriate
for upper floors.
(3) Note 4th story always steps back.
(4) Wall lengths should be in scale
with those seen traditionally on
industrial buildings in the area.
MASS AND SCALE
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 51
Some of the largest traditional warehouses included
interesting fenestration which created visual interest,
and is partially why the older industrial buildings are so
visually appealing. Incorporating these types of features
should be considered.
6.3 The primary industrial building form
should appear similar to those seen
traditionally.
› Simple rectilinear building forms are appropri-
ate. Avoid the use of highly complex forms.
› The facade should appear as predominantly flat,
with any decorative elements and projecting or
setback “articulations” appearing to be subordi-
nate to the dominant form.
6.4 Maintain the scale of traditional
building widths in the district.
› Design a new building to reflect the established
range of the traditional building widths in the
district.
› Where a building must exceed this width, use
changes in design features so the building reads
as separate building modules reflecting tradi-
tional building widths and massing.
› Attention to the designs of transitions between
modules is important. Too much variation,
which results in an overly busy design, is inap-
propriate.
6.5 Reflect the height of traditional
buildings as perceived at the street
level.
› Facade heights of new buildings should fall
within the established range of the block. Set
taller portions back from the street.
› Floor-to-floor heights should appear similar to
those of traditional buildings from the district.
4
Changes in details of materials, window design, pilasters or
materials are examples of techniques that should be con-
sidered to reflect the mass and scale of traditional industrial
buildings.
Note the stepped parapet and the offset at the entry on
this new industrial-like building. These design features
reflect the established range of simple industrial buildings
found within the district. They also help to break up the
mass of the building in a simple way.
4
Incorporating simple commercial building types is appropriate. The facade widths should reflect the traditional range of
the building widths seen in the district.
4
MASS AND SCALE
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
522014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
›
6.6 Position taller portions of a structure
away from neighboring buildings of
lower scale, natural resources and
the street.
› A taller new building should step down in height
to lower scaled neighbors, especially adjacent to
historic buildings.
› The taller portion of a new structure should be
located to minimize looming effects and shading
of lower scaled neighbors, the street and the
river.
6.7 Use building articulation techniques
to establish a sense of human scale
in the building design.
› Use vertical and horizontal articulation design
techniques to reduce the apparent scale of a
larger building mass.
4
The taller portion of a new structure should
be located to minimize looming effects and
shading of lower scaled neighbors, the street
and the river.
4
A series of simple building wall offsets provide vertical
articulation on this multifamily structure.
A simple facade offset provides articulation on this com-
mercial structure.
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses articu-
lation in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“Exterior building walls shall be subdivided and pro-
portioned to human scale, using offsets, projections,
overhangs and recesses, in order to add architectural
interest and variety and avoid the effect of a single,
massive wall with no relation to human size.”
4
4
MASS AND SCALE
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 53
STREET LEVEL
A building should be designed to provide visual interest
to pedestrians. For example, storefronts are of inter-
est to passersbys. Decorative wall surfaces may also be
used where a portion of a facade is a blank wall. These
features encourage pedestrian activity and should be
used.
6.8 Develop the street level of a
building to provide visual interest
to pedestrians.
› All sides of a building should include architec-
tural details to avoid presenting a “back side” to
the street or to neighboring properties. Provide
visual interest with:
• Well-defined windows and doors
• A display window or storefront that provides
views to activities in the building
• Display cases for exhibits
• Decorative wall surface, for example, a
change in materials or wall art
• Building articulation
• Site walls and raised planters
› A large expanse of blank wall is inappropriate on
any street-oriented facade.
4
Providing openings with industrial glass similar in size to
traditional loading doors is appropriate.
4
A building should be designed to pro-
vide visual interest to pedestrians.
All sides of a building should include
architectural details to avoid present-
ing a “back side” to the street or to
neighboring properties. A decorative
wall surface is an appropriate design
feature.
Decorative wall surfaces provide visual interest at the street
level. For example, a change in materials is appropriate.
4
4 4
PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY EDGE
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
542014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
Develop the street level of a building to provide visual interest to pedestrians. This series of images show
appropriate ways to enhance the visual interest of a building façade within in an industrial context.
4 4 4 4
4 4 4
PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY EDGE
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 55
SOLID-TO-VOID RATIO
Some traditional buildings in the River District ap-
peared as rectangular solids, with holes “punched”
in the walls for windows and doors, resulting in a
relatively uniform solid-to-void ratio. A similar ratio of
wall surface to that of building openings, is appropriate
on new buildings.
6.9 Use a ratio of solid-to-void (wall-
to-window) similar to that found
on traditional buildings in the area.
› Large surfaces of uninterrupted glass are gen-
erally discouraged as a primary fenestration
treatment, but may be used as areas of accent.
Where a large area of glass is planned, it should
be detailed to convey a sense of scale.
› Divide large glass surfaces into smaller panes
similar to those seen traditionally.
4
This traditional building shows relatively uniform solid-to-
void ratios.
4
Use a ratio of solid-to-void (wall-to-window) similar to that
found on traditional industrial structures.
Use a ratio of solid-to-void (wall-to-window) similar
to that found on traditional industrial structures.
4
SOLID-TO-VOID
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
562014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
4
ROOF FORM
6.10 A roof form should be similar to
those used traditionally.
› Flat, and low-pitch roofs are appropriate. In
some cases a low barrel roof may be appropri-
ate.
› Gable roofs may be used to provide an accent
to a building module.
› “Exotic” roof forms, including mansards and
A-frames, are inappropriate.
4
4
4
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses roofli-
nes in the R-D-R District. It states that:
“A minimum pitch of 8:12 shall be used for gable and
hip roofs to the maximum extent feasible. Where
hipped roofs are used alone, the minimum pitch shall
be 6:12.
Flat-roofed buildings shall feature three-dimensional
cornice treatment on all walls facing streets, the river
or connecting walkways, unless they are stepped and
terraced back to form a usable roof terrace area(s).”
A roof form should be similar to those used
traditionally. Flat, and low-pitch roofs are
appropriate.In some cases a low barrel roof
may be appropriate.
ROOFS
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 57
PRIMARY MATERIALS
Materials that are “authentic” and durable are pre-
ferred. Materials for new structures and additions to
existing buildings should contribute to the context of
the district and convey high quality in design and detail.
The intent is to promote visual continuity in the basic
materials palette, while encouraging creativity in their
use.
6.11 New building materials should
contribute to the visual continuity
of the design context.
› Genuine masonry, metal, concrete, structural
steel and glass are preferred.
› “Green” (sustainable) materials are also ap-
propriate. These include materials which are:
locally manufactured, easy to maintain, proven
to be durable in the Fort Collins climate, have
long life spans, recyclable, made from recycled
or repurposed materials, not manufactured us-
ing harsh chemicals, and do not off-gas harsh
chemicals.
› Avoid using synthetic materials, such as alumi-
num or vinyl siding, imitation brick or imitation
stone and plastic, which are not proven to be
durable, are difficult to repair and recycle or
that employ harsh manufacturing methods.
› Avoid using materials that are out of scale with
those seen traditionally, or that have a finish
which is out of character.
Materials for new structures and additions to existing buildings should contribute to the
context of the district and convey high quality in design and detail. Images above and on
the adjacent page convey an appropriate use of materials.
Concrete which is detailed to provide a
sense of scale is an appropriate build-
ing material.
4
4
The Fort Collins Land Use Code ad-
dresses primary building materials in the
R-D-R District. It states that:
“Textured materials with native and his-
toric characteristics such as brick, stone
and wood, and materials with similar
characteristics and proportions shall be
used in a repeating pattern as integral
parts of the exterior building fabric, to the
maximum extent feasible.”
4
BUILDING MATERIALS
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
582014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
6.12 Use high quality, durable materials.
› The material should be proven to be durable in
the local Fort Collins climate.
› The material should maintain an intended fin-
ish over time or acquire a patina, when it is
understood to be a desired outcome.
› Materials at the ground level should withstand
on-going contact with the public, sustaining
impacts without compromising the appearance.
(Note that some synthetic materials will not
sustain this degree of frequent contact.)
6.13 The use of traditional masonry
materials is encouraged.
› Brick and concrete are well-established materi-
als in the River District and their continued use
is encouraged.
› Brick should have a modular dimension and a
warm color similar to that used traditionally.
› Assure that masonry units wrap around corners
of walls, and thus do not appear to be an applied
veneer.
6.14 Architectural metals, which are
detailed to provide a sense of scale,
are appropriate.
› The metal should have a proven durability in the
Fort Collins climate.
› Metals should be detailed in a manner that will
endure.
› Architectural metals should convey a sense of
human scale. For example, a sense of scale can
be achieved through the use of smaller scaled
panels, varying forms and designs, creating pat-
terns to provide visual interest, or eliminating
expanses of unarticulated wall space.
6.15 New materials that are similar in
character to traditional ones may
be acceptable with appropriate
detailing.
› Alternative materials should appear similar in
scale, proportion, texture and finish to those
used traditionally.
› It is appropriate to use a change in materials
as an accent in building design. This can help to
express individual modules or units.
Architectural metals, which are detailed to provide a sense
of scale, are appropriate.
Exposed structural steel with glass curtain wall
or mesh features are appropriate materials to
use in the district.
4
4
BUILDING MATERIALS
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 59
SECONDARY MATERIALS
Secondary materials can help define building scale and
proportion. If any are used, they should be integrated
into the building design; for example, they can be used
to articulate horizontal and vertical design elements.
Secondary materials may include all of those listed as
primary materials and may also include stucco, similar
products and synthetics with proven durability.
6.16 Secondary building materials should
visually relate to the overall building
design, when used.
› Secondary building materials should help to
define building scale and proportion.
ROOF MATERIALS
6.17 New roof materials for sloped
surfaces should complement the
architectural style and context.
› When choosing a roof material for sloped
surfaces, the architectural style of the structure
should be considered.
› Appropriate roof materials include standing
seam metal roofs (low and narrow seam profile)
and photovoltaic systems in dark matte, non-
reflective finishes, for example. Composition
shingles are also appropriate on smaller struc-
tures.
4
Secondary building materials such as these wood panel
window surrounds articulate both the vertical and hori-
zontal expression in the building design.
The Fort Collins Land Use Code addresses sec-
ondary building materials in the R-D-R District. It
states that:
“Other exterior materials, if any, shall be used as
integral parts of the overall building fabric, in repeat-
ing modules, proportioned both horizontally and
vertically to relate to human scale, and with enough
depth at joints between architectural elements to
cast shadows, in order to better ensure that the
character and image of new buildings are visually
related to the Downtown and River context.”
New roof materials for sloped surfaces should convey a
scale and texture similar to those used traditionally.
4
BUILDING MATERIALS
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
602014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING
6.18 Simple, unembellished architectural
detailing is appropriate.
› Elaborate architectural treatments, such as
decorative moldings at cornices, windows and
door surrounds, are inappropriate.
› Exposed structural elements are appropriate as
detailing.
› Simple brick relief patterns such as recessed
brick, corbeled brick, belt course/banding, and
pilasters, are appropriate. Parapet walls with or
without stepped gables are also appropriate.
PRIMARY ENTRANCE
The primary entrance should be clearly identifiable and
should be oriented to a major street, pedestrian way,
plaza, courtyard and/or other key public space.
6.19 Design a main entrance of a building
to be clearly identifiable.
› Provide a sheltering element such as a canopy,
and define it by a simple surround or recess.
6.20 Orient the primary entrance of a
building to face a street, plaza or
pedestrian way.
› Consider using a “double-fronted” design where
entrances from parking areas or plazas are to
the rear.
› Focusing an entrance toward a parking lot or
other secondary site feature without also ad-
dressing the street is inappropriate.
4
The primary entrance should be clearly identifiable and should be oriented to a major street, pedestrian way, plaza,
courtyard and/or other key public space.
4 4
Simple, unembellished architectural detailing is appropriate.
4 4
BUILDING FEATURES
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 61
WINDOWS
Windows should be well defined, using frames, sills and
lintels. Windows can also be located to define building
stories, circulation features, entrances and storefronts.
Window placement and composition should also con-
sider human scale and proportion in the overall design.
6.21 Windows should be defined in
traditional masonry wall planes.
› A window frame should be located so a distinct
profile is present. It should be slightly recessed
and a shadow line should be visible.
› Also consider incorporating simple lintels and
sills in masonry structures.
6.22 Use window placement and
composition to def ine human scale
as well.
› For example, the use of storefronts along a
pedestrian way is appropriate.
› The use of banding and regularly spaced punched
window openings to define building stories is
also appropriate.
A window frame should be located so a distinct profile is present; for example, it
should be slightly recessed and a shadow line should be visible.
4 4
4 4
The Fort Collins Land Use
Code addresses windows in
the R-D-R District. It states
that:
“Windows shall be indi-
vidually defined with detail
elements such as frames,
sills and lintels, and placed
so as to visually establish and
define the building stories
and establish human scale
and proportion. Glass curtain
walls and spandrel-glass strip
windows shall not be used
as the predominant style of
fenestration for buildings in
this District. This requirement
shall not serve to restrict
the use of atrium, lobby or
greenhouse-type accent fea-
tures used as embellishments
to the principal building.”
BUILDING FEATURES
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
622014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
ACCENT FEATURES
Accent features can add interest to the building design
and may be incorporated into the structure. They
should complement the overall composition and design
of the building. Accent features can include entry ways,
loading docks, garage bays, balconies, canopies, cupo-
las, secondary connections and vertical elevator shafts.
They can be highlighted with a change in material, color
or other architectural treatment appropriate to the
context.
6.23 Design accent features to
complement the overall composition
of the building and its context.
› Use complementary building materials and
colors.
› Consider the mass and scale of the feature in
respect to the overall building composition.
› Do not overuse an accent feature.
4
4 4 4
4
Design accent features to complement the overall composition and design of the
building and context.
BUILDING FEATURES
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 63
AWNINGS AND CANOPIES
Awnings and canopies provide an accent to a building
design or plaza. They also protect pedestrians from
the elements. A canopy that is attached to a building
also provides an extension of the interior space and
helps cool the building. Their use is encouraged.
6.24 Design a new canopy or awning to be
in character with the building and
its context.
› Mount an awning or canopy to accentuate
character-defining features.
› Fit the awning or canopy with the opening of
the building.
› Design an awning to be a subordinate feature
on the façade.
› Use colors that are compatible with the overall
color scheme of the façade. Solid colors are
encouraged.
› Use simple shed shapes or horizontal planes for
most canopies.
› Do not impede pedestrian movement with a
canopy.
› The use of durable frame materials, glass and
fabric are appropriate.
4 4
Canopies provide an accent to a building design or plaza
and are appropriate accent features in the district.
4
BUILDING FEATURES
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
642014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
GUIDELINES FOR STRUCTURED PARKING:
6.25 When parking in a structure
occurs at the street level on a
primary street, it should ideally
have an active use at the sidewalk
edge.
› On a secondary street, other methods of pro-
viding visual interest may be employed. In these
locations, use architectural details, murals and
public art, wall sculpture or display cases at the
street level to provide interest to pedestrians.
6.26 The massing of a parking structure
should appear similar in scale to
other buildings in the area.
› See the guidelines for “Mass and Scale” begin-
ning on page 50.
6.27 Parking levels located above the
f irst f loor shall be screened.
› Wrapping the parking with another use is pre-
ferred.
› When an active use is not feasible, provide an
architectural screen.
› Screening that reflects window patterns along
the street is appropriate.
STRUCTURED PARKING
When parking in a structure occurs at the street level on a primary street, it should ideally have an active use
at the sidewalk edge.
When an active use
is not feasible along
the pedestrian level,
provide an architec-
tural screen.
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
DRAFT II
River District Design Guidelines | January 2014 Building Design Guidelines 65
EXTERIOR MECHANICAL AND ELECTRI-
CAL EQUIPMENT
Junction boxes, solar panels, wind turbines, external
fire connections and standpipes, utility meters,
telecommunication devices, cables, conduits, satellite
dishes, HVAC equipment and fans, and other exterior
equipment should be concealed from public view to
the extent feasible while still meeting their functional
requirements.
6.28 Minimize the visual impacts of
exterior building equipment from
the public right-of-way.
› Locate exterior building equipment out of pub-
lic view when feasible.
› Do not locate exterior building equipment on
the façade or a primary elevation when other
options exist.
› Use low-profile or screened mechanical units
on rooftops.
MISCELLANEOUS
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
662014 River District Design Guidelines | January
DRAFT II
Building Design Guidelines
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
OLD TOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
State Historical Fund, History Colorado, the Colorado Historic Project #2013-M2-032 Draft #1d March, 2014
ATTACHMENT 5
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
page left intentionally blank
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Credits
This project was paid for in part by the State Historical Fund Grant from History
Colorado, the Colorado Historical Society. Project # 2013-M2-032
Prepared by:
Winter & Company
1265 Yellow Pine Avenue
Boulder, CO 80304
303.440.8445
www.winterandcompany.net
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE
TREATMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
Architectural Details 43
Materials and Finishes 47
Windows 50
Doors and Entries 55
Commercial Storefronts 57
Historic Roofs 59
Exposed Historic Foundations 59
Loading Docks 60
Color 60
Existing Additions 62
New Additions and Accessory Structures 62
Planning for Energy Efficiency 64
Accessibility 68
Phasing Preservation Improvements 68
Temporary Stabilization Treatments 69
Existing Historic Alterations 69
IV. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL PROPERTIES
Awnings and Canopies 73
Street Layout 74
Outdoor Use Areas 74
Handrails and Enclosures 75
Art and Historic Properties 76
Site Lighting 76
Building Lighting 77
Service Areas 78
Surface Parking 78
Buffers 79
Building Equipment 79
Security Devices 80
Color 82
Archeological Resources 82
INTRODUCTION
Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
About This Document 4
What are Design Standards 4
Why Have Design Standards 4
Policies Underlying the Design Standards 5
Sustainability - Social, Economic and
Environmental Benefits of Historic Preservation 7
The Development of Old Town Fort Collins 9
1. USING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Design Review System 15
Where the Design Standards Apply 16
Design Standards Organization 17
II.. PLANNING A PRESERVATION PROJECT
What Does Historic Preservation Mean 23
Planning a Preservation Project 24
Old Town Fort Collins Case Studies 29
Designing in Context 38
Historic Architectural Styles 39
Overarching Preservation Principles 40
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
C 2013 Noré Winter (sketch material content)
V. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
Overview 85
Building Placement and Orientation 86
Architectural Character and Detail 87
Building Mass, Scale and Height 89
Building and Roof Forms 92
Entrances 93
Materials 94
Windows 95
Energy Efficiency in New Designs 97
Energy Efficiency in Building Massing 99
Environmental Performance in Building Elements 100
Solar and Wind Energy Devices 100
VI. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SIGNS
Overview 103
Treatment of Historic Signs 104
Sign Installation on a Historic Building 105
Design of New and Modified Signs 106
Design of Specific Sign Types 107
Awning Sign 107
Interpretive Sign 107
Murals 108
Tenant Panel or Directory Sign 109
Projecting/Under-Canopy Sign 109
Flush Wall Sign 110
Window and Door Sign 111
Kiosks 112
Other Sign Types 112
Illumination 112
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
INTRODUCTION
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins | March 2014 3
DRAFT
Overview
Fort Collins is recognized for its rich collection of his-
toric resources. They are enjoyed by residents, business
owners and visitors as links to the city’s heritage while
also setting the stage for a vibrant future. Preserving
these assets is essential to Fort Collins’ well being.
A key collection of these historic resources is
found in the Old Town Historic District which is a
place with special meaning for Fort Collins. Once
the core of business activity, the brick and stone fa-
cades provide a link with the past. The ornamental
cornices, brackets, and lintels are records of the
skilled craftsmen who worked to build Fort Collins
at the turn of the century.
The community recognizes the significance of
the Old Town Historic District as an important
cultural resource. They wish to preserve the
inherent historic elements of individual buildings
as a cultural record for future generations and to
maintain the sense of place that exists. Responding
to this sentiment the City Council designated the
area an official locally designated historic district
in 1979. Previously, in 1978, the Secretary of the
Interior also entered a somewhat larger Old Town
Historic District into the National Register of
Historic Places.
The Landmark Preservation Commission and city
staff have the responsibility to review the proposed
changes in the area and determine their compliance
with the design standards. The design standards
are to be used by the Landmark Preservation Com-
mission and city staff to review any design changes
to the exterior of buildings within the Old Town
Historic District. They are also for designers and
owners who are planning projects within the dis-
trict.
Today, many of the historic resources found within
the Old Town Historic District have been reha-
bilitated and the district is thriving. The document
highlights the success stories of past projects and
the positive impact they have had. While rehabilita-
tion will continue in the district, additions and infill
construction are also anticipated. The standards
are intended to promote creativity that respects
the heritage of the area. They therefore encourage
development that contributes to the quality of the
district.
The historic preservation design standards promote
the community’s vision for sustainable preservation.
The standards provide direction for rehabilitation,
alteration, expansion and new construction projects
involving locally-designated individual historic land-
marks and properties in locally-designated historic
districts. They also guide city staff and the Landmark
Preservation Commission’s evaluation of such projects,
helping the city and property owners maintain the
special qualities of Fort Collins’ history.
Financial Assistance
4 Introduction
DRAFT
About this Document
WHAT ARE DESIGN STANDARDS?
The standards convey general policies about the
rehabilitation of existing structures, additions, new
construction and site work. They define a range of
appropriate responses to a variety of specific design
issues.
WHY HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS?
One purpose of the standards and the review process
through which they are administered is to promote
preservation of the historic, cultural and architectural
heritage of the Old Town Historic District. An essential
idea is to protect historic resources in the district from
alteration or demolition that might damage the unique
fabric created by buildings and sites that make up the
Old Town Historic District.
The standards also promote key principles of urban
design which focus on maintaining an attractive human-
scaled pedestrian-oriented environment.
The design standards also provide a basis for making
consistent decisions about the treatment of historic
resources and new infill within the district. Designing
a new building to fit within the historic character of
Old Town requires careful thought. Preservation in a
historic district context does not mean that the area
must be “frozen” in time, but it does mean that, when
new building occurs, they shall be in a manner that
reinforces the basic visual characteristics of the his-
toric district. In addition, they serve as educational and
Why Do We Preserve Historic Resources?
We preserve historic resources for these reasons:
» To honor our diverse heritage
» To support sound community planning and
development
» To maintain community character and
support livability
» To support sustainability in our community
planning tools for property owners and their design
professionals who seek to make improvements.
While the design standards are written for use by
the layperson to plan improvements, property own-
ers are strongly encouraged to enlist the assistance
of qualified design and planning professionals, including
architects and preservation consultants.
These standards seek to manage change so the historic
character of the district is respected while accom-
modating compatible improvements. They reflect
the city’s goals to promote economic and sustainable
development, enhance the image of the city and reuse
historic resources.
Note
In this document, “Old Town” refers to the area
officially designated as the local historic district, in
contrast to a more general reference to a larger
portion of the downtown.
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins | March 2014 5
DRAFT
Background
POLICIES UNDERLYING THE DESIGN
STANDARDS
Several regulations and policy documents establish the
foundation for the standards, including:
City Plan Fort Collins, February 15, 2011
Historic Preservation
Principle LIV16: The quality of life in Fort Collins will be
enhanced by the preservation of historic resources and
inclusion of heritage in the daily life and development of
the community.
Policy LIV 16.1 – Survey, Identify, and Prioritize Historic Re-
sources. Determine what historic resources are within the
Growth Management Area, how significant these resources
are, the nature and degree of threat to their preservation,
and methods for their protection.
Policy LIV 16.2 – Increase Awareness. Increase awareness,
understanding of, and appreciation for the value of historic
preservation in contributing to the quality of life in Fort
Collins.
Policy LIV 16.3 – Utilize Incentives. Use incentives to
encourage private sector preservation and rehabilitation of
historic resources.
Policy LIV 16.4 – Utilize Planning and Regulations. Recog-
nize the contribution of historic resources to the quality of
life in Fort Collins through ongoing planning efforts and
enforcement regulations.
Policy LIV 16.5 – Encourage Landmark Designation. Actively
encourage property owners to designate their properties as
historic landmarks.
Policy LIV 16.6 – Integrate Historic Structures. Explore
opportunities to incorporate existing structures of historic
value into new development and redevelopment activities.
Principle LIV17: Historically and architecturally significant
buildings Downtown and throughout the community will be
valued and preserved.
Policy LIV 17.1 – Preserve Historic Buildings. Preserve his-
torically significant buildings, sites and structures throughout
Downtown and the community. Ensure that new building
design respects the existing historic and architectural
character of the surrounding district by using compatible
building materials, colors, scale, mass, and design detailing
of structures.
Policy LIV 17.2 – Encourage Adaptive Reuse. In order to
capture the resources and energy embodied in existing
buildings, support and encourage the reuse, and adapta-
tion of historically significant and architecturally important
structures, including but not limited to Downtown buildings,
historic homes, etc.
Policy LIV 17.3– Ensure Congruent Energy Efficiency.
Ensure that energy efficient upgrades contribute to or
do not lessen the integrity of historic structures. Consider
attractive means of achieving efficiency such as installing
storm windows.
Land Use Code Section 3.4.7 Historic and Cul-
tural Resources
Section 3.4.7 provides standards for preservation and
treatment of historic properties and their incorpora-
6 Introduction
DRAFT
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S
STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
The City of Fort Collins requires the rehabilitation
projects to be in conformance with the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings as noted in the Land Use Code.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation
are general rehabilitation standards established by the
National Park Service for historic properties. It is the
intent of this document to be compatible with The
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards while expanding
on the basic rehabilitation principles as they apply in
Fort Collins.
“1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be
placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the
defining characteristics of the building and its site and
environment.
2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and
preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration
of features and spaces that characterize a property shall
be avoided.
3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of
its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of
historical development, such as adding conjectural features
or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
undertaken.
4. Most properties change over time; those changes that
have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be
retained and preserved.
For More Information
For more information on national treatments
underlying the preservation standards, see
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
Rehabilitation:
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/standguide/
rehab/rehab_index.htm
For More Information:
See the following web links to National Park Ser-
vice Preservation Briefs and Tech Notes:
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs.
htm
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/tech-
notes.htm
5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques
or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic
property shall be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather
than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires
replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall
match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual
qualities and, where feasible, materials. Replacement of
missing features shall be substantiated by documentary,
physical, or pictorial evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting,
that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used.
The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be
undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project
Old Town Fort Collins | March 2014 7
DRAFT
Historic Preservation and Sustainability
SUSTAINABILITY - SOCIAL, ECONOMIC
AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Preserving and enhancing historic places promotes the
three basic components of sustainability. These are:
(1) Cultural/Social Sustainability, (2) Environmental
Sustainability and (3) Economic Sustainability. Each of
the components is described in greater detail in the
following pages.
Preserving historic places promotes the three basic categories
of sustainability.
Environmental
Sustainability
Economic
Sustainability
Cultural/Social
Sustainability
SUSTAINABILITY
Cultural/Social Component of Sustainability
This component relates to the maintenance of the
community’s cultural traditions and social fabric. Pre-
serving historic places and patterns promotes cultural
and social sustainability by supporting everyday con-
nections between residents and the cultural heritage
of the community. These connections are reinforced
by the physical characteristics of historic places, which
often directly support environmental sustainability.
Historic properties in the district provide direct links
to the past. These links convey information about
earlier ways of life that help build an ongoing sense of
identity within the community. Residents anchored
in this sense of identity may be more involved in civic
activities and overall community sustainability efforts.
The historic development pattern of the district pro-
motes social interaction that supports a high quality of
life and helps build a sense of community. The area is
compact and walkable, providing for impromptu mix-
ing of different cultural and economic groups. Direct
connections to the public realm provide opportunities
for community interaction. This physical pattern, com-
bined with the inherent cultural connections, provides
significant support for the community’s overall sustain-
ability effort.
Environmental Component of Sustainability
This is the most often cited component of sustainability.
It relates to maintenance of the natural environment
and the systems that support human development. Re-
habilitation of historic resources is an important part
of environmental sustainability and green building initia-
tives. It directly supports environmental sustainability
through conservation of embodied energy, adaptability,
and other factors that keep historic buildings in use
over long periods of time.
Embodied Energy
Embodied energy is defined as the amount of energy
used to create and maintain the original building and
its components. Preserving a historic structure retains
8 Introduction
DRAFT
Building Materials
Many of the historic building materials used in the dis-
trict contribute to environmental sustainability though
local sourcing and long life cycles. Buildings constructed
with wood and masonry were built for longevity and
ongoing repair. Today, new structures utilize a signifi-
cant percentage of manufactured materials. These ma-
terials are often less sustainable and require extraction
of raw, non-renewable materials. High levels of energy
are involved in production, and the new materials may
also have an inherently short lifespan.
The sustainable nature of historic building materials
is best illustrated by a window: older windows were
built with well seasoned wood from durable, weather
resistant old growth forests. A historic window can be
repaired by re-glazing as well as patching and splicing
the wood elements. Many contemporary windows
cannot be repaired and must be replaced entirely.
Repairing, weather-stripping and insulating an original
window is generally as energy efficient and much less
expensive than replacement.
Landfill Impacts
According to the Environmental Protection Agency,
building debris constitutes around a third of all waste
generated in the country. The amount of waste is
reduced significantly when historic structures are
retained rather than demolished.
Economic Component of Sustainability
This component of sustainability relates to the
economic balance and health of the community. The
economic benefits of protecting historic resources
are well documented across the nation. These include
higher property values, job creation in rehabilitation
industries, and increased heritage tourism. Quality
of life improvements associated with living in historic
districts may also help communities recruit desirable
businesses.
Historic Rehabilitation Projects
Historic rehabilitation projects generate both direct
and indirect economic benefits. Direct benefits result
from the actual purchases of labor and materials, while
material manufacture and transport results in indirect
benefits. Preservation projects are generally more
labor intensive, with up to 70% of the total project
budget being spent on labor, as opposed to 50% when
compared to new construction. Expenditure on local
labor and materials benefits the community’s economy.
Historic Preservation and Sustainability
By preserving existing buildings and guiding
compatible redevelopment, the Design Stan-
dards promote the three key elements of com-
munity sustainability:
» Cultural/Social Sustainability. Preserv-
ing historic places and patterns promotes
cultural and social sustainability by supporting
everyday connections between residents and
the cultural heritage of the community. It also
enhances livability in the community.
Old Town Fort Collins | March 2014 9
DRAFT
The Development of Old Town Fort Collins
HISTORY
The opening of the Overland Stage Line between
Denver and Wyoming, in the early 1860s, necessitated
the construction of military forts to protect coaches
and immigrant trains from the threat of Indian attacks.
Entering the Cache La Poudre River Valley in 1862,
the 9th Kansas Volunteer Cavalry set up camp in the
vicinity of Laporte, Colorado. In 1864, due to severe
flooding of the Cache La Poudre and a series of military
command changes, the outpost, known as Camp Col-
lins, was moved to the area just southeast of the old
Fort Collins Power Plant.
The founding of the military post attracted citizens
wishing to open mercantile establishments and thereby
capitalize on trading with the nearby soldiers. Joseph
Mason was the first to obtain permission from the War
Department to build a store on the four-mile-square
military reservation. His structure was erected in 1865
on land that later became the Linden/Jefferson inter-
section. Called “Old Grout,” it served as a settler’s
store, church, post office, community center, and later
as the county offices and courthouse. Old Town claims
the site as the foundation for the City of Fort Collins.
Two other notable structures built in the area include
Auntie Stone’s cabin/hotel and a flour mill.
The establishment of this commercial district neces-
sitated the platting of the town’s first streets. In 1867-
1868, Jack Dow and Norman H. Meldrum surveyed the
area and set up streets that ran parallel to the major
environmental landmark, the Cache La Poudre River.
However, the influx of proprietors to Fort Collins,
and specifically the Old Town area, was certainly not a
stampede because when the fort closed in 1866, there
were scarcely a dozen civilians in town. The subsequent
departure of the soldiers put the town’s future in ques-
tion. The town and its business district languished until
the mid-1870s.
In retrospect, the prosperity of the town was assured
in an incident, called by Ansel Watrous in his History
of Larimer County, “perhaps the most notable event in
the early history of Fort Collins.” In the fall of 1872 the
agricultural colony was established.
General R. A. Cameron, originator of the Union Colo-
ny in Greeley, spearheaded the drive for Fort Collins’s
Agricultural Colony. The purpose of the new commune
was for it to be the crop-raising group for the settlers
at the Union Colony. Working with the earlier settlers
of Fort Collins, the officers of the new colony organized
the Larimer County Land Improvement Company. The
goal of the company was to encourage settlement of
the Fort Collins area. Within two months of their
arrival, the company had acquired enough land for
their surveyor to come in and plat new city streets.
For this job they chose a young New Yorker, Franklin
C. Avery, who had also platted the Union Colony. Mr.
Avery, utilizing the latest techniques in city planning,
laid the streets according to the cardinal points of the
10 Introduction
DRAFT
The decades of the 1880s and nineties saw the addition
of ornately decorated buildings like the Miller Block and
the Linden Hotel. Other distinctive buildings, like the
City Hall /Fire Station, added uniqueness to this area.
In 1887 electric lights and the town’s first telephone
enhanced Old Town’s status as the mercantile center
for Fort Collins. In 1897 the Avery Building provided
the link between Old Town and New Town. An early
competition developed between the business people in
Old Town and those with businesses near the intersec-
tion of College and Mountain. The new Avery Building
was a bridge that joined these two shopping areas
together. But the competition between the two areas
was to remain strong throughout the next century.
The new century, however, brought other problems
to Old Town. The Post Office, with its accompanying
pedestrian traffic and long an institution in one building
or another in the triangle, moved to the corner of Oak
and College. Mr. Avery crossed Mountain Avenue to
build yet another structure for his rapidly expanding
First National Bank.
By the 1900s Fort Collins was the well-settled home
of Colorado’s first land-grant college, the possessor of
a notable in-town railway transit system, and a very
popular spot in northern Colorado for urbanite and
farmer alike. On the direct railroad line between Den-
ver and Cheyenne, the passenger depot on Jefferson
Street in Old Town welcomed contented old-timers
of the community and diverse newcomers: academic,
agricultural, and financial. Fort Collins’ residents were
served well by Old Town, whose offerings ranged from
commodities and services found in eastern cities to
items more commonly located in agricultural com-
munities. These ranged from hotel accommodations,
banks and restaurants to hardware stores, feed, coal
and hay shops.
1889 Bird’s Eye view of Old Town
Miller Block (1889)
Linden Hotel (1908)
Old Town (1900)
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins | March 2014 11
DRAFT
The major retail businesses left the interior of the
triangle to locate along College Avenue frontage in
the early 1920s in response to the advent of an auto-
oriented population. Other, smaller businesses soon
thought it was more advantageous to move along
College Avenue.
After World War II the area was beginning to show
signs of aging and decay. During the 1950s and 1960s,
Old Town became home to social services organiza-
tions, automobile maintenance facilities, and some
limited retail. It also housed a collection of taverns and
some low-cost housing.
Revitalization began in the 1980s, with individual inves-
tors who saw opportunities in rehabilitating the historic
structures in the area. The Secretary of the Interior
listed the Old Town Historic District in the National
Register in 1978. This included all of the land area that
was later (1979) designated as the local historic district,
but also extended farther north to include the original
fort site. This made federal income tax credits available
for the certified rehabilitation of historic structures
in the area. With the city’s designation of the local
historic district in 1979, a formal design review process
was established to assure that historic buildings would
be preserved and that new construction would be
compatible with the historic context.
Individual investment efforts attracted more invest-
ment, and in 1985 Old Town Associates proposed a
redevelopment plan that included rehabilitation of
several historic buildings, erection of new infill build-
ings and construction of a pedestrian area for a portion
of Linden Street. Revitalization continued through
the turn of the twenty-first century, with substantial
participation of the City of Fort Collins and the Down-
town Development Authority. By 2013, the Old Town
Historic District was well-established as a center for
dining, retail and entertainment as well as housing and
professional offices.
Fort Collins’ Old Town is a reminder of its early
pioneer settlement. It was established by people who
purchased lands from a real estate company in order to
ward off the loneliness of the prairies, to profit by the
experience and expertise of their new neighbors, and
to furnish their families with social amenities that were
long in coming to communities situated farther east on
the Great Plains. Old Town demonstrates how these
people settled a new area and used local materials to
decorate it with styles current in the East, creating a
substantial, as well as unique, latter nineteenth-century
American community.
HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Old Town retains many framework elements from its
early history but other features have changed. The fact
that it has remained dynamic is a part of its heritage.
For this reason, remaining resources which help to
interpret that span of human occupation and use are
valued.
While a row of historic buildings may be easily un-
12 Introduction
DRAFT
Circa 1920’s image of Old Town Fort Collins Historic District. Streets that run at an angle to the standard grid pattern of the rest of town give the Old Town Historic
District a distinct triangular shape that is clearly visible. The River District is visible in this image as well. (Aerial image looking south east.)
Jefferson ST
Linden ST
Mountain AVE
Walnut ST
North College AVE
Pine ST
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
1
USING THE DESIGN STANDARDS
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 15
Design Review System
The Landmarks Preservation Commission and City
staff shall take these factors into consideration when
reviewing proposed work:
› The significance of the property
› The context, with respect to other historic
properties
› The location of any key, character-defining
features
› The condition of those features
› The landmark status
› Eligibility status
In addition, there are many cases in which the stan-
dards state that one particular solution is preferred,
such as for the replacement of a damaged or missing
feature, but the text further notes that some alterna-
tives may be considered if the preferred approach is
not feasible. In determining such feasibility, the city will
also consider:
› The reasonable availability of the preferred
material
› The skill required to execute the preferred
approach
› The quality, appearance and character of
alternative solutions, such as new materials.
TERMS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE
When applying design standards, the City has the abil-
ity to balance a combination of objectives and intent
statements that appear throughout the document, in
the interest of helping to achieve the most appropriate
design for each project. Because of this, and the fact
that the design standards are also written to serve
an educational role as well as a regulatory one, the
language sometimes appears more conversational than
that in the body of the City Code. To clarify how
some terms are used, these definitions shall apply:
Standard
In this document the term “standard” is a criterion
with which the City will require compliance when it is
found applicable to the specific “land-use activity.”
Shall
Where the term “shall” is used, compliance is specifi-
cally required to the “maximum extent feasible,” when
the statement is applicable to the proposed “land-use
activity.” “Maximum extent feasible” shall mean that no
feasible and prudent alternative exists, and all possible
efforts to comply with the regulation or minimize po-
tential harm or adverse impacts have been undertaken.
Should
The term “should” is frequently used in the standards.
This indicates that compliance is specifically required
to the “extent reasonably feasible”, except in condi-
tions in which the city finds that the standard is not
applicable, or that an alternative means of meeting
the intent of the standards is acceptable. In this sense,
“should” means “shall,” but only to the extent reason-
ably feasible. ‘Extent reasonably feasible’ shall mean
that, under the circumstances, reasonable efforts have
16Standards Using the Design
DRAFT
Where the Design Standards Apply
The design standards apply to all properties within the Old Town Historic District. They also apply to Local Landmark Eligible properties and Local Landmark properties
within the River District. These areas and properties are identified on the map below.
North
NTS
Map Key
National Register District
Old Town Historic District
River District
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 17
Design Standards Organization
DESIGN REVIEW TRACKS
The design standards chapters are grouped into three
“tracks” for purposes of design review. Staff will deter-
mine which track a project will follow. (See the chart on
the following page.) These are:
› Preservation Track
› New Building Track
› Other Improvements Track
Follow these steps to get started:
Step 1 What Type of Improvement?
Determine the nature of the improvements that are
planned. There are three categories:
Existing Building
If improvements are planned to an existing building,
determine if it has historic significance or not. This will
influence which review track applies.
New Building
Will the planned improvements include construction
of a new building? If so, then the “New Construction
Track” applies. This includes a new structure to be
erected on a vacant lot; adding a new structure to a
lot with an existing building on it; or providing an addi-
tion to an existing noncontributing building where one
already exists.
Other Work
Site improvements, signs and other miscellaneous
projects follow this third track.
Step 2 What Type of Existing Building?
All existing structures in the Old Town Historic District
are classified with respect to their historic significance,
using criteria established by the National Park Service.
The city will work with the property owner to confirm
the status of historic significance. Two classifications
are used:
Contributing Property
A “contributing” property is one determined to be
historically significant. It is so because it was present
during the period of significance and possesses suf-
ficient integrity to convey its history, or is capable of
yielding important information about that period.
Note that some properties may have experienced
some degree of alteration from their historic designs.
These alterations may include window replacement,
cornice removal, a porch enclosure or covering of
a building’s historic materials. Nonetheless, these
altered properties retain sufficient building fabric to
still be considered contributors. For all contributing
properties, the Preservation Track shall apply.
Noncontributing Property
The classification of “noncontributing” applies to
existing buildings that do not possess sufficient and/
or exterior integrity necessary for designation, and
are considered noncontributing to a district. The New
Construction Track applies to these properties, except
as noted below.
Noncontributing, but Restorable
In some cases, an older noncontributing property
18Standards Using the Design
DRAFT
WHICH TRACK APPLIES?
The standards are organized into groups of chapters that represent “tracks” for
different types of improvements. This chart defines the track that will apply to
a specific proposal.
New
Building
Existing
Building
Step 1
Restorable
Non-
Applicable
Step 2
Noncontributing
Other
Track
Other
New Bldg.
Track
Contributing Preservation
Track
WHICH CHAPTERS APPLY?
Use this chart to determine which chapters of the design standards apply to a
proposed improvement project. Some projects will include work in more than
one track, in this case a combination of chapters will apply.
TYPE OF WORK
SECTION TO USE:
Introduction
I. Using the Design
Standards
II. Planning a Preservation
Project
III. Design Standards for
the Treatment of Historic
Resources
IV. Design Standards for
All Properties
V. Design Standards for
New Construction
VI. Design Standards for
Signs
Preservation
Track
Rehabilitate a
contributing
property
4 4 4 4 4 (1) (1)
Restore a
noncontributing
property
4 4 4 4 4 (1) (1)
New
Building
Track
Improve a
noncontributing
property
4 4 4 4 (1)
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 19
Permitted and Prohibited
Solutions
In many cases, images and dia-
grams in the historic preservation
standards are marked to indicate
whether they represent permitted
or prohibited solutions
4
A check mark
indicates permitted
solutions.
8
An X mark indicates
solutions that are
prohibited.
DESIGN STANDARDS FORMAT
The historic preservation standards are presented in a standardized format as illustrated below. Each of the components is used
by the city to determine compliance. Additional features that appear on a typical page of the historic preservation standards are
summarized at right.
A Windows Key
A Design Topic Heading
B
Intent Statement: This explains
the desired outcome for the specific
design element and provides a basis
for the design standards that follow.
C
Design Standard: This describes
a desired outcome related to the
intent statement.
D
Additional Information: This
provides a bullet list of examples of
how, or how not to, comply with the
standard.
E
Illustration(s): These provide
photos and/or diagrams to illustrate
related conditions or possible ap-
proaches. They may illustrate per-
mitted or prohibited solutions as
described at right.
B
Historic windows help convey the significance of historic structures,
and shall be preserved. They can be repaired by re-glazing and patching
and splicing elements such as muntins, the frame, sill and casing. Repair
and weatherization also is more energy efficient, and less expensive
than replacement. If an original window cannot be repaired, new
replacement windows shall be in character with the historic building.
C 1.1 Maintain and repair historic windows.
D
» Preserve historic window features including the frame, sash, muntins,
mullions, glazing, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings
of windows.
» Repair and maintain windows regularly, including trim, glazing putty and
glass panes.
» Repair, rather than replace, frames and sashes.
» Restore altered window openings to their historic configuration.
20Standards Using the Design
DRAFT
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
2
PLANNING A PRESERVATION PROJECT
Packet Pg. 180
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 181
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 23
DRAFT
What Does Historic Preservation Mean?
Historic preservation means keeping historic proper-
ties and places in active use while accommodating
appropriate improvements to sustain their viability
and character. It also means keeping historic resources
for the benefit of future generations. That is, while
maintaining properties in active use is the immediate
objective, this is in part a means of assuring that these
resources will be available for others to enjoy in the
future.
Historic preservation does not mean necessarily freez-
ing properties or districts in time. Historic preserva-
tion seeks to manage change to preserve authenticity
and historic craftsmanship while meeting existing and
future needs.
This section summarizes important steps and ap-
proaches to consider when planning a preservation
project
› Planning a Preservation Project
› Case Studies
› Designing in Context
› Historic Building Styles
When planning a preservation project, it is important
to determine historic significance, assess integrity and
determine program requirements prior to outlining a
treatment strategy that will inform the overall project
scope.
ACCEPTED TREATMENTS FOR HISTORIC
RESOURCES
The following list describes permitted treatments
for historic resources that may be considered when
planning a preservation project. Much of the language
addresses buildings; however, sites, objects and struc-
tures are also relevant.
Preservation
“Preservation” is the act of applying measures to sustain
the existing form, integrity and material of a building.
Work focuses on keeping a property in good work-
ing condition with proactive maintenance. While the
term “preservation” is used broadly to mean keeping
a historic property’s significant features, it is also used
in this more specific, technical form in this document.
Restoration
“Restoration” is the act or process of accurately de-
picting the form, features and character of a property
as it appeared in a particular time period. It may require
the removal of features from outside the restoration
period. This may apply to an entire building, or to
restoring a particular missing feature.
Reconstruction
“Reconstruction” is the act or process of depicting,
by means of new construction, the form, features and
detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, building,
structure or object for the purpose of replicating its
appearance at a specific time and in its historic location.
This has limited application, in terms of an entire build-
ing, but may apply to a missing feature on a building.
Rehabilitation
24Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
STEPS TO CONSIDER FOR A SUCCESSFUL PRESERVATION PROJECT.
Follow the steps below when planning a preservation project.
Step 1. Review reasons for significance: The reasons for significance will
influence the degree of rigor with which the standards are applied, because it
affects which features will be determined to be key to preserve. Identifying the
building’s period of significance is an important first step.
Step 2. Identify key features: A historic property has integrity. It has a suf-
ficient percentage of key character-defining features and characteristics from its
period of significance which remain intact.
Step 3. Identify program requirements for the desired project: The
functional requirements for the property drive the work to be considered. If the
existing use will be maintained, then preservation will be the focus. If changes in
use are planned, then some degree of compatible alterations may be needed.
Step 4. Implement a treatment strategy: A permitted
treatment strategy will emerge once historic significance, integrity and program
requirements have been determined. A preservation project may include a range of
activities, such as maintenance of existing historic elements, repair of deteriorated
materials, the replacement of missing features and construction of a new addition.
Planning a Preservation Project
PROHIBITED TREATMENTS
The following approaches are not permitted for his-
torically significant properties.
Remodeling
This is the process of changing the historic design
of a building. The appearance is altered by removing
historic details and by adding new features that are out
of character with historic materials. Remodeling of a
historic structure is prohibited.
Deconstruction
“Deconstruction” is a process of dismantling a building
such that the individual material components and ar-
chitectural details remain intact. This may be proposed
when a building is to be relocated or when the materi-
als are to be reused in other building projects. Decon-
struction may be a more environmentally responsible
alternative to conventional demolition. However, it is
still prohibited for a building of historic significance.
Demolition
Any act or process that destroys, in part or whole, a
structure, building or site is considered “demolition.”
This is prohibited for any historic building.
A successful preservation project shall consider the
significance of the historic resource, its key features,
and the project’s program requirements. When alter-
ing a historic building, it is also important to consider
preservation and repair prior to contemplating any re-
placement. The tables and diagrams below and on the
following pages provide overall guidance for planning a
preservation project.
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 25
DRAFT
PREFERRED SEQUENCE OF ACTIONS
Selecting an appropriate treatment for a character-defining feature is important.
The method that requires the least intervention is always preferred. By following
this tenet, the highest degree of integrity will be maintained. The following treat-
ment options appear in order of preference. When making a selection, follow this
sequence:
Step 1. Preserve: If a feature is intact and in good condition, maintain it as such.
Step 2. Repair: If the feature is deteriorated or damaged, repair it to its historic
condition.
Step 3. Replace: If it is not feasible to repair the feature, then replace it in kind,
(e.g., materials, detail, finish). Replace only that portion which is beyond repair.
Step 4. Reconstruct: If the feature is missing entirely, reconstruct it from ap-
propriate evidence. If a portion of a feature is missing, it can also be reconstructed.
Step 5. Compatible Alterations: If a new feature (one that did not exist previ-
ously) or an addition is necessary, design it in such a way as to minimize the impact
on historic features. It is also important to distinguish a new feature on a historic
building from the historic features, even if in subtle ways.
For More Information
For more information regarding the treat-
ments for a historic resource please visit the
National Park Service web site:
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/standguide/index.
htm
If a feature is deteriorated or
damaged, repairing it to its his-
toric condition is preferred.
Packet Pg. 184
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
26Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
A
C B or
D
E
WHICH AREAS ARE THE MOST SENSITIVE TO PRESERVE?
For most historic resources in the Old Town Historic District, the front wall is the most important to preserve intact. Alterations are rarely permitted. Many side
walls are also important to preserve where they are highly visible from the street. By contrast, portions of a side wall not as visible may be less sensitive to change.
The rear wall is sometimes the least important (excepting free-standing, individual landmarks, those along improved alleys or certain civic and industrial buildings), and
alterations can occur more easily without causing negative effects to the historic significance of the property.
Location A. Primary
Façade: Preservation
and repair of features in
place is the priority. This is
especially important at the
street level and in locations
where the feature is highly
visible.
Location B. A Second-
ary Wall, Which
Is Highly Visible: A
compatible replacement
or alteration is preferred.
Some flexibility in treat-
ment may be considered.
Location C. A Second-
ary Wall, Which Is Not
Highly Visible: Preserva-
tion is still preferred;
however, a compatible
replacement or alteration
may be acceptable when it
is not visible to the public.
More flexibility in treat-
ment may be considered.
Location D. Highly
Visible Rear Wall:
This applies to many
cultural buildings of historic
significance, such as civic
buildings, improved alleys
and other landmarks that
are viewed “in the round”
or border a public space
such as a park. Preservation
and repair in place is the
priority.
Location E. A Rear
Wall That Is Not Highly
Visible: A compatible
replacement or alteration
may be acceptable when
it is not visible to the
public. A higher level of
flexibility in treatment may
be considered.
Packet Pg. 185
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 27
DRAFT
ALTERED HISTORIC
COMMERCIAL FACADE
The starting condition.
Missing Cornice
Historic Windows
Altered Storefront
DEVELOPING A PRESERVATION STRATEGY
The standards discuss a range preservation options,
including reconstruction and replacement of features
in various ways. When applied to a building that is al-
ready altered, which would be the best approach? This
diagram outlines the approaches to consider in making
that decision.
When should I use this
treatment?
» There is substantial
alteration, making other
options difficult.
» There is less information
about the historic design.
» The context (the block
lacks a substantial number
of historic structures that
retain integrity) has more
variety.
When should I use this
treatment?
» The building is part of the
fabric of the district.
» There is less information
available about the
historic design.
» A phased project is
planned.
When should I use this
treatment?
» The building is highly
significant.
» There is good historical
information about the
design.
» The needed materials and
craftsmen are available.
» The context has many
intact historic buildings.
Approach 3:
Rehabilitation
(contemporary
interpretation)
Approach 1:
Accurate Restoration
4
Approach 2:
Rehabilitation (simplified
historic interpretation)
4 4
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
28Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
Historic building remodel. Interim improvements to the building included
removing the canopy, providing a new sign and
painting the stucco covering.
A later rehabilitation effort included remov-
ing the stucco, reconstructing the cornice and
installing a new storefront system.
4 4
PHASING PRESERVATION PROJECTS
In some cases, a property owner may wish to make
interim improvements, rather than execute a complete
rehabilitation of a historic property. This work shall be
planned such that it establishes a foundation for future
improvements that will further assure continued use
of the property and retain its historic significance. For
example, a simplified cornice element may be installed
on a commercial storefront, in lieu of reconstructing
the historic design, with the intent that an accurate
reconstruction would occur later.
Plan interim improvements to retain
opportunities for future rehabilitation
work that will enhance the integrity of
a historic property.
› Preserve key character-defining features while
making interim improvements.
› Avoid interim improvements that would
foreclose opportunities for more extensive
rehabilitation in the future.
Packet Pg. 187
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 29
DRAFT
Case studies
CASE STUDIES
Numerous rehabilitation projects have been suc-
cessfully completed since the adoption of the design
standards. Some examples appear in this section. They
include “before and after” pairings. Some of these in-
clude photographs from the early years when this was
the center of commerce. Then, images from the 1970s
and 1980s document interim conditions, when many
buildings had been altered. Finally, more recent photo-
graphs, generally from 2013, illustrate the progressive
rehabilitation and continuing revitalization of the area.
These case studies demonstrate the benefits of the
on-going stewardship of the historic resources in the
district, and of the positive effects that local historic
district designation has had. They further demonstrate
successful solutions for many of the design topics ad-
dressed in this standards document.
WALNUT STREET BLOCK
In the upper photos (ca.
1981), storefronts have been
altered, upper story windows
have been reduced in size and
new materials obscure historic
masonry.
In the lower photo, windows
and storefronts are restored,
and historic brick facades are
revealed.
Packet Pg. 188
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
30Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
AVERY BLOCK
An early image of the Avery Block exhibits a distinctive line of ground level storefronts. In 1981, storefronts had been altered, and the distinctive mid-belt cornice line was
obscured.
In 2013, a reconstructed cornice reestablished a distinctive hori-
zontal feature, and awning once more reflect the dimensions of
each storefront bay.
Packet Pg. 189
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 31
DRAFT
ANTLERS BLOCK
An early view of the Antlers hotel and associated buildings in its block
demonstrates a variety in building heights, but a sense of continuity is
established by the horizontal alignment of storefront level moldings and
second story cornices.
In 1981, many historic features remain, but minor alterations have
occurred, and some details are obscured by monochromatic paint
schemes.
Farther down the block, a more recent building is out of character with
the two-story emphasis seen in most buildings in the block.
After rehabilitation (photo: 2013), buildings have been adapted to new
uses while the key, character-defining features that contribute to their
historic significance have been preserved.
Packet Pg. 190
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
32Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
LINDEN STREET BLOCK, WEST SIDE
The northern end of the Linden Street block in 1980
appears with several storefronts missing, and a mono-
chromatic paint scheme diminishes one’s perception of
the distinctive architectural details.
A close-up view of the storefront at
252 Linden, in 1980 shows the miss-
ing storefront.
After rehabilitation in the mid-1980s, many storefronts have
been reconstructed. Architectural details are highlighted with
contrasting color schemes. The left most storefront remains
altered, but other features on this facade have been pre-
served.
In 2013, awnings and signs have been added, and color schemes
have changed. This demonstrates the ongoing adaptive use of these
properties, while preserving their historic significance.
In the mid-1980s, after the store-
front has been reconstructed.
Packet Pg. 191
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 33
DRAFT
BLACKS GLASS ROW
Ca. 1980, Black’s Glass, with a missing mid-belt molding, and historic storefront altered. The transom also is covered, changing the
proportions of the ground level.
In 2013, storefronts and the
midbelt molding are recon-
structed.
Packet Pg. 192
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
34Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
OLD FIRE STATION AND CITY HALL
The old city hall and fire station occupied two buildings side-
by-side on Walnut Street. A distinctive arch identified the door
for fire engines.
In 1980, the two buildings appear as one metal
clad facade. The storefront for city hall has
been removed, and the doorway for fire engines
has been widened.
At the beginning of rehabilitation in the early
1980s, damage to the historic masonry is vis-
ible. The hose tower also is missing.
Lower left:
Shortly after rehabilitation, reconstructed cornices and storefront
are visible. A more contemporary storefront, using dark metal
components, is used in the historic fire engine entry, to signify
that this is a later alteration. The tower also is reconstructed.
Lower right:
In 2012, awnings and signs have changed, but the key features
of the building remain intact, demonstrating the continuing use
of this historic resource.
Packet Pg. 193
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 35
DRAFT
J.L.HOHNSTEIN BLOCK
An early view of the Hohnstein
block documents the tall first floor
and the distinctive masonry arch
details on the upper floor.
In 1980, metal cladding obscures most of the key
character-defining features of the building front.
In the early 1980s, the initial reha-
bilitation revealed key features of
the facade.
Almost 30 years later, in 2013, the building continues to be in active service. An outdoor dining area
reflects a new use, but is designed to remain visually subordinate to the historic building. Note the
historic sign on the side wall.
Packet Pg. 194
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
36Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
MILLER BLOCK
In 1979, wood paneling obscures historic storefronts.
Shortly after construction of the plaza in Old Town Square, (ca. 1985), new awnings define
the dimensions of individual storefront bays.
In 2013, key features remain preserved. Different awning
colors distinguish individual businesses while retaining the
overall visual continuity of the building.
In this early photo, the Miller building stands as a signature building at Linden and Walnut
streets; diagonally from the Linden Hotel.
Packet Pg. 195
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 37
DRAFT
In this early photo, the Linden Hotel stands as the signature
building at the corner of Linden and Walnut Streets
In 1980s, historic masonry is covered with a cementatious
plaster and the storefronts have been altered. Some upper
story windows have been blocked up.
Again in the early 1980s, the Linden in an altered state. The Sal-
vation Army and Reed and Dauth buildings are to the right.
In 2013, the Linden is
once more the icon for
Old Town Fort Collins.
THE LINDEN HOTEL
Packet Pg. 196
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
38Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
Designing in Context
District-wide
Block
Immediate
Surroundings
A fundamental principle of the design standards is that
projects shall be planned to be compatible with the
context. This is especially relevant to the design of an
addition or new building.
Levels of Context Consideration
Context shall be considered at these levels:
› District-wide – in terms of the qualitative
features, such as the orientation of the street,
alley, street wall, buildings and features
› The block – which focuses on the collection of
buildings, sites and structures in the area
› Immediate surroundings – properties adjacent
to, facing or overlooking a specific site
Packet Pg. 197
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 39
DRAFT
Historic Architectural Styles
Many of the building styles found within the Old Town
Historic District are noted on the Colorado History
web site. These style descriptions will assist the city
in determining which features are key to a property’s
significance. Note that styles are rarely “pure” in
form, and a wide range exists within individual styles.
The majority of the buildings styles found in the Old
Town Historic District are shown here.
Early Twentieth - Century Commercial, single storefront.
Nineteenth-Century Commercial, Richardsonian Romanesque
architectural style
Nineteenth-Century Commercial, Italianate architectural style
that is fifty feet or more with multiple entrances.
Historic Architectural Styles
Information about Fort Collins’s historic architec-
tural styles is available from a number of sources,
including:
› City of Fort Collins, Central Business District
Development and Residential Architecture,
Historic Contexts, November 1992
› A Cultural Resources Inventory of The Old Fort
Site, Fort Collins, Colorado, June 2002
› See History Colorado web link at:
http://www.historycolorado.org/archaeologists/
colorados-historic-architecture-engineering-web-
guide
See also the following reference book:
› What Style is it? A Guide to American
Architecture. John C. Poppeliers, S. Allen
Chambers, Jr., Nancy B Schwartz. Historic
Building Survey, National Park Service, US
Department of the Interior. 1983
Packet Pg. 198
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
40Project Planning a Preservation
DRAFT
The following design principles apply to all historic
properties and will be used when evaluating the
appropriateness of related work:
Respect the historic character of a
property.
» The basic form and materials of a building, as well
as architectural details, are a part of the historic
character.
» Don’t try to change the style of a historic resource
or make it look older than its actual age.
» Confusing the character by mixing elements of
different styles or periods can adversely affect the
historic significance of the property.
Seek uses that are compatible with the
historic character of the property.
» Converting a building to a new use different from
the historic use is considered to be an “adaptive
reuse,” and is a sound strategy for keeping an
old building in service. For example, converting a
residential structure to offices is an adaptive use.
A good adaptive use project retains the historic
character of the building while accommodating a
new function.
» Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide
a compatible use for the building that will require
minimal alteration to the building and its site.
» Changes in use requiring the least alteration to
significant elements are preferred. In most cases
designs can be developed that respect the historic
integrity of the building while also accommodating
new functions.
Protect and maintain signif icant features
and stylistic elements.
» Distinctive stylistic features and other examples
of skilled craftsmanship shall be preserved. The
best preservation procedure is to maintain historic
features from the outset to prevent the need for
repair later. Appropriate maintenance includes
rust removal, caulking and repainting.
» These features shall not be removed.
Repair deteriorated historic features
and replace only those elements that
cannot be repaired.
» Upgrade existing materials, using recognized
preservation methods. If disassembly is necessary
for repair or restoration, use methods that
minimize damage to historic materials and facilitate
reassembly.
Overarching Preservation Principles
Nineteenth-Century Commercial, single storefront
Protect and maintain significant features and stylistic elements.
Packet Pg. 199
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE
TREATMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
3
Packet Pg. 200
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 201
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 43
Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic Resources
Architectural details help convey the significance
of historic properties, and shall be preserved.
The method of preservation that requires the
least intervention is preferred.
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 17:
Architectural Character - Identifying the
Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as
an Aid to Preserving Character.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-
preserve/briefs/17-architectural-
character.htm
The City seeks to preserve the historic integrity of
properties of historic significance in the Old Town
Historic District. This means employing best
practices in property stewardship to maintain the key
character-defining features of individual historic
resources, as well as maintaining the context in which
they exist.
This section provides standards for the treatment of
historic properties in Old Town. It focuses on the
rehabilitation and maintenance of character-defining
features of each individual contributing property as
well as the district as a whole.
The standards translate the general principles for
historic preservation outlined in the preceding chapter
to the treatment of individual building features and
components that are found typically in the district. The
standards in this section do not apply to new construc-
tion.
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
Architectural details help convey the historic and
architectural significance of historic properties, and
shall be preserved. The method of preservation that
requires the least intervention is preferred.
3.1 Maintain significant architectural
details.
› Retain and treat exterior stylistic features and
examples of skilled craftsmanship with sensitiv-
ity.
› Employ preventive maintenance measures such
as rust removal, caulking and repainting.
Packet Pg. 202
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
44Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
Historic Architectural Details
Typical historic architectural details to preserve
include:
› Cornices and eaves
› Moldings and brackets
› Windows and doors and surrounds
› Modillions and other surface ornamenta-
tion
› Columns
› Storefronts
3.2 Repair , rather than replace,
significant architectural details if
they are damaged.
› Do not remove or alter distinctive architec-
tural details that are in good condition or
that can be repaired.
› Document the location of a historic feature that
must be removed to be repaired so it may be
repositioned accurately.
› Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise
upgrade deteriorated features using recognized
preservation methods.
› Minimize damage to historic architectural de-
tails when repairs are necessary.
› Protect significant features that are adjacent to
the area being worked on.
Retain and treat exterior stylistic features and examples of
skilled craftsmanship with sensitivity.
Maintain significant
architectural details,
including: projecting
cornices, masonry
patterns, decorative
moldings, double-hung
wood windows and
other decorative fea-
tures.
4
4
Document the location of a
historic feature that must be
removed and repaired so it
may be repositioned accu-
rately.
4
Patch, piece-in, splice, con-
solidate or otherwise upgrade
deteriorated features using
recognized preservation meth-
ods.
4
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 27: The Mainte-
nance and Repair of Architectural Cast Iron
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/27-cast-iron.htm
and
See web link to Preservation Brief 47: Maintaining the
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 45
3.3 Reconstruct an architectural feature
accurately if it cannot be repaired.
› Use a design that is substantiated by physical or
pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepre-
sentation of the building’s history.
› Use the same kind of material as the historic
detail. However, an alternative material may be
considered if it:
› Has proven durability
› Has a size, shape, texture and finish that
conveys the visual appearance of the his-
toric feature.
› Is located in a place that is remote from
view or direct physical contact
› Avoid adding architectural details that were
not part of the historic structure. For example,
decorative millwork shall not be added to a
building if it was not a historic feature as doing
so would convey a false history.
The rehabilitation of the Reed and Darth building included reconstruction of missing features. Using
historic photographs, a cornice was constructed to match the historic in character. An alternative
material (wood) was used instead of the historic metal.
Before rehabilitation (ca. 1980) During rehabilitation (ca. 1982)
The rehabilitated Reed and Darth building (2013)
During rehabilitation (ca. 1982)
4
Packet Pg. 204
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
46Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
These buildings demonstrate a successful reconstruction of a missing cornice.
See the image above for the historic condition.
4
Use historic photos as a source for reconstructing a missing
detail.
4
Interim image of missing cornice.
Packet Pg. 205
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 47
MATERIALS AND FINISHES
Historic materials shall be preserved in place. If the
material is damaged, limited replacement to match
the historic should be considered. Historic building
materials shall never be covered or subjected to harsh
cleaning treatments. Preserving historic building mate-
rials and limiting replacement to only pieces which are
deteriorated beyond repair also reduces the demand
for, and environmental impacts from, the production
of new materials and therefore supports the city’s
sustainability objectives.
3.4 Maintain historic building materials.
› Protect historic building materials from dete-
rioration (see “Maintaining Historic Materials”
at right for information on treating different
types of materials).
› Do not remove historic materials that are in
good condition.
› Use a low pressure water wash if cleaning is
permitted. Chemical cleaning may be consid-
ered if a test patch does not have a negative
effect on the historic fabric (test patch shall be
reviewed by city preservation department).
› Do not use harsh cleaning methods, that can
inhibit the function and/or appearance of the
historic material, such as sandblasting, which
can damage its protective coating.
Maintaining Historic Materials
Primary historic building
materials include masonry
(brick, mortar, stone, and
concrete), wood and metal.
These shall be preserved
and repaired.
4
Appropriate treatments to protect specific materi-
als from deterioration include:
Masonry
› Maintain the natural water-protective layer
(patina).
› Do not paint, unless it was painted historically
(this can seal in moisture, which may cause
extensive damage over time).
› Re-point deteriorated masonry mortar joints
with mortar that matches the strength, com-
position, color and texture of the historic
material.
Wood
› Maintain paint and other protective coatings
to retard deterioration and ultraviolet dam-
age.
› Provide proper drainage and ventilation.
Metal
› Maintain protective coatings, such as paint,
on exposed metals.
› Provide proper drainage.
Do not use harsh cleaning methods, such
as sandblasting, which can damage his-
48Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
3.5 Repair historic building materials
when needed.
› Repair deteriorated building materials by patch-
ing, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise
reinforcing the material.
› Replace only those materials that are deterio-
rated, and beyond reasonable repair.
3.6 Replace historic building materials
in kind.
› Use the same material as the historic material
to replace damaged building materials on a pri-
mary façade.
› Also use historic materials to replace damaged
building materials on a non-primary façade.
› Replace only the amount of material that is
beyond repair.
› Use only replacement materials that are similar
in scale, finish and character to the historic
material.
› Use only replacement materials with proven
durability.
› Do not replace building materials on the pri-
mary façade, such as masonry and wood siding,
with alternative or imitation materials, unless
no other option is available.
Repair deteriorated building materials, when needed.
4
Alternative or
replacement materi-
als shall match the
style and detail of
the historic fabric
and be durable in
the local climate,
such as these cast
concrete details
that replace missing
stone features.
4
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 16: The Use of
Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors.
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/16-substitute-materials.htm
Typical Materials
Typical historic building materials used in Old Town
Fort Collins include:
» Masonry
› Brick
› Stone
› Terra Cotta
› Poured Concrete
› Pre-cast Concrete
» Wood
» Metal
› Cast iron,
› Copper
› Sheet metal
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 49
3.7 Preserve the visibility of historic
materials.
› Consider removing later covering materials that
have not achieved historic significance.
› Once a non-historic material is removed, repair
the historic, underlying material.
› Do not cover or obscure historic building ma-
terials.
› Do not add another layer of new material if a
property already has a non-historic building
material covering the historic material.
Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance (left) to reveal the underlying historic materials
(right).
8 4
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 1: Assessing
Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic
Masonry Buildings
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/1-
cleaning-water-repellent.htm
See web link to Preservation Brief 2: Repointing
Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/2-
repoint-mortar-joints.htm
Packet Pg. 208
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
50Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
WINDOWS
Historic windows help convey the significance of
historic structures, and shall be preserved. They can
be repaired by re-glazing and patching and splicing
elements such as muntins, the frame, sill and casing.
Repair and weatherization also is often more energy
efficient, and less expensive than replacement. If a his-
toric window cannot be repaired, a new replacement
window shall be in character with the historic building.
3.8 Maintain and repair historic
windows.
› Preserve historic window features including
the frame, sash, muntins, mullions, glazing, sills,
heads, jambs, moldings, operation and group-
ings of windows.
› Repair and maintain windows regularly, includ-
ing trim, glazing putty and glass panes.
› Repair, rather than replace, frames and sashes.
› Restore altered window openings to their his-
toric configuration.
Historic Window Components
Window components include:
› Sash
› Frame
› Number of lights (panes)
› Shutters
› Security Devices (bars and screens)
› Insect screens
› Storm windows
4 4
4
Before rehabilitation: upper story windows in need of repair. After rehabilitation: repaired windows.
Packet Pg. 209
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 51
3.9 Replace a historic window with a
matching design if repair is not
feasible.
› Match the appearance of the historic window
design (i.e., if the historic is double-hung, use a
double-hung replacement window).
› Maintain the historic size, shape and number of
panes.
› Match the profile of the sash, muntin and its
components to the historic window, including
the depth of the sash, which may step back to
the plane of the glass in several increments.
› Use clear window glazing that conveys the vi-
sual appearance of historic glazing (transparent
low-e glass is preferred).
› Do not use vinyl and unfinished metals as win-
dow replacement materials.
› Do not use metallic or reflective window glaz-
ing.
› Do not reduce a historic opening to accom-
modate a smaller window or increase it to
accommodate a larger window.
4
Before rehabilitation: historic windows are missing. After rehabilitation: historic openings are restored.
Packet Pg. 210
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
52Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
Alternative Window Material
If it is not feasible to match the historic design and
materials of a window, then an alternative design
may be considered in the following locations:
› On a non-primary façade, accessory build-
ing or addition
› On a primary façade if no other option is
available
Alternative window designs shall:
› Match the general profile and details of the
historic window.
› Use materials that match the historic ap-
pearance in dimension, profile and finish.
Match the appearance of a historic
window design (i.e., if the historic
is double-hung, use a double-hung
replacement window, or a window
that appears to be double-hung).
Replace historic windows (top) with a matching design (bottom),
if repair is not feasible.
4
Do not reduce a historic opening to accommodate a smaller win-
dow or increase it to accommodate a larger window.
8
4
Packet Pg. 211
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 53
3.10 Use special care when replacing a
window on a primary façade.
› Give special attention to matching the historic
design and materials of windows located on the
façade.
› Also, match the historic design when replacing a
window located on a secondary wall.
3.11 Design a storm window to minimize
its visual impacts.
› If a window did not historically have a storm
window, place a new storm window internally
to avoid exterior visual impacts.
› Use storm windows designed to match the
historic window frame if placed externally.
› Use insect screens with painted wooden frames
where wood windows exist.
3.12 Restore a historic window opening
that has been altered.
› Restore a historic window opening that previ-
ously existed.
› Place a new window to fit within the historic
opening.
Place storm windows internally to
avoid exterior visual impacts (right).
Use storm window inserts designed
to match the historic frame if placed
externally (left).
4
Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
8 4
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 9: The Repair of
Historic Wooden Windows
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/9-
wooden-windows.htm
See web link to window retrofit article from the
National Trust for Historic Preservation web site
http://www.preservationnation.org/who-we-are/
press-center/press-releases/2012/new-windows-
study.html
Web link to window treatments National Park
Service Tech Notes. Scroll down page to window
to secure links
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/tech-
notes.htm
Packet Pg. 212
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
54Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
3.13 When necessary, locate and design
a new window opening to preserve
the overall rhythm and arrangement
of windows on a secondary building
wall.
› Locate a new window opening to match the
general arrangement of historic windows in a
building wall.
› Design a new window opening to match historic
window proportions on the same façade.
3.14 Enhance the energy efficiency of
historic windows and doors.
› Make the best use of historic windows; keep
them in good repair and seal all the leaks.
› Maintain the glazing compound regularly.
Remove old putty with care.
› Place a storm window internally to avoid the
impact upon external appearance.
› Use storm windows designed to match the
historic window frame if placed externally.
Double-hung windows found in many historic structures
allow for transferring cool air in and warm air out during
the summer months.
Packet Pg. 213
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 55
DOORS AND ENTRIES
The design, materials and location of historic doors
and entries help establish the significance of a historic
structure and shall be preserved. When a new door
is needed, it shall be in character with the building,
especially when it is located on a primary wall.
3.15 Maintain a historic primary
entrance.
› Preserve historic and decorative features,
including door frames, sills, heads, jambs, mold-
ings, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights.
› Do not alter the historic size and shape of a
historic door opening.
› Do not change the historic locations of door
openings on primary façades.
› Do not add a new door opening on a primary façade.
› Do not enclose transoms or sidelights.
3.16 Repair or replace a damaged door
to maintain its general historic
appearance.
› Use materials that appear similar to that of the
historic door.
› When replacing a historic door on a primary
façade, use a design that appears similar to the
historic door.
› When replacing a historic door on a non-
primary façade, consider an alternative design
that is in character.
Historic Door and Entry Components
Historic door and entry features include:
› Door Detailing
› Sills
› Surround
› Transoms
› Heads
› Threshold
› Moldings
› Jambs
› Landing (mosaic tiles)
› Flanking sidelights
› Hardware
Maintain a historic primary entrance design.
The design, materi-
als and location of
historic doors and
entries help establish
the significance of a
historic structure and
shall be preserved.
4
4
Packet Pg. 214
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
56Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
3.17 Locate and design a new door and
entry to preserve the historic façade
composition.
› Locate a new door to be consistent with the
historic architectural style of the structure,
especially if located on the primary façade.
› Design a new door or entry to match historic
door proportions.
Design a new door or entry to match historic door proportions.
4 4
Packet Pg. 215
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 57
COMMERCIAL STOREFRONTS
A historic commercial storefront is a key defining
feature of a historic commercial building and shall be
preserved. A historic storefront is usually framed by
masonry side walls and a horizontal cornice or lintel
above the storefront windows. The space within is
highly transparent, including large transom windows
over the display windows. A store entrance is usually
recessed behind the plane of the façade and the cornice
or lintel separates the storefront from upper floors.
Preserving significant historic storefronts and recon-
structing altered or missing storefront features is a key
goal. Researching archival materials such as historic
photos and building plans can be helpful in understand-
ing the role of the storefront and its relationship to
the street.
3.18 Maintain and repair a historic
commercial storefront.
› Maintain interest for pedestrians by maintaining
an active street level storefront.
› Preserve the storefront glass if it is intact.
› Repair storefront elements by patching, splic-
ing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the
historic materials.
› Avoid altering the size and shape of a storefront
opening.
› Do not use reflective, opaque or tinted glass.
› Do not remove or enclose a transom.
› Retain the relationship of the storefront to the
sidewalk.
3.19 Replace storefront features to
match historic features if necessary.
› Use traditional materials such as masonry and
wood.
› If using traditional materials is not feasible, use
compatible substitute materials that are similar
in scale, finish and character to the historic
material, and have proven durability in the local
climate.
› Use historical documentation to guide the
design of replacement features, or design
simplified versions of similar elements seen on
nearby historic properties, if no documentation
is available.
› Expose historic storefront elements that have
been covered by modern siding or other ma-
terials.
4
Before rehabilitation: historic storefront
components survive. (ca. 1980)
After the initial rehabilitation
storefront components are
retained. (ca. 1982)
Storefront components continue to be pre-
served. (2013)
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 11: Rehabilitating
Historic Storefronts
58Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
3.20 Reconstruct a missing storefront
to match the character, scale and
materials of the historic.
› Use historical documentation to guide the
design of the reconstruction.
Traditional Commercial Storefront Features
Historic commercial storefronts typically feature a tall ground floor level while
upper stories have shorter floor-to-floor heights. The key character-defining
features of a commercial storefront are:
Molding or Lintel
Transom
Display Window
Bulkhead/Kickplate
Recessed Entry
Engaged Column or Pilaster
Contemporary Storefront Designs
When a historic storefront is largely missing, it
may be appropriate to design a replacement that
is a contemporary interpretation of a traditional
storefront. A contemporary replacement design
shall:
› Promote pedestrian interest and an active
street-level façade
› Use high-quality, durable materials that
are similar in type and scale to traditional
materials
› Be located within the historic structural
frame of sidewalls and lintel or cornice that
spaces the storefront opening
› Convey the characteristics of typical his-
toric storefronts
› Include traditional storefront elements
such as a bulkhead and transom
› Maintain the transparent character of the
display windows
› Provide a recessed entry
› Use a simple and relatively undecorated
design
› Relate to traditional elements of the façade
above
› Preserve early storefront alterations that
have become historically significant
3.21 A simplified or contemporary
interpretation of a traditional
storefront may be considered where
the historic storefront is missing
and no evidence of it exists.
› Where the historic is missing and no evidence
of the historic storefront exists, a new design
that uses traditional features of a storefront is
permitted.
› The new design shall continue to convey the
design character and materials of typical com-
mercial storefronts. This includes the transpar-
ent character of the glass.
› Use simple color combinations (see “Permitted
Color Combinations for a Commercial Store-
front” on page 61 for more information).
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 59
HISTORIC ROOFS
Many roofs in the Old Town Historic District are flat and
are concealed from view, where changes may not affect
the integrity of the structure. For those that are visible,
the form, shape and significant materials of a historic roof
help define the character of a historic structure as it is
perceived from the public way and shall be preserved.
3.22 Preserve the historic roofline on a
historic structure.
› Maintain the perceived line and orientation of
the roof as seen from the street.
3.23 Maintain and repair historic roof
materials.
› Preserve decorative elements, including crests
and chimneys.
› Retain and repair roof detailing, including gut-
ters and downspouts.
EXPOSED HISTORIC FOUNDATIONS
A historic building foundation contributes to the charac-
ter of a historic structure and shall be preserved.
Altering or replacing historic foundation walls is dis-
couraged. However, it may also be necessary to replace
historic foundation walls with compatible new materials
where the historic foundation is deteriorated beyond
repair.
3.24 Maintain and repair a historic
foundation.
› Re-point historic masonry foundations to match
the historic design.
› Design landscaping and other site features to
keep water from collecting near the foundation.
› Do not cover a historic foundation with newer
siding material.
› Do not install windows, window wells or an
access door on the front façade of a historic
foundation.
Historic Roof Features
Historic roof features to maintain include:
› Parapet profile
› Historic height and profile.
› Historic materials
› Historic skylights
› Parapet crests
Maintenance Tips:
› Look for breaks or holes in the roof surface
and check the flashing for open seams.
› Watch for vegetation, such as moss and
grass, which indicates accumulated dirt and
retained moisture.
› Patch and replace areas with damaged roof
material (often, repairing a roof can be much
less expensive than complete replacement).
Packet Pg. 218
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
60Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
3.25 Replace a foundation wall using new
material that is similar in character
to the historic foundation.
› For example, if a stone foundation must be
replaced, a material that conveys the scale and
texture of the historic fabric may be considered.
› Use materials and details that are similar to
those used in foundations on nearby historic
properties.
› Avoid increasing the height of the structure
when replacing a foundation wall as it will alter
the alignment of historic façades along the block
and its relationship to other details on the build-
ing.
LOADING DOCKS
Historic loading docks are important character-defining
features of some commercial and industrial buildings
and should be preserved. These features also influence
the perceived scale of the structure. Altering, enclos-
ing, or removing a historic loading dock is discouraged.
Even loading docks on the rear of a building may be
important to the character of a property, because al-
leys in the Old Town Historic District are now active
with pedestrians, among other reasons.
3.26 Maintain and repair a historic
loading dock.
› Maintain the historic location and form of a
loading dock.
› Maintain and repair loading dock components
and details, such as a canopy or railing.
COLOR
Choosing the right combination of colors for a historic
rehabilitation project can unify building elements with
the façade and highlight important architectural detail-
ing. Paint color selection shall be appropriate to the
architectural style and complement the building and
its surroundings. Using the historic color scheme is an
option, but new schemes that are compatible are also
permitted.
3.27 Retain historic colors.
› Retain the historic or early color and texture of
masonry surfaces.
› Retain historic coatings such as paint that help
protect exterior materials from moisture and
ultraviolet light.
› Do not strip paint or other coatings to reveal
bare wood.
› Do not paint unpainted masonry and architec-
tural metals.
› Do not use destructive paint removal methods
such as propane or butane torches, sandblasting
or water blasting which can irreversibly damage
historic materials.
Preserve traditional loading docks.
4
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 10: Exterior Paint
Problems on Historic Woodwork
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 61
3.28 Use a color scheme that is compatible
with the historic character of the
structure.
› Restore historic paint colors and finishes to the
extent reasonable to highlight the structure’s
historic appearance.
› Repaint with colors that are appropriate to the
period of historic significance of the building
and district. Color selection shall be based on
historic paint analysis of the historic layers of
paint or appropriate historic research.
› Use color schemes that are simple in character
(generally one to three accent colors for trim
elements).
› Seek professional advice and properly prepare
surfaces before painting.
Permitted Color Combinations for a
Commercial Storefront
Three colors are generally sufficient to highlight a
commercial storefront.
Base Color. This appears on the upper wall and
frames the storefront. The major expanses on a
storefront will be painted this color.
Major Trim. This defines the decorative elements
of the building and ties the upper façade trim with
the storefront. Elements include:
› Building and storefront cornice
› Window frames, sills and hoods
› Storefront frames, columns, bulk-heads and
canopies.
Minor Trim. This is intended to enhance the
color scheme established by the base and major
trim colors and may be used for window sashes,
doors and selective details.
Packet Pg. 220
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
62Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
EXISTING ADDITIONS
Some existing additions may have become historically
significant in their own right. Preserving an addition
that has taken on significance is an option to consider.
However, more recent additions may detract from the
character of the building and could be considered for
modification or removal.
3.29 Preserve an older addition that has
achieved historic signif icance in its
own right.
› Respect character-defining building components
of a historically-significant addition.
› Avoid the demolition of a historically-significant
additions.
3.30 Consider removing an addition that
is not historically significant.
› Ensure that the historic fabric of the primary
structure is not damaged when removing these
features.
NEW ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES
A new addition or accessory structure that is compat-
ible with the historic building and surrounding historic
context may be permitted. It is important to consider
its design and placement, as well as its relationship to
the surrounding historic context. The design standards
for new construction also apply to the design of a new
addition or accessory structure.
3.31 Design an addition or accessory
structure to be compatible with the
historic structure.
› Design an addition or accessory structure to
be visually subordinate to the historic building
(It shall not replicate the design of the historic
building.)
› Use materials that are of a similar color, tex-
ture, and scale to materials in the surrounding
historic context.
› Design an addition or accessory structure to be
compatible with the scale, massing and rhythm
of the surrounding historic context.
› Incorporate windows, doors and other open-
ings at a consistent solid-to-void ratio to those
found on nearby historic buildings.
› Use simplified versions of building components
and details found in the surrounding historic
context. This may include: a cornice; a distinc-
tive storefront or main door surround; window
sills or other features.
› Do not use replicas of historic building components
and details that would convey a false history or that
would draw undue attention to the addition.
4
For More Information:
See web link to Preservation Brief 14: New Exterior
Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/14-exterior-additions.htm
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 63
3. 32 Design an addition or secondary
structure to be subordinate to the
historic building.
› Place an addition or secondary structure to the
side or the rear of the historic structure.
› Place a rooftop or upper-story addition to the
rear to minimize visual impacts from public
streets.
› Do not locate an addition on a primary façade.
3. 33 Clearly differentiate an addition
from the historic structure.
› Use changes in material, color and/or wall plane.
› Consider using a lower-scale connecting ele-
ment to join an addition to a historic structure.
› Consider using contemporary architectural
styles or materials in an addition (a simplified
version of the architectural style of the historic
structure may be permitted).
3. 34 Do not try to make an addition or
secondary structure appear older
than it is.
› Avoid using historic details.
3.35 Do not damage the historic fabric
of the historic building when adding
an addition.
› Do not damage or obscure significant architec-
tural features of the historic building.
Locating an Addition to a Historic
Commercial Structure
An addition to a historic commercial structure shall
be subordinate to, and clearly differentiated from,
the historic structure as illustrated below.
Historic
Structure
The one and two-
story commercial
building illustrated
at right are historic.
Historic
Structures
Rear Addition
The rear addition
illustrated at right is
appropriate.
Rear
Addition
4
Rooftop Addition
The rooftop
addition illustrated
at right is appropri-
ate because it is set
back from the front
façade.
Rooftop
Addition
4
Appropriate addition to the rear of a contribut-
64Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
Planning for Energy Efficiency
PLANNING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
These standards address maintaining and improving
resource and energy efficiency in a historic building, as
well as methods for approaching energy conservation
and generation technologies. The standards in this
section apply to projects involving historic buildings.
Other sustainability standards throughout this docu-
ment will also apply.
Objectives for historic preservation and community
sustainability are often in alignment. Follow these basic
steps when considering a rehabilitation project for
energy efficiency:
Step 1: Establish Project Goals.
Develop an overall strategy and project goals for
energy efficiency to maximize the effectiveness of
a project. This will establish a broad view that can
help place individual actions into context. Focus on
minimizing use of resources and energy, minimizing
negative environmental impacts, and retaining the his-
toric integrity of a property. Strategies shall maximize
the inherent value of the historic resource prior to
considering alterations or retrofitting with new energy
generation technology.
Step 2: Maintain Building Components in
Sound Condition.
Maintaining existing building fabric reduces negative
environmental impacts. Re-using a building preserves
the energy and resources invested in its construction,
and removes the need for producing new construction
materials.
Step 3: Maximize Inherent Sustainable
Qualities.
Typically, historic buildings in the Old Town Historic
District were built with resources and energy efficiency
in mind. Construction methods focused on durability
and maintenance, resulting in individual building fea-
tures that can be repaired if damaged, thus minimizing
the use of materials throughout the building’s life cycle.
Buildings were also built to respond to local climate
conditions, integrating passive and active strategies for
year-round interior climate control, which increase
energy efficiency. Passive strategies typically include
building orientation and features such as roof over-
hangs and windows to provide both natural day lighting
as well as management of solar heat gain. Active strate-
gies typically include operable building features such as
awnings and double-hung and transom windows.
Identify a building’s inherent sustainable features and
operating systems and maintain them in good operat-
ing condition. In some cases these features may be
covered, damaged or missing; repair or restore them
where necessary.
Step 4: Enhance Building Performance.
A historic building’s inherent energy efficiency shall
be augmented using techniques which improve energy
efficiency without negatively impacting historic building
elements. Noninvasive strategies such as increased in-
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 65
ENHANCING ENERGY PERFORMANCE
Improvements to enhance energy efficiency shall
complement the historic building. The structure, form
and materials shall be sensitively improved in energy
efficiency terms to preserve the building’s character.
3.36 Use noninvasive strategies
when applying weatherization
improvements.
› Use cost-effective weather-stripping, insulation
and storm windows to improve energy ef-
ficiency while preserving historic character.
› Install additional insulation in an attic, basement
or crawl space as a simple method to make a
significant difference in a building’s energy ef-
ficiency. Provide sufficient ventilation to avoid
moisture build-up in the wall cavity.
› Install weatherization strategies in a way that
avoids altering or damaging significant materials
and their finishes.
› Use materials which are environmentally
friendly and that will not interact negatively with
historic building materials.
› When a roof must be replaced, consider install-
ing a radiant barrier.
› Maintain historic windows; keep them in good
repair and seal all leaks.
› Retain historic glass, taking special care in putty
replacement.
› Maintain the glazing compound regularly. Re-
move old putty with care.
› Use operable systems such as storm windows,
insulated coverings, curtains and awnings to
enhance performance of historic windows.
MAINTAINING ENERGY EFFICIENCY
The historic sustainable building features and systems
of a historic building shall be maintained in good oper-
ating condition.
3.37 Preserve the inherent energy
efficient features of the historic
building in operable condition.
› Identify a building’s inherent sustainable features
and operating systems and maintain them in
good condition.
› Retain historic shutters, awnings, canopies and
transoms. Operable features such as these
will increase the range of conditions in which
a building is comfortable without mechanical
climate controls.
Energy Audit
To inform an energy efficiency project strategy,
conduct an energy audit. Energy audits can give
a comprehensive view of how energy is currently
managed, in the daily and seasonal cycles of use,
and can also provide perspective on the payback
of investment for potential work on the building.
For example, an energy audit, when examined
based on an overall strategy, may demonstrate
that priorities shall be on increasing insulation in
66Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Diagram
This diagram summarizes the principal direction in the standards for a rehabilitation project for energy efficiency on a commercial building.
These measures can enhance energy efficiency while retaining the integrity of the historic structure.
Upper-story WindoWs
» Maintain historic windows
» Weather-strip and caulk
» Add storm windows (preferably interior)
transoms
» Retain operable transom to circulate air
solar panels
» Set back from primary façade to minimize visibility
from street
attic
» Insulate internally or roof
Green roof
» Place below parapet line to minimize visibility from
street
Wind tUrbines
» Set back from primary façade to minimize vis-
ibility from street
roof material
» Retain & repair
aWninGs/canopies
» Use operable awnings to control solar access and
heat gain
» Use fixed canopies to provide year-round shade and
shelter
doors
» Maintain/weather-strip historic doors
» Weather-strip
» Consider interior air lock area
storefront WindoWs
» Maintain/weather-strip historic windows
Packet Pg. 225
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 67
3. 39 Install solar collectors to minimize
potential adverse effects on the
character of a historic property.
› Place collectors to avoid obscuring significant
features or adversely affecting the perception
of the overall character of the property.
› Size collector arrays to remain subordinate to
the historic structure.
› Install collectors on an addition or secondary
structure.
› Minimize visual impacts by locating collectors
back from the front façade.
› Ensure that exposed hardware, frames and pip-
ing have a matte finish, and are consistent with
the color scheme of the primary structure.
› Use the least invasive method to attach solar
collectors to a historic roof.
USING ENERGY GENERATING
TECHNOLOGIES
Integrate modern energy technology into a historic
structure while maintaining its historic integrity, to the
extent reasonably feasible. Use of energy-generating
technologies should be the final option considered in
an efficiency rehabili-tation project. Utilize strategies to
reduce energy con-sumption prior to undertaking an
energy generation project. Consider the overall
project goals and energy strategies when determining
if a specific technology is right for the project.
As new technologies are tried and tested, it is impor-
tant that they leave no permanent negative impacts to
historic structures. The reversibility of their applica-
tion will be a key consideration when determining if it
shall be permitted.
3.38 Locate energy-generating
technology to minimize impacts to
the historic character of the site
and structure.
› Locate technology where it will not damage,
obscure or cause removal of significant features
or materials.
› Maintain the historic character of the building.
› Install technology in such a way that it can be
readily removed and the historic character eas-
ily restored.
› Use materials which are environmentally
friendly and that will not interact negatively
with historic building materials.
3.40 Install wind turbines to minimize
potential adverse effects on the
character of a historic property.
› Use turbines and any exposed hardware with
a matte finish that is consistent with the
color scheme of the primary structure.
› Do not obscure significant features or impair
the building’s historic significance.
› Attach turbines in a manner that avoids damage
to significant features.
› Install turbines to allow restoration of affected
68Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
ACCESSIBILITY
In 1990, the passage of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) mandated that all places of public accom-
modation be accessible to everyone. This includes his-
toric structures that are used for commercial, rental,
multi-family and public uses. Note that the law provides
that alternative measures may be considered when the
integrity of a historic resource may be threatened.
In most cases, property owners can comply without
compromising the historic resource. Owners of his-
toric properties should comply to the fullest extent
feasible with accessibility laws, while also preserving
the integrity of the character-defining features of their
building or site. These standards shall not prevent or
inhibit compliance with accessibility laws.
3.41 Accessibility improvements shall be
designed to preserve the integrity
of a historic property.
› Retain the key features of the historic structure
in any design.
› Ensure that accessibility improvements are
“reversible.”
PHASING PRESERVATION IMPROVEMENTS
In some cases, a property owner may wish to make in-
terim preservation improvements, rather than execute
a complete rehabilitation of a historic property. This
work shall be planned such that it establishes a founda-
tion for future improvements that will further assure
continued use of the property and retain its historic
significance. For example, a simplified cornice element
may be installed on a commercial storefront, in lieu of
reconstructing the historic design, with the intent that
an accurate reconstruction would occur later.
3.42 Plan interim preservation
improvements to retain opportunities
for future rehabilitation work that
will enhance the integrity of a
historic property.
› Preserve key character-defining features while
making interim preservation improvements.
› Avoid interim preservation improvements that
would foreclose opportunities for more exten-
sive rehabilitation in the future.
› See photo sequence on page 28.
Accessibility improvements shall be designed to preserve the
integrity of a historic property to the maximum extent feasible.
Packet Pg. 227
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014 69
TEMPORARY STABILIZATION
TREATMENTS
When a building is to be unoccupied for an extended
period of time, it may be secured in a way in which
to preserve historically significant features and prevent
deterioration from weathering or vandalism. Often
termed “mothballing,” such procedures are particularly
relevant to properties that have been vacant for a long
time. Stabilization shall be planned such that the integ-
rity of the property will be maintained.
3.43 If a building is unoccupied, secure
it in a way that protects its historic
character.
› Maintain a weather-tight roof. Temporary roof-
ing may be installed if needed.
› Structurally stabilize the building, if needed.
› When enclosing a window or door opening,
avoid damaging frame and sash components.
Mount any panel to cover the opening on the
interior. Also, paint the panels to match the
building color.
› Provide adequate ventilation to the interior of
the building.
EXISTING HISTORIC ALTERATIONS
Many historic structures experience changes over time
as design tastes change or need for additional space
occurs. Many of these occurred while retaining the
characteristics that are key historic features.
Some of these alterations now may be historically
significant themselves. An addition constructed in a
manner compatible with the historic building and as-
sociated with the period of significance is an example,
and it too may merit preservation in its own right.
In contrast, more recent alterations usually have no
historic significance and may even detract from the
character of the building and obscure significant fea-
tures. Removing such an alteration may be considered
in a rehabilitation project. Historic features that have
been modified can also be restored.
3.44 Consider the signif icance of early
alterations and additions. Consider
these options:
› Preserve an older addition or alteration that has
achieved historic significance in its own right,
when it is key to understanding the history of
the property.
› Take the context into consideration. If other
nearby properties also reflect a similar history
of alteration, then preserving the alteration may
be preferred. In other cases, if other buildings
are more intact, in terms of their historic char-
acter, then removing the alteration to restore
the earlier appearance may be preferred.
Packet Pg. 228
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
70Resources Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
DRAFT
Packet Pg. 229
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
4
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL PROPERTIES
Packet Pg. 230
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 231
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
73
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
AWNINGS AND CANOPIES
Traditionally, awnings and canopies were noteworthy
features of buildings in the Old Town Historic District,
and their continued use is encouraged. These elements
are simple in detail, and they reflect the character of
the buildings to which they are attached.
4.1 Preserve traditional canopies.
› Retain historic hardware.
4.2 Install an awning or canopy to f it
the opening and be in character with
the building.
› A fabric awning is permitted.
› A fixed metal canopy may be considered when
it would be in character.
› Mount an awning or canopy to accentuate
character-defining features. The awning or
canopy shall fit in the openings of the buildings.
› Simple sloping awnings and flat canopies are
permitted. Odd shapes, bullnose awnings and
bubble awnings are prohibited.
4.3 Design an awning or canopy with
colors and materials that are
durable and compatible with the
structure.
› Use canvas or a similar woven material
(preferred approach) for an awning.
› Do not use a material without proven durabil-
ity or that has a gloss finish.
› Contemporary awnings are permitted.
Design Standards for All Properties
› Post supported canopies are prohibited on
the front facade of a commercial building.
However, they are permitted on a rear
facade that faces an alley.
Design an awning or canopy with colors and materials that are
durable and compatible with the structure.
Traditionally, awnings were noteworthy features of commercial
buildings, and their continued use is encouraged.
Awnings and canopies can help define windows,
entry areas and the pedestrian level of buildings.
For More Information
See web link to Preservation Brief 44: The Use of
Awnings on Historic Buildings, Repair, Replacement
and New Design
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/44-awnings.htm
Packet Pg. 232
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
74
DRAFT
Design Standards for All Projects
STREET LAYOUT
Established vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access
shall be preserved.
4.4 Retain the historic network of
streets and alleys.
› The network of streets and alleys shall be
retained as public circulation space and for
maximum public access.
› Streets and alleys shall not be enclosed or
closed to public access.
› Link a new walkway to an existing public
right-of-way.
OUTDOOR USE AREAS
Outdoor use areas occur as accents. These include
outdoor dining areas and small public plazas. These
shall be integrated with the design of the site and the
building.
Small Public Plazas and Courtyards
A small public plaza or courtyard may be considered.
However, within the heart of the Old Town Historic
District, where the greatest concentration of historic
storefronts align, creating a gap in the street wall is
discouraged, because it disrupts the street wall.
4.5 A small public plaza or courtyard
shall contain features to promote
and enhance its use.
› It must be: directly accessible to the public
way; level with the public way;
› It may have one or all of the following: street
furniture; public art; historical/interpretive
marker.
A small public plaza or courtyard is permitted at the
rear of the structure to help to enliven the alley set-
ting.
Packet Pg. 233
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
75
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
Terraces, Patios and Deck Space
Improvements that provide areas for active outdoor
use (i.e., dining) are welcomed amenities, but they must
be in character with the historic fabric in the Old Town
Historic District. There are typically two types: raised
and at-grade.
4.6 Locate a raised dining area (deck)
to minimize visual impacts to the
street.
› Placing it to the rear of a property is preferred.
› A rooftop deck may be permitted, if it is set
back from the building facade.
› A projecting or cantilevered deck is prohibited.
› Dining support service areas, such as wait
stations and dish areas, shall be located away
from public view.
4.7 Locate an at-grade dining area to
minimize impacts on the streetscape.
› Consider locating an at-grade dining area to
the side or rear of a property to the extent
reasonably feasible.
› It is permissible to locate an at-grade
dining area in the public ROW in a street wall
context, subject to any necessary permits
or encroachment agreements which may
be required. The dining area shall be clearly
defined in this setting.
HANDRAILS AND ENCLOSURES
In some circumstances it may be necessary to add
handrails or an enclosure to a property to accommo-
date an outdoor dining area, accessibility or to enhance
safety. If so, it must have minimal impact on the urban
setting and/or a historic resource.
4.8 A railing shall be simple in design.
› Simple metal work is permitted.
› Very ornate metal, plastic or wood designs are
prohibited.
› The railing shall be transparent in its overall
appearance. One shall be able to see through
to the building.
Railings shall be mostly transparent and simple in design.
4
4
Packet Pg. 234
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
76
DRAFT
Design Standards for All Projects
SITE LIGHTING
The light level at the property line is a key design con-
sideration. This is affected by the number of fixtures,
their mounting height, and the lumens emitted per
fixture. It is also affected by the screening and design
of the fixture. Light spill onto adjacent properties and
into the night sky shall be minimized and the design
shall be compatible with the district.
4.11 Shield lighting to prevent off-site
glare.
› A light fixture shall incorporate a cut-off
shield to direct light downward.
› A luminaire (lamp) shall not be visible from
adjacent streets or properties.
› Shield a fixture to minimize light spill onto
adjacent properties and into the night sky.
4 .12 A light f ixture must be in character
with the setting.
› A fixture shall be compatible with the historic
context.
ART AND HISTORIC PROPERTIES
Public art is welcomed as an amenity in Fort Collins’
historic districts. It shall be planned as an integral
component of the urban environment and shall be
strategically located to serve as an accent to public
areas. An installation on private property that is
visible from the public way also shall be planned to
retain the historic significance of a property.
4 .9 Plub l i c a r t must be compa t i b l e
with the historic context.
› An art installation shall not impede one’s
ability to interpret the historic character of
the district.
› Locate public art such that the ability to
perceive the character of historic buildings
nearby is maintained.
4.10 An art installation on a historic
property must be compatible with
the resource. It shall:
› Maintain one’s ability to interpret the historic
character of the resource.
› Preserve key features that contribute to the
property’s significance.
› Be reversible in a way that the key features of
the property remain intact.
Packet Pg. 235
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
77
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
BUILDING LIGHTING
The character and level of lighting that is used on a
building is of special concern. Traditionally, exterior
lights were simple in character and were used to high-
light signs and building entrances. Most fixtures had
incandescent lamps that cast a color similar to daylight,
were relatively low intensity and were shielded with
simple shade devices. Although new lamp types may
be considered, the overall effect of modest, focused,
building light shall be continued.
When installing lighting on a historic building, use exist-
ing documentation as a basis for the new design. If no
documentation exists, use a contemporary light fixture
that is simple in design. Building lighting shall be installed
in a manner so as not to damage the historic fabric of
the building and shall be reversible. Most historic light-
ing was subdued and directed at signs, entrances and in
a few cases building features.
4.13 Use lighting to accent:
› Building entrances, signs and to illuminate
walkways.
4.14 Minimize the visual impacts of
architectural lighting.
› Use exterior light sources with a low level of
luminescence.
› Use lights that cast a similar color to daylight.
› Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
› Use lighting fixtures that are appropriate to the
building and its surroundings in terms of style,
finish, scale and intensity of illumination.
› Mount exterior fixtures in an inconspicuous
manner.
› Do not damage or obscure historic building
components and fabric when mounting
exterior fixtures.
4.15 Use shielded and focused light
sources to prevent glare.
› Provide shielded and focused light sources that
direct light downward.
› Do not use high intensity light sources or cast
light directly upward.
› Avoid excessive light spill from buildings.
Packet Pg. 236
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
78
DRAFT
Design Standards for All Projects
SURFACE PARKING
The visual impact of surface parking shall be mini-
mized. On-site parking must be subordinate to other
uses and the front of the lot shall not appear to be a
parking area.
4.18 Minimize the visual impact of
surface parking.
› Locate a parking area at the rear or to the
side of a site or to the interior of the block
to the maximum extent feasible. This is
especially important on corner properties.
Corner properties are generally more visible
than interior lots, serve as landmarks and
provide a sense of enclosure to an intersec-
tion.
4.19 Site a surface lot so it will minimize
gaps in the continuous building wall
of a commercial block.
› Where a parking lot shares a site with a
building, place the parking at the rear of
the site, or if this is not feasible, beside the
building.
4.20 Provide a visual buffer where a
parking lot abuts a public sidewalk.
› A landscaped strip or planter using a combi-
nation of trees and shrubs is permitted.
› A low, decorative wall as a screen for the
edge of the lot is also permitted. Materials
must be compatible with those of nearby
buildings.
SERVICE AREAS
Service areas shall be visually unobtrusive and must be
integrated with the design of the site and the building.
4.16 Minimize the visual impacts of a
service area.
› Orient a service entrance, waste/compost
disposal area or other service area toward
service lanes and away from public streets.
› Screen a service area with a wall, fence or
planting, in a manner that is in character with
the building and its site.
4.17 Position a service area to
minimize conflicts with other
abutting uses.
› Minimize noise impacts by locating sources of
offensive sounds away from other uses.
› Use an alley.
Orient a service area towards service lanes and away from public
streets.
4
Packet Pg. 237
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
79
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
BUFFERS
Parking, storage and equipment areas shall be visually
buffered with landscaping or a screen wall. The design
must complement the context.
4.21 Provide a visual buffer along the
edge of a parking lot or service area.
› Use a landscape strip or screen wall at the
edge of a parking lot.
› Provide an evergreen landscape buffer or
screen wall by ground mounted mechanical
equipment, service and/or storage areas.
BUILDING EQUIPMENT
Junction boxes, external fire connections, telecom-
munication devices, cables, conduits, satellite dishes,
HVAC equipment and fans may affect the character of
a property. These and similar devices shall be screened
from public view to avoid negative effects.
4.22 Minimize the visual impacts of
building equipment on the public
way and the district as a whole.
› Screen equipment from view.
› Do not locate equipment on a primary facade.
› Use low-profile or recessed mechanical units
on rooftops.
› Locate satellite dishes and mechanical equip-
ment out of public view.
› Locate utility lines and junction boxes on
secondary and tertiary walls, and group them,
to the maximum extent feasible.
› Group utility lines in conduit, and paint these
elements, to match the existing background
color, to the maximum extent feasible.
› Locate a utility pedestal (ground mounted) to
the rear of a building, to the maximum extent
feasible.
Parking Buffers
Consider the use of a landscaped
strip or planter to provide a visual
buffer where a parking lot abuts a public
sidewalk.
4
Packet Pg. 238
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
80
DRAFT
Design Standards for All Projects
4.23 Install mechanical equipment
to minimize impacts on historic
fabric.
› Install mechanical equipment in areas and
spaces that require the least amount of
alteration to the historic building.
› Avoid cutting holes in important architectural
features, such as cornices, decorative ceilings
and paneling.
› Do not install mechanical equipment on
a primary façade, to the maximum extent
feasible.
SECURITY DEVICES
It may sometimes be necessary to provide a security
device on a building. It shall be designed to be as
inconspicuous as possible, and must not alter signifi-
cant architectural features of the building. The use of
interior, operable, transparent devices is preferred.
4.24 Minimize the visual impact of
security devices.
› Locate a security device inside a storefront,
to the maximum extent feasible.
› Use operable and transparent (simple bars
with spacing so one can view through to
display) security devices on ground floor
storefronts, to the maximum extent feasible.
› Opaque, roll-down metal screens are
prohibited, because these obscure products
on display and thereby weaken the interest
of the street to pedestrians when in a closed
position.
› Decorative security devices are permitted
when they complement the architectural
style.
› Security devices are prohibited above the
second floor, unless unique security condi-
tions are indicated.
Install roof-mounted mechanical equipment, such as air
conditioners, to be inconspicuous when viewed from pub-
lic streets.
Back side of
building.
4
Packet Pg. 239
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
81
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
4.25 Do not damage the character of
the historic building when installing
a security device.
› Do not damage or obscure significant architec-
tural features of the historic building.
› The installation shall be reversible. Once
removed the historic building must remain
intact and the integrity of historic materials
shall not be compromised.
4 4
4
Decorative secu-
rity devices are
permitted when they
complement the
architectural style.
Packet Pg. 240
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
82
DRAFT
Design Standards for All Projects
4.27 Base or background colors shall
be muted.
› Building features shall be muted, while trim
accents can be either a contrasting color or a
harmonizing color.
› An accent color shall not contrast so strongly
as to not read as part of the composition.
› Bright high-intensity colors are not permit-
ted.
› Use matte or low luster finishes instead of
glossy ones.
› Non-reflective, muted finishes on all features
is preferred.
4.28 Building elements shall be
f inished in a manner similar to that
seen traditionally. The following
are recommended treatments:
› Brick and stone: unpainted, natural color
unless painted historically
› Window frames and sash, doors and frame
and storefronts: wood - painted; metal -
anodized or baked color
› Highly reflective materials, weathered wood
and clear finishes are prohibited on large
surfaces. A clear finish is permitted on a
wood entry door.
ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Negative impacts on archeological resources shall be
avoided.
4.29 Leave archeological resources in
place, to the maximum extent
feasible.
› Avoid disturbing known archeological
resources, to the maximum extent feasible.
› If archeological materials are discovered
contact the City of Fort Collins Historic
Preservation office.
COLOR
Traditionally, color schemes in the Old Town Historic
District were relatively muted. A single base color
was applied to the primary wall plane. Then, one or
two accent colors were used to highlight ornamental
features, as well as trim around doors and windows.
Since many of the commercial structures were brick,
the natural color of the masonry became the back-
ground color. Sometimes a contrasting masonry was
used for window sills and moldings. As a result, the
contrast between the base color and trim was rela-
tively subtle. These traditions of using limited num-
bers of colors, and muted ones, shall be continued.
These standards do not specify which colors should
be selected, but rather how they shall be used.
4.26 The facade shall “read” as a single
composition.
› Employ color schemes that are simple in
character.
› Using one base color for the building walls
5
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
Packet Pg. 242
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 243
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
85
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
Overview
Designing a new building to fit within the historic char-
acter of the Old Town Historic District requires careful
thought. Preservation in a historic district context does
not mean that the area must be “frozen” in time, but it
does mean that, when new building occurs, it shall be in
a manner that reinforces the basic visual characteristics
of the district. This does not imply, however, that a new
building must look old. In fact, imitating historic styles
is discouraged.
Rather than imitating older styles, a new design shall
relate to the fundamental characteristics of the his-
toric context while also conveying the design trends
of today. It may do so by drawing upon basic ways of
building that make up a part of the character of the
district. Such features include the way in which a build-
ing is located on its site, the manner in which it relates
to the street and its basic mass, form and materials.
When these design variables are arranged in a new
building to be similar to those seen traditionally, visual
compatibility results.
This section provides design standards for new infill
construction and improvements to buildings that con-
tribute to the fabric in the Old Town Historic District.
› Building Placement and Orientation
› Architectural Character and Detail
› Building Mass, Scale and Height
› Building and Roof Forms
› Primary Entrances
› Materials
› Windows
New Additions
A new addition to an existing building in the
historic district shall follow the standards for new
construction provided in this section. See also the
Design Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Resources section, for additional standards that
apply to additions to a historic structure.
The general alignment of storefronts, moldings and upper story windows contributes to the visual continuity of many commercial
blocks in Old Town Fort Collins. A variation in the height of cornices exists, within a range of one to three stories. Facade widths also
vary, but within a relatively narrow range.
Packet Pg. 244
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
86
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
Considering Context
Compatibility with the Old Town context is a key
principle for the design of new construction. This
typically focuses on buildings in the same block, on
both sides of the street, and also across an alley.
In some cases, a structure that is not historic may
also be found in the immediate vicinity, but this
does not influence considerations of compatibility.
BUILDING PLACEMENT AND ORIENTATION
Traditionally, buildings in Old Town were arranged
in consistent development patterns, in terms of their
site plan and orientation. Most commercial buildings
aligned uniformly along a street. This created a con-
sistent “street wall” that is now a key feature of the
historic district.
Reinforcing traditional development patterns is
paramount in designing a new building to fit within
the historic district. New infill shall reflect traditional
development patterns, including facade alignment and
uniform building orientation.
5.1 Maintain the alignment of building
fronts along the street.
› Locate a new building to reflect established
alignment patterns along the block.
› Where historic buildings are positioned at
the sidewalk edge, creating a uniform street
wall, then a new building shall conform to this
alignment.
5.2 Maintain the traditional pattern of
buildings facing the street.
› Locate a primary entrance to face the street
and design it to be clearly identifiable.
› For a commercial storefront, use a recessed
Locate a primary entrance to face the street and be clearly iden- entry.
tifiable.
4
New Commercial Building Design
Maintain the alignment of building fronts along the street.
Packet Pg. 245
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
87
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
4
ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND DETAIL
In order to assure that historic resources are appreci-
ated as authentic contributors in the historic district,
it is important that a new building be distinguishable
from them while also remaining compatible with the
context. New construction shall appear as a product
of its own time while also being compatible with the
historically significant resources of the area.
5.3 Design a new building to express its
own time while remaining compatible
with the historic district.
› See the standards that follow for information
about basic elements of compatibility.
5.4 An interpretation of a historic style
that is authentic to the district
will be considered if it is subtly
distinguishable as being new.
› Avoid an exact imitation of a historic style that
would blur the distinction between old and
new buildings and make it more difficult to
understand the architectural evolution of the
district.
4
New construction should appear as a product of its own time
while also being compatible with the historically significant
resources of the area.
Avoid an exact imitation of a historic style that would blur the
distinction between old and new buildings and make it more dif-
ficult to understand the architectural evolution of the district.
Packet Pg. 246
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
88
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
4
Design a new building to reflect its time while respecting key
features of its context.
5.5 Incorporate traditional facade
articulation techniques in a new
design. Use these methods:
› a tall first floor
› vertically proportioned upper story windows
› window sills and frames that provide detail
› horizontal expression elements, such as
canopies, belt courses, moldings and cornices
› vertical expression features, such as columns
and pilasters
› a similar ratio of solid wall to window area
› a base, middle and a cap
4
Incorporate traditional facade articulation techniques in a
new design.
Incorporate a kickplate into a
storefront design.
Packet Pg. 247
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
89
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
4
BUILDING MASS, SCALE AND HEIGHT
Each historic building in the district exhibits distinct
characteristics of mass, height and a degree of wall
articulation that contributes to its sense of scale. As
groupings, these structures establish a definitive sense
of scale. A new building shall express these traditions
of mass and scale, and it must be compatible in height,
mass and scale with its context, including the specific
block and the historic district as a whole.
5.6 Convey the traditional size of historic
buildings in new construction as it is
perceived at the street level.
› The height of a new building shall appear to
be within the height range established in the
context, especially at the street frontage.
› Floor-to-floor heights shall appear similar to
those of traditional buildings.
› If an additional floor is permitted, place it (or
sufficient portions of it) back from the street
front to maintain the traditional range of
heights at the street edge.
5.7 The overall height of a new building
shall be compatible with the historic
district. A building height that
exceeds the height range established
in the context will be considered
when:
› It is demonstrated that the additional height
will be compatible with adjacent properties and
for the historic district at large.
› Taller portions are set back from the street.
› Access to light and air of surrounding proper-
ties is respected.
The overall height of a new building should be compatible with
the historic district. A building height that exceeds the height
range established in the context will be considered when it is
demonstrated that the additional height will be compatible with
adjacent properties and for the historic district at large. Note the
additional height on the building in the background steps back
from the front and side.
4
The height of a new building should appear to be within the
height range established in the context, especially at the street
frontage.
Packet Pg. 248
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
90
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
Mass, Scale and Height at Different Levels
Building mass, scale and height shall be considered
in these ways:
(1) As experienced at the street level immediately
adjacent to the building.
› At this level of perception, the actual
height of the building wall at the street
edge is a key factor. The scale of windows
and doors, the modular characteristics of
building materials, and the expression of
floor heights also contribute to perceived
scale.
(2) As viewed along a block, in perspective with
others in the immediate area.
› The degree of similarity (or diversity) of
building heights along a block, and the
repetition of similar features, including
openings, materials and horizontal expres-
sion lines, combine to establish an overall
sense of scale at this level of experiencing
context.
(3) As seen from key public viewpoints inside and
outside of the historic district.
› In groups, historic buildings and compat-
ible newer structures establish a sense of
scale for the entire district and define the
skyline.
5.8 Provide variation in building height
when a new building is substantially
larger than historic buildings in the
district.
› In order to reduce the perceived mass of
a larger building, divide it into subordinate
modules that reflect traditional building sizes
in the context.
› Vary the height of building modules in a large
structure, and include portions that are similar
in height to historic structures in the district.
Avoid excessive modulation of a building mass,
since this would be out of character with
simpler historic building forms in the area.
5.9 Maintain the scale of traditional
building widths in the context.
› Design a new building to reflect the estab-
lished range of the traditional building widths
in the district.
› Where a building must exceed this width, use
changes in design features so the building reads
as separate building modules reflecting tradi-
tional building widths and massing. Changes
in the expression and details of materials,
changes in window design, facade heights or
materials are examples of techniques that shall
be considered.
› Where these articulation techniques are used,
they shall be expressed consistently through-
out the structure, such that the composition
91
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
4
This single, new infill building is divided into modules to reflect the scale of the historic
context. The height of a new building shall appear to be within the height range of historic
buildings, especially at street frontage.
5.10 Establish a sense of human scale in
a building design.
› Use vertical and horizontal articulation
techniques to reduce the apparent mass of a
larger building and to create visual interest.
› Express the position of each floor in the
external skin of a building to establish a scale
similar to historic buildings in the district.
› Use materials that convey scale in their
proportion, detail and form.
› Design architectural details to be in scale
with the building. Using windows, doors, and
storefronts (in commercial buildings) that are
similar in scale to those seen traditionally is
permitted.
This single infill building successfully employs building articulation
methods to break up the mass of the building. Note the height
of the storefront, depth of openings and variation in parapet
heights. The building also reads as separate masses with the
vertical circulation offsets that have been employed.
4
4
Packet Pg. 250
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
92
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
BUILDING AND ROOF FORMS
A similarity of building forms also contributes to a
sense of visual continuity. In order to maintain this
feature, a new building shall have a basic form that is
similar to that seen traditionally.
5.11 Use simple, rectangular building
forms.
› Use building forms that appear similar to
traditional forms.
› Use roof forms similar to those seen tradition-
ally in the district.
Floor to floor heights shall appear similar to those of traditional
buildings.
4
Use a tall first floor and vertically proportioned upper story win-
dows.
4
Packet Pg. 251
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
93
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
ENTRANCES
Traditionally in the historic district, most primary en-
trances were oriented to the street and were recessed.
They provided visual interest and a sense of scale to
each building. A primary entrance shall be clearly iden-
tifiable in a new building and it must be in character
with the building and its context. The entrance shall
include features to signify it as such, and convey a sense
of scale.
5.12 Orient a primary entrance towards
the street.
› Design an entrance to a commercial building
to convey a sense of scale and provide visual
interest.
5.13 Maintain the pattern created by
recessed entryways.
› Set the door back an adequate amount from
the front facade to establish a distinct thresh-
old for pedestrians.
› Where an entry is to be recessed, the building
line at the sidewalk edge shall be maintained by
the upper floor(s).
› Use a transom over a doorway to maintain the
full vertical height of the storefront.
› Oversized and undersized entrances are
discouraged.
4
Packet Pg. 252
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
94
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
MATERIALS
Traditional building materials in the historic district
include various types of masonry, primarily brick, stone
and concrete. Today, these materials are key to the
character of the district.
Building materials shall reflect the range of textures,
modularity and finish of those employed traditionally.
They also shall contribute to the visual continuity of
the specific historic district. They shall be of proven
durability in similar applications.
5.14 Use building materials that appear
similar in scale, color, texture and
f inish to those seen historically in
the district.
› Use materials that are proven to be durable in
the local climate.
› Use materials that will maintain an intended
finish over time, or acquire a patina.
› When possible, use masonry with a modular
dimension similar to typical masonry materials.
› When an alternative material is permitted, use
a durable material. (See “Using New Materi-
als” to the left for more information.)
› On the ground level, use materials that will
withstand on-going contact with the public,
sustaining impacts without compromising their
appearance.
Typical Materials
Typical historic building materials used in Old Town
Fort Collins include:
» Masonry
› Brick
› Stone
› Terra Cotta
› Poured Concrete
› Pre-cast Concrete
» Wood
» Metal
› Cast iron,
› Copper
› Sheet metal
Understanding the character of these materials and
the patterns they create is essential to developing
new interpretations.
Using New Materials
Compatibility with historic materials can be
achieved without purely replicating their traditional
use. A new building material that conveys the es-
sence of modularity and the texture and finish of
historic masonry, and that has proven durability in
the local climate, is often compatible.
The degree to which an alternative material may
be used successfully on a new building also will be
influenced by the degree of consistency or variety
in materials that already exists in the block.
Use building materials that appear similar in scale, color, texture
and finish to those seen historically in the district.
95
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
WINDOWS
The manner in which windows are used to articulate
a new building wall is an important consideration in
establishing a sense of scale and visual continuity. Tradi-
tionally in Old Town, a storefront system was installed
on the ground floor and upper story windows often
appeared as punched openings.
These features often align with others in the block, and
establish a rhythm or pattern of solid and void that vi-
sually links buildings along the street. These traditional
arrangements may also be interpreted in contempo-
rary designs that complement the established patterns
within the historic district.
Window design and placement shall help to establish
a sense of scale and provide pedestrian interest. Es-
tablished solid to void patterns must be maintained.
Contemporary and creative design interpretations of
window rhythms and patterns that reference, but do
not duplicate historic designs, are also permitted.
5.15 A contemporary storefront design
is permitted.
› Design a building to incorporate a ground floor
storefront.
› Incorporate the basic design features found
in traditional storefronts, such as a kickplate,
display window, transom and a primary
entrance.
› In storefront details, use elements similar in
profile and depth of detailing seen historically.
Design a building to incorporate a ground floor storefront.
In traditional commercial buildings, a storefront system was
installed on the ground floor and upper story windows often
appeared as punched openings. These features are recognized
in this contemporary building front. However, a more appropri-
ate treatment could be provided in the larger openings to reflect
traditional window proportions; for example, a vertical and hori-
zontal feature could be provided within the opening.
4 4
4
Incorporate the basic design features found in traditional store-
fronts, such as a kickplate, display window, transom and a pri-
mary entrance.
Packet Pg. 254
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
96
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
5.16 Arrange windows to reflect the
traditional rhythm and general
alignment of others in the district.
› Use window rhythms and alignments similar
to traditional buildings, such as: vertically
proportioned, single or sets of windows,
“punched” into a more solid wall surface, and
evenly spaced along upper floors; window sills
or headers that align; and rows of windows
or storefront systems of similar dimensions,
aligned horizontally along a wall surface
› Creative interpretations of traditional window
arrangement will be considered.
5.17 Use durable window materials.
› Permitted window materials include metal and
wood frame.
› Prohibited window materials include synthetic
materials that do not have a proven durability,
such as plastic snap-in muntins.
Arrange windows to reflect the traditional rhythm and general
alignment of others in the area.
4
Packet Pg. 255
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
97
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
New Construction and Sustainability
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN NEW DESIGNS
The conservation of energy is a key objective in site
design, building design and building orientation. The
site design process shall include an evaluation of the
physical assets of the site to maximize energy efficiency
and conservation in the placement and design of a build-
ing. Designs shall consider seasonal changes in natural
lighting and ventilation conditions.
A design shall also take into account the potential
effect on an adjoining property, in terms of its solar ac-
cess and ability to implement the same environmental
design principles. Careful consideration shall also be
given to balancing sustainable design principles with
those related to maintaining the traditional character
of the area.
5.18 Locate a new building, or an
addition, to take advantage of
microclimatic opportunities for
energy conservation, while avoiding
negative impacts to the historic
context.
› Orient a building to be consistent with historic
development patterns to the maximum extent
feasible.
› Maximize energy efficiency and conservation
opportunities to the extent reasonably feasible.
5.19 Design a building, or an addition, to
take advantage of energy saving and
generating opportunities.
› Design windows to maximize daylighting into
interior spaces.
› Use exterior shading devices to manage solar
gain in summer months. For example, use
canopies or awnings on storefronts similar to
how they were used traditionally.
› Energy-generating devices, including solar
collectors and wind turbines, are permitted
where they also remain visually subordinate.
Packet Pg. 256
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
98
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
COMMERCIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY
DIAGRAM
A
Wind Devices: Set back
from primary facade to
minimize visibility from
the street.
B
Operable Transoms:
Allows for natural air
circulation.
C
Green Roofs: Set back
from primary facade to
minimize visibility from
the street.
D
Shading Devices:
Operable canopies
located above display
windows.
E
Solar Panels: Set back
from primary facade
to minimize visibility
from the street.
A
B
C
D
E
These sustainability designs should be considered in the context of an overall strategy.
Packet Pg. 257
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
99
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDING MASSING
A building mass shall maximize the potential for natural
daylighting as well as solar energy collection, while
avoiding negative impacts to the historic context.
5.20 Shape a building’s mass to maximize
solar energy potential. Use the
following strategies:
› Design a building to allow natural daylighting to
the interior.
› Articulate wall planes as a way to provide
shade or increase solar access to interiors.
› Use thermal storage walls on a portion of
the south facing building exposure, where
appropriate.
5.21 Orient a building to maximize
green principles while ensuring
compatibility with adjacent,
lower-scale structures. Permitted
strategies include:
› Position the taller portion of a building along a
north-south axis to minimize shading on lower
scale structures to the north.
› Design a building mass to minimize shading
south-facing facades of adjacent buildings
during winter months.
Articulate building mass to take advantage of solar energy. The
image above shows a plaza to the left. It is shaded during peak
winter hours, therefore the plaza location should be considered on
the opposite side of the building. Below, the plaza is to the right; it is
enhanced by solar rays during peak winter hours.
Packet Pg. 258
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
100
DRAFT
Design Standards for New Construction
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE IN
BUILDING ELEMENTS
The elements that make up a new building, including
windows, mechanical systems and materials, can signifi-
cantly impact environmental performance. These shall
be designed to maximize the building’s efficiency, while
promoting compatibility with surrounding sites and
structures. New materials that improve environmental
performance are permitted if they have been proven
effective in this climate and are compatible with the
historic context.
5.22 Use green building materials
whenever possible. Such materials
are:
› locally manufactured
› low maintenance
› materials with long life spans
› recycled materials
5.23 Incorporate building elements that
allow for natural environmental
control. Consider the following:
› operable windows for natural ventilation
› low infiltration fenestration products
› interior or exterior light shelves/solar screens
above south facing windows
› green roofs
SOLAR AND WIND ENERGY DEVICES
Solar and wind energy devices (i.e., solar panels, wind
turbines) shall be positioned to have a minimal effect
on the character of Old Town.
5.24 Minimize the visual impacts of
energy devices on the character of
Old Town.
› Mount equipment where it has the least visual
impact, to the maximum extent feasible.
› Exposed hardware, frames and piping shall have
a matte finish, and be consistent with the color
scheme of the primary structure.
Green Roofs
Green roofs provide the following benefits:
› Increase energy efficiency
› Moderate waste diversion
› Stormwater management
› Reduce heat island effect
› Improve air quality
› Provide amenity space for building users
Packet Pg. 259
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
6
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SIGNS
Packet Pg. 260
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Packet Pg. 261
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
103
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
Overview
Signs are important elements of Old Town and balanc-
ing their functional requirements with the objectives
for the overall character of the district is a key con-
sideration. Their placement, relationship to historic
features and general character are key considerations.
This section provides standards that address the
qualitative aspects of sign design, in terms of how signs
contribute to the character of a historic district and to
individual properties. Materials include:
› Treatment of Historic Signs
› Sign Installation on a Historic Building
› Design of New and Modified Signs
› Design of Specific Sign Types
› Sign Illumination
Common signs types found in the district include:
› Projecting signs
› Flush wall signs
› Awning signs
› Interpretive signs
› Window and door signs
Signs are important
elements of Old
Town and balanc-
ing their functional
requirements with
the objectives for
the overall charac-
ter of the district is
a key consideration.
4 4
4
Sign Code
In addition to these standards, also see the Fort
Collins Land Use Code, Division 3.8 Supplementary
Regulations, 3.8.7 Signs.
Packet Pg. 262
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
104
DRAFT
Design Standards for Signs
All historic signs shall be retained. Historic signs that
represent the district’s evolution are also important.
6.1 Consider history , context and
design when determining whether
to retain a historic sign. Retention
is especially important when a sign
is:
› Associated with historic figures, events or
places.
› Significant as evidence of the history of the
product, business or service advertised.
› A significant part of the history of the building
or the historic district.
› Characteristic of a specific historic period.
› Integral to the building’s design or physical
fabric.
› Integrated into the design of a building such
that removal could harm the integrity of a
historic property’s design or cause significant
damage to its materials.
› An outstanding example of the sign maker’s
art because of its craftsmanship, use of
materials, or design.
› Historically significant type of sign
Flush wall signs and individual letter signs are signs
that are mounted on a building wall. They do not
project significantly from the surface to which they
are mounted.
6.2 Leave a historic wall sign exposed.
› Do not paint over a historic sign.
› There are times when some alterations to a
historic wall sign may be permitted; these are:
› If the sign is substantially deteriorated,
patching and repairing is permitted.
› If it is located on a secondary facade
› If the sign serves a continuing use, i.e.,
there are older signs that still have an
active business and they need to change
information such as the hours of operation
6.3 Do not over restore a historic wall
sign.
› Do not restore a historic wall sign to the point
that all evidence of its age is lost.
› Do not significantly re-paint a historic wall sign
even if its appearance and form is recaptured.
4
Leave historic wall signs exposed.
Treatment of Historic Signs
See Also:
Web link to Preservation Brief 25: The Preserva-
tion of Historic Signs
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/25-signs.htm
Packet Pg. 263
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
105
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
Sign Installation on a Historic Building
When installing a new sign on a historic building,
it is important to maintain the key architectural
features of and minimize potential damage to the
building.
6.4 Avoid damaging or obscuring
architectural details or other
building features when installing
a sign.
› No sign or sign structure or support shall
be placed onto or obscure or damage any
significant architectural feature of a building,
including but not limited to a window or a
door frame, cornice, molding, ornamental
feature, or unusual or fragile material.
6.5 A sign shall not obscure character-
defining features of a historic
building.
› A sign shall be designed to integrate with
the architectural features of a building, not
distract from them.
› No sign shall be painted onto any significant
architectural feature, including but not limited
to a window or door frame, cornice, molding,
ornamental feature, or unusual or fragile
material.
› No support for a sign shall extend above the
cornice line of a building to which the sign is
attached.
A sign shall be designed to integrate with the architectural fea-
tures of a building, not distract from them. This sign remains
subordinate to the architectural feature since much of the mold-
ing is still visible.
Avoid damaging or obscuring architectural details or
features when installing signs.
4 4
Mount a sign to fit within existing architectural features using
the shape of the sign to help reinforce the horizontal lines of the
building.
8
4
Packet Pg. 264
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
106
DRAFT
Design Standards for Signs
Whether it is attached to a historic building or as-
sociated with new development, a new or modified
sign shall exhibit qualities of style, permanence and
compatibility with the natural and built environment.
It shall also reflect the overall context of the building
and surrounding area.
6.6 A sign shall be subordinate to the
overall building composition.
› Design a sign to be simple in character.
› Locate a sign to emphasize design elements of
the facade itself.
› Mount a sign to fit within existing architectural
features using the shape of the sign to help
reinforce the horizontal lines of the building.
› All sign types shall be subordinate to the
building and to the street.
6.7 Use sign materials that are
compatible with the architectural
character and materials of the
building.
› Do not use highly reflective materials.
› Use permanent, durable materials.
6.8 Use simple typeface design.
› Avoid hard-to-read or overly intricate
typefaces.
› Use no more than two or three distinct
typefaces on a sign.
6.9 Use colors that contribute to
legibility and design integrity.
› Limit the number of colors used on a sign.
Generally, do not use more than three colors.
› Vibrant colors are discouraged.
6.10 Using a symbol for a sign is
permitted.
› A symbol sign adds interest, can be read
quickly and is remembered better than
written words.
Use sign materials that are compatible with
the architectural character and materials of
the building.
Design of New and Modified Signs
Using a symbol for a sign is permitted.
4
4
Packet Pg. 265
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
107
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
A variety of sign types may be permitted if each sign
contributes to a sense of visual continuity and does
not overwhelm the context.
AWNING SIGN
An awning/canopy sign occurs flat against the surface
of the awning material.
6.11 An awning sign shall be compatible
with the building.
› Use colors and materials that are compatible
with the overall color scheme of the facade.
INTERPRETIVE SIGN
An interpretive sign refers to a sign or group of signs
that provide information to visitors on natural, cultural
and historic resources or other pertinent information.
An interpretive sign can be erected by a non-profit
organization or by a national, state or local govern-
ment agency.
Interpretive signs shall comply with the design stan-
dards for the sign type that is the closest match. The
standards below apply to a common freestanding sign
type.
6.12 Design an interpretive sign to be
simple in character.
› The sign face shall be easily read and viewed
by pedestrians.
› An interpretive sign shall remain subordinate
to its context.
4
Although these interpretive signs are outside of the Old Town
district they’re good examples of permitted interpretive signs.
The signs are simple in character.
Design of Specific Sign Types
4
An awning sign shall be compatible with the building.
4
4
4
Packet Pg. 266
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
108
DRAFT
Design Standards for Signs
MURALS
A mural is a painting located on the side of the building
whose content, reflects a cultural, historic or environ-
mental event(s) or subject matter from the district.
6.13 Mural content shall be appropriate
to the district and its environs.
› The mural may not depict a commercial
product brand name or symbolic logo that is
currently available.
6.14 When used, a mural shall be
incorporated as an element of the
overall building design.
› The mural shall complement the wall on which
it is placed.
› It shall not obscure key features of a historic
building.
6.15 The application of a mural shall not
damage historic materials.
› The use of a mural that can be removed at a
later date is permitted.
Mural content shall be appropriate to the district and its envi-
rons.
4
Use a consolidated tenant panel
or directory sign to help users find
building tenants.
4
A mural shall complement the wall on which it is placed.
4
Design of Specific Sign Types
Packet Pg. 267
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
109
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
TENANT PANEL OR DIRECTORY SIGN
A tenant panel or directory sign displays the tenant
name and location for a building containing multiple
tenants.
6.16 Use a tenant panel or directory sign
to consolidate small individual signs
on a larger building.
› Use a consolidated tenant panel or directory
sign to help users find building tenants.
› Locate a consolidated tenant panel or direc-
tory sign near a primary entrance on the first
floor wall of a building.
PROJECTING / UNDER-CANOPY SIGN
A projecting/under-canopy sign is attached perpen-
dicular to the wall of a building or structure.
6.17 Design a bracket for a projecting/
under-canopy sign to complement
the sign composition.
6.18 Locate a projecting/under-canopy
sign to relate to the building facade
and entries.
› Locate a small projecting/under-canopy sign
near the business entrance, just above or to
the side of the door.
› Mount a larger projecting sign higher on the
building, centered on the facade or positioned
at the corner.
Design a bracket for a pro-
jecting sign to complement
the sign composition.
The combination of the sim-
ple painted wall sign and the
projecting sign are comple-
mentary to each another and
permitted for this building
type.
Locate a small projecting sign near
the business entrance, just above
or to the side of the door.
4 4
4
Design of Specific Sign Types
4
Direct lighting towards a sign from an external,
shielded lamp.
A projecting/under-canopy
sign is attached perpen-
dicular to the wall of a
building or structure.
4
Packet Pg. 268
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
110
DRAFT
Design Standards for Signs
FLUSH WALL SIGN
A flush wall sign is any sign attached parallel to the wall
or surface of a building.
6.19 Place a f lush wall sign to promote
design compatibility among
buildings.
› Place a wall sign to align with other signs on
nearby buildings.
6.20 Place a flush wall sign relatively
close to the building facade.
› Design a wall sign to minimize the depth of a
sign panel or letters.
› Design a wall sign to fit within, rather than
forward of, the fascia or other architectural
details of a building.
Design of Specific Sign Types
Place a wall sign to promote design compatibility among build-
ings.
Design a wall sign to minimize the depth of a sign panel or let-
ters.
4
4
A wall sign is any sign
attached parallel to the wall
or surface of a building.
4
Packet Pg. 269
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
111
DRAFT
Old Town Fort Collins Design Guidelines | March 2014
4
Design a door sign to minimize the amount
of window covered.
Design a window sign to minimize the amount of window
covered.
4
4
WINDOW AND DOOR SIGN
A window sign is any sign, picture, symbol, or combi-
nation thereof, designed to communicate information
about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale or
service that is placed inside within one foot of the
inside window pane or upon the windowpanes or glass
and which is visible from the exterior of the window.
6.21 Design a window sign to minimize
the amount of window covered.
› Scale and position a window sign to preserve
transparency at the sidewalk edge.
Design of Specific Sign Types
Packet Pg. 270
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
112
DRAFT
Design Standards for Signs
KIOSKS
A sign kiosk is typically a series of configured sign
panels.
6.22 A sign kiosk is prohibited within
the district.
› Unless used by the city for wayfinding or for
interpretive information.
OTHER SIGN TYPES
All sign types that are not mentioned here, but which
are permitted in the district, shall adhere to the stan-
dards in “Design of New and Modified Signs” in this
chapter.
ILLUMINATION
6.23 Include a compatible, shielded light
source to illuminate a sign.
› Direct lighting towards a sign from an exter-
nal, shielded lamp.
› Do not overpower the building or street edge
with lighting.
› Use a warm light, similar to daylight.
› If halo lighting is used to accentuate a sign or
building, locate the light source so that it is not
visible.
› A sign shall be illuminated from an indirect
light source.
6.24 If internal illumination is used, it
shall be designed to be subordinate
to the overall building composition.
› Internal illumination of an entire sign panel is
prohibited. If internal illumination is used, a
system that backlights text only is permitted.
› Internal illumination of an awning is prohibited;
however, lights may be concealed in the
underside of a canopy.
Illumination
Packet Pg. 271
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Form Completed July 29, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM)
Project or Decision: River District and Old Town Historic District Design
Guidelines Evaluated by:
Staff from CDNS and
TBL Team
Social Economic Environmental
WorkForce Community
STRENGTHS:
x S&Gs add some clarity to development
review process
x S&Gs simplify the Landmark Preservation
Commission review process
x S&Gs follow existing economic drivers
that add value to development proposals
previously identified in community plans
and strategies
x S&Gs are a vision implementation
exercise
x S&Gs further support Secretary of
Interior’s standards that staff must follow;
helps apply standards in actual case
studies within the community
STRENGTHS:
x S&Gs identify new building materials
and techniques that are
environmentally responsible
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; preserves historic
nature of communities and
neighborhoods, perpetuates character
of historic buildings
x S&Gs do not add extra work for
development review applications;
makes the process more efficient and
contributes to continued transparency
x S&Gs add some clarity to development
review process
x S&Gs add new regulations and require
some more work with the intent of
preserving character
x S&Gs improve building compatibility
within the districts; promotes a
cohesive identity within the districts
x S&Gs add predictability that promotes
infill and redevelopment opportunities
that meet larger community goals
x S&Gs follow existing economic drivers
that add value to development
proposals previously identified in
community plans and strategies
x S&Gs are a vision implementation
exercise
x S&Gs identify properties that qualify for
financial incentives and guide
alterations such that they still qualify
for them>>>>
STRENGTHS:
x Half of Old Town Historic District project
funded by State Historical Fund grant
Form Completed July 29, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
LIMITATIONS:
x S&Gs still do not resolve the problems of
capital improvement lag within the Old
Town and River District areas
x Capital project needs are outside the
scope of this project
x S&Gs do not go far enough for some
professionals working within the
community; too middle ground for some
LIMITATIONS:
x S&Gs do not resolve all concerns
identified in stakeholder outreach
feedback
x S&Gs still do not resolve the problems of
capital improvement lag within the Old
Town and River District areas
x Capital project needs are outside the
scope of this project
x S&Gs add new regulations and require
some more work with the intent of
preserving character
x S&Gs do not go far enough for some
professionals working within the
community; too middle ground for some
LIMITATIONS
x S&Gs still do not resolve the problems of
capital improvement lag within the Old Town
and River District areas
x Capital project needs are outside the scope of
this project
x S&Gs add new regulations and require some
more work with the intent of preserving
character
LIMITATIONS:
x
OPPORTUNITIES:
x S&Gs add predictability to review
process, may result in reduced staff time
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; may create research
and development opportunities
OPPORTUNITIES:
x Predictability will reduce costs for
applicants
x S&Gs may be used as template in
other CO communities – collaboration
potential, and leadership
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; may create research
and development opportunities
x S&Gs may stimulate a conversation
around existing and future land uses
and compatibility between the two
OPPORTUNITIES:
x Predictability will reduce costs for applicants
x S&Gs may be used as template in other CO
communities
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; leverages funds and
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS
Derived from a TBLAM Brainstorm on
River District and Old Town Historic District Design Guidelines
In Collaboration with Staff from CDNS
Purpose: To extract key triple bottom line information from a TBLAM, and use that information to
offer recommendations on key indicators and suggested action items for the design standards
and guidelines under consideration for the River District & Old Town Historic District.
I. General Observations from TBL Analysis (TBLA):
A. The TBLA exercise was not as well balanced as previous analyses.
B. Many considerations crossed into many columns, but there was little crossing between rows.
1. Crossing columns indicates excellent depth of discussion and debate.
2. Crossing of rows indicates potential for conflicting values.
C. The TBLA indicates many strengths, especially community-centric social strengths.
1. Key items like new building material promotion, added predictability of requirements, use and reuse
of existing structures, and preservation of neighborhood character were repeated across columns.
2. Future opportunities were few, but substantially outweighed the total identified threats.
D. Limitations highlight two critical problems at this stage of the development process, including capital
improvement lag and standards not extending the full breadth of what some professionals expect.
E. Connectivity between this plan, the downtown plan, and the surrounding neighborhoods is critical.
F. Environmental considerations must be expanded through additional analysis.
G. The TBLA brainstorm does not gage existing public engagement, nor does it identify any additional
stakeholders that need to be involved.
II. Conclusions Offered:
A. A multitude of strengths can suggest the TBLA is one-sided and overly optimistic.
1. New stakeholder input will help round out potential limitations and threats.
2. If the total volume of strengths is representative of the merits of the proposed guidelines, then it is
worthy of highlighting right away.
B. The community strengths are skewed to the River District and Old Town Historic Area as currently
captured in the TBLA.
1. Perceptions from and impacts upon the remainder of Fort Collins are not captured in this TBLA.
2. The analysis should be supported by engaging stakeholders outside the affected area before the
strengths of the proposed guidelines can be fully realized on a community basis.
C. Capital projects were a repeated theme, and the success of implementing new guidelines is clearly
connected to those improvements.
1. This interconnectedness suggests a strong need to align with existing master plans, City Plan, and
other capital improvement plans to find collaboration potential and to coordinate multiple efforts.
2. Scheduling of improvements in other departments presents a potential fatal flaw if guidelines are
rolled out predicated upon certain projects being completed within a specified window of time.
III. Potential Key Indicators Suggested:
A. The success of implementing updated guidelines is directly affected by scheduled capital improvements
around the City.
B. Gentrification concerns must be addressed early in the planning process, and before approval by decision-
making authorities.
C. Alignment with existing plans and schedules will substantially reduce limitations and add security to the
future success of guidelines if they are rolled out.
D. New stakeholders outside affected areas (River District and Old Town) must be engaged before the
community strengths suggested by this TBLA can be validated or verified.
1. Critical to success of ultimate project.
2. Provides new stakeholders that can validate the optimistic nature of the current TLBA.
Packet Pg. 274
Attachment2.6: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
1
Old Town Historic District
Design Standards
Project Update
Josh Weinberg
Historic Preservation Planner
City Council Work Session
April 8, 2014
ATTACHMENT 7
Packet Pg. 275
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
2
Area Boundaries
Packet Pg. 276
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
3
Update to Existing Design Standards
Packet Pg. 277
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
4
Project Goals
•Assist evaluation of projects in the historic district.
•Help maintain the special qualities of the area.
•Highlight successful rehabilitation and infill projects.
•Promote sustainable design and preservation.
Packet Pg. 278
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
5
Ca.1980
2013
Ca.1950s
Case Study
Old Fire Station/ City Hall – 232-236 Walnut
Packet Pg. 279
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
6
Case Study – Cont.
J.L. Hohnstein Block – 220 East Mountain
Pre-
1970s
1980
2013
Packet Pg. 280
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
7
2013
1980s 1980s
Case Study - Cont.
The Linden Hotel
Packet Pg. 281
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
8
Technical Guidance
Packet Pg. 282
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
9
Sustainability and Energy Efficiency
Packet Pg. 283
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
10
Standards for Compatible Infill
Packet Pg. 284
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
11
Downtown River District Design
Standards and Guidelines
Staff: Ted Shepard
Packet Pg. 285
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
12
Existing Plans
Packet Pg. 286
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
13
Neighborhood Scale/Connectivity
Packet Pg. 287
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
14
Site Design Guidelines
Packet Pg. 288
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
15
Building Design Guidelines
Packet Pg. 289
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
16
Comparisons of Standards
Packet Pg. 290
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
17
Existing Development Sets the Tone
Packet Pg. 291
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
18
New Development Must…
• Preserve an Overall Sense
of Continuity
• Maintain a Compatible
Scale
• Provide Street-Fronts and
Pedestrian Orientation
• Promote Visual Unity Yet
Allow For Individuality
• Ensure New Construction
Is a Product of Its Own
Time
Packet Pg. 292
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
19
The Road Show
Packet Pg. 293
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
20
Phase III Public Engagement
• Public workshop – April
• Post final draft to website – April
• Ordinance to LPC – May
• Ordinance to P&Z – May
• Council first reading – June 3rd
Packet Pg. 294
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
21
Direction Sought
• Does Council have recommendations for
improving the illustrations, graphic layout, or
content of either document?
• Does Council have other ideas on how best to
preserve the distinctive character of districts as
they continue to attract both new development
and re-development of existing properties?
Packet Pg. 295
Attachment2.7: Powerpoint presentation (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards
DATE:
STAFF:
April 8, 2014
Aaron Iverson, Senior Transportation Planner
Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to update City Council on the status of Midtown in Motion: College Avenue
Transportation Study. Phase I of the project has been completed, which reviewed existing conditions and
established a vision through extensive public outreach. Phase II is underway to develop alternatives based on
results from Phase I and feedback from City Council. Staff invites feedback and direction on proposed ideas for
improving circulation for all modes in Midtown.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback or questions does Council have on the idea of extending frontage roads throughout Midtown,
by expanding the existing frontage roads or by reusing existing lanes on College Avenue?
2. What feedback or questions does Council have on the idea of changing how the frontage roads are
accessed?
3. What feedback or questions does Council have on the idea of protected bike lanes on College Avenue?
4. What feedback or questions does Council have on the idea of a multi-use path adjacent but separated from
College Avenue?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The limits of the Midtown in Motion study are College Avenue from Prospect Road to Harmony Road. The study is
addressing circulation for College Avenue, the adjacent frontage roads, and connections to the MAX Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) stations.
Midtown in Motion is an implementation item stemming from the City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan
(2011) and the Midtown Plan (2013). A project team that includes City staff, Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), residents, and corridor landowners are
studying the following:
- Improving safety for all modes of travel
- Improving frontage road intersections and functionality
- Providing bicycle circulation options (on or near the corridor)
- Improving pedestrian circulation along and across College Avenue
- Ensuring mobility and accessibility for people of all ages and abilities
- Creating a beautiful, identifiable, and unique design
- Identifying funding and building partnerships
- Integrating with CDOT’s planned repaving of College Avenue in 2015.
Packet Pg. 296
April 8, 2014 Page 2
Project Purpose and Need
Although College Avenue is one of the most important north-south roadways in Fort Collins the current
configuration is reflective of an outdated design and operational philosophy. This section of College Avenue is no
longer on the edge of town but is central to Fort Collins. College Avenue lacks the design character and
appearance identified in the Midtown Plan including the following:
- “Transform College Avenue into a multi-modal corridor that is inviting to pedestrians and
bicyclists, while still functioning as a major vehicular arterial for Fort Collins and the region.”
- “Improve access to MAX throughout Midtown.”
- “Improve existing and implement new east-west connections”
- “Streets will be inviting to pedestrians, and public art and civic facilities will be located throughout
the area.”
Improvements to College Avenue are necessary to help achieve the vision identified in the Midtown Plan. This
vision includes improving College Avenue for pedestrians and bicyclists with safe connections to the MAX Bus
Rapid Transit (BRT) service, and a high functioning automobile network. The outcome of the Midtown in Motion
planning effort will be a sustainable preferred design alternative for College Avenue.
Existing Conditions
College Avenue is the busiest street in Fort Collins and has intersections with some of the highest crash rates
citywide. Travel times through the corridor are generally good, and most of the trips using this section of College
Avenue are local trips. Frontage roads exist along portions of the corridor and add complexity at intersections
and driveways. Walking and bicycling within Midtown is neither safe nor convenient, due to lack of facilities. This
includes crossing College Avenue and connections to MAX stations. A detailed summary of existing conditions
can be found in Attachment 1. Additional maps and existing conditions material can be found on the project web
page at <http://www.fcgov.com/advanceplanning/midtowninmotion.php>.
Public Outreach
The project team conducted extensive public and stakeholder outreach to develop the project’s vision and
purpose and need. The process began in October 2013 with a kick-off meeting and corridor tour with the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which includes members from staff and stakeholders including CDOT. The
TAC held a workshop in December to begin visioning for the project. A stakeholder and public workshop was
held in January at the Midtown Arts Center. This seven hour event was coupled with a virtual open house, and
received input from nearly 300 community members. This project was also part of the joint transportation open
house at the Discovery Museum. Results from the on-line questionnaire are included in Attachment 2. To date,
Staff has also presented to the following groups:
- South Fort Collins Business Association
- Transportation Board
- Bicycle Advisory Board
- Planning and Zoning Board
- Senior Advisory Board
- Air Quality Advisory Board
Public outreach will continue through the alternative development process, with additional public open houses,
targeted outreach to the South Fort Collin Business Association, and other neighborhood groups in Midtown.
Triple Bottom Line Analysis
A Triple Bottom Line Analysis was conducted very early in the development of the project. The results of this
effort are included in Attachment 3. Another analysis will be conducted as part of the alternatives screening
Packet Pg. 297
April 8, 2014 Page 3
process (as recommended in the initial analysis), to help inform selection of a preferred alternative. Highlights of
the first analysis include:
Social
- Connections to MAX are important, so College Avenue does not become a barrier
- Potential for providing better mobility for all ages and abilities
- Need to better manage vehicle congestion
Economic
- Increased access and mobility can benefit current and future business
- Improved infrastructure, accessibility, and urban design can help trigger redevelopment
- Potential for improved business visibility
- Cost of implementation is a potential limitation
Environmental
- Potential for increasing bicycling and walking, and potential for reducing auto congestion
- Opportunity for improved landscaping with more sustainable streetscapes
- Potential for mode shift reducing auto trips with air quality benefits
Proposed Options for Improvements
The project team developed some preliminary options for improvements based on extensive public feedback from
questionnaires, open houses, technical committee meetings, stakeholder meetings and multiple board and
commission meetings. Basic infrastructure improvements are needed and are assumed to be part of each of the
options. These improvements include the following:
- Targeted turn lane improvements at major intersections
- Reconfigure travel lanes to have consistent lane configurations for better driver expectation and continuity
- Consolidate access points if possible to reduce conflicts
- Rebuilding medians throughout and update landscaping (similar to the Harmony and College, or Harmony
and Lemay intersections)
- Enhance the parkways with updated landscaping, add parkways where missing
- Improved and updated signing, lighting, and way-finding
- Upgrade and update deficient sidewalks throughout the corridor, including east/west connections to MAX
stations
- Redesign and update signalized intersections to include improved pedestrian crossings (likely similar to the
Harmony and College intersection with free right turn lanes and pedestrian refuge to shorten the crossing
distance)
- Address frontage road configuration by closing at intersections and introduce slip ramps or close and
abandon, and over time redevelop and reuse
Four options were developed for further exploration:
A. The concept of extending and widening frontage roads
B. The concept of extending frontage roads by reusing existing travel lanes
C. The idea of adding protected bike lanes on College Avenue
D. The idea of adding a multi-use path separated but adjacent to College Avenue
Cross-sections for each option are provided in Attachment 4.
Option A: Multi-Way Boulevard: Expanded Access Roads (Attachment 4A)
The College Avenue frontage roads are currently an underutilized asset that present challenging intersection
movements for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. One idea is to embrace the concept of frontage roads for
Packet Pg. 298
April 8, 2014 Page 4
local access, and extend them throughout the corridor, creating a multi-way boulevard. Access to the frontage
roads would also be changed so they would no longer be accessed at intersections but rather by slip ramps on
and off of College Avenue (as shown below in Figure 1).
Figure 1. Schematic of Slip Ramp Concept
Source: Adapted from ITE Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, RP-036A,
2010
Option A addresses this by expanding the corridor footprint to fit frontage roads throughout the corridor. This
option results in a system of local access roads the full length of Midtown, very similar to the existing frontage
roads. They would also include improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as slip ramps for access
(instead of at intersections).
Benefits
- Economic development opportunities
- Separates local traffic from through traffic
- Moves all business access to frontage roads
- Improved urban design opportunities?
Challenges
- Property impacts
- Right of Way constraints
- Business access from through lanes may be more difficult for traffic on inside lanes
Option B: Multi-Way Boulevard: Repurpose Existing Lanes (Attachment 4B)
Option B would repurpose the existing College Avenue lanes to make the current outside lanes into frontage
roads (or local access roads) and keep the two inside lanes as through lanes. This option also results in a system
of local access roads the full length of Midtown, but without major property impacts. This option would also
include improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as slip ramps for access (instead of at intersections).
Benefits
- Economic development opportunities
- Separates local traffic from through traffic
- Moves all business access to frontage roads
- Fewer property impacts
Packet Pg. 299
April 8, 2014 Page 5
Challenges
- Business access from through lanes is more challenging
- Reduction of number of through lanes
- Potential traffic congestion impacts from reducing through lanes.
Option C: Protected Bike Lanes (Attachment 4C)
Creating facilities for safe and convenient bicycling is an important consideration for this corridor, as envisioned
by the Midtown Plan, City Plan and the Transportation Plan.
Option C achieves this by installing protected bicycle lanes on College (a bike lane with a curb or barrier between
the bike lane and traffic lanes).
Benefits
- Barrier between cars and bikes
- Improves business access for those arriving by bicycle
- Safety improvements by reducing unexpected bike maneuvers
- Visibility of bicyclist
Challenges
- Potential for out of the way travel
- Intersection and driveway treatments
- Left turn treatments
- May serve commuter trips better than local trips
Option D: Multi-Use Path (Attachment 4D)
Develop multi-use paths adjacent but separated from College throughout the corridor (in some cases these could
utilize part of existing frontage roads).
Benefits
- High degree of separation from cars
- Accommodates two way travel
- Preferred for use by families and less experienced bicyclist
- Makes optimal use of frontage road network.
Challenges
- Unexpected movements at driveways and intersections
- Potential for additional right-of-way to fully build out
- Potential impacts to existing trees
NEXT STEPS
Based on City Council’s feedback, the team will refine the ideas carried forward into a set of alternatives. These
alternatives will be screened against criteria established in Phase 1 of the project, including the vision, purpose,
and need. A preferred alternative will be finalized and develop to a 10% design level, which will be the roadway
layout shown on aerials, with major features and elements identified. Below is the remaining schedule for the
project.
Packet Pg. 300
April 8, 2014 Page 6
Phase 2: February 2014 to April 2014
- Prepare design alternatives
- Evaluate alternatives based on the following:
- Economic costs and benefits
- Refined sustainability assessment (triple bottom line)
- Multimodal level of service (MMLOS)
Phase 3: May 2014 to Fall 2014
- Select alternative
- Demonstration and public outreach
- Prepare an implementation schedule
- Present alternative(s) to City Council at second work session August 26
- Adoption by City Council Fall 2014
ATTACHMENTS
1. Existing Conditions Summary (PDF)
2. Online Survey Results (PDF)
3. Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF)
4. A B C D Cross-Sections (PDF)
5. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF)
Packet Pg. 301
ATTACHMENT 1
Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study
Summary of Existing Travel Conditions by Mode
Driving
College Avenue is the busiest street in Fort Collins with high traffic volumes and intersections with high
crash rates. Driving conditions including the following:
• 40,000 to 49,000 vehicles per day
• Stable traffic volumes over the past 20 years
• 7 of the top 25 worst crash intersections (in terms of excess crash costs)
• Speed limit is 40 miles per hour (MPH)
• The average travel speed is between 25 and 30 MPH, taking about 7 minutes to go from one end of
the corridor to the other (Harmony to Prospect)
• Only 20% of the motor vehicle trips on College Avenue are through trips
• 80% are trips making stops within Midtown, turning off at some point or end up coming back the
same way
Frontage Roads
There are just over 1.5 miles of frontage roads adjacent to College Avenue within the study area. This
includes 13 frontage road intersections with east/west cross streets or driveways. These frontage road
intersections add complex turning movements close to College Avenue and can be difficult to navigate.
Access and use of the frontage roads varies from residential with multiple driveways to commercial
with limited driveway or business access.
Walking
Walking is unpleasant in Midtown along College Avenue. Sidewalks are missing, in poor condition and
often immediately adjacent to traffic on College Avenue. In this 3 mile corridor, when both sides of the
street are included, there are about 4.6 miles of sidewalks (after street crossings and driveways are
subtracted). The conditions of those sidewalks are as follows:
• 3% (0.21 miles) of sidewalks are missing
• 81% (3.7 miles) are in poor or fair condition (in terms of surface quality and width)
• 61% (2.8 miles) are less than 7 feet wide (City standards for Arterial sidewalks is 7 feet minimum)
• 44% (2 miles) of sidewalks are attached (no buffer from traffic)
• 45% (2.1 miles) of sidewalks are not compliant with American with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards,
which means the width is too narrow or the pavement is in poor condition
• 33% of curb ramps are missing
• 74% of existing curb ramps are not ADA, which means the slopes are too steep, there is not enough
maneuvering space or the pavement is in poor condition
Crossing College Avenue on foot can be difficult and at the very least intimidating. Each signalized
intersections has crosswalks and pedestrian signals, which are timed to allow enough time for a
pedestrian to cross. Pedestrian crossings can impact traffic signal timing and progression of traffic,
particularly at peak travel times. At major intersections, when turn lanes are present, this can mean
walking across as many as nine lanes of traffic. One bicycle / pedestrian tunnel under College exists at
the Spring Creek Trail just north of Spring Park Drive.
Packet Pg. 302
Attachment3.1: Existing Conditions Summary (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
ATTACHMENT 1
Summary of Existing Travel Conditions by Mode
Bicycling
Bicycles are currently prohibited from riding on College Avenue. During field reviews and audits the
project team observed numerous bicyclists riding within the corridor.
• Bicyclist are riding on sidewalks and where available on frontage roads
• Existing sidewalks are deficient and not conducive to safe bicycling or walking
• Bicyclists were still observed riding on College Avenue
• Gaps in the east/west bicycle network (missing bike lanes) approaching and crossing College
Avenue, at Prospect Road, Drake Road, Horsetooth Road, Foothills Parkway and Troutman Parkway
• Commuter bicyclists have great options parallel to College Avenue including the Mason Trail and
Remington Street
• Bicyclists wishing to access uses (shop, live, work, play) within the Midtown have no safe or
convenient options.
Connections to MAX
The east/west sidewalk conditions are important for making safe and convenient connections from
College to the MAX stations. The project team analyzed the sidewalk conditions on the major east/west
streets (those with a signal) between College and the MAX corridor.
• A third of those east/west sidewalks are not ADA compliant,
• Over 70% are rated in fair or poor condition,
• 84% are attached (no buffer from traffic), and
• 68% are less than 6 feet wide (55% are less than 5 feet wide)
Packet Pg. 303
Attachment3.1: Existing Conditions Summary (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Survey: Midtown in Motion - Survey #1
Value Count Percent %
Strongly Agree 72 43.6%
Agree 59 35.8%
Undecided 24 14.6%
Disagree 10 6.1%
Strongly Disagree 0 0.0%
Statistics
Total Responses 165
Summary Report - Feb 13, 2014
1. It needs sidewalk improvements.
1. It needs sidewalk improvements.
Strongly Agree 43.6%
Agree 35.8%
Undecided 14.6%
Disagree 6.1%
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 304
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Value Count Percent %
Strongly Agree 112 68.3%
Agree 22 13.4%
Undecided 9 5.5%
Disagree 14 8.5%
Strongly Disagree 7 4.3%
Statistics
Total Responses 164
2. It needs to safely integrate bikes into the corridor.
2. It needs to safely integrate bikes into the corridor.
Strongly Agree 68.3%
Agree 13.4%
Undecided 5.5%
Disagree 8.5%
Strongly Disagree 4.3%
Packet Pg. 305
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Value Count Percent %
Strongly Agree 38 22.9%
Agree 48 28.9%
Undecided 41 24.7%
Disagree 29 17.5%
Strongly Disagree 10 6.0%
Statistics
Total Responses 166
3. It needs to reduce travel time for cars.
3. It needs to reduce travel time for cars.
Strongly Agree 22.9%
Agree 28.9%
Undecided 24.7%
Disagree 17.5%
Strongly Disagree 6%
Packet Pg. 306
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Value Count Percent %
Strongly Agree 61 37.0%
Agree 73 44.2%
Undecided 20 12.1%
Disagree 9 5.5%
Strongly Disagree 2 1.2%
Statistics
Total Responses 165
4. It needs upgraded character and appearance improvements.
4. It needs upgraded character and appearance improvements.
Strongly Agree 37%
Agree 44.2%
Undecided 12.1%
Disagree 5.5%
Strongly Disagree 1.2%
Packet Pg. 307
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Value Count Percent %
Strongly Agree 1 0.6%
Agree 3 1.8%
Undecided 12 7.3%
Disagree 83 50.3%
Strongly Disagree 66 40.0%
Statistics
Total Responses 165
5. Its fine the way it is. Don't change anything.
5. Its fine the way it is. Don't change anything.
Strongly Agree 0.6%
Agree 1.8%
Undecided 7.3%
Disagree 50.3%
Strongly Disagree 40%
Packet Pg. 308
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
6. Please share any other comments
Count Response
1 Bicycling should be allowed and encouraged on College.
1 Check out the new book "Bikenomics" by Elly Blue for some awesome ideas!
1 College is terrifying to walk or ride along the sidewalks. It is very unwelcoming.
1 Currently a no-pedestrian, no-bike zone.
1 Focus on safe biking. In an ideal world I would make it a pedestrian only zone.
1 More trees, boulevards and safe biking routes would be preferable.
1 Needs a pedestrian walk and bike overpass over prospect by the new housing development
1 North College needs the most work.
1 Only city or developer funds should be used to pay for projects. TIF funds should not be used!!!
1 Promote less congestion by encouraging bikes.
1 The corner of College and Drake needs improvement for the rapid transit.
1 The sidewalks need to be widened enough to include protected bike lanes from the car traffic.
1 There are some sidewalks missing, specially near the Foothills Mall and in front of Whole Foods.
1 Why are bikes prohibited from Laurel to Harmony?
1 cohesive "feel" and character for the region is important to attract businesses and consumers by creating focal points,
pedestrian friendly corridors, without eliminating the Old Town concept. Should integrate as an addition or a way to
augment the existing culture of Fort Collins.
1 I cycle daily all over the city. When you are planning street or transit updates, there needs to be much better project
planning performed. (I'm a PM). The length of time of the Spring Creek Trail disruption and detour to Drake was
inexcusable. I spoke with the work crew in July and again in Aug., and was assured that by the end of Aug/Labor Day it
would be completed. Yes, we had the floods in Sept. but we then spent Sept., Oct., Nov, Dec. and finally the beginning of
2014 before we could access it again. That's extremely poor planning and contingency planning. From living in Portland
and outside of Davis, especially for a city priding itself on cycling, that's inexcusable.
1 I think the arterials on the east/west side of college should be studied as one way streets to make it easier for
cars/bikes looking to use these. It is important to remember that the vehicle is an very important part of this portion of
town and not to try to make it less car friendly while making improvements.
1 A rather ugly street. It would be great if the businesses would show some pride and upgrade their look. I am NOT in
favor of using TIF tax money to fix it. Needs to be City money & private sector. We can't keep taking from other taxing
entities.
1 It needs better pedestrian crossings. I don't know if it's possible, but lowering parts of college and providing raised
crossing may help.
1 function is far more important than a good appearance, this should be the first priority, then appearnace
1 Bicycles have plenty of north-south alternatives to College...Remington, Mason trail, Stover. I would like to see wider
sidewalks for pedestrians, better pedestrian refuges, better ramps and beautification.
1 I'm a bicyclist and I support NOT having bicycle facilities on College. There are easy alternatives (Mason Trail for
example). Improving travel time for cars would definitely be a worthwhile effort.
1 My only objections to the current plans are building heights and closeness to street. A "canyon effect" down College Ave
is undesirable. The Summitt seems to be universally reviled for its appearance and looming presence. Hopefully the
powers that be in the city have learned from that fiasco. The university after all has it's"front lawn" which is aesthetically
pleasing, although the administration is determined to ruin the appearance of midtown with its stadium.
1 There are areas of College that are fine, however some places come to mind with respect to sidewalks, like the very
narrow ones from Rutgers north past Dairy Queen. I would prefer cyclists travelling north-south remain on either the
Mason Trail or Remington St. Timing of traffic lights needs significant improvement (for example, I often sit at a red light,
and when it turns green, the next light turns red. Not very fast or environmentally friendly
1 As we drove north on College yesterday my teenage daughters commented on how ugly College is. They asked me
why all the buildings look like they don't belong together. There's definitely a mish-mash feeling and renewed
infrastructure would be a good beginning toward improving the over all look of the area.
1 No more sky scrappers like the summit and mall residences. What is a "world class street" and why do we need one?
We don't need tourists crusing College Ave creating congestion and polution.
1 It needs lower speed limits and more strongly enforced speed violations. Very aggressive drivers weave in and out
Packet Pg. 309
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
1 It needs lower speed limits and more strongly enforced speed violations. Very aggressive drivers weave in and out
trying to "one up" other drivers.
1 College Avenue north of Laport St. used to be virtually inaccessible to me. The recent improvements are huge and the
north King Soopers is now my favorite grocery store. I moved to Ft. Collins for college in '98 and have never owned a
car. My bike is my primary means of transport. Part of the reason I settled here after college (vs. my hometown Denver)
is how bike-friendly the town was. Since then, it's gotten even better, but there is room for improvement. For example,
getting from Old Town to Harmony & College (I frequent the Goodwill down there) involves a hodgepodge of different
roads along the way. The Mason corridor, when finished, should alleviate the problem, but it's still not perfect. If south
College had been designed like north College is being designed now (with a wide, continuous sidewalk that's safely
separated from the street) it would be a nice trip down south. It would make it a lot easier to stop by different shops
along the way, which is currently a pain when you're on the bike path 1/4 mile west of College. I like to browse the stores
along College, but when I'm on that bike path a lot of them feel more out of the way. Going from store to store is like
extreme off-roading since the sidewalks on south College are so bad. Where they do exist, many sidewalks are uneven,
skinny, have extremely tight turns, have hanging tree-branches in your way, and need "curb cuts" from the street. I've
also risked my life too many times getting onto College ave. to cross that bridge just north of the former 3 Margaritas.
The whole mall area is awkward on College, to say the least. I would gladly waste many a summer Saturday cruising
my bike up and down south College, getting lunch at Whole Foods, heading down to Big Lots and stopping by Full Cycle
and KMart along the way, but crummy infrastructure makes that ride much less appealing.
1 We cannot continue to expand and engineer roads to keep up with growth predictions. Instead we must increase the
use of public transportation -- beyond the capacity of MAX. Suggest we start by increasing bus runs along harmony,
hoorsetooth and lemay so that buses arrive every 10 min. To accomplish dedicate one of the existing two lanes to
buses. This means buses don't get impeded by traffic and use of public transportation will be seen as the faster more
expedient choice and ridership will increase. This results in less cars on the main roads that feed into College, which
means less congestion on college.
1 Integrating bike lanes would be great! Hate to drive my car to Old Town. MAX will help but love to cycle instead on
College. Thank you!
1 College Ave. certainly needs to be repaved, especially in locations south of CSU. A bikeway concurrent with the Mason
St. corridor might make more sense, as bicyclists only have to worry about bus lines and the trains instead of heavy
traffic. However, travelers will still use College Ave. for bicycling if the means are there.
1 I strongly agree with integrating bike traffic into the College Ave. corridor, but I'm certainly not advocating adding on-
street bike lanes. I'm an experienced bike commuter, but I wouldn't consider riding with that kind of traffic. It's a real
shame that the railroad tracks restrict access to College from the Mason Trail, but the underpass at Troutman and the
coming overpass near Whole Foods are real improvements. It's too bad we don't have a continuous road with good
bike lines like McClelland drive over on the east side of College. The frontage road is great, in the places where it exists.
Where the frontage road doesn't exist, mid-block north and south travel is more difficult, particularly on the East side of
College.
1 As a midtown business owner, I am VERY concerned about the HUGE amounts of traffic the redeveloped mall and
Square will bring to the already highly-congested College Ave. This concern is causing me to consider moving my
business to the outskirts or out of the city altogether.
1 Fort Collins is a better than average city. In my opinion, becoming world class requires more equitable use of available
transportation monies, much improved walkability, and beautiful, human scale venues. Currently, the vast majority of
our streetscapes, including midtown College Ave, display a love of cars, not people.
1 Bicycles on the west side of College at least have the Mason Street Corridor. However, bicyclists on the east side of
College have to wind through many residential streets in order to go from north to south or vice-versa. Perhaps
sidewalk improvements would at least provide safe bicycle driving on the east side of College Avenue.
1 Make it a toll way for cars and free for bikes. Driving a car around town when you could just as easily ride a bike (all
year round even!) is silly and should be discouraged.
1 There needs to be a person/dept in the city that takes ownership of this project. The Summit complex is HORRIBLE
looking and WHO approved that design. Is this the design that you want to start the renovation of Midtown?
1 My comment on bikes relates to the fact that College Avenue itself should not promote bike travel on that roadway.
Bikes could be on adjacent roads or the MAX corridor.
1 traffic is always terrible. Especially south of prospect all the way to harmony. i avoid it at all costs which means those
businesses are losing out. I know i'm not the only one who does this either.
1 Impacts to traffic in and through neighborhoods should be considered when planning changes to the corridor.
1 College Ave lacks a consistent sense of style or planning The ugliness of the businesses really startled me me when I
first moved here because of the contrast to the majority of the City. The new student housing near DQ has exacerbated
this - the style is quite a discordant note and not particularly attractive. It would be great if the City could get businesses
Packet Pg. 310
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
to commit to moving towards a consistent vision. Obviously, this would take time. The City could facilitate and
coordinate, set standards, and perhaps put some City funds towards it. I do not support taking money from the county,
schools and special districts (TIF) and putting it towards this project, as was done for the mall. The community needs
the services provided by those entities more than a pretty street.
1 bikes have enough places, the sidewalks aren't good enough for pedestrians esp since this is a bus route. also need
better sidewalks on prospect and drake near college!!
1 A strong pedestrian and bicycle plan will make the corridor much more economically viable and attractive. Fort Collins
has a chance to do something that many cities won't do.
1 College avenue is also highway 287. As a highway people expect to be able to travel quickly. Bicycles and fast travel do
not mix well. Bicycles should be routed on the Mason street corridor and trail instead of College and Remington street
should be improved for bicycles as an alternative to College/287.
1 The mason road bike trail needs to go all the way downtown to avoid the cut over to Remington at prospect.
1 Bikes on college is too dangerous. It is already hard to keep your eyes on the road, people pulling out from parking
spots and jay walkers.
1 College Ave should have a consistent look & feel in terms of street scape, street lights, sidewalks etc. from Harmony
Road to Olive Street
1 College Ave. should be unlike anything else in Colorado. I would like to see wide sidewalks, protected bike lanes on
east/west streets, generous medians to help calm traffic and give the corridor a unified look. Make it a street people see
as a destination like College is through Old Town.
1 Bicycles are a Very Small portion of the population. Most of us are making more than one stop along College Ave and
a automobile is necessary for business and family pickups and drop off. The city of Fort Collins needs to drop all their
political ties and start working for the citizens. Forget the International Community stuff and start working for us. Bicycles
are not that important!
1 Why all the mid town all of a sudden Mulberry south to Prospect was called mid town just a few years ago. Still
neglected and in need of same improvements Why not add this area to scope
1 The Most important thing to be done, is to implement Scramble zones, where all traffic comes to a stop, and allows for
safe passage for pedestrians, joggers, skateboarders, cyclists and such to cross this street. 20 seconds of safe, is
worth Soo much more than allowing traffic to flow, and continue to hit cyclists, and pedestrians. Please, for the love of
life, stop all traffic, and allow the kids to walk safely without the Right on Red dangers. Use the pedestrian wants to
cross button, and allow the people to be safe, Please. Josh Kerson, Former BAC Chair. Questions? 970-305-0784.
thank you.
1 With the introduction of the BRT on Mason, the emphasis on bicyling and pedestrians; I feel that it should be OK to
accept a lower level of service on College Avenue and even embrace more congestion. Allow the alternatives in place
and coming on line to work while improving the aesthetics and gateway opportunities to the city that College Avenue
offers; treat it as a parkway and improve on that idea from the small segments that realize it. Improve the east-west
access to the avenue with better connectivity.
1 I would like to see some Midtown "branding" at the entrances(at Prospect and at Harmony) and art in public places
along the Midtown Corridor.
1 the stop lights seem to be unsynchronized, which makes traveling on college avenue very time consuming.
1 I actually think the best place for bikes in this corridor is off of College Avenue itself and on the parallel Remington Street
and/or Mason corridors. Wayfinding to these parallel routes is critical. I think other major considerations for Midtown
road improvements need to be storm drainage (at College/Prospect especially) and improving visibility and flow of the
College/Columbia Road intersection. The east/west Columbia intersection is really tricky due to the frontage road, grade
change, and confusing laneage.
1 Obviously, anyone East of College Ave will need to cross it to use the MAX. A lot needs to be done to make crossing
College (especially on streets with MAX stations) feel safe.
1 The street itself needs to be redone. As cyclists we cross often on Swallow, Troutman, and Horsetooth and it is
dangerous. Also as motorist the street is in bad shape.
1 Too many run down car dealerships, stores, banks, and dying restaurants. The lights are all poorly timed, all the right
turns lack a dedicated turn lane, and with no other north/south option nearby it is overcrowded. Also, the red lights
cameras are dangerous
1 it's not the only area that needs upgrades. isn't max already improving that same route? what about east/west routes
such as harmony? why aren't we connecting the rest of the city to max like we were promised?
1 This survey was a bit too vague regarding the general area of College Ave that it was referring to. It is a pretty long
street.
Packet Pg. 311
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
1 Improve interface between buildings and sidewalks so that it's easy and safe to access buildings while minimizing the
need to walk through parking lots.
1 Slow traffic, integrate active transportation, make it easier to cross on bike or foot (more distinct crosswalks).
1 Better timing of the lights. Less congested access points for businesses. Limit numbers or facilitate entry/exit of cars.
1 Add a physically separated bike lane from cars (e.g. A physical barrier between bike and car lanes).
1 Why not take care of the streets that are never resurfaced? If we have that much money, maybe citizens and
businesses are over taxed!
1 A bike lane should be added such that bicycles can easily visit businesses that are located on College Avenue
(especially on the east side). By eliminating one lane of traffic you would encourage bicycling and the use of Max.
1 Great idea! Let's put the kind of emphasis on College Avenue that fits the image we all want to have of Fort Collins.
1 There are no safe biking routes for College Ave (midtown). And it is VERY dangerous when riders bike on the sidewalks.
We would benefit from a bike lane or better access from the Poudre trail to the shops on College. Thanks for listening! :)
1 I really dislike the frontage road that is so close to College. For an example of what I don't like, if I'm on the frontage
road southbound at Harvard, and want to get on southbound College, I have to look for traffic from about 6 directions.
By the time I've checked them all, a car may have shown up in the first place I checked, so I need to check again. Repeat
indefinitely.
1 The city really needs to invest in non-grade crossings of major arterial streets for pedestrians and bicyclists.
1 It's hard to answer these questions because I don't know what part of College Ave. you are addressing.
1 As the "main" north-south street in Fort Collins, College Ave jams up a lot. I don't know if more lanes would be helpful,
but perhaps modest improvements to features like dedicated turn lanes could improve traffic flow. The pavement is
pretty choppy, and unpleasant for smaller vehicles including bikes. Accommodations for cyclists on College may not be
necessary if the service roads can serve bicycles. As a bicyclist, I am nervous about riding on College even on the best
sections, simply due to the volume and speed of cars, so bicycle traffic may not need to be on College itself. I often
bicycle on Mason, for example, rather than College.
1 I wouldn't complain if the decision were to keep bikes banned from College (as long as it's the only restricted road), but
it really needs better accommodations for crossing--underpasses, overpasses, pedestrian-activated lights at more
frequent intervals, or whatever method is determined to make it safer for non-car traffic. It's frankly terrifying at many
points as it is now.
1 Sidewalks too narrow, too close, routinely covered with ice and slush plowed off the street. Especially bad on west side
from Dairy Queen to Whole Foods.
1 I am a strong biking advocate but do not believe that bikes belong in College Ave traffic. This particular road is better
suited to cars with the focus put on good alternative North/South biking options near by.
1 Business access for bicyclist and pedestrians from MAX should be the priority. Currently you can get close to
businesses using many bicycle ways but it is hard to easily get to the businesses. It is also difficult for pedestrians and
bicycles to cross College at the many busy intersections. Bridges/Underpasses would help but also having islands large
enough for pedestrians and bicycles to stop upon midway through crossing the street at signals.
1 The downtown corridor needs to be completely redesigned to improve the safe flow of cars, bikes and pedestrians.
College Ave in the Downtown area--at least between Laurel and Cherry--should include a bicycle lane on each side of
the street just inside from the existing sidewalk. The diagonal, storefront parking should be removed from these
locations. Ideally the car lanes should be reduced from four lanes, to two, to slow traffic. Another option, in order to fit in
bike lanes, would be to change the curbside parking from diagonal to parallel, as it is much of the way on the West side
of the street between Olive and Laurel. There is a real problem with cyclist on the sidewalk along College. Bike lanes
separated from the sidewalk and protected from traffic would hopefully reduce this problem. It would also increase the
availability to access these areas by bicycle with increased, integrated bicycle parking (just look at the bold move of
Equinox Brewery. They have vastly increased customer parking, by giving up car parking for bicycle parking).
1 Speaking from a pedestrian-bike user, it would be very helpful if there were decent connections between the different
areas/shopping/parking lots. There are barriers in several places that force us to use the sidewalks directly adjacent to
College Ave. The sidewalk is very unpleasant during good weather and become totally miserable when they are blocked
by snow or sprayed by cars.
1 Changes to North College are a good start. Safe bike routes would be a priority, especially considering mobile home
park traffic.
1 Pedestrian and bicycle traffic seems to be an after thought on College Ave. It needs drastic improvements in these
areas.
Packet Pg. 312
Attachment3.2: Online Survey Results (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS
Derived from a TBLAM Brainstorm on
FC MOVES COLLEGE AVE CORRIDOR PLAN
In Collaboration with the FC Moves
Purpose: To extract key triple bottom line information from a TBLAM, and use that information to
offer recommendations on key indicators and suggested action items for the College Ave.
Corridor Plan at FC Moves.
I. General Observations from TBL Analysis Map (TBLAM):
A. The TBLAM was well balanced with ample strengths and limitations identified.
B. Many considerations crossed into many columns, and rows.
1. Crossing columns indicates excellent depth of discussion and debate.
2. Crossing of rows indicates potential for conflicting values.
C. More data and expertise is needed from Environmental Services personnel.
1. Not intended, but very clear during the TBLAM Process
D. Limitations show a primary cross-cutting concern involving the CDOT process for US 287.
E. Threats should be further explored and contain more information on community and traffic growth.
F. Mason Corridor MAX has a strong presence on the TBLAM.
G. Foothills Mall redevelopment has a strong presence on the TBLAM.
II. Conclusions Offered:
A. Need to refine TBLAM again in phases; re-TBLAM.
1. Project is large-scale and would benefit from a re-TBLAM ahead of critical phases.
B. Need to engage other stakeholders in the re-TBLAM process.
1. Add CDOT, Environmental Services, Commission on Disabilities, Chamber of Commerce, South FC
Business Association
2. Look for others, including student population.
3. Provide a ½-page briefing as a read-before packet on goals, objectives, and needs.
C. Clarity should be offered in the AIS as to where TBL discussions occurred.
1. “At these stages we brainstormed at the TBL level”
2. Show some project flow and iteration, and re-iteration for re-TBLAM.
3. Make TBL part of your regular communication plan.
4. Connection to the Mason Corridor MAX needs to be clarified to the public in a separate analysis.
5. Integration into the Mall should be clarified in a separate analysis.
III. Potential Key Indicators Suggested:
A. Limitations discussion suggests new stakeholders must be involved in TBLAM process right away.
1. If not now, let’s get them to the table soon as stakeholders.
2. Need to be sensitive to conflicting values of potential stakeholders and facilitate accordingly.
B. Re-TBLAM on a phased-schedule basis.
1. Include this process in a communication plan & public engagement plan.
2. Must determine how to sell the vision, not the details.
a. Focus on community strengths that are non-quantifiable.
b. Get a good sales pitch, and coordinate with CPIO to message to the public.
C. Provide Transportation Study information and calculations to address current and future traffic trends.
1. Multi-modal corridor needs to identify key challenges.
2. Connection to the Mason Corridor should be front and center.
D. Post-TBLAM review environmental suggestions warrant detailed meetings and coordination directly with
Environmental Services staff.
E. Question for FC Moves – please return any feedback to the TBL Team.
1. Was this useful? Did this help?
2. What came from the discussion? How will you use this?
3. How could the TBL brainstorm be improved?
4. Would you like the TBL Team involved in any future TBLAMs for this project?
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 313
Attachment3.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Form Completed July 29, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM)
Project or Decision:
College Ave Corridor for FC Moves – long range
transportation plan for College Ave.,for
redevelopment and transportation infrastructure
updates; bike access, medians, traffic function, etc.
Evaluated by: Staff from FC Moves
and TBL Team
Social Environmental Economic
Community
STRENGTHS:
x The corridor plan will affect everyone passing through mid-
Town FC.
x Crosses Spring Creek and connects people with the env.
Corridor.
x Some aging infrastructure problems can be resolved with
upgrades.
x Will better align the viewsheds in mid-town with Old-town.
x Connects to the Mason Corridor MAX.
x Business visibility can be enhanced by reformatting frontage
roads and offset intersections.
x Transitions from a short term plan to a longer term plan
x Increased job creation potential.
x Fits in well with existing projects (i.e. Mall redevelopment,
Mason Corridor MAX).
x Aesthetically pleasing.
x Provides LID demonstration and R&D areas.
STRENGTHS:
x Trading off vehicular mobility for parking space and retail space,
and for alternative transportation vehicles.
x Some aging infrastructure problems can be resolved with
upgrades.
x Connecting College with Mason Corridor will reduce total vehicle
miles.
x Reduced congestion should reduce air quality impacts and carbon
output per vehicle.
x Aesthetically pleasing (urban canopy opps in the median and
adjacent areas).
x Provides LID demonstration and R&D areas.
x Enhanced bike/ped access will reduce carbon emissions.
x Enhanced construction methods can reduce emissions created by
heavy equipment
STRENGTHS:
x Increased access & mobility can benefit current businesses.
x Increased access & mobility can trigger beneficial
redevelopment opportunities.
x Constrained corridor will be rebalanced with alternative
transportation.
x Connects to the Mason Corridor MAX funding and function.
x Will kick off other econ. catalysts (sustainable use of land).
x Business visibility can be enhanced by reformatting frontage
roads and offset intersections.
x SFCBA – will be able to engage in marketing and branding
x Increased job creation potential.
x Fits in well with existing projects (i.e. Mall redevelopment,
Mason Corridor MAX).
x Opp. to increase public safety with better transportation flow.
LIMITATIONS:
x Affects too big or small an area of town.
Form Completed July 29, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
OPPORTUNITIES:
x Crosses Spring Creek and connects people with the env.
Corridor.
x Will kick off other econ. Catalysts (sust. Use of land).
x Planning process can create a modal shift (internal capture) –
redev into mixed use encourages some to walk or ride to work,
saving trips and reducing vehicle traffic.
x Provide better mobility to people with disabilities and low to
moderate income.
x SFCBA – will be able to engage in marketing and branding.
x Opp. to increase public safety with better transportation flow.
OPPORTUNITIES:
x Crosses Spring Creek, and provides an opp. to reconnect with the
SpCk corridor (and others).
x Will kick off other econ. Catalysts (sust. Use of land).
OPPORTUNITIES:
x Constrained corridor will be rebalanced with alternative
transportation.
x Planning process can create a modal shift (internal
capture) – redev into mixed use encourages some to walk
or ride to work, saving trips and reducing vehicle traffic.
x Provide better mobility to people with disabilities and low
to moderate income.
x Provides a chance to be creative with other public
financing opportunities.
THREATS:
x
THREATS:
x Sensitive environmental resources could be harmed if not
appropriately accommodated .
THREATS:
x Sends more traffic to Old Town, where congestion is already
a problem.
x SFCBA – will be able to engage in marketing and branding.
NOTES:
dd,D Edϯ
Packet Pg. 315
Attachment3.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
Option A: Multi-Way Boulevard: Expanded Access Roads
Overall Option Analysis Chart
Local Access Median
Road
(11’ travel -
8’ parking)
11’ 11’
Parkway Travel Lanes
11’ 11’ 11’
Travel Lanes
Pedestrian 14’ 11’
Zone
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
Pedestrian
Zone
Future Commercial
Future Commercial
10’
Parkway
19’ 10’
Local Access
Road
(11’ travel -
8’ parking)
12’ 19’
Multi-Use
Path
12’
Multi-Use
Path
162’
Local Access
Roads
Total
Travel
Lanes
Center Medians
Posted
Speed
Aux. Lanes Bikes Flow Line
Mid-block
crossing
Enhanced
Ped Zones
On-street
parking
Adjacent land
use "front door"
Yes - closed at
intersection
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
Option B: Multi-Way Boulevard: Repurpose Existing Lanes
Overall Option Analysis Chart
Median
11’ 11’
Planting Travel Lanes
Strip
11’
Travel Lanes
Pedestrian 14’ 11’
Zone
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelopand new buildings front
College Ave.
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelopand new buildings front
College Ave.
Pedestrian
Zone
Future Commercial
Future Commercial
10’
Planting
Strip
10’
Drive
Lane
11’
Drive
Lane
12’ 11’
Multi-Use
Path
12’
Multi-Use
Path
8’
Parking
8’
Parking
140’
Local Access
Roads
Total
Travel
Lanes
Center Medians
Posted
Speed
Aux. Lanes Bikes Flow Line
Mid-block
crossing
Enhanced
Ped Zones
On-street
parking
Adjacent land
use "front door"
Yes - closed at
Option C: Protected Bike Lanes
Overall Option Analysis Chart
Median
11’ 11’
Travel Lanes
11’ 11’ 11’
Travel Lanes
Pedestrian 20’ 11’
Zone
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
couldl be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
couldl be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
Pedestrian
Zone
Future Commercial
Future Commercial
7’ 3’ 3’
Sidewalk
7’
Sidewalk
10’
Parkway
10’
Parkway
140’
Local Access
Roads
Total
Travel
Lanes
Center Medians
Posted
Speed
Aux. Lanes Bikes Flow Line
Mid-block
crossing
Enhanced
Ped Zones
On-street
parking
Adjacent land
use "front door"
Yes - closed at
intersection
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Remain
Multi-Use Path
(MUP)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, local
Option D: Multi-Use Path
Overall Option Analysis Chart
Median
11’ 11’
Travel Lanes
11’ 11’ 11’
Travel Lanes
Pedestrian 20’ 11’
Zone
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
NOTE: Pedestrian Amenity Zone
could be installed as properties
redevelop and new buildings front
College Ave.
Pedestrian
Zone
Future Commercial
Future Commercial
12’
Multi-Use
Path
12’
Multi-Use
Path
10’
Parkway
10’
Parkway
130’
Local Access
Roads
Total
Travel
Lanes
Center Medians
Posted
Speed
Aux. Lanes Bikes Flow Line
Mid-block
crossing
Enhanced
Ped Zones
On-street
parking
Adjacent land
use "front door"
Option A:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Expanded
Yes - closed at
intersection
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Remain
Multi-Use Path
City Council Work Session
April 8, 2014
ATTACHMENT 5
Packet Pg. 320
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
2
QUESTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL
1. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of extending frontage roads throughout Midtown, by
expanding the existing frontage roads or by reusing
existing lanes on College Avenue?
2. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of changing how the frontage roads are accessed?
3. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of protected bike lanes on College Avenue?
4. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of a multi-use path adjacent but separated from
College Avenue?
Packet Pg. 321
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
3
Safer for all modes of travel
Strengthened bicycle and pedestrian
connections to MAX
Universal designs for all ages and all
abilities
Create a well functioning high quality
and attractive street
Project Goals
Packet Pg. 322
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
4
Existing character is not
consistent with the
Midtown Plan vision which
includes:
- High quality streetscape
and area identity
- Bike friendly
- Walkable
- Improved way-finding
Character
Packet Pg. 323
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
5
College Avenue is used
primarily for local trips
with
- only 20% pass through
trips
- nearly 50,000 vehicles
everyday
- several high accident
intersections
- congestion during peak
travel times
Driving
Packet Pg. 324
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
6
Walking College Avenue is
an unpleasant experience
due to:
- Missing, narrow and
disconnected sidewalks
- forced to walk close to
traffic
- lack of walking
connections to
businesses and
neighborhoods
Walking
Packet Pg. 325
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
7
Despite the bicycling
prohibition on College
Avenue, bicyclists are
everywhere:
- On sidewalks
- Using frontage roads
- For everyday trips
Bicycling
Packet Pg. 326
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
8
Oct 2013
• Technical Committee Kickoff
• Corridor Tour
Dec 2013
• Technical Committee Workshop
#1
Jan 2014
• Stakeholder & Public Workshop
March 2014
• Technical Committee Workshop
#2
Jan – March 2014
• Numerous Board & Commissions
Participant Summary to Date
Packet Pg. 327
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
9
Majority of respondents strongly
agree or agree it should change to:
• be safer (94%)
• improve sidewalks (90%)
• improve appearance (77%)
• improve bicycling conditions (76%)
• to address the Midtown vision (74%)
Why Change College Avenue?
Packet Pg. 328
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
10
Majority of respondents strongly
agree or agree to avoid failure this
plan needs to:
• result in a safer road (88%)
• be multimodal (75%)
• address congestion (72%)
• take action (60%)
How do we avoid failure?
Packet Pg. 329
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
11
Majority of respondents strongly
agree or agree on these features:
• fix missing sidewalks (100%)
• balance needs of all users (88%)
• integrate bicycles (78%)
• improve frontage roads (57%)
How do we complete the street?
Packet Pg. 330
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
12
Multimodal
updates are
necessary to
support the land
use and
transportation
changes occurring
in the corridor.
Purpose and Need Statements
Packet Pg. 331
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
13
The corridor needs
safe connections to
the citywide
pedestrian, bicycle,
MAX, and
automobile network.
Purpose and Need Statements
Packet Pg. 332
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
14
College Avenue is
the most important
north/south
roadway in Fort
Collins but is not
attractive and lacks
the quality the
corridor deserves
and the community
desires.
Purpose and Need Statements
Packet Pg. 333
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
15
Functional Improvements
Frontage Roads
Streetscape Improvements
Bicycling Improvements
Walking and
Connections to MAX
Proposed Ideas
Intersections, lane configurations, access
points
Closed at intersections, expand or close
for redevelopment
Medians, parkways, signing, lighting and
way-finding
Protected bike lanes or multi-use paths
Update and fix sidewalks, improve
pedestrian crossings across College Ave.
Packet Pg. 334
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
16
OPTION A: Multi-Way Blvd: Expanded
Packet Pg. 335
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
17
OPTION B: Multi-Way Blvd: Reuse Lanes
Packet Pg. 336
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
18
Examples of Multi-Way Boulevards
Packet Pg. 337
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
19
Examples of Multi-Way Boulevards
Packet Pg. 338
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
20
Examples of Multi-Way Boulevards
Packet Pg. 339
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
21
Examples of Multi-Way Boulevards
Packet Pg. 340
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
22
Examples of Multi-Way Boulevards
Packet Pg. 341
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
23
OPTION C: Protected Bike Lanes
Packet Pg. 342
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
24
Examples of Protected Bike Lanes
Packet Pg. 343
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
25
Examples of Protected Bike Lanes
Packet Pg. 344
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
26
Examples of Protected Bike Lanes
Packet Pg. 345
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
27
OPTION D: Multi-Use Paths
Packet Pg. 346
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
28
Examples of Multi-Use Path
Packet Pg. 347
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
29
Examples of Multi-Use Path
Packet Pg. 348
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
30
QUESTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL
1. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of extending frontage roads throughout Midtown, by
expanding the existing frontage roads or by reusing
existing lanes on College Avenue?
2. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of changing how the frontage roads are accessed?
3. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of protected bike lanes on College Avenue?
4. What feedback or questions does Council have on the
idea of a multi-use path adjacent but separated from
College Avenue?
Packet Pg. 349
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
31
Phase 2: February 2014 to April 2014
– Prepare design alternatives
– Evaluate alternatives
• Economic benefit
• Sustainability (triple bottom line)
• Multimodal level of service (MMLOS)
Phase 3: May 2014 to Fall 2014
– Select alternative
– Demonstrate part of the alternative
– Prepare an implementation schedule
– Work Session #2 in August
– Council Adoption Fall 2014
Next Steps
Packet Pg. 350
Attachment3.5: PowerPoint Presentation (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
DATE:
STAFF:
April 8, 2014
Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to discuss potential options to expand the smoking regulations in Fort Collins.
City Council indicated a desire to look into further expanding the City’s smoking regulations at the Council Work
Session on August 13, 2013. This item provides background information, community feedback, and information
about actions taken in other communities. The additional smoking regulations to be discussed include restrictions
related to:
1. Electronic Smoking Devices
2. 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
3. Natural Areas, Parks, & Trails
4. Public Events & Festivals
5. Old Town or Downtown Area.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What additional smoking regulations, if any, would Council like to formally consider?
2. If Council would like to formally consider additional smoking regulations, what time frame would be
appropriate?
3. What additional information is needed?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
History
In 1984, Fort Collins was the first city in Colorado to pass a comprehensive smoking ordinance. The ordinance
limited smoking in public buildings and required restaurants to have no-smoking sections. It was passed by City
Council, and then placed onto the ballot by referendum led by the tobacco industry in an interest to overturn it.
The voters affirmed the Council decision by voting to support the ordinance. In 2003, Fort Collins was one of the
first communities in Colorado to designate bars, restaurants, and workplaces as smoke-free. In 2006, the Fort
Collins’ Smoking Ordinance was amended to conform to the Colorado Indoor Clean Air Act which helped the
community regulate smoking in all indoor public places. In 2013, Fort Collins expanded the smoking ordinance to
prohibit smoking in outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and Transfort’s public transit facilities.
During the City Council August 13, 2013 Work Session regarding the expanded smoking regulations, Council also
directed staff to explore additional smoking restrictions including:
1. Electronic Smoking Devices
2. 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
3. Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails
4. Public Events and Festivals
5. Old Town or Downtown Area
Packet Pg. 351
April 8, 2014 Page 2
Secondhand smoke exposure is proven to be harmful at any level, including in outdoor areas that are next to
buildings or have a high density of tobacco users. As a result, many cities have taken steps to protect their
residents, especially children or those with chronic diseases, from the dangers of secondhand smoke exposure by
creating smoke-free zones, especially in high-use outdoor areas such as playgrounds, parks, trails, downtowns,
or at public events.
In areas where people gather for recreation or a healthy activity, breathing tobacco smoke can be an unexpected
nuisance. A 2013 Colorado Tobacco Attitudes and Behavior survey found that more than half (56%) of persons
surveyed reported “putting up with someone smoking around them”, with the biggest annoyance experienced in
public parks. Tobacco butts are toxic and can be poisonous to small children or animals if consumed. Smoke-
free areas often reduce the amount of litter that is present, improving the appearance of local parks and reducing
clean up time and costs.
Fort Collins is known as a healthy community. Creating smoke-free areas generally result in a reduction of
tobacco use and improved community health. The City of Fort Collins has received many honors and awards,
including awards related to being a healthy community. In 2013, Fort Collins was named the 4th Healthiest Mid-
Size City in the U.S. by the Gallup-Healthways Survey. Tobacco rates are considered when overall health ratings
of a community are determined, and healthy community designations provide economic appeal and community
attractiveness.
The City staff team (including Parks, Recreation, Natural Areas, Police, City Attorney’s Office, and Environmental
Services) discussed the smoking ordinance expansion options, researched other communities’ smoking
regulations, and discussed how enforcement would work.
Additionally, the City of Fort Collins launched an informal on-line survey to gauge the communities’ current
experiences and level of interest in expanding smoking regulations in specific areas. More than 2,100 responses
were received. (Attachment 1).
1. Electronic Smoking Devices
Currently, electronic smoking devices are not regulated within the city. If City Council chooses to regulate
electronic smoking devices, it could be added to the City’s current smoking ordinance, which would ban their use
from all areas where smoking is prohibited. This would include all bars, restaurants, workplaces, outdoor dining
areas, bar patios, and transit facilities.
Electronic cigarettes or vaporizers are devices that vaporize and deliver to the lungs of the user a chemical
mixture composed of nicotine, propylene glycol and other chemicals. Some e-devices are offered without
nicotine, and some are offered in flavors that can be attractive to youth (candy or fruit flavors). When users
inhale, a battery operated vaporizer heats a liquid solution into a vapor. E-devices are also being used with highly
concentrated marijuana oil or wax, and may provide a discreet way of using marijuana in public settings.
The vapor from these devices may look like smoke from a conventional cigarette, which can confuse or weaken
current smoking regulations.
The FDA has not regulated electronic smoking devices nor declared them as an effective cessation product. E-
cigarette packaging is not required to include health warnings or ingredient labels. Some are advertised as
smoking cessation tools despite a lack of credible evidence that they are effective quit smoking aids. The FDA
recommends that people seeking to quit smoking should use FDA-approved quit smoking aids. It is expected that
regulations on e-cigarettes will come from the FDA in 2014.
A recent study published in the journal Nicotine and Tobacco Research found that e-cigarettes are a source of
secondhand exposure to nicotine and other chemicals which could be harmful to bystanders. However, e-
cigarette supporters caution that there is not enough available information about the health effects to draw
conclusions.
Packet Pg. 352
April 8, 2014 Page 3
While Colorado currently does not have state regulations for electronic smoking devices, several other state and
local governments have decided to regulate e-cigarette use:
Oklahoma - banned the use of e-cigarettes on state-owned property
Los Angeles and San Francisco - City Council and San Francisco Board of Supervisory - voted to ban e-
cigarettes from restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and outdoor areas where tobacco smoking is generally
restricted (parks, beaches, farmers markets, recreational areas, and outdoor dining spaces)
New York and Chicago - City Council extended the city’s ban on smoking in public places to include e-
cigarettes
Utah, New Jersey, and North Dakota - passed legislation prohibiting e-cigarettes wherever regular
smoking is banned
Nationally, 108 municipalities include e-cigarettes in their local smoking ordinances - including Durango,
CO.
The Fort Collins smoking survey asked: Do you think electronic smoking devices should be regulated in the same
manner as regular tobacco smoking products? The results show:
Yes 48%
No 30%
No Opinion 22%
2. 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
The current Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance aligns with the Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act, requiring at least 75%
of hotel or motel rooms to be no smoking rooms. Additionally, the City’s smoking ordinance prohibits smoking
within 20 feet of any entryway. City Council could choose to require that 100% of hotel/motel rooms be smoke-
free. The primary benefit of this requirement would be to protect hospitality industry workers who may have
considerable exposure.
In 2006, the U.S. Surgeon General’s report determined there was no risk-free level of secondhand smoke. The
2014 Surgeon General’s report expanded the list of diseases and adverse health effects caused by secondhand
smoke and, for the first time, linked secondhand smoke exposure to strokes in adults. Tobacco smoke exposure
is especially dangerous for the health of children, pregnant women, and persons with chronic diseases who might
visit local hotels/motels as well as hospitality industry workers who may have considerable exposure during work.
Of recent concern is third-hand smoke, the tobacco residue from cigarettes, cigars, and other combustible
tobacco products that is left behind after smoking and built up on surfaces and furnishings. These sticky, highly
toxic particulates, like nicotine, can cling to walls and ceilings and be absorbed into carpets, draperies, and other
upholsteries. Nicotine remains on surfaces for days and weeks, so carcinogens continue to be created over time,
which are then inhaled, absorbed, or ingested. Though the effects of third-hand smoke are not yet clear, a 2013
study in hotels found that when a hotel allows smoking in any of its rooms, the smoke gets into all of its rooms.
Larimer County Department of Health and Environment conducted a survey of hotel/motel owners within Loveland
and Fort Collins city limits in order to assess how many allowed smoking in their rooms. The results included:
20 business owners were surveyed and 15 (75%) indicated that they do not allow smoking in any rooms
of their hotel/motel. This same percentage said that an expansion to a 100% smoke-free policy would
have no impact or a positive impact on their business.
16 (80%) said that the Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance that was implemented in 2003 had no impact or a
positive impact on their business.
Economy motels that were booked for short term residential purposes were more likely to allow smoking
and less likely to be 100% smoke-free.
One hotel with frequent international visitors perceived higher customer demand for smoking rooms.
Packet Pg. 353
April 8, 2014 Page 4
Nationally, the following have 100% smoke-free hotel/motel room policies:
93 municipalities (none in Colorado)
5 states (Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wisconsin)
Many large chains hotels (including Marriott, Westin, and Comfort Inn)
The Fort Collins smoking survey asked: Do you think 100% of hotel/motel rooms in the City of Fort Collins should
be smoke-free? The results show:
Yes 56%
No 34%
No Opinion 10%
3. Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails
Currently, the City's smoking ordinance does not apply to Natural Areas, parks, or trails. If Council chooses to
regulate smoking in these outdoor areas, staff recommends considering specific locations within parks, trails, and
Natural Areas.
The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department and staff support the adoption of a citywide policy or expanded
smoking ordinance to prohibit smoking specific to natural area properties for the following reasons:
1. Public safety/structure protection in the event of a wildfire resulting from the use of lighted smoking
paraphernalia in natural areas.
2. Natural Resource protection which requires a heightened attention to non-irrigated, minimally landscaped
areas which are sensitive to habitat-changing fires.
3. Public support for natural areas being places of refuge from toxic substances.
4. Reduction of litter which remains in a non-biodegradable state.
5. Natural Areas could easily be zoned and posted as non-smoking areas with a high rate of voluntary
compliance.
The smoking survey indicated that 80% of respondents strongly or somewhat support new regulations prohibiting
smoking in Natural Areas.
When considering expanding smoking regulations to parks and trails, most respondents strongly or somewhat
support new regulations prohibiting smoking within specific area of parks. Based on the survey responses as well
as staff observations, it appears that the highest priorities are certain areas within Parks (parking lots, shelters,
seating, fields/courts, and playgrounds). If Council chooses to expand the smoking ordinance to certain areas
within parks, Parks and Recreation staff recommends exempting golf courses (excluding clubhouses and decks)
because of the impact to the golfing public, the low impact to other customers, and the potential impact to golf
enterprise fund.
One of the survey questions asked: How strongly would you support new regulations prohibiting smoking in the
following outdoor areas (percent responding somewhat or strongly support)?
Playgrounds 85%
Bleachers/Sporting Event Seating 82%
Park Shelters 81%
Athletic Fields/Courts 80%
Trails 80%
Skate Parks 75%
Dog Parks 74%
Parks Parking Lots 72%
Golf Courses 70%
There are many examples both nationally and locally of municipalities that have enacted smoking regulations in
Packet Pg. 354
April 8, 2014 Page 5
these outdoor areas. (Attachment 2) When looking at other communities’ smoking regulations, there are three
primary options for developing smoke-free outdoor public areas including:
1. Make all parks/recreation areas and public events smoke-free (with no designated smoking areas) -
Colorado examples include: Avon, Winter Park, Arvada, Edgewater, Brighton, and Greeley (if area is
defined as a public place).
2. Make all parks/recreation areas and public events smoke-free and allow or establish designated smoking
areas - Colorado example includes Centennial.
3. Make some parks/recreation areas and public events smoke-free - this includes activities that are
primarily family-oriented. Colorado examples include: Golden, Lakewood, Timnath, Grand Junction,
Steamboat Springs, Durango, Commerce City, and Denver.
Outdoor areas, by their nature, have places that are more likely to impact people and other areas that are more
open and are less likely to be bothersome. When considering the creation of smoke-free zones, the potential
areas that would likely impact more people could include:
All enclosed or partially enclosed areas
Areas where staff or volunteers are working
Areas with fixed seating
Areas where food or drink are served
Playgrounds/children-focused areas
Main thoroughfares.
Additionally, there are some important factors to consider if designated smoking areas are allowed, including:
Developing areas away from main thoroughfares
Developing clear signage
Clearly communicating a designated location
Not allowing children in the area
Clearly identifying whether it is a temporary location (e.g., for public events).
If smoking is prohibited in certain outdoor areas, additional outreach, signage, and prevention resources may be
needed to address high tobacco use behaviors in certain recreation areas or public events. Current examples of
concentrated smoking areas include: parks near high schools, certain parts of Old Town frequented by youth,
parks where transient populations gather, and some special events such as concerts and festivals attended by
young adults.
The smoking survey also asked how often people are currently impacted by secondhand smoke or notice
cigarette litter in the following locations (percentage that answered somewhat often, often, or very often):
Secondhand Smoke Cigarette Litter
Old Town/Downtown 75% 79%
Public Events 70% 75%
Parks Parking Lots 41% 63%
Park Shelters 31% 53%
Bleachers/Sports Seating 29% 44%
Athletic Fields/Courts 25% 36%
Playgrounds 24% 38%
Natural Areas 20% 30%
Trails 20% 32%
Skate Parks 13% 22%
Dog Parks 14% 23%
Golf Courses 12% 17%
Packet Pg. 355
April 8, 2014 Page 6
4. Public Events
Currently, the smoking ordinance does not apply to public events. The smoking survey indicates that 80% of
respondents strongly or somewhat support new regulations prohibiting smoking at public events/festivals. If
Council chooses to regulate smoking at public events, staff recommends considering the options mentioned
above.
Feedback from those hosting Public Events
Staff met with event promoters that host some of the larger public events (New West Fest, Taste of Fort Collins,
and Tour de Fat) to discuss their needs, concerns, and questions regarding potential smoke-free public events.
While they agreed that smoke-free events may be appreciated by many of their patrons, they also believe that
some patrons would not be supportive. Some of their concerns include:
Patrons would have to exit the event area unless there was a designated smoking area within the event
Public Relations
Possible loss of patrons if they can’t smoke at the event
Enforcement
Potential issues with the crews and talent (set-up and tear-down)
If non-smoking events were required, the event organizers agreed that it would be helpful for them to promote and
regulate if:
There was signage in the park indicating no-smoking
Information was provided by the City that they could give to their patrons, post on their website and social
media
They could show that it’s a City requirement (not the event organizer requirement)
Designated smoking areas were allowed, so the smokers had a reasonable place to go
5. Old Town/Downtown
Currently, the smoking ordinance only applies to outdoor areas within the Old Town/Downtown area on outdoor
dining areas, bar patios, and 20 feet from patios and entrances. The smoking survey indicates that 79% of
respondents strongly or somewhat support new regulations prohibiting smoking in the Old Town/Downtown area.
Staff spoke with representatives from Boulder because the City of Boulder enacted a smoking ban on the Pearl
Street Mall in 2013, and staff wanted to learn what has or has not worked well for them. In discussions with
Boulder, the following elements of success were highlighted:
Significant outreach and education leading up to implementation (personal contact)
Signage is extremely important
Work with businesses to be role models
Must have clear, understandable boundaries (See Attachment #4)
Enforcement from Code Compliance and Police Mall Officers
Start with warnings, then citations with fines that are substantial ($100)
o Since enforcement began in 2013, they have issued 92 tickets
27 paid fines (totaling $2,700)
Only 1 was issued to a juvenile
Only 3 cases were dismissed
Many referred to collections for failure to appear
Based on conversations with Boulder, it is important to identify an area with clear boundaries when considering
implementing a downtown smoking ban. Old Town Square could be a potential area to consider since it is
primarily a pedestrian area with clear boundaries (Attachment 3). The larger Downtown District might be more
Packet Pg. 356
April 8, 2014 Page 7
challenging to identify clear boundaries. A smoking ban in this area could be effective all the time or could apply
only during certain hours when families are more likely to be present.
The smoking survey asked the general question about whether people would support smoking regulations in Old
Town/Downtown (79% support as mentioned above). Additionally, the survey asked: Would you support
restricting smoking in Old Town/Downtown areas during specified hours such as between 5 a.m. and 11 p.m.?
The response was:
Yes 69%
No 24%
No Opinion 7%
Enforcement
Other municipalities have found that people generally voluntarily comply when informed and given an opportunity
and staff anticipates this would be true in Fort Collins, as well. Fort Collins is fortunate to have organizations that
support smoke-free public policies (including Tobacco Free Larimer County and the Youth Coalition) that the City
could partner with for education and related public health information assistance. Staff believes that a significant
amount of time and some resources, primarily for signage and messaging, will be needed for education and
outreach prior to implementation of enforcement.
Based on information obtained from other communities and experience here in Fort Collins, staff recommends a
tiered approach for enforcing any new code changes emphasizing education and voluntary compliance.
Education, promotion, signs, and messaging would be the first step to ensuring awareness of any new
expansions to the smoking regulations. Awareness and signage leads to the ability of people to point to a sign or
use peer-enforcement as a way to further gain compliance. As with other current enforcement practices,
complaints would be responded to by the appropriate staff (Natural Areas Rangers, Parks Rangers, other city
staff, or event organizers), and Police would only be contacted if compliance was not reached through other
methods.
Additional Survey Information
Youth Coalition (Attachment 5)
The Youth Coalition conducted a “Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey” in March that had 228 respondents. The
respondents were primarily between the ages of 14 and 19 years old.
Below represents the percentage of respondents who agree or strongly agree with the following statements:
- Children being exposed to secondhand smoke in parks/playgrounds is a problem 87%
- Cigarette butt litter in parks/playgrounds is a problem 86%
- Teens using tobacco in parks/playgrounds near my school is a problem 80%
- I think tobacco use should be prohibited in parks/playgrounds 78%
Another question asked: If Fort Collins were to ban smoking and tobacco use in outdoor areas, which outdoor
areas should be tobacco free (pick as many as you think)?
Playgrounds 87%
Natural Areas 80%
Bleachers/Seating Areas 72%
Athletic Fields 68%
Park Shelters 68%
Dog Parks 68%
Trails 63%
Public Events 55%
Old Town/Downtown 39%
Packet Pg. 357
April 8, 2014 Page 8
Skate Parks 37%
Parking lots 27%
Health District of Northern Larimer County (Attachment 6)
The Health District of Northern Larimer County recently conducted the 2013 Community Health Survey. Every
three years this survey is conducted to collect data on a variety of health conditions and behaviors, healthcare
affordability and coverage, access to healthcare and need for various services. A total of 2,819 surveys were
returned from adult residents of Larimer County, with an estimated response rate of about 40%. The data for the
following question regarding smoking is for 1,599 surveys returned by respondents with a Fort Collins zip code.
In the survey, respondents were asked several questions about their tobacco use and, at the request of local
health policy experts, about policies regarding the sale and use of tobacco. One question that was included in the
survey was: “Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as
restaurant patios, recreation areas, or playgrounds?”
Of Fort Collins residents, 74% “strongly” or “somewhat” favor a policy that would prohibit smoking in outdoor
public areas.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (PDF)
2. Smoke-Free Outdoor Recreation Areas, Downtowns, Events in Colorado Matrix (PDF)
3. Maps of Old Town Square and Downtown District (PDF)
4. Boulder Courtesy Cards (PDF)
5. Youth Coalition Survey (PDF)
6. Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (PDF)
7. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
Packet Pg. 358
Packet Pg. 359
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 360
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 361
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 362
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 363
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 364
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 365
Attachment4.1: Fort Collins Smoking Survey 2014 (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 366
Attachment4.2: Smoke-Free Outdoor Recreation Areas, Downtowns, Events in Colorado Matrix (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 367
Attachment4.3: Maps of Old Town Square and Downtown District (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 368
Attachment4.3: Maps of Old Town Square and Downtown District (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 369
Attachment4.4: Boulder Courtesy Cards (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Packet Pg. 370
Attachment4.4: Boulder Courtesy Cards (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
1 / 17
0% 0
3.95% 9
0.44% 1
44.74% 102
50.44% 115
0.44% 1
Q1 What school do you attend?
Answered: 228 Skipped: 0
Total 228
Centennial
High School
Fort Collins
High School
Fossil Ridge
High School
Poudre High
School
Rocky Mountain
High School
Other
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Centennial High School
Fort Collins High School
Fossil Ridge High School
Poudre High School
Rocky Mountain High School
Other
Packet Pg. 371
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
2 / 17
0% 0
0% 0
9.65% 22
22.37% 51
26.32% 60
28.95% 66
10.53% 24
2.19% 5
Q2 What is your age?
Answered: 228 Skipped: 0
Total 228
12 or younger
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 or older
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
12 or younger
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 or older
Packet Pg. 372
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
3 / 17
Q3 In general, how big of a problem do you
think each of the following issues is in our
community?
Answered: 228 Skipped: 0
Packet Pg. 373
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
4 / 17
51.10%
116
44.93%
102
2.20%
5
1.76%
4
227
45.81% 46.70% 6.61% 0.88%
Major problem Minor problem Not a problem I don't know
Tobacco Use
Secondhand
smoke
Cigarette
litter
Tobacco
company...
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Major problem Minor problem Not a problem I don't know Total
Tobacco Use
Secondhand smoke Packet Pg. 374
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
5 / 17
45.81%
104
46.70%
106
6.61%
15
0.88%
2
227
50.88%
115
38.05%
86
9.29%
21
1.77%
4
226
36.61%
82
41.96%
94
15.63%
35
5.80%
13
224
Secondhand smoke
Cigarette litter
Tobacco company marketing
Packet Pg. 375
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
6 / 17
8.89% 20
32.44% 73
41.33% 93
9.78% 22
7.56% 17
Q4 How often do you or someone from
your family visit a public park or
playground?
Answered: 225 Skipped: 3
Total 225
Once a day
Once a week
Once a month
Once a year
Never
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Once a day
Once a week
Once a month
Once a year
Never
Packet Pg. 376
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
7 / 17
8.93% 20
35.71% 80
34.38% 77
12.05% 27
8.93% 20
Q5 In the past, how often have you seen or
been exposed to other teens using
tobacco at parks or playgrounds?
Answered: 224 Skipped: 4
Total 224
Always
Often
Sometimes
Occasionally
Never
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Always
Often
Sometimes
Occasionally
Never
Packet Pg. 377
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
8 / 17
11.21% 25
35.87% 80
28.70% 64
17.94% 40
6.28% 14
Q6 In the past, how often have you seen or
been exposed to adults using tobacco at
parks or playgrounds?
Answered: 223 Skipped: 5
Total 223
Always
Often
Sometimes
Occasionally
Never
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Always
Often
Sometimes
Occasionally
Never
Packet Pg. 378
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
9 / 17
Q7 How much do you agree with the
following statements?
Answered: 226 Skipped: 2
Children being
exposed to...
Cigarette butt
litter in...
Teens using
tobacco in...
I think
tobacco use...
Packet Pg. 379
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
10 / 17
56.64%
128
30.53%
69
8.85%
20
2.21%
5
1.77%
4
226
46.90%
106
38.94%
88
10.62%
24
2.65%
6
0.88%
2
226
43.75%
98
36.16%
81
11.61%
26
7.59%
17
0.89%
2
224
51.56%
116
26.22%
59
13.33%
30
6.22%
14
2.67%
6
225
Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Strongly
Agree
Agree Not
Sure
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Total
Children being exposed to secondhand smoke and tobacco in
parks/playgrounds is a problem
Cigarette butt litter in parks/playgrounds is a problem
Teens using tobacco in parks/playgrounds near my school is a
problem
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
11 / 17
87.39% 194
63.06% 140
54.95% 122
39.19% 87
72.07% 160
68.47% 152
36.94% 82
Q8 If Fort Collins were to ban smoking and
tobacco use in outdoor areas, which
outdoor areas should be tobacco free?
Check as many as you think.
Answered: 222 Skipped: 6
Playgrounds
Trails
Public
Events/Festi...
Old
Town/Downtow...
Bleachers/Sport
ing event...
Athletic fields
Skate parks
Shelters/Picnic
areas
Parking lots
Dog parks
Natural areas
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Playgrounds
Trails
Public Events/Festivals (like New West Fest)
Old Town/Downtown areas
Bleachers/Sporting event seating areas
Athletic fields
Skate parks
Packet Pg. 381
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
12 / 17
68.02% 151
26.58% 59
68.92% 153
80.63% 179
Total Respondents: 222
Shelters/Picnic areas
Parking lots
Dog parks
Natural areas
Packet Pg. 382
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
13 / 17
69.82% 155
17.12% 38
4.95% 11
8.11% 18
Q9 Please describe your level of tobacco
use.
Answered: 222 Skipped: 6
Total 222
I have never
used tobacco
I have tried
tobacco
I currently
use tobacco
I have used
tobacco in t...
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
I have never used tobacco
I have tried tobacco
I currently use tobacco
I have used tobacco in the past, but quit
Packet Pg. 383
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
14 / 17
Q10 Please describe your current level of
knowledge in the following areas:
Answered: 223 Skipped: 5
Excellent Good Average Poor
Health risks
of tobacco
Health risks
of secondhan...
How tobacco
companies...
Environmental
effects of...
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Packet Pg. 384
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
15 / 17
42.60%
95
40.81%
91
13.90%
31
2.69%
6
223
35.59%
79
39.19%
87
21.17%
47
4.05%
9
222
29.28%
65
34.68%
77
24.32%
54
11.71%
26
222
26.91%
60
36.77%
82
27.80%
62
8.52%
19
223
Excellent Good Average Poor Total
Health risks of tobacco
Health risks of secondhand smoke
How tobacco companies market to children and teens
Environmental effects of tobacco use and cigarette litter
Packet Pg. 385
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
16 / 17
12.16% 27
33.33% 74
33.78% 75
18.92% 42
1.80% 4
Q11 How many teens (<18 years) do you
think smoke or use tobacco in Larimer
County?
Answered: 222 Skipped: 6
Total 222
Less than 20%
20-40%
40-60%
60-80%
80% or more
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Less than 20%
20-40%
40-60%
60-80%
80% or more
Packet Pg. 386
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
Fort Collins Youth Tobacco Survey
17 / 17
4.50% 10
28.83% 64
38.74% 86
21.17% 47
6.76% 15
Q12 How many adults (>18 years) do you
think smoke or use tobacco in Larimer
County?
Answered: 222 Skipped: 6
Total 222
Less than 20%
20-40%
40-60%
60-80%
80% or more
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Less than 20%
20-40%
40-60%
60-80%
80% or more
Packet Pg. 387
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
1
Level of Support for a Policy to Prohibit Smoking in Outdoor Public Areas
Fort Collins Respondents to the 2013 Larimer County Health Survey
The Community Health Survey
Every three years the Health District of Northern Larimer County (the Health District) conducts a community
health survey of adults living in Larimer County Colorado. The most recent survey was conducted in late
2013. The 2013 community health survey was a written, 16-page, 83-question survey designed to collect
data on a variety of health conditions and behaviors, healthcare affordability and coverage, access to
healthcare and need for various services. A total of 2,819 surveys were returned from adult residents of
Larimer County, with an estimated response rate of about 40%. The data in this report is for 1,599 surveys
returned by respondents with a Fort Collins zip code (80521-80528). More information about the survey is
provided on page 4 of this report.
Summary
In the 2013 Community Health Survey conducted by the Health District, respondents were asked several
questions about their tobacco use and, at the request of local health policy experts, about policies regarding
the sale and use of tobacco. One question that was included in the survey was: “Would you favor or oppose
policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant patios, recreation areas or
playgrounds?” Respondents could answer on a five-point scale ranging from “strongly favor” to “strongly
oppose.” Tables for all data are included in the appendix.
Of Fort Collins residents, 74% “strongly” or “somewhat” favor a policy that would prohibit smoking in
outdoor public areas. Support is fairly evenly distributed across age groups although males are more likely to
oppose the policy as females.
Support for this policy is associated with current smoking status. Twelve percent of survey respondents, or
173 people, reported using cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, or pipes (including hookah) on some days or every
day. Among the current smokers, 39% are in favor of the outdoor smoking restriction policy and 45%
oppose. This compares with non-smokers, 79% of whom support the policy and 13% oppose it.
A more detailed look at the results by age, gender and smoking status follows.
Support for Prohibiting Smoking in Outdoor Public Areas
In the 2013 Community Health Survey, respondents were asked, “Would you favor or oppose policies that
would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant patios, recreation areas or playgrounds?”
They could answer on a five point scale ranging from “strongly favor” to “strongly oppose,” including
“somewhat favor,” “no opinion” and “somewhat oppose.” Tables for graphed data are included in the
Appendix.
Packet Pg. 388
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
2
“Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant
patios, recreation areas or playgrounds?”1
Overall, 74% of Fort Collins residents reported that they “strongly favor” or “somewhat favor” policies that
would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant patios, recreation areas or playgrounds.
Fort Collins respondents are more than 4 times more likely to support the policy than they are to oppose it.
Females are more likely than males to “strongly” or “somewhat” favor a policy to prohibit smoking in
outdoor public areas. When considering respondents who “strongly oppose” or “somewhat oppose” this
policy, males are about twice as likely to be in opposition than females.
58%
16%
9% 9% 8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly favor Somewhat favor No opinion Somewhat
oppose
Strongly oppose
Percent of Respondents
Overall support for policies that would prohibit
smoking in outdoor public areas
52%
17%
9% 11% 11%
64%
16%
8% 6% 6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Strongly favor Somewhat favor No opinion Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose
Support for policies that would prohibit smoking
in outdoor public areas by gender
Male Female
Packet Pg. 389
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
3
Age was not a factor in level of favoring and opposing this item. Across all age groups respondents were over
4 times more likely to “strongly favor” or “somewhat favor” a policy that would prohibit smoking in outdoor
public areas than they were to “strongly oppose” or “somewhat oppose” this policy. Only 8% to 9% of
respondents, in all age groups, report that they “strongly oppose” a policy of this nature.
When we consider the Fort Collins population by
smoker status, we find that 12% report using
cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, or pipes (including hookah)
at least some days.
Of survey respondents, that 12% represents 173
individuals, compared with 88% or 1,296 respondents
who do not report using cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, or
pipes (including hookah).
Strongly favor Somewhat favor No opinion
Somewhat
oppose
Strongly oppose
18-29 58% 14% 12% 8% 8%
30-49 62% 15% 8% 7% 8%
50-69 55% 18% 7% 11% 9%
70+ 57% 17% 9% 9% 8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Percent of
Respondents
Support for policies that would prohibit
smoking in outdoor public areas by age group
* Smokers are defined as those who report using cigarettes,
cigars, cigarillos, or pipes (including hookah) at least some days
88%
12%
Percent of respondents who
smoke* at least some days
Non-smoker
Smoker
Packet Pg. 390
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
4
Smokers are more evenly split among those who favor and those who oppose the policies than non-smokers.
Thirty-nine percent of smokers “strongly” or “somewhat” favor policies that would prohibit smoking in
outdoor public places, while 45% “strongly” or “somewhat” oppose these policies. Of non-smokers, the
majority (79%) “strongly” or “somewhat” favor the policies, with just 13% who “strongly” or “somewhat”
oppose them.
About The Community Health Survey
Every three years the Health District of Northern Larimer County (the Health District) conducts a community
health survey of adults living in Larimer County Colorado to determine the health status and health care
needs of Health District residents. A triennial process is used so that health status trends may be followed
and heath service needs within the community can be understood on a regular basis. The information
obtained from the assessment is used to guide the planning, implementation, and evaluation of services that
the Health District provides. One of the assessment components is a written community health survey. The
first community health survey was conducted in 1995 and has been repeated every three years. The 2013
survey is the Health District’s seventh community health survey.
The 2013 community health survey was a written, 16-page, 83-question survey designed to collect data on a
variety of health conditions and behaviors, healthcare affordability and coverage, access to healthcare and
need for various services. A random-sample of approximately 7,300 households in Larimer County were
contacted by mail and asked to participate in the survey by return mail or through a secure online survey. A
total of 2,819 surveys were returned from adult residents of Larimer County, resulting in an overall response
rate of about 40%. Data was weighted by age and gender using the 2013 estimated Larimer County
population from the Colorado State Demography Office. Weighting is a common statistical technique used to
assure representation of underrepresented groups in the sample.
Some caution should be applied when interpreting survey results as only a part of the population, a sample,
is used to represent the whole population. Sampling error, also referred to as the margin of error, can be
estimated mathematically. The margin of error for this survey, at a 95% confidence level, is about+/-2.5%
(for proportions around 50%). That is, for every 95 out 100 samples drawn using the same survey
Strongly favor
Somewhat
favor
No opinion
Somewhat
oppose
Strongly
oppose
Smoker 23% 16% 16% 16% 29%
Non-smoker 63% 16% 8% 7% 6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Percent of
Respondents
Support for policies that would prohibit smoking in
outdoor public areas by smoker status*
*Smokers are defined as those who report using cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, or pipes (including hookah) at least some days
Packet Pg. 391
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
5
methodology, the estimated proportions would be no more than about 2.5 percentage points away from
their true values in the population. In addition to sampling errors, caution is needed because there could be
errors from things like how questions were worded or problems in how the survey was administered. These
types of errors cannot be estimated mathematically, although good faith efforts were made to reduce
known sources of bias and errors.
The Community Health Survey is conducted across Larimer
County. The Health District of Northern Larimer County
(Health District) service area includes the northern two-thirds
of Larimer County and includes Fort Collins, Wellington,
Timnath, Livermore and Red Feather Lakes (shown in green). The
southern part of the county includes Loveland, Estes Park,
Masonville and Berthoud (shown in white).
About this Preliminary Data Summary
This data summary was prepared by Health District of Northern Larimer County staff. The Health District is a
special district serving the northern two-thirds of Larimer County, Colorado, supported by local property tax
dollars and governed by a publicly elected five-member board. The Health District provides dental, mental
health, prescription assistance, and health promotion services to the communities it serves. For more
information about this summary or the Health District, please contact Susan Hewitt, Evaluation Coordinator,
at (970) 224-5209, or by e-mail at shewitt@healthdistrict.org.
Packet Pg. 392
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
March 2014
6
Appendix
“Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant patios,
recreation areas or playgrounds?”
Would you favor or oppose policies that would
prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such
as restaurant patios, recreation areas or
playgrounds?
All ages
Strongly favor 58%
Somewhat favor 16%
No opinion 9%
Somewhat oppose 9%
Strongly oppose 8%
Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit
smoking in outdoor public areas such as restaurant patios,
recreation areas or playgrounds?
Sex
All
Male Female
Strongly favor 52% 64% 58%
Somewhat favor 17% 16% 16%
No opinion 9% 8% 9%
Somewhat oppose 11% 6% 9%
Strongly oppose 11% 6% 8%
Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as
restaurant patios, recreation areas or playgrounds?
Age Groups
All Ages
18-29 30-49 50-69 70+
Strongly favor 58% 62% 55% 57% 58%
Somewhat favor 14% 15% 18% 17% 16%
No opinion 12% 8% 7% 9% 9%
Somewhat oppose 8% 7% 11% 9% 9%
Strongly oppose 8% 8% 9% 8% 8%
Would you favor or oppose policies that would prohibit smoking in outdoor public areas such as
restaurant patios, recreation areas or playgrounds?
Smoker Status
Smoker: uses cigarettes,
cigars, cigarillos, or
pipes (including hookah)
at least some days
Non-smoker: does
not use cigarettes,
cigars, cigarillos, or
pipes (including
hookah)
Total
Strongly favor 23% 63% 59%
Somewhat favor 16% 16% 16%
No opinion 16% 8% 9%
Somewhat oppose 16% 7% 8%
Strongly oppose 29% 6% 8%
Total 12% 88% 100%
Packet Pg. 393
Attachment4.6: Health District of Northern Larimer County Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
1
Smoking Ordinance Expansion
Options
City Council Work Session
April 8, 2014
Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services
Manager
ATTACHMENT 7
Packet Pg. 394
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
2
Purpose
• Discuss potential options to expand smoking
regulations in Fort Collins
• Areas to consider:
– Electronic Smoking Devices
– 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
– Natural Areas, Parks, & Trails
– Public Events & Festivals
– Old Town or Downtown Area
Packet Pg. 395
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
3
General Direction Sought
1. What additional smoking regulations, if
any, would Council like to formally
consider?
2. If Council would like to formally consider
additional smoking regulations, what time
frame would be appropriate?
3. What additional information is needed?
Packet Pg. 396
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
4
History
• 1984 – no-smoking sections
– Fort Collins was the first city in CO to pass a
comprehensive smoking ordinance
• 2003 – Fort Collins designated bars, restaurants,
and workplaces as smoke-free
• 2006 – Colorado Indoor Clean Air Act
• 2013 – Fort Collins expanded smoking regulations
to include outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and
Transfort’s public transit facilities
Packet Pg. 397
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
5
Outdoor Areas
• Why?
– Secondhand smoke exposure is proven to be
harmful at any level, including outdoors
– Many cities have created smoke-free zones
especially in high-use outdoor areas
– Outdoor areas for recreation and healthy
activities
– Cigarette butts are toxic and create trashy
appearance
– Smoke-free areas often reduce tobacco use
and litter
Packet Pg. 398
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
6
Electronic Smoking Devices
• Not regulated in Fort Collins
• Not regulated by FDA
• Could add to City’s ordinance
• Deliver chemicals to lungs
• Health impacts are unknown
Packet Pg. 399
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
7
E-Cigarette Laws
• Several other state and local regulations:
– Oklahoma, Utah, New Jersey, North Dakota
– Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York,
Chicago
– Nationally, 108 municipalities
• Fort Collins Survey: Regulate e-cigs?
– Yes 48%
– No 30%
– No opinion 22%
Packet Pg. 400
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
8
100% Hotel/Motel Rooms
• Currently, 75% required smoke-free and
20 feet from entrances
• Could require 100% rooms smoke-free
• Primary benefit to hospitality industry
workers and non-smoker guests
• Third-hand smoke – recent health concern
Packet Pg. 401
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
9
Hotel/Motel Room Data
• 20 hotels/motels surveyed – 75% do not allow
smoking at all
• 80% said the 2003 smoking ordinance had no
impact or positive impact on their business
• Nationally, 93 municipalities and 5 states have
100% smoke-free policies
• Fort Collins Survey – 100% smoke-free rooms?
– Yes 56%
– No 34%
– No opinion 10%
Packet Pg. 402
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
10
Natural Areas, Parks, Trails
• Current smoking regulations do not apply
• Natural Areas support
• Specific Park areas (shelters, seating,
fields/courts, and playgrounds)
• Some outdoor areas have more impact
than others
• Exempt golf courses
Packet Pg. 403
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
11
Options: Smoke-Free
Outdoor Areas
1. All recreation areas and public events
smoke-free with no designated smoking
areas
2. All recreation areas and public events
smoke-free and allow or establish
designated smoking areas
3. Some recreation areas and public events
smoke-free
Packet Pg. 404
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
12
Fort Collins Survey
Percentage currently impacted by secondhand
smoke or notice cigarette litter.
0 50 100
Golf Courses
Dog Parks
Skate Parks
Trails
Natural Areas
Playgrounds
Fields/Courts
Bleachers/Seating
Park Shelters
Parks Parking Lots
Public Events
Old Town/Downtown
Cigarette
Litter
Secondhand
Smoke
Packet Pg. 405
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
13
Public Events/Festivals
• Current regulations do not apply
• Feedback from Event Organizers:
– Concerns – public relations, loss of patrons,
enforcement, issues with smokers having to
leave
• It would be helpful if:
– Clear signage
– Information provided by City
– City Requirement (not theirs)
– Designated smoking areas
Packet Pg. 406
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
14
Old Town/Downtown
• Current smoking regulations apply only on
outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and 20
feet from patios and doors
• Smoking Survey – 79% support
• Smoking Survey – support ban 5 a.m. – 11
p.m.
– Yes 69%
– No 24%
– No Opinion 7%
Packet Pg. 407
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
15
Boulder Pearl Street Mall
• City of Boulder enacted smoking ban on
Pearl Street Mall in 2013.
– Outreach & education
– Signage
– Work with businesses
– Clear, understandable boundaries
– Code Compliance and Police
enforcement
– Warnings then citations
Packet Pg. 408
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
16
Packet Pg. 409
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
17
Enforcement
• Voluntary Compliance
• Partners for education and assistance
• Signage and messaging
• Tiered approach
• Appropriate staff respond to complaints
• Police contacted if compliance not reached
Packet Pg. 410
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
18
Additional Survey Info
• Youth Coalition
– Strong support to ban smoking in
playgrounds and near schools
• Health District of Northern Larimer County
– 74% favor a policy prohibiting smoking
in outdoor public areas
Packet Pg. 411
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
19
General Direction Sought
1. What additional smoking regulations, if
any, would Council like to formally
consider?
2. If Council would like to formally consider
additional smoking regulations, what time
frame would be appropriate?
3. What additional information is needed?
Packet Pg. 412
Attachment4.7: Powerpoint presentation (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
I think tobacco use should be prohibited in parks/playgrounds
Packet Pg. 380
Attachment4.5: Youth Coalition Survey (Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options)
(MUP)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
Option B:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Repurpose
Yes - closed at
intersection
4 thru 2
local
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
40 MPH &
15 MPH
Removed
Local Access
Roads (LAR)
Changes Yes
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
Option C:
Protected Bike Lanes
None 6 thru
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
Protected Bike
Lane
Changes None
Yes, setback
from roadway
None Not on College
Option D:
Multi-Use Path
Transition out
over time
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
MUP & Shared
Route
(Frontage Rd)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, setback
from roadway
Where local
roads
remain
Onto MUP
ATTACHMENT 4 (D)
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
Yes - closed at
intersection
4 thru 2
local
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
40 MPH &
15 MPH
Removed
Local Access
Roads (LAR)
Changes Yes
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
None 6 thru
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
Protected Bike
Lane
Changes None
Yes, setback
from roadway
None Not on College
Transition out
over time
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
MUP & Shared
Route
(Frontage Rd)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, setback
from roadway
Where local
roads
remain
Onto MUP
7’
Protected
Bike Lane
7’
Protected
Bike Lane
Option A:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Expanded
Option B:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Repurpose
Option C:
Protected Bike Lanes
Option D:
Multi-Use Path
ATTACHMENT 4 (C)
intersection
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Remain
Multi-Use Path
(MUP)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
Yes - closed at
intersection
4 thru 2
local
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
40 MPH &
15 MPH
Removed
Local Access
Roads (LAR)
Changes Yes
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
None 6 thru
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
Protected Bike
Lane
Changes None
Yes, setback
from roadway
None Not on College
Transition out
over time
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
MUP & Shared
Route
(Frontage Rd)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, setback
from roadway
Where local
roads
remain
Onto MUP
Option A:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Expanded
Option B:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Repurpose
Option C:
Protected Bike Lanes
Option D:
Multi-Use Path
ATTACHMENT 4 (B)
access
35 MPH Remain
Multi-Use Path
(MUP)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
Yes - closed at
intersection
4 thru 2
local
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
40 MPH &
15 MPH
Removed
Local Access
Roads (LAR)
Changes Yes
Yes, local
access roads
On local
roads
On local roads
None 6 thru
Narrowed with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
Protected Bike
Lane
Changes None
Yes, setback
from roadway
None Not on College
Transition out
over time
6 thru
Remain with
consolidated
access
35 MPH Removed
MUP & Shared
Route
(Frontage Rd)
Minimal
changes
None
Yes, setback
from roadway
Where local
roads
remain
Onto MUP
Option A:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Expanded
Option B:
Multi-Way Boulevard:
Repurpose
Option C:
Protected Bike Lanes
Option D:
Multi-Use Path
ATTACHMENT 4 (A)
x Constrained corridor will be rebalanced with alternative
transportation.
x Does not resolve primary problem of vehicle congestion on
College Ave.
x Trading off vehicular mobility for parking space and retail
space, and for alternative transportation vehicles
x Construction will mess up traffic flow.
x State highway status and corridor width are fixed limitations we
must design around.
x Sends more traffic to Old Town, where congestion is already a
problem.
x SFCBA – will be able to engage in marketing and branding
x Is this the best use of public revenue? Are we subsidizing
private dev.?
x Where is everyone going to park?.
LIMITATIONS
x Connection with Spring Creek could become a permitting and
process headache.
x State highway status and corridor width are fixed limitations we
must design around.
x Sends more traffic to Old Town, where congestion is already a
problem.
x Reduced congestion creates better vehicle flow increasing traffic
and total impact on air quality impacts and carbon output .
x Where is everyone going to park? More parking lots is not an
environmental asset.
x Construction will create temporary carbon emission increases.
LIMITATIONS:
x If impacts a large an area of town, the construction may get
expensive.
x If impacts a large an area of town, the contractor may not be
able to contain it.
x Constrained corridor will be rebalanced with alternative
transportation.
x State highway status and corridor width are fixed limitations
we must design around.
x Is this the best use of public revenue? Are we subsidizing
private dev.?
x Budget limitations exist – fixed budget on plan and
implementation.
x Provides LID demonstration and R&D areas.
x Where is everyone going to park?
dd,D Edϯ
Packet Pg. 314
Attachment3.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Midtown in Motion: College Avenue Transportation Study)
generates heritage tourism
x
OPPORTUNITIES:
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; may create research and
development opportunities
THREATS:
x
THREATS:
THREATS:
THREATS:
x
NOTES:
Attachment2.6: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; leverages funds and
generates heritage tourism
x S&Gs do not add extra work for development
review applications; makes the process more
efficient and contributes to continued
transparency
x S&Gs add new regulations and require some
more work with the intent of preserving
character
x S&Gs add predictability that promotes infill
and redevelopment opportunities
x S&Gs follow existing economic drivers that
add value to development proposals
previously identified in community plans and
strategies
x S&Gs are a vision implementation exercise
x S&Gs identify properties that qualify for
financial incentives and guide alterations that
promote continual eligibility for incentives
STRENGTHS:
x S&Gs identify new building materials and
techniques that are environmentally
sustainable
x S&Gs encourage the use and reuse of
existing buildings; reduces landfill volume
capture, reduces new material consumption,
contributes to retaining embodied energies
x S&Gs add predictability that promotes infill
and redevelopment opportunities
ATTACHMENT 6
Attachment2.6: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Old Town Historic District and River District Design Standards and Guidelines)
4
Packet Pg. 253
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
appears as several authentic building modules.
New Building
4
Changes in cornice lines combined with varia-
tions in wall planes can help a new, larger
building appear consistent with traditional
development patterns.
Packet Pg. 249
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
and another for the roof is preferred.
› Using one to three accent colors for trim
elements is also preferred.
Packet Pg. 241
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
building areas.
› Minimize structural impacts when installing
turbines.
Packet Pg. 226
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
walls, ceilings and foundations, rather than replac-
ing windows.
Packet Pg. 224
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
sulation, weatherization improvements and landscaping
should be employed.
Step 5: Add Energy-Generating Technologies
Sensitively.
The flexibility of many historic structures allows for
the respectful integration of energy efficient tech-
nologies. Energy-generating technologies are the most
commonly known strategies. However, the efficiency
of a historic structure will often be great enough that
generation technologies aren’t the most practical solu-
tions. Utilize strategies to reduce energy consumption
prior to undertaking an energy generation project.
Packet Pg. 223
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
ing structure.
Appropriate addition to the front of a one-story
non-contributing structure.
4
4
Packet Pg. 222
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
4
Preserve an older
addition that has
achieved historic
significance in its
own right.
Design an addition or secondary structure to be subordinate to
the historic building.
Packet Pg. 221
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/10-paint-problems.htm
Packet Pg. 219
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
4
4
Packet Pg. 217
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/11-storefronts.htm
Packet Pg. 216
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Understanding the character of these materials
and the patterns they create is essential to devel-
oping new interpretations.
Packet Pg. 207
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
toric materials.
8
Re-point mortar joints where there is evi-
dence of deterioration. This shall match the
historic design.
4
Historic building materials are key features
of historic buildings and shall be preserved.
Packet Pg. 206
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/
briefs/47-maintaining-exteriors.htm
Packet Pg. 203
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
“Rehabilitation” is the process of returning a property
to a state that makes a contemporary use possible
while still preserving those portions or features of the
property which are significant to its historical, archi-
tectural and cultural values. Rehabilitation may include
a change in use of the building or additions. This term
is the broadest of the permitted treatments and applies
to most work on historic properties.
Combining Treatments
For many projects a “rehabilitation” approach will be
the overall strategy, because this term reflects the
broadest, most flexible of the approaches. Within that,
however, there may be a combination of treatments
used as they relate to specific building components.
For example, a surviving cornice may be preserved, a
storefront base that has been altered may be restored,
and a missing kickplate may be reconstructed.
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
E
Sidebars
These provide additional infor-
mation that will be helpful in
understanding the standard. In
some cases a sidebar includes links
that direct the user to additional
material; this may be technical
information about a rehabilitation
procedure or other helpful infor-
mation.
4
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
Construct a
new building 4 4 4 4 (1)
Other
Track
Signs 4 4
(1) (1) (1) 4
Site Work 4 4
(1) (1) (1) 4
Miscellaneous 4 4 4
(1) Standards may apply to some projects in this category.
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
which has been substantially altered could be restored
with a sufficient degree of care, such that it may be
re-classified as a contributing property once improve-
ments are completed. An owner may elect to take
such an approach; the city will work with the owner to
determine if this is appropriate. For this special condi-
tion, the Preservation Track will apply.
This option is not mandatory and up to the building
owner.
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
been undertaken to comply with the regulation, that
the costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential
benefits to the public or would unreasonably burden
the proposed project, and reasonable steps have been
undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse
impacts resulting from noncompliance with the regula-
tion.
May Be Considered
The phrase “may be considered” appears in some
standards text. This indicates that the City will discre-
tion determine if the “land-use activity” is permissible.
This decision is made using the information specifically
related to the project and its context.
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
derstood as defining a particular span of time, other
features are more subtle but still continue to influence
patterns of development.
The aerial images shown underscore the value of the
features that still survive because they provide a hint to
the early character.
To preserve the historic building fabric and to provide din-
ing, retail and entertainment uses was a goal of the 1985
redevelopment plan.
Illustrative plan from the 1985 redevelopment plan set a vision
for Old Town.
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
compass, rather than along the environmental dictates
that guided Dow and Meldrum. By including most of
the original surveyed area of Fort Collins, Avery cre-
ated the distinct triangular shaped lots and streets that
characterize Old Town.
Spring of 1873 saw an influx of population, and many
new business buildings were erected in Old Town. Dur-
ing that year 68 frame buildings were constructed in
Fort Collins, with a majority in the Old Town area, but
gusty autumn winds blew several down. The ones that
remained were later removed to build the more sturdy
brick buildings that stand today. Near harvest time of
the same year a plague of grasshoppers descended
upon the crops and devoured them. The businesses of
the community suffered along with the farmers, as the
grasshoppers made repeat performances in 1874 and
1875. Many families and businesses in Old Town left,
Ansel Watrous wrote, “Building was practically at a
standstill and business of all kinds was in the dumps.”
The arrival of the Colorado Central Railroad in 1877
began a new era of prosperity for Fort Collins, and
in particular for Old Town, as the Terminal was in
close proximity to the business district. Investments
in housing and business buildings rose, as did the spirit
of the people who lived and worked in Old Town. The
following year saw the building of some substantial
brick business blocks in Old Town, and a promise of
more to come.
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
» Environmental Sustainability. Rehabilita-
tion of historic resources conserves energy
that is embodied in the construction of
existing structures. It also reduces impacts on
land fill from demolition and reduces the need
to fabricate new materials.
» Economic Sustainability. The economic
benefits of protecting historic resources
include higher property values, job creation
in rehabilitation industries and increased
heritage tourism.
For More Information:
See web link to National Park Service Sustainabil-
ity information:
http://www.nps.gov/tps/sustainability.htm
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
this energy. Re-using a building also preserves the
energy and resources invested in its construction, and
reduces the need for producing new construction ma-
terials, which require more energy to produce. Studies
confirm that the loss of embodied energy by demoli-
tion takes three decades or more to recoup, even with
the reduced operating energy costs in a replacement
building.
For More Information:
See the following web link to Preservation Brief 3:
Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings:
http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/3-
improve-energy-efficiency.htm
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be
disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new
construction shall not destroy historic materials that char-
acterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated
from the old and shall be compatible with the massing,
size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic
integrity of the property and its environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction
shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in
the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic
property and its environment would be unimpaired.”
PRESERVATION BRIEFS & TECH NOTES
The Cultural Resources Department of the National
Park Service, in the U.S. Department of the Interior,
publishes a series of technical reports regarding proper
preservation techniques. This series, Preservation Briefs
and Tech Notes, is a mainstay for many preservationists
in the field. When considering a preservation project,
these resources should be consulted.
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
tion into new developments. It provides a good basis
for design standards and guidelines as it sets the broad
principles for the treatment of historic resources,
but gives only very limited guidance or direction for
rehabilitation of historic properties themselves.
Home Rule Charter and the Code of the City of
Fort Collins 1986
Chapter 14 Landmark Preservation
This section of the code sets forth the following dec-
laration of policy for Historic Preservation within the
City:
(a) It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that
the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites,
structures, objects and districts of historical, architectural
or geographic significance, located within the City, are a
public necessity and are required in the interest of the
prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people.
(b) It is the opinion of the city council that the economic,
cultural and aesthetic standing of this City cannot be main-
tained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architec-
tural and geographical heritage of the City and by ignoring
the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets.
It also identifies:
› standards for determining eligibility,
› designation procedures,
› construction, alterations, demolitions and
relocation procedures, and a
› landmark rehabilitation program
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
See the following web site links for financial as-
sistance programs that may be available for the
rehabilitation of a historic resource:
• History Colorado web site to assist in rehabilita-
tion projects:
http://www.historycolorado.org/archaeologists/
grants-financial-incentives
• National Park Service web site for tax credit
information to assist in rehabilitation projects:
http://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives.htm
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment2.5: Old Town Historic District Design Standards (Old Town Historic District and River District
› Landscape features
› Public art
› Trails
› Overlooks
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
be incorporated into the structure. They should complement the
overall composition and design of the building. Accent features
can include an entry ways, loading docks, garage bays, balconies,
canopies, cupolas, secondary connections and vertical elevator
shafts, for example. They can be highlighted with a change in
material, color or other architectural treatment appropriate to
the context.
3.1 Design accent features to complement the
overall composition and design of the building
and context.
› Use complementary building materials and colors.
› Consider the mass and scale of the feature in respect to
the overall building composition.
› Do not overuse an accent feature.
4
Design accent features to
complement the overall
composition and design of the
building and context.
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
bypassed, creating a more direct channel. This resulted
in the relocation of the river from the site now known
as the “Oxbow” to the south in its present location.
A diverse range of building types existed, reflecting the mix
of uses and the changing economy in the area.
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
In 2008, a streetscape improvements project report
for the River District was prepared for the City of Fort
Collins. The goal of that project is to create a new sense
of place by making the area welcoming, visually pleasing
and ready for infill development. The streetscape plan
recommends improvements to streetscapes, traffic
circulation, parking, bicycle, pedestrian and transit,
as well as utility infrastructure upgrades. Highlights
include inviting and attractive streetscapes designed to
serve all types of transportation - pedestrians, bicy-
clists, drivers and transit riders.
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
the review and permitting process is different, as de-
scribed below.
Locally listed landmark
Some properties in the area are listed as local histori-
cal landmarks, under the city’s preservation ordinance.
(The Ranch-Way Feeds property is an example.)
Improvements to these locally listed landmarks are
subject to review by the Landmark Preservation Com-
mission.
Locally listed “contributor” to a local historic
district
A few properties that lie within the River District also
are within the locally designed Old Town Historic Dis-
trict. (The Depot on Jefferson Street is an example.)
For these properties, improvements also are subject
to review by the Landmark Preservation Commission.
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment2.4: River District Design Standards and Guidelines (Old Town Historic District and River
Provides a community health benefit
Reducing cost of crashes
Education on return on investment
Opportunities
Lower carbon footprint
Decrease single occupancy vehicles
Support Climate goals
Biking essential to meeting our
environmental goals: GHG & Energy
Education of next generation
Safety in numbers, reduced collision costs
Innovative infrastructure (e.g. cycle
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map
ATTACHMENT 5
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment1.5: Triple Bottom Line Analysis [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
a
r
d
w
alk
D
r
W
C
ou
n
t
y R
o
a
d 38E
9th St
W Mountain Ave
S Howes St
S County Road 19
Jefferson St
S County Road 11
E County Road 36
N Lemay Ave
S Lemay Ave
W Vine Dr
N Taft Hill Rd
Kechte
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
!"`$
!"`$
S Shields St
S College Ave
S Taft Hill Rd
E Vine Dr
S Timberline Rd
E Prospect Rd
Ziegler Rd
S Lemay Ave
Laporte Ave
E Mulberry St
W Drake Rd
E Drake Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Trilby Rd
N Shields St
W Mulberry St
S Overland Trl
W Prospect Rd
W Trilby Rd
E Harmony Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
E
L
i
n
coln
A
v
e
Riverside Ave
N College Ave
W Elizabeth St
Country Club Rd
W Harmony Rd
N Overland Trl
Remington St
N Lemay Ave
Richards Lake Rd
Mountain Vista Dr
Strauss Cabin Rd
S Mason St
W Vine Dr
County Road 54G
N Timberline Rd
N US Highway 287
E
W
i
l
l
o
x
L
n
Turnberry Rd
W Willox Ln
W Laurel St
Giddings Rd
Kechter Rd
S Summit View Dr
Bo
a
r
d
w
alk
D
r
W
C
ou
n
t
y R
o
a
d 38E
9th St
W Mountain Ave
S Howes St
E
Cou
S County Road 19
E Coun
Jefferson St
S County Road 11
E County Road 36
N Lemay Ave
S Lemay Ave
W Vine Dr
Ziegler Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
Kechter Rd
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
!"`$
!"`$
S Shields St
S College Ave
S Taft Hill Rd
E Vine Dr
S Timberline Rd
E Prospect Rd
Ziegler Rd
S Lemay Ave
Laporte Ave
E Mulberry St
W Drake Rd
E Drake Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Trilby Rd
N Shields St
W Mulberry St
S Overland Trl
W Prospect Rd
W Trilby Rd
E Harmony Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
E
L
i
n
coln
A
v
e
Riverside Ave
N College Ave
W Elizabeth St
Country Club Rd
W Harmony Rd
N Overland Trl
Remington St
N Lemay Ave
Richards Lake Rd
Mountain Vista Dr
Strauss Cabin Rd
S Mason St
W Vine Dr
County Road 54G
N Timberline Rd
N US Highway 287
E
W
i
l
l
o
x
L
n
Turnberry Rd
W Willox Ln
W Laurel St
Giddings Rd
Kechter Rd
S Summit View Dr
Bo
a
r
d
w
alk
D
r
W
C
ou
n
t
y R
o
a
d 38E
9th St
W Mountain Ave
S Howes St
E
County
Road 48
S County Road
E County Road 36
Jefferson St
S County Road 11
E County Road 36
N Lemay Ave
S Lemay Ave
W Vine Dr
Ziegler Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
Kechter Rd
!"`$
!"`$
S Shields St
S College Ave
S Taft Hill Rd
E Vine Dr
S Timberline Rd
E Prospect Rd
Ziegler Rd
S Lemay Ave
Laporte Ave
E Mulberry St
W Drake Rd
E Drake Rd
E Horsetooth Rd
E Trilby Rd
N Shields St
W Mulberry St
S Overland Trl
W Prospect Rd
W Trilby Rd
E Harmony Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
W Horsetooth Rd
E
L
i
n
coln
A
v
e
Riverside Ave
N College Ave
W Elizabeth St
Country Club Rd
W Harmony Rd
N Overland Trl
Remington St
N Lemay Ave
Richards Lake Rd
Mountain Vista Dr
Strauss Cabin Rd
S Mason St
W Vine Dr
County Road 54G
N Timberline Rd
N US Highway 287
E
W
i
l
l
o
x
L
n
Turnberry Rd
W Willox Ln
W Laurel St
Giddings Rd
Kechter Rd
S Summit View Dr
Bo
a
r
d
w
alk
D
r
W
C
ou
n
t
y R
o
a
d 38E
9th St
W Mountain Ave
S Howes St
E
County
Road 48
S County Road 19
E County Road 36
Jefferson St
S County Road 11
E County Road 36
N Lemay Ave
S Lemay Ave
W Vine Dr
Ziegler Rd
N Taft Hill Rd
Kechter Rd
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
Southeast Fort Collins
October 26, 2013 | 10 Participants
Northwest Fort Collins
November 2, 2013 | 21 Participants
Southwest Fort Collins
October 19, 2013 | 8 Participants
FC Rides! Community Bike Audits
Start Finish Packet Pg. 27
Attachment1.4: FCRides Community Bike Audits Summary [Revision 1] (2014 Bicycle Master Plan)
BOLTAGE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT X
HIGH SCHOOL BICYCLE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM X
AFTER-SCHOOL BIKE CLUBS AT K-8 SCHOOLS X X
BIKE FIELD TRIPS AT K-8 SCHOOLS X X
BIKE-PED EDUCATION AT PRESCHOOLS X X
FAMILY BIKE RODEOS AT COMMUNITY EVENTS X X
HELMET FITTING, EDUCATION, DISTRIBUTION TO LOW-INCOME K-12 STUDENTS/
PARENTS
XX
SRTS PRESENTATIONS TO PTOS/PTAS, SCHOOL WELLNESS TEAMS X X
BIKE LUNCH TALKS X X
HELMET AND LIGHT GIVEAWAYS X X
BICYCLE LEVEL OF COMFORT MAP X
WINTER AND SUMMER BIKE MONTH & BIKE TO WORK DAY ACTIVITIES X X
EDUCATION CLASSES: TS101, LCI TRAININGS, LEARN TO RIDE, WINTER COMMUTING, SRTS
TRAIN-THE-TRAINER WORKSHOPS
X X
DDDDDDDR DR DRAFTTT RA AFT AF FT
LLY SHARE SHAR TH
ND INCENTIVES INCENTI
N GOING OING BICYCLE
S TO CONDUCT TRA
S AND TYPES OF O CRA
ORATIVE RECOMMEN
MESSAGES A AN
AMENDM
LW
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg